356 réponses à ce sujet

[Drakest3]

 +1 

[Versidious]

lillitheris wrote...

Interesting perspective, Versidious, thanks! Like I said, I can barely force myself to play Renegade so I definitely don't have the mindset

It sounds like you don't really see any particular problems with how this would play out for a Renegade (be they a genuine bastage, or just…goal-oriented), even with my elaborations?

What about the epilogue scenes? It's kind of hard to extrapolate the correct amount of closure people will need (except that it's definitely NOT “your crew is stranded on some planet, the end”) and how that might differ for various players. Paragon is actually a little easier, but as you point out, especially all Renegade aren't the same, so we can't really just necessarily define a certain direction based on those coarse classifications.

Nope! No problems.  My only Renegade playthrough so far featured a character who joined the military to kill humanity's enemies, especially Batarians, who he really, really hates, being a Ruthless Colonist. In ME1, he lets Kate die to kill Balak, because Balak is a long-term threat, kills Wrex because he doesn't trust aliens, and lets the Council die. BUT in ME3 he also keeps the Geth alive, because he wants to use them as a weapon against the Reapers, and convinces Ash instead of killing her, because she's a badass and could still be useful to him (And also because I'd spent most of the game being mean to her and was feeling a bit bad about it). So, a Renegade can have Renegade reasons for taking the Paragon option.

As for epilogue options... Well, I guess it could be a little bit like with ME1. If you let the council die, you get the same scene, but the dialogue's different depending on whether or not you're Paragon or Renegade. I don't see much need for there to be any difference with Synthesis, but, if Shepard's the template for a galaxy, as the Catalyst says, then perhaps represent that in some way? So, the new prevalent ideals are things like strength, ruthlessness, sheer bloody-minded willpower, etc. Realistically, however, an epilogue which discusses the fates of races, based on your decisions, would reflect paragon/renegade choices as it is. That being said, I doubt that Bioware wants to give us too much galaxy-wide epilogue, as they clearly want to make games in the future in the ME universe, and don't want to lock themselves in too tightly...

[Ieldra]

lillitheris wrote...

What I'm trying to find atm is a new method of long-range FTL travel that's still Mass-Effect-y enough to fit the universe but doesn't depend on relays, so that I can propose it for a relay-less Synthesis scenario. My take on the Synthesis is that it de-centralizes technology - many things separate AIs and big machines were needed can now be done with nanotech, integrated symbionts and collective processing power. I can't go quite that far with FTL without things becoming unbalanced, but that's the guideline I'm using.

Nice, sounds interesting. The thing of it is that we know that it's technologically possible to achieve the relay transit, so it's not magic (so to speak). Still, even the asari were at least hundreds, possibly thousands of years away from understanding the technology involved. Synthesis would probably gain the access to that vast amount of knowledge, so I don't really see any reason why they couldn't be rebuilt – or indeed another system devised. A counterpoint would be that the Reapers themselves, despite being heavily networked, still use the same mechanism. So they don't have the answer off the shelf either

Find my proposal in this thread. BTW, I think the technology is mainly understood - else Aethyta wouldn't have suggested to build new relays in ME2. The problem is resources. Explanation in the linked thread.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 20 avril 2012 - 11:41 .

[d1ta]

 

So, maybe the most plausible thing would be that you go for the Investigate option, “why should I believe you?”, and the Catalyst says that it's going to upload some schematic data to the fleet; a moment later, it opens some communication shield (which has been preventing you from getting comms earlier), and among the cacophony of the fleet in battle, you hear Hackett, EDI, Dr. Lok or someone try to hail: “Commander Shepard? Commander? We received schematics and analysis, are you transmitting this? They show that the Crucible plans were correct, but there's something preventing it from firing. You can release the destructive ray by disabling the thingamajic somewhere nearby place, it looks like; EDI also says that there's some kind of a code repository there with Reaper command structure modifications that could be used if they could be beamed to the Reapers, but she can't get access to it. There's also some really weird schematics for nanotech that seem something like the ones in the husks but not quite. Commander, we can only hold off for a few minutes before the Reapers get to the Crucible, what is going on?! What's the situ-” with the Catalyst then closing the comms shield.

