9089 réponses à ce sujet

[Shaigunjoe]

After finally going through the EC stuff, it definitely seems that, as far as the narrative is concerned, all the choices are kind of a wash (with the exception of refuse).  They gave all of them a giant dose of sugar. It seems they all lead to the same future (which is kind of a bummer, as I still do believe that the ending is the story being told by the stargazer, it is much less interesting now). Thematically, synthesis still seems to be the best though.

I think they filled in too many blanks with the actual synthesis ending, and the green glowing stuff was too much. But as far as the catalyst's definition is concerned with regards to humans, it is crystal clear that all synthesis does is enable people to integrate with synthetic technology in a way that won't allow their biology to reject it(maybe thats what was up with all the deus ex allusions), so I don't know what the big deal is anymore.

Modifié par Shaigunjoe, 06 juillet 2012 - 01:34 .

[Isichar]

Im jumping boat to now support synthesis.

Why? Why the hell not.

Glow in the dark eyes ftw

[Ieldra]

Shaigunjoe wrote...
After finally going through the EC stuff, it definitely seems that, as far as the narrative is concerned, all the choices are kind of a wash (with the exception of refuse).  They gave all of them a giant dose of sugar. It seems they all lead to the same future (which is kind of a bummer, as I still do believe that the ending is the story being told by the stargazer, it is much less interesting now). Thematically, synthesis still seems to be the best though.

I think they filled in too many blanks with the actual synthesis ending, and the green glowing stuff was too much. But as far as the catalyst's definition is concerned with regards to humans, it is crystal clear that all synthesis does is enable people to integrate with synthetic technology in a way that won't allow their biology to reject it(maybe thats what was up with all the deus ex allusions), so I don't know what the big deal is anymore.

Yeah, the green glow was unsubtle. Otherwise, I don't think the endings are a wash. Well, perhaps if you just look at the slides and don't pay attention to the narrators, but I see *very* different futures emerging from the endings. They feel drastically different for me. Just try to extrapolate the current situation 10k years into the future, and you'll see that.

I agree they laid it on a little thick with the happiness. Particularly Destroy got an overdose I don't think is thematically fitting, but hey, I got what I wanted with Synthesis, I won't begrudge the Destroy-ers their happy future. What I really like about the high-EMS EC endings is that now the decision is more about philosophical differences - which *kind* of future do you want for the galaxy, rather than which will preserve galactic civilization and which will not.

Regarding Synthesis, if the response to the Synthesis had been a little more mature, I wouldn't have minded a little more ambiguity particularly about the part played by the Reapers, but as it is, I like that the anti-Synthesis faction got a slap in the face. I think it was necessary to deny the worst-case scenario some people had conjured up. Of course rather than accept defeat, they're gone into denial and would rather believe everyone is brainwashed.

Anyway, I think the "jump into the unknown" factor is still very much prevalent in Synthesis, since the long-term consequences of having the Reapers integrated into civilization remain unknown and the prospect may just be a little scary to some. EDI's epiloge also says quite clearly that this is just the start of a process of change, with the prospect of ascension somewhere in the future.

[Ieldra]

Isichar wrote...
Im jumping boat to now support synthesis.

Why? Why the hell not.

Glow in the dark eyes ftw

Jumping boat? From which boat did you jump?

[lillitheris]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

But as far as the catalyst's definition is concerned with regards to humans, it is crystal clear that all synthesis does is enable people to integrate with synthetic technology in a way that won't allow their biology to reject it(maybe thats what was up with all the deus ex allusions), so I don't know what the big deal is anymore.

If that were the case, it wouldn’t be a big deal. It would, in fact, be such a not a big deal that it makes Synthesis utterly pointless.

[Shaigunjoe]

lillitheris wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...

But as far as the catalyst's definition is concerned with regards to humans, it is crystal clear that all synthesis does is enable people to integrate with synthetic technology in a way that won't allow their biology to reject it(maybe thats what was up with all the deus ex allusions), so I don't know what the big deal is anymore.

If that were the case, it wouldn’t be a big deal. It would, in fact, be such a not a big deal that it makes Synthesis utterly pointless.

Except synthetics don't die or get enslaved.

[Isichar]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Isichar wrote...
Im jumping boat to now support synthesis.

Why? Why the hell not.

Glow in the dark eyes ftw

Jumping boat? From which boat did you jump?

The destroy boat. It had too many leaks and was kinda boring (Hacket's epilogue been the least interesting out of all of the endings IMO) and synthesis is looking mighty fine now with its "Transcend mortality" goodness:wizard:

[lillitheris]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...

But as far as the catalyst's definition is concerned with regards to humans, it is crystal clear that all synthesis does is enable people to integrate with synthetic technology in a way that won't allow their biology to reject it(maybe thats what was up with all the deus ex allusions), so I don't know what the big deal is anymore.

