[Multi] Mass Effect 3

I prefer destroy because it is the only ending that keeps any sort of continuity with the game. The entire ♥♥♥♥ing series you are trying to kill reapers its what Shep does. Destroy is the only ending that lets you do that.Well you may have to kill the geth I still think it is the best.

I love the geth and always treated legion nicely. How ever I also think they would be the first species to volunteer for extinction if it meant the survival of the rest of the galaxy. They have have that machine cold logic mentality that lets them think about something so horrible rationally.

Also about the reject ending I read an article defending it. The quick version is that Shep know about Liara's device with all of the knowledge and because of that (s)he can go long term with the reapers. (S)He can defeat them with out compromising on his/her views. All the other ending have Shep forcing his/her views on the galaxy something Shep doesn't do.

Hey guys, if you're gonna be talking about the Extended Cut stuff, be sure to use spoiler tags.

I'm not going to ask twice. Spoiling games is srs bsns and I do not want to have to deal with the cleanup that needs done when people don't use spoilers.

^ My bad but that's not really Extended Cut, just an explanation of the original endings. All is well.

Better safe than sorry, know what I mean? For the time being, all ending-related stuff is to be spoilered~

Originally Posted by Apollo

I prefer destroy because it is the only ending that keeps any sort of continuity with the game. The entire ♥♥♥♥ing series you are trying to kill reapers its what Shep does. Destroy is the only ending that lets you do that.Well you may have to kill the geth I still think it is the best.

Throughout the entire series, Shepard has been trying to destroy the reapers, because that's what seemed like the best option to keep everyone safe and alive. When presented with an option that allows Shepard to keep the galaxy safe, NOT kill off the geth/EDI/other AIs, I see no reason why they wouldn't at least consider that option instead.

It all comes down to YOUR Shepard. If you've played a Shepard that's hellbent on completely DESTROYING the reapers, then absolutely go with the destroy route and don't even consider the options. If you've played a Shepard that's always wanted the best for everyone, when being presented with options that will protect every race, of course your Shepard would be interesting in exploring those options.

I picked Synthesis for my main Shepard, because I've always played wanting to protect everyone, and find the best option for all of the races to thrive together. After doing so much for the geth, resolving the conflict between the geth and the quarians, having built this friendship with EDI and watching her relationship with Joker slowly blossom, I was glad to have been presented with an alternative to "yeah, kill the reapers, but we'll also destroy the geth and other AIs like your friend EDI". It also allowed me to see EDI becoming truly alive, which was something I'd always kind of wished for in the back of my mind.

The destroy ending may provide continuity with how you played YOUR Shepard, but I'm pleased to have the freedom to change my mind, and explore the alternative options that don't include destroying the reapers. I'm absolutely going to pick the destroy ending for my renegade Shepard, because when I play that Shepard, I play in the mindset of HATING the reapers and wanting to tear them to shreds, and making the necessary sacrifices to do so.



I've been watching the low EMS endings on YouTube (uggh... heartwrenching), and there's one part that always gets me, in every ending (even high EMS). When Admiral Hackett says the Crucible is armed and instructs all ships to head to the rendezvous point, and Joker keeps trying, and one of your crew members has to go back and tell him that they can't stay any longer... it's so sad, every time. D: Poor Joker. And after the first time the crew member kind of nudges him, and then they share this look with Traynor and it's all so heartbreaking. ;___;

Originally Posted by Panique

Throughout the entire series, Shepard has been trying to destroy the reapers, because that's what seemed like the best option to keep everyone safe and alive. When presented with an option that allows Shepard to keep the galaxy safe, NOT kill off the geth/EDI/other AIs, I see no reason why they wouldn't at least consider that option instead.

It all comes down to YOUR Shepard. If you've played a Shepard that's hellbent on completely DESTROYING the reapers, then absolutely go with the destroy route and don't even consider the options. If you've played a Shepard that's always wanted the best for everyone, when being presented with options that will protect every race, of course your Shepard would be interesting in exploring those options.

