WKlingbeil1 wrote...
Haha, I do like your 1 and 2 options, however, I don't like the idea of not having closure as paragon, and I don't think the devs would either. They're supposed to end the Shepard trilogy at 3, so they have to have complete closure there. I think it's possible, but I'm sure either way will end up with Reaper destruction (involving some core computer you hack and destroy the entire fleet with, I'm sure).
I guess I'm thinking the paragon option will lead to the scattering and defeat of the reapers to the extent that they will not be a problem again for a long long time. The renegade option will lead to the annihilation of the reapers (including the technology to defeat them again), but requires massive amounts of collateral damage.
Even though popular opinion may disagree, Bioware has been careful to make renegade choices (aside from the occasional punching of random people) any less moral than paragon options. I justify letting the council die in ME1 because they were an acceptable loss considering they sucked at leading anyway and throwing valuable reinforcements to save some sort of symbol seemed irresponsible. In ME2 I gave TIM the technology he asks for because atm we have no chance if the reaper fleet attacks, so worst case scenario for giving him the technology is no worse than the reapers winning (also the "we can take the reapers option" seemed absurdly naive).
If the option in ME3 is kill many aliens to establish human dominance or win with many fewer casualties, there seems to be an obvious "right" answer in that case.
But i digress, Bioware has done an excellent job in this series balancing the the paragon-renegade playstyles as a morally grey area and I do not think ME3 will disappoint.