I hated the ending, Im glad they made a new one but I am sure I will hate this too. Their whole premise is one I couldnt find believable, so no matter how they wrap that turd its still going to taste like shit to me. 
 
Loved the game as a whole though, ending just made me mad and sad all at the same time, sad cause an epic saga required an epic ending, instead of a weird nonsense-ending like the one it got. It's like the entire game is all about one thing, then the last fifteen minutes they bombard you with crap that come out of nowhere and just kills whatever else you did in the universe, rendering the hundreds of hours before that threeway choice completely void.

Not being too terribly invested in the adventures of Commander Shepard myself beyond a basic, casual enjoyment of the series, I've never quite understood the uproar over the ending. I mean, was it a great one? No, not really. Was it a bit careless, all things considered? Yeah, probably. Did it ruin any and all enjoyment I had of the series to date? Not really. But I'm not the sort to generally get too up-in-arms over these sorts of things, so I realize that my viewpoint may be skewed.

@MikeFightNight: People just have an issue with how condescending Alex can be with people he is writing for. It's almost as if he doesn't want us to read his articles.

@Zippedbinders said:

Is it okay to have actually liked Mass Effect 3? I thought it was better than 2 at least. I'm interested in seeing what they add to the ending, but looking at the comments it seems like I'm bad people for that. Maybe I'm just optimistic.

It's perfectly fine to have liked ME3, I'd say. While I'm thoroughly disappointed with BioWare's effort on this game, I still believe that ME3 is one of the better games released this year.

But even an optimist such as yourself must have been surprised to find the two squad mates that were with Shepard on the final mission onboard a crashed Normandy light years away from Shepard's location.

Or you might have raised an eyebrow when the starchild explained how it created the 'old machines' to kill us in order to prevent us from ultimately inventing machines that would kill us.

Or maybe you've frowned a little when your Shepard was more than willing to just accept at face value the explanation and options presented to him/her by the starchild; to just roll with the thing he/she fought against over the course of three games. Right?

Woohoo. I can only imagine the amount of ME3 ending threads that will crop up this time.

Also I feel I should add that I do not approve of the mocking tone of the topic of this newspost!

@GrandHarrier: I guess I enjoy the snark Alex brings, as no one else on GB does it. Now if they all wrote like Alex I could see myself deleting GB from my bookmarks.

@Shaanyboi: Well they're crazy people. I can explain my complaints about ME3, but I'm over it. I just believe that it's a disappointing game with some fantastic moments. Overall I just wasn't impressed. It's good, but not what I expected.

It's official, the download for the extended cut will be 1.9GB (which is quite big, I must admit). Now, we just have to hope that the endings will be tightly edited, and we'll get a better explanation on how Kaiden and James, who I took with me on the final mission, were seen with Joker and Edi on that planet the Normandy crashed on.

I'm really excited about this.

@Sooty:

I still own all three of the Mass Effect Games. Even though I was disappointed in the ending of ME 3, I still think it's the greatest trilogy of games I've ever played.

Heard the news and was ready to play the ending again even from the attack on Cerberus until I realized my galactic readiness is now in the shitter after not playing for however many months. I don't want to play all that multiplayer again to see the true ending. Looks like it might be youtube for me.

Even though I found the ending to be disappointing I still enjoyed my time with Mass Effect 3. I'll probably play through the extended cut just to see what they added.

Bioware could give everyone free blowjobs and/or mustache rides and they'd still complain.

@RVonE said:

@Zippedbinders said:

Is it okay to have actually liked Mass Effect 3? I thought it was better than 2 at least. I'm interested in seeing what they add to the ending, but looking at the comments it seems like I'm bad people for that. Maybe I'm just optimistic.

It's perfectly fine to have liked ME3, I'd say. While I'm thoroughly disappointed with BioWare's effort on this game, I still believe that ME3 is one of the better games released this year.

But even an optimist such as yourself must have been surprised to find the two squad mates that were with Shepard on the final mission onboard a crashed Normandy light years away from Shepard's location.

