296 réponses à ce sujet

[Balek-Vriege]

This has been argued in countless threads over and over, but I guess one more post about Synthesis won't hurt. We have to take into account what the Catalyst says and what we see post Synthesis choice (mainly Joker and EDI).

So first lets tackle what the Catalyst says about it:

CL (Catalyst): "There is another solution."

SH (Shepard): "Yeah?"

CL: "Synthesis"

SH: "And that is?"

CL: "Add your energy to the Crucible's. Everything you are will be absorbed and then sent out. The chain reaction will combine all synthetic and organic life into a new framework. A new DNA."

SH: "...I... Don't know..."

CL: "Why not? Synthetics are already a part of you. Can you imagine a life without them?"

SH: "...And there will be peace?"

CL: "...The cycle will end. Synthesis is the final evolution of life, but we need eachother to make it happen.

CL: "You have a difficult decsion to make... (continues to choice gameplay)"

So what did the Catalyst just say?

-Everything, synthetic or organic, will be changed to include aspects of both using Shepard as a blueprint.
-It will be the final step in evolution for everything, giving all races, species and life the same template (everything having a hybrid "DNA").
-Because everything will have a common basis of thought, purpose and being, the cycles will end. Notice the Catalyst doesn't say "Yes" flat out when Shepard asks "...And there will be peace?"

Organics gain the abilities of Synthetics (possibly higher logic, intelligence, AI-like processing etc.) and Synthetics gain the abilities of Organics (possibly gaining empathy, higher or lower purpose, self-identity etc).

What we don't know (especially with the Catalyst's evasive answer to the peace question) is how such a Galaxy would look like in the long term and if we would still have feelings etc. on the same level we do now. That's where the EDI/Joker scene comes in. Obviously they're still in love and quite happy with eachother. Showing they're more less the same as they were before, but showing visual signs of synthesis augmentation. To a lesser extent, the soldiers on Earth seem to still be thinking normally after being hit the blast (Looking around like "...Uh, what just happened?").

Based off the above there may still be war, peace, love, loss, joy and happiness, but the cycle of organics being wiped out by Synthetics in a war of extinction will end. It's possible the need or will to build synthetics, ever, is now gone. Of course the artificial Reaper cycles end as well. The same way they do for all the endings.

Even if Synthetics were created or new primordial goo (likely) did form post Synthesis and weren't affected by it, those lifeforms would still have to compete with the massively superior races of transorganic and transynthetic beings. The same way organics are destined to fail against synthetics applies to why synthetics/organics would fail against synthesis races.

So what's the real problem with the ending? The sacrifice or "uh oh" moment?

It's the following moral/ethical question:

Does Shepard have the right to unilaterally force an evolutionary direction, no matter how perfect, benevolent and beneficial, on every single form of life in the Galaxy, at the expense of their right to choose for themselves? A decision which will likely railroad evolution in one direction, if not stop the natural evolution of things forever?

I myself was ok with making that choice for the "Greater Good." I admit that I have never been a pushover when it comes to "free will" or the "freedom to choice" in all cases, which makes me a hypocrit on many things. But the Synthesis was a one time opportunity to fix the problems of civilization and the dark sides of technological progress forever. The very things explored with the Reapers (Reaper cycles), Geth/Quarian conflict (the cycle Reapers prevent on a larger scale), Krogan/Asari Upliftment, Resource depletion (Drell), etc etc.

If you have serious ethical problems with deciding everyones fate so drastically, then Synthesis may not be the ending for you.

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 08 avril 2012 - 09:49 .

[Baronesa]

Pottumuusi wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

"This person will kill in the future, so we will throw him/her in jail"

Well, if you could know that for certain, which you can't, then yes.

It is unknowable...

And in your hypothetic case of the person being an omniscient god...

If such being knows EVERYTHING that was, is and will be... then it could have stopped the mass murdered before he even acted... If such entity does not stop it before acting, then it does not care for the action, or is actively malevolent and condones such act.

So any omniscient being that is faced with a mass murdered, and didn't stopped him before he commited the act, is not going to punish it at all, because if it was such an abhorrent act to such being, it would have not allowed for it to happen, if such being consider such an act evil.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
- Epicurus

Modifié par Baronesa, 08 avril 2012 - 09:49 .

