Current Events > Mass Effect 3's patched-in "Refuse" ending was petty as hell

(+) Yeah! (+)

Fine, you want to continue the whole "Shepard doesn't play by the rules, don't trust the reapers" thing?

And then everyone died. Liara: "If anyone finds this beacon, just know that Shepard was a fucking moron and don't do what he did, thanks"

---

I felt insulted by it

I mean, I felt insulted by all the endings, but that one in particular
---

ME1
Saren: I think we should maybe work with the reapers.
Shepard: Absolutely not.

ME2
Illusive Man: I think we should maybe work with the reapers.
Shepard: Absolutely not

ME3
Shepard: I think we should maybe work with the reapers.

The end.

---

People hate but the indoctrination theory was so much better than what we got.

---

Wasn't the story of ME3 supposed to be something quite different?

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

ME1
Saren: I think we should maybe work with the reapers.
Shepard: Absolutely not.

ME2
Illusive Man: I think we should maybe work with the reapers.
Shepard: Absolutely not

ME3
Shepard: I think we should maybe work with the reapers.

The end.

Literally every game ever, including 99% of ME3: "Don't trust the Reapers. Don't trust anyone who works with the Reapers. You can't control the Reapers. The Reapers lie."

Holographic AI boy representing the Reapers: You can trust us
Shepard: Ok (three bad options that make no sense)
Shepard: Fuck no (game literally calls you an idiot)

Yep

---

I think this is pretty much correct. Bioware didn't like the complainers so they added the "fuck you" option.

Easier than giving us a competent ending I guess.

---

Star Child: Organics and AI can never co-exist.

Shepard: I just brokered peace between the Quarian and the Geth.

Star Child: That doesn't count.

Shepard: Okay.

---

cjsdowg posted...

People hate but the indoctrination theory was so much better than what we got.

I didn't buy into it but I thought it was a surprisingly solid theory overall

---

All Bioware had to do was not make a terrible ending to Mass Effect 3. Everything in the story was fine until Shepard meets the Starchild. If they actually put a little bit of effort into the ending people would of remembered Mass Effect 3 much more fondly. The ending is so bad that it paints a terrible picture for the whole game.

---

Everyone knows ME3 ends with looking over earth with Anderson and both of them succumbing to their wounds.

---

DarkRoast posted...

I didn't buy into it but I thought it was a surprisingly solid theory overall

Shit was great. Was never canon or the intention of the creators like some people were trying to make it out to be, but it is far far far better than what we got. Also some great arguments with evidence presented for the most part.

---

EbonTitanium posted...

Wasn't the story of ME3 supposed to be something quite different?

The Reapers were supposed to be purging the galaxy to prevent buildup of dark energy, but the writer behind that idea left before ME3
---

YellowSUV posted...

Everything in the story was fine

---

YellowSUV posted...

All Bioware had to do was not make a terrible ending to Mass Effect 3. Everything in the story was fine until Shepard meets the Starchild. If they actually put a little bit of effort into the ending people would of remembered Mass Effect 3 much more fondly. The ending is so bad that it paints a terrible picture for the whole game.

it is interesting that the game is so good up until that point yet remembered with such disdain for it

like, kai lung was a bad inclusion but not really a big deal

Funkydog posted...

Everyone knows ME3 ends with looking over earth with Anderson and both of them succumbing to their wounds.

quite honestly, if that scene concluded with crucible firing and an immediate shift to the rest of the destroy ending, with the outcome a function of military assets, i'd be pretty satisfied

---

DarkRoast posted...

I didn't buy into it but I thought it was a surprisingly solid theory overall

You know the ending is bad when a fan theory makes more sense.

EbonTitanium posted...

Wasn't the story of ME3 supposed to be something quite different?

Yes, at least the purpose of The Reapers and the ending. The Reapers were trying to find a way to stop the expansion of black holes from consuming the galaxy which was accelerated by the use of mass effect technology. This was hinted at in a side quest in Mass Effect 2 which was totally dropped in 3. Advanced civillizations were harvested to help with the calculation power of solving this problem. In the theoritical ending Shepard could accept The Reapers ideas or tell them to fuck off or destroy the Reapers and the galaxy will deal with this issue themselves.

