@Harkat: Nah wish I did. That's Angry Joe.

@JeanLuc

I was just about to post Joes video too. The man sums it up perfectly.

This is certainly a respectable theory and much more preferable to the indoctrination theory, but the sad truth is that BioWare was rushed to create a new ending due to the leak of the original. And with EA breathing down their backs and the loss of one of their main writers all they could do was pull together whatever symbolism and imagery that they could think of, primary example being the Garden of Edin vibe from the Normandy Crash.

@Lazyaza: seconded

@Tylea002 said:

Inception's ending did not require forum threads to understand why it was ambiguous, why it was satisfying, and what it ultimately meant. Sure, it raised discussion based on deeper readings, but on a surface level, it worked as a great ending. Mass Effect 3's does not. It requires some form of justification and reading into to explain away the large list of errors and inconsistencies within the story. When you watch the ending, it does not leave you satisfied; further research online and interpretation is required to get anything out of it. Personally, I like the indoctrination theory, as it explains all the bullshit away and leaves it open for a continuation that isn't incongruous with the universe presented. That doesn't mean it's a good ending, it's not - it's a slap in the face to players promised a conclusion. And no doubt, it wasn't intended - but it's far better than face value, and provides Bioware an 'out' that can allow them to salvage this mess. When you think about it, you can come up with many different theories to explain why, in fact, the ending is actually good. But, if you need a 14 minute youtube video to explain why it was good, then it wasn't.

Also; I love ambiguous AND depressing endings. I'm not a fan of Happy Endings that are happy for the sake of it, and don't bring anything interesting or new to the table. The intended tone was not the problem, it was the fact it made no sense and didn't mesh with the characters (Shepard not questioning, joker running away), a large theme of the game (Unity through diversity) OR your own personal choices throughout.

Thanks for linking that Google doc. It was a good read and raised a ton of points that are hard to argue against. I admit to the possibility of being wrong, but I'm still sticking with the indoctrination theory, especially after reading all of that.

I thought the same things about the kid and about Shep dying. I was still disappointed because the ending was so far from what I was expecting/desiring. I also agree that the ambiguity doesn't really fit with the series.

@JeanLuc said:

As a counter to your video I post this

Succinct, yet thorough.

Also, those quotes make Casey Hudson sound utterly clueless.

@Tylea002 said:

When you think about it, you can come up with many different theories to explain why, in fact, the ending is actually good. But, if you need a 14 minute youtube video to explain why it was good, then it wasn't.

I'm trying to avoid responding but I had to for this one. I've seen that 20 minute video people have posted in here about why the ending is so bad. So, by your logic if that person needed a video that is 6 minutes longer than mine to explain how bad something was it must not be bad then? right? What you're saying is if I need a 14 minute video to explain why something is good then it wasn't good? I'm sorry, that is flawed logic. His explanation must have been really irrelevant then if it has a run time even longer.

And I don't need 15 minutes to explain why it was a good ending. I do that in one sentence. I say that it was ambiguous which is sadly a storytelling trait that I think a lot of gamers are not ready for. Gamers seem to want finality, blatant and Star Wars-esque with thumbs up, beers on a beach, and head nods. I knew ME3 was a good narrative with a perplexing ending the second I finished the game. I didn't need a 15 minute video. I only needed 15 minutes to explain this one possible interpretation to other people. The second half of the video is explaining my afterlife theory and the first 7 minutes are actually not about my afterlife theory at all. The first half is about Shepard's questionable mental state throughout the entire game and the last part is about how silly the idea of victory is. Actually I really spent the least amount of time during the entire video on why I actually liked the ending and what I think constitutes an intelligently composed finish to a story.

The people that seem to be truly upset seem to be the ones that fell for Mass Effect's illusion of choice throughout the series in its entirety and then when they got to the very end and discovered that the amassment of their decisions hadn't really mattered all along they were now stricken with disillusion and pissed about the sudden change. I for one never thought my choices truly impacted the game profoundly (it was always in small nicely placed nuances where choices came into play) and never really changed the way the game ended too much in any of them. That doesn't mean the choices weren't difficult to make throughout regardless.

@TerraMantis: Very good, I agree I think.

@TerraMantis: Question. I LOVE the movies you mentioned in your blog and I am one of those who think the ending to ME3 is just terrible. Mind you I have no problem with what the ending was but the way it was presented. Even if you fucking loved the ending we have to agree it felt rushed and unfinished especially if you got the "extra scene". I know Casey Hudson "said" it he always intended to have this ending but his response felt like it was written by a PR person, probably was.

Personally I think what happened is another case where EA suits played "developer pretend". I think once they realized He [Casey] is going to actually finish this particular series they FREAKED OUT and went about changing the ending so they could either 1.) Exploit the series even further through DLC that they know for sure will be a must have, and 2.) Making sure Bioware leaves enough room so they can make ME4.

ME3 was a good ride no doubt about it but at the end I just felt empty and slightly depressed. This will be my first Bioware game that I played that will get multiple playthrough. They just sucked that desire right out of me.

@Napalm said:

People who legitimately enjoyed Mass Effect 3's ending, I am willing to bet, didn't play the previous games, or have no emotional investment in the universe. The endings fly in the face of everything about Mass Effect.

I've been paying attention to Mass Effect since X05 and bought every game day 1. I am very much emotionally invested in the universe and I thought Mass Effect 3 had the best ending of all the ME games.

I don't think it's a coincidence that all the people who don't like the ending have a habit of saying really stupid shit.

'Nuff said.

@TerraMantis said:

@Tylea002 said:

When you think about it, you can come up with many different theories to explain why, in fact, the ending is actually good. But, if you need a 14 minute youtube video to explain why it was good, then it wasn't.

