1114 réponses à ce sujet

[Jvolikas]

 I chose Destroy, since, you know that was my objective for 100+ hours...

[Geneaux486]

1. A plot hole is a lack of information.

Dude you really need to stop defining things, your track record in that department is miserable so far.

Plothole according to http://www.reference...owse/Plot holes:

[color=#333333">A plot hole  ]against[/color] the flow of logic established by the story's plot.
While many stories have unanswered questions, unlikely events or chance occurrences, a plot hole is one that is essential to the story's outcome. Plot holes are usually seen as weaknesses or flaws in a story, and writers usually try to avoid them to make their stories seem as realistic as possible.

While it's true that unanswered questions can count as plotholes, in this case the Catalyst's lack of involvement in the first game is not one of those.  Knowing what the Catalyst is doing is largely irrelevant to the matter at hand, and to the story in general.  The Catalyst is there, it exists, and it wasn't visibly involved in the events of the first Mass Effect game, so logically we can infer that something was keeping it from intervening.  Unawareness (Reapers enter dormant states to conserve energy, why would the Catalyst be any different?), restrictions in its programming, or simply personal choice.  It also doesn't go against previously established lore because the Citadel, while we learn a lot about it in the games, is still largely an unknown, and we were nowhere near close to learning everything about it by the time the end of the third game rolled around.

2. You mentioned arrival scientist being aware of the process yes...but,they gave into there "suggestions" as Dr Kenson herself said in a video log where she starts to believe that the reapers CANT possibly do what shepard says they do  because life continues in every cycle! So yes its is in the codex and yes it does support my claim.

She gave into the suggestions because she had no choice, because Indoctrination is not a thing that can be resisted.  She knew about indoctrination, she took necesarry precautions, she did everything a person can do to withstand it, and it still steamrolled her brain into a Reaper-sympathetic pancake.  There is literally no observable case of someone actually resisting indoctrination.  So no, it does not support your claim, it actually does the exact opposite.

3. There are hints all through the ending man..The kid and grandfather even tell us "Ok, one... more... story!" as well as the kid is the same kid as the catalyst! there are other clues too like TIM's choice is paragon and Andersons choice is renegade. Why the change?

Why does the grandfather say "Ok, one more story"?  Because he's telling stories to his grandkid.  He also says that it all really happened.  And Control and Destroy are not paragon/renegade respectively.  They're color-coded to show their varying lethality.  Both choices are a mixture of paragon and renegade.

4. You do know that the I.T. states that your not really killing your synthetic friends if you pick destroy right? He mentions this so you will not pick that one and even goes so far as to switch the color (blue/red) of paragon and renegade!

The logic here fails for two reasons.  First of all, there's no reason to doubt that the Crucible wipes out synthetic life because a) everything else the Catalyst tells you about the outcomes of your choices comes true (unless you already subscribe to IT and believe everything else to be false, just one example of the circular logic present in the theory) and the races that designed it would target all synthetics as the easiest way to not only to disable Reapers but also to wipe out any synthetic baddies they may have been fighting at the time.  Second of all, if the Catalyst was trying to mislead you, he wouldn't have told you about destroy at all.  Or if he did, he would have tried to tell you that it would wipe out everything, because not every Shepard actually cares about synthetics.  But the Catalyst doesn't do those things.  He lays it all out on the table, acknowleges that the Crucible can better accomplish what the Reapers can not, and gives Shepard all the options in the interest of full disclosure and as a sign of cooperation.

 I chose Destroy, since, you know that was my objective for 100+ hours... 

My Shepard's objective was to save everyone, including the Geth, and he accomplished it by choosing control.  Like I've said, there's no wrong choice.


 

Modifié par Geneaux486, 16 mai 2012 - 06:33 .

[feliciano2040]

Geneaux486 wrote...

My Shepard's objective was to save everyone, including the Geth, and he accomplished it by choosing control.  Like I've said, there's no wrong choice.

The voice of reason, it still exists in the BSN.

[WinterCrow]

Geneaux486 wrote...

