The reaction to it was gross and overblown, but that doesn't really change the part where even 5 years on, I still think the ending to ME3 was pretty terrible. It really doesn't help its credibility when Bioware not only went back and redid the ending with the "Director's Cut," but also had to release the Leviathan DLC to actually fill in and explain logic holes.

Honestly though? The rest of that game is mostly fine. There are a couple of plot beats and resolutions to character arcs that I thought were super lame (Kai Leng is so stupid, and you can tell the writers thought he was so cool) but there were just as many plot beats and resolutions that I thought were done well. It's also the last time I enjoyed a Bioware game, soooo....

I was never mad and always tell people, especially those that played the past two ME games, that ME3 is 90% great. I still think that it probably has the best combination of RPG elements and shooting out the original trilogy and the set pieces for some of the levels are pretty awesome. It's probably not the most expansive out of the three. Having less squadmates and less worlds to explore is a bit of a bummer. However, I think that the DLC does make up for that.

The ending is pretty disappointing, but that sure didn't subtract from my overall experience with the game.

He appeared because he was in a Mac Walters comic book. And guess who was one of the major writers on ME3?

I like ME3. Not going to defend either version of the ending, but the storylines I cared about got ended satisfactorily, so it never ruined the game for me like it did some people. As far as the game having some areas where you could point at places they cut corners and thereby failed to deliver on the promise of the trilogy - I could do the same thing for ME2. People cut that game a lot of slack just because it's not "The End" and therefore it isn't responsible for its failure to resolve anything. Or even significantly advance the plot.

ME3 didn't stop being a disappointing game from then to now just out of nowhere, so I'm still disappointed by it. It was always more than just the ending though. That game had a lot of poor design choices in dealing with conversation, you know, the fucking thing I come to a bioware game for. Walking through the citadel and randomly having quests pop into my questlog, not knowing where the fuck they came from was really lame. Learning that I was supposed to stop and overhear conversations for context as to why I'm doing a thing didn't make it any better. Then there was those weird ass situations where you walk up to two people arguing and you're supposed to hit a button prompt to agree with person A or person B. How engaging.

It wasn't a bad game, but man did it have some faults that I couldn't forgive.

I was never mad. I just thought it was genuinely a bad game. The ending was laughably bad, but so was a big chunk of the writing throughout. The only really good parts I can really remember are Mordin's part and Thane's part. Every other bit with your old teammates lasted two lines. They made it feel like nothing you did mattered way before the ending happened. Just felt half baked all around to me. Andromeda seems to be pretty similar, except now with bad Inquisition side quests.

This. I think people often forget how hard it is to wrap up a franchise of this caliber. You can look to TV to see countless very good series built on building up to some conclusion and failing to find a good way to wrap it up. It's historically very tough to do something like that. I mean if we lived in a world where Mass Effect 3 had a great ending? It's probably one of if not the greatest games of all time. The rest of that game was rather good. Sure it had some corner cutting, but as mentioned in posts in here really the only complaint people have is mostly structure. It was tough to justify a games worth of side content in a situation when they had written themselves into this war situation. And wanted much of the game to be acquiring allies, and allowing you to wrap up your companions loyalty missions around that. Yet despite all that most of the story beats in that game are memorable, and most would agree that a big reason the ending sucks isn't just because it sucks, but it's because so much else in that game is great. It was so close.

Still mad. I have not touched any single player Mass Effect since completing 3. I had played through ME1 with every class, ME2 at least 3 times. Never touched any of it again after 3; the ending completely soured me on the series. Dabbled a little in multi player which was fun but quickly turned frustrating because of the blind boxes.

I would have to hear incredibly positive things to consider playing a new Mass Effect. Or they would have to release another game called Mass Effect 3 that ends the series properly.

