233 réponses à ce sujet

[Hudathan]

 

Taleroth wrote...

Hudathan wrote...

Having a smaller, slower, and weaker fleet than the Reapers and still coming out ahead in a direct fight goes against the entire game way more than the Crucible ever could.

Isn't that more or less what happened at the end of Mass Effect 2?

A weaker ship going blind into a situation where the enemies have every single possible advantage, yet kicking their quads and mooning them on the way out. Maybe the upgraded Normandy is a better ship, but you could go in with absolutely no upgrades and lose like 3 people.

First, yeah, the upgraded Normany has a lot up its sleeve.

Two, I personally dislike the fact that you can perform a flawless Suicide Mission without going through some tough Virmire-like decisions. While I cared about my team and really wanted to bring them all back, it did end up breaking the immersion of what ME1 has already accomplished.

And last but not least, the Collectors are Protheans who were deemed unfit for ascension by the Reapers and ended up as Harbinger's lackies, defeating them is a much more 'realistic' goal than the collective might of the Reapers who have never been close to defeat. Especially considering how many Collectors you've killed even before the Suicide Mission.

Sepharih wrote...

Hudathan wrote...

Having a smaller, slower, and weaker fleet than the Reapers and still coming out ahead in a direct fight goes against the entire game way more than the Crucible ever could. The game is only intense because of the severity of the situation, the futility of resistance and the suspense in putting all your hopes and dreams in a device you're not even sure would work.

Having the Reapers suddenly lay down before a fleet of inferior organics simply because Shepard and co. 'wanted' to win would go against everything that made the game suspenseful and unique as a piece of fiction.

The crucible isn't really what goes against the game in my view...it's the catalyst.  These are two seperate things and for the purposes of the story you can have one without the other (or rather you can have the citadel be the catalyst, as was stated).  Remove the entire scene with the catalyst, end with the crucible firing, and then tack on the extended cut dlc for closure with the characters and I'll be fine.

I prefer a victory with just the fleet and I find it fits more with the themes of conquering impossible odds and unity with diversity and I think it would be far more cathartic, but that's just my preference.

The Catalyst doesn't really offer anything new other than providing some perspective into the Reapers and why they do the things they do. I don't personally see a problem with anything that happened during that conversation.

No one is arguing that a Star Wars/Independence Day ending isn't satisfying, but at some point things have to be reasonable within the story. The writers had two choices, either making it so that the Crucible weakened the Reapers and give players the illusion of choice by showing their various war assets in action, or taking the story to a whole new level by giving the players a tough final choice that carries untold rammifications.

They went with the second option and made it too vague, turning the entire thing into a pill that got harder to swallow over time for many players. But if film editing is any evidence, an extended cut DLC can easily change the entire experience in unexpected ways.

Modifié par Hudathan, 09 avril 2012 - 05:53 .

[humes spork]

Byronic-Knight wrote...

The choices already present can be left in for all I care, along with the Catalyst. I only want the OPTION to take the course of action I have related to you. That's my point. That's the only change I want to the ending. I don't want a complete rewrite, where things are taken out to be replaced by something else, I want more choice(s) added to the ending. 

...in other words, in the context of the circumstances presented to the player by the end of ME3, you want an ending where Shepard puts his/her feet down and promptly allows the extinction of all civilized organic races, and the continuation of the cycle, just because the Catalyst already conceded and just lays down your options and you're unhappy with that?

[Tyrzun]

This is from my previous post

This is how the Star Child utterly makes Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 useless.

Remember he is the KING of the reapers and is on the Citadel.  He controls them.  Why would he need Sovereign to come to the Citadel to activate the Citadel portal to bring in the other Reapers?  He wouldn't!  He controls it too, he brought it to the EARTH!  He moved the freaking thing.  So, yeah his existance destroys all logica after half way through ME 1.

Ok you Sci-Fi people that still may not get the degree of how destructive the Star Child angle really is if you just look at the endings.

Imagine Star Trek for a moment, doesn't matter if it's Captain Kirk, Picard,
etc...  The Borg are trying to destroy the earth, it's the last stand of
humanity.  The series pain stakingly introduced us to the Borg and what
their REAL mission is, to assimilate everyone.  AKA the Reapers.  Now a
Pink Space Pony pops up at the pinacle of the finale battle and says
the Borg bring WAR and death to you to keep you from killing each other,
and then your own Borg creations kill you so I sent my Borg creations
to kill you first.  To save other organic life, because BORG life is
superior anyways... 

