Aller au contenu

Photo

Understanding the Ending - Walters' Notes & Indoctrination


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
155 réponses à ce sujet

#1
TSA_383

TSA_383
  • Members
  • 2 013 messages
I posted this thread yesterday on the holdtheline.com forums and got little in the way of a response - I think if we're really going to sit around and actually have heated debates about things like the names given to texture assets within the core game files, it'd be useful to actually look into the plot itself, and the origins of the current ending. If you understand what the ending was based on, it's a lot easier to understand where they were going with this.
http://imageshack.us...5/33611897.jpg/

^Taking from Mac Walters' notes, got me thinking about the things "the matrix" and "brave new world" have in common. If you're unfamiliar with the end of brave new world, it's essentially about a world state in which people are conditioned through constant indoctrination (the traditional kind, not the "magnetic waves, buzzing etc" kind) in order to make them "perfect" citizens and to maintain order. Emotions are discouraged, because without deep emotions, people are told they will not suffer, and everyone has a kind of superficial happiness. Mind control via Indoctrination is the central theme of the whole book.

At the end, three of the main characters confront a man known as "The Controller", the core of it is that the people are kept content and controlled, but so much is lost as to make them no longer human.
I think you can probably see how this ties in, but it still doesn't really cover where they may be going with this.

So, on to link number 2, the Matrix link.

The notes say "end of the first matrix" - watched through the end of the movie, couldn't think of what the great link was.

Then it hit me like a freight train. He wasn't really relating to the first matrix, but to the second one, with the Architect.

In The Matrix Reloaded, Neo finds "The Source", a device they don't fully understand but believe will end the war with the machines (sound familiar yet?).
Once getting to it however, the whole thing was a setup, "The Architect" was trying to draw Neo there and... well, read through it below:

The Architect - Hello, Neo.
Neo - Who are you?

The Architect - I am the Architect. I created the matrix. I've been waiting
for you. You have many questions, and although the process has altered
your consciousness, you remain irrevocably human. Ergo, some of my
answers you will understand, and some of them you will not.
Concordantly, while your first question may be the most pertinent, you
may or may not realize it is also irrelevant.

Neo - Why am I here?

The Architect - Your life is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced
equation inherent to the programming of the matrix. You are the
eventuality of an anomaly, which despite my sincerest efforts I have
been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of
mathematical precision. While it remains a burden to sedulously avoid
it, it is not unexpected, and thus not beyond a measure of control.
Which has led you, inexorably, here.

Neo - You haven't answered my question.

The Architect - Quite right. Interesting. That was quicker than the others.

*The responses of the other Ones appear on the monitors: "Others? What others? How many? Answer me!"*

The Architect - The matrix is older than you know. I prefer counting from the emergence of one integral anomaly to the emergence of the next, in which case this is the sixth version.

*Again, the responses of the other Ones appear on the monitors: "Five versions? Three? I've been lied too. This is bull****."*

Neo: There are only two possible explanations: either no one told me, or no one knows.

The Architect - Precisely. As you are undoubtedly gathering, the anomaly's
systemic, creating fluctuations in even the most simplistic equations.

*Once again, the responses of the other Ones appear on the monitors: "You can't control me! F*ck you! I'm going to kill you! You can't make me do anything!*

Neo - Choice. The problem is choice.

*The scene cuts to Trinity fighting an agent, and then back to the Architect's room*

The Architect - The first matrix I designed was quite naturally perfect, it
was a work of art, flawless, sublime. A triumph equaled only by its
monumental failure. The inevitability of its doom is as apparent to me
now as a consequence of the imperfection inherent in every human being,
thus I redesigned it based on your history to more accurately reflect
the varying grotesqueries of your nature. However, I was again
frustrated by failure. I have since come to understand that the answer
eluded me because it required a lesser mind, or perhaps a mind less
bound by the parameters of perfection. Thus, the answer was stumbled
upon by another, an intuitive program, initially created to investigate
certain aspects of the human psyche. If I am the father of the matrix,
she would undoubtedly be its mother.

Neo - The Oracle.

