319 réponses à ce sujet

[wright1978]

Destroy's my favourite ending but imo i don't think DLC should change the the Geth/EDI sacrifice. As much as i find i their sacrifice saddening, a commensurate sacrifice is needed to balance with the cleansing of the galaxy of the reapers.

I'd have preferred the option of a very bloodied conventional victory but unfortunately the game goes out of its way to say this is impossible.

[christrek1982]

yes DLC could make all the choices better allow shepard to live expand upon the breath seane and all that. Will it? No as I have said Bioware have made there choice and we all have to live with it I just hope Bioware remember all this and think back to it when sales figure for DA3 or whatever there next title is are lower than they would /should of been.

[3DandBeyond]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Dav3VsTh3World wrote...

I'm
guessing those who want a Destroy ending with the Geth and EDI still
alive have never had to deal with real life consequences,

Hell if
one ending had no consequences whatsoever everyone would choose that
one over the other and everyone would live HAPPILY EVER AFTER

Let me see what kind of real life consequences you mean.
My sister committed suicide.
I watched both my father and my mother die-tried to revive my father-he died in front of me when I was 16.
I cared for terminally ill friends who I watched die.
I
worked in emergency services and prevented people from killing
themselves by talking them down or getting help to them in time.
I oversaw emergency personnel at a hostage standoff at a major US car plant.
I helped people save others from choking
I helped people over the phone deliver babies

What
type of real world consequences are you looking for?  And explain to me
what real world consequences for the end choices are shown in the
epilogues with the overly happy sentiments of rebuilding easily and all
that.

Sorry to hear that :/

Not trying to be overly dramatic, but life happens to us all and we all will experience loss, unfortunately.  But I get really sick of people assuming others are living in some sort of happiness bubble.  Look around, life can be harsh.  Personally, I figure you still have to get up and meet and greet it each day and you decide to be happy, no matter what.  You decide.

These things (and more) happened to me.  Others have had worse and better experiences, so thanks for the sympathy, but I wasn't trolling for it.

It just irks me because people will fling anything at others here.  I've been told that I didn't understand the word "suicide" and you can see that I do.  I've been told that I don't understand that you can't always get what you want in life.  I think I can prove that I know that.  People need to stop and think before hitting submit.  They know nothing about the real person at the other end of their "witty" and sometimes insulting comments.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

OperatingWookie wrote...

DWH1982 wrote...

I'd love to see a destroy ending that doesn't kill EDI and the geth. Frankly, it's what I wanted in the ending in the first place

Don't want to kill the Geth and EDI?

Pick another ending.


Otherwise, know that in war there are casualties. EDI and the Geth are the last. And as such, they'll be remembered. 

Victory does not come without cost. That is the reality of war. Accept it's ruthless calculus, or accept another variant of it. There is no other option, nor shall there be.

I don't believe Destroy kills EDI and the Geth.  But you are free to believe the Reapers' Kid if you wish.  I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.  [And you can't throw him because he's a Reaper hologram.]  And I certainly wouldn't accept his statements as fact.  The Reapers are masters of deception and deceit.  Fortunately, you have the right to disbelieve and there is nothing in the plot of the game that compels you to accept the words of the suddenly appearing Star Kid.

Modifié par PuppiesOfDeath2, 15 août 2012 - 01:19 .

[3DandBeyond]

christrek1982 wrote...

yes DLC could make all the choices better allow shepard to live expand upon the breath seane and all that. Will it? No as I have said Bioware have made there choice and we all have to live with it I just hope Bioware remember all this and think back to it when sales figure for DA3 or whatever there next title is are lower than they would /should of been.

Never say never.  They've said other things before too.  And they said the EC wouldn't change the endings and it added one.  A "better" destroy would only have to mean a slightly altered destroy.    And if you want to get really technical about it, even if they one day decided to totally rewrite what control is or what synthesis is, that wouldn't change the endings.  It just depends on how they are defining it.  It's kind of like how the kid interprets his purpose and programming.  Subject to change.

Do I expect it to happen or anything to happen?  No.  But I can ask for it.  People on here are fond of calling everyone haters and complainers.  I came up with this idea and this thread in order to say that many of us do have ideas and we don't hate anything but the endings as they are.  It's meant to be constructive and offer one way I think it could be done very easily.  It wouldn't be without complaint, sure.  However, I do think there are ways to stave off the complaining-and part of that has happened with the EC endings.  I think it's possible to see them as the middle ground between what we had and what could be.

