Mass Effect 5 'The Return of Shepard'

May 19, 2017 3:19:28 GMT KaiserShep said:

May 19, 2017 2:56:58 GMT The Twilight God said:

Why wouldn't there be?

Well, I guess if some small pocket of geth somehow manage eluded the destroy wave, but I'd say that's a rather insignificant possibility when the narrative basically frames the Destroy choice with a sort of emotional blackmail to make you consider Control or Synthesis, and then leaves them out of the epilogue so there's no "gotcha they live anyways!". But really, who cares? EDI dies so we know it somehow selectively fucks up AI. 

Gotcha? The only way for Synthesis or Control to have any chance at all is too allow you to believe there is a downside to Destroy, which is a carryover sentiment from the original ending. Clearly, Bioware themselves understood how idiotic Green and Blue were so felt they needed to poison the well. This allows emotion to overwhelm reason. However, there is no evidence whatsoever for this downside Destroy supposedly has. Not in the EC. Well, I mean, I would contend that galactic civilization would be over and there would be widespread death, disease, starvation and general unlawfulness in the wake of the collapse of government, infrastructure, etc. I'm not sure if the stranded Qurians and Turians would make it if the liveships (which are big easy targets) were lost in the battle. I mean it would be a mess, but the ending doesn't dwell on that. I understand wanting to end the series on a hopeful note even though asshole Mac wanted everything destroyed originally. I think that's why the Normandy crash is so weird and out of place. Someone decided complete and total destruction of all life was too much and checked him on that.

The original CLAIM was that it would target AI. Even then it was just a claim. We have no means to verify the validity as each of the original endings were identical save for a color swap. The EC retcons this in which the Starbrat claims it will effect "all synthetics". When asked for clarification he states exactly what he means by this phrase: "technology you rely on".  He even states that Shepard's implants fall under this categorization as synthetic so he is not talking about AI's, but instead ALL technology. Yet...

Everything and everyone else eluded it accept for synthesized matter like husks, EDI's blue box (Patrick Weekes stated that was why she died as originally she survived Destroy) and the Reapers themselves (presumably the "terminators" inside the cuttleships as the ships didn't disintegrate because they aren't synthesized). Seeing as Shepard can live with a synthetic neck vertebrae, Kasumi presumably survives despite a partially synthetic brain, the Qurian's suits didn't fail, all the ships are operational, data pads, etc. All the technology that wasn't of an organic/synthetic blend of Reaper design appear unscathed.

The only so-called "evidence" of Geth demise people can come up with is them not being shown in a slide. But then, by that same logic Volus aren't shown. Hanar aren't shown. Drell aren't shown. Do all those races die off regardless of ending/choices? Do Salarians die off if Mordin dies or is Mordin the sole survivor of his species? Ask yourself this: If Bioware did continue ME post-Destroy and the Geth were still around could you bring forth any definitive proof that they were all wiped out? Could you point to any one instance and say, "See, right there. That shows that the Geth definitely died out. No question about it."? Yet Bioware could easily point out how they never said or showed anything about the Geth or AI's in general being specifically targeted at any point in the ending or the Starbrat conversation. In fact, you wouldn't even be able to point out a single instance of any "technology you rely on" being "affected" other than relays which are a matter of being overloaded beyond capacity, not being targeted by the Crucible.