5087 réponses à ce sujet

[Pinax]

generalleo03 wrote...

Well, this doesn't bother me as much as it does others.  Yes, it is a plot hole the size of a crater, but compared to the whole catalyst crap, it is just really small.  Black box development is done all the time.  Its fine to build the crucible and not know exactly what it does in the greater scheme.  But the Catalyst says it is little more than a power source, which begs the question.  If he's had literally millions of years of time, and all it takes to change the variables is a bigger power source, what has he been doing?  Was that really that hard to come up with?  "Well, if I had a bigger power source I could do synthesis, guess I better wait until someone else figures it out..."  Its silly really.  They should have known that the crucible was a power source.  To be honest, in the greater scheme of the ending, that little thing is a small plot hole (relative the to the whole organics vs synthetics coming from nowhere).

Lol, that's true! To be honest building the Crucible reminds me a little bit about "finding the Conduit" in ME1 - no other reasons to do it beside the one Saren wants to find it and it all makes true sense when Vigil explains what the Conduit really is (and then it goes: OMG, this is just great!). But true, this is ok, as long around this plot-crater there are no other craters you desperately want to be filled in.

I remember there was a speculation here or "Mass Effect 3 Extended Cut DLC Coming June 26" thread (unfortunately, I cannot find the exact quote which I sincerely regret!) raised by CGG (if I recall correctly) about Crucible could have been a weapon against indoctrination - as for me quite a cool vision.

Regarding the Crucible as a power source which itself is able to "change the variables" - true, sounds pretty empty. I do not remember the original endings so well, but I think the "power source" was added in EC after a question "how and why Crucible would fire red/blue/green wave into space?" - please correct me if I am wrong.

Also I think that Crucible could alter the Starchild-AI original variables, but... I don't know by it's code, components, content, whatever, not being just by an additional switch. In this case, (I agree with you): if the Catalyst is "altered" why for example couldn't he implement the red/blue/green changes himself instead of inviting "the first organic to be here" to do it for him? Not to "force" a solution? Quite shady in a mouth of someone who sends the Reapers to wipe out galactic life every 50,000 years

[drayfish]

bc525 wrote...
 
(with regrettable snippage)

The real kicker for me is that Synthesis is the Catalyst's "ideal" solution. Whew, with the added conversation of the EC between Shepard and the Catalyst, that statement hits me pretty hard. As the player I simply have to trust the information that the game is presenting to me. Otherwise this is all a lie, and then what's the point?

So I'm forced to believe a demented AI monster. This is getting tough to rationalize but right now my feeling is that the Catalyst has literally gone insane and some actions it takes are reasonable while some just don't have any discernible logic to them. On some points it could be deceiving Shepard while in other cases it's actually being very accurate. I suppose being utterly inconsistent plays into the maniacal AI role. Is it telling the truth? Is it lying? Make your best guess.

This is a fantastic point, bc525, and I must admit, that issue remains at the centre of a good deal of my distaste for the ending. I hate each of the concluding options strenuously anyway, but the fact that every one of them is delivered to me by the face of untold millennia of cruelty and devastation just tips it over the edge. Perhaps with the clever scenario proposed by generalleo03 I'd have no such problem, but in their current state, any attempt to see them as anything less than an oppressive, unholy act gets utterly derailed when I think of the source of the information. 
 
It's hard to see how anyone in the writing team thought that it would be a fitting end to this heroic narrative to have the central character fight for years against the mad oppression of a dispassionate foe, only to then meet their leader and then agree to do what he says. Not even to offer a new solution, but just to follow the course he has already established: death or psychological domination, or fulfil his wildest fantasy: merge everybody into one.
 
I mean, fundamentally the guy is a lunatic. His problem isn't real, so his solutions are naff. Ultimately we're not altering the universe to fix a problem; we're doing it just to shut him up – and that's just as crazy. We're indulging insanity, and by doing so, becoming what we despise.
 
It's one thing to say we could never talk this unhinged A.I. out of his plan; quite another to say that oh well, since he can't be persuaded we should therefore just do what he says. This twisted, murderous ideologue is too stuck in his ways, so I guess we should just finish his work for him. He must be all tuckered out after all that slaughter. 
 
The little scamp.

[Strange Aeons]

Hi again,

I figured I ought to assemble a few words in the aftermath of the EC. It turned out to be more than a few, so rather than dump them all into a giant post I’ve linked them in the blog entries below.

For what it’s worth, if you’re interested in reading my take on the state of the ending post-EC, as well as some thoughts on how things in a better world might have proceeded differently, feel free to read on:

How the Catalyst and the ME3: EC failed

Part 1: the problem

Part 2: the solution

[edisnooM]

@Strange Aeons

Excellent read, I especially liked "conversational kung fu". I picture Shepard's signature finisher being the "I should go" punch. :-)

And the ending, absolutely brilliant. I would pay BioWare many dollars to get that in game.

Modifié par edisnooM, 04 juillet 2012 - 10:26 .

[SHARXTREME]

Pinax said...
if the Catalyst is "altered" why for example couldn't he implement the red/blue/green changes himself instead of inviting "the first organic to be here" to do it for him? Not to "force" a solution? Quite shady in a mouth of someone who sends the Reapers to wipe out galactic life every 50,000 years

He couldn't implement RGB choices because he didn't have that much power at any point in history.
You know, crucible is a giant battery, more power to synthesize, control and destroy(what this lunatic has been doing for past billion years, and that'why that 3 special options ) .
So he said to himself:

"(Yes,yes, I will totally trick Shepard, like all others before. Offer him the same solutions I had originally. Only this time I will switch the colors a little, talk some nonsense so Shepard completely loses his judgement of what is right and what is wrong.)"