I do think BW has loved ME and Shepard and I can only conclude that the torso scene is meant to be a cliffhanger and to lead to something in the end.  Sure, it's very likely I am wrong.  But I prefer to think it's possible.  I know that they had to know that with the outcry about the original endings people wanted to see closure for an alive Shepard and then they just left the torso the same.  Why?  Why go to all the trouble of finishing the other endings and adding all of that and not finish the torso one?  Why the confused explanation for destroy?  And why have the kid say the crucible is "largely intact" at best?  That indicates some assets are missing.  So, head canon or not, I just wondered what difference would it make if the crucible was fully intact (undamaged or finished)?  The kid says it will not discriminate and this seems to go along with it not being fully intact.  And it is even less discriminate and less intact with lower EMS.  So, it makes some sense that if it was fully intact it might work better and do what it is supposed to do-destroy reapers.  Only reapers.

[christrek1982]

I'm sorry to hear of your loss I also have had to live through the loss of my mother and father and as you say some have it better some have it worse but sometime I think people forget that it is a computer game it is meant as an escape for a few hours but after I finished ME3 I felt genuinely depressed there's something wrong when a computer game dose that to you.

[EnvyTB075]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Not trying to be overly dramatic, but life happens to us all and we all will experience loss, unfortunately.

Don't care, willing to bet thats a whole lot worse than almost all of BSN has ever had to go through. No one should have to go through that.

Just pure honesty here mate, though i do admit to praying that you're not a fantastc troll, y'know, internets being what it is and all.

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 15 août 2012 - 01:28 .

[christrek1982]

3DandBeyond wrote...

christrek1982 wrote...

yes DLC could make all the choices better allow shepard to live expand upon the breath seane and all that. Will it? No as I have said Bioware have made there choice and we all have to live with it I just hope Bioware remember all this and think back to it when sales figure for DA3 or whatever there next title is are lower than they would /should of been.

Never say never.  They've said other things before too.  And they said the EC wouldn't change the endings and it added one.  A "better" destroy would only have to mean a slightly altered destroy.    And if you want to get really technical about it, even if they one day decided to totally rewrite what control is or what synthesis is, that wouldn't change the endings.  It just depends on how they are defining it.  It's kind of like how the kid interprets his purpose and programming.  Subject to change.

Do I expect it to happen or anything to happen?  No.  But I can ask for it.  People on here are fond of calling everyone haters and complainers.  I came up with this idea and this thread in order to say that many of us do have ideas and we don't hate anything but the endings as they are.  It's meant to be constructive and offer one way I think it could be done very easily.  It wouldn't be without complaint, sure.  However, I do think there are ways to stave off the complaining-and part of that has happened with the EC endings.  I think it's possible to see them as the middle ground between what we had and what could be.

I do think BW has loved ME and Shepard and I can only conclude that the torso scene is meant to be a cliffhanger and to lead to something in the end.  Sure, it's very likely I am wrong.  But I prefer to think it's possible.  I know that they had to know that with the outcry about the original endings people wanted to see closure for an alive Shepard and then they just left the torso the same.  Why?  Why go to all the trouble of finishing the other endings and adding all of that and not finish the torso one?  Why the confused explanation for destroy?  And why have the kid say the crucible is "largely intact" at best?  That indicates some assets are missing.  So, head canon or not, I just wondered what difference would it make if the crucible was fully intact (undamaged or finished)?  The kid says it will not discriminate and this seems to go along with it not being fully intact.  And it is even less discriminate and less intact with lower EMS.  So, it makes some sense that if it was fully intact it might work better and do what it is supposed to do-destroy reapers.  Only reapers.

humm that is intresting maybe the DLC would/could add to it maybe we find tech that come ith dlc that change things 

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

Dav3VsTh3World wrote...

I'm guessing those who want a Destroy ending with the Geth and EDI still alive have never had to deal with real life consequences,

Hell if one ending had no consequences whatsoever everyone would choose that one over the other and everyone would live HAPPILY EVER AFTER

I think a number of people have responded to the first part of your post better than I could, so I'll just leave it there.

