126 réponses à ce sujet

[azerSheppard]

Unless I'm shown something similar to what it's telling me then I dismiss it as bullsh*t. 

The Catalyst is talking about a pretty specific situation. Organics will always create synthetics, these synthetics will always try to wipe out all organic life, and these synthetics can't be stopped.

There's literally nothing in this game that even comes close to that. Literally nothing. The kid may be an eons old machine intelligence that has seen it happen many time before, but despite it being a flawed premise to being with, unless it actually uses some solid reasoning to convince me that I should take it seriously I will continue to ignore its little problem.

So you would dismiss anything you can't see? Do you dismiss the theory of evolution because you can't see it occur? What about quantum fluctuations? The big bang?
Just because the scope goes beyond your reasoning ability, does not make it false.


This is an erronous way of thinking, the failure here isn't the theory behind tech singularity and unfriendly super AI, rather the failed way of BW executing this plot thread. You say you won't believe it unless it's told with solid reasoning, I say they should have had given solid reasoning to convince the players.
But this is very DIFFICULT to do, and therefore BW originally decided for the reapers to be incomprehensible, due to our "feeble minds".

It's a singularity, and the machine is intelligent with at least the basics of human ways of thinking. There's no certainty with this, there can't be. It's specifically called a singularity and an event horizon because we don't know what happens after it. There's no reason to believe an AI will think this way other than the Catalyst's word, which is worthless. 

That is actually a rather old theory, but according to recent discoveries, making a "friendly" AI is harder than an "unfriendly" one. Therefore there would be a larger chance for UAI to achieve singularty.

Also an tech singularity would not follow basic human thinking, as it can change it's "source code" to whatever it likes. THAT is what predefines an UAI, being "shackled" is defined as FAI, because as soon as a FAI can change it's source code, it can chage it's way of thinking to whatever it more profitable.

The catalyst is an example of a friendly super AI, one that is definetly shackled to some level. I would think it's word is superior to a human, whose vision is limited, a being like the Star Child, unlike us, is free from the strains of time, and therefore sees everything objectively. Data comes in, data gets analysed, new viewpoint is added. Best viewpoint is chosen.

What two other authors have said is irrelevant. 

Anyone who reads Arthur  would know about his ideas on nanotechnology,(and therefore would call "space magic" on eveything, except actual space magic know as biotics and ME) and also the idea that someone somewhere in the universe has already reached a singularity, and may have set plans to prohibit others to achieve it.

[NRieh]

Destroy is arguably the most redundant and galaxy dooming choice, all technology is destroyed

Now where did this one come from? Kid did not say "all technology". Not even in live version. He said that much-synthetical shep can't live without it...and it's the only ending with +6sec of hope? No one knows what desrtoy really destroys. I'd say even reapers are questionable.

[azerSheppard]

Nrieh wrote...

Destroy is arguably the most redundant and galaxy dooming choice, all technology is destroyed

Now where did this one come from? Kid did not say "all technology". Not even in live version. He said that much-synthetical shep can't live without it...and it's the only ending with +6sec of hope? No one knows what desrtoy really destroys. I'd say even reapers are questionable.

Destroy most certainly get's rid of the reapers, BUT NOT OF THE PROBLEM.
That problem being technological singularity occuring in the future, and organics being wiped out because of it.
Even if only the relays and reapers get destroyed.

[The Night Mammoth]

azerSheppard wrote...

TheNightMammoth wrote...

Unless I'm shown something similar to what it's telling me then I dismiss it as bullsh*t. 

The Catalyst is talking about a pretty specific situation. Organics will always create synthetics, these synthetics will always try to wipe out all organic life, and these synthetics can't be stopped.

There's literally nothing in this game that even comes close to that. Literally nothing. The kid may be an eons old machine intelligence that has seen it happen many time before, but despite it being a flawed premise to being with, unless it actually uses some solid reasoning to convince me that I should take it seriously I will continue to ignore its little problem.

So you would dismiss anything you can't see? Do you dismiss the theory of evolution because you can't see it occur? What about quantum fluctuations? The big bang?
Just because the scope goes beyond your reasoning ability, does not make it false.