If that were the case, it wouldn’t be a big deal. It would, in fact, be such a not a big deal that it makes Synthesis utterly pointless.

Except synthetics don't die or get enslaved.

You can free them later, if you like.

I prefer the potential and potentially short-term enslavement of the potential machines than the potential enslavement/brainwashing of the entire galaxy. Lesser evil.

[Shaigunjoe]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...
After finally going through the EC stuff, it definitely seems that, as far as the narrative is concerned, all the choices are kind of a wash (with the exception of refuse).  They gave all of them a giant dose of sugar. It seems they all lead to the same future (which is kind of a bummer, as I still do believe that the ending is the story being told by the stargazer, it is much less interesting now). Thematically, synthesis still seems to be the best though.

I think they filled in too many blanks with the actual synthesis ending, and the green glowing stuff was too much. But as far as the catalyst's definition is concerned with regards to humans, it is crystal clear that all synthesis does is enable people to integrate with synthetic technology in a way that won't allow their biology to reject it(maybe thats what was up with all the deus ex allusions), so I don't know what the big deal is anymore.

Yeah, the green glow was unsubtle. Otherwise, I don't think the endings are a wash. Well, perhaps if you just look at the slides and don't pay attention to the narrators, but I see *very* different futures emerging from the endings. They feel drastically different for me. Just try to extrapolate the current situation 10k years into the future, and you'll see that.

I agree they laid it on a little thick with the happiness. Particularly Destroy got an overdose I don't think is thematically fitting, but hey, I got what I wanted with Synthesis, I won't begrudge the Destroy-ers their happy future. What I really like about the high-EMS EC endings is that now the decision is more about philosophical differences - which *kind* of future do you want for the galaxy, rather than which will preserve galactic civilization and which will not.

Regarding Synthesis, if the response to the Synthesis had been a little more mature, I wouldn't have minded a little more ambiguity particularly about the part played by the Reapers, but as it is, I like that the anti-Synthesis faction got a slap in the face. I think it was necessary to deny the worst-case scenario some people had conjured up. Of course rather than accept defeat, they're gone into denial and would rather believe everyone is brainwashed.

Anyway, I think the "jump into the unknown" factor is still very much prevalent in Synthesis, since the long-term consequences of having the Reapers integrated into civilization remain unknown and the prospect may just be a little scary to some. EDI's epiloge also says quite clearly that this is just the start of a process of change, with the prospect of ascension somewhere in the future.

I guess I meant it was a wash as far as what the catalyst says, it seemed like he was saying "Doesn't matter what you pick, ultimatly everything will be great!" (again, except refusal)

But yes, head cannon wise, you can definitly imagine very different futures, which is good.

[Ieldra]

@Isichar:
I see. Well, Destroy got a giant dose of happiness, but it's a more conventional ending, which makes it less interesting to me. Control is awesome in its own way, but Synthesis is where I've always envisioned the galaxy to go after Cyrus Shepard (my main) was done with it.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 06 juillet 2012 - 03:18 .

[Shaigunjoe]

lillitheris wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...

But as far as the catalyst's definition is concerned with regards to humans, it is crystal clear that all synthesis does is enable people to integrate with synthetic technology in a way that won't allow their biology to reject it(maybe thats what was up with all the deus ex allusions), so I don't know what the big deal is anymore.

If that were the case, it wouldn’t be a big deal. It would, in fact, be such a not a big deal that it makes Synthesis utterly pointless.

Except synthetics don't die or get enslaved.

You can free them later, if you like.

I prefer the potential and potentially short-term enslavement of the potential machines than the potential enslavement/brainwashing of the entire galaxy. Lesser evil.

I just don't see how you can get potential brainwashing out of what the catalyst says.  I don't recall all that was said about control, did the catalyst say you can free the reapers (geth?) later without negative stuff?

Modifié par Shaigunjoe, 06 juillet 2012 - 03:23 .

[His Name was HYR!!]

lillitheris wrote...

I prefer the potential and potentially short-term enslavement of the potential machines than the potential enslavement/brainwashing of the entire galaxy. Lesser evil.

ROFL @ brainwashing the galaxy ... repeating a lie doesn't make it true, friend-e.

[Vigilant111]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Isichar:
I see. Well, Destroy got a giant dose of happiness, but it's a more conventional ending, which makes it less interesting to me. Control is awesome in its own way, but Synthesis is where I've always envisioned the galaxy to go after Cyrus Shepard (my main) was done with it.

