Mass Effects future (Spoiler alert)

[darkjak]

What do you think of the future of the ME franchise?

 

Supposedly ME3 is supposed to be the end of Shephards story. But is it? I mean, wasn't Halo 3 supposed to kinda be the end of Master Chief?

 

To me Mass Effect is all about the Shephard and his crew.

 

Personally, I'd prefer to get just a straight sequel. More Shephard, more Normandy, more Joker, Tali, Garrus etc. But to make a sequel or sequel trilogy, you have to top off the old trilogy. And what could possibly top off a multi milion year old race of machines that anihilate most life every 50 000 years?

After watching the Iron Sky trailers, I started thinking. What if not all protheans were killed? What if this hyper-advanced race sent out a few ships to other galaxies, where they colonised a bunch of planets? And after 50 000 years of technological advancements and mobilization, they return to take back the galaxies?

 

These guys should be even more advanced than the reapers. I mean, while being really old, the reapers hibernate most of the time.

 

 

 

What do you think of my idea? And what are your ideas?

[Hero-of-Time]

After watching the Iron Sky trailers, I started thinking. What if not all protheans were killed? What if this hyper-advanced race sent out a few ships to other galaxies, where they colonised a bunch of planets? And after 50 000 years of technological advancements and mobilization, they return to take back the galaxies?

 

These guys should be even more advanced than the reapers. I mean, while being really old, the reapers hibernate most of the time.

 

 

 

What do you think of my idea? And what are your ideas?

 

They weren't. Play the DLC.

[Cube]

I want a new story with a new crew. Probably set a few hundred years in the future so your choices balance out - with dialogue and codex entries explaining how things happened based on your save file.

 

However, unless they fix the end, there isn't a future.

[Happenstance]

However, unless they fix the end, there isn't a future.

 

Of course there is. Anything that happened in the game ending can easily be written into any future storylines. Nothing has to be fixed. Not liking the ending is one thing but all these people demanding it be changed are just getting annoying.

[darkjak]

Of course there is. Anything that happened in the game ending can easily be written into any future storylines. Nothing has to be fixed. Not liking the ending is one thing but all these people demanding it be changed are just getting annoying.

 

We're going a bit off topic right now, but more and more things are indicating that the current ending isn't supposed to be the ending at all, and that there'll be a free DLC with the real final chapter in a month or two.

[Aimless]

We're going a bit off topic right now, but more and more things are indicating that the current ending isn't supposed to be the ending at all, and that there'll be a free DLC with the real final chapter in a month or two.

No, the ending is the ending. If it does get changed it'll be due to fan pressure, not because of some grand BioWare plan.

 

Personally I'd like to see them update the ending so it's better executed — kind of like a director's cut — but actually changing the direction post-release would be weird, even if I do think it was an unfitting road to go down. Regardless, I'll map out a likely direction based on what we have.

 

The Milky Way as we know it is pretty much screwed. Galactic civilisation was built upon the relay network and the Citadel, both of which are now destroyed. There's little remaining government to speak of and each star cluster is more or less isolated; assuming the alien ships stranded near Earth can reliably map their way home just using FTL travel, in many cases it will take generations for them to get there. The homeworlds themselves will also be in a difficult position, left to pick up the pieces after the Reaper invasion without the leadership and infrastructure they once had; colony worlds that rely on supplies being shipped in are screwed, destined for famine, sickness and infighting.

 

At the very end of the game we see a winter scene, an old guy telling a kid about "the Shepard". Based on the skyline this would appear to take place on the same planet that Joker et al inexplicitly land on previously, the implication being that the pair standing in the snow are descendants of the Normandy crew, living several centuries later in a culture that has yet to really explore the stars. This could potentially set up a new series of games — those people take to the stars and discover new races, as they could well be in uncharted places of our galaxy or perhaps a different one altogether — although I'd have to question if there's much point in that given that all the trappings of the series would no longer be present; you're essentially dealing with a reset of the narrative universe, so you could brand it as something else entirely and it wouldn't matter.

