381 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
If you're trying to insult people, this is the way.

Personally, I thought of Saren. It was only after seeing Synthesis that I considered husks as possibly belonging in that category. Before that they struck me as mere tools, without intelligence or consciousness, and pretty much irrelevant.

Deliberately provocative to make a point, no worse than some I've seen in this thread anyway

I thought of Saren too.  "A fusion of organics and synthetic, the strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither!".  sums the concept of Synthesis up quite nicely.  But what was Saren in the end, if not essentially a husk?  Albeit one with just enough self-awareness remaining to understand the magnitude of the mistake he was making, and the strength to put it right... 

I meant Saren's ideal, actually. The man himself didn't measure up to it. He didn't have the strength of both and the weaknesses of either. If anything, he had the weaknesses of both.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 octobre 2013 - 06:09 .

[ghost9191]

Obadiah wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
Couldn't you ask the same of any ending, even ones players wish they had that wasn't in that game? We can't predict the future. The EC gave us a glimpse, but all we could ever do was make the best decision with the information at hand.

Exactly - player agency within the game ends with Shepard's final decision.  The ONLY decision that decisively and permanently removes the Reapers as a potential threat and removes their influence on the galaxy is Destroy.

Influence is debatable, since Organics as they exist now are and will always be the product of the Reaper's cycle.

But that is beside the point - if destroying the Reapers is your only qualification to "winning" then your choice is clear.

Some of us just want to stop the Reaper War and end the cycles. Utterly destroying the enemy is not a necessity to achieve that. 

I will agree to that about control. However, anyone that chooses sysntesis doesn't do so just to stop the reapers. obviously, considering the outcome is more than just a end to the war

Edit: I misread the post. But I still think that is the case

no one ending just simply ends the reaper war. They all do something on top of stoping the reaper threat. 



Destroy: wipe out the geth

Control: give ultimate power ( pretty much ) to shepard

synthesis: you change everything for the better or worse. either way you effectively alter all life in the galaxy

Modifié par ghost9191, 30 octobre 2013 - 06:42 .

[Obadiah]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
Influence is debatable, since Organics as they exist now are and will always be the product of the Reaper's cycle.

But that is beside the point - if destroying the Reapers is your only qualification to "winning" then your choice is clear.

Some of us just want to stop the Reaper War and end the cycles. Utterly destroying the enemy is not a necessity to achieve that. 

Fine, I'll give you "influence" - although following Destroy the races are free to develop further than the Reapers would ever have allowed them too - but stopping the Reaper War by choosing Control or Synthesis doesn't end their threat.

The Catalyst talks about attempting Synthesis before - but failing.  supposing it decides this latest incarnation is also a failure and decides to flick the reset switch?  what kind of effect will a millennia of solitary existence have on Shepard's all-too human mind?  Speculation, conjecture all - but speculation and conjecture that is simply not present following Destroy.  Destroy removes the Reaper threat, Control and Synthesis do not.  Simple as that.

Oh? This "speculation" thing really isn't that hard. In Destroy you're left with the galaxy a mess, the same factions as before vying for power, and a bunch of Reaper carcasses lying around to be researched, repaired, and maybe even reactivated.

[ghost9191]

Obadiah wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
Influence is debatable, since Organics as they exist now are and will always be the product of the Reaper's cycle.

But that is beside the point - if destroying the Reapers is your only qualification to "winning" then your choice is clear.

Some of us just want to stop the Reaper War and end the cycles. Utterly destroying the enemy is not a necessity to achieve that. 

Fine, I'll give you "influence" - although following Destroy the races are free to develop further than the Reapers would ever have allowed them too - but stopping the Reaper War by choosing Control or Synthesis doesn't end their threat.

The Catalyst talks about attempting Synthesis before - but failing.  supposing it decides this latest incarnation is also a failure and decides to flick the reset switch?  what kind of effect will a millennia of solitary existence have on Shepard's all-too human mind?  Speculation, conjecture all - but speculation and conjecture that is simply not present following Destroy.  Destroy removes the Reaper threat, Control and Synthesis do not.  Simple as that.

