182 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

What I hate about your scenario, Fapmaster, is that it requires MP.

Also, may I remind you that the max TMS you can get in the game in any one playthrough is 7530. Because, for instance, the geth have a maximum of 815 and the quarians of 825 IIRC, but you can't get both in the same playthrough.

Nice job with the Synthesis, btw. (apart from the EMS). I need to let that sink in more before I can comment.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 30 avril 2012 - 11:00 .

[Fapmaster5000]

Ieldra2 wrote...

What I hate about your scenario, Fapmaster, is that it requires MP.

Also, may I remind you that the max TMS you can get in the game in any one playthrough is 7530. Because, for instance, the geth have a maximum of 815 and the quarians of 825 IIRC, but you can't get both in the same playthrough.

Nice job with the Synthesis, btw. (apart from the EMS). I need to let that sink in more before I can comment.

Like I said to Dark Pentitent, EMS was me messing up. I swapped the numbers in my head and thought the max was 9750, not 7950, hence the 9000 cap. Let me go edit that....

Multiplayer-wise: yeah, that's problem, but that's gameplay, not story. Basically, I was going for "you have to do everything" to get this ending, kind of like Wild Card: Perfect from New Vegas.  Unfortunately, "everything" in ME3 means 100% readiness.

Modifié par Fapmaster5000, 30 avril 2012 - 06:44 .

[Ieldra]

Fapmaster5000 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

What I hate about your scenario, Fapmaster, is that it requires MP.

Also, may I remind you that the max TMS you can get in the game in any one playthrough is 7530. Because, for instance, the geth have a maximum of 815 and the quarians of 825 IIRC, but you can't get both in the same playthrough.

Nice job with the Synthesis, btw. (apart from the EMS). I need to let that sink in more before I can comment.

Like I said to Dark Pentitent, EMS was me messing up. I swapped the numbers in my head and thought the max was 9750, not 7950, hence the 9000 cap. Let me go edit that....

Multiplayer-wise: yeah, that's problem, but that's gameplay, not story. Basically, I was going for "you have to do everything" to get this ending, kind of like Wild Card: Perfect from New Vegas.  Unfortunately, "everything" in ME3 means 100% readiness.

Which means you are dependent on others to get your own best ending, since you can't solo MP maps and can't set a difficulty in MP. That's not how things should be.

And the TMS maximum is 7530 for any one playthrough, as I've explained above.
.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 01 mai 2012 - 08:55 .

[PsyrenY]

CATALYST - WORRIED
CATALYST - DESPERATE

I'm going to go ahead and assume you have no idea how AI works.

[asmodic zion]

this is exactly the sort of thing i'm hoping bioware do with the dlc . . hopefully it will be on par with this
thumbs up OP

[Fapmaster5000]

Optimystic_X wrote...

CATALYST - WORRIED
CATALYST - DESPERATE

I'm going to go ahead and assume you have no idea how AI works.

THIS HURTS ME!

In all seriousness, no one alive today knows how AI works.  We have theories, we have concepts, but we're just figuring in the dark.  As Bioware has presented AI before (Legion, EDI), they have basically behaved liked super-smart people with occasional logic quirks and suppressed emotions.  They have "imitation" emotions, but we've seen Legion show embarassment (no data), idolation (wears Shepard armor), concern (when the geth are about to be rendered defenseless); moreover, we've seen  EDI have a Pinocchio story ark about learning to love.

This has not been a series where the AI thinks so alienly to humanity that it is another thing entirely.  (No super-AI tries to convert every molecule into computational bits to calculate pi more exactly, or anything like that.)  This is a series where AI is presented like another flavor of human, just like the aliens.

Within this setup, why shouldn't the Catalyst behave like the other AI: logical, data driven, occasional alien thoughts, and basically human-parallel 'emotions'?  If this improves the story (by increasing emotional investment/payoff), then it would not be a stretch at all in this universe.  So, why not?

