6432 réponses à ce sujet

[BearlyHere]

AresKeith wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Lunch Box1912 wrote...

I understand Shepard must die, that’s what makes the story good (correction) IMO … sacrifice. The way Bioware did it felt rushed and poorly thought out. I’m no writer but I would like to see what a Pat Weekes ending would look like. I’m a huge fan of the wrapping up of the Genophage. It had everything the end of the game lacks.

We still love you Bioware, even if we didn’t love the ending. Keep the single player DLC coming!

And nice touch, liked the added Catalyst dialogue after completing the Leviathan DLC.

Fixed. Added IMO.

Sacrifice doesn't make the story good for everyone.

forced Sacrifice you mean, Bioware shouldn't have tried to kill Shepard in every single ending. Thats very bad writing

I'd like to see a poll asking simply if the death of Shepard had been stated, or heavily foreshadowed in ME1, would you have still played the series?

[Pararox]

I was honestly more surprised that Shepard could survive in any of the endings than I was by dying in the others. The protagonists' death is subtly hinted at throughout the game, just like in DA:O. I'd go as far as to call it cliche.

[Iakus]

Pararox wrote...

I was honestly more surprised that Shepard could survive in any of the endings than I was by dying in the others. The protagonists' death is subtly hinted at throughout the game, just like in DA:O. I'd go as far as to call it cliche.

Except, in DAO, the Warden could choose to sacrifice him/herself.  Or to choose something else.  No "perfect ending" but the player could shape an ending they'd find satisfactory.  Hey if the Warden lives, you even get to see the face!

ME3:
Blue Death
Green Death
Red Death (or maybe not death, Speculations!)

Or just plain old Death.

[babachewie]

DrwEddy wrote...

Someone has to take a stand agianst BioWare. Believe me, I have always imagined many ways to either corece and/or force BioWare. Even if it means the company dies with all the games they've had been developing.

Dude you're an idiot just op is. Take a stand? Against what? Making Video Games? if you don't like it, ****** off. I dont understand the logic in hey we want the Mass Effect universe to be better and the way we envision it, but if it isnt we want it destroyed and the company to go out of business leading to job lose for people with families. You're all psychos that need serious mental help. Especially op. That person has been on here everyday for months pleading and begging like a dog to get their way and is completely ignored like they should be by Bioware. People like this are all ready on the hook for Bioware even though they claim other wise. They are gonna buy the next game no matter what it is. Thats how deep their obsession goes despite the claims of unforgivable actions blah blah blah ending sucks blah blah plotholes blah blah. Its been 6 months. Time to move on or shut up and get use to what you have. Bioware doesnt have to focus to please you. They own you already. They have to work on getting back the people who actually left and never came back. Not ones who stuck around. 

Modifié par babachewie, 06 septembre 2012 - 05:58 .

[Zan51]

Seival wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Everyone in BSN should understand two major things:

(1) There are many people, who find the entire ME Trilogy (including the endings) good or even perfect.
(2) BioWare will never change anything no matter how long your "last troll attempt" will continue.

Deal with it and accept the endings as they are. If you don't want to - so be it. Just leave. It's as simple as that.

1, no one knows the real number of people who are happy with the way ME3 ended

2. This isn't a troll thread, no matter how many times you wanna call it because we aren't ok with the endings like you

(1) Noone knows the real number of haters either. I prefer to think they are just vocal minority.
(2) This is troll thread. BioWare officially stated they will never change the endings. But you are keep whining.

Why do you care? Why do you come here and post this? Does it make you feel important, or what? And do not make assumptions and call people names. I am not a Hater. I really dislike the last 10 minutes of the game, but th rest of it was full of lovely moments.  You are wrong about me, and probably most of the folk here.

The game does fill me with sadness that it never reached its potential but instead settled for second best and cliched endings stolen from other games.

[Iakus]

babachewie wrote...

DrwEddy wrote...

Someone has to take a stand agianst BioWare. Believe me, I have always imagined many ways to either corece and/or force BioWare. Even if it means the company dies with all the games they've had been developing.

