The space elevator was the point of entry chosen by Andersen. It was how they were sending bodies up to the Citadel to render the new human Reaper. Remember your point of entry in the processing area with the bodies all around you?
That was the Reapers being true to their programming. Their initial attempts to create a human Reaper were thwarted in ME2 with the destruction of the Collector base, and they were still attempting that at this late stage. Indeed, its why they were on Earth in the first place.
And if all that's true, there's a very distinct reason that the Reapers would still feel the need for processing the Earth, even at this point when they were actually loosing Reapers to armed resistance.
They refused to see it as a war, and only as a harvest -and that Shepard was actually destroying life by fighting them.
As far as the Catalyst - there seemed to be some point that unifying the races allowed Shepard access, which had never happened before.
That was the part I was criticizing - not sure WHY that changes things.
Of course, this is all writer fiat - I'd much rather have crashed the Normandy through the beam and sent out my squad to fight our way in. Makes just as much sense - and is far more in character for Shepard.
It's me, I didn't explain that very well - it's the elevator that takes you up to the catalyst, just after Anderson dies. Hackett contacts you to let you know that the Crucible has docked but isn't working, and then you try to get to a control panel but collapse. At that point, the Catalyst could literally just let you die.
Tbh the whole Catalyst thing pisses me off - having the main antagonist introduced as a deux ex machina in the last 10 minutes, never my idea of a good ending.
Well, personal ethics then - I couldn't see the synthesis, as invasive and violating as it was, the same as genocide. Either choice clearly sucks though.
Yup. We get that there are sometimes hard decisions, especially in war, but c'mon, this just doesn't sit right.
Agreed. There's lots of ways you could try, but the big problem is the multiple endings mean you come from the galaxy in a vastly different state.
One way would be to 'meta' it - the Mass Relays being broken/frakked up could have all sorts of consequences. One interesting one would be an alternate reality - all three endings happen, but different places in the Mass Relay circuit have different endings in place. It would make for a series of cool what ifs. But I think there's be a lot of blow back on that one for being too Star Trek, as much fun as exploring all the different outcomes would be in one setting.
That's why I thought about the Reaper Rebirth idea - all of the three endings work there, and it can dramatically alter the universe. You get past the Reaper threat, and have a whole new series of questions. Hell, remember how warlike the Protheans were? Imagine them and hundreds of other species popping up. LOL.
It's going to be hard to come up with a way that legitimizes the choice and still makes for a game setting that all three endings could provide. The control by itself is a bitch - what possible threats could arise that the Reapers themselves couldn't deal with under a benevolent God-Shepard?
I think you need to get rid of the Reapers to continue the story no matter which choice you make.
I can only really see them going in three directions with this;
1) Prequal - if only to give them more time to ponder what to do with the galaxy post ME3.
2) Far future - Looking at the 3 endings historically through the prism of time, will probably give them the best chance of trying to run with a scenario where parts of all 3 endings play a part.
3) Canonize one ending over the other two
Personally, I think it'll be #3. They'll canonize 'destroy'. In terms of narrative it would have the least impact and give them the best platform to move forward in terms of keeping what they had in ME1-ME3. They'd lose the Geth, and they'd lose EDI, but beyond that, not much difference.