Poll: Was the Mass effect 3 ending that bad?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Worgen:
So I didn't hate the ending of ME3, I actually thought the ending itself was pretty good, granted I did play it awhile after release when they had expanded the ending. The neding itself that I got was good, the everyone joining the singularity ending, the problem I had wasn't the ending, it was how you got to the ending. Just letting you choose what ending you wanted from like 4 different ones was super lazy.

I should perhaps reply to this specifically: what a strange question. When people say the ending they mean the last bit of the game, not the end result of it in canon. They also tend to see the ending in relation to the larger whole of mass effect 1, 2 and 3 and in that relation there was little to no build up to the specific endings we got. Something journey road.

Even then though, taking your question with a lot of charity. No, didn't much like the coloured explosions. I wanted to see some reapers shot to bits with a bit of violence and oomph. The weapon used was far too much of a plot device with its ability to specifically destroy synthetics, mind control reapers or the gibberish green thingy. I wanted to kill me some reapers so without having to murder the geth, or to mindcontrol the WMD's or to do the gibberish green thingy.

Samtemdo8:
I am just extremely worried that Game of Thrones will suffer the same fate as Mass Effect 3.

With the sheer amount of characters and how polarized the fanbase is regarding them, it seems impossible for 2/3 of people NOT to be pissed off nomatter how it ends.

I don't know, I never played ME3 because I was already on an anti-EA kick by then also the first trailer I saw for it turned me off because it looked too much like CoD. However it was described to me and it did sound like a massive disappointment esp. considering Bioware built it up Peter Molyneux style. However the backlash against it was one of the biggest examples of First World Problems I've ever seen in my life. Holy fuck, get some goddamn perspective!

The ending isn't as bad as many people make it out to be. But it is pretty crap. And that was enough to stir up a lot of hate from the community, because of simply how much love and fandom and time they invested in the whole damn series. Dragon Age didn't have a spectacular ending, but at least it wasn't garbage.

So 2 things:
a) the hype that Bioware pumped it up with, especially the "your actions will affect every outcome in the end" bullshit, and
b) the sheer quality and immersion that the rest of the trilogy's story, gameplay, and design warranted, led to a big giant WTF.

I didn't really rage all that much, I admit I felt very let down but I didn't let it bother me all that much because to me it wasn't that great a series anyway. But life goes on, I didn't even want to see how they fixed it with the extended cut on youtube or anything, just muttered a quiet "fuckit" and moved on.

I didn't get around to ME3 until around 2015 so I missed the original ending drama firsthand(still read a lot about it at the time though).

I felt it was disappointing, but not terrible. It feels extremely simplistic and underdeveloped, with all the feeling of "We were writing by the seat of our pants half the time and thus the ending wasn't really planned out" so we get the Crucible, which is a thing that nobody knows what it does but somehow every cycle it's improved despite nobody knowing what it does which does magical space stuff because reasons. And the space brat who personifies the reapers who decides "Oh, you got here. I give up. Make a choice now to decide how this all goes".

Learning about the Dark Energy plot from ME2 only reinforces that the writers really didn't know what they were trying to accomplish, which is why it doesn't feel satisfying. Granted, when you start with "Robo Cthulhu shows up every 50K to kill everyone" doesn't leave a lot of avenues that involve a good ending.

Casey hudson drunk on his own power changed so much leading to people like mac walters to leave the company, and we have all see how bad bioware is now expecially with the trainwreck of andromeda which was supposed to save the Mass effect name

Worgen:
So I didn't hate the ending of ME3

Obviously you didn't, going by how you worded the poll options. "Ending gave me cancer" vs. "It was alright". Christ.

Silentpony:

Souplex:

Silentpony:
Wasn't the whole problem that it was rewritten on the fly? I was on the Bioware forums, HOLDING THE LINE!, when the game first dropped and the ending shat the bed. I remember seeing a Dev post on one of the threads that the original ending had been leaked, so it was scrapped, and only one of the writers had time to write the new ending, and it wasn't given to the other writers too proof-read, edit and keep in tone, and was rushed into animation and voice acting.

Its no excuse for sloppy writing, but I think it was less a bad script and more a rough draft over a burger at lunchtime patch-job.

I still don't understand why they didn't just go with the leaked ending.
Anti-spoiler culture is ruining media.

Agreed. I understand not wanting to be spoiled, but if a script is leaked, implying Bioware didn't want it known, then its on the gamers not to read the script and keep themselves unspoiled, as opposed to Bioware needing to do a day-1 rewrite of the entire thing.