Dude you're an idiot just op is. Take a stand? Against what? Making Video Games? if you don't like it, ****** off. I dont understand the logic in hey we want the Mass Effect universe to be better and the way we envision it, but if it isnt we want it destroyed and the company to go out of business leading to job lose for people with families. You're all psychos that need serious mental help. Especially op. That person has been on here everyday for months pleading and begging like a dog to get their way and is completely ignored like they should be by Bioware. People like this are all ready on the hook for Bioware even though they claim other wise. They are gonna buy the next game no matter what it is. Thats how deep their obsession goes despite the claims of unforgivable actions blah blah blah ending sucks blah blah plotholes blah blah. Its been 6 months. Time to move on or shut up and get use to what you have. Bioware doesnt have to focus to please you. They own you already. They have to work on getting back the people who actually left and never came back. Not ones who stuck around. 

Never a billy goat around when you need one...

[Zan51]

3DandBeyond wrote...

See that's part of the thing though Robert-the one person that always saw the threat is the one that must pay the ultimate price.  Not in my game.  And the people that saw what that person saw and wanted to fight them too-they must pay the ultimate price?  Not in my game.  I'd actually rather Shepard, EDI, the geth, and the Normandy crew along with ME2 teammates take a run at leaving this galaxy (along with anyone else with a real brain) and let the reapers have the whole darn thing.  Then, once the galaxy is toast, go to where they're hiding out and whomp their reaper butts and then rebuild their own new galaxy. 

Of course, I know that they couldn't travel that fast and accomplish all this, but I don't think Shepard should be the one paying for the galaxy's idiocy.  I'd be happier to have the chance of taking the council up to visit the kid and make a deal.  Save the geth and EDI-get rid of them.  However, that sounds so cruel.  But, I see the geth as being so devalued as to be expendable so that what, the better people or the "other" people of the galaxy can live.  Why?  The geth knew about the old machines and didn't like them much.  So, sure, by all means let's get rid of the brains of the galaxy and save all the rest who had to be coerced and bribed to fight for their own lives.  Makes sense to me.

It makes even less sense with Leviathan when you see that Bryson has a piece of Sovereign and somehow created a field to protect from indoctrination.  Gee, when did that happen?  And Hackett knew about it?  And Hackett never told Shepard about it?  And nobody still did anything about it?  This freaking galaxy doesn't deserve to be saved.  I say activate all those other relays-the ones that people don't know where they go to.  Go to other systems.  I mean the reapers in ME3 seem to invade a very small portion of it, so just go and find some place to hide until it's all over and start over.

This is a sensible option! There are plenty of other galaxies...

[Zan51]

Saracen 16:
Says you. Everything pointed towards Shepard entering the fray with the Reapers' arrival, and no one said that it would be easy. No one knew what would happen, but ME was always about choice, and that's exactly what the outcome was. ME3 involved a lot of individuals dying and sacrificing themselves to save more than they could. This all geared the game towards the ending that we have right now. Changing all this would mean an overwrite of the entire game because the ending will have to be placed in a different context: that of some fanboy. This is why it would hurt me and the large group of fans who liked the ending, but this is art: this is about what BioWare chooses to express, not about what we want out of them. Forcing them to change it for your emotional ideals hurts them more than you'd think.
------

Choice. Ah, yes. When the dialogue becomes auto-dialogue so we cannot interrupt and disagree with what Shepard says, this is choice. When we get shot in the side by a beam from a Reaper, (who kills tall buildings with a glancebut only WOUNDS Shep??) taken OUT of our armor and are in ship civvies, this is choice. When we are railroaded into decisions that until then the game was NOT about - like controling the Reapers, or merging with them and all synthetics - that is choice.

Ah, yes, "choice" We have dismissed the use of choice in ME3.....

Modifié par Zan51, 06 septembre 2012 - 06:28 .

[Calamity]

alleyd wrote...

