23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Female Commander Shepard]

Campaign playthrough was amazing! Simply the best game that I've ever played... but the ending. I really feel like the ending didn't fit the "Mass Effect Theme".... Mass Effect is a war story, but it didn't end like one. In addition, the ending really didn't give the closure us fans wanted. We wanted to know what happened to the whole crew... And what about the fleets? We basically brought the whole galaxy together, as one, and for what? For them to be stuck out there in space? And what about civilians on home planets? They're forced to be stranded  because the Mass relays were destroyed? That is messed up ... And the crew is just stranded on a planet, what's going to happen to them?... Sorry for the complaints Bioware, but I think we need answers.






Still love you though.

[3DandBeyond]

sdinc009 wrote...

MSandt wrote...

Ichigo-16 wrote...

We only have the word of the Star Kid, which is not enough reason to believe him.

You don't have to believe him, but the fact remains that he created a system that can either control or destroy synthetics or ensure that there's no distinction between them and organics. So it's pretty obvious that at least he believed this to be the case. He could be wrong, which he clearly acknowledges. Therefore he lets you choose rather than simply letting the cycle run its course again. But your choices are limited by his beliefs: he built the system based on his beliefs, not Shepard's. Whatever relationships Shepard might have established had at no point any relevance to the Catalyst or the Reapers so obviously such meaningless factors had no relevance to the system the Catalyst created and as such no relevance to the availability of choices.

In any case, I fail to see the downside of pulling the plug on synthetic lifeforms. They're just machines.

I'm sorry, but last I checked the protagonist of this story is Shepard not the Catalyst. The Catalysts choices and beliefs are irrelevant to the narratives dramatic progression. It is the role of the protagonist to asert their will in order to provide the dramatic elements to propel the story forward not some random last minute ghost kid that has no relevance to the story. The Catalysts logic is flawed and when thought out to it's logical conclusion collapses in on itself. For example, the Synthesis ending says that there will be peace, but what if the new synth-org decided to create a new synthetic race afterwards. By the Catalysts logic the created would then destroy the created and the Synthesis "solution" is now rendered inviable. You'd think an Superior intelligence should be able to see this possible outcome.
And depending on player choice, the Geth could be sentiant, independant, life forms. It doesn't matter if their composed of carbon, dextro-amino based, or circuitry. Life is life, I think therefore I am. Number 5 is alive.

Number 5, gotta love it.

Just considering that the kid's own "logic" is at best backwards in this cycle, since the creators often in their paranoia (whether they actually "created" organic life and intelligence or synthetic) have always been the instigators of destruction, all that he says is tainted by lack of real knowledge.  This is borne out by of course many other facts within the game, facts Shepard as the protagonist would know.  And Shepard's view is the only one that matters, not the kid's view on things, not Bud the Barber's view.  No one's view but Shepard's matters, because Shepard makes the decisions.  The kid may set up the options, may describe them, may desire certain ones, but Shepard is the one to see and act.

But, you can go beyond what the kid thinks as well and not only poke holes in his logic but effectively nuke it to smithereens.  If the destroyers are the created, then why not shut them down?  The reapers have used code to augment them, direct them.  Then why not just turn them off?  Why not, instead of leaving reaper tech lying around, why not leave a failsafe code imbedded in all tech? So that should any AI or VI be created that will want to attack advanced organics the code will run and turn them off?  Why create the conflict or exacerbate it by infecting the Geth?

What about other conflicts?  People are really efficient at destroying each other without the need of synthetics, thank you very much.  What if a synthetic creates an organic lifeform from primordial ooze and that lifeform is peace-loving and kind and wishes only to hug and be loved.  Should the synthetic being be killed in the next cycle since it is the creator or is it always the organic which must die?  The kid seems to think because synthetics will always rise up and kill organics, that organics only must die so as not to create synthetics that can destroy them.  But, if so he can't see that in between 50k cycles a smart synthetic might rise up and create organic life or even other synthetic life-what if synthetics create synthetic life?  Nothing the kid says can be reconciled with the possibilities that exist. 

This just points out the star kid thing with people goo on his hands and that Bioware pulled out of their nether regions is insane and logic-deprived.  His programming hit a brick wall.  And so, from Shepard's point of view, the only one that matters between the two of them or between Shepard and the reapers, the game fails, the kid's crazy and evil, and/or stupid.


People are quick to point to what the Protheans did, but no one really knows all that the Protheans did.  The only reliable info we have on anything they did is based on what Javik says, if you bought the DLC.  Otherwise, even that does not exist for you.  And Javik's knowledge of things is limited.  He was not alive before the reapers came back-he has no personal knowledge of all that happened before.  And even during his lifetime, his only area of expertise was as a warrior and not even a leader.  His glimpses into their actions causes all previous beliefs to be suspect. 

The Protheans are slavers, akin to the Roman Empire but on a galaxywide scale.  They assimilated other races or slaughtered them.  They apparently advocated commonality and rejected diversity.  As such, their knowledge and their wisdom may have been truly limited.  And their very honor is suspect.  To put it simply, their culture would be more in line with a tendency to believe the Earth was flat than to believe that cooperation was a possibility.  Any synthetic life they created was bound to be imbued with the precepts they held dear.  A radical fascist is not going to create synthetic life that wants to live happily together with others.  Instead they are vastly more likely to create synthetic life that shares their views (even accidentally) creating synthetic life that if it becomes self-aware may share their creators social beliefs and be fascist and unforgiving themselves.  Synthetic life just as all life, might have the ability to adapt and learn, but they still may start out with the same ideas as their creators.  And for the Protheans the idea was submit or die.  Of course they'd have conflict-both sides would want the other side to conform.