-"(and it's all wrong, heehehheehhe)"
- "(Creators gave the Control to me, so I used that to Synthesize them, and I have used synthesized Creators to Destroy others, only to Synthesize some more)"
- "(But that was all very slow and dirty bussines. I mean waiting for 50.000 years each cycle only to see that organics still couldn't come up with something new)"
. "(Yes,yes the "Crucible". I requested its manufacturing, after some serious calculus that showed that I can't possibly synthesize every Creator and synthetic at once. Need-More-Power)"
- "(poor bastards kept refining its design, and it's now the time to cash in)"

- "(Shepard-opportunist will jump in quickly to Control or Destroy).
- "(Shepard-Hero will also pick the Control. I mean that "human" stuff with self-sacrifice "for greater good" is legen...wait for it a few cycles...dary.)"
- "(Shepard-tactician wiil be confused beyond belief. (Why the hell did he leave me the option to Destroy?") What he doesn't know is , well, anything, but i can't underestimate this guy, let's add a some sugar here, let's say that he must sacrifice someone, hmm, he does that on regular basis, make it a whole species. Better yet, make it a species that contradicts everything I represent and what I say I represent.")
-("Yes, that will also bring Shepard-Strategist into sweat. Clock is ticking, Shepard!)"
-("Shepard-philosopher-sceptic-scientist will try to ask too many questions. I will confuse them easily. First I will say I'm catalyst which will make no sense at all, then I will talk about ideals, inevitabillity and sugar coat it in morals. That type will just give up eventually and probably refuse under the weight of too many unknowns)
-("Shepard-ideologist-hobby diplomat and "peacemaker" will be the one to push the real button.
He will think, and think, considering all sacrifice traps I layed out, that type is always mostly the same as me. His vision of world is HIS vision of the world. World must make sense to him, so he will shape it so far it really starts making sense and jump in. Other type will calculate that it is better to take the "compromise" and survive, and let's add "everybody's happy-new-beggining" stuff".)
-
"(Other Shepards will Refuse. I can give that option, patient as I am. Next cycle will refine the Crucible battery even more. Need-More-Power. Other galaxies just sit there without order)".

-"So, Shepard, I control the Reapers. Yeah, first organic ever to come this far, (you must be proud). We are killing organics and synthetics so synthetics won't kill all organics. For good"
"Yes, we are synthetics too, so?"

Shepard: "I don't like Your options and I didn't come this far to negotiate with lunatic VI"
Catalyst: "But it must be this options, and I can't make them happen(how weak he is, he will think, and to give some sense of urgency and stakes here, let's say:)
There is not much time left, you must decide"

Shepard: - "Wait, I can't decide such thing on my own.. and it doesn't.make any sense and why is there not much time? You had all the time in the world to make this happen. You control the Reapers, right? You can summon any husk to do what you asking me to do. And I simply cannot believe that you think that all previous cycles and ours didn't try to find a way to stop you and your mind control games: But they did and what's even better we refined the design to use you as access point to spread the destruction protocols to all Reapers "

Catalyst: But, but, inevitability, morals, peace..
Hackett to Fleet: It's almost ready.

Computer voice: Energy transfer complete.
EDI: Connection established, upload...Complete.
Shepard: Fire!

Joker: Fire what? I kid, I kid.

(Legion: Shepard Commander did good. Anderson: Yes she did, yes she did.
Mordin: It had to be done. Timing critical. Failure unacceptable.)

A little twist on the ending, hope nobody minds.

EDIT: And some aftermath 

-"Commander."
-"Sargeant"
(door opens)
.- "So, Ilusive man. All that husk stuff was a make-up. Was that the procedure I saw in video archives at your base?"
- "You didn't really think that I didn't have a backup plan, Shepard, that I just would let them to use me as pawn, did you? 
   I tried everything, Shepard. We just couldn't find a way to counteract indoctrination fully, and it was good that you damaged that Human Reaper in Collector base, who knows what would happen if he started to function fully "
- "Why all that reaperizing stuff, experiments, destroying our resourses"?
- "Illusion had to be perfect. Cerberus was already infiltrated. I had to play the game so they wouldn't notice and I  helped to solve the problem, didn't I?"
- "But your methods were brutal. Who knows how many men died because of you?"
- "Shepard, you should befirst to understand. After all, I brought you back to life, and what's more important, I gave You fighting chance. You w ould be indoctrinated on the spot by catalyst illusion, as would I if I didn't install in you our anti-indoctrination device. It was only a prototype, but it did buy you some time on many occasions."
- "You installed what in me?"
-"Miranda tried to install control mechanism in you, and she wasn't the only one, I had to be sure you wouldn't turn, and it gave me the chance to maintain the illusion. Secrets are my job. Shepard. And remember I did fight the Reapers when everybody was just hoping that is some scary story. Council members were first to be indoctrinated, so It was harder. Shooting Anderson must have been tough"
-"... But finally it was Geth and EDI who came up with the solution with a little help from Racchni. They had Reaper tech in them, and they overcame it's hold, and EDI downloaded unfinished code in your base."
- "Yes, it was coincidence that you helped Geth and Racchni, and that EDI discovered that Prothean VI was a Trojan horse. EDI was still under my control at the time, or so I thought. You both tricked even me.
I didn't expect you would use that situation, Shepard, but as always, best strategy is to use best weapon of your enemy against them. ...Implications of Geth, Racchni and EDI can be problematic in the future, but we will deal with that later" 
- "You're done "dealing with things". You will be tried and.."
(explosion. smoke clears. Illusive Man disappears)

. 

