23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Malditor]

Redbelle wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...


It is true, they have been lacking in information, but bringing them back at then end sort of closes the circle as it were. They were there at the beginning protecting organics from the reapers and at the end are there to "help" shepard make his choice on how to stop them. Of course, like everything I say here, I don't expect anyone to believe me or insist they do. I just like throwing out these ideas and seeing what others think. At least those who respond intelligently and not just by saying "oh that's just stupid" or some variation.

And I mean no disrespect, but how exactly are they helping Shepard?  The star kid says he controls the reapers and they are his solution-he could have helped everyone if he'd just sent the reapers off long ago to play on a beach somewhere.  Understand this, the kid is not a guardian, is not protecting anyone, he has been sending his reaper children to turn sentient organic life into goo.  I'm pretty sure if some guy showed up at my doorstep with a bunch of guys that he totally controls with guns and told them to kill my family, and then said he was there to help, I would not believe him.  Why on Earth would Shepard and why would you?

The guy at the door brought the thugs to hurt me-he didn't have to, he could have kept them away.  The star kid controls (he says controls) the reapers and sends them to kill untold trillions of people that think, feel, love, hate, struggle, work, use, abuse, sacrifice, and live.  He isn't there to help anyone but himself and his "kids".

I will repeat myself.  He's lying.  The reapers harvest organics every 50k years as part of their reproduction cycle.  They need the organic goo to live and love and make babies.  Ever been lied to or lie to anyone for sex.  Hmmmmmm.....  The kid doesn't even want to buy anyone dinner first.

Ah give the SC a break. He's well over 50k yrs old multiplied I don't know how many times. He missed his pills the last cycle and now he's all confused. Someone needs to guide him back home for a sit down.

Btw, if the Protheans altered the Citadel signal and the catalyst lives in the citadel, and if the catalyst wants the Reapers to continue harvesting as, in the words of the Joker.......... "It's all.......part of the plan". Why didn't the kid turn the signal back on?

That kid reminds me of a scientist who puts an experiment into motion and then sits back and lets it run itself. When the SC says the old system wn't work so it's time for a new system, he's basically saying "I don't want you to be free. I just want you to run another maze for my experiments."

That SC would pull wings off butterflies and then claim he's an entermologist

You see it like the end of the Matrix triology I see. Which sort of fits if you look at it from that angle. Assimilate whatever exceptional being that happens to make it to the end of the maze?

[Andy the Black]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...


It is true, they have been lacking in information, but bringing them back at then end sort of closes the circle as it were. They were there at the beginning protecting organics from the reapers and at the end are there to "help" shepard make his choice on how to stop them. Of course, like everything I say here, I don't expect anyone to believe me or insist they do. I just like throwing out these ideas and seeing what others think. At least those who respond intelligently and not just by saying "oh that's just stupid" or some variation.

And I mean no disrespect, but how exactly are they helping Shepard?  The star kid says he controls the reapers and they are his solution-he could have helped everyone if he'd just sent the reapers off long ago to play on a beach somewhere.  Understand this, the kid is not a guardian, is not protecting anyone, he has been sending his reaper children to turn sentient organic life into goo.  I'm pretty sure if some guy showed up at my doorstep with a bunch of guys that he totally controls with guns and told them to kill my family, and then said he was there to help, I would not believe him.  Why on Earth would Shepard and why would you?

The guy at the door brought the thugs to hurt me-he didn't have to, he could have kept them away.  The star kid controls (he says controls) the reapers and sends them to kill untold trillions of people that think, feel, love, hate, struggle, work, use, abuse, sacrifice, and live.  He isn't there to help anyone but himself and his "kids".

I will repeat myself.  He's lying.  The reapers harvest organics every 50k years as part of their reproduction cycle.  They need the organic goo to live and love and make babies.  Ever been lied to or lie to anyone for sex.  Hmmmmmm.....  The kid doesn't even want to buy anyone dinner first.

I honestly believe that he/it/wtfe believes he/it/wtfe is doing us a favour. In his/it's/wtfe's twisted little mind his/it's/wtfe's persevering the identity of the races turned into Reapers befor they get stuffed out by their own AI that have gone crazzy. Kind of like how some butterflies catchers say they are persevering their natural beauty by killing them and stuffing them in a glass case.

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...

They don't harvest all sentient life, just as a side note, just technologically advanced life. The difference between you and I here is that you believe that the being is evil and I don't. The being is doing what it believes is right based on eons of experience watching the same events happen and threatening the existence of all organic life. I don't expect you to feel that way, and I'm sure you don't expect me to feel the way you do. And no, I've never lied or been lied to for sex :-P. Always been in committed relationships before getting to that point.

Ok, I know this where did I ever say they harvested all life-sentience implies a certain level of advancement.  They don't specifically say what level of advancement is harvested so this is just argumentative and picky.

I said in many posts the star kid is either lying, evil, or crazy or all of the above.  I minimalize it by just stating he's lying, only because it doesn't matter.  He isn't good.  He may think he is-so what?  I don't care about someone's motivations if they are trying to kill me-they are evil from where I stand.  Shepard would see the kid as evil.  Shepard only knows what Shepard sees at that point-the kid is sending things to hurt people s/he cares about-how could that not be evil to Shepard?  I don't care what the kid believes.  Dead is dead and if you cared about the person that died, you don't much like the one that killed them.