ME3 is space opera, with flavors of milscifi, not hardcore near-future scifi.  It has biotics, FTL, aliens that work like humans, space combat within visual range, AI that learns to love, and a million other story and character moments that are not "true".  They are "true-enough" to pass suspension of disbelief inside the confines of space opera.  

Further, those were cues for people reading to get a general idea.  The cue notes should have been drawn out to:

"CATALYST - REALIZING THAT EVENTS ARE RAPIDLY MOVING OUTSIDE OF SAFE OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS, AND BEING FORCED TO RELY ON AN UNKNOWN AND HOSTILE ACTOR IN ORDER TO RETAIN BASE FUNCTIONALITY"

-and-

"CATLYST - FURTHER REALIZING THAT BIOLOGICAL MOTIVATIONS, COMBINED WITH CATALYST'S OWN PRIOR ACTIONS, HAVE CREATED A NEARLY NO-WIN SCENARIO THAT WILL QUITE PROBABLY DESTROY BILLIONS OF YEARS OF SUCCESSFUL OPERATION, AND THE SITUATION APPEARS TO NOT HAVE A RECTIFYING MOVE BESIDES A BASE APPEAL TO EMOTION TO THE EMPOWERED BIOLOGICAL ACTOR."

Basically, "worried" and "desperate" through a different lens.  Probably more accurate, but far, far, too much writing to convey the intent.  Interpretation, it happens.

Modifié par Fapmaster5000, 01 mai 2012 - 07:11 .

[Fapmaster5000]

asmodic zion wrote...

this is exactly the sort of thing i'm hoping bioware do with the dlc . . hopefully it will be on par with this
thumbs up OP

Glad you like it!

I would like something like this, and I would also be cool with a well-done Indoc expansion, or something else game-changing.

[Eryri]

@Fapmaster
Just read all three of your ending scenarios. Terrific, really well written! I hope Bioware reads this thread.
The only thing I would miss would be the opportunity for some sort of epic final boss fight.
Still, a big improvement on the endings as they stand.

[Fapmaster5000]

Eryri wrote...

@Fapmaster
Just read all three of your ending scenarios. Terrific, really well written! I hope Bioware reads this thread.
The only thing I would miss would be the opportunity for some sort of epic final boss fight.
Still, a big improvement on the endings as they stand.

Thanks!

Personally, I actually liked the "Illusive Man talking" boss fight.  I thought it was a nice change of pace, and that it really drove home that Mass Effect was about choices and characters, not pew-pew.  Plus, I think it was a solid reminder of "this is why this guy is dangerous - his mind" as opposed to just shooting up a mutated TIM.  That would have pissed me off.

Now, shooting up Harbinger?  That would have been BOSS.  (Heh.)

[PsyrenY]

Fapmaster5000 wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

CATALYST - WORRIED
CATALYST - DESPERATE

I'm going to go ahead and assume you have no idea how AI works.

THIS HURTS ME!

In all seriousness, no one alive today knows how AI works.  We have theories, we have concepts, but we're just figuring in the dark.  
...
Basically, "worried" and "desperate" through a different lens.  Probably more accurate, but far, far, too much writing to convey the intent.  Interpretation, it happens.

I apologize, that was overly confrontational looking back at it. I'll elaborate.

You're correct that we don't know how AI works in our world. However, we know how it works in Mass Effect. In ME2 Legion tells you that synthetics do not feel "pity, remorse or fear."  And in ME3, he tells you this again - synthetics cannot feel fear, even when faced with extermination. 

Worry and desperation are emotions borne of fear. Putting in this slant is a cheap attempt to make the player feel as though he is "winning" by backing the Catalyst into some kind of corner, when in reality the Catalyst is almost totally apathetic to your decisions. He flat-out considers Destroy a mistake (in the long run), and has doubts about Control, while he considers Synthesis to be logical and right - but he doesn't have any misgivings at all about offering you all three options as long as the Crucible is intact enough to deliver on them.

