I have seen the news of the new extra epilogue DLC. I can not help but be completely unsure of how this will sate me and other people that feel similar.

The key thing is the ending is not going to change. Sure I will accept that to a point. I sort of accept and have to be fine with the whole crucible and Mass Relays stuff. That is unchangeable maybe cushion it and make it less "choose a colour of explosion" other than that fine. Annoying slightly that Shepard dies in all decisions,Ill take it, however it annoys me that Shepards supposedly lives ONLY if you destroy everything...with the secret ending by having over 5000MS. Not going to take legal action over it.

However.....how can they explain the completely strange and out of character stuff that happens after that?

Some epilogue as you why Joker has "Ran" from the biggest battle (and so quickly) to end up in the Mass Relay as it explodes. Aswell as how did everyone who was on earth fighting suddenly appear on the Normandy for them to run away? This make a little sense by simply saying "They fucked up" since the written testament by a writer of ME3 said himself he had to fight to even get to see all your teammates to say goodbye and get holo calls to others. Meaning someone didnt realize the continuity error and since the ending of them flying away was already done before the fight for the last goodbye was put in.

Now I feel a bit annoyed that we dont get an offical epilogue however I can live with that. You have every race now stranded at earth.

I dont even feel the actually ending needs a change yeah sure give more explanation to soften it sure.

What I would like changed is the whole Normandy thing. And the final after the credits bit of "Tell me more of The legend of Shepard." except I have the best eraser of all already. My mind. I will just wipe it. Its only a problem if the next ME games follow on with that as cannon.

The only explanation I feel is needed, is the one about Joker running away and everyone on the ship. Other than that I simply have to accept the ending. as is. Is it a good one? no. Can the Improve it, I hope it can be, However it will be a decent amount of work to buffer the ending into something better while not actually changing anything.

They say it will give players a more personal touch to the ending. I like that idea. However I don't know how it works out. Especially for people who already completed it and had the not so good ending ingrained as the truth.

What do people think? Is an explanation needed?

I copy and pasted the below from the article. This is my basic feeling about the current information we have been given.

What Bioware should have done in the first place is to delay this game for at least one to two years for how much is wrong with it. They should have had fans come in, check the ending they planned out and have the fans tell them what is wrong with it. Like ANY movie maker in history. They need to learn to say "No, that is clinically stupid!" to whoever is in charge of things.

The amount of artistic and storytelling SUICIDE they had done at the end of ME3 is so bad that I doubt anyone will trust Bioware again for how horrid of a job they did. I can get a first grader, have him play all three games up to the very end, and then ask him what was wrong with it. It is that damn obvious with how horrible it was!

I expect the most massive of shitstorms to happen as PAX soon here. This shit won't appease people. They need to admit that they need to retcon anything after Harbringers beam and just start over from there! Otherwise it will never be enough, even for free, it will NEVER be fixed and Bioware has officially lost all creative/artistic/writing capabilities they had. Fuck man, when FF13-2 has a better ending than your own game you have failed entirely!

Hell, at this point people, I trust JRPG makers FAR more than WRPG makers. Hell, this shit may actually END WRPG's with how bad everything turned out! Resurgance of the JRPG maybe possible soon here.

Also if you have a ending with a choices but only does one of three things, well chrono trigger had 12 DIFFERENT ENDINGS! That game was made 20 damn years ago. Where the fuck have these guys been?

Nope.

People who wanted a new ending will not be satisfied. People that didn't will think this is stupid and pointless. It's a move that means nothing, and is a compromise that doesn't help anyone

They either should have said indoctrination was true (which would have been a different bullshit) and gone from there, or just said we had no plans to change it, we are moving on, because changing it would never please the fanbase.

Regardless of how it shakes down, it's a shame the Mass Effect franchise is stained with this, with both the poor ending AND the huge reaction. At this point it's hard to tell what's stained it more, and how intertwined the two are.

I have long held that the ending should stand where if nothing else as an example of what not to do. However I do look forward to explaining what their reasoning and thought process behind "the way to beat a marauding synthetic threat bent on destroying any intelligent life that isn't a marauding synthetic life (bent on destroying intelligent life) is to give up everything that made them unique and become a synthetic life form" where if nothing else it should be an entertaining laugh. :)

No, I'm pretty sure that BioWare just won't be able to win in the internet hivemind's eyes ever again.