 

On a more speculative note, if BioWare wanted to they could undo a lot of ME3's changes. We know that the Protheans managed to build a semi-functional mass relay as we used it in the first game, so the writers could always go back to the well of convenient plot devices that is the Mars dig site: "Hey guys, we totally found these plans for a relay, so let's build one and then make our own network!" Similarly they could construct something akin to the Citadel and re-establish a galactic government, allowing for new games to take place say a century or two after the current ones in a not entirely unfamiliar, but still different, situation; introducing new races isn't a problem as there's an unspecified amount of unmapped relays out there.

 

I suspect BioWare might have wanted to be done with the series after the third game, hence the ending we got. They could easily continue it if they wished to, but it would inevitably be something of a different game and one without Shepard; not really an issue as they're pretty much a cypher. I'm okay with that last part, at least, because I'd want a new cast — Garrus and co might be great but we've seen their arcs, so their place going forward is in codex entries rather than starring roles.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Aimless
Typo

[Magnus]

Supposedly ME3 is supposed to be the end of Shephards story. But is it? I mean, wasn't Halo 3 supposed to kinda be the end of Master Chief?

 

To me Mass Effect is all about the Shephard and his crew.

Just like Star Wars is all about Luke Skywalker, right?

 

As much as I love (some of) the cast of Mass Effect, we've seen their stories now, and if I were BioWare, I'd love the chance the start over without having to keep a hundred different decisions and dozens of different characters in mind.

 

Of course, the ending kind of soured the whole experience for me, so at the moment I have very little interest in the future of Mass Effect. Ask me again in a couple of years.

[Esequiel]

I never played any mass effect game and these spoilers are making me think I should have..... Cliff notes anyone?

[Magnus]

I never played any mass effect game and these spoilers are making me think I should have..... Cliff notes anyone?

I hope you meant on the Mass Effect series, because here goes...

 

It's an RPG/shooter hybrid about a space marine who travels around the galaxy in an attempt to save all life from being wiped out by a galactic threat. You've got a team of character that you can bring with you into combat, as well as talk to between missions.

 

The first game suffers a bit from clumsy RPG gameplay, including an inventory that you end up having to purge every hour or so. It also has extremely repetitive sidequests, where you land on uncharted planets and drive around until you find find one of three or four copy-pasted buildings. Fortunately, it makes up for most of its flaws with a strong main story and well-written characters.

 

The sequels fix most of the problems from the first game, though Mass Effect 2 has its own issues, including mind-numbingly boring planet scanning for resources and a weaker main story, but overall the sequels are a lot more polished. The third game really brings things to a head, and has a lot of great character moments.

 

The biggest draw is probably that all of your decisions carry over from one game to the other, and while the differences are usually small (you helped someone out in one game -> you run into them again in the next game, someone died in one game -> a different character takes their place in the next game), it's still cool and makes it feel like you're really playing your story.

 

It's a great series overall - it's just a shame that the last five minutes of the last game sucked so much.

[darkjak]

Just like Star Wars is all about Luke Skywalker, right?

That's not the best example, the new trilogy's been bashed to no end.

I wrote my personal oppinion. I admire the Mass Effect team to no end, they've done an excellent job and I do believe that they are fully capable of creating an interresting continuation.

But to me, personally, continuing Mass Effect without Shephard and his crew would be like... Gran Turismo without the licensed cars.

As much as I love (some of) the cast of Mass Effect, we've seen their stories now, and if I were BioWare, I'd love the chance the start over without having to keep a hundred different decisions and dozens of different characters in mind.

I understand why they wanted to finish the Shephard saga. Firstly, I believe that they sort of wanted prevent EA from forcing them into doing things they didn't want to. And as you said: it would be a complete nightmare to make a second trilogy. Mass Effect 3 had a (literally) thousand factors from the previous games weighing in to your game experience. Imagine how many variations of the story that would have to exist by let's say the end of a second trilogy.

 

But still: I've invested like a hundred hours in to my characters path.