Or you might have raised an eyebrow when the starchild explained how it created the 'old machines' to kill us in order to prevent us from ultimately inventing machines that would kill us.

Or maybe you've frowned a little when your Shepard was more than willing to just accept at face value the explanation and options presented to him/her by the starchild; to just roll with the thing he/she fought against over the course of three games. Right?

1: Not really, Garrus was the only squad member that stepped off the ship that I took with me, so I was just happy he was alive.

2: Not really, I was looking for any sort of reason to explain what the reapers were doing or how they came to be. That was as reasonable a reason as I could expect. Its all chaos and mumbo jumbo in that universe anyway, why should I expect anything different?

3: My Shepard was willing to accept that at face value because I was. Again, we're talking ancient space voodoo, I'd have just about believed anything in that position, especially considering the shit Shepard has seen. I picked synergy because it involved everything working together, which is precisely what my Shepard had been doing over the course of three games. She had done everything she could to get everyone else in the universe working together, how hard would the reapers be?

There shouldn't even be a new one...

An ending isn't going to save this game, I'm already hoping they've learned their lesson and make a good RPG for Mass Effect 4. Seeing what EA's done to Dead Space, makes me think we're screwed.

WORST THINGS TO EVER HAPPEN IN THE WORLD ACCORDING TO GAMERS:

1. HOLOCAUST

2. APARTHEID

3. MASS EFFECT 3 ENDING

@Zippedbinders said:

1: Not really, Garrus was the only squad member that stepped off the ship that I took with me, so I was just happy he was alive.

2: Not really, I was looking for any sort of reason to explain what the reapers were doing or how they came to be. That was as reasonable a reason as I could expect. Its all chaos and mumbo jumbo in that universe anyway, why should I expect anything different?

3: My Shepard was willing to accept that at face value because I was. Again, we're talking ancient space voodoo, I'd have just about believed anything in that position, especially considering the shit Shepard has seen. I picked synergy because it involved everything working together, which is precisely what my Shepard had been doing over the course of three games. She had done everything she could to get everyone else in the universe working together, how hard would the reapers be?

1. Sure, I was happy that my squad mates were alive as well, but them teleporting to the Normandy does not bother you at all? If that's the bar you're setting for your expectations for a video game in 2012, developers can get away with just about anything.

2. Well perhaps you're right. I shouldn't expect mediocre story-telling to become better story-telling in the last act.

3. Space voodoo. That just about sums it up, I guess.

@Brodehouse said:

@RVonE I'm constantly baffled beyond reason when I hear people continue to express the opinion regarding the Reapers destroying some life to save all life. I wonder if they were paying attention to any of the games. The Reapers don't destroy all organic life, they destroy all _advanced_ organic life. The last time Reapers be reapin', humans were cave people and salarians communicated by licking. The fear is that these advanced societies will create a synthetic life force that doesn't have the same 'ethics' as the Reapers; an AI that actually will destroy all organic life in the galaxy. The Reapers are pruning the tree to prevent it from growing something that kills the entire tree. The Reapers are the Catalyst's pruning shears, to save the galaxy from final, permanent death. This makes complete sense, and fits with everything stated in the previous games. It fits with the same parent/child drama that defines the entire series. That is not the problem with the ending.

Exactly this. When I beat the game and saw my synthesis ending it was essentially the ending to the anime Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann. In that anime the "bad guys" have a system in place to keep all life at a certain level of technology to prevent them from destroying the whole universe. They even have their main bad dude monologue on how they are destroying them to protect the balance of the universe.

