• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

The correct ending was

  • Destroy

    Votes: 436 43.9%
  • Control

    Votes: 75 7.5%
  • Synthesis

    Votes: 395 39.7%
  • Refuse

    Votes: 88 8.9%

  • Total voters
    994

Enduin

You look 40
Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,468
New York
Control is the only option that leaves the Mass Effect universe in an interesting place.

The only thing you achieve by choosing "destroy" is making the universe smaller, undoing huge parts of its worldbuilding. It's a worthless option.
Synthesis has always been a joke ending. Nothing quite like achieving world peace by forcibly altering everyone's (and every hat's) technobiomagical makeup.


This is a short-sighted concern anyway. Even if the choice backfires, at least it backfires in an interesting way.
The few brief shots of the post-control world are absolutely fascinating. I want to see what life looks like when everything you do happens in the shadow of a giant robot cuttlefish cop.

jTcl8ER.png
How is it interesting though? You'd have machine gods basically playing Big Brother over the whole galaxy. Again, unless Shepard Reapers basically pulls some bullshit excuse to sit out on galactic conflicts, which directly contradicts ME3s endings of how they use the Reapers under their control, what conflict is there for the series to explore? If there is a war or major conflict of any kind Shepard Reapers will be there to put a stop to it and play galactic peacekeepers. It's an inherently static world at that point as Shepard Reapers can fix everything. They don't just have overwhelming monopoly on violence and force, but they are a source of near infinite possibilities when it comes to tech and scientific advancement for the galaxy. It's as utopian an ending as much as Synthesis, just with machine god overlords. Literal Deus Ex Machina able to solve every problem that could arise.

The only real interest story to come form that would be one where people rebel against said Big Brother and seek to give sentient life the chance to do as they wish and without the interference of machine gods doing what is best for them. Which is pretty much just a retread of the ME Trilogy all over again. Sentient life fighting to take control of their own destiny from the Reapers. That's creating a very boring and narrow president for the series if that's the only kind of story it can tell. That or dramatically escalating the scale of conflict by introducing a threat that even the Reaper led galaxy is helpless against, which is just absurd power escalation.

Destroy at least sets the galaxy up for major changes and upheaval that can result in both advancement, regression and conflict on their own merits and failures. Not at the whim of some all powerful overlord. There's just way too much baggage and far too many contrivances required to make Control or Synthesis work as a basis for the series going forward.
 

Quinton

Specialist at TheGamer / Reviewer at RPG Site
Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,244
Midgar, With Love
The correct ending is turning off your gaming console or PC immediately after killing TIM and opening The Citadel.



I've pretty much never picked Synthesis since it's giving the Reapers exactly what they want, setting aside the immoral nature of it. My favorite part about Synthesis is the rationale, even after the Extended Cut. The Starchild said "they've tried a similar solution in the past" but it didn't work since organics were not ready. It specifically states, "it is not a thing that can be forced." Then it gives you the choice to Force Synthesis on the entire galaxy. LOL.

Oh yeah, I hear you, man. It's downright comical how little sense it makes. I just wish the Destroy narration sequence had much emotional impact on me. It really kind of doesn't. It's not that I dislike Hackett or anything but I feel more attuned to Shepard's narration in Control and far more attuned to EDI's in Synthesis. (Say what you want about the character but Tricia Helfer is amazing in that sequence.)

The other thing that hurts Destroy for me is that the whole split-second "Shepard lives!" bit has never done anything for me. Well, that's not true. I chuckle dryly at it every time I see it. I get that the brevity is the point but the point flies straight past me as a result. lol
 

Astral

Member
Oct 27, 2017
27,988
Green because that way at least the Geth live after all the trouble I went through to unite them with the Quarians.
 

gogosox82

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,385
Synthesis does not fit with the themes at all. Let alone it's pointless and shows how flawed the Reaper logic is as you already made peace with the Geth without needing to force space magic on people without their consent.
But it does fit thematically? Synthesis is terribly written and literally ignores things you do in that game specifically (not to mention ME1 &2) and is completely nonsensical but it fits within the theme
 

Phinor

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,235
Another shoutout for indoctrination theory. Out of the actual three (four?) choices, I would vote destroy but I don't like it either, it's just the least worst option out of all the terrible choices. Synthetic is clearly the worst though. Why or indeed how did they write an ending sequence this bad..
 