[Archonsg]

About the whole Quarian - Geth conflict, do remember that even when being hunted by the faction that wanted to kill the Geth, the Geth were mostly non-violent. The Geth only started to kill Quarians in defense of their owners who belonged to the faction that believed in the Geth's right to exist as a new species, as their children as it were, when other Quarians physically attacked their owners.

Now whst is interesting, is, we the players are asked the same question tgat was asked of those ancient Quarians. How do you define that something is alive, that something has a soul. Can a synthetic have a soul, can a synthetic be considered a living thing if it does?

It is unfortunate that Bioware tagged the answers to renegade / paragon choices since I thought that this is more about one's philosophy towards life and what life means to you, the player. But you can explore this philosophical question depending on what you did whdn you met Legion and the events that follows.
Note too that EDI's existence and personality mirrors this question, and the central theme that caused the Quarian - Geth war.

So any wonder why so many who are used to this kind of writing with its depth, suddenly go amok when presented by the frankenmonster of an ending, that dog-vomit pool of inconsistencies and illogical drivel?

Mind you, I can and will accept minor inconsistencies or the odd non-logical stuff here and there as long as they don't break character or break the game's theme (player's choices matter) but there's just too much of that all in those short 10 minutes of an ending.

[CeeO-connor]

Sorry, if we hate the ending part; but it appears to be the love of a gamer that caused the tension.

Modifié par CeeO-connor, 05 juin 2012 - 03:04 .

[BlueStorm83]

--- Sdinc, WOW, great post. It said so much that I'd said, only it said it without babbling like a tool, and it touched on points I was unable to articulate. THAT, sir, is a true professor of literature, whereas I am merely one who did 3 years of college to become one and then drop out when I lost my scholarship due to a woman. I agree wholeheartedly, and I believe that should be printed out and physically mailed to BioWare's headquarters. And now I walk to the deli, considering a sandwich for lunch.

[3DandBeyond]

babachewie wrote...

daveyeisley wrote...

Yup.

I have no interest in repeating my old posts, but not one.... not a single person who has spoken in favor of the endings has been able to explain why they believe it was 'good' without ignoring facts, or making stuff up to suit their position.

Not a single one.

Trying to direct them to what they have missed or imagined just results in circular arguments where they refuse to admit the anti-enders actually have a point (or multiple points).

If its not deliberate attempts at trolling, it is willful or impressively oblivious ignorance.

Stupid statement is stupid. You're obviouslynot looking hard enough or just closing your eyes and plugging your ears. I could just as easily say that nobody who hates the ending has giving a great reason why they dont like it with looking like a whining ignorant turd who can't see the anwsers right in front of them. Not a single one

Well, the problem is in order to say that you'd have to lie.

We've all made numerous statements, as has the literary professor Dray in sdin009's post, as have literary reviewers, as have SF writers, as have hundreds of youtube video creators, as have many, many more people. We have all pointed directly at very specific issues that exist within at least the ending, but as yet no one that likes the ending can state why it makes sense without dragging in stuff that does not exist within the game(s).

If I start on one point that does not make sense it leads to extremely long posts as well, because the issues are many and they are sometimes interconnected.

The biggest fatal flaw of all is still in my opinion, the interaction between the star kid and Shepard. I've repeated this so many times and not one person can refute it with one good sensible reason at all. The evil in this story is the enemy that turns people into goo-the reapers. The being that controls the reapers is the star kid. No human being would believe him and do what he says. It doesn't matter what he thinks or says or what eventually happens (in all its awesome stupidity). What matters is the game fails here. It does not allow a rational human reaction from Shepard.

You can read, so go back and read what we've said and then get on point and try to use elements within the game and only those within the game to refute what we have all said so many times. Try to explain it and think of it as Shepard would, because the story is through Shepard's eyes. We have consistently used logical thought as a basis for our assertions.

I personally have yet to have one single person explain with real logic just how this ending makes complete sense as it is.

But to do so, someone must explain the kid's logic-prove that it will always be so.

Explain why Shepard would not speak up and ask a question at least.

Explain why Shepard would not just reject what this kid offers.

Provide proof (what Shepard knows and sees) that the 3 choices will do what the kid says they will do.

Explain how the kid knows what the choices will do if he didn't have anything to do with the creation of the Crucible's plans.

Explain why the reapers didn't attack the Crucible if it could destroy them.

Explain why the kid couldn't just shut off the reapers if he controlled them or why Shepard didn't just ask him to.

Explain why Shepard must die or Earth must get vaporized based upon certain EMS scores for Destroy.

Explain how TIM forced Shepard to shoot Anderson.

Explain who the Star Kid is and why any logical person wouldn't just ask him to reveal his true self. And tell me you'd still believe him if he looked like TIM or a Collector or Harbinger or Sovereign.

Explain why Shepard must die. And why since there's no other choice this is seen as a sacrifice. The game offers no other option and a sacrifice is something someone chooses-so how is any of this a sacrifice.

Explain where the sweet part is in bittersweet.

Explain why a vaporizing laser beam didn't vaporize Shepard, especially when shot from the most powerful and oldest reaper of all, Harbinger. On Rannoch, every hit with the reaper beam there killed Shepard. How come not this time.

Explain, within the game how it's possible the mass relays did not destroy or ruin the star systems. In 2 parts of ME the destruction of the relays leads to dire consequences. The Arrival points to an asteroid crashing into the relay that sets off an explosion which utterly destroys the star system. In a codex, Desperate Measures, a "ruptured" relay causes all terrestrial worlds to be ruined. Within the game (again not something made up or some conjecture like maybe the explosion was smaller) explain why the galaxy isn't screwed.

