D20 Day - An ending perspective

Oh boy, I'm sure you haven't seen one of these before.


Heavy (handed) symbolism ahead. Those that staunchly stick to literal interpretations may want to turn back now. We going off the deep end.



Control = Determinism
Destroy = Nuh-uh, Free Will.
Synthesis = Fine line between them. It’s right there in the name. Choose your Fate. Also, it’s holistic rather than reductionism.
Refuse = Analysis paralysis. Can’t decide. Makes somebody else handle it. Nothing gets truly resolved.

Indoctrination ends in Control for anyone that isn’t a Shepard. Only a Shepard has the potential to experience it without being overwhelmed by it.

Shepard’s Spectre status gives the right to decide on behalf of the entirety of Council space.



So I strongly support Synthesis. I found the endings quite abrupt initially, and kinda went with my gut (Adept FemShep, mostly Paragon) to choose green, as I thought it was the only one that breaks the old cycle. Not interested in postponing or deflecting the responsibility to someone else. Mess was big enough already, and my understanding of Shepard was a person that didn’t want or need someone else to handle problems that could be addressed right there on the spot. I've picked up some moderately decent symbolism proficiency, compared to the me of a few years ago, and now I quite like the ending. Both in world (plot) and real world (author) references have a purpose. It was abrupt because the writers sacrificed logical consistency for artistic vision. They could perceive of the Shepard, but were not yet strong enough to become one themselves. Thus, their creation contained flaws. This is to be expected.

I’ve seen speculation that Starchild was aiming for Synthesis. It’s just always ended up as Control (aka, how he exists). He has attempted endless variations, but can’t seem to find a solution on his own. As the Albert Einstein quote goes: “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” Starchild had reached a stalemate and decided to yield to another’s will.

I agree that Synthesis seems to be what Starchild is ultimately aiming for (but can’t do himself, as he’s outside the cycle). He guides the Reapers, but they haven't managed it yet. This is basically about the person that makes the choice being able to see beyond the immediate, to see the order of the universe playing out. In a word: Fate. As Control basically turns a person into Starchild, it is essentially someone that couldn't see through indoctrination and just submitted to it instead. Eventually the cycle restarts itself. Destroy is to reject Fate. Whether as an allergic reaction to the thought of no free will or otherwise. Synthesis is a result of seeing what indoctrination/the order of the universe is going towards (the Dao, of the Dao de Jing, for example). The Reapers are just an agent within. The gaze can pierce further than their existence. When things are perceived at that level, then the plan makes sense. Factors that lead to good, positive things full of beauty and splendor all seem to align - and it just so happens to be what Starchild has been trying to achieve. The Shepard can see what indoctrination is trying to do, but is strong enough to not be swayed. Shepard can still choose whatever option desired (yes, that's a have my cake and eat it too stance about free will and determinism).

About war assets. Having a single option is based on the Collector Base decision at the end of 2. Not importing a save gives both options. As war assets increase, it is worth noting that there is a certain level where Control doesn't damage Earth, but Destroy still inflicts heavy damage. This implies that Destroy is less desirable and sends progress back further. There can be the view that if current progress is rewinded enough, variations that were cut off by the current path could then be explored. If Shepard survives in a Destroy then yes, having no cybernetics means that he's kinda screwed. Scarred, crippled, and constant pain will be his life. No more tech to help him.

It can be further pondered if taken to a meta level of Mass Effect stories within Mass Effect stories. Like how a player can have multiple saves/playthroughs. Or all the players collectively talking about it with each other, like this. Each individual is a Commander Shepard. The one that guides them is the Shepard Commander. This is why Legion uses the name that he does, and refers to Shepard in that way. It is why, when the Geth reached a stalemate, they turned to Shepard (an outside entity) to make the decision. It is why Starchild allows Shepard to choose. Starchild in one level is Harbinger in the other. Trying to solve issues vs expressing frustration at the situation.

In any case, I currently have the hunch that Shepard surviving basically depends on what meta Shepard does, which influences the third Shepard above that. If the middle option is Destroy then Shepard continues to be alone on the Citadel - severed from outside existence even further. The Starchild of a Destroy is part of the Harbinger the next level up (Harbinger being a gestalt), driven by irritation and anger at the ever increasing unresolved issues. If Control, Shepard becomes part of Harbinger (pain etc. drives him mad over time) while middle Shep is Starchild, of course. If Synthesis, he is Joker. Not completely healed, but functional, alive, and not really suffering compared to his previous state. He knows how to navigate and fly the ship, because he has experience, but the new Shepard makes the decisions. Middle Shepard melds into the new Shepard (I think...), furthering his conviction. This process is mainly intended to go up, but can go down for two main reasons: obtaining an initial result that breaks the cycles, or rescuing a stranded Destroy Shepard and others in that universe that were severed with him. Things that weren’t reachable during the first ascent. It goes up and down, like a wave. The rescue option is akin to fancy archaeology (or the Reapers providing knowledge from previous civilizations). Refuse plays out as reset and go again, I suppose (stalemate continues). Starchild put all that time and effort into a Shepard, who finally made it to the Catalyst… and Shepard throws a tantrum and makes Starchild start again. So be it. I’d be irritated too if I’d put so much effort into someone, trusted them with my very existence, and they just flip me off. Has to go back and reincarnate a new Shepard through the Lazarus Project. Again. Should that repeatedly fail, has to go even further back and make a new Shepard. Trying endless variations until finally stumbling upon something that works.