I was never mad, but slightly disappointed about it, yes. The additional stuff they added as a downloadable didn't help, and arguably made it worse. In hindsight, though, which I think is important, it's far less worse than I initially felt about it. Mass Effect is about the characters you meet along the way, and ME3 concluded that aspect well, so it is pretty hard to be mad that the end didn't give the player a special ending for their Shepard. It also helps if you play all the ME DLC. ME3 is a superb game and does some things the best in the trilogy; the end doesn't ruin that at all. It certainly gave me no reservations of the future of Mass Effect either (nor did Dragon Age Inquisition for that matter, since I think some people bundle in disliking ME3's end and Inquisition as to why Andromeda may not be good).

This is such a dumb thing but the thing that really rubs me the wrong way about 2 was how it was so praised for solving the problems of the first game. One thing I remember in particular the GB guys mentioning was how it did away with the long ass elevator rides from the first game. You know the elevator rides where you would hear idle chatter between your team mates, radio broadcasts of news talking about your latest exploits and so on. Mass Effect 2 DID get rid of those. And replaced them with loading screens. And was praised for it. What the actual...

ME3 is a far better game than 2. Better combat, better level design, better weapon variety. Oh, and unlike 2, ME3 actually had a plot and wasn't utterly redundant filler.

Sue me.

They gave me that DLC where you have to throw a party which is the canon ending in my mind.

Even as a self professed Mass Effect super fan, I was never mad about Mass Effect 3. I was disappointed in how the ending played out, mainly because of how well the other games wrapped up in comparison. Look at the second game and the final suicide mission. Everything fit together and the choices you made fed into that last push. It wasn't perfect, and once you knew how it worked you could break it and save everyone, but nothing in a game since has made me feel so powerful and so much like an actual leader. It was awesome. Even the first game had an epic ending filled with choices (save the council, etc) and to that end it also felt like you were in a universe where everything fit together properly. The promise of those two games and their endings was enough to make me envision an ending where all of your choices mattered. You saved the Rachni? That would come up. You settled the Geth vs Quarian conflict? That should be a big deal. And, as the credits rolled on that ending, I realized that I had become a victim of that hype. I was let down. I wasn't mad at all, just a little perplexed and a bit melancholy.

It doesn't help that so much of the third game hits the story beats so damn well. All the big moments of the game worked for me. Seeing Mordin, Grunt, Legion and Thane again, and the conclusions to their character arcs was super satisfying. With every major plot thread closed I actually got teary eyed. Everything seemed to be working out to make this the conclusion that I had thought about since I finished Mass Effect 2 and all of that games DLC. Almost everything up to the very last few minutes of the game was fine. I didn't like how the war readiness and assets ended panning out. Instead of seeing the Rachni come in guns blazing during that final fight they're just a number in the war asset list. I guess that's one of my main issues with the conclusion. I feel like that list could have been something really nifty. I mean, if they had the time, it could have been an epic cut scene (more epic than what they ended up making) or maybe something more. I don't know. As a fan I felt like there was this build up to something that was going to surpass the suicide mission, and it ended up kind of being a wet fizzle.

The final choices didn't bother me so much. My husband and I assumed that Shepard was going to turn into Space Jesus and jump into a beam of light (no joke, we both talked about this before the game dropped) so when it actually happened, I was pretty accepting of it. I was more put out by the weird conversation with the ghost kid and how it seemed that Shepard was pretty much giving up when it mattered the most. When I say giving up, I mean trusting the AI and just accepting three choices. With all the AI troubles that Shepard has had in all 3 games, I thought she might be a bit more reticent to trust ghost kid, but that's a relatively small quibble. Still, it was indicative of how rushed the ending felt. Yes, I felt in my guts that Shepard was going to die, but the way it happened was pretty uninspired, imo.

