So why does almost everyone wo supports a canon ending want Destroy to be canonized?

Suspension of disbelief is the audiences' ability to ignore unrealistic claims because those claims are supported by narrative elements. Suspension of disbelief ends when the audience no longer believes those claims to be true/accurate/cohesive/etc.

There is nothing magical about using your own imagination... :/

If there ever is a Milky Way sequel, there may need to be a sole import that it is based on. The results of the endings diverge too much for them all to be accommodated in a single sequel.

The only alternative would to the single import route would be to have them all carry over but for the results to be heavily changed so that it's possible to squeeze them all into a single game. Destroy might have a synthesized future anyway for example, or Synthesis might end with life reverting back to its natural unaltered state, or in Control and Synthesis the Reapers are equally gone. Ect, ect.

That the results of all three endings can't be fit into a single sequel in a way that will satisfy everyone, is likely why the next game in the lineup is set in Andromeda. The writers painted themselves into a corner with ME3's endings.

And yet there is nothing supporting the narrative elements. Because the world they have created the world that ME:A is taking place has already established the base line. The entire basis of ME:A's story defies the already defined universe. Defying all narrative logic to support it.

Control would actually preseve the status quo the best and thus provide the closest ME "feel". Reapers would obviously be hands off/gone to do their own thing (see my control thread). Relays would be rebuilt the fastest, everyone would be alive and unchanged.

Synthesis is the most divergent (and the true culprit behind why you can't just roll up the ending consequences together). It's not just about painting green TRON lines on everybody. With what it implies, the entire galaxy should change/evolve/upgrade/whatever at an exponential rate. In even a few decades the result should be unrecognizable.

Destroy, you maybe get human Shepard back. That's about it.

Of course, fuck setting canon. But yeah, Control would actually be the best candidate for a setting where they just do the same thing over and over.

... and yet in this dictionary.com definition of "suspension of disbelief" there is no mention of it necessarily being supported by anything other than a persons willingness to do so "for the sake of enjoyment."


www.dictionary.com/browse/suspension-of-disbelief

gothpunkboy89: What part of "I don't care if you buy it" are you missing?

Why not talk about the Andromeda stuff in the Andromeda section?

Then make a thread about that in the Andromeda section

Actually, suspension of disbelief is literally about "suspending" (i.e. setting aside) your disbelief in something; that is, you know it's not logical or real, but you decide to overlook that in order to enjoy the performance, game, movie, etc.  First coined in reference to, I believe, performances by magicians... logically not believing in magic but deciding to go along with it in order to enjoy or facilitate the performance of the magician.  You can believe that it's 100% illogical and still decide to go along with it.

What Bioware really misjudged with the ME3 endings was the willingness of the audience to go along with them.

The thing is they already created the rules of the universe. My suspension of disbelief exists to support that universe they have sculpted and build. To then take that existing and sculpted universe and then so blatantly and hideously defy the logic of that universe to the point it no longer fits in is a problem.  Particularly when the solution to the problem is so ungodly simple there is no logical reason not to take it.

In this case simply have ME:A take place after ME 3 during a preselected time line. Doesn't even have to be official canon. Simply this game exists if X, Y and Z choices were made. A What If scenario so to speak. Instead they try to force the thing into the universe that makes no sense and breaks the suspension of disbelieving that was created to accept the universe.

Instead they try to force the Andromeda Initiative. Something that would require a ton of scientific advances and massive funding to have taken off during the few month gap between ME 2 and ME 3. Never mind that simply the construction of the SR-1 Normandy was seen as a massive financial cost to build one ship. And yet private funding was some how able to build not one but several massive Ark ships that have the capabilities to house and sustain hundreds if not thousands of people needed to keep a viable gene pool. Not just for one race but for multiple.  And the supplies (building/machining/food/water) to sustain them while they were building or forging for new food. Which could easily be months before they find food that wasn't toxic to them.  Even worse for Turian or Quarian who can't even eat the same food as Asari, Human or Salarian. 

Not to mention stasis is considered  Prothean level tech (AKA more advanced then current race) technology that they not only mastered but out right improved on because the Protheans on Ilos despite being the smartest Protheans in existence were only able to keep their stasis pod running for a couple hundred years. And yet here are a handful of ships capable of keeping hundreds in stasis for 500 years.  Not to mention to even achieve the distance traveled in 500 years they would need to keep the ME field active. And that would cause the static build up on the hull requiring them to discharge every 4 days. Over coming that limitation is a massive technological advancement on par with creating a jet engine for interstellar travel.

It very heavily focuses an AI as the controller of the human Ark. Even though at this point AI's are still every big the boogey man they were in ME 1. As far as the galaxy know AI's rebelled against the Quarains nearly killing them. Then launched an all out assult on the Citadel killing hundreds of thousands of people. There is no reconciliation between the boogeyman AI's are and the potential for peaceful coexistence yet. That doesn't happen till ME 3. Legion and his actions are only know about by Shepard and Crew as well as a few higher ups in the Alliance and other government that Garrus, Tali or Liara might have talked to.  So people willing letting an AI literally controlling if they live or die while in stasis for 500 years doesn't make any sense.

Hence why I go back to Superman example. If they build the universe Superman exists in that tells you that Superman gets his powers because of the yellow sun. And is weakened/killed if exposed to kryponite. Your disbelief is suspended to accept that universe. When in that same universe suddenly Superman now get's his powers from the belife in children and now kryponite power him up. For no explained reason. His powers and weakness suddenly just randomly shift. For no adequately explained reasons. How do you think the people who buy that comic book would react?

For a real world example look no further then Man of Steel or Batman Vs Superman. Both movies get shit on and a metric ton of negative reviews because they altered the universe those characters exist in. Even though the changes were given adequate reasons and explanations for changes. The fact that Zack Snyder in many ways threw out the continuity of that universe to tell his own story got people in an uproar over it.  Even now you can find areas that people mention it or use BvS as the punchline of a joke because of how bad it is. 

Hence why canon ending needs to be taken. And while I find all 3 endings are very viable set ups to allow Andromeda to continue. Destroy would be the one that has the least amount of people getting butt hurt over their choice not being accepted. Or at least they tend to be the more vocal ones.  Even though I personally find Destroy to be the most over simplified and boring ending possible.

I see some real problems with what you're calling the modern variation of the term.  I see the implication of having to "actually believe" something that I know is a fiction is an oxymoron to say the least... and I am just unwilling to suspend my disbelief in that statement.