395 réponses à ce sujet

[Lalue]

I do like the ending...its perfect. MA was a trilogy. Why do you
guys want a better ending? it couldnt be better. Shepherd is maybe dead
but a new life begins, the end.

Modifié par Lalue, 09 avril 2012 - 06:08 .

[Udalango]

lx_theo wrote...


His logic is fine. Did you try thinking about it from his point of view. it makes plenty of sense that way.

As for why couldn't they get his help? Thats assuming he'd be willing to give his help until the Reaper's could not fulfill his plan anymore. He would have known that they could simply fly there if needed (like they did).

I saw him as the embodiment of the Reapers. Mind you he did say we a lot when referring to the Reapers.

Ok thinking from his point of view....Synthetics are killing the creators.....AHA Lets effing kill all of them without warning! to "Preserve" them but really im just making them slaves. HA im so brilliant.

Or a more logical approach.  Hmmmm Why not punish the race that made synthetics.  Ill have my first reaper and ill have him out there to just police the galaxy.  Its a giant death squid.  I doubt any other species will want that fate.  

Or better yet.  Lets not build the Relays.  Then the galaxy wont progress along the lines I made that apparently lead to synthetics.  His logic is so ridiculously flawed I dont understand how you can say his chosen solution works

[nevar00]

No it was not.

First and foremost, it was poorly written. A massive dues ex machina and main antagonist and main goal switch all within the last few minutes is just bad, bad writing. Then there's the plot holes (some massive ones that are certainly not covered with a few minor assumptions), a change in theme, a change in characters, decisions not mattering, decisions rendered pointless... no, it's bad. I really can't think of anything worse.  Then the cherry on top is all the lies and false promises we were told  beforehand.

It's okay to like it though. I like Wisseau's "The Room". It's still an awful movie.

Modifié par nevar00, 09 avril 2012 - 05:53 .

[Udalango]

JBONE27 wrote...


I don't remember Harby being the oldest reaper, but yes, a final conflict with him doing his whole taunting thing, taking control of varrious husks, canabals, banshies, etc. while the alliance is pounding on him would have been a lot better.

It says something to that effect in the Codex.  

[SlyTF1]

Lalue wrote...

I do like the ending...its perfect. MA was a trilogy. Why do you guys want a better ending? it couldnt be better. Shepherd is maybe dead but a new life begins, the end.

I don't want new life. I just want to survive. If I'm going to die, I'm taking the entire universe with me!!! Which is why my favorite ending is the unprepared destroy ending.

[lx_theo]

Udalango wrote...

lx_theo wrote...


His logic is fine. Did you try thinking about it from his point of view. it makes plenty of sense that way.

As for why couldn't they get his help? Thats assuming he'd be willing to give his help until the Reaper's could not fulfill his plan anymore. He would have known that they could simply fly there if needed (like they did).

I saw him as the embodiment of the Reapers. Mind you he did say we a lot when referring to the Reapers.

Ok thinking from his point of view....Synthetics are killing the creators.....AHA Lets effing kill all of them without warning! to "Preserve" them but really im just making them slaves. HA im so brilliant.

Or a more logical approach.  Hmmmm Why not punish the race that made synthetics.  Ill have my first reaper and ill have him out there to just police the galaxy.  Its a giant death squid.  I doubt any other species will want that fate.  

Or better yet.  Lets not build the Relays.  Then the galaxy wont progress along the lines I made that apparently lead to synthetics.  His logic is so ridiculously flawed I dont understand how you can say his chosen solution works

Sounds like your logic, not theirs... they believe that being harvested is a better solution to the inevitable demise that would come with synthetics totally killing them. Without the values of individuality (each is a ntion among their own) or anything like that, they don't see the problems organics have with it (like enslavement) as a problem.

That's a stupid one. Having a random reaper cop would just cause the organics to rebel once they got strong enough.

Someone would build the relays. The technology exists. Someone would stumble upon it eventually.

[Lalue]

Lalue wrote...

I do like the ending...its perfect. MA was a trilogy. Why do you guys want a better ending? it couldnt be better. Shepherd is maybe dead but a new life begins, the end.



I don't want new life. I just want to survive. If I'm going to die, I'm taking the entire universe with me!!! Which is why my favorite ending is the unprepared destroy ending.

surviving or not, its over. you ll never play this game anymore...