I will say that the amended ending was better. I played both and felt like the revamped one was a bit more complete. But I didn't need it to feel good about the series. The three games were almost perfect in my mind. They had their problems, but the story and characters were top notch and I felt like they managed to have more hits in the games than misses. The first game had glitches and the combat was rough around the edges, but the world building was fantastic and the RPG bits were great. The second game improved the game play mechanics but jettisoned the RPG elements. The story was great, if less epic in scope, and the characters really were center stage. The third game continued refining the game play and added in some of the lost RPG like mechanics. The conversations took a hit to make them more streamlined (my guess) and so the game seemed more set on a specific course. The story beats were fantastic and more character arcs had satisfying endings. The ending was not good, but I can forgive a fumble at the goal line in a game that's already a blowout for team ME.

So, long story short, I love the ME series and the ending of the third game, though disappointing in it's kind of slapdash, rushed conclusion, didn't anger me. It just made me feel a bit sad that it couldn't have landed on a better, more cohesive note and wrapped up in a way that was worthy of the series as a whole.

I thought Mass Effect 3 was fine, the flaw in that game was not the game itself, it was the story that had been set up 2 games prior, just imagine for a moment that instead of the reapers being a big overarching threat that its just that one ship, Seran escapes at the end of 1 and you spend all of 2 setting up for a civil war in 3...

I am however PISSED about how DLC effected that trilogy, I originally played through it with none of the add-on's before going back a year or two after the fact and dropping $60 on some of it during a sale. It is not OK how much ME2 DLC influences things that happen in 3, in addition to all of the ME3 DLC which feels like it should of just been in the game to begin with.

@crysack: ME3's entire plot was utter nonsense the galaxy gonna build this crucible thingy and hope it does something, Shepherd then spends the game convincing everyone to get together for a final wiz bang.

I was never actually mad but I do think the writing was terrible. I always thought the universe of Mass Effect was something that would grow and expand because it had so much potential. Then they go and write implausible and crap endings.

ME3's ending was very bad but it spawned one of the best analytical youtuber on the internet:

I'm looking forward to his video on ME:A

I wasn't mad, I was disappointed... but I was never in favor of all those complains, letters, fan fiction or downright threats.

To be honest, the ME3 ending was not even among the worst endings I have seen in a AAA game (looking at you, Half Life 2), and I was more disappointed with Bioware for bending down backwards to fix it after the fact, than I was with the actual deus ex machina ending. That patched ending felt like a sore spot...

Also, we got Citadel, possibly the best oficial fan service I have ever played. If people have issues with the ending of 3, they can just think of Citadel's sendoff like the cannon ending.

BTW, those options are kind of ambiguous: "Yes I'm still mad" and "No I'm still mad" sound like the same thing.

I am still mad, red, and nude over ME3.

I never played any of the Mass Effect games, so I was never mad. That being said hearing and reading about that game made me never want to play any of those games. Don't see the point when the conclusion to everything is so disappointing.

I was confused and disappointed by the end, but a lot of their follow up DLC (that should have just been in the game) eased that a bit. I was just really attached to the characters and the universe and to have it all summed up to the dialog wheel bummed me out. I guess when I really think about it the giant reaper terminator from 2 was stupid as well and I allowed myself to be hyped for no reason for some grand conclusion. I just wanted to win.

@TechnoSyndrome: Most of the major arcs end in a very satisfying manner. The characters and world are some of the best in video games. There is a piece of DLC for Mass Effect 3 that makes for a great send off for the franchise. ME3's ending is bad but it got better with the stuff they added later on and it doesn't erase the fantastic moments present in ME1 2 and 3. Some of the best moments of sci fi storytelling out there.

I was never mad but felt the ending was a missed opportunity. Sole Porpoise has an interesting critique on his channel which has recontextualised it in a way that makes it feel considered, rather than rushed. You can definitely take the trilogy as a whole, rather than one sticking out like it doesn't belong.

@pyrodactyl: I heard about the ways 3 either eliminates or barely mentions all the choices you make in the first two, so I just replayed Alpha Protocol instead. Pretty sure I made the right choice there.

A lot of good things end terribly it doesnt make them not worth experiencing because of that. (to me at least) Especially since things never end these days until someone (or group) screws up and makes a terrible game, movie, book, show finale etc. In which case give it 5-10 years and it will be rebooted anyway because nostalgia paints things more positively.

