473 réponses à ce sujet

[Geneaux486]

ediskrad327 wrote...
the explosion of the Crucible would have damaged the Citadel destroying The Catalyst's CPU and killing him, Shepard dies, Reapers get even more stupid and are killed by the fleet

You're basing this on nothing.  There is nothing to suggest that the Catalyst's CPU (assuming it has one), is located anywhere near that area, nor is there anything to suggest that an inactive Crucible would damage the Citadel at all were it destroyed.  None of this happens.  if it did, it would not be a "Critical mission failure".

Modifié par Geneaux486, 06 juin 2012 - 02:12 .

[ediskrad327]

Geneaux486 wrote...

ediskrad327 wrote...
the explosion of the Crucible would have damaged the Citadel destroying The Catalyst's CPU and killing him, Shepard dies, Reapers get even more stupid and are killed by the fleet

You're basing this on nothing.  There is nothing to suggest that the Catalyst's CPU (assuming it has one), is located anywhere near that area, nor is there anything to suggest that an inactive Crucible would damage the Citadel at all were it destroyed.  None of this happens.  if it did, it would not be a "Critical mission failure".

i'm trying to retcon that abomination don't destroy my ending >_<

[GreyLycanTrope]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...
The Crucible is destroyed by the Reapers in the critical mission failure.  Not only does the Catalyst live, he wins, and the Reapers keep on reaping.  It's essentially accepting their logic and surrendering.

Funny thing is I felt that way with all the presented options anyways.

Strange considering all three options stop the Reapers, either through death, control, or invalidation.

You stop the cycle but still accept their logic.

[ediskrad327]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...
The Crucible is destroyed by the Reapers in the critical mission failure.  Not only does the Catalyst live, he wins, and the Reapers keep on reaping.  It's essentially accepting their logic and surrendering.

Funny thing is I felt that way with all the presented options anyways.

Strange considering all three options stop the Reapers, either through death, control, or invalidation.

You stop the cycle but still accept their logic.

and the Galaxy enters a 10,000 year Dark Age and the Normandy is doomed to become a tribe of inbreed freaks

[Geneaux486]

Greylycantrope wrote...
You stop the cycle but still accept their logic.

Incorrect.  Stopping their cycle via any of the means presented by the Crucible is a compete and utter rejection of their logic, because their logic is that all living things must be processed into Reaper form.  Stopping that from happening, again, is a rejection of their logic.

and the Galaxy enters a 10,000 year Dark Age and the Normandy is doomed to become a tribe of inbreed freaks

You say you're trying to retcon the ending, claiming that it is an abomination, yet your complaints about it are based on things that are neither stated nor even implied.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 06 juin 2012 - 02:19 .

[Ticonderoga117]

ediskrad327 wrote...
and the Galaxy enters a 10,000 year Dark Age and the Normandy is doomed to become a tribe of inbreed freaks

Oh, no need to worry about this really. The needed population to form a sustainable breeding base is much much higher than however many are on the Normandy. 20ish people are not enough. Not too mention either Tali and Garrus die, or everyone else but those two die.

[ediskrad327]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...
You stop the cycle but still accept their logic.

Incorrect.  Stopping their cycle via any of the means presented by the Crucible is a compete and utter rejection of their logic, because their logic is that all living things must be processed into Reaper form.  Stopping that from happening, again, is a rejection of their logic.

and the Galaxy enters a 10,000 year Dark Age and the Normandy is doomed to become a tribe of inbreed freaks

You say you're trying to retcon the ending, claiming that it is an abomination, yet your complaints about it are based on things that are neither stated nor even implied.

stargazer prooves that people are still stranded on Random worlds 10,000 years after the Reaper War and i doubt the Normandy's crew are just going to sit watching their faces until they die

[George-Kinsill]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...
You stop the cycle but still accept their logic.

Incorrect.  Stopping their cycle via any of the means presented by the Crucible is a compete and utter rejection of their logic, because their logic is that all living things must be processed into Reaper form.  Stopping that from happening, again, is a rejection of their logic.

