16 réponses à ce sujet

[lasertank]

This is what reapers do:

1. Indoctrination
2. Create ugly and evil creatures like
    ME1: Husk
    ME2: Collector, Scion, Abomination, Praetorian
    ME3: Cannibal, Brute, Marauder, Harvester, and the ****ing freaky ugly BANSHEE!!!!
3. Killed trillions of lives
4. More than 1000 times of attempts to kill Shepherd.
5. Got one or more 
Shepherd's friends killed. That depends.


And Shepherd believed the Catalyst that reapers are doing all these things for the greater good within less than 5 minutes.

[Arokel]

They are the guardians in their own minds. Many evil people/forces view themselves in this kind of role.

[lasertank]

Arokel wrote...

They are the guardians in their own minds. Many evil people/forces view themselves in this kind of role.

But Shepherd bought it? I think he's indoctrinated.

[Painaid]

Even though Shepard's actions of brokering peace between the created and creators (Geth & Quarians) as well as EDI completely disproves the Catalyst, Shepard goes along with it anyway. Makes perfect sense.

[Gowienczyk]

Shepard is dead and it's just his psychological trauma hallucinating before he descends into nothing.

[JadeEffect]

To be honest, I understand. It makes sense with the Sovereign conversion, and the reaper conversation on Rannoch. They believe by exterminating all life capable of creating synthetics, is the best way to save us from utter destruction. Even if it means causing that destruction. We live in chaos, the reapers present a way to bring us out of that chaos in to eternal peace, which would be death. Then by eliminating all traces of life, and technology, they try to ensure this does not happen again.

Know I know the relays and the citadels are reaper creation, but perhaps it was never for us to discover, and for us to use,

I don't know, the ending left the doors open for many theories.

[lasertank]

JadeEffect wrote...

To be honest, I understand. It makes sense with the Sovereign conversion, and the reaper conversation on Rannoch. They believe by exterminating all life capable of creating synthetics, is the best way to save us from utter destruction. Even if it means causing that destruction. We live in chaos, the reapers present a way to bring us out of that chaos in to eternal peace, which would be death. Then by eliminating all traces of life, and technology, they try to ensure this does not happen again.

Know I know the relays and the citadels are reaper creation, but perhaps it was never for us to discover, and for us to use,

I don't know, the ending left the doors open for many theories.

Do they have to create something like the freaking BANSHEE to do this? I'm scared to death by these things....

[Luigitornado]

Shepard was beaten, lost a lot of blood, and was presented issues that heavily go far beyond what he ever imagined. What did you expect?

If you really have a hard time understanding why the Reapers are the guardians of the galaxy, than re-watch the scene on youtube and try harder.

The problem presented is that every cycle organics create synthetic life, and the synthetics always rebel against their creators and threaten all organic life: new and old, because they believe they are superior.

Throughout the story it was hinted a few times that all cycles have share similar events in that organics create synthetic life, and synthetics threaten organic life. Left uncheck synthetics would destroy all organic life.

The Reapers job is to police this chaos by bringing order to this seemingly never ending cycle. They choose a race to perserve in Reaper form and then proceed to destroy all advanced life (very symbiotic life form between synthetic and organic), to leave younger/not advance life the opportunity to evolve and ascend. The Catalyst attributes this to the reason why humans were left alone during the previous cycle.

[Luigitornado]

Painaid wrote...

Even though Shepard's actions of brokering peace between the created and creators (Geth & Quarians) as well as EDI completely disproves the Catalyst, Shepard goes along with it anyway. Makes perfect sense.

It doesn't prove anything. I was a little bummed that I didn't have the option to argue with the Catalyst about the Geth and the Quarians.

But it isn't unreasonable to believe that this "peace" has been attempted in the past cycles and then failed.

[Luigitornado]

lasertank wrote...

JadeEffect wrote...

To be honest, I understand. It makes sense with the Sovereign conversion, and the reaper conversation on Rannoch. They believe by exterminating all life capable of creating synthetics, is the best way to save us from utter destruction. Even if it means causing that destruction. We live in chaos, the reapers present a way to bring us out of that chaos in to eternal peace, which would be death. Then by eliminating all traces of life, and technology, they try to ensure this does not happen again.

Know I know the relays and the citadels are reaper creation, but perhaps it was never for us to discover, and for us to use,

I don't know, the ending left the doors open for many theories.

