6432 réponses à ce sujet

[drayfish]

shepdog77 wrote...

Waaaaahhhhhh Waaaaaaaahhhhhh Waaaaaaahhhhhh

That's all I see in this thread.

What an extraordinarilly tedious reply.

Well done.

[AngryFrozenWater]

dreman9999 wrote...

a load of stanton wrote...

if you really care about the community you will listen bioware

this thread wont die

Who are you to speak for the community? How about the ones who don't want what you want?

They are excused. I don't think they rebel against the creators this time (pun intended).

[Calamity]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

This is another attempt to imply all anyone wants is bunnies and rainbows with no consequences.  In fact, a better ending should be hard to get.  I've always said that.  I've even said that a truly sacrificial bittersweet should exist, but doesn't.  There are downsides that exist already.  The galaxy is a total mess as it should be for a war of this scale.  The fact that the current endings don't reflect that is part of the craziness of the endings.  Everything's so easily rebuilt, and the sun will come out tomorrow, with sappy cutscenes.  That is why part of my vision of things had to do with the rebuilding aftermath.  Anyone that thinks that people will just skip hand in hand together as they try to dig their way back to normalcy is deluded by the game's "epilogue".

You want downsides how about this:
Palaven burning
Thessia almost totally destroyed
Billions in this cycle made into goo or dead-how many Einsteins, Hawkings, Mother Theresas, and Sharon Osbournes were lost?
Trillions of those in past cycles gone forever
The Batarians decimated (ok, many don't like them, but we don't really know them)
Mordin dead
Thane dead
Legion dead

Samara lost another daughter and the refuge for the other is all but destroyed
Shepard died once
TIM, no matter what he became he was once a hero, dead
Anderson, dead
Earth in ruins-it likely took the brunt of it since humans were the target
Horizon destroyed
Eden Prime destroyed
Other outlying colonies-wiped out

The whole basis for the advancement and knowledge of people is in question-how much of it based on any real independent thought and how much on reaper tech?
The galaxy brought down to the equivalent of its infancy-people given self-determination and reliance, must learn on their own, find their own way.

And more.
Sacrifice has happened, already and is only done when it is for something-the greater good.  In capitulating with the foe the greater good does not exist so sacrificed is pointless suicide.  Why fight to keep an enemy from getting something that in the next minute you will just hand over freely?  And what I see is choices that are not gifts being given by Shepard dying or by killing others, they are chains being placed on the galaxy-chains they may never be rid of.

Thank you. The ending slides are like propaganda pictures.

Now I'll add things unique to the Destroy Ending:

Geth dead -- we see them no where
represented in the extended cut and these people would have been a huge
asset to helping rebuild.

All AIs and VIs based on reaper code including EDI because the wave can read reaper code. What I don't understand is why people don't make backups of software anymore, thus enabling them to restore AIs like EDI to their former state, but I didn't write this crap.

You know these are other things that people tend to gloss over. Hackett says "The Mass Relays are SEVERELY damaged. Did anyone really look at the Charon relay as the fleet passed it? Does it look as simple as assembling an Erector Set? No. How about the Citadel? Does that look as simple as assembling a set of Tinker Toys? No. You know does it look simple without such minor inconveniences like a manufacturing base, let alone understanding the technology of these things in the first place? No.

The "Artists' Conception" of the completed Citadel is at minimum a 400 hundred years in the future, people. The relay system won't get completely fixed for several thousand years. Why? First we have to figure out how the technology works. This is going to require the birth of an Einstein, Hawking, or several of them. We may have them, or they may have gotten mashed into goop. They have to have that "ah ha!" moment. Then it has to become practical. We have to fly by FTL to each of them, assess the damage, fly back and forth via FTL with parts to rebuild, and then remap them. Then move onto the next one.This is going to take a ****load of time. If we had the help of the Geth available it might, and I say might cut the time in half because they can work 24/7. 10,000 year "dark age" for destroy. The sacrifice was already made.
It's not like "oh, no problem, we'll just wave a magic wand and build it in the next 50 years. It's so simple. We'll just make these components and fly them up there, but wait. Where are we going to make the components.... hmmm. We've got to build factories first. Oh. Major inconvenience. How many people we have left on earth? 2 billion? 3 billion?

We have a major humanitarian crisis that has to be dealt with first before all the rebuilding gets to take place.

