Current Events > The ending(s) of ME3 still piss me off to this day (spoilers)

(+) Yeah! (+)

Aside from the fact that the previous two games make it clear that Shepard is all about breaking the rules and forging his own path, the fact that "Destroy" is depicted as the Renegade choice and Control as the "Paragon" choice really irks me as well.

Destroy is the most obviously Paragon choice you have, other than taking StarKid to piss off.
---

Both the endings and story were garbo.
---

Always go Destroy

"But the Geth"

If the Geth are still alive at that point, you're playing a stupid Shepard.

the fact that "Destroy" is depicted as the Renegade choice and Control as the "Paragon" choice really irks me as well.

Tbh this pissed me off so much. Its renegade action just cause you kill off geth. And how is it becoming a reaper is a good idea and paragon action.
Destroy all day erryday

The last mission (other than when the clusterfuck begins) is one of the high points of the entire series but the ending ruins it

Indoctrination theory is still my headcanon to this day
---

vocedelmorte posted...

the fact that "Destroy" is depicted as the Renegade choice and Control as the "Paragon" choice really irks me as well.

Tbh this pissed me off so much. Its renegade action just cause you kill off geth. And how is it becoming a reaper is a good idea and paragon action.
Destroy all day erryday

It's the only choice that is consistent with Shepard's character either way
---

The Control ending has a lot of implications that I do not like. "Don't worry, I'll control the Reapers. Promise." The day will come where ReaperShep and the galaxy no longer see eye to eye. Better to get rid of them entirely.

Remember that magazine where the guy shits on people for not liking the ending and at the same time admits he hasn't finished the game
---

Also when they added the Refuse ending because virtually everyone (rightly) believed that Shepard had literally no reason to actually listen to that little shit, and they made it an ending that deliberately makes fun of the player for being a moron.

Oh, sorry for expecting character personality consistency.
---

It's weird how everyone always complains about the ending, but never really says what exactly it is.
I mean, I guess it works for me since I've yet to play this series but it's odd how respectful everyone is about not spoiling the ending.

DarkRoast posted...

vocedelmorte posted...

the fact that "Destroy" is depicted as the Renegade choice and Control as the "Paragon" choice really irks me as well.

Tbh this pissed me off so much. Its renegade action just cause you kill off geth. And how is it becoming a reaper is a good idea and paragon action.
Destroy all day erryday

It's the only choice that is consistent with Shepard's character either way

The only choice that implies that Shepard lives too

Destroy was the only ending that felt consistent

Control...like the entire game is about how you "can't" control the Reapers, the Reapers control you.

Then they are just like "Nah, Illusive man couldn't even though he was one of the most strong willed characters in the universe, but you can cause you're Shepard."

There was just no scenario where the Reapers becoming a force of good worked. Controlling them was unbelievable, convincing them not to reap everyone was unbelievable.

Yeah, people can say being able to destroy the Reapers wasn't believable but they actually set up some plausible explanations before they threw it all away for a deus ex machina thing. And that was always the fucking goal from day one.

Don't even get me started on the stupid bullshit that was Synthesis.
---

Noirespanties posted...

It's weird how everyone always complains about the ending, but never really says what exactly it is.
I mean, I guess it works for me since I've yet to play this series but it's odd how respectful everyone is about not spoiling the ending.

I'll boil down the problem, spoiler free: At the end of the game, regardless of any decisions you made before that point, you are presented with 3 choices, and with the free dlc, a fourth. Imo all except one (Destroy) are extremely lame and go against Shepard's character.

Destroy was the worst ending of any game I ever beat

Play a while trilogy about overcoming differences, coming together, being better...
And the ending is to kill everyone who is different than you?

Ive never seen an ending so stupid and anti thematic
---

That's the thing, it is not a "genuine" horrible ending like Yugioh 5 or Drawn to Life 2 where you think "how did the writer think this is good?" Its chiefly lazy and cemented by an infamous EA message.

I mean they are bad but that is not really the base of their infamy
---

SpaghettiCookie posted...

And the ending is to kill everyone who is different than you?

The ending is to kill genocidal robots.

