1086 réponses à ce sujet

[Ariq007]

Blinks wrote...

Lethys1 wrote...

This thread is insane.  The OP is just completely wrong, I'm sorry.  The entire point of a villain is to be villainous, and to write off genocide as a topic of discussion because it shouldn't exist will make people forget about it.  It isn't offensive, stop it.


People like the OP are dangerous and have caused the Political Correct chokehold of a society we now live in, where everything is taken far too personally and everything is an attack.

The issue is not so much that the villain was portrayed as genocidal, it was that Shepard as the protagonist was forced to agree with this worldview. The game forces us to accept that the god child is correct and to accept his "solutions" as the only ones. While it may not have been intentional, the endgame conversation implies that reducing individuals to their basic hardware (synthetic vs. organic, in this case) and using this as a valid means of defining them is all right.

If there had been an option to deny the endgame options as they were presented, I think a lot of the problems with the ending would no longer exist. As it is, the game thematically falls apart in those last few minutes.

^This.

[Heather Cline]

Interesting thoughts on the ending. I don't think it is true but that is my thoughts only.

[Zine2]

Therefore_I_Am wrote...

If you see it that way, fine. But really, the Reapers are more based off of the fiction of H.P. Lovecraft. The "Cosmic Horror Story" trope, to be more accurate. God-like incomprehensible beings that drive people mad while spanning the entire universe and beyond.
Until that stupid ending I always thought the Reapers were doing this because of the whole "survival of the fittest" thing.

That may be true about the Lovecraft parallels, but I've always been of the inclination to drag the Great Old Ones out of their slumber, and then beat the crap out of them so badly that they learn to never mess with th human race.

The Trope "Did You Punch Out Cthulhu?!" exists for a reason.

[Ashilana]

This is problematic... but I am playing through ME3 without Mordin alive.

The replacement character Padok Wiks seams to be a social darwinist.

I am not going to spell out what this means(for fear of a ban)... but anyone who understands the contents of Zine2's original post will likely see how disgusting it is to see social darwinism portayed as anything other than pure evil.

[NightHawkIL]

Ariq007 wrote...

Blinks wrote...

Lethys1 wrote...

This thread is insane.  The OP is just completely wrong, I'm sorry.  The entire point of a villain is to be villainous, and to write off genocide as a topic of discussion because it shouldn't exist will make people forget about it.  It isn't offensive, stop it.


People like the OP are dangerous and have caused the Political Correct chokehold of a society we now live in, where everything is taken far too personally and everything is an attack.

The issue is not so much that the villain was portrayed as genocidal, it was that Shepard as the protagonist was forced to agree with this worldview. The game forces us to accept that the god child is correct and to accept his "solutions" as the only ones. While it may not have been intentional, the endgame conversation implies that reducing individuals to their basic hardware (synthetic vs. organic, in this case) and using this as a valid means of defining them is all right.

If there had been an option to deny the endgame options as they were presented, I think a lot of the problems with the ending would no longer exist. As it is, the game thematically falls apart in those last few minutes.

^This.

+1

[Ome6ablak]

I agree with the premise that you are forced into the solution that the Catalyst wants, but to call it racist is going overboard. It wasn't choosing only humans or asari or turians or synthetics. It decided that all intelligent sentient life no matter what form is too dangerous to advance to a certain level because if unchecked they would destroy the galaxy as they knew it. Is what the Catalyst doing considered genocide? Yes. Is it racist? No.

[Moil]

lol, the amount of effort you put into this is quite disturbing. I don't agree with your entire theory, but interesting none the less.

[captainbob8383]

Blinks wrote...

The issue is not so much that the villain was portrayed as genocidal, it was that Shepard as the protagonist was forced to agree with this worldview. The game forces us to accept that the god child is correct and to accept his "solutions" as the only ones. While it may not have been intentional, the endgame conversation implies that reducing individuals to their basic hardware (synthetic vs. organic, in this case) and using this as a valid means of defining them is all right.

If there had been an option to deny the endgame options as they were presented, I think a lot of the problems with the ending would no longer exist. As it is, the game thematically falls apart in those last few minutes.