And people can have a Shepard that saw the folly of the kid's assertion that synthetics will always rise up and kill their creators-people have Shepards that reunited geth and quarian. 

That means there is another solution-coexistence and even symbiotic though separate relationships.  Shepard's smarter than this supposed super being.  This super being can in the span of 5 minutes decide that instead of one choice (the destruction of advanced organics) that Shepard should get 3 nonsensical choices because Shepard made it to the top, and is all powerful enough to have seen everything that goes on in the galaxy over those eons, but does not even see all that Shepard has accomplished that puts the lie to his supposed "beliefs"?

The kid, being this all seeing all knowing thing, should have seen that Shepard at a bare minimum united many diverse cultures with very old hatreds and that they worked together.  And if a player did reunited the geth and quarian and cured the genophage and got the Batarians (after what happened in the Arrival) to work with him/her, and got mercs to help, and so on, the kid should have seen that.  And all of that means the created will not always kill the creator.

If the kid does not see this (and he doesn't) then he doesn't care and is not there to help.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 mai 2012 - 04:32 .

[Malditor]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...

They don't harvest all sentient life, just as a side note, just technologically advanced life. The difference between you and I here is that you believe that the being is evil and I don't. The being is doing what it believes is right based on eons of experience watching the same events happen and threatening the existence of all organic life. I don't expect you to feel that way, and I'm sure you don't expect me to feel the way you do. And no, I've never lied or been lied to for sex :-P. Always been in committed relationships before getting to that point.

Ok, I know this where did I ever say they harvested all life-sentience implies a certain level of advancement.  They don't specifically say what level of advancement is harvested so this is just argumentative and picky.

I said in many posts the star kid is either lying, evil, or crazy or all of the above.  I minimalize it by just stating he's lying, only because it doesn't matter.  He isn't good.  He may think he is-so what?  I don't care about someone's motivations if they are trying to kill me-they are evil from where I stand.  Shepard would see the kid as evil.  Shepard only knows what Shepard sees at that point-the kid is sending things to hurt people s/he cares about-how could that not be evil?  I don't care what the kid believes.  And people can have a Shepard that saw the folly of the kid's assertion that synthetics will always rise up and kill their creators-people have Shepards that reunited geth and quarian. 

That means there is another solution-coexistence and even symbiotic though separate relationships.  Shepard's smarter than this supposed super being.  This super being can in the span of 5 minutes decide that instead of one choice (the destruction of advanced organics) that Shepard should get 3 nonsensical choices because Shepard made it to the top, and is all powerful enough to have seen everything that goes on in the galaxy over those eons, but does not even see all that Shepard has accomplished that puts the lie to his supposed "beliefs"?

The kid, being this all seeing all knowing thing, should have seen that Shepard at a bare minimum united many diverse cultures with very old hatreds and that they worked together.  And if a player did reunited the geth and quarian and cured the genophage and got the Batarians (after what happened in the Arrival) to work with him/her, and got mercs to help, and so on, the kid should have seen that.  And all of that means the created will not always kill the creator.

If the kid does not see this (and he doesn't) then he doesn't care and is not there to help.

People at war with each other will often put aside differences to fight a common greater enemy/threat. However, after the common foe is defeated these factions often go back to war with each other. That is the way of things, always has been. This is part of what the being has seen too. Just because all these alien species came together to fight against the Reapers means nothing, besides they had a common enemy. It doesn't mean that suddenly all hostilities between them will cease should they win the battle.

Modifié par Malditor, 19 mai 2012 - 04:36 .

[3DandBeyond]

Actually the idea of the maze and assimilating the best one at the end is what I was getting at. The kid specifically wants the best DNA. Humans are touted as being the most diverse (bestest ever). The kid keeps going after the most advanced organics and as in 2001, he leaves things behind to help organics to make the jump to advanced status. They made the Citadel, relays, and so on. Most tech is based on something made by reapers. And it's a recurring theme throughout the game of cultures that have been uplifted artificially.

The reapers do this in order to get to that one race of people that has the perfect DNA (perfection) to be ascended. The kid wants to be alive and needs human DNA for it, possibly.

[Andy the Black]

Malditor wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

Andy the Black wrote...

Malditor wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

HyperGlass wrote...

Malditor wrote...

I don't remember everything from every ME game because they've been spread out over several years, however I thought someone mentioned that "a being of light" or whatever created or controlled the reapers in one of the DLCs from a previous game. I could be completely wrong here, but just in case someone does know for sure.

The "beings of light" were mentioned in ME1 but they weren't explained in that big of detail aside they are believed to have acted as guardians to protect organic life from the Reapers. Also, the Catalyst is hinted to be of of them from what I read off the ME wiki.