O-k so if original ending was leaked (then changed). What was it? Where is it? Should be readily available to all since it leaked so hard, Bioware shat themselves over it, that everyone knew it and all hope is lost, oh noes etc. I still never seen/read it. Any help there?

Floating in a vacuum, the ending would be lacklustre, since it doesn't really offer much conclusion to any arcs (and the series effectively rebooted away from it after).

Put into context, its a terrible ending because no part of the narrative leads up to it. The narrative across all 3 games is either delaying the Reapers or preparing the galaxy to face them or both. Only for an ending that goes for some MAtrix 2 style "They engineered it all along" type twist.

Gameplay wise, even in a series that struggles to manage to bare competence in its basic gameplay, fighthing some generic mooks is an awful culmination compared to Saren or the Human Reaper at the end of ME2.

Oh, that ending was terrible, no butts about it. It's not just the fact that you got there through three binary choices, what the ending tries to say is ridiculous. The Reaper's motivations are ridiculous, and are made even more pointless by the fact they had the means to fix all of their concerns immediatly. Plus, the far more interesting endings proposed were scrapped in favor of the "we need to stop organics from making synthetics that kill organics by killing organics with giant synthetics", which could never have been made good without somehow rewriting the entire series itself to make that a far more important focus. Obviously if the way we got to the endings was more effected by choices throughout the series, it would have helped, but I do really believe the ending itself is just downright bad.

Jamcie Kerbizz:

O-k so if original ending was leaked (then changed). What was it? Where is it? Should be readily available to all since it leaked so hard, Bioware shat themselves over it, that everyone knew it and all hope is lost, oh noes etc. I still never seen/read it. Any help there?

If I remember right it was something like this:

The use of Mass Effect fields leads to a build up of Dark Energy, which is destroying the universe itself. The Reapers reap in part to contain the spread of Mass Effect technology (maybe, not 100% on that bit), and create more of their own (every Reaper being a Hive Mind gestalt of an entire species) to increase their 'manpower pool' dedicated to stopping the problem. Things are almost at the point of no return and their push for the Human Reaper is presented as their one last Hail Mary to save the universe. The ending choices then become allowing the harvest to continue, and hope the Human Reaper does indeed solve the problem, or telling the Reapers to fuck themselves, maybe blow them all up, and declare that the Citadel species can solve the problem as is.

Personally, I find that ending just as bad as the one we got. It still represents a major tonal shift for the game/series (unless they completely rewrote the 3rd game, a bit of foreshadowing in the previous game doesn't cut it). It still completely ruins the Reapers, who go from a Lovecraftian menace to, at worst, 'well intentioned extremists' (I maintain, the reasons why they reap should never have been explained, as it would never measure up, better to leave them as 'unknowable'). Plus, it's just so, grim and depressing. Taking what started as a classical, wonder-filled Space Opera setting, with a focus on unity and optimism and adding 'The thing that makes our setting unique (the Mass Effect) also kills the universe' is still a major and unwelcome tonal shift.

Pseudonym:

Worgen:
So I didn't hate the ending of ME3, I actually thought the ending itself was pretty good, granted I did play it awhile after release when they had expanded the ending. The neding itself that I got was good, the everyone joining the singularity ending, the problem I had wasn't the ending, it was how you got to the ending. Just letting you choose what ending you wanted from like 4 different ones was super lazy.

I should perhaps reply to this specifically: what a strange question. When people say the ending they mean the last bit of the game, not the end result of it in canon. They also tend to see the ending in relation to the larger whole of mass effect 1, 2 and 3 and in that relation there was little to no build up to the specific endings we got. Something journey road.

Even then though, taking your question with a lot of charity. No, didn't much like the coloured explosions. I wanted to see some reapers shot to bits with a bit of violence and oomph. The weapon used was far too much of a plot device with its ability to specifically destroy synthetics, mind control reapers or the gibberish green thingy. I wanted to kill me some reapers so without having to murder the geth, or to mindcontrol the WMD's or to do the gibberish green thingy.

When I say ending, I mean the specific events that occurred after the choice. Not the choice itself. I probably should have been more clear about that. I thought the events were fine but how you got them was lame.

I probably should have checked out the other endings too, since the join the singularity one worked fine, the big red plot device endings might have sucked since every scifi thing tends to have the big red plot device to win the day.