As for your second statement, maybe you are suggesting that the ME2 ending where half your crew dies is a better ending than the one where no one is left behind?  Or equally valid?  No.  Every installment of this trilogy had an ideal outcome that was generated by playing the game well.  If you can't figure out how to get sufficient war assets or a high EMS, you don't get the best ending.  In this game, many have argued that you get an unsatisfying ending no matter how well you play. 

I have a high EMS.  I choose Destroy because killing the Reapers has been the objective for three games.  I don't believe the Reapers' Star Kid.  (Why would you?  They've indoctrinated the Illusive Man and nothing he says is true.)  And I have my own view of what the Destroy ending means.  Bioware can show Shepard living in Destroy with later DLC and I would be interested in that.  But if it doesn't, then "art" is "art" and my interpretation of the Destroy ending (where Shepard, EDI and the Geth survive) is as valid as any other.

Modifié par PuppiesOfDeath2, 15 août 2012 - 01:30 .

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

christrek1982 wrote...

I'm sorry to hear of your loss I also have had to live through the loss of my mother and father and as you say some have it better some have it worse but sometime I think people forget that it is a computer game it is meant as an escape for a few hours but after I finished ME3 I felt genuinely depressed there's something wrong when a computer game dose that to you.

I completely agree.  This is really well said.

[3DandBeyond]

wright1978 wrote...

Destroy's my favourite ending but imo i don't think DLC should change the the Geth/EDI sacrifice. As much as i find i their sacrifice saddening, a commensurate sacrifice is needed to balance with the cleansing of the galaxy of the reapers.

I'd have preferred the option of a very bloodied conventional victory but unfortunately the game goes out of its way to say this is impossible.

The problem is that the geth/EDI "sacrifice" is theirs to offer and not for someone else to choose for them to make.  That gasping torso may have had good reason, but no amount of good can outweigh the bad that was done and that it could lead to.  Unfortunately, all their sacrifice gets is one line about not forgetting what they did from Hackett and then the sun comes out and the galaxy is a happy place.  It's sort of that way with all the endings-a lot happier than I envision even a "good" destroy ending would leave things.  It shouldn't be such an easy road forward and there should be consequences, real ones.  Their deaths might lead others to conclude they too could be expendable when things get tough.

The deaths of EDI and the geth (and whoever else dies from the loss of "synthetics") are gratuitous, but may only occur because of "faulty" equipment.  This certainly is not the intent of destroy because it exists this way due to an incomplete crucible, in my opinion.

The other thing that could also happen is that a more complete or intact crucible might lead to subtle changes in control and synthesis, and not just destroy.  It could be theorized that neither of them are at their peak either.  What might they be if the crucible is intact?  Control might be more obviously the status quo and then some.  Instead of Shepard in charge, maybe the kid's programming gets augmented by Shepard's energy and they together are in charge.  And maybe in Synthesis something more dramatic happens as well.  Maybe it truly is the end of evolution (ok, ugh) and maybe immortality is achieved (EDI only now says it could happen), but people are at the pinnacle of all knowledge.  Again, these might make people think harder about whether these are good choices or not.

[3DandBeyond]

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...

christrek1982 wrote...

I'm sorry to hear of your loss I also have had to live through the loss of my mother and father and as you say some have it better some have it worse but sometime I think people forget that it is a computer game it is meant as an escape for a few hours but after I finished ME3 I felt genuinely depressed there's something wrong when a computer game dose that to you.

I completely agree.  This is really well said.

Absolutely and ME was never grim dark.  The endings have a very grim dark/futility feeling to them.  Not a win for me and I like a road to winning in games.

@christrek1982, I am sorry for your loss as well.  One thing that always helped me kind of stay a bit grounded (I try but certainly often fail) is, strangely enough, a poem.  It's called Desiderata and I think it contains much wisdom.  If interested, it is here in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Desiderata

[EnvyTB075]

Personally, i still don't believe it affects them at all, because logical loopholes.

>What of all the Geth in Rannoch server banks?
>What of all the Geth in Quarian suits?
>What of all the surviving warships' basic computer systems that allow them to fly? If the beam was powerful enough to wipe EDI, what in sandheckers name would it do to all the other systems?
>Why were they only represented by their physical platforms? Surely BioWare doesn't consider us dense enough to believe that? Why no destroyed AI core on the Normandy?
>Why are the supposed severe consequences almost trivial?

Because it didn't happen....well thats what i'm sticking to.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

Oh, and cristrek1982, like some other captains, my Shepard doesn't believe in the Kobayashi Maru.