Completely agree.
The three ending choices are in total contradiction with all Mass Effect themes: people self determination, unity forged despite differences (NOT homogeneity), fight against all odds.

This ending scrupulously violates each theme:
- Shep gives up
- accept to control the most lethal fleet ever known. While in ME2/ME3 Shep clearly states such power shouldn’t be wielded by just anyone.
- Genocides all non organics, whereas the whole trilogy makes clear synthetics are not hostile.
- Alter the whole universe DNA and transform everybody in hybrid/monster without asking.

No difference = homogeneity = peace. Wonderfull way of thinking.
And some people even find those endings beautiful.
I'm seriously wondering if they have understood anything about the series, and anything about life in general.

In any case, Sheppard would have refused ANY of these options.

[JunMadine]

I find that destroying the reapers is the only way to be safe from them. The other choices leave the possibility of them returning and reaping. But forcing us to kill the geth, EDI and all other synthetic life is genocide (not a perfect word but the meaning is not lost).

[Ashilana]

SandTrout wrote...

millich wrote...

Ok, sure. But it was the Catalyst saying and doing those things, not Bioware.

BioWare wrote the catalyst and prevented Shepard from rebuting it.

The Catalyst's message is BioWare's message.

Nice and succinct.

[inblack]

Your an idiot

[N-Seven]

Eyeroll.

[TUHD]

o.O? Okay, there are elements which are strange, but 'racist and offensive'?....

[N-Seven]

TUHD wrote...

o.O? Okay, there are elements which are strange, but 'racist and offensive'?....

I especially like how after 25 pages, the angry mob has now made a the link that 'Bioware is racist, and shares the Reaper's ideology'.       

Modifié par N-Seven, 26 mars 2012 - 06:31 .

[ScriptDiver]

Well, leaving the ending open for speculation apparently opens for the racist card to be played. Though I didn't expect it, but it's the internet so I should learn... This ending is sure going to be memorable for ALL the wrong reasons

[Talhydras]

Blinks wrote...

Lethys1 wrote...

This thread is insane.  The OP is just completely wrong, I'm sorry.  The entire point of a villain is to be villainous, and to write off genocide as a topic of discussion because it shouldn't exist will make people forget about it.  It isn't offensive, stop it.


People like the OP are dangerous and have caused the Political Correct chokehold of a society we now live in, where everything is taken far too personally and everything is an attack.

The issue is not so much that the villain was portrayed as genocidal, it was that Shepard as the protagonist was forced to agree with this worldview. The game forces us to accept that the god child is correct and to accept his "solutions" as the only ones. While it may not have been intentional, the endgame conversation implies that reducing individuals to their basic hardware (synthetic vs. organic, in this case) and using this as a valid means of defining them is all right.

If there had been an option to deny the endgame options as they were presented, I think a lot of the problems with the ending would no longer exist. As it is, the game thematically falls apart in those last few minutes.

Indeed. Having it so that the best ending is the one where the hero admits that no matter what different people will always ultimately fight to the death and endorses the solution of forcible homogenization is... well, what TVTropes calls unfortunate implications.

It's a real catch-22, too. If we argue that there remain enough differences between individuals and post-synthesis species that it isn't "really" forced homogenization, then isn't there enough differences to go to apocalyptic war over? Humans have attempted to annihilate each other over skin color and idealogical differences and heredity in reality, why would Synthesis prevent this? What's to stop one post-Synthesis species from deciding the rest are all jerks and attempting to cleanse the galaxy of the impure?

[aimlessgun]

I'm so glad this thread is still going. The terrible moral implications are just as important as the general incomprehensibility of the ending in terms of how bad it is. 

Modifié par aimlessgun, 26 mars 2012 - 06:41 .

[beyondsolo]

@OP Thank you for sharing your thoughts. This has opened a whole new approach to look at the ending for me (and another reason to dislike it...). I think you made a number of valid points. What I find myself especially agreeing with is your claim that we are forced to go along with that genocidal monster. I mean, we've known what the Reapers were doing since ME1, but the fact that we can't send the little bastard to hell is truly agonizing.