@Brodehouse said:

@RVonE I'm constantly baffled beyond reason when I hear people continue to express the opinion regarding the Reapers destroying some life to save all life. I wonder if they were paying attention to any of the games. The Reapers don't destroy all organic life, they destroy all _advanced_ organic life. The last time Reapers be reapin', humans were cave people and salarians communicated by licking. The fear is that these advanced societies will create a synthetic life force that doesn't have the same 'ethics' as the Reapers; an AI that actually will destroy all organic life in the galaxy. The Reapers are pruning the tree to prevent it from growing something that kills the entire tree. The Reapers are the Catalyst's pruning shears, to save the galaxy from final, permanent death. This makes complete sense, and fits with everything stated in the previous games. It fits with the same parent/child drama that defines the entire series. That is not the problem with the ending.

THANK YOU. Seriously, thank you. I'm glad I'm not the only one who picked up on this.

I wouldn't be surprised if all the extended ending was was a more obvious, detailed explanation of this. That and a bit of an epilogue would be perfectly fine, imo.

@RVonE said:

3. Space voodoo. That just about sums it up, I guess.

When in doubt... space voodoo!

@AbeBroHamLincon said:

i just want to know 1 example of what is so wrong with the ending to this game. a well thought out complaint all i have honestly heard is OMFG it ended and i dont like that.

at least they ended the story unlike some games like halo were they just keep making up random shit because it makes money really there is plenty of halo fan boys that would buy halo 10 the flash game for $100 bucks a pop.

all im saying is the ending is smart if you catch every word and detail.

this new free DLC ending will just be a a way to hold everyone's hand so everyone gets it

------------------------------------that is all good day to you sirs-------------------------------------------

The Catalyst Child uses faulty logic to justify the genocide of millions of different species, and the game never holds it accountable.

Shepard is told by this same entity that is responsible for the murders of trillions of lives that the only way to stop the Reapers is for him/her to kill himself/herself in one of three ways. And, without question, Shepard does it.

BioWare changed Shepard from a hero who continually beats the odds into a mere henchman for the ultimate villain of the series.

@Seii said:

I wouldn't call myself a huge Mass Effect fan, having only truly enjoyed ME2, but I found the concept for the game fascinating and often think of the impact it may have on games as a whole with regards to plot decisions and their affect on the world we inhabit as these characters. Within that context I found the ending to ME3 to be nearly shameful with regards to the fundamental design and premise of the Mass Effect series - without saying anything about it as the finale to the narrative itself. The fundamental undertone of the Mass Effect series was that this was a single story spanning over three games. The series seemed to identify itself as a game with an extremely strong point of pressure on the ultimate climax of saving the galaxy from the Reaper threat, which may have exacerbated this contention people have with it's ultimate conclusion. But more importantly the conclusion seemed irrelevant completely to every action you had made within this world, and to the core concept of the narrative design of the game in doing so, blatantly I might add.

This is only considering the actual design decisions of the game, which is something that would rest in the hands of more then just the writers, so as not lay fault at the feet of (apparently) one man, but an entire team. I have many issues with the conclusion's writing itself, but that is a much more subjective opinion I realize. Having said all this, I find it funny that games "journalists" are so quick to side with Bioware by attempting to vilify and dismiss this valid opinion as "entitled" or "internet whiners" in their contentions. This is an important conversation us as gamers should be allowed to have in improving games as a medium as well as enriching the gamer culture, and I find it worrying how many games "journalists", who, like it or not are the representatives to the less-invested, continuing to devalue the people who play games and their opinions.

Thank you.

Interesting

@Brodehouse said:

@RVonE I'm constantly baffled beyond reason when I hear people continue to express the opinion regarding the Reapers destroying some life to save all life. I wonder if they were paying attention to any of the games. The Reapers don't destroy all organic life, they destroy all _advanced_ organic life. The last time Reapers be reapin', humans were cave people and salarians communicated by licking. The fear is that these advanced societies will create a synthetic life force that doesn't have the same 'ethics' as the Reapers; an AI that actually will destroy all organic life in the galaxy. The Reapers are pruning the tree to prevent it from growing something that kills the entire tree. The Reapers are the Catalyst's pruning shears, to save the galaxy from final, permanent death. This makes complete sense, and fits with everything stated in the previous games. It fits with the same parent/child drama that defines the entire series. That is not the problem with the ending.

