55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Andromidius]

Weird thing is, they could have easily made the Catalyst both be honest and sincere while also making logical sense.

Just make them be logical extremists who were doing what they did for the good of the Galaxy (maybe preparing for an even greater foes), but were so alien to organic life that they didn't realise what they were doing was 'wrong'. Then have the Crucible cause the Catalyst to understand the minds of Organics, and then realise their solution was a violation of the basic rights of life. Then it can come up with new solutions so the suffering can end but the problem is still being addressed - and if Shepard refuses it continues with regret because the problem can't be ignored.

There, job done. Roughly.

[Andromidius]

Fingertrip wrote...

Ya know, I'm just beginning to actually just accept a literalist ending. Afterall, the music score in the Extended Cut is really well-put and doesn't exactly fit into the emotions of being decieved, it leaves you with a sense of closure and conclussion.

So you don't believe IT because you like the music?

That's the most bizzare stance I've ever seen.

[SubAstris]

Fingertrip wrote...

Ya know, I'm just beginning to actually just accept a literalist ending. Afterall, the music score in the Extended Cut is really well-put and doesn't exactly fit into the emotions of being decieved, it leaves you with a sense of closure and conclussion.

It would feel pretty stupid to having those soundtrack just being a part of a hallucination (Alá Mind Battle), and again force Sam Hullick or another one of the composers to make additional tracks for what some people would consider, the real-deal ending (IT?)

It's really far-fetched at this point to be honest. The Rejection ending might get some more work on and maybe Leviathan of Dis DLC can make a conventional victory possible, making alot of people happy about it, and ensuring War Assets make a difference.

But about waking up, then re-finishing the fight again, with additional emotional songs and a conclussive-story telling etc; it just feels so bloody far fetched and unpausible for me at this point of time, and I've really been intrigued by the indoctrination theory since well, from the get-go.

Well yeah, I've really been saying this all along, why would BW put loads of effort into something that isn't real, especially as this was their final time to do anything concerning the endings.

[SubAstris]

Andromidius wrote...

Weird thing is, they could have easily made the Catalyst both be honest and sincere while also making logical sense.

Just make them be logical extremists who were doing what they did for the good of the Galaxy (maybe preparing for an even greater foes), but were so alien to organic life that they didn't realise what they were doing was 'wrong'. Then have the Crucible cause the Catalyst to understand the minds of Organics, and then realise their solution was a violation of the basic rights of life. Then it can come up with new solutions so the suffering can end but the problem is still being addressed - and if Shepard refuses it continues with regret because the problem can't be ignored.

There, job done. Roughly.

How could the Crucible make the Catalyst understand exactly? The Crucible is just a massive weapon. No organic knows of the existence of the Catalyst as an AI

Modifié par SubAstris, 07 juillet 2012 - 12:04 .

[Arian Dynas]

Andromidius wrote...

Weird thing is, they could have easily made the Catalyst both be honest and sincere while also making logical sense.

Just make them be logical extremists who were doing what they did for the good of the Galaxy (maybe preparing for an even greater foes), but were so alien to organic life that they didn't realise what they were doing was 'wrong'. Then have the Crucible cause the Catalyst to understand the minds of Organics, and then realise their solution was a violation of the basic rights of life. Then it can come up with new solutions so the suffering can end but the problem is still being addressed - and if Shepard refuses it continues with regret because the problem can't be ignored.

There, job done. Roughly.

And if that WAS what they had gone with, it would have caused a great deal less heart burn.

Two reasons, I do not, and never have, believed in Utopias, as far as I am concerned, the name always hides something rotten.

And while it WOULD have killed a great deal of the punch to the Reapers, it would't be the crap we got fed, and would actually be SOMEWHAT in line with the series mythos.

Which is part of why, Bioware being the bunch who should know their own stories the best, would be the first to notice this incongruity.

[Andromidius]

SubAstris wrote...

How could the Crucible make the Catalyst understand exactly? The Crucible is just a massive weapon.

No it isn't.  The Catalyst even admits this - the Crucible is just a giant power source.

Besides, I'm talking how they could have done it.  Not how it was done.

Pay attention.

[Andromidius]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Which is part of why, Bioware being the bunch who should know their own stories the best, would be the first to notice this incongruity.

Exactly.  Because they avoided the easy explaination path and instead went for a confusing and contradictory one its clear that we're supposed to speculate what it actually means. 

Other then going "Oh, okay," at the disappointingly mundane answer to the big questions.

[SubAstris]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Weird thing is, they could have easily made the Catalyst both be honest and sincere while also making logical sense.

