5087 réponses à ce sujet

[KitaSaturnyne]

I'm someone who likes the idea behind Occam's Razor - the simplest answer is usually the best/ correct one.

As you can tell from that last sentence, I like to simplify things considerably. While I entertain verbosity often, I like to be able to sum things up in just a few sentences. That said, I had this thought that I want to share with you.

One major reason this ending fails to resonate with its audience (that's us, you guys!) is because it's more like the beginning to a completely different story masquerading as an ending.

Why do we need to be told what happens to the fleet stuck in Sol? Why do we need to be shown all the things we want to know regarding the mass relays (whether they took all those star systems with them, if they are eventually rebuilt, etc)?

Because these scenes, beginning with meeting the Catalyst, are the beginning of a new narrative, rather than being the conclusion to the old one.

My thoughts, anyway.

[drayfish]

I third edisnooM and Sable Phoenix. (Is 'third it' a thing?)

Welcome to the discussion botfly10. Your reading is every bit as welcome, valid and encouraged as anyone else's on this thread.

And I must agree with Sable Phoenix (who did a marvelous job articulating this), I'm sure you won't find this thread a breeding ground of hate - I have felt nothing but generosity and keen, attentive insight from the contributors here, from all sides of the argument. Indeed, in spite of my own issues with the ending, participating in this forum thread has magnified my love of this franchise exponentially, because if people this passionate and wise can engage with the text with such clarity, then it must be something truly epic.

Modifié par drayfish, 05 mai 2012 - 10:29 .

[botfly10]

edisnooM wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

Well, sorry if my tone was overly confrontational. I just finished ME3 and came here to revel and discuss, only to find giant walls of hate.

To me, the end is all about the assumptions you bring with you and how you use them to fill in the narrative gaps.

I had no problems with merging my assumptions with the end I chose and the whole star child sequence. I had no issues with the associated suspension of belief.

Imo, the meaning of the choices and the ending itself were defined by your personal relationships with the game.

A cop out? Maybe, but I liked it.

I second that it's not a cop out.

I have absolutely no problem with people that liked the ending, what I mainly take issue with is when people dismiss me for not liking it because I "didn't get it", which I do not think you are doing.

And from reading some peoples reasons why they liked the ending I can see why they think that way, though I myself do not.

Yeah, I don't really care if anyone liked it or not. 

I came here to discuss the assumptions that made the end work for me.

But what bothers me in a lot of the threads is the effort to use lore to leaverage, or "prove", why one perspective is explicitly correct and the rest BS.

[botfly10]

This is mainly where I differ with the OP's interpretation of the 3 options.

Namely, the synthesis option.

My assumption in the synthesis option was that the different species would largely go on as the separate species they were originally. To me, the organics would just gain some new powers and some mechanical anatomy, while synthetics gain free will, emotion, hope... self actualization.

To me, I thought it was actually elegant how it turns out that your motivation and Saren's motivation are actually parallel. It was also part of my assumption that once actualized, the reapers would value life as organic beings do.

As far as Shep deciding what to do for the whole galaxy... well, to me hard choices was a pervasive theme throughout the series. I did not like being a single individual making the choice. But I was there and had to make the call... a burnden I do not carry lightly.

For me this option was about marrying polar opposites, granting the synthetics free will, and breaking the cycle of destruction.

Modifié par botfly10, 05 mai 2012 - 11:02 .

[botfly10]

drayfish wrote...

I third edisnooM and Sable Phoenix. (Is 'third it' a thing?)

Welcome to the discussion botfly10. Your reading is every bit as welcome, valid and encouraged as anyone else's on this thread.

And I must agree with Sable Phoenix (who did a marvelous job articulating this), I'm sure you won't find this thread a breeding ground of hate - I have felt nothing but generosity and keen, attentive insight from the contributors here, from all sides of the argument. Indeed, in spite of my own issues with the ending, participating in this forum thread has magnified my love of this franchise exponentially, because if people this passionate and wise can engage with the text with such clarity, then it must be something truly epic.

Thanks, this is what I was hoping to find here.

Again, sorry for the hostility and projection...

Modifié par botfly10, 05 mai 2012 - 10:51 .

[delta_vee]

 @drayfish:

Thanks for the kind words. Never figured I'd be using quantum mechanics in vidogame criticism. I'm just glad I didn't mangle the explanation.

