Hello!
I'll delurk for a post, because I have some thoughts on the Reject ending I haven't seen discussed yet. This isn't necessarily related to IT, and it's very subjective, dealing with the mood, rather than facts. I am also biased both in favour of IT and the Reject ending. Now with that out of the way..
First, let me explain what I thought of the kid, both in the original ending and in the EC. His style during the conversation is soothing, even peaceful. He contradicts you on a couple of things, but he does it in a reasonable, "I'll calmly explain why you are wrong" fashion, like a patient teacher. He isn't confrontational. His arguments are based on logic. He is concise, and his descriptions are neutral in their wording. Even though he obviously has a preference among the RGB choices, the presentation of them all, even Destroy, suggests that he has no emotional investment in any of them. Perhaps the best word to describe his style is 'detached'.
Before you misunderstand me, I will point out that his logic is broken, he makes no sense, and I feel like I'm being manipulated by a patronising sociopath. I do not believe him, or trust him. The above description refers to the show he puts on for us. My point is that I can see these aspects, however forced and fake they feel, therefore I understand why people are taken in by him if they don't look behind the scenes. I wanted to establish that I can feel this mood, because most of my argument is based on this. Let's get to it.
When you reject him first, he says "Then you will die knowing that you failed to save everything you fought for."
-This is bleak and it feels like he loses his composure and breaks character. It doesn't fit with his previous behaviour. Interestingly, the only other time during the conversation that has his tone shift is when you insult him by calling him "just an AI". His answer to that is clearly scornful.
-In terms of information value, this line is pointless. It's just repeating "we can't win conventionally" with different words. By this point everybody has made up their mind whether they buy that or not. If somebody doesn't trust Hackett's judgement, the kid definitely won't convince them.
-Most of the conversation is not really a conversation. You could take what he says and with minimal to no changes turn it into a narration aimed and everyone and no one. This is clearly aimed at one person, or at most, a specific group of people. Not a blanket statement.
-If we go for a literal view AND trust him, he contradicts himself. His stance was a mixture of "I'm helping you" and "it's a natural thing, like fire". "Failed to save", with the wording, clearly implies that this is a bad thing. Either he lied when he said he sees what does as a right/natural thing, or he is lying now.
-Otherwise, this is just a more transparent attempt at manipulation. I believe guilt specifically has been established as a powerful tool for indoctrination. Shepard sees the kid - who might not even exist in the first place - die on Earth. Shepard has nightmares of the kid. Creepy-Reaper-Thing takes the form of the kid. This line.
-It is noteworthy that you have to reject him twice. If you go for RGB, after he presents the options he leaves you alone. From a purely in universe point of view, there is no reason why he couldn't try to talk to you if you pick Destroy or even Control over his beloved Synthesis, yet he doesn't. This is the only choice of the four he doesn't accept straightaway.
Now for something a different. The rage over the horrible ending drowned out most other criticism for the game. I think one thing that would have been a major point is the amount of auto-conversation. In the first few hours of the game it felt jarring, as if I wasn't playing a ME game, but watching cutscenes. I bring that up because you actually have to reject the kid twice. Even during the EC talk with him, there is plenty of auto-conversation.
Keeping this in mind, having chosen to reject him already, Shepard should have given The Speech after the kid's one-liner without further input. It would flow well, and it would fit the game's design.
I think doing it this way was a very deliberate decision on BW's part. It reinforces with gameplay that the kid has just delivered another blow to your willpower/said something supposedly convincing to talk you out of it.
It works. I prefer the Reject ending over the others a lot. I was fully committed to it. Here's what I thought when the when popped up the second time: "OMG! BW is giving me another chance to choose! Why would they do that?! Did I make a mistake? I must have made a mistake! I have to pick from RGB!" Of course, it lasted only a split second, and I clicked reject again, but I find it disturbing that it even occurred to me in the first place.
One last thing. In the same scene, in the same conversation, without anything happening to change the situation, without being provided any additional information, we have to make the same decision twice. Off the top of my head I can't think of a single example from the entire trilogy where this has happened. I'm really not sure of this, but I just can't think of anything like this, and I find that curious.
Regards, Arkennys
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