[BurningArmor]

I feel the need to quote Sgt Nantz from the movie, Battle: Los Angeles. "There was no right answer. You could go left; you could go right. It didn't matter."

[Tigerman123]

The Reapers were as much a victim of the Catalyst as any husk or banshee; they aren't culpable for any crimes they committed while under its influence. It's simple logic to assume that they're controlled in a similar manner to the aforementioned creatures, the star child doesn't have ethical qualms, it simply follows its directive to preserve organic life and it does so in the most efficient manner possible. That doesn't really allow for dissent, if a Reaper could choose whether or not to follow orders, not only would that reduce their overall military effectiveness, but it could endanger the Catalyst's project. It has been demonstrated through out the series, that the Reapers or whatever compels them have no respect for the sanctity of individuals' bodies or minds, there's no reason that this shouldn't apply to the Reapers themselves, now that they've been revealed to be merely subordinates. It is true that they're still allowed some measure of sapience, unlike the lesser creatures, in line with their role as the arks preserving species and civilizations, but it's likely limited.

I think the strongest argument for their not being in control of their own faculties, is simply that it would make little sense for them to do so. Reapers' intellects are constructed from the gestalt minds of billions of disparate individuals from many cultures, not only that, each individual ship is created from a different species, each with it's own idiosyncratic viewpoint. Does it make any sense that these heterogeneous creatures would all follow a uniform agenda? It is difficult enough to reconcile groups of humans together, let alone these bizarre beings. It's quite strange to imagine them even wanting to perpetuate that goal. We know from Chakwas and Chambers that the preamble to being harvested is horrific; given that it's likely that something of an individual survives liquefaction, why would an organism that has billions of copies of that memory wish to inflict that upon others? Some of the Reapers should have qualms, that they don't is indicative of control, whether in the Jesuit educational sense, or simple domination

[DocDoomII]

Eudaemonium wrote...

DJBare wrote...

DocDoomII wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you are giving BioWare exactly what they wanted by speculating this much?

Reapers merging organics with themselves is in no way speculation, it's what they do.

In the immortal words of Harbinger: "We are your genetic destiny."

I was referring to the fact that you all are speculating on which of the 3 little piles of crap is the less crappy. Not only in this thread, but in many others.

The only thing worth of speculation is how we felt when faced to the end and the sudden realization that we paid for 3 little piles of crap.

I felt like the Batman suddenly knocked me down and stole my icecream, then run away while laughing at me.

[DJBare]

The reaper do NOT leave in synthesis! "ALL ORGANIC AND SYNTHETIC LIFE IS MERGED"; the galaxy's population are now REAPERS.

[Joush]

Synthesis ends all conflict between organic and synthetic life. Of course, you can't just do by makeing everything cybernetic. Cyborges would fight each other, as humans, geth and everyone else has proven that people don't need different races to fight each other.

So instead, it combines every intelligence in the universe into one. With no free thought or will, all minds are one and there is no longer the differences in perspective and needs that lead to conflict between even identical people.

Synthesis, logically, kills everything to replace it with a homogeneous over mind with no diversety and no conflict.

[The Angry One]

kimuji wrote...

How do you expect to sue, put the Reapers on a trial or punish them? We are not even sure they have any free will. They're not even a civilization (they don't have cilvilians, citizens, art, culture, spirituality etc...). The Starchild basically says they are mere tools (though like everything he says it could also be just a lie). I'm not even sure they can feel guilt. I see them more like a huge technological disaster or natural predators than criminals. Even the Geth are by far a more advanced society than the Reapers.

Whether they're under control or not, Reapers like Harbinger have revelled in their actions. Reapers like Sovereign are full of contempt for anything that is not a Reaper. Even common Destroyers seek to condescend to organics.
They are essentially worthless creatures who's sole defining trait is unbelievable malice.

Modifié par The Angry One, 08 avril 2012 - 09:49 .

[savionen]

DJBare wrote...

The reaper do NOT leave in synthesis! "ALL ORGANIC AND SYNTHETIC LIFE IS MERGED"; the galaxy's population are now REAPERS.

And because of this, Reapers are still basically.... superior synthetic-organics. Maybe they'll be like "Well, the reign of terror is now over..... it's time for a new reign of terror not restricted by the Catalyst!"

[Pottumuusi]

Baronesa wrote...

