356 réponses à ce sujet

[lillitheris]

SkaldFish wrote...

@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!!!

Thank you, I appreciate it! :happy: It's quite hard to keep any threads visible on the S/C forum especially

[lillitheris]

TheRognik wrote...

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.

Excellent perspective! Thank you, that's good food for thought. I have a few comments, and I want to stress again that I'm not arguing how you're ‘wrong’, but to see if we can find common ground.

The thing about Destroy is that not only do your loved ones live – that's true in the happy version of every ending – but that you're around to enjoy it (potentially, but I never took the Catalyst's words to mean you'd die for certain). The other options provide more intangible benefits for everyone else but you. In that sense, this is the ‘selfish’ choice.

Importantly, this doesn't mean that it's your reason for picking Destroy. It's just an excellent way to balance the endings against eachother. I think I can also change the wording a little bit in the summary to reflect this better.

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.

This one we see most differently, I suppose. I think that without a doubt, Destroy leaves the worst initial scenario. Disregarding the possibility of the destroyed geth/EDI and possibly basically all synthetic stuff (which I find just implausible, and unlikely to be implemented), you're still left without the relays – temporarily or even permanently. The krogans are united…under Wrex. Wrex was fighting on the front lines. Did he survive? Or maybe he'll just get replaced later. That future is a lot dimmer without him around. Or if you don't have Wrex, the krogans will figure out the hoax cure sooner or later. That's the only ending where the Salarians are actually united – in the others, you only have Kirrahe and the Councilor's personal grant of a single fleet. Either way, there can be repercussions. Earth's still in bad shape, the fleet's in bad shape, etc., etc.

In both Control and Synthesis, you have an externalities that will help – relays not destroyed, or reaper tech at your disposal, whatever Synthesis actually does, and so on :happy:

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.

I'd objectively note that (apparently) Control and Synthesis can actually work out reasonably well but of course the in-character perspective is important, and in that sense this is a perfectly valid approach. It's in fact very close to how Eevy and Jean would make their decision.

Modifié par lillitheris, 21 avril 2012 - 01:28 .

[lillitheris]

Versidious wrote...

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.

Agree. What really baffles me is that they want LOTS OF SPECULATION…and then remove the main source of speculation. It would have worked best if they had just hinted via reaper speeches that they're just harvesting civilizations in different galaxies to build more of themselves. Even stating that outright might have been more reasonable than this nonsense about saving organics.

But, I work with what I've been given!

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

Yes, but no. Tough love!

[lillitheris]

Note about possible Shepard decommissioning.

[lillitheris]

Versidious wrote...

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.

That makes a certain amount of sense, but it's got two problems: first, you need to have a comm channel to Hackett, and secondly – if we take it at face value that they can somehow remote-scan the area – you're only left with Destroy in that case. Especially if/when the Catalyst is certainly monitoring the area, it might not be happy with just letting Shepard go for Destroy.

There's essentially no way to be 100% certain, and we have some other constraints (like a constant connection to the radio enabling all kinds of things they don't want enabled). Within that framework, I think that uploading the data would be the most reasonable assurance that can be given. Perhaps it could be further tempered with them sending back schematic data to your omnitool, showing that their guesses correspond exactly with the locations the Catalyst points out? It'd act as semi-independent verification.

[Ukjack44]

There are alot of people who are talking sense in this thread, yet I still stand by my opinion in saying that it is poorly written. Just why does everything have to echo from reality... Martyrdom, sacrifice and the greater good. Yes this appeals to the older generation rather than school kids but as much as I find these topics important in life, I do not particularly enjoy seeing so much of it in games. Especially in a game about choices leading to cause and effect.

I'm not one of those people crying out for a happy ending, I just wanted an ending where I could finally put the game down and smile to myself and say "I quite enjoyed that". If I want to be depressed I'll pick up a Newspaper.

[lillitheris]

Ukjack44 wrote...