I'm trying to avoid responding but I had to for this one. I've seen that 20 minute video people have posted in here about why the ending is so bad. So, by your logic if that person needed a video that is 6 minutes longer than mine to explain how bad something was it must not be bad then? right? What you're saying is if I need a 14 minute video to explain why something is good then it wasn't good? I'm sorry, that is flawed logic. His explanation must have been really irrelevant then if it has a run time even longer.

And I don't need 15 minutes to explain why it was a good ending. I do that in one sentence. I say that it was ambiguous which is sadly a storytelling trait that I think a lot of gamers are not ready for. Gamers seem to want finality, blatant and Star Wars-esque with thumbs up, beers on a beach, and head nods. I knew ME3 was a good narrative with a perplexing ending the second I finished the game. I didn't need a 15 minute video. I only needed 15 minutes to explain this one possible interpretation to other people. The second half of the video is explaining my afterlife theory and the first 7 minutes are actually not about my afterlife theory at all. The first half is about Shepard's questionable mental state throughout the entire game and the last part is about how silly the idea of victory is. Actually I really spent the least amount of time during the entire video on why I actually liked the ending and what I think constitutes an intelligently composed finish to a story.

The people that seem to be truly upset seem to be the ones that fell for Mass Effect's illusion of choice throughout the series in its entirety and then when they got to the very end and discovered that the amassment of their decisions hadn't really mattered all along they were now stricken with disillusion and pissed about the sudden change. I for one never thought my choices truly impacted the game profoundly (it was always in small nicely placed nuances where choices came into play) and never really changed the way the game ended too much in any of them. That doesn't mean the choices weren't difficult to make throughout regardless.

People are fine with ambiguity. Plenty of gamers have watched and enjoyed movies that ended like Inception. But ambiguity is the last thing you should do in the last game of a trilogy when the developers go on to say things like, "there will be more answers than questions" and "we will not end our game like Lost". And looking through any thread will show that people don't want a stereotypical happy ending. Just one that provided closure and made sense with the lore of the universe. Something that Shepard being Space Jesus does not do.

And if we want to get picky, that twenty minute video could easily be summarized to a few sentences so time on a video is irrelevant. Either way I'm glad you enjoyed the ending and didn't fall for the illusion of choice. I wish I felt the same way, but it all left a bad taste in my mouth.

Edit: If anything I expected an ending similar to Dragon Age: Origins. Just text describing how your decisions effected the world with multiple outcomes whether they were good or bad.

The ending of Mass Effect 3 is completely out of place and ridiculous.

WHICH IS BECAUSE IT'S ALL FROM INDOCTRINATION!

I WOKE UP FROM THE RUBBLE, THEN I FLEW THE CITADEL INTO HARBINGER!

Lots of speculation, people.

Lots of speculation.

@Joeybagad0nutz said:

'Nuff said.

This

@TerraMantis said:

@Tylea002 said:

When you think about it, you can come up with many different theories to explain why, in fact, the ending is actually good. But, if you need a 14 minute youtube video to explain why it was good, then it wasn't.

I'm trying to avoid responding but I had to for this one. I've seen that 20 minute video people have posted in here about why the ending is so bad. So, by your logic if that person needed a video that is 6 minutes longer than mine to explain how bad something was it must not be bad then? right? What you're saying is if I need a 14 minute video to explain why something is good then it wasn't good? I'm sorry, that is flawed logic. His explanation must have been really irrelevant then if it has a run time even longer.

And I don't need 15 minutes to explain why it was a good ending. I do that in one sentence. I say that it was ambiguous which is sadly a storytelling trait that I think a lot of gamers are not ready for. Gamers seem to want finality, blatant and Star Wars-esque with thumbs up, beers on a beach, and head nods. I knew ME3 was a good narrative with a perplexing ending the second I finished the game. I didn't need a 15 minute video. I only needed 15 minutes to explain this one possible interpretation to other people. The second half of the video is explaining my afterlife theory and the first 7 minutes are actually not about my afterlife theory at all. The first half is about Shepard's questionable mental state throughout the entire game and the last part is about how silly the idea of victory is. Actually I really spent the least amount of time during the entire video on why I actually liked the ending and what I think constitutes an intelligently composed finish to a story.

The people that seem to be truly upset seem to be the ones that fell for Mass Effect's illusion of choice throughout the series in its entirety and then when they got to the very end and discovered that the amassment of their decisions hadn't really mattered all along they were now stricken with disillusion and pissed about the sudden change. I for one never thought my choices truly impacted the game profoundly (it was always in small nicely placed nuances where choices came into play) and never really changed the way the game ended too much in any of them. That doesn't mean the choices weren't difficult to make throughout regardless.

You don't need a twenty minute video to explain why it's bad. The creator of the video simply took twenty minutes to explain every last one of his ten points in detail with examples that aren't necessary to get the basic points across. The indoctrination theory requires analytical details on the level of playing a game like 9 Persons, 9 Hours, 9 Doors. You have to jump through hoops, some of which are on fire, in order to make the basic idea that it's all an indoctrination-induced hallucination make any level of sense. Even then, it's a stretch to suggest that this theory that required intense research into the game was actually intended by the developer.

@Mordukai said:

@TerraMantis: Question. I LOVE the movies you mentioned in your blog and I am one of those who think the ending to ME3 is just terrible. Mind you I have no problem with what the ending was but the way it was presented. Even if you fucking loved the ending we have to agree it felt rushed and unfinished especially if you got the "extra scene". I know Casey Hudson "said" it he always intended to have this ending but his response felt like it was written by a PR person, probably was.