[3DandBeyond]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Not trying to be overly dramatic, but life happens to us all and we all will experience loss, unfortunately.

Don't care, willing to bet thats a whole lot worse than almost all of BSN has ever had to go through. No one should have to go through that.

Just pure honesty here mate, though i do admit to praying that you're not a fantastc troll, y'know, internets being what it is and all.

No, I can only assure you that the things that have happened in my life are as I've said.  I work at being happy, but have often been lucky to be a conduit for certain things.  I'm not special, but I've been able to help others because of what has happened to me, but I also recognize that people are people.  I've known some so-called "greater" people and the less valued in my time and people are people.  Everyone has something to say if you just listen.  I wouldn't post such things if they weren't true, because they are a deep part of me and yes, are still painful no matter how long ago they happened.  I have to live with things I never got to say (did I say I love you enough) and I've lived through nightmares. 

Not to get too morose, but I never understood the value of seeing someone dead until I never saw my sister in death.  I spent years having nightmares where I'd try to find her, knowing she was still alive somewhere.  I still occasionally have them.  I know ME is just a game, but it is part of what resonates with me about not getting to say goodbye to a living Shepard.  It isn't real life, but I understand the need to do so, even in a game.  The characters in it mattered just as they were supposed to.

Please, understand I am not looking for pity of any kind.  I am merely saying we are complex beings with different feelings and needs and it bothers me when someone devalues an opinion in a dismissive way.  Discuss the merits of the opinion without demeaning the person you have envisioned is saying it.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

3DandBeyond wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Not trying to be overly dramatic, but life happens to us all and we all will experience loss, unfortunately.

Don't care, willing to bet thats a whole lot worse than almost all of BSN has ever had to go through. No one should have to go through that.

Just pure honesty here mate, though i do admit to praying that you're not a fantastc troll, y'know, internets being what it is and all.

No, I can only assure you that the things that have happened in my life are as I've said.  I work at being happy, but have often been lucky to be a conduit for certain things.  I'm not special, but I've been able to help others because of what has happened to me, but I also recognize that people are people.  I've known some so-called "greater" people and the less valued in my time and people are people.  Everyone has something to say if you just listen.  I wouldn't post such things if they weren't true, because they are a deep part of me and yes, are still painful no matter how long ago they happened.  I have to live with things I never got to say (did I say I love you enough) and I've lived through nightmares. 

Not to get too morose, but I never understood the value of seeing someone dead until I never saw my sister in death.  I spent years having nightmares where I'd try to find her, knowing she was still alive somewhere.  I still occasionally have them.  I know ME is just a game, but it is part of what resonates with me about not getting to say goodbye to a living Shepard.  It isn't real life, but I understand the need to do so, even in a game.  The characters in it mattered just as they were supposed to.

Please, understand I am not looking for pity of any kind.  I am merely saying we are complex beings with different feelings and needs and it bothers me when someone devalues an opinion in a dismissive way.  Discuss the merits of the opinion without demeaning the person you have envisioned is saying it.

Your posts highlight the best of the trilogy.  The story compelled the player to invest in the characters.  You spend countless hours trying to play the game well because the story is meaningful.  That is why the ending leaves such an empty feeling.

[EnvyTB075]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Please, understand I am not looking for pity of any kind.

I know, doing it anyway because i'm a nice person

[3DandBeyond]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Please, understand I am not looking for pity of any kind.

I know, doing it anyway because i'm a nice person

Then thank you for your kindness.

[zambot]

Yes, Bioware could make one ending better and the others worse in DLC

No, they won't elevate one ending above the others, because that is not their goal.

[3DandBeyond]

zambot wrote...

Yes, Bioware could make one ending better and the others worse in DLC

No, they won't elevate one ending above the others, because that is not their goal.

It depends on what you mean by elevate.  One thing that can be assumed is that everyone has their idea of what's good and bad.  That means if an ending is sad and dark, one person will say that is "their" ending and you couldn't convince that person to pick anything else.  That's their canon.  I always wanted sad and sacrificial (not demented giving up as I see it) as well as a full bloody war and loss or a full bloody war and win.  And I would have played any one of them at least once.  But one ending would have been my canon one and the one that would drive replay for me.  I don't have a canon ending, because I don't have an ending without head canon.  I have "main menu".

