148 réponses à ce sujet

[philippe willaume]

Oldbones2, razman
You kind of are both right.

Raz, oldbones point us that we do not need any what if we have enough information to rationalise the blue ending. (i am going to wash my mouth after that)
ie the release of energy is the sphere and not the beam from the citdele+catalyst
so th crucible is used. basically this is the tack I am comming from

Oldbones Raz is saying that it doe not make sense to close the citadel instead of destoying it as per the other ending. In a rational world that makes sense I am just not sure it has as much meaning as Raz.but it is there.

Modifié par philippe willaume, 27 mars 2012 - 04:00 .

[Arkitekt]

LOTS OF SPECULATION!

Seriously though. Nice catch

[Oldbones2]

First of all, yes he does say that.

"...We find a new solution.

Shepard: Yeah but how.

The crucible CHANGED me. Created new possibilities. But I can't make them happen."

Catalyst dialogue in ending.

Keep in mind that BIOWARE wrote that. For you to say that it doesn't matter is about as valid as saying the ending doesn't make any sense.

Totally true, and also totally irrelevant. Bioware wanted to create this ending, and they did even if it creates huge gaps in logic.

Furthermore, he doesn't (I don't think) say that he controls the Reapers. He says he created them and that they are his solution. He may be able to control them, he may only be able to control them if they are close by, he may have created the first one to start the cycle and replicate but is unable to change its programming now. We just don't know.

But he does say that the energy of the crucible will be used. He says that. There is no arguing with what he says.

You can's just ignore what he says to promote a theory. That's where the flaw in your logic is.

[Getorex]

The Razman wrote...

By the way, nobody seems interested judging by the lack of responses before this thread hit the second page ... but if Bioware confirm this with their "clarity" DLC ... there will be smugness. Just warnin' ya. ;-)

No.  There wont be "smugness" because this doesn't fix the ending.

You STILL get Shepard dead shoved down your throat NO MATTER WHAT and worse, you get Shepard doing EXACTLY the opposite of everything he has stood for and been struggling for since ME1.  It MAKES NO SENSE.  AND it doesn't make the starbrat work out OK.  That little sh*t is STILL a starbrat and is STILL a McGuffin and STILL spouts jibberish nonsense.  

[Getorex]

Oldbones2 wrote...

"...Releasing the energy of the crucible will end the cycle, but it will also destroy the mass relays."

The Catalyst. Speaking in regards to Shepard's choices.

Relays go boom. Case closed.

This.  This settles it, period.

Bioware goofed alright.  They goofed BIG TIME.  The entire ending is a BIG F*CKUP.

[Tirigon]

Costin_Razvan wrote...


Claiming all the Relays are destroyed in Control makes no sense when you have the Citadel surviving. It's something called Logic. There are differences between Control and Destroy/Synthesis in what happens to the Citadel and Relays.

The Citadel is not a normal Relay though. It being an exception from the destruction proves nothing.

[Bubalo]

I think Final Hours has a picture or reference somewhere saying that relays are destroyed in all endings, I could be wrong though, Ill go back a see if I can find it.

[Tirigon]

Bubalo wrote...

I think Final Hours has a picture or reference somewhere saying that relays are destroyed in all endings, I could be wrong though, Ill go back a see if I can find it.

Well that would be pretty awesome if you could. Being proven right is always sweetB)

[The Razman]

Oldbones2 wrote...

First of all, yes he does say that.

"...We find a new solution.

Shepard: Yeah but how.

The crucible CHANGED me. Created new possibilities. But I can't make them happen."

Catalyst dialogue in ending.

Keep in mind that BIOWARE wrote that. For you to say that it doesn't matter is about as valid as saying the ending doesn't make any sense.

At what point did I say that anything that the Starchild says doesn't matter? In fact, my argument is that it does matter, extremely.

The Starchild needs Sheperd for all three solutions. When it says "I can't make them happen", it means it can't make anything happen without Sheperd's intervention (seeing as how that line is a segway into explanations of Sheperd's options).

Furthermore, he doesn't (I don't think) say that he controls the Reapers. He says he created them and that they are his solution. He may be able to control them, he may only be able to control them if they are close by, he may have created the first one to start the cycle and replicate but is unable to change its programming now. We just don't know.

"The Reapers are mine, I control them"?

But he does say that the energy of the crucible will be used. He says that. There is no arguing with what he says.

You can's just ignore what he says to promote a theory. That's where the flaw in your logic is.

Let me make it completely and utterly clear, just in case you're thinking of posting anything else like that. I do not ignore a single little thing that the Starchild says. I take every line into account. To not do so would be utterly foolish, as many others have done over the past weeks (or ignored because some people just don't want to listen to any explanation of the ending which involves the Starchild whatsoever out of hatred.)