The Silver

Member
Oct 28, 2017
10,703
Control is the ending if your view of the series is that it's the story of Space Jesus Shepard. They die, is resurrected, and finally ascends to a higher plane to watch over the galaxy, taking on all the burden themselves.

Synthesis is the ending if you acknowledge the Reapers are right, they had the right idea but the wrong method. You can argue a problem with it is that it veers too hard into super high concept sci fi, almost high fantasy stuff. But when you think of the initial reveal of the Reapers they WERE high concept unknowable eldritch horrors. Synthesis loops back around to that crazy space magic shit that can't be comprehended.

Destroy is like the "realistic" ending, you had to make some big sacrifices to win but you haven't guaranteed that in the future the galaxy won't find itself in a similar fight again. It's the ending if you identify more with the more grounded down to earth nature of the ME galaxy that it was portrayed as for the majority of the time.
 

Deleted member 31817

Nov 7, 2017
30,876
I'll type more than this shitshow of an ending deserves;


The synthesis ending goes against themes by saying organics and synthetics can't live together and also is egregious space magic and alters the DNA of hundreds of billions of people against their consent, the destroy ending destroys the geth they spent 3 games building up as an ally and also proves the dumbass reapers correct in their dumbass theory that organics will kill synthetics so we created synthetics to kill organics so organics wouldn't kill synthetics and the control ending also goes against the point of Saren and the illusive man (who died like... 5 minutes prior) that the reapers cannot be controlled or reasoned with and any attempts to do so ends in tragedy.

And this is ignoring the terrible space child shit, the hilarious reasoning for the crucible in the first place, the fact that the ending cutscenes were basically recolors, Joker looking backwards in the Normandy, all the Mass Effect relays getting destroyed to kill any chance of sequels in any media in the galaxy, the weird "Shepard story" against a photo background at the end, the insulting "buy more DLC" after the ending kicks you back to the Normandy and the fact that a reworked ending after months of development and community outrage didn't change shit.
 

Mindwipe

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,189
London
Yup, plus all the past civilizations had their central governments wiped out at the citadel right from the start. That was prevented in Mass Effect 1

Indeed. The Reapers aren't that overwhelming against a united galaxy. If they were the entire scheme in ME 1 to shut down the relays and sneak in via the Citadel wouldn't be neccessary. By preventing that we also made the Reapers fly in under their own power, presumably at the cost of their energy reserves.

None of this has ever happened before, and therefore the Reapers can be beaten. It's even why a Galactic Readiness Score makes sense.
 

Asbsand

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
9,901
Denmark
Synthesis is the ending if you acknowledge the Reapers are right, they had the right idea but the wrong method. You can argue a problem with it is that it veers too hard into super high concept sci fi, almost high fantasy stuff. But when you think of the initial reveal of the Reapers they WERE high concept unknowable eldritch horrors. Synthesis loops back around to that crazy space magic shit that can't be comprehended.
I think that's a good point but at the same time I thought the fundamental struggle was always the "Us" versus the "Dominating superior beings" and making the unknowable, absurdist ending the conclusion to the story feels like this became the Reapers' story and not Shepard's or our cycle's and I can't comprehend not rooting for the protagonist or protagonists the whole trilogy was about.
 

N0xtis

Member
Nov 19, 2019
40
NJ, USA
Forgetting that this game was ever made.

There are parts of it that I found enjoyable: the mordin plot, combat is the best its ever been, and I liked the idea of the illusive man becoming indoctrinated; however, the game as a whole was a mess.

