Should bioware do one final shepard game?

LOL yea that was a fat finger it was meant as my opinion as for the doctor ? your meaning?  

Why would that matter to a new player?

The whole coup mission was crap. And yes, it would have been better if the standoff was removed and Udina survives so he can be questioned.

And what exactly did A/K do as a spectre? Did A/K only get the spectre promotion because the other ME1 squadmates got a promotion from what they were in ME1? What will happen in ME4? Will A/K continue to follow Shepard or will they have a couple cameos while doing spectre stuff for the council?

They already have content. Just use the stuff when in the hospital to be used when they're on the ship. Maybe add a few more lines of dialogue.

He can die. Take him on the beam run with ems below 2000. Harbinger will vaporize the guy. Try it. I've done it.

Not that it really means anything anymore during the Reaper War, since they have an arguably more important job to do with their home service in the alliance. I don't really see the VS as being qualified to be a Spectre, or even a good fit for the job considering that they;

1) don't have a ship, nor are likely to get one that's worth a damn in a galaxy-spanning war of survival, or at least not one anywhere near the capability of any military/reconnaissance/surveillance vessel, let alone one of the Normandy's value.

2) don't have the ability to procure resources beyond anything that any other organization could get within their existing logistics and procurement infrastructure.

and

3) they lack the political/diplomatic/personal clout that Shepard has which allows him to get away with the above. Shepard's a hero, a bloody icon (in the words of my favorite Australian space beauty.) The VS just doesn't have the name recognition to get that kind of access, even as a Spectre. And that's not getting into their sheer lethality (or, more appropriately, their lack of it,) in comparison to Shepard. Shep's effective. The VS just isn't, not on that level.

But then again, it's addressed in the game, with everyone basically saying they made the VS a Spectre to throw humanity a bone since Earth is occupied.

You are a pretty awesome individual hype himself... and so wrong about all of this 

1) Shepard had no ship when he was executive officer. Udina and the Alliance brass forced Anderson to give him one.

2) Neither did Shepard, and even if that was what specters were for then that is a role that the Alliance fulfills. Shepard was in no capacity as XO to provide anything other than his own skills and experience to the job, which was all that the council was looking for.

3) I wouldn't challenge the experience of a person who was part of the crew that rescued an asari researcher on a mining colony, prevented the resurgence of a rachni invasion, saved a prothean world from destruction by the geth and impeded a krogan clone army to be unleashed upon the galaxy. That's a huge resume right there, perhaps even bigger than someone who just was part of an operation on some batarian moon.

I don't understand. I don't think it would've mattered because Shepard needed his/her own ship and there was no way the Alliance was going to give him/her any less than its most advanced ship.

I believe it would matter. If Anderson were to face Saren, how would he react? If he gets too emotional, angry, it could cause problems leading to bad things. Having Anderson out of the picture is best. Even if he isn't forced/steps down, what purpose would he have to remain as Captain of the SR1? Saren is an immediate threat. No time for Shepard to wait around for a ship to take him/her to wherever.

I'm never wrong. Context mate. I could build on what KaiserShep said, but that would probably ruin the message. Suffice to say, he nailed it. I'll give it an abridged shot though.

The VS is a Spectre only because the Council threw us a sympathy line over Earth. As was said, it was meaningless. The only thing in-universe that comes of it is that the VS being a Spectre makes them a bodyguard to the Council that sets up a final conflict and resolution for the VS, Shepard, and the wedge between them over Cerberus. It's arguable, but inferred that Councilor Udina engineered that in part so that they could manipulate the VS to be against them and Shepard, which would help him with his nefarious plans. Presumably, Udina was banking on the VS being grateful for the Spectre Promotion enough to fight Shepard.

Shepard meanwhile has only had his legend (and lethality) increased, and he also has a plan to fight back, which leads to; 1) Being given priority control of the most advanced ship in the galaxy during a galaxy-spanning war of survival to 2) get the resources that no one else, not even another Spectre, can get because 3) Shepard, through his actions, skill, and sheer audacity, has acquired the political/diplomatic/personal clout and sheer effectiveness that enables him to get the stuff that, in-context, the VS simply couldn't. Being a Spectre wouldn't change any of this at all, and as was pointed out, it has no bearing on the plot aside from a handful of missions and computer taps on the Citadel that don't influence the game at all. 

Moving on, from a story perspective, Shepard forges his own path to success, first to and then finally regardless of Spectre status (I personally tell the Council to shove it in ME2.) The VS gets it for the purpose of being manipulated and used as a political pawn and pseudo-hostage. That tells me that Spectre status in the long run of the game is meaningless. It wouldn't be much of a power fantasy if you weren't the biggest, most badass space Marine out there, after all. So back to the original point, I think this is more of a personal referendum on the VS against Shepard and the gap and differences between them. I've never been particularly fond of the VS, and I appreciate seeing part of their narrative meaning in being a foil to the Shepard that I created (a very practical, results-at-all-costs type of character who does paragon things for very renegade reasons.)

Plus, I just don't see the VS being able to thrive in the role as a Spectre. Both have a very defined sense of morality, of good and evil, and, particularly in Ashley's case, an aversion to nuance. They're not blind to it, but they don't dislike it any less. And being a Spectre probably requires a lot ability to nuance, to see the gray vs. grey in all situations. Getting to your point in your above post about 'idealism vs. pragmatism,' I think the VS, whoever they are, runs on the idealist side (though Ashley does have a practical streak regarding actual problem-solving) to the point where they just aren't suited for a job that exists as the culmination of pragmatism in galactic politics.

