1291 réponses à ce sujet

[Rafe34]

firebreather19 wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...

Leozilla wrote...

I don't recall them saying that, all I remember was that it was an end of Shep's story

"We will not leave you with more questions than answers."
"We will not pull a LOST on the fanbase."
"It will not at all be like a traditional video game ending, where you just pick ending A, B, or C."
"The ending will be based on your choices throughout the series. Why would you be forced into the same bespoke ending that everyone gets?"

etc., etc. Go look up the developer quotes, there are plenty of threads dedicated to the pretty much outright lies that were given to us.

That's not how they worded it, and I'm actually a little disappointed no one considers the subtleties that went into crafting the ending. EMS, saving/destroying the base, etc. 

The biggest problem with ME3 is not really a problem but more that people got used to how the game works. In ME2 it was "Oh, lost a squadmate? Well just go back to the previous save and do this-and-this-and-this and there...better ending." 

You, sir, are incorrect. That's exactly how Mr. Hudson worded it:  "That means the endings can be a lot more different. at this point we're taking into account so many decisions that you've made as a player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C." - Casey Hudson, jan 11, 2012 

As to your second point- so what? That's their prerogative. I lost Mordin and killed Wrex on my first playthrough of ME1 and ME2. I kept that Shepard. I still have her. She's in stasis since it's so sad after losing Thane, (she went with Liara and then Thane, now possibly back to Liara, we'll see), but it's called role-playing. 

I don't understand. I said they didn't word it the way you did, and I was right. You say someone picks from ending A B or C. They never said you wouldn't pick from ending A B or C, they said you wouldn't always get ending A B or C, and you don't. You might get the same C (synthesis) ending, but there are like 7-8 variants of the A and B endings depending on your actions in the final five minutes, whether you saved or destroyed the base, and your EMS throughout the game.

But I guess they should've just told you that. Everyone loves spoilers. 

Yes. They did tell me exactly that.  "It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C."

I can say how many endings there are. There are six, at absolute maximum.

Destroy very bad, Destroy bad, destroy good, control bad, control good, and synthesis good.

That is IT.

Really, there's only 3. Whether or not I let TIM shoot Anderson in the back of the head, or whether he dies five minutes later from my own gunshot, does not CHANGE THE ENDING. That is such a bull**** copout. He still dies.

It does not affect the ending.

You walk down a path and you choose ending A, B, or C, based on only ONE thing: your EMS. We don't see the Rachni helping, all we have is a little number that says they are giving +100 to our War Assets. That doesn't count as playing a "major role in the assault on earth," another lie that was put out by Bioware.

[Turtlicious]

firebreather19 wrote...

Trikormadenadon wrote...

xsdob wrote...

sometimes I wonder why I even come here anymore. OP's thread is sad, it ignores the goal of stopping the reapers and selfishly focuses on just shepard living and not on the future controlled by a genocidal machine race. The fact that so many other people agree is even worse, it tells of a group of fans who claim to be mature on one side but resort to tantrum throwing that everything didn't end well for us, but might end well for the future, which should be the focus of winning a war.

Things turning out well in the imediate is of little concern, how things turn out for the future is more important.

You know what, screw this, any thread I see the angry one in, I'm just gonna turn around and ignore that thread even exist anymore.

Ask any soldier who has fought in a real war what he/she is fighting for, and very few of them will say the future of his/her country. Most will say for a loved one of some kind be it wife/husband/lover, son/daughter or even a friend. As peple, we need to put a face to the concept of what we are fighting for. You think a soldier who fights and dies in a war wants to see their family die during that war just so the next generation will survive? No, they won't care at all about that. They will only care that they failed to save their loved ones.

EDIT: Speaking metaphorically on those last few sentences obviously. Don't respond to me saying that one who dies won't care about anything. I know this already.

Idk, I've got a couple wars based on freedom from opression that say otherwise. 

You just completely ignored his post and nit picked sentences from it.

That's sad, especially when you quote the whole damn thing.

[ZiegenkonigIII]

vivaladricas wrote...

I clearly see as a fact, that here, Amazon, etc... a large % of people hating and thinking the ending is bad. The writers did not execute.