Part 2 of my Mass Effect David Bowie Trilogy. Hope you enjoy the song

This one is to Space Oddity 


BSN To Bioware......BSN To Bioware
Take a hit on this and take the helmet off
BSN To Bioware commencing chilldown, the bongs switched on
Inhale please and hope you all love the songs

This is BSN to Bioware, your game falls short of the grade
And I want to know if you are still out there
Its still safe to come around here, We still care

This is BSN to Bioware, I've not yet walked out the door
Your game affects me in a peculiar way
The ending isn't that fun to play.
Here I am sitting in my jim-jams in a cold part of the world.
Mass Effect feels screwed and there's nothing I can to do


Though I've amassed so many different playthroughs my game is sitting still
And I think the writing stinks and the ending a crock of Sh-ha hite
My wife thinks that I'm obsessed, she's right
BSN to Bioware, your halos slipped and your direction is wrong.

CAn you hear me Bioware?
CAn you hear me Bioware? 
CAn you hear me Bioware? 
Can You?

Here I am sitting in my jim-jams far into the night
mass Effect feels screwed and that's it folks, good night

LOL <3 This one! 

*Cranks lighter up* 

[Calamity]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Lunch Box1912 wrote...

OR is it  www.youtube.com/watch

Is the second Harbinger beam at the end just reminding you that you have been out cold since 7:05 and it was all just a dream.. a dream man! ahahahaha! (evil laugh)

Well, the kid does say "wake up" at the end of the game.  At that point Shepard doesn't look asleep, but is probably looking around for something to knock him/her out cold to avoid what's to come.

I always did wonder why he said that. Is he an idiot? My shep cant sleep on her hands and knees...well not unless she is draped over something(one)? 

[Calamity]

alleyd wrote...

 Man Who Sold the World Is The PERFECT Mass Effect song for the Control choice. Excellent choice EloiseK. i hope I can do it some justice.

Imagine a cycle of Mass Effect billions of years into the future for this treatment. You are a future Shepard and you have just defeated the Reapers. only the last, mightest one remains
 

I dropped into the lair and spoke to the last of them
A mighty voice rang through the air, he said welcome my friend
Which came as a surprise then I looked into his eyes
They said he'd died alone, a long long time ago 

Oh No, not Me I chose to have control
You'e face to face with man who Sold the Worlds

I cried as he took my hand, and ti the core I was chilled
I was thrown through space and time, For Billions of years I killed
My soul was ripped aside as I watched the trillions die
I wish I'd known, a long, long time ago.

Oh Yes, thats me. That's the cost of Control
The fall from grace of the Man who sold the Worlds.

Wooooooooo! *Whistles!*

[Calamity]

Lunch Box1912 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Lunch Box1912 wrote...

They over thought the story part and forgot about it being an RPG?

From things I've read it is almost like the people that liked the great story aspect of the games wanted a real action packed ending with a real fight.  The people that like more action usually (you can read it here in some posts where some say they just love shooting and the combat) and less story, liked the endings.  This is counter-intuitive. 

What it seems to be like is this:
Like a great cohesive story--wanted ending with lots of fighting, use of war assets, (un)conventional victory.
Like a lot of shooting and more action, story not as important--happier with current endings.

This is what I have observed.  To me the best way to have ended this would have been an all out fight, a real gasp for breath for the galaxy trying to survive.

Many of those that say the endings are ok or better (many of them, most that I've read the posts of here and elsewhere) don't try to delve too deeply into the endings and say they look cool and save the galaxy.

Many of those that don't like the endings give detailed reasons for why they think they are bad.  They have looked into them to see what they say and what they show and they don't think the slides depict what the choices ask them to do.

You would think that people that like action games would want the big fight at the end and the people that like the story would want some intellectually based discussion of the reapers' reasons.  I don't know for a fact this isn't so, but it appears not to be.

I'm a stoyline gamer the story has to be good, the game play being good is just a plus.