Major hubs of course get taken care of first (Earth, Palaven, Thessia, Rannoch, Illium, Sur'Kesh, Tuchanka, Arcturus). Probably 100 - 400 yrs for these, and they'll be direct routes. The rest of the galaxy? It will take thousands of years.

No problem for Control or Synthesis because the friendly reapers are helping. It's their tech. A few hundred years for the entire galaxy. You understand now?

All these are solved with Control and Synthesis endings because the reapers help out. So don't give us the horse hockey that this would unbalance the endings. The sacrifice has already been made.

We thought that the reapers could not be trusted, that no one could control them, and that we shouldn't impose a new galactic order on the galaxy, and thus we destroyed the reapers and their controller along with the Geth and EDI and were penalized by being left in a pile of garbage with a 10,000 yr "rebuilding age."

You sacrificed yourselves perhaps to save the Geth and EDI either to control the reapers or synthesize with them, and were rewarded with the help of the reapers in rebuilding the galaxy in short order.

Let us have our reunion. I even say leave the Geth out of the Destroy ending. 

Very good points, Grandma. I am also a grandma.  I would also like to say that the Prothean VI stated that the reapers were completing the harvest of earth so we may not even have the 1 or 2 billion left...

[RenegonSQ]

DId any Bioware people respond to this forum?? Please let me know

[shepdog77]

RenegonSQ wrote...

DId any Bioware people respond to this forum?? Please let me know

Do you see a Bioware tag on the thread?

They're not going to reply to a bunch of butthurt people who can't move on.  Besides, they've already said their piece regarding the endings over multiple medias.

[Calamity]

Massa FX wrote...

Why can't people that don't agree with the OP make their own thread? Why is there discussion on a thread addressed to Bioware and clearly the OP is leaving a message for Bioware.

It's ok not to agree but why not start your own thread with your thoughts?

After reading the OP and then the responses, I was thinking the same FX. Its why I started just quoting some of the good posts that are on topic. Trying to get past the hand full of peoples negativity. 

[inko1nsiderate]

Calamity wrote...

Massa FX wrote...

Why can't people that don't agree with the OP make their own thread? Why is there discussion on a thread addressed to Bioware and clearly the OP is leaving a message for Bioware.

It's ok not to agree but why not start your own thread with your thoughts?

After reading the OP and then the responses, I was thinking the same FX. Its why I started just quoting some of the good posts that are on topic. Trying to get past the hand full of peoples negativity. 

This is how every thread is.  Threads that are supposed to be a place where people who like the endings/synthesis/control/destroy can hang out and talk end up being people attacking the endings/synthesis/control/destry and a few people making localized attempts to defend against various arguments. The only thread that seems largely immune to this is the IT thread.

The only place I've found were I can get actual and productive discussion without a lot of useless and angry noise is in private messages.

Modifié par inko1nsiderate, 31 août 2012 - 08:39 .

[Calamity]

Ithurael wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

I like the endings as they are, maybe not exactly in excution but in that each one requires some compromise, some careful weighting the risk against the possible losses. But a straight happy ending wouldn't hurt me, unless it would be conventional victory.

So +1 to OP, as long as it is not just a simple conventional victory, invalidating the whole plot. Super high EMS destroy with dialogue indicating clearly that you have power over the Catalyst and targeting Reapers alone would work for me.

I do agree. Also, I would just love it in any future DLC where you can actually bring up the geth/quarian resolution (provided you made peace) to the star kid. Yeah he would deny it as something silly but at least it would lend credence to "Our choices matter"

That and a Harbinger bossfight.

Just want to throw this out there:

Can you imagine that if they made a ME4 and you had picked this ending when importing... Your old shep being the kind of "Adm Anderson" of ME4? That would be kinda cool. Gives a nod to ME1-3 but you are now starting a different characters story...

Modifié par Calamity, 31 août 2012 - 08:43 .

[Gtacatalina]

Great post OP!

[RenegonSQ]

shepdog77 wrote...

RenegonSQ wrote...

DId any Bioware people respond to this forum?? Please let me know

Do you see a Bioware tag on the thread?

They're not going to reply to a bunch of butthurt people who can't move on.  Besides, they've already said their piece regarding the endings over multiple medias.

The butt-hurt comment is really old.

[MaxGwenesef]

Great. Thank you 3DandBeyond.

[ZeCollectorDestroya]

I wouldn't mind a sequel to ME3. They could roll with the ME3 Indoctrination Theory, and tell the us that they have been tricking us the whole time.