Hey, this is cool... I can sense the urgency of the situation where Shepard is forced to do something NOW with the limited knowledge that s/he has in this scenario. Adds more drama to it I think (for me anyways ) 

Although my original idea was really having Shep 'investigate' the tube/console/whatever there on her own and try to make her personal assesment. The reaper kid would still try to say something to Shep, She just went, "Lalalalaa.. Can't hear you..(ignores)..," while continuing to examine the curious looking tube with her omnitool (well, the crucible schematics are available already. would it make sense if Shep can partially figure what/how the crucible work/operates? Or just have a few hunches about it now that she's in the control room?)

Well anyways, still like your idea better than mine, though..  

[Versidious]

Ieldra2 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

What I'm trying to find atm is a new method of long-range FTL travel that's still Mass-Effect-y enough to fit the universe but doesn't depend on relays, so that I can propose it for a relay-less Synthesis scenario. My take on the Synthesis is that it de-centralizes technology - many things separate AIs and big machines were needed can now be done with nanotech, integrated symbionts and collective processing power. I can't go quite that far with FTL without things becoming unbalanced, but that's the guideline I'm using.

Nice, sounds interesting. The thing of it is that we know that it's technologically possible to achieve the relay transit, so it's not magic (so to speak). Still, even the asari were at least hundreds, possibly thousands of years away from understanding the technology involved. Synthesis would probably gain the access to that vast amount of knowledge, so I don't really see any reason why they couldn't be rebuilt – or indeed another system devised. A counterpoint would be that the Reapers themselves, despite being heavily networked, still use the same mechanism. So they don't have the answer off the shelf either

Find my proposal in this thread. BTW, I think the technology is mainly understood - else Aethyta wouldn't have suggested to build new relays in ME2. The problem is resources. Explanation in the linked thread.

I'd always thought that the problem was not simply limited resources, but limited will vs resources, much like with current space programs. Sure, in short order we could travel to other worlds in this solar system, if we really wanted to, but there are other things we'd rather spend our money on, when the benefits seem so small compared with those. Likewise, in ME, there is already a network of relays that provides all that the current galactic civilisations actually *need*, so there's not really any motivation for them to expend a lot of resources on building new mass relays! So I wonder if they'll just be trying to build new mass relays from the off, or if, as you propose, they'll be trying to get some new kind of technology! Though, with Mass Relays, you have the advantage of them being dedicated mass effect generators, that do not have to move their own structure.

[Versidious]

d1ta wrote...

 

So, maybe the most plausible thing would be that you go for the Investigate option, “why should I believe you?”, and the Catalyst says that it's going to upload some schematic data to the fleet; a moment later, it opens some communication shield (which has been preventing you from getting comms earlier), and among the cacophony of the fleet in battle, you hear Hackett, EDI, Dr. Lok or someone try to hail: “Commander Shepard? Commander? We received schematics and analysis, are you transmitting this? They show that the Crucible plans were correct, but there's something preventing it from firing. You can release the destructive ray by disabling the thingamajic somewhere nearby place, it looks like; EDI also says that there's some kind of a code repository there with Reaper command structure modifications that could be used if they could be beamed to the Reapers, but she can't get access to it. There's also some really weird schematics for nanotech that seem something like the ones in the husks but not quite. Commander, we can only hold off for a few minutes before the Reapers get to the Crucible, what is going on?! What's the situ-” with the Catalyst then closing the comms shield.

Hey, this is cool... I can sense the urgency of the situation where Shepard is forced to do something NOW with the limited knowledge that s/he has in this scenario. Adds more drama to it I think (for me anyways ) 

Although my original idea was really having Shep 'investigate' the tube/console/whatever there on her own and try to make her personal assesment. The reaper kid would still try to say something to Shep, She just went, "Lalalalaa.. Can't hear you..(ignores)..," while continuing to examine the curious looking tube with her omnitool (well, the crucible schematics are available already. would it make sense if Shep can partially figure what/how the crucible work/operates? Or just have a few hunches about it now that she's in the control room?)

Well anyways, still like your idea better than mine, though..  