 

Modifié par SHARXTREME, 05 juillet 2012 - 12:04 .

[bc525]

@ drayfish

I can't express how much of a shift this has been for me from the original ending to the new EC ending. Before, I clearly saw the Reapers as the ultimate evil and the driving force behind all of this massive death and destruction. They were portrayed as ultra-intelligent, mysterious juggernauts that we mere Citadel races couldn't possibly understand. They were exponentially powerful and intelligent beyond comprehension, and in that regard they became extremely frightening. Worthy villains of a good sci-fi series.

Wrong. It turns out that I misunderstood what was actually happening. The Reapers didn't even possess free will, let alone extreme intelligence. They were chess pieces being moved around the board by a psychotic program construct. Sure, they had absorbed an extreme amount of knowledge and information through the races and civilizations that were used to manufacture them, but there was never any real intelligence there.

Before, the Catalyst just seemed like a tool of the Reapers in their methodology, much like the Citadel's Keepers. In my original experience I just figured that the Catalyst AI had somehow worked itself free of Reaper control and that enabled it to present the three options to Shepard which could make it possible to defeat them. This little AI was exposing a backdoor that allowed access to the vulnerabilities of the Reapers, and that explained the presence of the Destroy option. In that original ending, the Reapers were caught in a Catch-22. The Catalyst held some vital function, but they had lost control of it. They couldn't simply destroy the Citadel (and the Catalyst) without destroying themselves. They were helpless at that point to whatever Shepard decided.

Now the EC has revealed that the true Satan in all of the insanity is this Catalyst construct. It is the root of all the evil, and it has been manipulating the Reapers all along. So, like you wrote, Shepard is meeting the leader of the enemy force ... and should just trust this thing?

This is a complete turnaround from my original ending experience. Before, I could trust the options presented by the Catalyst, but now with more clarity I don't see how at that critical moment Shepard can believe any action he takes will actually have the intended results. I'm still asking myself, why is the Destroy option even available at that point? Is the Catalyst suicidal? It must at least be demented to the point that it has completely lost reason, or it could just be demonstrating the central theme that synthetics will always be in conflict with organics. Maybe synthetics inevitably reach a critical breaking point? The equivalent of death in organics might be insanity in synthetics. Everything must have a beginning and an end. So maybe it could be argued that organics are born and eventually die, while synthetics are programmed and then eventually become corrupted to the point that their programming fails.

Well, at any rate, that's how the EC has modified my Mass effect experience. I no longer see the Reapers as the evil of the series, it's now this singular Catalyst AI that is the true villain. Bummer.

[Hawk227]

@ Strange Aeons

Brilliant. I thought the whole Catalyst scene needed to be redacted, but you manage to make it feel necessary. Again, Brilliant. If this were packaged and came with an apology letter for screwing up, I'd gladly forgive BW and pay $10. Why some degree of this didn't happen originally, or even in the EC is utterly incomprehensible.

[SHARXTREME]

@ Strange Aeons
Great stuff. We both agree completely in what catalyst represents, and that Bioware should have known that in the first place.
And as I said many times: I WANT DIFFERENT ENDINGS BASED ON ACTIONS/INACTIONS.
And you presented the mechanism that I think is not that hard for Bioware to implement.
Pack it with some expansion SP mission, offer an apology and people would pay for that.

[edisnooM]

@SHARXTREME

Also a good ending. I picture your version of the Catalyst as very Uriah Heep like with much hand wringing and such.

Also Ninja TIM. :-)

[generalleo03]

Strange Aeons wrote...

Hi again,

I figured I ought to assemble a few words in the aftermath of the EC. It turned out to be more than a few, so rather than dump them all into a giant post I’ve linked them in the blog entries below.

For what it’s worth, if you’re interested in reading my take on the state of the ending post-EC, as well as some thoughts on how things in a better world might have proceeded differently, feel free to read on:

How the Catalyst and the ME3: EC failed

Part 1: the problem

Part 2: the solution

Agree with pretty much everything you say here.  Especially about synthesis.  As I noted a few pages back, this is exactly what the national socialists' (aparently you can't say ****) advocated for with their superior race crap.   (Goodwin's law and all that, but in this case I think it fits).  Eugenics is insidious.  It is actually a very logical concept, let's build a better human.  Selective breeding is how we build better corn, so lets just apply that to humans!  Except, in real life, that's abhorent.  It clashes completely with free will and the exercise thereof, in addition to dehumanizing all of us to merely breeding tools.  

What is "better" about people post-synthesis?  How does "understanding" prevent conflict?  I can understand perfectly well why Tom wants to kill my family, doesn't mean I'm not going to stop him.  

The fact that BioWare seems dead serious about this, and explicitely tries to make this the best, preferred, ideal outcome is quite disturbing on many levels.  Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are destined to repeat it.

Modifié par generalleo03, 05 juillet 2012 - 12:49 .

[generalleo03]

Pinax wrote...

Lol, that's true! To be honest building the Crucible reminds me a little bit about "finding the Conduit" in ME1 - no other reasons to do it beside the one Saren wants to find it and it all makes true sense when Vigil explains what the Conduit really is (and then it goes: OMG, this is just great!). But true, this is ok, as long around this plot-crater there are no other craters you desperately want to be filled in.