I want to quickly say thank you again to you all. I continue to find every angle of this discussion fascinating. It's like I am engaged in the greatest dinner party conversation in the world.

Seconded. Pass the yams, please?

@Strange Aeons:

From five pages back, or so (sorry) - I read the ME2 summary of yours, and there were lulz and nods of agreement. It's striking (to me, at least) how much more coherent ME2 would've been without the pervasive Cerberus angle.

@RollaWarden:

Without further ado, AWTR posters, GodChildinTheMachine, and the Frankenstein Complex:
http://social.biowar.../index/10550373

I did read. Quite impressive. I hadn't conceived of the Geth->Gnostic connection, but it makes a metric ton of sense. And yes, "synthetic Gnositc monks" is a great turn of phrase.

@bc525:

Mind if I join you guys for beers? I'll buy the first round.

@Opsrbest:

Also on a side note I don't know if it has come up in should be dedicated single pages of the thread for certain peoples posts, has it been discussed how awesome the Catalyst is?

Awesome in the old meaning of "inciting awe", usually reserved for deities? I certainly believe that was the intention. I'm sure the Catalyst was meant to invoke awe and wonder and scale, standing there and discussing the fate of the galaxy with a billion-year-old machine god.

I just don't think it worked.

@KitaSaturnyne:

It would be like saying Legion is capable of anger - it is not. Even EDI, a fully actualized artificial intelligence, is uncapable of anger even in the final scenes of ME3.

If you tell Legion he can't upload the code, he gets quite angry with you. "I won't let you decide our fate!" is the line, I believe - just before he grabs Shepard by the throat.

Shooting him - repeatedly - was a hard series of renegade interrupts...

@Sable Phoenix:

One of the subtexts that this essay also introduces in relation to the geth is that of Cosmicism.  Given the direct Lovecraftian influence of the Reapers themselves, I find this an interesting thematic element, i.e., that of a vast, impersonal, unknowable universe that cares nothing for the creatures that inhabit it and will carelessly grind them under its heels, or at the very least shatter their minds if they should ever gaze upon its true nature.

I've read of the Cosmicism link before, and certainly the Reapers seem to be made of the stuff. And I rather liked Vendetta's details about the cycles and their repeating elements, with that terrifying implication of unknowable cosmic order even higher-level than the mechasquids before your eyes. I think the Catalyst undoes that impression, though - the temptation to literalize and anthropomorphize the cycle was too great, and we got a machine god you can talk to (however feebly) instead of incomprehensible vastness.

@botfly10:

Welcome to the party. Chips and dip are over on the table. If you have time, you'd do well to go back and read through the whole thread. A lot of people here may disagree with your interpretation, but we keep things civil, and there's some truly excellent stuff to be found in the sixty(!) pages thus far.

My assumption in the synthesis option was that the different species would largely go on as the separate species they were originally. To me, the organics would just gain some new powers and some mechanical anatomy, while synthetics gain free will, emotion, hope... self actualization.

 
I think that's exactly how synthesis was supposed to be received. For me, however, it was so ill-defined as to lack coherency. There are a lot of subtleties in discussion of transhumanism, many of which are vitally important distinctions to make, and for my part I didn't have enough information about it within the game to decide if I agreed with it as presented.

That said, I'm certainly not going to bash you over the head with a big book o' lore. This thread is approaching things in the manner of (civilized) criticism. Everything's on the table, and there's no one right answer.

Modifié par delta_vee, 05 mai 2012 - 11:39 .

[Rustedness]

Reading this discussion is rather cathartic compared to some of the other threads.

[botfly10]

Yep.

I would just add that the interpretations I detailed above happened for me in real time, in game, on my 1st play-through.

I did not feel like I was making any exceptionally large leaps...

I am basically still coming down from the whole thing and processing, so I appreciate the gentle tone here! lol

Modifié par botfly10, 05 mai 2012 - 11:55 .

[botfly10]

I guess I'm just lucky that my ME experience and the assumptions I brought with me affected my interpretation of the choices in such a way that one was attractive to me and to my Shep...

lol

[KitaSaturnyne]

delta_vee wrote...

@KitaSaturnyne:

It would be like saying Legion is capable of anger - it is not. Even EDI, a fully actualized artificial intelligence, is uncapable of anger even in the final scenes of ME3.

If you tell Legion he can't upload the code, he gets quite angry with you. "I won't let you decide our fate!" is the line, I believe - just before he grabs Shepard by the throat.