[Aimless]

But you're attached to the character because of your investment, not because of their personality. It would be incredibly easy to introduce a Shepard analogue with a different name.

[Cube]

[flameboy]

Ok so I've moved over here for discussion of ending. I for one liked my ending the synthesis ending. I do feel there were litterings of this theme throughout both ME2+3. However I can see why people would believe that is a bit of a curve ball.

 

For me it felt whole and complete it ended the synthetic-organic arguement by combining the two. I do think the xzbit (sp?) image/meme that is doing the rounds is simplifying things somewhat. There is some confusion on the space baby, I mean he both refers to the reapers in third person and as us, to me it makes more sense if he is some kind of sentient being and the justification for all this is more that they are judging organics for making the same decisions over and over again which is why they give Shepherd the choice as the first organic to rise above it all. However that's me putting my own views to fill in the gaps.

 

For people who disliked the ending is it more the unpersonal nature of it? The plot holes?

 

Because I really get that problem but do not see the issue with the choices as such. It's interesting to read up on the actual differences a lack of total effectiveness can have on the choices you get to make at the end. For me far to many of these are implied rather than actually shown. This is an issue sure.

 

The whole Normandy crashing and revealing people is so strange....they have come out and said that just to demonstrate that the crew survived/didn't survive. However the crew members who step out seems totally random...for me it was Joker, EDI and Liara (my love interest) both of who were down on Earth with me. Anderson at the end made little to no sense for me I would have preferred having Javik up there with to complete his story in a way.

 

For me losing the mass relays is the price to pay for breaking a cycle that has lasted thousands of years. I defintely think they made this decision so they can frame the next game as a fresh start without it having to be a prequel. I for one wouldn't like to see an actual full blown prequel I think it would undo the great work they did in both the codex and in the exposition during the game to explain what has come before.

 

I honestly hope they don't change the ending, I wouldn't mind them either fleshing out the ending with an epilogue or hell even leaving people hanging and explaining the history in a sequel based hundreds of years in the future.

 

This is already a huge post but do have more views I will post in time.

[LegoMan1031]

What pissed me off the most was lack of explanation. I can't help but think something else is at work here. They have been great at telling the story etc but then somehow it just feels wrong at the end? I somehow can't see how they would/could fuck it up.

 

If that is the general idea of the ending then I am fine with that as it is definitely interesting in it's own right - maybe a bit disappointing but it just kinda felt rushed/random and wtf.

 

The whole cycle thing has been hinted at several times by the Reapers etc so there is a link there and ending shows truth in that but how it was done just was wrong.

 

I know you liked that ending @flameboy but to me to just feels a bit wrong... it's like basically turning everyone into the Borg (they wouldn't need to assimilate anyone coz they would all basically be the same! lol)

 

Shepard being indoctrinated in a very interesting theory, as people indoctrinated make you feel like you are in control etc and Shepard was oddly calm at the end?

[Cube]

For me, one of the bigger insults was the final resolution to the Quarian/Geth war.

 

In Mass Effect the Geth were simply mindless enemies controlled by reapers, whom they believed to be their version of a god.

 

In Mass Effect 2 you're introduced to Legion. He's a geth that isn't compromised by the Reapers. Through him you find out that the Geth don't hate organics, and you can help make Legion and Tali trust each other and become friends. Because of how interested I was in these two characters and their conflict, I even took both of them to fight the proto-reaper as I thought it would be nice if those two were the ones to help save the galaxy with me. In the game you also give advice to the Quarians about going to war with the Geth.

 

In Mass Effect 3, you're fully put into the conflict. The Quarians destroy a large majority of the Geth, and the Geth are left with just the ones on Rannoch. Because of this, they have no choice but to get help from the Reapers, losing their free will in the Process. Legion still keeps his free will, and shuts down a Geth Dreadnought to save Quarian lives - which the Quarians proceed to blow up without even waiting for you to step off.

