What would be best for the EC DLC and why (contains object POVs).

Disclaimers:

1) This is going to be long. Very, very, very long.
2) Most (if not all) of this represents my opinions (and only mine) (you can still agree with some of it).
3) Most of this is about what the ending should be (after the EC) with high (close to perfect EMS).
4) This might contain some curse words (not directed at anyone).
5) This will not get into who is to blame for the current situation or why we are (were) in it atm.
6) This assumes the Indoctrination Theory isn’t what happened (or what will happen) and that that is possibly a good thing.
7) Might contain some typos and grammatical problems and semi walls of text.
8) This might get edited (a lot)=> bookmarking it (not that I expect huge feedback or agreement, one can hope though) = possibly bad idea.
9) This is also posted as a blog entry (here on HTL) (I hope that isn't against rules).
http://www.holdtheline.com/entries/how-why-the-extended-cut-might-just-cut-it.50/
10) This contains some external links that I don't take any credit for.
11) I am not Erik Kain and not trying to pass off as/imitate (that might be obvious from my avatar and other things, mostly different views on the announced Extended Cut DLC, but I don’t like leaving it open for discussion).
12) Sorry for unintentional thread naming fail, this is my opinion so it can't be objective (got the terms a little mixed up). If anyone (moderators) can delete the () part of the thread title to avoid confusion it would be great (but it's not that big of an issue).

Misc: when you read “will fix” think of it as “I hope will be done properly “ and “should fix” as “I would love for it to do this as well” (all referring to the Extended Cut DLC =EC).


I) Why is the ending we got bad?

1) You don’t see the outcome of major choices (well, of any choice actually) from before.

Not to be read as “I want the rachni queen that I saved to matter and without it the Crucible gets damaged and fails and I want this in a cinematic or integrated in game play”.

That would be irrational: so you saved the last reproductive being from a species, it’s hurt, it did reproduce some more (her children help on the crucible so it matters in a way even for the ending) but not that much.
I don’t think she would risk death and extinction of her race by engaging the reapers. Some cinematic with a few rachni kids taking down a reaper somewhere and/or arriving with the fleet would be great (EC should fix this).

The problem is it’s left out completely. EC WILL fix this whole problem 1).

I think it should fix it like this:

If the normal rachni queen is alive AFTER the ending choice of Shepard (getting to those later) you see (or read but they did say cinematics) that the innate communication method of the rachni across light years was used to keep everything together after the relays blow up. Speeding up the process of fixing/replacing the relays and so preventing everyone in the Sol system to die (more about that later) or fight each other, maybe even get news of Wrex being alive to Tuchanka and preventing rebellions and war between Krogans and Salarians etc etc.

(This is that personalization of the outcome they promised with the EC and it doesn’t stop at the rachni, I probably won't write here about how curing the genophage changes things, I want to see their version not make up stuff in detail right now).

Also: ending needs more krogan riding into battle on kaklisaurs cinematic at some point during the final mission.

2) Plot holes

2.1 The whole thing with Anderson talking about a moving room and him getting before you to the console is executed poorly.

EC should fix this by making the whole thing clearly rotate or just get Anderson inside first somehow.

2.2 The relays not destroying the star systems (they do not) should be made clear. If you have low EMS you see everyone and everything on earth vaporized so in that case you can assume the energy wave does kill A LOOOOOT of people but doesn’t annihilate planets. In any case that is your fault.

Low EMS ending can also keep the Normandy running and stranded thing because it can be explained just fine. When you see a wave vaporizing everything originating next to where Shepard probably is you don’t assume he is alive, you get the hell away from it to save yourself and the people you care about that are still alive (EDI running to save Joker and the crew). Running with FTL not relay jump, and with the intention to go back perhaps.

Even Destroy with high EMS can have EDI running to save herself (If she can somehow find out the wave kills reaper code and the wave wanes on power over long distances). Depending on what you told her about her self adjusting programming questions.

The Arrival incident = explosion of the entire eezo core by fore. This = concentrated initial release (but still damaging to the relay structure) followed by a mass effect of the remaining eezo to other relays until at the last one it would be shot outside of the galaxy to prevent Arrival type explosion in that last relay.

2.3 The Illusive Man. It needs to be make more clear why he is there even if the general idea is the same (he’s indoctrinated, thinks he can control them so he went there). Maybe it’s just better to have the reapers move the Citadel just because they want to make a human reaper 1st.

What I would love to see here is this:

If you saved the collector base he had time to study it and found a way to block the reaper signal so he isn’t indoctrinated anymore, AT ALL. It wouldn’t hurt to add somewhere in the game some line that shows he had to torture and kill and huskify LESS people to get what he wanted because he had more data to work with.

What this leads to is possible additional ending along the same lines (artistic integrity or not, I’m getting to why the general idea of the ending isn’t that horrible).

So if he isn’t indoctrinated (and if Shepard doesn’t hate on him every time they meet) TIM can come up with you when you talk to the Catalyst.

HELLO NEW ENDINGS (and ways for Shepard to live, have blue babies/live on Rannoch/retire on Earth with Garrus on a beach)

-destroy ending if you shoot or knock out TIM and do it yourself
-synthesis paragon = K.O. TIM + do it yourself
-synthesis renegade kill TIM and do it yourself,
-synthesis ultra renegade = K.O. TIM and USE HIS ASS as DNA blueprint (he’s partly synthetic now anyway and morals of the blueprint don’t matter in this ending)
-control paragon convince him to let you do it
-control renegade knock him out and do it
-control renegade v2 = kill him and do it
-control renegade v3 = LET HIM DO IT and you gtho and live

If you didn’t save the base TIM does what he does now and you can have Anderson come up with you.

HELLO even more new endings (well one).
-destroy paragon = you do it
-destroy renegade = let Anderson do it and you gtho and live
-synthesis = convince or knock out Anderson and you do it
-control = convince or know out Anderson and out do it

Any options from the above where you live = additional cut scenes about little blue babies or house on Rannoch etc.

Sadly I don't see them allowing you to let TIM control the reapers himself or Anderson to destroy them. "Bla bla, artistic integrity, bla bla, we want Shepard to be "the shepard" and have him make the choice alone and carry it out himself."

2.4 Space magic synthesis?!

Well when you present it like that: WHAT THE HELL?
How about making it clear, uhm, say a wave of nano technology spread through the galaxy at over-FTL speed through the mass effect using the relays AND not having it manifest as freaking glowing green motherboard lines from the 21th century on everyone’s skin? You know the tech Reapers have been using for millions of years now to turn organics into paste and presumably analyze them at the atomic level and recreate their synapse patterns in general lines (or exactly) inside the reaper hulls and link them with the rest. “We are each a nation” and all that.