What he says about the Destroy ending is this: "You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want. Including the Geth, and most of the technology you rely on."

And then, switching to talk about the Control ending: "OR, do you think you can control us? ... You will die, you will lose everything that you are." No mention of the destruction of anything.

The line "releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle, but will also destroy the mass relays" is spoken independently of either explanation, as proven by the fact that the position of that line within the scene is always at the end of the explanations, no matter how many options are open to you in the final sequence. Observe that same line spoken after the Control explanation here (in an ending where you only have Destroy and Control to choose from), and after the Synthesis explanation here (in an ending where all three options are open to you).

I can't make it much clearer than that without going through the entire Starchild's script line by line and pointing it all out.

Modifié par The Razman, 27 mars 2012 - 05:45 .

[The Razman]

Tirigon wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...


Claiming all the Relays are destroyed in Control makes no sense when you have the Citadel surviving. It's something called Logic. There are differences between Control and Destroy/Synthesis in what happens to the Citadel and Relays.

The Citadel is not a normal Relay though. It being an exception from the destruction proves nothing.

That's pretty shaky logic, there. The destruction of the mass relay network would surely include the hub of the relays ... in fact, wouldn't you assume that the control centre for the mass relay network would be one of the major things to be destroyed, if the mass relay network was going to be blown up?

[Tirigon]

The Razman wrote...

The line "releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle, but will also destroy the mass relays" is spoken independently of either explanation, as proven by the fact that the position of that line within the scene is always at the end of the explanations, no matter how many options are open to you in the final sequence. Observe that same line spoken after the Control explanation here (in an ending where you only have Destroy and Control to choose from), and after the Synthesis explanation here (in an ending where all three options are open to you).

If it is spoken  at the end, that would suggest it applies to all outcomes. Otherwise he would surely have said "Releasing the energy of the Crucible will destroy the Mass Relay, but taking control of the Reapers will not".

[Tirigon]

The Razman wrote...

That's pretty shaky logic, there. The destruction of the mass relay network would surely include the hub of the relays ... in fact, wouldn't you assume that the control centre for the mass relay network would be one of the major things to be destroyed, if the mass relay network was going to be blown up?

Actually not; it makes sense that whoever built a way to destroy the Relays would want to KEEP the Citadel, as it would presumably be their base of operations and control center, if not their home. Just because you blow up the road to your castle you dont want to kill yourself and destroy your castel as well, right?

That aside, I am fully aware that the Citadel being special does of course not PROVE the others are destroyed. I am just saying that it being saved does in no way prove the others are as well.

[The Razman]

Tirigon wrote...

The Razman wrote...

The line "releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle, but will also destroy the mass relays" is spoken independently of either explanation, as proven by the fact that the position of that line within the scene is always at the end of the explanations, no matter how many options are open to you in the final sequence. Observe that same line spoken after the Control explanation here (in an ending where you only have Destroy and Control to choose from), and after the Synthesis explanation here (in an ending where all three options are open to you).

If it is spoken  at the end, that would suggest it applies to all outcomes. Otherwise he would surely have said "Releasing the energy of the Crucible will destroy the Mass Relay, but taking control of the Reapers will not".

Indeed. That's exactly what he should have said. The issue here is not with what the Starchild's said. It's that the writing ... is poor. Very poor. It doesn't make it clear what the Starchild means when he says these things. It's almost as if the Starchild's said that expecting us to know that the Crucible's energy is required for two of those options, but not for the Control one.

After the fact, we can clearly see that "Releasing the Crucible's energy" refers to the Destroy and Synthesis endings. But only because we see it happening. I'm the first one in any group to say that the Starchild's explanations of the ending choices are not written well or clearly enough ... I didn't understand them first playthrough either.

[Costin_Razvan]

The Starchild is just full of a **** as far as I am concerned.

[Oldbones2]

The Razman wrote...

Oldbones2 wrote...

First of all, yes he does say that.

"...We find a new solution.

Shepard: Yeah but how.

The crucible CHANGED me. Created new possibilities. But I can't make them happen."

Catalyst dialogue in ending.

Keep in mind that BIOWARE wrote that. For you to say that it doesn't matter is about as valid as saying the ending doesn't make any sense.

At what point did I say that anything that the Starchild says doesn't matter? In fact, my argument is that it does matter, extremely.

The Starchild needs Sheperd for all three solutions. When it says "I can't make them happen", it means it can't make anything happen without Sheperd's intervention (seeing as how that line is a segway into explanations of Sheperd's options).

