User blog comment:Markurion/How many of you put a bullet in Godchild in EC?/@comment-5271559-20120718235017/@comment-166.82.245.89-20120719061022

I feel the Need to object to the idea of "wrong" decisions, as MammalSecretionHomoSapiens once said, in Mass Effect, there aren't really any right or wrong choices. There are choices that can bite you in the a$$ obviously, and in general don't work out in your favor to put it mildly, but there has never been an objectively "wrong" choice you make in the game that results in GAME OVER. This was one of the reasons why IT deviated so much from the original game.

When it comes to the Refusal choice, I understand completely that assembling all those fleets were simply a means to an end that was the means to a bigger end, but what bugs me so much about is that it is that saying it was under done is a drastic understatement, they could have added scenes that would give emotional impact, as one person pointed out below in the comments. That is one of the game's purpose's. Another reason is that while it certainly does not come across as a slap to the face, the way it was poorlyexecuted in addition to the way Catbrat talks makes it come across as more of a passive-aggressive hissy fit because we didn't like the concept of the Starcyst and the three endings than just simple refusal. And I heard somewhere that the next cycle chose one of the Catalyst's options anyway, so what was the point!?