I remember there was a speculation here or "Mass Effect 3 Extended Cut DLC Coming June 26" thread (unfortunately, I cannot find the exact quote which I sincerely regret!) raised by CGG (if I recall correctly) about Crucible could have been a weapon against indoctrination - as for me quite a cool vision.

Regarding the Crucible as a power source which itself is able to "change the variables" - true, sounds pretty empty. I do not remember the original endings so well, but I think the "power source" was added in EC after a question "how and why Crucible would fire red/blue/green wave into space?" - please correct me if I am wrong.

Also I think that Crucible could alter the Starchild-AI original variables, but... I don't know by it's code, components, content, whatever, not being just by an additional switch. In this case, (I agree with you): if the Catalyst is "altered" why for example couldn't he implement the red/blue/green changes himself instead of inviting "the first organic to be here" to do it for him? Not to "force" a solution? Quite shady in a mouth of someone who sends the Reapers to wipe out galactic life every 50,000 years

Yup, agree, it's exactly like the conduit.  Its important to find the conduit because saren wants it, by necessity I want to stop him, so I want to stop him from getting it.  IE it's important because it is, pure Mcguffin.  Only I would say the conduit is much better done than the crusible.  

You are right that it was new dialogue.  He said "crude, but effective", which further makes me doubt it.  If it's "crude" why couldn't he do it?  He's already criticisizing it while "giving up"?!?

He said it altered the variables, but if he's an AI, and has thousands if not millions of minds under his control with the reapers, and millions of years, what exactly is he waiting for?  He couldn't conceive of what to do with more power? Really?  I can conceive of what to do with more power without actually having it.  It turns him into a VI instead of an AI.  Makes him more silly than he already is...

I still don't know what organic "energy" is.  Does it need to be alive?  Couldn't I just go grab Anderson?  He's probably not quite dead yet, would that work?  What about the very dead one's even further down?  What does having a sustaining chemical reaction do (living vs dead)  to the nature of this organic energy?  Could we just agree to it now and find a rat to do it?  

I've also hated that he's still attacking.  If he's controlling the reapers, and he's essentially conceding victory to me, why is he still attacking my forces?   "I'll let you destroy all of us, but you have to hit the button now! Now! NOW! if not my forces will finish wiping you out" to which my reaction is "Uh, what?"

[CINCTuchanka]

I'm still very confused as to why everyone believes that all the choices are "provided" to the player by the Catalyst. It is very clear that the Crucible itself is providing the options. Consider the following:

Low EMS playthrough with the Reaper Heart results in Destroy being the only option;

EMS, in a general sense, reflects the military power and research that allows the Crucible to dock with or without taking damage/be more precise.

It is clear then that the Crucible and not the Catalyst is the entity that is allowing for the ending "choice" in this case. If the Catalyst had a choice then he would have Synthesis be the only option with High EMS and would just let Cmdr Shepard bleed-out at Low EMS.

The only conclusion is that the Crucible is the device from where all the choices arise. It "changes" the Catalyst because it requires the Catalyst to unleash the Crucible's energy. This is stated explicitly. Catalyst: "The Crucible changed me."


The Catalyst no longer has free will after the Crucible docks. Shepard has the choice. Shepard always had the choice. The Catalyst tells him this. Wanting the Crucible to do something else than what is presented is like wishing that atomic bombs only killed "the bad guys."

As such, you can agree with the Catalyst and choose Synthesis if you like. It is not necessarily the best option. Indeed, High EMS destroy has the highest EMS barrier, so arguably High EMS destroy is the "best" ending as far as the actual game is concerned. The fact that the Catalyst allows you to kill him and all the Reapers and sometimes presents that as the ONLY OPTION is proof enough that the options are not "handed down" from the Catalyst. It's okay to think the endings are rubbish, but the EC made this clearer than ever. It disappoints me that this element of the plot is being so utterly misunderstood.

[generalleo03]

CINCTuchanka wrote...

I'm still very confused as to why everyone believes that all the choices are "provided" to the player by the Catalyst. It is very clear that the Crucible itself is providing the options. Consider the following:

Low EMS playthrough with the Reaper Heart results in Destroy being the only option;

EMS, in a general sense, reflects the military power and research that allows the Crucible to dock with or without taking damage/be more precise.

It is clear then that the Crucible and not the Catalyst is the entity that is allowing for the ending "choice" in this case. If the Catalyst had a choice then he would have Synthesis be the only option with High EMS and would just let Cmdr Shepard bleed-out at Low EMS.

The only conclusion is that the Crucible is the device from where all the choices arise. It "changes" the Catalyst because it requires the Catalyst to unleash the Crucible's energy. This is stated explicitly. Catalyst: "The Crucible changed me."


The Catalyst no longer has free will after the Crucible docks. Shepard has the choice. Shepard always had the choice. The Catalyst tells him this. Wanting the Crucible to do something else than what is presented is like wishing that atomic bombs only killed "the bad guys."

As such, you can agree with the Catalyst and choose Synthesis if you like. It is not necessarily the best option. Indeed, High EMS destroy has the highest EMS barrier, so arguably High EMS destroy is the "best" ending as far as the actual game is concerned. The fact that the Catalyst allows you to kill him and all the Reapers and sometimes presents that as the ONLY OPTION is proof enough that the options are not "handed down" from the Catalyst. It's okay to think the endings are rubbish, but the EC made this clearer than ever. It disappoints me that this element of the plot is being so utterly misunderstood.

