Aucune réponse à ce sujet

[Guccimayne]

It seems like The Catalyst was programmed with a lasting solution in mind. That is why he vehemently opposed flying off with the Reapers and letting the Galaxy do its own thing, since that won't stop synthetics from fighting organics (as Bioware so elegantly conveyed by making Refuse auto-lose). So why are any of his 3 options seen as preferable to that? None of them guarentee lasting peace either. Starchild said it himself that Destroy is temporary. And the outcome would be the same as the reapers simply flying away again, except now they are all destroyed and Joker is lonely forever.  Being synthetic/organic doesn't necessarily mean sunshine and rainbows.. hell, organics fight all the time. And Control pretty much keeps things like they are now, but with Shepard as the head of The Reaper Galaxy Police. Organics and Synthetics can still fight it out.

So how are any of those three options seen as acceptable to starchild, yet packing up and leaving isn't? He already acknowledges that Shepard's actions are novel, which prompted him to say that his solution of harvesting organics needs to be changed. Plus he united the Quarians and Geth under one banner, despite the organic/synthetic differences. Shepard still didn't bring that up for reasons that are beyond me. Not to mention EDI.  It is clear that the starchild understood Shepard was a special individual, yet he couldn't go one more step and realize that maybe this cycle could be different? By refusing Shepard's stance of not making a galaxy-wide decision, Starchild continued with his failed "solution" and quite possibly destroyed the only key to lasting peace.

And in the next cycle, as with this one, they will be even better prepared for the reaper threat than the previous generation and look how far Shepard got. Surely the catalyst knew this would only hasten his eventual destruction?

Modifié par Guccimayne, 26 juin 2012 - 11:58 .