Personally I think what happened is another case where EA suits played "developer pretend". I think once they realized He [Casey] is going to actually finish this particular series they FREAKED OUT and went about changing the ending so they could either 1.) Exploit the series even further through DLC that they know for sure will be a must have, and 2.) Making sure Bioware leaves enough room so they can make ME4.

ME3 was a good ride no doubt about it but at the end I just felt empty and slightly depressed. This will be my first Bioware game that I played that will get multiple playthrough. They just sucked that desire right out of me.

As for your first paragraph, I see that you start by saying "Question" and then I see no question marks after that point so I don't know that everything thereafter is not so much a question as it is a statement. What's the question?

As for your second paragraph, I agree for the most part. I don't know that people came in and did this or that but I do know that the lead writer and creator of ME left BioWare only a short time before ME3's release. I also don't think that Mass Effect was ever going to be over. Shepard, on the other hand, was where the question of closure would be placed on his/her story. Mass Effect as a mythos I thought would live on for certain, maybe not as being called "ME4" so much as it could be...Mass Effect: First Contact War or something of the sort. The franchise is such a brilliant IP and the idea could be pushed into nearly endless ideas that even go beyond the current races of the Milky Way. The Citadel, as we known, spans millions or even possibly billions of years. They could introduce race/s from even before Protheans. Meaning 'race X' could be roughly 100k years before current humanity and a mission might take you to the Turrian home world where you would see them in their very early evolution stages and they could be some type of reptile or bird-like creature. The Ideas for missions and video game premises is literally endless. That being said, I don't think that they were very afraid of closing on Shepard, but I do think they always had "ME4" in mind.

That is mostly about #2 of your second paragraph. For the first part of the paragraph I completely agree. I thought the most ugly and discussing part of the ending was at the very end when it said something along the lines of "Shepard is a legend, further that legend with giving us money for DLC!!! =D" YEEAAAAHHHH. Yeah, that was just disgraceful. Sometimes I think EA has no fucking shame whatsoever.

In the last sentences you say "this will be my first bioware game that I played that WILL get multiple playthroughs". I assume you meant "will NOT get multiple playthroughs". I'm sorry to hear that, but my ME3 will get the same amount all of the others got, which is two initial playthroughs and then a replay of the entire series whenever whatever is coming next will be hitting shelves (by then they might not hit shelves, could be all digital). Sucks man, feel for you, I was on the same boat last year with DA2. I tried to playthrough it again but the first playthrough was even tedious. I was lying to myself even starting a second. At least the gameplay of ME3 is fundamentally improved and as fun as the first two. DA2 didn't even have have good gameplay for me. I see where you're coming from though.

@TerraMantis: Well, I'm glad you enjoyed the ending, and can actually enjoy the Jesus metaphors, for example - unlike me, who believes them to be an insult on everything that ME has stood for - because well, I'd love to like the ending too. That said, it's time for my rebuttal.

I love ambiguity in endings. I love depression in endings. I love endings that play with established themes and concepts, turning them on their head, but in a way that makes total sense in hindsight. The Mass Effect 3 ending does not make total sense in hindsight. I knew choice was an illusion in those games, and I didn't mind. Bioware's official line on that seemed to always be 'Yes, so we can carry it forward to the next game,' and an implication that the final one would vary greatly, thus leading to false expectations among many. But say we didn't get that, say at no point had we been promised wildly diverging endings - the starchild, Shepard's acceptance of everything he says, the explanation for the reapers are still bad, that is to say, illogical when viewed in the context of the universe. Synthetics vs Organics had never been the main theme, it had been the subject matter of ONE of the subplots. A subplot paralleled by the Genophage, which shows a similar thing (Krogan rebelling once the salarians helped them), but synthetics got nothing to do with that. The theme of this final game was unity through diversity, bringing everyone together, without taking away their identity. At no point, on a game based on choice, can you call him on that. Whilst the mass effect games may have had similar progressions, you were without fail, always able to call the villains on their bullshit. Saren and TIM both commit suicide when you call their bullshit, so how have you forgotten that all important ability now?

This generalization that gamers 'can't handle' an ending that is ambiguous and insulting is also, bullshit, which in a parallel, I shall proceed to call you on. If Shepard died in the Cerberus base, or a slightly different style of end mission, and the game ended before the final battle; that would be an ambiguous ending in line with the themes of the series, which would have been satisfying. The ending would have showed that the real victory was uniting all the races; Shepard achieved that, and sacrificed himself to do that, because he believed (or I would have believed) that would be enough. It would be ambiguous and not let you know who won, but satisfying as it completes Shepards personal story in an emotional way that makes sense. Now, I just made that off the top of my head, because it is fairly easy to keep making up depressing, ambiguous etc. endings that fit with the series. The godchild, the Jesus parallels, the fact that the motivations of the villains directly contradict themselves in the final game, all this flies in the face of what made Mass Effect so amazing - it was a hard sci fi universe that was about reality, about soldiers, comradship and standing as one.

In fact, I would have been happy with 0 choice in an ending. Shepard gets to the crucible, but it turns out it was created by the reapers as a false beacon of hope to prevent mass suicides; thus why they allowed Shepard on it in the first place. Shepard throws all the war assets at them, but it's not enough, everyone dies, but with their honour intact. Depressing, inevitible, and futile, but within the themes of the series: That is to say, even if it's futile, shepard will try. He may not win, but god damnit he'll try.

So yes, that's my rebuttal. Most people who really hate the endings have logical arguments that are far above 'Little blue babies,' and are not 'silly little gamers can't handle having to use their brain. I use my brain, and it still thinks the ending is crap.