There are alot of people who are talking sense in this thread, yet I still stand by my opinion in saying that it is poorly written.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. Sadly, the pro-end contingent seems to have been completely silent here, and we're missing their – no sarcasm – valuable input.

But, it's what we got, and it seems unlikely that we'll be getting radically different endings, so this is what we've got to work with.

I'm not one of those people crying out for a happy ending, I just wanted an ending where I could finally put the game down and smile to myself and say "I quite enjoyed that". If I want to be depressed I'll pick up a Newspaper.

Can you tell me what that would entail? Or if you don't want to invent the entire thing yourself, take a stroll through the OP and point out your trouble spots with Destroy, for example.

Modifié par lillitheris, 21 avril 2012 - 07:34 .

[Versidious]

lillitheris wrote...

Versidious wrote...

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.

Agree. What really baffles me is that they want LOTS OF SPECULATION…and then remove the main source of speculation. It would have worked best if they had just hinted via reaper speeches that they're just harvesting civilizations in different galaxies to build more of themselves. Even stating that outright might have been more reasonable than this nonsense about saving organics.

But, I work with what I've been given!

If I'd been designing the campaign, I'd have had the Reapers doing mysterious things which we investigate, as well as harvesting during it. Probably to do with Dark Energy...

lillitheris wrote...

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

Yes, but no. Tough love!

Right! On my new playthrough, I'll just have to keep telling myself that it's 'tough love'!  :-P

[wiggums91]

Absolutely perfect. I can see you poured a lot of time and effort into this, and bioware should really read.

[Versidious]

lillitheris wrote...

Versidious wrote...

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.

That makes a certain amount of sense, but it's got two problems: first, you need to have a comm channel to Hackett, and secondly – if we take it at face value that they can somehow remote-scan the area – you're only left with Destroy in that case. Especially if/when the Catalyst is certainly monitoring the area, it might not be happy with just letting Shepard go for Destroy.

There's essentially no way to be 100% certain, and we have some other constraints (like a constant connection to the radio enabling all kinds of things they don't want enabled). Within that framework, I think that uploading the data would be the most reasonable assurance that can be given. Perhaps it could be further tempered with them sending back schematic data to your omnitool, showing that their guesses correspond exactly with the locations the Catalyst points out? It'd act as semi-independent verification.

I meant when Hackett tells you its not working, and that there's something at your end that has to be done, right before you get starchilded. Now he would actually elaborate a bit, tell more about you what you're looking for, make it clear that there is definitely something nearby that triggers the device, and that it's neccesary to do it because, although the Catalyst is connected, the connection isn't right/complete and needs changing/completing, which would fit in with the choice you have to make. It has to still be short, obviously, but can be a bit more specific so that what the Catalyst tells you fits in a bit more with what you know. This then also somewhat alleviates the Catalyst being untrustworthy, as it has now confirmed what we already know, and then elaborated, demonstrating that it is telling the truth about *something*.

[Ukjack44]

lillitheris wrote...

Can you tell me what that would entail? Or if you don't want to invent the entire thing yourself, take a stroll through the OP and point out your trouble spots with Destroy, for example.

I do really like some of your ideas, as the saying goes you are "making lemonade out of lemons". The pro-end supporters I spoke to say I just dislike the ending because I didn't get a happy ending or Liara and Garrus were no where to be seen. Which is partially true, but I after I have poured many hours into this game, I do want to feel like I was victorious once I finished it. Hell I would of been happy to see my 6000+EMS in action, giving me that sense of achievement. Alas I am stuck with more questions than I had at the beginning of the trilogy, combined with the feeling that I should of never picked up the first game.

[lillitheris]

wiggums91 wrote...

Absolutely perfect. I can see you poured a lot of time and effort into this, and bioware should really read.

Thanks! I can't take all the credit, the discussions in this and a few other threads have been really great.

If you've anything to add, don't hesitate!

[lillitheris]

Versidious wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Versidious wrote...

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.