 

You also delve into the Geth consciousness yourself, witnessing events prior to the Quarian war. Quarians didn't fight the Geth because they rebelled. The two major events were: one Geth didn't shut down because it didn't know what task it had failed, while another asked "Does this unit have a soul?". The first time a Geth picked up a weapon was in order to sacrifice itself and save other Geth. Some Geth even tried to sacrifice themselves in order to save Quarians who sympathised with the Geth. In the end, they had no choice but to claim the planet. And even then, they allowed the Quarians to leave.

 

One you've worked with Legion and the Quarians to remove the Reaper influence from the Geth, the Quarians start pummelling the Geth fleet to wipe them out. Legion uploads modified Reaper code to the Geth in order to give them true AI rather than a shared consensus, and warns the Quarians that if they do not shooting the Geth will have no option but to fight back. Once you've persuaded the Quarians to back down there's a really touching moment where Tali responds to the question of "Does this unit have a soul?" with "Yes" before he gives his life for the good of his people.

 

Then, even after all the Quarians have done, the Geth offer to share their homeworld. They help to build shelters and set up power, they even take over Quarian environmental suits in order to mimic viruses to boost Quarian immune systems with no risk of a real infection. Because of this, there are Quarian children on Rannoch who will grow up strong and healthy. Both fleets pledge their allegiance to you and follow you to take back Earth.

 

And then, after all of that, some kid tells us that it was all a lie and the Geth will destroy every single trace of organic life, the only possible reaction is...

 

 

...Fuck You Space Jesus!

[LegoMan1031]

...Fuck You Space Jesus!

 

I completely agree (to the whole post).

 

At the end it was basically saying that it was inevitable that synthetics and organics can not get along, no matter what! And it was a bit like huh, wtf have I been doing with Legion/EDI etc?!

[Happenstance]

I still dont think that we have to take that as truth though. I think weird catalyst kid was so stuck in carrying on the cycles that he just would never believe that the cycle could have been broken on its own and synthetics truly were starting to co-exist with organics. Its a shame there wasnt a paragon option that you could actually convince him and he sends the Reapers away on his own.

[Aimless]

For people who disliked the ending is it more the unpersonal nature of it? The plot holes?

I certainly dislike the plot holes, but I think the ending is terrible on a more fundamental level.

 

Whether we're talking fantasy epics or recounting an anecdote to friends, stories follow a fairly basic structure: introduction, ascending action, climax, descending action, resolution. ME3 falls at the final hurdle, giving us an info dump of new information that isn't in service of resolution. In other words, we are left with more questions than answers specifically due to the information imparted in the final moments

 

On top of the above, the ending is pretentious; in the literal sense, not the overused I-want-to-lazily-belittle-this-therefore-it's-pretentious one. The series has always leant towards soft sci-fi where the hero triumphs despite impossible odds, yet at the end of the third game in the trilogy there's a sudden tonal shift as the ending makes a grab for 2001: A Space Odyssey. This could potentially have worked, but the attempt itself is a failure, demonstrating a lack of understanding as to what it means to have an ambiguous ending: Inception's ending is ambiguous, Mass Effect 3 leaves the player to fill in almost all the blanks whilst fielding a slew of new questions that the game throws at you in the final few minutes.

 

In relation to the above, the shift in tone also retroactively undermines past victories. It cheapens every success and failure of your Shepard by levelling all the consequences, effectively moving the goal posts after you've already scored.

 

The absolute worst part is just how needless it is, really. The prior two games had very straight forward endings, but that wasn't something that needed 'fixing' for the third. All people wanted was something akin to Dragon Age: Origins resolution, yet instead we got Casper forcing us to make one of three nonsensical choices because... why? I don't see the motivation outside of an incredibly misguided attempt at being profound.

[darkjak]

For people who disliked the ending is it more the unpersonal nature of it? The plot holes?

I think you hit the nail on the head there. In the end, nothing you did seemed to matter. While gathering war assets, I expected that they would change the outcome of the final battle. That maybe if I'd max it out completely, the organics would make a straight-out victory. Or maybe while storming London, I'd get to actually see some of the forces I've gathered in action. Or just having the ammount of war assets change how much time I have to activate the crucible.