4. You do know that the I.T. states that your not really killing your synthetic friends if you pick destroy right? He mentions this so you will not pick that one and even goes so far as to switch the color (blue/red) of paragon and renegade!

The logic here fails for two reasons.  First of all, there's no reason to doubt that the Crucible wipes out synthetic life because a) everything else the Catalyst tells you about the outcomes of your choices comes true (unless you already subscribe to IT and believe everything else to be false, just one example of the circular logic present in the theory) and the races that designed it would target all synthetics as the easiest way to not only to disable Reapers but also to wipe out any synthetic baddies they may have been fighting at the time.  Second of all, if the Catalyst was trying to mislead you, he wouldn't have told you about destroy at all.  Or if he did, he would have tried to tell you that it would wipe out everything, because not every Shepard actually cares about synthetics.  But the Catalyst doesn't do those things.  He lays it all out on the table, acknowleges that the Crucible can better accomplish what the Reapers can not, and gives Shepard all the options in the interest of full disclosure and as a sign of cooperation.

 I chose Destroy, since, you know that was my objective for 100+ hours... 

My Shepard's objective was to save everyone, including the Geth, and he accomplished it by choosing control.  Like I've said, there's no wrong choice.

"Everything else the Catalyst tells you about the outcomes of your choices comes true"

Here we go again. It's not. Even though he only suggested Shepard would die and he survives, when choosing this with low EMS everything is devastated. It wipes out everyone, not just synthetics.

Secondly, we have the "EDI walks out in destroy" thing. I have yet to confirm it myself, but Jessica Merizan (Bioware CM) already talked about that being all right.

And we know nothing about the Synthesis effect, or if it's really what he tells you. Honestly, to me that option was just retarded, it made no sense. Space Magic creating magic DNA.

Then you have that other thing: 3 games, 100+ hours and over 3 years of Shepard's life hearing "It is not a thing you can comprehend" and "we are beyond your comprehension" and yet we get a totally clear explanation of the reapers in 4 lines of dialogue. Wow. It sure was that simple. And it sure it's Bioware's fault, they didn't come up with anything better.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. There are no wrong choices? I'd argue, but I can see why some people chose Control or Synthesis, I can even understand their reasons. What I don't understand is why you believe that damn brat so easily, when you have all the clues not to trust him. From the shape to his speech.

[Geneaux486]

Even though he only suggested Shepard would die and he survives, when choosing this with low EMS everything is devastated. It wipes out everyone, not just synthetics.

He says "Even you are partly synthetic" not "you will die". So no, he's not lying about that. As for the crucible wiping out everything, that's not the Catalyst's fault, it's the result of shody workmanship from your side.

Secondly, we have the "EDI walks out in destroy" thing. I have yet to confirm it myself, but Jessica Merizan (Bioware CM) already talked about that being all right.

Like you I've seen no proof of this.

And we know nothing about the Synthesis effect, or if it's really what he tells you. Honestly, to me that option was just retarded, it made no sense. Space Magic creating magic DNA.

Whatever the energy wave did, it caused some kind of genetic mutation. Maybe they'll explain how it works in the EC.

Then you have that other thing: 3 games, 100+ hours and over 3 years of Shepard's life hearing "It is not a thing you can comprehend" and "we are beyond your comprehension" and yet we get a totally clear explanation of the reapers in 4 lines of dialogue. Wow. It sure was that simple. And it sure it's Bioware's fault, they didn't come up with anything better.

Really it isn't a thing Shepard could comprehend. We're told why the Reapers do what they do, and it still sounds like bull**** to us, but they're basing their conclusion off of billions of observed cycles where the same thing happened over and over again. Additionally, the Reapers themselves are something we can't fathom.  Melted down genetic material of an entire race, but still containing billions of organic minds.  Furthermore, what the Catalyst tells us isn't a far jump from what Soveriegn tells us. "We impose order on the choas of organic evolution", or Harbinger "We are your salvation through destruction". The Catalyst sheds more light on it, but does not contradict established lore.  The Reapers are still in the wrong, of course, hence why they're villains, and need to be stopped.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 16 mai 2012 - 01:37 .