The trouble is, any information coming from the Catalyst must be treated with the same suspicion that the Catalyst's initial statement is. We can assume that if it's clever enough to design and build Reapers, and is capable of lying to you, that it would be capable of falsifying technological documents just as quickly as it would be able to understand them and explain itself to your allies. The only solution I can see is to have Hackett himself tell you that there ought to be a trigger mechanism near where you are, and to look around for it, when he first informs
you that it's not working. Eg,

"Shepard! Shepard, can you hear us? We can't trigger it from this end, the scientists say the energy flow's not right. There should be a device near where the beam hits the citadel to alter it. Can you find it? Shepard? Shepard, come in!" Or something like that.

[Ieldra]

Versidious, I was trying to make the endings more different by proposing that there would be different primary ways to travel between the stars after Destroy, Control or Synthesis. Mainly, the idea was that Destroy results in the most restrictive scenario with travel limited to non-jump FTL, albeit much improved over time, Control results in the relays being repaired in fairly short order, and Synthesis results in something new. I would've preferred the Synthesis version to be even more exotic, but then I feel it wouldn't have been Mass Effect any more.

[lillitheris]

Good stuff all around, thanks! I'll get to responding after some housekeeping

[Versidious]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Versidious, I was trying to make the endings more different by proposing that there would be different primary ways to travel between the stars after Destroy, Control or Synthesis. Mainly, the idea was that Destroy results in the most restrictive scenario with travel limited to non-jump FTL, albeit much improved over time, Control results in the relays being repaired in fairly short order, and Synthesis results in something new. I would've preferred the Synthesis version to be even more exotic, but then I feel it wouldn't have been Mass Effect any more.

Well, the hints from devs at PAX etc have been that the most likely method is that in Destroy, the Reapers will be getting cannibalised for their FTL drives, which are of course highly efficient, have twice the maximum (observed) speed, and so on. Presumably in Synthesis it would be quite similar, but done with the Reapers' aid, perhaps. In Control, the relays are supposed to be ruined, but not annihilated, and hence fixable. Whilst I appreciate your goal, I would say that there is an issue with making the travel mechanisms too different, that issue being future games set in this universe can't vary too much in their basic mechanisms. I just can't see Bioware wanting to set up significantly different travel methods for what could otherwise be significantly different travelling methods?
I think (SPECULATIONS!   ) that Bioware probably wants the universe to ultimately end up the same, regardless of what happens to the relays and FTL immediately afterwards, but perhaps take different paths there. The easiest way, therefore, is just to have the relays to be directly repaired/replaced. Of course, the problem with my theory is that Synthesis, as you say, is a weird outcome, and does somewhat create issues with having a future game in the universe anyway, unless it turns out thaat Synthesis just basically means we're a bit cleverer, have shiny green tattoos and eyes, and no longer have to defecate (And also that Joker's Vrolik's syndrome is cured so he can actually get it on with EDI, which I think we all want for the dude).

[lillitheris]

Versidious wrote...

Well, the hints from devs at PAX etc have been that the most likely method is that in Destroy, the Reapers will be getting cannibalised for their FTL drives, which are of course highly efficient, have twice the maximum (observed) speed, and so on. Presumably in Synthesis it would be quite similar, but done with the Reapers' aid, perhaps. In Control, the relays are supposed to be ruined, but not annihilated, and hence fixable. Whilst I appreciate your goal, I would say that there is an issue with making the travel mechanisms too different, that issue being future games set in this universe can't vary too much in their basic mechanisms. I just can't see Bioware wanting to set up significantly different travel methods for what could otherwise be significantly different travelling methods?

This is probably correct. I have the feeling that they changed the plan of not allowing any events after the end of ME3 and had to converge the endings slightly. They're certainly not completely the same, but I think there's enough common ground that they can be fitted in the same game. Actually, honestly, Control would probably be the most divergent. Synthesis is basically (in their original vision) the same as Destroy but with green bits.

…Still a little busy for a more substantial reply. And silently cursing at the various 500-reply topics consisting of only complaints and countercomplaints (Actually it's a little but it's the way of the world.)

[lillitheris]

Added a note about the option to fail in the OP:

There should also be that option to fail that was promised. No, not CRITICAL MISSION FAILURE. If you fail at the end – any time on Earth, even? – you should get a cinematic showing the destruction of the various planets (including yahg!), and the Reapers retreating after fixing up the Citadel and so on. Then, cut to 50 000 years later, and some aliens finding Liara's time capsule. Maybe they could be playing it in the Citadel, with some people speaking in a funny language explaining the meaning of the thing while the Reaper hologram, Shepard, and so on flicker in the air.

