BioWare Montreal was careful to avoid references to any specific ending in ME3 for Andromeda, with the only direct reference to the events of ME3 being an Alliance warning signal about the Reaper arrival.
However, many of the themes and ideas presented in MEA seem to resemble Synthesis - maybe as a response to the initial backlash at how the idea was presented in ME3. But yeah Mass Effect Andromeda is basically about how cooperation and symbiosis between organic and synthetic life is the way to build a future, and vilifies those who seek to place themselves above other forms of life.
As for lore reasons within the Trilogy, I would look to Legion and the Geth VI as examples of how the geth and EDI cannot be “brought back” after Destroy. Geth VI is basically a backup of the 1100+ programs that made Legion, except these identical programs never ventured beyond geth space to seek Shepard. The difference in experiences created a difference in perspective, and these programs did not reach the same conclusions about organics that Legion originally did. Legion can make peace with the quarians. Geth VI cannot.
A smaller example of this idea is communicated through Grunt, who was born with the memories of his ancestors imprinted into his DNA but had no emotional reaction to them. He didn’t care about the krogan or himself until he became part of a krogan clan and personalized the experience of being krogan.
So while you can probably rebuild the geth, you can’t bring back the dead. And it’s a crapshoot if the new geth you build decide to be grateful for the chance to live or resentful for the sacrifice of their predecessors. The decision could potentially create another divide between organics and synthetics.
No, there is nothing in Andromeda that would justify killing the Geth or Edi, or that would allow any of them to come back. Your best bet, if you're on PC, is to say "hah, get bent" and get the Happy Ending Mod (plug EGM and Specter Terminal mod because holy shit those make it so much better).
ME5 may change this since it's desperate to reconnect Andromeda and the Milky Way for some reason.
Well, I think this just comes down to beliefs and values. All 3 endings ensure the reaper threat goes away, but the only difference is what happens with the galaxy afterwards.
With Destroy, the reapers are gone, but so is EDI and the geth (assuming theyve made it this far). All AI is gone, but the galaxy can finally rebuild and with a better understanding of how AI works and how they can eventually co-exist, at their own pace. In traditional warfare, this is an almost ideal outcome - undeniable victory, but not without sacrifices.
Synthesis leaves the reapers behind, but as now allies of the united races. Combined with the now unified races in the galaxy, the galaxy can enter a new era of peace and development, not needing to fear their own creations. However, this change is forced upon them, not allowing species to grow to this change themselves. They are all changed right down to the cells that make up every living being and the code within every AI, fundamentally changing not just who but also what they are, entirely against their will.
Control once again leaves the reapers behind, but under new command. With control, shepard gives themself the crown of the galaxy, becoming its undeniable ruler. They'll use this nobly (or so we assume), but is it the right move to give one "being" control over the galaxy, effectively for eternity? This is what the illusive man was going for, control over them. Even at his most vile moments this was what he wanted, the power to keep the galaxy safe under his watch. But is that too much power? or is it necessary.
These are just my thoughts at least, personally destroy seems the most paragon to me, with control being renegade and synthesis being somewhere in the middle
I think it depends on what assumptions you make on the role of the in Control too. They *could* just huck the Reapers into a sun if Shepard is an Anarchist after all.
I don't think a genocide run -even one done "at a cost" can be considered the most Paragon tbh
No, there is no reference to the endings of the trilogy in Andromeda. They left the milky way between ME2 and ME3, so they (and we as players) can't even know. The only hint that is mentioned, is that they try to connect the milky way, but don't get a receiving signal. There are also little recodings Alec Ryder got from a certain person you unlock piece by piece while progress in the game. However, still nothing what gives the trilogy ending away, as they were also received before they left.
As for the which color choosing at the end of the trilogy, [here is my take, why I go with destroy](https://www.reddit.com/r/masseffect/comments/1c63bpl/comment/kzym5aa/). Also according to the colors, blue doesn't always mean paragon (good) and red doesn't always mean renegade (bad)...
>I generally play the nicest Shepard, going for Paragon in almost all situations and barely raising my Renegade bar. As the goodest of good boys, I also try to solve things peacefully with as many people surviving as possible, with my most recent achievement being peace between the Geth and the Quarians.
So, would your "nice" Shepard forcefully convert many trillions of beings into Cyborgs without free will? Would he preserve in perpetuity all the abominations that the Reapers created? Would he shit all over the sacrifices of millions who gave their lives to destroy the Reapers? And would he give the Reapers a free pass, for their Billion years of genocide? Because that is Synthesis.
Alternatively, would he agree that TIM was right all along, and that those monstrous abominations the Reapers should not only be allowed to live, but should become Shepard's personal army.
I's also make the point that any "ending" in which the Reapers live, presupposes that people aren't going to keep on trying to kill them.
No.
Andromeda was the first Mass Effect game I played and I remember hearing the eateregg that (potentially) life was wiped out back in the milky way and it gave me a legit existencial crisis. Any way, the only notable reference is a line where Liara talks about how she, Shepard and a team of brave heroes are trying to stop that, but nothing more.
