394 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

It's a fair point. I don't particularly care about fairness, but if you do, then it's a real cost. This makes the proposal a loser for me, since I have the cost of losing the game-world, and derive no benefit from the fairness.

Is it a winner for Bio? You'd need to have a lot of fans who are interested in fairness in the abstract, as opposed to being concerned with fairness towards their own particular ending. Synthesis fans are a rounding error, and I'm not sure Control's much more popular.

What problem is this approach actually solving? I suppose that depends on the particulars of the not-MEHEM we're canonizing. How would you do a not-MEHEM, anyway? MEHEM has no distinguishing features about the ending -- the Reapers are destroyed, full stop.

[AlanC9]

Do you believe it is? Would you have a problem if they didn't pick red, green or blue to be canon?

Wouldn't that depend on what Bioware chooses to do instead of picking red, green or blue?

It's a cost; all cost since there's no upside. I'd need to see a specific proposal to know how much of a cost.

 

What world state has been rewritten? I'm not talking about any decision made before the ending. I'm just talking about the ending itself.

How would you handle Rannoch? Tuchanka isn't a serious problem since we can always canonize the genophage being cured at some late time if it didn't happen in ME3.
 

Do you believe you're wrong?

Of course not. If I think my beliefs are wrong I change them.

As for coming up with an ending that's better than red, green, or blue, what do you mean by "better"?

[Quarian Master Race]

Mathematics and sense left the building when we were told Shepard's "organic energy" could be spewed throughout the galaxy to create a galactic Nirvana.

 

Who am I kidding?  It left the building way before that.

I'd join you in criticizing Synthesis as it is indeed as bad or worse than Shep and buddies defeating the technologically, numerically and intellectually (by canon) superior Reaper war machine with the power of friendship. Fortunately, I have a choice of two (arguably 3 given there are two seperate Controls) much better options, so it isn't really an issue. Given the nebulous nature of the Crucible's operation, it also isn't technically impossible by the rules of the universe, it is just nonsensical and ill elucidated. It is also thematically consistent. By contrast, defeating the Reapers with this cycle's conventional resources is impossible, in case the games telling you aproximately as many times as Anderson's telling you about where he was born didn't make that clear to you. 

Anyway, nonsense is not a valid excuse to include more nonsense, although the argument works great in the opposite direction. I'd love to get rid of Synthesis, but it's the developer's preferred conclusion so it isn't happening. No use complaining about it, just like there is no use asking for a Nirvana solution based on an idealized form of modern Western progressive values or whatever it is you're asking for.

What can I say?  You have a similar rudely dismissive attitude

I don't think that disparaging unreasonable expectations is rude or dismissive. There were choices provided but you didn't like everything about them, so you throw your toys out of the pram.

Know what? Welcome to the club. I spent 3 games of watching the Shep I was playing being forced down narrative paths that she wouldn't have personally agreed with given the proper choice. Rachni decision (why can't I leave this to someone better qualified?), Council decision(why am I putting different representatives of the same problem species back into power?), Quarian politics (why can't I support Rael's experiments and reacquiring control of the geth?), Legion (why am I forced to either dangerously activate it or send it to incomptent Cerberus mad scientists who don't get results, instead of competent ones who do like Xen or Sanders?), pre collector attack (don't have everyone capable of defending the ship all go full retard and leave) Collector Base (again, blow up the base and its useful technology like a moron or hand it to a bunch of hapazard morons who will predictably use it to get themselves indoctrinated), Dreadnought (experiment on the recovered geth and its Reaper technology to gain potential advantages over the enemy), Rannoch battle (blow up the geth like an ignorant neo-Luddie and lose all their utility, or hand them code upgrades and self determination that will make every organic species into a subservient race), Thessia (laugh my arse off at the asari councilor whom I wish I could have ensured wasn't in power exactly for reasons such as this), and the endings (synthesis is pish, destroy is anti-progress, refuse is intentionally losing the game because of stupid, and control's brain upload crap is stupid). 

But you know what, I don't make or pollute endless unrelated threads (such as this one) with how Bioware is awful because they didn't write the game precisely to suit the tastes of my own personal power fantasy, this despite the fact that everything I've listed is a far more reasonable and thematically reconcilable request within the universe than conventional victory being asspulled from literally nowhere after we've been told and explicitly shown that it is impossible a thousand times. It is completely unreasonable to expect that.