Well in direct response, he prevents Shepard from bleeding out on the Citadel?  He also explains the Crucible's use?  I mean the game makes it pretty clear that without the Catalyst, the Crucible wouldn't work.  As the Catalyst is the leader of the Reapers, it seems pretty obvious he's giving you the options...

Also "It has changed me" does not mean "I have been forced to surrender by the Crucible.  The Crucible has rewritten my code and forced me to give in to you and whatever you want.  It also forced me to describe the reason for the Reapers, my plans, and the proper usage of the Crucible.  I am also required to wake you up, and get you here so that you can do this."  If the Crucible really, trully was the victory point, why would the reapers still be attacking after the Catalyst, their controller (not leader - Controller), has been conquered?  Why if I decide to not use the Crucible does the cycle continue without any trouble?  You're making a huge assumption here.  You're presuming your conclusions.  The Crucible does not in any way force the Catalyst to do anything.  It provides "possibilities", not control.

There is absolutely nothing in the game that says he lost free will.  Nowhere is it even inferred.  

Edit: Also, in the EC the catalyst says "We must find a new solution"  This very strongly implies he is working WITH you, not FOR you, IE has Free Will.

Modifié par generalleo03, 05 juillet 2012 - 01:09 .

[MrFob]

@Strange Aeons: Just had time to skim the blog but it sounds really interesting. Will get back to it later when I have some more time for sure.

@Pinax and generalleo03: The line about the crucible being a power source was one of these extensions to the EC which made me shake my head in confusion once more. So let me get this straight: Humans (an a couple of other races created a power source which the reapers (the god like huge space robots that can fly FTL indefinitely and double the speed of organics and god knows what else) and their master super AI have kept the cycle going because they couldn't build this giant battery which they needed for their other solutions. Or maybe they just didn't think about it at all since reaping everyone worked so well. No wait, the catalyst says it actually got a hold of the schematics a few cycles back and apparently hoped that he had eradicated the idea so scratch that. The whole idea is again ludicrous and ridiculous to the extreme,
Besides, the fact that it "changed the variables" indicates that it is more than just a power source. If just it's existence would change the variables, then that should have already happened when the catalyst became aware of the concept some cycles ago. If the fact that it actually interfaced with the catalyst changed the catalyst itself somehow then it's clearly more then a power source. Can someone enlighten me as to where to find the string of logic in this gibberish please?

BTW, this is also a point that I felt worked better in the original cut (OC). Back then we didn't know what the crucible was, an energy transformer, an emitter, a reprogramming device, a combination of those and a power source? It was unclear and IMO there was not really a need to specify this particular point at all. I am not sure why they felt the need to put it in.

Modifié par MrFob, 05 juillet 2012 - 01:58 .

[CINCTuchanka]

generalleo03 wrote...

CINCTuchanka wrote...

I'm still very confused as to why everyone believes that all the choices are "provided" to the player by the Catalyst. It is very clear that the Crucible itself is providing the options. Consider the following:

Low EMS playthrough with the Reaper Heart results in Destroy being the only option;

EMS, in a general sense, reflects the military power and research that allows the Crucible to dock with or without taking damage/be more precise.

It is clear then that the Crucible and not the Catalyst is the entity that is allowing for the ending "choice" in this case. If the Catalyst had a choice then he would have Synthesis be the only option with High EMS and would just let Cmdr Shepard bleed-out at Low EMS.

The only conclusion is that the Crucible is the device from where all the choices arise. It "changes" the Catalyst because it requires the Catalyst to unleash the Crucible's energy. This is stated explicitly. Catalyst: "The Crucible changed me."


The Catalyst no longer has free will after the Crucible docks. Shepard has the choice. Shepard always had the choice. The Catalyst tells him this. Wanting the Crucible to do something else than what is presented is like wishing that atomic bombs only killed "the bad guys."

As such, you can agree with the Catalyst and choose Synthesis if you like. It is not necessarily the best option. Indeed, High EMS destroy has the highest EMS barrier, so arguably High EMS destroy is the "best" ending as far as the actual game is concerned. The fact that the Catalyst allows you to kill him and all the Reapers and sometimes presents that as the ONLY OPTION is proof enough that the options are not "handed down" from the Catalyst. It's okay to think the endings are rubbish, but the EC made this clearer than ever. It disappoints me that this element of the plot is being so utterly misunderstood.

Well in direct response, he prevents Shepard from bleeding out on the Citadel?  He also explains the Crucible's use?  I mean the game makes it pretty clear that without the Catalyst, the Crucible wouldn't work.  As the Catalyst is the leader of the Reapers, it seems pretty obvious he's giving you the options...

Also "It has changed me" does not mean "I have been forced to surrender by the Crucible.  The Crucible has rewritten my code and forced me to give in to you and whatever you want.  It also forced me to describe the reason for the Reapers, my plans, and the proper usage of the Crucible.  I am also required to wake you up, and get you here so that you can do this."  If the Crucible really, trully was the victory point, why would the reapers still be attacking after the Catalyst, their controller (not leader - Controller), has been conquered?  Why if I decide to not use the Crucible does the cycle continue without any trouble?  You're making a huge assumption here.  You're presuming your conclusions.  The Crucible does not in any way force the Catalyst to do anything.  It provides "possibilities", not control.

There is absolutely nothing in the game that says he lost free will.  Nowhere is it even inferred.  

Edit: Also, in the EC the catalyst says "We must find a new solution"  This very strongly implies he is working WITH you, not FOR you, IE has Free Will.

Okay, let's assume that you're working WITH the Catalyst.

Then why does he bring you up to his super secret lair in Low EMS Destroy JUST SO YOU CAN KILL HIM AND ALL THE REAPERS.

