How will game 'journalists' spin Casey Hudson's return to BW?

It seems to me like people are equating this to the old BSN forum, which was an official BioWare forum, and think this must be the same.  Hence, they figure what's here is "news".

For different people, the reasons for liking and/or disliking something like the endings of ME3 vary extensively.  I preferred the original endings over the EC ones... which means I have a differing opinion than a lot of people here.  I liked, in particular, the ambiguity of EDI's fate with a destroy ending since the pre-EC endings did not show the memorial wall with her name on it... ergo, I could head canon that she was still alive.  By arranging to have the quarians eliminate the geth, I could also limit the perceived collateral damage of the destroy ending.  IMO, the destroy ending became the obvious "default" best choice under the old endings.  That the mass relays were blown apart didn't phase me because I also felt that the species had, during the process of deciphering the crucible weapon, learned a lot about the tech and would be able to eventually rebuild them.  In some respects, it is the EC that "ruins" the ME3 endings for me.  Still, as I've said many times, I have been able to see my way to select any one of them depending on what sort of belief system I put into Shepard as a character... the more different Shepards I've created, the more "at peace" with the various endings I've become.

None of that precludes my ability to recognize that there are others who simply do not like the endings and who never will... just like I can recognize that not everyone likes horror movies... even well written ones.  For a game, I consider the ME Trilogy to be well written.  I also thing ME:A is better written than it is being given credit for being.  There are some aspects of the writing in ME:A that I consider to be superior to the MET.  My bottom line, however, has little to do with any of that... I believe that authors should be allowed to construct the story as they want to tell it.  RPG developers give us some leeway to inset ourselves into their stories, but they have the same "rights of authorship" as writers who write books... where we have absolutely no ability to shape the characters or the plot to our own liking and certainly no right to badger the authors into changing their stories or forcing them to quit their jobs or badgering companies to fire them merely because they didn't tell us the story in exactly the way we wanted to hear it.

OK, in a general paragon run, I had these types of things (varies based on some choices, but this outcome could happen):

quarians living on rannoch
wrex and grunt return to tuchanka, we see rebuilding taking place for the first time in millennia, and babies are being born
jack is teaching biotic kids
jacob is a teacher
miranda is working with the alliance
samara is spending time on lessus with her remaining daughter
the citadel is rebuilt

So, how exactly is that in line with what you think happened?  No one said it was going to be easy.  What war zone looks optimal after all is said and done?  

2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016... Did it ever go away?

Copy/Paste job. How childish. Not that I expect any better...

I've already seen a couple of articles referring to Flynn leaving and Hudson coming back as a 'shake up' at Bioware.

And yet it's true.

Seeing as I feel towards Andromeda as you do towards ME:3, I figured this could be an informative example for you to help you understand my opinions - but no, you're clearly incapable of that.  And I'll engage with whomever I want.  If you post something I disagree with, you'll get my opinion on it - and if you can't handle that, there's always the 'ignore' button at your disposal.

And yes, I did report this, because clearly you need to reconsider how to engage with users that have an opinion different from your own on this forum.

First, that's conjecture.  No timeline is placed but given that our known surviving cast are all doing well, the idea that things are horrifying makes no sense.  Clearly, whatever difficulties that may happen, it ultimately leads to a fairly decent outcome.  Hence, I can say that choosing Destroy could (depending on my choices) lead to a good, positive, shiny future.  The galaxy definitely wasn't in the best shape but "destroyed" isn't accurate.  Now, maybe that's the difference between EC and pre-EC but EC is "canon" for whatever the means.

Folks, let's settle down a bit. There's no need to start insulting each other.