I picked Synthesis for my main Shepard, because I've always played wanting to protect everyone, and find the best option for all of the races to thrive together. After doing so much for the geth, resolving the conflict between the geth and the quarians, having built this friendship with EDI and watching her relationship with Joker slowly blossom, I was glad to have been presented with an alternative to "yeah, kill the reapers, but we'll also destroy the geth and other AIs like your friend EDI". It also allowed me to see EDI becoming truly alive, which was something I'd always kind of wished for in the back of my mind.

The destroy ending may provide continuity with how you played YOUR Shepard, but I'm pleased to have the freedom to change my mind, and explore the alternative options that don't include destroying the reapers. I'm absolutely going to pick the destroy ending for my renegade Shepard, because when I play that Shepard, I play in the mindset of HATING the reapers and wanting to tear them to shreds, and making the necessary sacrifices to do so.

I'm assuming you played full paragon which is what I did as well. All 3 games straight up paragon so its not like we're talking about different Sheps. I guess its just my interpretation. Stuff like the end of mass effect 2 where you blow up the reaper base, because it is reaper tech and should be destroyed even though some of it may be able to help us. I know paragon Shep may be out to protect everyone, but he never compromised with the reapers. I mean it wouldn't be as bad if Shep wasn't constantly saying that we need to the reapers dead when conflicting with The Illusive Man. That has more to do with the control ending, but that is a separate issue.

My other issue with the synth ending that everything is too perfect. Like way to perfect. EDI's speach is awesome, but everything is still to perfect. Everyone if friends all problems are going to be solved all that's is to rebuild and everyone will help so it wont even be an issue. It sort of reminds of this comic http://i.imgur.com/sNUsF.jpg. Not quite as bad but its seems like its only a step or two away. :)

Originally Posted by Apollo

I'm assuming you played full paragon which is what I did as well. All 3 games straight up paragon so its not like we're talking about different Sheps. I guess its just my interpretation. Stuff like the end of mass effect 2 where you blow up the reaper base, because it is reaper tech and should be destroyed even though some of it may be able to help us. I know paragon Shep may be out to protect everyone, but he never compromised with the reapers. I mean it wouldn't be as bad if Shep wasn't constantly saying that we need to the reapers dead when conflicting with The Illusive Man. That has more to do with the control ending, but that is a separate issue.

My other issue with the synth ending that everything is too perfect. Like way to perfect. EDI's speach is awesome, but everything is still to perfect. Everyone if friends all problems are going to be solved all that's is to rebuild and everyone will help so it wont even be an issue. It sort of reminds of this comic http://i.imgur.com/sNUsF.jpg. Not quite as bad but its seems like its only a step or two away. :)

Nah, this is my first Shep, my instinctive Shep. I ended up around 90/10 paragon/renegade, but I definitely wasn't full paragon. I mostly just go off knee-jerk reactions.

I did destroy the reaper base, mostly because by that point TIM was creeping me out with the extent of his "WE MUST CONTROL THE REAPERS" tirade. That's what felt right at the time. But at the end of ME3, after hearing the catalyst's options (and already having explored reject... eep), I felt like the Shepard that I was playing would have stood back and looked at the three options separately, not just gone with "okay kill reapers at whatever cost". I'm glad that I had the option to go with something other than that and still feel very in character.

That's what I love about the series. We're playing the same protagonist, even making mostly the same decisions in-game, but we start to build these back stories and motivations for our Shepards. Your Shepard is intent on destroying the reapers, and will make the necessary sacrifices to do so, and that's okay. I like the fact that I can choose a different option, and still feel that we both played out the final moments of the game true to our characters. I don't think it's worth it to argue over which ending is 'canon', or 'in-character for Commander Shepard', because I feel like for each person that differs. It always has; that's the beauty of the game. You can take a completely different path to someone else, and although you're playing the same game and going through the same steps, you do come out with a fairly different view and feel for the character.

Originally Posted by Apollo

I'm assuming you played full paragon which is what I did as well. All 3 games straight up paragon so its not like we're talking about different Sheps.