If I had to choose an emotion to the Mass Effect 3 ending it would be confusion. I understand what the game was trying to do but I didnt know (and still dont) why it was trying to do it.

I still havent seen the extended cut or played the Leviathan DLC. Maybe that clears things up.

By conclusion I mean Mass Effect 3 as a whole, not just ME3's ending. Nothing about that game sounded good.

@TechnoSyndrome: That's kind of like saying I never played the Deus Ex games because I heard Invisible War is bad ;p

The overarching narrative in most videogames is terrible, Mass Effect 2 is remembered more fondly due to it's focus on characters and cool moments above all else.

Bioware games feel like they have been made by committee for a while now. They turn out formulaic titles that aim for the lowest common denominator. You can just see how all the passion was focus grouped out of their franchises. I guess the influence of EA's corporate machinery is just too big.

It was a great game that I had a ton of fun playing. I don't get all the flack it still gets, especially after they fixed the ending thing in a free update

Jeff, is that you? Anyway, if you don't want to play some of the best games of all time that's your loss.

I was underwhelmed by the finale of ME3 but I just chalked it up to there being no possible way to end a 3 game space epic in a satisfying way. After all it's always about the journey not the destination when it comes to these sorts of grand epics be it books, movies, or games.

I don't know where this sense of entitlement and anger came from fans. Growing up playing games all my life I grew up expecting game endings to be rather disappointing so when a cool ending happened it felt more special.

Never Be Game Over. Even as an MGS fan, I didn't feel hugely burned by the ending. I just thought, "Well, Kojima couldn't manage it. Of course it wouldn't end well." I'd like to see the how's and why's of how that came to pass but not actively conspire to force something.

Also, the whole thing about player choice is a weird one, Your decisions had weight throughout the games. Maybe not the scope you expected. They get resolved largely in the scope of their corresponding game. At best, you'll get a line in the following game that references it. You keep that butterfly effect to a minimal because any impact larger than that has to be taken into account for years through many different members of staff. You don't want to make it a handful.

I was never mad, just disappointed by the overal rushed nature of the game. Sound and music mixing felt off, graphics looked poor in some area's and the ending was obviously not fleshed out (I did like the idea behind it, fits the series). But overal the game was still fine and I enjoyed playing it and was satisfied by the closure. Andromeda looks just a little bit too rough to enjoy it, rougher than ME3.

ME3 had some brilliant character moments but there's a lot of bad writing and characters and the plot isn't great with the crucible and star child. It played really well though.

Was never mad, I loved 3 and remember defending the ending at the time. As an overall package it's probably the best in the series, although 1 has the best story.

I never got to the ending of ME3 so I wouldn't know. That said, I'm still disappointed in how Assassin's Creed 3 dropped the ball on Desmond's story, so I wouldn't hold anything against those that still felt strongly about Shepard's.

I stopped being mad about 3 less than a day after I beat it. And mad is a pretty strong word for how I felt. It was more liked intensely annoyed. I realized that despite a rough ending, I pretty much loved the rest of the game.

I chose option 3, since I know what you were going for despite the typo.

Before ME3, I read every book, even ordered the art book, and pre-ordered the $80 edition. After getting through ME3 once, I didn't even play any of the DLC

Still shakes my head whenever I hear people saying synthesis is the best ending, but that might be my biologist bias.

I will always maintain though the initial endings, which lacked any "investigate" options before choosing and were largely color swaps, were really disappointing for how little effort they put in. The patch fixed things up a bit, which is good for anyone that picked up the game later. But my memories of the game is really tainted by those RGB endings.

The problem i have with people complaining about the ending of 3 is most of them define the ending as the last few minutes + the choice. i've always been of the mind that the "ending" of that game and the trilogy was the moment when all the ships jump back to earth to the credits, a good 1-2 hours of content.