Explain where Shepard got the amazing infinite ammo gun from and where his/her 2 teammates went that were right there when Shepard got hit by the beam.

Explain one example where within the game and within this current cycle, the catalyst kid was right in his logic-and that Shepard could not instantly refute or something Shepard has not already refuted.

Explain just how all 3 choices would work based upon every single type of Shepard any player might choose to play. For instance, my Shepard is a Paragon and as such cannot agree to any of the choices in my opinion. I can't commit genocide (killing geth and EDI that I see as people). I can't create Synthesis, because that is abhorrent and removes the spark of life as I see it because I have no information to suggest otherwise. I can't agree to control, because only evil people have tried to assert it and the case can be made that becoming a "god" and taking control can change things. I also don't quite understand but never ask just how I can control the reapers if I die right away. My paragon also has just always wanted them blasted out of existence and in all cases the possibility exists they will return. So, please explain how all Shepards could make any choice.

Explain why in real life any normal person might have the initial reaction of wanting to hurt someone who has hurt someone they love and yet in this game when confronted by the being that has killed trillions and has the desire to hurt you and those you love, you could even consider having a civil conversation with him. Explain how after seeing those piles of bodies that the kid has in his "home", any reasonable person could listen to him at all and not freak out. Explain this in context with all the things that TIM did that while horrible were much less in scope, Shepard often pitched a fit when talking to him. Or, how about the reporters Shepard might have slugged and all they did was ask a question.

Explain why Shepard would need the god player to play multiplayer to pump up the EMS so Shepard could gasp at the end. Explain just how multiplayer affects the tube Shepard shoots in the destroy option, so that the explosion from it is not as strong as the one created when the god player does not play multiplayer.

I could go on and on and on chasing various threads and continually unraveling the ending.

[3DandBeyond]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--- Sdinc, WOW, great post. It said so much that I'd said, only it said it without babbling like a tool, and it touched on points I was unable to articulate. THAT, sir, is a true professor of literature, whereas I am merely one who did 3 years of college to become one and then drop out when I lost my scholarship due to a woman. I agree wholeheartedly, and I believe that should be printed out and physically mailed to BioWare's headquarters. And now I walk to the deli, considering a sandwich for lunch.

The whole thread that that is in, is awesome-other professors chimed in as well and were in complete agreement.

http://social.biowar.../index/11435886

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 05 juin 2012 - 04:05 .

[Holger1405]

akenn312 wrote...


You have got to be kidding me, common sense? What?!? The game constantly shows the synthetics were not a problem without some Reaper influence. The Geth were forced to fight against the Quarians and also could have completely eradicated them but chose not too and became isolated. So if the Geth choose to let the Quarians go because they could not bring themselves to destroy a entire species where is the major threat to organic races again?

No it doesn't. There are many problems with synthetic intelligence in the game without reaper influence and I pointed a few of them out. You did choose to ignore them, as you choose to ignore the philosophical questions behind the Mass Effect "synthetic" storyline at all. That's fine, it's your game, but I am allowed to think further.
    

akenn312 wrote...
In Project Overlord Shepard stopped the threat. So where in this story has an rouge AI or VI shown to be all powerful like the Reapers? I don't care about speculating on some future they don't tell us about. I mean show me one rouge AI or VI in this story that wasn't easily defeated by deactivating it or convincing it to shut down? Plus why does the Catalyst even care that synthetics destroy organics? Also if it's supposed to save organics why would he give the Geth Reaper code to make them stronger and aggresive to help them destroy organics? This story is just poorly written. That's why.

Because the fight the same, advanced, organic's the Reaper fight.

akenn312 wrote...
They never show (and the creative team in the story should have clearly done this) what would happen naturally if organics and synthetics are left to their own devices. Show us how a mega rouge AI will end all life or mega synthetics destroying organics. As it stays now the only thing that an intelligent person can see in this story is that the Reapers are the only issue. Cut out the Reapers and the pressure of galaxy destruction goes away.

If Bioware show us such thing, it would render destroy and control completely worthless, even worse, it would  render the complete Mass effect storyline worthless because it would make clear that Shepard couldn't change anything and that the Reapers are in fact a good soulution. 
BTW, to claim that the "only thing that an intelligent person can see in this story is that the Reapers are the only issue" is insulting my intelligence. Good thing that I am not so proud of mine than you of yours.

akenn312 wrote...
If Bioware wants to make this story synthetics vs. organics fine, but don't sit there and insult my intelligence over two games showing that synthetics and AI's are really misunderstood and peaceful then force some ending where the central conflict is synthetics. You just made two major storyline's that disprove that very fact of synthetics being a threat.

Again, it doesn't disprove anything. Bioware permitted you to resolve this two storylines peacefully by means of the uber hero Shepard.  But that doesn't proof that, in the future of this universe, no other Synthetic live form will become a tread to the organic races. And this question, that Synthetics  perhaps become a tread to organic life again, is raised in game, by the statements of the Catalyst.

[Void Of Humanity]

These are increbible post's & Links that state everything but with such a task at hand to rectify this do you think the forthcoming DLC will answer these questions & correct the inconsistencies, i'm not holding out much hope here, i did have some faith at one point lol

[BlueStorm83]

--- That Future Synthetics MIGHT be created which MIGHT become a threat to organics is not a valid reason to believe the Catalyst: there are Present Synthetics that are CURRENTLY a threat to organics. They're called Reapers. In the future you MIGHT murder my family and MIGHT burn my house down; that does not justify me killing you right now, nor would it make sense for you to kill my family and burn my house right now so it doesn't happen in the future.

[3DandBeyond]

Void Of Humanity wrote...