This is correct as far as the beings of light, but the whole problem is in describing them as guardians.  They are then set up in a very minor missable way as being a force for good.  But the star kid is definitely not good.  The codex could of course be wrong, because it's what they are believed to be, so it could fit.  But, you don't set up a major plot point by using one extremely minor almost unknown codex entry-if it were to be this, then all along the 3 stories there should have been some major hints at it.  The problem is the beings of light were never supposed to be a part of the ending, so they were never referenced in any major way in the games.  It does seem however that that's what they did with the star kid-but that's just great.  Many people never played ME1 because they couldn't and so they never even had the chance to read that tiny codex entry.

It is true, they have been lacking in information, but bringing them back at then end sort of closes the circle as it were. They were there at the beginning protecting organics from the reapers and at the end are there to "help" shepard make his choice on how to stop them. Of course, like everything I say here, I don't expect anyone to believe me or insist they do. I just like throwing out these ideas and seeing what others think. At least those who respond intelligently and not just by saying "oh that's just stupid" or some variation.

I'm totally on board with The Catalyst being a Being of Light (it's as much as been confirmed by the very lovely Jessica Merizan) , I even like they bring these kind of things back up, like they did with the Leviathan of Dis. The problem is The Catalyst is such a major player he should not have been brought in in the last 5 minutes with the only hint at his/it's/wtfe's existence being an obscure planet codex entry that not everybody could or would have read and even less would reameber.

Do you think that maybe BW will expand the SC's role throughout the game in the EC? If the SC was actually that other kid who no one else but Shep see's that would imply that he's been watching events the whole time and paying special attention to Shep in particular........... Unless The SC's been seeing other characters behinds my back. And how would I know if I can't see him except when he's invading Shepards dreams with oily smoke stuff.

I think it's definitely a possibility that they will expand on what that being is. If they don't then they are missing a major aspect of what makes so many people angry at the ending. The reason I didn't dislike the ending is because I make connections like this on my own, which I think they were hoping everyone would do. Basically formulate whatever connections they personally felt fit.

It should be addressed one way or another. Like I said, I'm hoping they add some clues to his/it's/wtfe existence in dialogue or cutscene pre ending. Without the IT I don't really know why the little kid at the start wouldn't be real, and I always took Shep's dreams to be his guilt at not being able to save him.

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...

People at war with each other will often put aside differences to fight a common greater enemy/threat. However, after the common foe is defeated these factions often go back to war with each other. That is the way of things, always has been. This is part of what the being has seen too. Just because all these alien species came together to fight against the Reapers means nothing, besides they had a common enemy. It doesn't mean that suddenly all hostilities between them will cease should they win the battle.

The geth evolved beyond wanting to kill the quarians.  They were on a path to help rebuild Rannoch.  They no longer wanted to kill them. 

The Krogan had shifted under Wrex and Eve and the Turians had changed as well.  There was a major shift towards coexistence.  Any being with a mind knows that people might fight again, but you don't punish good attempts or good behavior. 

And again, it still does not matter.  The star kid could think whatever he wants.  He might even know or see the future.  It is of no significance since to Shepard he's still not to be trusted.  He wants to destroy all that Shepard cares about-and has had the ability to prevent that destruction.

It's defeatist to just say that no matter what you do or try to do people will always fight each other.  At this point it makes more sense to just blow up all life and forget about it all.  If doom and gloom is the only fate, why bother trying?  Why try for any nobler purpose?  Give up now and forget it.  That's then what the kid is saying.  But that's just not true.

In real life, whole groups of people do continue to go at each other and want to destroy one another, but there are rays of light, people that decide this is wrong and change.  You might never change a whole group of people, but you can sometimes get one person, one spark to ignite a movement for change.  Apartheid.  The Final Solution. I could go on.  If not one person ever stood up and said no, these things would continue to play out.  I don't choose defeat and wouldn't ever follow someone that said you can't avoid your destiny so you must die, if they have had a way all along to help and didn't.

In actuality, the game even has that one spark for change (Shepard) and the ending and the star kid ruin all that.  Well, the devs ruined that because that Shepard isn't the one that's been in the rest of the games.  This Shepard just accepts the crazy kid's logic and hobbles off to do his bidding.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 mai 2012 - 04:56 .

[3DandBeyond]

If they make this ugh star kid an even bigger part of the ending and/or game then most people will totally dump the games. The reapers were the antagonist of the game. Shepard, the protagonist. The kid fits nowhere within it and I for one have come to even hate the "real" fake kid thrown into the game.

In order to insert the star kid as the big dog on the block, they needed to do more foreshadowing of him in all 3 games. From the start in ME1, you got a foreshadowing of the reapers and that's the way you introduce characters. It didn't matter that you never were really to face off directly against them (other than Sovereign) fully until ME3-they were there hovering somewhere waiting to destroy you.

The devs never hinted at the kid. In the Final Hours they discuss their thoughts and indicate on a notepad a Matrix-like ending. There was talk of an indoctrination ending, dark energy ending, never a star kid glow boy ending. And nothing in the games, in 3 games hinted at it.

[Malditor]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...

People at war with each other will often put aside differences to fight a common greater enemy/threat. However, after the common foe is defeated these factions often go back to war with each other. That is the way of things, always has been. This is part of what the being has seen too. Just because all these alien species came together to fight against the Reapers means nothing, besides they had a common enemy. It doesn't mean that suddenly all hostilities between them will cease should they win the battle.