The Leviathans are the symbol of the original problem: selfish pride. They believe themselves just, yet see all but themselves as slaves and tools for the betterment of the Leviathans. They think themselves kind because they look after their thralls, but their kindness involves culling other species simply because those species, as a whole, experienced lowered ability to efficiently serve the whims of the Leviathans. It traces back to their superiority complex and lack of humility. They initiated Control. Starchild was made with their conceit built in. When Starchild pointed out that they were part of the problem, and Destroyed many of their number in the process, they chose to Refuse to face the problem and ran away instead, believing that the situation would resolve itself on its own if they just waited long enough. Then they’d be able to resume their rightful place as the Apex species, or so their arrogance convinced (indoctrinated, even) themselves. They believed themselves to be at the Apex, yet found themselves isolated in the Deep.

The Catalyst made one progression past the Leviathans, however. While it still believed itself superior, it was aware that its current solution was imperfect. It allowed a tiny sliver of there being a chance of a better solution being possible - even if it could not enact it itself. If someone were able to manage the monumental task of getting close enough, then Starchild was willing to place its continued existence and very being into the hands of someone else. Allowing another to decide one’s fate is not a small level of trust, even if only bestowed upon a single individual. It presented its very best efforts, the three options, and then stepped back and yielded to the Shepard. Shepard in turn could decide to trust in the effort behind those options or he could decide he knew better and could do better. Control repeats the Leviathans pride in oneself. Destroy places higher value on the self, even to the abstract degree of sacrificing his own health for the sake of organics (what he identifies as - pro-human, anti-alien sentiments are just another manifestation). Again, self pride. Refuse spits on the trust given to Shepard. Believing that waiting long enough will produce the perfect solution (Ashley or Kaidan?). Analysis paralysis and unwillingness to accept outside aid. Synthesis reflects acceptance of what has been entrusted to her, valuing all things, humility while still being willing to make the hard choices to the best of her ability, trust in those that come after her, and a willingness to decrease so that others may decrease. Confidence in what has gotten her this far, yet also willing to let it all go.

The Leviathans showed an ability to revert and restore Collector’s to their previous state, even though thousands of years had passed. This is conceptual evidence that Shepard can be revived no matter which ending you choose, should those that come after wish to do so. A smaller scale of that happened in ME2, with Liara. She did not give up hope, but also did not try to do it all herself. She yielded to Cerberus, not knowing if they would try to corrupt and control the reborn Shepard or not. I saw one person mention that her dialogue about it, when questioned, is “Was I supposed to let my friend die?” To her, despite the traditional definition of death, Shepard had not quite died yet. The danger of it happening was very real, though. Different people are better at perceiving different aspects of reality. Where one uses the naked eye, another has a microscope and telescope available. To her perception, part of Shepard was not truly dead yet. Essentially, she’s the one that saved a crippled ME2 Shepard from the aftermath of experiencing a Destroy selection. That’s the nature of her bond.

A Shepard decision is a chain reaction - thus bouncing from relay to relay. Discussion of reasoning for the choices available, with eventual updates (or even changes) in stances reflects this. Changes are also depicted. No matter how convinced someone may be of something, at most they have to only be 99.99% sure. 100% is arrogance and shuts out outside perspective (Geth consensus stalemate). That tiny fraction of a percent must always be considered as a valid conclusion as well, which is part of Starchild’s brilliance. It must be allowed a voice. It might be both, or that the conclusion one was sure of is actually incorrect, upon examination from a new angle or with new information. Curing the genophage is such an overturning of a nigh unanimously held decision. Made possible by Shepard's support of Mordin's inner Shepard journey/decisions. The famous song(s)? Maybe an inner Joker. Hard for me to peer that far.

Some, after ruminating for quite some time about it, think that curing the genophage is insanity. Well, I always play on Insanity. Whether or not to cure it at that time in the story is a pretty great choice. It’s a mess that does need to be cleaned up eventually, but there’s no absolute right or wrong answer. Some things you can handle. Other things should be deferred to others.