I just can't see Mass Effect with a different hero that is not Shepard.
ME should take the "Halo" alternative. Go make games up until ME6. A new trilogy with the same hero.

Or is "Artistic Integrity" going to **** everywhere?

[ZeCollectorDestroya]

robarcool wrote...

The endings are final. Personally, I don't like it, but I have accepted this fact. Move on to a new game, or play multiplayer. You will feel better. I haven't played SP since last 3-4 months lol.

The endings are like a scar. They take years to heal.

[Calamity]

drayfish wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Adding something to my "story":

It was because I moved on that I discovered my love for new hobbies and games. One of those games being Mass Effect, which IMO is 10X better than Gears of War.

So if the endings bother you, moving on isn't necessarily a bad thing. You might find something that you like much better.

There is a beautiful and sad truth to what you say here, MegaSovereign, and elegantly stated.

Personally, I had thought that the Mass Effect universe was saying something truly life affirming about inclusivity and respect for diversity.  It was a powerful and moving message.  It has been sad to discover through the endings that this was probably not their intention at all, that in the end a big unsolvable moral hypothetical was more important than affirming that message of intellectual and biological biodiversity.

It's a shame, because I truly do (did?) love this text, but you are right: in the long term moving on might well be the healthier option than just waiting around trying to get Bioware to clarify that this nihilistic endpoint was not what they meant. 

Both true. I have been looking (I could not really get into Halo or DeusEx), havent found anything yet but hope to soon.

[Ranger1337]

Have some faith though . BioWare has constantly proved itself a great storywriter for Mass Effect up till the early parts of ME3 . I believe that they don't want to change the endings because they have something up their sleeve . They've confirmed they will continue making DLC for at least a year and I will cling on to that hope that at the apex of this period , they will unravel something really clever that may easily overshadow the Indoctrination Theory . BioWare are clever writers and I remain faithful to them . If at the end of their Mass Effect lifespan they haven't done so , then it's safe for me to say that they did screw up ultra bad .

[2Shepards]

 This strange thing is, if I'm speaking to anyone and we start on ME3 endings, I become angry,resentful, bitter and generally really pissed off.

However, I'm glad I stuck to my guns and 

• Never completed any of my saves.  My Shepards will stay in London, I won't be forced into a choices that revolt me.
• Refused to buy into flawed logic woven with bad writing
• Absolutely refused to buy DLC and most likely any possible future BW title

Every much like SquareEnix who pushed me away be creating the worst rping game of all time FF13, I refused to be duped into bying its sequel to just be let down once more.  


Once I stuck to these "resolutions" I started feeling less disappointed.....Well unless someone says "Yo Dawg!"  around me and then its on like Donkey Kong.

Modifié par 2Shepards, 31 août 2012 - 10:29 .

[JPR1964]

I prefer to think that the story of my Sheppards stopped at the end of the 2... He/She is somewhere in the Galaxy trying to fight against the reapers, in any way possible...

And that really don't mean accepting any solutions from some genocidal derailled IA : Starbrat...

Sheppard story has more than one precedents about shooting murderous IA, I don't see why it has to change.

JPR out!

Modifié par JPR1964, 31 août 2012 - 10:33 .

[Kataphrut94]

Is it honestly as nihilistic an ending as people have been saying? I can understand thinking so with the original cut where people weren't even sure if the mass relays hadn't blown up and killed everyone, but the Extended Cut ones always felt to me like they go out on a high note.

Yes, losing Shepard and potentially EDI & the geth is painful, but it's implied that the rest of the galaxy can rebuild, either through their own gumption and tenacity, through the aid of the benevolent Shepard AI controlling the Reapers, or through cooperative symbiosis between organics and synthetics. The only remotely nihilistic ending is refuse, which is basically saying "we can't win, so lets not even try" and if you think that, you are quite clearly a chump.

[ld1449]

2Shepards wrote...

 This strange thing is, if I'm speaking to anyone and we start on ME3 endings, I become angry,resentful, bitter and generally really pissed off.

However, I'm glad I stuck to my guns and 

• Never completed any of my saves.  My Shepards will stay in London, I won't be forced into a choices that revolt me.
• Refused to buy into flawed logic woven with bad writing
• Absolutely refused to buy DLC and most likely any possible future BW title

Every much like SquareEnix who pushed me away be creating the worst rping game of all time FF13, I refused to be duped into bying its sequel to just be let down once more.  