Pottumuusi wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

"This person will kill in the future, so we will throw him/her in jail"

Well, if you could know that for certain, which you can't, then yes.

It is unknowable...

And in your hypthetic case of the person being an omniscient god...

If such being knows EVERYTHING that was, is and will be... then it coudl have stopped the mass murdered before he even acted... If such entity does not stop it before acting, then it does not care fo r the action, or is actively malevolent and condones such act.

So any omniscient being that is faced with a mass murdered, and didn't stopepd him before he commited the act, is not going to punish it at all, because if it was such an abhorrent act to such being, it would have not allowe for it to happen.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
- Epicurus

This is irrelevant. The point was that there is no possibility that this guy will ever kill again.
After that I asked "what do you do?" to see if The Angry One believed in punishing criminals even if it serves no functional purpose.

So the omniscience part was to distinguish this hypothetical from real life, in which case I think that of course murderers should be imprisoned, because they will likely kill again, and imprisonment will prevent that. It however has nothing to do with punishing them.

Modifié par Pottumuusi, 08 avril 2012 - 09:53 .

[Necrotron]

Shepard has no logical or moral choices at the end.

[firebladec]

jengelb1 wrote...

firebladec wrote...

kimuji wrote...

forsaken gamer wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

Not necessarily.

The Catalyst stated that the Crucible changed it and opened it up to new possibilities.  This was from the work of the
Protheans and other extinct races, and by us, when the Crucible was designed and built.  They could have changed/infected the Catalyst's programming.  The Catalyst could possibly be rendered to simply being the messenger for the architects of the Crucible, by giving us these three choices.

You still do what they wanted to. The Starchild says the synthesis is a mean to prevent wars between organics and synthetics, which is precisely the Reapers goal (according to what he says about synthetics wiping out organics and the "created rebels against creator" thing). With the blue ending you force them to retreat, with the red you destroy them. But with the green ending you don't force the Reapers to retreat they do that by themselves so that means they AGREE. They accept that solution so yes, you gave them what they wanted.

just because it is the reapers goal does not necessarily make it bad.  

is a war between synthetics and "organics"  good?

Sure the reapers methods are nasty to put it mildly, that doesnt necessarily make the goal a bad thing.

Ah yes "war between synthetics and organics". We have dismissed that claim.

Seriously though, this "total war" they claim to be preventing only exists in the insane minds of the reapers themselves. We didn't need the crucible at all. We needed a s**tload of cyber-thorazine.

ok the goal is quite possibly stupid and over simplistic, along with the endings , but the question is it bad?

heard the expression “let the baby have his bottle”?

if the goal isnt incompatible is there a problem (edit: with giving them what they want)?

Modifié par firebladec, 08 avril 2012 - 09:56 .

[DJBare]

savionen wrote...

DJBare wrote...
The reaper do NOT leave in synthesis! "ALL ORGANIC AND SYNTHETIC LIFE IS MERGED"; the galaxy's population are now REAPERS.

And because of this, Reapers are still basically.... superior synthetic-organics. Maybe they'll be like "Well, the reign of terror is now over..... it's time for a new reign of terror not restricted by the Catalyst!"

They have no need for anymore reign of terror, their intentions were sincere whether we agree with it or not, to stop the chaos, their ultimate goal "ascension" is achieved through synthesis.

[jengelb1]

firebladec wrote...

jengelb1 wrote...

firebladec wrote...

kimuji wrote...

forsaken gamer wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

Not necessarily.

The Catalyst stated that the Crucible changed it and opened it up to new possibilities.  This was from the work of the
Protheans and other extinct races, and by us, when the Crucible was designed and built.  They could have changed/infected the Catalyst's programming.  The Catalyst could possibly be rendered to simply being the messenger for the architects of the Crucible, by giving us these three choices.

You still do what they wanted to. The Starchild says the synthesis is a mean to prevent wars between organics and synthetics, which is precisely the Reapers goal (according to what he says about synthetics wiping out organics and the "created rebels against creator" thing). With the blue ending you force them to retreat, with the red you destroy them. But with the green ending you don't force the Reapers to retreat they do that by themselves so that means they AGREE. They accept that solution so yes, you gave them what they wanted.

just because it is the reapers goal does not necessarily make it bad.  

is a war between synthetics and "organics"  good?

Sure the reapers methods are nasty to put it mildly, that doesnt necessarily make the goal a bad thing.