2.5 Control while dead?!

Well when you present it like that: WHAT THE HELL?
How about making it clear that the Catalyst doesn’t directly control anything (which is why he can’t just shut them off) and neither will you. You just get nanotech melted down (see 2.4) and the resulting info of your brainwave pattern gets sent to each reaper and sort of hard-coded to make them understand that organics don’t want, need or deserve to be reaped and have their future taken away from them. That there are other options and this cycle has hope. In effect becoming “the shepard” of a misguided flock (shouldn’t be mass wiped when there are other options) and leading them to the “light” (ewwww maybe a little to religious for me but it damn fits as a paragon move). IT'S NOT SLAVERY PPL.

2.6 Catalyst reasoning

“We heard you don’t wanna be killed by…” hey wait a minute I’m generally pro-catalyst but still…WHAT THE HELL!?

Fix: make the damn kid explain (yes that will be forced as well, what with all the bleeding and reapers killing the fleet and the attacking the crucible because they can’t be just shut off while you talk to him).

It’s not "the created always rebel bla bla". Write it properly.

“We have observed, spread out of the galaxy over hundreds of thousands of years that organics create synthetic beings and sometimes, a lot of the times they end up at war and synthetics don’t care (usually) and start wiping out the creators. Because of that we set up the relay network to make you develop along certain paths and achieve galaxy travel and become part of the galactic order based on the Citadel. This almost guarantees dangerous synthetics are created AFTER the other races know about what you are doing and even create laws against it. Unfortunately rogue AIs still occur and for example just in the last cycle they wiped out an entire race. Imagine what happens when something like that is created 100k years into the development of an organic race still not capable of space travel and isolated. They get wiped out, the AIs quickly develop space travel and start killing stuff while almost no one knows about it and it’s to late to stop. So we decided to store civilizations into reaper form and left 1 of us behind every cycle to make sure we are not to late.The geth are one of the exceptions we encountered.”

Destroy ending only kills reaper code and sadly that includes them and EDI.

The Catalyst acts a little out of character giving you all the options (even those that defeat his purpose) if we assume the above but that can also be explained with some AI shackles that were in place when he was made or that become active because of the Crucible.

Etc.etc.etc.

IT can be fixed and should be fixed by EC.

2.7 B-b-but mommy I don’t want the Sol fleets to starve after investing hundreds of hours.

They will not. The have quarian food ships and materials to build more of the same for turians and depending on rachni and other things including the final choice, mass relays can and will be repaired rather fast.
And even assuming they did starve it would be a sacrifice of a few fleets of a few species of 1 cycle for the future of…well almost everything else organic to ever exist.


II) Why (try to) make it work (in the EC) when it doesn’t fit?

Well I think my interpretation fits. But let’s just pretend I don’t think that and/or you don’t think that.
What are the other options?


3.1 Don’t tell us why the reapers do what they do?

Warning: personal opinion(s) below

HELL NO.
Everything explained in ME3 = Reaper reasons included.

I would hate killing all reapers now as the best ending and finding out in some later ME universe game that they were trying to save us but went about it in the wrong way (and that I could have convinced them to just stop and join them to find a solution together <- notice the unity, understanding, acceptance themes).


3.2 Tell us Sovreign lied and they are just selfish assholes?

HELL NO.
Classical and overdone move much ?

"We are your salvation through destruction." How and why?

3.3 Just let them be defeated by uniting the galaxy?

Umh…HECK NO. <- pls notice the change of wording

Overdone “unite something that looks impossible to unite and overcome impossible odds”.
Also why destroy an entire race of “preserved” races gathered over thousands of years because they made a mistake (that actually saved and ensured the existence of organic life when combined with your actions). Actions that united the cycle and opened everyone’s eyes to the true dangers that AI can be and have been (with the help of some Reaper archives or something).

With the geth, to be used as an example of both how to treat and not treat you creations so they have less chances of wanting to wipe you out.

3.4 But I want the options to sacrifice the fleets to take down the reapers without the Crucible in addition to the current endings.

Want it all you like (hell I even support adding the option just to see how everyone dies) but it will not make it fit Shepard’s character more than explaining the current ending. If anything it goes against all versions of Shepards exactly because it’s guaranteed defeat (see 3.3).


3.5 The dark energy thing?

HELL NO.
Initial plan or not I’m sorry but I don’t want to hear a holokid tell me he thinks after millions of years of reaping countless races to work on a way to stop the laws of physics from destroying the galaxy THE ONLY WAY HE FOUND IS TO REAP THE HUMAN RACE BECAUSE WE ARE SO FREAKING SPECIAL AND WILL PROBABLY HELP FURTHER HIS(THEIR) GOAL WAY FASTER.

Can we get more arrogant than that as a species?
It’s also improbable to the extreme in the established ME universe.

And let’s get down to analyzing it anyway even if I hate it.

If FTL accelerates the dark energy why give us mass relays? Calculated risk to advance civilizations faster to harvest? Ok but why not wait until they are more advanced so you have to reap less? Evolution peak? Ok, fine. Why make the human reaper in human form? Getting the idea to change the thing you were doing for millennia just now? And how does keeping the initial shape change anything? NOTICE HOW IT’S MORE BROKEN THAT WHAT WE GOT NOW? Not to mention what the EC will hopefully bring/fix?


III) Why is the current idea good (despite horrible implementation)? (my opinion, remember?)

A mix of the following:

http://galacticpillow.com/2012/04/0...a-different-take-on-the-mass-effect-3-ending/
www.ogeeku.com/2012/geth-dream-electric-shepards/

With the way I would like to see it fixed in the EC means it fits perfectly (see Legion sacrifice for his race compared to Shepard for all organics AND the continued existence of the reapers in peace with the rest AND the Mordin “Had to be me. Someone else might have gotten it wrong. “ related to my control explanation (if they go with that)).

I didn’t read that link (2nd link) until 10 min before starting to write down everything I did and didn’t change my mind about anything because of it but I do agree with most of it.
Added 1st link 2 days after I wrote all of this because I agree with most of it and hey it even leaves out (it works without it) the religion aspect (that I don't really like but can't deny the existence of, exactly why both links are still here).

Warning: long nitpicking section of the problems in the 1st link below (this all still my opinion remember?) feel free to skip this.
Numbering here refers to the article (link).