Once I stuck to these "resolutions" I started feeling less disappointed.....Well unless someone says "Yo Dawg!"  around me and then its on like Donkey Kong.

Yo dawg, I heard you didn't wanna be killed by synthetics-

[JPR1964]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

Is it honestly as nihilistic an ending as people have been saying? I can understand thinking so with the original cut where people weren't even sure if the mass relays hadn't blown up and killed everyone, but the Extended Cut ones always felt to me like they go out on a high note.

Yes, losing Shepard and potentially EDI & the geth is painful, but it's implied that the rest of the galaxy can rebuild, either through their own gumption and tenacity, through the aid of the benevolent Shepard AI controlling the Reapers, or through cooperative symbiosis between organics and synthetics. The only remotely nihilistic ending is refuse, which is basically saying "we can't win, so lets not even try" and if you think that, you are quite clearly a chump.

NO!

Accepting any solution from Starbrat is simply accepting to sell his soul to the devil. This rogue IA just murdered countless organics on the account of his ridiculous logic.

Synthesis is a pile of craphorse and nonsensical IMO. "Oh, you're here Sheppard?!? Nice, why we don't make synthesis together, so we can preserve all life? I'm a bit tired of killing countless species since millions of years, and just seing you make me think suddenly at another solution : after all, I was programmed to preserve all life, no?"

OMG 

What a pile of....

For me refusal, is just thinking that if we cannot win, perhaps I can help the next generation to break the cycle...

Killing the geths and all synthetics, is just accepting genocide as a "reasonable" solution... 

How much players just choose this one because their Sheppard just survive and overlook completely this part of the deal?

I don't know why BW just bother to create an RPG next time : make it a pure shooter like crysis with a nice story and there we go...

JPR out!

Modifié par JPR1964, 31 août 2012 - 10:45 .

[Calamity]

Eloise K wrote...

devSin wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

"Dark Age" and "wasteland" aren't the same thing, of course. But I suppose the script wouldn't show what they figured "dark age" means. I'm concerned with the specifics.

There is no "script". There are only designer notes (communication between the writers and level and cinematic designers) and dialogue.

There is no dialogue about what happens after the ending, and there are no gameplay scenes that take place after the ending, so there is nothing they will have written down about it.

As for what they felt it means, I think the original ending was clear enough. Relays destroyed (and cannot be repaired), fleets stranded, and space travel essentially eliminated. In other words, galactic dark age.

Since the first endings were heavely inspired by The Hyperion Cantos it isn't unlikely that the outcome of the choices given by the Catalyst would lead to a very dark age. For instance, in the first book of said saga humanity travels through space using the farcaster network (portals), which permits to travel instantly throughout the galaxy; at the end of the book those portals are destroyed, humanity is stranded and faces a new dark age, et cetera.

As for the OP, I share the same sentiment, like many other people I played ME to abstract myself from a reality that sucks. Like many others I know the horrors of this world and I know that no matter what we are destined to fail, but not in ME. ME was a game that allowed us to believe that our actions make sense, that we can defy the evil, that our friends would never betray us, that's what the game told us from the beginnig. The endings that we got, those attempts at emo nihilism don't belong to ME. If BioWare wanted to tell us a story of genocide, eugenetics and delusion of grandeur they should have made it clear from day 1, from ME1. As it is ME is just a schizophrenic series. Ah, don't start with the happy endings at any cost, because that's not the point.
Finally, three options are left:
1- redo the series with a nihilistic vibe (at least we know what we are playing);
2- add a conventional victory/lost ending (a matter of coherence, righ?);
3- abandon all hope, ye who enter here (exits the forum, stops buying BioWare games:crying:)

[Xellith]

You know. Bioware making dlc thats set during the story and yet changes NOTHING more or less goes against the spirit of what ME was about. "Make choices. View outcome". You can Leviathan and outside of 2 lines of dialogue, NOTHING changes. Is this going to happen with every DLC? Minor changes but in the end its insignificant enough to alter an outcome? That would just go to show how pointless it is to spend money on those DLC in the first place.

Not when you can just youtube the results and save yourself some money.

[ld1449]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

Is it honestly as nihilistic an ending as people have been saying? I can understand thinking so with the original cut where people weren't even sure if the mass relays hadn't blown up and killed everyone, but the Extended Cut ones always felt to me like they go out on a high note.