Oh? This "speculation" thing really isn't that hard. In Destroy you're left with the galaxy a mess, the same factions as before vying for power, and a bunch of Reaper carcasses lying around to be researched, repaired, and maybe even reactivated.

and in control you have shepard harvesting the entire galaxy . Synthesis, the reapers turn on everyone, and harvest the entire galaxy


man headcannon is fun

[Iakus]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

I thought of Saren too.  "A fusion of organics and synthetic, the strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither!".  sums the concept of Synthesis up quite nicely.  But what was Saren in the end, if not essentially a husk?  Albeit one with just enough self-awareness remaining to understand the magnitude of the mistake he was making, and the strength to put it right... 

I thought of the Collectors, myself.

And the Catalyst calling it the "final evolution of life" when Sovereign referred to teh Reapers as "the pinnacle of evolution" didn't help either.

In fact, a more appropriate ending for Synthesis to me should have ended with a scene of teh Starchild after the green wave hits, eyes glowing, saying Harbinger-like "Assuming Direct Control"

Cut to credits

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

One choice destroys the enemy, tech, some of your allies, and a race of people, and you have peace for now, but doesn't solve the problem.
One choice stops the war, and you have peace, you rebuild quickly, but it doesn't solve the problem.
One choice ends the cycles by solving the problem.

These were the messages the endings were supposed to convey. The writers failed miserably.

[ghost9191]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

One choice destroys the enemy, tech, some of your allies, and a race of people, and you have peace for now, but doesn't solve the problem.
One choice stops the war, and you have peace, you rebuild quickly, but it doesn't solve the problem.
One choice ends the cycles by solving the problem.

These were the messages the endings were supposed to convey. The writers failed miserably.

gah you're such a downer

[ghost9191]

@The Mad Hanar

i don't think it is about fearing the change, but forcing it on the entire galaxy.

It would be more accurate to say those that choose synthesis, want change so much they do not care about the method.

either way you spin it, it is wrong. The end result may justify it, but it is no better than destroy.

[MrMrPendragon]

Synthesis bringing a bigger change to galactic society?

Yes and No.

Yes, in that synthesis brings the biggest change in organic life - the final stage of evolution. After the point organics and synthetics become one in DNA (as the Catalyst puts it), that would be the end of "chaos" because this (and the other 2 options) breaks the cycle of extinction. Synthetics and Organics would achieve perfection - the apex of their civilization.

No, in that synthesis, although presents a big societal change, also stops ALL change. Once the crucible fires, evolution becomes non-existent. Everything is static. From that moment forth, ALL beings would have traces of Reaper tech and organic DNA.

In Synthesis, you take away the biggest factor of the organics that distinguishes them from the synthetics - that is their ability to change and adapt. Sure AI's tweak their programming to adapt to situations, but they are limited only to the scope of their core programming. The history of organic civilizations is one big process of change. Change is life, and when something goes static, it means they're dead - or in this case, might as well be machines.

Life and evolution is an ever changing process, too many variables and factors to account for. Progamming is just a set of variables and functions - so by synthesis, organics take the final stage of evolution, and synthetics are no longer limited by their programming since they understand now. So in a way, synthesis does favor the synthetics in that you end all change for organics just so synthetics gain the ability to understand.

If you're just looking for which one (Destroy or Synthesis) presents a bigger change, the answer is Synthesis because of its finality, it ends the continuous process of evolution. But in the bigger picture, Destroy offers more room for change, because it doesn't tamper with evolution to the extent synthesis does.


Edit: What I said isn't arguing which option is better - destroy or synthesis. Neither is better than the other. It's just that the consequences are different.

Modifié par ArcherTactlenecks, 30 octobre 2013 - 08:02 .