[Redbelle]

lillitheris wrote...

Added a note about the option to fail in the OP:

There should also be that option to fail that was promised. No, not CRITICAL MISSION FAILURE. If you fail at the end – any time on Earth, even? – you should get a cinematic showing the destruction of the various planets (including yahg!), and the Reapers retreating after fixing up the Citadel and so on. Then, cut to 50 000 years later, and some aliens finding Liara's time capsule. Maybe they could be playing it in the Citadel, with some people speaking in a funny language explaining the meaning of the thing while the Reaper hologram, Shepard, and so on flicker in the air.

Personally I would have liked to see a 'Reapers win' scenario like the one suggested. But also an option for Shep to use the catalyst to spread dark energy throughout the galaxy collapsing all suns and thereby ending all organic life.... Ok I can hear a collective sharp intake of breath but I've been considering the following logic process. If Shepard used the catalyst to destroy all life in the galaxy and not the Reapers, Reapers would be unable to carry out their primary directive to harvest advanced organic species. Since that was their given MO they would have to decide how to approach the problem of having a Shep who might or might not push the button and remove their reason for existing. It's essentially a MAD scenario which places the fate of the galaxy squarely in the hands of the player which could be 'conversation wheeled' to convince the Reapers to stop, or used to end all organic life.

[Redbelle]

Ieldra2 wrote...


I think (SPECULATIONS!   ) that Bioware probably wants the universe to ultimately end up the same, regardless of what happens to the relays and FTL immediately afterwards, but perhaps take different paths there

I been thinking the same thing. That all the endings were the same because ni ME4 (I hope and dream) the universe need to be in a state that we the players arrive in it feeling that it is not the same galaxy we've been stomping around in.

[lillitheris]

Redbelle wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Added a note about the option to fail in the OP:

There should also be that option to fail that was promised. No, not CRITICAL MISSION FAILURE. If you fail at the end – any time on Earth, even? – you should get a cinematic showing the destruction of the various planets (including yahg!), and the Reapers retreating after fixing up the Citadel and so on. Then, cut to 50 000 years later, and some aliens finding Liara's time capsule. Maybe they could be playing it in the Citadel, with some people speaking in a funny language explaining the meaning of the thing while the Reaper hologram, Shepard, and so on flicker in the air.

Personally I would have liked to see a 'Reapers win' scenario like the one suggested. But also an option for Shep to use the catalyst to spread dark energy throughout the galaxy collapsing all suns and thereby ending all organic life.... Ok I can hear a collective sharp intake of breath but I've been considering the following logic process. If Shepard used the catalyst to destroy all life in the galaxy and not the Reapers, Reapers would be unable to carry out their primary directive to harvest advanced organic species. Since that was their given MO they would have to decide how to approach the problem of having a Shep who might or might not push the button and remove their reason for existing. It's essentially a MAD scenario which places the fate of the galaxy squarely in the hands of the player which could be 'conversation wheeled' to convince the Reapers to stop, or used to end all organic life.

This is an interesting scenario, although I'm afraid that it's also got some fatal (hahah) flaws, foremost of which is that there's very little time for negotiations It broadly mirrors the current situation: you're presenting a credible threat, so the Catalyst is already treating.

Also, if this were the road taken, we'd need to develop some kind of a plausible mechanism for this dark energy surge and, in particular, how it was achieved with the Crucible! Daunting task :happy:

[Ieldra]

I certainly hope they won't make any games set after ME3. What's the point of the final choice, if it doesn't make the post-Reapers civilizations drastically different.

I believe that the ending was made the way it was exactly because they didn't want any Mass Effect games set after ME3 - neither by Bioware nor by another EA division. That was the whole point of the "destruction of galactic civilization".

[lillitheris]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I certainly hope they won't make any games set after ME3. What's the point of the final choice, if it doesn't make the post-Reapers civilizations drastically different.

I believe that the ending was made the way it was exactly because they didn't want any Mass Effect games set after ME3 - neither by Bioware nor by another EA division. That was the whole point of the "destruction of galactic civilization".