---

Speaking of fan endings, I think it's kind of funny that JK Rowling actually acknowledged and integrated the "Neville also fulfills the prophecy" theory into Deathly Hallows.


---

Now that I think of it, the ending seems like someone watched 2001 : a Space Odyssey and End of Evangelion and decided they were smart enough to somehow take those endings and slap them on to Mass Effect.

---

Sackgurl posted...

quite honestly, if that scene concluded with crucible firing and an immediate shift to the rest of the destroy ending, with the outcome a function of military assets, i'd be pretty satisfied

100% would have loved it, yeah. Even more so if they kept the cut dialogue between Shepherd and Anderson when they talk about children they would have "liked to have had"

---

It was funny how BioWare and some game journalists initially went with the "people just aren't mature enough to handle unhappy endings"

I think a large number of people would've actually been much more satisfied with a "Shepard gave them absolute hell, even though he lost" ending.

---

I shot the catalyst the first time around because he was such a dick, and then refuse happened, fuck.

eh, i thought what was there was enough

it had a very strong frodo and sam at the end of all things vibe

perhaps if they saw the crucible firing at the point anderson comments on the view, and everything after that has the backdrop of the facility coming apart

---

Funkydog posted...

100% would have loved it, yeah. Even more so if they kept the cut dialogue between Shepherd and Anderson when they talk about children they would have "liked to have had"

The parts with Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game were great. I also loved what they did with the Illusive Man at the end (although I understand a lot of people don't like that part).

---

YellowSUV posted...

The parts with Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game were great. I also loved what they did with the Illusive Man at the end (although I understand a lot of people don't like that part).

who didn't like that part?! that was great.

---

YellowSUV posted...

The parts with Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game were great. I also loved what they did with the Illusive Man at the end (although I understand a lot of people don't like that part).

I don't like the part how it's the final, perfect example of why you can't trust the reapers.

Ten minutes before you're apparently supposed to trust them.


---

DarkRoast posted...

I think a large number of people would've actually been much more satisfied with a "Shepard gave them absolute hell, even though he lost" ending.

Definitely. I'm not sure anyone expected anything other than a pyrrhic ending at best, given how much it took to take down one reaper in the first game. The giant tonal shift away from unity the game had been hammering home through all three games as well being just tossed aside remains the main issue and feels like Casey wasn't even aware of the games main themes when he wrote the ending.
YellowSUV posted...

The parts with Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game were great. I also loved what they did with the Illusive Man at the end (although I understand a lot of people don't like that part).

Really is. The ending part had bits that were utterly fantastic (even if I am still disappointed they cut parts of the Anderson/Shep conversation) with those two parts. But then to just jump from THAT to do the same damn thing you'd be yelling at Saren and TIM doing to... do it yourself.

I just don't get it. Even more so with indoctrination not being the why, like with those two.

---

Sackgurl posted...

who didn't like that part?! that was great.

Some peolpe think The Illusive Man's character was ruined at the end of the game. However, I don't have a problem with it since Reaper Indoctrination make people different. Logically, it makes sense for the Illusive Man to be indoctrinated since he was constantly around Reaper technology.

---

Theres people that think TIM was right and should have been vindicated, when its clear from minute one in ME2 hes a terrorist and psychopath

---

DarkRoast posted...

I don't like the part how it's the final, perfect example of why you can't trust the reapers.

Ten minutes before you're apparently supposed to trust them.

Well said. Just another example of how the very end of the game is dissonant from the rest of the game.

---

CleanerIGotThis posted...

Theres people that think TIM was right and should have been vindicated, when its clear from minute one in ME2 hes a terrorist and psychopath

Soon as you know he's Cyberus, from all they did in ME1 you know he's trash and not to be trusted.

"Oh, didn't realise they were terrorists, honest. Just ignore all the instances you'll see through working with us later on"

Ashley and Kaiden were right in ME2

---

Funkydog posted...

