The less gods into the world the better,i dislike gods i just don't find a valid reason to make an exception for elven ones
I agree with that sentiment. However, I do it in a different way than you: a god is a god purely because of being regarded as one. There is no intrinsic attribute that makes something or someone a god. Thus, what I would like to see is for people to cease to create gods, i.e. regard other beings - whether they exist or not - as existentially relevant to their own lives, and having existential primacy.
Meanwhile, I appreciate that those powers exist, and do not want to kill them. We may have something to learn from them even if we don't worship them. As for the dangers of preserving it, we don't preserve the archdemon that causes the Blight, but the non-infected god-soul that existed before.
If redeem Loghain is a selfish and low thing to do (hey the warden and Alistair even survive in the process
), but subject an unborn child to interfere with his essence and let him possessed and merged by the will of a lizard
Morrigan says the child will not be harmed. I've always taken that to mean it will not be possessed as well. You may not believe her and reject the DR for that reason, but that's what we're told. There is no evidence of possession.
I have just pointed out that in the other topic that i have read yesterday to make a sort of comparison
(the one of the 2009 ,a time in which i wasn't present in the forum) there wasn't the metagaming component,which is highly present in this one and that the DR was not apparently so popular or obvious choice evar!.
It was a time in which players were mostly concerned about the soul of the boy (especially it he was the Warden son), Flemeth which many have considered to be a demon not an elven goddess,and most important there was no WH,so basically Morrigan stayed true to the witches legends,that they were capable to "steal children" well, she is the mother but basically she run away with the Warden son without reveal her goal,which is from RP perspective a no,no for me.
I was mostly active in the ME section back then, so I don't recall what the prevalent mood was regarding the DR, but I've never thougt Flemeth was a demon, but more like a very powerful mage. She only only acquired the touch of the transcendent with DA2. As for Morrigan's goals, she wanted a child with a "god-soul", that was clear enough, and my main Warden agreed with her. He always thought he would meet her again (at that point, Witch Hunt wasn't out but the possibility for a re-union was clear because of the ring). I don't know what others were thinking back then, but I've always seen the DR as going off into unfamiliar territory, something that might look evil at first glance but was rather revealed as more of a jump into the unknown if you examined things more closely.
Personally the DR to me is valid just like the US both are extreme for my tastes many decided to take that route mostly because they arrived unprepared at the ending
(wish to kill the old god? You need to die, or wish to survive but you are forced to make a deal with Morrigan and be with her, togheter to be Flemeth's pawn and risk another blight,inacceptable),
but less valid for me than the Redemption ending,basically because this ending have the same benefit (your own survival) without any cost (give this power to Flemeth).
At that point, it was not clear how much of a stake Flemeth had in this, and how much you'd play into her hands if you did the DR. Also, you could kill her, and that you actually didn't wasn't clear until Witch Hunt. There was no risk of a new Blight since the god-soul would not be infected.
I agree that you can avoid the risks inherent in the DR and stay alive as well by making a companion kill the archdemon, and that's perfectly valid of course. However, my main Warden was not particularly risk-averse about these things, and he agreed with Morrigan's rationale.
Oh yes you can easly argue that spare Loghain is also metagaming,no actually it is not for my perspective,for the fact that riordan is standing in eamon's house all that time during the denerim quests and never bothers to mention that very important bit about killing the archdemon and dying. Sort of a tie in to the dark ritual.
All of the heated debate about loghain could be avoided for the most part if the game didn't insist on either or and if it gave you a persuade option to chill alistair and convince him that we can throw him at the archdemon....
It actually IS metagaming if you spare him for that reason, since when you make the decision about Loghain, you don't know yet that the Warden who strikes the killing blow will die. In the game where I did this, I did it on the rationale that I didn't want to kill Loghain for Anora's sake and the Wardens could use another warrior after the decimation Loghain caused. That this revealed Alistair as an immature twit was irrelevant, and that it made Loghain's redemption possible is a lucky twist. Of course, we all make decisions for the outcomes now and then if we know what they are. We can't avoid that knowledge influencing our decisions, but for me an in-world rationale is nonetheless necessary.
For the sake of avoiding the dilemma "DR or US", it was only important that there is another Warden who could strike the killing blow. If Alistair is present, that being him would follow Warden traditions, so I wouldn't have a problem making him do it. If Loghain is present, it's his redemption so that's ok, too. In the end, however, I prefer it if nobody dies. That's one reason why I tend to favor the DR.