But it's not destroyed after all

Maybe they did figure out that it wouldn't go over too well with the players, although given their track record, they're not batting too well in that area. Or maybe they figured out that most people wouldn't be very interested in pre-ME events (I certainly am less so, even if it required canonicizing a certain ME3 outcome). There does seem to have been some kind of a change either way, and I think it's rather convergent than divergent. I could definitely be wrong, though.

[Ieldra]

lillitheris wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

I certainly hope they won't make any games set after ME3. What's the point of the final choice, if it doesn't make the post-Reapers civilizations drastically different.

I believe that the ending was made the way it was exactly because they didn't want any Mass Effect games set after ME3 - neither by Bioware nor by another EA division. That was the whole point of the "destruction of galactic civilization".

But it's not destroyed after all

Maybe they did figure out that it wouldn't go over too well with the players, although given their track record, they're not batting too well in that area. Or maybe they figured out that most people wouldn't be very interested in pre-ME events (I certainly am less so, even if it required canonicizing a certain ME3 outcome). There does seem to have been some kind of a change either way, and I think it's rather convergent than divergent. I could definitely be wrong, though.

I don't  think it's possible to integrate the Synthesis into a unified after-the-Reapers scenario. And what would be the point of that ending in that case?  I think the change in attitude is a reaction to the fans. They recognized that it makes no sense to start a story about saving a civilization only to destroy it in the end, so they'll some "happy stuff" to the endings to make them less depressing. Which may include rebuilding relays in short order in some endings. I don't recall exactly what was said, but I recall someone saying that there's the idea of balanciung Shepard's against the rebuilding of galactic civilization. That would be OK with me.

[Redbelle]

lillitheris wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Added a note about the option to fail in the OP:

There should also be that option to fail that was promised. No, not CRITICAL MISSION FAILURE. If you fail at the end – any time on Earth, even? – you should get a cinematic showing the destruction of the various planets (including yahg!), and the Reapers retreating after fixing up the Citadel and so on. Then, cut to 50 000 years later, and some aliens finding Liara's time capsule. Maybe they could be playing it in the Citadel, with some people speaking in a funny language explaining the meaning of the thing while the Reaper hologram, Shepard, and so on flicker in the air.

Personally I would have liked to see a 'Reapers win' scenario like the one suggested. But also an option for Shep to use the catalyst to spread dark energy throughout the galaxy collapsing all suns and thereby ending all organic life.... Ok I can hear a collective sharp intake of breath but I've been considering the following logic process. If Shepard used the catalyst to destroy all life in the galaxy and not the Reapers, Reapers would be unable to carry out their primary directive to harvest advanced organic species. Since that was their given MO they would have to decide how to approach the problem of having a Shep who might or might not push the button and remove their reason for existing. It's essentially a MAD scenario which places the fate of the galaxy squarely in the hands of the player which could be 'conversation wheeled' to convince the Reapers to stop, or used to end all organic life.

This is an interesting scenario, although I'm afraid that it's also got some fatal (hahah) flaws, foremost of which is that there's very little time for negotiations It broadly mirrors the current situation: you're presenting a credible threat, so the Catalyst is already treating.

Also, if this were the road taken, we'd need to develop some kind of a plausible mechanism for this dark energy surge and, in particular, how it was achieved with the Crucible! Daunting task :happy:

Fatal flaws indeed, but in Shepard we trust and I will carry out my mission or die trying..... ok maybe not that last part.

Dark Energy was touched on in ME2 when we picked Tali up. We know it can shorten the life span of a star. Conrad (bless his fanboy little heart), has written a paper on dark energy and if he lives, hands it over to the crucible project. This gives us a tentative link between the crucible and dark energy.

Now the bit that had me scurrying around reading crumbs from leaked sources about alternative ending BW had written. In one end the use of Eezo cores creates dark energy. Therefore without the Reapers to kill off advanced races the creation of dark energy would continue unabated. The catalsyt was in this version of event's a tool to destroy dark energy. With a bit of engineer wizardry and alot of duct tape the catalyst could create dark energy and feed it through the mass relays, destabilising all suns and causing them to nova before the next cycle.

One flaw in this logic. If the catalyst can accomlish the goal of the Reapers, why harvest advanced races. Well, Reapers are a bit thick.....And stubborn. and above all, programmed, (I think). They have a signal that indoctrinates organic life to their way of thinking..... but Reapers are also partially organic so I can't see how they themselves could avoid being indoctrinated by their own signal. Somewhere in the codex I believe an entry exists that states that ppl who recieve and are indoctrinated in turn become a Indoc transmitter. Extrapolate from that and the Reapers are themselves indoctrinated.