These are increbible post's & Links that state everything but with such a task at hand to rectify this do you think the forthcoming DLC will answer these questions & correct the inconsistencies, i'm not holding out much hope here, i did have some faith at one point lol

Given all that Bioware has said and that they stand by their illogical muddled mess as if it were the canon they claimed the game never had, I have slim hope.  Bioware always stated the game had no canon, but the endings create canon.  They allow for little other than their own thought, yet they have no foundation.

Some for whatever reason adhere to the thought that within this cycle the conflict of synthetics and organics is central which is what the star kid asserts.  But, it isn't.  And even if it were the central issue, the kid has it backwards.  He could claim that he kills organics because they create synthetics that they then want to annihilate-that they give life and for no good reason other than unfounded fear, they choose to destroy it and are thus tainted and need to be destroyed. 

But then, punish the sinners and not everyone.  Shepard would be quick to point out that killing was generally done for a reason and not for what might be.  It was involving imminent threat, not some possible threat that at some point might occur, because the counterpoint is that anything that might be possible just as easily might not be possible.  It's like here they took a page from Minority Report, but they took it one step further.

Advanced organics might create synthetic life (this is not always a certainty so always cannot be said) that might rebel against their creators (again, not a certainty) and so the kid sends the reapers to kill advanced organics (the creators) to keep them from creating.  The only certainty is what the kid has and is doing-he is killing people.  The kid also thinks somehow he is not killing people, but merely ascending them into reaper form, but in fact, he is lying.  So, it is no longer the case that he is just illogical or might be lying.  He is lying.  He is killing a great many people and not "ascending" them, though I think turning them into goo is also killing them, so he's just plain crazy and evil.

ME has shown the exact opposite of what the kid says in almost every thing that he says.  The created will kill the creator (partly true, but only after the creator started killing them and only after that due to the kid's interference).  I could make a prophecy and say a guy I know named Joe will get in a car accident.  That may or may not come true.  But if I get in my car and race over to Joe's house as he starts to drive off and I smash into him, I have been right in my prophecy.  This is what the kid does.  He says synthetics and organics will always fight and the synthetic created will destroy the creator, but he makes it happen.  So.  He lies.  He's evil. He's crazy.  And, he uses circular logic and self-fulfilling prophecy, but yeah, I should trust him.

It's also quite true that in every case where a rogue VI went rogue, the issue has been handled and/or the issue was created by a problem with the organic that started the project and not the other way around.  The Project Overlord Archer VI, was due to horrific experiments being performed on a human being with autism.  To even compare this to the geth/quarian issue is somewhat ridiculous.  It was perhaps an attempt to create a melded organic/synthetic consciousness and AI, but it is debatable what the rogue element was in that case.  Was it the organic David that went rogue or the tech he was attached to?  No one can use that as some synthetic organic issue that bears out the star kid's point unless they can tell me that it wasn't because David was being tortured and he rebelled.  The effect was of course that the VI became like a virus, but we have no hard and fast proof of what made it so.  All we have are the words of the man torturing his brother-Gavin Archer and he's really trustworthy.  It was a horrific attempt to meld a geth consciousness with an organic being and it overwhelmed David who couldn't shut out the noise, so his subconscious could most probably have worked to try to shut it down and save himself.

[Holger1405]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--- That Future Synthetics MIGHT be created which MIGHT become a threat to organics is not a valid reason to believe the Catalyst: there are Present Synthetics that are CURRENTLY a threat to organics. They're called Reapers. In the future you MIGHT murder my family and MIGHT burn my house down; that does not justify me killing you right now, nor would it make sense for you to kill my family and burn my house right now so it doesn't happen in the future.

I don't belief that the catalyst is right, I only think that it beliefs what it said and that it could be right, despite my beliefs.  

[3DandBeyond]

Just to be clear people think the star kid might be lying. Well, he is lying. He says he does not kill organics merely ascends them so they exist in reaper form-ok, forget that this seems like killing them.

He does not ascend everyone. Some get vaporized. In fact, on Rannoch Shepard gets vaporized (ok, I get it that you need to not die there to "finish" the game, but). What's one of the earliest things Shepard sees happening in the game. Hmmm, when Shepard and company see reapers have come to Earth, in the prologue. Alliance people are killed. And what kills them? A reaper beam. Who sent the reapers? The star kid. So, who is killing people? The star kid. In fact, he takes the form of a human being he killed.

Forget about thinking he might be lying. He is lying. He even killed the kid that he looks like.

[3DandBeyond]

Holger1405 wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--- That Future Synthetics MIGHT be created which MIGHT become a threat to organics is not a valid reason to believe the Catalyst: there are Present Synthetics that are CURRENTLY a threat to organics. They're called Reapers. In the future you MIGHT murder my family and MIGHT burn my house down; that does not justify me killing you right now, nor would it make sense for you to kill my family and burn my house right now so it doesn't happen in the future.

I don't belief that the catalyst is right, I only think that it beliefs what it said and that it could be right, despite my beliefs.  

But you are risking the lives of everyone in the galaxy on the belief the kid might be right.  Wow.  I put my faith and my belief in better things.  But, believing that he might be right is way too big a leap of faith to make.

And please yes I know I've believed others, but I've always been able to minimize the bad thing that might happen if my belief in what they say is wrong.  And others have at least offered some proof.  And the fact that the floor rose to the top of the Citadel is proof of nothing.  Nothing in the game says the kid made it move.  And the creation of the Crucible proves nothing.  We don't know where the original idea of it came from. 

And what the Protheans believed proves nothing.  Everything we thought we knew about them was wrong and even Javik (if you bought the DLC) knows next to nothing and the Protheans were not wonderful and nice people.  They were totalitarian and despotic in their practices so my opinion of them is colored.  And just because Javik is apparently honorable, does not mean the Protheans all were.  Often there's a fine delineation between the honor and dignity of the military and that of the leadership and society at large.