As for the Synthesis choice, I think the biggest problem is that it contradicts everything the Mass Effect games have been about up until the ending.

Before the ending, the games followed the perspective that we must work to understand each other and overcome our differences to achieve a common goal, no matter what our origin. I think this works beautifully with Orson Scott Card's hierarchy of foreigness by which strangers are categorized (http://ansible.wikia..._of_Foreignness). The essence of Card's Ender Quarter is, however, that becoming more familiar with a stranger (or a species) is an act of maturation on our side, not theirs.

The Synthesis ending just magically takes all the effort out of a process that has always been equally difficult and important for all races in the Mass Effect universe. Further, it also makes Shepard's effort of uniting the galaxy null.

Modifié par beyondsolo, 26 mars 2012 - 06:58 .

[Klijpope]

The Reapers see themselves as far above us on the pecking order as we do a pest infestation. It is not genocide to the Reapers, it is a cull. So the term genocide only applies from the PoV of Shepard and the other Citadel species - to the Reapers it is pest control to save the ecosystem.

However, not disagreeing that Shepard should have some more words for the Catalyst.

[elaf000]

What distincts between synthetic and machine?
How does it know to just destroy the geth\\AI and not all computers everywhere including ships?

What it comes down to is organic creates machine, machines destroys organic which leaves the catalyst and reapers.

Are the gatekeepers mini reapers?lol
I loved the game until the last 10 minutes when boy wonder shows up and justs blah blahs about crap and blows the whole story for me.

[Titan_HQ]

I was expecting a ****ty rant, I found something amazing! Touche.

[zarnk567]

 :wizard:SPECULATION FOR EVERYONE:wizard:

[dallicant]

 While I think it's a bit of hyperbole to say that the ending is supporting racism, the ending is certainly problematic (problematic is a term I'm really getting sick of using, but it's appropriate here).

Sitting through the ending, I was wondering why I wasn't able to even mention the peace between the quarians and the geth.  Had I done something wrong?  Did a lack of sufficient EMS cause Shepard to suffer a serious head wound that resulted in partial amnesia?

Instead, Shepard just listened to the Catalyst and accepted everything the brat had to say.  And I was disturbed by the idea that things were so predetermined since it goes against the ethos of the entire series.  Players have the option of defying the Council's assertion that the rachni can only be a threat.  They can give the krogans a second chance after the entire galaxy has given up on them.  And, they can unite the quarians and the geth.

Now, it's worth saying that ending the quarian-geth conflict doesn't prove the Catalyst wrong.  It remains to be seen how long the union lasts.  However, it should at least be offered as contrary evidence.

As a whole, the ending feels deeply authoritarian.  The Catalyst offers an essentialist view of the universe that the player is not allowed to challenge, despite having always had the option to question authority.  This is why the ending failed to do justice to an otherwise great series.

[Ashilana]

dallicant wrote...
As a whole, the ending feels deeply authoritarian.  The Catalyst offers an essentialist view of the universe that the player is not allowed to challenge, despite having always had the option to question authority.  This is why the ending failed to do justice to an otherwise great series.

Exactly.  There are those who think comparing the idealogy of the starchild to that of the creators of the game, but we are left with no alternative... because they gave us no alternative.   They chose to make us cooperate with that war criminal and have that be the end of their game.

[Ashilana]

N-Seven wrote...

TUHD wrote...

o.O? Okay, there are elements which are strange, but 'racist and offensive'?....

I especially like how after 25 pages, the angry mob has now made a the link that 'Bioware is racist, and shares the Reaper's ideology'.       

And you disprove the ideas stated in the op with funny faces.  Interesting approach.

Perhaps give some more thought to how the child uses the word "solution" in reference to genocide, how synthesis is the closest thing to a happy ending... even though it forcibly alters all living beings, and how the closest thing most fans can find to a "good ending" is to wipe out an entire people they helped save multiple times.

Also, see if you can find the dialogue you get from Mordin's replacement.