The geth evolved beyond wanting to kill the quarians.  They were on a path to help rebuild Rannoch.  They no longer wanted to kill them. 

The Krogan had shifted under Wrex and Eve and the Turians had changed as well.  There was a major shift towards coexistence.  Any being with a mind knows that people might fight again, but you don't punish good attempts or good behavior. 

And again, it still does not matter.  The star kid could think whatever he wants.  He might even know or see the future.  It is of no significance since to Shepard he's still not to be trusted.  He wants to destroy all that Shepard cares about-and has had the ability to prevent that destruction.

It's defeatist to just say that no matter what you do or try to do people will always fight each other.  At this point it makes more sense to just blow up all life and forget about it all.  If doom and gloom is the only fate, why bother trying?  Why try for any nobler purpose?  Give up now and forget it.  That's then what the kid is saying.  But that's just not true.

In real life, whole groups of people do continue to go at each other and want to destroy one another, but there are rays of light, people that decide this is wrong and change.  You might never change a whole group of people, but you can sometimes get one person, one spark to ignite a movement for change.  Apartheid.  The Final Solution. I could go on.  If not one person ever stood up and said no, these things would continue to play out.  I don't choose defeat and wouldn't ever follow someone that said you can't avoid your destiny so you must die, if they have had a way all along to help and didn't.

In actuality, the game even has that one spark for change (Shepard) and the ending and the star kid ruin all that.  Well, the devs ruined that because that Shepard isn't the one that's been in the rest of the games.  This Shepard just accepts the crazy kid's logic and hobbles off to do his bidding.

The Geth never "wanted" to kill the Quarians, they did it because of self preservation being that the Quarians tried to kill them first. Regardless of that, the Quarians were never going to stop attacking the Geth, at least from what we saw in the game. As long as one side keeps attacking there is war. They had no way of beating the Geth though, and as such would have put themselves into extinction. At least, this is how it went in my playthrough, so perhaps that's a part of why I see it as a never ending battle.

[Andy the Black]

3DandBeyond wrote...

If they make this ugh star kid an even bigger part of the ending and/or game then most people will totally dump the games. The reapers were the antagonist of the game. Shepard, the protagonist. The kid fits nowhere within it and I for one have come to even hate the "real" fake kid thrown into the game.

In order to insert the star kid as the big dog on the block, they needed to do more foreshadowing of him in all 3 games. From the start in ME1, you got a foreshadowing of the reapers and that's the way you introduce characters. It didn't matter that you never were really to face off directly against them (other than Sovereign) fully until ME3-they were there hovering somewhere waiting to destroy you.

The devs never hinted at the kid. In the Final Hours they discuss their thoughts and indicate on a notepad a Matrix-like ending. There was talk of an indoctrination ending, dark energy ending, never a star kid glow boy ending. And nothing in the games, in 3 games hinted at it.

Ideally, yes. If they were going to remake the ending from the ground up I think most would rarther not have him/ti/wtfe. The Reapers were much scarier when they were just motivated by a desire to harvest organic life. If they were always going to go with the puppet master idea they should have started foreshadowing a greater power from at least Mass 2.  But as we're not getting a new ending and reamakeing Mass 2 is out of the question I would like to see some foreshadowing in this game. It can't be worse that having him/it/wtfe coming from out of nowhere like he/it/wtfe does now.

Modifié par Andy the Black, 19 mai 2012 - 05:20 .

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...

The Geth never "wanted" to kill the Quarians, they did it because of self preservation being that the Quarians tried to kill them first. Regardless of that, the Quarians were never going to stop attacking the Geth, at least from what we saw in the game. As long as one side keeps attacking there is war. They had no way of beating the Geth though, and as such would have put themselves into extinction. At least, this is how it went in my playthrough, so perhaps that's a part of why I see it as a never ending battle.

So the only thing to do with a never ending battle (which is a defeatist attitude), is to destroy all advanced life?

This is getting ridiculous.  I'm sorry, it is.  I know all about the geth and quarians (and gee, kind of skews that whole idea that the created will rise up to destroy the creator, when the creator was doing the destroying here).

It doesn't matter what the geth wanted to do, they were fighting quarians.  They all did learn to get along with Legion's and Shepard's help if you played that way.  And, no we didn't see in the game that they were always destined to fight.  In fact, we were shown the opposite-the geth were helping rebuild and were helping the quarians get back to Rannoch, if we played it that way.  Otherwise, the creator could have destroyed the created if the Quarians won-also a possibility.

But, in your opinion if there's still a conflict among people, cultures, races, then the only thing that makes sense is their total destruction?  And, that even if you disagree with this as the thing to do, you should understand that the person (star kid) telling you it is good, means well, so you should go along with whatever he says?

The thing is you cannot base the validity of the ending only on how you played the game, because others played it differently and if the ending does not fit their game then it is flawed, fundamentally flawed.

