Hawk227 wrote...
optimistickied wrote...
Hawk227 wrote...
yikes, I need to proof read better. My last post was a mess.
In that case it makes sense to include the Geth, but I still feel Control and Destroy are fairly redundant. The destroy ending doesn't make anyone forget how to build technology, it doesn't remove the motivation to build technology. How long will it take the galaxy to rebuild? A generation? In Reaper time that's a blink of an eye.
Listen to that conversation with sovereign again. Sovereign speaks of organic life with disdain:
"Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation. An accident. Your lives are measured in years and decades. You wither and die. We are eternal, the pinnacle of evolution and existence. Before us, you are nothing. Your extinction is inevitable. We are the end of everything."
Whilehe does say the Reapers impose order on the chaos of Organic evolution,he mentions it in the context of the Mass Relays. When he says it, it comes off more as a means of herding organics in a predictable way that the Reapers can take advantage of each cycle, rather than a means of saving organics from themselves.
The Catalyst states the reapers purpose is to save Organic life, allowing it to continue. I never got the feeling from sovereign that he felt organic life was worthy of existence. Also, if the Reapers believe they're the pinnacle of evolution, what does that make everything post synthesis? Reapers?
Furthermore, and this is straying a little, the Organics vs. Synthetics conflict more or less describes the Technological Singularity. I wasn't originally going to bring this up, but that quote just screamed it at me. The idea (at least floating around the BSN right now) is that the Catalyst is trying to prevent the Tech singularity, a point
in time where synthetics will surpass organics at an exponential rate, and organics will be helpless if the synthetics attack. Now, listening to Sovereign again, I feel like the Reapers fit as a post singularity species.
"My kind transcends your very understanding. We are each a nation, independent, free of all weakness. You cannot even grasp the nature of our existence."
Can the reapers be a solution to the technological singularity, if they are already post singularity? Can
they be a solution to themselves? I guess in a literal sense they could be. They could prevent a second post singularity race thats not as accomodating as them. But in a narrative sense, I feel like it fails.
I understand what you're saying above (in bold). But for me, the Reapers being the post-singularity menace is much more satisfying than them being a tool to prevent it.
But in Control/Destroy, man will be accountable for his recklessness. There will be no divine intervention, no planned Apocalypses. This is significant. We keep our forms, we're not harvested, we become free. However, if what the Catalyst claims is true, is having freedom to expand and innovate good or bad? Dunno.
He also says Reapers are because they must be. Reapers (as of then) had continued the cycle with no real purpose, other than to be eeeevil and "maintain order." They uplifted civilizations with their technologies and harvested them, but we never knew why. We had no idea what they gained in return and they weren't coughing up any answers. What was the salvation they were giving us? What's really mind blowing is, the Reapers may actually have come to resent organic life for being given this cosmic errand, this tedious universal chore. Note: that is totally made-up based on Sovereign's tone.
Anyway, the Catalyst finally and formally defines their purpose: to keep synthetic life from wiping out organic existence. What I'd like to know is, is the Catalyst self-aware? Were the Reapers designed with planned obsolescence?
It sounds like this is becoming a matter of taste. The endings, bad or good, have sparked discussion; to me that makes them semi-successful. I can't comment on whether Reapers can be a "solution to themselves" but it's an interesting way to analyze their role in the game.
If I weren't so incredibly tired right now, I'd probably write one of those long 1000 word responses everybody has to glance over to praise the Gospel of Dray, but I'll have to save it. I'll get back to you though, provided you don't think I'm really stupid yet.
Please do. This is the only thread that has made it possible for me to perceive the endings at face value as anything other than incompetent filth (hmm, that sounds harsh) and you've been a major part of that.
You're most certainly right in saying it comes down to taste. Although I can appreciate your point of view on most of this, I'm having a lot of trouble agreeing. To each there own, of course. But the discussion is still very interesting.
Also, I'll say I'm still not clear on how Control and Destroy are not redundant solutions: one solution masquerading as two. The only explanation I can think of (maybe you meant this, I couldn't quite tell) is that if the Catalyst's warning comes true, we'll have an advanced, immortal fleet of sapient warships we can call on to save the day? But would they then just harvest us? That seems problematic. And, as I asked earlier, is this option not a copout? Does it matter if it is? I'm not sure. I'd be interested to see your take on it when you're up for it.
Well, I think if nothing else, there's an ideological difference. Like we talked about earlier, in Destroy you're formally condemning synthetic lifeforms, whereas in Control, you're essentially imposing your will upon the Reapers and making them heel to your command. The Catalyst uses the word obey. This is something most people find repugnant and inappropriate, whereas I just find really interesting. The Catalyst is providing our options here, so we are using its morality system. We know from the Reapers, its idea of morality is skewed, so all three options are not necessarily moral. However, we played the trilogy waiting for a showdown with the Reapers. We were prepared to kill them out of survival. It is a violent game with war as its backdrop, so having to make a decision that is not pleasant didn't come as a surprise.
In all three endings, the Reapers are dealt with, while the synthetic/organic conflict lingers on. Control and Destroy have seemingly the same outcomes (abeyance), but one preserves current synthetic lifeforms, while the other ends them.
What you brought up about the Reapers returning in Control is something I totally hadn't even considered. I guess it's possible, isn't it? However, with the Mass Relays destroyed, it's unlikely they'll ever return. So then the question would be, what's the point of controlling the Reapers if you can't do anything with them? Once Shepard has asserted his will, what will he do with it? Send them away, but to do what? You'd touched on that earlier. I think. It's a scary thought, the idea of Shepard entrapping his consciousness in these Old Machines, and squandering eternity in some black corner of Dark Space. I mean, would Shepard be so selfless? Would anyone?
I can't really answer that, but it contributed to why I picked Synthesis. I even walked up to the Control station, and just couldn't do it. It seemed too tragic, especially considering Saren and the Illusive Man. What if Shepard lost his sanity or worse, what if he didn't? In Synthesis, at least Shepard's legacy would be visible; I could give him glory. For me, at the time, that was important. It was as if I picked Synthesis by deduction.
Er, anyway, yeah, Control/Destroy are similar, but I feel like they diverge in some significant ways.
Also, the quality of the endings didn't concern me at the time. What about you? Like, in hindsight, I can take what I've been reading and really start to break it all down, but when I was experiencing it, I had to pause and sit there and think about what to do, about what each choice could potentially mean; I thought about the very first time I turned the first game on, and how everything had lead up to this moment, and how I had to, as a player, do right by Shepard, who stood before me bloody and confused and battered all to hell. If I played it now, I'd probably hate it. I've read too much on it, but... at first, it was pretty cool.
Retour en haut