By choosing any of the endings, you reject their means. For example, I accept the logic that increased government speding will stimulate the economy. However, I reject the N@Z!s means of this by starting a war and holocaust.

In Synthesis, at the very least, you agree that creators rebelling against the creators is a significant problem that might result in all organic life being wiped out. Thus, you reject destory as inadequate since it will doom the galaxy according to the Catalyst. Thus you go with the option that for certain solves this problem.

If you disagree that this is a problem and don't want to kill the Geth and EDI, more likely than not you will go with control and presumably fly the Reapers into the sun or a black hole. 

[Geneaux486]

ediskrad327 wrote...
stargazer prooves that people are still stranded on Random worlds 10,000 years after the Reaper War and i doubt the Normandy's crew are just going to sit watching their faces until they die

What you're saying about the stargazer is untrue.  All he says is that his grandson will be able to go into space one day, presumably when he's older, and that each of the billions of stars in the universe could be home to a different form of life, which is a prediction anyone in the present time of Mass Effect could make as well, as there are still billions of places they haven't travelled, and new forms of life that have not yet been discovered.  So no, the stargazer neither proves nor implies what you're saying he does.

As for the Normandy's crew, we have no idea.  Just as likely that someone would come by to rescue them.  We don't know where they are, how close they are to a populated area, nor how long they remain on that planet.

In Synthesis, at the very least, you agree that creators rebelling against the creators is a significant problem that might result in all organic life being wiped out. Thus, you reject destory as inadequate since it will doom the galaxy according to the Catalyst. Thus you go with the option that for certain solves this problem.

Doing so accepts that what the Catalyst tells you about this being a problem is right, but still rejects the methods and reasoning of the Reapers themselves because the process erases the boundaries between synthetics and organics, and allows each person to retain their individuality, something the Reapers consider to be a weakness.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 06 juin 2012 - 02:26 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Incorrect.  Stopping their cycle via any of the means presented by the Crucible is a compete and utter rejection of their logic, because their logic is that all living things must be processed into Reaper form.  Stopping that from happening, again, is a rejection of their logic.

No, processing organics into Reapers is their solution to their percieved problem. This problem is that organic will always be destroyed by synthetics and the Reapers must do something about it. That is their logic, though a better word would be assumption. So lets run down the new solutions presented and see if they fit the saving organics form synthetics and Reaper intervention criteria.

Destroy: Kill the Reapers and All Synthetics. All current synthetics dead organics safe from synthetics for the moment. Not a long term solution but for the Reapers still fulfilled their function, their intervention stop synthetics. Check

Synthesis: Organics and Synthetics merge, Organics are safe, technically they don't exists anymore but they didn't get wipped out by synthetics, who also technically don't exist anymore. Reapers still around incase someone decided to try and make more synthetics. Check

Control: Reapers still around, Shepard for some reason decided it's better to keep them, they are still capable of protection organics against synthetics, and possibly humanity against other organics if Shepard decides on that. Regardless Reaper goals still met, they still can protect synthetics from organics and Shepard relys on them directly.  Reaper intervention and safe guard against synthetics. Check.

[Geneaux486]

Greylycantrope wrote...
No, processing organics into Reapers is their solution to their percieved problem. This problem is that organic will always be destroyed by synthetics and the Reapers must do something about it. That is their logic, though a better word would be assumption.

The problem of synthetic agression is based on observation of that pattern repeating itself through countless cycles.  The Reaper's logic that turning organics into more of them is what is being rejected in each choice.

Destroy: Kill the Reapers and All Synthetics. All current synthetics dead organics safe from synthetics for the moment. Not a long term solution but for the Reapers still fulfilled their function, their intervention stop synthetics. Check

The Reapers don't care about "the moment", they're all about the long run.  By Reaper logic organics will again create synthetics, only this time without the Reapers there as a safety net, and with the Geth, anomalous in that they are the first known synthetic race to coexist with organics, being destroyed.  This is a complete failure on the part of the Reapers', as they are not only defeated, but the disaster they are trying to prevent will go on unopposed.  Uncheck.