Also I am not getting this lets hold hands and rejoice for the future 10,000 years from now in the ME universe. I mean I kind of get it, but fact is the end is some serious space magic shoehorned in crap to a large majority, and none of three things make any logical sense, its a forced sacrifice and a ****** poor one at that, like 99% of the other time a writer rapes that into a story just because its the new cliche BS.

I could get 7 different polls from the first 2 pages of google alone that show the Anti-enders are a majority in said poll, and I could get even more if I went past page 2.  We buried the "minority" issue awhile ago, though some prople don't want to believe it.

Yeah i'm still not even getting how they decided to work the three magic machines that could do such ungodly things on a galactic scale, into the story.  I don't care how many cycles it went through, its ridiculous.

Hell, I just went into a Starcraft 2 game and said "The endings, you can't comprehend them", and literally 3 people in there said "ME3 endings sucked so hard."

Modifié par ZiegenkonigIII, 01 avril 2012 - 05:49 .

[Leozilla]

ZiegenkonigIII wrote...

Dear god this thread is moving to fast!

right circumstances, and the right people

[DJBare]

Rolando93 wrote...
Synthetics are the only things destroyed meaning it is possibly only synthetic codes like VIs and AIs that are destroyed. Also that only happens if you choose for it to. As well if you destroyed the geth that is only your game. And any geth destroyed in physical combat could upload to quarian suits which helps to bolster quarian immune systems. And what makes you think quarians know nothing about agriculture. Where do you think they get their food?

Well, that's even more bad news for the Quarians, I'll give you one guess what the control system is for their isolation suits are?, oh that's right VI, in the destroy selection, nothing synthetic can survive according to starbrat.

[Rolando93]

Quietness wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...

Quietness wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...

CmdrStJean wrote...

So, given all the raging and complaining that's been going on over the ending since the 6th, I'm starting to wonder just why exactly Bioware thought this nihilistic tragedy of theirs would land well with the fans?  What was it about the current set of endings that purportedly made Casey Hudson and Mac Walters feel they would be acceptable?  I do note that some people seem to be okay with how things have turned out but at least around here they don't seem to be in the majority. 

It only seems that way because most of the people who liked the ending don't feel the need to bring it up.

LOL "I can only prove that there are 700 people standing behind me by using facebook so instead i will claim everyone who has not voiced their opinion as obviously they agree with me.... cause well they do"

No no Im not saying that. Im saying if somebody is good with the ending how likely is it they will come on the forums to defend it. If you like the color green how often will we find you raving about it online?

"Again im going to claim a random abitrary fact and have no way of backing up what i state with numbers. I understand that there have been many posts showing exactly how i am not apart of the majority, but we will ignore that as it inconviences my random logic"

Are you on some kind of medication? Here there is a majority that feel that the ending is terrible. Tell me, Quietness, what thread are we on? Once you figure that out then tell me if you've taken a census of all the Mass Effect 3 players who like and dislike the ending. I haven't. I have no way of knowing who has the real majority. This is a discussion of people voicing there opinions on the ending of the game. You are just trying to tell me something I already know. I do not know who has the majority.

[The Angry One]

IsaacShep wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...

Did every other race send ALL of their people to Earth as well?

The Quarians are their flotilla. They are virtually inseperable.
Moreover, leaving undefended Quarians on Rannoch would be suicide. The Reapers WILL come to investigate the loss of control of the Geth and they know this because they SAY SO.

OK, going with "Quarians sent every single Quarian to Earth" is just nonsense.

The liveships are with you, the civilian fleet is with you. The Reapers are expected to come to Rannoch to investigate the death of the destroyer/loss of the Geth.

The Quarians would stand more of a chance with the fleet than alone with a couple of ships to protect them if the Reapers turn up.

[Rolando93]

DJBare wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...
Synthetics are the only things destroyed meaning it is possibly only synthetic codes like VIs and AIs that are destroyed. Also that only happens if you choose for it to. As well if you destroyed the geth that is only your game. And any geth destroyed in physical combat could upload to quarian suits which helps to bolster quarian immune systems. And what makes you think quarians know nothing about agriculture. Where do you think they get their food?

