User blog comment:StagedDom19/Missing the Main Problem/@comment-5008642-20120712005513/@comment-4950455-20120713092540

While you're strictly correct in that there are differences, several of those differences (in my opinion) fail the "show, don't tell" test. When people were told that the rachni's presence in ME3 would have "real, tangible consequences" (or whatever it was), I think most of us were expecting more then numbers on a sheet. While I'm certainly aware of the practical difficulties involved, it still is disappointing to see how many different decisions, from the Collector Base to the fate of the Council to smaller things like the colonists on Feros, ultimately came down to nothing or little more then War Assets. It would be untrue to say that they didn't matter at all, but from the standpoint of actually seeing those decisions make an impact instead of, basically, adding to your score, I think fans have a right to be disappointed.

As for the endings, I'm assuming the writer is speaking from a pre-Extended Cut standpoint, in which (again) the "show, don't tell" test was failed. The endings in the EC are indeed quite visibly distinct and not at all "pretty much the same", but the same can't be said of what we were shown before.

Also, some of the replacement characters are more different then others. Wreav is probably the most so, but as he originated as early as ME2 that's understandable (also, the "genophage arc" is quite possibly the best-done in the game - and, I feel, probably the best example of how your choices do matter). Some of the others, though, are pretty much generic fill-ins (was there even a Not-Garrus at all? I can't remember).