Synthesis: Organics and Synthetics merge, Organics are safe, technically they don't exists anymore but they didn't get wipped out by synthetics, who also technically don't exist anymore. Reapers still around incase someone decided to try and make more synthetics. Check

All of the atrocities the Reapers have committed, the bolstering of their own ranks, and the losses they've sustained are all completely invalidated by synthesis, which accomplishes what the Reapers could not, while valueing and preserving the aspects of organic life that the Reapers consider to be weaknesses.  Though the synthetic vs. organic conflict is prevented, the Reapers themselves are proven utterly wrong in their methods, it is as much a personal loss for them as either of the other choices.  Uncheck.

Control: Reapers still around, Shepard for some reason decided it's better to keep them, they are still capable of protection organics against synthetics, and possibly humanity against other organics if Shepard decides on that. Regardless Reaper goals still met, they still can protect synthetics from organics and Shepard relys on them directly.  Reaper intervention and safe guard against synthetics. Check.

The Reapers lose their position as the most "advanced" forms of life, now subject to Shepard's bidding, and their extinction cycle, as well as the increase of their own ranks, comes to a permanent hault.  Uncheck. 

All of these choices reject the Reapers' logic and methods, all three choices represent a total failure on the part of the Reapers in what they have already done, and what they are seeking to do.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 06 juin 2012 - 02:59 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Gene you seem to be hung up on the Reapers methods. As I said, the cycle is what's being reject I agree on that point. The logic behind this method remains however. You keep arguing about the Reapers actions not the reasons behind their actions.

On the other points:

"The Reapers don't care about "the moment", they're all about the long run.  By Reaper logic organics will again create synthetics, only this time without the Reapers there as a safety net, and with the Geth, anomalous in that they are the first known synthetic race to coexist with organics, being destroyed. This is a complete failure on the part of the Reapers', as they are not only defeated, but the disaster they are trying to prevent will go on unopposed.  Uncheck."

I did say this destory was a short term solution did I not? They won't be able to do anything in the future but in that moment they can still use their influence to destroy all current synthetics. The criteria was "stopping synthetics through use of reaper intervention", that still fits even if it's not a long term solution, whether it's effective in the long run is not part of the citeria.

"All of the atrocities the Reapers have committed, the bolstering of their own ranks, and the losses they'vesustained are all completely invalidated by synthesis, which accomplishes what the Reapers could not,
while valueing and preserving the aspects of organic life that the Reapers consider to be weaknesses.  Though the synthetic vs. organic conflict is prevented, the Reapers themselves are proven utterly wrong in their methods, it is as much a personal loss for them as either of the other choices."

Again you are arguing method here not reason behind the method. You admit that the synthetic vs organic conflict is prevented, still fits the criteria.

"The Reapers lose their position as the most "advanced" forms of life, now subject to Shepard's bidding, and their extinction cycle, as well as the increase of their own ranks, comes to a permanent hault."

What does their position have to do with anything? Anyway they don't lose it they've still got the most advanced tech in the galaxy Shepard being in charge doesn't change that. And again you're disregarding the reason cycle exists in the first place. It's not just to bolster Reaper numbers, the main purpose is to "preserve organic life in Reaper form".

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 06 juin 2012 - 03:30 .

[MegaSovereign]

Eh Catalyst is a cool guy kills organics and doesn't afraid of integrity.

On a serious note, my "theory" is that the Crucible modifies the catalyst AI's core programming and forces it to present the Crucible's capabilities to Shepard in a truthful manner.

[George-Kinsill]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...
No, processing organics into Reapers is their solution to their percieved problem. This problem is that organic will always be destroyed by synthetics and the Reapers must do something about it. That is their logic, though a better word would be assumption.

