207 réponses à ce sujet

[The Night Mammoth]

Evil Minion wrote...

In ME2, you blow away "rogue AIs" left and right. That is a fact.

You are presented with examples of AIs behaving badly. You are presented with AIs behaving well. You have to make up your own mind whether you believe synthetics will eventually attempt to wipe out organics.

Whether or not they're "optional" is irrelevant.

Yes it ****ing is. If you're going to explain something as important as the Reaper's motivations in the last five minutes you better make sure the player has enough to back up that revelation. A few optional side missions in a game where this hadn't even been thought of yet isn't enough, evidently.

Whether or not the "rogue AI" mission were "optional" is irrelevant. The Reapers think synthetics will eventually attempt to wipe out organics. You are not required to agree.

Every single species in the galaxy employs "Reaper logic" to some extent. Every. Single. One.

If you missed it, you missed it, but I don't see how you could.

So........... you can't actually prove what you're saying, then. 

Seriously, just give me a single mission (just one now, not a couple) where you encounter a rogue AI whose goal is to destroy all organic life. 

[Annihilator27]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

In ME2, you blow away "rogue AIs" left and right. That is a fact.

You are presented with examples of AIs behaving badly. You are presented with AIs behaving well. You have to make up your own mind whether you believe synthetics will eventually attempt to wipe out organics.

Whether or not they're "optional" is irrelevant.

Yes it ****ing is. If you're going to explain something as important as the Reaper's motivations in the last five minutes you better make sure the player has enough to back up that revelation. A few optional side missions in a game where this hadn't even been thought of yet isn't enough, evidently.

Whether or not the "rogue AI" mission were "optional" is irrelevant. The Reapers think synthetics will eventually attempt to wipe out organics. You are not required to agree.

Every single species in the galaxy employs "Reaper logic" to some extent. Every. Single. One.

If you missed it, you missed it, but I don't see how you could.

So........... you can't actually prove what you're saying, then. 

Seriously, just give me a single mission (just one now, not a couple) where you encounter a rogue AI whose goal is to destroy all organic life. 

Shepard VI annnddd go!!!......If it could become one lmao.

Modifié par annihilator27, 14 avril 2012 - 06:36 .

[jsadalia]

What the geth want and believe now is not necessarily what they will always want and believe. The Star Child's statement was long-term. It might not even have been the geth, but some other future race of synthetics who would destroy organics.

That said, I don't trust the little brat anyway.

[Evil Minion]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

In ME2, you blow away "rogue AIs" left and right. That is a fact.

You are presented with examples of AIs behaving badly. You are presented with AIs behaving well. You have to make up your own mind whether you believe synthetics will eventually attempt to wipe out organics.

Whether or not they're "optional" is irrelevant.

Yes it ****ing is. If you're going to explain something as important as the Reaper's motivations in the last five minutes you better make sure the player has enough to back up that revelation. A few optional side missions in a game where this hadn't even been thought of yet isn't enough, evidently.

Whether or not the "rogue AI" mission were "optional" is irrelevant. The Reapers think synthetics will eventually attempt to wipe out organics. You are not required to agree.

Every single species in the galaxy employs "Reaper logic" to some extent. Every. Single. One.

If you missed it, you missed it, but I don't see how you could.

So........... you can't actually prove what you're saying, then. 

Seriously, just give me a single mission (just one now, not a couple) where you encounter a rogue AI whose goal is to destroy all organic life. 

Where did I say the goal of "rogue AIs" in ME2 was to "destroy all organic life?"

What you're doing is called "attacking a strawman."

And, do you honestly believe that there must be a "rogue AI" whose mission is to "destroy all organic life" for the Reapers to be correct? There doesn't.

In ME2, you blow away "rogue AIs" left and right. You are given evidence of AIs behaving badly. You are given evidence of AIs behaving well.  You make up your own mind as to whether the Reapers are correct.

Modifié par Evil Minion, 14 avril 2012 - 07:11 .

[Verit]

Evil Minion wrote...
In ME2, you blow away "rogue AIs" left and right. You are given evidence of AIs behaving badly. You are given evidence of AIs behaving well.  You make up your own mind as to whether the Reapers are correct.

Then which ending to ME3 really allows you to disagree with the Catalyst? Even the destroy ending still (well, at least until Bioware "clarifies" the ending) wipes out all synthetic life, if only to prove its point that they're a danger that need to be dealt with.

Modifié par -Draikin-, 14 avril 2012 - 07:14 .