You say to Pink Space Pony  "Why not have
your BORG destroy our BORG after our BORG kill us to keep them from
killing other life, but while still weaker than your BORG?"  Uh.... 
stop looking behind the curtain of the all powerful OZ kid.

Your other choice is to turn all organics into BORG and there will be no more
organic life ever.  Yes, you Captain get to commit galactic genocide to
all living things against their will.  You're such a good guy if you do
this Captain!

Your last choice is to destroy my Borg and all of your AI friends, but your Borg will kill you and take our plac eventually.

You say "Ok so you are going to destroy all "software" in the universe,
because our friends the GETH are just software and make ALL ships
crippled in the process and set us back to the industrial age because all computer run on software?"

Pink Space Pony "Uh well, no your computer softare isn't going to be harmed nor your electronic equipment."

You say "What's the difference all of it is made up of code?"

Pink Space Pony says "Uh.... kid I told you to stop looking behind the curtain of the all powerful Oz"

There is NO WAY they can ever make the Star Child or the 3 choices make any sense at all.  It's illogical cannon breaking rubbish.

Oh and one more EASY one is this.  Star Child says this has never happend before, not sure what to do etc...  BUT I magically have 3 choices construced behind me.  Go left and grab the handles... don't ask why they are there, go up the ramp in the middle, or use you pistol to shoot this magical spot that blows up the reapers... Yeah Star Kid just makes those metal constructed areas up in 1 split second...

Modifié par Tyrzun, 09 avril 2012 - 06:14 .

[PsyrenY]

Byronic-Knight wrote...

And that is fine with me, but my Shepard would refuse to play into the Catalyst's "This is the way it has to be, so choose" speil and allow the force I spent the previous forty hours amassing "kick the Reapers back into whatever black hole they crawled out of"---to quote Garrus---or to die trying, because I feel controling the Reapers only serves to turn me into the Illusive Man; believing that all life should self-determinate, I feel unqualified to make a decision to re-write the DNA of every living creature in the galaxy; and I would not betray EDI and the Geth, especially after I worked so hard to make peace between them and the Quarians, who are potentially also screwed because I don't know if "killing all synthetics" includes their enviro-suits. 

Your Shepard would do no such thing, because your Shepard knows that the war cannot be won conventionally. All throughout the game, whenever your Shepard was told this fact, or whenever the Crucible was brought up to your Shepard, he/she never voiced a single word of dissent or complaint. Even the staunchest of Renegades - ironically, the least likely people to have united the galaxy with minimal losses - know that the Reaper forces are simply too strong.

There is no shame in that, nor is there in choosing among the options that prevent total genocide.

[Unit-Alpha]

xsdob wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

Catalyst finishes it's explanation and waits for Shepard's decisions

Shepard: I should go.

And against all odd, that was the secret phrase to activate the citadels self-destruct sequence, killing all the reapers and disintegrating the citadel to ashes.

No, the secret phrase is:

"Shepard."

"Wrex."

"I should go."

Followed by:

"STEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEEEE!"

Harbinger will join in a song-and-dance routine if you follow all that up with:

"ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL!"

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 09 avril 2012 - 06:16 .

[Tyrzun]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Byronic-Knight wrote...

And that is fine with me, but my Shepard would refuse to play into the Catalyst's "This is the way it has to be, so choose" speil and allow the force I spent the previous forty hours amassing "kick the Reapers back into whatever black hole they crawled out of"---to quote Garrus---or to die trying, because I feel controling the Reapers only serves to turn me into the Illusive Man; believing that all life should self-determinate, I feel unqualified to make a decision to re-write the DNA of every living creature in the galaxy; and I would not betray EDI and the Geth, especially after I worked so hard to make peace between them and the Quarians, who are potentially also screwed because I don't know if "killing all synthetics" includes their enviro-suits. 

Your Shepard would do no such thing, because your Shepard knows that the war cannot be won conventionally. All throughout the game, whenever your Shepard was told this fact, or whenever the Crucible was brought up to your Shepard, he/she never voiced a single word of dissent or complaint. Even the staunchest of Renegades - ironically, the least likely people to have united the galaxy with minimal losses - know that the Reaper forces are simply too strong.