Whew, ok I'm done.

[Redbelle]

On the topic of negotiations, well Shepard having his finger on the button of a galicatic civilisation ending for all time bomb would warrent very little negotiation. He could simply go with "Hi Reapers, I'm Commander Shepard. And this fingers hovering over the biggest red button on the citadel........ Run"!

One thing I've never understood is why the Reapers never try to seperate the catalyst from the citadel once it's docked.

Modifié par Redbelle, 20 avril 2012 - 10:17 .

[lillitheris]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I don't  think it's possible to integrate the Synthesis into a unified after-the-Reapers scenario. And what would be the point of that ending in that case?

I don't think we can apply the normal criteria of “sensible” to anything to do with the endings   Against an external enemy (or some types of internal, like the krogan?), synthesis would work just as well. It is, admittedly, a remote possibility.

I think the change in attitude is a reaction to the fans. They recognized that it makes no sense to start a story about saving a civilization only to destroy it in the end, so they'll some "happy stuff" to the endings to make them less depressing. Which may include rebuilding relays in short order in some endings. I don't recall exactly what was said, but I recall someone saying that there's the idea of balanciung Shepard's against the rebuilding of galactic civilization. That would be OK with me.

I don't mean this last change, really. It seems to me that this could partially be the impetus for the entire ending change in the fall sometime. Originally their 16 endings were more divergent. But that might be just hopeful thinking. Or hopeless, I'm not really sure.

Haven't had the time to read your FTL topic yet, I'll try to get to it soon.

[lillitheris]

Redbelle wrote...

Now the bit that had me scurrying around reading crumbs from leaked sources about alternative ending BW had written. In one end the use of Eezo cores creates dark energy. Therefore without the Reapers to kill off advanced races the creation of dark energy would continue unabated. The catalsyt was in this version of event's a tool to destroy dark energy. With a bit of engineer wizardry and alot of duct tape the catalyst could create dark energy and feed it through the mass relays, destabilising all suns and causing them to nova before the next cycle.

I suppose, but…in a quarter hour, without any access to the outside world?  I think it could work, overall, but it'd require both some preparation, and some foreshadowing to be a viable option. Just adding it on, I think, might be a little too much!

I guess the way – or ways – that I see the ending is that you've either already forced the Catalyst into the negotiation with your credible threat of Destroy, or then you've more or less lost and the Catalyst is dictating all the terms. In the former case, Destroy is what you came to do anyway and the Catalyst could also be trying to play it down to get you to choose one of its preferred options.

[SkaldFish]

@lillitheris: Just want to say (1) I'll admit it -- in the clutter I hadn't even seen this thread until I noticed your blog post when I went to the blog list a few minutes ago & thought "hmmm... must check this out..." (2) You've done an amazing job in your op of working within BioWare's stated constraints (as we understand them) to describe what an acceptable solution might look like. It's not what most of us really want, of course, but it describes solutions I would definitely find acceptable. Very nice work!!!

[Ieldra]

lillitheris wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

I don't  think it's possible to integrate the Synthesis into a unified after-the-Reapers scenario. And what would be the point of that ending in that case?

I don't think we can apply the normal criteria of “sensible” to anything to do with the endings   Against an external enemy (or some types of internal, like the krogan?), synthesis would work just as well. It is, admittedly, a remote possibility.

No, what I mean is that they can't continue the ME universe in a way that unifies all the endings into one canonical scenario. They'd have to choose one outsome as canonical and disregard the others. There can't be a future that's more or less the same post-Control and post-Synthesis. 

Haven't had the time to read your FTL topic yet, I'll try to get to it soon.

Best comment on this thread. I've integrated it there because there didn't appear to be much interest in it as a separate thread.

[Versidious]

lillitheris wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

Now the bit that had me scurrying around reading crumbs from leaked sources about alternative ending BW had written. In one end the use of Eezo cores creates dark energy. Therefore without the Reapers to kill off advanced races the creation of dark energy would continue unabated. The catalsyt was in this version of event's a tool to destroy dark energy. With a bit of engineer wizardry and alot of duct tape the catalyst could create dark energy and feed it through the mass relays, destabilising all suns and causing them to nova before the next cycle.