@N7: Oh, I absolutely agree that a lot of the complaints so far have been warranted. But you have to question the maturity of a fanbase that seems to spend a lot of their time spamming metacritic with 0/10 user reviews and filing complaints with the Better Business Bureau. I kind of suspect that even if BioWare's next game was perfect in every possible way, those people would still find a way to complain.

@N7: Oh, I absolutely agree that a lot of the complaints so far have been warranted. But you have to question the maturity of a fanbase that seems to spend a lot of their time spamming metacritic with 0/10 user reviews and filing complaints with the Better Business Bureau. I kind of suspect that even if BioWare's next game was perfect in every possible way, those people would still find a way to complain.

I'll admit to being a "lapsed re-taker." When I finished the game, I was pissed as hell at what happened. I've realized how silly I was getting that pissed about a game and moved on now. But looking back with (a little) perspective, I don't see how this change going to help at all. Completely aside from the ending, I think the whole way both sides handled this whole issue has done far more damage than anything that happened story-wise.

In law, we have a concept called "anchoring" (I think it actually comes from business - but whatever). Basically, whenever someone in a negotiation sets a really specific term, they drop an "anchor" for their negotiations going forward. People tend to not to agree to terms that move them too far away from their anchor. When two sides set anchors really far away from one another, it tends to lessen the chances of a successful compromise - the sides start out so far away from each other that an agreement amenable to both parties effectively becomes impossible. Although anchors can be a useful negotiation tactic, it is generally thought to be better to wait on placing one until later on in the negotiations. Parties should try to find some common ground on general matters first, and then drop their anchors so that when discussions move on to specifics, the parties are closer to each other.

In this instance, both Bioware and the fans set anchors early on the in the process and set them really far away from each other. Bioware was pretty clear that they weren't going to change the ending (hence all the words like "integrity," "artistic," "feedback," etc.). The fans, on the other hand, made it pretty clear they wouldn't accept anything less than an ending that got completely reworked. This had the effect of derailing the discussion early on. Rather than trying to understand each other's underlying interests, the sides focused entirely on what they themselves wanted. Not surprisingly, this led to a lot of the sides "talking past" one another and the general feeling from the fans that Bioware wasn't really "listening" to them.

A more successful process would have focused on the "whys" of each side rather than the "whats." For example, rather than Bioware beginning with "we're not changing the ending," they should have focused on things like why they felt it was important to not change the ending and reasons a completely new ending was not feasible for them (expense, time, future plans for the series, etc.). The fans, on the other hand, should not have started with demanding a new ending (and yes, I realize this does not cover all fans, there was some very constructive criticisms from what I saw, but "demand" was how it ended up coming off). They should have started with an acknowledgment of the difficulty Bioware was facing, followed by a list of their own concerns that needed to be addressed (feeling of accomplishment, narrative coherence, etc.). The discussion could then have moved forward to trying to reconcile each sides interests with specifics to come later.

Now, this process might not have done any better, but it would have had a greater chance of success. Even if it did end up in the same place, it at least might have been more successful in avoiding all the vitriol that has been spewed the last few weeks.

It will to me ..... to an extent , when I ended the game I said "if they just added epilogues cards like Dragon Age Origin a lot of these complaints would fade away (mine included)" , but I did get carried away with all the negativity and now side with the more "fanatic" fans ... im not too proud of myself :/ but damn it I wanna happy ending for Shep -_- (man I became a monster)

After witnessing how lazy and bad the writing throughout ME3 was (not just the ending), I have to wonder if Bioware the talent to attempt a fix even if they were committed to it. And I'm not convinced they are committed to a strong fix either, because this most recent statement seems calculated to split the Retake folks right before PAX, and to shift focus away from the Consumerist poll rather than announce the creative vision for the series going forward.

Bottom line: no. I don't have any reason at this point to expect that the DLC will help, because there has been no indication from Bioware that they are treating the situation as anything besides crisis management.

I really don't think that there is any explaining to do. The ending was bad, either retconn it out of existence or go with indoctrination. The damage is done,the best course of action would be going with indoctrination, to at least make it look like Walters and Hudson knew what they were doing, otherwise they'll just dig the hole deeper.

Like I said: Shepard wakes up, tells Harbinger to fucking go eat shit, flip him the bird, blow him to hell with a rocket launcher and then activate the Crucible to kill all Reapers.

GAME OVER, MOTHERFUCKERS!