Yes, losing Shepard and potentially EDI & the geth is painful, but it's implied that the rest of the galaxy can rebuild, either through their own gumption and tenacity, through the aid of the benevolent Shepard AI controlling the Reapers, or through cooperative symbiosis between organics and synthetics. The only remotely nihilistic ending is refuse, which is basically saying "we can't win, so lets not even try" and if you think that, you are quite clearly a chump.

The reason people find this ending so distasteful is simple really.

Yes they seem to go out on a high note and with Edi, Hacket or Shep AI doing some voice over, things seem to "all turn out ok at the end" So by that view, no, its not nihlistic. But the reason many people can't find any significant meaning in Shepard's sacrifice is because he HAS to die.

There is never a choice for Shepard.

In all stories that end with Martyrdom, the reader knows that the protagonist always had a choice when he gave his life to save XYZ thing/person. He could have chosen to run away, to not jump infron't of the bullet or charge into the burning building. Its not his problem.

But the difference here is that it will ALWAYS be Shepards problem because there isn't any place he CAN run. The reapers will harvest everyone and every thing. There is no safe haven so he HAS to fight, there is no choice in his running away or in his leaving it up to someone else. He can't just leave it up to someone else and hope for the best.

So now even the subconsious way out is gone.

Then, when taking the endings themselves at face value, all of them end with Shepards death (even destruction is painted this way with the Catalyst saying "even you are partly synthetic"

So the reader/viewer now has no way out, save death, which turns many views from the "beauty" or "significance" of this persons sacrifice because he didn't CHOOSE to die, he was simply KILLED OFF.

And that's why, asside from the moral and ethical implications from all the endings, that the endings to this game chafe so much for a lot of people. And why refuse by contrast has become a note of pride for those who'll pick it with the "I refused" Banner. Because since we die in every single ending (unless you can headcannon destroy) at least in this one we die with Shepards Honor intact and uncompromised by comitting what many equate to Mass Slavery, Genocide or Molestation (control, destroy, synthesis respectively)

That's why they still find it nihlistic because there is nothing that the protagonist can do to change his fate. It will always end in death, his actions are futile (which is one of the key themes of nihilism)

[Xellith]

ld1449 wrote...

Kataphrut94 wrote...

Is it honestly as nihilistic an ending as people have been saying? I can understand thinking so with the original cut where people weren't even sure if the mass relays hadn't blown up and killed everyone, but the Extended Cut ones always felt to me like they go out on a high note.

Yes, losing Shepard and potentially EDI & the geth is painful, but it's implied that the rest of the galaxy can rebuild, either through their own gumption and tenacity, through the aid of the benevolent Shepard AI controlling the Reapers, or through cooperative symbiosis between organics and synthetics. The only remotely nihilistic ending is refuse, which is basically saying "we can't win, so lets not even try" and if you think that, you are quite clearly a chump.

The reason people find this ending so distasteful is simple really.

Yes they seem to go out on a high note and with Edi, Hacket or Shep AI doing some voice over, things seem to "all turn out ok at the end" So by that view, no, its not nihlistic. But the reason many people can't find any significant meaning in Shepard's sacrifice is because he HAS to die.

There is never a choice for Shepard.

In all stories that end with Martyrdom, the reader knows that the protagonist always had a choice when he gave his life to save XYZ thing/person. He could have chosen to run away, to not jump infron't of the bullet or charge into the burning building. Its not his problem.

But the difference here is that it will ALWAYS be Shepards problem because there isn't any place he CAN run. The reapers will harvest everyone and every thing. There is no safe haven so he HAS to fight, there is no choice in his running away or in his leaving it up to someone else. He can't just leave it up to someone else and hope for the best.

So now even the subconsious way out is gone.

Then, when taking the endings themselves at face value, all of them end with Shepards death (even destruction is painted this way with the Catalyst saying "even you are partly synthetic"

So the reader/viewer now has no way out, save death, which turns many views from the "beauty" or "significance" of this persons sacrifice because he didn't CHOOSE to die, he was simply KILLED OFF.