I suppose, but…in a quarter hour, without any access to the outside world?  I think it could work, overall, but it'd require both some preparation, and some foreshadowing to be a viable option. Just adding it on, I think, might be a little too much!

I guess the way – or ways – that I see the ending is that you've either already forced the Catalyst into the negotiation with your credible threat of Destroy, or then you've more or less lost and the Catalyst is dictating all the terms. In the former case, Destroy is what you came to do anyway and the Catalyst could also be trying to play it down to get you to choose one of its preferred options.

The Dark Energy concept, whilst interesting, doesn't really work. For one thing, it's a real life phenomenon - there is a constant increase in the levels of Dark Energy in our universe, along with a constant decrease in Matter and Radiation, the other two components of our universe. But it really is everywhere in our universe. It wouldn't really work unless the Reapers were a universe wide phenomenon. It also wouldn't make sense for the Reapers to guide us along a technological path which heavily utilises dark energy, if they were trying to reduce it. My guess is that this is why they rejected it as a plotline.
Having said that, holding the Reapers to ransom with a Doomsday Device is rather Captain Kirk (A good thing, obviously, I can just imagine it: "You wouldn't. Your people also would be destroyed!" "Try me! I'm organic, I'm irrational, I might do ANYTHING!"), but as lillitheris says, it's a bit out of the blue. Bioware would have to do far more work on the rest of the game if they did that!

I mean, honestly, it would've worked better if they'd not explained the Reapers' motives to us, and just left loads of clues and red herrings around the place. The current ending leaves them, as mentioned by Redbelle, as stupid, nonsensical robot  slaves, instead of grim, mysterious, ancient machine-gods.

On that subject, has anyone else replayed ME1 recently, and felt really bad about beating up EDI, now we know who she is?

[TheRognik]

lillitheris wrote...

Destroy: Shepard hopes to live, and save his/her loved ones, but the immediate future may be harder (war cleanup, vying for power, the salarian/krogan situation maybe escalating…), and the more distant future is uncertain – the synthetic war will yet come, if the krogans don't rebel first. But there's hope, and there's the now. Relays may be dysfunctional (see below) or possibly even destroyed.

Nothing could be further from the truth about why I picked the Destroy ending. The Starbrat made it clear I would die no matter what- I couldn't make decisions about what I did not know. Additionally, far from saving all of my loved ones, this ending killed some of them, such as EDI. Watching the Normandy flee the explosion is much more tragic if you view it as a desperate attempt by Joker to save his lover, which is how I viewed it at the time, not realizing how he does the same thing in every ending. If I wanted to save my loved ones at any cost, I would have chosen control, because then I could theoretically tell the the Reapers to go fly into the sun.

Secondly, the immediate future would not be harder at all, because I took great pains to make sure that it wouldn't be. I united the Krogan under the only two politically moderate people in their race. The Salarians are united with all the others because of my friend Captain Kirrahe and the Salarian Councilor who I saved... twice. I made the Quarians and the Geth not only make peace, but become symbiotic. Far from harder, the immediate future is brighter than it ever has been in the history of the galaxy.

In short, I picked destroy because it was the only thing that had any similarity to the goal I had been working toward in all three games - freedom, peace, and unity through tolerance and the destruction of the Reapers. Choosing control was immediately unthinkable - I had just watched the Illusive Man blow his brains out because that was imposible. Synthesis was simply idiotic -  it is philosophically identical to melting humans down to make Reapers. It would eliminate all genetic diversity; it represents the antithesis of tolerance and freedom. It represents homogenization.

So no, I refuse to accept that the destroy ending was all about me trying to save myself at the expense of the galaxy. It is literally the only ending that makes the ending feel at all connected to a playthrough like mine. Yes, it may represent genocide... but given only these incredibly stupid and terrible choices, I would rather murder a significant portion of the galaxy to prevent the entire thing from becoming a wasteland.

Finally, if we are allowed to consider the fact that shepard lives in the destroy ending - if for only a moment - and that tweets from BioWare (it's a sad day when you have to cite Twitter to understand a story) indicate all synthetic life may not have been destroyed after all, Destroy is unquestionably the best ending in my mind.