@VinceNotVance said:

Paying $60 for a video game does not give you the right to have artistic input on someone else's creation.

You are right. The main thing should have been as a customer you were not satisfied about certain things of the ending, you give criticism and hope in future the next product improves.

People flat out demanded for change. Yet Bioware is sticking with their guns and going "No thats the ending we want.....except we will explain it better." in hopes its makes people happy.

I think its wasted time and effort to be honest. Could make some decent DLC instead of this pandering.

At this point, I think anything will help. If they can expand upon and explain Reaper Kid in a way that makes sense, fits the themes of the series, and provides closure, then more power to them.

I doubt that they can really do that, but any sort of change or addition will surely at least be a step in the right direction.

@VinceNotVance said:

Paying $60 for a video game does not give you the right to have artistic input on someone else's creation.

Well, if someone tells me they are selling a rock song for $60 and I decide to buy it and when I actually get the song, turns out it's a country song, they have 3 choices:

A. They give me my money back.

B. They create the rock song they originally promised.

C. or they do nothing and accept I probably wont be buying from them again.

Adding extra scenes to an already stupid ending doesn't really help. It also doesn't change my first experience with the game, which was quite negative, and not just because of the ending.

I am not interested in further content for Mass Effect 3 or ending changes.

Coming out in summer is a bit far off too, at least people jumping in late will get to experience a hopefully better ending. Everybody who has already played it though...do you see yourself caring by summer time? I don't care whatsoever and it's only April.

They were kind of put into a position where they couldn't win. If they had done nothing to change or at less shed some more light on the ending, people would have been furious. If they patched in a completely different ending or latched onto the indoctrination stuff, people would have accused them of selling out. This is the middle ground. Compromise rarely makes anyone truly happy.

I was actually really satisfied with the creator's explanation for why the reaper's cycle has to exist. It makes sense to me that unchecked evolutionary advances will inevitably lead to complete destruction of organics. My only problem with the options is with the scope of their impact. Shepard choosing the destruct option should shut down the reapers and mass relays not everything synthetic in the galaxy. The creator of the reapers would have built this failsafe in. Similarly, the control option would just be for the reapers, no idea why this would destroy the mass relays, but it could be justified. The synthesis option is kind of dumb all around.

It'll work. It'll be far enough out that the anger will have died down, and it'll appease enough people to disarm the angry mobs. Now they've lied to us on any number of occasions but providing that they aren't lying to us this particular time, they are promising a personalized ending with epilogues. This tells me they're going to pull a Fallout 1/2/New Vegas and give us a slideshow, or a short cinematic, for each major character and location. Perhaps that's wishful thinking... I do expect, at least, a longer ending cut-scene followed by some voiced over slides. Getting to hear where people ended up after the war was won would be enough to make me happy... I mean, sure, the ending is bad and nonsensical or whatever, but if you can give me the illusion that I actually affected change in the Mass Effect universe I'll be thrilled to death. Fallout 2 is the Golden Standard™ for RPG endings as far as I'm concerned, and Dragon Age has come the closest to recreating it of any of the RPGs I've played over the last ten years, with New Vegas a close second.

I was less upset with the narrative inconsistencies of this ending and more upset that it just didn't give me any feedback. I might be in the minority here but I actually do play RPGs for the ending. The journey has to be good enough to keep me playing but I know as soon as that game boots me back to the main menu the biggest thing I'm going to take away from the game was its story. I don't remember Planescape: Torment for its thrilling 2nd edition AD&D, or even its pregnant alleyways, but for my character's narrative arc through its powerful conclusion. Right now I look back on Mass Effect as a really exciting roller-coaster that derailed at the end, and there are so many plot holes I can't even reasonably speculate as to what happened. Just give me a little more to go off of and I'll be fine with it. I think the industry in general needs to take a little more time with its endings. We don't all get to see it, but those of us who do are likely to remember or forget your game altogether based off of the last image it burned into us. Make this one stick.

Everyone seems to have forgotten (though this is all opinion anyway) that Mass Effect 3 was still a great game. Sure the ending left a bit of a bad taste and didn't fulfill all the hype leading up to it. However no-one seems to have filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau against Peter Molyneux and some of his unfulfilled promises. ME3 was great. Yes the ending was meh and maybe the DLC will explain things a bit better. Should it have come to this? Of course not. Still the way I see it I had 28hrs of great fun with ME3 and about 10 minutes of bleah. Sadly those 10 minutes were the ending 10 but there was some form of conclusion at least.