[Evil Minion]

-Draikin- wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...
In ME2, you blow away "rogue AIs" left and right. You are given evidence of AIs behaving badly. You are given evidence of AIs behaving well.  You make up your own mind as to whether the Reapers are correct.

Then which ending to ME3 really allows you to disagree with the Catalyst? Even the destroy ending still (well, at least until Bioware "clarifies" the ending) wipes out all synthetic life, if only to prove its point that they're a danger that need to be dealt with.

Depends entirely on your interpretation of the endings.

"Control" and "destroy" both leave the door wide open for synthetics to rebel against organics (Ghostdweeb even says so).

[GeneralBacon339]

 The Geth didn't want to Kill quarians! they did it in self defense and preservation!

The starchild isn't geth he is a "reaper" or (god help me) the creator of the reapers!..... (i feel so... Unclean when i say that.... /shudder)

Some of the Geth were Reprogrammed to worship the reapers, but my shepard at least set the geth free of the reapers.

So no.... They are not contradicting them selves!

Your point is MOOT!

[Spectre Impersonator]

Probably because whoever wrote the last ten minutes didn't understand Mass Effect like the other writers did.

[Leafs43]

GeneralBacon339 wrote...

 The Geth didn't want to Kill quarians! they did it in self defense and preservation!

The starchild isn't geth he is a "reaper" or (god help me) the creator of the reapers!..... (i feel so... Unclean when i say that.... /shudder)

Some of the Geth were Reprogrammed to worship the reapers, but my shepard at least set the geth free of the reapers.

So no.... They are not contradicting them selves!

Your point is MOOT!

Star kid never said the reapers are the ones that will want to wipe out organic life, he specifically said synthetics, like the geth.


/checkmate

[J717]

All I see in this thread is MOAR SPECULATION FROM EVERYONE.

No, seriously - people have good arguments, and while they seem to follow the path of logic - considering what a giant mess the ending is, I would not be surprised if not a single assumption/theory in this thread ends up being true to what BioWare actually releases with the Extended Cut.

[Verit]

Evil Minion wrote...
Depends entirely on your interpretation of the endings.

"Control" and "destroy" both leave the door wide open for synthetics to rebel against organics (Ghostdweeb even says so).

So let's say you disagree with the Catalyst's assertion that synthetics will inevitably end up destroying all organic life. Destroy has Shepard wiping out synthetic life, so you kill the very synthetics that convinced you that they wouldn't harm organic life. Control leaves the door open to restart the cycle if needed, so you're not rejecting the Catalyst's claim at all. Instead you maintain the status quo, believing the Reapers are still needed. Synthesis is the Catalyst's actual solution to the problem. So I don't see too much room for interpretation here.

[sdfgdsfsdfsfs]

Stegoceras wrote...

Starchild may not have meant the Geth at all, come to think of it. He could have been describing a future threat. If the Geth were about to destroy the rest of the galaxy aren't they sort of guessing a bit on the dangerous side with the whole 50,000 year cycle, shouldn't they be better of with a 45,000 year cycle so they have a bigger margin to stop galaxy threatening Synthetics from being created?

That doesn't really help the narrative if true. It's a vague, undefined, potential threat, far far in the future, that we are never exposed to, yet we're supposed to be on board with the radical choices that the Catalyst proposes to deal with it?

Modifié par sdfgdsfsdfsfs, 14 avril 2012 - 07:38 .

[The Night Mammoth]

[quote]Evil Minion wrote...


Where did I say the goal of "rogue AIs" in ME2 was to "destroy all organic life?"[/quote]

You didn't. The Reapers did. You said there was sufficient content to back that up.

[quote]What you're doing is called "attacking a strawman."

And, do you honestly believe that there must be a "rogue AI" whose mission is to "destroy all organic life" for the Reapers to be correct? There doesn't.[/quote]

No. There was to be one to foreshadow the finale.

[quote]In ME2, you blow away "rogue AIs" left and right. You are given evidence of AIs behaving badly. You are given evidence of AIs behaving well.  You make up your own mind as to whether the Reapers are correct.[/quote]

You aren't given evidence to suggest that the goal of synthetic life is to eventually wipe out organic life. Hence wht the ending is out of place, because the game does not support it.





[/quote]

[The Night Mammoth]

Leafs43 wrote...

GeneralBacon339 wrote...

 The Geth didn't want to Kill quarians! they did it in self defense and preservation!

The starchild isn't geth he is a "reaper" or (god help me) the creator of the reapers!..... (i feel so... Unclean when i say that.... /shudder)

Some of the Geth were Reprogrammed to worship the reapers, but my shepard at least set the geth free of the reapers.