Ah yes "war between synthetics and organics". We have dismissed that claim.

Seriously though, this "total war" they claim to be preventing only exists in the insane minds of the reapers themselves. We didn't need the crucible at all. We needed a s**tload of cyber-thorazine.

ok the goal is quite possibly stupid and over simplistic, along with the endings , but the question is it bad?

heard the expression “let the baby have his bottle”?

if the goal isnt incompatible is there a problem?

It's bad.
It's like killing a child because a psychotic person tells you that the voices in his head told him that the child is the antichrist. The catalyst is psychotic. That fact taints everything it says.

[SiriusXI]

yeah, green ending is some serious racist sh**! it blows my mind that the writers actually thought this was good. i'm a history teacher and if i should have children someday i wouldn't want them to experience this logic that is tepresented as a good solution... i certainly will discuss this at school, should one of my students mention mass effect 3.

[Baronesa]

Pottumuusi wrote...

So the omniscience part was to distinguish this hypothetical from real life, in which case I think that of course murderers should be imprisoned, because they will likely kill again, and imprisonment will prevent that. It however has nothing to do with punishing them.

And this is the problem.

I am for personal responsability, that means everyone should be held accountable for their actions, that can ONLY happen ex post facto.

What you are advocating is punishing people for actions they have not even performed, the difference is that you call it prevention. And it also seems that for you the past actions bear no weight as long as the future is different.

In your view, a person kills 10 people, but then due to many circumstance, you know that person will never kill again or commit any crime, according to YOUR criteria, such person should remain free.

In the other extreme, a person has never commited a crime, but you know for sure it will eventually kill 10 people, so you lock that person up so he does not kill those 10 people.


Do you see where the problem lies?


You are discarding personal responsability, people are not responsible for their actions, they can do as they please cause they are not held accountable for whatever they have done, however you do hold them accountable for what they MAY or may not do.

[Ieldra]

Tigerman123 wrote...
The Reapers were as much a victim of the Catalyst as any husk or banshee; they aren't culpable for any crimes they committed while under its influence. It's simple logic to assume that they're controlled in a similar manner to the aforementioned creatures, the star child doesn't have ethical qualms, it simply follows its directive to preserve organic life and it does so in the most efficient manner possible. That doesn't really allow for dissent, if a Reaper could choose whether or not to follow orders, not only would that reduce their overall military effectiveness, but it could endanger the Catalyst's project. It has been demonstrated through out the series, that the Reapers or whatever compels them have no respect for the sanctity of individuals' bodies or minds, there's no reason that this shouldn't apply to the Reapers themselves, now that they've been revealed to be merely subordinates. It is true that they're still allowed some measure of sapience, unlike the lesser creatures, in line with their role as the arks preserving species and civilizations, but it's likely limited.

I think the strongest argument for their not being in control of their own faculties, is simply that it would make little sense for them to do so. Reapers' intellects are constructed from the gestalt minds of billions of disparate individuals from many cultures, not only that, each individual ship is created from a different species, each with it's own idiosyncratic viewpoint. Does it make any sense that these heterogeneous creatures would all follow a uniform agenda? It is difficult enough to reconcile groups of humans together, let alone these bizarre beings. It's quite strange to imagine them even wanting to perpetuate that goal. We know from Chakwas and Chambers that the preamble to being harvested is horrific; given that it's likely that something of an individual survives liquefaction, why would an organism that has billions of copies of that memory wish to inflict that upon others? Some of the Reapers should have qualms, that they don't is indicative of control, whether in the Jesuit educational sense, or simple domination

QFT.

That's exactly why I find the idea of freeing the Reapers from the Catalyst's control appealing. The species contained in them wouldn't have any reason to be hostile to the organics, and in fact the Synthesis ending shows that they aren't because they leave on their own.  In fact, you could reasonably argue that they could become allies. 

[soulprovider]

SnakesSon wrote...

EvilMind wrote...

I have no idea what are you talking about, I think Synthesis is best option. So far I dont see any good argument against it in this thread. I'd love to hear facts why you think its bad, only facts, not vague assumptions

I swear I'm making the rounds against Synthesis today, but here goes.

1-You're rewriting the DNA of not just one species, but everyone in the galaxy without their permission. This is kind of a dick move.
    -not to mention that its almost impossible to make an evolutionary change and goes completely against the science of the game.