@Captain_Insano: Honestly, I don't believe ME3 was all it was cracked up to be. There were far more noticeable glitches than any of the previous games, the load times were muck, and the story felt very underwhelming, with very few instances where you really felt the desperation of the events happening around you. The ending was only viewed so negatively because the game was railroading you into getting to that point, even going so far as to stop you from accessing side missions in certain systems you obtained early in the game, because you hadn't completed a certain story mission yet. It felt like the game had one hell of an ending to show off...and what was received was, to say the least, less-than anticipated, given the way the game was structured. I'd even go so far as to say that a major issue is the piss-poor importer that can't recognise certain facial features from the previous two games, which is pretty shabby in the third game of a well established series. When some of the basics are thrown under the bus, you know there's more to the game's negative points than just the ending...but people are so hung up on it, they just won't draw attention to these facts.

You had fun with it, and I'm not saying that people couldn't have had fun with it, as you said, it's all opinion. There were some well executed sections in the game...but honestly, what people aren't addressing here is that the game itself is the problem, with the ending becoming more 'awful' due to facts I've outlined...though there could be more or less, depending on the person. For me, the game just didn't deliver, with very few moments appealing to me emotionally. It just felt hollow, from a storyline perspective, there were good moments, but they hadn't got to do with the actual, overall narrative. At least, that's how I see it.

And Peter Molyneux hadn't really established a series in the same way as ME, with each game focusing on different characters from the same bloodline...ME had a single character, across the span of the three games...people get invested in that character, not just one they can't control in any significant way. Also Molyneux is full of it, he never really made that big a splash this gen, Fable: The Lost Chapters, was probably the best thing his name will ever be associated with...and I'm hard-pressed to think of anyone I know who actually played that version of the first game.

OP: The DLC will give some people what they want. I don't think it'll be enough, I really don't, as the ending itself just doesn't work. I don't care if they retcon it or not...the damage is done. I'm happy to move on, but I'll always give my two cents on the matter, because I was just plain stumped by how...utterly botched would be the best description...that ending really was. The DLC was obviously planned, but it'll be in vain. I think the other issues in the game should be addressed first...then again, most of the issues I have with the game stem from the rushed feel of it all, so a whole revamped title may be needed to make me feel like the game was a worthwhile endeavour. I'd imagine that by the time this comes out, people just won't care enough to get it. Of course, the Retake movement will be judging it, among others, but I feel as if ME3 is a one hit wonder, with a MP section solely added for the fact that there was kind of a feeling that the main game wouldn't be enough to keep people going. I say this because the MP feels half-hearted, with only 6 maps and random loot to keep things varied. Whatever the case...it comes down to how much people care, and at the end of the day, I don't really care enough to see what happens.

I doubt it will change any minds.  Everyone has already formed their opinion either way and undoing that is almost impossible.
 
I didn't like the ending but was against changing anything not because it was art or whatever, but because it doesn't really matter.  I don't think anyone actually cares.  Even if people think they do, I think they will see it and will feel no catharsis, no matter how good or bad it is and will only be able to associate it with the social spectacle that got them there.

@VinceNotVance said:

Paying $60 for a video game does not give you the right to have artistic input on someone else's creation.

And yet not all pieces of media, especially in the department of story-telling, are left unchanged when a small but significant fix would have made them significantly better.

Blade Runner had a horrible running narration in it's theater release. It is gone from all but the oldest copies now, which nearly everyone agrees is for the better. Season 8 of the television show Dallas was so bad that they made the entire year a dream in the following season. Dallas was one of the largest shows on television from 1978-1991, and did well for another 5 seasons after the "dream season." Nearly everyone agrees that this was the right move to make. Charles Dickens' novel Great Expectations has two endings. Stephen Spielberg made changes to ET in the re-release, and removed them in later editions because he realized it was not a good idea.

To act like this is the first time something like this has happened, or to imagine that it ruins the creative vision, is ridiculous.

@VinceNotVance said:

Paying $60 for a video game does not give you the right to have artistic input on someone else's creation.

I'm tired of seeing people spout out this observation. No, $60 does not give me the "right to have artistic input on someone else's creation". That is totally besides the point.