There is no shame in that, nor is there in choosing among the options that prevent total genocide.

Trying to tell someone else what they would do is ridiculous.  Some people murder other people, some people harm children, some people will not even kill a fly, some people choose death over other "punishments" and have throughout history, a samurai would often choose honorable death if they lost in a fight, etc...

MANY people would rather die than lose their soul, or their humanity and become a machine.  That's the beautiful thing about the human spirit, some refuse defeat and don't fear death.

The synthesis is galactic genocide.  You exterminate ALL organic species forever against their will and turned them into machines.  Many species would rather die aka the samurai mentality.   You assiminilated them all into BORG, because the BORG said they are superior.  What a GOOD guy you are... NOT!

Many many people throughout history have decided it's better to die fighting than live as a slave.  We get it... you'd choose the slave route.  Stop saying everyone else would too.

Modifié par Tyrzun, 09 avril 2012 - 06:24 .

[Lord Raine]

Erixxxx wrote...

Richard 060 wrote...

The entirety of the Star-Child's assertions can be blown out of the proverbial water with one additional line of dialogue:


SHEPARD: "Prove it. Any of it. Why should I believe you?"


...and that's where it falls apart. Sovereign spoke in OPINIONS, but was confident that the Reapers would be able to carry out their promises. The Catalyst offers opinions dressed up as ABSOLUTES, without being able to prove any of them, especially when many of them have a massive body of evidence weighted to the contrary.

And if the Catalyst refuses to listen, what would you do then? Let the Crucible be destroyed and have the galaxy wiped of advanced life?

Personally? I would just stand there. Because I don't know about you, but my War Assets were enormous, and my Galactic Readiness was maxed out.

Unless you seriously screwed up your preperation, I'm pretty sure we were winning. Having to take a choice to move the plot was pure gaming convention. If that had actually happened for real, Shepard could have just stood there with crossed arms and waited, and the problem would fix itself.

And now that I think about it, it would have been pretty clever of BioWare if the alledged 'Golden' ending could only be obtained if you did absoultely everything right and, when meeting the Star Child, just stood there. Invisible timer ticks down, one minute later an automatic cutscene happens, different ending, you win.

Because the only way to win the Star Child's game, is to not play at all.

[Tyrzun]

Lord Raine wrote...

Erixxxx wrote...

Richard 060 wrote...

The entirety of the Star-Child's assertions can be blown out of the proverbial water with one additional line of dialogue:


SHEPARD: "Prove it. Any of it. Why should I believe you?"


...and that's where it falls apart. Sovereign spoke in OPINIONS, but was confident that the Reapers would be able to carry out their promises. The Catalyst offers opinions dressed up as ABSOLUTES, without being able to prove any of them, especially when many of them have a massive body of evidence weighted to the contrary.

And if the Catalyst refuses to listen, what would you do then? Let the Crucible be destroyed and have the galaxy wiped of advanced life?

Personally? I would just stand there. Because I don't know about you, but my War Assets were enormous, and my Galactic Readiness was maxed out.

Unless you seriously screwed up your preperation, I'm pretty sure we were winning. Having to take a choice to move the plot was pure gaming convention. If that had actually happened for real, Shepard could have just stood there with crossed arms and waited, and the problem would fix itself.

And now that I think about it, it would have been pretty clever of BioWare if the alledged 'Golden' ending could only be obtained if you did absoultely everything right and, when meeting the Star Child, just stood there. Invisible timer ticks down, one minute later an automatic cutscene happens, different ending, you win.

Because the only way to win the Star Child's game, is to not play at all.

Great point!  You're galactic readiness even SAYS you are winning key battles.  That means you are winning the war.  So, this you "can't win" stuff is totally contradicted by that.

[Sepharih]

Hudathan wrote...
]The Catalyst doesn't really offer anything new other than providing some perspective into the Reapers and why they do the things they do. I don't personally see a problem with anything that happened during that conversation.

No one is arguing that a Star Wars/Independence Day ending isn't satisfying, but at some point things have to be reasonable within the story. The writers had two choices, either making it so that the Crucible weakened the Reapers and give players the illusion of choice by showing their various war assets in action, or taking the story to a whole new level by giving the players a tough final choice that carries untold rammifications.