[Udalango]

lx_theo wrote...

Udalango wrote...

lx_theo wrote...


His logic is fine. Did you try thinking about it from his point of view. it makes plenty of sense that way.

As for why couldn't they get his help? Thats assuming he'd be willing to give his help until the Reaper's could not fulfill his plan anymore. He would have known that they could simply fly there if needed (like they did).

I saw him as the embodiment of the Reapers. Mind you he did say we a lot when referring to the Reapers.

Ok thinking from his point of view....Synthetics are killing the creators.....AHA Lets effing kill all of them without warning! to "Preserve" them but really im just making them slaves. HA im so brilliant.

Or a more logical approach.  Hmmmm Why not punish the race that made synthetics.  Ill have my first reaper and ill have him out there to just police the galaxy.  Its a giant death squid.  I doubt any other species will want that fate.  

Or better yet.  Lets not build the Relays.  Then the galaxy wont progress along the lines I made that apparently lead to synthetics.  His logic is so ridiculously flawed I dont understand how you can say his chosen solution works

Sounds like your logic, not theirs... they believe that being harvested is a better solution to the inevitable demise that would come with synthetics totally killing them. Without the values of individuality (each is a ntion among their own) or anything like that, they don't see the problems organics have with it (like enslavement) as a problem.

That's a stupid one. Having a random reaper cop would just cause the organics to rebel once they got strong enough.

Someone would build the relays. The technology exists. Someone would stumble upon it eventually.

........that doesnt make his logic any less stupid. His logic isnt logic.  I see no way where if you are the catalyst that you can only reach that killing everyone every 50000 years is the best logical solution to Synthetics killing organics.  Especially under the delusion that you are "Preserving" them.  If you are a logical being you cannot think that making everyone a reaper you control is preserving them.  As far as I can tell the Reapers all have the same basic personality all have the same agenda.  I would assume they all fought the Reapers.  So they change the mindset.  sThat is not preserving in any logical definition of the word preservation   
The kid is 100% not logical.  You can spout off "TO his logic it is fine"  but it doesnt work.  Logical conclusions dont change because you believe something else.  
Star kid has his own idiotic beliefs that are 100% not true.  Which would actually make for an interesting bad guy if it wasnt just thrown in last minute 

[METALPUNKS]

I think most people on both sides of the street would say this is getting old. Player says it was good. Member says they are trolls. Player says not many plotholes. Member says explain Plotholes. Now the other way around. Player says game was bad. Member says you just didn't get it. Player says it has many plotholes. Member says explain.

Back and forth and back and forth. Regardless of what side you fight for its really ruining the forums. We should all just not talk about the ending, we should stop playing righ before the end. I don't even care to tell people what I think anymore. Who cares if it was good or bad, it's making is fall apart. It's gone beyond a topic that can remain civil.

Oh one player says he/she didn't register their game. Other player says I borrowed it or it won't let me. Player says he only signed up to be a member a month ago. Other player says it wouldn't let me. See how it gets old?

[SlyTF1]

METALPUNKS wrote...

I think most people on both sides of the street would say this is getting old. Player says it was good. Member says they are trolls. Player says not many plotholes. Member says explain Plotholes. Now the other way around. Player says game was bad. Member says you just didn't get it. Player says it has many plotholes. Member says explain.

Back and forth and back and forth. Regardless of what side you fight for its really ruining the forums. We should all just not talk about the ending, we should stop playing righ before the end. I don't even care to tell people what I think anymore. Who cares if it was good or bad, it's making is fall apart. It's gone beyond a topic that can remain civil.

Oh one player says he/she didn't register their game. Other player says I borrowed it or it won't let me. Player says he only signed up to be a member a month ago. Other player says it wouldn't let me. See how it gets old?

LOL! I remember being called a troll when I said I liked DA2 more than Origins when I first joined. Now I call "troll" on the people who like the ME3 ending. Oh the irony.

[lx_theo]

Udalango wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Udalango wrote...

lx_theo wrote...


His logic is fine. Did you try thinking about it from his point of view. it makes plenty of sense that way.

As for why couldn't they get his help? Thats assuming he'd be willing to give his help until the Reaper's could not fulfill his plan anymore. He would have known that they could simply fly there if needed (like they did).

I saw him as the embodiment of the Reapers. Mind you he did say we a lot when referring to the Reapers.