Lastly, on your point about the qualifications for the VS; it's a fair cop. But look at where the VS is and what they're doing. They're the followers, not the leaders, planners, and primary executioners of actions like Shepard in any of those cases. They take their cue from their Commander. And as far as the game goes, they may not have even had their boots on the ground for much, or any of the operations in the game. At the time of relevance for Spectres in ME1, it's clear they're picked from the movers and shakers, the people who have the strong blend of skill, leadership, and audacity/innovation/ability to work outside the box. In ME1, neither VS has developed enough either personally or professionally to even begin to be considered for Spectre status, and come ME2, this really hasn't changed given our knowledge of what's seen in the game of them. By ME3, it's all pointless anyways in the face of the Reapers, and aside from its use as a political ploy, everyone is aware of this. With the Reapers here, kicking in our shit, we don't need more Spectres. Or, more appropriately, Spectres are kind of extraneous - sure, they might wrack up a few dozen/hundred more dead husks than non-Spectres, but what are they really going to do against the Reapers? Quoting Kasumi from a different context, "they can't just go into a Reaper base and steal an 'I Win' bomb." Aside from delaying actions on the ground and bold rescues of civilians, what can they do?

That's a part of it, but I think skill, determination, and grit played much more of a part than chance. Luck may have rounded out Shepard's success, but it was not the root cause, particularly for the Sole Survivor background (my own Shepard's background.) Luck alone isn't going to save him. It's his own mettle that gets him through, gets him out, and gets him home. Something else to look at is how Shepard is at the center of all the backgrounds, regardless of what you pick (or all of them, as in a meta-sense, I have my Shepard having participated in all 3 backgrounds.) Shepard isn't relying on anyone else to get the job done. He is the mover and the shaker. For the Skyllian Blitz, Shepard is single-handedly holding off an entire army of pirates and raiders. For the thresher maw attack, Shepard comes into his own after everyone else is slaughtered, presumably close to the beginning. He survives for hours, possibly days (I'm not sure if it's elaborated how long this event took) whereas his comrades barely last for minutes. 

Even for the butchery of Batarians in the Ruthless background, where Shepard is not the only person to take part but is actively leading Marines in combat, it demonstrates to the Council and the alliance what Shepard is willing to do to get the job done. Shepard is making the calls and the decisions. He's the linchpin. He's the prominent one getting things done that no one else would or could, and that's a far cry from where the VS is in any of the scenarios you've presented. Shepard (rightfully) gets the trophy, and they get the 'Participant' ribbon (maybe it says 'Distinguished Participant.') There's no legal recourse since the Batarians have long since withdrawn from the Citadel convention of species over disputes with humanity, and are frankly sponsors of terrorism and targeting of civilians and colonists for nothing more than petty motivations against humans. The alliance, the defining actor over Shepard's career at this point (I don't see the Council getting involved in something like this, especially for actions against a civilization that has cut itself off from the galactic community,) obviously doesn't see it as too concerning. It raises a few eyebrows, but no one is really losing sleep over the Batarians so far as the chain of command goes.

My sarcasm crystal ball has been busted for a while now, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and say that yes, that is what I see as the reason for the VS to become a Spectre. Udina is plotting, and the Council wants the monkey off their back regarding Humanity being tee'd that they're not doing anything for Earth by having the human councilor (all the better that he'd offer it for them) offer a perfunctory token by making another human Spectre.

I don't know if undeserving is the right word, or if the Spectres are really what you'd define as something of immense honor. It's certainly presented that way in ME1, but look past the fluff and you're basically the Council's janitor and fixer. I definitely wouldn't call them lesser in their integrity (indeed, I tend to think that someone of more flexible morality, ethics, and values would thrive better in the role.)

None of this is to say I'm against the Spectres, with the irony being that I think this kind of job is necessary for the hegemony of the Council races. But I think you're misinterpreting my position - while yes, I do think that Ashley/Kaidan don't really have what I'd really call the qualifications to be a Spectre, I'm not knocking them (even though in the past on this and especially prior forums, I have been known to knock on Ashley a lot.) I'm also saying that cut past the surface and the job of a Spectre is more like, say, a Witcher (if you're a fan of that series.) At their core, they clean up messes. And that sometimes means having to clean up people. Permanently. And it means that they find themselves in a lot of situations that aren't clear cut, and to a person like the VS (both of them) that's anathema. As I said, being a Spectre kind of means that you have to be able to operate way outside the moral bounds (no matter how much one might think otherwise) and face problems where there is no easy answer. If you're knowledgeable on International Relations Theory (you seem to be pretty intelligent so I imagine you are,) you'd see that Spectres are in many ways an ultimate example of a Realists zero-sum instrument. Not necessarily in what they represent but in their methodology. You can squeeze some Idealism in there too, but you're looking at something designed to make sure their bosses were on top at the end of the day, by any means. The VS certainly isn't going to buy into that, at least not for the council. Ashley *may* want it for the alliance, but I think it'd be a stretch to say that she'd resort to duplicitous means to achieve it.

Not sure why. It’s possible and more likely that more people think that Shepard’s story should stay over. 

No one’s going out of their way to cheat a poll that won’t even affect the actual franchise. Besides, the customer is always right, so I’m told.

No. Shepard's story is over and bringing them back would only ruin their legacy.

Besides, I liked ME3's ending.