The problem of synthetic agression is based on observation of that pattern repeating itself through countless cycles.  The Reaper's logic that turning organics into more of them is what is being rejected in each choice.

Destroy: Kill the Reapers and All Synthetics. All current synthetics dead organics safe from synthetics for the moment. Not a long term solution but for the Reapers still fulfilled their function, their intervention stop synthetics. Check

The Reapers don't care about "the moment", they're all about the long run.  By Reaper logic organics will again create synthetics, only this time without the Reapers there as a safety net, and with the Geth, anomalous in that they are the first known synthetic race to coexist with organics, being destroyed.  This is a complete failure on the part of the Reapers', as they are not only defeated, but the disaster they are trying to prevent will go on unopposed.  Uncheck.

Synthesis: Organics and Synthetics merge, Organics are safe, technically they don't exists anymore but they didn't get wipped out by synthetics, who also technically don't exist anymore. Reapers still around incase someone decided to try and make more synthetics. Check

All of the atrocities the Reapers have committed, the bolstering of their own ranks, and the losses they've sustained are all completely invalidated by synthesis, which accomplishes what the Reapers could not, while valueing and preserving the aspects of organic life that the Reapers consider to be weaknesses.  Though the synthetic vs. organic conflict is prevented, the Reapers themselves are proven utterly wrong in their methods, it is as much a personal loss for them as either of the other choices.  Uncheck.

Control: Reapers still around, Shepard for some reason decided it's better to keep them, they are still capable of protection organics against synthetics, and possibly humanity against other organics if Shepard decides on that. Regardless Reaper goals still met, they still can protect synthetics from organics and Shepard relys on them directly.  Reaper intervention and safe guard against synthetics. Check.

The Reapers lose their position as the most "advanced" forms of life, now subject to Shepard's bidding, and their extinction cycle, as well as the increase of their own ranks, comes to a permanent hault.  Uncheck. 

All of these choices reject the Reapers' logic and methods, all three choices represent a total failure on the part of the Reapers in what they have already done, and what they are seeking to do.

Simply writing "uncheck" does not mean you have invalidated someone's argument. Sure, the Reapers are no longer get to perform genocide, but that was always a means to an end; the end being a prevention of a technological singularity.

Everything they do is to stop this. They serve the Catalyst, thus if the Catalyst's will is done, then they win. As simple as that. In destroy and possibly control, you reject their means to stop a technological singularity and their reasons for doing so. In synthesis, you simply reject their means, but not the underlying reason.

Synthesis is thus for them the best option at that point. The Reapers get to live on and technological singularity is avoided. 

Ultimately, I think your problem is with semantics and absolutism. The Reapers don't experiance a "total failure" in synthesis. Partial? Possibly. In any case, if their ultimate purpoe is fulfilled, it doesn't matter how its accomplished. No matter whether its synthesis or genocide, anything that prevents a technological singularity is a victory on their part.

[Geneaux486]

Greylycantrope wrote...
I did say this destory was a short term solution did I not? They won't be able to do anything in the future but in that moment they can still use their influence to destroy all current synthetics. The criteria was "stopping synthetics through use of reaper intervention", that still fits even if it's not a long term solution, whether it's effective in the long run is not part of the citeria.

As I said, the Reapers believe it necesarry to prevent a synthetic uprising each time the pattern is repeated.  A short-term elimination of synthetics, especially synthetics that actually can exist peacefully with organics, is irrelevant to a race that percieves time over billions of years and observes repeating patterns.  Destroy is a failure on their part because the percieved problem will continue unchecked.  It is a rejection of Reaper logic because, well, it kills them.  The destruction of synthetics is not something the Reapers intended, it's a function of the Crucible, which the Reapers had no known involvement in.

Again you are arguing method here not reason behind the method. You admit that the synthetic vs organic conflict is prevented, still fits the criteria.