2-Homogenizing an entire galaxy is bad. This will curb different opinions, advancements in technology, or idealogies completely. Javik even says that's why his empire fell in the end.
         - absoluetely correct 
3-You're doing close to what Saren wanted in the first place; compromising with the Reapers to make sure they don't kill all of us, just enslave us. Nice.
       -I personally think bioware forgot about mass effect 1's story otherwise start child would have never been in the game it completely invalidates the first games story.

4-Synthetics weren't killing Organics because they weren't Synthetic. That makes no sense from a logical standpoint, and the Geth knew it. They were simply defending themselves from the bloodthirsty Quarians who couldn't handle having their creations become smart.
       -It almost seems like the catalyst is thinking from an irrational organic point of view but once again is contradicted by both harbringer and sovereign. "Mass efffect 1+2" we've dismissed those claims

5-There's no guarantee someone won't build another Synthetic race that decides it's time to kill the partly synthetic humans.
    - theres no garruntee about anything.

6-It's racist. It's racist. It's RACIST. This one needed a lot of emphasis.
    - agreed, it basically states that diversity will result in destruction and to be diverse will kill you all. I'm no fan of the word diversity because we've lost our culture here but to say that its an absolute evil is taking it too far.

7-It goes against key themes in the Mass Effect trilogy. One of the main themes is unification of all people despite, and indeed because of their differences. The differences of the species gives them powerful advantages used to win wars. If this wasn't a key theme, please explain to me why we spent half of the game forging alliances between the aliens.
     -agreed though I think your not taking it far enough, it destroys the entire franchise in 10 minutes.

8-What the hell is everyone going to eat now that EVERYTHING is partly synthetic? How far did you go in butchering the genetic code of an entire galaxy? How does anything work? How will people reproduce? How will EDI and Joker repopulate a planet? WHAT?!
                 -there synthetic hunger is not needed, basically your machine parts will supplement your organic parts........ I know it doesn't make sense but this is what biowares going to try anf go with. just watch.

I think that's quite enough. If you have any problems with my points, feel free to acknowledge them so I can counter-argue. I could do this all day.

Edit: Oh, and as Zix13 said right above me, Starchild, the 'god' who is imposing these horrific choices on you, is pretty jazzed about Synthesis. That's enough alone for most people to steer clear.

So many issues with the ending, apart from it destroying the frranchise story line, it doesn't even make sense on its own rules. which were established with 14 lines of dialogue. did a 5 year old write this what the hell.

[Balek-Vriege]

DJBare wrote...

savionen wrote...

DJBare wrote...
The reaper do NOT leave in synthesis! "ALL ORGANIC AND SYNTHETIC LIFE IS MERGED"; the galaxy's population are now REAPERS.

And because of this, Reapers are still basically.... superior synthetic-organics. Maybe they'll be like "Well, the reign of terror is now over..... it's time for a new reign of terror not restricted by the Catalyst!"

They have no need for anymore reign of terror, their intentions were sincere whether we agree with it or not, to stop the chaos, their ultimate goal "ascension" is achieved through synthesis.

They're not Reapers.

-Synthesis races are individuals, synthetic and organic, who are perfected evolutionary hybrids.  They are the same people and things they were Pre-Synthesis, but "better."
-The Reapers are also perfected evolutionary hybrids, but are war machines doubling as space arks, created with the consciousness and DNA of millions and billions of a single race.  They're a twisted memorial and enslaved beings that execute a plan.

[jengelb1]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Tigerman123 wrote...
The Reapers were as much a victim of the Catalyst as any husk or banshee; they aren't culpable for any crimes they committed while under its influence. It's simple logic to assume that they're controlled in a similar manner to the aforementioned creatures, the star child doesn't have ethical qualms, it simply follows its directive to preserve organic life and it does so in the most efficient manner possible. That doesn't really allow for dissent, if a Reaper could choose whether or not to follow orders, not only would that reduce their overall military effectiveness, but it could endanger the Catalyst's project. It has been demonstrated through out the series, that the Reapers or whatever compels them have no respect for the sanctity of individuals' bodies or minds, there's no reason that this shouldn't apply to the Reapers themselves, now that they've been revealed to be merely subordinates. It is true that they're still allowed some measure of sapience, unlike the lesser creatures, in line with their role as the arks preserving species and civilizations, but it's likely limited.

