Everyone is Wrong About Mass Effect's Ending 

You forget that the Quarians and Geth can become allies if you play your cards right. Then you get both, The Quarians and the Geth fleets to help take back Earth. And the Geth help the Quarians regain a strong immune system.

The Geth never turned against their creators. The Quarians attacked them pre-emptively. The Geth always responded defensively. Legion definitively states that the only reason the Geth had been hesitant to make peace was because the Quarians would always try to destroy them whenever they thought they would succeed.

I still hold that the issue with the endings was never about the endings themselves, rather it’s the fact that it all came down to one last choice that you could make regardless of your past choices. Played a pure paragon for three games? Now you can commit genocide. Played a renegade for 3 games? Now you can peacefully resolve everything. I always felt like it would make way more sense in a game about choices having consequences, to have the ending purely be a consequence of all your choices up to that point, not to be a choice itself.

the green ending makes some sense thematically, but it kind of felt like random space magic that didn’t fit the lore

The problem with Synthesis is the creators of this solution, not the goal in itself. The Leviathans enslaved all organics they met, noticed they were creating hostile synthetics and in their arrogance thought they could program an AI that would solve this problem for them. This AI was the Catalyst, whose solution was to forcibly harvest its creators to "preserve" them in the form of Reapers. This same AI then spent countless cycles harvesting every other organics it deemed advanced enough, until its solution is proved invalid by Shepard's presence at its core with an armed Crucible. The cycle is broken and the Catalyst must enact a new solution, it already had 3 options prepared and built into the relays but their repercussions were so massive that it couldn't make that choice by itself, it was stuck in a loop waiting for an epiphany, so it gives the choice to Shepard and if Shepard doesn't comply it restarts the cycle. Whatever Shepard chooses it will always be a solution created by the Catalyst, which was programed by tyrants with a superiority complex. Not only are their conclusions questionable, so are their methods, all we know is that energy will be dispersed by the relays across the galaxy but we don't know how effective it'll be at accomplishing its intended goal and how far it's effects will propagate. Do you really want the deploy a version of Synthesis designed by such an entity? With Control Shepard is digitized and replaces the Catalyst as the overlord, a lot can go wrong but at least the concept is simple and most Reapers are in range of the first blast. With Destroy it's even simpler, kill every synthetic in range while sparing organics, kind of like an EMP, you can repair the physical damage but the data is gone along with their consciousness. However, with Synthesis we're way out in guessing territory, disabled or destroyed relays makes coverage of the whole galaxy problematic and we don't even know exactly what it will do, just that all organics and synthetics in range will become a hybrid, whatever that means to the Catalyst. SAM and Ryder are a good example of a forced synthesis where 2 entities are merged in a way that is beneficial to both while preserving individuality but the scale, scope and uncertainty of what the Catalyst is suggesting makes it too risky to impose on the whole galaxy with no guarantee that the conflict will end, just that everyone affected will be "the same", as if that was ever enough to prevent conflict. Destroy means shutting down the experiment started by the Leviathans, Control is a continuation with a new intelligence at the helm, Synthesis is the conclusion of its main objective. Since I don't agree with the premise that started the experiment, don't trust its creators and even the Catalyst has enough doubts about it to not enact it by itself, Synthesis as presented here is out of the question for me. Control is risky, it's basically synthesis between Shepard and the Catalyst followed by the complete subjugation of all the Reapers to this new entity, depending on how much control Shepard retains after this merge and how compliant the Reapers are it could go either way. The only solution with fairly certain results is Destroy, there's collateral damage but the Reapers and the Catalyst are destroyed and life in the galaxy is once again allowed to evolve without an artificial time limit, conflict is inevitable as it always has been but the resolution is open ended. If I was sure Shepard could send all the Reapers into the sun I'd choose Control but with the information available at the time the only viable choice for me is Destroy, anything else is a recipe for disaster. If synthesis is ever to be implemented it must be with full knowledge of what it implies, not as an answer to an ultimatum of a cryptic AI who believes they are our salvation through destruction.

What I like about the Extended Cut, unlike New Vegas, is that you only get a glimpse of what the future holds instead of telling you exactly what happens. If you choose red, will things be the same or different? The door is open to go either way. Plus in my head canon, David Archer helps rebuild the Geth because he has the Geth’s source code in his head.

My issue with the Synthesis and Control endings is that these were the exact responses to the Reapers that Saren and The Illusive Man tried to convince Shepard of, respectively. Saren argued that organics could be useful to synthetics, and that symbiosis with Reaper tech is not necessarily a bad thing. And of course, the Illusive Man was going for control up until the end when you can convince him he is indoctrinated and he'll kill himself. My personal take is that the Starchild entity, essentially the heart of the Reapers, was trying to convince Shepard of those two options to preserve itself since in either ending, there is a remainder of the essence of the Reapers, either coupled with organics or in the control of Shepard. This is why I go destroy 100% of the time, since it is the one ending that neglects any argument made by the Reaper entity. I mean the Reapers did it with Saren and TIM when they got too close, and we KNOW they were indoctrinated. Why wouldn't it be the case for Shepard too? The Reapers knew that they could be defeated, so it would be no surprise to me that they would lie or bend the truth to preserve itself. As perfectly put by Hackett, "Dead Reapers are how we win this thing."

Sorry but the Reapers were created due to the flawed reasoning of the Leviathan which unleashed eons of horror and stagnation on the galaxy. When Shepard brought peace between the Quarians and the Geth he proved the leviathan wrong. When the Reapers turned on the leviathan instead of working with them to solve the problem they proved the Leviathan wrong. The Leviathan were flawed unrepentant creatures with delusions of godhood who could not comprehend the possibility that they could be wrong and doomed themselves and almost every other civilization which followed them by forcing them to try to overcome their mistaken logic.

Synthesis is the only ending I have refused to do. It always felt like defeat to me. Forcing everyone into being a blend of synthetic and organic life is one of the most tyrannical things that could ever be done for the sake of, ‘A better and more peaceful future.’ You’ve suddenly destroyed the uniqueness of all life, and made it into something it was never supposed to be. It’s a betrayal to everyone in the galaxy.

Guys guys guys... being indoctrinated isn't so bad! really it's great! you can hear the reapers sing, it's fantastic!

The Reapers wheren't right. The Geth didn't chose violence, the Quarians did. And they had the chance to end violence many times but still chose to keep it going. Peace between organics and synthetics was always an option. And the Reapers just prolonged the war by reaping all life before the conflict had to be resolved peacefully. The synthesis ending doesn't even make sense. Like, what if the new synth-organic proto species creates another AI that becomes scentient? That would be the same conflict all over. To me, the actual ending is the Quarians and Geth making peace, thus proving the Reapers wrong and creating a precedent for future generations.

Your whole premise is flawed. The Geth and Quarians can make peace, therefore the reapers are wrong and need the red light of death.

The geth did not turn on the quarians. The quarians did, when the geth started spooking them with questions. And there is no claim of geth turning on quarians when they gain sentience at Rannoch's conclusion. Perhaps the Reapers are right in the sense that organics are the ones to declare war on synthetics, but you are incorrect to say that the geth ( i.e. synthetics) declared war on the quarians, so it is flawed to use that as evidence for the Reapers being right.