So, it's okay to annihilate millions of species because you are afraid of an outcome that you have no proof will ever come to light?

Is this one of those things that gets rid of the original ending? I haven't even bought ME3 yet, but if that's the case then when I do get around to it I'll be playing it without downloading this DLC first.

@Lord_Punch: Exactly. It's like Sovereign said (and I'm paraphrasing because I don't remember the actual line): "you develop along lines we desire." Starchild doesn't like things that are beyond its control. Like an infant.

I just started playing Mass Effect 3. I guess this is pretty cool for me. I don't know what happened at the end, so I will refrain from reading the comments.

I wonder if the Wii U version of ME3 will feature the extended ending by default or if people will have to download it.

I've been slowly doing a second playthrough of the ME games and am near the end of ME2 so will be hitting ME3 at just the right time I think.
 
Can't wait. ME3 was fucking great.

I'm all for free dlc, but I can't say that I'm excited for an 'extended' ending. I hated the conclusion to ME 3, and was somewhat disappointed in the game as a whole, but by now that's all kind of a moot point.

I don't care if the 'extended' ending was fabulous and fulfilled everything I ever wanted in the conclusion to Shepard's story - the damage has been done. I will never get that first experience back, I will never be that invested in the characters again. Bioware fucked up, in my opinion, but that's a mistake that can't really be undone and, honestly, doesn't need to be.

The Mass Effect narrative is what it is, and while I think it's shitty for people to dismiss fans' displeasure with said narrative, it's also shitty for a certain segment of the fanbase to think Bioware owes them a damn thing.

All that said, interested or not, I'm sure morbid curiosity will get the better of me. Hell, I bought those bullshit Star Wars blurays.

@Lord_Punch: I guess its because the original rulers of the galaxy created an army of synthetics so fecked up in the head and so powerful that they didnt want to even risk anything like that happening again. Especially since, right or wrong, they believed that organic life will inevitably create something so fecked up in the head and so powerful.

@Brodehouse said:

@RVonE I'm constantly baffled beyond reason when I hear people continue to express the opinion regarding the Reapers destroying some life to save all life. I wonder if they were paying attention to any of the games. The Reapers don't destroy all organic life, they destroy all _advanced_ organic life. The last time Reapers be reapin', humans were cave people and salarians communicated by licking. The fear is that these advanced societies will create a synthetic life force that doesn't have the same 'ethics' as the Reapers; an AI that actually will destroy all organic life in the galaxy. The Reapers are pruning the tree to prevent it from growing something that kills the entire tree. The Reapers are the Catalyst's pruning shears, to save the galaxy from final, permanent death. This makes complete sense, and fits with everything stated in the previous games. It fits with the same parent/child drama that defines the entire series. That is not the problem with the ending.

So, it's okay to annihilate millions of species because you are afraid of an outcome that you have no proof will ever come to light?

@babblinmule said:

@Lord_Punch: I guess its because the original rulers of the galaxy created an army of synthetics so fecked up in the head and so powerful that they didnt want to even risk anything like that happening again. Especially since, right or wrong, they believed that organic life will inevitably create something so fecked up in the head and so powerful.

The problem is none of that is ever present in any capacity in the Mass Effect lore. You are resorting to creating fan fiction in order to fix the logical problems with the ending of the game.

The ending was fine. Little bitches need to stop complaining

Damn you for making me think about ME3 again, internet.

@Lord_Punch said:

@babblinmule said:

@Lord_Punch: I guess its because the original rulers of the galaxy created an army of synthetics so fecked up in the head and so powerful that they didnt want to even risk anything like that happening again. Especially since, right or wrong, they believed that organic life will inevitably create something so fecked up in the head and so powerful.

The problem is none of that is ever present in any capacity in the Mass Effect lore. You are resorting to creating fan fiction in order to fix the logical problems with the ending of the game.

Yeah but it's alluded to repeatedly. They never saying it quite like I said it granted, but they give you the general gist of it and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what they meant.