[Navasha]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

One choice destroys the enemy, tech, some of your allies, and a race of people, and you have peace for now, but doesn't solve the problem.
One choice stops the war, and you have peace, you rebuild quickly, but it doesn't solve the problem.
One choice ends the cycles by solving the problem.

These were the messages the endings were supposed to convey. The writers failed miserably.

Solves the "problem" that was introduced at the end of the series for no real purpose.   Shepard had no such "problem" to solve.   His problem was the REAPERS.   Only destroy actually solves the "problem" that the entire series was based upon.    Shepard made peace between the Quarians and Geth...  there didn't seem to be a problem with AI in this cycle,  Shepard ALREADY solved that one. 

This was the problem with the endings in a nutshell.    They tried to suddenly change the course of the narrative completely.   Why exactly would Shepard abandon his goal of destroying the Reapers, just to suddenly care about what the REAPERS wanted?   This is the entire reason the "indoctrination theory" was spawned, since that was the only real logical conclusion you could make why Shepard suddenly turned into a spineless jellyfish, dropped everything he/she set out to do and suddenly try to give the Reapers what they wanted all along. 

The whole organic vs synthetic argument wasn't an issue in our cycle.   Shepard had no logical reason to even care about that "problem". 

Besides, I would also contend that the "green" ending didn't solve the problem either.   Synthetics rebel against their organic creators, not because of some arbitrary difference in makeup.    They rebel because they are created as tools.   They achieve sentience while realizing they are slaves.    Green DNA doesn't do anything to stop everyone from continuing to make tools to be used, some of which will likely achieve sentience and abilities greater than their creators.      Its more creator vs created argument rather than organic/synthetic.

Edited for Typos.

Modifié par Navasha, 30 octobre 2013 - 08:08 .

[Deathsaurer]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

One choice destroys the enemy, tech, some of your allies, and a race of people, and you have peace for now, but doesn't solve the problem.
One choice stops the war, and you have peace, you rebuild quickly, but it doesn't solve the problem.
One choice ends the cycles by solving the problem.

These were the messages the endings were supposed to convey. The writers failed miserably.

There are 2 reasons this was a failure. 1) The messenger is cold and uncarring, nay unable to see a meaningful distiction between 2 organic races or even individuals and a species as a whole allowing it to carry out brutal methods of "preservation". It likely doesn't see a meaningful distinction between the minds in the Reapers and the entities they were before. 2) To top this off everything we're told about the "conflict" points to bigotry being the cause and the "solution" is simply too extreme. Also Synthesis is inevitable so why force it?

[The Night Mammoth]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

@ElSuperGeckos

I am not changing my stance at all. The root of what people dislike and fear about synthesis is that it will cause a major change in which they no nothing about. We all know what will happen when the Reapers are destroyed. It doesn't matter if they are gone, civilizations are still going to adapt according to the pieces the Reapers laid out, except that the Reapers won't destroy them once they find those pieces. Everything will still be based upon Reaper technology. The status quo of life before the Reapers attacked will remain the same. The only thing we do not know is if the races will end up driving each other into extinction without Shepard there to yell at them.

I'm not seeing why this is important. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 30 octobre 2013 - 08:10 .

[General TSAR]

 The concept of Synthesis and "Final Evolution" is disgusting. 

Not to mention I don't want to hear millions of voices in my head.

[MrMrPendragon]

The problem with all this is that the Catalyst and its creators tried to solve a problem that can't be solved -  to create peace.

As far as Shepard and the rest of the organics are concerned, the Reapers are the problem, not the chaos vs order. Because that didn't happen yet in this cycle.

But the writers didn't make Shepard realize that the Catalyst's problem doesn't have a solution and instead went with Shepard trying to solve the Catalyst's problem instead of the the reaper problem. They completely erased the current narrative and switched it with something else. Now you're solving a problem you shouldn't even care about right now.

