Half-full vs Half-empty: Tell us why the ending failed/succeeded in one sentence

Full-Full - Any literary ending that people insist on arguing about obsessively for more than 4 years has to be considered a success.

Is the purpose of all literary endings to provide a "satisfying" conclusion?  Some works are written to disturb their audiences or incite controversy (as exemplified by the "ending" of both the OP's post and yours).  If this arguing goes on for another 6 years, this work (i.e. Mass Effect) may be in danger of becoming a "classic."

So there.

Half-Empty:

Final act wasn't particularly fun or even really much different from the rest of the game in gameplay, and then the final half hour was non-combat with a lot of exposition thrown in.

I wouldn't say that I am the biggest fan of the three choices, but they aren't really bad enough that I would have judged the whole ending on them had the rest of it been better.

The sign of a bad story is that it is forgotten.

The sign of a good story is that it is remembered.

Lord of the Rings is not the first nor only fantasy novel with elves, dwarfs and wizards in it. But due to the story it is the most remembered while others are forgotten about.

You might have had a point if the endings were actually written to cause controversy. They weren't. They caused controversy because they were badly written and made no narrative sense.
Many have tried to imbue them with some deeper meaning that simply isn't there. It's an ending written by an emo teen desperate to be taken seriously but who doesn't have the depth of experience to do his ideas justice.
Imagine the end of Blade Runner. After Roy Batty dies another character shows up who we've never met and had no idea existed and gives an exposition dump to Deckard, ending with three choices, while he sits in the rain on that rooftop.
Doesn't matter what Deckard's choices are. The whole scenario is ludicrous. The entire audience goes 'huh, what?'. Not because they don't 'get it' (something many love to claim so they can sit, smug and superior, sneering at the masses), they get it just fine. They just don't like it.
Can't believe I'm getting involved in an ending discussion. I usually avoid them like the plague.
And Happy Xmas.

Oh stop being a prat. I don't obsessively hunt down anything. ME is a game I happen to think is great but has a third act that is seriously flawed.
I'm perfectly capable of engaging in discussions about it without accusing anyone who disagrees with me of obsessive behaviour. I can accuse them of being divorced from reality (you anyway).

So then the "success" of the ending may be accidental... but it is still a "success" nonetheless.  If Mass Effect had a satisfying ending, the whole Trilogy would have been long forgotten by now.  It's not.  It's one of the most videoed video games on YouTube.  As a result, ME:A is, without any doubt, currently the most anticipated game out there.  The VO contest recently had over 16,000 entries... way more than the contest held for DA:I.  The endings being what they are has, without any doubt, probably put more money in Bioware's pockets than if they had been "satisfying" endings.  It has certainly put money in the pockets of all those YouTubers and gaming magazines that have written articles and blogs about the endings for all those years.  Writing "inciting" threads about the endings and Mac Walters has certainly gained some posters a lot of attention here on this forum.  Ending discussion threads are among the most "popular" ones here.

I was just expressing my own opinion here... in accordance with the "rules" of a game set out by the OP.  You're the one who chose to start this little bit of controversy with the  "so there" ending to your post.  I merely posted back in the exact same "kind" as you had.  So, a bit of advice... If you really don't want to get into ending discussions like this one, just resist adding those little digs you put into your posts.

... and may God bless you during this most Holy of seasons (for Christians)... and if you're not a Christian... Have a nice day!  (Sometimes, things have been "imbued with deeper meanings" by some people and not others... That's just the way the world has worked for centuries.)

Being memorable because it's shitty does not mean a story "did it right". The Room is memorable. Nothing about it is "right". Now there may be some silver lining (i.e. the Room is so horrendous it's fascinating in its own right and hilarious to inflict on others). But that's different from saying it's good, or even a good thing. It just sort of is. And no, ME3's ending doesn't have that going for it either, if you were wondering.

Full Empty- forced illogical nonsense not supported by the majority of the game up to that point, capitulation to the enemy, reduction of the enemy, reduction of the player, pallette swapped RBG (original), Powerpoint epilogue (EC), forced arbitrary consequences, pure wtf ending choice irreversably affecting every living thing in the galaxy, middle finger "fourth choice" that's obviously petty, implied dark age (original), retcon'ed dark age but with crap still breaking and inexplicably being fixed (EC).

Half-full (aka the silver lining): With some mental gymnastics, people can, for the most part, find some interpretation of one of the choices that's acceptable to them and ignore the rest. And with ME:A, your final choice at least is preserved.

... ah, my chosen interpretation of the question presented by the OP isn't "was it good?" or even "was it done right?"... it is "was it successful?"

It seems to me, one primary goal of an RPG is to enable a variety of interpretations of the story (and ending).  (Note: the use of the singular is intentional here).  The Mass Effect Trilogy obviously does that... since even the people who decry the endings as being awful are, as above, stating that they can be interpreted in different ways and "imbued with deeper meanings."  The fact that they "don't like" that some people can interpret the endings in those ways is irrelevant to the question at hand.

^Point Proven Sondergaard. Really every point I made proven in a single post.