Why do that? Why just always choose what is labeled as "paragon"? You know what's actually fun? Role playing. This being a series of role playing games that refers back to and builds from all your old decisions and is thus intensely personal, with that being the whole goal from the beginning, how can you just play like "I'm gonna always choose the good guy option"? I ranked a paragon overall but I still refused to save the Council in 1 and saved the Human Reaper in 2 and took a WHOLE lot of Renegade interrupts if it looked like there wasn't going to be a peaceful solution. This is because I stood back and examined what decision makes the most sense at every turn. This made it fun, personal, immersive.

The Paragon/Renegade meters were not "which guy are you?" but "how are you perceived by the rest of the galaxy as a result of the actions you have taken?". To just subscribe to one undermines it.

I found that I just fundamentally felt more right to me. I know I made some renegade decisions, but they weren't substantial. A big reason behind this is probably in ME2 you can lose the loyalty of a squad mate if you don't go full one or the other. I remember in Thane's loyalty mission where you can beat the hell out of the guy you are interrogating. I used them all. That and the interrupt where you light the krogan on fire during Mordin's loyalty are the only other two substantial renegade decisions I remember doing. When it came to jack Miranda check I ended up failing and having to pick.

ME2 forced you to play one or the other I don't know if that mentality carried over to ME3, but in that game I still went full on paragon. I never felt like I was missing out though. I was perfectly happy to just hit the top option every time. It didn't ruin immersion or anything for me.

Originally Posted by Araneaes

Control reminds me of a Jedi's transition to a Sith lord.

lol, I kinda get what you mean by that, but it could really go either way. The music suggests, however, that something isn't quite right. Even though the control ending has the fewer casualties, everything's in Shepard's hands. At that point it's up to the player to decide whether or not their choices as Shepard up to that point were for the best, and whether or not the galaxy will ever turn against him if he does something they don't like. Because of these interesting possibilities, in my opinion, the Control ending has the most interesting potential for future stories.

The Destroy ending returns things to pretty much normal, and the Synthesis ending turns everything into a "perfect" solution where there's (probably) no more war because everyone's the same, where machines gain some humanity, but where humans lose some of theirs.

Originally Posted by Araneaes

Okay.. That's an optimistic way of looking at the destroy ending. For me, as I have said before, my take on it is that Shepard just bought the galaxy a decade or two in the destroy ending. The VI already said that it's a cycle and organics will create synthetics again. Reapers are synthetics so it's inevitable that they will return someday. And when that time comes, it's not sure that someone with a Superman syndrome like Shepard can lead the galaxy again. That's how I see it.

My view's optimistic, yours is a bit pessimistic. You could view it either way, but I think that the odds of something exactly like the reapers happening again are very slim. Even if it does happen, it would happen probably several thousand years later. I personally don't see it as an event that's doomed to repeat itself, as I just think the Star Child claims it is since he doesn't want to be destroyed. If you listen to him, he poises the Synthesis ending as his preferred choice, Control as his second option, and Destroy as his least favorite. Going into that ending you have to realize that the Star Child isn't omniscient, he just wants you to think he has all the answers so you choose what he wants you to choose. Just because he says synthetics will always turn against everyone doesn't mean they will, as proven by Edi and the Geth.

Originally Posted by Araneaes

At least in the control ending, no one dies (Geth and Quarians working together, Joker and EDI live happily ever after, then again, I'm sure Joker won't be able to keep up with father time.) and Shepard is now Lord of the Reapers and control them as he sees fit. Would be interesting if BW added a feature like the one in Fable 3 where players decide what to do after the player becomes the King.

Yeah, again the control ending could either end on a happy or eerie note, depending on how you view it. I think it's the best of the three monologues. Not necessarily the happiest and most perfect ending, but the world of Mass Effect without a little conflict would be boring.

Another scary thought I had about the control ending, though, is that Shepard could indoctrinate anyone he wanted to. If someone was threatening something he was protecting, he'd indoctrinate them and force them to behave... which presents a whole new level of creepiness.