Merely by altering the options in this way, you're fundamentally altering the character of the Catalyst, and that of AI in general, in the series.

[daecath]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Fapmaster5000 wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

CATALYST - WORRIED
CATALYST - DESPERATE

I'm going to go ahead and assume you have no idea how AI works.

THIS HURTS ME!

In all seriousness, no one alive today knows how AI works.  We have theories, we have concepts, but we're just figuring in the dark.  
...
Basically, "worried" and "desperate" through a different lens.  Probably more accurate, but far, far, too much writing to convey the intent.  Interpretation, it happens.

I apologize, that was overly confrontational looking back at it. I'll elaborate.

You're correct that we don't know how AI works in our world. However, we know how it works in Mass Effect. In ME2 Legion tells you that synthetics do not feel "pity, remorse or fear."  And in ME3, he tells you this again - synthetics cannot feel fear, even when faced with extermination. 

Worry and desperation are emotions borne of fear. Putting in this slant is a cheap attempt to make the player feel as though he is "winning" by backing the Catalyst into some kind of corner, when in reality the Catalyst is almost totally apathetic to your decisions. He flat-out considers Destroy a mistake (in the long run), and has doubts about Control, while he considers Synthesis to be logical and right - but he doesn't have any misgivings at all about offering you all three options as long as the Crucible is intact enough to deliver on them.

Merely by altering the options in this way, you're fundamentally altering the character of the Catalyst, and that of AI in general, in the series.

Actually I disagree. The geth are a first generation AI, so they are going to still be pretty primative. Take a look at EDI, who has integrated reaper technology, and is capable of some emotion. She loves Joker. She understands humor, to the point where she is capable of not just understanding it but creating it.

The catalyst would be created by a race that had faced something close to the technological singularity. They would have had to have created something close to that in order to be desperate enough to take the action they have. Therefore, the catalyst would be much more advanced than the geth are. It is entirely possible that they are capable of feeling rudimentary emotions like fear.

[PsyrenY]

daecath wrote...

Actually I disagree. The geth are a first generation AI, so they are going to still be pretty primative. Take a look at EDI, who has integrated reaper technology, and is capable of some emotion. She loves Joker. She understands humor, to the point where she is capable of not just understanding it but creating it.

The catalyst would be created by a race that had faced something close to the technological singularity. They would have had to have created something close to that in order to be desperate enough to take the action they have. Therefore, the catalyst would be much more advanced than the geth are. It is entirely possible that they are capable of feeling rudimentary emotions like fear.

Even if you're right, EDI doesn't feel fear either. There's nothing to indicate the Catalyst would beyond wishful thinking.

[daecath]

Optimystic_X wrote...
Merely by altering the options in this way, you're fundamentally altering the character of the Catalyst, and that of AI in general, in the series.

And this is a bad thing how? The catalyst is a flawed "character". If it's going to be the final "boss", it needs more than 14 lines of dialog and the personality of a toaster. It needs to provide the satisfaction of defeating an enemy. That is one of the main things that is missing, there's no satisfaction of defeating your opponent. The ending is entirely void of any emotional closure, in large part because the catalyst is so blah. It needs more. The ending as it is clearly doesn't work for most people, and what we have here is probably the simplest way to get something that's at least functional.

[daecath]

Optimystic_X wrote...

daecath wrote...

Actually I disagree. The geth are a first generation AI, so they are going to still be pretty primative. Take a look at EDI, who has integrated reaper technology, and is capable of some emotion. She loves Joker. She understands humor, to the point where she is capable of not just understanding it but creating it.

The catalyst would be created by a race that had faced something close to the technological singularity. They would have had to have created something close to that in order to be desperate enough to take the action they have. Therefore, the catalyst would be much more advanced than the geth are. It is entirely possible that they are capable of feeling rudimentary emotions like fear.

Even if you're right, EDI doesn't feel fear either. There's nothing to indicate the Catalyst would beyond wishful thinking.