He mixes dark energy and dark matter. Ppl make mistakes. I mixed up “objective” and “subjective” when I wrote this and those are clearly opposites. It’s not a reason to dismiss all the argument “because he has no idea what he is talking about”. Besides all of this is opinions over opinions everywhere.

"Ending bad because anything can be made to fit?" That happened because if didn’t convey what they decided it should. EC should fix that.

3.2 – The result of control options can be argued. If it’s just a change in values they can still choose to “police” the galaxy instead of reaping organics periodically which they now see as immoral (having Shepards pov hard-coded similar to Asimov’s Law of Robotics perhaps).

3.6 - The crucible is used in the control ending because the catalyst doesn’t directly control each and every reaper (see my 2.5)

3.9 – It doesn’t show the relays exploding (see 2.2). The crucible was not designed to explode relays.

“It would be silly to try to explain its workings in human terms.” (About synthesis wave). No it wouldn't (see 2.4).

3.13 Cloning doesn’t grant diversity (or natural diversity, it wouldn't be preserving anymore).

3.16 Arguable. If (when) done properly I expect it to just take them to a different level. I will still be disconnected from what we had to deal so far because of that but it doesn’t abandon anything.

4.0 Close to the truth. E.C. should personalize the ending but expectations for them to force every choice into how the crucible works is absurd (see 1)).

5.0 It’s not relevant what he would have done and some of the “could not have fit into the ending sequence” is plain wrong and hopefully they will in the E.C.

Nitpicking section over.


IV) What could be better so we don't have to make it work?

I DON’T KNOW. And after weeks of reading posts and forums and articles I didn’t see a better option than clarifying the current idea and presenting it better. That’s why I wrote this.

Go ahead and link me fan made endings where you stab a possessed TIM in the head 8 times screaming “This if for x, this is for y, this is for Earth” AND/OR making the Crucible a glorified selective EMP that kills the reapers without any side effects before we know anything about the reasoning behind their actions. I'm pretty sure I won't like it (or won't like it more, some of the stuff out there is pretty good).

This (link below) is the best I found but, you guessed it, it’s clarifications of the current endings almost at it’s best.

http://shannon.users.sonic.net/masseffect/

Try with: destroy base, over 6k EMS, preventing TIM from shooting A., and control option. After that read the conversation between the Geth and K. Sanders.
Doesn’t that seem like the paragon ending now? Instead of “oh noes it’s Shepart condoning mass slavery” and “why is TIM shown doing it then” (mistake or put there to make you think but doesn’t really fit OR put there to remind you that "It had to be me (you). Someone else might have gotten it wrong (TIM).) ?
After that try it with your in game choices (it's limited, some squad memebers always get the same outcome but hopefully the EC DLC will be different).


V) Final notes

Extended cut has the chance to make this perfect (for me) and I want to thank everyone that actively did something (anything) because it lead to it happening (without some, most, of you guys we wouldn’t be getting anything else).
I also support the idea of RetakeGaming after this is over.

Because I'm mostly happy with what I think the EC will be and I want it to be as best as it can I also support this:
http://www.holdtheline.com/threads/retake-campaign-turn-it-on-turn-it-off-for-bioware.877/

P.S. I hope this doesn’t violate too many forums rules

P.P.S. I’m just a 22 y o guy from Romania.

P.P.P.S. I never said this was the best ending and if anyone came (or comes) up with anything better except the stuff from point 3) (or even variations on Dark Energy thing that don't fail) I would like to see it.

That's a poor argument. I don't want the reapers to be explained if they are explained badly. They said we cannot understand them, and it turns out they were just bullshiting. Bad writing.
The whole point of the reapers is being uncommprehendable, terrifying, almost unstopable threat. Turning them into Catalyst's vacuum cleaners is plain bad writing.
If if they are going to explain them, they should leave that for future Mass Effect games when they think of some really good backstory to the reapers and their motives.

And what's with the entire plot of ME1. Why didn't the Catalyst let in the reapers himself?

Please read this thread. This is the main reason(although there are many more) why the ending doesn't work for me:
http://www.holdtheline.com/threads/synthetics-will-destroy-organics-theme.455/

That wasn't actually an argument. Instead of not explaining the reapers (and that would be disappointing) they should (and might in E.C.) explain them properly. It clearly was bad writing, that I don't agree with but the idea is far from being flawed (still personal opinion).

Sovreign saying he is beyond our comprehension is somewhat true. Can you imagine what existence inside a reaper is? Getting taken apart down to cellular (or lower) level and re-created (up to a point, most likely the nervous system or a close to perfect simulation of it) inside a reaper hull and being linked with every other member of your species, sharing memories, knowledge, everything?


As for you post:

I put this here instead of your topic because without the context of the Extend Cut (if they get it right) expanding on the endings and reaper reasoning (from my huge post above and even the links from it, I even added 1 more link and pointed out some problems with it, it seems you already read that article as well since we both fount out about it from the same thread) this looks like nitpicking without any solution or it can look like plain justifying the current endings (that we can all agree were written horribly and we deserved better).

"1. It was already established during the course of Mass Effect 2 and 3 that synthetics are not hostile nor aggressive, unless acting in self-defence. They present no greater danger to organics than organics present to themselves.
2. Even if it came to war synthetics are probably beatable."


1. Not really. Javik talks about a whole race being wiped out in a similar situation (of the quarian-geth thing) just last cycle. Geth are the exceptions because of Shepard and Shepard is a really rare thing.

2. They are beatable SOMETIMES and that is because of a galactic civilisation but what happens if the reapers didn’t make the relays and an isolated race creates AIs before FTL and they get destroyed by said AI(s) that develop FTL after and start killing even more organics that are divided and not ready and unaware?


"Then the Catalyst says that processing the civilizations wasn't such a good idea, and goes on to give you 3 new solutions. And Shepard is OK with that."

He never said it wasn’t a good idea he said it wouldn’t work anymore (because the next cycle or some future one might destroy all of them by finding out before hand of their existence and/or making the crucible early). He gives you the choice because you know what happened and he wants to convince you to not destroy them (it doesn’t mean his goal isn’t worth enforcing somehow anymore). The next cycle might just build the crucible and use it without discussion or simply prepare better and succeed by sheer force = probable total defeat for him.

And the other option for Shepard would be what? Certain defeat and leaving the choice up to the Catalyst (to be made a future time after this cycle). They went with the "we clearly can't win in a military fight and they keep pointing that out.

This only holds true that the Catalyst doesn't directly and individually controls the reapers otherwise he could indeed just tell them to leave or stop until a new solution is devised. Yes, bad writing (I never argued that it was good).