The star kid might believe what he says, but what he says is often proven wrong in the game, so his logic is at best flawed, so anything based upon that logic is flawed as well.

The star kid is also lying.  I've given proof.  Anything he says coud also be a lie and so he cannot be trusted.  I just want to know one thing that he says that is provable outside of what he says.  Concrete, touchable proof.  There is none.  I couldn't risk it and if just one person, one Shepard thinks the risk is unacceptable, the game has failed.  It's as logical a conclusion as any other and moreso based upon what we have been shown.

[3DandBeyond]

Holger1405 wrote...

akenn312 wrote...
If Bioware wants to make this story synthetics vs. organics fine, but don't sit there and insult my intelligence over two games showing that synthetics and AI's are really misunderstood and peaceful then force some ending where the central conflict is synthetics. You just made two major storyline's that disprove that very fact of synthetics being a threat.

Again, it doesn't disprove anything. Bioware permitted you to resolve this two storylines peacefully by means of the uber hero Shepard.  But that doesn't proof that, in the future of this universe, no other Synthetic live form will become a tread to the organic races. And this question, that Synthetics  perhaps become a tread to organic life again, is raised in game, by the statements of the Catalyst.

So Shepard should think since it's possible that in the future some synthetic might want to kill people, that it's been ok at present for the kid to kill people?  Especially since the kid thinks he's been doing the right thing.  And then they should walk off merrily hand in hand and choose Control? 

Ok, then if all this and Control makes sense, and that's a new choice that Shepard can make, then why wouldn't you see it as a failure of the game that Shepard doesn't turn to the kid and say, "you control them now, why don't you make them fly into the sun?"  And if the kid can't do that or won't do that, then isn't that a real problem in deciding to pick something (control) that the star kid says he currently has.  Does he control them or doesn't he?  And if he does, he should be able to smash them to bits and if he doesn't, how can Shepard expect to?

And really, since these are issues that you defend, please don't state you agree they need to explain it more.  Either it's broken as it is or it isn't.  I see it as unfixable in its current state and all the clarity in the world will leave it as a muddied mess.  Where we disagree is it seems you believe if they merely explain it a bit more it will be ok.  If I misrepresent what you think, I am sorry.  I just don't see anything the kid says or does as defensible and certainly it cannot be clarified.  I see clearly what they are trying to say and I think it's stupid.  They need to use logical logic and real thought here.

This probably sounds harsher than I mean it-I really don't mean anything bad against you.  I like spirited debate and appreciate that you are willing to explain your thinking.

[akenn312]

Holger1405 wrote...
No it doesn't. There are many problems with synthetic intelligence in the game without reaper influence and I pointed a few of them out. You did choose to ignore them, as you choose to ignore the philosophical questions behind the Mass Effect "synthetic" storyline at all. That's fine, it's your game, but I am allowed to think further.

No you choose to ignore the fact that the "synthetic threat" story line is weak and forced as a main conflict to give the Reapers a stupid purpose. I ask again, name one rouge AI or VI throughout Mass Effect 1-3 that showed that they could be potentially as powerful or worse than the threat of the Reapers? You can't because there is not one in any DLC or the main game. The EDI & Legion stoylines in Mass Effect 2 and 3 basically disproves any philosophical question that the Mass Effect storyline had begun by making two AI's part of your crew and showing the Geth as a peaceful race and EDI as a friend. You can fool yourself all you want that your being deep believing synthetics are a future threat, but this storyline visually and through lore basically disproves itself. That's what makes the Reapers have no purpose now. There is not a believable threat after them. Nothing is shown to be worse than what they have done to the galaxy.
    

Holger1405 wrote...
Because the fight the same, advanced, organic's the Reaper fight.

So again were supposed to believe in more stupid logic that to save us from ourselves they empower synthetics and force the synthetic conflict that could have resolved itself without them? You do realize that the reason all this is happening is because the Reapers are leaving their AI making tech everywhere and forcing their code into synthetics. Before the Reapers Geth defend themselves after Reapers influence they are aggressive heretics.

Again within the story name me one mission were a rouge AI or VI is shown to be more powerful or worse than the Reapers?

Citadel AI = ponzi scheme machine that blows itself up
Overlord VI = Easily deactivated mathematical savant being used by his brother for evil.
Rouge Hannibal class VI = EDI who is now your trusted ally
Geth = Misunderstood race of AI's that are helping the Quarians or easily destroyed after Reaper upgrades are taken away. Also one of them is your friend and squadmate. Guns can kill them.

Reapers = Hulking masses of almost indestructible genocidal machines that cull organic life and threaten the galaxy every 500,000 years for no reason. *update* reason is now to stop sythetics from killing organics.

Yeah it's the little synthetics  and VI's that are the real threat to the galaxy

Holger1405 wrote...
If Bioware show us such thing, it would render destroy and control completely worthless, even worse, it would  render the complete Mass effect storyline worthless because it would make clear that Shepard couldn't change anything and that the Reapers are in fact a good soulution. 
BTW, to claim that the "only thing that an intelligent person can see in this story is that the Reapers are the only issue" is insulting my intelligence. Good thing that I am not so proud of mine than you of yours.

No your posts insult my intelligence much more. So basically if they visually show us the actual possibility of synthetic conflict or expand to prove it's actually possible now you are saying that makes the endings worthless? What the heck kind of logic is that?

If it's vague all of the endings make sense, if it's proven now Destroy and Control are invalid?