EDI might have reaper tech, but she's not a reaper. Neither is the catalyst. In fact, neither the reapers nor the catalyst could be wholely synthetic, otherwise the plan would fail. The catalyst and reapers would turn on their creators, and destroy the galaxy if they were wholey synthetic. Therefore they have to have elements of organic life as well, and therefore would potentially be capable of emotions. So on both the basis of being significantly more advanced than any current synthetic lifeform, and on the basis of being partially organic, it's not unreasonable to assume that they are capable of emotion.

[PsyrenY]

daecath wrote...

EDI might have reaper tech, but she's not a reaper. Neither is the catalyst. In fact, neither the reapers nor the catalyst could be wholely synthetic, otherwise the plan would fail. The catalyst and reapers would turn on their creators, and destroy the galaxy if they were wholey synthetic. Therefore they have to have elements of organic life as well, and therefore would potentially be capable of emotions. So on both the basis of being significantly more advanced than any current synthetic lifeform, and on the basis of being partially organic, it's not unreasonable to assume that they are capable of emotion.

Yes, but fear is the most organic emotion there is, because it is intrinsically tied to our own mortality. Synthetics do not possess either, reaper tech or no. And the Catalyst certainly displays none, as he matter-of-factly tells you exactly what you need to do to destroy him.

[Baa Baa]

Really cool read. Well done, actually with these I might have enjoyed that part of the ending. I still would have been disappointing by my crew leaving me and crash landing on a random planet, but this is written very well and was executed amazingly.

[Fapmaster5000]

Optimystic_X wrote...


In ME2 Legion tells you that synthetics do not feel "pity, remorse or fear."  And in ME3, he tells you this again - synthetics cannot feel fear, even when faced with extermination.  

He says this, true, but then he goes on to demonstrate worry (what will happen to the geth), embarassment (hiding Reaper tech), and nostalgia (Quarian sympathisers history).  This is handled much like Vulcans in Star Trek.  In dialogue, they're all, "No, Captain.  I do not have emotions, only logic."  And then in action, they're all, *does something emotionally driven*.  

This may simply be writing failure, but I chalk it more to the genre that Mass Effect operates in, and the writers' choice of characters over concepts.

Optimystic_X wrote...

Even if you're right, EDI doesn't feel fear either. There's nothing to indicate the Catalyst would beyond wishful thinking.

Optimystic_X wrote...

Yes, but fear is the most organic emotion there is, because it is intrinsically tied to our own mortality. Synthetics do not possess either, reaper tech or no. And the Catalyst certainly displays none, as he matter-of-factly tells you exactly what you need to do to destroy him.

 

But she does experience a fear analogue.  In addition to what I and Daecath have stated previously, I point you to two specific EDI conversations in ME3.

• On "pleasing".  EDI states that following certain procedures generates positive feedback loops.  She compares this to being "happy" for organics, showing that AI's (even based on Reaper tech) have been designed to imitate organic (human, for our sake) thought patterns and reward cycles.  This is very close to the dopamine hit you get in your chemical computer when you complete a task successfully.
• "I despise the Reapers."  She says this because the Reapers are "nothing but self-preservation" and that she would "gladly risk non-functionality for Jeff".  Fear, in organics, is a self-preservation function, designed to make you GTFO from being rendered non-functional.  This conversation showcases that the Reapers have a fear-analogue, as does EDI.  (Truthfully, it makes sense to program for fear.  Fear keeps "platforms" running and away from doing self-destructive operations, like walking off a cliff or accidentally drowning.)  EDI even has to overcome a bias for self-preservation (overcoming fear) in order to serve a higher purpose (protect loved ones). Yeah, those Mass Effect AIs aren't really that alien.

Optimystic_X wrote...

Merely by altering the options in this way, you're fundamentally altering the character of the Catalyst, and that of AI in general, in the series.

 

Here, you are completely correct, and I did this deliberately.