 

I was more than ready to see members of my crew get killed, or even see Shephard die. But Shephards relation to the crew was central to the franchise. I was expecting to see some kind of reaction from the surviving crew members. Hell, just making your choices affect whom you see in your flashback before you die would make things better.

 

Because I really get that problem but do not see the issue with the choices as such. It's interesting to read up on the actual differences a lack of total effectiveness can have on the choices you get to make at the end. For me far to many of these are implied rather than actually shown. This is an issue sure.

 

The whole Normandy crashing and revealing people is so strange....they have come out and said that just to demonstrate that the crew survived/didn't survive. However the crew members who step out seems totally random...for me it was Joker, EDI and Liara (my love interest) both of who were down on Earth with me. Anderson at the end made little to no sense for me I would have preferred having Javik up there with to complete his story in a way.

In my ending, it was my squad that left the wreck.

The whole wreck scene made no sence at all. Why did Joker pick up my squadmates? Why did my squadmates stop running towards the beam? Why did they leave Shephard to his fate? Why did Joker then decide to leave the sol system? Did my entire crew and squad turn out to be a bunch of cowards whom bailed literally minutes before victory?

For me losing the mass relays is the price to pay for breaking a cycle that has lasted thousands of years. I defintely think they made this decision so they can frame the next game as a fresh start without it having to be a prequel. I for one wouldn't like to see an actual full blown prequel I think it would undo the great work they did in both the codex and in the exposition during the game to explain what has come before.

 

I honestly hope they don't change the ending, I wouldn't mind them either fleshing out the ending with an epilogue or hell even leaving people hanging and explaining the history in a sequel based hundreds of years in the future.

The thing is that if they make a sequel set even centuries in the future, you'd still need to take in to consideration what Shephard did in the first three games. Are there any Rachni? Are there Geth or Quarians, or even both? Are there any pure organics, or were they all merged? Is the genophage still around?

 

So if the reasoning of killing Shephard off was to avoid taking factors from the previous games in to consideration in sequels, they've failed. Even worse, if they make a prequel (atless it takes place in a previous cycle), they are limited to what they can do, as they can't do anything that messes up the continuity. Players won't be able to prevent the genopage from happening, you can't stop the quarian genocide of Geth, you can't kill Matriarch Benezia or Urdnot Wrex.

[flameboy]

For me, one of the bigger insults was the final resolution to the Quarian/Geth war.

 

In Mass Effect the Geth were simply mindless enemies controlled by reapers, whom they believed to be their version of a god.

 

In Mass Effect 2 you're introduced to Legion. He's a geth that isn't compromised by the Reapers. Through him you find out that the Geth don't hate organics, and you can help make Legion and Tali trust each other and become friends. Because of how interested I was in these two characters and their conflict, I even took both of them to fight the proto-reaper as I thought it would be nice if those two were the ones to help save the galaxy with me. In the game you also give advice to the Quarians about going to war with the Geth.

 

In Mass Effect 3, you're fully put into the conflict. The Quarians destroy a large majority of the Geth, and the Geth are left with just the ones on Rannoch. Because of this, they have no choice but to get help from the Reapers, losing their free will in the Process. Legion still keeps his free will, and shuts down a Geth Dreadnought to save Quarian lives - which the Quarians proceed to blow up without even waiting for you to step off.

 

You also delve into the Geth consciousness yourself, witnessing events prior to the Quarian war. Quarians didn't fight the Geth because they rebelled. The two major events were: one Geth didn't shut down because it didn't know what task it had failed, while another asked "Does this unit have a soul?". The first time a Geth picked up a weapon was in order to sacrifice itself and save other Geth. Some Geth even tried to sacrifice themselves in order to save Quarians who sympathised with the Geth. In the end, they had no choice but to claim the planet. And even then, they allowed the Quarians to leave.