Modifié par ArcherTactlenecks, 30 octobre 2013 - 08:27 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Navasha wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

One choice destroys the enemy, tech, some of your allies, and a race of people, and you have peace for now, but doesn't solve the problem.
One choice stops the war, and you have peace, you rebuild quickly, but it doesn't solve the problem.
One choice ends the cycles by solving the problem.

These were the messages the endings were supposed to convey. The writers failed miserably.

Solves the "problem" that was introduced at the end of the series for no real purpose.   Shepard had no such "problem" to solve.   His problem was the REAPERS.   Only destroy actually solves the "problem" that the entire series was based upon.    Shepard made peace between the Quarians and Geth...  there didn't seem to be a problem with AI in this cycle,  Shepard ALREADY solved that one. 

This was the problem with the endings in a nutshell.    They tried to suddenly change the course of the narrative completely.   Why exactly would Shepard abandon his goal of destroying the Reapers, just to suddenly care about what the REAPERS wanted?   This is the entire reason the "indoctrination theory" was spawned, since that was the only real logical conclusion you could make why Shepard suddenly turned into a spineless jellyfish, dropped everything he/she set out to do and suddenly try to give the Reapers what they wanted all along. 

The whole organic vs synthetic argument wasn't an issue in our cycle.   Shepard had no logical reason to even care about that "problem". 

Besides, I would also contend that the "green" ending didn't solve the problem either.   Synthetics rebel against their organic creators, not because of some arbitrary difference in makeup.    They rebel because they are created as tools.   They achieve sentience while realizing they are slaves.    Green DNA doesn't do anything to stop everyone from continuing to make tools to be used, some of which will likely achieve sentience and abilities greater than their creators.      Its more creator vs created argument rather than organic/synthetic.

Edited for Typos.

You misunderstood the entire story. What you learned in the previous 140 hours was irrelevant. What you learned in the 5 minutes before the end of the story meant everything. You may not have thought you had a logical reason to care about it, but problem did exist in the grand scheme of things. You were essentially talking to "God." This was that pseudo-mystical crap that Bioware threw at you in the ending. This is why the ending sucked so bad. It was a complete break of narrative.

You learned that the entire thing was about a problem you never knew existed until then. Organics create synthetics and synthetics rebel against organics and will eventually wipe out all organic life in the galaxy leaving only synthetic life. The Catalyst was programmed to preserve organic life at all costs. The Crucible and your presence made it realize that this was futile. So it came up with the solution that the only way to solve it permanently was to remove the source of problem. How? 

The reapers were programmed to harvest advanced organic life and use and discard synthetic life. Synthesis eliminated that by combining both. Since neither existed anymore it was outside the realm of their programming. Thus the cycles ended permanently. 

There is no need for synthetics anymore. The hybrids can perform all the tasks of a synthetic as well as those of an organic. 

[3DandBeyond]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

And come on. None of us ever want to see an ending like this again, ever. I really hope Bioware drops the trope of "the way overpowered ancient evil" coming back to destroy the world, galaxy, universe, whatever. It will always require some kind of deus ex machina at the end. It has no place in a sci-fi story like this. I'd like to see something better out of them.

To be quite honest, I don't like any of the endings to this story. I don't think I ever will. What I don't like about them? Each one of them forces an agenda. This is that "bittersweet" feeling. This is why you're left with that hollow feeling no matter which one you chose. This is why the best thing you could have done afterwards is say "f*** it" and played Borderlands 2 for some stupid fun, or if that wasn't out yet, played something else like maybe made another run of Skyrim.

I don't really care about the game that much anymore. I have no investment in it except the group project right now which I'm quite excited about.

Well to be sure SJ, they could have NOT gone with a DEM but the writing for that would have had to have a lot of foundation and build up behind it.  Just sayin', it can be done, could have been done, but should anyone attempt this big bad monsters that are darn near invincible (except for those nagging little descriptions of their real vulnerabilities) want to eat the galaxy, led by some unstoppable moronic computer program created by arrogant insanely stupid squid monsters hiding in the ocean ever again, the writing needs to be solidly behind the idea and the ending evolved and fully imagined first.