Soon as you know he's Cyberus, from all they did in ME1 you know he's trash and not to be trusted.

"Oh, didn't realise they were terrorists, honest. Just ignore all the instances you'll see through working with us later on"

Ashley and Kaiden were right in ME2

I think it's more complex than that.

Illusive Man doesn't even deny that Cerberus is a terrorist organization. His argument is that the rest of the Galaxy is unwilling to make difficult choices and sacrifices in a time when there's basically no choice.

Doesn't mean Cerberus is right, obviously. But it's a compelling argument, given the circumstances.

What good is political correctness if it results in genocide? It's almost a metaphor for the UN back when it would use terms like "ethnic cleansing" to avoid their mission to stop genocide.

---

Even ignoring how crappy the ending itself is, the fact that they did absolutely nothing in the first go to reflect the myriad of choices you made was even worse. Even just a Fallout slideshow style ending with 100 different variations would have been more suitable.

DarkRoast posted...

Illusive Man doesn't even deny that Cerberus is a terrorist organization. His argument is that the rest of the Galaxy is unwilling to make difficult choices and sacrifices in a time when there's basically no choice.

Wasn't the defense they were "rogue cells" along with that? Or maybe that was Miranda, been quite awhile since played ME2.

And of course he'd say he was the one "making the choices others wouldn't" and definitely one Renegade Shep likely makes too, as he wants you to work towards the goals he wants. And "political correctness" is an odd term to use for being against torturing children and the other heinous things Cerberus did. He'd long been making the hard choices, before was an apparent need and perhaps while (in his mind) he was doing things for the greater good it's an easy excuse many such people fall back on.

---

UnholyMudcrab posted...

I felt insulted by it

I mean, I felt insulted by all the endings, but that one in particular

Could not agree more. Anyone with a brain can see that the starbrat ending was terrible Deus Ex Machina bullshit & they should have known that people were going to be pissed, especially as it invalidated several of the themes of the entire series.

They should have cut that entire scene, just had Shepard push the button & then cut directly to the epilogue cut scenes.

UnholyMudcrab posted...

EbonTitanium posted...

Wasn't the story of ME3 supposed to be something quite different?

The Reapers were supposed to be purging the galaxy to prevent buildup of dark energy, but the writer behind that idea left before ME3

That was just one of the ideas being tossed around the writing team at some point during ME2 (see below quote for interview with Karpyshyn), not the actual direction the story was going before ME3 which was made as people spun the Karpyshyn interview to say. It made more sense to abandon the idea as dark energy being a problem worth Reapers genociding advanced civilizations every 50,000 years over a time span of a billion years to solve was never alluded to in ME1 and only briefly touched upon with Tali's recruitment mission in ME2. A proper Reaper motive would have had more hints than one measly mission to make people suspect dark energy being the true motive.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-19-ex-bioware-writer-discusses-dropped-ideas-for-mass-effect-trilogy-ending
"Again it's very vague and not fleshed out, it was something we considered but we ended up going in a different direction.

"I find it funny that fans end up hearing a couple things they like about [the dark energy idea] and in their minds they add in all the details they specifically want. It's like vapourware - vapourware is always perfect, anytime someone talks about the new greatest game. It's perfect until it comes out."
---

Funkydog posted...

Wasn't the defense they were "rogue cells" along with that? Or maybe that was Miranda, been quite awhile since played ME2.

And of course he'd say he was the one "making the choices others wouldn't" and definitely one Renegade Shep likely makes too, as he wants you to work towards the goals he wants. And "political correctness" is an odd term to use for being against torturing children and the other heinous things Cerberus did. He'd long been making the hard choices, before was an apparent need and perhaps while (in his mind) he was doing things for the greater good it's an easy excuse many such people fall back on.

I don't think anyone argued that what he was doing was right. But it made him personally an interesting villain.

---

GameGodOfAll posted...

Star Child: Organics and AI can never co-exist.