And that's why, asside from the moral and ethical implications from all the endings, that the endings to this game chafe so much for a lot of people. And why refuse by contrast has become a note of pride for those who'll pick it with the "I refused" Banner. Because since we die in every single ending (unless you can headcannon destroy) at least in this one we die with Shepards Honor intact and uncompromised by comitting what many equate to Mass Slavery, Genocide or Molestation (control, destroy, synthesis respectively)

That's why they still find it nihlistic because there is nothing that the protagonist can do to change his fate. It will always end in death, his actions are futile (which is one of the key themes of nihilism)

I have actually talked about this.  Its not really a sacrifice if its your only option.  If an ending that could save the most people involved you dying then I could roll with it.  If an ending with some collateral damage existed that involved you living I could roll with it.

But to RAILROAD pretty much all the options into a "You Died"... thats NOT a sacrifice.  You might as well put a gun to my head and tell me that when I die I land on a pressure plate that will deactivate all the nukes in the world.  Nukes that are already on their way to my location.

Its really quite silly how Bioware (or anyone for that matter) can consider an ending where you are killed with no clear chance of survival a "sacrifice".

[ld1449]

Xellith wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Kataphrut94 wrote...

Is it honestly as nihilistic an ending as people have been saying? I can understand thinking so with the original cut where people weren't even sure if the mass relays hadn't blown up and killed everyone, but the Extended Cut ones always felt to me like they go out on a high note.

Yes, losing Shepard and potentially EDI & the geth is painful, but it's implied that the rest of the galaxy can rebuild, either through their own gumption and tenacity, through the aid of the benevolent Shepard AI controlling the Reapers, or through cooperative symbiosis between organics and synthetics. The only remotely nihilistic ending is refuse, which is basically saying "we can't win, so lets not even try" and if you think that, you are quite clearly a chump.

The reason people find this ending so distasteful is simple really.

Yes they seem to go out on a high note and with Edi, Hacket or Shep AI doing some voice over, things seem to "all turn out ok at the end" So by that view, no, its not nihlistic. But the reason many people can't find any significant meaning in Shepard's sacrifice is because he HAS to die.

There is never a choice for Shepard.

In all stories that end with Martyrdom, the reader knows that the protagonist always had a choice when he gave his life to save XYZ thing/person. He could have chosen to run away, to not jump infron't of the bullet or charge into the burning building. Its not his problem.

But the difference here is that it will ALWAYS be Shepards problem because there isn't any place he CAN run. The reapers will harvest everyone and every thing. There is no safe haven so he HAS to fight, there is no choice in his running away or in his leaving it up to someone else. He can't just leave it up to someone else and hope for the best.

So now even the subconsious way out is gone.

Then, when taking the endings themselves at face value, all of them end with Shepards death (even destruction is painted this way with the Catalyst saying "even you are partly synthetic"

So the reader/viewer now has no way out, save death, which turns many views from the "beauty" or "significance" of this persons sacrifice because he didn't CHOOSE to die, he was simply KILLED OFF.

And that's why, asside from the moral and ethical implications from all the endings, that the endings to this game chafe so much for a lot of people. And why refuse by contrast has become a note of pride for those who'll pick it with the "I refused" Banner. Because since we die in every single ending (unless you can headcannon destroy) at least in this one we die with Shepards Honor intact and uncompromised by comitting what many equate to Mass Slavery, Genocide or Molestation (control, destroy, synthesis respectively)

That's why they still find it nihlistic because there is nothing that the protagonist can do to change his fate. It will always end in death, his actions are futile (which is one of the key themes of nihilism)

I have actually talked about this.  Its not really a sacrifice if its your only option.  If an ending that could save the most people involved you dying then I could roll with it.  If an ending with some collateral damage existed that involved you living I could roll with it.

But to RAILROAD pretty much all the options into a "You Died"... thats NOT a sacrifice.  You might as well put a gun to my head and tell me that when I die I land on a pressure plate that will deactivate all the nukes in the world.  Nukes that are already on their way to my location.

Its really quite silly how Bioware (or anyone for that matter) can consider an ending where you are killed with no clear chance of survival a "sacrifice".

You can railroad it. Its done all the time. The only thing is that its done WELL and its done with the knowledge that the protagonist always had the option of FLEEING. He always had a way out. Just saying "**** this I'm done" Even JUST with that option open that means he choose to die, even if they didn't say "Have anderson jump into the beam." If the Reapers were for whatever reason limited to a harvest of "Earth" and not the whole galaxy, then Shepard could have gone to the citadel and lived out the rest of his days. **** those country bumkins back on that ball of dirt.

But without even the Offscreen option of just saying "**** this" that's when it becomes a true railroad that looses all significance.