Well, that's even more bad news for the Quarians, I'll give you one guess what the control system is for their isolation suits are?, oh that's right VI, in the destroy selection, nothing synthetic can survive according to starbrat.

Right, the quarians will die. After all, hazmat suits require VIs. The seals are for fun.

[Rafe34]

Quietness wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...

Leozilla wrote...

I don't recall them saying that, all I remember was that it was an end of Shep's story

"We will not leave you with more questions than answers."
"We will not pull a LOST on the fanbase."
"It will not at all be like a traditional video game ending, where you just pick ending A, B, or C."
"The ending will be based on your choices throughout the series. Why would you be forced into the same bespoke ending that everyone gets?"

etc., etc. Go look up the developer quotes, there are plenty of threads dedicated to the pretty much outright lies that were given to us.

That's not how they worded it, and I'm actually a little disappointed no one considers the subtleties that went into crafting the ending. EMS, saving/destroying the base, etc. 

The biggest problem with ME3 is not really a problem but more that people got used to how the game works. In ME2 it was "Oh, lost a squadmate? Well just go back to the previous save and do this-and-this-and-this and there...better ending." 

You, sir, are incorrect. That's exactly how Mr. Hudson worded it:  "That means the endings can be a lot more different. at
this point we're taking into account so many decisions that you've made as a
player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. it's not even in any way like the
traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or
whether you got ending A, B, or C." - Casey Hudson, jan 11, 2012 

As to your second point- so what? That's their prerogative. I lost Mordin and killed Wrex on my first playthrough of ME1 and ME2. I kept that Shepard. I still have her. She's in stasis since it's so sad after losing Thane, (she went with Liara and then Thane, now possibly back to Liara, we'll see), but it's called role-playing. 

I don't understand. I said they didn't word it the way you did, and I was right. You say someone picks from ending A B or C. They never said you wouldn't pick from ending A B or C, they said you wouldn't always get ending A B or C, and you don't. You might get the same C (synthesis) ending, but there are like 7-8 variants of the A and B endings depending on your actions in the final five minutes, whether you saved or destroyed the base, and your EMS throughout the game.

But I guess they should've just told you that. Everyone loves spoilers. 

A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 C1  ive seen hard fact for, where is A4-7/8 B4-7/8

Actually its just A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, and C1. Six. At the most. Even that is really stretching it, IMO.

[Turtlicious]

firebreather19 wrote...

I don't believe anyone's too stupid to get the ending. I just believe folks are too selfish to accept it. Big difference.

And you don't find that even a little bit ego-tistical?

[Leozilla]

The Angry One wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...

Why salarian space?

A lot of it was relatively untouched during the Reaper war, hence there would still be infrastructure that could refuel and resupply ships.

Turians were also able to hold on to some of their more important infrastructure during the war.

really so there are resources to reestablish galatic society then

[Rolando93]

The Angry One wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...

Did every other race send ALL of their people to Earth as well?

The Quarians are their flotilla. They are virtually inseperable.
Moreover, leaving undefended Quarians on Rannoch would be suicide. The Reapers WILL come to investigate the loss of control of the Geth and they know this because they SAY SO.

OK, going with "Quarians sent every single Quarian to Earth" is just nonsense.

The liveships are with you, the civilian fleet is with you. The Reapers are expected to come to Rannoch to investigate the death of the destroyer/loss of the Geth.

The Quarians would stand more of a chance with the fleet than alone with a couple of ships to protect them if the Reapers turn up.

In that case why did the krogans ever leave Tuchanka?

[HeliusCarthaxis]

Vhalkyrie wrote...

Shepard presided over the biggest pyrrhic victory since time began. The Mass Relays blowing up destroys the star systems for hundreds of star clusters. That SHOULD include the Sol System too. Any excuse why this isn't the case is garbage. A visible expanse of light viewable from space means a tremendous amount of energy is released. Why bother showing us what happens when a Mass Relay blows in Arrival if this isn't the case? Every bunny, puppy, bug, or plant in every star system with a mass relay is now reduced to cosmic dust. Shepard accepting any Reaper offer is mutually assured destruction, not a victory.