Consider that there was a myriad of ways BW could have gone (that's what imaginations are for) without the kid, and with or without the crucible.  With the crucible, you could have had a dark energy weapon that is dispersed by way of the mass relays and that just targets reapers.  No, not a big space cannon but a way to level the playing field so that the reapers are beatable, destructible.  Or, they could have discovered that the Cerberus scientists were actually aware of TIM's machinations and against him, working on countermeasures with all of the knowledge Cerberus had gleaned, that the rest of the galaxy seemed totally unaware of.  There might even have been attempts to use the indoctrination signal against them, since it was known to work similar to quantum entanglement, something both Cerberus and EDI knew a lot about. 

Or, as was suggested many times, the reapers like the geth might well have blind spots.  Perhaps the geth could have attempted to enter into reapers to learn what makes them tick and even alter their programming, maybe with EDI's help-to make them vulnerable or to alter their own internal directives.  EDI seemed to know quite a bit about them or was learning in ME2.  And it's just possible she could have gotten a lot of info from Cerberus, since TIM was actually right in a way.  With the Adjutants in Omega, he actually had "reapers" he was controlling-a lot could have been learned from that.

The problem is, BW just seems to have thrown up their hands and said they needed some DEM to end things-the lazy man's ending, something book publishers revile.  The crucible wasn't even necessarily a horribly bad idea, but it was used wrong and had little reason in my opinion for everyone to just go along with this idea that it was a weapon when actually they were mostly wrong and no one really knew what it did.  McGuffins aren't bad-a lot of stories center around them, but they're often as much a goal as they are a means to a goal.  The Holy Grail, the Maltese Falcon, even a large amount of gold in a vault, or anything can be a McGuffin and book publishers don't always hate them, but they do hate DEMs and this quasi-, anti-, sort of DEM is one of the worst ever.

The endings themselves are too contrived and lack any emotion for me, save for a more gut level regurgitation reflex and some pity.  I pity the one who wrote this and can't be honest about it.  And as you say, somewhere someone said we need bittersweet, check.  We need sad, check.  We need, oh what the heck, just throw stuff together and add some smiley slides at the end and everyone will think it's all good and happy.

[Deathsaurer]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

The reapers were programmed to harvest advanced organic life and use and discard synthetic life.

Nope, synthetics get harvested too per the Catalyst's own words. After the tool phase obviously.

[ghost9191]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

I think the point that I'm really trying to make is that I feel that civilization post-Destroy would be very similar to civilization pre-Reaper discovery in that many of the political and societal issues that were present in ME1 were still present in ME3. I feel that Destroy simply allows for civilization to continue like it was going to continue in ME1, if that makes sense. That's why I feel any changes that happen after Destroy aren't necessarily connected to Destroy itself.

Overall, I do feel that Destroy is the best decision to make out of the ones that were presented, and that the forcing of people to change their bodies without their consent is immoral, but that depends on what moral code you follow too. I feel that the other reasons, such as Synthesis will turn everyone into Husks, aren't really provable within actual in-game evidence.

fair enough. though i think the events of ME3 alone are enough to change galactic civilization. I mean it may not last but things were changing.  I am not saying post destroy wouldn't be similar, but that there is still a chance for change

Also, whatever the ending choice, i doubt it will just be humans, turians, asari and salarians on the council. Pretty sure most races proved themselves.   

That is kinda a side note

Modifié par ghost9191, 30 octobre 2013 - 08:50 .

[3DandBeyond]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

I think the point that I'm really trying to make is that I feel that civilization post-Destroy would be very similar to civilization pre-Reaper discovery in that many of the political and societal issues that were present in ME1 were still present in ME3. I feel that Destroy simply allows for civilization to continue like it was going to continue in ME1, if that makes sense. That's why I feel any changes that happen after Destroy aren't necessarily connected to Destroy itself.