More importantly, it's their story, and Shep their character. They can write them however they wish. You've the right to criticize as well, but crying for and and then incessantly complaining that they didn't fundamentally change the themes of the story they wished to tell in order to suit your tastes is ridiculous petulance bordering on narcissism. I don't personally agree with any of the themes presented in the endings (would've liked something similar to Control without the nonsensical brain upload), and think that the execution in general was poor (and EC didn't address it and arguably made it worse), but I approve of the writers at least trying to make some sort of statement rather than mindlessly pandering to the audience that wants an indulgent fantasy (because the series already has far more than enough of that). 

Don't like Mass Effect? There are power fantasies out there for you that can give you exactly what you're asking for (hell, Bioware makes a few of them, which I think is the real issue here i.e. expectations from brand loyalists that believe this is the only thing the company should make instead of whatever they decide they want to). There are plenty of us who do like it though, and would rather it remain an experimental platform in the gaming industry rather than be completely turned into a thoughtless, glorified choose your own adventure book designed to indulge rather than something actually created for its own purpose of telling a story and making a statement.

[Sanunes]

It's a fair point. I don't particularly care about fairness, but if you do, then it's a real cost. This makes the proposal a loser for me, since I have the cost of losing the game-world, and derive no benefit from the fairness.

Is it a winner for Bio? You'd need to have a lot of fans who are interested in fairness in the abstract, as opposed to being concerned with fairness towards their own particular ending. Synthesis fans are a rounding error, and I'm not sure Control's much more popular.

What problem is this approach actually solving? I suppose that depends on the particulars of the not-MEHEM we're canonizing. How would you do a not-MEHEM, anyway? MEHEM has no distinguishing features about the ending -- the Reapers are destroyed, full stop.

 

We as players really don't know all the facts for it could be possible that people that haven't been talking about the game prefer a ending besides Destroy or BioWare doesn't want to continue along the Destroy storyline because it would lead to being too similar to the first three games.

Modifié par Sanunes, 04 novembre 2015 - 06:15 .

[AlanC9]

We as players really don't know all the facts for it could be possible that people that haven't been talking about the game prefer a ending besides Destroy or BioWare doesn't want to continue along the Destroy storyline because it would lead to being too similar to the first three games.

That's a good point. Until the tracking data came out nobody here had any idea that so many of us had sided against the quarians.

[Iakus]

I'd join you in criticizing Synthesis as it is indeed as bad or worse than Shep and buddies defeating the technologically, numerically and intellectually (by canon) superior Reaper war machine with the power of friendship. Fortunately, I have a choice of two (arguably 3 given there are two seperate Controls) much better options, so it isn't really an issue. Given the nebulous nature of the Crucible's operation, it also isn't technically impossible by the rules of the universe, it is just nonsensical and ill elucidated. It is also thematically consistent. By contrast, defeating the Reapers with this cycle's conventional resources is impossible, in case the games telling you aproximately as many times as Anderson's telling you about where he was born didn't make that clear to you. 
 

Anyway, nonsense is not a valid excuse to include more nonsense, although the argument works great in the opposite direction. I'd love to get rid of Synthesis, but it's the developer's preferred conclusion so it isn't happening. No use complaining about it, just like there is no use asking for a Nirvana solution based on an idealized form of modern Western progressive values or whatever it is you're asking for.

Which is funny given "it's all nonsense" is used all to often to justify goofy space magic throughout the trilogy.  But the one time I note that "it's nonsense anyway" could be used to actually calm a storm of protest (since it's unliekly the Art will be abandoned anyway, so it would certainly have plenty of company), it's gets mercilessly mocked.

 

And the alternate endings are only "better" in the sense that a punch in the nose is arguably "better" than a kick to the crotch.  At least to me.

 

And no, nonsense doesn't excuse nonsense.  But if logic has been thrown out the airlock, might as well make what's left of the game fun.  Note how popular Citadel was.  There was so much cheese I could wish for a ham sandwich to go with it.  But at least I could laugh with it. 

 

 

 

I don't think that disparaging unreasonable expectations is rude or dismissive. There were choices provided but you didn't like everything about them, so you throw your toys out of the pram.

See, it's stuff like that...

 

I'm as vocal about my dislikes as anyone (just ask Alan) but I don't stoop to personal attacks.

