User blog comment:Legionwrex/Why Destroy is the worst ending (besides refusal)./@comment-3130611-20130314220511

I personally think Destroy is the best solution to the Reaper threat: no more Reapers eliminates the possibility of future harvests, at least for the foreseeable future. I (and my Paragon, alive Shepard) can only hope that organics will have learned their lesson for at least a few millennia (Liara can hopefully see to that; she's got 900+ years left in her, after all).

My only qualm with Destroy is that it destroys all AI, including the geth and EDI. If there was an ending that focused the beam such that it could target only Reapers, I would choose it in a heartbeat.

My problem with Control and Synthesis is that in both cases, Shepard exerts what I believe to be too much dominance.

In Control, Shepard rules over the Reapers, and for all his good intentions, has the possibility of "bringing down the hammer" and squashing all of the litte organics beneath his boot heel (or rather, his metallic tentacle).

In Synthesis, Shepard forces all organic and synthetic life to merge, without the consent of either race. Not only is this highly confusing and improbable (not to mention the Catalyst waves away any explanation of this -- enter the "space magic" argument), but it also is really morally troubling. Shepard makes a change to the very basic properties of the universe and intelligent life.

In addition, by choosing Synthesis, Shepard essentially "uplifts" all life, removing the potential for any more progress as a society. Remember what Eve said about the krogan? "We sought out new challenges, and found them in each other. Nuclear war was inevitable." (not sure if that's exactly it, but you get the point). Now, the galaxy as a whole might not be as brutish and war-focused as the krogan, but if even real-life human history has shown us anything, it is that war is seemingly inevitable.