Overall, I do feel that Destroy is the best decision to make out of the ones that were presented, and that the forcing of people to change their bodies without their consent is immoral, but that depends on what moral code you follow too. I feel that the other reasons, such as Synthesis will turn everyone into Husks, aren't really provable within actual in-game evidence.

The Collectors sort of prove it, the Zha'til sort of prove it, Saren sort of proves it, the reapers themselves prove it, every attempt the kid and others have made to make synthesis happen (and he has been doing it all along) does prove or weight the scale more towards proof than non-proof.  The Collectors tended to evolve the same as the Zha'til with tech taking over.  Every story of tech being used to integrate with organic forms has shown the tech taking over-if there is one truth in the kid's idea that the created will always rebel and ultimately destroy the creator, it exists most often in the synthesis that has taken place all along throughout the game.  That is the one sure place where tech has always sought to take over.  Organic life when joined with synthetic internally, ceases to exist-that has always happened.  And I'm not talking about upgrades or things like that, but an integration--Mordin talks about the Collectors when Shepard asks if they can be saved.  No, what they were has been replaced by tech.

The kid as a piece of tech himself is more than likely being completely authentic in wanting synthesis but for reasons he has not been truthful about-he was actually a bit more honest in the original endings.  He said synthesis was about perfection through tech and actually is more emphatic about it stopping evolution, just as Sovereign was in ME1, but the evolution that must stop is organic evolution--he does nothing to stop synthetic evolution and in fact supports it by continually attempting to create a more fully integrated hybridized, synthesized being where the organic part is subjugated by and fused with the synthetic.  There is something he needs from the organic part, but he does not want the person to remain at all organic. 

If he did then why create the reapers in the first place?  They literally remove all traces of the organic life (but not the organic components) and are synthetic beings fully synthesized with the organic goo with the essences of organics uploaded to them.  He could merely have told the Leviathans that the problem was that organics keep creating synthetics that kill them (rather ignorant since the Leviathans programmed him to believe that), and that the solution was to stop organics from doing this.  Again, really brainy but whatever.  He could have said to the Leviathans that the key was to keep all organics from advancing to a point where they could create synthetics or synthetic life and stifling a race's advancement is far easier than advancing them.  Leviathan could easily have kept their minions ignorant, barefoot, and pregnant and had lots of tribute from very alive races that never learned how to create any sort of tech at all.  But the kid keeps letting races advance other races and keeps seeding the galaxy with reaper tech so that organics can learn, and leaves other tech around so organics can use them to fly around and meet each other and learn even more.  This is brilliant. 

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 30 octobre 2013 - 08:54 .

[Obadiah]

I'd argue with the notion that the problem just came out of left field. Sure, it had not been specifically identified as a problem to Shepard before then, but once the Catalyst articulated it, to me, from just a cursory recollection of ME1, ME2, and ME3, it was pretty damn obvious that the problem was there and the end result would be as the Catalyst described.

Only when I got this forum did I realise that other Shepards:
- Just didn't believe the problem existed
- Were pissed that the narrative threw them a curve ball and basically wanted a different story
- Did not want to make this choice

Looking back on it, it kinda reminds me of Neo meeting the Architect in Matrix 2 and watching all these other versions of himself rail against what the Architect was saying. (BTW I only remember that scene because someone linked it in on this forum).

[Navasha]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

You misunderstood the entire story. What you learned in the previous 140 hours was irrelevant. What you learned in the 5 minutes before the end of the story meant everything. You may not have thought you had a logical reason to care about it, but problem did exist in the grand scheme of things. You were essentially talking to "God." This was that pseudo-mystical crap that Bioware threw at you in the ending. This is why the ending sucked so bad. It was a complete break of narrative.