Worgen:

When I say ending, I mean the specific events that occurred after the choice. Not the choice itself. I probably should have been more clear about that. I thought the events were fine but how you got them was lame.

I probably should have checked out the other endings too, since the join the singularity one worked fine, the big red plot device endings might have sucked since every scifi thing tends to have the big red plot device to win the day.

Oh, you want to see all the endings? I'll save you some time:

Worgen:

When I say ending, I mean the specific events that occurred after the choice. Not the choice itself. I probably should have been more clear about that. I thought the events were fine but how you got them was lame.

I didn't play the trilogy until 2015 and kept myself spoiler-free in general, and I didn't apply any DLC in my first playthrough to see what everyone was complaining years after release from the complainers perspective. The thing I learned after 80 hours of playing the games: the endings didn't happen in a vacuum. The more invested one was in the characters and the decision making mechanics (which was incentivized heavily in Mass Effect 2 and in less measure in ME3), the worst the ME3 endings appear to be.

Megalodon:

Jamcie Kerbizz:

O-k so if original ending was leaked (then changed). What was it? Where is it? Should be readily available to all since it leaked so hard, Bioware shat themselves over it, that everyone knew it and all hope is lost, oh noes etc. I still never seen/read it. Any help there?

If I remember right it was something like this:

The use of Mass Effect fields leads to a build up of Dark Energy, which is destroying the universe itself. The Reapers reap in part to contain the spread of Mass Effect technology (maybe, not 100% on that bit), and create more of their own (every Reaper being a Hive Mind gestalt of an entire species) to increase their 'manpower pool' dedicated to stopping the problem. Things are almost at the point of no return and their push for the Human Reaper is presented as their one last Hail Mary to save the universe. The ending choices then become allowing the harvest to continue, and hope the Human Reaper does indeed solve the problem, or telling the Reapers to fuck themselves, maybe blow them all up, and declare that the Citadel species can solve the problem as is.

Personally, I find that ending just as bad as the one we got. It still represents a major tonal shift for the game/series (unless they completely rewrote the 3rd game, a bit of foreshadowing in the previous game doesn't cut it). It still completely ruins the Reapers, who go from a Lovecraftian menace to, at worst, 'well intentioned extremists' (I maintain, the reasons why they reap should never have been explained, as it would never measure up, better to leave them as 'unknowable'). Plus, it's just so, grim and depressing. Taking what started as a classical, wonder-filled Space Opera setting, with a focus on unity and optimism and adding 'The thing that makes our setting unique (the Mass Effect) also kills the universe' is still a major and unwelcome tonal shift.

We won't know for sure. Execution is more important than the concept itself. The Extended endings didn't change much plot-wise (if anything at all), but they were still better received than the original ones.

zombiejoe:
Oh, that ending was terrible, no butts about it. It's not just the fact that you got there through three binary choices, what the ending tries to say is ridiculous. The Reaper's motivations are ridiculous, and are made even more pointless by the fact they had the means to fix all of their concerns immediatly. Plus, the far more interesting endings proposed were scrapped in favor of the "we need to stop organics from making synthetics that kill organics by killing organics with giant synthetics", which could never have been made good without somehow rewriting the entire series itself to make that a far more important focus. Obviously if the way we got to the endings was more effected by choices throughout the series, it would have helped, but I do really believe the ending itself is just downright bad.

TO me the Reapers motivations far more into the line of "From a certain point of view". IIRC, in the Leviathan DLC, it's revealed by the creators of the reapers that they were meant to "Preserve Organic Life", which to the Repears translated as "Ok. THe best way to do that is preserve each worthy species as a reaper. Thus the sum of the species will survive forever. Let's get to work."

I can totally see an AI using that kind of logic, especially an AI that doesn't care about individual beings.

Granted, giving robo cthulhu a motivation at all was a bad choice but I can't really complain about their logic here.

I'd actually like to know why people chose the ending that they chose.

I'm in the minority in that I chose to kill the reapers and end the cycle. It's an endless cycle, break that fucking cycle! Human life and organic life in the galaxy isn't about fate, and moreover, most of the side missions in ME3 were about breaking the fucking cycle like curing the Genophage! Or helping the Rakni Queen in ME1!

Also, it's been your mission for 3 games and at least 150 hours combined, it's weird to suddenly give the player a moral dilemma right at the end of 150+ hour saga.