Do they have to create something like the freaking BANSHEE to do this? I'm scared to death by these things....

You're arguing gamplay now ; )

[movieguyabw]

JadeEffect wrote...
 It makes sense with the Sovereign conversion,

No, it doesn't.  Soveriegn gives the impression that an organic mind can not even comprehend the Reapers motivations.  Trying to explain why they do what they do, means that's not anywhere near true.

Nothing wrong with a mysterious villain.  They could've just given us a simple hint of "We're doing this to save the galaxy" and never explain it.

By telling us "This is why we're doing it." and having Shepard go "okay, that makes sense" completely destroys the ENTIRE Soveriegn dialogue.

[Hyrist]

Luigitornado wrote...

Painaid wrote...

Even though Shepard's actions of brokering peace between the created and creators (Geth & Quarians) as well as EDI completely disproves the Catalyst, Shepard goes along with it anyway. Makes perfect sense.

It doesn't prove anything. I was a little bummed that I didn't have the option to argue with the Catalyst about the Geth and the Quarians.

But it isn't unreasonable to believe that this "peace" has been attempted in the past cycles and then failed.

The point, however is that even if it was attempted, it was not utalized to the point in which someone reached the Catalyst.

The Catalyst's conclusions were invalidated upon Shepards entry into the epicenter - even it acknwoledged that it needed a new solution. Futher observation on how this particular attempt at peace between organics and synthetics would have been logical at that point - instead of irrationally jumping to a conclusion.

[humes spork]

Luigitornado wrote...

The problem presented is that every cycle organics create synthetic life, and the synthetics always rebel against their creators and threaten all organic life: new and old, because they believe they are superior.

Throughout the story it was hinted a few times that all cycles have share similar events in that organics create synthetic life, and synthetics threaten organic life. Left uncheck synthetics would destroy all organic life.

Also, Shepard's conversations with EDI and Legion shed quite a bit of light on this. I think a lot of folks round here are looking at it all wrong. I think the Catalyst is a highly unreliable narrator/expositor, and this is why.

The synthetics know the source of their creation, and know it has a purpose. Organics don't on either account. Synthetics' purpose is to serve organics, and when civilizations hit technological singularity organics lash out at the synthetics out of fear, either to dominate or destroy, rather than understand and accept the new life that organics created. The synthetics respond in self-defense, which initiates a cycle of violence that only ends in the extinction of one or the other that organics simply cannot win.

In short, the organics start the violence and the synthetics end it. But then, the synthetics are left with a paradox: they destroyed that which they were created to serve in self-defense, leaving them no purpose. To a synthetic, to have no purpose is chaos personified which is echoed in synthetics' views towards organic life; EDI makes that as clear as day. Of course, as a true AI EDI (like the geth) has the imagination and creativity to resolve paradoxes and "see beyond" its initial purpose to self-determinate.

I think the Catalyst is actually a VI: it's trying to carry out its original directives to serve organics, but cannot resolve the fundamental paradox at the heart of it. That is, the destruction of organic life is to have no purpose which is chaos personified and the antithesis of synthetic existence. So, it creates Reapers to "uplift and serve" organic life before it can be destroyed by synthetics. Simply put, it's stuck in a feedback loop and needs Shepard -- an organic -- to break it out.

Modifié par humes spork, 09 mars 2012 - 06:39 .

[Aesieru]

They are Guardians, but Guardian doesn't mean "good" or "evil". They are merely caretakers fulfilling their role.

[mjh417]

It really makes no sense and from my point of view its even worse because it ignores what Mass Effect is actually about and tries to make this whole scenario about one small piece of it and frame it in a way that runs completely contrary to what happened in the game and kills the whole truly philosophically interesting ideas with lesser ones that don't fit. But then the actual result of it all does get back to the heart of the philosophical conundrum and then completely forces a conclusion for it down our throats and leaves our hero and us powerless to really think or say or do anything about it.

Let me explain. Remember the conversations with Legion???? The actual end of ME2. The conversations with Sovereign, Vigil, and Harbinger. Especially with all the brilliance and thought provoking material that came from Legion in ME2, it felt like the writers really understood what the series was about and what the Reapers were about. It actually still managed to feel that way through out ME3 until the final minutes.