The kid - out of all the thing we've seen and done this is the one that haunts shepard? Oh, that's not all lets make him the form of the space god (emotions!)
I'm not saying this is a bad idea, just the execution. Take a look at FFXIV shadowbringer's Tesleen. I still have an image scarred into my brain.

Rannoch Reaper - Absolutely, a stunning sequence. Should never have happened. It took battalions of space ships to deal with 1 reaper. The entire mythos of the reapers just makes this scenario entirely unlikely.

Just a few others to list: the crew starting all over again, kai leng, the entire crucible setup, starting your game from a consequence that happened in dlc, etc. I'm probably nitpicking, but that's what happens when the ending to your big 3 game spanning series ends so poorly. Everything starts becoming questionable. So I'm just left wishing I'd never seen it.

If there is some sort of remake of this series. I will play 1 and 2. Three will never be touched.
 
Oct 31, 2017
2,421
Refuse. Fuck em all. I'll pass down the knowledge for the next cycle to kick the reapers asses and end the cycle the right way. The protheans almost did it on their own. One properly prepared cycle especially after the loses the reapers took this time and it's over.
This is the only choice. I don't trust star child at all. The next cycle will finish the fight without the bs color choices.
 

Asbsand

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
9,901
Denmark
I liked the idea of the illusive man becoming indoctrinated
Here is why this sucks:
Illusive Man was portrayed as an intelligent, self-interested "both sides" neutral party but kinda antagonist in his original appearance. By indoctrinating him and giving him an army that is the enemy of the entire galaxy his part in the story becomes fundamentally the same as Saren in Mass Effect 1 and it meant they took an original story development and made it unoriginal.
 

RecRoulette

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,044
I know it's not a "real" option because everyone interested in ME3 at launch played it before it was an option and your first ending is YOUR ending. But I played ME3 after Refusal was an option and it's the best option.

Refuse. Fuck em all. I'll pass down the knowledge for the next cycle to kick the reapers asses and end the cycle the right way. The protheans almost did it on their own. One properly prepared cycle especially after the loses the reapers took this time and it's over.

Preach.
 

Coolduderedux

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,463
Can someone remind me what the original choices were and what was patched in? All I remember if beating the game pre-patch.
 

BossAttack

Member
Oct 27, 2017
42,927
Oh yeah, I hear you, man. It's downright comical how little sense it makes. I just wish the Destroy narration sequence had much emotional impact on me. It really kind of doesn't. It's not that I dislike Hackett or anything but I feel more attuned to Shepard's narration in Control and far more attuned to EDI's in Synthesis. (Say what you want about the character but Tricia Helfer is amazing in that sequence.)

The other thing that hurts Destroy for me is that the whole split-second "Shepard lives!" bit has never done anything for me. Well, that's not true. I chuckle dryly at it every time I see it. I get that the brevity is the point but the point flies straight past me as a result. lol


LOL.

Brevity makes no sense when they show the future of everyone else including a totally rebuilt Earth. Yet, they can't commit to whether Shepard is alive. Such horseshit. The entire ending, no matter the choice, is just pure comedy in how it totally misses the point. I still laugh with how the EC has Joker disengage combat in orbit above Earth to pick up Shepard's wounded squadmate, meanwhile everyone else is being vaporized by Harbinger. Then Harbinger patiently waits as Joker lands, picks up the crewmate, and blasts off back into outerspace. ALL OF THIS, to cover up the fact that BioWare forgot that they placed our chosen squadmates in the Normandy during the crash sequence when they should have been vaporized.

Just stop.
 

Moist_Owlet

Banned
Dec 26, 2017
4,148
The ending of ME1 was so well done with the attack on the citadel, beating saren via a conversation or gameplay, and the entire fleet defeating a reaper. It's almost impressive how badly they fucked up on part 3, like they lost a bet to make a bad ending on purpose. The ending is bad enough to sour the entire trilogy. I wish part 3 didnt exist and I feel bad for anyone who looked forward to it.
 

Skux

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,942
The only correct choice is not to play.