I don't get the synthesis ending. So many people chose it! I don't want a metal dick or suddenly give other people circuit board balls. It's super rape-y to suddenly, forcibly, change the entire galaxy of beings just so Joker and EDI can get it on.
Changing all life in the universe to be some other form is literally the plan of every mad scientist who ever needed to be stopped.

Also, I had renegade Sniper Shep. He obviously wasn't there to compromise.

Dalisclock:

zombiejoe:
Oh, that ending was terrible, no butts about it. It's not just the fact that you got there through three binary choices, what the ending tries to say is ridiculous. The Reaper's motivations are ridiculous, and are made even more pointless by the fact they had the means to fix all of their concerns immediatly. Plus, the far more interesting endings proposed were scrapped in favor of the "we need to stop organics from making synthetics that kill organics by killing organics with giant synthetics", which could never have been made good without somehow rewriting the entire series itself to make that a far more important focus. Obviously if the way we got to the endings was more effected by choices throughout the series, it would have helped, but I do really believe the ending itself is just downright bad.

TO me the Reapers motivations far more into the line of "From a certain point of view". IIRC, in the Leviathan DLC, it's revealed by the creators of the reapers that they were meant to "Preserve Organic Life", which to the Repears translated as "Ok. THe best way to do that is preserve each worthy species as a reaper. Thus the sum of the species will survive forever. Let's get to work."

I can totally see an AI using that kind of logic, especially an AI that doesn't care about individual beings.

To build a bit more off this post, it's also made very clear that the Reapers don't destroy all life in the galaxy during a purge. They come in and destroy intelligent species above a certain tech level.

The Reapers are a surgeon removing the "potentially cancerous tumors" (advanced species) while keeping the rest of the body (all other universal life) as safe as possible. This was necessary because the "tumor" was guaranteed (according to the Reapers) to eventually spawn growths (rogue AI) that would kill the entire body. They then go into dormancy until the inevitable next set of tumors has reached a critical mass wherein they return.

It's probably not the most logical thing in the world, but it's not like it's out of this world ridiculous either. There have been plenty of stories that take the "AI given orders to protect life decides to destroy all humans to protect all other life" approach. The reasoning behind the Reapers is another form of that idea.

It wasn't great, but not as bad as it was made out to be (nothing could, barring the ending coming out of the screen and punching you in the teeth).

It was a tone deaf mess that had nothing to do with anything that had come before, ignored all player decisions until that point, gave no closure, said nothing about the most important characters or places and even between each other offered no difference between a colour change.

The ending was every bit as bad as everyone said. A generic voice-over by Buzz Aldrin is no way to end 100+ hours of role playing until that point. Baldur's Gate 2:ToB had a better ending (choice of endings) and that was delivered by text slides.

Ravenbom:
I'd actually like to know why people chose the ending that they chose.

I'm in the minority in that I chose to kill the reapers and end the cycle. It's an endless cycle, break that fucking cycle! Human life and organic life in the galaxy isn't about fate, and moreover, most of the side missions in ME3 were about breaking the fucking cycle like curing the Genophage! Or helping the Rakni Queen in ME1!

Also, it's been your mission for 3 games and at least 150 hours combined, it's weird to suddenly give the player a moral dilemma right at the end of 150+ hour saga.

I don't get the synthesis ending. So many people chose it! I don't want a metal dick or suddenly give other people circuit board balls. It's super rape-y to suddenly, forcibly, change the entire galaxy of beings just so Joker and EDI can get it on.
Changing all life in the universe to be some other form is literally the plan of every mad scientist who ever needed to be stopped.

Also, I had renegade Sniper Shep. He obviously wasn't there to compromise.

Well for me, Synthesis is very obviously presented as the "Golden" ending and Hudson's(?) pet favorite, and usually I'm quite adamant about getting the golden ending, but it's so stupid that I can't in good conscience support it. "Oh since you're a cyborg if you jump into this pillar of light and disintegrate, then synthetics will somehow become partially organic, organics will become partially synthetic and the problem of understanding between different races/cultures organics and synthetics will be solved forever, and the Reapers will all understand this on an intrinsic level and leave everyone alone". And then of course there's the matter of in-character knowledge, namely: WHY IN THE NINE HELLS WOULD SHEPARD BELIEVE THAT??? The self-declared Master Control Program of the Reapers, enemies whose most prominent weapon is summed up as tricking/corrupting people into becoming their willing servants just told Shepard to that killing him/herself would solve the problem and that s/he should just trust that the Reapers would abandon their genocidal campaign. They promise. And this is a promise that's worth so much more than the promises to Saren and the Geth because reasons.