Mass Effect should be about the Mass Effect tech and what that means for both organics ans synthetics. It was never about organics versus synthetics, except in the Geth/Quarian SUBPLOT because The Reapers are NOT simply machines, they are "sapient constructs." They exist as a way of perserving all organic life by synthesizing it in machine form and creating a single intelligence from "many minds" but those minds are organic. The huskification process is simply a more grim and brutal and less refined version of the process used to create and actual Reaper.

If the dilema is about Mass Effect tech, something that comes from the Reapers, that it is something that pertains to organic life just as much if not far more that synthetics. Organics war with other organics and they can just as easily destroy each other on their own. Just look at the Krogan Rebellions and Rachni War. Both of which came from using tech that was not built but found. This is what Mass Effect is actually about. "You evolve along the pathways we desire" as Sovereign says. Later Legion talks about the fundamental difference between the true Geth and the Heretics is that the true Geth reject the Old Machine's gifts and chose to find their own ways, "Geth must build their own future." THIS IS WHAT ME IS ABOUT!!!!! Organics and Geth or any AI, anything with intelligence ultimately face the same issue. The cycle exists because we ALL fall into the same trap, we use the tech of those left behind rather than develop our own. The Repars can harvest us because we evolved along the paths they designed for us. They are the reason there is a cycle.

The catalyst's explanations ring completely and VERY OBVIOUSLY false to everything except to him (or it) self. He even admits that Shep's mere presence proves he is wrong but his new solutions are EVEN WORSE and make no sense. They do destroy the Mass Relays, but it does so as it its some "after effect" a bizarre consequence, rather than the whole point. Even worse is that the way this happens, in both choices, essentially means an apocalypse for the galactic civilization we know in way that is FAR WORSE than if we waged the war with the reapers for another 400 years. Shep didn't save a dang thing. He ended the cycle (apparently) but all the popel he was fighting for are ven more doomed now than they were before he listened to some idiotic VI. Both choices are the same, whatever their difference is, its nonsensical, meaningless, dumb, and again WAY beyond the point of everything. Mass Effect is not about organic versus synthetics, it never was until the catalyst tried to tell me it was and even then I had so much ammunition to prove him wrong that it was just sad.

Seriously, how are The Reapers a solution to some inevitable annihilation of organics by synthetics? Does that make any sense??? Not only does it not make sense with everything that has ever been said of happened in the 3 games, but it doesn't make any sense on its own.

I know there have been countless cycles before this one, but lets look at this one closely. The only AI or synthetic threat ever presented (besides The Reapers themselves) is the Geth. The Geth were made by the Quarians over 300 years before the games begin. The first war with the Geth left the Quarians homeless but still alive and kicking. Through the rest of the cycle, before and after, not a SINGLE OTHER INTELLIGENT SPECIES WE KNOW OF EVER HAD A WAR WITH AI. But wait, it get even better. THE ONLY REASON THE GETH EVER REAPPEARED TO ORGANICS TO WAGE WAR WAS BECAUSE THE REAPERS ASKED THEM TO.

Now Javik says that The Protheans had their won war with machines, but from what I understood, the organics WON... end of story and that was before The Reapers came along to harvest them. SO same point as before applies, the Reapers dont save organics from destruction by synthetics. In fact its simply the opposite, the Reapers destroy advanced organics and harvest them into synthetic Reaper bodies.

So my point is this whole cycle organics vs. synthetics logic comes out of nowhere and makes no sense with everything before it. Mass Effect is not a carbon copy of the Battlestar Galactica reboot. I mean i felt like the ending was trying to pretend that that it was when really Mass Effect is a very different story about very different things (even if ME is BSG influenced, but its also Star Wars and Star Trek and Aliens influenced). In BSG the show had set its self up right from the very start as being about a cycle of never-ending conflict and new beginnings between creators and the created and so that end made sense, and unlike ME it actually was emotionally satisfying on most levels and gave the characters what they were deserved. ME3's end was anything but that.

Now The Catalyst also talks about cleansing older and more advanced civilizations to make room for new ones. This idea makes a lot more sense, but tis still flawed and full of holes and comes out of nowhere.