Man, that ending sucked. That was the only time I've gone full "gamer rage".
 

N0xtis

Member
Nov 19, 2019
40
NJ, USA
Here is why this sucks:
Illusive Man was portrayed as an intelligent, self-interested "both sides" neutral party but kinda antagonist in his original appearance. By indoctrinating him and giving him an army that is the enemy of the entire galaxy his part in the story becomes fundamentally the same as Saren in Mass Effect 1 and it meant they took an original story development and made it unoriginal.

I agree with you. As with most issues in this game, the execution is dull and disappointing. You're right it's just a copy paste of saren; however, I still liked the idea of it. I think there could have been a more unique path that the Illusive man's indoctrination could have taken.
 

Deleted member 3196

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,280
It doesn't really matter. One is green space magic, the other is blue space magic, and they threw some red space magic in for good measure. Oh and an extra terrible tacked on bad ending was made in a patch because people felt the first three choices were clearly not bad enough.

Everything about ME3 felt rushed. The ending is emblematic of that.
 
May 10, 2020
154
Those days after the ME3 launch, man...one of the greatest gamer meltdowns I've seen on the internet. But yeah, destroy all the way. That's what we were after since the very first game, still left a bitter taste in my mouth but of all the endings, it was the one who made the "most sense".
 

Cranster

Prophet of Truth
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,788
It doesn't really matter. One is green space magic, the other is blue space magic, and they threw some red space magic in for good measure. Oh and an extra terrible tacked on bad ending was made in a patch because people felt the first three choices were clearly not bad enough.

Everything about ME3 felt rushed. The ending is emblematic of that.

The whole trilogy was rushed to an extent. 2 and 3 more so because of EA.
 

J_Atlas

Member
Apr 11, 2019
391
Refuse

To finish the game, turn it off and forget it happened.

Out of all the endings, I can't think of a single part of any of them I genuinely like or feel remotely satisfied about.
 

Parabolee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
86
Destroy. No question. Putting logic asside, it's the only way for Shepard to live, so obviously the best ending :)

BUT if you want to logic too, well, I don't have time to reiterate that which I have spent probably a hundred hours explaining, so I will leave a link to that and just say the other options are terrible and make no sense. Synthesis is in theory good if you ignore ALL the lessons from the game thus far and the fact that it is absurd and makes zero sense that it would even be possible. I loathe that option with a fiery passion.

If you want to read an absurd amount of deconstruction on this opinion -

www.masseffectindoctrination.com
 

MadLaughter

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
13,070
It blows my mind that Control has the least amount of votes.

Destroy kills EDI and all the Geth.
Synthesis takes away the power of choice from every single being in the galaxy.
 

MechaX

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,040
Indeed. The Reapers aren't that overwhelming against a united galaxy. If they were the entire scheme in ME 1 to shut down the relays and sneak in via the Citadel wouldn't be neccessary. By preventing that we also made the Reapers fly in under their own power, presumably at the cost of their energy reserves.

None of this has ever happened before, and therefore the Reapers can be beaten. It's even why a Galactic Readiness Score makes sense.

This set up is vastly more interesting than what we got. Like yeah, the Reapers are all powerful, but the series should have cemented that this cycle is entirely new territory to everyone, including the Reapers themselves. In every cycle for the past 50,000 years, they had to rely on absolute subterfuge through the Citadel to not only eliminate central governments from the get go, but also to back door their way into the galaxy so the galaxy -couldn't- unite.