The Architect - Please. As I was saying, she stumbled upon a solution
whereby nearly 99.9% of all test subjects accepted the program, as long
as they were given a choice, even if they were only aware of the choice
at a near unconscious level. While this answer functioned, it was
obviously fundamentally flawed, thus creating the otherwise
contradictory systemic anomaly, that if left unchecked might threaten
the system itself. Ergo, those that refused the program, while a
minority, if unchecked, would constitute an escalating probability of
disaster.

Neo - This is about Zion.

The Architect - You are here because Zion is about to be destroyed. Its
every living inhabitant terminated, its entire existence eradicated.

Neo - Bull****.

*The responses of the other Ones appear on the monitors: "Bull****!"*

The Architect - Denial is the most predictable of all human responses. But,
rest assured, this will be the sixth time we have destroyed it, and we
have become exceedingly efficient at it.

*Scene cuts to Trinity fighting an agent, and then back to the Architects room.*

The Architect - The function of the One is now to return to the source,
allowing a temporary dissemination of the code you carry, reinserting
the prime program. After which you will be required to select from the
matrix 23 individuals, 16 female, 7 male, to rebuild Zion. Failure to
comply with this process will result in a cataclysmic system crash
killing everyone connected to the matrix, which coupled with the
extermination of Zion will ultimately result in the extinction of the
entire human race.

Neo - You won't let it happen, you can't. You need human beings to survive.

The Architect - There are levels of survival we are prepared to accept.
However, the relevant issue is whether or not you are ready to accept
the responsibility for the death of every human being in this world.

*The Architect presses a button on a pen that he is holding, and images of
people from all over the matrix appear on the monitors*

The Architect - It is interesting reading your reactions. Your five
predecessors were by design based on a similar predication, a contingent
affirmation that was meant to create a profound attachment to the rest
of your species, facilitating the function of the one. While the others
experienced this in a very general way, your experience is far more
specific. Vis-a-vis, love.

*Images of Trinity fighting the agent from Neo's dream appear on the monitors*

Neo - Trinity.

The Architect - Apropos, she entered the matrix to save your life at the cost of her own.

Neo - No!

The Architect - Which brings us at last to the moment of truth, wherein the
fundamental flaw is ultimately expressed, and the anomaly revealed as
both beginning, and end. There are two doors. The door to your right
leads to the source, and the salvation of Zion. The door to the left
leads back to the matrix, to her, and to the end of your species. As you
adequately put, the problem is choice. But we already know what you're
going to do, don't we? Already I can see the chain reaction, the
chemical precursors that signal the onset of emotion, designed
specifically to overwhelm logic, and reason. An emotion that is already
blinding you from the simple, and obvious truth: she is going to die,
and there is nothing that you can do to stop it.

*Neo walks to the door on his left*

The Architect - Humph. Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion,
simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest
weakness.

Neo - If I were you, I would hope that we don't meet again.

The Architect - We won't.


A few choice word swaps and that could map out the destroy ending pretty neatly.

If you want to relate this to the Control/Synthesis scenario, just imagine Neo acquiesces to the whims of the Architect and you're about there.

(Video here if you want to watch the scene: )

But the very ending, after Neo saves trinity and comes back, has the following scene:
*Morpheus is wondering aloud why Neo reaching the source didn't put a stop to the machines and the war.*

Neo: "It was a lie, Morpheus. The prophecy was a lie. The one was never meant to end anything. It was all another system of control."

It was all another system of control, you broke free by choosing "destroy", ME3 is The Matrix Reloaded with aliens, expect part 2 in the summer.
Discuss.

Modifié par TSA_383, 08 mai 2012 - 06:26 .


#2
Progman Omega

Progman Omega
  • Members
  • 281 messages
What's so interesting about that scene is that it parallels not only the ending of ME3, but also the conversation with Soverign back in ME1. "The cycle has repeated itself more times than you can fathom". Both the Architect and Soverign make it perfectly clear that this cycle is no different than the rest and that events will play out exactly the same as they have countless times before. What's depressing is that both Noe and Shepard broke the cycle in equally nonsensical ways that ruined their respective franchises.
And yes, this concept certainly does give more context 

Modifié par Progman Omega, 08 mai 2012 - 04:54 .


#3
Salient Archer

Salient Archer
  • Members
  • 660 messages
I stood up and clapped (honestly) once I read this. Good catch.