Ok thinking from his point of view....Synthetics are killing the creators.....AHA Lets effing kill all of them without warning! to "Preserve" them but really im just making them slaves. HA im so brilliant.

Or a more logical approach.  Hmmmm Why not punish the race that made synthetics.  Ill have my first reaper and ill have him out there to just police the galaxy.  Its a giant death squid.  I doubt any other species will want that fate.  

Or better yet.  Lets not build the Relays.  Then the galaxy wont progress along the lines I made that apparently lead to synthetics.  His logic is so ridiculously flawed I dont understand how you can say his chosen solution works

Sounds like your logic, not theirs... they believe that being harvested is a better solution to the inevitable demise that would come with synthetics totally killing them. Without the values of individuality (each is a ntion among their own) or anything like that, they don't see the problems organics have with it (like enslavement) as a problem.

That's a stupid one. Having a random reaper cop would just cause the organics to rebel once they got strong enough.

Someone would build the relays. The technology exists. Someone would stumble upon it eventually.

........that doesnt make his logic any less stupid. His logic isnt logic.  I see no way where if you are the catalyst that you can only reach that killing everyone every 50000 years is the best logical solution to Synthetics killing organics.  Especially under the delusion that you are "Preserving" them.  If you are a logical being you cannot think that making everyone a reaper you control is preserving them.  As far as I can tell the Reapers all have the same basic personality all have the same agenda.  I would assume they all fought the Reapers.  So they change the mindset.  sThat is not preserving in any logical definition of the word preservation   
The kid is 100% not logical.  You can spout off "TO his logic it is fine"  but it doesnt work.  Logical conclusions dont change because you believe something else.  
Star kid has his own idiotic beliefs that are 100% not true.  Which would actually make for an interesting bad guy if it wasnt just thrown in last minute 

Stop shouting like an idiot. Logical conclusions DO CHANGE because you have different values. Let's say you are a an athlete. Its obviously in your best interest and logical to stay in shape. Lets say another person doesn't care about fitness at all. In that regard, it is not logical or have any point to stay in shape. 

You're obviously looking from your viewpoint, your values. You want proof that there is a huge difference in the ways of thinking? Look at the part when the child and Shepard are arguing over the values of what it is to be organic in contrast to the Child's ideas. That contrast alone makes it painfully obvious they don't think with the same values. These are enough to come to the conclusion.

[Han Shot First]

The_Shootist wrote...

1) destroy civilization, or 2) become your enemy, or 3) make all sentient beings cybernetic against their will.

Yep, right up there with Plan 9 from Outer Space and Attack of the Killer Tomatoes.

This.

[Belhawk]

i am glad u liked the ending and it didn't spoil the ME universe for u, but the ending ruined the ME universe for me. I find that i have little interest in playing any of the ME games, and I doubt that i will buy the next ME game because i don't see how that they can patch the logic and lore holes that BW made in the ME universe.
Shepard's story died with a whimper instead of a bang, and took out the whole ME universe with it for me!

[The Milky Waver]

You're crazy OP. You're entitled to your own opinion, but my opinion of your opinion is that its crazy.

[lx_theo]

The Milky Waver wrote...

You're crazy OP. You're entitled to your own opinion, but my opinion of your opinion is that its crazy.

And my opinion of you is that your opinion of me is stupid. Happy?

[JBONE27]

SlyTF1 wrote...

METALPUNKS wrote...

I think most people on both sides of the street would say this is getting old. Player says it was good. Member says they are trolls. Player says not many plotholes. Member says explain Plotholes. Now the other way around. Player says game was bad. Member says you just didn't get it. Player says it has many plotholes. Member says explain.

Back and forth and back and forth. Regardless of what side you fight for its really ruining the forums. We should all just not talk about the ending, we should stop playing righ before the end. I don't even care to tell people what I think anymore. Who cares if it was good or bad, it's making is fall apart. It's gone beyond a topic that can remain civil.

Oh one player says he/she didn't register their game. Other player says I borrowed it or it won't let me. Player says he only signed up to be a member a month ago. Other player says it wouldn't let me. See how it gets old?

LOL! I remember being called a troll when I said I liked DA2 more than Origins when I first joined. Now I call "troll" on the people who like the ME3 ending. Oh the irony.

The same thing happened to me.  Except I don't say he's trolling, simply wrong.