The Reapers have to fly here manually but as you said, maybe being able to fly to the galaxy fast enough to not let their technology advance and/or they unite is something even Harbinger is concerned about since you at least beat Sovereign.

with the way it is now, war readiness doesn't mean jack shit in the grand scheme of things
 

Flipyap

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,489
How is it interesting though? You'd have machine gods basically playing Big Brother over the whole galaxy. Again, unless Shepard Reapers basically pulls some bullshit excuse to sit out on galactic conflicts, which directly contradicts ME3s endings of how they use the Reapers under their control, what conflict is there for the series to explore? If there is a war or major conflict of any kind Shepard Reapers will be there to put a stop to it and play galactic peacekeepers. It's an inherently static world at that point as Shepard Reapers can fix everything. They don't just have overwhelming monopoly on violence and force, but they are a source of near infinite possibilities when it comes to tech and scientific advancement for the galaxy. It's as utopian an ending as much as Synthesis, just with machine god overlords. Literal Deus Ex Machina able to solve every problem that could arise.

The only real interest story to come form that would be one where people rebel against said Big Brother and seek to give sentient life the chance to do as they wish and without the interference of machine gods doing what is best for them. Which is pretty much just a retread of the ME Trilogy all over again. Sentient life fighting to take control of their own destiny from the Reapers. That's creating a very boring and narrow president for the series if that's the only kind of story it can tell. That or dramatically escalating the scale of conflict by introducing a threat that even the Reaper led galaxy is helpless against, which is just absurd power escalation.

Destroy at least sets the galaxy up for major changes and upheaval that can result in both advancement, regression and conflict on their own merits and failures. Not at the whim of some all powerful overlord. There's just way too much baggage and far too many contrivances required to make Control or Synthesis work as a basis for the series going forward.
There was exactly one war/major conflict in this trilogy and it was a disaster because of how badly it clashed with the type of sci-fi the series was built around. Not being able to tell war stories in this setting can only be a good thing. RPGs in general need to finally learn to tell smaller stories because saving the world/universe is never what makes them interesting.

Mass Effect is at its best when you're either working in secret or otherwise digging to uncover the secret plan of a rogue agent. It's why people are still wishing for that Garrus the C-Sec detective spin-off. A Big Brother-style setting is perfect for that kind of story. We don't even know what would be the extent of their Big Brotheriness, but it's not like the trope ever prevented stories from being told.
I'd love to see how the various species and organizations would adjust to the new status quo and how they would try to defy it. And if the God Emperor of Mass Effect were to become their own character and develop their own personality, that could also be fun to learn about.
 

Moist_Owlet

Banned
Dec 26, 2017
4,148
Destroy. No question. Putting logic asside, it's the only way for Shepard to live, so obviously the best ending :)

BUT if you want to logic too, well, I don't have time to reiterate that which I have spent probably a hundred hours explaining, so I will leave a link to that and just say the other options are terrible and make no sense. Synthesis is in theory good if you ignore ALL the lessons from the game thus far and the fact that it is absurd and makes zero sense that it would even be possible. I loathe that option with a fiery passion.

If you want to read an absurd amount of deconstruction on this opinion -

www.masseffectindoctrination.com
More effort put into this than the story in the game
 

Cranster

Prophet of Truth
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,788
There was exactly one war/major conflict in this trilogy and it was a disaster because of how badly it clashed with the type of sci-fi the series was built around. Not being able to tell war stories in this setting can only be a good thing. RPGs in general need to finally learn to tell smaller stories because saving the world/universe is never what makes them interesting.

Mass Effect is at its best when you're either working in secret or otherwise digging to uncover the secret plan of a rogue agent. It's why people are still wishing for that Garrus the C-Sec detective spin-off. A Big Brother-style setting is perfect for that kind of story. We don't even know what would be the extent of their Big Brotheriness, but it's not like the trope ever prevented stories from being told.
I'd love to see how the various species and organizations would adjust to the new status quo and how they would try to defy it. And if the God Emperor of Mass Effect were to become their own character and develop their own personality, that could also be fun to learn about.

Yeah I felt being a Spectre had less weight in ME2 and ME3. In ME@ it didn't matter because you were working with Cerberus where in ME3 it was just, whatever, your a spectre again!
 

lukeskymac

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
992
They are all stupid, but what's up with people saying Synthesis is ethically problematic and then picking destroy? Hello?
 