Stop pretending that the Geth are people, and that they didn't take every fucking opportunity to kill everyone for their own benefit

I was just annoyed that I couldn't pick Destroy without killing the Geth and all the other arbitrary bullshit that comes with that. In resolving the Geth and Quarian conflict, Shepard shows that the perceived cycle of synthetic life always destroying organic life is nonsense. The Reapers become obsolete, so you should be able to destroy them without having to blow up everything else in the process.
---

Mass Effect 1
Saren: "WE MUST WORK WITH THE MACHINES!"
Shepard: "NO I'M GONNA KILL YOU NOW!"

Mass Effect 2
Illusive Man: "WE MUST WORK WITH THE MACHINES!"
Shepard: "NO I BLOW THEM ALL UP!"

Mass Effect 3
Catalyst: "Ok you win. Now what?"
Shepard: "I was thinking we could work with the machines."
---

The best irony of ME3 is that if you go too Renegade you basically become Saren and iirc no one calls you on it.

Refusal is best ending.
---

I played ME3, but honest question.

Does the final choice really even make much of a difference? Does the ending really change that much?

Youngster_Joey_ posted...

SpaghettiCookie posted...

And the ending is to kill everyone who is different than you?

The ending is to kill genocidal robots.

Stop pretending that the Geth are people, and that they didn't take every fucking opportunity to kill everyone for their own benefit

The Reapers are following orders and its uncleat to what extent they have free will and to what extent they need to obey. But when they get a chance, they work with Organics.

The Geth allowed the Quarian to flee. They could have committed genocide but when the Quarian stopped attacking, Geth stopped attacking.

They also have advanced thought and their own culture. If they dont die, they work with the Quarian by their own will and theyre excited to do it.

EDI also dies, after her entire story arc being about being alive and being accepted by the crew.

Shepard and joker have a very obvious story about growing to accept synthetics, and how they grow as people while also becoming more accepting. Tali and Garrus share these themes to lesser extent.

Shepards dialogue that you cant choose shows that he grows this way.

And again, the themes of the story are about coming together, being better together, moving past your differences, looking for the best way, etc.

destroy doesnt work thematically. It doesnt make sense to conclude the story of Mass Effect. Control comes from nowhere. Synthesis is literally the conclusions that the entire story leads to.
---

how to enjoy ME3 endings:

1) pick destroy
2) ignore the geth destruction aspect
3) assume it triggers immediately after shepard and anderson's conversation, with the starchild chat never taking place
4) enjoy your scaling ending whose outcome depends on how well you united the galaxy
---

The thing that baffles me about ME3 is that the endings should have literally been

1. You defeat the Reapers and Shepard lives
2. You defeat the Reapers, and Shepard dies
3. You don't defeat the Reapers

People wanted there to be a consequence of their choices, but being realistic there couldn't have been the million of differences that people wanted. It should have basically boiled down to if you did enough correct choices Shepard would survive, and if you did enough incorrect choices that Shepard would have to sacrifice himself. From there, they could do an epilogue where your choices further changed the basic outcome of the Galaxy (probably Humans are dominant or not, because of the obvious Renegade/Paragon parallels to human dominance or co-existance) as well as slides detailing what happened to certain characters based on outcomes just like in Fallout.

The bad ending, much like in ME2, would be so fucking hard to achieve that you'd have to be actively trying to get it.

The reason I say this, of course, is that even with this ending you could easily *continue* Mass Effect. Maybe it would be centuries down the line or whatever, but there could be a continuation.

As it stands, there is no fucking way to continue the series because the endings are so vastly fucking different. Which seems like such a stupid fucking thing to do since EA was pushing for Mass Effect to be their big multi media property along with Dragon Age.
---

Popcorn_Fairy posted...

Refusal is best ending.

"The game implying that the player is a failure who accomplished nothing is the best ending."

lmao
---

Alek, I don't agree. I liked the scaling damage to earth/the galaxy, and how your actions in side stories impacted how those regions turned out longer term.

What I didn't like was the existence of a control option (the entire game was about how the control option was a trap that fucked over every prior civilization) or a synthesis option (which just seems like indoctrination).

Should never have been a choice. Anderson should have uttered "I'm proud of you" as the crucible began to fire.

Destroy had enough layers to satisfy players, IMO. Earth is destroyed, earth is damaged but saved and the relays are lost, the relays are saved, or Shepard survives.
---

t_paynes_ghost posted...