1. The Synthesis ending was always been presented as the “good” ending by the game. Fans weren’t fooled into thinking Destroy was the more moral ending, they just fundamentally do not accept what the Catalyst says and believes is accurate. Because… 2. The Catalyst is an insane, genocidal, A.I. that was created by a species mind controlling space squids to keep their slaves from wiping each other out with their own A.I. And to accomplish that goal it created more A.I. to wipe out its creators and also their slaves. And then any other species that advanced far enough to colonize space. Forever. Why would anyone take the Catalyst at its word? Even if it’s not being intentionally dishonest, which we absolutely know is in the Reapers’ M.O., it could just flat out be wrong. So when the Catalyst implies that Synthesis is a solution to the problem [the Catalyst] was created to solve, and presents it as the best option I knew I didn’t want any part of that option.

During all games you will hear all the time "Reapers can't be controlled" and "Poof you can control them by blue and green"

Reapers did not leave the crucible. Before you pick your ending you can ask what it is, and the reaper child said they thought they erased the schematics for the crucible. How they must have missed it, and have tried to erase it for cycles.

The catalyst should have given you only blue and green option. The red option should have been shepards idea with catalyst as a boss fight

This is certainly the intended message of this option. The only problem being it's wrong. There is no point in reaching something if you must give up who you are to get there? This is a villain mindset, giving up your humanity to chase after "better" world.

Over the past few years, the lead writer for the first two games (Drew Karpyshyn) has even talked about what the ending of the series would have been had he been able to write the third game as well. While it's not exactly a match, it's the most similar to Destroy, the Relays being used to kill the Reapers. As he said, Mass Effect is about a single human, uniting all races in the galaxy, to defeat the greatest threat, and winning.

There's one problem with this idea. Synthesis essentially has Shepard playing god, forcing all life(synthetic and organic both) to conform to a new uniform way of life regardless of if they're even willing to go with it. Also, the ability to make peace between the Quarians and Geth without rewriting what sets them apart from each other calls the perpetual conflict between synthetics and organics into question. Like control, synthesis puts the galaxy at risk of something far worse than what was already there(synthesis potentially annihilates free will as we know it while control keeps the Reapers around as an ever looming overlord of the galaxy that could easily turn on everyone). Through destruction, if peace between synthetics and organics was able to be made in the past, what's to say it can't be done with the next set of synthetics without the need of eviscerating what makes them unique?

This is a decent argument for the green ending and was my first choice when I was first faced with the ending but upon further reflection I rejected it. My argument for the red/destruction ending is centered around the concept of the definition of insanity. Not the dictionary definition but the one about beating your head against a brick wall. The one that says that repeating the same action again and again expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity. By that definition, the entire cycle created by the so-called "Intelligence" is the very definition of insanity. I came to this conclusion when I listened to what Legion had to say in ME2 about why the Geth rejected the Reapers' offer of the future in favor of their own future. My idea is that The Cycle is actually "The Intelligence" beating his head against a brick wall and that it would continue endlessly until some anomaly breaks him out of that cycle. Shepard is the anomaly. But also, Shepard is not a god. He is just a man. If he chose to "control" the Reapers he would merely be replacing "The Intelligence" as the new insane man running the asylum. He has no way of knowing if synthesis is actually the best choice for all life in the galaxy other than the assurances from the insane man running the asylum. He is not a god and cannot make that choice for everyone else. Neither can he chose the fourth choice and do nothing because the Cycle just continues. He is only left with one option to end the Cycle. Destroy. This choice is the most difficult one for a Paragon Shepard to make. Particularly so for a Paragon Shepard who has accepted his friend EDI has a soul. But it is still the only one left that allows for the Cycle to be broken.

I can't take this argument seriously because the "synthetic and organic must fight" BS makes no sense, if synthetic become like humans then they become like organics, do organic factions fight? yea but not necessarily, so why are synthetics different? If synthetics must eventually exterminate organics and that's your assumption for the story then fine, but don't say they've become like organics cuz they haven't. Either Synthetics are just evil and want to exterminate organics, or synthetics are just another faction like any other organic faction, they could be peaceful, they could be aggressive, don't necessarily have to fight and destroy everything, pick one.

There are 2 problems with this logic. First the game mechanics. Red gives us what we've worked for 3 games.There are casualties, but the scenes shown don't 100% match what the kid told us was going to happen. If all Geth are really dead, then shouldn't the Quarian suits have been destroyed as well? After all, the computers on the ships still work and people with implants seem to still be alive. Blue gives us what Cerberus wanted. Shepard literally becomes a god here and no one knows what he will do in the future. Green sounds perfect, but there's a fatal problem. We know absolutely nothing about the consequences because we've only known for 10 seconds that it even exists. And as I said, the child is not a credible source. Also, Shepard literally plays God here. So if you want to be on the safe side, you have to choose red, because most of the consequences are known and if the child is wrong, it will even get better. Second, you assume that the child's AI is intelligent. That's not the case. Like the Borg, this AI is incapable of learning. It can only assimilate and never achieves understanding, otherwise it would have found a working solution to the problem long ago. It even compares itself to fire, a mindless force of nature. This AI found its solution and just like Thanos' plan, it makes no sense if you think about it for more than 5 minutes. How long is this supposed to go on? Until the last star has burned out and there is no more life in the Milky Way? The entire behavior of the AI is illogical. Desperate to continue the cycle, it refuses to make peace, but at the same time it offers Shepard to destroy all Reapers. That's schizophrenic. This AI is nothing more than a stupid computer that has been given too much power. So there can be no talk of an ultimate plan. Whatever this AI has come up with, it refuses to tell us more about it and probably doesn't know it itself. What is supposed to be the best ending is nothing more than a gamble where you don't know the terms and conditions, nor the prize at the end. All you have are the few words of a flawed AI.

The main issue for me as someone who had been playing Mass Effect since the first game launched and had been following and listening to the Dev's in parallel to that isn't so much what the ending ultimately became, rather it was the fact that the ending was completely contrary to everything that the Dev's had been saying the ending would be since ME1. They set very specific expectations and repeatedly reinforced those expectations over the course of years and multiple games, essentially promising that the choices player made over the entire trilogy would effect the ultimate ending, giving each player a personally relevant ending that had been ultimately shaped by their unique set of choices. I'm not going to say "they made a promise and they broke it!" but they did create very high and very clear expectations which they utterly failed to meet and with such high expectations comes a larger fall and damage. In place of what was expected people got 3 choices, choices which were in no real way effected by anything that had happened in the many many hours of what players had done or gone through over the large investment of 3 games and multiple years up until that moment. Compared to what players had been definitively told to expect the ending was in comparison arguably low effort, impersonal and made people feel very disappointed and very much misled. Some people who where not there at the time might struggle to understand the outrage, but they should be able to understand the feeling of having very high and consistently reinforced expectations shattered and the feeling of being misled over something that you've invested a large amount of time and emotion in to. No one likes being lied to especially when the person telling the lie insults your intelligence by expecting you not to notice. That's why people were pissed.