Strawman.

I dismiss things that have no proof or solid reasoning to support it. 

This is an erronous way of thinking, the failure here isn't the theory behind tech singularity and unfriendly super AI, rather the failed way of BW executing this plot thread. You say you won't believe it unless it's told with solid reasoning, I say they should have had given solid reasoning to convince the players.
But this is very DIFFICULT to do, and therefore BW originally decided for the reapers to be incomprehensible, due to our "feeble minds".

Then we're in agreement on that. I have no qualms with using this theory in fiction, or in Mass Effect, it's an intriguing concept that I've had much discussion about in school.

What I have a problem with is the stupid execution of it, the extremely basic form of it presented in game, and just how disconnected it is. Nothing in the game up until that point even puts forward the basic idea. 

Leave the Reapers unexplained or at least come up with something plausible and interesting. Shifting the narrative focus and plot direction to this in the last five minutes is just annoying. 

It's a singularity, and the machine is intelligent with at least the basics of human ways of thinking. There's no certainty with this, there can't be. It's specifically called a singularity and an event horizon because we don't know what happens after it. There's no reason to believe an AI will think this way other than the Catalyst's word, which is worthless. 

That is actually a rather old theory, but according to recent discoveries, making a "friendly" AI is harder than an "unfriendly" one. Therefore there would be a larger chance for UAI to achieve singularty.

Also an tech singularity would not follow basic human thinking, as it can change it's "source code" to whatever it likes. THAT is what predefines an UAI, being "shackled" is defined as FAI, because as soon as a FAI can change it's source code, it can chage it's way of thinking to whatever it more profitable.

That's the basics yes, although the problem arises when people try and hypothesize the effect on humans. No one knows how an AI will react once achieving greater than human intelligence, and it's pretty much a certainty that not every AI will react the same. Which is why this form of the theory in Mass Effect is simply insulting in its simplicity.

The catalyst is an example of a friendly super AI, one that is definetly shackled to some level. I would think it's word is superior to a human, whose vision is limited, a being like the Star Child, unlike us, is free from the strains of time, and therefore sees everything objectively. Data comes in, data gets analysed, new viewpoint is added. Best viewpoint is chosen.

That's one way of thinking about it I suppose, although it being freindly is dubious considering the nature of the Reapers. If I were to really think about it I would probably say something programmed it for a different purpose, and it has malfunctioned somehow, hence why the Reapers are such a monstrous and unethical solution of its problem. Perhaps it no longer holds the same value over life and individuality as we do, and just sees organic life as a whole instead of a population of individuals.

What two other authors have said is irrelevant.

Anyone who reads Arthur  would know about his ideas on nanotechnology,(and therefore would call "space magic" on eveything, except actual space magic know as biotics and ME) and also the idea that someone somewhere in the universe has already reached a singularity, and may have set plans to prohibit others to achieve it.

Nanotech already exists in one form in Mass Effect, it's how the Reapers create husks and their other mooks. Some explanation of how the Crucible interacts with the nano-machines within the Reapers might be plausible, but I wouldn't have a clue how it affects the Geth with Destroy, or every non-Reaper with Synthesis.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 11 mai 2012 - 11:48 .

[kalasaurus]

And they replaced this to make the ending intentionally vague. That is what frustrates me more than these "choices". The attempt to make the ending "smart" through ambiguity and lack of explanation.

[Ieldra]

GlassElephant wrote...
And they replaced this to make the ending intentionally vague. That is what frustrates me more than these "choices". The attempt to make the ending "smart" through ambiguity and lack of explanation.

If it were only that.....smart. There can be no doubt that the result is stupid rather than smart. That's what frustrates me about it.

[wright1978]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@wright1978:
They made Control deliberately contradictory with this sentence about Shepard dying, and made Synthesis 85% nonsensical with the "new DNA" and the "final evolution of life". That's why I say the endings are biased in favor of Destroy. At least it's somewhat clear what happens in that ending. With the others, people are free to project their worst fears on them, and since they want the ending where Shepard survives to be the best, that's what they're doing. With the version of the leaked script, things would have been clearer.