I played ME3, but honest question.

Does the final choice really even make much of a difference? Does the ending really change that much?

They don't, which is one of the main criticisms.

Congratulations, you've defeated the Reapers! How'd you do it?

Destroy: Killed 'em all, with some significant casualties.
Control: I'm their king now and I'm telling them to leave.
Synthesize: Everyone's a Reaper now!

Tyranthraxus posted...

Mass Effect 1
Saren: "WE MUST WORK WITH THE MACHINES!"
Shepard: "NO I'M GONNA KILL YOU NOW!"

Mass Effect 2
Illusive Man: "WE MUST WORK WITH THE MACHINES!"
Shepard: "NO I BLOW THEM ALL UP!"

Mass Effect 3
Catalyst: "Ok you win. Now what?"
Shepard: "I was thinking we could work with the machines."

...no.

1:
Shepard is in a world where everyone everywhere tells Shepard and everyone machines are bad and theres no redemption.
Sets the player up to learn machines are bad!

2:
Shepard meets EDI. He and Joker (the man who would die before giving up his ship) bond with and become close with EDI (Joker giving up his ship to a machine is evidence of his growth) and Shepard grows to trust Legion and EDI
-and Shepard himself is filled with synthetic tech. And is much better than ME1 Shepard.

3:
Shepard helps EDI feel alive, giving her advice and many times she makes it clear how happy she is to feel alive now.
Shepard is very defensive of Legion, especially to the Quarian.
Uniting Geth and Quarians will make everyone stronger as you have more war assets, Geth have their creators home in peace like theyve wanted, and the Quarians are home and Geth are working on their suits to strengthen them.

ME is a very clear story about working with AI instead of killing it.

TIM says we can enslave all machines not that you can work together.
---

SpaghettiCookie posted...

ME is a very clear story about working with AI instead of killing it.

this does not make sense in a world where the AI in question is committing mass genocide and has already done so on the scale of trillions of lives. it does for the geth, ofc. but the reapers were shown to be blacker than black, beyond redemption, not worth saving, etc. total tone change with the non-destroy endings. total story-fuck with the geth being killed in destroy 'because renegade'.
---

Tag. I like these debates
---

The Reapers are following orders and its uncleat to what extent they have free will and to what extent they need to obey. But when they get a chance, they work with Organics.

It's unclear if they have free will, so let's just assume they don't? And when the fuck do they ever work with organics except for when they are using them to cause a galaxy wide genocide?

The Geth allowed the Quarian to flee. They could have committed genocide but when the Quarian stopped attacking, Geth stopped attacking.

Except for when they decided to join Sovereign and actively began attacking colonies because some guy told them that a robot told them to do it.

They also have advanced thought and their own culture. If they dont die, they work with the Quarian by their own will and theyre excited to do it.

Because they're reprogrammed, with Reaper tech, mind you. There's no sure fire bet that it isn't a trick down the line.

EDI also dies, after her entire story arc being about being alive and being accepted by the crew.

She also said she was willing to sacrifice herself to save the galaxy many times.

Shepard and joker have a very obvious story about growing to accept synthetics, and how they grow as people while also becoming more accepting. Tali and Garrus share these themes to lesser extent.

Which became very forced in ME3. My Shepard was always weary of Synthetics until they forced him to become some synthetic apologist in ME3.

Shepards dialogue that you cant choose shows that he grows this way.

And that is bad writing.

And again, the themes of the story are about coming together, being better together, moving past your differences, looking for the best way, etc.

Once again, Reapers are fucking ROBOTS BENT ON GALACTIC GENOCIDE. STOP TREATING THEM LIKE PEOPLE.

destroy doesnt work thematically. It doesnt make sense to conclude the story of Mass Effect. Control comes from nowhere. Synthesis is literally the conclusions that the entire story leads to.

No, it's all horrible writing and why Bioware fucking sucks now.

Stop fucking putting your shit in spoiler tags when there are spoilers in the title topic.
---

Darkman124 posted...

SpaghettiCookie posted...