They went with the second option and made it too vague, turning the entire thing into a pill that got harder to swallow over time for many players. But if film editing is any evidence, an extended cut DLC can easily change the entire experience in unexpected ways.

Actually there's a third choice:  Just say **** it and handwave the reapers strength without the need of a magic plot device and let the combined forces of the galaxy achieve victory against all odds.
Contradicts lore you say?  Contrived you say?  No more than what we got I say.  End of the day, I'll take that over a done to death plot device like the crucible.  Ideally, i'd have had a twist where it either A) Doesn't work at all or is revealed as the final reaper trap.

I've already outlined just how badly I think the catalyst and the entire sequence damages both the Shepard character and undermines the entire themes and narrative in this thread. But as another thread pointed out, even if you put aside whether or not you think the catalyst's logic is stupid (and I believe it to be powerful stupid), his very existance damages the entire nature of the reapers.
So much for this idea of these incredible godlike machines, each a nation fully independant, with motivations that we simply cannot wrap our heads around.  Truth is, they're all just slaves to some petulant god child.

[Byronic-Knight]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Byronic-Knight wrote...

And that is fine with me, but my Shepard would refuse to play into the Catalyst's "This is the way it has to be, so choose" speil and allow the force I spent the previous forty hours amassing "kick the Reapers back into whatever black hole they crawled out of"---to quote Garrus---or to die trying, because I feel controling the Reapers only serves to turn me into the Illusive Man; believing that all life should self-determinate, I feel unqualified to make a decision to re-write the DNA of every living creature in the galaxy; and I would not betray EDI and the Geth, especially after I worked so hard to make peace between them and the Quarians, who are potentially also screwed because I don't know if "killing all synthetics" includes their enviro-suits. 

Your Shepard would do no such thing, because your Shepard knows that the war cannot be won conventionally. All throughout the game, whenever your Shepard was told this fact, or whenever the Crucible was brought up to your Shepard, he/she never voiced a single word of dissent or complaint. Even the staunchest of Renegades - ironically, the least likely people to have united the galaxy with minimal losses - know that the Reaper forces are simply too strong.

There is no shame in that, nor is there in choosing among the options that prevent total genocide.

So, you've brought it back to "Bioware created it, so even though they've said repeatedly that we are the architects of our own journey, we are co-writers, the masters of our destiny within the world, and there is no canon, they can take choice away from you in the most profoundly decisive moment in the entire series."

http://social.biowar...9105/1#10409105 

They hand you the pieces of an Erector set---pieces that they provided, ones that cannot be altered (set, setting, characters, very basic direction in terms of story telling)---tell you to build something, then, after you're done, they take what you made back, completely reärrange it into something they wanted to make in the first place. 

If they just made the linear narrative about Commander Shepard, allowing me no input, in no way alluding to me being in any way in control over this character's actions, then I would not be so very outraged over the ending---it would have still disappointed and confused me, but I certainly wouldn't be arguing with you or anyone else over why it should be changed in order to better reflect what I consider sensible (in regard to the actions and decisions Shepard would or would not take). 

As it is, I was told that I could make the decisions that I would make if I myself were actually going through the events presented in-game, and then told, at the very end, when such a promise was made, that I had to adhere to the 'artistic vision' of somebody else. 

(My) Shepard does not know the war could not be won conventionally, he has been told numerous times that it could not be won conventionally. That sentiment is the opinion of fallible mortals. 

You neglect the (very slim) possibility that it could be won conventionally. Is it a risk? Most certainly. Is it a bigger risk than choosing one of the three options presented? Probably. 

What happened to "making difficult choices?" 

While not entirely difficult to me personally---as I would choose it with only minimal thought over those presented---it is still a difficult choice that should have been an option.  Making the choice to forgo the option(s) presented as effetively ending the conflict immediately and instead allow the conflict to wage until one side ultimately destroys the other is just as difficult as choosing "assuming control", making a decision on behalf of every living being in the galaxy to have their DNA (somehow) spliced with circuitry, or effectively severing the synthetic life-line (robots. . . off, at least temporarily). 

Given the options, I would choose death. 

Modifié par Byronic-Knight, 09 avril 2012 - 06:56 .

[Sepharih]

 

CavScout wrote...

Athla k4 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Sepharih wrote...
I would prefer the fleet rather than the crucible, in spite of all proclamations of it being "impossible".