 

 

 

Know what? Welcome to the club. I spent 3 games of watching the Shep I was playing being forced down narrative paths that she wouldn't have personally agreed with given the proper choice. Rachni decision (why can't I leave this to someone better qualified?), Council decision(why am I putting different representatives of the same problem species back into power?), Quarian politics (why can't I support Rael's experiments and reacquiring control of the geth?), Legion (why am I forced to either dangerously activate it or send it to incomptent Cerberus mad scientists who don't get results, instead of competent ones who do like Xen or Sanders?), pre collector attack (don't have everyone capable of defending the ship all go full retard and leave) Collector Base (again, blow up the base and its useful technology like a moron or hand it to a bunch of hapazard morons who will predictably use it to get themselves indoctrinated), Dreadnought (experiment on the recovered geth and its Reaper technology to gain potential advantages over the enemy), Rannoch battle (blow up the geth like an ignorant neo-Luddie and lose all their utility, or hand them code upgrades and self determination that will make every organic species into a subservient race), Thessia (laugh my arse off at the asari councilor whom I wish I could have ensured wasn't in power exactly for reasons such as this), and the endings (synthesis is pish, destroy is anti-progress, refuse is intentionally losing the game because of stupid, and control's brain upload crap is stupid).
But you know what, I don't make or pollute endless unrelated threads (such as this one) with how Bioware is awful because they didn't write the game precisely to suit the tastes of my own personal power fantasy, this despite the fact that everything I've listed is a far more reasonable and thematically reconcilable request within the universe than conventional victory being asspulled from literally nowhere after we've been told and explicitly shown that it is impossible a thousand times. It is completely unreasonable to expect that.   

Is that seriously whay you think?  That I wanted a "conventional victory" ending?   Hahahaha, nope!

 

I went into ME3 fully expecting a Deus Ex Machina ending, thanks to all the wheel spinning done in ME2, and at least some of the very complaints you listed above.

What I contest is "conventional victory" (whatever that means) was any less reasonable than the endings we did get.  If Green nonsense is valid, than so is conventional nonsense.Goose=gander.

 

And this thread is about "keeping an open mind" about MEA.  And if I don't care or even want Shepard returning in that game, I have other reasons to be deeply suspicious about the next game.

 

 

 

More importantly, it's their story, and Shep their character. They can write them however they wish. You've the right to criticize as well, but crying for and and then incessantly complaining that they didn't fundamentally change the themes of the story they wished to tell in order to suit your tastes is ridiculous petulance bordering on narcissism. I don't personally agree with any of the themes presented in the endings (would've liked something similar to Control without the nonsensical brain upload), and think that the execution in general was poor (and EC didn't address it and arguably made it worse), but I approve of the writers at least trying to make some sort of statement rather than mindlessly pandering to the audience that wants an indulgent fantasy (because the series already has far more than enough of that).
Don't like Mass Effect? There are power fantasies out there for you that can give you exactly what you're asking for (hell, Bioware makes a few of them, which I think is the real issue here i.e. expectations from brand loyalists that believe this is the only thing the company should make instead of whatever they decide they want to). There are plenty of us who do like it though, and would rather it remain an experimental platform in the gaming industry rather than be completely turned into a thoughtless, glorified choose your own adventure book designed to indulge rather than something actually created for its own purpose of telling a story and making a statement.

Their story, whom we were invited to shape.  But their character?  Sorry, no.  They explicitly told us multiple times this was our character.  This isn't Halo.  This is not Gears of War.  The market is full of such games.

 

And I'm not complaining that they didn't fundamentally change the themes of the story.  I'm complaining that they did!  

 

But you're starting to throw around the "power fantasy" trope which is the equivalent of godwinizing the thread, so yeah, I'm done with you.

[goishen]

Meh.  You're complaining about "You always have control over everything!"  When, the fact of the matter is, you have some degree of control of what happens to you and some things you have no control over. 

 

This is one of those instances where Shepard has no control but he/she does have a choice.  Where as before this, Shepard did have control over some (or all) of the things around her.

[Sion1138]

Shepard is not a character.

[Seboist]

Shepard is not a character.

 

Right, he's a vessel for the players' Biowarian wish fulfillment/power fantasy.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

Right, he's a vessel for the players' Biowarian wish fulfillment/power fantasy.