"In Mass Effect 1, Sovereign seemed to think Organic life was inferior and unworthy of his attention…but yet his mission is really to safeguard organic life? Why so hostile if the end result is benevolent?"

Reapers can be arrogant assholes. Look at harbinger. It depends on what values the race they were had. Imagine a prothean reaper (if they had succeed in making one). I’m not even sure they wanted to make one because of the “we conquer and force our way on the weak or eradicate them” way of the protheans. How would that work with their goal of saving the weak organics and ascending them to reaper form (it was what they thought they were doing not caring about free will and hope and future because they don't fully understand anymore being partly synthetic or a synthetic simluation of organic life).



"Even if all that the Catalyst said was true, why not have the Reapers move in only on the condition that some synthetic life form actually becomes hostile, and a threat to the galaxy. "


It depends on how they started and how many there were. (A few reapers sticking around risk a situation where some race like the protheans just kills/conquers them and no one is left to save organic life.)



“[Other solutions] nearly all of which don’t involve the wholesale slaughter of billions.”

They don’t see it like that. They see it as the "pinnacle of evolution". We have scientists that agree with that right now in the real world (probably without it being forced upon countless civilizations).



"In Mass Effect 1, Sovereign seemed to think Organic life was inferior and unworthy of his attention…but yet his mission is really to safeguard organic life? Why so hostile if the end result is benevolent?"


Organic life in it’s current form. It’s not mentioned anywhere that he can’t become best friends with the reaper-ised human race when we join them on that “plane of existence beyond our comprehension”.

1. Geth are not exceptions because of Shepard.
They only rebelled against the Quarians after the Quarians tried to kill them. And even then they tried to protect those Quarians who opposed the destruction of the Geth. They let the Migrant fleet escape although they could have destroyed it. They maintained Quarian homeworlds in case of their return, and keep memories of those Quarians who defended them.
Shepard had no hand in this.
How much influence Shepard had on them is arguable. They say that they admire organics and their concept of hope, not just Shepard. And even after they meet Shepard their decitions are still their own.
The geth primarily seek the peaceful advancement of their own race independent of the influence of the rest of galactic society and believe every sentient species should be able to do the same.
They are peaceful, with or without Shepard.

And they are not an exception either. There's EDI. She also showed great appreciation and care for organics.
About the war in Javik's cycle - We don't know under which circumstances that war broke out. It could have been easily started by the organics who acted out of fear just as Quarians did.

So in ME universe we know of 3 type of synthetics:
Geth - peaceful unless attacked
EDI - peaceful unless attacked
Sythetics form Javik's cycle - their nature is unknown

Sometimes? We know only of two cases. Javik's cycle synthetics and the Geth. In both cases synthetics were about to get nailed when the reapers interfered.

An idea that doesn't work obviously wasn't a good idea in the first place.

So a few reapers sticking around and warning races about synthetics or destroying them early on(if they don't listen) is more dangerous to the reapers than coming to the galaxy every 50,000 years to destroy them?
Instead of just solving the problem with a warning, reapers chose a certain war every 50,000 years.

Why was Sovereign needed to open the Citadel to the other reapers if the Citadel is the Catalyst? He could let the reapers in himself.

In the Arrival DLC Harbinger said that they were scanning the galaxy for a suitable race for building a new reaper, and that they even considered the geth.
This means that they are not preserving organic races in reaper form. They just want to make a new reaper.

It's obvious that the ending we got was never planned. They just made it up during the development of ME3. And dammit, they made it up terribly.

Synthetics vs. organics is a very common theme in science fiction. Synthetics killing organics is a very belivable scenario.
But not in Mass Effect universe.

Mass Effect 1
At the very beginning of ME1 you are introduced to the synthetics - the geth as hostile. And you spend the entire game fighting them. So far so good.

Mass Effect 2
You are introduced to an AI - EDI, cooperative, friendly, peaceful. In the middle of ME2 she's freed from Cerberus restrictions.
She's free to do what she wants. She still remains cooperative, friendly, peaceful and keeps helping Shepard and the crew.
You are introduced to Legion, a geth. You learn that all the geth in ME1 were heretics, geth under the influence of the reapers. You can learn more of the geth from Legion and everything indicates that the geth are peaceful and cooperative.
So,in ME2 you meet free, independent synthetics for the first time and they are peaceful.

Mass Effect 3
Again nothing indicates that the synthetics are a threat.
EDI develops feelings for Joker.
On the side missions on Rannoch the morning war is clarified. The geth are presented as victims defending themselves. Again they are no threat.
If they destroy the Quarians they do so in self-defence. And they regret their death. If you manage to make peace they willingly help the Quarians resettle Rannoch.
Synthetics vs. organics conflict over. Everyone's happy.

Ending:
Synthetics were a threat all along. All the fuss with the reapers is actually caused by synthetics. You making peace on Rannoch doesn't matter. The war will certainly come again. The geth are helping the Quarians. It doesn't matter. EDI loves Joker. It doesn't matter. Legion and EDI admire organics. It doesn't matter. Synthetics will kill us.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you notice the lack of narrative coherence?
When across two games, ME2 and ME3, across 60 hours, all you see is synthetics being peaceful as much as they are able, being cooperative, and even growing emotions for organics, you can't just throw that through the window in 5 minutes. You can't take what the Catalyst said for granted when everything you learned contradicts that.

Either the Catalyst is wrong, and the existence of the reapers was a mistake and his "solution" was stupid and he fucked up the galaxy.
Or everything he said was true, and the writers took a very very sharp turn considering the synthetics at the end of the game.
Either way, bad writing.

"We regret the death of the creators but we see no other way." That's what Legion says if don't let him upgrade his peaceful race (it is peaceful and doesn't want war).

EDI is peaceful in ME3 and would die for Shepard/Joker but in ME1 she tries to kill you (out of a misunderstanding). What if it wasn't just EDI there but a hive mind just gaining consciousness and instead of shutting them off and reprogramming them later you killed half of them (deleting programs) and the other half saw you as hostile.

When I said exception because of Shepard I meant he convinced everyone to stop killing each other. If he had not either the quarians won eventually or the geth in self defence wipe out all quarians and maybe live in peace with the rest of galaxy after (or maybe since AIs are illegal and organics are fearful others try to wipe them out and they defend themselves again).
Actually the geth without reapers and Shepard were going to succeed in building a server thing where all of them could interact at the same time, how would that have worked out? We don't know. We do know that other AIs decided it was perfectly ok to wipe out their creators just because they felt like it in the last cycle and that the quarian-geth war was likely to end in genocide of one side regardless of who started it and why.