This latter issue comes up again with regards to controlling the Reapers. "Oh no, the Illusive Man could never have controlled us, but you totally could." So...given what I know of you and how me stopping you is antithetical to your plans, that probably means that the odds of success are low and ultimately this would be a pointless sacrifice on my part, right? There is no basis to trust the characterization of your ability to succeed where TIM would have failed.

I can also go into the thematic resonance of each point. Synthesis represents adopting Saren's ideology during the climax of ME1, Control represents adopting TIM's ideology which you literally just rejected not five minutes prior, and Destroy is what you've been aiming for since ME1, but with all other synthetics thrown in for the simple reasons that the writer doesn't want you to choose that option because he prefers Synthesis.

Avnger:

It's probably not the most logical thing in the world, but it's not like it's out of this world ridiculous either.

The ridiculous part is that the player has to fork over 10 bucks (pretty sure it was 15 on release) just to get a few quests that lampshades the stupidity of the ending. Leviathan does make it slightly more palatable, but post hoc justifications are always bad, especially when the player has to fork out more money just to not have an ending that's a giant logical fallacy.

Gethsemani:

Avnger:

It's probably not the most logical thing in the world, but it's not like it's out of this world ridiculous either.

The ridiculous part is that the player has to fork over 10 bucks (pretty sure it was 15 on release) just to get a few quests that lampshades the stupidity of the ending. Leviathan does make it slightly more palatable, but post hoc justifications are always bad, especially when the player has to fork out more money just to not have an ending that's a giant logical fallacy.

I definitely won't disagree with you there. Considering the impact it has on the overall story, it should have been, at the very least, free if not a part of the base game. I was just taking issue with zombiejoe's claim that the story was absolutely off-the-walls bonkers.

On the whole "95% of the game is great aside from the ending" did they already forget Kai Leng? That character alone is enough to destroy a game, I didn't like the ending but I couldn't muster any real anger because by that point I just didn't give a shit anymore, Kai Leng killed all the shit I had to give.

His first boss fight is textbook definition of a bad boss fight.

I'd second reading Shamus Young mass effect retrospective (can't link it cause his website is down atm) for a lengthy analysis of what went wrong. He's more negative about ME2 than I'd be (although ME2 need to be played on insanity to be appreciated), but overall I mostly agree with him and he's a far better writer than me.

Dalisclock:

zombiejoe:
Oh, that ending was terrible, no butts about it. It's not just the fact that you got there through three binary choices, what the ending tries to say is ridiculous. The Reaper's motivations are ridiculous, and are made even more pointless by the fact they had the means to fix all of their concerns immediatly. Plus, the far more interesting endings proposed were scrapped in favor of the "we need to stop organics from making synthetics that kill organics by killing organics with giant synthetics", which could never have been made good without somehow rewriting the entire series itself to make that a far more important focus. Obviously if the way we got to the endings was more effected by choices throughout the series, it would have helped, but I do really believe the ending itself is just downright bad.

TO me the Reapers motivations far more into the line of "From a certain point of view". IIRC, in the Leviathan DLC, it's revealed by the creators of the reapers that they were meant to "Preserve Organic Life", which to the Repears translated as "Ok. THe best way to do that is preserve each worthy species as a reaper. Thus the sum of the species will survive forever. Let's get to work."

I can totally see an AI using that kind of logic, especially an AI that doesn't care about individual beings.

Granted, giving robo cthulhu a motivation at all was a bad choice but I can't really complain about their logic here.

Putting Leviathan as a DLC was ME3 biggest mistake, I think. I wonder if there would have been as big as an outcry if this was part of the main game.

Lovecraftian works have always had a problem - the characters are pointless because their survival isn't dependant on themselves, it dependant on Deus Ex Machina (or maybe Dues Ex Lovecraftian -a person gets randomly killed because the monster wanted to scratch his leg). Dues Ex Machina endings always feel bad, its a cheap way to get out of situations. The same can be said for Star Trek technobabble, which has the same affect.

The same problem here. Reapers just killing without any concern of others. Also, the crucible feels Dues Ex Machina.

This might not be a problem if it wasn't a game about defeating the Reapers. Which puts it in contrast with the Lovecraftian theme. It was always doomed to fail, and this can be seen in ME1 and ME2 ending as well.