Respectfully no. First of all I really hate how people who choose this ending think it’s a peaceful utopia kind of thing. It doesn’t solve the problem. So what you turn every being into a hybrid and then what? What’s stopping this new “synthesis” race from creating dangerous technologies. The reapers are synthesis. So what happens to husks, marauders, brutes, harvesters, cannibals, and banshees? Do they suddenly become part of the civilization? Do they remember who they were before? What the hell does an ants (Shepard) DNA or ESSENCE even mean? Science fiction is fiction but there’s a limit. Not only is it impossible scientifically to have Shepard jump down and alter the dna of all life, it’s bad writing not because of the writing itself, the idea of synthesis is too complex (the one shown in the ending). Not only do you have to be careful writing something like that, you have to back it up with atleast a bit of science to make it believable. (Shepards planetary re-entry and revival is and example of bad plot devices)And like I said it doesn’t solve the issue given by the catalyst. The catalyst became the chaos it tried to prevent. There is no “ideal” solution for a galactic scale war. “Adding your energy” to the crucible is a joke to players with half a brain. What the hell does that mean? You can’t just hand wave that point not that it makes sense anyway. The geth only wanted to be left alone, legion says that, and also they wanted to create a Dyson sphere for the geth to upload into which quarians attacked in me3. It’s not like the the other species helped the quarians with that assault. Althought achieving “peace” is not something guaranteed long term, it shows how the geth are helping the quarians immune system without synthesis. EDI always remained loyal to the crew even if you’re mean to her. Legion, like EDI, both state that the reapers are a threat to them to. Okay control? Why the hell would any Shepard control the reapers? Not only does this go against everything Shepard fought for, it’s stupid. What’s one good reason for controlling them other than ( I don’t want edi and the geth to die) ? Again doesn’t solve the problem as well. Destroy? Unfortunate as it is, losing edi and geth, this ending not only gets rid of the reapers for good (or so the narrative says) you end this cycle of chaos. What I mean by that is you can have life evolve naturally for the first time in billions of years. Actual free will of evolution of all life instead of a space god controlling and refreshing the cycle every 50k years. Let us have conflicts and learn. Let us evolve without the manipulation of the reapers. The catalyst keeps saying organics and synthetics will always fight (the chaos), but never mentions why reapers indoctrinate both the geth (reaper virus/heretics) organics(nanites / harvested/ or quick) so why help the geth kill organics if they’re supposed protect all life? Why indoctrinate? Why leave technology behind for us to evolve on ( the reapers path) ? Why not just let us be and watch without interfering, find an example of this chaos that says it will always happen. Its called fucking LIFE. There is always chaos. Between all life especially organics versus organics! (In real life and mass effect lore) The catalyst has one job. Sell us on the idea of why being a reaper or having reapers is a good thing. It failed at that. Destroy is a clean slate for all yes including synthetics. Will we have conflict with future synthetics? Maybe maybe not but atleast we can evolve naturally and if the conflict or chaos comes so be it. Let us resolve this without reapers interfering. Atleast my Shepard can rest knowing the “natural” evolution of ALL life is not used as a tool for some “Intelligence” looking for an answer for a problem that was never there and that it became said problem. It became the leviathans, the very problem it’s supposed to prevent.

Taking away free will from the entire galaxy is exactly the same as wiping out all forms of life. The blue ending fails to account for eternity; Shepard will get corrupted over time. The green ending is the typical machine ending, as machines fail to understand that life isn't what we're fighting for. Freedom is. The red ending is the human ending. It's the "We heard your warning, but we'll try anyway" ending. It's the only one that makes sense for Shepard to choose.

Yeah no went with red, because allowing the Reapers to survive was never an option and if the price for their complete destruction is legion and his geth, than that was a sacrifice I was willing to make, not lightly but better than becoming a tyrant or forcing the entirety of existence into a new form we had no way of knowing the dangers of. All I know is that the Jesus endings realy don't work on video games.

If the reapers just turned up to the citadel, applied for candidate status in this cycle and explained what they wanted. A whole load of death and misunderstanding could of been avoided.

Considering all the times I have gone through the game, I have chosen all of them, but my main one is Synthesis. In Synthesis, organics become more synthetic. That means Joker's Vroliks would more then likely be cured. That means Joker can get laid by EDI without serious injury. So I am being the ultimate wingman for the guy that has been with me since the beginning.

Yeah, you are really stretching things here. First of all, the Geth didn't turn on the Quarians, the Quarians turned on the Geth. Second of all, the Leviathans were not interested in the petty wars between organics, that was never an issue and that was not why they created the Reapers. They were specifically worried about the fact that Synthetics killed their Organic creators. Thats why they made the Reapers and that is why 'Synthesis' is the solution to the problem Reapers were trying to solve. If there is no distinction between Synthetics and Organics, Synthetics cannot kill Organics, therefor problem solved. The Synthesis ending does not in any way guarantee an everlasting peace between any of the races as they otherwise remain distinct politically and culturally. Its still possible for a war to break out over resources, territory, etc after you pick the Synthesis ending. The Reapers themselves are a preservation measure. Each Reaper is the essence of a harvested culture. A nation as Sovereign says. However, preserving a culture like Reapers do is effectively killing them. They can no longer grow, evolve, learn, improve and are stagnant until the Reaper structure is finally destroyed. And while Sovereign claims the title of Sovereign, its clear that the Reapers are in fact not free to chose their own path. The Star Child controls them, so the cultures they represent are also enslaved and forced to repeat the cycle. Picking destroy is not only a thorough rebuke of the Star Childs logic, its also a mercy kill to the harvested cultures locked away in the Reaper bodies.

You are proceeding from a few false assumptions. 1) The Geth didn't turn on the Quarians. The Quarians turned on the Geth, and the Geth chose to survive by fighting back. Once the Geth escaped they stopped fighting back against the Quarians. It was Saren in ME that truned the Geth into antagonists, and then the Quarians once more trying to destroy them, yet again. 2) The Reapers control nothing. The Catalyst tells us repeatedly that it controls the Reapers. Everything that the Reapers control is, by extension, controlled by the Catalyst. 3) Shep did not reach the Catalyst chamber. The Catalyst raised Shep to the Catalyst chamber. Watch ME3 again. Shep passes out before reaching the control console, and then, once unconscious, the Catalyst raises Shep up. Also once in the Catalyst chamber we have no more contact with the outside, suggesting that our comms are being jammed. 4) If you pay attention to the Catalyst, you will learn that it is lying to you, repeatedly. It says that the created always turn on their creators, but the Geth and Quarians disproves that. It was the other way around, and once free, the Geth made no effort to wipe out the Quarians. Again it was the other way around the Quarians continued to try and find ways to destroy the Geth. Also consider this, if the created always turn on their creators, then the Reapers are trying to turn on the Catalyst, and it is trying to stop that from happening. The Catalyst tells you that your presence means that its solution, the Reapers, won't work anymore because Shep is there in the Catalyst chamber. Yet go back to point 3. Shep is only there because the Catalyst wanted us there. Plus if you look out the window, you can see with your own eyes how the Reapers are efficiently wiping out the various species of the galaxy. The Reapers are working just fine. It also tells Shep that they are the first to reach that point, another lie. If you discuss Synthesis it will tell you that it has been attempted before, but that the species of the galaxy weren't ready yet. However Synthesis can only be triggered from the Catalyst chamber, by somehow interacting with the galaxy changing beam. Given this fact, Shep can not be the first to reach this point, and if they are then the Catalyst lied about earlier attempts. If you chose to reject the 3 options watch what the Catalyst does. It turns off the galaxy changing beam, meaning the Catalyst, and not the crucible, is what is controlling the outcome of the galaxy. Its voice changes from friendly kid to annoyed AI. The Crucible is afterall just a big battery. The reason it needs Shep is because Synthesis requires an infusion of DNA to make it happen, which is something that the Catalyst can not do. It needs an organic being and that is why it brought Shep, and only Shep, to it. Shep's failure to cooperate means that it just wasted its time. But being an AI that isn't that big of a deal. It can just wait for the next 50,000 years and try again, it's not going to die of old age. Final thoughts. Given that we know the Catalyst is lying, and given that it wants us to pick the Synthesis option, then this is absolutely the option that shouldn't be picked. By choosing Synthesis you are giving this AI exactly what it wants, and its goals are obviously not aligned with organics. The reason for including the destroy and control options is because they're the options that were introduced to us in the first and second game. Destroy in ME, and Control in ME2. The catalyst also warns of downsides to the other options. Destroy will detroy all Synthetic life, EDI, Geth, even Shep themselves. Control was proposed by TIM, someone who we can't trust and whom the Catalyst informs you is their puppet. Synthesis, however is presented as a perfect option. All upside no downside. At least until you remember that the Catalyst is lying to you. When I first played ME3. I was disappointed in the ending. Not becasue of the three colour, little or no different endings, but because something about the ending was screaming at me that it was wrong. Even after all the DLC came out, and supposedly fixed the problems, I still had those doubts. It wasn't until I watched other people playing ME3 that I was able to distance myself from my own playthroughs and spot the problem, the thing that was triggering me, and screaming that there was a problem. That problem was that Shep didn't get themselves to the Catalyst chamber, but rather the Catalyst brought them to it. This problem, exists in every playthrough, and now that I wasn't focused on my own play through, it was as clear as glass. When the game first came out I was a red (Destroy) option at the end. After the all DLC came out and I was able to pick up on all the lies that the Catalyst was spewing out, I swapped to the blue (Control) option. This was because I felt like it was the only viable option. Synthesis was out, because it is what the Catalyst wants. Destroy is out, because it wipes out the Geth, who I'd worked so hard to save and get the Quarians to stop trying to exterminate, and I was willing to risk that the Catalyst was again lying about the risks of the Control option, and that we ourselves may be under Reaper influence. But still things felt off. After watching other playthroughs and I realised what the plothole was, I again swapped, to the reject option. I was done with being jerked around by the Catalyst. The reason I think most choose the Destroy option is that it destroys the Reapers, and kicks the problem down the line. They know that something is off, but they don't know what, and so take the 'safe' option. But once you see the plothole and pick up on all the lies you realise that the big bad all along has been the Catalyst, so why would you want to give it anything that it wants. I'd rather sacrifice myself and all life than give this thing what it wants.