 

One you've worked with Legion and the Quarians to remove the Reaper influence from the Geth, the Quarians start pummelling the Geth fleet to wipe them out. Legion uploads modified Reaper code to the Geth in order to give them true AI rather than a shared consensus, and warns the Quarians that if they do not shooting the Geth will have no option but to fight back. Once you've persuaded the Quarians to back down there's a really touching moment where Tali responds to the question of "Does this unit have a soul?" with "Yes" before he gives his life for the good of his people.

 

Then, even after all the Quarians have done, the Geth offer to share their homeworld. They help to build shelters and set up power, they even take over Quarian environmental suits in order to mimic viruses to boost Quarian immune systems with no risk of a real infection. Because of this, there are Quarian children on Rannoch who will grow up strong and healthy. Both fleets pledge their allegiance to you and follow you to take back Earth.

 

And then, after all of that, some kid tells us that it was all a lie and the Geth will destroy every single trace of organic life, the only possible reaction is...

 

 

...Fuck You Space Jesus!

 

I think 3 did a really good job of further demonstrating that the Geth don't hate organics through the data clusters you viewed when inside the Geth mind. The Geth were forced into war by organic (Quarian) abuse and trying to wipe them out. I think this is the crux of the matter really organics will always be either not be able to control machines or drive them to a point where they will have to fight to defend themselves.

 

I'd like to think because of the players role in the Geths evolution that they would not be the ones to wipe out organics rather another species later down the line. That's why in a some ways space babys argument does make sense at least the reapers carry a species genetic code on rather than be totally eradicated...also I know there is the arguement why not use the reapers to wipe out Geth and the like but then the evolved races will continue to create machines believing this time will be different, so why not give lesser species a chance to evolve? Perhaps there is a secret hope that at some point a set of species will arise that don't attempt to create machines and then it won't be necessary for the Reaper to come marching in.

 

It's interesting to read that the synthesis option apparently isn't always available depending on choices you make, this coupled with the Geth-Quarian storyline and the Joker-EDI for me makes this seem like the purest ending.

 

In my ending, it was my squad that left the wreck.

The whole wreck scene made no sence at all. Why did Joker pick up my squadmates? Why did my squadmates stop running towards the beam? Why did they leave Shephard to his fate? Why did Joker then decide to leave the sol system? Did my entire crew and squad turn out to be a bunch of cowards whom bailed literally minutes before victory?

 

 

 

The thing is that if they make a sequel set even centuries in the future, you'd still need to take in to consideration what Shephard did in the first three games. Are there any Rachni? Are there Geth or Quarians, or even both? Are there any pure organics, or were they all merged? Is the genophage still around?

 

So if the reasoning of killing Shephard off was to avoid taking factors from the previous games in to consideration in sequels, they've failed. Even worse, if they make a prequel (atless it takes place in a previous cycle), they are limited to what they can do, as they can't do anything that messes up the continuity. Players won't be able to prevent the genopage from happening, you can't stop the quarian genocide of Geth, you can't kill Matriarch Benezia or Urdnot Wrex.

 

It's interesting that yours was your squad members...maybe I got EDI swapped out for Javik....The whole thing was clumsy I know the battle is going on but we really don't know how long Shephard has taken to get to the Citadel and maybe things did change to justify the Normandy espacing but they really didn't explain it well enough.

 

What's wrong with them basing a new galaxy set centuries in the future based on your decisions? They can import your save somehow (may be harder if it's next gen) they have already said don't get rid of those save files. I'll admit it would be a mammoth task I mean the 3 endings alone represent vastly different galaxies to be living in even without the decisions made throughout the games.

 

I wonder if they had presented the finale a little better and more personal but with the same choices people would feel the same? As much as I liked it I'm by no means saying its perfect. I defintely get the decision being sprung on us is bullshit...if it was the middle game in the series something being sprung like that would be fine as you have another game to flesh it all. You could compare to the end of Empire Strikes Back and the reveal of Vader as Luke's father, imagine if that had happened in the aftermath of the Emperors death in Jedi it would have been like wtf?!