Also, I do not mind the "Crucible" as much as I mind the "catalyst".  The crucible is a lame plot device...but it doesn't contradict the entire themes of the series.

If they recut the ending to go like this:
 

and then added on the extended cut dlc for closure with the characters I would be satissfied.  The ending would still be underwhelming...but it'd be ok.

And I wanted to side with Sovereign in ME1 and take over the Citadel... they didn't give me that option. Why not? Where was the petulant demands to do whatever we wanted with our Shep back then?

That was the First of Three planned games, they were allowed leeway. This is the end, no more choices and the consequences are suppose to be unfolding, not building up and being almost entirely bypassed..

You missed the point. You've never been given freedoom to play your Shep anyway you wanted. You've always had to follow BW's rails with some minor pathing choices. ME3 had the same number, if not more, choices as ME1 and ME2 and the "outrage" simply wasnt there.

....because the choices in ME1 were not completely at odds with the entire narrative of the game.

[PsyrenY]

Tyrzun wrote...

Trying to tell someone else what they would do is ridiculous.

But being a video game, Bioware has to do that at some point, or else the game becomes impossible to program with all those options.

You don't have the option for instance to say "screw Saren" and instead go on a killing spree across the Citadel until you're caught and tried. Bioware simply doesn't let you. Isn't that a case of "telling you what your Shepard would do?" Or in ME2, even after you've been to Freedom's Progress and saw no hard connection between the Collectors and Reapers, you should have the option to walk away from Cerberus and rejoin the Alliance - but the game doesn't let you do that either. And finally, in ME3, you never have the option to just say "forget this Crucible crap, let's attack."

You have a lot of input into Shepard's personality and beliefs but there are still boundaries. No matter how disgusted you make your Shepard be with the system for instance, you can never just leave the military. And throughout the series, Shepard still knows when some things are possible or not.

So when the two most decorated generals in the galaxy tell Shepard "X can't be done conventionally" and Shepard does not argue, we can safely hold it to be true, however distasteful we may find it personally.

[PsyrenY]

Tyrzun wrote...

Great point!  You're galactic readiness even SAYS you are winning key battles.  That means you are winning the war.  So, this you "can't win" stuff is totally contradicted by that.

"Key battles" is ground stuff - Cannibals, Husks and Brutes, just like you see in the MP.In space, i.e. the battles that actually count, you hear things like the Turian fleet in full retreat, because they're being decimated, and their only hope being to hold back for the Crucible.

Byronic-Knight wrote...

So, you've brought it back to "Bioware created it, so even though they've said repeatedly that we are the architects of our own journey, we are co-writers, the masters of our destiny within the world, and there is no canon, they can take choice away from you in the most profoundly decisive moment in the entire series."

"You have hope choice. More than you think."

Just because none of the options are perfect, does not make them suddenly stop being options.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 09 avril 2012 - 07:06 .

[Billabong2011]

The Angry One wrote...

xsdob wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Well that doesn't matter because the crucible forces the catalyst to let you change the cycle. The crucible gives shepard the options, and the catalyst has to explain them, like forcing the ctrl+alt+delete button on him and making him listen to you.

Except he doesn't listen. He states his agenda and the options he has determined for Shepard, and Shepard just smiles and nods.

How does he decide what choices the crucible has to offer? He didn't make it nor did he have a hand in it. Shepard's actions allow for the outcomes and choices presented, which is why it hinges on EMS in the first place.

If anything, the catalyst is reduced to the great expositor, having no sway or impact on what the crucible or shepard does, but having to explain it to him.

So pretty much, the catalyst loses it's power as soon as the crucible is docked, all it needed now was someone with a physical body to activate it and to specify what it does.

The only logical explanation for the Crucible's origin is that the Catalyst or it's creators designed it.
Therefore, it provides functions that it or it's creators have already determined.

This.
If, we can only assume, the Crucible must be compatible with Reaper technology so as to actually have an effect on it, and organics have NEVER understood how to create nor even MIMIC said technology, it is only logical that those who either created the Reapers/starchild or the Reapers/starchild themselves created the Crucible.

[Hudathan]

We were never even close to winning. Isolated moments of success does not add up to a victory against a numerically and technologically superior enemy who needs no supplies and requires no rest.

Billabong2011 wrote...