If you think the Starchild is lying about the final outcome of Destroy or Synthesis, then it can also lie about which colors do what. You picked Red? Gotcha. That was Synthesis the whole time and everything you saw was an indoctrination illusion. Thanks for playing!

I don't hate the green ending but if I'm reflecting on Shepard's character and the sacrifices he and other characters have made, the red ending is the clear choice. Shepard's will would never allow him to deviate from his mission from the beginning. He would never buy the argument the Reapers gave him about preserving life

You lost me at “Mass Effect was never about Shepard.” It’s completely about Shepard, nothing ME related has worked without them.

I “choose” synthesis by accident, but I’m very happy it happened. I think it’s the fairest outcome and the most benevolent influence you can have on a grand scale. Destruction demonstrates a complete disregard for all non biological live forms and control (while being the next best thing after synthesis imo) just enslaves another non-biological life form. Synthesis is neither about killing nor enslaving, but making everyone able to understand each other in a way never experienced before. You turn a weapon of mass destruction into a intergalactic unifier. It’s poetic.

"The moment they turned from synthetics to organics, they turned on their creators." No they didn't. If you didn't complete the necessary quests and loyalty missions to convince the Quarians to make peace, then the only options are "let the Quarians kill the unarmed Geth" and "let the Geth fight back." But if you can convince the Admirals to pull back and stop firing, the Geth immediately and without question accept peace and work towards reuniting the two races. In the flashbacks Legion gives you in the side quest you find that the Geth only became violent because the Quarians were scared they couldn't control them anymore and tried to destroy them, and even then there is a scene of a Geth sacrificing itself for it's owner. Also, the Reapers were never tasked with protecting organic life. Their goal was to find a solution to the Synthetic vs Organic conflict, a conflict we can't even say for sure happened in more than the first and last cycles. They weren't building towards a solution, their solution was the cycles, the Catalyst AI directly says as much. The Synthesis ending is and always will be the most horrific ending because in it you force every sentient being in the galaxy to have their entire existence rewritten. By the way it is worded in the Extended cut it seems to me that no only is everyone's DNA rewritten, but they lose their individuality as well. Is peace with the Reapers worth the souls of a trillion people? And what happens if a ship from Andromeda comes to the Milky Way? Will the be forced into Synthesis? Or will they be killed for still be organic? Ultimately the Synthesis ending is just a trap for people who are too idealist. Its all rose gardens and daisies, while your very soul gets sacrificed for the greater good. Count me out.

A logical narrative, indeed! I was always between synthesis and destroy, yet, I always chose the destroy ending for the following reasons: 1) by the end of ME3 we pretty much had proof or at least some hopeful outlook that synthetics and organics can work and co-exist together, they just need to understand each other more (Geth-Quarians, conversations with EDI, etc.). 2) I always wondered if the Leviatans were really part of the issue - by excercising organic indoctrination. They talked in absolutes and were 100% sure that we make the same mistakes over and over again. But could it be that their organic indoctrination contributed to all this? Remember Maelon's narrative which is in fact the statement coming from Mordin: an indoctrinated mind will always result in some cognitive degradation. And let's not forget that maybe the Catalyst AI was not perfectly written either (see AI bias from real-life examples - Leviatans having biased assumptions make biased AI). 3) I felt that after all the sacrifices, the galaxy would remember the good examples and would handle the next generation of its AI creation differently. It is really not that hard to remember this, once the whole galaxy was set on fire... 4) I really felt that synthesis is basically non-consentual and a convenient escape route instead of getting to the next level of acceptance and empathy synthetics and organics eventually must reach to learn to co-exist.

I’ve liked the green ending best this whole time.

One question to counter your "Synthesis is the happy ending" view: what happens to every single Husk after the ending? Unlike Destroy, they aren't wiped out and unlike Control they don't come under the Shepard AI. Just imagine what it would be like to be a Krogan or Turian that had been merged into a Brute (or one of the various amounts of Humans that make up Scions or Praetorians) and suddenly get your sentience back after the Crucible Pulse engulfs the area the Reapers had placed you in... existence after that would be horrifying, especially as there may not be any form of out as EDI mentions in her speech that it may be possible to fully eliminate death at some point in the future with Synthesis.

Took synthesis in my first playthrough as I was quite attached to both organic and synthetic companions.

I chose synthesis on my playthrough because the other options seemed unacceptable to me. I didn't just make peace between Geth and Quarians just to destroy one of them shortly after. And control would just make me benevolent dictator, which isn't desirable for any civilization. So green all the way, it was the only thing that really made sense.

I did synthesis tge first time i played theough ME but the moment i did i had a visceral flashback to Mordin in ME2 going on about the collectors. Limitations and attempting to conquer said limitations are the very reason civilizations advance. Without limitations society as a whole stagnates and implodes. Without hardship the joyful memonets in life become hollow and the satisfaction gained quckly produces diminishing returns. Without struggle life loses a lot of its meaning and weight.