I have no idea what BW's goal is.  I know what they've said.  I also know that many things they say never happen or are altered to be something else.  They have every right and every possibility of changing their minds on anything they've said.  They just aren't very good at cluing in fans because I think they are often trying to go for the "surprise" factor.  They may just not realize that it's not much fun the way they are doing it.

Consider some people have said that some of what's in the EC was in text that's in the original game-it just was not part of the original game as shown.  Then the EC comes out and it has Leviathan text in it (hints).  And I think there are references to Omega in the Firefight DLC (I could be wrong but I seem to remember people saying this).

The Arrival showed a destroyed galaxy was what would take place with destroyed relays at the end of ME3.  They started retconning that and kind of badly.  Why not just say fans didn't like it so they did see it was a mistake?  I have no idea where they are going with anything, but I know it makes no sense to use Leviathan for war assets and then do the same with Omega (if there's DLC for that), if they won't amount to anything.

[zambot]

First you have to consider that most people do not play DLC, so changing anything via DLC is a dubious proposition already. Using DLC to invalidate the choices that people made would, in my opinion, be an enormous mistake. Now of course Bioware could change their mind. Someone in a suit could say, "wow, this ME stuff makes us so much money. Go make an ME4, and I don't care how much story you have to butcher to make it happen". ( If Hollywood is any indication something like that probably will happen.) Then they'll chop up the ending (or make an alternate universe / prequel). Maybe they'll pick a canon ending and ****** off everyone who didn't pick it. Maybe they'll try to preserve all three in some cheesy way (+2 augments for synthesis choosers!, synthetic enemies 20% weaker for destroy choosers! Activate Word of Shepard power once per day for Control choosers!). Who knows.

I personally wouldn't buy such a product, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be successful.

[wright1978]

3DandBeyond wrote...

The problem is that the geth/EDI "sacrifice" is theirs to offer and not for someone else to choose for them to make. 

Well i'd disagree here. Sacrifices can often made without the sacrificed choosing it and often in the ME story too.

3DandBeyond wrote...
The deaths of EDI and the geth (and whoever else dies from the loss of "synthetics") are gratuitous, but may only occur because of "faulty" equipment.  This certainly is not the intent of destroy because it exists this way due to an incomplete crucible, in my opinion.

Don't think you can conclude that at all. They both have reaper code. Seems likely to me that this is what destroy beam is tageting, so unlikely beam will be able to differentiate between friendlies and enemies with the code.

As i said in my original post a commensurate alternative sacrifice of equal size would be needed if there is to be an alternative means to kill the reapers, otherwise you just cheapen the reapers as a foe and the war that's been fought. Like i said i would have liked a brutal bloody conventional victory to be there too but Bioware didn't want want option and i think many would have baulked at the sacrifices if it was there.

[3DandBeyond]

zambot wrote...

First you have to consider that most people do not play DLC, so changing anything via DLC is a dubious proposition already. Using DLC to invalidate the choices that people made would, in my opinion, be an enormous mistake. Now of course Bioware could change their mind. Someone in a suit could say, "wow, this ME stuff makes us so much money. Go make an ME4, and I don't care how much story you have to butcher to make it happen". ( If Hollywood is any indication something like that probably will happen.) Then they'll chop up the ending (or make an alternate universe / prequel). Maybe they'll pick a canon ending and ****** off everyone who didn't pick it. Maybe they'll try to preserve all three in some cheesy way (+2 augments for synthesis choosers!, synthetic enemies 20% weaker for destroy choosers! Activate Word of Shepard power once per day for Control choosers!). Who knows.

I personally wouldn't buy such a product, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be successful.

But it wouldn't invalidate any choice or wouldn't have to.  If you always thought Synthesis was great, nothing would sway you from that.  In fact, a lot of people complain that making a Shepard lives ending would make everyone choose that.  But why would it?  And if so, why is that wrong?  If people preferred to not have Shepard live, then why would they suddenly choose that ending?  And if so many people would choose a Shepard lives ending, then they really are not that happy with the other endings either.  If people like the endings they have and the choices they pick, why would they ever choose something else?  They wouldn't be forced to.  And if they would choose something else, then it would be because they like it better.