Modifié par JBONE27, 09 avril 2012 - 06:39 .

[Udalango]

lx_theo wrote...

Stop shouting like an idiot. Logical conclusions DO CHANGE because you have different values. Let's say you are a an athlete. Its obviously in your best interest and logical to stay in shape. Lets say another person doesn't care about fitness at all. In that regard, it is not logical or have any point to stay in shape. 

You're obviously looking from your viewpoint, your values. You want proof that there is a huge difference in the ways of thinking? Look at the part when the child and Shepard are arguing over the values of what it is to be organic in contrast to the Child's ideas. That contrast alone makes it painfully obvious they don't think with the same values. These are enough to come to the conclusion.

Im shouting?  Here I was thinking I was typing?  I dont know why you would think I am shouting.  All Caps was for emphasis but whatever. I also never attacked you and said you were stupid or anything so I would appreciate if you not call me an idiot again. 

And no just because you arent an athlete doesnt make it logical to not stay in shape.  You dont stay in shape and suddenly you have heart problems.  Or other issues that can stem from just going with the flow.  Athletes do a whole hell of a lot more than "Stay in shape"  They are in peak physical shape.  Those are two vastly different things.  Im not an athlete but its logical to me to stay in shape because i would like to be able to live without problems that I can do my part to prevent.  

The "Preserve" nonsense makes no logical sense regardless of your POV.  He preserves nothing but genetic material.  But if thats what he wants fine whatever.  Whats he preserving it for?.....To kill other races at the risk of the genetic material being lost?  That isnt a preserving action.  Shepard kills reapers.  Those races werent preserved.  

his logic doesnt work.  Saying "To him it does" doesnt change anything.  If the problem was Synthetics killing Organics his solution makes zero logical sense.  Its completely simple.  But if you are going to insult me for my opinion dont bother responding

[Stank3]

EDIT: MY bad misread a post!

Modifié par Stank3, 09 avril 2012 - 06:40 .

[lx_theo]

Udalango wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Stop shouting like an idiot. Logical conclusions DO CHANGE because you have different values. Let's say you are a an athlete. Its obviously in your best interest and logical to stay in shape. Lets say another person doesn't care about fitness at all. In that regard, it is not logical or have any point to stay in shape. 

You're obviously looking from your viewpoint, your values. You want proof that there is a huge difference in the ways of thinking? Look at the part when the child and Shepard are arguing over the values of what it is to be organic in contrast to the Child's ideas. That contrast alone makes it painfully obvious they don't think with the same values. These are enough to come to the conclusion.

Im shouting?  Here I was thinking I was typing?  I dont know why you would think I am shouting.  All Caps was for emphasis but whatever. I also never attacked you and said you were stupid or anything so I would appreciate if you not call me an idiot again. 

And no just because you arent an athlete doesnt make it logical to not stay in shape.  You dont stay in shape and suddenly you have heart problems.  Or other issues that can stem from just going with the flow.  Athletes do a whole hell of a lot more than "Stay in shape"  They are in peak physical shape.  Those are two vastly different things.  Im not an athlete but its logical to me to stay in shape because i would like to be able to live without problems that I can do my part to prevent.  

The "Preserve" nonsense makes no logical sense regardless of your POV.  He preserves nothing but genetic material.  But if thats what he wants fine whatever.  Whats he preserving it for?.....To kill other races at the risk of the genetic material being lost?  That isnt a preserving action.  Shepard kills reapers.  Those races werent preserved.  

his logic doesnt work.  Saying "To him it does" doesnt change anything.  If the problem was Synthetics killing Organics his solution makes zero logical sense.  Its completely simple.  But if you are going to insult me for my opinion dont bother responding

You still DON'T GET IT. This is assuming that you don't care about heart problems. I'm saying this person has literally no reason to stay in shape. You can't make one up. 

To them, the preservation of the genetic material could easily be enough to see as an alternative to the species simply being wiped out in an ineviatable syntheitc organic war. Its a compromise for neither synthetics or organics to simply die out. they don't value the actual life portion of it enough to see the upside of letting organics live their lives. To them, with their POV, its a fair compromise to help preserve.

The logic is fine. You obviously are unable to think outside of your value system. So it seems you're quite closed minded. Unless you prefer to show otherwise, you're argument has no merit. You can't argue someone's logic is wrong without knowing their POV and understanding why that effects their decisions first.