The best thing about this ending is that it was completely unexpected for me. Most game endings are predictable as fuck and don't really engage any afterthought whatsoever. When I reached that moment of choice I was like "holy fuck" and felt the same kind of burden that Shepard would have felt with an entire galaxy of civilisations at your disposal.

I don't think it matters if the kid is real or not at the beginning. You are correct enough about the Contact comparison, in that the Catalyst is simply projecting what Shepard already feels guilty about (possibly alluding to the concept of original sin). Hence the kid's early line "You can't help me". It doesn't matter if he is real or imagined, the Kid is an embodiment of what humanity is going through and the idea that one man/woman alone cannot change the course of history. In the first two games Shepard is portrayed as a one-man rapetrain dropping reapers like they were twigs. Nothing fazed the guy because he had the power to do anything. But now when the real invasion begins, Bioware has tried to establish the scale of the war by diminishing Shepard to a more human character (as opposed to previously superhuman) with a few cracks showing.

When it comes time for Shepard to "fix" the catalyst on his end, he is simply proving to the catalyst (who has clearly been watching this scenario unfold the whole time) that he is a worthy candidate for deciding the fate of the galaxy after overcoming the will of The Illusive Man (the embodiment of humanity's evil - ie consumed by "the dark side" etc etc.).

The ascension theory is plausible but only in a metaphorical sense IMO. Shepard was revived from certain death by Cerberus (evil) to do their bidding in ME2, so why can't Shepard be revived by this omnipotent character that is likely millions of years more advanced than anything that has existed? This deus ex machina is also necessary otherwise the story would never resolve itself. It both explains the existence of the reapers and why they are so advanced, and also brings a finality to the story. Yes it's a cheap tactic used to exploit your money with future DLC (WELCOME TO VIDEO GAMES PEOPLE), but in this instance it also serves to probe our relationship with the divine.

As Stephen Fry once said "Non fiction tells you facts, fiction tells you the truth". IMO this is an excellent Science Fiction story, within the context of game stories, and deserves better than a pathetic whiny backlash.

I love all the raging. Personally I like Control and Synthesis endings. Fuck you internet.

@Tylea002 said:

@TerraMantis: Well, I'm glad you enjoyed the ending, and can actually enjoy the Jesus metaphors (I don't know where you're getting this from but apparently I really enjoyed this...Jesus metaphor. I must have mentioned it often to display that enjoyment. Is it because Shepard sacrifices him/herself? Is it because I use themes that happen to have to do with some different conceptual realms of existence beyond what we know? I'm sorry that I did not create new abstract terms for everything instead of just using well-known terms for those concepts. Also, if you're talking about my reference to Hell, purgatory, and an afterlife- those were adapted to Catholicism from themes and concepts that predate Catholicism by a long shot. EVEN JESUS. The fact that you associate it with Jesus is your business. I specifically tried not to use words like heaven and I even used Torment instead of Hell to give a generalized idealization to what "hell" is no matter what theology you place it in.) , for example - unlike me, who believes them to be an insult on everything that ME has stood for - because well, I'd love to like the ending too. That said, it's time for my rebuttal.

I love ambiguity in endings. I love depression in endings. I love endings that play with established themes and concepts, turning them on their head, but in a way that makes total sense in hindsight. The Mass Effect 3 ending does not make total sense in hindsight. (Just making a mental note here for later *1 -->) I knew choice was an illusion in those games, and I didn't mind. Bioware's official line on that seemed to always be 'Yes, so we can carry it forward to the next game,' and an implication that the final one would vary greatly, thus leading to false expectations among many. But say we didn't get that, say at no point had we been promised wildly diverging endings - the starchild, Shepard's acceptance of everything he says, the explanation for the reapers are still bad, that is to say, illogical when viewed in the context of the universe. Synthetics vs Organics had never been the main theme, it had been the subject matter of ONE of the subplots (I don't agree. Each game was about Synthetics and Organics throughout each game. ME1 was literally about you fighting the Geth throughout its entirety. ME2 was about the Collectors- a group of retrofitted organics to do the bidding of synthetics which is the same thing. And well, ME3 was about Reapers killing organics. So, at the very least it was a subplot, if not a main theme, of each game's narrative.) A subplot paralleled by the Genophage, which shows a similar thing (Krogan rebelling once the salarians helped them), but synthetics got nothing to do with that. The theme of this final game was unity through diversity, bringing everyone together, without taking away their identity. At no point, on a game based on choice (Revert to *1, I thought you knew the games where about the illusion of choice...and you didn't even mind.), can you call him on that. Whilst the mass effect games may have had similar progressions, you were without fail, always able to call the villains on their bullshit. Saren and TIM both commit suicide when you call their bullshit, so how have you forgotten that all important ability now? (I'll tell you how, I must be under the same spell of confusion as you. I like how you were without fail able to call them on their bullshit and then you revert to an example of calling a villain on their BS directly from the game you say you can't do it in with the reference to TIM committing suicide in ME3. Have you forgotten the sentence you just typed only a few words beforehand? Just because you throw the "Whilst" at the beginning of the argument doesn't mean you're making any sense. Also, who said the catalyst kid was a villain. I mean, you just did, but I never did and I also never got that impression from the game.)