Actually, its a cadmean victory, not a pyrrhic victory. A phyrrhic victory is one that is devastating to the point where another one like it will mean your defeat. A cadmean victory is one that brings about your own defeat at the same time.

[Rafe34]

Trikormadenadon wrote...

pistolols wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

It's come up in a few discussions now and then from various people that, no matter what the consequences of the ending, the cycle is in fact broken, Reapers are no longer a threat and future races will be free of bad Reaper influence, being culled etc. etc.

There's one issue I have with this: I DON'T CARE.

I got into Mass Effect because I became invested into the galaxy, it's various races and the galaxy.
I don't care whether the Yahg are now free to expand across the galaxy and eat puppies or whatever it is they do.
I don't care that in 10, 20, 30,000 years there'll be some form of galactic society again and I certainly don't care what some senile old man has to say to his naive grandson 10,000 years in the future on some backwater world I don't know and don't give a damn about!

I care about this galaxy, as is. I care about Garrus, about Liara, about Kaidan, about Tali building her home on Rannoch, about Wrex raising his new children. I care about Jack and her students, about Conrad, about Bailey. I care about the Turians, the Asari, the Quarians, the Geth, the Krogans.
Heck I even care about Vega and his N7 promotion.

That's what I care about, the characters I've gotten to know for 3 games. Not some nebulous, unseen and uneeded future. For that, you might as well let the Reapers win, because it amounts to exactly the same thing in the end. This isn't just about Shepard's unhappy ending. I want a happy ending, but even if it had to be a sacrifice, then I want that sacrifice to mean something other than some alien I don't care about not fearing the robotic squids from hell.

the way i see it, casey hudson made it very clear he was sorry he hurt your feelings and that he knows his most passionate fans needed more time to say goodbye to their video game characters...so not really sure what you're still crying about.  They made a statement about this.  They know how you feel.  So what is this thread possibly accomplishing other than beating a dead horse?

Sometimes people need to just vent. Let them. better that then they hold it in until they blow a gasket and go on a shooting spree....

Out of line. WAY out of line.

[Vhalkyrie]

Turtlicious wrote...

Sidney wrote...

So much wrong here.

Not all explosions are the same. An EMP pulse is a discharge and it is definately different than the shockwave from a conventional bomb. One blows up my ipod the other blows up me. The pulse that stops the REapers is, in most endings, clearly shown to not be destructive unless you get the earth burns ending. In my ending the wave takes out the reapers and you see people cheering as it passes over them.

Yes but when an EMP goes off you can't see it, and if it's too strong you catch cancer.

These explosions were big enough to see on a GALAXY MAP, they were obviously irradiated because where did the color come from? If you didn't kill everyone from the super nova, you just flooded them with radiation until they died.

Let's assume for a moment we see an EMP.  An EMP is no better than a destructive atomic-level blast as seen in Arrival.  An EMP that big that we can see from the galaxy map would be massive enough to strip off the planetary magnetic fields.  Anything left alive will die a horrific death from radiation sickness, and the planet will become unsustainable for future life due to having no magnetic field.

[Quietness]

Rolando93 wrote...

Quietness wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...

Quietness wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...

CmdrStJean wrote...

So, given all the raging and complaining that's been going on over the ending since the 6th, I'm starting to wonder just why exactly Bioware thought this nihilistic tragedy of theirs would land well with the fans?  What was it about the current set of endings that purportedly made Casey Hudson and Mac Walters feel they would be acceptable?  I do note that some people seem to be okay with how things have turned out but at least around here they don't seem to be in the majority. 

It only seems that way because most of the people who liked the ending don't feel the need to bring it up.

LOL "I can only prove that there are 700 people standing behind me by using facebook so instead i will claim everyone who has not voiced their opinion as obviously they agree with me.... cause well they do"

No no Im not saying that. Im saying if somebody is good with the ending how likely is it they will come on the forums to defend it. If you like the color green how often will we find you raving about it online?