Until I can save the galaxy through the magic of friendship before settling down with my gay Quarian lover and adopting a Krogan baby in real life, Bioware has a moral obligation to make it happen for me on my TV.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

Right, he's a vessel for the players' Biowarian wish fulfillment/power fantasy.

 

She's both. 

[Teddie Sage]

My utter lack of faith in their ability to produce a decent storyline is not predicated on the absence of Shepard. 

^ This.

If the story isn't good in the end, it's not because of the protagonist but because the writers failed the basic task of keeping things simple and immersive for players. 

[AlanC9]

What I contest is "conventional victory" (whatever that means) was any less reasonable than the endings we did get.  If Green nonsense is valid, than so is conventional nonsense.Goose=gander.

You're talking about two unrelated kinds of nonsense here. One kind of nonsense is wacky physical rules. The other kind of nonsense is having characters react incoherently to the wacky rules of that universe. For a CV or anything like it to happen, both the Reapers and the Citadel forces would have to have somehow gotten through months of warfare without being able to form a rational estimate of the relative power of the opposing sides.

If you want to treat both kinds of nonsense the same way -- it's OK for ME NPCs to behave irrationally because ME science is irrational -- you're free to do that. But I don't see how one has any bearing on the other.

Their story, whom we were invited to shape.  But their character?  Sorry, no.  They explicitly told us multiple times this was our character.  This isn't Halo.  This is not Gears of War.  The market is full of such games.

You're conflating your character with the choices that character faces? Again?

[Iakus]

You're talking about two unrelated kinds of nonsense here. One kind of nonsense is wacky physical rules. The other kind of nonsense is having characters react incoherently to the wacky rules of that universe. For a CV or anything like it to happen, both the Reapers and the Citadel forces would have to have somehow gotten through months of warfare without being able to form a rational estimate of the relative power of the opposing sides.

If you want to treat both kinds of nonsense the same way -- it's OK for ME NPCs to behave irrationally because ME science is irrational -- you're free to do that. But I don't see how one has any bearing on the other.
 

But the thing is, ME3 was full of both.  Wacky physical rules as well as incoherent behavior.  And long before the ending.  Seriously, aside from being a lot less dark, the Citadel DLC isn't all that different from the logic Bioware had been feeding us 

 

 

You're conflating your character with the choices that character faces? Again?

 

I'm saying these are supposed to be our characters.

 

Everyone here p*ssed that Shepard was more upset about the fall of Thessia than the lost of Vendetta, please raise your hands

 

Now everyone who wanted to laugh along with Joker at his joke about asari dancers.

 

Who here wanted more than two dialogue options?

 

Who didn't like Shepard being unduly concerned about Ashley/Kaidan after the Eva face-off?

 

Now who wanted to get involved in the Thane/Kai Leng fight rather than let the dying drell face him alone?

 

I can go on if you like.

[haduj]

be cool to have a sheppard memorial or something to visit.

[AlanC9]

But the thing is, ME3 was full of both.  Wacky physical rules as well as incoherent behavior.  And long before the ending.  Seriously, aside from being a lot less dark, the Citadel DLC isn't all that different from the logic Bioware had been feeding us

Never bought Citadel, and maybe never will, so I can't speak to that.

As for the rest, you're OK with adding the plot equivalent of synthesis because the science equivalent of synthesis is in there already, right. I still don't see what one position has to do with the other. Even if not caring about one means that you don't care about the other, I don't see why that position is inevitable or even coherent.
 

I'm saying these are supposed to be our characters.
 
Everyone here p*ssed that Shepard was more upset about the fall of Thessia than the lost of Vendetta, please raise your hands
 
Now everyone who wanted to laugh along with Joker at his joke about asari dancers.
 
Who here wanted more than two dialogue options?
 
Who didn't like Shepard being unduly concerned about Ashley/Kaidan after the Eva face-off?
 
Now who wanted to get involved in the Thane/Kai Leng fight rather than let the dying drell face him alone?
 
I can go on if you like.

No sense continuing with a parade of non-sequiturs. None of these have anything at all to do with what QMR was talking about in the "power fantasy" bit you were responding to. Unless that was an unconnected rant rather than a response? I'm not quite clear why you went off in this direction.

I mean, surely you realize that everything in that list could have been changed without them changing anything whatsoever about the endings, right?

[Iakus]

Never bought Citadel, and maybe never will, so I can't speak to that.