The fucking US Constitution gives us the right to call a piece of art crap, and tell the artist they need to change it, and be as vocal as we want about it. We can shout to high heaven, post on message boards and say whatever the hell we want. It's pop art we're talking about here, there are no limits as to what the public can say. You are complaining about people complaining. And yes I realize that I am complaining about someone complaining about someone complaining. It's America man, love it today, hate it tomorrow. And be glad that you're not in China where they watch the internet big-brother style.

Let's just say I don't think the additional content could make it any worse.

Nope. I'm sure that people that hated the ending will end up disliking this new DLC. It seems that whatever Bioware/EA does will always be criticize by angry internet people. Not saying that they are wrong, it's just annoying and tiring to hear over and over again. I don't think this will change how much people hated the ending before this DLC. It just seems like a lost cause.

@Paul_Is_Drunk said:

@VinceNotVance said:

Paying $60 for a video game does not give you the right to have artistic input on someone else's creation.

And yet not all pieces of media, especially in the department of story-telling, are left unchanged when a small but significant fix would have made them significantly better.

Blade Runner had a horrible running narration in it's theater release. It is gone from all but the oldest copies now, which nearly everyone agrees is for the better. Season 8 of the television show Dallas was so bad that they made the entire year a dream in the following season. Dallas was one of the largest shows on television from 1978-1991, and did well for another 5 seasons after the "dream season." Nearly everyone agrees that this was the right move to make. Charles Dickens' novel Great Expectations has two endings. Stephen Spielberg made changes to ET in the re-release, and removed them in later editions because he realized it was not a good idea.

To act like this is the first time something like this has happened, or to imagine that it ruins the creative vision, is ridiculous.

These are all good examples.

If it turns out that everything after Harbinger's beam is to be taken literally I can't imagine some extended scenes making much of a difference. However, if it turns out to be a representation of a battle of wills between Shepard and Harbinger I think some extended scenes would be fine. I'm bummed there won't be any more gameplay after Shepard wakes up in the rubble, but I'll take what I can get.

The fact that it's not coming out until summer means they're putting some effort into it at least.

@VinceNotVance said:

Paying $60 for a video game does not give you the right to have artistic input on someone else's creation.

And yet not all pieces of media, especially in the department of story-telling, are left unchanged when a small but significant fix would have made them significantly better.

Blade Runner had a horrible running narration in it's theater release. It is gone from all but the oldest copies now, which nearly everyone agrees is for the better. Season 8 of the television show Dallas was so bad that they made the entire year a dream in the following season. Dallas was one of the largest shows on television from 1978-1991, and did well for another 5 seasons after the "dream season." Nearly everyone agrees that this was the right move to make. Charles Dickens' novel Great Expectations has two endings. Stephen Spielberg made changes to ET in the re-release, and removed them in later editions because he realized it was not a good idea.

To act like this is the first time something like this has happened, or to imagine that it ruins the creative vision, is ridiculous.

No, it won't help. Only a full rewrite could fix that shit show but that is unrealistic to expect and it will still always be the alternative ending, the one they had to fix because they fucked up so badly the first time.

I agree completely with Jeff when he said that ME3 could have been one of the greatest games of this generation, but it's not and never will be.

It can't make it any worse.

And if anyone says an ending won't be changed BUT will be extended, that's a complete lie. Any ending will be different, because with the cut right now, Joker running makes no sense. Shepard killing himself because the Catalyst tells him to makes no sense. Just a bit of exposition fixes any of that.

Hey, Portal added 5 seconds to the ending, and it completely changed it, making Portal 2 possible.

I've got high hopes for the DLC.

Lets just say bioware no longer gets preorders from me.

Don't care.

I'm not playing it.

I highly doubt it. A turd is a turd is a turd, even with prettier window dressing.

Having finished ME3 a few days ago, I have to say this whole ending fiasco is absolutely ridiculous. I was expecting something real bad. I mean...talk of suing Bioware, verbal abuse towards one of their employees and trying to organize protests? I was half-expecting a swastika to pop up on my screen and Shepard coming out as the new fuhrer. Holy shit, people. The ending was disappointing at absolute worst. It certainly was not insulting in anyway. I personally thought it was a good ending.

And no, the new ending won't change anything. Because anyone who reacted that harshly to the ending that is in there wants to be angry and pissed off about stuff on the internet.

All right duders. I myself for the last week never put a single thought towards the Indoctrination theory and clearly alot of haven't as-well. IT GIVES HOPE!