@Brodehouse said:

@Lord_Punch said:

@Brodehouse said:

@RVonE I'm constantly baffled beyond reason when I hear people continue to express the opinion regarding the Reapers destroying some life to save all life. I wonder if they were paying attention to any of the games. The Reapers don't destroy all organic life, they destroy all _advanced_ organic life. The last time Reapers be reapin', humans were cave people and salarians communicated by licking. The fear is that these advanced societies will create a synthetic life force that doesn't have the same 'ethics' as the Reapers; an AI that actually will destroy all organic life in the galaxy. The Reapers are pruning the tree to prevent it from growing something that kills the entire tree. The Reapers are the Catalyst's pruning shears, to save the galaxy from final, permanent death. This makes complete sense, and fits with everything stated in the previous games. It fits with the same parent/child drama that defines the entire series. That is not the problem with the ending.

So, it's okay to annihilate millions of species because you are afraid of an outcome that you have no proof will ever come to light?

The Catalyst has no concept of 'okay' morally, it doesn't think in terms of morals, it thinks in absolutes. In the Catalyst's view of the situation, it's the only way to be sure. The structured, ordered annihilation of some organics is preferable to the possibility of the annihilation of all organics. With the Reapers it can prevent it in complete perpetuity, until now ("My solution won't work anymore.") With the Reapers, there was a 0% chance of the death of all life in the galaxy. Without the solution, even if it was the smallest fraction, it's not 0, and a machine never chooses 0.0001% over 0%. You are no more important to it than the Protheans before you, or the varren and fish who will rule the galaxy after you. And technically, you are being saved, forever, in the shell of a Reaper. Also, you have no idea what built the Catalyst and how it came to its conclusion. Millions of years have passed since it created its solution. Tens of thousands of cycles. There are problems with the Mass Effect ending, but the Catalyst's reasons for destroying advanced organics check out. It fits with the entire series. One of the running stories is powerful organics (humans, quarians, etc) destroying synthetic life before it grows too powerful, allowing it to remain as undeveloped VIs. At the end you discover this exact same thing is happening in reverse, a powerful synthetic is destroying organic life before it grows too powerful, resetting it back to primitive, uncivilized organics.

" The structured, ordered annihilation of some organics is preferable to the possibility of the annihilation of all organics. With the Reapers it can prevent it in complete perpetuity, until now ("My solution won't work anymore.") With the Reapers, there was a 0% chance of the death of all life in the galaxy. Without the solution, even if it was the smallest fraction, it's not 0, and a machine never chooses 0.0001% over 0%."

The Catalyst is basing all of this on NOTHING. It offers no proof, and neither does the game.

"One of the running stories is powerful organics (humans, quarians, etc) destroying synthetic life before it grows too powerful, allowing it to remain as undeveloped VIs."

The storylines involving EDI and Legion would beg to differ with your assertion.

@babblinmule said:

@Lord_Punch said:

@babblinmule said:

@Lord_Punch: I guess its because the original rulers of the galaxy created an army of synthetics so fecked up in the head and so powerful that they didnt want to even risk anything like that happening again. Especially since, right or wrong, they believed that organic life will inevitably create something so fecked up in the head and so powerful.

The problem is none of that is ever present in any capacity in the Mass Effect lore. You are resorting to creating fan fiction in order to fix the logical problems with the ending of the game.

Yeah but it's alluded to repeatedly. They never saying it quite like I said it granted, but they give you the general gist of it and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what they meant.

Give me examples from the games.

@babblinmule: @babblinmule said:

@Lord_Punch: I guess its because the original rulers of the galaxy created an army of synthetics so fecked up in the head and so powerful that they didnt want to even risk anything like that happening again. Especially since, right or wrong, they believed that organic life will inevitably create something so fecked up in the head and so powerful.

That's still a terrible logic. And really, the only thing they say is that Synthetics always end up revolting and killing organics. That's it.