I played through the EC just minutes ago, but it wasn't a giant dose of happiness, but thanks for trying to make people to feel better

[Ieldra]

Shaigunjoe wrote...
I guess I meant it was a wash as far as what the catalyst says, it seemed like he was saying "Doesn't matter what you pick, ultimatly everything will be great!" (again, except refusal)

I don't think the Catalyst conversation comes across like that. If you pick Destroy supposedly "the chaos will come back." If you pick Control, you will loose your connection to your former self, which sounds ominous. The only big change for the better in the big picture in the Catalyst conversation is that the relays can be repaired with high enough EMS. And while I think in the case of Destroy, the theme of rejecting the Reaper's legacy had to be compromised for balance, I'm very relieved that the dark age is gone.

[Ieldra]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
@Isichar:
I see. Well, Destroy got a giant dose of happiness, but it's a more conventional ending, which makes it less interesting to me. Control is awesome in its own way, but Synthesis is where I've always envisioned the galaxy to go after Cyrus Shepard (my main) was done with it.

I played through the EC just minutes ago, but it wasn't a giant dose of happiness, but thanks for trying to make people to feel better

No? I think compared with the prospect of a dark age with no Reapers to help repair the relays, which you got in the original ending, Destroy has been vastly improved. Everything will eventually be rebuilt, and the epilogue hints at a galaxy-spanning civilization with the Sol system as the hub. It takes more time to rebuild than in the others, but I think that's very appropriate.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 06 juillet 2012 - 03:32 .

[Isichar]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Isichar:
I see. Well, Destroy got a giant dose of happiness, but it's a more conventional ending, which makes it less interesting to me. Control is awesome in its own way, but Synthesis is where I've always envisioned the galaxy to go after Cyrus Shepard (my main) was done with it.

For me, its about another point you already mentioned; its all about the beauty of stepping forward into the unknown future. Thats what Sci-fis are all about. Thats why I loved Mass Effect to begin with. it was like an ocean you could just dive into. And it leaves me with the same sense of wonder that I begun it with. And its also why I hope the series does not continue on, I would rather bioware create a new series to explore.

Destroy still makes a lot of sense in terms of what i would consider my Shepards Canon choice, but on a personal level I just like what synthesis represents.

[Vigilant111]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
@Isichar:
I see. Well, Destroy got a giant dose of happiness, but it's a more conventional ending, which makes it less interesting to me. Control is awesome in its own way, but Synthesis is where I've always envisioned the galaxy to go after Cyrus Shepard (my main) was done with it.

I played through the EC just minutes ago, but it wasn't a giant dose of happiness, but thanks for trying to make people to feel better

No? I think compared with the prospect of a dark age with no Reapers to help repair the relays, which you got in the original ending, Destroy has been vastly improved. Everything will eventually be rebuilt, and the epilogue hints at a galaxy-spanning civilization with the Sol system as the hub. It takes more time to rebuild than in the others, but I think that's very appropriate.

There is a disparity between the intention to induce happiness and its effectiveness, a scar is a scar

I cannot help but feel that EC paints destroyers as war mongers, and will stop at nothing to win a battle, and are exactly the kind of people that will doom in the future, the destroy ending is nowhere as optimistic as the synthesis ending, not to mention if u don't play MP then you will be robbed of the $2 consolation prize of the breath scene

[Shaigunjoe]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...
I guess I meant it was a wash as far as what the catalyst says, it seemed like he was saying "Doesn't matter what you pick, ultimatly everything will be great!" (again, except refusal)

I don't think the Catalyst conversation comes across like that. If you pick Destroy supposedly "the chaos will come back." If you pick Control, you will loose your connection to your former self, which sounds ominous. The only big change for the better in the big picture in the Catalyst conversation is that the relays can be repaired with high enough EMS. And while I think in the case of Destroy, the theme of rejecting the Reaper's legacy had to be compromised for balance, I'm very relieved that the dark age is gone.

Good points.

[Heeden]

Vigilant111 wrote...

There is a disparity between the intention to induce happiness and its effectiveness, a scar is a scar

I cannot help but feel that EC paints destroyers as war mongers, and will stop at nothing to win a battle, and are exactly the kind of people that will doom in the future, the destroy ending is nowhere as optimistic as the synthesis ending, not to mention if u don't play MP then you will be robbed of the $2 consolation prize of the breath scene

Not true, I have an EMS of 3377 (no MP) and my Destroy ending was all about victory through unity, sacrifice, hope for the future and my Shep will be there to paragon the hell out of everyone so we get things right.

I was very happy with it, things are significantly less broken than I assumed they would be pre-EC and there is definite ambiguity about the ultimate fate of EDI and the Geth.

[Ieldra]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
@Isichar:
I see. Well, Destroy got a giant dose of happiness, but it's a more conventional ending, which makes it less interesting to me. Control is awesome in its own way, but Synthesis is where I've always envisioned the galaxy to go after Cyrus Shepard (my main) was done with it.