Originally Posted by Quark

lol, I kinda get what you mean by that, but it could really go either way. The music suggests, however, that something isn't quite right. Even though the control ending has the fewer casualties, everything's in Shepard's hands. At that point it's up to the player to decide whether or not their choices as Shepard up to that point were for the best, and whether or not the galaxy will ever turn against him if he does something they don't like. Because of these interesting possibilities, in my opinion, the Control ending has the most interesting potential for future stories.

The Destroy ending returns things to pretty much normal, and the Synthesis ending turns everything into a "perfect" solution where there's (probably) no more war because everyone's the same, where machines gain some humanity, but where humans lose some of theirs.

It's up to the players again to interpret about the endings. For me, Paragon Shepard have the mentality of Superman/Captain America, the perfect hero, and he'll/she'll probably won't do anything that will upset the galaxy. Hell, a Paragon Shepard might even throw a Reaper party in the 4th of July. Can't say the same for a Renegade Shep because I think he/she just put whole galaxy under martial law in the Control Renegade ending. .

Hmm... Now that I think about it, in the synthesis ending, does that mean that no one can have sex or get hungry ever again? o_O

Spoiler:  

Renegade Control

Originally Posted by Quark

My view's optimistic, yours is a bit pessimistic. You could view it either way, but I think that the odds of something exactly like the reapers happening again are very slim. Even if it does happen, it would happen probably several thousand years later. I personally don't see it as an event that's doomed to repeat itself, as I just think the Star Child claims it is since he doesn't want to be destroyed. If you listen to him, he poises the Synthesis ending as his preferred choice, Control as his second option, and Destroy as his least favorite. Going into that ending you have to realize that the Star Child isn't omniscient, he just wants you to think he has all the answers so you choose what he wants you to choose. Just because he says synthetics will always turn against everyone doesn't mean they will, as proven by Edi and the Geth.

So you think that the Star Child is lying about the return of the synthetics/Reapers just because he doesn't want to get destroyed? That's interesting but I never thought about it that way.

It maybe slim but like I said, it will happen in the next 3 or more decades. So I'm like, if they will return someday, then Shepard, EDI, the Geths and the others died in vain. The goal is to stop the Reapers to have a future. That future won't matter if the Reapers will return someday even if it took a thousand years. Sure, the galaxy will have peace and deal with crime, merc wars and space pirates for centuries but what if the Reapers showed up again? Once they have returned, then the current generation are doomed and the Reaper experts left are Liara, Samara and some of the Asaris, because you know, they can live for centuries. To me, it really is just delaying the inevitable.

The Geths and EDI have a different programming though. The Reapers are programmed for the cycle. Even someone like Shepard can't influence the Reaper like what he did to EDI.

Originally Posted by Quark

Yeah, again the control ending could either end on a happy or eerie note, depending on how you view it. I think it's the best of the three monologues. Not necessarily the happiest and most perfect ending, but the world of Mass Effect without a little conflict would be boring.
Another scary thought I had about the control ending, though, is that Shepard could indoctrinate anyone he wanted to. If someone was threatening something he was protecting, he'd indoctrinate them and force them to behave... which presents a whole new level of creepiness.

Yep, Shepard is playing God. Controlling the galaxy as he/she sees fit.

I'm so glad this is still going!!! My EC feelings:

I still think the destroy ending is the best of the three/four endings. Synthesis is ok but control betrays everything Shepard stood for. He's shed his humanity and has lost the essence of who he once was. 'I control the most powerful army in the galaxy'...he's become the illusive man. I destroyed the collector base. What the reapers did was unforgivable.

In destroy yes EDI dies, but you fight the whole time to destroy the reapers. You still have a possibility of living. I like how if you do your love interest is shown gazing at the stars. I love the hesitation they show to put Shepard's name up. He does what he has to do, even with the reapers trying to indoctrinate him the whole time with the dreams. Its telling the reapers turned on their creators who didn't agree but 'there was no other way'. It was the only way.

---------- Post added at 04:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:31 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Panique

Nah, this is my first Shep, my instinctive Shep. I ended up around 90/10 paragon/renegade, but I definitely wasn't full paragon. I mostly just go off knee-jerk reactions.