Shooting him - repeatedly - was a hard series of renegade interrupts...

Ah, my bad. I hadn't refused Legion, so I didn't know. Sorry.

[delta_vee]

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

delta_vee wrote...

@KitaSaturnyne:

It would be like saying Legion is capable of anger - it is not. Even EDI, a fully actualized artificial intelligence, is uncapable of anger even in the final scenes of ME3.

If you tell Legion he can't upload the code, he gets quite angry with you. "I won't let you decide our fate!" is the line, I believe - just before he grabs Shepard by the throat.

Shooting him - repeatedly - was a hard series of renegade interrupts...

Ah, my bad. I hadn't refused Legion, so I didn't know. Sorry.

It's alright. It's that issue of access to the whole text I mentioned earlier.

Also, I should note that my first Shepard didn't have the required rep score to keep Tali from being exiled, so I didn't have the option for peace.

[delta_vee]

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

[...] Why do we need to be told what happens to the fleet stuck in Sol? Why do we need to be shown all the things we want to know regarding the mass relays (whether they took all those star systems with them, if they are eventually rebuilt, etc)?

Because these scenes, beginning with meeting the Catalyst, are the beginning of a new narrative, rather than being the conclusion to the old one.

There have been a number of conspiratorial theories about this idea, but without access to Bioware's plans for the ME franchise, it's all speculation. That said, it certainly does leave room for something to follow - or at least the destroy option would. I'm not sure, though, why they felt the need to remove the iconic mass relays from the picture, given their association with the brand...

[KitaSaturnyne]

delta_vee wrote...

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

[...] Why do we need to be told what happens to the fleet stuck in Sol? Why do we need to be shown all the things we want to know regarding the mass relays (whether they took all those star systems with them, if they are eventually rebuilt, etc)?

Because these scenes, beginning with meeting the Catalyst, are the beginning of a new narrative, rather than being the conclusion to the old one.

There have been a number of conspiratorial theories about this idea, but without access to Bioware's plans for the ME franchise, it's all speculation. That said, it certainly does leave room for something to follow - or at least the destroy option would. I'm not sure, though, why they felt the need to remove the iconic mass relays from the picture, given their association with the brand...

I'm not sure either, especially given the franchise's title. That makes me wonder if the Catalyst has become just as iconic in reference to the ending. When someone mentions the ending to Mass Effect 3, do they think of a wave of energy coming from the Citadel, or do they think of an 8-year-old made from energy? Has the Catalyst become the icon for the disparity regarding the ending?

My argument wasn't so much regarding the possible future of Mass Effect as much as it was just pointing out that the scene wasn't the ending to one narrative, but the beginning of another. Picture replacing the last 50 pages of Moby Dick with the first 50 pages of 1984. That's how the ending of ME3 feels to me.

Modifié par KitaSaturnyne, 06 mai 2012 - 01:01 .

[edisnooM]

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

delta_vee wrote...

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

[...] Why do we need to be told what happens to the fleet stuck in Sol? Why do we need to be shown all the things we want to know regarding the mass relays (whether they took all those star systems with them, if they are eventually rebuilt, etc)?

Because these scenes, beginning with meeting the Catalyst, are the beginning of a new narrative, rather than being the conclusion to the old one.

There have been a number of conspiratorial theories about this idea, but without access to Bioware's plans for the ME franchise, it's all speculation. That said, it certainly does leave room for something to follow - or at least the destroy option would. I'm not sure, though, why they felt the need to remove the iconic mass relays from the picture, given their association with the brand...

I'm not sure either, especially given the franchise's title. That makes me wonder if the Catalyst has become just as iconic in reference to the ending. When someone mentions the ending to Mass Effect 3, do they think of a wave of energy coming from the Citadel, or do they think of an 8-year-old made from energy? Has the Catalyst become the icon for the disparity regarding the ending?

My argument wasn't so much regarding the possible future of Mass Effect as much as it was just pointing out that the scene wasn't the ending to one narrative, but the beginning of another. Picture replacing the last 50 pages of Moby Dick with the first 50 pages of 1984. That's how the ending of ME3 feels to me.

I hadn't thought about it as starting a new narrative but now that you said it I can see it.

I suppose I can understand that they would want to continue in this world they've created, certainly I think I would be dissapointed that such vast untapped potential had been put on a shelf permanently (I still hold hope for Jade Empire 2). And I would have been fine with and open end, but I think that they should have at least provided a certain amount of closure for Shepard.