Furthermore, he doesn't (I don't think) say that he controls the Reapers. He says he created them and that they are his solution. He may be able to control them, he may only be able to control them if they are close by, he may have created the first one to start the cycle and replicate but is unable to change its programming now. We just don't know.

"The Reapers are mine, I control them"?

But he does say that the energy of the crucible will be used. He says that. There is no arguing with what he says.

You can's just ignore what he says to promote a theory. That's where the flaw in your logic is.

Let me make it completely and utterly clear, just in case you're thinking of posting anything else like that. I do not ignore a single little thing that the Starchild says. I take every line into account. To not do so would be utterly foolish, as many others have done over the past weeks (or ignored because some people just don't want to listen to any explanation of the ending which involves the Starchild whatsoever out of hatred.)

What he says about the Destroy ending is this: "You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want. Including the Geth, and most of the technology you rely on."

And then, switching to talk about the Control ending: "OR, do you think you can control us? ... You will die, you will lose everything that you are." No mention of the destruction of anything.

The line "releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle, but will also destroy the mass relays" is spoken independently of either explanation, as proven by the fact that the position of that line within the scene is always at the end of the explanations, no matter how many options are open to you in the final sequence. Observe that same line spoken after the Control explanation here (in an ending where you only have Destroy and Control to choose from), and after the Synthesis explanation here (in an ending where all three options are open to you).

I can't make it much clearer than that without going through the entire Starchild's script line by line and pointing it all out.

"The Reapers are mine, I control them"?

This link goes no where.  But I'll take your word for it.


The line "releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle, but
will also destroy the mass relays" is spoken independently of either
explanation, as proven by the fact that the position of that line within
the scene is always at the end of the explanations, no matter how many
options are open to you in the final sequence. Observe that same line
spoken after the Control explanation here (in an ending where you only have Destroy and Control to choose from), and after the Synthesis explanation here (in an ending where all three options are open to you).

This just proves my point completely.

[The Razman]

Tirigon wrote...

Actually not; it makes sense that whoever built a way to destroy the Relays would want to KEEP the Citadel, as it would presumably be their base of operations and control center, if not their home. Just because you blow up the road to your castle you dont want to kill yourself and destroy your castel as well, right?

Considering the Crucible was devised by races trying to stop the Reapers (and thus mostly after they found out that the Citadel is actually Reaper technology designed to take them down), I don't think they would really be concerned with preserving the giant hub of Reaper technology? In fact, considering its a relay to Dark Space where the Reapers come from, I would think it'd be top of most people's list of things to destroy?

[Sharn01]

They get destroyed in every ending, its quite clear that they do, they just do not show the entire explosion scene. If bioware states they do not explode then its just more laziness, if we cut the camera away when they start exploding and dont show the shock wave, the fans will never notice. You clearly see them explode.

[The Razman]

Oldbones2 wrote...

The Razman wrote...

Oldbones2 wrote...

First of all, yes he does say that.

"...We find a new solution.

Shepard: Yeah but how.

The crucible CHANGED me. Created new possibilities. But I can't make them happen."

Catalyst dialogue in ending.

Keep in mind that BIOWARE wrote that. For you to say that it doesn't matter is about as valid as saying the ending doesn't make any sense.

At what point did I say that anything that the Starchild says doesn't matter? In fact, my argument is that it does matter, extremely.

The Starchild needs Sheperd for all three solutions. When it says "I can't make them happen", it means it can't make anything happen without Sheperd's intervention (seeing as how that line is a segway into explanations of Sheperd's options).

Furthermore, he doesn't (I don't think) say that he controls the Reapers. He says he created them and that they are his solution. He may be able to control them, he may only be able to control them if they are close by, he may have created the first one to start the cycle and replicate but is unable to change its programming now. We just don't know.

"The Reapers are mine, I control them"?

But he does say that the energy of the crucible will be used. He says that. There is no arguing with what he says.

You can's just ignore what he says to promote a theory. That's where the flaw in your logic is.

Let me make it completely and utterly clear, just in case you're thinking of posting anything else like that. I do not ignore a single little thing that the Starchild says. I take every line into account. To not do so would be utterly foolish, as many others have done over the past weeks (or ignored because some people just don't want to listen to any explanation of the ending which involves the Starchild whatsoever out of hatred.)

What he says about the Destroy ending is this: "You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want. Including the Geth, and most of the technology you rely on."

And then, switching to talk about the Control ending: "OR, do you think you can control us? ... You will die, you will lose everything that you are." No mention of the destruction of anything.

The line "releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle, but will also destroy the mass relays" is spoken independently of either explanation, as proven by the fact that the position of that line within the scene is always at the end of the explanations, no matter how many options are open to you in the final sequence. Observe that same line spoken after the Control explanation here (in an ending where you only have Destroy and Control to choose from), and after the Synthesis explanation here (in an ending where all three options are open to you).

