By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JWeinCom on 28 January 2017
Edit Thread
Scoobes said:
JWeinCom said:

1.  The reason for the catalyst is because apparently conflict between synthetic and organic life is inevitable.  However, in the game you only see evidence to the contrary.  If you play your cards right, you are able to broker peace between the Geth and the Quarians.  EDI, an unshackled AI, is a valuable ally to her human crew.  The conflict between the Geth and the Geth heretics show that even with a purely synthetic world, peace is not a given.  Conflict can exist even within a hive mind.

The starchild says that the conflict is inevitable, and you just have to go with it.  In the DLC ending, you can challenge him on it, but he shuts you down.  This is odd considering you'd been able to change the mind of every major villain (Serin (sp) in ME1, the Elusive man right before) in the game to that point.

That's only if you play your cards right though, and then that's only via Shephards (your) influence. Without the player influence then synthetic life and organic life were in a constant war with each other. For instance, EDI was originally a rogue AI that could have slaughtered hundreds without you there to stop her and the Geth and Quarian war would have continued unabated without Shephard as peacekeeper. 

I also think the developers were trying to make a point that some things are simply innevitable no matter what you choose to do and no matter how successful you are in what you acheive. 

*spoilers*

Yes, if you play your cards right.  So, if you played your cards right, and show that peace between synthetics and organics is possible, shouldn't that be reflected in the ending?  That's kind of the whole point of "the shephard" guiding humanity down the right path (or the wrong path).

If you couldn't resolve the war between the Geth and the Quarians, or something like that, then maybe the ending would be fine, and it would make sense that you'd have to choose one of the options.  But, it's incredibly unsatisfying to solve the conflict between synthetics and organics, and then be told a few hours later that you have to make a giant sacrifice to solve the conflict between synthetics and organics.  Whether the starchild is ultimately right or wrong about the conflict being inevitable, from Shepard's,and by extension the player's, point of view, it is nonsensical. 

I don't know what was in the developer's minds, but if they were trying to show that some things are simply inevitable, then that was a poor choice to make. You spend nearly the entirety of the trilogy as the badass who can accomplish anything.  Deciding to change that at literally the last second is poor writing. It doesn't really matter if it was intended or not.  Either it was a bad choice, or bad execution.  Bad either way.