Like Daecath says: 

daecath wrote...
And this is a bad thing how? The catalyst is a flawed "character". If it's going to be the final "boss", it needs more than 14 lines of dialog and the personality of a toaster. It needs to provide the satisfaction of defeating an enemy. That is one of the main things that is missing, there's no satisfaction of defeating your opponent. The ending is entirely void of any emotional closure, in large part because the catalyst is so blah. It needs more. The ending as it is clearly doesn't work for most people, and what we have here is probably the simplest way to get something that's at least functional.

 

I would add to it my reasons: Catharsis is a powerful sensation.  It's what makes tragedy work, and it can make bittersweet elevate to a higher level.  It is an emotional release.  Without this, a "tragic" end is simply terrible.  My theory is that the end of ME3 failed not because it was a "bad ending", but because the components of catharsis did not operate.  The Catalyst's sheer mind-bogglingly bland ending-dispenser was probably the single greatest contributor to why the ending fell so flat for so many.

Hence, I ran with the few hints of emotion presented (opinions on the choices), and turned the Catalyst from a plot device into a character.  A character can be opposed or appeased, a plot device 'is'.

So, yes, this was the primary change of what I did, and I did it deliberately.

Modifié par Fapmaster5000, 01 mai 2012 - 09:43 .

[PsyrenY]

Fapmaster5000 wrote...

He says this, true, but then he goes on to demonstrate worry (what will happen to the geth), embarassment (hiding Reaper tech), and nostalgia (Quarian sympathisers history).  This is handled much like Vulcans in Star Trek.  In dialogue, they're all, "No, Captain.  I do not have emotions, only logic."  And then in action, they're all, *does something emotionally driven*.

The embarrassment I'll give you. I've never seen Legion actually worry, however, and I've never seen EDI do so either. 

Even when learning that his people can be mass-brainwashed at any given moment, his only comment is "our arrival was timely." He could as well have been discussing leaving the beach before it rains.

But she does experience a fear analogue.  In addition to what I and Daecath have stated previously, I point you to two specific EDI conversations in ME3.

• On "pleasing".  EDI states that following certain procedures generates positive feedback loops.  She compares this to being "happy" for organics, showing that AI's (even based on Reaper tech) have been designed to imitate organic (human, for our sake) thought patterns and reward cycles.  This is very close to the dopamine hit you get in your chemical computer when you complete a task successfully.
• "I despise the Reapers."  She says this because the Reapers are "nothing but self-preservation" and that she would "gladly risk non-functionality for Jeff".  Fear, in organics, is a self-preservation function, designed to make you GTFO from being rendered non-functional.  This conversation showcases that the Reapers have a fear-analogue, as does EDI.  (Truthfully, it makes sense to program for fear.  Fear keeps "platforms" running and away from doing self-destructive operations, like walking off a cliff or accidentally drowning.)  EDI even has to overcome a bias for self-preservation (overcoming fear) in order to serve a higher purpose (protect loved ones). Yeah, those Mass Effect AIs aren't really that alien.

Neither of those are fear. The first is its complete opposite. The second one she categorizes as "a desire to keep Normandy functioning" not "fear of what might happen if Normandy is destroyed."

And even if you somehow proved that Legion and EDI could feel fear, that still wouldn't necessarily extrapolate to the Catalyst. Hell, there are still a number of fans who consider him to merely be a VI.

 
Here, you are completely correct, and I did this deliberately.
...
I would add to it my reasons: Catharsis is a powerful sensation.  It's what makes tragedy work, and it can make bittersweet elevate to a higher level.  It is an emotional release.  Without this, a "tragic" end is simply terrible.

I disagree completely. Humanizing the Catalyst just to make its "defeat" somehow feel satisfying is completely missing the point of the entire exchange.

You are not "defeating" him, any more than you are allowing him to "win." You won the moment you hooked the Crucible up to him and modified his programming. He is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Reapers, and slapping ill-fitting emotions onto him to make him into some kind of Harbinger is pointless.