They had mentioned several times if  I recall that this trilogy was Shepards story, and that it would end with ME3. Because of this I was expecting a blaze of glory death, with lots of over the top slow mo and much fan fare. A definitive end to an amazing character I had forged with my own two thumbs. Instead, well we got this. Its definately an end but not the one I wanted.

[3DandBeyond]

botfly10 wrote...

Well, sorry if my tone was overly confrontational. I just finished ME3 and came here to revel and discuss, only to find giant walls of hate.

To me, the end is all about the assumptions you bring with you and how you use them to fill in the narrative gaps.

I had no problems with merging my assumptions with the end I chose and the whole star child sequence. I had no issues with the associated suspension of belief.

Imo, the meaning of the choices and the ending itself were defined by your personal relationships with the game.

A cop out? Maybe, but I liked it.

Well, actually the ending all but abandons your personal relationships.  They don't matter much at all.  And one huge relationship is missing though it looms somewhere off in space.  Your antagonism for the reapers. 

Your friends are nowhere to be seen.  Things you worked for are rendered moot.  You don't have to thoroughly analyze the story to be feel left out of the ending.  But, Bioware considered it in terms of artistic integrity, indicated that players just didn't get it with further statements.  This means they viewed it as something esoteric and thoughty.  And for that reason alone a discussion of how a game built on a great story featured a broken story in the last 10 minutes of play, no the last 10 minutes of watching.

The content of the endings and the "substance" of the choices themselves break the meaning of any other relationships you forged.  If again you only take the Geth/Quarian conflict and choice to reunite them, picking Destroy not only obliterates the Geth, but will rock the foundation of inroads made with Tali and the Quarian.  I envision a ranking member of flotilla leadership saying, "we risked everything so you could promote the Geth, and you do this?"  It's a what the heck moment.  This is partly because the Quarian saw that the Geth would be a real help in getting them re-established on Rannoch.

[botfly10]

3DandBeyond wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

Well, sorry if my tone was overly confrontational. I just finished ME3 and came here to revel and discuss, only to find giant walls of hate.

To me, the end is all about the assumptions you bring with you and how you use them to fill in the narrative gaps.

I had no problems with merging my assumptions with the end I chose and the whole star child sequence. I had no issues with the associated suspension of belief.

Imo, the meaning of the choices and the ending itself were defined by your personal relationships with the game.

A cop out? Maybe, but I liked it.

Well, actually the ending all but abandons your personal relationships.  They don't matter much at all.  And one huge relationship is missing though it looms somewhere off in space.  Your antagonism for the reapers. 

Your friends are nowhere to be seen.  Things you worked for are rendered moot.  You don't have to thoroughly analyze the story to be feel left out of the ending.  But, Bioware considered it in terms of artistic integrity, indicated that players just didn't get it with further statements.  This means they viewed it as something esoteric and thoughty.  And for that reason alone a discussion of how a game built on a great story featured a broken story in the last 10 minutes of play, no the last 10 minutes of watching.

The content of the endings and the "substance" of the choices themselves break the meaning of any other relationships you forged.  If again you only take the Geth/Quarian conflict and choice to reunite them, picking Destroy not only obliterates the Geth, but will rock the foundation of inroads made with Tali and the Quarian.  I envision a ranking member of flotilla leadership saying, "we risked everything so you could promote the Geth, and you do this?"  It's a what the heck moment.  This is partly because the Quarian saw that the Geth would be a real help in getting them re-established on Rannoch.

Well, in my experience Shep sacrificed himself, so hard to have to many relashionships after that.

[edisnooM]

botfly10 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

[Snipped for size] 

[Snipped for size]

Well, in my experience Shep sacrificed himself, so hard to have to many relashionships after that.

True, that is rather final.
I wonder if the Shepard VI survived?  

Modifié par edisnooM, 06 mai 2012 - 02:37 .

[KitaSaturnyne]

edisnooM wrote...

True, that is rather final.
I wonder if the Shepard VI survived?  

Well, 7% is better than 0%, I suppose.

[delta_vee]

edisnooM wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

[Snipped for size] 

[Snipped for size]

Well, in my experience Shep sacrificed himself, so hard to have to many relashionships after that.

True, that is rather final.
I wonder if the Shepard VI survived?  