[Hadeedak]

Because your Shepard apparently does, so anything else is breaking character and therefore wicked!

*ahem* Because love him or hate him, the Star Kid's exposition chunk is what we've got to go on, unless we start throwing bits out, in which case... It could mean anything and discussion is largely an exercise in headcanon.

Not that it isn't already with the ending's vagueness, but at least we have some base parameters to go with.

[jli84]

For some reason I got it in my head that only destroy would blow up the relays, so I went green. Then the relays blew up anyway, and seeing the Joker & co hybrids really made me cringe...Immediately went back to my last save and made a straight-line run for destroy. Synthesis - never again 


Control was never an option. 

Modifié par jli84, 16 mai 2012 - 08:23 .

[Hadeedak]

Uh... Jili, I hate to tell you this...

Control doesn't blow up the relays.

[kookie28]

I like the parts of IT that don't require you to make millions of assumptions.

[Ieldra]

kookie28 wrote...
I like the parts of IT that don't require you to make millions of assumptions.

[Kargesh voice]: You mean there actually are some?

Edit:
Heh....that's more to the point than I intended. IT followers have been sold fish from the Presidium.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 16 mai 2012 - 08:33 .

[jli84]

Hadeedak wrote...

Uh... Jili, I hate to tell you this...

Control doesn't blow up the relays.

I know. Still not an option...All thanks to TIM (kudos to him)

And now that Ive got my head around the ending (if thats even possible )
it will never be anything other than destroy...unless something in the EC changes everything. 

Modifié par jli84, 16 mai 2012 - 08:32 .

[Hadeedak]

Ieldra2 wrote...

kookie28 wrote...
I like the parts of IT that don't require you to make millions of assumptions.

[Kargesh voice]: You mean there actually are some?

Bahdum csh.

[Hadeedak]

jli84 wrote...

Hadeedak wrote...

Uh... Jili, I hate to tell you this...

Control doesn't blow up the relays.

I know. Still not an option...All thanks to TIM (kudos to him)

And now that Ive got my head around the ending (if thats even possible )
it will never be anything other than destroy...unless something in the EC changes everything. 

Way to let TIM boss you around from beyond the grave! D:

[kookie28]

Hadeedak wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

kookie28 wrote...
I like the parts of IT that don't require you to make millions of assumptions.

[Kargesh voice]: You mean there actually are some?

Bahdum csh.

Thank you!  We'll be here all week!

[jli84]

Hadeedak wrote...



Way to let TIM boss you around from beyond the grave! D:

lol...True that!

Actually, after Shepards talks with TIM, control just felt like it would be against everything my shep believed in. I dont play as myself, and sometimes I just have to go with what feels right for the character. Just like synthesis also felt all wrong when I saw it play out.

[Mobius-Silent]

Geneaux486 wrote...
While it's true that unanswered questions can count as plotholes, in this case the Catalyst's lack of involvement in the first game is not one of those.  Knowing what the Catalyst is doing is largely irrelevant to the matter at hand, and to the story in general.  The Catalyst is there, it exists, and it wasn't visibly involved in the events of the first Mass Effect game, so logically we can infer that something was keeping it from intervening.  Unawareness (Reapers enter dormant states to conserve energy, why would the Catalyst be any different?), restrictions in its programming, or simply personal choice.  It also doesn't go against previously established lore because the Citadel, while we learn a lot about it in the games, is still largely an unknown, and we were nowhere near close to learning everything about it by the time the end of the third game rolled around.

Firstly I have to say that I really like your posts, for the most part I appreciate the points you are making and they are made well. However this is flat out wrong. Demonstrably so.

Let’s talk about the tools an author has when they are relating an actor to a plot point.

Location: Is the actor within range of acting on the event
Motivation: What action would the actor choose to take
Ability: What actions are within the actor’s ability to take.