See?  It doesn't make much sense does it? 

If we refuse to look at all the possibilities in the game then we miss out on a lot.  As it stands, all of the ending analysis is proceding from High Ems choices.  I think that is a fundamentally flawed way to approach the endings.

Low EMS Destroy proves that AT LEAST the Destroy option was forced upon him.  What possible motivation is presented by the Catalyst to allow this option?

[generalleo03]

CINCTuchanka wrote...

Okay, let's assume that you're working WITH the Catalyst.

Then why does he bring you up to his super secret lair in Low EMS Destroy JUST SO YOU CAN KILL HIM AND ALL THE REAPERS.

See?  It doesn't make much sense does it? 

If we refuse to look at all the possibilities in the game then we miss out on a lot.  As it stands, all of the ending analysis is proceding from High Ems choices.  I think that is a fundamentally flawed way to approach the endings.

Low EMS Destroy proves that AT LEAST the Destroy option was forced upon him.  What possible motivation is presented by the Catalyst to allow this option?

It's not an assumption, its stated directly.  

I see, so you've identified one problem lots of people have with the ending.  However, you resolved this by actually inserting more information into the game than exists?  If we're going to add things to the game to force it to make sense, there are a lot more things we should start from, like forcing more information about what the Crucible really is and does.  How about proof about organics vs synthetics being inevitable?  How about more information about what synthesis really is?  You say to take EMS into account, but really how does EMS make the Crucible include control? Synthesis?  

You've presumed your conclusion again.  You have presumed that the only plausible answer is that the Crucible forced him to surrender and let you destroy them, but couldn't force them to stop attacking?  Or to allow Shepard to call for help?  What are the limits to this forcing?  How does it work?  Why is he being forced to explain its usage? Why doesn't he at least say "The Crucible has forced me to surrender"?  "It has changed me" is not an equivalent statement.  I just ate a sandwich, it changed me.  I'm no longer hungry.  "It has changed me" is a totally ambiguous statement that has no concrete meaning.

You're fixating on one small problem and coming to a conclusion for the whole based on it.  Considering all the other things that make no sense with the ending, including the central conflict switch, the silly limitations of the Crucible, the nonsensicle EMS numbers, etc.
Occums' Razor dictates the reason it doesn't make sense is because the author didn't think the ending through, just like all the rest of this stuff.

Modifié par generalleo03, 05 juillet 2012 - 02:14 .

[bc525]

CINCTuchanka wrote...

...

The Catalyst no longer has free will after the Crucible docks. Shepard has the choice. Shepard always had the choice. The Catalyst tells him this. Wanting the Crucible to do something else than what is presented is like wishing that atomic bombs only killed "the bad guys."

As such, you can agree with the Catalyst and choose Synthesis if you like. It is not necessarily the best option. Indeed, High EMS destroy has the highest EMS barrier, so arguably High EMS destroy is the "best" ending as far as the actual game is concerned. The fact that the Catalyst allows you to kill him and all the Reapers and sometimes presents that as the ONLY OPTION is proof enough that the options are not "handed down" from the Catalyst. It's okay to think the endings are rubbish, but the EC made this clearer than ever. It disappoints me that this element of the plot is being so utterly misunderstood.

I can appreciate the reasoning that docking the Crucible to the Citadel directly affects the Catalyst, and it does declare that the Crucible has changed things.  As the player I have to trust that the game is presenting me with the truth.

I'm also trying to follow the EMS logic too.  With extremely low EMS (absurdly low EMS to be honest) the sole option available to Shepard is either Destroy or Control, depending solely on what was done with the Collector Base.  The determining factor isn't low military strength, it's what gets recovered from the Kronos Station.  The War Asset from that mission gets added to the Crucible construction, so I can see the logic that the Crucible is influencing the Catalyst.  I'm cool with that line of thinking.

But does that influence mean that the Catalyst no longer has any free will?  If its options are rejected then it assumes control and finishes the cycle.  If it gets shot then it assumes control and finishes the cycle.  Those actions don't really suggest that the Catalyst is being completely controlled by the Crucible and/or Shepard.

[Prosarian]

generalleo03 wrote...

How about proof about organics vs synthetics being inevitable?

With the EC, now they don't have to prove that at all.

From the conversation with the catalyst, it's creators programmed it to find a solution to the synthetic - organic conflict, a 'belief' in this conflict is already hardwired into the catalyst AI. Hence it doesn't need any evidence. Regardless of what Shepard says or of how many incidents of Synthetic - Organic co-operation the catalyst witnesses, it won't change it's programming.

I actually liked this idea, it was certainly better than the way it was presented in the Original Endings.

[RiouHotaru]

Strange Aeons wrote...

Hi again,

I figured I ought to assemble a few words in the aftermath of the EC. It turned out to be more than a few, so rather than dump them all into a giant post I’ve linked them in the blog entries below.

For what it’s worth, if you’re interested in reading my take on the state of the ending post-EC, as well as some thoughts on how things in a better world might have proceeded differently, feel free to read on:

How the Catalyst and the ME3: EC failed

Part 1: the problem

Part 2: the solution

While an interesting read, you once again make a few mistakes and ruin your entire argument:

- Turning Refusal into something it's not
The sole purpose of Refusal is to give the people of the fanbase the option to say no.  But, since people back in the day ACCEPTED the obvious consequence that saying 'No' entailed, that's exactly what you get.  Even assuming the Coalition fleet could defeat the Reapers over Earth, there's still the Reapers everywhere else in the galaxy.  Defeat is inevitable.  Trying to turn Refusal into the esoteric "conventional victory" ending everyone seems to think should exist would grossly undermine the theme of the Reapers, and completely negate the point of the entire plot.