I wasn't satisfied with the endings originally, I'm still not satisfied I've just kind of come to except it.?( I've almost got myself convinced it's ok be gentle with me)

The great thing that I found about this thread, the so called "haters" here do not judge and do not want to deprive those who like the endings. I also have come to accept the endings BUT I would love and pay for MOAR Shepard. I dont know why ending sheps story (or any hero for that matter) MUST mean that they have to kill him/her. If they added more endings, then I can import more of my Sheps (I have about 10 or 12) to choose each ending. As it stands now, I only choose destroy since it is the only one I have come to accept. OH except for Mr. Bards MS ending, which I have also choosen. (MS = Maurader Sheilds FTW!). 

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

BearlyHere wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Lunch Box1912 wrote...

I understand Shepard must die, that’s what makes the story good (correction) IMO … sacrifice. The way Bioware did it felt rushed and poorly thought out. I’m no writer but I would like to see what a Pat Weekes ending would look like. I’m a huge fan of the wrapping up of the Genophage. It had everything the end of the game lacks.

We still love you Bioware, even if we didn’t love the ending. Keep the single player DLC coming!

And nice touch, liked the added Catalyst dialogue after completing the Leviathan DLC.

Fixed. Added IMO.

Sacrifice doesn't make the story good for everyone.

forced Sacrifice you mean, Bioware shouldn't have tried to kill Shepard in every single ending. Thats very bad writing

I'd like to see a poll asking simply if the death of Shepard had been stated, or heavily foreshadowed in ME1, would you have still played the series?

Like I said, sacrifice doesn't make the story good for everyone.

Had Bioware stated the death of Shepard from the beginning, I probably wouldn't have played the series. If it had been heavily foreshadowed, I probably wouldn't have invested much time in it, if I finished it at all.

And forced sacrifice that is not foreshadowed as a plot device simply sucks, especially in a role playing game where choices are supposed to matter.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 06 septembre 2012 - 08:51 .

[saracen16]

Zan51 wrote...

Choice. Ah, yes. When the dialogue becomes auto-dialogue so we cannot interrupt and disagree with what Shepard says, this is choice. When we get shot in the side by a beam from a Reaper, (who kills tall buildings with a glancebut only WOUNDS Shep??) taken OUT of our armor and are in ship civvies, this is choice. When we are railroaded into decisions that until then the game was NOT about - like controling the Reapers, or merging with them and all synthetics - that is choice.

Ah, yes, "choice" We have dismissed the use of choice in ME3.....

Way to miss the point. The game has always been about stopping the Reapers at any cost. We know there are those who seek to destroy and seek to control, so obviously those choices were made for us in the end. We already have other major decisions in-game that affect the future of the galaxies we helped shape and they mean something to those immersed in the universe. Whether auto-dialog is present or not doesn't disregard choice.

[SpamBot2000]

Don't know whether to laugh or cry whenever I read one of these "Mass Effect was always about the Grim Sacrifice of Space Jebus!" posts. Look, Mass Effect was always about a lot of things, but in the end the guys in charge just decided to trash the entire project and move on, Walters to milking the comics that are much more suited for his particular writing style and Hudson to pursuing that Hollywood dream. It's so blatantly obvious that it takes serious powers of denial to miss it.

Now the rest of BioWare and EA were left holding the bag, and it would be very much in their interest to try to salvage what still remains of the increasingly marginalized GAME component of the Mass Effect 'intellectual property'. Unfortunately it is hard on the human nature to recognize having been had in this way. But recognition is the first step to recovery.

[saracen16]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Don't know whether to laugh or cry whenever I read one of these "Mass Effect was always about the Grim Sacrifice of Space Jebus!" posts. Look, Mass Effect was always about a lot of things, but in the end the guys in charge just decided to trash the entire project and move on, Walters to milking the comics that are much more suited for his particular writing style and Hudson to pursuing that Hollywood dream. It's so blatantly obvious that it takes serious powers of denial to miss it.

Now the rest of BioWare and EA were left holding the bag, and it would be very much in their interest to try to salvage what still remains of the increasingly marginalized GAME component of the Mass Effect 'intellectual property'. Unfortunately it is hard on the human nature to recognize having been had in this way. But recognition is the first step to recovery.