I think that was the purpose of the conversations just before the final push - to give closure of a sort. It seemed awkward as hell to me at the time, even before the Infamous Ten Minutes, so I'd debate the efficacy of it as a narrative device. But it was there.

[edisnooM]

delta_vee wrote...

edisnooM wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

[Snipped for size] 

[Snipped for size]

Well, in my experience Shep sacrificed himself, so hard to have to many relashionships after that.

True, that is rather final.
I wonder if the Shepard VI survived?  

I think that was the purpose of the conversations just before the final push - to give closure of a sort. It seemed awkward as hell to me at the time, even before the Infamous Ten Minutes, so I'd debate the efficacy of it as a narrative device. But it was there.

I read an article about that actually, I may have mixed up some of it, but essentially he said that the placement of the final goodbyes was wrong narritively, put within the rising action, that they had the resolution and the climax all mixed up which was why it felt so disjointed. Here is the article if anyone's interested: jmstevenson.me/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/. It's definately an interesting read.

Modifié par edisnooM, 06 mai 2012 - 03:02 .

[botfly10]

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

edisnooM wrote...

True, that is rather final.
I wonder if the Shepard VI survived?  

Well, 7% is better than 0%, I suppose.

Oh man, I just realized what you guys were talking about!  LMAO


Oh, and btw, how come the trolls and flamers don't come into this thread?

[botfly10]

delta_vee wrote...

edisnooM wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

[Snipped for size] 

[Snipped for size]

Well, in my experience Shep sacrificed himself, so hard to have to many relashionships after that.

True, that is rather final.
I wonder if the Shepard VI survived?  

I think that was the purpose of the conversations just before the final push - to give closure of a sort. It seemed awkward as hell to me at the time, even before the Infamous Ten Minutes, so I'd debate the efficacy of it as a narrative device. But it was there.

It worked on me.  It was a little weird and slighly contrived to walk from character to character but I understood why it needed to happen there based on the mechanics of the game and I was able to forgive that and just soak it up.  

It was a very intense moment.  Especially the one with Liara.  I choked up.

Modifié par botfly10, 06 mai 2012 - 03:46 .

[edisnooM]

botfly10 wrote...

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

edisnooM wrote...

True, that is rather final.
I wonder if the Shepard VI survived?  

Well, 7% is better than 0%, I suppose.

Oh man, I just realized what you guys were talking about!  LMAO


Oh, and btw, how come the trolls and flamers don't come into this thread?

Shh don't Jinx it. 

There have been a few over the course of the past 60 pages, mostly people ignore them or don't rise to the barbs and they seem to just go away.

Edit: Yeah Liaras final scene was pretty good. She was my Shepards LI, but I sort of liked the mind meld part in the non-LI version better.
Then she ran off with my ship and pilot.

Modifié par edisnooM, 06 mai 2012 - 03:57 .

[botfly10]

edisnooM wrote...

botfly10 wrote...

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

edisnooM wrote...

True, that is rather final.
I wonder if the Shepard VI survived?  

Well, 7% is better than 0%, I suppose.

Oh man, I just realized what you guys were talking about!  LMAO


Oh, and btw, how come the trolls and flamers don't come into this thread?

Shh don't Jinx it. 

There have been a few over the course of the past 60 pages, mostly people ignore them or don't rise to the barbs and they seem to just go away.

Seriously, I just had my thread that was just basically just an expression of pure joy over the ME series go down in a flaming pile of flame.

It was really pretty feel-good until some ass decided he couln't cope with people's enjoyment and end-game-raged all over it.  He busy now telling everyone why what they felt is just plain wrong.

Modifié par botfly10, 06 mai 2012 - 03:57 .

[delta_vee]

botfly10 wrote...

It worked on me.  It was a little weird and slighly contrived to walk from character to character but I understood why it needed to happen there based on the mechanics of the game and I was able to forgive that and just soak it up.  

It was a very intense moment.  Especially the one with Liara.  I choked up.

Oh, the conversations themselves were well-done, I'll admit. Garrus was a highlight for me. The structural problem, in my eyes, is that we weren't given any counterpart on the other side of the Crucible's activation. The brief Normandy crash scene was supposed to fill that role, I suppose, but it was rather...cursory...in almost everyone's estimation.

Oh, and btw, how come the trolls and flamers don't come into this thread?

They're intimidated by our textwalls, I suppose.