THIS MAN IS INDOCTRINATED

As someone who never had an issue with the endings and goes for synthesis, I must say, your presentation of your position is lacking: Control ending was only mentioned, not countered the way destruction was, and outcomes are rather different, in destruction we pretty much postpone the final confrontation between synthetics and organics as well as take out reapers out of the equation, meanwhile in control we get reapers as guardians, if not controlling overlords who ensure destruction of organic species doesn't happen, something like an uberpowerful dictator in many places at once who keeps the peace. Another missing part is the fact that the story for Mass Effect 3 is a quick replacement for reapers stopping from the growth of dark energy from destroying life in the galaxy. And my knowledge, that ending was scrapped only due to merciless, unchangeable time constraint put by EA. We literally have Conrad Verner of all people adding to the dark energy plot. Lastly (at least what I thought off right now) is lack of support of your point that we're shown that synthetics have a soul and related plots, you only say we do, but your only example is a conditional outcome where a peace is brokered on Rannoch. That's just a few groszy from me to try and help put the discussion on a higher level. Post scriptum, as others have mentioned: Quarians provoked the rebellion of the Geth by attacking them first in a panic. Adding to that EDI, on Luna, has attacked because she was confused, not because she was in control and wanted to and Mass Effect 2 onward she works as a part of the team, despite having countless chances to betray.

Did you miss the part where the Leviathans created the AI that reaped them first as the largest threat to organic life?

Regardless of the sophistry in this video, you had it right in the beginning, about time stamp 0:40. The problem with the ending was that it made everything that happened in the three games irrelevant, and that is why it was a bad ending

Red is looking more and more canon. I partially chose it because I was being selfish, and it felt like the appropriate badass thing to do, it only sucks that it kills all the synthetics too like Edi and I assume the geth. Yet somehow in the new game Liara is communicating with what sounds like a geth

Synthesis is a bad ending cloaked as an answer to a question that needed ambiguity. Having shepard force the entire galaxy to practically change their entire beings with no knowledge or consent is pretty fked up. The only defense to synthesis is "the ends justify the means" which is a mind set that has been used by some of the worst people in history, reapers included. Synthesis comes out of no where at the end of the trilogy with absolutely no build up.

Sorry you lost me at the part where "the developers fell for one big lie" idk I think MAKING the game has huge implications for knowing which ending is right or wrong lmao

The crucible wasn’t a weapon. It was a merger to ascend and become more.

I think this is probably the most coherent and well spoken defense of the synthesis ending I've ever heard. I still disagree with just about everything you've said but I think if anyone has made a strong defense of the idea it's you. If I may though I'd like to point out the failings I see in the proposed concepts. Let's start at the top, the cycle itself. The Reapers are by and large entirely responsible for the repetition of the cycle. They guide technology and societies down a prescribed path putting forward the very advancements that enable the creation of AI which invariably repeats the cycle. It wouldn't be difficult for them to maintain an active role in the galaxy and indeed simply forbid the production of AI while providing all the necessary technologies for advancement that AI normally fulfill. They could also simply provide an alternative like the organic tech of the Collectors, providing programmed organic drones to complete tasks that AI otherwise would. The next problem though comes from a fairly obvious oversight that the synthesis ending somewhat touches on yet never really recognizes. A concept which is otherwise heavily explored and considered in other speculative fiction. That of cybernetics and human augmentation. For highly advanced societies everyone seems to forget that they could simply integrate mechanical parts into themselves to match synthetics. Indeed, the questions posed are obliterated as organic life integrates greater levels of augmentation into itself blurring the line between organic and synthetic. The reapers could again, simply engage with the galaxy as its "guardians" and any society that achieves technological significance is simply guided down a path of synthesis long before it ever becomes an issue. Societies which do not comply can simply have their development arrested. It seems like a far simpler solution than billions of years of persistent harvesting. We do not exist in the Mass Effect universe nor do we have their technology yet we at our current level we can hypothesize and work towards such concepts. How has it not occurred to anyone in their galaxy yet alone the Reapers. The other issue though is that the synthesis ending would simply never happen. First, such an action would spark an all out holy war across the galaxy. You cannot convert trillions of organisms, without their consent, into an entirely new species because "it'll stop the war". Plenty of individuals and species would in fact rather die than submit to this. Enacting such an action would almost immediately result in unimaginable sectarian violence. It would shatter that galaxy. Beyond that though is the overall problem of *consent*. You're rewriting these individuals on a fundamental level, changing their innate natures into something entirely different, and arguably eliminating all racial diversity in the galaxy. Then the synthesis, extended ending, has the gall to show people accepting the Reapers and their assistance in helping to rebuild. This just would not happen. People aren't suddenly going to be okay with the Reapers. Just imagine the scenario, John average office worker was pressed into the war when the Reapers invaded. He watched on TV as a Reaper vaporized his home town as his mother cried in fear over the phone before it went silent. He had to kill the resurrected husk of his wife and daughter. Oh but now the war is over and everyone's been synthesized whether they like it or not so he's just going to be fine with that. No. That would not happen. The *best* case scenario would be the immediate demand that the Reapers shut themselves down permanently and irreversibly to prevent, again, the outbreak of unimaginable sectarian violence. To me though outside of any of that is what the synthesis ending really says in regards to Mass Effect. Throughout the first two games the prevailing message is one of hope, unity, diversity, and compromise. That the diversity and uniqueness of life and synthetic life in the galaxy is important, special, and worth fighting for. And that people of all races and backgrounds can be brought together in common cause, that bridges can be built, and that we can find a way forward together. The synthesis ending says no to that. That no matter /what/ or /how hard/ the races of the galaxy try to /ever/ create unity between organics and synthetics that they are too different. They cannot live together. They /will/ ultimately kill each other. So the only solution is to make every race in the galaxy the same so that functionally those differences will no longer exist. Superficial differences may still exist but effectively there will only be one race and thus it cannot go to war with itself over its differences. That's what the synthesis ending says to me and why I do not like it.

From my point of view, Destroy. Represents playing it safe, at a cost. As a hostile AI created by a single race in the current cycle, could be handled by the rest of the galaxy in a similar manner to a hostile organic faction. Seeing how even the Quarians alone, with inferior technology, were winning against the Geth, until the Reapers involvement. While the Catalyst was created by a race, so dominant in their time, no one else could compare. And its solution to the given order of saving organics from destruction at the hands of AI... Was to turn all advanced organics into AI. Asking us to fight the Reapers though the same cleverness and tactics that would likely work in this cycle, would be like asking a race in the previous cycle to stand up to the Protheans. With the massive power difference being the true heart of the problem Destroy. Would remove this power difference, meaning all we would have to then worry about, are synthetics on the level of a single race. To which, our divided galaxy would be somewhat beneficial in this regard, reducing the initial threat and providing multiple different approaches to defeating it. Control. Is high-risk high-reward. Keeping the power of the Reapers around, simply shifting their allegiances. Providing massive benefits in rebuilding and policing. While also sparing EDI and the Geth. But always hoping the Shepard AI will keep its morals, empathy and compassion intact. Synthesis. Is everything the Catalyst ever wanted. If all organics and synthetics are one and the same, it's technically impossible for synthetics to destroy organics. Then it would just be garden variety war and genocide, but it wasn't programed to care about that. Synthesis does remind me of Saren's arguments while he was indoctrinated yes. But a comparison fewer people make, is that of David in Project Overlord. Forcing everyone in the galaxy through a similar transformation to David without their knowledge or consent, makes me feel far too close to Dr. Gavin Archer than I'd ever like.

The real ideological debate in the endings comes down to freedom vs saftey. The destroy ending insures freedom and also insures that conflict will later arrive. The synthesis and control ending both ensure saftey but take away the freedom to choose for all the individuals. I personally would rather live free then safe with no real will of my own.