Consider that if people don't get DLC then they already have what they want.  So, how does that change anything?  If they wanted something different they could get it.  Most people don't get DLC for a reason-some because they don't spend their money that way.  Some do it because they are just opposed to DLC and figure it should be in the game-well, that's fine but then 3 disk games for $150 that you have to wait even longer for, don't appeal to most people.  So, DLC just is what it is.  You buy it or don't.  BW might calculate (as a business should) that making pro (for something) DLC that adds value to the game ultimately could be far better and get more fans than creating status quo DLC that adds nothing except a bit more story and play to the game.  They have to calculate that.  And considering that the interest in Leviathan seems pretty mixed out there even among people that liked the endings, they might still want to change things up a bit. 

They already have an ending to the game as they see it.  All DLC could do if they were to do it, would be to add to that.  It's already being done in other games-so it's not like BW would be making up new rules in doing this.  And in doing it they could at least rehabilitate the ending, if not their image completely.  And I've said they could make a very simple free DLC down the road that just allows these changes to take effect in the games of people that want it.  The difference would be in paying for it or waiting for the free stripped down version.

They've always created a canon ending to their games in ME-they've had to.  And I do think that if they ever do consider making any ME4 that exists after ME3 chronologically, then they need to do it at some point.  Far better to do it when they have all the VAs and such together for doing so.  I think it would help many people like ME again (bring back value to 3 games) and might help some to dislike BW less and allow some to consider buying an ME4 if it ever happened.  And businesses do need to think about such things.

[christrek1982]

@3DandBeyond
that was a wonderful poem and a code to try and live by (not easy there have been many time when I have failed to be kind or have judged un fairly but the important thing is we try.

thank you for making me aware of the poem

[3DandBeyond]

wright1978 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

The problem is that the geth/EDI "sacrifice" is theirs to offer and not for someone else to choose for them to make. 

Well i'd disagree here. Sacrifices can often made without the sacrificed choosing it and often in the ME story too.

3DandBeyond wrote...
The deaths of EDI and the geth (and whoever else dies from the loss of "synthetics") are gratuitous, but may only occur because of "faulty" equipment.  This certainly is not the intent of destroy because it exists this way due to an incomplete crucible, in my opinion.

Don't think you can conclude that at all. They both have reaper code. Seems likely to me that this is what destroy beam is tageting, so unlikely beam will be able to differentiate between friendlies and enemies with the code.

As i said in my original post a commensurate alternative sacrifice of equal size would be needed if there is to be an alternative means to kill the reapers, otherwise you just cheapen the reapers as a foe and the war that's been fought. Like i said i would have liked a brutal bloody conventional victory to be there too but Bioware didn't want want option and i think many would have baulked at the sacrifices if it was there.

I don't see that as happening "often" in ME.  It may happen, but I don't see it as being shown as a sacrifice.  If a building is burning and some of us have to jump out a window, is it ok if I throw you out first to cushion our fall?  I just sacrificed you.

I conclude that the crucible does not discriminate and do what it was intended to do (kill only reapers) and it gets worse the less intact it is.  If it's really incomplete it basically destroys everything.  So, the opposite could well be true.  The more intact it is the better it gets, the more it does discriminate.

Your statement is like offering a sacrifice to the gods or God.  "Here, take them so we can win".  Why would more deaths be needed?  Aren't all the trillions of deaths that have come before enough?  It doesn't cheapen them at all-that already happened the minute the kid showed up.  I can't change that and they won't change that except through some further dialogue.  I'd prefer a lot of other things too, but I don't think you can cheapen them anymore than they already have been cheapened and I think enough of the galaxy has already been sacrificed so one more friend and several billion more people are a drop in the bucket, but inserted merely as gratuitious deaths.  They are there to give destroy a cost, but the cost has been paid, over and over and over again.

It also wouldn't be easy to complete the crucible and it would take time-that's the cost, having to work for it.

It's like the suicide mission.  You had to work to keep everyone alive and to rescue your crew and then to defeat the collectors.  That was the cost.  Should Shepard have just pushed a bunch of teammates out of the Normandy and said they had not paid enough of a price for such a victory?  Or should the player have not gone back and replayed it to save teammates that died because that was a price that needed to be paid?

I understand what you are saying, but the idea was to destroy the reapers not other races just for fun.  The crucible doesn't do a good job of that so it is not working correctly.  If it was working right, it might just target reapers and that may have been what happened in the future cycle shown in refuse.  They may have completed the crucible and used it against the reapers and not against their own people.