[Udalango]

lx_theo wrote...

You still DON'T GET IT. This is assuming that you don't care about heart problems. I'm saying this person has literally no reason to stay in shape. You can't make one up. 

To them, the preservation of the genetic material could easily be enough to see as an alternative to the species simply being wiped out in an ineviatable syntheitc organic war. Its a compromise for neither synthetics or organics to simply die out. they don't value the actual life portion of it enough to see the upside of letting organics live their lives. To them, with their POV, its a fair compromise to help preserve.

The logic is fine. You obviously are unable to think outside of your value system. So it seems you're quite closed minded. Unless you prefer to show otherwise, you're argument has no merit. You can't argue someone's logic is wrong without knowing their POV and understanding why that effects their decisions first.

Now now dont start shouting.  one might think you are an idiot if you do that *Heavy sarcasm*

Lol I get exactly what you are saying.   I dont have have to make up a reason for that person to want to stay in shape.  Their own body does it for them. Them not caring changes nothing.  Bad example for what you are saying.

Also please stop assuming you know me.  The personal attacks arent needed we are arguing a point not arguing whether or not I am closed minded by your opinion as someone who knows absolutely nothing about me.  Stay on topic champ

 But since you cant not attack me good night.  This argument isnt worth having 

[beyondsolo]

lx_theo wrote...

 *Readies Omni-Shield of Invulnerability*

Yes, I said it. The ending was good. It wasn't great. It wasn't amazing. It wasn't the quality the series deserved to end on after such a great run. But it was good.

Many of the so called "plotholes" can easily be explained relatively easily without creating a whole conspiracy around it. There are a few that seem like oversights, like the sudden appearance of certain characters in ending scenes.

The whole Indoctrination Theory is just silly, and while it would be cool, it would also make no sense for Bioware to do without having actual content afterwards in the released title. Not to mention much of this "proof" is nothing of the sort, and a lot of it is non sequitur even when together.

Other than that, the greatest failing was that it didn't provide enough closure. The universe had many ways it could develop afterwards based on how things turned out on many different fronts throughout the game. The problem with the ending is that it doesn't reference these and specify what happens to provide said closure. Bioware is doing the smart thing is offering an ending that gives more closure.

So, the ending was good. All this hate for it is absolutely ridiculous.

BioWare is releasing Extended Cut because of the protests. Therefore, the "hate" is not ridiculous. I find it interesting that some people on the forums (who usually defend BioWare's integrity) suddenly don't believe BioWare to be competent enough to judge which criticism BioWare considers convincing and which it doesn't.

Also, thank you for supporting your claim that the plotholes can be easily explained with argumentation and evidence.

You also do realise that you've said more against the ending than you did in favor of it, right?

Finally, thank you for sharing your opinion. I'm glad you liked the ending better than I did and I hope you continue to enjoy Mass Effect and other BioWare products in the future.

Modifié par beyondsolo, 09 avril 2012 - 06:56 .

[lx_theo]

Udalango wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

You still DON'T GET IT. This is assuming that you don't care about heart problems. I'm saying this person has literally no reason to stay in shape. You can't make one up. 

To them, the preservation of the genetic material could easily be enough to see as an alternative to the species simply being wiped out in an ineviatable syntheitc organic war. Its a compromise for neither synthetics or organics to simply die out. they don't value the actual life portion of it enough to see the upside of letting organics live their lives. To them, with their POV, its a fair compromise to help preserve.

The logic is fine. You obviously are unable to think outside of your value system. So it seems you're quite closed minded. Unless you prefer to show otherwise, you're argument has no merit. You can't argue someone's logic is wrong without knowing their POV and understanding why that effects their decisions first.

Now now dont start shouting.  one might think you are an idiot if you do that *Heavy sarcasm*

Lol I get exactly what you are saying.   I dont have have to make up a reason for that person to want to stay in shape.  Their own body does it for them. Them not caring changes nothing.  Bad example for what you are saying.

Also please stop assuming you know me.  The personal attacks arent needed we are arguing a point not arguing whether or not I am closed minded by your opinion as someone who knows absolutely nothing about me.  Stay on topic champ

 But since you cant not attack me good night.  This argument isnt worth having 

Yes, the shouting is what makes someone an idiot, not the lack of common sense, O.