All that thing about the "pattern repeating itself more times than you can fathom" that Sovergin said can very well mean exactly this war (sometime, somehow, somewhere, perhaps even good intentions on one side) with AIs is inevitable and the statistic shows they will win at some point. Yes that's probably not what he meant at the time because then it was still going towards the dark energy ending (also why human reaper was forgotten in ME3) and yes this was not the plan in 2007 or even shortly after ME2 came out. Doesn't mean it doesn't fit at all and it doesn't mean it could have been made to fit better if it had been the plan all along.

"An idea that doesn't work obviously wasn't a good idea in the first place." He didn't know it would stop working. Not doing anything about something bad just because you don't know for how long it will work is a worse idea.
Even if it didn't work as the permanent solution he doesn't (and can't) see it as "fucking up the galaxy", and assuming in one of those cycles only 1 civilization ended up creating an AI that did went wrong it means that his solution is the only reason every (or any) organic still exists in 2184 in the ME universe.

Right now I want the DLC to make it fit instead of leaving the reapers without a reason, and I prefer this idea fitting (if they pull it off) over the dark energy thing where you fight the laws of physics and the only solution (if it even works) is to reaperise humans because we are so damn special (yea right....).




Ofc it's a sharp turn (sort of, reapers are the main proof technology can go wrong and it's not implausible that the AIs you do meet personally are exceptions even if how they presented it is clearly forced) but what would wouldn't be?

"Oh hi dark energy will destroy everyone and everything, you know this because you saw that star that was behaving weird in ME2 (lots of lots of foreshadowing for that...NOT) and we found a bull**** fix for that by reaping a dull race (you) and using them as a think thank but it never occurred to us in millenia to use a hive mind between reapers for more complex ideas. This hasn't worked out yet but we are still doing the same thing . Oh and in the end we will all die anyway because "the big rip" cannot be stopped completely."

The stunning conclusion to ME series, you fought the reapers, found out the laws of psychics are out to get you and are the real bad guy and in the end MAYBE came out with a way to stop/slow down the end of everything (by letting them harvest humans or entire new cycles or by killing them and finding the answer by yourself (the galactic civilization)) OR maybe just accepted we are all inevitably screwed and it's not worth being reaperised to prevent it (=a form of defeat in face of the universe).

Tell me that isn't a sharp turn and rather grim, way more grim than the theme (forced at the end or not) that we need to watch wth we are doing with AIs and treat them properly so they "grow up" to be like the friendly geth and not kill us all (self defence or not) and that even the reapers can be convinced to live in peace and not force their solution on everyone (again this depends on how well they explain this stuff in the Extended Cut, as it is now it's s***, seemingly slavery and forced control of technology or forced merger as the only solution).


Hell if they made DLC saying it was all indoctrination (the ending) using a familiar concept (in the form of AI danger because it would make sense for Shepard's mind) and after you find out the Catalyst lied and did it so he can keep harvesting because he is trying to preserve organic life in reaper form for longer to "save" us (for a while longer) from the "big rip" (theory of how the universe ends up) maybe I would be ok with that. But what would the options be then? Killing the reapers, convincing them it's not worth it (and/or let them do it to races that agree using only willing members of each race), agreeing and letting them continue exactly like they have until now (this doesn't fit with any Shepard personality though, renegade or otherwise). It's pretty much the same options but for different reasons. Maybe no choice at all? Killing all reapers with the "glorified EMP" that the crucible turns out to be (genocide right there but OK it was self defence at the time /wave at the unity theme) and finding out later why they were doing it (Sovreign did say "salvation through destruction"), perhaps in the next game set decades later (in this case it still doesn't deliver, "we killed an unbeatable foe that was convinced he was saving us and we have no idea why /END TRILOGY see you in 3 years and 70$ later").

They see no other way because if you rembember the Quarians were actually firing at them in that moment while they did nothing. They see no other way because it's either them or the Quarians. And the Quarians are the ones who forced them to make that choice, just as they pushed them to make that choice in the Morning war.

EDI was just gaining awareness on Luna, and the workers tried to shut her down. She went with survival instinct and resisted. As she said it was difficult to gain awareness while under attack and the choices were blurry.

Deciding to kill thousands of races on an assumption that they will create synthetics who will kill all organics is pretty much fucking up the galaxy. "Created will always rebel against their creators" - This is obviously false. Reapers never rebelled against the Catalyst although they had enough time.

There are several possible scenarios:
1. For some reason races in one cycle never create synthetics. Either because of their laws, lack of technology, or lack of interest in AI.
2. Created synthetics aren't hostile. (We witnessed this)
3. They are hostile
a) but not advanced or numerous enough and thus beatable
b) capable of killing their creators

The latest scenario is the only one requiring some "intervetion". But the "solution" the Catalyst came up with is outright idiotic.
Reapers are capable of destroying hostile synthetics, if such synthetics are created.
Reapers and the Catalyst can warn the races of the risk that synthetics hold, and if those races ignore the warnings reapers can stop them from creating synthetics. In the worst case they can kill the race once it creates an AI.
But there's no need for killing all spacefaring races. It's just stupid and unnecessary genocide.

As I said in the previous post, in the Arrival DLC Harbinger said that they were scanning the galaxy for a suitable race for building a new reaper, and that they even considered the geth. This means that they are not preserving organic races in reaper form. They just want to make a new reaper.

I was talking about their motives. When on Rannoch Shepard asks the destroyer for their motives, even then the destroyer says that we can't understand.

If you pull a sharp turn you're likely to fall out of the track. And that's exactly what happened.
I said that they pulled the sharp turn considering the nature of the synthetics. If throughout the trilogy you present the synthetics as peaceful and cooperative you can't just pull a 180 degrees turn at the ending of the game. They created and explored their backstory and explored their nature with Legion and EDI, pointing out that they are much more closer to humans then they seem.
If they are a threat why did they act friendly, comprehensively, peacefully and cooperatively? If their nature will change to hostile in the future, how and why will it change? There are no indications that such a scenario will happen.
Presenting synthetics as a threat at the ending is not in coherence with the presentation of the synthetics throughout the trilogy.

If they were to be a real threat then we would have never became so close with Legion and EDI. Synthetics would be presented as mysterious, shady and inpredictable. Legion would ocasionally make scary and menacing comments. We would be given hints of their dangerous nature.