As for the rest, you're OK with adding the plot equivalent of synthesis because the science equivalent of synthesis is in there already, right. I still don't see what one position has to do with the other. Even if not caring about one means that you don't care about the other, I don't see why that position is inevitable or even coherent.
 

I don't see how you're differentiating between "plot equivalent" versus "science equivalent" of nonsense.  To my mind Synthesis is both.  

 

And not caring about one vs the other is exactly my point.  If you don't care about the logic or science, or even the plot aspects of Synthesis, then why is something as ridiculous as conventional victory so stupid?  If you can turn your brian off for Green Nirvana, then what isn't off-limits?

 

 

 

No sense continuing with a parade of non-sequiturs. None of these have anything at all to do with what QMR was talking about in the "power fantasy" bit you were responding to. Unless that was an unconnected rant rather than a response? I'm not quite clear why you went off in this direction.

I mean, surely you realize that everything in that list could have been changed without them changing anything whatsoever about the endings, right?

I wasn't addressing his statements about "power fantasy" (note I cut off discussion when he started flinging that term around)  I was addressing how people were p*ssed at Bioware hijacking a character we were in fact told was "ours".  And in situations beyond story choices.  It's a separate issue from the endings.

[Il Divo]

 

I wasn't addressing his statements about "power fantasy" (note I cut off discussion when he started flinging that term around)  I was addressing how people were p*ssed at Bioware hijacking a character we were in fact told was "ours".  And in situations beyond story choices.  It's a separate issue from the endings.

 

Still, none of the examples given here really seem to do that concept justice. Short of full on Planescape Torment, which had a ridiculous amount of dialogue, or the headcanon narrative route of Skyrim, I really can't see how the examples of ME3 are any worse than what you get in your typical cRPG. Being confined to a narrative means you never get more than 2-3 options for how to respond with a scenario.

 

Even if we wanted to say Bioware forced us to watch Thane die like an idiot, if they fixed that, the end result might just be that we get to help Thane and instead we're forced to take some other non-sensical action. Limited resources and all that. ​

 

Assuming here that the claim is that hijacking our characters is specific to ME3? Because going back to the old days, Bioware was also a fan of forcing the player down two extremely narrow view points with being either a sociopath or an angel. ​
 

[themikefest]

How would you handle Rannoch?

If destroy were to be made canon, it would only have 1 of two choices. Are the quarians alive or not?

If I was to do it, I would have both geth and quarians survive, if peace were achieved, and if not either the quarian or geth survive
 

As for coming up with an ending that's better than red, green, or blue, what do you mean by "better"?

Better than having to pick red, green or blue.

I've said before. As soon as the Citadel arms are fully opened, the crucible fires a pulse throughout the galaxy that reprograms the reapers to stop their harvest. They head back to dark space never to be seen again.

What this does is it gets rid of the magic carpet ride up to lala land
gets rid of the leviathan turd aka catalyst aka intelligence
gets rid of the comment 'you do not know them and there's not enough time to explain'
gets rid of the comment 'synthesis is the final evolution of all life'
gets rid of the shoot this ending, pull that ending and jump into this ending

The geth and the edibot survive. Shepard survives. I guess for an extra bonus, Anderson isn't dead. He just passed out.

 

Is this the best idea Bioware could use? No. Are there better ideas? I'm sure there are. And I'm sure if Bioware was to have another game in the Milky Way, they will come up with whatever idea that works best for what they want to do.

[KaiserShep]

I think the geth kind of provide an easy way out because the bodies they walk around with are not really necessary for the geth themselves to exist. 

[saMoorai]

I like my Shepard a lot, and felt he had a lot of personality. I'd love to play as him again someday.

 

That being said, I'm really glad he's not in Andromeda. The series shouldn't just be about Shepard, and they can tell more stories by diversifying the protagonists. 

 

Personally, I'm content with knowing my Shepard is still in the Milky Way, helping things rebuild, doing Spectre and Alliance stuff, and exploring the galaxy with his friends. I like to think that while I'm playing as the new guy, Shepard is still having plenty of adventures, just off screen. 

[AlanC9]

I don't see how you're differentiating between "plot equivalent" versus "science equivalent" of nonsense.  To my mind Synthesis is both.

The tech is a bunch of arbitrary rules, but the NPCs have minds that function like ordinary minds do -- assuming that particular NPC is human or close to human, anyway. Plot nonsense probably isn't a great term for referring to making the NPCs behave in stupid ways to get the plot where you want it to go.