I'm not attacking you anymore than what you're doing right in front of me. If you care so much about those comments, prove me wrong. Or stay in the light you're showing yourself and still seem like I've said. Not my decision.

[lx_theo]

beyondsolo wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

 *Readies Omni-Shield of Invulnerability*

Yes, I said it. The ending was good. It wasn't great. It wasn't amazing. It wasn't the quality the series deserved to end on after such a great run. But it was good.

Many of the so called "plotholes" can easily be explained relatively easily without creating a whole conspiracy around it. There are a few that seem like oversights, like the sudden appearance of certain characters in ending scenes.

The whole Indoctrination Theory is just silly, and while it would be cool, it would also make no sense for Bioware to do without having actual content afterwards in the released title. Not to mention much of this "proof" is nothing of the sort, and a lot of it is non sequitur even when together.

Other than that, the greatest failing was that it didn't provide enough closure. The universe had many ways it could develop afterwards based on how things turned out on many different fronts throughout the game. The problem with the ending is that it doesn't reference these and specify what happens to provide said closure. Bioware is doing the smart thing is offering an ending that gives more closure.

So, the ending was good. All this hate for it is absolutely ridiculous.

BioWare is releasing Extended Cut because of the protests. Therefore, the "hate" is not ridiculous. I find it interesting that some people on the forums (who usually defend BioWare's integrity) suddenly don't believe BioWare to be competent enough to judge which criticism BioWare considers convincing and which it doesn't.

Also, thank you for supporting your claim that the plotholes can be easily explained with argumentation and evidence.

You also do realise that you've said more against the ending than you did in favor of it, right?

Finally, thank you for sharing your opinion. I'm glad you liked the ending better than I did and I hope you continue to enjoy Mass Effect and other BioWare products in the future.

Thanks for reading the thread. Good of you. Maybe if you paid attention, you'd have noticed that I'm working on a very detailed list of plotholes and my responses to them.

As for saying more against it, I didn't realize quanity suddenly mean more that quality in terms of how much it effects it. Good insight there.

And yes it is ridiculous. Because most of the hate is based on silly and ridiculous things. Very few of it is justifiable. Bioware is fixing what actually needs to be fixed, not the complaints some people pull out of nowhere,

Modifié par lx_theo, 09 avril 2012 - 07:02 .

[lx_theo]

Zany Jedi wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Zany Jedi wrote...

In that case, could you please explain the plotholes? Also I would be hard pressed to call an ending with a deus ex machina good, lazy and poorly written is more like it in my opinion.

Set out the plotholes then. I don't see many that aren't just trying to pick holes in it.

Here's a link to all the problems with the ending. And as the document says, it's not nitpicking it's things about the ending that just don't make sense. Also, you never mentioned anything about previous choices not making any difference, which is my main gripe about the ending. What's your opinion about that?

This may take a while... spoilers likely to follow

Nothing Regarding the Assault...
1. Irrelevant. if you didn't notice, in that scenario, Shepard was also alive. It just means they didn't see him.
2. Being unconscious in the thick of battle likely could mean you seem dead. Once you wake up its a different story. Considering there were enemies attacking you by then... It makes sense. As for it ebing able to be shut off. That's assuming they had a good reason to shut it off. It could easily take forever to turn on, and it would be bad to have off if they needed to get someone in. Its not explained, but its not a plot whole.
3. Not a plot hole. Just an event that can be taken in any context a person wants.
4.  Odd, but hardly proof of anything. Mind you, it was a moving laser beam. Its movement could have lead to movement from the blast sending you forward. Or, better yet, it didn't move you basically at all because there's not explosion in itself, and its just not perfect placement before and after by Bioware.
5. Just seemed like a standard model they made that could work for everyone's armor when destroyed. Seemed fine to me.
6. Answered the reasonable answer in it. It was probably due to the actual beam. I doubt they wanted to go through the trouble of showing the process in which it transfered him. Probably easier way fro Bioware without making a plothole.

Every Single Line of Dialogue Spoken...
1. Again, they could have easily have not seen him, as they did with Shepard. A bit of the answer is given in there, as there are multiple paths to central chamber. They dismiss it as unnecessary because there would be a simpler way to have him rach there first. I suggest that it was done that way becuase they wanted to have them talking about what they were seeing and for Anderson to make it there first. Otherwise they would have made it at the same time.
2. This addresses certain parts of dialogue.
For the first one... Without seeing more of the area, the writer of this has no idea if this is true or not. So, i call BS on that...
For the second one... This is a nonsensical argument. Walls can realign if they want them to...
For the third one... Also fine with the idea what Anderson is taking a different route into the center area.