This generalization that gamers 'can't handle' an ending that is ambiguous and insulting is also, bullshit, which in a parallel, I shall proceed to call you on. If Shepard died in the Cerberus base, or a slightly different style of end mission, and the game ended before the final battle; that would be an ambiguous ending (I'm not going to address this much, I think you just need to spend more time with the meaning of the word ambiguous. Ambiguous means that a definitive answer is difficult to exact because of choices between MULTIPLE INTERPRETATIONS. The ending being ambiguous is not even up for debate. The fact that there are like 6 different believable theories for the ending means that the state of whether or not ME3's ending is ambiguous is simply a fact.) in line with the themes of the series, which would have been satisfying. The ending would have showed that the real victory was uniting all the races; Shepard achieved that, and sacrificed (Oh sacrifice...you must mean the Jesus ending as a metaphor. Always with the Jesus parallels this guy.) himself to do that, because he believed (or I would have believed) that would be enough. It would be ambiguous and not let you know who won, but satisfying as it completes Shepards personal story in an emotional way that makes sense. Now, I just made that off the top of my head, because it is fairly easy to keep making up depressing, ambiguous etc. endings that fit with the series. The godchild, the Jesus parallels, the fact that the motivations of the villains directly contradict themselves in the final game, all this flies in the face of what made Mass Effect so amazing - it was a hard sci fi universe that was about reality, about soldiers, comradship and standing as one. (These last few paragraphs are just...either unfounded or fictional. Your endings are not ambiguous so much as they are definitive. PLEASE, let's not discuss hypothetical fictions that never happen. It is pointless. Unless you make a thread about a detail ending of a hypothetical ending, I'd like to read that.)

In fact, I would have been happy with 0 choice in an ending. Shepard gets to the crucible, but it turns out it was created by the reapers as a false beacon of hope to prevent mass suicides; thus why they allowed Shepard on it in the first place. Shepard throws all the war assets at them, but it's not enough, everyone dies, but with their honour intact. Depressing, inevitible, and futile, but within the themes of the series: That is to say, even if it's futile, shepard will try. He may not win, but god damnit he'll try (He didn't need to TRY. He already succeeded if you're taking the ending at face-value.) .

So yes, that's my rebuttal. Most people who really hate the endings have logical arguments that are far above 'Little blue babies (What? I'm obviously missing something. I don't understand this at all.),' and are not 'silly little gamers can't handle having to use their brain. I use my brain, and it still thinks the ending is crap.

First off, I simply made my comments inside your "rebuttal" with an underline and in bold. I didn't feel like I should truly address a lot of what you're saying seeing as most of it does not pertain to my forum comment you were following in nearly any way, shape, or form. I think your whole rebuttal "flies by its own face" time and again. Comeback with something not so contradictory to the words within your own rebuttal, bloated, contrived, and convoluted and we'll both wipe the pomposity off. Stop using words like rebuttal and whilst so I can put my nose down. This isn't a dick measuring contest of word smithery. I'd love to have a normal conversation without all of the smartass mannerisms back and forth.

I agree with a lot of what you say... The Synthetic ending seemed like the best move. One thing you do not mention is that when you arrive on the Citadel during the final mission it sure looks a lot like Hell. Dead bodies, red and dark with some orange colors etc. I am not so sure that he did die or it is a dream though. I think the final charge was to represent mankind "storming Heaven". Man had become godlike by creating life... However it took Shepard and his spirit/essence to complete the merge of god and man. On my iPhone, hope that makes sense

A list of all the problems with the ending:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QT4IUepvrU1pfv_B95oQj0H84DlCTUmzQ_uQh1voTUs/mobilebasic?pli=1

A video detailing the top 10 problems with the ending:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M0Cf864P7E&fmt=22

I keep reading that those who are choosing to not participate in the massive cathartic display of childish nerd rage keep getting told things like "you must not have played the entire series" or that "you do not really understand" etc. Basically anything that might suggest that they like the game and know more about it then you do. ME is my favorite series, I love the lore (am so pumped that I now have the codex on my iPhone) and can assure you that I enjoy the games. I do not think its a great ending, but I do not think it is the abomination that some feel it is. Also, for people suggest "nothing changes" with the merge ending I have to say that insisting something does not make it true. A new DNA is formed, life takes its next step in evolution and THE CYCLE ENDS. Joker does not come out looking like a husk nor do the other squad mates. Merge is not merging into the Reapers. Shepard is already partly synthetic fer chrisake. Some people become so fucking enraged when you suggest that there indoctrination theory is wrong. ME 3 spent lots of time attempting to show that Synthetic life is equal to organic life. Why the game would want you to kill it all makes no sense. Shepards gasp at the end of the destroy ending could just as well be his last. And do not get me started on people automatically assuming that he is in London because of the way the "rubble looks like London debris". The entire ME series was great and tons of fun. Shepards story is over but I am sure it's not the last ME game we see.

I keep reading that those who are choosing to not participate in the massive cathartic display of childish nerd rage keep getting told things like "you must not have played the entire series" or that "you do not really understand" etc. Basically anything that might suggest that they like the game and know more about it then you do. ME is my favorite series, I love the lore (am so pumped that I now have the codex on my iPhone) and can assure you that I enjoy the games. I do not think its a great ending, but I do not think it is the abomination that some feel it is. Also, for people suggest "nothing changes" with the merge ending I have to say that insisting something does not make it true. A new DNA is formed, life takes its next step in evolution and THE CYCLE ENDS. Joker does not come out looking like a husk nor do the other squad mates. Merge is not merging into the Reapers. Shepard is already partly synthetic fer chrisake. Some people become so fucking enraged when you suggest that there indoctrination theory is wrong. ME 3 spent lots of time attempting to show that Synthetic life is equal to organic life. Why the game would want you to kill it all makes no sense. Shepards gasp at the end of the destroy ending could just as well be his last. And do not get me started on people automatically assuming that he is in London because of the way the "rubble looks like London debris". The entire ME series was great and tons of fun. Shepards story is over but I am sure it's not the last ME game we see.

The endings are broken plain and simple, despite how much of an emotional response felt from playing the main story and then the end just gives me nothing except the need to scratch my head thinking about what happened afterward?