Whaaa? If they show something that proves synthetics will destroy organics no mater what, now Destroy or Control makes actual sense. The Reapers purpose is now not dumb. 

Do you read what you post? Do you understand what you are trying to defend here?

Holger1405 wrote...Again, it doesn't disprove anything. Bioware permitted you to resolve this two storylines peacefully by means of the uber hero Shepard.  But that doesn't proof that, in the future of this universe, no other Synthetic live form will become a tread to the organic races. And this question, that Synthetics  perhaps become a tread to organic life again, is raised in game, by the statements of the Catalyst.

Again, just because you want to take the Catalyst's word that's fine it's your galaxy to help destroy, but I call bull pucky. He's going to have to do better than that to convince me synthetics are more of a problem than him and his Reapers. What if he is malfunctioning? What if he was built by some crazy scientist who hated robots? If he can show me a vision of what choosing Destroy means, he should be able to show me a vision of how synthetics will destroy us to prove his theory correct. That simple.

Ugg now my head hurts.

Modifié par akenn312, 05 juin 2012 - 07:01 .

[POBmaestro]

If anyone from Bioware is still reading this thread I’d like to have seen this as a possibility:

I’m guessing most players who have voiced their concerns and opinions here have played the Mass Effect series in its entirety, so for these dedicated players it would have been nice if an EMS >6000 (only possible if previous ME games have been played AFAIK) would result in an ending whereby the sheer power and size of the combined fleets could take down the Reapers, without resorting to the extreme of the final 3 options. Based on the fact that the Turians managed to destroy a few Capital Ships in their initial encounter (stated in one of the Codex entries), and Shepard destroyed two Reapers by aiming for the Reaper laser beam generator, I think it is plausible that with the right tactics they could have been brought down conventionally.

While Shepard survives in this scenario this could have been neatly tied in with the fact that Shepard was clearly starting to struggle emotionally in ME3 with the losses inflicted both personally and globally. Perhaps having the injured Shepard back on a war torn Earth being supported by the Mass Effect family (squadmates/LI) would have been a bit soppy, but for me this would have been a touching yet respectful end to the series. This may have thrown away the point of building the Crucible in ME3, but it beats throwing away all of ME1 & 2 combined.

With the endings we are provided with, however, I am most annoyed with the extra clip after the credits (the bit with Buzz Aldrin). This is because during the end credits I was trying to rationalise the ending I had chosen – the destruction “best ending”. All synthetics may have been destroyed, but I thought that surely with all the best minds and experience now stuck together in the Sol system, surely they could soon rebuild the machines they so heavily relied on?

But alas no, my optimism was soon crushed at the end with the following script: Man: “It all happened so very long ago”, Boy: “When can I go to teh stars?” Man: “One day...”. This bluntly destroyed my attempt of creating my own story in the hope of closure, as the combined effort of the species clearly did not re-invented FTL drives to embark on a Star Trek Voyager mission back to their home worlds (I allowed in my mind for the fact that Mass Relays could not be rebuilt).

So to sum it up for me, plot holes aside, Mass Effect, evoked so many emotions throughout, the third game especially, but after the “best” ending possible I was left feeling empty inside. Maybe the ending was rushed to meet deadlines; I doubt we will find out for sure. Regardless, Bioware have crafted 3 excellent games and I’d love to see a another trilogy made – the Mass Effect universe is one we clearly all love and I for one would like to spend more time there.

P.S. Akenn312: hilarious sig : )

Modifié par POBmaestro, 05 juin 2012 - 06:21 .

[Redbelle]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Just to be clear people think the star kid might be lying. Well, he is lying. He says he does not kill organics merely ascends them so they exist in reaper form-ok, forget that this seems like killing them.

He does not ascend everyone. Some get vaporized. In fact, on Rannoch Shepard gets vaporized (ok, I get it that you need to not die there to "finish" the game, but). What's one of the earliest things Shepard sees happening in the game. Hmmm, when Shepard and company see reapers have come to Earth, in the prologue. Alliance people are killed. And what kills them? A reaper beam. Who sent the reapers? The star kid. So, who is killing people? The star kid. In fact, he takes the form of a human being he killed.

Forget about thinking he might be lying. He is lying. He even killed the kid that he looks like.

This is going to sound a little corny but............ The catalyst's thought processes and reasoning are on an entirely different planet.

I understand this up to a certain point. So, he wants to save all organics from synthetics........ probably in response to an event in past cycles......... and he choose the Reaper solution......... I'd like to steer away from the stand point of 'The GC is lying' for the following because as the saying goes, one mans god is another mans devil.

So many points have been made as to why this solution is unneccesary. The core point in the Shepard cycle is......... Its Unneccessary! The Reapers have been proactively influencing the Geth in this cycle to attack organics. Had they not done so then the Geth would not have attacked anyone as Legion little data dive into a server with Shepard pointed out that the Geth did not want to drive their creators to extinction, just to drive them far enough away theat they posed no threat to their consensus which, as a unity of.......... lets say souls for now, is actively diminished when one is destroyed.

So the Geth, in essence, only attack when one is attacked because losing one is taking away from the whole and the Geth are a whole, ok, maybe divisions of wholes that feed into bigger whol.......... Stop laughing at the back there! I'm trying to make a point.!

Tying this back to what I was saying at the start is that, regardless of what occured previously, the Reapers have always known that the Geth did not desire the extermination of Organics. The Reapers instilled that desire into them. The Reapers therefore instigated the very thing they ultimately are built to prevent........... but they are made to prevent this by converting worthy advanced races into Reapers......... Not by simply floating around doing nothing and letting things progress naturally.

The Geth may not be able to fathom the Reapers but the Reapers should be able to understand the Geth. Unless the Reapers are so far into la-la cookoo land of their own indoctrinated mindset that, as much as they believe we can't understand them, they cannot understand us.