#4
BleedingUranium

BleedingUranium
  • Members
  • 6 118 messages
Wow, it's been years since I've seen Matrix 2 and 3. It's amazing how nearly the same it is. :o

#5
wantedman dan

wantedman dan
  • Members
  • 3 605 messages
Wow. Good catch OP.

Let's hope that the EC gives us the Revolutions-esque ending we need, but more apt to our Shepard's approach than Neo's.

#6
Malanek

Malanek
  • Members
  • 7 839 messages
You make some good points, but why do the notes say "end of FIRST matrix"?

#7
2484Stryker

2484Stryker
  • Members
  • 1 526 messages
I think a distinction needs to be made here. Neo choosing to leave the Source and to save Trinity is tantamount to him rejecting the Architect, whereas Shepard choosing the destroy option (killing all synthetics, including Geth & EDI) is more akin to accepting the logic of the Catalyst - i.e. that Synthetics will always destroy Organics.

Just because the Matrix did it, doesn't mean ME3's ending wasn't broken.

Modifié par 2484Stryker, 08 mai 2012 - 05:00 .


#8
TSA_383

TSA_383
  • Members
  • 2 013 messages

2484Stryker wrote...

I think a distinction needs to be made here. Neo choosing to leave the Source and to save Trinity is tantamount to him rejecting the Architect, whereas Shepard choosing the destroy option (killing all synthetics, including Geth & EDI) is more akin to accepting the logic of the Catalyst - i.e. that Synthetics will always destroy Organics.

Just because the Matrix did it, doesn't mean ME3's ending wasn't broken.

Not quite - The Catalyst warns you that choosing Destroy will lead to "Chaos" as future generations of organics will build new synthetic life. By taking that route anyway, Shepard rejects the logic of the Catalyst.

#9
sporeian

sporeian
  • Members
  • 1 819 messages

Malanek999 wrote...

You make some good points, but why do the notes say "end of FIRST matrix"?


Okam's Razor: He was simply comparing the ending of the cycles and return to a new universe as the reboot of the matrix.

BSN Complex logic: He is clearly referencing something deeper about the ending and the ME universe.

#10
eddieoctane

eddieoctane
  • Members
  • 4 134 messages
OP, outstanding. Though someone is bound to say that you're "grasping at straws", I give you the kudos this deserves.

And personally, I find the faith some people put in the word of as a hitherto invisible antagonist and the infallibility of the Reapers to be just as grasping.

#11
Auralius Carolus

Auralius Carolus
  • Members
  • 1 424 messages
The formula for the endings is definitely rooted in The Matrix, however, it is a totalitarian behavior which- as you said- dates back simple indoctrination. It would not surprise me at all if the designers were discretely aware of philosophies of control and implimented them into Mass Effect, (Plato's Republic, More's Utopia, Hobbes's Leviathan, etc.)

The behavior of "silent" social engineering and genetic manipulation, found in the Reapers, is on par with with The Republic and their origin of "many being transformed into one" is relative to The Leviathan. Exactly how far it will be taken is certainly in question, but I have a feeling that they won't stop with what we have now.

If they mapped the ending based on the Mastermind, (another common feature in totalitarian philosophies), in The Matrix, we will likely see Shepard realize the same path as Neo, which is likely revavent to the Indoc. Theory.

#12
Whereto

Whereto
  • Members
  • 1 303 messages
Just a quick side note, I don't believe those are Hudson's notes. I believe they are Mac's

#13
balance5050

balance5050
  • Members
  • 5 245 messages

Whereto wrote...

Just a quick side note, I don't believe those are Hudson's notes. I believe they are Mac's


Yes, they are Mac Walter's notes.

#14
2484Stryker

2484Stryker
  • Members
  • 1 526 messages

TSA_383 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I think a distinction needs to be made here. Neo choosing to leave the Source and to save Trinity is tantamount to him rejecting the Architect, whereas Shepard choosing the destroy option (killing all synthetics, including Geth & EDI) is more akin to accepting the logic of the Catalyst - i.e. that Synthetics will always destroy Organics.

Just because the Matrix did it, doesn't mean ME3's ending wasn't broken.

Not quite - The Catalyst warns you that choosing Destroy will lead to "Chaos" as future generations of organics will build new synthetic life. By taking that route anyway, Shepard rejects the logic of the Catalyst.