Not to mention that dickhead Casey Hudson saying how the ending wouldn't be the simple A, B, and C choices that anyone could get. Yeah fuck you Casey.

The whole thing about the reapers and that AI god child was that Humans and Synthetics could never co-exist that there would always be conflict unless they were all the same through synthesis. Umm hello?! I just brought peace between the Geth and the Quarians after 300 years of war you dolt!

But the biggest thing that got on my nerves was the total lack of closure. There's still a shit ton of unanswered questions and I know some people feel like "Some questions are better left unanswered" but to me that shouldn't be the case here because it only makes me feel like Bioware themselves don't even know what the answers are!

Hell! They probably didn't know what to make a Quarian look like! How will people get around without Mass Relays? Well too damn bad because even Bioware probably doesn't know the answer!

I go back and forth on how I feel about the ending. I like this theory though, the choice after he/she has died. I also thought the first time through that Shepard probably died there, the light in his/her eyes goes out and then the white beam. Out of the 3 most likely theories: face value, indoctrination, and now afterlife, I feel this one is probably the closest to home.

I'm just going to set this here.

@dantey said:

I like the a similar version I found in the forums, but it has some differences. So the idea is, that after Shepard is hit by the laser beam before the elevator to the Citadel, that is where the whole dream sequence begins. The main arguments for this is the way his pistol handles: you don't have a ammo counter. And the fact, that when you are walking on the bridge to the console on The Citadel, there is no visible way to get there any other way, although Anderson says, that he is waling on similar path. And when you do get to the center, only your bridge is connected, which begs the question: How did Anderson get there? Also, when Shepard sits down, he has a wound in his side. The same spot, where he shoot Anderson, yet he himself never received a bullet there.

This theory states, that the whole sequence on The Citadel is about fighting indoctrination. Previously in the series, it has been stated, that when a victim is being indoctrinated, it starts to see black lines. We see these lines in the ending several times. Also, what supports this theory, is the appearance of The Illusive Man out of nowhere and his ability to command Shepard to shoot Anderson. I know that my paragon Shep would never do that on his own. As for the three ending themselves, then they represent the final effort in fighting off the indoctrination. The "control" and "symbiosis" endings represent antagonists of the ME trilogy. The Illusive Man wanted to control the Reapers, but Saren was all for symbiosis. This leaves the "destroy" ending, which kill all robotic races in the universe. That ensures the death of the Reapers, but also kills the Geth and EDE, which may not be, what a good guy would want to do. But, if this ending is chosen and the galactic readiness meter is full, then, after the alien planet sequence, a little video shows someone with a N7 tag waking up between concrete ruble. This suggests, that Shepard was not successfully indoctrinated and wakes up from his dream back on Earth surrounded by the remains of buildings, since The Citadel is not made out of concrete.

This theory also states, that the Catalyst was using the form of a boy to seem familiar to Shepard, to which I can agree. But I don't agree with the idea, that the boy was never there to begin with, as both the theory and your video claim.

Trust me, you didn't have to write this out or try to explain it. Everyone has heard this "theory" over 100 times. For whatever reason, many who believe this also feel the need to keep repeating over and over again... basically in an attempt to convince others it is true. That way it is easier for they themselves to believe it.

Also, the pistol arguement is really silly.... it is a video game. Imagine if you went into the ending with only 3 bullets left.. or you did not even carry one with you?

The ending is extremely sci-fi ish, especially old school sci-fi. Sci-Fi endings are often very open. This is because they want you to sit and ponder and think "what if". The entire genre was created in order to allow people to fantasize. That is what Mass Effect did best, the universe and lore they created allows people to imagine all sorts of things. Like right now, I am really interested to try to figure out what would happen to the Batarians now that the Hegemony is gone. How would the Batarians create their new society, would slavery and caste systems continue. Its very similar to the stuff we asked ourselves in regards to North Korea recently.

Not many games can make you think like that....

@Hailinel said:

@815Sox

I keep reading that those who are choosing to not participate in the massive cathartic display of childish nerd rage keep getting told things like "you must not have played the entire series" or that "you do not really understand" etc. Basically anything that might suggest that they like the game and know more about it then you do. ME is my favorite series, I love the lore (am so pumped that I now have the codex on my iPhone) and can assure you that I enjoy the games. I do not think its a great ending, but I do not think it is the abomination that some feel it is. Also, for people suggest "nothing changes" with the merge ending I have to say that insisting something does not make it true. A new DNA is formed, life takes its next step in evolution and THE CYCLE ENDS. Joker does not come out looking like a husk nor do the other squad mates. Merge is not merging into the Reapers. Shepard is already partly synthetic fer chrisake. Some people become so fucking enraged when you suggest that there indoctrination theory is wrong. ME 3 spent lots of time attempting to show that Synthetic life is equal to organic life. Why the game would want you to kill it all makes no sense. Shepards gasp at the end of the destroy ending could just as well be his last. And do not get me started on people automatically assuming that he is in London because of the way the "rubble looks like London debris". The entire ME series was great and tons of fun. Shepards story is over but I am sure it's not the last ME game we see.

I have not played the Mass Effect series. I am not intimately familiar with the characters or story beyond synopsese I have read online. But even air can tell that ending is insane in the worst way possible.

I would suggest you not form opinions based on shit written on the internet. Mass Effect 1 is still very much playable btw... you can get through it relatively quick if you want too. Give it a try, you are missing out.

This is insane. I really enjoyed the ending to ME3, this is so stupid that people are yelling and calling for action somehow saying "WE ARE THE MAJORITY! CHANGE THE ENDING!" so stupid like Jeff said on the podcast. This is just like the Sopranos ending or the Battlestar Galactica ending, not everyone is going to be happy. If you don't like it, deal with it write your own story on Fanction.net with your indocrination theory.