But, I'm sorry I assert that your own belief that because the star kid thinks he means well that Shepard should believe him and not think he's bad.  All Shepard knows is the kid controlled the reapers.  The reapers want to kill people that Shepard cares about.  No matter what the kid thinks, it's what Shepard knows and sees that matters.  S/he cannot think the kid is trustworthy.  And the kid's assertions are defeatist-give up now because you might fight with each other later.  What kind of message is that?

In real life there have been many despots that believed their cause was the noble one and they committed genocide in furtherance of their just cause.  So, Shepard is confronted by Hitler.  Should Shepard trust him?

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 mai 2012 - 05:21 .

[Andy the Black]

3DandBeyond has a point. It dosn't matter why he's/it's/wtfe's trying do harvest organic life (I still think he/it/wtfe thinks he's/it's/wtfe's doing good), the point is it doen't matter. History is littered with evil men who thought they were doing good, and what ever way you cut it galactic genocide is probably not going to get you good karma.

[Malditor]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...

The Geth never "wanted" to kill the Quarians, they did it because of self preservation being that the Quarians tried to kill them first. Regardless of that, the Quarians were never going to stop attacking the Geth, at least from what we saw in the game. As long as one side keeps attacking there is war. They had no way of beating the Geth though, and as such would have put themselves into extinction. At least, this is how it went in my playthrough, so perhaps that's a part of why I see it as a never ending battle.

So the only thing to do with a never ending battle (which is a defeatist attitude), is to destroy all advanced life?

This is getting ridiculous.  I'm sorry, it is.  I know all about the geth and quarians (and gee, kind of skews that whole idea that the created will rise up to destroy the creator, when the creator was doing the destroying here).

It doesn't matter what the geth wanted to do, they were fighting quarians.  They all did learn to get along with Legion's and Shepard's help if you played that way.  And, no we didn't see in the game that they were always destined to fight.  In fact, we were shown the opposite-the geth were helping rebuild and were helping the quarians get back to Rannoch, if we played it that way.  Otherwise, the creator could have destroyed the created if the Quarians won-also a possibility.

But, in your opinion if there's still a conflict among people, cultures, races, then the only thing that makes sense is their total destruction?  And, that even if you disagree with this as the thing to do, you should understand that the person (star kid) telling you it is good, means well, so you should go along with whatever he says?

The thing is you cannot base the validity of the ending only on how you played the game, because others played it differently and if the ending does not fit their game then it is flawed, fundamentally flawed.

But, I'm sorry I assert that your own belief that because the star kid thinks he means well that Shepard should believe him and not think he's bad.  All Shepard knows is the kid controlled the reapers.  The reapers want to kill people that Shepard cares about.  No matter what the kid thinks, it's what Shepard knows and sees that matters.  S/he cannot think the kid is trustworthy.  And the kid's assertions are defeatist-give up now because you might fight with each other later.  What kind of message is that?

In real life there have been many despots that believed their cause was the noble one and they committed genocide in furtherance of their just cause.  So, Shepard is confronted by Hitler.  Should Shepard trust him?

Let me turn that around on you, because it does work both ways. In war, one side always concedes, therefore they realize they can not win. Are they being defeatist or facing reality? I'm not saying here that Shepard is admitting defeat, just playing devil's advocate to your reasoning.

[Malditor]

Andy the Black wrote...

3DandBeyond has a point. It dosn't matter why he's/it's/wtfe's trying do harvest organic life (I still think he/it/wtfe thinks he's/it's/wtfe's doing good), the point is it doen't matter. History is littered with evil men who thought they were doing good, and what ever way you cut it galactic genocide is probably not going to get you good karma.

It's always a matter of perspective, depending on what side you are fighting the other side is evil to you. When the North fought the South in the Civil War both sides thought they were right. Again, I'm not saying the South was right, just saying that perspective matters. Were the people who fought for the South evil? I don't think so, I just think the cause they fought for was wrong.

[3DandBeyond]

Andy the Black wrote...

3DandBeyond has a point. It dosn't matter why he's/it's/wtfe's trying do harvest organic life (I still think he/it/wtfe thinks he's/it's/wtfe's doing good), the point is it doen't matter. History is littered with evil men who thought they were doing good, and what ever way you cut it galactic genocide is probably not going to get you good karma.

You cut to the chase and said it far better than I did.  It's at that point, that the game just enters the realm of the truly ridiculous.  The fact that it's a given past that that Shepard would believe this kid is nonsense and cannot be overcome with cutscenes of clarity.  The kid is the antagonist in a story that had a major antagonist.  You do not do that and have cohesion within a story.

All characters in any story are meant to evoke emotion-you remove that emotion which causes readers or players to "buy into" a story and the reader/player is left hanging.  My emotions in the game are back in London, because the ending dropped me there.  I could not overcome my disbelief at what was being shown me and that was punctuated by the creator/created flawed circular logic and the acceptance by Shepard of what the kid said as truth.  But it also cut deeper on an emotional level.  Many unbelievable things can happen in a story but don't matter so much because you are emotionally invested.  Harbinger, the reapers were scary and so I was emotionally invested in them and might be more willing to believe irrational thoughts from them.  The kid meant nothing to me so anything he said would always be met with a "so what" attitude.  I didn't love and didn't hate him.  He was nothing.