ME is a very clear story about working with AI instead of killing it.

this does not make sense in a world where the AI in question is committing mass genocide and has already done so on the scale of trillions of lives. it does for the geth, ofc. but the reapers were shown to be blacker than black, beyond redemption, not worth saving, etc. total tone change with the non-destroy endings. total story-fuck with the geth being killed in destroy 'because renegade'.

Geth spared the Quarians way before the Reaper tech was in their heads.

Destroy was never the tone being set by the trilogy.
People who can only see things surface level tend to say it is; but the weird thing is nobody who actually looks into the games and plays those (so for me, ME is one of the only games I play so I read the dialogue every time, I read each line even if I remember that it wasnt important)
And Idk. Theres never a time where the conclusion seems to be pointing to destroy. Thats the surface level ending yes. But its not built towards and is actively built against.

Also doing destroy is literally committing many genocides at once and the consequences would include killing many Organics just to fulfill your grudge.

Youngster_Joey_ posted...

It's unclear if they have free will, so let's just assume they don't? And when the fuck do they ever work with organics except for when they are using them to cause a galaxy wide genocide?

Except for when they decided to join Sovereign and actively began attacking colonies because some guy told them that a robot told them to do it.

Because they're reprogrammed, with Reaper tech, mind you. There's no sure fire bet that it isn't a trick down the line.

She also said she was willing to sacrifice herself to save the galaxy many times.

Which became very forced in ME3. My Shepard was always weary of Synthetics until they forced him to become some synthetic apologist in ME3.

And that is bad writing.

Once again, Reapers are fucking ROBOTS BENT ON GALACTIC GENOCIDE. STOP TREATING THEM LIKE PEOPLE.

No, it's all horrible writing and why Bioware fucking sucks now.

1. Yes, because the catalyst is in control of them. Sovereign says you would not understand us yet they make sense. Their motivation makes sense. Catalyst? We cant understand him. Hes in control of everything. Also leviathan dlc shows they dont all want to be forced to obey catalyst.

2. Only some did that. And the ones that did are gone. And, it was about finally being free from persecution going to their promised land; which Shepard is meant to lead them to but some fall for the other guy.

3. Shepard has Reaper tech. Geth are on your side.

4. Her entire story arc is about feeling alive. Learning what it means. Etc. Her dying when Shepard knows there is a better way because Shepard is...mad at Reapers? Isnt a solid reason for her to have to sacrifice herself.

5. And yet you need to grow to accept EDI in 2 and Legion is a squadmate.

6. Its you being upset that ME isnt a game about committing genocide its a game about working together and not being stuck in the ways of the past and overcoming differences.

7. The catalyst does that. The reapers stop as soon as they get a chance. But they are tools doing the catalysts bidding. This is mentioned when he talks about their creation.

8. Now you are throwing a small fit because destroy wasnt built toward. But it wasnt built toward because it is the oppressive mindset that began the entire trilogy. There is nothing to build because it is so weak.
---

The only common theme in Mass Effect is how the Reapers manipulate people into thinking they can work together when they have no intention of doing it.

Mass Effect 1 is about a war hero thinking he can broker a deal for the Reapers and Organics to work together, and by the end, become one. He lets them implant him, and in his own words it is "a union of flesh and steel, the strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither."

Except, they were still just using him and planned to kill him when they were done.

Then you have Mass Effect 2, where the entire final choice is Bioware bashing you over the head on how it is morally wrong to use Reaper tech because of the atrocities they have committed. If you go against this, literally everyone on your squad tells you it was a dumb move.

Then Mass Effect 3 is about how Illusive Man thinks he can control the Reapers, but in actuality they are manipulating him the entire time.

So seeing all that, the logical outcome is to either try to control the Reapers or create bond with them...right?
---

SpaghettiCookie posted...

Destroy was the worst ending of any game I ever beat

Play a while trilogy about overcoming differences, coming together, being better...
And the ending is to kill everyone who is different than you?

Ive never seen an ending so stupid and anti thematic

You literally only kill machines, every organic race is live on.

Distant_Rainbow posted...

Popcorn_Fairy posted...

Refusal is best ending.