Just make them be logical extremists who were doing what they did for the good of the Galaxy (maybe preparing for an even greater foes), but were so alien to organic life that they didn't realise what they were doing was 'wrong'. Then have the Crucible cause the Catalyst to understand the minds of Organics, and then realise their solution was a violation of the basic rights of life. Then it can come up with new solutions so the suffering can end but the problem is still being addressed - and if Shepard refuses it continues with regret because the problem can't be ignored.

There, job done. Roughly.

And if that WAS what they had gone with, it would have caused a great deal less heart burn.

Two reasons, I do not, and never have, believed in Utopias, as far as I am concerned, the name always hides something rotten.

And while it WOULD have killed a great deal of the punch to the Reapers, it would't be the crap we got fed, and would actually be SOMEWHAT in line with the series mythos.

Which is part of why, Bioware being the bunch who should know their own stories the best, would be the first to notice this incongruity.

The emphasis here being firmly on "should" than anything else. A bit like they said have known that using a stock photo for Tali's face was not acceptable, and they should have known that people would associate the destruction/overload of the Mass Relays at the end with the same thing in Arrival.

[SubAstris]

Andromidius wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

How could the Crucible make the Catalyst understand exactly? The Crucible is just a massive weapon.

No it isn't.  The Catalyst even admits this - the Crucible is just a giant power source.

Besides, I'm talking how they could have done it.  Not how it was done.

Pay attention.

I realise. I'm just saying it doesn't make that much sense. Or you could explain it further

[Andromidius]

SubAstris wrote...

I realise. I'm just saying it doesn't make that much sense. Or you could explain it further

How?  It makes more sense then the Catalyst deciding the solution won't work anymore based on one organic being brought up to his chambers - one that was apperently bleeding out and dying just moments before and had no way of actually making it up there.

Its at least the beginning of an explaination, not a leap of faith with no pretext at all.

[SubAstris]

Andromidius wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

I realise. I'm just saying it doesn't make that much sense. Or you could explain it further

How?  It makes more sense then the Catalyst deciding the solution won't work anymore based on one organic being brought up to his chambers - one that was apperently bleeding out and dying just moments before and had no way of actually making it up there.

Its at least the beginning of an explaination, not a leap of faith with no pretext at all.

His state at the time is irrelevant; all that matters is that organics have the power to defeat the Reapers.

[insomniak9]

dorktainian wrote...

I'll share this post on here cos it makes Mass Effect 3 and all before it mean something.

"My theory: I believe that the reason Harbinger doesn't kill Shepard or fire on the Normandy is because it is fighting against the Catalyst's control. The final 'beam run' scene is occuring while Harbinger is in an internal struggle against the Catalyst. Just like Benezia in ME1 harbinger used the collective consciousness of the entire civilization it is built from to lock away part of its mind so that it could use it at some point to destroy the Catalyst. Firing on the Normandy would have surely killed Shepard.

My explanation: Firstly, all Reapers are the collective product of the harvesting of their respective civilizations. We can more or less safely assume that this was done against their will. So each individual Reaper has essentially become enslaved and controlled against their will to carry out the Catalyst's goals. The means of control is likely a form of indoctrination since this would mean the Catalyst does not have to monitor or maintain direct control of each Reaper. By indoctrinating the Reapers the Catalyst can have them willingly do what it wants because they now believe it is the right thing to do instead of constantly engaging in direct control. The form of control doesn't even have to be indoctrination really but it does seem like the most efficient way to achieve dominance and maintain control.

At the point of firing on Shepard Harbinger is trying to fight off the Catalyst's control. Harbinger is initially firing on Shepard because it is obeying the Catalyst but overpowers the control at the last second, barely allowing Shepard to survive. Harbinger then flies away (when it must have known Shepard would have lived) in order to allow Shepard to get to the beam and stop the Catalyst. Harby didn't fire on the Normandy because that would have killed Shepard. Having Harbinger, as possibly the first harvested civilization, help stop the continuation of the cycle is a great potential plot element. I say potential because this is only a theory afterall.

Also, Harbinger can be heard saying something before firing on Shepard. There are a lot of interpretations but one of the most prominant is "save us". This would definitely make sense given my explanation.

The reason Harbinger was trying to Kill Shepard throughout ME2 and calling him a 'jive turkey' and all that was because he was still under the Catalyst's control. He had no reason to think that Shepard could potentially stop the cycle so he didn't try to combat the Catalyst. He only did so at the end because he figured this was his best chance. He's seen what Shepard is capable of so puts everything he has into fighting control at the last minute as a final 'hail Mary'.

So basically, Harbinger doesn't blow up the Normandy or kill Shepard because he is defying the control of the Catalyst in order to end the cycles and stop all future organics from the same fate.