"Again im going to claim a random abitrary fact and have no way of backing up what i state with numbers. I understand that there have been many posts showing exactly how i am not apart of the majority, but we will ignore that as it inconviences my random logic"

Are you on some kind of medication? Here there is a majority that feel that the ending is terrible. Tell me, Quietness, what thread are we on? Once you figure that out then tell me if you've taken a census of all the Mass Effect 3 players who like and dislike the ending. I haven't. I have no way of knowing who has the real majority. This is a discussion of people voicing there opinions on the ending of the game. You are just trying to tell me something I already know. I do not know who has the majority.

You were the one claiming majority ^^ im just stating you are using arbitrary opinion. Why am i doing your leg work?

[The Angry One]

Rolando93 wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...
Synthetics are the only things destroyed meaning it is possibly only synthetic codes like VIs and AIs that are destroyed. Also that only happens if you choose for it to. As well if you destroyed the geth that is only your game. And any geth destroyed in physical combat could upload to quarian suits which helps to bolster quarian immune systems. And what makes you think quarians know nothing about agriculture. Where do you think they get their food?

Well, that's even more bad news for the Quarians, I'll give you one guess what the control system is for their isolation suits are?, oh that's right VI, in the destroy selection, nothing synthetic can survive according to starbrat.

Right, the quarians will die. After all, hazmat suits require VIs. The seals are for fun.

You do know that Quarians use extensive cybernetic implants that directly interface with their suits, right?

[Harbinger of your Destiny]

Rolando93 wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...
Synthetics are the only things destroyed meaning it is possibly only synthetic codes like VIs and AIs that are destroyed. Also that only happens if you choose for it to. As well if you destroyed the geth that is only your game. And any geth destroyed in physical combat could upload to quarian suits which helps to bolster quarian immune systems. And what makes you think quarians know nothing about agriculture. Where do you think they get their food?

Well, that's even more bad news for the Quarians, I'll give you one guess what the control system is for their isolation suits are?, oh that's right VI, in the destroy selection, nothing synthetic can survive according to starbrat.

Right, the quarians will die. After all, hazmat suits require VIs. The seals are for fun.

Well seeing as how they are now trapped in a system where the only food available is Ievo based, yes they are dead. Unless they want to resort to eating the turians but that can only last for so long.

[CaptainIngenuity]

Rolando93 wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...
Synthetics are the only things destroyed meaning it is possibly only synthetic codes like VIs and AIs that are destroyed. Also that only happens if you choose for it to. As well if you destroyed the geth that is only your game. And any geth destroyed in physical combat could upload to quarian suits which helps to bolster quarian immune systems. And what makes you think quarians know nothing about agriculture. Where do you think they get their food?

Well, that's even more bad news for the Quarians, I'll give you one guess what the control system is for their isolation suits are?, oh that's right VI, in the destroy selection, nothing synthetic can survive according to starbrat.

Right, the quarians will die. After all, hazmat suits require VIs. The seals are for fun.

See you get it!  Oh.. wait....

[firebreather19]

Quietness wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...

Leozilla wrote...

I don't recall them saying that, all I remember was that it was an end of Shep's story

"We will not leave you with more questions than answers."
"We will not pull a LOST on the fanbase."
"It will not at all be like a traditional video game ending, where you just pick ending A, B, or C."
"The ending will be based on your choices throughout the series. Why would you be forced into the same bespoke ending that everyone gets?"

etc., etc. Go look up the developer quotes, there are plenty of threads dedicated to the pretty much outright lies that were given to us.

That's not how they worded it, and I'm actually a little disappointed no one considers the subtleties that went into crafting the ending. EMS, saving/destroying the base, etc. 

The biggest problem with ME3 is not really a problem but more that people got used to how the game works. In ME2 it was "Oh, lost a squadmate? Well just go back to the previous save and do this-and-this-and-this and there...better ending." 

You, sir, are incorrect. That's exactly how Mr. Hudson worded it:  "That means the endings can be a lot more different. at
this point we're taking into account so many decisions that you've made as a
player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. it's not even in any way like the
traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or
whether you got ending A, B, or C." - Casey Hudson, jan 11, 2012 

As to your second point- so what? That's their prerogative. I lost Mordin and killed Wrex on my first playthrough of ME1 and ME2. I kept that Shepard. I still have her. She's in stasis since it's so sad after losing Thane, (she went with Liara and then Thane, now possibly back to Liara, we'll see), but it's called role-playing. 