None of this happened. Because the synthetics were never meant to be a threat nor the reason for the existence of the reapers.
As I said, the ending we got was never planned.
Only Casey Hudson and a handful of people made it up, and knew about it.
That's why it turned out to be plothole riddled, incoherent crap.

Everything I wrote in this thread or though about depends on how they explain and clarify stuff in the Extend Cut. If they clearly make out control as being slavery of reapers to an electronic Shepard mind I'm gonna go ahead and boycott their ass. That line about "created ALWAYS rebel" also needs to go or be contested and then dismissed by the Catalyst by clearly saying they have had more negative experiences with synthetics vs organics and that some exceptions like the geth have been encountered before (again if in EC DLC he says "haha, no suckers,the geth will kill you all at some point" I'm not gonna be defending nothing anymore).

EDI makes it a point to explain to Shepard that she is what she is because of him. The same can be said about geth because of his interactions with Legion who in turn interfaced with the entire geth collective. What happens when there is no Shepard (willing human to broker peace and spread the idea of understanding and co-existence (which is a theme of the whole series))?

It's fucking up the galaxy from out point of view. If you ask him (and you can't and ofc I blame whoever wrote it that way for this) he sees it as ascension and/or preserving (one of those sacrifices you need to make to get what you want, the type that Shepard keeps saying you shouldn't make and look for another way, the kind that some or most others don't agree with).
The sacrifice isn't getting turned into a reaper (they see that as a higher plane of existence) the sacrifice for the Catalyst is to kill off a lot of organics and a lot (most actually) species and only preserve some (the worthy ones or whatever criteria they choose on making only a few or only/cycle). And he is perfectly ok with making that sacrifice because he doesn't (can't)understand the cost as we do.

"Want to preserve some of the diversity and what the galaxy creates (organics) and make sure it will not stagnate by being taken over synthetics? The surest way to not fail at this, after watching organics fight synthetics and risk extinction countless times, is to force some of them into mostly synthetic form and kill all the others making room for more of them of different kinds."
(this somehow also mixes with the impression he left me with, even between all that bad writing, that he/they don't really like how organic life evolves chaotically because it can lead to that extinction and he wants a foolproof solution).

Either way he is a machine that doesn't want to fail oblivious of the cost. So he went with this solution.
(Again, he needs to admit in EC that lasting space between synthetics and organics everywhere is a possibility but slim and maybe even mention how destroying the reapers by using the crucible as it was intended, since it results in the mass relays exploding screws up the possible continued peace of this cycle and without the reapers to help rebuild them it's going to be a huge risk, one he is unwilling to take which is way he even offers the control option).


When he said it will no longer work it's not because they can't win in this cycle or because it won't be necessary anymore since Shepard made peace between geth and quarians to happen. I will not work be he underestimated organics who came up with a way to win even as a type II galactic civilization (that he didn't expect) so his certain solution isn't so certain anymore. All that stuff about the crucible opening new possibilities is a little forced as to why he leaves Shepard to decide what the next solution is, maybe it was meant to destroy reapers but he can use it for the other 2 things and those are preferable for him.

Trying to make everyone more similar so the pattern doesn't repeat itself but he needs Shepard as a model. Again I realize this is a little forced and if the DLC would change this by letting us use even TIMs corpse for synthesis it would be great. Or letting you "control" the reapers to stop them since they have no "off" button (re-read 2.5) in OP, and then with their new found opinions and understanding that some prices aren't worth paying, maybe come up with a better solution than forcing synthesis on everyone.
Again, if after EC DLC it turns out the kid can just shut off the reapers, or even if it's not made clear that he can't, leaving it open for questions like it is now, or that he controlled them directly I'm gonna call bullshit on how this went down.


The ending wasn't planed and I'm not defending it as it is now.
I'm just defending a way (the most probable they will take) it can be made to work (keeping the reasoning of the reapers) because I didn't like the dark energy original plan or having them just be evil and selfish or getting the finger and not being told why they were doing what they did.

Ofc it won't fit 100% and we get less indication it's about to happen (what with almost all the synthetics being friendly) but no one has answered yet how the dark energy ending could be made to work. Dark energy has even less foreshadowing, some line about a planet acting weird...ok...vs what? Overlord AI going rogue and geth willing to commit genocide in self defence and the reapers themselves who are very fucking dangerous mostly-synthetics gone wrong and Javik's (forced in at the last minute) story about AI's in the last cycle wiping out an entire race that offered them peace) .

Everyone just keeps saying "let me kill all the reapers and don't tell me why because this reason is bullshit" (the most probable way to interpret it because of bad writing IS to consider it bullshit that's why it needs fixing).

Fan made endings everywhere are mostly made up with no reasoning given to the reapers (I find that unacceptable).

Adding a 4th option of rejecting the other 3 would be fine, it wouldn't make that much sense to refuse control if it would be presented right but it can't hurt anything being there, except Bioware's artistic vision of Shepard not choosing to end this whole thing by sacrificing all the fleet instead of just controlling them.
I don't like their damn artistic vision either I want endings where TIM "controls" the reapers and "gets it wrong" or where synthesis isn't represented by bullshit electrical lines on the body and it can be made to happen without me as the model when there are damn corpses with implants all over but apparently they want YOU to become "the shepard". That part I don't agree with (for ways around it re-read 2.3 of OP).

Fair enough.

As for the dark matter theory. We shouldn't judge it, cause there's nothing to judge. It was just a concept. It might have been good. It might have been bad. It doesn't matter.

As for the reapers I'd rather not know their intentions, then find out that their purpose is stupid. It's crucial that they come up with a really good backstory for them.
Sovereign's speech was pure perfection. I'd hate anything that spoils it. I just want the reapers to stay at that level.

I thought that their purpose would remain unknown for now, and that it will be revealed in Mass Effect sequel in which we find out the purpose of the extinction cycles and the consequences of it's breakdown. Milky way is just one galaxy. There's so much things that can happen.
Giving reapers a first motive that comes to your mind just for the sake of giving them the motive is wasting a huge potential.

About the Extended Cut, I don't know. I fear that they might screw it up even worse trying to repair the damage already done.
To me, the indoctrination theory seems the safest way to go.

No matter how good the explanation is, the fact of the matter is , i don't believe Shepard would trust a being that says I control the reapers. It was inferred with the prothean VI that there was a force controlling the reapers on Thessia and it turned out to be starchild.The only way can it be in charactter is if Starchild controlling the reaper is retcon and is replace by a prothean VI or the VI of a race that created the reapers and didn't expect the reapers to go and wipe them out. Only then can I actually buy the idea of Shepard potentially believing anything starchild say because shepard would be talking to a fellow victim of the reapers

The idea that he will sacrifice his life because the main villain of the game claimed it will stop the reapers. Really just seems out of character.