I believe this theory fits in with all aspects of the Mass Effect lore without requiring any great leaps in logic. It is thematically satisfying (for me at least) and most importantly addresses the issue of why Harbinger didn't kill Shepard or the Normandy."

Thanks to The Eruptionist for that post. Makes a hell of a lot of sense and I believe is actually what happened. Maybe 'Indoctrination' is just grasping at straws after all?

I agree with your idea 100%; I posted  similar theory a while back, and I think it is one that will be opened up further once the Leviathan DLC shows us some insight into a Reaper who has chosen to go against the Collective Consensus. 

I do like to think it ties in with IT though; in that Harby still indoctrinates you, under the greater will of the Catalyst, but allows you an 'out'; an option that will break the indoctrination, break the AI, and allow the Reapers AND organic life to be free of the SpaceKid once and for all. Note how the "Destroy" conduit is shaped like a Reaper, shaped quite obviously differently to the Control side...

[MaximizedAction]

Andromidius wrote...

Fingertrip wrote...

Ya know, I'm just beginning to actually just accept a literalist ending. Afterall, the music score in the Extended Cut is really well-put and doesn't exactly fit into the emotions of being decieved, it leaves you with a sense of closure and conclussion.

So you don't believe IT because you like the music?

That's the most bizzare stance I've ever seen.

I, too, find the EC soundtrack delivers a sense of closure -- which should come to no surprise, as that is also the main theme of the EC. We even have the last track that is called "Resolution" and sounds like the THE ultimate tune for closure of the ME trilogy.

On the other hand, the original "And End Once and For All" ended in the most cliffhanger-y way possible. Therefore, no matter how much closure you feel coming from the music, there has been a pre-EC ending version that is actually a stark contrast to the version we got in the EC. And they must've known that the original ending did in no way deliver closure.

So, either they expected the people to sense that this wasn't supposed to be closure and were genuinly surprised that fans wanted that or they planned that outcry to some extend which means that the EC was planned in some way.
To me the latter seems makes more sense, since the former has negative implications on Bioware's story-crafting abilities.

But all in all, I, too, find the EC soundtrack to have a rediculous amount of closure.

[insomniak9]

Whilst we're on the soundtrack debate, don't forget that the 'Leaving Earth' score, in which we 'see' SpaceKid get zapped, sounds very similar to 'An End Once and For All', and is reversed during the 'Dream' sequences.

I'd say foreshadowing of the highest order...

[Leonia]

Andromidius wrote...

Fingertrip wrote...

Ya know, I'm just beginning to actually just accept a literalist ending. Afterall, the music score in the Extended Cut is really well-put and doesn't exactly fit into the emotions of being decieved, it leaves you with a sense of closure and conclussion.

So you don't believe IT because you like the music?

That's the most bizzare stance I've ever seen.

I dunno, they proved throughout the entire game that they knew what they were doing with the music, why would they not be deliberate in the ending? Though music, like any art, is open to interpretation and it might very well give a sense of closure without wrapping up the story. Or rather, it could wrap up the story from Shepard's perspective (who thinks they are dieing and it's all over now). It's anybody's guess without more content to compare to (until more DLC is coming with the "real" ending then we're stuck waiting around to prove IT, right?)

To call it a "bizarre stance" almost sounds like you're attacking the poster for having that opinion. Also telling Sub to "pay attention". Can't you just voice your differing opinion without having a go at people?

Modifié par leonia42, 07 juillet 2012 - 12:50 .

[Rifneno]

Fingertrip wrote...

Ya know, I'm just beginning to actually just accept a literalist ending. Afterall, the music score in the Extended Cut is really well-put and doesn't exactly fit into the emotions of being decieved, it leaves you with a sense of closure and conclussion.

It would feel pretty stupid to having those soundtrack just being a part of a hallucination (Alá Mind Battle), and again force Sam Hullick or another one of the composers to make additional tracks for what some people would consider, the real-deal ending (IT?)

It's really far-fetched at this point to be honest. The Rejection ending might get some more work on and maybe Leviathan of Dis DLC can make a conventional victory possible, making alot of people happy about it, and ensuring War Assets make a difference.

But about waking up, then re-finishing the fight again, with additional emotional songs and a conclussive-story telling etc; it just feels so bloody far fetched and unpausible for me at this point of time, and I've really been intrigued by the indoctrination theory since well, from the get-go.

... Let me get this straight. You think all the evidence like indoctrination eyes, dreams reeking of indoctrination symptoms, Starbinger's story not just breaking but shattering known lore, the gun switch, the infrasound, ect. is null and void because the soundtrack doesn't scream "deception"? The same sound track that named Starbinger's theme "wake up"?