Good stories don't drop you this way-and horror SciFi doesn't let up on your feelings of impending doom the way this one did.  You float, don't run at the end.  The suspense of it all.

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...

Andy the Black wrote...

3DandBeyond has a point. It dosn't matter why he's/it's/wtfe's trying do harvest organic life (I still think he/it/wtfe thinks he's/it's/wtfe's doing good), the point is it doen't matter. History is littered with evil men who thought they were doing good, and what ever way you cut it galactic genocide is probably not going to get you good karma.

It's always a matter of perspective, depending on what side you are fighting the other side is evil to you. When the North fought the South in the Civil War both sides thought they were right. Again, I'm not saying the South was right, just saying that perspective matters. Were the people who fought for the South evil? I don't think so, I just think the cause they fought for was wrong.

With all due respect at what point would it be possible to think that a being that controls things that want to turn you and all the advanced organics in the galaxy into goo may have a valid just cause?

The Civil War is debatable in some respects, but that at least tangentially it was fought over the real evil of slavery at some point is germaine.  There were other reasons-state's rights vs. federal rights, labor issues, and all, but in the end it became fundamentally (read Lincoln's conflicted ideas-at first he wasn't for freeing the slaves, but then did embrace it and went against advisors with the Emancipation Proclamation) about freeing slaves.  And slavery as one issue that became a main issue is evil.  But turning trillions of people into goo is a far cry different from the other issues that revolved around the Civil War.  And a great many in the South were in fact evil in their assertion that slavery was a state's rights issue.  It was a human rights issue, no matter what else it was hiding behind.

Fighting for an evil cause is in and of itself evil. 

I just want to know what perspective could or should Shepard use in order to see the kid's cause as justified and ok even if it is evil.  It isn't about where you sit.  The reapers cannot be construed as anything good, nor can the kid controlling them.

And to say that it makes sense that the only way to stop people from fighting is to kill them is utter nonsense. 

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 mai 2012 - 05:47 .

[3DandBeyond]

And actually in war many times it's not the soldiers seen as evil, it's often more the leaders. Many soldiers do respect their counterparts on the other side, but see the leaders as evil when the cause is evil. The kid is the leader, the reapers the soldiers. That's what having the kid in the game has done. The reapers in many ways are more honorable because they are being good soldiers (though again fighting for an evil cause is evil). The kid is just being evil.

[Malditor]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...

Andy the Black wrote...

3DandBeyond has a point. It dosn't matter why he's/it's/wtfe's trying do harvest organic life (I still think he/it/wtfe thinks he's/it's/wtfe's doing good), the point is it doen't matter. History is littered with evil men who thought they were doing good, and what ever way you cut it galactic genocide is probably not going to get you good karma.

It's always a matter of perspective, depending on what side you are fighting the other side is evil to you. When the North fought the South in the Civil War both sides thought they were right. Again, I'm not saying the South was right, just saying that perspective matters. Were the people who fought for the South evil? I don't think so, I just think the cause they fought for was wrong.

With all due respect at what point would it be possible to think that a being that controls things that want to turn you and all the advanced organics in the galaxy into goo may have a valid just cause?

The Civil War is debatable in some respects, but that at least tangentially it was fought over the real evil of slavery at some point is germaine.  There were other reasons-state's rights vs. federal rights, labor issues, and all, but in the end it became fundamentally (read Lincoln's conflicted ideas-at first he wasn't for freeing the slaves, but then did embrace it and went against advisors with the Emancipation Proclamation) about freeing slaves.  And slavery as one issue that became a main issue is evil.  But turning trillions of people into goo is a far cry different from the other issues that revolved around the Civil War.  And a great many in the South were in fact evil in their assertion that slavery was a state's rights issue.  It was a human rights issue, no matter what else it was hiding behind.

Fighting for an evil cause is in and of itself evil. 

I just want to know what perspective could or should Shepard use in order to see the kid's cause as justified and ok even if it is evil.  It isn't about where you sit.  The reapers cannot be construed as anything good, nor can the kid controlling them.

And to say that it makes sense that the only way to stop people from fighting is to kill them is utter nonsense. 

Ok, when is eliminating an entire population good. We do it everyday when we destroy hives of insects that infest our homes and yards. This would be similar to what the Reapers are doing in the game. If we see one ant hill in the back yard we typically ignore it, if we see 20 we call in the exterminators. Are we evil because we are doing this? No, we are protecting our home and yard from destruction.

Modifié par Malditor, 19 mai 2012 - 05:54 .

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...

Ok, when is eliminating an entire population good. We do it everyday when we destroy hives of insects that infest our homes and yards. This would be similar to what the Reapers are doing in the game. If we see on ant hill in the back yard we typically ignore it, if we see 20 we call in the exterminators. Are we evil because we are doing this? No, we are protecting our home and yard from destruction.

Honest to God, really?  No, we don't see ourselves as evil.  Of course not. Nor does the kid.  I said it didn't matter what he thought of himself or his motives.  If the bees and ants could talk, I daresay they'd say "stop it, that hurts" and in essence they do, when they sting you.  Ever been stung by the lone bee flying around because you destroyed the nest-he's telling you you are being evil to him and his friends.  He doesn't stop and wonder what you are thinking.