I would sort of say in leaked version endings are biased unfairly against destroy. Relays destroyed in that but nothing in either of the other 2 endings. I don't like the railroading of their destruction/damage across all endings and would have preferred different costs across the endings but there has to be balance of sacrifices to rewards.

I can sort of see how original phrasing would have cleared up some of the worst aspects of people's logical deductions of the current endings. Synthesis still wouldn't make any sense though as there is no explanation of why they stop reaping. That would still be speculation city. Also I still think starbrat's presence infects all the endings as nothing it says can be trusted as it is a genocidal insane maniac. EC is needed and always was going to be needed to explain all the important consequences of the endings.

[jstme]

azerSheppard wrote...

Nrieh wrote...

Destroy is arguably the most redundant and galaxy dooming choice, all technology is destroyed

Now where did this one come from? Kid did not say "all technology". Not even in live version. He said that much-synthetical shep can't live without it...and it's the only ending with +6sec of hope? No one knows what desrtoy really destroys. I'd say even reapers are questionable.

Destroy most certainly get's rid of the reapers, BUT NOT OF THE PROBLEM.
That problem being technological singularity occuring in the future, and organics being wiped out because of it.
Even if only the relays and reapers get destroyed.

Destroy gives that galaxy a chance to evolve naturally. It is about giving power of every life form making its own choices. After all ,technolocigal singularity destroying organic life is just a catalyst assumption.  And it is 100% false according to the facts -  in ME universe it did not happen. You can say that it is due to reaper actions, but reapers did not came into being with the universe, did they? They were created at some stage - and clearly organics were not destroyed yet at that time.
Then there is that taint - killing Geth/EDI and basically all non-organic life. Which is awful.
But: 
Synthesys on the other hand is 100% destruction of organic/biological life - from highest form to lowest form. Leaves are now synthetic! And it is not a "merge" - there is nothing that organic life does better then a designed artificial parts if you kill the evolution process. 
 And it is not even a choice each individual can make, it is forced down the throat of every creature only due to Shepard's desicion.
It is so much more awful then destroy.....
Brrrr. No wonder that all choices suck, reaper king is giving those to you. 

[Linkenski]

Ieldra2 wrote...
About Control:
S: What would happen to me?
C: You will become the catalyst. You will continue the cycle as you see fit.
S: And the Reapers will obey me?
C: Correct. [no ambiguity here, Shepard will continue to exist and the Reapers will obey]

It like to correct this because if Shepard becomes the catalyst, he still loses everything he has in a way.
He vanishes and reappears as a hologram replacing the Starchild.

[Lonsecia]

azerSheppard wrote...

Nope, still sucks.

The premise of "synthetics vs. organics" was never laid out like this in any of the rest of the game. There isn't a single incident where a hostile synthetic was the result of a willful decision.
Geth - defending themselves against an oppressor and fighting for their freedom
Presidium AI - rebelling due to the restrictions imposed on AI's
Luna base VI - external tampering
Rogue VI factory - computer virus

And the synthetic vs. organic conflicts were never shown to be anything unique. The conflict with the geth was shown as the same as the rachni wars, the krogan rebellions, the first contact war, and the conflict between humans and batarians. So to elevate that one conflict above all the others, and to twist it from a race defending itself into an existential inevitability that all synthetics have a fundamental need to destroy organics, is insulting to the story, and insulting to the player. It would be like saying that blacks have a fundamental need to destroy whites, because just look at what they did in the civil rights movement.
 

Let me help you out on this, as what you say sounds right, but is limited to your experience and knowledge of the games.
The Star Child has existed for long enough to realise that synthetics vs organics will always result in conflict, and unlike an organic vs organic conflict, the synthetic party will attain technological singularity, making the gap between both parties immensely big and therefore destroying any change of development from other side.

The Star Child has likely witnissed the rise and fall of many nations under their own AI creations. All it takes is one Unfriendly AI reaching technological singularity to mess up the entire galaxy.

"Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an ‘intelligence explosion,’ and the intelligence of man would be left far behind. Thus the first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make. "

Why?

"The AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you are made out of atoms which it can use for something else." 

Reasoning: Do you ever notice the bacteria inside your body? Do you feel bad when you squash a bug? Well what about all the single celled organisms that you kill by breathing them in? An AI that is Tech singularity will think the same of us.

 
Then there's synthesis. Synthesis is still stupid. It still doesn't fit. At least this version doesn't mention "synthetic DNA". That I suppose is an improvement. But it still is a complete WTF in how it could possibly do what it does, or even understanding what it's supposed to do at all.

Molecular nanotechnology.

"Nanotechnology (or molecular nanotechnology to refer more specifically to the goals discussed here) will let us continue the historical trends in manufacturing right up to the fundamental limits imposed by physical law."

With enough energy, anything can be done that is imposed under physical law, infact if you have enough energy (nigh infinite for our comprehension), you can even go beyond the physical limitation, creating new physics. e.g. Big Bang.

Control and destroy are better, in that they make more sense how they work here. A little. I actually never had a problem with the control ending. You are destroyed physically and your mind is uploaded to the reapers to control them, or something. This is just a better explanation.

Control has statistically an almost certain chance for the Reapers to continue doing what they do; What occurs during control?

Shepard is uploaded into the catalyst, his mind is added to the AI and Reapers as an additional viewpoint, all data is shared among them, and Shepard concludes the same thing as the Catalyst did: "Inevitable".

And destroy I like better because it makes it clear that it isn't just selectively targeting certain things while ignoring other very similar ones. Technology is technology, and it's all going to be destroyed. So those two are improved in that they make more sense.
 

Destroy is arguably the most redundant and galaxy dooming choice, all technology is destroyed, the Reaper cycle start from beginning, worst case this time no organic race creates a Star child esque prevention AI, and galaxy is wiped clean from all organics by highly advanced synthetics, or nano synthetics.



I laugh when people say "synthesis is space magic", just because you lack the knowledge or capacity to know if some thing is possible or not, doesn't mean it's magic. But ofcourse this isn't the players, fault, the least BW could have done was explain things to non-science fiction buffs, i mean most player don't even know about Arthur C. and Asimov...

Although i bet half of you would have ****ed all over it if they said "using dark energy we blah blah biotics blah blah blah powerfull mass effect fields blah".

Everything you say is very interesting, and no doubt the probable theories the writers may have been thinking about (or more likely they just read some sci-ci and thought that using those ideas was a great thing to do). 
However, there are a few issues I have.

The most glaring being that the catalyst infer that he's prevented any cycle reaching the point where the synthetics rise up and start to destroy organics. There's some hint about it regarding the last cycle, but at no point are we given any indication that the Reapers swoop in and end a war. In fact if it had, I think most people would be slightly more tolerant of the ending. Instead we're told that the Reapers come as close to every 50k years as they can, to wipe out dominant species to -prevent- them making a synthetic creation that'd wipe all organic life. The very fact that there are still organic creatures would make it fairly safe to assume that no cycle has reached the point where everything will die.
This is made worse by some of the Sovereign/Harbinger boasting that says we have evolved according to their plan/along the path they 've chosen, which is never fully explained by the Catalyst. 
The Catalyst states that it's inevitable, yet it seems to have happened maybe... twice in the history of the reapers (the race that created the Reapers would be the most obvious).
It clearly didn't happen before them, or we'd already be in a universe where there are no synthetic beings.
As stated above, it seems unlikely any cycle since has reached a point where every organic is doomed.
There's also far too much speculation on the part of the Catalyst to make any of its claims hold much water.
If it's fate, then the Reapers would never succeed, and if it's inevitable, they wouldn't be able to either.
According to him, he/they didn't like the path before them, so feel it's only right they dictate the future paths. 
'The reapers were created to stop all organic life being destroyed by synthetics. They do this by killing off every advanced, space-faring civilisation roughly every 50,000 years.'
The issue is, that through their meddling with the supposed status quo is that the Reapers don't arrive to address the balance, rather enforce it on the cycle. This in turn means they kill more organics than any synthetics have managed (not taking into account those that they'd theoretically prevent from being born as that's true of anything that kills).
I get that they see themselves as something akin to a Park Ranger being forced to cull their animals for the prevention of all of them dying out, but, excluding my own dislike of culling by humans of animals in the wild, it's at least under the delusion that it's something only done when it reaches the point of deeding to be done. The Reapers just come every fifty thousand years to sweep organics off their feet.
Then there's the fact that though they're supposed to be hybrids, they think only in absolutes. They seem incapable of abstract thought, which is probably why people see them as synthetic. The closest to any reasoning comes from the catalyst, in the last minutes of the game. Is this supposed to represent the Reapers regaining some semblance of 'humanity'? I think more likely it's a case of remembering that they should be capable of a more creative thought process. Afterall, The Catalyst has been around this long, I doubt the three options were things he thought of there and then. Additinally, the whole of that chamber is set out with those strange machines that can only be activated via weird science.