[LegoMan1031]

It's interesting to read that the synthesis option apparently isn't always available depending on choices you make, this coupled with the Geth-Quarian storyline and the Joker-EDI for me makes this seem like the purest ending.

 

But joining organics and synthetics just seems wrong as I have already said imo. You are basically deciding that everyone in the universe will be joined, thus removing choice from everyone and that just doesn't seem right.

 

Everyone set out to stop the reapers so in that respect destroying the reapers is the 'obvious' one but then gets the added complication of destroying all synthetic life and because of my connection with helping out the Geth made that one a no go for me.

 

I went with controlling the Reapers but in a good way by getting them to basically sod off away but then it's not right that I control a whole race?

 

Also where was my stand off with Harbinger!? I at least wanted some epic convo where we traded insults and trying to convince each other who is right. etc etc etc.

 

Also the keepers looked after the citadel, would it be safe to assume that the true purpose was maintaining that station to look after the Catalyst?

[Cube]

I went with controlling the Reapers but in a good way by getting them to basically sod off away but then it's not right that I control a whole race?

 

But you die...so you can't control them.

 

Synthesis is by far my least favourite endings. Especially the "epilogue" with the old man and the kid. People's cells shouldn't decay, people shouldn't grow old - people should now be immortal.

 

If people aren't immortal the reason for creating fully synthetic life is still there, therefore doing nothing to stop the cycle.

 

One aspect of the ending I really did like was that the large reapers were each representative of the species of a single cycle, and that the general "conciousness" of the cycle is still alive. Just in an absolutely horrific way.

 

Which would also likely make Harbinger the youngest Reaper, as he's likely created from the Prothean era.

[Magnus]

Aimless always says exactly what I'm thinking in these discussions about the ending.

 

Except a lot more eloquently.

 

 

It's interesting to read that the synthesis option apparently isn't always available depending on choices you make, this coupled with the Geth-Quarian storyline and the Joker-EDI for me makes this seem like the purest ending.

It's only ever not available if your effective military strength isn't high enough, so it's not really based on your choices, unless you count "only doing the bare minimum" as a choice.

[Cube]

EMS is a silly way to determine that, too. As the only reason given for that kid giving you those choices is simply that you've reached the catalyst.

 

I can't believe I'm saying this...but copying how the treasury worked in Fable III would have been a much better way to implement the EMS.

[ViPeR]

I have so many questions about the game and the ending it's beyond count! A lot of people seem to think that we just want a 'happy' ending. I couldn't give a shit if they all died and the reapers won at least it'd be closure. It just feels like a kick in the nuts that everything I went through for the whole 3 games was basically for nothing. The destruction of the reapers storyline (which I'd treat as a renegade option) seems to be the best! That in itself is a shit ending because the entire universe is screwed anyway as they're all trapped in the Sol system. I don't appreciate the game culminating in 3 really crap choices from space kid. However do you guys/gals not feel the whole ending as a little 'off' pretty much after Shepard gets blown up before the beam? A few questions I have;

 

Why is space boy the same kid Shepard has been dreaming about in the whole game?

How the hell did Anderson end up in the Citadel?

More to the point how did the Illusive man end up there!?

When Shepard ascends to space boys hideout, where is he? It looks as if he's standing next to the beam which would mean he's in a vacuum?

How is it people in London are in the Normandy at the end?

No fight with Harbinger? Was that him on the planet in front of the beam? I would expect a fight/conflict of some sort!

I chose the synthesis ending. So why does the green energy cause the Normandy to crash? Does this mean it caused all the other fleets to crash/blow up?

The Crucible was planned as a weapon the entire game. I even picked up several war assets indicating it would 'target reapers'. So why is it suddenly a control device?

 

I can take a bittersweet ending. If Shepard/Anderson have to sacrifice themselves then fair enough. The way it actually panned out was just shit. No explanation whatsoever what happened to everyone. Apart from the randoms who appeared on the Normandy. Was anyone else pissed that the final scene was Joker?? I mean what the shit! How did they think any of that ending was good. Poor, poor execution to such a great franchise.