That makes a certain amount of sense, but it's got two problems: first, you need to have a comm channel to Hackett, and secondly – if we take it at face value that they can somehow remote-scan the area – you're only left with Destroy in that case. Especially if/when the Catalyst is certainly monitoring the area, it might not be happy with just letting Shepard go for Destroy.

There's essentially no way to be 100% certain, and we have some other constraints (like a constant connection to the radio enabling all kinds of things they don't want enabled). Within that framework, I think that uploading the data would be the most reasonable assurance that can be given. Perhaps it could be further tempered with them sending back schematic data to your omnitool, showing that their guesses correspond exactly with the locations the Catalyst points out? It'd act as semi-independent verification.

I meant when Hackett tells you its not working, and that there's something at your end that has to be done, right before you get starchilded. Now he would actually elaborate a bit, tell more about you what you're looking for, make it clear that there is definitely something nearby that triggers the device, and that it's neccesary to do it because, although the Catalyst is connected, the connection isn't right/complete and needs changing/completing, which would fit in with the choice you have to make. It has to still be short, obviously, but can be a bit more specific so that what the Catalyst tells you fits in a bit more with what you know. This then also somewhat alleviates the Catalyst being untrustworthy, as it has now confirmed what we already know, and then elaborated, demonstrating that it is telling the truth about *something*.

Hmm, I can see that. But, if we start on the line of suspicion…maybe the Catalyst has been listening in and knows that you're expecting to find a destroy button, and cleverly points you in the wrong direction for that? Plus you still have the problem that you only know about one option, and that Hackett needs some kind of a scanner ability.

It's definitely not implausible, but overall it's not really crucially better than my alternative. Both would probably work if done right.

Needs some more musing!

[lillitheris]

Hm, I actually have an idea regarding that now. I'll see if standing in the shower helps me think as it usually does, or if it'll have to wait for sleep processing to either approve or reject :happy:

Modifié par lillitheris, 21 avril 2012 - 10:04 .

[lillitheris]

Ukjack44 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Can you tell me what that would entail? Or if you don't want to invent the entire thing yourself, take a stroll through the OP and point out your trouble spots with Destroy, for example.

I do really like some of your ideas, as the saying goes you are "making lemonade out of lemons". The pro-end supporters I spoke to say I just dislike the ending because I didn't get a happy ending or Liara and Garrus were no where to be seen. Which is partially true, but I after I have poured many hours into this game, I do want to feel like I was victorious once I finished it. Hell I would of been happy to see my 6000+EMS in action, giving me that sense of achievement. Alas I am stuck with more questions than I had at the beginning of the trilogy, combined with the feeling that I should of never picked up the first game.

I know that feeling

Well, please do add any ideas and/or participate in our musings!

[lillitheris]

lillitheris wrote...

Hm, I actually have an idea regarding that now. I'll see if standing in the shower helps me think as it usually does, or if it'll have to wait for sleep processing to either approve or reject :happy:

No, even my mighty sleep processing powers failed to resolve this

I'll try to formulate a way to get the alternative mechanism in…I think I need to reformat the OP a little anyway. The flow is pretty good and I think it reads quite easily, but it can seem unnecessarily daunting, I suppose, so maybe breaking it up into three sections would help correct that perception.


Still looking for more Renegade and/or pro-end perspectives! :happy:

[Graius]

I like this.

[lillitheris]

Graius wrote...

I like this.

Thanks! <3

…

I added Versidious' alternative to the Catalyst logic and rephrased my version to a be a little less verbose.

[lillitheris]

I really just can't believe that we've not gotten a single pro-end perspective here. Can anyone fix that?

[lillitheris]

Added some more in the Clarification cinematics section and reformatted a bit elsewhere.

[lillitheris]

Monday morning bump. I have some additional content, and then I'll need to start pruning, I think, to make sure the text doesn't get overly bloated.