This.
If, we can only assume, the Crucible must be compatible with Reaper technology so as to actually have an effect on it, and organics have NEVER understood how to create nor even MIMIC said technology, it is only logical that those who either created the Reapers/starchild or the Reapers/starchild themselves created the Crucible.

That's one of the more interesting things to think about.

Modifié par Hudathan, 09 avril 2012 - 07:09 .

[PsyrenY]

I personally go with "the catalyst's creators created the Crucible." Similar to how the scientists in Portal created the moral inhibitors for GlaDOS before they were killed.

[Byronic-Knight]

Lord Raine wrote...

Erixxxx wrote...
And if the Catalyst refuses to listen, what would you do then? Let the Crucible be destroyed and have the galaxy wiped of advanced life?

Personally? I would just stand there. Because I don't know about you, but my War Assets were enormous, and my Galactic Readiness was maxed out.

Unless you seriously screwed up your preperation, I'm pretty sure we were winning. Having to take a choice to move the plot was pure gaming convention. If that had actually happened for real, Shepard could have just stood there with crossed arms and waited, and the problem would fix itself.

And now that I think about it, it would have been pretty clever of BioWare if the alledged 'Golden' ending could only be obtained if you did absoultely everything right and, when meeting the Star Child, just stood there. Invisible timer ticks down, one minute later an automatic cutscene happens, different ending, you win.

Because the only way to win the Star Child's game, is to not play at all.

THANK YOU!!!

[Sepharih]

Optimystic_X wrote...
So when the two most decorated generals in the galaxy tell Shepard "X can't be done conventionally" and Shepard does not argue, we can safely hold it to be true, however distasteful we may find it personally.

I don't mind if Shepard has his own doubts about whether or not it would be possible throughout the game.  Makes for a good story, and would have made the catharsis that much stronger when at the moment of truth he'd have chosen to trust in those around him just as they had placed all their trust in him.

Modifié par Sepharih, 09 avril 2012 - 07:12 .

[daecath]

CavScout wrote...

daecath wrote...

I actually took the time to deconstruct all the logical fallacies in starbrat's argument in another forum post. I think I found 6 or 7 standard fallacies that apply to the starbrat's logic, and that was without even trying.

Curious: How many fallacies did you have to commit to get to them?

Begging the question to a degree. I started with the premise that there were problems with his logic, then went through the wiki article on logical fallacies looking for specific ones that fit the arguments he used. There were a few that were less solid than others. I would say 4 or 5 really strong instances where there was a clear mistake made on the part of the starbrat, and 2 or 3 instances where the argument for a fallacy is weaker. Those are typically just plain stupid statements on the part of the kid that I was trying to turn into an actual fallacy. Unfortunately there is no specific one for being a moron.

[daecath]

Byronic-Knight wrote...

Lord Raine wrote...

Erixxxx wrote...
And if the Catalyst refuses to listen, what would you do then? Let the Crucible be destroyed and have the galaxy wiped of advanced life?

Personally? I would just stand there. Because I don't know about you, but my War Assets were enormous, and my Galactic Readiness was maxed out.

Unless you seriously screwed up your preperation, I'm pretty sure we were winning. Having to take a choice to move the plot was pure gaming convention. If that had actually happened for real, Shepard could have just stood there with crossed arms and waited, and the problem would fix itself.

And now that I think about it, it would have been pretty clever of BioWare if the alledged 'Golden' ending could only be obtained if you did absoultely everything right and, when meeting the Star Child, just stood there. Invisible timer ticks down, one minute later an automatic cutscene happens, different ending, you win.

Because the only way to win the Star Child's game, is to not play at all.

THANK YOU!!!

Back when IT was a strong possibility, I'd hoped that by importing your ME3 save, you would unlock the true ending on your next playthrough.

So sad that the players, in their desperation to find ANYTHING that would turn this stinking dungheap of an ending into something workable, have been infinitely more cleaver and creative than the actual team that worked on the ending. Whoever that was.

[Billabong2011]

Lord Raine wrote...

Erixxxx wrote...
And if the Catalyst refuses to listen, what would you do then? Let the Crucible be destroyed and have the galaxy wiped of advanced life?

Personally? I would just stand there. Because I don't know about you, but my War Assets were enormous, and my Galactic Readiness was maxed out.