[Wulfram]

Shepard thinks it's at least worth asking EDI whether she's afraid. Suggests there's nothing inherent about an AI which would make it impossible.

[PsyrenY]

Wulfram wrote...

Shepard thinks it's at least worth asking EDI whether she's afraid. Suggests there's nothing inherent about an AI which would make it impossible.

"I do not understand the question." Says all you need to know there.

[Wulfram]

Optimystic_X wrote...

"I do not understand the question." Says all you need to know there.

It's "I do not understand the purpose of the question", actually.  Rather different.

She certainly sounds afraid.

[CDHarrisUSF]

I hope this isn't what we get in the DLC...

... but I expect to be disappointed.

[Fapmaster5000]

CDHarrisUSF wrote...

I hope this isn't what we get in the DLC...

... but I expect to be disappointed.

Are you hoping for complete rewrite?  Or for less change?

The first is simply not possible inside of budget.  The second... I disagree.  This was my "minimum acceptable deviation" theory.

Or Indoc?

I could see Indoc, but it would mean a lot of what they said about EC DLC would be at best misleading.

[Fapmaster5000]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Neither of those are fear. The first is its complete opposite. The second one she categorizes as "a desire to keep Normandy functioning" not "fear of what might happen if Normandy is destroyed."

And even if you somehow proved that Legion and EDI could feel fear, that still wouldn't necessarily extrapolate to the Catalyst. Hell, there are still a number of fans who consider him to merely be a VI.

I would say it functions as a fear analogue, an inbuilt desire to retain functionality.  This what fear does for humans, evolutionary-wise.  Fear of dark, fear of snakes, fear of disease... these are routines programmed into us to keep us functioning.  It would be logical to program similar things into AI, to keep it operational, or to keep it "friendly" in operation (that is: functions enough like us to be understood and understand).  While the Catalyst may very well be operating outside of the latter protocol, the former would still be a good design principle.

The "worried" and such were stage cues, like in scriptwriting, to convey in shorthand what is being felt/acted.  I would qualify those cues as the more complex, logic-rooted "emotion analogues" I mentioned above, but abbreviated for purposes of art-assets, voice talent, and audience reception.

 
Optimystic_X wrote... 

Fapmaster5000...

Here, you are completely correct, and I did this deliberately.
...
I would add to it my reasons: Catharsis is a powerful sensation.  It's what makes tragedy work, and it can make bittersweet elevate to a higher level.  It is an emotional release.  Without this, a "tragic" end is simply terrible.

I disagree completely. Humanizing the Catalyst just to make its "defeat" somehow feel satisfying is completely missing the point of the entire exchange.

You are not "defeating" him, any more than you are allowing him to "win." You won the moment you hooked the Crucible up to him and modified his programming. He is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Reapers, and slapping ill-fitting emotions onto him to make him into some kind of Harbinger is pointless.

I don't think we're going to be able to bridge this gap, then.

I changed this to make it clear that the player is "defeating" him, or cooperating with him, or synthesizing with him, in three victory conditions, including one where you both "win".  I agree that the docking to change programming is the moment of victory, in my fanfic version (and probably what was intended in the canon ending), but I feel that the emotional payoff is necessary to make the ending successfully function.

We saw how people reacted to the ending without catharsis.  (See: month of strife.)  This was an attempt to inject that into the ending.

I have to ask, then, did you enjoy the endings as they are?  If you did, cool.  If you did not, how would you address them?

Modifié par Fapmaster5000, 01 mai 2012 - 10:33 .

[Thornne]

These seem reasonable, in that they are better versions of what we already have. But it is still largely unnecessary IMO.

I still think the ending would be (and flow) better if Star Kid were cut. Go from Anderson's death into Red/Destroy boom. Otherwise the big plot change has be shoe-horned into the closing moments. To pull that off with 'clarity and closure' is likely going to require too much exposition. The ending is going to lose what momentum it had.