"The game implying that the player is a failure who accomplished nothing is the best ending."

lmao

Nah. Rounds it the trilogy nice. Game started with Shepard finding a warning from the previous cycle. Ends with Shepard and Liara setting up a new warning for the next cycle. Shepard and friends got close to killing the Reapers, but didn't quite make it. They go down giving the Reapers everything they have. The warning helps the next kick the Reapers asses. Makes the trilogy a little bit more dark and gloomy, but it's not dumb like the other endings.
---

SpaghettiCookie posted...

Geth spared the Quarians way before the Reaper tech was in their heads.

Destroy was never the tone being set by the trilogy.
People who can only see things surface level tend to say it is; but the weird thing is nobody who actually looks into the games and plays those (so for me, ME is one of the only games I play so I read the dialogue every time, I read each line even if I remember that it wasnt important)
And Idk. Theres never a time where the conclusion seems to be pointing to destroy. Thats the surface level ending yes. But its not built towards and is actively built against.

i literally said geth were the exception- the AI that you were supposed to see you could cooperate with

destroy was always the tone set by the trilogy. the villains each game wanted to use/collaborate with the reapers. they were not shown to have any good ideas and consistently were shown to be indoctrinated, ie the message was "anyone who thinks collaboration with reapers is possible is indoctrinated by reapers and should not be trusted"

the third game even says that explicitly. that past civilizations failed to use the crucible because some faction wanted to try to control the reapers instead and mucked up the plan.

the trope of history repeating itself and you having to stop the cycle is literally the core story of the game. destroy is always what you're pointed towards; the ending even shows anderson as a reference to whose philosophy you are embodying.

destroy under highest EMS kills 0 organics so i dont know what youre even talking about. if shepard survives, any cyborg-type being would survive.
---

im glad i gave up playing that game halfway through 2.
---

1. Yes, because the catalyst is in control of them. Sovereign says you would not understand us yet they make sense. Their motivation makes sense. Catalyst? We cant understand him. Hes in control of everything. Also leviathan dlc shows they dont all want to be forced to obey catalyst.

When does Leviathan show that? You mean when they change some Reapers programming to work for them as slaves?

Only some did that. And the ones that did are gone. And, it was about finally being free from persecution going to their promised land; which Shepard is meant to lead them to but some fall for the other guy.

"Only some did that."

And then all of the others who went and joined the Reapers to fight the Quarians.

3. Shepard has Reaper tech. Geth are on your side.

Shepard having Reaper tech should be a concern of anyone willing to pick Synthesis. Or did everyone completely forget about Saren AND Illusive Man?

4. Her entire story arc is about feeling alive. Learning what it means. Etc. Her dying when Shepard knows there is a better way because Shepard is...mad at Reapers? Isnt a solid reason for her to have to sacrifice herself.

No, it's not because Shepard is "mad at the Reapers", it's because only a complete fucking idiot would take the Reaper controller at his word.

5. And yet you need to grow to accept EDI in 2 and Legion is a squadmate.

So because two synthetics are good (let's not forget that Legion tries to kill you if you don't side with him to upload Reaper tech, btw) then all Synthetics must be good?

6. Its you being upset that ME isnt a game about committing genocide its a game about working together and not being stuck in the ways of the past and overcoming differences.

Working together to *STOP THE REAPERS*

7. The catalyst does that. The reapers stop as soon as they get a chance. But they are tools doing the catalysts bidding. This is mentioned when he talks about their creation.

Exactly, the Reapers are *TOOLS*

8. Now you are throwing a small fit because destroy wasnt built toward. But it wasnt built toward because it is the oppressive mindset that began the entire trilogy. There is nothing to build because it is so weak.

I'm throwing a "fit" because you're being ridiculous with your analysis and because all three endings were poorly written. Killing the Reapers shouldn't have required the destruction of the Geth or Edi even if I personally did not care about saving the Geth anyways. Just like Control and Synthesis make no sense when the other games actively said they were bad ideas.

Stop pretending any of these endings were good, dude.

The only problem I had was that theres no way paragon Shepard would have the audacity to think he could control the Reapers. It seems very out of character.
---

The games arent all about that, it is one part

Saren and Shepard are different because Saren sold himself to the machines while Shepard goes to their mainframe and talks with their controller one and one and they agree to sacrifice their lives for this.

Shepard and Sarens path is very different..