As by the title of the theory. Indoctrination. Shepard the entire time was Indoctrinated except it not until he is hut by Harbingers blast and koed. Then its all a dream. The evidence makes SOOOO MUCH SENSE! The points of evidence when I first played I went "Well....that seems...odd....or even wrong." It seemed like sloppy work. If indoctrination is true. It makes perfect sense.

Meaning this DLC would mean at minimum is a video of Shepard getting up and beaming up towards the citadel and docking the cruicable. At Maximum is has Shepard awake jump up say "FUCK YOU HARBINGER!" Headbutt harbinger fly up to the citadel.....without the transporter and thusly a on rails shooter of super Shepard begin and his "INFINITE AMMO PISTOL" taking out reapers in one shot. THEN you wake up and beginning the last mission and maby even a boss battle with harbinger?

If this is all not true, and we will find out with the dlc. Then a loud cry of "FUCK YOU" from everyone who believe the theory and as-well as those you dont or dont care.

So untill it is out I think the dlc is hopefull with the knowledge of the Indoc theory.

Here is two videos that help out.With the Indoctrination theory.

Angry Joes reaction to the announced DLC after coming to terms with the Indoc Theory.

However it would be hilarious if Bioware and this ending is 100% the true reason that EA got voted worst company of America. And the ending of the game with the dlc will make 100% sense. However EA may strangle Bioware like a new born pup if it is all put together.....maby thats why the dlc is taking so long as to appease their EA overlords?

Truly ultimately if its fucked up. Then I will hold Marauder Shields as a bloody icon. He successfully held me off from the ending 5 times. Before i got past him. He tried hard to keep me away from the end. no......I had to finally kill him.

Having just completed Mass Effect 2 as well as all of the DLC that was released for it, I can attest that Mass Effect 2 is better than Mass Effect 3, bar Arrival. I want all of the Mass Effect 3, BioWare, I don't care about all these silly theories about the ending. "What's done is done" as far as I'm concerned, I just want to uncover and experience some crazy shit like I did in Lair of the Shadow Broker, be met with some scientist's crazy shit a la Overlord, and maybe, maybe, down the line something that shows your fans what's in store for them in the Mass Effect universe.

Just get this ending stuff over with.

Also, vehicles. Get the Mako back in there. Equipped with Reaper-killing tech.

@rjayb89 said:

Having just completed Mass Effect 2 as well as all of the DLC that was released for it, I can attest that Mass Effect 2 is better than Mass Effect 3, bar Arrival. I want all of the Mass Effect 3, BioWare, I don't care about all these silly theories about the ending. "What's done is done" as far as I'm concerned, I just want to uncover and experience some crazy shit like I did in Lair of the Shadow Broker, be met with some scientist's crazy shit a la Overlord, and maybe, maybe, down the line something that shows your fans what's in store for them in the Mass Effect universe.

Just get this ending stuff over with.

Also, vehicles. Get the Mako back in there. Equipped with Reaper-killing tech.

I loved the mako myself. The firewalker on the other hand!? Jesus they somehow made ME into a platformer! I donno I loved so much of ME3 Its on par with ME2. However ME1 I still the best in my opinion. I played all 3 in the last three weeks. So when I got me3 I was 6hours fresh from finishing ME2. However Me1 even after completing it 4 times and knowing it in and out. I still felt epic through it. Which ME3 started to bring such feelings back at points.

Yeah the everyone wants the ending over with aswell. Be it indoc theory or not. The announcement of ending dlc makes it feel like there is a better ending despite everyone pessimism. More so if you believe the Indoc theory. If it all fall down. YET SO FUCKING LONG TO GO!!!! Summer?!

With such a long time it makes you think....they arnt prepared and thusly its just bad writing. Its a horrible situation to be in even if Bioware is in control the entire time.

The ending is fundamentally broken, so I don't see this shit adding anything. Especially given that they implied they're supposed to fix the plotholes, so it's probably just going to add more layers of random, out of place nonsense that gives a stupid explanation for each thing. IE a dumb hamfisted reason your squadmates are running away, joker fleeing, etc.

All I want to know is why Liara is with me, in London heading toward the Citadel portal one minute and then disembarking the Normandy on some paradise planet the next. While I'm buried in rubble somewhere (Earth I guess?). Explain that to my satisfaction and I'll be impressed.

Doesn't matter I still don't want it to exist

I still do not understand why people are so angry about the ending. A lot of the argument, not all mind you, sounds like nitpicking about plot holes and display a general ignorance of the thematic ideas present in the ending that Bioware produced. For myself the thematic meaning is far more important then "How did so and so get on the Normandy".