I can't make it much clearer than that without going through the entire Starchild's script line by line and pointing it all out.

"The Reapers are mine, I control them"?

This link goes no where.  But I'll take your word for it.


The line "releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle, but
will also destroy the mass relays" is spoken independently of either
explanation, as proven by the fact that the position of that line within
the scene is always at the end of the explanations, no matter how many
options are open to you in the final sequence. Observe that same line
spoken after the Control explanation here (in an ending where you only have Destroy and Control to choose from), and after the Synthesis explanation here (in an ending where all three options are open to you).

This just proves my point completely.

First ... why has BSN broken all my links? *HULK SMASH*

Second ... "this just proves my point completely"? With no explanation of ... how? I almost feel like I'm being trolled at this point.

[Bubalo]

What I dug up from skimming back through the Final Hours app.

"The crucible will cause a 'galactic dark age'" - You do in fact need to use the Crucible in all endings. No explanation on the "dark age".

Casey does say that the only thing that's the same in all 3 endings, lacking any variables, is the Stargazer scene.

Modifié par Bubalo, 27 mars 2012 - 05:47 .

[Oldbones2]

You're being trolled?

You said in your post the Catalyst dialogue is poorly written so we have to extrapolate what happens in the ending.
Then you said that it was a mistake made in the control cutscene that shows relay being destroyed.
Then you helpfully showed that in all endings (whether you have required war assets or not) the catalyst utters the line releasing the energy of the crucible will destroy the relays.
Now you are arguing that the the control ending doesn't require the use of the Crucible's energy because it was not explicitly stated by the catalyst. BUT IT WAS.

The fact that

"releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle, but
will also destroy the mass relays" is spoken independently of either
explanation, as proven by the fact that the position of that line within
the scene is always at the end of the explanations, no matter how many
options are open to you in the final sequence"

is proof that he his statement is meant to apply to all choices.

[The Razman]

Bubalo wrote...

What I dug up from skimming back through the Final Hours app.

"The crucible will cause a 'galactic dark age'" - You do in fact need to use the Crucible to do the control ending. No explanation on the "dark age".

Casey does say that the only thing that's the same in all 3 endings, lacking any variables, is the Stargazer scene.

Link to the bolded section, would you kindly?

As we've been discussing ... the Crucible would've have to be used in the Control ending. Which would fit in with all of this.

[Costin_Razvan]

Sharn01 wrote...

They get destroyed in every ending, its quite clear that they do, they just do not show the entire explosion scene. If bioware states they do not explode then its just more laziness, if we cut the camera away when they start exploding and dont show the shock wave, the fans will never notice. You clearly see them explode.

No it's not. 

[The Razman]

Oldbones2 wrote...

You're being trolled?

You said in your post the Catalyst dialogue is poorly written so we have to extrapolate what happens in the ending.
Then you said that it was a mistake made in the control cutscene that shows relay being destroyed.
Then you helpfully showed that in all endings (whether you have required war assets or not) the catalyst utters the line releasing the energy of the crucible will destroy the relays.
Now you are arguing that the the control ending doesn't require the use of the Crucible's energy because it was not explicitly stated by the catalyst. BUT IT WAS. 

... you can't be serious? I mean ... I ... literally just went through it in the clearest possible terms?

The fact that the line is said at the end of every explanation sequence is proof that it is is said independently of any explanation. It wasn't saying within the Control explanation "and releasing the Crucible's energy will destroy the relays". It just said it at the end, before saying make your choice. It is a line which gives you information on which endings destroy the mass relays. The part where it is poorly written is that it isn't clearly said which options release the Crucible's energy.

You cannot not understand what I'm saying there, surely? You can disagree if you want to, but that is surely as clear as it can get? Without diagrams, I literally can't make it any simpler.

EDIT: If it helps, I've fixed all the links in that post further up, so you can have another look with the video evidence.

Modifié par The Razman, 27 mars 2012 - 05:53 .

[amp1236]

We shall find out in Mass (shareholder) Effect: (franchise) Terminator !

[Bubalo]

The Razman wrote...

Bubalo wrote...

What I dug up from skimming back through the Final Hours app.

"The crucible will cause a 'galactic dark age'" - You do in fact need to use the Crucible to do the control ending. No explanation on the "dark age".

Casey does say that the only thing that's the same in all 3 endings, lacking any variables, is the Stargazer scene.

Link to the bolded section, would you kindly?

As we've been discussing ... the Crucible would've have to be used in the Control ending. Which would fit in with all of this.

It was all in the Final Hours app. I did edit my post though, Crucible is just refrenced as being used in all endings.