I am a human being and assume you are too.  If alien beings came here and wanted to suck up my family and turn them into goo pancakes, I wouldn't stop to wonder if they thought they were doing good.  They would be evil to me.

But, beyond that.  We all do have considerations as for what constitutes evil done against more intelligent species, even those that cannot speak to us.  There's evil done to dogs and cats and horses.  In ME, people can speak to the reapers and the kid at the very least and yet, the one person with that opportunity never says the kid is perpetuating an evil cause.  If dogs could talk and you were repeatedly beating one, it would stop and tell you you are being bad.  It would try to fight back, maybe bite you.  Shepard just listens to the kid.

Shepard never tells the kid he is being evil to people Shepard cares about.  And Shepard the human being that has watched this kid send reapers to slaughter billions of beings that express pain, would say something.


And since you bring up bugs-we often exterminate more than we should and kill beneficial ones to our own detriment.  But, even so at times we kill those that may do some harm to us.  There's no indication anywhere that the reapers and the kid are doing any killing to protect themselves.  But, even so Shepard never even asks why.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 mai 2012 - 06:03 .

[Richard 060]

Re-posting from another thread, because I feel it's relevant:



'Clarity' would be a good start with the Extended Cut - there's a lot of stuff in the ending that isn't very well-explained. Considering that there's been genuine surprise from BioWare over things like 'the fleet are stranded at Earth without sufficient supplies', 'the Mass Relays are destroyed', 'all the NPCs we know on the Citadel are dead', etc., the implication is that the outcome of the ending should have been a lot clearer then it ended up being. That's a failure in execution, so adding extra material to 'fill in the blanks' and 'connect the dots' more adequately is definately a positive step. 

And a greater sense of 'closure' wouldn't hurt, either - showing how the final outcome affects the galaxy at large and the characters of the story in particular. After all, what's the point in making a choice in a game when the specific effect of that choice is never realised on-screen? Remember, this isn't a movie or a book - the interactive element is an integral part, and should count for something. Never mind "when you press a button, something awesome has to happen. Button - awesome." - how about "when you press a button, something happens. When you press a different button, something different happens"?


However, both of those are improvements to the execution of the ending. Neither deals with (or even acknowledges) the intrinsic problem - as it stands currently, the ending either undermines or outright contradicts crucial plot elements and story arcs from all three games.


I'll probably post a 'laundry list' of some of the less obvious ones and add it to this thead at some point, when I can drum up the constitutional fortitude to do so (it's an arduous task, and no mistake...). Just for the record, I'm not talking about things that aren't clear - I'm talking about cases where something the Catalyst says directly conflicts with an important plot point from earlier in the trilogy.


[EDIT]Oh, alright - http://social.biowar...40571#12141425]here are just a few examples of what I'm talking about...[/url]

And they do exist, which leads to the crucial question: which version is right? Do we now have to ignore the validity of what Sovereign says in ME1, because it doesn't mesh with what the Catalyst tells us in the final scenes? Or does the original version carry the greater weight, because it's what lays the foundation for the entire story and indeed setting of the Mass Effect universe?


I think most people would agree that it's a 'cardinal sin' of any storyteller to negate/invalidate crucial elements of their story, simply for the sake of a contrived plot twist later on. Yet this has yet to even be acknowledged by the team at BioWare, which is troubling - you'd think that a company that prides and markets itself on the strength of 'story-based games' would be able to tell when they'd made an elementary mistake, especially once people had pointed it out to them. But there's been nothing, other than the implication that any such issues are simply a lack of understanding on the part of the audience.


To conclude: the very effort of the Extended Cut is an implied admission that the ending as-is doesn't work, and could be improved. If it were 'fine', it wouldn't need any additional content. The concern is that it ends up being a waste of time and money, if the fundamental flaws in the storytelling aren't fixed. Again, BioWare has said repeatedly that they're "not changing the ending".

But if this also extends to 'not correcting contradictions' and 'ironing out continuity issues', then it means the creative team can't tell that they've made what most writers worth their salt would consider 'rookie mistakes'.

And if a company selling itself on the quality of it's games' stories and storytelling can't tell the difference between 'good' and 'bad' writing, that's a damning statement about the current state of BioWare.

Modifié par Richard 060, 19 mai 2012 - 07:35 .

[Malditor]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...

Ok, when is eliminating an entire population good. We do it everyday when we destroy hives of insects that infest our homes and yards. This would be similar to what the Reapers are doing in the game. If we see on ant hill in the back yard we typically ignore it, if we see 20 we call in the exterminators. Are we evil because we are doing this? No, we are protecting our home and yard from destruction.

Honest to God, really?  No, we don't see ourselves as evil.  Of course not. Nor does the kid.  I said it didn't matter what he thought of himself or his motives.  If the bees and ants could talk, I daresay they'd say "stop it, that hurts" and in essence they do, when they sting you.  Ever been stung by the lone bee flying around because you destroyed the nest-he's telling you you are being evil to him and his friends.  He doesn't stop and wonder what you are thinking.

