If you put 5 - 10 minutes of actual thought into the ending you will.

I'm a massive ME fan and ME3 is a 10 / 10 game until the final 12 minutes.  It litteraly is the most plot hole ridden ending in video game history, its not just a "cerebral" ending as D21Lewis is trying to claim.  It litteraly doesn't make sense, not just as in oh well its supposed to be vague, but more in terms of the entire lore and Universe Bioware created.  There are MANY things that happen during the ending that just aren't possible and contradictions.

Flat out it doesn't make sense.

I guess the word would be scope.  Making a trilogy, making decisions carry over from one game to the other, making the game work whether you choose to be a male or famale (with voices for both), creating an entire universe with its own history, coming up with a theory as wild as the one they came up with (the entire universe keeps getting destroyed and starting over)--and making it a fun game with lots of diversity on top of that.  I think the Mass Effect trilogy is one of the most ambitious undertakings in all of gaming.  It could have done one thing wrong--story, gameplay, sales, etc.--and the whole project would be ruined.  Right now, I'm just in awe of the franchise.  I won't take anything away from Heavy Rain, though.  It was amazing, too.

Oh, I had a hard time getting into ME3 even though I bought ME1 and ME2 on day one.  It just felt like it was missing something.  Don't worry.  Soon, it's going to grab you like it grabbed me.  I just hope you're more forgiving of the ending since it really is totally unexpected.  Hope you manage to avoid spoilers like I did.  Go into it fresh and decide for yourself.

Okay.  It sucks and I was wrong for liking it. I grade video games on a curve because you have to overlook certain things just because of the medium. Now, tell me which game ending ties everything up in a nice little bow?  I can't think of one.

Metal Gear?  Resident Evil?  Mario?  Chrono Trigger?  Final Fantasy?

*edit* I'll probably watch that second video tomorrow or something.  I haven't read this thread, either.  Gotta do both when I get more time.

Hey man sorry if I'm coming across dickish I'm not trying to at all. 

And I'm not just bashing Mass Effect, I still LOVE ME3 and the entire franchise.

My big problem with the ending is just simply that it isn't possible.  When you actually compare what happens with established ME lore and what Bioware has told us throughout the entire franchise it just can't happen the way the ending does.

Everything from the moment you beam into the Citadel just does not make sense.  That's why I'm holding out a small hope that Indoc Theory ends up being real, cause it would link everything together perfectly and even set up an awesome ME4 or ME MMO.

I wanna join the discussion so baaaaaadly! but alas, i have yet to start ME3. Soon though...soon.

I've yet to play a different side to the game only choosing one option but I presume the ending 10 minutes will be the same no matter what but I didn't find anything so hard to understand.

Each game had a different goal with minor details being told to the gamer about the final outcome, why should they tell more? That would spoil the surprise. It was quite simple though, if a little presumption is needed. To me it makes sense and  fits with ideas spread throughout the games.

Only one of those series is actually over for the most part, so Metal Gear:

Yes, it did tie everything up in a nice little bow. It was a little heavy on the nanomachines, but so what? It made sense. It was logically consistent. It gave you no pretense of being able to control Snake's fate at any point. Big Boss strangles Zero and everything is over, and the world is saved, and nobody is going to be killed by an enormous supernova.

I thought the ending was great. While playing the game, I was wondering how on earth they were going to write a satisfying ending to the game. It didn't really seem possible to me. During the game, I was also a bit upset by the Illusive Man being turned into a pure villain, as he'd been a very interesting character in ME2. In many ways, most of ME3 was far more akin to a stupid American action movie than the previous Mass Effects were, so I was worried about an ending of that kind. With little to no explanation of why or how anything happened.

Instead, the ending was nice and reflecting. I expected the ending of the game to be purely based on what you'd done. If you'd built a giant army and had good friends, one thing would happen, while if you had no allies and friends, something else would. Rather than that, the actual ending sort of asked you to consider how much faith you had in the peoples you had helped during the game. Not only that, but the choice also reflects back on how you view the real world and where humanity is headed. I certainly ended up thinking about stuff like that.

And honestly, I think that's when sci-fi shines best. Not when it creates a set of rules, and then follows them to the point, but when it bends its own rules to tell the best possible story and ask the best possible questions.

All in all, I'm extremely satisfied with the ending. I find it to be the by far best ending of the Mass Effect games, and probably in the top 10 of all games I've ever played. The "plot holes" mentioned earlier really don't bother me at all. How Anderson entered the beam before Shepard, for instance, or why he ended up  in a different place than Shepard, as it's not really relevant to the point the game is making at all.

I think your romanticising a fuck up and giving credit where it isn't due.

Much like people give credit to "great" artists who exhibit questionable modern art in galleries these days then give some kind of deep context to that art.

Yes there is art like that, where it has been thought out and on the surface to many it appears shallow, silly and intellectually insulting. Some of that art, really is art. Some of it, definately isn't and people will still relate to it, art is subjective to a degree of course. But not entierly and context should always be available, or at least a linking concept or idea of where that came from and it's intention. Mass Effect 3's ending does not have that, yet it does have similarities with modern art in so far as it is abstract so I think the comparison is more than valid, regardless of if ME3 is art or not, I'd say not.

I would implore you to look at the context and aim of the Mass Effect series. It was implied that it was going to offer exactly the opposite of what it did, and also the opposite of what you liked. For what it's worth, generally speaking I agree with you, but this wasn't a film, this wasn't a piece of art. It was a series that was designed to give the player the choice, and logical conclusion  to choices they made. Some choices would require thinking a little to get the desired outcome, some wouldn't. But this was not a sci-fi film and cannot be compared to one.

I don't know if you're familiar with the game Star Ocean 3 Till the end of time? I'm sure you are you've been here a while, that game offered a similar unsatisfying ending, because the plot took a direction that was neither believeable, but most importantly, not fitting with the series. People invest a lot of time and emotional empathy with games like this, only to be rewarded with something alien and utterly dislikeable. I mean alien in terms of it fitting with the series in any form.

Sorry for the contradictions on art etc, art as in an idea, or a self contained eco system that fits together well...would that always be art, no, sometimes yes.

Let's be honest the endings for Mass Effect 3 could be bolted on to any sci-fi film, 25 years ago people would have thought it was clever. We're not in the era where things like "time travel" and "space time continuum" make an ending good. Abstract can be good, but just because something is abstract doesn't entitle it to be deemed good and have every possible positive interpretation drawn out of it.

Heavy Rain was a point and click adventure with posh clothes. There was nothing risky about it other than it not being a mass market genre anymore. Farenheit which preceded it did the same things it did only less refinded and less polished and more basic level. I think the marketing got to you CGI, which admittedly was beyond fantastic. It doesn't change the fact though that is was a point and click adventure with top notch cinematic value.