Unless you're preventing the conflict by converting people into more Reapers, you are rejecting the Reapers' logic, rejecting their solution, and rejecting everything they've done up to this point.  Synthesis proves the Reapers wrong once and for all, it being an achievement of the Crucible, and by extension all organics who played a part in designing it, that accomplishes what the Reapers could not, with a finality they were not capable of, and invalidating all the atrocities they've committed.

What does their position have to do with anything? Anyway they don't lose it they've still got the most advanced tech in the galaxy Shepard being in charge doesn't change that. And again you're disregarding the reason cycle exists in the first place. It's not just to bolster Reaper numbers, the main purpose is to "preserve organic life in Reaper form".

Which no longer happens.  The Reapers pride themselves on their perfection, their dominance.  Not only do they lose this and the entire war in control, but they lose the ability to carry out their mission.  Control is still a rejection of the Reapers' logic, and what's more it forces the Reapers themselves to reject their own logic.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 06 juin 2012 - 03:38 .

[MegaSovereign]

No replies on my theory?

Alright. ;(

[Pinkflamingo22]

The catalyst is the Reapers, End of argument.

[Vigilant111]

MegaSovereign wrote...

No replies on my theory?

Alright. ;(

Dismissed, a million things could have happened, I have already accepted your view that Crucible joining the Citadel presents two more options other than destroy, but your theory is too far

Modifié par Vigilant111, 06 juin 2012 - 03:50 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Gene the point you seem to be missing and I probably haven't stated it clearly enough, the Reapers are trying to preserve organics. They're doing it in a twisted and illogical way but that it their purpose. Turning entire races into Reapers is how they've accomplished this purpose before but making more Reapers is a method to achieve their goal not the goal itself.

And yes Destroy is a failure of their part in the long term but again if their going to be destroyed they'll still try to accomplish what limited victory they can for their agenda because that is their main function, their very reason for existing,

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 06 juin 2012 - 03:57 .

[BatmanTurian]

This is just my opinion and it might be based on fallacious logic. I'm not sure. This is independent of IT and takes the ending at face value.

EDI proves unshackled AI can be deceitful and dishonest. EDI does it in a benevolent manner but that doesn't mean other AI will.

The Catalyst is an AI. It may be shackled or it might not. My opinion is that it is unshackled or else it would not have been able to destroy its creators, which it obviously did or they might still be around (that might mean the Catalyst is the synthetic destroying organics that it fears; it might think it made a mistake by destroying its creators when it became sentient, Perhaps it overreacted, like that AI from Pinnacle Station that EDI is based on; so now it works to rectify its mistakes and is stuck in a loop).

Therefore, the Catalyst could lie and could be dishonest. It seems to use emotional manipulation. Some of its arguments are fallacious and some are outright dishonesty by omission.

Whether it is lying or not, I can't completely prove it and I won't bother to, as there is not enough data to completely nail it to the wall. It definitely has a warped and detached point-of-view. It has not had the ability to interact with organics and achieve understanding like EDI has if it's telling the truth that no other organic has interacted with it. That might explain why it doesn't understand that it is not actually helping organics or that it might be unreasonably cruel in its methods.

Of course, this view also doesn't take into account that it claims to be the Reaper boss, while also implying it is at least part of the Reaper consensus. This means if the Reapers are its solution and it guides them, then it is responsible for giving them the knowledge to perform their methods and is also responsible for their arrogant and cruel philosophy. It doesn't take into account that the Reapers, as a race, are manipulative and enormously cruel and evil by our standards, whether they think the end result is noble or not (the path to hell is paved with good intentions). And as before, it does not include an IT interpretation, as I can separate the literal and IT view of the ending.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 06 juin 2012 - 04:49 .

[Veneke]

There are 15 pages on this topic that I'm not going to read. Given that I do think the Catalyst is telling the truth I'd feel like I just copped out if I didn't reply to OP. So, yeah...

The Angry One wrote...

I've pointed this out many times and I've yet to get a satisfactory response, therefore I am making a topic about it because I crave attention.