I played through the EC just minutes ago, but it wasn't a giant dose of happiness, but thanks for trying to make people to feel better

No? I think compared with the prospect of a dark age with no Reapers to help repair the relays, which you got in the original ending, Destroy has been vastly improved. Everything will eventually be rebuilt, and the epilogue hints at a galaxy-spanning civilization with the Sol system as the hub. It takes more time to rebuild than in the others, but I think that's very appropriate.

There is a disparity between the intention to induce happiness and its effectiveness, a scar is a scar

I cannot help but feel that EC paints destroyers as war mongers, and will stop at nothing to win a battle, and are exactly the kind of people that will doom in the future, the destroy ending is nowhere as optimistic as the synthesis ending, not to mention if u don't play MP then you will be robbed of the $2 consolation prize of the breath scene

Post-EC, you won't need MP any more to get the breath scene. You only need 3100 EMS.

Also, the original Destroy ending was like that, I agree. The EC ending? Really, I can't see much to complain about except the death of the geth, and while that's bad, I can accept it as a necessary sacrifice if I really believe getting rid of the Reapers once and for all is the best way into the future, just as I can accept changing everyone if I really believe Synthesis is the best way. Hackett says you'll rebuild everything...and more. The slides look good. It's clearly a best-case case scenario given the circumstances. IIRC, you even see the Citadel repaired which you don't see in Synthesis. Synthesis paints a transhuman future, with all the new wonders (which are shown or told) but also new horrors (which are admittedly not shown but neither are bad side effects in the other endings) inherent in such a scenario. It is best only in that everyone survives and nobody is enslaved. If you think it goes beyond that, perhaps you're more attracted by that prospect of immortality and ascension than you care to admit?

But perhaps thinks look different after I've experienced it on my own screen. So far I've only seen EC Destroy on YT. Ask me again in a week or two.

[lillitheris]

Isichar wrote...

Destroy still makes a lot of sense in terms of what i would consider my Shepards Canon choice, but on a personal level I just like what synthesis represents.

I like what it represents, too. It’s just that the price of forcing it on everyone is too high*.


* Even assuming that it were in any way plausible and that it did not have any of the obvious potential to be really evil.

** The idea of a soldier — a great one, but still a soldier — making this irreversible decision in 5 minutes is just truly frightening to me. It’s horrifying that someone would think that was a great idea. Sorry if you do…

Modifié par lillitheris, 06 juillet 2012 - 08:28 .

[Heeden]

lillitheris wrote...

** The idea of a soldier — a great one, but still a soldier — making this irreversible decision in 5 minutes is just truly frightening to me. It’s horrifying that someone would think that was a great idea. Sorry if you do…

“Spectres are not trained, but chosen. Individuals forged in the fire of service and battle—those whose actions elevate them above the rank and file.”

Spectres are agents entrusted with extraordinary authority by the Citadel Council, including the power of life and death over the inhabitants of the galaxy. They form an elite group selected from a number of different species, and their primary responsibility is to preserve galactic stability by whatever means necessary. Though they are generally considered as being above the law and have complete discretion as to the methods used to accomplish their mission, an individual's status as a Spectre can be revoked by the Council in a case of a gross misconduct.
Spectres work either alone or in small groups according to nature of a particular task and to their personal  preference. "Spectre" is a syllabic abbreviation of Special Tactics and Reconnaissance.

Modifié par Heeden, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:21 .

[Xilizhra]

Reposting from a different thread about how apparently Mike Gamble confirmed that Keiji returned to life:

Excellent. This seems to confirm my theory that Shepard can return if she has a greybox made. If that's the case, and it's updated before leaving the Normandy that last time, all Shepard will be missing is the memories of the final Earth mission, especially if she's uploaded into a new body. Hell, with the current applications of Synthesis, she might even still be able to have children with Liara in that form, and could well actually live long enough to see even higher forms of directed evolution arise. The implications here are actually quite lovely.

[lillitheris]

Heeden wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

** The idea of a soldier — a great one, but still a soldier — making this irreversible decision in 5 minutes is just truly frightening to me. It’s horrifying that someone would think that was a great idea. Sorry if you do…

“Spectres are not trained, but chosen. Individuals forged in the fire of service and battle—those whose actions elevate them above the rank and file.”

Like I said. Soldier.

(If it was Stephen Hawking up there, I’d maybe trust his judgment. Maybe. But he’d be smart enough to not make the decision by himself.)

Modifié par lillitheris, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:30 .

[Xilizhra]

Do note that it's a soldier who's very far physically from their best. Actual reasoned logic probably won't be going through Shepard's mind much at this point in time.