i'm not sure what goes here

And so it carries on, for the better part of 200 pages.

Out of all the things she would never say, she would never say any of this the hardest.

Same character, by the way. The What If novels are very explicitly an AU of Krakoa, where the appearing X-Men are concerned. An AU of Krakoa where Kitty was raised by Emma. They, supposedly, aspire to be portraying a more serious version of her character than is typical.

But a lot of readers do get to the final chapters of A Dance with Dragons, and come away with the certain impression that it amounted to a hard character reset, and Martin intended for nothing that came before to matter to Daenerys' journey going forward. That interpretation is still out there. It's been out there since Dance was published, I don't think it's just happenstance that some readers seem to get there so easily. Maybe Martin did just decide he'd had his fun little detour worldbuilding in Essos while the real plot was moving forward elsewhere, and the time had come to course correct.

If you look back to the original tropes that Daenerys' character was subverting, of the sister of the exiled prince, and of the mother of the prince born in exile, the subversion is that she survives when they don't. Moving forward from that point, what was established could work just as well for the saga villain as one of its heroes. I think there's definitely a reality out there where we're presented with evil dragon queen Daenerys from the very get-go, and we all stan. He could have written a very sympathetic story about a lonely exile who finds solace in these ancient prophesies, thinks she's the chosen one, and can't let herself see that she's marching toward ruin and taking everyone else with her. The problem is we have five books where that hasn't happened, neither she nor anyone in her camp believe she is the promised prince, and she still has no idea that any of this is going on!

(And he also already wrote that story about someone named Stannis)

One of the archetypal X-Men plots, even all the way back to Shooter's original Secret Wars miniseries, is to have one or more of the X-Men working as an outlaw to expose government malfeasance, or to correct some other grand injustice, while facing misguided opposition from an Avenger. It's been traditional to use Tony or Steve in that role, but you only have to look at Uncanny Avengers to understand why they would never actually do that in character. Peter Parker, however, is a much more natural choice. In a lot of ways he's the biggest cop out of all of the mainstream superheroes, even including all of the ones who are actual cops, and it's easy to see him shutting down any personal unease to blindly do the work of a corrupt government agency.

We spent all of the first game hearing about how the Reapers are an existential threat to all life in the galaxy, that everyone must work as one to oppose them, that nothing matters more. The second game chooses to interrogate what the practical limitations of that stance actually are, or if there should even be any.

The player's new allies were ever present in the background of the previous game, kidnapping and assassinating people that you had come to know. Depending on player customization choices, they may have even had a role in shaping your avatar's personal tragic past. But they still heard the call when many refused it, have recalibrated their goals, and say they're willing to do their part to help. What should Shepard do with that? The game doesn't really have an answer, except for the obvious fact that you cannot progress if you refuse. But even so, it never really stops asking if you're really sure you're doing as you ought to be.

No member of the SR-2's new crew, save for maybe Kasumi, are people that Shepard would have spoken to without a gun the year before. A lesser story would have shied away from Mordin and Miranda's crimes, because the player is inclined to like them, or would have had unsavory politicians like Udina or the Quarian Admiralty disgrace themselves in some more obvious ways, that Shepard could be justified in removing them. Mass Effect 2 denies the player neat, tidy, satisfying answers to its moral quandaries.

The Illusive Man is a malevolent evil whose influence must be removed from the galaxy, and is also Shepard's strongest ally in the fight against the Reapers. Where is the line? Should Shepard and their team ignore Cerberus' nature, because they need them? Should we all say it doesn't really matter, because the STG and the Spectres are just as bad, and not think too hard about what Cerberus is doing when Shepard isn't watching them? Or should Shepard take the high road, walk away, and die?