Currently Online 
Brent Knowles, former BioWare employee, thoughts on the ending of ME3, clarification he did not play ME3, but gives his thoughts on how a trilogy should end.
I read one recent blog post where the writer basically said "the ending was awesome because it was just like a movie" and I think she was missing the point.
It is a game. Not a movie.
And more specifically, its a role-playing game. The players are *part* of the game. Part of the process of building and experiencing the game, much more so than with most other forms of entertainment.
Entitlement is really a right, for the gamer, because they have participated, actively, in the game itself.
Again, I can't speak to the actual ending myself, because I have not played it but in generally I'd say a Role-Playing Video Game Trilogy Ending should (try to) do the following:
1. Reward the player's choices throughout the series. The big stuff they did should be noted. They should *feel* like they had a unique impact on the world.
2. End on a positive note. This is really important for video games... life in general is full of shitty stuff happening all the time. When I invest a hundred hours into a game I need to walk away feeling like a hero.
When you waste a couple hours of a person's life with an artsy/depressing movie or short story or even a novel, it is more forgivable because the time spent is less. And presumably the consumer knew what they were going into when they started. Certain directors create certain styles of movie. Certain writers write specific types of fiction.
On the other hand somebody playing an epic role-playing video-game trilogy is going to *expect* to be the hero and save the universe. That's why they are playing the game. When expectations don't match reality, disappointment is created.
It might be an artistic/creative move to go with a different style of ending but I feel its the wrong choice, especially for a videogame *trilogy*. Make your middle game bleak if you want to, but end the series on a high note.