You learned that the entire thing was about a problem you never knew existed until then. Organics create synthetics and synthetics rebel against organics and will eventually wipe out all organic life in the galaxy leaving only synthetic life. The Catalyst was programmed to preserve organic life at all costs. The Crucible and your presence made it realize that this was futile. So it came up with the solution that the only way to solve it permanently was to remove the source of problem. How? 

The reapers were programmed to harvest advanced organic life and use and discard synthetic life. Synthesis eliminated that by combining both. Since neither existed anymore it was outside the realm of their programming. Thus the cycles ended permanently. 

There is no need for synthetics anymore. The hybrids can perform all the tasks of a synthetic as well as those of an organic. 

I understand what the catalyst THINKS is the problem, but it wasn't ever OUR problem.    No one cares about a problem that hasn't ever surfaced yet.   

And we weren't presented with "god", we were presented with essentially the reaper king.

Imagine this scenario... 

Frodo is standing on the edge of the cracks of Doom just about to toss the ring of Power into the abyss.   Sauron, himself, suddenly appears before Frodo and tells him that the only reason for all his evil actions is that none of the races look like bunnies, and that he could never harm a bunny.   So Frodo, in his grand wisdom puts on the Ring of Power and transforms everyone in Middle Earth into bunnies.    Now, Sauron won't be able to harm them.    That is essentially the "green" ending of Lord of the Rings.  

[MrMrPendragon]

Navasha wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

You misunderstood the entire story. What you learned in the previous 140 hours was irrelevant. What you learned in the 5 minutes before the end of the story meant everything. You may not have thought you had a logical reason to care about it, but problem did exist in the grand scheme of things. You were essentially talking to "God." This was that pseudo-mystical crap that Bioware threw at you in the ending. This is why the ending sucked so bad. It was a complete break of narrative.

You learned that the entire thing was about a problem you never knew existed until then. Organics create synthetics and synthetics rebel against organics and will eventually wipe out all organic life in the galaxy leaving only synthetic life. The Catalyst was programmed to preserve organic life at all costs. The Crucible and your presence made it realize that this was futile. So it came up with the solution that the only way to solve it permanently was to remove the source of problem. How? 

The reapers were programmed to harvest advanced organic life and use and discard synthetic life. Synthesis eliminated that by combining both. Since neither existed anymore it was outside the realm of their programming. Thus the cycles ended permanently. 

There is no need for synthetics anymore. The hybrids can perform all the tasks of a synthetic as well as those of an organic. 

I understand what the catalyst THINKS is the problem, but it wasn't ever OUR problem.    No one cares about a problem that hasn't ever surfaced yet.   

And we weren't presented with "god", we were presented with essentially the reaper king.

Imagine this scenario... 

Frodo is standing on the edge of the cracks of Doom just about to toss the ring of Power into the abyss.   Sauron, himself, suddenly appears before Frodo and tells him that the only reason for all his evil actions is that none of the races look like bunnies, and that he could never harm a bunny.   So Frodo, in his grand wisdom puts on the Ring of Power and transforms everyone in Middle Earth into bunnies.    Now, Sauron won't be able to harm them.    That is essentially the "green" ending of Lord of the Rings.  

I laughed at the analogy. I don't blame Sauron for loving bunnies though.

[Deathsaurer]

3DandBeyond wrote...


The kid as a piece of tech himself is more than likely being completely authentic in wanting synthesis but for reasons he has not been truthful about-he was actually a bit more honest in the original endings.  He said synthesis was about perfection through tech and actually is more emphatic about it stopping evolution, just as Sovereign was in ME1, but the evolution that must stop is organic evolution--he does nothing to stop synthetic evolution and in fact supports it by continually attempting to create a more fully integrated hybridized, synthesized being where the organic part is subjugated by and fused with the synthetic.  There is something he needs from the organic part, but he does not want the person to remain at all organic. 

And this is why it constantly failed. It didn't or more preciesly can't understand the organic component. This is the symbolism with the ending, a synthetic can't force their vision of it, it takes an organic and synthetic working together to make it work.