So no.... They are not contradicting them selves!

Your point is MOOT!

Star kid never said the reapers are the ones that will want to wipe out organic life, he specifically said synthetics, like the geth.

/checkmate

Still not a contradiction in absolute terms. 

[Leafs43]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...

GeneralBacon339 wrote...

 The Geth didn't want to Kill quarians! they did it in self defense and preservation!

The starchild isn't geth he is a "reaper" or (god help me) the creator of the reapers!..... (i feel so... Unclean when i say that.... /shudder)

Some of the Geth were Reprogrammed to worship the reapers, but my shepard at least set the geth free of the reapers.

So no.... They are not contradicting them selves!

Your point is MOOT!

Star kid never said the reapers are the ones that will want to wipe out organic life, he specifically said synthetics, like the geth.

/checkmate

Still not a contradiction in absolute terms. 

In absolute terms, the reapers end up being fluffy carebears that give hugs and rainbows.

Absolute terms have nothing to do with how the story is presented

[The Night Mammoth]

Leafs43 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...

Star kid never said the reapers are the ones that will want to wipe out organic life, he specifically said synthetics, like the geth.

/checkmate

Still not a contradiction in absolute terms. 

In absolute terms, the reapers end up being fluffy carebears that give hugs and rainbows.

Absolute terms have nothing to do with how the story is presented

If you read a few pages back you'd find a post where I agree, but not in the same sense. 

To paraphrase though, it's a breakdown in narrative cohesion, and a contradiction of narrative purpose. The story doesn't actually support the Catalyst's revelation, but what it actually says doesn't contradict what happens to the Geth.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 14 avril 2012 - 08:07 .

[SilentK]

jsadalia wrote...

What the geth want and believe now is not necessarily what they will always want and believe. The Star Child's statement was long-term. It might not even have been the geth, but some other future race of synthetics who would destroy organics.

That said, I don't trust the little brat anyway.

Jupp, I'm going with this.

The Catalyst operates on such a different timescale, was it 50 000 years? Get the feeling that Reapers simply roll out as soon as the AI:s start's to show up in the galaxy with a "Here we go again"-attitude. Simply because they seen it before. But who knows, it might be that several times when there have been situations between the organics and synthetics before they could have been solved peacefully but the reapers reaped and that was that.

Hmm... it can perhaps be that there has always been some conflict, but it was never allowed to be solved peacefully. I don't trust the Catalyst. But neither do I take the current situation with the Geth as a " And this is how it ends between organics and synthetis, peace forever and ever". That is simply today, or this century, I do not know what happens next.

[Omega Torsk]

To answer the OP: The answer is quite simply- Oooh! Look at the keys! Look at them shake! Over there! Is that- IT IS! Look at the pretty bunny! Look at the pretty bunny!

...Poodles

[goose2989]

TheJiveDJ wrote...

For the love of artistic integrity, can we just ignore these plot holes please? K thanks.

You can't just throw a plothole-filled ending into a story and call it art

[MrAtomica]

They were rushed.

Furthermore, the endings were the product of only two people involved in writing the story.

Granted, this is an opinion of mine, not necessarily fact. But I stand by these two factors as the reasons for the endings being as they are.

[Filanwizard]

The Catalyst could also just be spewing bull****, Remember its job is to wipe out organics capable of space flight every 50,000 years. As such it cannot be trusted.

[Zhuinden]

Leafs43 wrote...

 I'm sure its been asked before, but why would they contradict themselves.in such a fashion?

And it's not like this is a story line right at the beginning of the game either.  It's pretty much the 2nd to last mission before TIM's base.

Because those who wrote the Rannoch mission knew what the game is about, while those who wrote the ending had no clue whatsoever.

Which is why the story of the final ME novel is horrendous as well. It wasn't just the writer, really.
(For the story of ME: Deception, there are links to the Rage Comic which provides a fair amount of laughter. )

Modifié par Zhuinden, 14 avril 2012 - 09:21 .

[The Angry One]

Because Mac Walters wrote the ending on his own, without peer review, while convincing Hudson that it would all totally work out.

[Delta_V2]

To be clear: it's not a direct contradiction in-universe, as the situation with the geth doesn't prove anything long term (nevermind the Catalyst's logic is based on an unfalsifiable claim and thus completely 100% worthless).

But it is a narrative contradiction. Bioware just spent how many hours showing us that synthetics are every bit as worthy of being called 'life' as organices, only to contradict themselves at the end. Contradicting a major theme of your story in the last five minutes is not a good idea.

Modifié par Delta_V2, 14 avril 2012 - 09:41 .