Seems theres a backlash against people disliked the ending. New band wagons and all.

I for one feel that this extended cut will not change my opinion of the game. Mass Effect 3 will always stick with me as a disappointment and wasted potential. It wasn't just ending that made me feel this way, the entire earth mission is lackluster, it just lacked a soul and impact for me.Where were decisions and consequences through out the mission like the suicide mission in 2? As the ending, I straight up despise it, it can't be what Bioware had planned, it felt so rushed and left me feeling kind of robbed.

Does this make me an internet crybaby? Make up your own mind. ME1 and 2 still hold a place in my heart of how stories in video games should be told.

@Lord_Punch: Dude its 2am and im struggling to type out basic sentences as I'm still half drunk, I am NOT going to bother finding the specific individual lines from the games. :P If I'm in the mood for it when I wake up tomorrow, I'll give you specifics haha.

They should have stuck with the dark energy ending. Instead they abandon the foreshadowing from ME2 to concoct an ending that flies in the face of everything accomplished throughout the Quarian/Geth conflict.

This is the second news story today in which Alex has used the phrase "not too terribly." I notice this because every time he writes it, I assume it means he must be, in this case, terribly invested in Commander Shepard's story, just not too terribly.

@Lord_Punch said:

@babblinmule said:

@Lord_Punch said:

@babblinmule said:

@Lord_Punch: I guess its because the original rulers of the galaxy created an army of synthetics so fecked up in the head and so powerful that they didnt want to even risk anything like that happening again. Especially since, right or wrong, they believed that organic life will inevitably create something so fecked up in the head and so powerful.

The problem is none of that is ever present in any capacity in the Mass Effect lore. You are resorting to creating fan fiction in order to fix the logical problems with the ending of the game.

Yeah but it's alluded to repeatedly. They never saying it quite like I said it granted, but they give you the general gist of it and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what they meant.

Give me examples from the games.

It's in the DLC through conversations with Javik. He wants all synthetics destroyed because during is own cycle, before their own reaper invasion, symbiotic synthetics were created that eventually tried to snuff them all out.

The idea is that the reapers come in and prevent these situations from ending in synthetics wiping out all life. If organics never got advanced enough to discover the citadel then they would pose no risk to the galaxy as a whole.

And complain I will.

@GoatRoyale said:

I'm all for free dlc, but I can't say that I'm excited for an 'extended' ending. I hated the conclusion to ME 3, and was somewhat disappointed in the game as a whole, but by now that's all kind of a moot point.

I don't care if the 'extended' ending was fabulous and fulfilled everything I ever wanted in the conclusion to Shepard's story - the damage has been done. I will never get that first experience back, I will never be that invested in the characters again. Bioware fucked up, in my opinion, but that's a mistake that can't really be undone and, honestly, doesn't need to be.

The Mass Effect narrative is what it is, and while I think it's shitty for people to dismiss fans' displeasure with said narrative, it's also shitty for a certain segment of the fanbase to think Bioware owes them a damn thing.

All that said, interested or not, I'm sure morbid curiosity will get the better of me. Hell, I bought those bullshit Star Wars blurays.

Ugh, really? "The damage has been done"? Jesus Christ, you weren't sexually assaulted. This is not that big of a deal.

Also also, I wonder if they'll explain how it is that all the Mass Relays could be destroyed without taking out every system that had one in the process.* This happens under all ending flavors, right?

Either way, it won't explain Sheppard's refusal to comment at the point where you're given these choices. You know, like "But I destroyed a Mass Relay once, recently, and it wiped out the entire system it was in. How can I believe that this won't do the same thing to every inhabited system?"

For a character who sure had a lot to say throughout the entire series, it was incredibly cheap that you couldn't have any meaningful dialog with a completely new character introduced in the final scene of the game. Especially when the stakes are the highest they've ever been.

Shoddy, shoddy storytelling.

* Before you launch into a detailed explanation, yes, yes, I already know all the space voodoo required, and it is just that.