'the purprose of the Crucible is to defeat the reapers, but we forgot to make a switch, so if you want to stop them, you have to shoot that wall panel over there. If you want to control them, you need to hold that switch under the glowy light that'll burn you from the inside out and likely cause immeasurable agony. And if you want to do the third option, you'll need to make a leap of faith into the beam. Of course, we can't guarantee with you being injured an' all that you'll actually make it to the beam, as that's a pretty big leap.' All of that could have been avoided if the Catalyst had given us voice control of the crucible, or at least if the developers had just remembered to put in an off switch.

With regards to your squashing a bug comment: I actually do feel bad about it, and go out of my way to avoid killing things if I can. However, even I think it somewhat odd to compare an insect to, what in synthetic terms is killing your creator. I was not made by ants, but synthetics were made by us, so there should be some reverence, or at least some respect for us as they'd never have existed otherwise. 

I agree that nanotechnology would be a great way to explain what synthesis is supposed to be, but the game explicitely states that all life will have a new DNA. I'm guessing the theory behind them being able to alter DNA is probable, but how do you do that for EDI and the Geth... and ships..? It'd make more sense if the Catalyst said 'we'll combine all of who you are and rebuild every sentient being, be it organic or synthetic at a molecular/subatomic level, creating a new dawn' or something posy. It doesn't make things better, but at least everything has molecules.

How synthetics will actually react if they gain true sentience is far too often only shown in a negative 'hey, we have somethin' new to hate on' way of thinking. I hate to make the comparison, but really, synthetics when viewed with this mindset is very much like people saying anyone who's not like them is only out to destroy what they hold dear. I get that the Reapers might think like that, and we know the Quarians did. But no way would Shep.
The problem is, we're given choices based on this silly assumption that synthetics are the new black/asian/jewish/muslim/atheist/polytheist/agnostic/mixed-race/disabled enemy that'll only weaken from the inside and then destroy all we love through their actions.
I base this on how the labour force of the Quarians basically turned around and questioned why to being akin to the build up to the Amercian civil war, with the Quarians as the plantation owners, and the Geth as the slaves (not exactly a stretch). Anyone who sided with the slaves/Geth was treated as a traitor and shot.

All we actually know of when the Reapers were created is that the first one was made from harvesting their own people to make one. We don't know if this was some knee-jerk reaction to AI, or if it was the only way to 'save' those left alive. Going by what we've seen of harvesting though, it must have taken millions of their race to make it, and once they did, we can assume they obliterated the rebelling/conquering synthetics. We have no idea if in fact the synthetics were simply defending themselves as the Geth did, or if they really were out to kill all life. We have an AI/VI/thing that was made at around the same time, that didn't turn on the organics, and wasn't sabotaged by the 'evil' synthetics.

You assumptions about control contradict what is in the game and in the original script. Neither state Shep would join as a part of the consensus. They both state s/he'd have control over them. If Shep has brokered peace between the Geth and Quarian, there's very little chance s/he'd come to accept that synthetics killing all organics is inevitable (and as I say, the Reapers seemingly prevent this ever being remotely true).