Following this frame of reference it therefore boils down to, not who is right, but who gets to be right after they have wiped out the opposition. The catalyst, by extention, uses this logic to ramble on about how it is right because he's always been right in the past up to the point where Shep manages to get to him. An act that breaks the catalyst self held belief in his infallibility that he decides to try one of 3 other approaches that are valid alternatives to the Reaper solution because.......................................... You guessed it............. The catalyst is always right!

Only the above train of thought about the Catalyst's ability to choose has been successfully argued multiple times as being wrong. The only way the Catalyst could concieveably be right was that if it was a deity who sees life outside of the meatbag Born>Live>Die trend, who created all life that now exists and maintains complete control over events. Sort of like a shadow broker with space magic, yet instead it is portreyed as an opponent/info dump/decision branch whose logic is founded on foundations so uncertain that if you jumped up and down you would find yourself the proud participent of a bouncy castle attraction.

The Catalyst, as he is portrayed, appreciates no thoughts but his own and has created a system based on his own logic. Sort of like two writers sequestering themselves in a room to do some writing apart from any system of peer review to point out inconsistentcies. Meeeoooow.

The only good thing I will say in defence of this system is that since it is the Reapers doing the reaping their will always be organic life, as opposed to a galactic Terminator strong Skynet overlord who in a comic so old the pages have fallen out, depicted our robot lords and masters ridding Earth of pesky humans and then moving onto the galaxy in general because Robo-Shepa.......I mean cop failed to prevent the rise of the machine. That is unless machines are built before the 50 thousand Reaper deadline and decide to sort every atom in existence into neat little boxes for cataloging and storage.

So the Catalyst is either a dictator or a butterfly collector, each with it's fingers in it's ears singing to drown out anyone else POV, who then mangles species he thinks are worth saving in a form that may be of his own design. I have a slightly different term to label the Catalyst other than a lier. It is a raving egotist.

Modifié par Redbelle, 05 juin 2012 - 06:30 .

[3DandBeyond]

@akenn312,
There's just no getting around it. I and others have said it before. The relevant issues here are what a Shepard, any Shepard could see and do in the games. If just one Shepard can magically turn a banana into a Cadillac, then you can't at the end say it's impossible for Shepard to turn a banana into a Cadillac. And, essentially that is what the kid is saying.

The kid created the reapers and controls them and as such he fomented a problem between the Geth and Quarian, but a Shepard can resolve it and they can get along. This is provable and exists. But instead of embracing that, we are told we are doomed based upon something that might happen at some future point in time if ever. Ok, WHAT????

I prove today that I did a good thing and that good things came of it, but in the future I may do something bad or someone else might or maybe they make something that might do something bad and I am expected to atone for that today, by dying. Ok, if I have to find some rotted space in my brain where this makes sense, I wish to remain sensibly ignorant.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 05 juin 2012 - 06:25 .

[heraymo]

wonder if the starchild in the wii-u version will be mario

[Void Of Humanity]

Its far bigger than just conflict's between Synthetics & Organics but as Organics are creators we are flawed, we cannot understand ourselfes let alone a Synthetic trying to,

This flaw has been passed on, for a Synthetic to understand & comprehend this it would be far greater & beyond its abilities, a Synthetic would try & look for a logical choice but without any logic to fall back on because its not there to begin with, i think this is what the Star Kid is a flawed balance, created to restore balance but over the time has been corrupted & struggling desperatly to understand, maybe the Star Kid is lying or he believes in his flawed logic is correct, this is why some are spared some are not & to justifie it he makes out they have ascended, because we as creators throughout our history life has been documented on evolution & ascention, to touch & to be like Gods, you can see how a Synthetic can misinterpret this because creators did & do

[Void Of Humanity]

3DandBeyond, you are a good thing, we loves ya Baby!

[3DandBeyond]

Redbelle wrote...


This is going to sound a little corny but............ The catalyst's thought processes and reasoning are on an entirely different planet.

I understand this up to a certain point. So, he wants to save all organics from synthetics........ probably in response to an event in past cycles......... and he choose the Reaper solution......... I'd like to steer away from the stand point of 'The GC is lying' for the following because as the saying goes, one mans god is another mans devil.

So many points have been made as to why this solution is unneccesary. The core point in the Shepard cycle is......... Its Unneccessary! The Reapers have been proactively influencing the Geth in this cycle to attack organics. Had they not done so then the Geth would not have attacked anyone as Legion little data dive into a server with Shepard pointed out that the Geth did not want to drive their creators to extinction, just to drive them far enough away theat they posed no threat to their consensus which, as a unity of.......... lets say souls for now, is actively diminished when one is destroyed.

So the Geth, in essence, only attack when one is attacked because losing one is taking away from the whole and the Geth are a whole, ok, maybe divisions of wholes that feed into bigger whol.......... Stop laughing at the back there! I'm trying to make a point.!

Tying this back to what I was saying at the start is that, regardless of what occured previously, the Reapers have always known that the Geth did not desire the extermination of Organics. The Reapers instilled that desire into them. The Reapers therefore instigated the very thing they ultimately are built to prevent........... but they are made to prevent this by converting worthy advanced races into Reapers......... Not by simply floating around doing nothing and letting things progress naturally.

The Geth may not be able to fathom the Reapers but the Reapers should be able to understand the Geth. Unless the Reapers are so far into la-la cookoo land of their own indoctrinated mindset that, as much as they believe we can't understand them, they cannot understand us.

