Current Events > Hot take: The ''other'' planned ending for ME3 would've been worse. *spoilers*

(+) Yeah! (+)

Basically that mass effect technology is killing the universe when people use it. The Reapers clean-up every 50k years to allow the universe time to bounce back a little and hoping that each cycle there might be a solution found, with humans being the last best chance at salvation because of our genetic diversity.

Shepard is then presented with the choice to destroy the Reapers and hope we can figure out a solution or allow the cycle to continue.

This has always sounded dumb as hell. I also dislike the "humans are special" trope.

I had my issues with the original endings at launch but with time and the additional context the EC added I quite enjoy them.

My main issue remains the Catalyst. It's fine in concept but the presentation needed work. The form it takes and the way it speaks just need to be swapped around. Give it a deeper voice and make it look like a Leviathan or w.e.

Anyway you'll be getting a ton of Mass Effect topics from me til I'm done replaying the trilogy again, so enjoy.


---

No

SamAnders posted...

No

yes and you know i'm right

---

Hard disagree. They laid the groundwork for it throughout 1 and 2, not the dumb bullshit we ended up getting.

---

The non-human species must have next to no genetic diversity given that humans are low in genetic diversity compared to the vast majority of other animals.

---

SuperShake666 posted...

They laid the groundwork for it throughout 1 and 2

I mean they laid the groundwork for order vs chaos, synthetic vs organic, created vs creator throughout 1 and 2 as well

---

May be lame, but at least it's an actual story instead of "and then this happens" that we got.

Hot take: I don't dislike any of the endings of ME3.

---

I wouldn't say the other planned ending would be super great, but it certainly would be better the actual ending.

As for the whole "humans being special thing," if you rejected the Repears, the whole galaxy would of be working to stop the threat of dark energy. You don't have to listen to the Reaper's ideas that "humans are special".

When someone's "it was all a dream" ending (indoctrination theory) sounds better than the actual ending, you have a problem.

---

AdrianBeterson posted...

Hot take: I don't dislike any of the endings of ME3.

Destroy and Control are both great

Synthesis makes no sense mechanically and the game doesn't lean into explaining the implications of it as much as I'd like.

---

Just getting rid of the star child and changing how you go about deciding what to do would fix so much of the ending. Heck, just get rid of star child.

---

Doom_Art posted...

Destroy and Control are both great

Synthesis makes no sense mechanically and the game doesn't lean into explaining the implications of it as much as I'd like.

I think of it this way:
Destroy: Shepard's preferred ending
Synthesis: Reaper's preferred ending
Control: Neutral ending

I think they work perfectly as choices.

---

None of the endings would have been overly bad if they weren't just generic templates that don't take any of your actions into account. All of them would have been perfectly fine natural endings falling in line with your choices up until that point, with scenarios that reflect the galactic changes that were made throughout.

Funkydog posted...

Just getting rid of the star child and changing how you go about deciding what to do would fix so much of the ending. Heck, just get rid of star child.

Star child is just an avatar used by the catalyst to fuck with Shepard. I don't know why that specific detail confuses and enrages people so much.

---

Funkydog posted...

Just getting rid of the star child and changing how you go about deciding what to do would fix so much of the ending. Heck, just get rid of star child.

Like I said, I don't even think you need to get rid of it entirely.

You can still have the "Reaper God" up there, just make it something than some other dumb kid talking to you. My only issue with it is the appearance.

Something like a Harbinger or Leviathan hologram would've made a lot more sense

---

No, nothing is worse than an arbitrary pick your color ending, even with as tedious as humans are special trope is. That ship already sailed in 2.
But you are correct insofar that that still would feel overly-contrived. Why not simply destroy the mass relay network, if thats the case? Its several times more humane than genociding entire interstellar civilizations.

Doom_Art posted...

Destroy and Control are both great

Synthesis makes no sense mechanically and the game doesn't lean into explaining the implications of it as much as I'd like.

Control also goes against the entire trilogy leaving Destroy the only decent one, and it sucks balls too because the devs realized "hey why would anyone ever pick another ending" so they just threw in downsides to it for no reason.

Nemu posted...

None of the endings would have been overly bad if they weren't just generic templates that don't take any of your actions into account. All of them would have been perfectly fine natural endings falling in line with your choices up until that point, with scenarios that reflect the galactic changes that were made throughout.

Problem is, most of your choices throughout the series didn't matter. Kill or save the council? Has no effect on ME2. Kill or destroy the rachni? Has no effect on ME2. Destroy or secure the collector base? Has no effect on ME3.

If anything, they were consistent throughout the series at giving you choices, but concluding with them not really mattering in the next game.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

Star child is just an avatar used by the catalyst to fuck with Shepard. I don't know why that specific detail confuses and enrages people so much.

In the indoctrination theory this is true. I think the creators of the game intended him to be "helpful" or at the very least neutral.

---

SamAnders posted...

Control also goes against the entire trilogy

There's a bunch of examples in ME2 of Reaper technology being used in constructive ways. EDI, and the Thanix Cannon both come to mind. The endgame decision of 2 also lets Shepard preserve Reaper technology to gain the edge in the war (and possibly on other species).