What is this, terrible logic day? It's not even 8 AM as I type this and this isn't even the first savage assault on logic and reason we've had. When SubAstris is making more sense than the average poster, something is Twilight Zone levels of wrong.

[Code_R]

Rifneno wrote...

... Let me get this straight. You think all the evidence like indoctrination eyes, dreams reeking of indoctrination symptoms, Starbinger's story not just breaking but shattering known lore, the gun switch, the infrasound, ect. is null and void because the soundtrack doesn't scream "deception"? The same sound track that named Starbinger's theme "wake up"?

What is this, terrible logic day? It's not even 8 AM as I type this and this isn't even the first savage assault on logic and reason we've had. When SubAstris is making more sense than the average poster, something is Twilight Zone levels of wrong.

[MaximizedAction]

insomniak9 wrote...

Whilst we're on the soundtrack debate, don't forget that the 'Leaving Earth' score, in which we 'see' SpaceKid get zapped, sounds very similar to 'An End Once and For All', and is reversed during the 'Dream' sequences.

I'd say foreshadowing of the highest order...

Nah, I think the dream soundtrack is not a reversed version of Leaving Earth but a slowed down one (with additional elements like extra bass appearing over time).

[insomniak9]

 Some parts of it are reversed. Either way, it's the same damn tune 

That's the point I'm making. That music always accompanies the kid, and the weirdness. 

[Andromidius]

leonia42 wrote...
To call it a "bizarre stance" almost sounds like you're attacking the poster for having that opinion. Also telling Sub to "pay attention". Can't you just voice your differing opinion without having a go at people?

I'm not having a go at them.  Basing a literal interpretation off of a musical score IS a bizarre stance, especially in the face of everything else.  And Sub keeps asking the same questions or giving replies that don't match with the previous poster's statement so its clear he's either not paying attention or is purposely twisting what the are saying.  So me saying 'pay attention' is actually playing nice, rather then 'stop twisting people's words'.

Or is this me having a go?  Oh well.

Rifneno wrote...

... Let me get this straight. You think
all the evidence like indoctrination eyes, dreams reeking of
indoctrination symptoms, Starbinger's story not just breaking but
shattering known lore, the gun switch, the infrasound, ect. is null and
void because the soundtrack doesn't scream "deception"? The same sound
track that named Starbinger's theme "wake up"?

What is this,
terrible logic day? It's not even 8 AM as I type this and this isn't
even the first savage assault on logic and reason we've had. When
SubAstris is making more sense than the average poster, something is
Twilight Zone levels of wrong.

This is more akin to 'having a go'.  We're both essentially saying the same thing, but Rif is being a bit more forward about it.

Oh, and good morning Rif!

Modifié par Andromidius, 07 juillet 2012 - 02:00 .

[CoolioThane]

Is this the point where SubAstris asks questions a) and c) then receives an answer followed by him ignoring the answers and asking questions c) and a) ?

[insomniak9]

"Dreams" sounds better slowed down sped up and reversed. O.o

Not important, just cool

Backwards sped-up Dream sequence

Modifié par insomniak9, 07 juillet 2012 - 02:17 .

[Rifneno]

Andromidius wrote...

This is more akin to 'having a go'.  We're both essentially saying the same thing, but Rif is being a bit more forward about it.

Oh, and good morning Rif!

Sublety was never my strong point. :innocent:

Morning, Andro.

[MaximizedAction]

insomniak9 wrote...

 Some parts of it are reversed. Either way, it's the same damn tune 

That's the point I'm making. That music always accompanies the kid, and the weirdness. 

THIS!

I also noticed that a while ago. I came to the conclusions that "Leaving Earth" either a theme for Reaper's attack of Earth and the people lost and left back (what the kid represents in a literalist's point of view) or it's a combination of the that and a theme for Shepard's indoctrination.

After all, the track appearing in the dreams in a suggestive version (slow tracks do have that effect) just again calls for the debate of PTSD vs. indoc. attemps.

And we can assume from the talk with Kelly on the Citadel that it doesn't seem to be PTSD. Also, as many here already wrote, Shepard has lost way more people than just a random kid.

So, either way, Leaving Earth has Reaper growls in it because the Reapers are omni-present; but then, so is the kid. And when the game ends in the same way it begins, the kid in the beginning must've been more connected to the Catalyst than it seems. Shepard is being manipulated, the question is how.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 07 juillet 2012 - 02:18 .

[Rifneno]

I lose a little bit more faith in humanity everytime someone seriously believes it's PTSD. And my "faith in humanity" meter already reads "law enforcement agencies are the only reason most people don't eat their own children."