- Catalyst as antagonist
Why people insist in doing this will always baffle me.  He's not an antagonist, or even a villain.  Hell, if you want to put it in the broadest terms, ME3 never had a clear antagonist.  The Reapers?  Sure, but they're more like a force of nature than anything else.  We're told of their slow and gradual progress, and see it in the Galaxy Map, but only a handful of times are they ever directly confronted.

What about TIM?  He definitely makes for a much clearer antagonist, considering he was already vaguely antagonistic during ME2, and simply loses the grey-and-grey morality facade he tried to manipulate you with in ME2 and just does exactly what he does best.

But the Catalyst?  He's a plot device introduced a handful of minutes away from the endings simply to tell us what we can do.  Just like ME1 and 2, he's a character whose sole purpose is to give us the final options.  Joker did it in ME1, and TIM did it in ME2.  Following tradition, the Catalyst slips into the role once again.  That he's the (ironic!) catalyst behind the Reapers is inconsequential.  Largely, his origin-story infodump serves little purpose, and it's clear why the devs left it out originally.  Besides his explanation of exactly what each option entails, the rest of the conversation it utterly needless and time-consuming.

Who cares where he came from, or who came up with the idea for the Crucible.  Are any of those facts relevant to the here and now of saving galactic civilization?

And it's been proven over and over that if the Catalyst truly desired to "defeat" Shepard, all he had to do was let Shepard bleed out.  Using the light elevator and presenting the three choices only hurts him if his goal is to perpeutate the cycle.  Giving Shepard the choice to rewrite, replace, or outright destroy him also does nothing to help his goal.  Unless you're willing to ignore the EC showing that the Catalyst was correct in describing each outcome, then it's clear that at no point is he making a willing effort to decieve you.  And to attribute malicious intent or thought to in inappropriately makes no sense, since as an AI, he's incapable of that.

[generalleo03]

Prosarian wrote...

With the EC, now they don't have to prove that at all.

From the conversation with the catalyst, it's creators programmed it to find a solution to the synthetic - organic conflict, a 'belief' in this conflict is already hardwired into the catalyst AI. Hence it doesn't need any evidence. Regardless of what Shepard says or of how many incidents of Synthetic - Organic co-operation the catalyst witnesses, it won't change it's programming.

I actually liked this idea, it was certainly better than the way it was presented in the Original Endings.

Not much of an AI if it can't even question its own reasoning.  In fact it demotes him to a VI.  This also isn't a better idea, its worse.  It was programmed to prevent organic synthetic conflict so its solution is to kill everything?  Wow, talk about an over-reaction.  Its both smart enough to create the reapers and the cycle, and ignorant enough to not prove its precepts?  It clearly values organic life as a whole, because he makes that specific point.  It said it tried to broker peace many times.  Here's my main point.  EC doesn't really change the point of this.  It's still assuming its true and we can't try to show it wrong by simply having it talk to EDI or the Geth.

I do agree on one level.  It's presented better, but it demotes the reapers even further to do this, now they're controlled by a sociopathic VI.  Problem is, it still doesn't fit the game at all.  Why would anyone think that way after playing Mass Effect?  Where does the game even care about it except there?  Its silly to bring this forth.  Its just as bad from a thematic point of view as the non-EC.  Its just done a better job of hiding exactly how flawed the decision to provide that motivation to the reapers actually is.

Edit: As an aside.  I responded to you directly, but as it referenced the original point.  If we are going to add things, we should add things about the inevitability of organic-synthetic conflict.  That doesn't change based on whether the Catalyst needs to prove it or not.  It is still quite aparent that we are supposed to understand what this is about, yet through the entirety of 3 games, there has been for intents and purposes nothing about this supposed conflict.  He could have thought he was preventing the creation of peanuts, and it would have worked just as well from that point of view.  He doesn't need to prove if peanuts are good or bad, its just his goal.  Its a demotion of motivation to the asinine to say he doesn't need to prove his motivation.  It's a staple of a bad narrative.

Modifié par generalleo03, 05 juillet 2012 - 03:08 .

[edisnooM]

@RiouHotaru

The thing is the Reapers were the Villains, they were the Eldritch horrors, the monsters in the dark spaces, they were good effective villains. Sovereign's speech on Virmire is one of my favourite points in the series, and it set them up so perfectly.

But then at the end the Catalyst declares himself as master of the enemies we have been fighting for 3 games, and completely changes everything. I'm sorry but for me you can't do that without being a villain yourself. It's like if in LoTR you discover at the end that someone has been controlling Sauron all along. Wouldn't that make whoever it was a villain automatically?

Also the bleeding out thing is something that really doesn't make sense. It really doesn't seem to me that he is being forced to help us. And he says that we have hope because we're the first organic to stand there but we didn't get there without him bringing us up. And if you refuse he Reaperily says "So be it" followed cheerfully by "The Cycle continues".

As for refuse, it really irks me because that choice, that standing up for freedom, individuality, self-determination has been what my Shepard has been doing for three games, and it has worked out pretty dang well so far. But then at the end suddenly, nope, doesn't work, compromise to win, despite several people telling us at different points that was not the way to win.

Modifié par edisnooM, 05 juillet 2012 - 03:15 .

