Mass Effect lived up to the expectations, and they will make a new game, I´am not sure if it´s gonna be a trilogy but it will be a new Mass Effect game. But first they will make a few DLC like they did with Lair of the  Shadowbroker just to extend the. But I´am certain that they will release Mass Effect 4 in 2 or maybe 3 years when every has stopped complaining. I mean this is Biowares Masterpiece they can´t just abandon it.

A case could be made for Bioware's questionable philosophy, but it's not much of a case if they won't allow any scrutiny of it by Shepard at all. A solid 20-minute long scene, complete the ability of Shepard to argue with the Starchild, and an option to say "screw you", would have made it a great final scene. As it was, it was a poorly explained mess which made no sense and was hurried through in an attempt to hide how little sense it made.

No, we don't. ME3 is a fantastic game with several brilliant storytelling moments. It just has a terrible ending.

Ohh shit I didn´t meant that the game sucked. It doesn´t it was one of my favourite games of all times, I meant the ending. The game was beyond good it brilliant with so many magic moments. And there were so many in this where I just turned it off and thought for hours about it, like Mordin curing the krogan. I´am so sorry I never wanted to insult the Mass Effect franchise. I hope I can edit my post

By lazy I mean like, if you didn't unite the galaxy you shouldn't even be able to make it to the catalyst.  That would be the only complaint I would have (And I wouldn't even complain about it, but I can see why others would).  Though this new DLC to "explain" the ending might make me not like the ending if my ideas aren't even remotely right or they can't make a better theory for canon.

Games, particularly corporately generated ones, are NOT first and foremost art.  What they are is playthings to entertain people.  You have fun.  Artistic integrity?  HA!  You respond to the fans and give the what they want.  Being corporate funded, you do it with extra production value.  To resume otherwise is absurd.  Want artistic integrity, go support indie film makers, and stop looking for such in corporately produced entertainment devices.

This blog post I did on my blog involving game design would fit here I think:

http://boardgamegeek.com/blogpost/9535/in-the-end-we-make-toys

Lines from it that are relevant:

This post has to do with having fun and taking things too seriously. It also links to the BGG rating system, and the reality that people with games can take their interest too seriously, and sometimes want it to be more than it is.

The play is the thing, but how is it the thing? In the end, doesn't our enjoyment matter? Is there some sort of holy perfection obtained, and people seek some sort of transcendent experience from it? Is the idea to have some sort of static game they think is perfect? Is change to be thrown out? You have people who play Chess, for example, who think the game is perfect, to the extent that you had someone quote the game was handed down by God. You had someone who claims they want to play the exact same game Kasparov played. Want to master a plaything is what they are after. Try showing up a chess club with a variant, and people will look at you funny. And this being of narrow mind had an irony at a local chess club, where you had speed chess purist who complained about the regular chess community not being open-minded about speed chess. Let's just say my ability to find a local group to playtest chess variants is out now.

And we come to A Few Acres of Snow, which people enjoyed but now has an elephant in the room issue of apparently being solved in advanced play. People enjoy the game. But, the game gets sold because of the issue. Is it not for those who like the game to end up coming up with ideas on how to make the game still work? One can yell, "I didn't sign up to be a playtester". But, the reality is that any game produced will reveal things about it that can be improved, or can be tweaked if they get stale, to make them fresh. Why is mixing it up a problem? If it is fun, why not save the fun? Even if a game gets playtested a bunch, things STILL can slip through. Balloon Cup fits into this category. Are those who like the game not supposed to accept a fix for the game, and with the fix, not recommend it to those who look for a game? The person I spoke of earlier who ended up not liking the BGG rating system thought so. It apparently is an abomination if you now give a positive review of Balloon Cup. Games are some sort of sacred devices of holiness we get offended at.

Yes, and those involved with games can take things very seriously, and maybe too much for its own good. Maybe you have regrets that you gave yourself so much to an area of your life, wanting more. Maybe you can have balance in your life.

What I would give an example of taking things just a bit too seriously is Adam Sessler with his Soapbox looking at Red Dead Redemption. He sings on how awesome of an experience the game is, and ends up thinking it is a metaphor for the videogame industry. Really Adam? How about you realize you are involved in an industry that should be making toys for people? How about some fun? I did play though Red Dead Redemption, and thought it decent, but the penultimate experience? I didn't have as much fun as I did with Borderlands. I consider Red Dead decent, but not as much fun as I hoped. I think it is a case of people in the industry hyping things up more out of wish for greater than they are, why a game like Grand Theft Auto IV gets high reviews, but then falling short in the fun area. The Soapbox episode I refer to can be seen here:

http://www.g4tv.com/videos/46118/sesslers-soapbox-red-dead-redemption-perfects-the-western/

So, to sum up, I say game designers ultimately make toys. One can want to do more, and maybe like any toy, the toy can be used for other purposes, but they are toys. The idea is fun here, and what is wrong with that? If you want significance, and meaning, go study philosophy or join a religion. Games are meant to be playthings mainly, and enjoyed and have fun. And isn't a bunch of fun, with flaws, worth more than boring perfection?

End of quote from blog:

Sorry folks, but you SERIOUSLY think you are going to get some awesome storytelling from game designers in a corporate machine, who operate under deadlines?  It is now, get something out by a certain time period to maximize revenues.  The end is not storytelling, but rather, entertainment in exchange for your coin.

My bad Harbinger. ;)

I am surprised you accuse me so quickly of drawing interpretations from nothing, when I am drawing them from many subtle hints throughout the game. There are a lot of plot props throughout the series and even in ME3. The biggest of these that I noticed are the dreams that Shepard has chasing the child, the mechanical sounds he often hears and him becoming more and more parinoid.

I am not saying the ending was perfect, I think it needed to put in more hints for the player to figure out what was happening. Also, with the good ending there should have been a showdown of what actually happens after Shepard breaks free of indoctrination. Since with the indoctrination theory the ending is just choosing wether or not Shepard can fight it off and has nothing to do with actually destroying the Reapers or not.

Also don't tell me that I'm missing the point why people are complaining. I'm just saying that was a non issue for me. I said I thought the ending was ingenious and why I thought it. I'm not tell you that you have to think the same way. I thought the ending to Lost was awesome too, does that mean that I am missing the point why other people were upset with that as well?

Seriously check out this video. Right or wrong it's interesting:

http://youtu.be/ythY_GkEBck

I second that.

Yup. Totally agree. The concept and implication of the game is the most important.

Too many people here are nerd raging for a "linear ending." It is Sci-Fi fictional.

The past 2 weeks I played 1,2,3. Finished 3 yesterday. I do not have a problem with the ending. I am a Christian and can somewhat see why there is "starchild," as a  means for convention. I am not going to explain it either. I dont need Bioware to hold my hands for my creative thoughts.  I did see 2 videos of commentaries  NERD RAGING. I am a fan of open endings needless to say. I view some of the characters as a symbol and contemplate on how  it can be implemented into the real world like the Illusive man. I do not care where the reapers come from either. I loved the game from beginning to end.