For the purposes of this discussion, we will assume that Reaper ascension is just that, that somehow melting bodies into grey/orange goo does ascend them into the mind of a superior (in the Catalyst's view) Reaper form.

Now, when Shepard states that the Reapers are killing organics, the Catalyst replies with a flat "No."
Reapers do not kill organics, they ascend and preserve them in Reaper form. It entirely dodges the fact that it murders other beings without "ascending" them.
Most blatantly, it takes the form of Vent Boy. Vent Boy, if you need any reminders, was blown up in a shuttle by a Reaper laser. No ascension to Reaper form, but vaporised in a fireball.

So really, how is the Catalyst at all believable when it not only lies to your face, it also flaunts the proof that it's lying in front of you for the entire scene!

Short answer: Catalyst is trustworthy because the endings fall apart under their own weight if he is not. See the Indoctrination Theory. It doesn't matter if he get something wrong because the crux of what he's saying must be the truth.

Long answer: More speculation!

Perhaps the Catalyst misunderstood what Shepard was asking, deliberately or otherwise.
Perhaps he doesn't exercise minute control over the Reapers and only controls them in a very basic manner.
Perhaps he doesn't want to admit to being a billion year old murdering psychopathic genocidal machine.
Perhaps [insert any other explanation here]...

Ultimately, it doesn't matter that he lies or gets particular facts wrong, nor does it matter that he shouldn't be trusted at all. Those who argue in favour of the Catalyst telling the truth can really only do so from the point of view that the story makes no sense otherwise. It's the same logic that applies to the fact that the mass relays are still intact. Everything ingame says they should blow up and wipe out the galaxy and everything in game says that we shouldn't trust the Catalyst. However, the endings fall apart under their own weight if we believe that the Mass Relays destroy the galaxy or if the Catalyst is lying on the major decisions.

When you get down to it, it's part of your suspension of disbelief. You have to believe that you're being given an honest choice, even though there's no reason to think that. Unfortunately, pretty much everything in the ending goes so far beyond any reasonable suspension of disbelief that the entire thing is an utter trainwreck. If anything of the story is to be salvaged then we must assume that the Starkid is telling us the truth, otherwise none of the options mean anything at all. He could be lying about all of them, or none of them, or one of them, or perhaps if you pick Destroy you're actually picking Control and the cutscenes are simply a dream or any number of other combinations.

What it boils down to is that if you can't trust the Catalyst with regards what the endings actually mean we won't have 6 endings, we'll have 2 - 'Critical Mission Failure' and 'Crayons!'

Modifié par Veneke, 06 juin 2012 - 05:16 .

[Shallyah]

Geneaux486 wrote...


The Crucible is destroyed by the Reapers in the critical mission failure.  Not only does the Catalyst live, he wins, and the Reapers keep on reaping.  It's essentially accepting their logic and surrendering.

This is another point I find interesting.

If the Catalyst controls the Reapers and he's told you to make a decission, why do the Reapers destroy the Crucible if you take a bit too long making that decission? Why isn't the truthful and trustable Catalyst saying "Hey minions, hold up. We're trying to find a new solution that will affect the Galaxy for the billions of years to come. It's not something that can be decided in a heartbeat".

It's simply ridiculous.

Modifié par Shallyah, 06 juin 2012 - 07:30 .

[Erield]

Veneke wrote...

There are 15 pages on this topic that I'm not going to read. Given that I do think the Catalyst is telling the truth I'd feel like I just copped out if I didn't reply to OP. So, yeah...

Ultimately, it doesn't matter that he lies or gets particular facts wrong, nor does it matter that he shouldn't be trusted at all. ...the endings fall apart under their own weight if we believe that the Mass Relays destroy the galaxy or if the Catalyst is lying on the major decisions.

When you get down to it, it's part of your suspension of disbelief. You have to believe that you're being given an honest choice, even though there's no reason to think that.

Which pretty much sums up the reasons why it's bad writing...right?