Unless you seriously screwed up your preperation, I'm pretty sure we were winning. Having to take a choice to move the plot was pure gaming convention. If that had actually happened for real, Shepard could have just stood there with crossed arms and waited, and the problem would fix itself.

And now that I think about it, it would have been pretty clever of BioWare if the alledged 'Golden' ending could only be obtained if you did absoultely everything right and, when meeting the Star Child, just stood there. Invisible timer ticks down, one minute later an automatic cutscene happens, different ending, you win.

Because the only way to win the Star Child's game, is to not play at all.

Have you seen the movie War Games? An 80's flick about a super computer that kind of is about to unleash nuclear war on the entire planet (based on analyses of chess) until, at the final moment, it stops all processing and, after having assessed all possibilities of the chess game he's analoguing the earth to, he realizes: "Nobody can win."

Hence he doesn't initialize the nukes at all.
I really can't stop thinking about War Games when I think about the endings..only that movie was wonderful... *cough*

[Billabong2011]

Hudathan wrote...

We were never even close to winning. Isolated moments of success does not add up to a victory against a numerically and technologically superior enemy who needs no supplies and requires no rest.

Billabong2011 wrote...

This.
If, we can only assume, the Crucible must be compatible with Reaper technology so as to actually have an effect on it, and organics have NEVER understood how to create nor even MIMIC said technology, it is only logical that those who either created the Reapers/starchild or the Reapers/starchild themselves created the Crucible.

That's one of the more interesting things to think about.

By the way, thank you!

[shodiswe]

Sepharih wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...
I fail to see how the endings undermine the series' themes.

Well aside from what's already been stated about how Shepard would have defied the idea fate as divinely proclaimed by a previously unseen character and should be inherently distrustful of him....

Synthesis:  Biggest betrayal.  Unity with diversity is highlighted upon over and over again as being the thing which seperates this cycle from the others...and Synthesis means you buy into the idea that synthetics and organics cannot simply co-exist and so therefore the only way to resolve this conflict is making things homogeneous.
Control:  Not so much a betrayal of the series as much as the shepard character himself.  The only one's who have ever been shown to think that co-existance and/or control of the reapers is possible are people who are indoctrinated.  Undermines the entire narrative and it's the equivalent of Luke killing the Emperor in Return of the Jedi and finding out that he can somehow use the Darkside for good.
Destroy:  Again...requires you to take the starchild at face value....but if you do then this one sort of works I guess...unless you're a paragon who believed that the Geth and EDI had a place in the galaxy, which I did.  Even if you want to argue that this could be interpreted as a necessary sacrifice, it's impossible to divorce from the overtones of whether or not you believe synthetic life is as valueable as Organic life.

No matter what you do you're contradicting everything you've seen in the story.

 

Optimystic_X wrote... 
You went into ME3 knowing the odds were nigh-impossible just as you went into ME2 knowing that Shepard wouldn't die because the series was a trilogy, suicide mission or no suicide mision.

Furthermore, Starkid's behavior is totally consistent. When have you ever been able to convince any Reaper of the error of its ways? Did Sovereign listen in ME1? Harbinger in ME2? The Rannoch Reaper in ME3? So why should their master?

Yeah, and Shepard never took what the Reapers said at face value either.

Maybe destroy wont destroy all the geth, just hurt a little.. least if you get the good destroy ending that seems less destructive. After all the geth have just evolved beyond the networking AI's the catalyst assumes they are, assuming you allow Legion to comlete the geth transformation saving both the geth and quarians. This is one of the things I wish Bioware could be more specific on, does the destroy endign kill all get, just a few of them or will it jsut sting them and they shrug it of? Because the Reaper destruction field wasn't calibrated to destroy the new geth? Since I saved them both and the destroy option becomes central on this point it seems like something I would want clarity on.
Destroying the Reapers is abosolutely ok since they are obviously flawed and adamantly set in their ways of mass genocide.

Also there are millions of galaxies out there... why are the Reapers only doing this to this galaxy? They never mention doing it to any of the others and the solution just seems to cover this galaxy... So yes.. I can see conspiracey there. It also makes me think of what Garrus said at some point, about finding an even bigger enemy to fight after this.. Maybe the Reapers masters will decide to blow up every star in the galaxy like Halestrom now that the experiment has run it's course it's time to sterilize the petridish. Enter ME4 and 5

[Billabong2011]

shodiswe wrote...
Also there are millions of galaxies out there... why are the Reapers only doing this to this galaxy? They never mention doing it to any of the others and the solution just seems to cover this galaxy...  