I don't understand. I said they didn't word it the way you did, and I was right. You say someone picks from ending A B or C. They never said you wouldn't pick from ending A B or C, they said you wouldn't always get ending A B or C, and you don't. You might get the same C (synthesis) ending, but there are like 7-8 variants of the A and B endings depending on your actions in the final five minutes, whether you saved or destroyed the base, and your EMS throughout the game.

But I guess they should've just told you that. Everyone loves spoilers. 

A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 C1  ive seen hard fact for, where is A4-7/8 B4-7/8

Pick up a strategy guide sometime, eh? 

Just a few:

Save the base-->

-readiness below 1750, Earth dead no matter the choice
-1750, earth destroyed if you choose destroy
-2050, become a reaper and you can save earth
-2350, destroy the Reapers and earth is devestated but still there
-2650, destroy the reapers, earth is saved
etc. etc. etc.

destroy the base-->

-readiness below 1750, earth dead no matter the choice (same, granted)
-1750, earth destroyed if you become a reaper (clearly weighing on your decision to save or destroy the base--control/destroy options)
-1900 destroy the Reapers, earth is devestated but still there
...and it goes on and on then taking into account Anderson living or dying and then Synthesis and then Shepard living.

[The Angry One]

Rolando93 wrote...

In that case why did the krogans ever leave Tuchanka?

Tuchanka is a radioactive dirt ball and the Krogan are mean fighters, the Reapers would have a much harder time there than on Rannoch, that's why they tried using the shroud to poison the atmosphere.
Also, according to their directives, losing control of the Geth is FAR more a concern than losing a destroyer alone.

[Rolando93]

Leozilla wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...

Why salarian space?

A lot of it was relatively untouched during the Reaper war, hence there would still be infrastructure that could refuel and resupply ships.

Turians were also able to hold on to some of their more important infrastructure during the war.

really so there are resources to reestablish galatic society then

Sounds like the salarians are fine then. So are the turians. The quarians already live on ships so they are fine. The humans still have Earth. The krogan already lived on a dump planet so I'm sure they will be fine. The geth dont need anything but energy so they will be good. The asari screwed themselves anyways so nobody cares about them.

[shepskisaac]

The Angry One wrote...

The Quarians would stand more of a chance with the fleet than alone with a couple of ships to protect them if the Reapers turn up.

How about packing kids and eldery into few ships and hiding them in some remote system for a few days? Seriously, dragging all the civilians to what will likely be the most bloody battle ever makes zero sense.

[BWGungan]

I agree with the OP. If I can't save the universe as is (even if Shepard has to die),, there's no reason to play any Mass Effect game again.

Modifié par BWGungan, 01 avril 2012 - 05:54 .

[AlexXIV]

IsaacShep wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...

Did every other race send ALL of their people to Earth as well?

The Quarians are their flotilla. They are virtually inseperable.
Moreover, leaving undefended Quarians on Rannoch would be suicide. The Reapers WILL come to investigate the loss of control of the Geth and they know this because they SAY SO.

OK, going with "Quarians sent every single Quarian to Earth" is just nonsense.

Yeah because you hate it.

The quarians live on ships for millenia and they have turned EVERY SHIP, even life ships into war ships. It's stated right in the game. Now tell me why they should not send every ship to Earth like every other race that believes that the Catalyst can stop the Reapers and that the allied fleet is not strong enough to beat the Reapers conventionally anyway? It's the same logic fail as with 'saving the Council at all costs' in ME1. You either believe this is your only chance and not even a good one and throw in everything. Or you think it is going to go well anyway and only send half your fleet in. If it is so like you pro-enders say, that the Reapers are that powerful that there could not be a different ending, then why hold back? Why leave half of your fleet or even 10% at home when the all deciding battle does have little chance to work even if ALL AVAILABLE ships of the alliance are going to Earth?

Seriously, the most annoying thing about you pro-enders is the sheer unwillingness to apply logic and common sense to it and just make up your own ending while at the same time defending the one we got from Bioware.