Its also why Shepards vision of his friends includes Mordin (organic spreading tiny protein or something in the air like the cure for the Genophage)
And then Legion (Spreading his code thin to give it to all synthetics life like during Rannoch)

Shepard didnt sacrifice anything for his goal (except his life)
While Saren said ill be your slave and ambassador
---

you see the faces of any squadmates that died during the game in that scene, incl those who die pointless deaths

the one unique case is anderson/illusive man
---

If the Reapers don't want to kill everything, why couldn't you simply just destroy the Star Child and restore their free will instead of taking over them?

That way, you wouldn't have to force everyone to be a Synthetic and the Reapers could just be the peaceful robots they were portrayed as.

oh wait.
---

Also, isn't the only reason the Geth and Edi die is because they had Reaper programming installed into them.

Why the fuck was everyone so cavalier with uploading Reaper programming?

How much of a fucking dumbass do you have to be to sit there and be like "Yeah, let's upload our enemies AI into our networks and allies! That's a good idea!"

Also, the Geths whole fucking culture was about how they *didn't* want to be like organics and did not want to have free will. They liked being a hive mind because everyone had a say and everyone was together.

But then suddenly, in Mass Effect 3, it's their main fucking objective. Specifically *after* being upgraded with Reaper programming IIRC.

Isn't that just a LITTLE suspicious?
---

Youngster_Joey_ posted...

When does Leviathan show that? You mean when they change some Reapers programming to work for them as slaves?

"Only some did that."

And then all of the others who went and joined the Reapers to fight the Quarians.

Shepard having Reaper tech should be a concern of anyone willing to pick Synthesis. Or did everyone completely forget about Saren AND Illusive Man?

No, it's not because Shepard is "mad at the Reapers", it's because only a complete fucking idiot would take the Reaper controller at his word.

So because two synthetics are good (let's not forget that Legion tries to kill you if you don't side with him to upload Reaper tech, btw) then all Synthetics must be good?

Working together to *STOP THE REAPERS*

Exactly, the Reapers are *TOOLS*

I'm throwing a "fit" because you're being ridiculous with your analysis and because all three endings were poorly written. Killing the Reapers shouldn't have required the destruction of the Geth or Edi even if I personally did not care about saving the Geth anyways. Just like Control and Synthesis make no sense when the other games actively said they were bad ideas.

Stop pretending any of these endings were good, dude.

1. Yes. The reapers programming isnto be slaves. Leviathans can control them all the same.

2. In order to avoid being slaughtered in an upcoming war, yeah.

3. Did you forget about...Shepard? Coping with it for years? And the ending before you pick it all but explicitly states that people will retain free will.

4. Its not like thats the first you Shepard meets AI. He is with the Catalyst and learns that the Catalyst has one goal. Preservation of life. However, Shepard proves this method wasnt working. The Catalyst wants this goal fulfilled more than anyone else. Its literally Catalysts entire purpose.
Shepard is the one who proved Catalyst would eventually fail. So he is given control.
There is no reason for Catalyst to lie, and no evidence anywhere that it was lying to Shepard.

5. It shows that they arent all bad, yes. And that unity is possible, yes.
Oh yeah. Legion fights with you when you tell him his people dont matter and you are willing to wipe them all out after you were the only person on his side throughout his life, you were his hero, you were literally the shepherd of his people.
Him fighting you didnt show synthetics as evil, it shows that they are capable of complex thought and emotion. Him not fighting you would make him like a slave, no different from reapers forced to work under one person.

6. To stop the catalyst. Which synthethesis does.

7. Who can be given free will.

8. Im not saying the execution was perfect. But the synthesis ending was always what ME was building to, not destroy.
---

---

The idea that synthesis was the build up is such a bad take.

First of all, it is explicitly stated by the original writers it wasn't. That was something they literally made up at the last minute.

Second of all, the build up was everyone coming together to defeat a threat to the galaxy, NOT joining said threat.
---

Vyrulisse posted...

The ending is varied

What people call the ending is the final decision. Some choice had to be the last one.

The official ending though, has many variables.
---

I will never buy a BioWare game at full price again after ME3. Im still upset over that ending.
---

SpaghettiCookie posted...

Some choice had to be the last one.

what they dislike was the relative weight of decisions which you are really misrepresenting

saving the entire geth civilization should not be 1% as important as picking red over blue
---