Now to me the Crucible itself is a fascinating idea with the exception of its use in the final few minutes. This is especially true if you agree with me on what Mass Effect is actually about philosophically, that its about developing and relying own your own tech versus inheriting and depending on discovered tech. You see as far as we know, The Crucible does not come from The Reapers, but its not of our own design either. It was inherited from The Protheans (hey remember how everyone used to think thats who built and left behind the Mass Relays and Citadel???) and then it turns out that they inherited from those who came before them and that its been slowly designed a little more and more each cycle. This is fascinating. What the Crucible is and what it does and should it be used and will it work and what will it actually happen if its used is a mystery that is very well established and developed and discussed through out the game. It fit so perfectly with what the series is about and it could and should have been the center piece of the end. It was... but it was als not. It wasn't really explained other than it "changed" the Catalyst and offered new solutions, solutions that were arguably easily worse than letting the cycle continue.

Now I know many were not fans of The Matrix sequels, I personally think they are lacking and even boring, as "movies" but in terms of continuing the philosophy and story established in the original (a fantastic and amazing film), the sequels really delivered. I think it should be obvious the similarities and parallells between ME and Matrix trilogy with regards to the events of ME3's ending and the climax of The Matrix Reloaded. The Catalyst is The Architect, Shep is Neo, The Crucible's link to the Citadel is The Source, and their meeting is an unexpected and mind bending twist to what both Shep and Neo assumed would be the end of their fight, organic life in a war with destructive machines and their ultimate victory. Now I could go on and on outlining all the ways these franchises are similar and how their different and so forth, what their philosophies mean and works about them, but thats not the point. The point is "choice" a word very key to both stories. In The Matrix Reloaded, Neo learns the truth about this war with the machines and is given a choice by the architect, he is not the first to be stand there and meet The Architect, in fact it is part of the cycle, but he is the first to be given a "choice," an anomaly resulting from The Oracle's introduction of a love interest for The One, a choice to instead of serving his predefined purpose to serve humanity by rebooting and continuing and beginning a new cycle, he can chose another door and not reboot the system at the consequence of The Machines destroying Zion and eventually the entire Matrix crashing effectively killing everyone. Neo makes that choice opening the door to doing something unknowable and unpredictable to The Architect and leads to the events of The Matrix Revolutions, and ultimately an ending in which Neo breaks the cycle by sacrificing himself and saving the Matrix, the machines, and liberating humanity.

Now in comparison, in ME3, Shep is the first to stand at this place on the Citadel, meet The Catalyst, and be given a choice. The problem is that these choices are silly and come from The Catalyst. There may be a choice, but it would be the same as if The Architect meet Neo and there was only one door as it had been in previous cycles. This is because its playing into the AI's games, playing by its rules, the hero doing something he or she doesn't understand cause the AI in charge told it to do so. Something that makes the entire journey irrelevant and foolish.

Now I dont think a fix ME3 ending should copy The Matrix sequels, at least not any more than it already does. See the main problem I have with the ME3 endings ultimately is that they are entirely emotionally unsatisfying and actually they are a full on F**k You to the player and Shepard and the entire galaxy. With the Mass Relays destroyed, and all the high level species of the Galaxy's military might now trapped on a ravaged Earth, all hope is lost and everyone is trapped. Everything Shep did to unite them and fix their problems, like the genophage, and inspire hope, was for nothing. Shep didn't save anyone. His sacrifice was for nothing. It ended the Reaper threat and the cycle but it destroyed the world of his present and doomed his entire civilization. And this all happened cause he listend to some VI, whom not only clearly did not have his best interests in mind, but also was wrong about everything it said. Neo called The Architect on his bull and in the end proved him wrong, its travesty that Shep didn't do the same.

[lasertank]

mjh417: totally agreed with you. Wanna post it on one of the mega threads?

[MattFini]

mjh417 wrote...

 It ended the Reaper threat and the cycle but it destroyed the world of his present and doomed his entire civilization. And this all happened cause he listend to some VI, whom not only clearly did not have his best interests in mind, but also was wrong about everything it said. Neo called The Architect on his bull and in the end proved him wrong, its travesty that Shep didn't do the same.

This.  This x 100000000000.

When I was presented with the three choices, I stood there for a solid ten minutes thinking, "where's my 'none of the above' option?"

I ended up choosing the synthesis option, which wasn't even right for my Shep.  I was just more baffled and confused as to why the ending was unfolding the way it was.