Controlling the Reapers directly is a pretty reasonable progression from that on its face

---

Doom_Art posted...

There's a bunch of examples in ME2 of Reaper technology being used in constructive ways. EDI, and the Thanix Cannon both come to mind. The endgame decision of 2 also lets Shepard preserve Reaper technology to gain the edge in the war (and possibly on other species).

Controlling the Reapers directly is a pretty reasonable progression from that on its face

Controlling the Reapers is certainly not a bad idea, but the game literally has a whole scene before the ending where Anderson and Shepard tell The Illusive Man that you cannot control the Reapers and you have to destroy them. That is quite the dissonance.

---

AdrianBeterson posted...

Problem is, most of your choices throughout the series didn't matter. Kill or save the council? Has no effect on ME2. Kill or destroy the rachni? Has no effect on ME2. Destroy or secure the collector base? Has no effect on ME3.

If anything, they were consistent throughout the series at giving you choices, but concluding with them not really mattering in the next game.

That was the consequence of them needing to flow well into the sequel, but ME3 didn't need to worry about that. We should have gotten something a little less varied than the Fallout slideshow but more than a 3.5 button choice that reflects nothing of your characterization of Shepard up until that point.

Nemu posted...

That was the consequence of them needing to flow well into the sequel, but ME3 didn't need to worry about that. We should have gotten something a little less varied than the Fallout slideshow but more than a 3.5 button choice that reflects nothing of your characterization of Shepard up until that point.

But the major conflicts in the game were already concluded in ME3. You end the Geth vs. Quarian conflict. You end the Krogan genophage conflict. You get all of the races to work together with you vs. the reapers. All that's left is deciding the fate of the reapers and the mass relays, and the game gives you 3 choices at that.

---

AdrianBeterson posted...

But the major conflicts in the game were already concluded in ME3. You end the Geth vs. Quarian conflict. You end the Krogan genophage conflict. You get all of the races to work together with you vs. the reapers. All that's left is deciding the fate of the reapers and the mass relays, and the game gives you 3 choices at that.

In a perfect world, you'd have choices at the end, but you'd have different choices depending on your actions up until that point and each choice would have variations depending on your choices up until that point. We don't need 100 different ending variations, but we did need the consequences to have some purpose.

Nemu posted...

In a perfect world, you'd have choices at the end, but you'd have different choices depending on your actions up until that point and each choice would have variations depending on your choices up until that point. We don't need 100 different ending variations, but we did need the consequences to have some purpose.

Therein lies the fault of the ME universe. The Reapers have been presented as such astronomical antagonists throughout the series, that in the end, none of the other choices really matter beyond the choice of what happens with the Reapers. Does the choice of what happens to that tiny creek behind your house that feeds into the Pacific Ocean really matter?

---

AdrianBeterson posted...

Therein lies the fault of the ME universe. The Reapers have been presented as such astronomical antagonists throughout the series, that in the end, none of the other choices really matter beyond the choice of what happens with the Reapers. Does the choice of what happens to that tiny creek behind your house that feeds into the Pacific Ocean really matter?

Yes, the post-reaper politics of the galaxy and the effects of the fate of the Reapers on those politics would be important. The fates of the individual characters, their roles in the affairs of the universe, an actual set of fates for Shepard, etc would all have been much better than what we got.

Nemu posted...

Yes, the post-reaper politics of the galaxy and the effects of the fate of the Reapers on those politics would be important. The fates of the individual characters, their roles in the affairs of the universe, an actual set of fates for Shepard, etc would all have been much better than what we got.

The trilogy was about the Reapers. What happens post-reapers is content for an entirely new game (which I assume the new ME game in development will address).

---

AdrianBeterson posted...

Therein lies the fault of the ME universe. The Reapers have been presented as such astronomical antagonists throughout the series, that in the end, none of the other choices really matter beyond the choice of what happens with the Reapers. Does the choice of what happens to that tiny creek behind your house that feeds into the Pacific Ocean really matter?

Yes it matters. Life goes on, it doesn't end with the Reapers destroyed.

---

AdrianBeterson posted...

The trilogy was about the Reapers. What happens post-reapers is content for an entirely new game (which I assume the new ME game in development will address).

Not really, seeing as they picked an entirely new galaxy for the very purpose of allowing the series to continue while making sure they didn't need to canonize any particular ending from the previous game. While this new project may change that a decade later, the original plan was obviously to abandon the galaxy for good, but Andromeda's failure caused them to turn back.

dave_is_slick posted...

Yes it matters. Life goes on, it doesn't end with the Reapers destroyed.

Sure, but that's content for another game, not ME3.

Nemu posted...

Not really, seeing as they picked an entirely new galaxy for the very purpose of allowing the series to continue while making sure they didn't need to canonize any particular ending from the previous game. While this new project may change that a decade later, the original plan was obviously to abandon the galaxy for good, but Andromeda's failure caused them to turn back.

Let's not talk about Andromeda.

---

AdrianBeterson posted...

Sure, but that's content for another game, not ME3.

No it isn't.

---

dave_is_slick posted...

No it isn't.

Whatever you say dude.

---

Imagine if Luke Skywalker, and Vader managed to kill Palpatine. Then Luke became the new emporer, and everything was good just because he was in control. lol