(These principles are so axial to critical thinking that they are used in law enforcement as motive, opportunity and means)

My premise: In the Crucible activation scene in ME3 we are given information that destroys the narrative coherence of the plot of ME1, due to the author presenting us with unqualified information that would cause us to assume that the Catalyst should have intervened in the events of ME1.

What we learn of the Catalyst in the last moments of ME3:

Location:

"The Citadel, It's my home"

"The Citadel is part of me"

Both present tense, however that Catalyst later refers to events long past in the present tense indicating that it is speaking about a long period of time that stretches back before the events of ME1. Hence the Catalyst was present at the sought after location (The Citadel) during ME1

Motivation:

"The Reapers are mine, I control them, they are my solution"

In ME1 when we realised that Saren was under the direction of Sovereign he/it because our antagonist. Sovereign (and by extension the Reapers) received the the blame for the crimes we had witnesses and we learned a little of their supposed motivations on Ilos. Whatever we know of Reaper motivations we would now naturally assume that the Catalyst shares the bulk of these motivations. We don't actually know if the Reapers have any independent agency any more but if they do we must assume that the Catalyst is capable of quashing that from the above statement.

Hence if Sovereign had the motivation to open the Citadel Relay we must assume that the Catalyst would share that motivation. This is supported by the explicit declaration that the cycle is the creation of the Catalyst and that the opening of the Citadel relay was a critical part of the completion of single cycle.

Hence without additional qualification we must assume that the catalyst would open the Citadel Relay to start the cycle if it could.

Additionally here we see the Catalyst speak about the solution while speaking in present tense, indicating that "now" in the Catalyst's timeframe is the entire period from when the cycles were started.

Ability:

"The Citadel is part of me"

Mostly only an issue in Sci-Fi or exotic fantasy but sometime we must ask the question of what it means for something to be "part of you", the most common and sensible definition of this would be:

"Able to sense and act through the item in question to the limits of what would be expected due to the nature of the item"

For example, Shepard is on a new alien planet, talking to a non-humanoid creature. To the side of the room a tentacle moves an item from A to B. Shepard asks "What is that" referring to the tenticle, and the creature says "It is a part of me"

Given that it's shaped like a tentacle, it is currently moving and acting with apparent dexterity, we would naturally assume that the creature had control of the movement.

We know that the Citadel is a Mass Relay, and that this function is used by the reapers and by extension it is part of the cycle initiated by the Catalyst. Without further qualification of the limits of the Catalyst's abilities we _must_ assume the Catalyst is capable of opening the Citadel relay.

There we have it, by the authors statements, through the Catalyst, we are given location, motivation and ability for the Catalyst to have prevented our foiling of our Antagonists desires in ME1 without any qualification or reason to assume anything else.

That is a contradiction of the events of ME1 and is a narrative inconsistency that qualifies as a "plot hole"
Much is the same way a murder mystery would most definitely have a plot hole if your sidekick was revealed to be in the room where the murder was committed in the last few moments of the plot without any reason or additional explanation. You would have implicit motivation (they are on your side they woudl want to prevent the murder), location and implicit ability (without some qualification like "I was tied up" we assume the ability to act on our motivations). The natural questions raised would be "Why didn't you prevent the murder?"

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 16 mai 2012 - 08:58 .

[WinterCrow]

Hadeedak wrote...

Uh... Jili, I hate to tell you this...

Control doesn't blow up the relays.

They do, in every option. It's the Citadel that doesn't blow up.

[Mobius-Silent]

WinterCrow wrote...

Hadeedak wrote...

Uh... Jili, I hate to tell you this...

Control doesn't blow up the relays.

They do, in every option. It's the Citadel that doesn't blow up.

It has been sugested by Bioware (Jessica Merizan) that at least some of the relays are only shut down in the control ending. The cinematic where a relays is shown to explode is cut _very_ short in the control ending. Seemingly for no reason other than Bioware didn't want to show the relays rent asunder during that ending.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 16 mai 2012 - 09:49 .

[Shepard Wins]

For those who chose control on synthesis: Congratulations on keeping thousands of races from previous cycles in a liquified-then-solidified in bodies of Reaper form and thus denying all those races ther requiestat in pace. Still feel like a hero?