I think the strongest argument for their not being in control of their own faculties, is simply that it would make little sense for them to do so. Reapers' intellects are constructed from the gestalt minds of billions of disparate individuals from many cultures, not only that, each individual ship is created from a different species, each with it's own idiosyncratic viewpoint. Does it make any sense that these heterogeneous creatures would all follow a uniform agenda? It is difficult enough to reconcile groups of humans together, let alone these bizarre beings. It's quite strange to imagine them even wanting to perpetuate that goal. We know from Chakwas and Chambers that the preamble to being harvested is horrific; given that it's likely that something of an individual survives liquefaction, why would an organism that has billions of copies of that memory wish to inflict that upon others? Some of the Reapers should have qualms, that they don't is indicative of control, whether in the Jesuit educational sense, or simple domination

QFT.

That's exactly why I find the idea of freeing the Reapers from the Catalyst's control appealing. The species contained in them wouldn't have any reason to be hostile to the organics, and in fact the Synthesis ending shows that they aren't because they leave on their own.  In fact, you could reasonably argue that they could become allies. 

If that is true, they're most likely leaving to kill themselves.

Think about it, could you live with yourself if you had the blood of billions on your hands?:

I doubt many of us could. I'm not sure I'd want to know the people who could...

[DJBare]

Balek-Vriege wrote...

They're not Reapers.

-Synthesis races are individuals, synthetic and organic, who are perfected evolutionary hybrids.  They are the same people and things they were Pre-Synthesis, but "better."
-The Reapers are also perfected evolutionary hybrids, but are war machines doubling as space arks, created with the consciousness and DNA of millions and billions of a single race.  They're a twisted memorial and enslaved beings that execute a plan.

Okay, let me put this in a way that is more logical, I choose not to be merged, your argument against my choice is?

[cardinalally]

@ Richard 060: you managed to sum up everything that I find wrong with this ending much better than I can at the moment
*fyi not even drunk logic can save the ending...all you'll get is drunk raging at starbrat and a massive hangover the next day*

[SupR G]

 

Happy Easter.

[firebladec]

jengelb1 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Tigerman123 wrote...
The Reapers were as much a victim of the Catalyst as any husk or banshee; they aren't culpable for any crimes they committed while under its influence. It's simple logic to assume that they're controlled in a similar manner to the aforementioned creatures, the star child doesn't have ethical qualms, it simply follows its directive to preserve organic life and it does so in the most efficient manner possible. That doesn't really allow for dissent, if a Reaper could choose whether or not to follow orders, not only would that reduce their overall military effectiveness, but it could endanger the Catalyst's project. It has been demonstrated through out the series, that the Reapers or whatever compels them have no respect for the sanctity of individuals' bodies or minds, there's no reason that this shouldn't apply to the Reapers themselves, now that they've been revealed to be merely subordinates. It is true that they're still allowed some measure of sapience, unlike the lesser creatures, in line with their role as the arks preserving species and civilizations, but it's likely limited.

I think the strongest argument for their not being in control of their own faculties, is simply that it would make little sense for them to do so. Reapers' intellects are constructed from the gestalt minds of billions of disparate individuals from many cultures, not only that, each individual ship is created from a different species, each with it's own idiosyncratic viewpoint. Does it make any sense that these heterogeneous creatures would all follow a uniform agenda? It is difficult enough to reconcile groups of humans together, let alone these bizarre beings. It's quite strange to imagine them even wanting to perpetuate that goal. We know from Chakwas and Chambers that the preamble to being harvested is horrific; given that it's likely that something of an individual survives liquefaction, why would an organism that has billions of copies of that memory wish to inflict that upon others? Some of the Reapers should have qualms, that they don't is indicative of control, whether in the Jesuit educational sense, or simple domination

QFT.

That's exactly why I find the idea of freeing the Reapers from the Catalyst's control appealing. The species contained in them wouldn't have any reason to be hostile to the organics, and in fact the Synthesis ending shows that they aren't because they leave on their own.  In fact, you could reasonably argue that they could become allies. 

If that is true, they're most likely leaving to kill themselves.

Think about it, could you live with yourself if you had the blood of billions on your hands?:

I doubt many of us could. I'm not sure I'd want to know the people who could...

that or spend the rest of your existance trying to make up for it