I'm not defending that kind of solution to the ending, but what's your opinion on Fallout 3 and Broken Steel? Isn't that what Bioware essentially would do if they released it as DLC?
the original Fallout 3 ending was logical for a player without allies, but fell apart by the (later added?) addition of allies. At least three of them could have taken care of it without harm to themselves. (Super Mutant, Ghoul, Robot)
So that ending was pretty much FUBAR anyway. The DLC ending actually kind of improved it, since the whole 'sacrifice yourself' was toned down to 'you'll be out for weeks, but you'll live'.
Of course, the dialogue didn't change, but the ludic narrative was definitely improved.
However, the ending was completely in tune with the world, story, and expectations. While not everyone believes it to be well written, it was more than sufficient (imo) for a game story.
The same is not true at all for Mass Effect 3, sadly. The ending singlehandedly rewrites every rule, previously established expectation and utterly and completely negates any 'world' that ME had. HAD being the emphasized word in this case.
It's unacceptable that this nonsense made into the final product. Sure, it's there to make the story sensical for newbies and set up a sequel (yes, really), but this shit just should not have happened. Every single viewer / reader will instantly realize that the ending negates the choices in the game, and the world at large. They may be new to the series, but they're not stupid. EA seems to have assumed that they were.
It does explain why the embargo was set at the actual releasedate though.
Also: Bioware (Austin?) claims that the Shepard story is done, but that only counts for them and is clearly not true. Expect ME4 to be made another studios labeled Bioware by EA, just not the original studio.
But honestly, as Emcee puts it above me, it is best to pretend the series doesn't exist past shooting TIM.