There is nitpicking and there is the Mass Effect 3 ending. I'm unclear how anyone can resolve the fundemental situation shown by the ending.

Lets take a look at the Synthesis Ending since I suppose that is the biggest thematic idea presented in the ending that Biowarae produced!

- The theme of changing "everything" to be biological/synthetic flies in the face of the general themes of Mass Effect 1, Mass Effect 2, and Mass Effect 3 which seemed to instead focus on strength through diversity. Now everything is ostensibly this new hybrid.

- How does the Crucible-Citadel actually change "everything" to be a biological/synthetic ... thing? The light hits everything everywhere and it transforms people, right? How do you give synthetics like EDI and Geth organic stuff to make them hybrids?? Nothing anywhere in any of the three games indicated any thing that had ever existed could do that but suddenly it can happen...?

- Why would Shepard make this choice at all? His goal is to "Stop. The. Reapers." not "transform every being into else so The Reapers ignore them". And another fun side question to ask: Are The Reapers still hanging around?

- Why would they need to destroy the relay system if the player chose Synthesis? The threat is neutralized by the funny definition Bioware and The Star Child set out so blowing them only serves ruin vital infrastructure. And oh yeah, do biological-synthetic things need to eat? Since Earth is trashed and the relays are gone it is a very long way to their next meals.

- Why would they need to blow up The Citadel if the player chose Synthesis? Again the threat is neutralized by the funny definition Bioware and The Star Child set out so it only seems to serve a purpose of "looks good blowing up". Even if everything that survived is now some biological-synthetic hybrid The Citadel blowing up means there is now a Citadel sized hole in the side of Earth that has a mass that made the comet that wiped out the dinosaurs look tiny.

So on and so forth. I don't nitpick game endings but this is a case where the long you inspect the situation the worse it looks. There are substantial plot holes they setup in each of the three endings that are hard to dismiss as nitpicks.

All I really wanted was a little more closure for the characters who survived (the characters with the most closure, strangely enough, were the ones who died). So ... yeah. I think it will help. But then, I never had much of an issue with the content of the ending. I thought it was pretty good. I just wanted the ending to have more payoff for all the decisions I made throughout the course of the game. I know that ME3 already did take into account all those decisions, but I wanted it demonstrated in the final cinematic. I think the extended cut will be fantastic.
 
And it's free, so, everyone complaining about it can either download it and enjoy it, enjoy the existing ending for what it is, or convince themselves that the (silly, in my opinion) indoctrination theory is true. BioWare has refused to comment on the theory for just this reason: if that's what you need to believe to enjoy the game, so be it. I think most of us understood that the ending was not going to change. But the new cut may smooth over some of the rough edges.
 
And a final thing: I remember the initial complaints about the ending, and how so many were offended when people pointed out the demands for the changed ending were rooted in gamer entitlement. And here it is again. Here's more Mass Effect, for FREE, and people are still complaining. Here's your free content. But it's not what I want! This is getting ridiculous.

i think it will

im confident it will leave every mental, weird, rabid internet poster perfectly satisfied and content with no futher reason to bang on about it again and again and again.

I personally found the ending to be not only confusing, but very depressing. No matter which choice I made, my female Shepard died because I managed to get my war assets score up to only 5,000.

I really do hope the extended DLC makes the ending cinematic much more cohesive, so we can finally understand how Joker was flying the Normandy away, during the battle, and then the ship crash-lands on that planet. That's the only explanation I need.

Nothing will help for those that are still upset.

To me, my only real problem with the ending was that, there really wasn't an ending there to begin with. It was left completely wide open with no definite explanation as to what exactly happened to everyone. So an epilogue to me would be a good thing much like what they did with the first Dragon Age Origins game. I know they wanted to leave things ambiguous to be different or to get people talking, but to end a trilogy of long and involving games on what such a blank open note is just down right ludicrous. You just don't do that!

And given how some companies like Capcom and EA lately have been accused of holding back content only to sell it to us later makes me wonder if they left things wide open in such a manner so that they could sell us some DLC pack and advertise it as the "true" conclusion to the game. I know many folks accused bioware/EA of doing this with ME2 and it's Arrival DLC pack. However without any real hard evidence of these decisions being made by those who developed or published the game, it's all just speculation.