why would you kill trevor anyway, Michael is the one who deserved it the most
but I chose to keep all 3 of them alive because I already feared that I couldn't play that character anymore - I was lucky
I'd argue compelling cases for both Trevor or Michael being off'ed could be made. I couldn't help but feel bad for the dumb but well-meaning Floyd, Trevor basically ruined his life, and then ended it. Same with boot F'ing Johnny after banging his old lady at the start there. Trevor's a hell of a lot of fun to play with in GTA, but he's basically a huge, psychotic S.O.B. that deserved to die.
As soon as i learned i could off T, I did it. No regrets, no looking back. He's a horrible, horrible character. He destroyed Dwayne's life just to have a loyal follower, he obliterated Floyd's life, too. Floyd died for no reason. Johnny died for no reason - Rockstar wanted to show T as a badass, and in doing so he looks like a dick .He is a dick. He complains over and over about how Michael betrayed him, but he did the same to his "friends". He's got some redeeming features, but how he acts toward Michael (and how childish he is when talking about him to Franklin), Floyd and Dwayne and Ron, Johnny, I found him a very unlikable character. Some of the development was good, speaking as a writer, but it was all hidden behind Rockstar trying too hard to make him tough, and when i had the option to kill him, well I hate JK's death, but mostly, I felt like i was getting revenge for Floyd. I liked Floyd.
I'd like to have had a "D" ending where Franklin gets offed - not because i disliked him, but because i think it'd be interesting. C is the canon ending, clearly, but killing T felt very satisfying to me.
I'd much rather the story to have been such that made me, and many others, to have liked Trevor. His introduction prevented that. JK is one of my favourite characters. Rockstar had to know that such an act would alienate some people - sure some people didn't like him and that's fine, but they have to understand that seeing that even would be difficult for JK fans, and more to the point, it actually sets Trevor up as an antagonist - GTA has always taught us that "he who f*cks with the protag gets f*cked in turn" - so he who f*cks with JK, even in V, is set up as the enemy. But he's you. So therefore that character, for some (or many), is simply unlikable. Throughout the game, while T has some redeeming features and opens up some cool things, but at the end of the day he's always going to be that unlikable character for me. That's my opinion of course. As a writer, objectively, I think JK's demise makes sense, but it's definitely there for one reason - shock. It's not there for a serious narrative point. It's not a commentary of how drugs can mess you up, it's not a commentary on how rage can lead to events, it's Rockstar killing off a previous protag in a lazy way of making the new one seem tough. It's almost "dues ex machina" - it's a method to convey something wihout it being worked on.
Killing Michael is an interesting thing but one that makes little sense too. Franklin never really berates M for his actions. He seems to understand, but disagree. He seems to act toward trevor in a "get over it" way. And all this, for us to turn on either protag and kill them to save F, seems a but contradictory. The underlying theme of betrayal and loyalty (or lack thereof) is too prevalent for anything other than option C to work. But despite that, despite C being the obvious "canon" if you like (yeah, no one knows that for sure), I found option A the most satisfying.
I hold out hope that some DLC will arise that changes the story and doesn't kill JK or Floyd, and that makes Trevor likable. Won't happen, but I want to like Trevor, and until JK's appearance, I thought i would.