I'm only posting this here to see if I can get some opinions on my line of reasoning, and because I feel it would be beneficial for us to bandy around some ideas for Bioware to possibly take a hint from.
The more I think about it, the more partial I am to an ending that gives the Reapers back their free will. There is no guarantee that they will accept the path that they are currently being forced to follow. After what Shepard has learned through the series, and after the potential to voice the opinion that "Synthetic life is life, just as we are alive. The only difference is the metal skin. If it has sentience, it is alive.", it makes sense to allow him or her to explore the immorality of just flatly annihilating what essentially amounts to entire nations.
What if the Reapers turned on each other, or actually chose to leave in peace? They have no apparent wants outside of the demands of the Catalyst, and they obviously would not benefit from reaping all life in the galaxy for no purpose. The whole business with them seemingly
choosing to destroy us is bollocks according the the endings as given. If that is the case, then why would we be denied diplomacy?
It would be seen as a monstrous act, perhaps, to give them any quarter after all that they have done to the free peoples of the galaxy. But imagine...just imagine the incredible debate that would flourish after an ending like that! An option to set the Reapers free could satisfactorily offer some players the chance to question the morality of their actions and stance. It might seem like a cancellation of all that made the first two games great, but it would also be a cool twist.
Since the whole Catalyst and tech singularity message seems to be geared toward creating some form of Sympathy for the Devil type of thinking, this would be an interesting addition. Perhaps we could have a conversation with an unshackled Harbinger, where a sufficiently persuasive Shepard could reason with him (them?)? I realize that we already have that type of situation with TIM and Saren, but to have one with the supposed main antagonists of the series would be a whole new perspective than the conversations with Saren and TIM.
I've heard many ideas about reasoning with the Catalyst, and this too could be an option. But I'd also like to directly speak with a Reaper free of enslavement. It's been noted that they are little more than a nation of independent beings grafted into a metallic skin, with a tether to the Catalyst. Remove that tether, and you are dealing with little more than an uber-Geth, right?
I just feel that the dissolving of the concrete idea from ME1 and ME2, that the cycle is a choice of the Reapers for some reason or another, offers new possibilities. Who are we to assume that they would unilaterally wish to continue harvesting us? If they were given a choice, would such an existence truly satisfy some of them?
Maybe we could even expand the Saren suicide ending to a massive scale. The unshackled Reapers, be they a portion or a whole of the remaining force, could request (or self inflict) their own demise. They are liquidated persons; would such an individual be content with living as a monster?
You see, I always assumed that the Rachni were the analogue to Issac Asimov's "Formics" (they actually are, in my opinion). But, with this new information that Bioware has set as canon, the Reapers are also a safe comparison. Think about it - a race feared by all living creatures as monsters. They represent the apocalypse of life, and are hated because of it. Consequently, the hero desires to annihilate them, for the good of all. Yet, the hero ultimately discovers that they have worth. They are alive, just as he is alive. And life is precious. Whether the hero ultimately chooses to destroy them is a personal choice, and should go either way based on the player's desire (Different mediums demand different conclusions. What was acceptable for a book series is not acceptable for an interactive one based on decision making.) But the desires and values of the "enemy" are of worth, are they not? Just because we have hated them up to the last moment of our experience with them gives us no legitimacy to end them.
I am playing a bit of Devil's Advocate here, but only to foster discussion. I would love to see the choice that this series has so drummed up be a major factor in the endings. Creating really "unique" endings like this (hackneyed or no, it does offer a new perspective) would open the doors for some truly interesting views.
Modifié par MrAtomica, 11 mars 2012 - 10:33 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Guest_zoider16_*
Retour en haut