Maybe that's where they go for those 50,000 years!! 

Modifié par Billabong2011, 09 avril 2012 - 07:31 .

[Tyrzun]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Tyrzun wrote...

Trying to tell someone else what they would do is ridiculous.

But being a video game, Bioware has to do that at some point, or else the game becomes impossible to program with all those options.

You don't have the option for instance to say "screw Saren" and instead go on a killing spree across the Citadel until you're caught and tried. Bioware simply doesn't let you. Isn't that a case of "telling you what your Shepard would do?" Or in ME2, even after you've been to Freedom's Progress and saw no hard connection between the Collectors and Reapers, you should have the option to walk away from Cerberus and rejoin the Alliance - but the game doesn't let you do that either. And finally, in ME3, you never have the option to just say "forget this Crucible crap, let's attack."

You have a lot of input into Shepard's personality and beliefs but there are still boundaries. No matter how disgusted you make your Shepard be with the system for instance, you can never just leave the military. And throughout the series, Shepard still knows when some things are possible or not.

So when the two most decorated generals in the galaxy tell Shepard "X can't be done conventionally" and Shepard does not argue, we can safely hold it to be true, however distasteful we may find it personally.

The choices you are provided are very flawed.  All equate to blind trust and the "I give up" mentaliity.  So you have 1 choice.

Now, for my canned long answer regarding the rest of what you bring up.  You opened the door to ME 1 etc...


This is how the Star Child utterly makes Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 useless.

Remember he is the KING of the reapers and is on the Citadel.  He controls them.
 Why would he need Sovereign to come to the Citadel to activate the
Citadel portal to bring in the other Reapers?  He wouldn't!  He controls
it too, he brought it to the EARTH!  He moved the freaking thing.  So,
yeah his existance destroys all logica after half way through ME 1.

Ok you Sci-Fi people that still may not get the degree of how destructive
the Star Child angle really is if you just look at the endings.

Imagine Star Trek for a moment, doesn't matter if it's Captain Kirk, Picard,
etc...  The Borg are trying to destroy the earth, it's the last stand of
humanity.  The series pain stakingly introduced us to the Borg and what
their REAL mission is, to assimilate everyone.  AKA the Reapers.  Now a
Pink Space Pony pops up at the pinacle of the finale battle and says
the Borg bring WAR and death to you to keep you from killing each other,
and then your own Borg creations kill you so I sent my Borg creations
to kill you first.  To save other organic life, because BORG life is
superior anyways... 

You say to Pink Space Pony  "Why not have
your BORG destroy our BORG after our BORG kill us to keep them from
killing other life, but while still weaker than your BORG?"  Uh.... 
stop looking behind the curtain of the all powerful OZ kid.

Your other choice is to turn all organics into BORG and there will be no more
organic life ever.  Yes, you Captain get to commit galactic genocide to
all living things against their will.  You're such a good guy if you do
this Captain!

Your last choice is to destroy my Borg and all of your AI friends, but your Borg will kill you and take our plac eventually.

You say "Ok so you are going to destroy all "software" in the universe,
because our friends the GETH are just software and make ALL ships
crippled in the process and set us back to the industrial age because all computer run on software?"

Pink Space Pony "Uh well, no your computer softare isn't going to be harmed nor your electronic equipment."

You say "What's the difference all of it is made up of code?"

Pink Space Pony says "Uh.... kid I told you to stop looking behind the curtain of the all powerful Oz"

There is NO WAY they can ever make the Star Child or the 3 choices make any
sense at all.  It's illogical cannon breaking rubbish.

Oh and one more EASY one is this.  Star Child says this has never happend before,
not sure what to do etc...  BUT I magically have 3 choices construced
behind me.  Go left and grab the handles... don't ask why they are
there, go up the ramp in the middle, or use you pistol to shoot this
magical spot that blows up the reapers... Yeah Star Kid just makes those
metal constructed areas up in 1 split second...

They
obliterated common sense and are retconning the Mass Effect story like a
comic book would.

So, the 3 choices are flawed garbage, but even more damaging is the existance of Star Child.