Enduin

You look 40
Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,468
New York
There was exactly one war/major conflict in this trilogy and it was a disaster because of how badly it clashed with the type of sci-fi the series was built around. Not being able to tell war stories in this setting can only be a good thing. RPGs in general need to finally learn to tell smaller stories because saving the world/universe is never what makes them interesting.

Mass Effect is at its best when you're either working in secret or otherwise digging to uncover the secret plan of a rogue agent. It's why people are still wishing for that Garrus the C-Sec detective spin-off. A Big Brother-style setting is perfect for that kind of story. We don't even know what would be the extent of their Big Brotheriness, but it's not like the trope ever prevented stories from being told.
I'd love to see how the various species and organizations would adjust to the new status quo and how they would try to defy it. And if the God Emperor of Mass Effect were to become their own character and develop their own personality, that could also be fun to learn about.
First, this is kind of faulty given the fact that ME1 itself ends with a massive military battle. A culmination of the clandestine events that the game led up to which was all about cultivating allies to help combat it. Events that really wouldn't ever occur in a Control setting because again the galaxy would be teeming with Shepard Reapers. A Sovereign like entity or Saren like threat would pose no threat to them like it did to the Citadel forces alone or likely be able to operate in the shadows for so many years. You'd be relegated to most mundane and low level conflicts imaginable. Sure A C-Sec game could be interesting, but you don't need to neutralize everything above petty street level crime and conflict in the galaxy to make such a game.

Second, you're ignoring the other half of my post, that being Shepard Reapers are basically an infinite fountain of knowledge and power. These are beings that have been around for over a billion years and have toppled and consumed tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of super advanced space fairing civilizations. They are the most advanced tech in the galaxy likely by several magnitudes. The very tech they're made of had the power to merge all Organic and Synthetic life together. Literally rewriting the fabric of reality in the blink of an eye. That's literally unbelievable power and knowledge. And they are now imparted with Shepard's will to aid the galaxy however they can. Conflict whether large scale or small scale is rendered largely irrelevant in such a world.

What roguery is supposed to transpire in a galaxy where creatures like that can effectively provide endless aid and information for pretty much everything imaginable. There would be no more slavers or raider as Reapers would be able to effortlessly hunt them down and shut them down. Not to mention killing them at the source by providing the means to basically squash any kind inequity or hardship through their advanced tech. Ohh your planet is barren and a struggle to survive, here's some Reaper tech to improve things or here's a thousand other planets we know of due to our billion years of knowledge and conquest of countless civilizations that can sustain life much better. Ohh is it hard to get to, no problem, we'll just build like infinitely more Mass Effect Relays for you so you have access to farther reaches, systems and planets than ever before.

When you have that vast a degree of power and knowledge at your disposal it becomes extremely tenuous and tough to justify and make any kind of meaningful or interesting conflict feel genuine and realistic within the setting as it stands. Yeah God Machines being present is a cool concept and makes for a snazzy looking backdrop but it has tremendous implications for the entire setting. Whatever you come up with it has to be checked against the question of "Well why doesn't Shepard Reapers do something to fix it?"
 
Last edited:

Ushojax

Member
Oct 30, 2017
5,927
The correct ending to this dumb game was the one where Shepard tells the machine god to fuck off, sentient life is wiped out but Liara's time capsule will ensure the Reapers eventual defeat by a future species.

I say this as someone who finished the game at launch, chose the control ending (the only logical one of the three) then ejected the disc with no desire to ever return to this world again. At least they bothered to put in a proper ending eventually, even if it was far too late to save the IP.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,109
My Shepard was a tireless friend to true AI, brokered peace between the Geth and the Quarians, and encouraged EDI to reach her full potential. But Shepard was first and foremost, a soldier, with the job of ending the Reaper threat once and for all. Destroying all AI was the only way to guarantee that, he did it without batting an eye.
 

Wrexis

Member
Nov 4, 2017
21,220
I'm shocked that Destroy is barely winning by 10% over Synthesis. Back in 2012 it was 95% for people.