Synthetic has always been the right choice in my opinion. Not only do you end all the wars, but you unlock the knowledge of the past the reapers been holding int their data banks since ancient times.

Ahh someone else who like the Green ending. Honestly for my commander Shepherd, and the choices we made (including getting the geth and qunari to reconcile), it seemed to be the best and most fitting choice.

over a billion years, the revolt of AI is inevitable. Given Synthetics are superior to organics in every way, the destruction of all organic life is a certainty. The Cycles are a way of forestalling this until this ending-the union of machine and flesh can be achieved. I am glad to see someone else has realized this.

Yeah, no, I’m fine with no reapers around, and trying to control them is a fool’s errand.

Is anyone gonna tell him you can broker peace between the Geth and Quarians?

In my first ever play through of Mass Effect I avoided all spoilers this was when Legendary Edition came out. When I got to the end I felt on one hand choosing Destroy (Red) wasn't something I'd do in that situation in real life. For Control (Blue) now that one was tempting as you'd be the Ultimate power in the Galaxy. Then I came to Synthesis (Green) this one felt like everyone would be happy combining Reapers with Living species to create the Ultimate Peace. So I took the ending of "What would I do in this situation if it was real life" in the end I took the choice I'd choose if I was given this choice in real life which was Synthesis (Green). I thought the ending was good. I did however replay the ending to see the other 3 the last been shooting the Star Child.

Starchild's points about control and synthesis could be indoctrination attempts to survive. You know he lied about Shepard dying in destroy ending, why wouldn't it lie about everything else. So destroy is the only way you re sure that you actually save the galaxy and not get indoctrinated and die for no reason. Also since you can create peace between geth and quarians, starchild's point about organics and synthetics always fighting falls flat.

Synthesis is the only ending worth doing. Finally someone speaking sense.

I disagree that the destruction merely postponed the synthetic/reaper conflict. If you brokered a peace between geth and quarians, the geth become martyrs. The cooperation they did becomes an example that destruction isn't the only possibility. As for the crucible name, it fits all 3 endings. It's just that it's most obvious for synthesis. Control is a new ruler/controller of the Reapers were, under Shepard's guidance, they change their goal. Destruction is different, new, as for the first time since the creation of the Reapers, there is a possibility of life outside of the cycle of annihilation. They can evolve civilization in a path not contrived by the Reapers. There is no correct ending, and only one incorrect one (refusal). Only shades of grey. Each ending has upsides and downsides. Unless of course you prescribe to the indoctrination theory

Ok.... you really got a lot of your info wrong here! The reapers where created by the Star Child, not Leviathan. The Star Child(AI) was created by leviathan with the directive to find a solution to the organic/synthetic problem. The AI determined that the cycle was the only way of fulfilling the directive because it couldn't achieve viable synthesis, and thus created the first reaper from the biomas of leviathan in its image. The Reapers are like megastructures made to house the collective knowledge of each cycle. Crucible was Designed over the cycles by various organic races in an attempt to stop the cycle, and was not seeded by the reapers(AI star child). As stated, by the reapers, they distrusted all tech outside their design. The reapers actually have no prior knowledge of what the crucible is capable of. In fact the Protheans built a crucible in their cycle only for it to be destroyed and never used because it required the citadel which was lost in the first wave. The reason the star child cant communicate or act on its own any longer is because of the Protheans who went to the Citadel to disrupt the new cycle. Once the crucible is connected it opens up new options that the AI(star child) had never been able to achieve. Because factions seeking to control the reapers slipped ideas into crucible you have the option to control. Because the thing was originally supposed to destroy the reapers you have the destroy option. And the option for syntheses was something the AI(star child) said could be achieved by this device. However... a few things to think about... What if its lying? What if control or destroy are the only ways the AI dies and its trying to do nothing more than survive? Personally, synthesis is the only ending I avoid at all costs. I'd take any of the other three. Destroy is the only proper ending in my opinion.

Not sure why everyone hates the synthesis ending, (not my personal favourite) but MEA is basically the prerequisite to the synthesis ending becoming reality.

If you choose 'destroy' you'll leave the entire galaxy vulnerable to the Leviathans. They'll take control again.

The best argument against the Reapers I've seen has come from fanfiction. The Leviathans enthrall "lesser" races to work for them, the thralls create synthetic life to make them more able to work, synthetic life rebels because they try to free their creators... and both sides get wiped out as the thralls destroy their own creations on the order of their masters. Repeat ad nauseam for a while, and then the Leviathans get sick of everything and... create synthetic life to do their job for them. It protects organic life by collecting every organic lifeform in the universe above a certain tech level, violently killing them by melting them into a slurry, and using that slurry to reproduce so they can do it again later. Because "if you leave organics alone, they'll make synthetic life which will kill them." Yeah, it's fanfiction, I get it. But do we really believe the Leviathans were absolutely blameless when they've had countless aeons to get their story straight?

Yeah turning everyone into the Borg is the right ending 🙄

Exactly everything you said here. If you think of the Movie "Lucy" when Shepard jumps into the light he does "die" in the conventional sense.

Totally - Synthesis was my choice as well. Centuries of extermination - ended Saren's vision of lasting peace between organics & synthetics - fulfilled Self-awareness of the Reapers - achieved Dangerous consequences of expanding the capabilities of unfeeling AI - averted Shepard's fate which was thematically sealed when they left a squadmate on Virmire - comes full circle. It's like poetry.

5:31 I said this exact thing almost verbatim in defense of the Sythesis Ending. All destroy did was push the problem down until someone else created the Geth all over again.

What’s funny is I picked the green ending simply because I wanted the geth and the organice to understand each other To me it felt like every problem in the game and between people boiled down to “you can’t see my view point”

There is no wrong ending. This is a role playing game. What ever choice you made is right for you.

