I don't think anyone would argue the story went a little meh after the original. The original ME stands FAR above 2 and 3 on story.

It's just that the story issues don't ruin the game.

I completely agree with you. Still, when the story goes as off-tracks as it did in the ME 3 ending, customers are entitled to complain.

The people who acted like that ending was the worst thing ever and somehow completely ruined the series are just big drama queens, of course, but they shouldn't overshadow legitimate and reasonable complaints.

Neither Hitler nor the reapers were "evil" for the sake of being evil. "Evil" is not a motivation. The reapers destroyed organic life in order to preserve organic life. That was their motivation.

First of all, the reapers are not organic life. Second, does "machine logic" mean trying the most ineffecient way to accomplish something? If there's an AI in the universe trying to destroy organic life, how about destroying that one instead of pre-emptively destroy *everything*, which poses a threat to the reapers as well? Third, the only thing that was threatning organic life was the reapers themselves. Shepard had already proven with the Geth it was possible for organics and the machines to coexist peacefully.

It's obvious the reapers are a very, very advanced AI, and this is very simple logic.

You don't understand the simplest things.

Destroy organic life = empty the basket , so the machine would continue it's work until the last one is killed

Preserve organic life = as long as there is one reproductive couple in a basket, the life is preserved.

It's simple mathematics. The number series is empty only where is nothing inside. The series isn't empty as long as there's at least one item.

And reapers were destroying organic life not when they create AI capable of destroying all organic life, but when they were capable of creating one. The next war like with Geth would destroy all life. You may say "we don't know if that's going to happen" but you wouldn't talk reapers into changing their mind. Their job is to make sure that this never is going to happen, and they were kind enough to wait until we are advanced enough to do so :D

Destroying all life vs. destroying most of the life -> for the reapers the second outcome was 100% better than the first.

And no. Saving as much as you can is never simplier than saving only a few.

That's my last post here, because I had endless tyrads with morons on Bioware forums already :P Here the level of discussion is much higher and you're obviously not morons, but I already have enough :P

Thank you for maintaining a civil discussion, I guess.

If the reapers only wanted to preserve life, *any* amount of life, the simplest and most logical solution would have to keep a handful in captivity and breed them like chicken. Even making sure that no life ever gets to the point where they can make any sort of AI, would be more logical than to wait around until they are able to destroy a reaper. Instead they went with a plan that was the most unnecessary complicated, difficult, resource-intensive and posed the greatest amout of threat to themselves, not to mention pointless since the resulting reaper is not even "alive". This is not "machine logic". It's not logic at all.

No question in my mind they are fading fast. Won't be surprised if in a few years they aren't around anymore, or reduced to a footnote in the industry. Or perhaps they'll veer so far away from making RPG's they'll invent a new genre: romance dating sim with combat elements.

I don't think Keeveek is trying to argue that they used the simplest way to accomplish their mission, only what their mission was since some seem to be confused on the whole "killing all non-primitive life to save organic/synthetic life" instead of what some seem to think it meant "killing life to preserve life". The first has logic, the latter has circular logic.