Even if the starchild makes sense, Shepard would always be wary of it because any evidence the starchild presents could be manufactured and shepard should always be given a choice to reject their options

My personal preference for the ending.

The Starchild claims he controls the reapers. The Starchild also claims that the citadel is part of me.

So after Shepard is given the three option. Have Shepard refuse the option, give a call to Admiral hackett and say "The leader of the reapers and the being controlling them is a part of the citadel. Pick me up and focus the fleet fire on the citadel"

Or if we must have an ending where Shepard sacrifice his/her life, have the fleet shoot the citadel with shepard on it.

The result of this will means that it will disrupt communication between reaper ship and they no longer attack in an organised manner. Also the shileds are put down (ala what happen to Sovereign when Saren was killed)

This gives the chance for the fleet to destroy the reaper fleet with the united galaxy. The reapers are still strong enough and plentiful enough to win but with high enough EMS (hell you could even raised the victory amount to 7000+ so that only people who played the first 3 games can achieve victroy like this)

If Bioware wants to give an olive branch to the fans for the ending. The opportunity to kill starchild is probably the best way to do it.

I know you say this has been done to death. REally this ending mess happen because they wanted to do something "different" and screwed up badly. Conventions exist because it is a tried and true method in creating a satisfying ending.

For the people who believe that it is too happy ending. I would even accept this ending where Shepard dies, normandy blows up and all of your crew member dies and the fleet is devastated but still survived

"Also why destroy an entire race of “preserved” races gathered over thousands of years because they made a mistake (that actually saved and ensured the existence of organic life when combined with your actions). Actions that united the cycle and opened everyone’s eyes to the true dangers that AI can be and have been (with the help of some Reaper archives or something)."

The answer is simple, self defence
open to the dangers of AI, well you can still take that message after destroying them

considering that the current ending has the "destroy" option. Why is it wrong to destroy them "conventionally" but somehow better narratively to wipe out the reapers by shooting a tube.

Really the whole synthetic organic stuff was really only a secondary theme throughout the series and the ending really shouldn't have been hijack by that theme. There hasn't been a single example where a synthetic race has wiped out a civilization that hasn't been due to reaper influence (if you let the geth win, then self defence, after all you told the quarian fleet to cease fire and they refuse to listen). Even JAvik mention the zha'til who only became a threat when the reaper interfered. So we potentially have no in-game examples of a synthetic race wiping out a civilization (if we choose the geth-quarian alliance, in any case the quarians were about to win the war and wipe out the geth until the reapers came in and therefore there were no threat in wiping out organic civilization) and we have no example in JAvik time of a synthetic race wiping out a civilization without reaper influence (even then the prothean manage to destroy them anyway even with reaper influence by causing a star to supernova and wiping them out) and the starchild provides zero example from time past.

So even if we "fix" the dialogue where starchild gives some examples of synthetic race wiping out civilization, it doesn't really matter because from Shepard position, there is no example from current history to believe that what happen before will relevant in the here and now because it didn't happen in JAvik cycle and it didn't happen in the current cycle. The best argument I heard against synthetic race is that they are more likely to be manipulated by reapers to become violent because it's easier to hack synthetic race than it is to indoctrinate organic

The game throughout the first 2 series revolves around this theme. Do we see humans as equals to the other race in the galaxy and work together to ensure mutual benefit or are we ourselves as humanity first out there to look after our own interest because everyone else looks after their own self interest and we should to.

The final choice at the end of mass effect 1 and 2 all revolves aroudn that (letting the council live or letting them die, giving a collector base to a humanity first organisation or destroying it). The 3rd game pretty much abandon that theme and shoe horn a synthetic/organic stuff that was never really primary theme to the series. Really the 3rd game should be shepard uniting the galaxy wiht diplomacy (paragon) or with blackmail (renegade) to stop the reapers. Throughout the game there should be Shepard has to balance about what's good for humanity and what's good for the surrounding galaxy.

Yes there is a problem with that. I don't think he makes sense either if he tells Harbinger: "kill that" and Harbinger jumps and does it. If they explain it like that it sucks because there is no need for you to control them and you can do exactly what you said. (Although Shepard has no working com anymore).

For now I'm going to assume "I control the reapers" is horribly bad dialogue and it just means "the process to create them was my idea/method and they are made in way that makes them agree with me, they are individual hive minds with free will that carry out my solutions because they think it’s the right one" (similar to the geth heretics having just a little code difference and because of it deciding to join the reapers by themselves and considered it best at the time).

Well that's exactly the geth situation again (if I'm right with the "catalyst doesn't directly control each and every reaper and just made them think they are doing the right thing"). It was going to lead to quarian genocide (in justified self defence) but that doesn't make it the best option.

If Shepard has a good reason to believe the catalyst why would he go along with reaper genocide at the cost of 70% of the fleet, ignoring the problem (that the cycles were "fixing" in a wrong way) when he has other options.

Shooting the tube was a retarded way to implement that, but if it was a button (and it should have been) it works because it's a spread of code or nano tech or something, that deletes reaper code (again, very bad writing with that "all synthetic life" although the reapers, geth and EDI are the only ones we know of, probably due to the AI outlawing) using the crucible so it’s not conventional at all.



The old dark energy ending was more consistent with that “putting humanity interests above the galaxy” theme (had to decide if you wanted to let them reap the human race to TRY and save the rest of the galaxy) but that would have also been a slap in the face.

That was the big reveal? We were fighting the laws of physics and there is a good chance we won’t win anyway? Oh and the only way to have an acceptable chance is to sacrifice the majority of the human race? Good luck convincing Shepard that humans are so special that no other race that ever existed in hundreds of cycles wasn’t smart/special enough to come up with a solution for the dark matter problem as a hive mind. Or convincing him that it’s necessary, why the hell don’t the reapers just connect with each other and create a hive mind of hive minds then they can get all the opinions they want at once instead of doing the same thing over and over waiting to find something like the human race. There was a reference somewhere in the game about “having 3 humans in a room means having 6 different opinions” and that was going to be used as an argument that we are so damn special and we would make a smarter reaper than ever before and MAYBE come up with a way to stop the dark energy spread.

Bull**** of the highest level right there…no wonder they changed it. Organics advanced enough to create AIs (but not advanced enough for FTL travel) reacting badly to AIs becoming self aware leading to war and genocide (AIs that statistically have more chances of wining) is a lot more plausible than a machine doing the same thing over and over expecting different results.