OT: I don't find the ending offensive as others do but I see problems with it. But then I see massive problems with Witcher 3, the Fallouts, Divinity Original Sin 2 and Pillars of Eternity endings and wonder why they don't get as much scrutiny

Yes.

We went over this, again and again, 5-6 years ago.

Time hasn't somehow polished that particular turd.

Even after the "Extended Cut", it's still so bad as to be able to make cancer develop cancer. No, it's not chemotherapy; because even as bad as chemo is, it at least has some positive effects. ME3's ending is just shit.

Ravenbom:
I'd actually like to know why people chose the ending that they chose.

Bear in mind that I've never played ME3, only watched it, but if I did have to choose, it would be Control, the reasons being:

-Destroy: What about EDI and the geth? :( Also, the whole destroy ending feels off in the context of what's come before, if you've played your cards right (forging peace between the geth and quarians, curing the genophage, saving the rachni, etc.) It feels off for Shepard to choose such a 'brute force' option when he/she has been able to do better in the past. I feel that Destroy is meant to be the 'bad' option from the writer's point of view. Also, it's the only ending where Shepard can survive, but it feels like you're being rewarded for being selfish.

-Synthesis: I have the feeling that this is the 'best' ending, but I'm very uneasy about it, as it feels at odds with what's come before. At least in ME1 (the one game I did play to completion), I got a sense that one of the game's themes was "strength through diversity" or "unity, not uniformity," that it was ultimately better to cooperate with intergalactic life rather than remaining in competition and standing alone. Synthesis feels at odds with that, not to mention the ethical questions it brings up. Yes, I'm sure that Joker and EDI are happy they're now of the same species now, but did everyone else want this? If you didn't, well, tough, you're getting green eyes anyway. Again, it also feels at odds from Shepard being able to forge peace between groups rather than forcing it on them.

-Defy: I sort of like this ending in terms of presentation and in implication, but it doesn't quite get there. Thing is, as iffy as the other options are, they're at least preferable to extinction, which is the alternative that Shepard is choosing. We know that the races of the next cycle defeat the Reapers because of his (and Liara's efforts), but that's kind of cold comfort. Thing is, Defy would be a good ending if the other endings were worse, but they're not bad enough to make this decision feel justified.

-Control: There's a big issue with Control and that's that Shepard's effectively doing what the Illusive Man tried and failed to do. In a sense, you're justifying TIM's actions (when I don't think the game wanted that), and Shepard can succeed where TIM failed because...reasons? That said, I do feel it's the best option, because that aside, Control does feel like it can leave the galaxy intact. You don't force synthesis on everyone, you don't arbitrarily destroy all synthetics, and the only group that's suffering is the Reapers, but, well, not really feeling that sympathetic towards them. There's arguably some poetic irony in that the role of the Reapers is now reversed.

Again, only as an observer, but while I'm not as scathing of the ME3 ending as others (at least with the Extended Cut), it does represent a significant thematic shift in my eyes.

The choose a color thing and the star brat hologram were kind of cheesy.

The synthesis ending was really dumb and made no remotely plausible scientific sense.

So I ignore the synthesis ending. I headcanon that it's probably a trick by the reapers. It's not really a choice.

All evidence leading up to this point says the Crucible is a weapon, so use it as a fricken weapon to end the war and save the galaxy. Do exactly what you set out to do in the first place. Pick Destroy. It's what Admiral Hackett wants you to do. It's what he's counting on you to do. It's what he ordered you to do. The Destroy ending is solid. Or, pick the Illusive Man's choice, Control, which I think is the renegade/evil choice, and take all the power for yourself and become a god. Both work.

Otherwise, it wasn't that bad. (I didn't play it upon release. I played it a year later with Extended Cut and all the DLC.) The confrontation with TIM was solid, and the death of Captain Anderson was poignant. The final cinematic where Joker is forced to leave Shepard and is trying to outrun the energy wave in the Normandy was pretty cool.

Acknowledge that it has flaws and accept it. And then appreciate and enjoy the Mass Effect trilogy for what it is, the best story/character-driven RPG game series ever fucking made.

The people who let the ending ruin the entire series... I just don't get it... to me it's like guys pointing out flaws in a super model. Yes, she's not perfect... but holy fuck... she's a goddamn super model, and she's way, way hotter than 99% of the chicks out there. Get some perspective.

I hope one day a new RPG comes out and it's as good as the original Mass Effect series. But I'm not holding my breath.