Thanks for trying, but I still hate the ending.

@Hailinel said:

@815Sox

I keep reading that those who are choosing to not participate in the massive cathartic display of childish nerd rage keep getting told things like "you must not have played the entire series" or that "you do not really understand" etc. Basically anything that might suggest that they like the game and know more about it then you do. ME is my favorite series, I love the lore (am so pumped that I now have the codex on my iPhone) and can assure you that I enjoy the games. I do not think its a great ending, but I do not think it is the abomination that some feel it is. Also, for people suggest "nothing changes" with the merge ending I have to say that insisting something does not make it true. A new DNA is formed, life takes its next step in evolution and THE CYCLE ENDS. Joker does not come out looking like a husk nor do the other squad mates. Merge is not merging into the Reapers. Shepard is already partly synthetic fer chrisake. Some people become so fucking enraged when you suggest that there indoctrination theory is wrong. ME 3 spent lots of time attempting to show that Synthetic life is equal to organic life. Why the game would want you to kill it all makes no sense. Shepards gasp at the end of the destroy ending could just as well be his last. And do not get me started on people automatically assuming that he is in London because of the way the "rubble looks like London debris". The entire ME series was great and tons of fun. Shepards story is over but I am sure it's not the last ME game we see.

I have not played the Mass Effect series. I am not intimately familiar with the characters or story beyond synopsese I have read online. But even air can tell that ending is insane in the worst way possible.

I would suggest you not form opinions based on shit written on the internet. Mass Effect 1 is still very much playable btw... you can get through it relatively quick if you want too. Give it a try, you are missing out.

@ShalashaskaUK666 said:

Your theories are awesome man, I love the idea that the physical kid never existed, however all of that said, it's still fuckTACULARLY stupid to end a franchise predicated on scientific reasoning, with a religiously-tinged, chaos/order metaphor.

Hey man, did you see Lost?

Same shit.

@815Sox: Yeah, but I cannot expect people to know what I am talking about.

@WiqidBritt: the first two endings were pretty straight forward and made sense. Mass effect 2 even improved upon how players actions played out in the ending. If you chose not to upgrade the normandy or dismiss some of the characters side missions these aspects greatly affect who lives and who dies. You also left out the part where you had to choose how to utilize your squad mates which you spent then entire game collecting and if you put one in a situation they could not handle they'd either die or get someone else killed.

I was pretty disappointed that these war assets that we spent all game collecting just to fill up a bar. This made most of the game rather pointless because with 1500 ems and 100% readiness you can get the same end result of someone who beat all the side quests and main quests to get 3000+ ems.

I'm glad some of you were able to enjoy this cookie cutter ending/s because I sure as hell didn't

i love the ending too

@TheHumanDove said:

Loving the ending of ME3 is for people that don't understand ME.

Nice video, but I've got some questions.

1. Why didn't Shepard go through a journey to heaven when he died at the beginning of ME2?

2. If the nightclubs are supposed to represent the trilogy's "death" theme then what is the deal with Chora's Den?

3. Why does Shepard hallucinate the little kid out of stress one time, and then never see him? If he's really just stressed out, shouldn't he be hallucinating more?

4. How did the Illusive Man get to the Citadel and why would he even want to confront Shepard if the Crucible can't work?

5. What do you make of the "secret ending" where Shepard appears to take a breath somewhere?

Furthermore, this whole thing is just so totally out of left field and utterly divorced from everything we've seen in the series that I just can't buy it at all.

Bottom line, this theory is way harder to swallow than the Indoctrination Theory, and even that is a stretch. I'm still of the opinion that ME3 has one of the worst endings in video game history and even the folks at Bioware who wrote it have know idea what it means to them. They are like high school students who didn't do their assigned reading and are trying to bullshit their way to a passing grade. Pathetic.

@boj4ngles said:

Nice video, but I've got some questions.

1. Why didn't Shepard go through a journey to heaven when he died at the beginning of ME2?

2. If the nightclubs are supposed to represent the trilogy's "death" theme then what is the deal with Chora's Den?

3. Why does Shepard hallucinate the little kid out of stress one time, and then never see him? If he's really just stressed out, shouldn't he be hallucinating more?

4. How did the Illusive Man get to the Citadel and why would he even want to confront Shepard if the Crucible can't work?

5. What do you make of the "secret ending" where Shepard appears to take a breath somewhere?

Furthermore, this whole thing is just so totally out of left field and utterly divorced from everything we've seen in the series that I just can't buy it at all.

Bottom line, this theory is way harder to swallow than the Indoctrination Theory, and even that is a stretch. I'm still of the opinion that ME3 has one of the worst endings in video game history and even the folks at Bioware who wrote it have know idea what it means to them. They are like high school students who didn't do their assigned reading and are trying to bullshit their way to a passing grade. Pathetic.

Thanks, okay.

1. I think this question is irrelevant. How do you know Shepard didn't? The narrative only shows you the perspective it wishes. Which also leads to question #2.

2. Maybe that is why the symbolism truly becomes more prominent at ME2 and goes onward, because Shepard does die in the beginning of 2.

3. I think that the kid (human form) is a symbol for Shepard's peace of mind. When Shepard sees the kid on the rooftops Shepard smiles while watching him play, but when the Reapers arrive each sighting becomes more dire. The mind is extremely powerful and people's minds are so powerful that they can create a person or places with so much lucidity that it is as real to them as the first time you met your best friend or told a boss to fuck off. Reality is relative to perception. So, when Shepard sees the kid die in the same ship that the commander's mind put him, Shepard has no choice but to accept the death, whether it be fictitious or not. The kid doesn't stop haunting the commander though, it only changes forms and Shepard begins having night terrors throughout the game's entirety.