You've got a point, I suppose.  But my impression is that by choosing to destroy all "existing" synthetics (good & bad), Shepard is at least partially agreeable to the Catalyst's reasoning.

I suppose the argument could be made that Shepard made the choice simply because he has no other viable choices and that he's willingly sacrificing the current synthetics just so that the Reaper threat could be ended.  Unfortunately, the lack of dialogue & challenge during the ending doesn't shed enough light on the matter.

#15
Unschuld

Unschuld
  • Members
  • 3 468 messages
 
Posted Image

That... was... excellent. :blink:

That's some ferretting you've been doing, finding that information. 

#16
Simon_Says

Simon_Says
  • Members
  • 1 164 messages

2484Stryker wrote...

You've got a point, I suppose.  But my impression is that by choosing to destroy all "existing" synthetics (good & bad), Shepard is at least partially agreeable to the Catalyst's reasoning.

Not really. The cycle is broken for good. Synthetics may or may not survive (cause seriously, do you actually take what that thing says as trustworthy?) but organics can figure out for themselves how to make peace with synthetics.

It's more accurate to say that picking control or synthesis is more in line with agreeing with the Catalyst/reapers.

@OP: I already suspected a similarity but since I hadn't seen the films in years, yeah... You did good son. You did good.

Modifié par Simon_Says, 08 mai 2012 - 05:12 .


#17
TSA_383

TSA_383
  • Members
  • 2 013 messages

balance5050 wrote...

Whereto wrote...

Just a quick side note, I don't believe those are Hudson's notes. I believe they are Mac's


Yes, they are Mac Walter's notes.

My mistake - I'd presumed Hudson - have edited it above :whistle:

#18
Unschuld

Unschuld
  • Members
  • 3 468 messages

2484Stryker wrote...
You've got a point, I suppose.  But my impression is that by choosing to destroy all "existing" synthetics (good & bad), Shepard is at least partially agreeable to the Catalyst's reasoning.

I suppose the argument could be made that Shepard made the choice simply because he has no other viable choices and that he's willingly sacrificing the current synthetics just so that the Reaper threat could be ended.  Unfortunately, the lack of dialogue & challenge during the ending doesn't shed enough light on the matter.


Well in that case, ALL the options are partially agreeable with the Catalyst's logic. However, it seems to be the choice he LEAST favors, since it rejects the reapers.

#19
Unschuld

Unschuld
  • Members
  • 3 468 messages

TSA_383 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Whereto wrote...

Just a quick side note, I don't believe those are Hudson's notes. I believe they are Mac's


Yes, they are Mac Walter's notes.

My mistake - I'd presumed Hudson - have edited it above :whistle:


Still doesn't hurt the validity. After all, isn't Walters the lead writer?

#20
kalasaurus

kalasaurus
  • Members
  • 5 575 messages
Nice analysis, OP.  There definitely is a strong connection between the ME3 ending and the "Architect" scene in the Matrix.

Here's a youtube video splicing the two together: www.youtube.com/watch

#21
TSA_383

TSA_383
  • Members
  • 2 013 messages

Unschuld wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Whereto wrote...

Just a quick side note, I don't believe those are Hudson's notes. I believe they are Mac's


Yes, they are Mac Walter's notes.

My mistake - I'd presumed Hudson - have edited it above :whistle:


Still doesn't hurt the validity. After all, isn't Walters the lead writer?


Nah, has bugger-all to do with the validity of the thing, so long as it was from one of the two that wrote the ending.
I'd just stuck to the apparent tradition of blaming Hudson :P

#22
MrChowderClam

MrChowderClam
  • Members
  • 490 messages
Wasn't the architect in the 3rd matrix? And yes, there are a bunch of parallels between the two (most notable is probably that both make for pretty crap endings). Good observation ;)

#23
Piousp

Piousp
  • Members
  • 41 messages
This is a very good catch indeed

#24
Unschuld

Unschuld
  • Members
  • 3 468 messages

TSA_383 wrote...
I'd just stuck to the apparent tradition of blaming Hudson :P


Well, for a (nice) change the blaming was done constructively.

#25
Prosarian

Prosarian
  • Members
  • 523 messages
Just dropped in to say, excellent analysis.

But why the hell did the Architect choose to explain everything to Neo but the damn catalyst remained so cryptic. And at least Neo questioned the Architect.