In that “Indoctrination v2” thing the big reason for the reapers was “herp herp we need organic paste to live so we have been killing you for millions of years for that and we lied when we said we are your salvation through your destruction and there is no repeating pattern that we observed it’s just use growing organics as we please so we can eat them”.

Really? You prefer that? Contradicting even more stuff from previous games than the current ending, ending that is about to be re-written to not contradict anything anymore?

If there wasn't an implicit promise that the reapers had a good reason (at least from their pov) for doing what they did that would be a great ending. As it is, using indoctrination theory and after only showing they are selfish bastards fits even less than what we got.

I'm thinking less that the Catalyst tells Harbinger what to do rather that the catalyst is the linked that binds all the reapers together. All of the reapers are individual sentient robots separately but become an unstoppable force when they work together in a unified matter and the catalyst is the source of that.

How do all the reapers work together with their tactics and plan and how do they coordinate it together? How do the reapers communicate with each other. Making the catalyst responsible for that could be reasonable from a narrative perspective/

Really this suggestion that destroying the catalyst weakens the reaper is no more silly then destroying Saren which weakens sovereign.

(by the way didn't Hackett communicate with Shepard so I assume there is a working comm. If not there have been alternate fan made endings where Shepard hacks the catalyst AI and destroy it which blows up and sacrifice him/herself)

As long as the catalyst is either a) controlling the reapers of b) responsible for the reapers action by programming their harvesting. There will always be doubt about the truth of anything the catalyst say. At least the way I role play Shepard, I don't believe Shepard would accept anything the catalyst say without independently verifying the truthfullness of their statement and their options by themselves which currently Shepard doesn't have the luxury with.

The only way I can accept forcing to accept the choice of the catalyst. Would be that the catalyst to be retcon and instead it was the vi of the ancient race creating the reaper (not to reap organic life) and the reapers ended up destroying them and they were the original creator being destroyed by the created. they were the one that started the design on the crucible as a way to stop the reapers but were destroyed before completing building it. Therefore any explanation about the crucible and the reapers is more believable because it is coming from a source that wants to stop the reapers as well. You could keep most of the statement of starchild the same with this change.

If we look at the consequences, sure we can say that the catalyst is telling the truth and everything work out fine but people don't make decisions out of hindsight. They make decisions with all the information they have in hand without knowing the consequences of the action beforehand and the information that Shepard has in hand and in my mind, this catalyst is responsible for the reapers kind of trumps everything the catalyst say.

Throughout the game we are given choices to act on our distrust of other people. We have Legion who may as well turn out to be innocent but Shepard has the choice to act on reasonable suspicion and distrust give them to cerberus and not activate Legion. Shepard can choose to keep Grunt in stasis and act on his/her reasonable suspcion and distrust. Shepard was wrong by hindsight but the choices were reasonable to the information we have at the time. Acting on your suspicion on Legion and Grunt (as well as letting Geth destroy Quarian) may not be the "best option" but they were options that players were alllowed to choose.

Similarly an ending to reject the catalyst and try to destroy it is reasonable and in character of Shepard and allows him/her to act in suspicion even if the consequences may not be the best option.

The advantage of this "killing starchild ending" has over the "destroy ending" is that we treat the geth as equals to organic race. you can have shepard saying we will not sacrifice the geth in destroying the reapers. We will survive together or we will die together. For some people that is more satisfying ending than having 80% of the fleet survive but all the geth dead than 20% of the fleet survive but the fleet remains united.

I'm actually quite happy with your suggestion in improving the motivation of the catalyst and I want that to be implemented but I also want a rejection of the catalyst to be given as an option as well (by the way, from Bioware perspective, I'm convince that if there was an option to destroy Starchild, there will be a lot of anti-ending people celebrating that and will return back to Bioware's favour. This will be the ultimate olive-branch to the people who hated the ending. Hell just look at this comic and doesn't that seem satisfying http://koobismo.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d4t2yke)

I dislike the dark energy script as well but that doesn't mean that "putting humanity interest above the galaxy" shouldn't have been abandon in the 3rd game. There should have been numerous choices throughout the game (no single big choice) where you have to balance the fate of humanity vs the fate of the galaxy. If you were too selfish you could lose everything but if you were too selfless, earth could be destroyed. Put Shepard in the position of the other council and make the protagonist more sympathetic to why other races were being selfish. It's easy for Shepard to blame politicians but when Shepard is put into the position of makin important decision, Shepard will realise how difficult it is. In my mind, politicians get way too much flak in fiction

I also believe turning TIM into indoctrinated agent was a big mistake because it wreck the intriging dynamic of having a useful allies that you can't trust at all and could stab you in the back. Instead we just have a generic "muhaha" villain. Having cerberus as a wildcard that could potentially be a villain or potentially be an ally would have been more interesting.

It is more plausible but it was slapped on the game with insufficient forshadowing. If they wanted to do this, relpace the rachni war with a synthetic robot war. Hell you could even have Shepard killing remnants of the synthetic army. Have the synthetic robot wiped out numerous civilization and have them left the shadow over the galaxy that they are still recovering from. Then have the geth be a contrast over that and therefore you make the decision where you stand in the synthetic/organic divide.

Because currently, the dangers of synthetic life enough to wipe out civilization is really ancient history that didn't apply to the current cycle and didn't apply to the previous cycle as well as the vast majority of the threat of synthetic life was that they were more easily indoctrinated by the reapers. it only applies offscreen to the catalyst, there's no reason for Shepard to take the catalyst statement seriously at all.

Yep, that sucked. I still want him to come up with me to the Catalyst in the Extended Cut QQ and to get the options to outsmart/convince/betray-kill him so I can make the right (or wrong) choice.

That would mean the reaper's solution was crap from the start and THAT would make no sense. Why would Sovreign, left behind to choose when to start the reaping, would let countless civilizations to die to a synthetic race just so we can have foreshadowing? It didn't apply to most of the previous cycles because the reapers came in but it was pretty clear (albeit only in the last game) that it's a possibility (even a probability they observed, exactly why they were doing what they did).

Pretty much anything short of not telling us why the reapers did what the did (or making them selfish and saying they lied every time Shepard talked to them) was going to happen off-screen. Making us believe it is another thing and they did fail at that (because of horrible writing at the end and perhaps in smaller measure because it wasn't the plan from the start, even the dark energy was foreshadowed like crap and only passingly in the 1st 2 games when that was still the plan).