4. Good question. I want to almost say...who cares? Anything I say would simply be conjecture, I truly have no idea. But, TIM was working with the reapers in some capacity or another, whether it be directly or indirectly I do not know. He did almost look husk-like. Maybe the other Reaper husk were not able to distinguish him as a foe and he simply walked right up to the teleporter. He had the idea in his head he could control the Reapers, perhaps controlling husks was simple. Like I said though, it's just conjecture.

5. I make nothing of it. Like I said before, the narrative only shows you the perspective it wishes. As we know from Vega's dilemma throughout ME3 over the idea of joining the N7 initiative or not that the N7 sect is fairly large and stretches beyond just the Normandy. That ending only shows someone, anyone, with some dog tags and N7 armor. It could be anyone, anywhere.

Sorry to hear that. I think a lot of people's hatred toward ME3's ending is fairly justified. That being said though, I happy I enjoyed it. It wasn't the best game in the series (story-wise, ME1 takes that spot for myself amongst all games actually) but, thankfully I'm one of the few that didn't think it was complete dog shit.

Great read! I am kind of on the same page with some of your theories. I totally loved the ending. I tried to avoid most of the bashing online until I could get through it and form my own opinions and I'm glad I did. ME3 really did have some glaring issues that a few more months of polish could have fixed to make this a solid conclusion (gameplay wise) but I thought the ending was fantastic! As stated before if you don't like the ending to BIOWARE's story that BIOWARE wrote for a BIOWARE property...go write fan fiction.

So I just watched your video. I understand what you're trying to say but being able to choose your life after death seams contrary to not only the concept of heaven and hell but also the point of making the choices you do. The after life is believed to be a consequence of your actions in life no one get's to choose whether they want to be tortured for all eternity or live in bliss. In mass effect your choices have consequences as well but some how if you play enough multi-player it doesn't matter how you play the game at all or what choices you make because you'll get the same 3 choices as every one else. I guess this would be the equivalent of saying enough Hail Mary's.

This is all really obtuse and goes against conventional ideas of what the after life is. This means that no one is going to get it. You bring up inception but you never compare how it's ambiguous ending works. It uses a well known philosophical question and gives it a visual representation in the form of a spinning top; is this a dream or is this reality? That's it, simple. I never had a problem with inceptions ending because this was one of it's major themes and for it to answer this question would be contrary to the fact that you really can't.

Basically

“If you have to ask what it symbolizes, it didn't.”

― Roger Ebert

I think I'd be more fine with the ending if they didn't cut out the original plot that Drew Karpyshyn intended where the Reapers were the good guys (and yes, I totally called that ages ago), and were trying to stop dark energy from consuming the universe.

At the very least, I like it when there's one writer with a cohesive vision behind a story. That just makes me feel better about it and not make me wonder what could have been.

If you love the end to Mass Effect 3 you weren't paying attention or hate writers that pay attention to their own scripts.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QT4IUepvrU1pfv_B95oQj0H84DlCTUmzQ_uQh1voTUs/edit

@Hailinel said:

@815Sox

@Hailinel said:

@815Sox

I keep reading that those who are choosing to not participate in the massive cathartic display of childish nerd rage keep getting told things like "you must not have played the entire series" or that "you do not really understand" etc. Basically anything that might suggest that they like the game and know more about it then you do. ME is my favorite series, I love the lore (am so pumped that I now have the codex on my iPhone) and can assure you that I enjoy the games. I do not think its a great ending, but I do not think it is the abomination that some feel it is. Also, for people suggest "nothing changes" with the merge ending I have to say that insisting something does not make it true. A new DNA is formed, life takes its next step in evolution and THE CYCLE ENDS. Joker does not come out looking like a husk nor do the other squad mates. Merge is not merging into the Reapers. Shepard is already partly synthetic fer chrisake. Some people become so fucking enraged when you suggest that there indoctrination theory is wrong. ME 3 spent lots of time attempting to show that Synthetic life is equal to organic life. Why the game would want you to kill it all makes no sense. Shepards gasp at the end of the destroy ending could just as well be his last. And do not get me started on people automatically assuming that he is in London because of the way the "rubble looks like London debris". The entire ME series was great and tons of fun. Shepards story is over but I am sure it's not the last ME game we see.

I have not played the Mass Effect series. I am not intimately familiar with the characters or story beyond synopsese I have read online. But even air can tell that ending is insane in the worst way possible.

I would suggest you not form opinions based on shit written on the internet. Mass Effect 1 is still very much playable btw... you can get through it relatively quick if you want too. Give it a try, you are missing out.

Tried the ME2 demo and hated it. I have no interest in playing the series. But anyone that just watches the ending and understands the context can tell that it went completely off the rails.

Far enough, but the ending did not go "off the rails".... it was different yes... but if you really look into it, there are ways to bring peace. That was the goal of Shepard. People can interpret that however they want. Lots of pissed off people are going to off course imagine that it all meant nothing and that everything was destroyed. I do not think that is what Bioware intended, nor do they suggest that everyone died.

But yeah if you do not like 2 then you will most likely not like 3. Of course the story is the major focus of the game. I think 3 really improved the game play and I have a lot of fun with the multiplayer.

@Snowsprite said:

If you love the end to Mass Effect 3 you weren't paying attention or hate writers that pay attention to their own scripts.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QT4IUepvrU1pfv_B95oQj0H84DlCTUmzQ_uQh1voTUs/edit

If you are seriously telling other people that your own opinion is correct and that the one they hold is incorrect then sadly there is a good chance you will not realize how condescending and narcissistic you sound.