The arrogance. It's as if you have a better idea of how the game can end.

[SpamBot2000]

saracen16 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Don't know whether to laugh or cry whenever I read one of these "Mass Effect was always about the Grim Sacrifice of Space Jebus!" posts. Look, Mass Effect was always about a lot of things, but in the end the guys in charge just decided to trash the entire project and move on, Walters to milking the comics that are much more suited for his particular writing style and Hudson to pursuing that Hollywood dream. It's so blatantly obvious that it takes serious powers of denial to miss it.

Now the rest of BioWare and EA were left holding the bag, and it would be very much in their interest to try to salvage what still remains of the increasingly marginalized GAME component of the Mass Effect 'intellectual property'. Unfortunately it is hard on the human nature to recognize having been had in this way. But recognition is the first step to recovery.

The arrogance. It's as if you have a better idea of how the game can end.

Well, send me money and find out.

[Alez Zinai]

saracen16 wrote...
Way to miss the point. The game has always been about stopping the Reapers at any cost.

In the end it turned out that to stop the Reapers you need to fulfill thier goals. Even at destroy they kill all synthetics following thier solution (in that case they just delay "conflict organics vs synthetics"). Is this what the game has always been about?

[ghost9191]

if it stops the reapers, if you choose to think you fulfill the reapers goals by doing so then so be it. Or you can just use the crucible for what it was made for. not to stop synthetics from destroying organics, but to stop the reapers from destroying and harvesting

which brings me to the whole , why not just have the crucible target reapers only. depending on actions through out the game and war assets. it was after all created to be used against the reapers. So the options had to have been built in, considering it could be used without the citadel. So why would the options be made to stop all synthetics rather then jsut reapers. As in the purpose was not to prevent synthetics from wiping out all organics, but to stop the reapers from doing so.

At least those that wish to destroy the reapers would then have a ending they would like, and those that want synthesis or control will still have their happy ending

using the crucible doesn't help the catalyst, besides ( as it says in game ) synthesis, which helps them achieve what they have been trying to. but the others do not solve the problem so why would they help?

So basically the game to me has been to stop the reapers, maybe a control option like they had , but that would be like more power for humans or something. a theme of the game. Always options to advance humanity

But all options as they are will seem to help the reapers i guess. but destroy and control less so, control the reapers no longer preserve life ( that we know of) they just enforce and probably destroy anyone that gets too advanced. whereas destroy well destroys them, but doesn't solve the catalysts issues, but does destroy the immediate threat.


bold was to stay on topic, rest was about prior posts. was just saying that they could make destroy ( depending on war assets) a better ending. make it so ppl would not need to commit genocide in order to stop the reapers. Understand needing a downside and all, but maybe find a way to limit the blast to reapers alone rather then all synthetics. A better understanding of the crucible and all.

Modifié par ghost9191, 06 septembre 2012 - 09:44 .

[Cirreus]

saracen16 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Don't know whether to laugh or cry whenever I read one of these "Mass Effect was always about the Grim Sacrifice of Space Jebus!" posts. Look, Mass Effect was always about a lot of things, but in the end the guys in charge just decided to trash the entire project and move on, Walters to milking the comics that are much more suited for his particular writing style and Hudson to pursuing that Hollywood dream. It's so blatantly obvious that it takes serious powers of denial to miss it.

Now the rest of BioWare and EA were left holding the bag, and it would be very much in their interest to try to salvage what still remains of the increasingly marginalized GAME component of the Mass Effect 'intellectual property'. Unfortunately it is hard on the human nature to recognize having been had in this way. But recognition is the first step to recovery.

The arrogance. It's as if you have a better idea of how the game can end.

Well that's the crux of it ... ME3 is mediocre (compared to previous installments), with a few gem sections & a broken ending. The idea that anyone could scrounge up a better idea is the key problem with ME3's ending.

That notion that a few buddies, over some beers & lunch, can pump out better endings is not arrogance. It is confidence that one's intelligence exceeds 2nd grade.