Shepard: I just brokered peace between the Quarian and the Geth.

Star Child: That doesn't count.

Shepard: Okay.

This is my big dig against ME.

It's like "it's in your nature for you to destroy each other" and it just goes against the entire point of the series, which was finding some way for coexistence. And of course, the "best" answer for that was to have everyone just become half-organic and half-synthetic. If we remove differences, no one will hate each other and Joker gets to bang EDI good and proper.

---

Fallout 3's ending was the dumbest by far, if only from a logical standpoint.

"I know I'm immune to radiation and all I need to do is go in there and push a button, but you must fulfill your destiny"

---

DarkRoast posted...

I don't think anyone argued that what he was doing was right. But it made him personally an interesting villain.

Oh, yeah. I loved him as a character, even more so than Saren I think and possible one of Bioware's best. It's the fact that he does all these heinous things as part of his vision of "the better good" that helps flesh him out, as do think he genuinely believes it is helping humanity.

---

CyricZ posted...

This is my big dig against ME.

It's like "it's in your nature for you to destroy each other" and it just goes against the entire point of the series, which was finding some way for coexistence. And of course, the "best" answer for that was to have everyone just become half-organic and half-synthetic. If we remove differences, no one will hate each other and Joker gets to bang EDI good and proper.

"Eliminate all diversity, otherwise people will be different" is not very progressive for the "best" option.

---

Here's how I would have done the ending.

The Catalyst reveals himself to be a former Prothean who has assumed control of the reapers using an artifact from a race even older than his. He explains to Shepard that his position allows him to influence and keep the reapers at Bay and makes him resistant to indoctrination though he will eventually succumb to it. He then asks Shepard to take his place before he becomes fully indoctrinated. He says Shepard will go on to suffer the same fate. He will be able to hold back the reapers but will eventually become indoctrinated and so would be forced to attack again some indeterminate amount of time in the future to find a replacement for himself.

This is basically a less stupid version of the control ending as a basic premise. From here Shepard has several options based on the choices he's made in the previous games including ME3. Not all options are available.

1. Agree and do it himself
2. Get EDI to do it
3. Find a way to stall for more time allowing the Catalyst to resist indoctrination for longer than previously expected while they prepare better.
4. Kill the Catalyst and repurpose the technology in the crucible to create weapons / tech that could help fight the reapers but turn the tide of the battle into a winning one.
5. Assume command with the Catalyst at the same time, work together to have the reapers destroy each other.
6. EDI does version of #5
7. Destroy the reapers, same as ME3 original "the bad ending" for people who don't meet the prerequisites for any others.

---

DarkRoast posted...

"Eliminate all diversity, otherwise people will be different" is not very progressive for the "best" option.

Yeah, it's really garbage, because the subtext is that we cannot and will never overcome our differences. The only way is to make everyone the same.
It's gross as hell, and don't they passive-aggressively imply you made the wrong choice if you don't do that?

Really, IMO, even aside from the writing, the biggest problem is how little agency the player has. It's just "Oh hai, you made it this far, now pick a color!" There's no cool fight, no debate, no conversation, not even much is offered about the implications of your decision. They threw out the one possible purpose of the Reapers that could have made things interesting.
And yeah, the entire theme of nearly three games is that, "The Reapers brainwash sentients into serving them and annihilate entire galactic civilizations" and then at the end they go, "LOL it's cool now, you can trust them!" and you totally can and it's weird and lame.

Lastly, my problem with the Illusive Man is that 3 makes him an idiot. Where the hell did he get that Reaper from(it looks like the one from ME2. If so, how did he even salvage it?)? And why would he think it would be a good idea to keep it in his personal space station, given that Cerberus knows all about indoctrination?
I just think it would be much more interesting if he was being all "Humanity First" during the crisis, trying to develop ways to influence Reaper attacks patterns to humanity's "benefit", sending Cerberus raids into devastated areas to loot tech and research, and just generally being a pain in the ass to the Alliance and the galactic effort to unite and fight off the Reapers, rather than just him and Cerberus being indoctrinated mooks.