[bc525]

@ RiouHotaru

I agree that the Catalyst AI might not see its actions as malicious or evil. Maybe its just futilely trying to execute its impossible objectives, and in that mode it disregards what I consider morality. I understand that distinction, but from Shepard's point of view there's no excusing the systematic annihilation of intelligent life.

Shepard clearly becomes the protagonist of the story and the opposing force becomes the antagonist. You're very right that Mass Effect varied who exactly the enemy was throughout the story. There were Mercs, Pirates, Cerberus, Geth, Collectors, Husks, and Reapers. And after the EC I don't consider the Catalyst to be benign or even neutral in that regard. To me it has become the ultimate antagonist, the ultimate bad guy. It started the cycle of destruction that our hero is trying to stop. It started the conflict that our main character must overcome.

[CINCTuchanka]

bc525 wrote...



I can appreciate the reasoning that docking the Crucible to the Citadel directly affects the Catalyst, and it does declare that the Crucible has changed things.  As the player I have to trust that the game is presenting me with the truth.

I'm also trying to follow the EMS logic too.  With extremely low EMS (absurdly low EMS to be honest) the sole option available to Shepard is either Destroy or Control, depending solely on what was done with the Collector Base.  The determining factor isn't low military strength, it's what gets recovered from the Kronos Station.  The War Asset from that mission gets added to the Crucible construction, so I can see the logic that the Crucible is influencing the Catalyst.  I'm cool with that line of thinking.

But does that influence mean that the Catalyst no longer has any free will?  If its options are rejected then it assumes control and finishes the cycle.  If it gets shot then it assumes control and finishes the cycle.  Those actions don't really suggest that the Catalyst is being completely controlled by the Crucible and/or Shepard.

That's a legitimate concern.  I think that the Catalyst is largely disempowered however, even if does exercise some form of "free will."  He just can't do anything about it.

When Shepard questions the Control option, the Catalyst states that he doesn't the choice  either, but ihe would be FORCED to comply with your decision.  So clearly the Catalyst has preferences, and it does NOT prefer Control.  The same could likely be said for Destroy.  The only option it DOES like is Synthesis. 

If the Catalyst had the ability to exercise its "free will" then it would simply force Synthesis upon the galaxy.  It NEEDS Shepard to choose however.  The Catalyst needs Shepard to choose because it is compelled to.

As to why the Cycle continues if you choose Refuse, that is simply the continuation of the Catalyst's previous will, so to speak.  It is the Status Quo of the Reapers and the Galaxy.  The Reapers are sentient warships, they don't need the Catalyst checking up on them every other week to make sure they are making their Reaping Quota.  They continue with the Cycle unless the Catalyst tells them otherwise.

[Prosarian]

generalleo03 wrote...

Not much of an AI if it can't even question its own reasoning.  In fact it demotes him to a VI.  This also isn't a better idea, its worse.  It was programmed to prevent organic synthetic conflict so its solution is to kill everything?  Wow, talk about an over-reaction.  Its both smart enough to create the reapers and the cycle, and ignorant enough to not prove its precepts?  It clearly values organic life as a whole, because he makes that specific point.  It said it tried to broker peace many times.  Here's my main point.  EC doesn't really change the point of this.  It's still assuming its true and we can't try to show it wrong by simply having it talk to EDI or the Geth.

Since we haven't actually created a true AI yet, we don't know if an AI is capable of questioning its programming. It's more of a technical question and unless there's someone here who has some expertise in this, I'm happy to go along with the idea that it is unable to change it's core programming.

From the Catalyst's point of view;

Conflict between Synthetics and Organics is inevitable.
I was designed to find a permanent solution.

Considering that this is how it was programmed, it's not a surprise that it would choose death as a permanent solution, there is no other alternative. Everything else has a chance of leading to conflict. Also, yes it values organics as a whole. But individuals, not so much. As far as it is concerned, preserving a few organics is equivalent to preserving the whole, since it was never programmed to think of individuals.

I do agree on one level.  It's presented better, but it demotes the reapers even further to do this, now they're controlled by a sociopathic VI.  Problem is, it still doesn't fit the game at all.  Why would anyone think that way after playing Mass Effect?  Where does the game even care about it except there?  Its silly to bring this forth.  Its just as bad from a thematic point of view as the non-EC.  Its just done a better job of hiding exactly how flawed the decision to provide that motivation to the reapers actually is.

I can see how this wouldn't exactly be everyone's cup of tea, considering how menacing and powerful Sovereign was. However it does fit in with the theme of cosmicism IMO.

The philosophy of cosmicism states that there is no recognizable divine presence, humans are a particularly insignificant in the larger scheme of intergalactic existence, and are just a small species susceptible to being wiped from existence any moment.  This also suggest that the majority of humanity are creatures with the same significance as insects in a much greater struggle between greater forces.

Here we have this extremely powerful being, the catalyst, who is perpetrating a cycle of genocide on an unfathomable scale simply because it was programmed wrongly from the start. Just spend some time thinking about how many people have died all over the galaxy during Shepard's cycle. Now multiply that by a billion years (at least).

To it, each of our individual lives is worth nothing more than an insect's, since it is only concerned with preserving the whole. With the catalyst, I really feel as though humanity and the other alien species are utterly insignificant. All our dreams, hopes and achievements are worthless in comparison with the catalyst's drive to bring us salvation through destruction. It is so futile and stupid yet we are unable to to defend ourselves and our people are being slaughtered by the millions.

I am aware that the Reapers, even without an explanation of their motivations, still fit this theme. A catalyst like being, just more powerful, is a nightmare of mine and I'm glad the EC went that route.