Edit: "Stupid" is the wrong concept there. Try "incoherent." There wouldn't even be any rationale for it except that we really, really wanted the player to win. I gotta go with QMR on this one; it's lame and a bit contemptible.

Of course, you're going to say that ME has some of that already. And you'd be right. That doesn't mean that making this aspect much, much worse is the way to go.

And not caring about one vs the other is exactly my point.  If you don't care about the logic or science, or even the plot aspects of Synthesis, then why is something as ridiculous as conventional victory so stupid?  If you can turn your brian off for Green Nirvana, then what isn't off-limits?

Because I couldn't turn my brain off for Hackett not knowing that he can beat the Reapers, and the Reapers not knowing that Hackett can beat them. It's a different category of stupid. You don't get to play this card after months of warfare. I can turn my brain off for technobabble easily. Probably comes from 40 yeas of watching Doctor Who -- although, honestly, Star Trek is hardly any better.
 

I wasn't addressing his statements about "power fantasy" (note I cut off discussion when he started flinging that term around)  I was addressing how people were p*ssed at Bioware hijacking a character we were in fact told was "ours".  And in situations beyond story choices.  It's a separate issue from the endings.

OK. OK. When you go off on a tangent like that you really shouldn't quote the material you're going to ignore; it's harder to follow the point.

[AlanC9]

If destroy were to be made canon, it would only have 1 of two choices. Are the quarians alive or not?

If I was to do it, I would have both geth and quarians survive, if peace were achieved, and if not either the quarian or geth survive.

OK. I'd just leave the geth dead and quarians alive, full stop.
 

Better than having to pick red, green or blue.

I was thinking more along the lines of what makes something better. What makes your alternative proposal better, for instance?

[Iakus]

Still, none of the examples given here really seem to do that concept justice. Short of full on Planescape Torment, which had a ridiculous amount of dialogue, or the headcanon narrative route of Skyrim, I really can't see how the examples of ME3 are any worse than what you get in your typical cRPG. Being confined to a narrative means you never get more than 2-3 options for how to respond with a scenario.

 

Excuse me while I wipe drool off my face at the mention of Planescape: Torment...

 

At any rate, go through earlier Bioware games and you see that 3-4 responses have been typical.  Even with voiced companions like Shepard or Hawke you get 3 +up to three investigate options.  I have been playing through ME3 lately.  You get two responses, often with a great deal of autodialogue wherin you have zero input into Shepard's state of mind.  So in several intense scenes you get NO say in how Shepard reacts.  Or even the freedom to headcanon.  

 

It's funny, the furst time I played ME3 I marveled at how Shepard seemed to be losing his sh*t at Ashley (his LI) being hurt on Mars.  HE was hovering over her in the infirmary, head hanging down, Liara practically had to pry him away to talk to Hackett.  

 

Then I learn that Shepard reacts that way no matter the relationship.  No choice I made, no input on my part, determined this   I could just imagine how people who despised her (or Kaidan, for those who got that scene with him) reacted.

 

Say what you will about the Inquisitor, but when there's an emotional scene, it gives you a choice of what kind of emotion to display.  And more than two!

 

 

 

Even if we wanted to say Bioware forced us to watch Thane die like an idiot, if they fixed that, the end result might just be that we get to help Thane and instead we're forced to take some other non-sensical action. Limited resources and all that. ​

 

 

Or Bioware could have come up with a plausible reason why we couldn't help Thane.

 

 

Assuming here that the claim is that hijacking our characters is specific to ME3? Because going back to the old days, Bioware was also a fan of forcing the player down two extremely narrow view points with being either a sociopath or an angel.

 Two paths, yeah.  But we've typically had more flexibility in motivation for taking one.  

 

I mean, in ME2 there were four "options" for what to do with the genophage data, two "paths" and two motivations

1) Keep the data because the genophage should be cured

2) Keep the data because the information could be useful some day

3) Destroy the data because the experiments were monstrous

4) Destroy the data because keeping the genophage going was the right call.

[themikefest]

OK. I'd just leave the geth dead and quarians alive, full stop.

I don't have aproblem with that.
 

I was thinking more along the lines of what makes something better. What makes your alternative proposal better, for instance?

Better than what was in the game? Read the rest of my post below that one line you quoted