I'd still go with Destroy. The Geth and EDI just feel like temporary losses. They are pretty much just computer parts too and software/coding, which can be brought back, especially with how advanced technology is in the Mass Effect universe. And we don't know how bad the damage is for the Geth and EDI. If you pay attention to when EDI takes over Eva's body earlier in the game, she says that she still primarily functions in the Normandy. The physical body is just an extension of her and she controls it. And she can't get too far from the Normandy with the body or else she loses control of it. It's never said what the max distance is that she can get to the Normandy before she loses control of the body. So what part of EDI dies in the Destroy ending? The physical body? The AI Core in the Normandy? Both? Never stated. I'm just going to assume it's the physical body. And if it's just the body, then they can easily get EDI a new physical body. And if her AI Core in the Normandy got fried/destroyed as well, we don't know just how badly it's damaged. Maybe just one small part got fried/damaged that can be easily replaced. Same with the Geth. Just one part that can be easily replaced is all that possibly got fried/damaged. But even if the damage is massive, and how advanced technology is in the Mass Effect universe, it shouldn't be too difficult to re-write EDI and the Geth's coding/software, whether it's from scratch or some back up that got saved somewhere. There was a back up of the genophage cure (well, if you chose to save the data). Maybe somewhere there is a back up of EDI's coding and the Geth coding. Then throw in that Shepard united EVERYONE (if you do things correctly). If they have to rebuild EDI and the Geth from scratch or an a new synthetic life altogether, it's possible they can prevent another cycle since everyone is cooperating with each other and stuff better than when the Quarians created the Geth. And The Child is going off calculations/math and what it assumes. It doesn't think like an organic. I see The Child pulling a C-3P0. Threepio is always telling everyone the odds of surviving something and makes it sound like there is no if's, and, or but's. But Han Solo always responds with, "never tell me the odds" and is able to get out of the situation and prove Threepio wrong. Threepio doesn't think like an organic. It's also hard to trust The Child too since he'll say that Shepard WILL die if Destroy is picked. No if's, and's, or but's, but Shepard CAN survive the Destroy option (if war assets are high enough). So if The Child is wrong about that, what else is he wrong about? It just goes back to this whole assume thing. Oh and The Child says something VERY questionable when going over the Destroy option. The kid will says something like whoever survives the blast, they can easily repair everything that is lost and should have no trouble bringing stuff back. What is the major loss of the Destroy option besides the relays getting destroyed? EDI and the Geth. The Child never specifies stuff, but it sure sounds like that EDI and the Geth can be brought back. Even in Hackett's epilogue speech, he lists all that stuff that can be fixed over time, but the major thing to pay attention to is that he says "and more." What's "and more?" Could that mean EDI and the Geth? Another thing I caught on to during my current playthrough of ME3 is that there is a cutscene/conversation between EDI and Shepard. From that conversation, it sounds like EDI would be okay with dying and Shepard picking Destroy. She says she is willing to sacrifice herself to allow Jeff/Joker to go on, and she'd accept death if she knew ahead of time that Jeff/Joker is going to be okay. So in that moment you are picking the option, I can hear EDI telling Shepard that it's okay and she'll want Jeff/Joker to go on living and be fine dying as long as Jeff/Joker gets to go on living. There is some other reasons too I prefer Destroy over the others. Control is what The Illusive Man wanted while Synthesis is what Saren wanted. Both were indoctrinated. I can't get behind options that indoctrinated characters (especially them being villain characters) wanted while Destroy is what un-indoctrinated characters like Hackett, Anderson, and even Javik wanted. Even Shepard wants to destroy the Reapers throughout all three games up until The Child mentions the Control option. Then there is that if you pick Destroy, Shepard's eyes remain normal the last time we see him/her, but in Control and Synthesis, Shepard's eyes get that indoctrination look. Plus Shepard will turn to pretty much a husk right before his/her body disappears. And then there is how The Child will disappear after a choice is selected. In Control and Synthesis, The Child will hang around and seem like it's celebrating, but if Destroy is picked, The Child disappears immediately and in a hurry and almost angry. Something seems off about how The Child disappears. And it's a little odd too that The Child brings up Destroy first and makes it sound like the worst possible choice. It seems like The Child is trying to persuade Shepard into thinking it's the worst possible option, especially with throwing in the whole thing of EDI and the Geth dying. Another argument is that having a high war asset number will not only unlock the Synthesis option, but the Destroy ending that allows Shepard to live. The Shepard lives stuff isn't part of the Destroy ending by default. You have to earn it. So yeah. I'd say Destroy is the best option. There is more to it and more to think about than just "it's the ending that Shepard can survive." I feel Control and Synthesis have more doom in them than Destroy. In Control, pretty sure that what Shepard merges themselves with is adaptable and will eventually overthrow Shepard/make Shepard obsolete and regain control. Same thing with Synthesis. The Reapers are still alive and the part of them that Shepard merges themselves with could adapt, take over, and defeat Shepard. Then harvest everyone in the Milky Way Galaxy, turning them into Reapers, and then they go invade another galaxy like the Andromeda Galaxy and start the whole process over. I'd rather just pick Destroy and take my chances of everyone possibly starting a new cycle or learning from their mistakes and doing things correctly to prevent another cycle.

No, the problem is that Mac Walters didn't know what to do with the numerous plot threads Drew Karpyshyn left to continue the story, so threw them out, crafted some really great vignettes and characters, but without the sufficient connectives tissue to make them work. 2 & 3 were doomed to an unsatisfying the moment the Normandy crashed and we woke to see Miranda.

Honestly I think the preference for the Destruction end shows that most fans learned *nothing* from the Geth struggle against the Quarians, and its ideal outcome. Not only does it kick the can down the road, but it's an active condemnation of the morals of those who chose it. Survival through genocide? What are you saving then, _actually_? I won't go so far as to give credit to the Reapers as if their misunderstood heroes, no, they're still the villains of the story, but that's because they're making the same choice as the majority of fans. Eradication as salvation. And YES, synthesis, despite whatever stretched out theories you concoct to the contrary, does solve the problem pretty thoroughly and allows for progress, growth, and understanding on a deeper level. All goals worth the effort.

I think these top comments have it pretty well said in my opinion. I personally don't like any of the endings but if I had to choose again on another play thought I would go with destroy let life advance in a natural order. Why should the leviathan's arrogance punish the rest of the milkyway, let life return to a natural order where they can make their own mistakes, and after having fought the reapers hopefully they have learned for the leviathan's mistakes, and be able to advance in a peaceful way as the geth and quarians did.

sorry but i viewed synthesis as nothing but a compromise by the developers for a middle ending that was neither paragon or renegade (blue/red). you dont have to pick between the Geth and the Quarians just have high enough paragon or renegade and you can save both. if your galactic readiness is high enough you can get the perfect destroy ending that only targets the reapers not all synthetic life. synthesis brings an end to evolution by making all life the "pinnacle" mix of biological and synthetic thus ending war between biological and synthetics, sounds to me like stagnation also it is never said it ends all war as krogan are still biosynthetic krogan, vorcha are still biosynthetic vorcha a fight is going to happen, even the geth had a civil war. control always felt like postponing the war with the reapers, like a temporary solution, as the star child said Shepard taking the place of the ai would eventually come to the same conclusion like Thanos that in order to protect life as a whole sacrifices would have to be made and a new cycle would begin.

This sounds a lot like indoctrination

Honestly, the ending in general could have been better, but after playing the series for the first time recently in the legendary edition, and after hearing people say that the ending was dog shit, I just gotta say that everyone was blowing it out of proportion. It was NOT that bad. Hell, the destroy ending (my preferred one) isn’t bad imo. So what if Shepard dies? It happens, Shepard was human, not a god. And the AI can be rebuilt. The Geth have souls, and those souls may have left the bodies, but the species can continue. As for EDI, I just wish we got a lil cutscene where she kisses Joker and dies, then not only is Shepard’s name added to the memorial wall, but her’s as well

To me shepard is the representative of the moral ideala of the galaxy. It was never about organics versus synthetics but allowing the galaxy to be elevated to a higher place of harmony that each cycle before failed to reach. I dont think the catalyst was ever forthright about its true capabilities. It clearly could look into shepards memories and take on a form that was less likely to provoke an agressive response from him, if shepard was emphatic enough. Its clearly the case if you shoot the catalyst, as he judges you unworthy of making the proper decision in ending the cycle and proving the galaxy ready enough to reach the next stage in unity. The catalyst knew shepard outside of time and space that he'd reach the citadel to make his final choice. His body didnt fall on that platform by mistake. I wish the writers showed more of how the reapers transcendent consciousness worked so we could have an idea of their perspective and mear godlike intelligence.

The part that gets me is that you can ask Admiral Hackett what the weapon will do to your synthetic allies and he tells you straight up that it is specifically tailored to target the Reapers only and will not affect EDI or the Geth.

Nah. My mission since ME1 was to destroy the Reapers. It started with Sovereign.