To me, a lot of the final few minutes seem to be so technophobic as to border on hysterical.

We have no precedent regarding what synthetics will do, so it seems more logical to not force the Catalyst to deal in his absolutes. The game tries to be balanced, with the geth and EDi perhaps swinging more towards a liberal outlook, but then the ending closes that door, and bolts it tight with it's 'I know best. You've been fooled by those synthetics you know'. EDI is probably the most important synthetic we come across, primarily because she started as an AI. She wasn't restricted by TIM, and so her personality and understanding of organics grew. She saw the good and the bad and despite that, wanted to be like us, not destroy.
I know some people hate how 'human' she is, but to me it makes more sense considering that she's seeing primarily the very best of the galaxy onboard, and then once she has EVA's body, she gets to interact in a new way that allows her to bond significantly more. The ending says that she's irrelevent. Synthetics will destroy organics and then the universe will enter a time of complete order. Which incidentally seems to be what the Reapers would prefer anyway.

Just my opinion on the matter. I know full well I could very easily be wrong, and that I'm doing the typical thing that almost anyone will do and project their own idealogy, but eh, it's almost impossible unless the source is more than 50% against your ideals.

[shepskisaac]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I was going over the leaked script from November 2011 again, and with increasing annoyance I noticed how much more sense it all makes than the version we got in the game. Not that I haven't known this before, but now, since polls have shown how much the endings are biased in favor of Destroy, it really sends me up the wall

Some quotes from the Catalyst encounter (leaked script version):

There's also another (again slighty different) version of Catalyst dialogue. It is obvious that this dialogue was rewritten several times but I don't think much changes in the core concept, it's just that the final dialogue is much more vague and "speculations from everyone" than other versions

[LadyWench]

Ieldra2 wrote...

GlassElephant wrote...
And they replaced this to make the ending intentionally vague. That is what frustrates me more than these "choices". The attempt to make the ending "smart" through ambiguity and lack of explanation.

If it were only that.....smart. There can be no doubt that the result is stupid rather than smart. That's what frustrates me about it.

Definitely. Add "lore-breaking" to that list. I still facepalm everytime I think about the fact that Synthesis is touted by many, and especially in this older script, as the ideal ending, despite the Catalst pretty much paraphrasing everything Saren said in the first game. If your trilogy end rewrites history and tells me that both of the so-called villians from the previous two games are "correct," something has gone horribly wrong. Once again, I don't know why Shep bothered to fight at all if the inevitable conclusion would have been the sameif he/she had just rolled over and let the Reapers win in ME1. Oh, except for the relays stop working. <_<

[PsyrenY]

I'm as usual firmly in Ieldra2's camp.Control in particular is more appealing if you explicitly continue to exist in some form, allowing for possible resolution with your LI and definitely allowing for ongoing control. (But becoming a hologram-AI could also be pretty problematic in the long run, and open a floodgate to Shepard's eventual corruption by external or internal forces.)

I find the idea that the Geth have surpassed all organics in a mere 300 years to be extremely telling. Combine that with the math-error Heretics and you have a pretty scary scenario indeed.

[ediskrad327]

the dialog in the script is much better, but still i hated the endings back then in Novembber, i was hoping they would end up better in game, oh how wrong was i

[Zix13]

Well, that was equally ****ty.

[shepskisaac]

OK, these are all the different versions from leaked scripts.

This is from BIOGame_INT_Test:

-Take my hand.
-This is the Citadel. Where I live.
-I am the Catalyst.
-An honest mistake. The Citadel is an extension of me.
-You must be quick. The war still rages out there.
-The Crucible is a tool, much like the Reapers. And tools need a user.
-You are the user of the Crucible, as I am the user of the Reapers.
-I was created eons ago to solve a problem. The Reapers are my solution.
-The Reapers main purpose is to prevent organics from creating an AI so powerful that it would overtake them and destroy them.
-Not exactly. The Reapers harvest fully developed civilizations, leaving the lesser ones intact.
-And the essence of each harvested civilzation is stored, forever, in Reaper form.
-An important distinction.
-An answer to a choice.
-I can of harness and direct the energy of the Crucible.
-But you must choose how to release it.
-And you must decide the form it's energy will take.
-The energy can be released as a destructive force. Organics will prevail at our expense. All synthetic life will be destroyed.
-As will much of the technology your kind rely on.
-Including the relays you will use to dispense the energy.
-You may harness the energy. Use it to circumvent my control of the Reapers.
-Correct... though he could never have taken control, as we already controlled him.
-You will subvert my existence. You will control the Reapers. You will continue to seek an answer to problem.
-Correct.
-There is another choice.
-My ultimate goal, the exact solution to the singularity problem, is to combine the synthetic and the organic.
-Much like yourself. You are already a melding of both.
-If you choose so, your energy, combined with that of the Crucible, can be used to convert, and transform each of our kind.
-We, will become like you, and organic life will become like us. And the problem of Technological Singularity will be solved.
-But you must choose.
-But you must act. It must be your volition that guides my actions.
-Go. If you falter now, the cycle will continue. I will not act as Catalyst if you do not act first.

These are all the Catalyst lines from BIOGame_INT:

-Take my hand.
-A simple mistake. The Citadel is part of me.
-It's energy can be released as a destructive force. Organics will prevail at our expense. All synthetic life will succumb.
-As will much of the technology your kind rely on.
-Including the relays you depend upon.
-Harness the Crucible's energy. Use it to take control of the ones you call the Reapers.
-Correct... though he could never have taken control, as we already controlled him.
-You will become the catalyst. You will continue the cycle as you see fit.
-There is one other solution.
-You may combine the synthetic and the organic.
-Add your energy, your essence, with that of Crucible. The resulting chain reaction will transform both of our kind.
-We synthetics will become more like you, and organic life will become like us.
-But you must choose.
-But you must act. I can't proceed.
-Go. If you don't, the cycle will continue, but I will no longer control the Reapers.

--- (these two parts were in separate blocks of text) ---

-This is the Citadel. Where I live.
-I am the Catalyst.
-I was created eons ago to solve a problem.
-To prevent organics from creating an AI so powerful that it would overtake them and destroy them.
-Not exactly. The Reapers harvest fully developed civilizations, leaving the less developed ones intact.
-Just as we left your species when we were here last.
-We harvested them. We brought order to the chaos.
-We helped them ascend and become one of us, allowing new life to flourish, while preserving the old life forever in Reaper form.
-Impossible. Organics will always trend to a point of technological singularity. A moment in time where their creations outgrow them.
-Conflict is the only result, and extinction the consequence.
-My solution creates a cycle which never reaches that point. Organic life is preserved.
-There is hope. Maybe more than you know.
-You have choice. More than you know.
-The fact that you are standing here, the first organic to do so in countless cycles, proves this.
-Just as it proves my solution is no longer valid.
-A new solution must be found.
-The Crucible has altered my function. I can't proceed.
-I can only guide you in it's use.
-Correct. But the probability of singularity occurring again in the future is certain.
-It is a very elegant solution. And a path you have already started down.
-The harvesting will cease. It will be a new ascension, for synthetic and organic life.

Mostly the same, but both version provide much more information than the final version we got in the game. Of course we still don't know why the Catalyst is so convinced tech singularity is certain and what exactly the Catalyst is (a Reaper, an AI, an uploaded organic etc) but at least the choices were more detailed, the Crucible and what problem Catalyst was trying to solve (instead of just vague "created rebel against creators" crap)

[Pelle6666]

Sorry, this still sucks!

[Starkzard]

Looks like the same to me, just different words, I like the way they described synthesis in the leaked scripts, it's more of an "Organic with implants" than the "New DNA" stuff that we got right now.

[Ieldra]

@LadyWench:
What you say is definitely NOT what I was talking about here. The new phrasing is stupid because it makes no sense and it is contradictory. That Saren and TIM had certain ideas established these ideas in the lore, but otherwise what they wanted is completely irrelevant to the merit of the idea, since an idea is always good or bad independently from who supports them. I should put this into my sig since this very basic truth appears to elude most people here. How they went about it - Saren by submitting to the Reapers, TIM by leaving thousands of corpses in his wake and mind-controlling his own people - that's what made them bad.