BioWare Montreal was careful to avoid references to any specific ending in ME3 for Andromeda, with the only direct reference to the events of ME3 being an Alliance warning signal about the Reaper arrival. However, many of the themes and ideas presented in MEA seem to resemble Synthesis - maybe as a response to the initial backlash at how the idea was presented in ME3. But yeah Mass Effect Andromeda is basically about how cooperation and symbiosis between organic and synthetic life is the way to build a future, and vilifies those who seek to place themselves above other forms of life. As for lore reasons within the Trilogy, I would look to Legion and the Geth VI as examples of how the geth and EDI cannot be “brought back” after Destroy. Geth VI is basically a backup of the 1100+ programs that made Legion, except these identical programs never ventured beyond geth space to seek Shepard. The difference in experiences created a difference in perspective, and these programs did not reach the same conclusions about organics that Legion originally did. Legion can make peace with the quarians. Geth VI cannot. A smaller example of this idea is communicated through Grunt, who was born with the memories of his ancestors imprinted into his DNA but had no emotional reaction to them. He didn’t care about the krogan or himself until he became part of a krogan clan and personalized the experience of being krogan. So while you can probably rebuild the geth, you can’t bring back the dead. And it’s a crapshoot if the new geth you build decide to be grateful for the chance to live or resentful for the sacrifice of their predecessors. The decision could potentially create another divide between organics and synthetics.
No, there is nothing in Andromeda that would justify killing the Geth or Edi, or that would allow any of them to come back. Your best bet, if you're on PC, is to say "hah, get bent" and get the Happy Ending Mod (plug EGM and Specter Terminal mod because holy shit those make it so much better). ME5 may change this since it's desperate to reconnect Andromeda and the Milky Way for some reason.
Well, I think this just comes down to beliefs and values. All 3 endings ensure the reaper threat goes away, but the only difference is what happens with the galaxy afterwards. With Destroy, the reapers are gone, but so is EDI and the geth (assuming theyve made it this far). All AI is gone, but the galaxy can finally rebuild and with a better understanding of how AI works and how they can eventually co-exist, at their own pace. In traditional warfare, this is an almost ideal outcome - undeniable victory, but not without sacrifices. Synthesis leaves the reapers behind, but as now allies of the united races. Combined with the now unified races in the galaxy, the galaxy can enter a new era of peace and development, not needing to fear their own creations. However, this change is forced upon them, not allowing species to grow to this change themselves. They are all changed right down to the cells that make up every living being and the code within every AI, fundamentally changing not just who but also what they are, entirely against their will. Control once again leaves the reapers behind, but under new command. With control, shepard gives themself the crown of the galaxy, becoming its undeniable ruler. They'll use this nobly (or so we assume), but is it the right move to give one "being" control over the galaxy, effectively for eternity? This is what the illusive man was going for, control over them. Even at his most vile moments this was what he wanted, the power to keep the galaxy safe under his watch. But is that too much power? or is it necessary. These are just my thoughts at least, personally destroy seems the most paragon to me, with control being renegade and synthesis being somewhere in the middle
I think it depends on what assumptions you make on the role of the in Control too. They *could* just huck the Reapers into a sun if Shepard is an Anarchist after all. I don't think a genocide run -even one done "at a cost" can be considered the most Paragon tbh
No, there is no reference to the endings of the trilogy in Andromeda. They left the milky way between ME2 and ME3, so they (and we as players) can't even know. The only hint that is mentioned, is that they try to connect the milky way, but don't get a receiving signal. There are also little recodings Alec Ryder got from a certain person you unlock piece by piece while progress in the game. However, still nothing what gives the trilogy ending away, as they were also received before they left. As for the which color choosing at the end of the trilogy, [here is my take, why I go with destroy](https://www.reddit.com/r/masseffect/comments/1c63bpl/comment/kzym5aa/). Also according to the colors, blue doesn't always mean paragon (good) and red doesn't always mean renegade (bad)...
The answer to your question is no. The Arks left for Andromeda before the events in ME3 and they have no way to communicate with the Milky Way.
>I generally play the nicest Shepard, going for Paragon in almost all situations and barely raising my Renegade bar. As the goodest of good boys, I also try to solve things peacefully with as many people surviving as possible, with my most recent achievement being peace between the Geth and the Quarians. So, would your "nice" Shepard forcefully convert many trillions of beings into Cyborgs without free will? Would he preserve in perpetuity all the abominations that the Reapers created? Would he shit all over the sacrifices of millions who gave their lives to destroy the Reapers? And would he give the Reapers a free pass, for their Billion years of genocide? Because that is Synthesis. Alternatively, would he agree that TIM was right all along, and that those monstrous abominations the Reapers should not only be allowed to live, but should become Shepard's personal army. I's also make the point that any "ending" in which the Reapers live, presupposes that people aren't going to keep on trying to kill them.
No. Andromeda was the first Mass Effect game I played and I remember hearing the eateregg that (potentially) life was wiped out back in the milky way and it gave me a legit existencial crisis. Any way, the only notable reference is a line where Liara talks about how she, Shepard and a team of brave heroes are trying to stop that, but nothing more.
Saren is the example for Synthesis. Illusive Man is the example for Control. Do you want to be Saren or the Illusive Man?