I did destroy the reaper base, mostly because by that point TIM was creeping me out with the extent of his "WE MUST CONTROL THE REAPERS" tirade. That's what felt right at the time. But at the end of ME3, after hearing the catalyst's options (and already having explored reject... eep), I felt like the Shepard that I was playing would have stood back and looked at the three options separately, not just gone with "okay kill reapers at whatever cost". I'm glad that I had the option to go with something other than that and still feel very in character.

That's what I love about the series. We're playing the same protagonist, even making mostly the same decisions in-game, but we start to build these back stories and motivations for our Shepards. Your Shepard is intent on destroying the reapers, and will make the necessary sacrifices to do so, and that's okay. I like the fact that I can choose a different option, and still feel that we both played out the final moments of the game true to our characters. I don't think it's worth it to argue over which ending is 'canon', or 'in-character for Commander Shepard', because I feel like for each person that differs. It always has; that's the beauty of the game. You can take a completely different path to someone else, and although you're playing the same game and going through the same steps, you do come out with a fairly different view and feel for the character.

Omg post of the year. Great insight.

So this is not actually relevant to Mass Effect 3 so much as it is 2, but on the topic of defining our own version of Shepard as a character and learning more about them as you go, in Mass Effect, I started a character that was, initially, going to be paranoid. I choose "can we trust him?" in one dialog option and she goes and opens her mouth and says she doesn't like working with turian. So then I rolled with it; in addition to not trusting anyone, she had a specific prejudice against turians as many humans are stated to have as a result of the war in the backstory. This results in me never recruiting Garrus in this file and, in fact, rejecting him outright when he asked to come aboard the Normandy. He spends the duration of ME1 standing next to the elevator.

Come Mass Effect 2, I am disallowed from not recruiting "Archangel". The story literally is not progressing. So I do the mission, Garrus and Shepard greet each other like old friends. The game actually has robbed my Shepard of the very individuality that it instilled to begin with.


So there's something that's bothered me since then that maybe one of you will know but that I don't want to start a new ♥♥♥♥ing series playthrough just to find out; if I am to snub Wrex, simply not recruit him at all, how does his story go? Does he show up at Virmire under Saren's employ? Does he not show at all? Does he still lead Urdnot in 2 and 3 afterward? If not, does Wreave still act like you killed him?

Originally Posted by Morgan

I'm so glad this is still going!!! My EC feelings:

I still think the destroy ending is the best of the three/four endings. Synthesis is ok but control betrays everything Shepard stood for. He's shed his humanity and has lost the essence of who he once was. 'I control the most powerful army in the galaxy'...he's become the illusive man. I destroyed the collector base. What the reapers did was unforgivable.

In destroy yes EDI dies, but you fight the whole time to destroy the reapers. You still have a possibility of living. I like how if you do your love interest is shown gazing at the stars. I love the hesitation they show to put Shepard's name up. He does what he has to do, even with the reapers trying to indoctrinate him the whole time with the dreams. Its telling the reapers turned on their creators who didn't agree but 'there was no other way'. It was the only way.

You're alive!

Before I made the Control choice, I did think about that if I made this choice, Shepard will turn his back to what he stood for, which is destroy the Reapers. But for me, it's the best for everyone. It has the 2nd less casualties. Destroy ending strike me with the question 'Are you willing to massacre an entire race and one of your friends, which is also your other friend's girlfriend, for the sake of millions to live in peace and knowing that the Reapers will return someday?' The entire goal is stop the Reapers for good.

For me, Shepard didn't really become TIM just because he agreed to control the Reapers. Shepard still acts like a hero even if he's the head of the Reapers, Paragon or Renegade. It's just like Wrex's and Wreav's beliefs. Shepard wants to protect everyone, TIM wants humanity to be superior and doesn't care about the others.

Guys, come to think of it, if TIM is like what Anderson/Hackett is to Shepard but still keep that "racist" attitude, and if he can indeed control the Reapers, would your Shepard choose to replace TIM or would you let him control it? I picked it up during the dialogue inside the Crucible, Shepard did say that "What are you waiting for? Put a stop to this."