Following this frame of reference it therefore boils down to, not who is right, but who gets to be right after they have wiped out the opposition. The catalyst, by extention, uses this logic to ramble on about how it is right because he's always been right in the past up to the point where Shep manages to get to him. An act that breaks the catalyst self held belief in his infallibility that he decides to try one of 3 other approaches that are valid alternatives to the Reaper solution because.......................................... You guessed it............. The catalyst is always right!

Only the above train of thought about the Catalyst's ability to choose has been successfully argued multiple times as being wrong. The only way the Catalyst could concieveably be right was that if it was a deity who sees life outside of the meatbag Born>Live>Die trend, who created all life that now exists and maintains complete control over events. Sort of like a shadow broker with space magic, yet instead it is portreyed as an opponent/info dump/decision branch whose logic is founded on foundations so uncertain that if you jumped up and down you would find yourself the proud participent of a bouncy castle attraction.

The Catalyst, as he is portrayed, appreciates no thoughts but his own and has created a system based on his own logic. Sort of like two writers sequestering themselves in a room to do some writing apart from any system of peer review to point out inconsistentcies. Meeeoooow.

The only good thing I will say in defence of this system is that since it is the Reapers doing the reaping their will always be organic life, as opposed to a galactic Terminator strong Skynet overlord who in a comic so old the pages have fallen out, depicted our robot lords and masters ridding Earth of pesky humans and then moving onto the galaxy in general because Robo-Shepa.......I mean cop failed to prevent the rise of the machine. That is unless machines are built before the 50 thousand Reaper deadline and decide to sort every atom in existence into neat little boxes for cataloging and storage.

So the Catalyst is either a dictator or a butterfly collector who mangles species he thinks are worth saving in a form that may be of his own design.

Well, I do agree the kid or the lump of lard or whatever it is, thinks it is omnipotent and can do no wrong.  I also do agree that I think any solution is its solution and just some trumped up way to do what it's always done.  The instigating of the Geth and the peppering of reaper tech in the galaxy is proof that the kid/reapers are setting up advanced organic life for harvesting.  They have no cause people would see as honorable and they through Sovereign stated they are unknowable and so their cause is not deemed to be known to antlike minds.

Sovereign also expresses disdain for the geth as if they are way beneath the reapers. 

As such I think they don't feel they owe people any explanation, so lying means nothing.  They won't be truthful, can't be truthful, because they don't think such beings will understand anyway.

I am again reminded of Babylon 5-one of the things the dev team likes.  I could make a list of movies and books and series they um, borrowed from.

There's a scene where the one character picks up an ant and then tells another (female) character that the ant couldn't explain to other ants what just happened.  It's because the female wants to know about these mysterious beings she encountered at the far edges of space.  He basically tells her he could no more explain them than the ant could explain people.

I think this is what Sovereign is saying and what the kid is saying.  "Shepard, you are too stupid so I will give you some info that you might think makes sense."  And then he draws on things he thinks Shepard will see as possible conflicts or that he (the kid) actually doesn't understand in order to justify what he's been doing and to seemingly give Shepard a new way forward.  The kid is really the stupid one, but he's omnipotent in his mind so he can't see it.  Everyone is a bug to be squashed.

And then the similarity is this-in real life.  We humans put animals in zoos-look at all their fish references.  We don't save animals (usually) in their normal habitat, we remove them and put them into cages to "save" them.  We put fish in huge aquariums (aquaria?) in order to preserve them.  We justify this because we fear someone will kill them and they will go extinct, and we could not sit down and tell a fish why we are doing this.  In fact, we often overlook that other animals do have some intelligence-now we know that we could not have a conversation with them, but since I've always wanted a tie in to the fish theme throughout the games, I finally found one.

Along the way, not all of them are saved-we eat some of them, others that we don't care that much about at all, just get run over or whatever.

I won't say this is what they are trying to say, but the Babylon5 thing seems to apply and the fish thing just never made sense to me.

The ending is causing my brain to twist so hard that almost anything starts to make sense.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 05 juin 2012 - 06:46 .

[akenn312]

3DandBeyond wrote...

@akenn312,
There's just no getting around it. I and others have said it before. The relevant issues here are what a Shepard, any Shepard could see and do in the games. If just one Shepard can magically turn a banana into a Cadillac, then you can't at the end say it's impossible for Shepard to turn a banana into a Cadillac. And, essentially that is what the kid is saying.

The kid created the reapers and controls them and as such he fomented a problem between the Geth and Quarian, but a Shepard can resolve it and they can get along. This is provable and exists. But instead of embracing that, we are told we are doomed based upon something that might happen at some future point in time if ever. Ok, WHAT????

I prove today that I did a good thing and that good things came of it, but in the future I may do something bad or someone else might or maybe they make something that might do something bad and I am expected to atone for that today, by dying. Ok, if I have to find some rotted space in my brain where this makes sense, I wish to remain sensibly ignorant.

I agree with you 3DandBeyond, there is not much getting around any of it. It's just such a forced conflict and resolution also to do it they have to break Shepard, Joker, the Reapers and almost every character in story to make it work. My head hearts just thinking about all the other bad stuff, but Shepard just going along with this sythetic issue as the larger problem than the Reapers is just crazy. You can't tell me a bunch of AI's that blow themselves up after a botched ponzi scheme and I can kill with a Avenger assault rifle are going to destroy the world one day. LOL You have to forshadow a little better than that.


Thanks @POBmaestro you can copy the sig for yourself if you want they were made by this guy.
http://social.biowar.../index/10712627

Modifié par akenn312, 05 juin 2012 - 06:47 .

[Archonsg]

Oh one other thing, any one realize that one of starbratz solutions is the complete removal of any true organic, turning every organic into a synthetic, thus fulfilling its role in "saving every organic by destroying every organic".