The Confrontation with the...
1. He was hurt before. Him bleeding there doesn't need to be anything more than coincidence to make sense. Not a plothole.
2. The Illusive Man understands how to control people. That was made clear earlier in the story with his research. Unfortunately he happens to be under their control while using it on the two to the extent he is able to now. I see no problem here.
3. They don't have to be indoctrinated. He didn't have a huge grasp over the control of them, obviously, since Shepard has the chance to shoot him later. Its a first steps type of ability from the impression I got.
4. I got the impression that this was when the Illusive Man was asserting his basic understand of control. The fact that this happens at all adn isn't constant shows that it has to be from him.
5. He's been preaching that it can do it the entire game. Obviously the indoctrination implanted the idea in his head strong enough for him to think it. that way he'd undermine Shepard's efforts.
6. Eh, probably just light turned on. This is assuming its traffic. Or that Bioware would go through the effort to make a whole new texture for a less active citadel. hardly a worthwhile problem. One that wouldn't be seen if people didn't look so far into it.
7. The whole thing just opened and attached to each other. I'd be shocked if Hackett didn't know about this. It only means that Hackett assumed Shepard was the one to make it.

Every Single Thing the Child Says...
1. This assuming that the starchild even wanted to take part in it. Maybe he wanted to leave the Reapers to do it themselves. Maybe that was the point of creating a whole species to do the dirty work. Given his intelligence (evident from creating the Reapers), he probably knew they still were coming. The Reapers are patient, why wouldn't their creator?
2. ------
A) This is assuming that species like the Geth would have been kept afterwards. I remember Javik mentioning a geth like species in his time. Do we see them around now? No. The only reason the Reapers stick around are because they are tools of this plan.
You can't control people to that extent. The reason they have them develop on those certain paths is so that... One... They have the same setup so that they can be harvested more efficiently... and Two... So they are generally along the same amount of development each time. 
C) All he is saying that its ineviatable. Even if one synthetic life leads to a peaceful co-existence (assuming the Geth Quarian lasts, or even happens in your playthrough. It didn't in mine), he's saying inevitably one will come along in some way or another. The assumption here is that this child, old enough and intelligent enough to be the creator of the Reapers, as seen enough of history to know this as an inevitability. 
D) Well, this one is just stupid. Mass Effect obviously takes up the idea of evolution in how life comes to fruition. Life does not need to exist for it to start up again with evolution.
E) If its such a simple concept, why is there so much arguing about how it doesn't make any sense? This is also assuming there isn't more to it, adn the child just gave the stuff Shepard needed to know. Also, I'd liek to point out that this would be even worse if the starchild wasn't involved somehow.
F) I don't remember the scene with Harbinger saying that. Though if you think about it, they're using organic life to create synthetic life. Why couldn't you use synthetic life to create synthetic life as well?
G) Different way of thinking. Harvesting can be seen as a better solution than total death. Don't see the problem here.
H) No, he doesn't. He actually counters the child several times in regards to what it means to be organic in contrast to the view the child is putting forth. In the end, they obviously can't agree one way or another. They do seem very much from a purely logical way of thinking, or synthetic. He treats them as normal because he has dealt with synthetic before, mind you.
3) I don't hear it when I listen to the scene. Even if its true, I also remember the voice actor for male Shepard commenting on how he did all the Varren (or something) for ME2. Another conspiracy! If it means anything at all, it means that they wanted to not have to cast new voice actors for this role, wanted to keep the ending involving the child on the downlow and not with some rarely used voiced actors, and/or that (this one is a maybe) they were rushed so they might not have time to find voice actors
4)
A) Assuming the Reapers even knew. They didn't even know what the Catalyst was.
Wasn't that their justification for Harvesting? That the organics becoming them was the optimum solution. The idea of Synthesis doesn't really cross this line in my mind. The idea that it gave me was that the fundmental building blocks of each type of life (Like DNA and whatever synthetics use), would become the same, making the distinction between synthetic adn organic the same as, say Human to Turian.
C) I'm assuming they don't leave the synthetics to do what they want. I don't see the earlier synthetics like the Geth still going around space.
D) if they have no end, they they couldn't be killed either. Sort of tripped up on himself there in the same game. The beginning sort of goes with it too. I assume they just don't know. Or something more complex. How they'd have been created would have to be explained.
5) These don't seem like plotholes, just what happened to happen. And I assume the child isn't all powerful. If he was, he wouldn't need the Reapers.
6) ...
A) New Form just means a new Reaper.
This is assuming a few things... The mortaility rate is consistent with other periods... That it takes many to create the Reapers... That dead Reapers cannot be salvaged for making of new Reapers.
C) The impression I got from ME2 (yes, ME2) is that Shepard's activities made Humanity a species of extreme interest. In this regard, the collectors focused on them, and the main focus of their attack (and therefore best place to defend the Citadel) was Earth. Their purpose for doing it doesn't have to have anything to do with the strategies they use for doing it.
D) The Collector's purpose were as more like field scouts than anything. The creation of the human reaper in ME2 was likely more a test than anything.
E) Does seem like their could have been a better strategy. There's a lot of factors to consider. Like that there were still people on the citadel. If they just closed it, then they could have had someone open it from the inside. To stop that, they'd want to convert the populace. They'd need to be able to sedn reinforcements if they needed.
7) I got the impression he was at the very least identifying with the Reapers, if not one of them (in some way).
8) Shepard being able to make it to the Citadel means that a situation that had not been proven to be possible before, that someone could get to the state of actually stopping them, was possible was enough to show the plan could not be forever lived.
9) I get the feeling the Reapers are unaware of this child's existence. Or there is another connection (considering the child itself may well be a Reaper in some way ior form). How do you rebel against something you don't know exists? Or you see as one of you?

