Dwailing wrote...
I've concluded something. There's a reason I hate Control and Synthesis. They will ultimately lead to stagnation. Without conflict, nothing changes. Remember what the Catalyst says? "But the Reapers will be destroyed?" "Yes, but the peace, won't last." That's not a bad thing. Conflict is not a bad thing. We're in some form of conflict every day of our lives. I don't mean war. War and conflict are two different things. War is bad. Conflict is not. And even war has a place, no matter how horrible it is. Would the world be a better place if the U.S. hadn't gone to war with Germany during WW2? I don't think so. That's ultimately the reason the Catalyst is wrong. He was created to end the conflict between organics and synthetics. That's impossible. There will ALWAYS be conflict, it doesn't matter whether it's between organics and synthetics, or just between organics. And if there WAS a way to end conflict, it wouldn't be right.
I agree with what you're saying but I think that Star Bieber was referring to the *inevitable* demise of organics in a conflict between organics and synthetics.
Consider, the outcomes of Control and Synthesis and you'll see that peace and lack of conflict isn't eternal there either:
Synthesis: a massive upgrade in tech and synthetic upgrades for synthetics. It's a new experience certainly but I can't see how a certain level of technology will prevent people from having conflict. Life is different but the underlying currents stay the same, if you get my meaning.
Control: I'm sure some will band together to resist the Reaptatorship. I mean, the galaxy just fought a war to be free from Reapers and now they're being told by the Reapers, "Yeah, we don't want to kill you anymore. As long as you do what we say." ...Yup that will go over well.
So in conclusion, I believe conflict is present in all 3 literal endings...the kid just messed up how it phrased its explanation... the devious little overlord