[saracen16]

Cirreus wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Don't know whether to laugh or cry whenever I read one of these "Mass Effect was always about the Grim Sacrifice of Space Jebus!" posts. Look, Mass Effect was always about a lot of things, but in the end the guys in charge just decided to trash the entire project and move on, Walters to milking the comics that are much more suited for his particular writing style and Hudson to pursuing that Hollywood dream. It's so blatantly obvious that it takes serious powers of denial to miss it.

Now the rest of BioWare and EA were left holding the bag, and it would be very much in their interest to try to salvage what still remains of the increasingly marginalized GAME component of the Mass Effect 'intellectual property'. Unfortunately it is hard on the human nature to recognize having been had in this way. But recognition is the first step to recovery.

The arrogance. It's as if you have a better idea of how the game can end.

Well that's the crux of it ... ME3 is mediocre (compared to previous installments), with a few gem sections & a broken ending. The idea that anyone could scrounge up a better idea is the key problem with ME3's ending.

That notion that a few buddies, over some beers & lunch, can pump out better endings is not arrogance. It is confidence that one's intelligence exceeds 2nd grade.

And yet all of this is just opinion, not fact.

[Calamity]

ghost9191 wrote...

if it stops the reapers, if you choose to think you fulfill the reapers goals by doing so then so be it. Or you can just use the crucible for what it was made for. not to stop synthetics from destroying organics, but to stop the reapers from destroying and harvesting

which brings me to the whole , why not just have the crucible target reapers only. depending on actions through out the game and war assets. it was after all created to be used against the reapers. So the options had to have been built in, considering it could be used without the citadel. So why would the options be made to stop all synthetics rather then jsut reapers. As in the purpose was not to prevent synthetics from wiping out all organics, but to stop the reapers from doing so.

At least those that wish to destroy the reapers would then have a ending they would like, and those that want synthesis or control will still have their happy ending

using the crucible doesn't help the catalyst, besides ( as it says in game ) synthesis, which helps them achieve what they have been trying to. but the others do not solve the problem so why would they help?

So basically the game to me has been to stop the reapers, maybe a control option like they had , but that would be like more power for humans or something. a theme of the game. Always options to advance humanity

But all options as they are will seem to help the reapers i guess. but destroy and control less so, control the reapers no longer preserve life ( that we know of) they just enforce and probably destroy anyone that gets too advanced. whereas destroy well destroys them, but doesn't solve the catalysts issues, but does destroy the immediate threat.


bold was to stay on topic, rest was about prior posts. was just saying that they could make destroy ( depending on war assets) a better ending. make it so ppl would not need to commit genocide in order to stop the reapers. Understand needing a downside and all, but maybe find a way to limit the blast to reapers alone rather then all synthetics. A better understanding of the crucible and all.

Hiya Ghost!

As far as destroy only targeting the reapers, I can understand that they target the geth and EDI if the premiss is that it is based off of reaper code - that destroying is actually destroying the code... ? But also if this was the case, maybe it wouldnt total make EDI and the Geth non functional since EDI was gaining awareness on Luna (before the reaper code) and Legion (and the geth consensus ((not the heritics)). It would be a longer process but it could be done. I guess that is the problem, although we are hinted at the ramifications of each of our decisions, we really are not told so that we can make an informed decision...

Modifié par Calamity, 06 septembre 2012 - 11:29 .

[Ozida]

Some people honestly amaze me. I’ve seen this 6 month before and I am surprised to see it again now (although, I shouldn’t knowing the humans’ nature). 

To all people like saren16, Seival and same others:

You come to a thread that by title must give you a hint thatbit is not a pro-enders thread. You read OP that you disagree with (based on your comments). And then what do you do? Instead of stating your opinion once
and leaving the thread, you give yourself a right of free speech and lecture those, who actually agree with OP. You make those people apologize and explain their opinions by stimulating offensive arguments (such as “you are just a minority, shut up and move on”, “you are idiots, you’ll never accomplish anything” and so on). And yet, you do not accept the right of free speech of other people who want something different. This is the most hypocritical thing to do: to say you have rights to state your opinion, and yet to argue with others and ask for reasons why people feel that way. I do not have any single reason to apologize for my desire to want something different for ME3, and I have no reason to stop posting here and just leave” only because my opinion is different from yours.