Still looking for more renegade/pro-end perspective…

[lillitheris]

Rewrote the first half, but only managed to remove some 100 words altogether. There's just so much to fix! :happy:

[lillitheris]

End of the first part redone, although I think I added more than removed…I'm probably at -75 words altogether now.

[lillitheris]

*facepalm* Of course the Synthesis thread has about three times the participation in about 3 hours as a constructive thread in 2 weeks. I'm not sure how much point there is to this in this environment

[fle6isnow]

Hmm sorry I haven't posted in this thread before, lilitheris! I do think you're making some great work with this. I feel your frustration when people would rather hate on the endings than analyze and try to make something good out of it, I really do.

Honestly, my only problem with the ending as a "pro-ender" is the nonsensical and stupid ending animations. What I would propose is somewhat similar to what you already have:

Control
Low EMS: destroys infrastructure on Earth (and possibly elsewhere), overloads but not destroys the relays, but make it clear that rebuilding is possible since the relay network is still intact and just needs to be reactivated. Teammates die.
Medium EMS: saves infrastructure on Earth, overloads relays, but make it clear they can be reactivated. Teammates live.
High EMS: saves infrastructure on Earth, saves relays. Teammates live.

I think in all cases, the Citadel should be saved as the main "Reaper control" area. It should also be made clear in all cases that Shepard is controlling the Reapers somehow. Someone--pistolos, I think?--suggested that they show this by reactivating the Shepard VI in the refugee area, and have Shepard reaching out, or smiling beatifically... something like that. I think it is a good idea, and I would also like to see the Shepard VI slowly turning into the "being of light" type thing that the Catalyst was before it flickers out.

Synthesis
Low and Medium EMS: not a choice
High EMS: Earth saved, teammates saved, but citadel and relays destroyed
4000+EMS: Earth saved, teammates saved, citadel and relays saved but disabled.

I think they can explain the "space magic" by nano-tech, sure. Or another way would be that synthesis option turns the Crucible into a giant version of the Prothean beacon? I dunno, I'll have to think about how exactly they can do this. The "circuitry" can start subtly on the teammates in this case, like maybe Joker just has the circuitry in his hand instead of everywhere at first.

Destroy

I think this is where we will differ greatly. I think the relays should be destroyed in this ending, no matter what. Destroy is basically the rejection of ALL Reaper tech, and though life will suck a lot for the survivors in the short term, they at least have the hope to be truly self-determining without the threat of Reapers in the long term. The teammates, if alive, should be within a couple of months by standard FTL.

Low EMS: Earth destroyed, citadel destroyed, synthetics destroyed, teammates die.
Medium EMS: Earth saved but devastated, citadel destroyed, synthetics destroyed, teammates saved.
High EMS: Earth saved, citadel disabled but intact, Shepard is dead (can retrieve body for funeral), synthetics disabled (but possibility for reactivation), teammates saved.
4000+EMS: Earth saved, citadel disabled but intact, Shepard lives, teammates live, synthetics live, chance for reunion after several months.

You make a good point about the confirmation from Hackett, but honestly, one of the things I liked about the original ending is that you don't know whether you can trust the Catalyst or not. Maybe Bioware could add a couple of lines for the Catalyst, something like, "you don't have to take any of the choices the Crucible has made possible. But the more you wait, the less chance you have of defeating us. The cycle will continue." This would add the sense of urgency that you have to choose, while still retaining the uncertainty.

The "Reapers win" scenario would just be as you described--instead of the Critical Mission Failure if you take too long, it will have a longer version of the Arrival time-out cutscene showing everything getting devastated by the Reapers. My proposal for the Reapers win scenarios are as such:

Low EMS: everything destroyed, even the yahg, raloi, etc. Liara's boxes do not make an appearance.
Medium EMS: everything destroyed, but you see pyjacks (or some other "primitive" race) examining Liara's boxes
High EMS: everything destroyed, but the Reapers suffer a substantial amount of damage because the sword fleet is strong. Cut to 50,000 years later, and see a new cycle completely prepared to face down the Reapers due to Liara's boxes.