I am a human being and assume you are too.  If alien beings came here and wanted to suck up my family and turn them into goo pancakes, I wouldn't stop to wonder if they thought they were doing good.  They would be evil to me.

But, beyond that.  We all do have considerations as for what constitutes evil done against more intelligent species, even those that cannot speak to us.  There's evil done to dogs and cats and horses.  In ME, people can speak to the reapers and the kid at the very least and yet, the one person with that opportunity never says the kid is perpetuating an evil cause.  If dogs could talk and you were repeatedly beating one, it would stop and tell you you are being bad.

Shepard never tells the kid this.  And Shepard the human being that has watched this kid send reapers to slaughter billions of beings that express pain, would say something.


And since you bring up bugs-we often exterminate more than we should and kill beneficial ones to our own detriment.  But, even so at times we kill those that may do some harm to us.  There's no indication anywhere that the reapers and the kid are doing any killing to protect themselves.  But, even so Shepard never even asks why.

What if the EC shows more discussion between the two, more arguing and convincing before each of the decisions? Would that help you?

*edit* Sorry, I didn't touch on this, you say he IS evil then by association so would WE be in my scenerio. Thinking you are or aren't isn't relevant to whether you truly are. But no, we are not evil for killing insects, of course not. Protecting something worthwhile is never evil, at least not in my opinion, be it life, love, home, family, friends, etc.

Modifié par Malditor, 19 mai 2012 - 06:11 .

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...


What if the EC shows more discussion between the two, more arguing and convincing before each of the decisions? Would that help you?

I've already addressed this and said no it wouldn't.  And that's because there's no foreshadowing of someone being in control of the reapers.  Stories have emotional connections.  They have antagonists-the reapers.  A protagonist-Shepard.  You do not substitute either at the very end with some stand in.  Take any good movie you have ever watched and mentally substitute someone else at the end for the villain.  Someone you had no idea about (oh and make the movie 100 hours long).

What would be better is a rejection of what the kid offers.  He's not to be trusted in any sensible way and so no Shepard would choose anything he offers.  Argument won't fix it, only rejection and some alternate Shepard-created option could.

The kid could never convince me that he's been trying to help all along.  Could that guy that sent the thugs to kill your family (and who has killed everyone in your neighborhood) ever convince you to trust him?  But the game never did allow one real objection from Shepard.  An argument can't fix this.  A bullet that destroys the kid might.  And then Shepard saying that's done, let's kill some reapers.

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...

What if the EC shows more discussion between the two, more arguing and convincing before each of the decisions? Would that help you?

*edit* Sorry, I didn't touch on this, you say he IS evil then by association so would WE be in my scenerio. Thinking you are or aren't isn't relevant to whether you truly are. But no, we are not evil for killing insects, of course not. Protecting something worthwhile is never evil, at least not in my opinion, be it life, love, home, family, friends, etc.

Now you are just making things up to be argumentative.  I read what you write, please be respectful and do the same for me.  I never said killing something that is out to hurt you is evil.  I specifically said that there are bugs we kill to protect things.  I also said the bugs don't have true sentience, but that many are killed needlessly which ultimately may be detrimental to us.

I also said that nowhere within ME is there any hint that the reapers are sent to kill advanced organics in order to protect themselves.  In fact, this is a silly analogy because all the reapers have to do is stay away and no one would try to hurt them at all.

Please don't try and make up things you think I've said, but that I didn't.  And then explain to me just exactly how the reapers and the kid are just protecting themselves by killing people they don't have to.

I said he is evil because he wants to destroy what Shepard cares about-read your own words you just made my point.  Shepard would want to protect that stuff from not just the reapers but the kid as well.

[Malditor]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...


What if the EC shows more discussion between the two, more arguing and convincing before each of the decisions? Would that help you?

I've already addressed this and said no it wouldn't.  And that's because there's no foreshadowing of someone being in control of the reapers.  Stories have emotional connections.  They have antagonists-the reapers.  A protagonist-Shepard.  You do not substitute either at the very end with some stand in.  Take any good movie you have ever watched and mentally substitute someone else at the end for the villain.  Someone you had no idea about (oh and make the movie 100 hours long).

What would be better is a rejection of what the kid offers.  He's not to be trusted in any sensible way and so no Shepard would choose anything he offers.  Argument won't fix it, only rejection and some alternate Shepard-created option could.

The kid could never convince me that he's been trying to help all along.  Could that guy that sent the thugs to kill your family (and who has killed everyone in your neighborhood) ever convince you to trust him?  But the game never did allow one real objection from Shepard.  An argument can't fix this.  A bullet that destroys the kid might.  And then Shepard saying that's done, let's kill some reapers.

I most certainly could accept someone I've never seen at the end of a movie, given sufficient explaination. Though I can understand the rejection of said figure if there is no explaination. You are very fixed in what you demand, inflexible. I can admire that, however being that way will almost certainly lead you to disappointment in this case. I'm sure you'd be very upset if they put in the option to defy the being and by doing so he all was lost, that it was the absolute wrong decision. You'd maybe even be more upset about it than what you have as options now.