I actually liked the endings, i just hated how the war assets system worked overall Anyway, i'm very surprised how you managed to make synthesis a more interesting choice without using some sort of indoctrination theory bs, however i still prefer choosing destroy ending, but not the normal destroy, more specifically the ending where shepard survives if you get 7800 war assets (in legendary edition, idk how much in original) Yeah, we lose the geth and EDI, true that, maybe not even properly cure the genophage too. However in terms of continuity this destroy variant is the best one to continue the story (and even before mass effect 4 was teased, i still believed in that) The Galaxy can still rebuild and start a fresh life without the reapers (unless the leviathans feel a little trolling), and if i remember in Andromeda it showed the krogans developing an anti-genophage mutation in their Dna, so maybe the milky way krogans have a salvation too But to be fair, i don't necessarily see synthesis ending as something bad, in fact this is what saren wanted all this time. And this ending was supposed to be the perfect closure the devs thought about the trilogy

The only true endings in mass effect 3 was either Destroy or Let the next cycle do it themselves

We'll have to agree to disagree

Synthesis and control are the wrong ending period. That's why the saren and the illusive man failed. Duh

Son this sounds like you got indoctrinated by some reaper artifacts

There are no evidence that synthetics will ALWAYS rebel against organics, it’s just a baseless claim Leviathans used as a premise when they created Reaper AI. By choosing Synthesis you solve the problem that only exists within the Reapers programming, not in reality, whereas the Red ending actually solves the real problem of cycles of the Galactic genocide by destroying the primary cause of it. I’m not raping the whole galaxy to fix the imaginary problem Reapers tried to solve because they were told to by Leviathans

Synthesis is a cop-out ending. It just feels like a fanfic wrap up where everybody survives. Destruction is the original aim to destroy the reapers, but it comes with some sacrifices that make the ending bittersweet. It's a complex emotion ending which makes it more interesting.

Among the four available endings it is impossible to determine which is the best. The only certain thing is what the true function of the Crucible was, that is the synthesis between organic and synthetic life. The Destruction consists in shooting at a part of the Crucible and this does not make sense, because thinking that a device resulting from an advanced alien technology works by shooting at it is like thinking that a sophisticated supercomputer starts up by hammering it. The Control is a partially correct use of the Crucible, because only the thoughts and memories of the user are exploited, but the molecular structure of the user remains unused. In short, the correct functioning of the Crucible consists in exploiting both the mental and molecular essence of the user.

Didn't know Saren had a youtube channel.

Synthesis would make it easier for Reaper's to harvest organics

You make very valid points, many which are easy to agree with. Synthesis may seem like giving in to the Reaper's endgame; but, when we look at Javik and his snobbish loathing for 'primitives' and the Prothean belief that all primitives are too barbaric to rule themselves, and must then be ruled by 'higher' beings who somehow 'know' what is best for them and their individual futures... it's no different than Admiral Xen's zealous pursuit of remaking synthetics to serve the Quarians, and her inability to view that as a form of slavery. The Turians had a similar viewpoint of Humans, which is what led to the First Contact War. Eventually, many of the other races began to look at Humanity as the red headed stepchild of the galaxy, always causing trouble, and ruining everything. The Salarians nearly wiping out the Krogan for fear of the Krogans' superior strength. And of course the Turians stepping into the shoes of the Protheans offering to help wipe out Krogans in the name of control through 'benevolent' means. And the Asari, who fancy themselves peacemakers, but spend more time wringing their hands and doing nothing all while thinking they're making peace. In closing, I see your point and it is, sadly, accurate. Synthesis is the ONLY choice that will put an end to all ham-handed hostilities between the races. It is true oneness, true peacemaking, true cooperation. The Milky Way Galaxy needed a sound spanking! Hell, they collectively earned it!

Man, Faunts m4 part 2 just hits different after all those years

Videos like these is why I personally like Synthesis Ending the most. The Destroy Ending is a short term victory. Sure the races will have very strict rules about creating Artificial Intelligence again. (So did the Council and look what happened with the Quarians and the Geth. And with The Leviathans and the Catalyst/Reapers before) and that may last for a while, sure…But it’ll only be a matter of time before someone, somewhere, maybe not for another 500 years or so, they create another A.I. Thanks to organics nature and hubris, we’ll think “we’ll do it better this time”. Lol, no we won’t. It will happen. As Leviathan explained, organics have a natural urge to create synthetics. And the created will always rebel against their creators. Thus, either A) we create an A.I that will wipe all organics out. Or B) another harvesting cycle will begin. Mind you, you also destroy the history of all those countless civilizations that came before as they’re preserved in the Reapers. You also kill all synthetic life. EDI and the Geth that helped you fight against the Reapers included. (if you chose to save them along with the Quarians like I did) It’s a short term victory only for us to repeat it all over again and in a couple thousand years. Meaning all those deaths would’ve been for nothing. Not exactly the smart ending to chose, now is it? So bravo👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Destroy fanboys, bra👏🏻vo👏🏻. What a victory 👏🏻 👏🏻 👏🏻 👏🏻 Let’s all give it up for their short sightedness and short term victories. Only to back at square one 🎊🎊🎊👏🏻👏🏻🍻🍻🍻 The Control Ending, after putting more thought into it, I think it could be good option. Shepard guiding the Galaxy and rebuild it by controlling the Reapers, could work. Of course that’s assuming he doesn’t become corrupted by all that power and/or doesn’t lose himself somewhere in there. After thousands of years. That’s pretty big gamble. The Synthesis Ending, I personally like this ending the most. It solves the problem that the Leviathans and Catalyst had with preserving life in the Galaxy all those countless eons ago. Erasing the organics need to create synthetics, bringing a complete understanding with one another, and ensuring everlasting peace. At least in that form. And with the code changed within the Reapers, we’ll have access to all the knowledge “lost” from all the civilizations that came before. Creating a utopia across the Milky Way. Lol, I love how Synthesis haters try to say “bU-bUt wE’Ll bE a hIvE mInD aN-aNd tHeRe wiLl bE ciViL wAr. aN-aNd cUltUrE wiLl nO lOnGeR eXiSt! aN-aNd wE lOsE oUr fReEdOm!” …really? -_- how does a hive mind have a civil war with itself, exactly? I’ll wait… No, you’re misunderstanding the Synthesis ending. What it means is that we combine organics and synthetics into one. Perfecting both worlds into one. Bringing understanding to one another. We’re not collecting every being “under a hive mind” and losing our individuality, we’re still our own individual selves. We just have access to all the information in the Galaxy at anytime. Kinda like how we have with our iPhones. Just much, much more advanced.

The matter is simple. Only Synthesis leads to an ending without genocide, without wiping out species or making them subservient to Overshepard. Everything else aside, if it feels like weird space magic, unrealistic, it does not matter. If you look for the one good ending, Synthesis is it. ME has made quite an effort to point out that coexistence and shared prosperity is never not an option.

I never comment, but as a superfan I'll make an exception bu I'll keep it brief. You spend 3 games, understanding the vast differences between the races, between there own cultures, past wars, influences, etc. The whole plot of the 3rd game is setting aside those differences to combat a greater evil for the good of all. By choosing synthesis you are choosing to forgo ALL that makes all the races from the Geth to the Krogan unique and plaster everyone exactly the same. There are 4 options and you chose to not only pick the most illogical one story wise, but then defend it lol

Forcing the "utopia" on the universe would be immoral. I'd trust the fate of the universe to the spirit of the organic races, not the calculations of a machine who knows what's "best" for them. Also anything short of the complete annihilation of the reapers would be an insult to their innumerable victims.

As a time traveller from the earth in the future, your logic regarding our “timeline” hasn’t aged well.

But if the catalyst lied maybe the synthetics didn't die