So here is my suggestion: please, either participate in discussion about the game, not about the players, or do not participate in this thread if your only goal is proving us wrong by claiming your own opinions the
only truth.

Modifié par Ozida, 06 septembre 2012 - 11:58 .

[Dendio1]

Leviathan dlc pretty much solidifies the ending. If it was day one dlc then people wouldn't have been as shell shocked by star kid.

We would have simply said * Ah this is what levvy was talking about*. The way it was initially star kid had next to no foreshadowing. in reality there simply may have been no way for shepard to know the truth until he got there, but now leviathan provides some level of build up to star kid the transition to the ending is smoother.

Modifié par Dendio1, 06 septembre 2012 - 12:02 .

[3DandBeyond]

saracen16 wrote...

Zan51 wrote...

Choice. Ah, yes. When the dialogue becomes auto-dialogue so we cannot interrupt and disagree with what Shepard says, this is choice. When we get shot in the side by a beam from a Reaper, (who kills tall buildings with a glancebut only WOUNDS Shep??) taken OUT of our armor and are in ship civvies, this is choice. When we are railroaded into decisions that until then the game was NOT about - like controling the Reapers, or merging with them and all synthetics - that is choice.

Ah, yes, "choice" We have dismissed the use of choice in ME3.....

Way to miss the point. The game has always been about stopping the Reapers at any cost. We know there are those who seek to destroy and seek to control, so obviously those choices were made for us in the end. We already have other major decisions in-game that affect the future of the galaxies we helped shape and they mean something to those immersed in the universe. Whether auto-dialog is present or not doesn't disregard choice.

Nope.  The story was always about destroying the reapers and about reaffirming certain parts of people's character.  Diversity, unity, and redemption.  Don't even try to say that these were not the major points and that it was about doing anything at all costs, because that would be wrong.  These were the themes and where the game seemed to be heading was the idea that the galaxy itself was waking up-it had been living this guided, surreal existence all geared to helping lead it towards the annihilation of the most advanced species.  The ending seemed to be where the galaxy might at last wake up and take the future in its own "hands".  It seemed to be that it might rise up and really show just how these ideals came together under Shepard's "command" and would either get the job done or not or various levels of success or failure in between. 

The whole ending disregarded choice-true choice that stuck with the themes of 3 games.  And no sane person in the game sought anything other than the destruction of the reapers.  The idea of any choice being relevant if it does not involve their destruction, especially when the alternate choices are 2 that no sane, not indoctrinated, non-reaper being in the game ever thought were good ideas is exactly what is wrong with including them as choices.  It is stated and implied so many times throughout that it makes the choices truly easy if only...  


One of the most incredible arguments someone tried to make (has been made a lot by others as well) is that if destroy didn't have the cost of the geth and EDI, that would be bad because it would be canon.  Thing is it is canon.  Once a person accepts the idea that my preferred way for the game to go rather than the ugh crucible-the (un)conventional victory is impossible, refuse becomes impossible (cannot destroy them that way), then destroy becomes canon.  However, it is given its cost and its nonsensical description to avoid that appearance.  They tried too hard to avoid canon that they had stated all along.  Even Shepard's first contact with the idea of the crucible states what is canon-the crucible is considered to be a weapon and weapons destroy.  The problem is the crucible also backed destroy into a corner-no reaper instant off button.

But even so, the choices stand.  I have yet to see you make any credible meaningful or relevant case as to why creating any optional content that you'd never have to see would bother you so.  The idea apparently assaults and insults your sensbilities even when I'm suggesting that these new things would never have to be in your game.  The fear often comes from others that for some reason it would be bad because too many people would choose it.  Well, threaten me with a good time.