Yeah, it was pretty bad.

When all the ending choices make me go "...What. Fuck your BS holo-kid" and get the bad ending, and were I only walk away not hating everything because the Control Ending does make sense for my Shepherd to make given that he was a death-seeking lunatic by the end...Yeah, that's a sign you've seriously messed up.

I do sympathize though. Some spoiler theory stuff got leaked and there was pressure from on high to change things in a really short time frame to replace it, and EA supposedly pulled the funding right near the end, and it IS remakably hard to write a decent coherent "wrap up the loose ends" conclusion when you're making a story with a shitton of branching, but still...

With the extended cut, the ending was just "meh". Without it...hooo boy I understand the outrage. I mean...You can't just end a AAA type game that caps off a trilogy all about player decisions like that where you have the same damn ending ith just a different colored explosion. I mean, Dragon Age Origins did it right with the slides showing us how our decisions impacted the world and all that.

Honestly, the writing in ME3 was all over the place. On one hand, the Geth-Quarian resolution was freakin' brilliant and loved it (aside from how freakin' weird the "Geth seem to act a lot more individual now" thing was) and I genuinely elt accomplished having gotten the best result there. On the other hand, between Longsword mc-douche coming out of nowhere and just wrecking all the shit, plot threads that went nowhere like the Asari having gotten an unfair head start, and various other bits like the rachni plot resolution being really freakin' wonky, I feel like the writing team had a tremendous disparity of talent, or that they were under an insane amount of time crunch.

Worgen:
So I didn't hate the ending of ME3, I actually thought the ending itself was pretty good, granted I did play it awhile after release when they had expanded the ending.

Compare it the Battle of the Citadel and to the Suicide Mission. Even the expanded ending is not finished, both from a gameplay and story perspective.

For gameplay there is no final boss, something the previous games had. There is also no gameplay structure to speak of, the real gameplay ends with you defending the missile launchers, which can be achieved by running round and round the launchers in a circle while the timer runs out. Then the rest of the game is some dialogue boxes and a colour picking excersize.

From a story perspective it's horrendously lazy too. You always win, but in slightly different ways. Since this was the end of Shepard's story they could have gone for wildly different endings and degrees of victory. Instead you either completely lose (by doing nothing) or win with the machines all dying, nobody dying or nobody dying again.

Even the expanded endings just give you a few little vignettes and a monologue from Hackett, there was so much to explore but the game's ending amounts to it going 'Lolno' at the player. Also the pre-patch ending literally concluded the game with a dialogue box telling you go to the multiplayer and buy loot boxes.

So yes, it was that bad and since EA has apparently killed the Mass Effect series entirely it will never be expanded upon now.

aegix drakan:
I feel like the writing team had a tremendous disparity of talent, or that they were under an insane amount of time crunch.

With the way EA finances and publishes games it was defiitely the latter.

Meiam:
On the whole "95% of the game is great aside from the ending" did they already forget Kai Leng? That character alone is enough to destroy a game, I didn't like the ending but I couldn't muster any real anger because by that point I just didn't give a shit anymore, Kai Leng killed all the shit I had to give.

His first boss fight is textbook definition of a bad boss fight.

I'd second reading Shamus Young mass effect retrospective (can't link it cause his website is down atm) for a lengthy analysis of what went wrong. He's more negative about ME2 than I'd be (although ME2 need to be played on insanity to be appreciated), but overall I mostly agree with him and he's a far better writer than me.

That was the cyborg ninja dude who felt like a fanfic insert character, wasn't he? Yeah, kind of atrocious.

Though Bioware's always had a thing for silly fanfic type characters, which got weird when they started doing it in their own IPs somehow (The ME2 crew were all these weird abnormal concepts, with the DLC pair being the straight plays other then Generic McSoldierGuy) and not in D&D games.

Where is the "No, it was worse" option?

And to think that last decade Bioware bestrode the world like colossi.

Asita:

I can also go into the thematic resonance of each point. Synthesis represents adopting Saren's ideology during the climax of ME1, Control represents adopting TIM's ideology which you literally just rejected not five minutes prior, and Destroy is what you've been aiming for since ME1, but with all other synthetics thrown in for the simple reasons that the writer doesn't want you to choose that option because he prefers Synthesis.

Oh, that explains why the secret "is Shepard alive?" segment appears only in the Destroy ending! Jeez, these could had been so much better endings if they hadn't been delivered and executed in such clumsy way.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here