Everything about the Three Choices
1) Your assuming the child has direct control over the Reapers. It could have easily been that he simply set up the Reaper's with the logic and plan and then let them do their job. He could easily not have the ability to control the Reapers like that himself.
2) Its takes a bit of imagination, but how I see I;ve already explained, in that the fundamental building blocks like DNA align as the same between the two, making being Organic or synthetic no more special than being human or turian.
3) Seems not important.
4) It was probably part of the design of the different species. The control would have had to been designed (and could have been added to the citadel), the destroy just requires something important enough to blow up to make the whole area go boom, adn synthesis just needed the energy stream, which wasn't a contraption in itself.
5) Perhaps there wasn't a person with the mix of synthetic and organic like Shepard has? It doesn't mean its not reproducable, just not thought of.
6) I'm assuming they didn't want to just kill all the synthetics either. Harvesting was likely the compromise they saw between total destruction of organics and total destruction of synthetics. Wouldn't have been my choice, but I can see why they'd pick it.
A) The species could have easily modified the Citadel as well. Or did that not come to your mind?
7) You're assuming that it was intended that way. The synthesis happened to involve the beam that was the energy of the crucible, the destroy was likely just a vulnerable part. The control is the only real contraption they'd have to make.
8) Your over thinking the effect of this option.

Nothing About the Post...
1) You're assuming the Mass Relays are being destroyed in a way that'll cause the same effect. Arrival has it actually blow up. This could easily be a more contained destruction.
2) While I don't know the series of events that led him there. I do know that it looks like the crucible's effect was that it was effecting Mass Effect based technology. The Normandy is largely based on this.
3) You don't know that. When each exploded, it sent out a wave that wasn't going as fast as a mass relay. The onthing that did was when it went to other mass relays, which wasn't the wave. Joker was outrunning the wave, so he couldn't have been doing this.
4) This is one of the few I have no answer for. I assume it was an oversight in design. This is an actual plothole.
5) This one is so easily countered. You don't know anything about the planet adn you assume it can't support them. Who knows, it could be a planet with both Dextro adn Carbon based life.
6) It is an intriguing scene. There are a number of possibilities. There is, of course, the Indoctrination Theory's spin on it. It could very well be Shepard falling back to Earth (and surviving, somehow). I'd like to think of it as the second. Why? Because I see the synthesis as the best choice morally, but its ally the most sacrificing. Destroy is the worst choice morally, but it could also be the least sacrificing, in that Shepard somehow survives because you chose the most jerk option.


That's a lot of writing