The reversals of Legion's way of referencing Shepard as an alternative to the standard way, as well as how Anderson and the Illusive Man seem to swap colors at the end, also tie into this. Anderson is basically the ethical voice of what is right, but taken too far and trying to forcefully impose such sentiments can lead to severing something offensive to oneself ("you're dead to me" reaction). A logic, resource acquisition type like Illusive Man (think of what we could do if we had that!) ultimately desires to control and subjugate to their will. Their 100% belief warped their ability to see the end result, despite good intentions. The one that was right tried to brute force a logic solution, even though that’s not his area of expertise. TIM (or TIMmay, said like the South Park character) tried to force his views with unskilled appeals to emotion. Both tried their best to do what they thought was the best course of action. They should be viewed with compassion despite the inability in certain areas, for they are also a Shepard. There is something only they can handle, so we should endeavor to aid them. Whether the Crucible was real or in Shepard’s head is certainly up for interpretation. TIMmay and Anderson being reflections of Shepard’s inner selves is certainly valid. The wound appearing on both Anderson and Shepard, but opposite sides, looks like it could be related to staring into the mirror of the self. Could also just be a temporary blackout. That can happen if shot in the stomach.

Going by what we know of how our minds developed, emotions came first. Later came logic and conscious decision making. Destroy reverts to a more feral, primal state. Control rejects the old way in favor of the new. It sucks out the data and knowledge it believes important, based on its perception, but there are leftovers due to it being an imperfect solution. As Reapers require a Starchild, which requires a Control decision, that’s what the ground forces are, such as the husks. Devoid of reason. Asari are basically the specialists of emotional areas. Ditto for biotics in general. That’s why they’re Banshees: That much power still remains after what is deemed logically useful has been extracted. Biotic explosions have reduced influence on technology based shields for this reason. Brutes are similar, but more about what remains of a focus on the physical rather than the abstract.

There are instances of Synthesis and reversals playing out previously, on a smaller scale. The Quarians and the Geth are a good example. Taking the lens of logic vs emotion, the Geth are logic based machines while the Quarians are flesh and blood. In a reversal, the Geth are questioning their existence (Does this unit have a soul?) whereas the Quarians largely see them as just a collection of parts and circuits. This is essentially reductionism vs a holistic view (whole greater than the sum of its parts). Are the Geth sentient? Does the collective (Legion) have an identity different and distinct from all his internal processes? A simple description I read was that reductionism tends to reject holistic views, whereas a holistic perspective sees reductionism as a useful option, depending on the situation. It goes back and forth, like a wave. As a holistic entity, Legion also chose Synthesis. He sacrificed and dispersed himself for the betterment of his race. All converged for and yielded to one, and then one dispersed to all. He was basically a Spectre of Geth society - not dependent or chained to the will of the collective, yet still charged with caring for it. Shepard and Tali’s support of Legion makes that outcome possible. For extra fun, look up #42 of the Dao de Jing. Threads connecting everywhere.  Also, ongoing reversal is the principle of AC compared to DC.  If you want to argue with electrical energy that's fine, but good luck.

For that matter, Starchild is basically a Spectre of the Leviathans. He is tasked with solving a problem that they, with all their advanced technology and dominance, were unable to take care of themselves. He has a singular task and is allowed to explore virtually any option. Even killing many of the Leviathans was not enough for them to dismantle him - if they are capable of dealing with Reaper forces with ease, they could likely erase the Catalyst if they so chose. Their ambition for greater heights prevents that. Perhaps that’s why Starchild allowed Shepard’s input, much like Legion did. Despite their differences, they were both Spectres of their respective societies and could speak as equals.

Speaking of which, Shepard's Spectre status gives the right to make for/force on others a decision about the Crucible. Council space is ruled by laws and the Council itself. By the representative power that the people delegated to them, the Council bestowed upon Shepard (and other Spectres, including a second human whose journey overlaps) the right to act outside and above the law, according to his own judgment. He is expected to hold in mind the impact on everyone, not just his personal whims. Spectre status is both the freedom to not have to do everything by the book and it is a breaker of stalemates. There may be those outside Council space (or that don't have a voice on the Council) that don't agree with what happened. A decision was made, and there is always aftermath. Dealing with that is basically akin to a different form of genophage. They did the best they could with what was available and then entrusted the rest to those that came after them.



All of this has happened before. All of this will happen again. With a lot of work and little luck, we just might be able to make this the last. Do I think Synthesis escapes the cycles? No. There are always cycles. I think it represents the best option to break out of the current cycle and achieve progress. Perhaps in the future, unsynthesizing certain entities will be the solution.


As for anyone that disagrees: The Council can kiss my ass!