Think of it another way: What should Valve if this dev threw death threats against a some other person (reviewer, poster, etc) totally unrelated to Valve?
I believe there is a "good behavior" clause in the EULA where either party can halt their business if they feel the other behaving badly and would reflect poorly on them by association. Valve would be in their rights to remove the game and suspend access if they saw a developer throwing around threats. This time it just happened to be against their leader.
I am a fan of using "live" versions of Linux that can be booted off of USB or CD for diagnostics. If you are familiar with modern Linux, this is really easy to do and offers a way to access and inspect the hardware to see if it is functioning correctly where importantly there are tools built to access SMART status of any drive that supports it. Once you've either confirmed or eliminated hardware problems as an issue you can go forward with fixing up your install with a rescue disk or whatever you need.
This "disappointment" sounds familiar. Pretty much like Diablo 3 where a bunch of was warranted with the initial design but I would like to believe that just like Diablo 3 there can be corrections made to make it work.
I do agree the "The Extended Cut" was a waste of time because the ending was so flawed that explaining more of doesn't address the flaw. To borrow the currently running metaphor, the game is a nicely build house with a hole in the floor of one room. "The Extended Cut" just redoing that one room but leaving the hole. Mass Effect is a great game with many good ideas, beautiful moments, and stories...just don't go in that last room because you'll be tempted to ask "Why is this hole here?" :)
Was Illusive Man trying to control them? Illusive Man and Sarin seem to have some angle but it is pretty apparent to the player if either of them had the goal "control some awesome galactic power" they were failing miserably at it. The suggestion Shepard would get some inspiration like "I can do that" or "I would do it better than them" is a huge stretch. Even the most Renegade play through would be rough to believe nor (and this is important) it was never offered or suggested to player until the last 30 minutes when you encounter The Illusive Man one last time.
I suggested a PC because with either ps4 or xbone and a PC you have covered most of the major game releases while going for only the consoles you are leaving a bunch of software and games out. Sure there are exclusives for both consoles but the "ecosystem" for both consoles seem pretty similar while the PC offers something else entirely.
No one, not Sarin not Shepard not Illusive man not any scientist or enemy or ally ever suggested there was a way to co-op Reaper tech or anyone else's tech to anything more. And one must keep in mind no one would have known if turning one's self into a cybernetic life form would have made The Reapers ignore or even serve as a viable defense against their attacks and tech. There was never once an utterance that this was a way to halt the current "the reaping" let alone whole "reaper cycle". You have to squint your eyes, tilt your head and throw on some thick rose colored glasses to even see that was remotely a possibility in any chapter of Mass Effect. Instead it was introduced in the last ten minutes by telling the player to jumping into a light which also makes me wonder "why that?" Any more than shooting a conduit or grabbing some electric pylons or just telling the star-kid "Do synthesis please"? That doesn't read or sound or feel like great writing.
If you need another hint on how bogus the ending is: Neither the player or Shepard came up with the idea of synthesis as a way to halt the cycles. The Crucible, a character that was not revealed to the player until the last fifteen minutes of the game, did and only because "it felt like it".
@extomar I'm not exactly sure which situations you're referring to. Any threat of taking someone's life is a cause for concern, sure the presence of specific time and location of an individual does warrant a higher level of concern but at this point we're really just picking between the greater or lesser of two extreme evils. Neither of which are welcome.
Yes but who do we call to protect some anonymous poster on an unverified account? What is the strategy we should use? Saying "we should take it all seriously" is a noble goal but reality is neither you or I can save them.
I can help with people harassing Zoe Quinn. There are any number of electronic and real world things I can do to lend a hand. Neither you nor I can help @MasterChief210029 because only a handful of people know who that or where they are to help them. At best I can tell that "guy" to block them.