Originally Posted by TheGhostOfMandrag

So there's something that's bothered me since then that maybe one of you will know but that I don't want to start a new ♥♥♥♥ing series playthrough just to find out; if I am to snub Wrex, simply not recruit him at all, how does his story go? Does he show up at Virmire under Saren's employ? Does he not show at all? Does he still lead Urdnot in 2 and 3 afterward? If not, does Wreave still act like you killed him?

Even if you didn't recruit Wrex in ME1, ME2 would still have the default story, which is Wrex died and replaced by Wreav as clan leader.

For ME3, it's the same. Wreav still wants to cure the genophage.

I think the only difference is the future of the Krogans. Wrex wants the Krogans to be civil again, Wreav wants the Urdnot clan to be the best and will continue to wage war against other clans.

If you don't want to start another playthrough, if you are on the PC, go to MassEffectSaves.com and pick a save file. There are so many options that are neatly categorized. Just look for a file that floats your boat.

Originally Posted by Araneaes

Even if you didn't recruit Wrex in ME1, ME2 would still have the default story, which is Wrex died and replaced by Wreav as clan leader.

But did I kill him?

It just says that he died. Wrex's name would still appear during the conversation with TIM when asking about Shepard's original crew, saying that he's the leader of Tuchanka. But if you go to Tuchanka, Wreav is the one over there and it would have the default dialogue that Wrex died.

I didn't know about the Garrus ME/ME2 thing. That's kinda strange.

I can't imagine not recruiting Garrus, though. Couldn't do it. Does kind of suck that they didn't take that into consideration, though, and even offer another turian team member (who could again be rejected, even).

I think if you didn't recruit Garrus in ME1, it would have the other dialogue option where Garrus and Shepard never met in ME2, but he's still there.

Originally Posted by Bon Bon

You know what's sad?

The new ending they added (refusal) is the best ending.

Here's why. In Control, Shepard gives up his human body to become a reaper, the same thing he set out to destroy. He becomes immortal, and gets to see all his friends die, when he is something he wanted to destroy. In Synthesis, you make everyone part robotic. That also goes against Shepards viewpoint. He's fighting for the right to be free as they are, not part robot. Destroy has to be the worst. You destroy all Synthetics. That means the Geth, which the Quarians need to rebuild their home planet. You also destroy ED-i, which is the love of Joker's life. The worst part? It's the only ending where Shepard lives, so he has to live with his Consequences. He will forever be known as the guy who destroyed all Technology. In Refusal, Shepard denies all of the Catalysts options. As humans, we expect the freedom of choice. So being told that we only have 3 options is bull♥♥♥♥ to us. When you deny all of the starchilds options, he says "SO BE IT!" in Harbinger's voice. This could also add into the evidence that this is an indoctrination. If you pick this option, then it's hinted that the NEXT cycle is successful in defeating the reapers, so that none of these things have to happen.


Also, you get to shoot the Starchild.

I didn't mind them. I just think they left more plot holes than anything... Although the original ending had plot holes. What makes me mad is the ending isn't even finished really. At first the Mass Relays got destroyed. Now they just fall apart and everything can be fixed.

Gaah I wish they spent a long time on the ending. And also in Synthesis ending, there shouldn't have been a stargazer scene. Major plot hole since wouldn't it be of them in a city that was constructed by the alien civilization? Unless the whole thing was told by that kid and that guy... But they should have done that from the beginning since ME1.

I just destroyed the reapers because thats all I wanted to do because they caused me enough grief and anger with full assets because I don't want anyone dying. Thats the only ending that EMS actually had an effect >.> Which is kind of stupid. It hardly effects anything. [B]They should have just had Bad ending assets or good ending assets for Destroy ending.[/B]

It definitely filled some gaps though which makes me happy and I am thankful for but they didn't end the story. They just added more. That's what I think anyways. =P

Originally Posted by Araneaes

I think if you didn't recruit Garrus in ME1, it would have the other dialogue option where Garrus and Shepard never met in ME2, but he's still there.

He is at C-sec I think and you can completely avoid him. I always get him because the dialogue option if you never met him in Me1 doesn't feel right. I wish he was my real life friend sometimes.