Optimystic_X wrote...
I'm as usual firmly in Ieldra2's camp.Control in particular is more appealing if you explicitly continue to exist in some form, allowing for possible resolution with your LI and definitely allowing for ongoing control. (But becoming a hologram-AI could also be pretty problematic in the long run, and open a floodgate to Shepard's eventual corruption by external or internal forces.)

There are never any guarantees for anything, so I don't consider that a hindrance, but yeah, it's a lonely existence unless you find some way to reconnect with others. I recall there was some speculation that continued isolation is why TIM became so ruthless.

I find the idea that the Geth have surpassed all organics in a mere 300 years to be extremely telling. Combine that with the math-error Heretics and you have a pretty scary scenario indeed.

It is interesting that this fact has been right in front of our noses for three games and that it took quite some time for me after ME3's ending to recognize it as a factor. I wonder if the writers recognized it themselves or of this was a fortunate circumstance.

@Starkzard:
Yeah, the choices are the same but the descriptions differ as well as the exposition, and that makes all the difference to me. Give me back that description in the EC, plus some closure and filling up the most egregious plot holes, and I'll be fine with the ending.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 11 mai 2012 - 01:38 .

[antares_sublight]

All my many questions about the ridiculousness of synthesis remain. Well, if it's not a genetic change then replace those questions with ones about these god-like nanomachines and how dangerous they are.

Modifié par antares_sublight, 11 mai 2012 - 01:50 .

[JBPBRC]

Eh, still think the ending is bleh, even with this. Starchild himself, as a character and a concept, is worse than the choices he gives out, no matter how in-depth they are. Hopefully this isn't all the EC turns out to be.

[eddieoctane]

The leaked ending still sounds off from the rest of the script. Casey is still probably a terrible writer who shouldn't have gotten so involved in the final moments of the game. If the prevailing opinion that he wrote the ending was true, and if he decided to assert his control earlier in the series, ME1 would have sucked and we wouldn't be here. He should have taken a far more laissez-faire approach, as the writers are far batter than Casey at the actual writing.

[zambingo]

The Catalyst/Guardian still says "Our" and "We" when referring to itself AND the Reapers.

So...

Nothing changes.

It's the villain who's terrorized, brutalized and destroyed countless civilizations. How trustworthy can it be, especially when it is facing it's own destruction and utter failure of it's purpose? It's a mark begging the assassin to let it live.

Destroy.

Even with those minor dialogue changes the only real option is to give life back to Life. Shepard can't let some being that's propped itself up as God continue on doing what it has been doing, that's not what the entire united [galactic] fleets are fighting for. Control and Synthesis still mean that Shepard decides to continue on the villain's path (who's been Playing God). Destroy gives self-determination back to Life, capital L.

Modifié par zambingo, 11 mai 2012 - 05:07 .

[shepskisaac]

zambingo wrote...

The Catalyst/Guardian still says "Our" and "We" when referring to itself AND the Reapers.

So...

Yep. And this is in the game's files:
EGO_ReapersDestroyedEarthDestroyed,
EGO_ReapersDestroyedEarthDevastated,
EGO_ReapersDestroyedEarthOk,
EGO_ReapersDestroyedEarthOkShepardAlive,
EGO_BecomeAReaperAndEarthDestroyedAndReapersLeave,
EGO_BecomeAReaperAndEarthOkAndReapersLeave,
EGO_HarmonyOfManAndMachine,
EGO_Demo,
EGO_None,
EGO_MAX,

BecomeAReaper is Control and based on all we know, the way Catalyst reffering to himself and Reapers as we and leaked scripts where he says Shepard will replace him, there's one big conclusion - Catalyst is a form of a Reaper too.[/code]

Modifié par IsaacShep, 11 mai 2012 - 02:47 .

[zambingo]

That's great, Issac. +1