[WinterCrow]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

WinterCrow wrote...

Hadeedak wrote...

Uh... Jili, I hate to tell you this...

Control doesn't blow up the relays.

They do, in every option. It's the Citadel that doesn't blow up.

It has been sugested by Bioware (Jessica Merizan)that at least some of the relays are only shut down in the control ending. The cinematic where a relays is shown to explode is cut _very_ short in the control ending. Seemingly for no reason other than Bioware didn't want to show the relays rent asunder during that ending.

I just saw the cinematics to be sure, and they do blow up. Sure, the animation is shorter, but they still do. Maybe they don't vaporize and are just easier to rebuild.

About Jessica Merizan... same that with EDI walking out in the destroy option, I won't fully believe anything she said until I see it by myself.

All the Catalyst says is "releasing the energy of the crucible WILL destroy the relays" in every option. Everything points towards that. If Jessica *knows* they don't, wouldn't the kid be lying again?

Geez, ignoring everything till the EC comes would be healthier, and smarter, I just can't.

Modifié par WinterCrow, 16 mai 2012 - 09:45 .

[Mobius-Silent]

WinterCrow wrote...

I just saw the cinematics to be sure, and they do blow up. Sure, the animation is shorter, but they still do. Maybe they don't vaporize and are just easier to rebuild.

All I was saying is that we have reason to look at that cinematics carefully. The rings do break off, there is _an_ explosion and the Ezo core is discharged. However the relay is not hit by the same beam that they are hit with in the other endings and we are not shown the relay body breaking apart. Perhaps thy would just need a new ezo core and new rings, tough but much more possible than building them from scratch. There is definitely _something _different with the relays in control.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 16 mai 2012 - 09:57 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Shepard Wins wrote...

For those who chose control on synthesis: Congratulations on keeping thousands of races from previous cycles in a liquified-then-solidified in bodies of Reaper form and thus denying all those races ther requiestat in pace. Still feel like a hero?

Would you switch off the life support of someone who was not brain-dead but required a machine to live. What was done to the races that buit the reapers was horrible and almost certianly non-consensual but be don't know to what degree they contiunue to exist. Maybe it's a horrific amalgam and they should be granted peace but maybe without the Catalyst's direct control they can find peace in their new form as whole entities.

We just don't know

[Shepard Wins]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Shepard Wins wrote...

For those who chose control on synthesis: Congratulations on keeping thousands of races from previous cycles in a liquified-then-solidified in bodies of Reaper form and thus denying all those races ther requiestat in pace. Still feel like a hero?

Would you switch off the life support of someone who was not brain-dead but required a machine to live. What was done to the races that buit the reapers was horrible and almost certianly non-consensual but be don't know to what degree they contiunue to exist. Maybe it's a horrific amalgam and they should be granted peace but maybe without the Catalyst's direct control they can find peace in their new form as whole entities.

We just don't know

Well I agree with you on that, we don't know. Speculations!!! 

[GimmeDaGun]

I played the game 2 times. I chose destroy both times because I hate the other two options even more and find them highly unethical and illogical and I also feel the constant need to blow the little starbrat creation of artistic integrity to hell along with Casey Hudson's and Mac Walter's "speculations" and incompetence.

[Magiking117]

I chose Synthesis for several reasons:

1) After the journey we'd been through I really didn't want to wipe out the Geth, and EDI.

2) I misunderstood what the Catalyst said. When it told me the Chaos would come back, I thought he was also referring to the Reapers returning to keep it under control. That made Destroy utterly pointless, to me, and was the big reason I decided not to chose it. I was just utterly confused why this ultimate solution would mean only delaying the Reapers another cycle. Turns out I just didn't understand.

3) Control was not an option

4) I latched onto the words 'eternal peace' or whatever it said

5) I thought there would be a more fleshed out ending so was more interested in seeing the consequences of making everyone a hybrid. Unfortunately, the aftermath was a load of poo so I didn't really get to see anything that interesting.