I just find it annoying that you frustratingly shooting the shitchild auto causes this.
---

Isn't TIM indoctrinated before ME3 begins? So really his actions are just what Reapers want him to do, which is to attack within. Its explained in the character DLC in ME3 that the Reapers use indoctrination to help them cull the galaxy faster.

Personally I thought some of the lore they introduced in Andromeda could be used as a Reaper origin story.

---

Jiggy101011 posted...

Isn't TIM indoctrinated before ME3 begins? So really his actions are just what Reapers want him to do, which is to attack within. Its explained in the character DLC in ME3 that thats how the Reapers are able to take over every cycle.

It's quite possible he was indoctrinated during all of ME2 as well and the whole deal was to try and steal the reaper for himself.

---

That's extremely boring story writing if true, though.
---

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Lastly, my problem with the Illusive Man is that 3 makes him an idiot. Where the hell did he get that Reaper from(it looks like the one from ME2. If so, how did he even salvage it?)? And why would he think it would be a good idea to keep it in his personal space station, given that Cerberus knows all about indoctrination?

I forget where but somewhere in the game it's mentioned that Cerberus was able to salvage some of the human reaper remains from the Collector Base if you didn't hand it over to Cerberus. Although it's never explained how they did this considering one would need the Reaper IFF that's on-board the Normandy, and only the Normandy, to travel through the Omega-4 Relay to get to it.

Basically it's another one of many examples in ME3 of shoehorning in a bullshit excuse to make the story play the way they wanted it to if you didn't make the choices they wanted you to make instead of actually making the game play differently depending on what you did in the first two games. Like the Reapers just creating their own Rachni if you killed the last Queen on Noveria, or some other Salarian just happening to create a Genophage cure if Mordin died in the Suicide Mission, or Tali returning to the Migrant Fleet even if she was exiled in her loyalty mission.

geno_16 posted...

I forget where but somewhere in the game it's mentioned that Cerberus was able to salvage some of the human reaper remains from the Collector Base if you didn't hand it over to Cerberus. Although it's never explained how they did this considering one would need the Reaper IFF that's on-board the Normandy, and only the Normandy, to travel through the Omega-4 Relay to get to it.

Basically it's another one of many examples in ME3 of shoehorning in a bullshit excuse to make the story play the way they wanted it to if you didn't make the choices they wanted you to make instead of actually making the game play differently depending on what you did in the first two games. Like the Reapers just creating their own Rachni if you killed the last Queen on Noveria, or some other Salarian just happening to create a Genophage cure if Mordin died in the Suicide Mission, or Tali returning to the Migrant Fleet even if she was exiled in her loyalty mission.

You see the philosophy behind modern Bioware games is they want to have these big dramatic moments but don't want you to have to deal with the consequences of those big dramatic moments.

---

Paragon21XX posted...

That was just one of the ideas being tossed around the writing team at some point during ME2 (see below quote for interview with Karpyshyn), not the actual direction the story was going before ME3 which was made as people spun the Karpyshyn interview to say. It made more sense to abandon the idea as dark energy being a problem worth Reapers genociding advanced civilizations every 50,000 years over a time span of a billion years to solve was never alluded to in ME1 and only briefly touched upon with Tali's recruitment mission in ME2. A proper Reaper motive would have had more hints than one measly mission to make people suspect dark energy being the true motive.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-19-ex-bioware-writer-discusses-dropped-ideas-for-mass-effect-trilogy-ending
"Again it's very vague and not fleshed out, it was something we considered but we ended up going in a different direction.

"I find it funny that fans end up hearing a couple things they like about [the dark energy idea] and in their minds they add in all the details they specifically want. It's like vapourware - vapourware is always perfect, anytime someone talks about the new greatest game. It's perfect until it comes out."

oh, that makes much more sense.
whenever this is brought up, i had always heard it presented like it was a deliberate "we're working to do this thing, but the audience already guessed it so now we have to change it to something else".

---

ME3 gave us hot Jack

---