565 réponses à ce sujet

[CrutchCricket]

To "like" one of the endings, I basically renounced the entire ME world. If Bioware doesn't care about their universe, why should I?
Once I was well into apathy I picked Control because my player character gets to become a nigh-godlike advanced consciousness, free from weakness and bull**** logic (there's no evidence that Shepard buys the organic/synthetic crap even if you do pick one of the choices) and is free to explore the universe with all the perception and understanding such power affords him. I find that extremely interesting.

So to answer the OP, no it no longer bothers me because I've written the whole thing off anyway and Control gives me personal satisfaction.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Dragoonlordz wrote...
Yeh, I see it a bit like Hal 9000 too. The catalyst was designed by Bioware to be flawed much like Hal. It has no sympathy, it acts on programming. Finding solution to a problem asked to resolve by it's creators only to have that solution due to the flaw in the programming be one that ends up turning on them because of the flaw in it's design. It has no emotions, it has no sympathy, it cannot be reasoned with it is a computer construct flawed in design from the offset.

I recognize this, which is why my blood boils that our only option in stopping him ourselves is to appease his faulty logic. We literally have the bad guy deciding the only ways we could end this, aside from Reject of course.

[Taboo]

He isn't deceptive.

Ever.

He's fallacious.

He is programmed to think he's right.

[my Aim is True]

The catalyst is a dick, but at least I can tolerate the endings now. Not exactly what I wanted, but I consider the conclusions a minor disappointment, not a major one like it used to be

[Caenis]

Nope I have no problem with the endings and issues other people have with it, I absolutely love the endings. I didn't feel jilted the first time around just...sad and depressed, because I felt like everyone I loved died and there was no closure. I got that in the EC which I never expected them to and am 100% satisfied. Also The endings fit perfectly with the story, after all Edi pondered the idea of parallel universes where our logic might not be the same and the ME Universe is not exactly set in our universe it's set in that universe so the Catalyst works in that universe, and I don't need any explanation as for why. I just need to know: Where to point it and how big is the effect afterwards? Don't care about the science to it or the little green people who made it, just point me in the direction I need to go with it so I can make my decision and be done with saving the day XD...time for a little song "I saved the world today--Annie Lennox" or some Hang Drums/Hand Pans do a little beat yeahh....

Modifié par Caenis, 30 juin 2012 - 05:58 .

[Doom972]

I always assumed he was manipulating Shepard. Even before the EC. He takes on the image of the child that haunts his nightmares in order to get him to listen. It makes sense to me and I don't have a problem with the fact that it's now a bit more apparent than before.

[Sniktchtherat]

The_mango55 wrote...

The Catalyst doesn't consider its actions to be "incredible crimes" any more than a gardner considers trimming his hedges to be a horrible crime.

It doesn't care about individual lives, or even individual species. It just wants to preserve life as a whole.

But if it is permitting you to destroy it, while acknowledging that doing so will essentially fail its entire existence because "it will happen again", then there's something more going on.  not only does it make no logical sense, it also makes no emotional sense.  The controller is surrendering control without a fight.  The ambassador is shutting down the embassy without a reason or an order.  And it is saying flat-out that "if you do this, you'll still get wiped out by synths.  It'll just take a little longer".  So why does everyone assume he's telling the truth about any of it?  I quote The Usual Suspects:  the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

And I've already gone over why Control and Synthesis are very, very suspect.  Unless you assume massive benefactorial altruism on the part of the being you've been locked in a life-or-death struggle with for the past 3ish years and ALL LIFE, organic and synthetic, has been battling for at least a billion years, you have to take his offers with a grain of salt the size of Everest.  When you sup with the devil, use a looooooong spoon.  And a multitude of other old-fogey-proving chestnuts all apply.  Nothing he offers you can be trusted, because HE cannot be trusted.  Everything he gives has a fishhook inside it - the simple fact of if you let the Reapers choose which paths you are allowed to walk on, you develop as they choose.  And that has always ended with harvesting before.  We know AI can lie.  We know they can omit.  We know they can twist, distort, bull**** and boast.  And yet we're to trust the kid.  The kid who faces his own death, a death that proves he is a failure at his sole core task, like most people face the task of lcipping their toenails.  And if you refuse to pick one of the three paths he offers...he reacts with rage.

[Dragoonlordz]

dreamgazer wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

memorysquid wrote...

Curious, are you certain his logic is faulty?  In the game, that is.  In reality, yes he is simply wrong.  Just asking for purposes of interpreting the writing of this particular game.  His logic doesn't appear to be faulty, one of his premises does, namely the premise that looks something like "Synthetics will always destroy all organics."  However in the ME universe that could simply be a true premise or very likely to be true.

Spoken about this before with another person in different thread...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Sharkey1337 wrote...

Most likely unintentionally, it simply saw it as a solution and went with it. I mentioned Hal 9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey being a good parallel.

HAL was unable to resolve a conflict between his general mission to relay information accurately and orders specific to the mission requiring that he withhold from Bowman and Poole the true purpose of the mission. With the crew dead, he reasons, he would not need to be lying to them.

The Catalyst simply saw by destroying organics that can create synthetics, it would be a way to stop synthetics from destroying all organics beforehand. Computer logic=cold and calculating.

Yeh, I see it a bit like Hal 9000 too. The catalyst was designed by Bioware to be flawed much like Hal. It has no sympathy, it acts on programming. Finding solution to a problem asked to resolve by it's creators only to have that solution due to the flaw in the programming be one that ends up turning on them because of the flaw in it's design. It has no emotions, it has no sympathy, it cannot be reasoned with it is a computer construct flawed in design from the offset.

(thumbs up)

Only it does have emotions; they're just anchored to its agenda. Pretty hard to deny the punctuated emotion in: "Your belief is not required", and "So be it". 

Neither of those prove emotion (imho). Belief is not required is an emotionless statement in itself and further points to a lack of emotion being that it does not care what you feel or think about what it is saying. The voice change did not have any emotion to it as far as I could tell after listening closely, I heard no anger in it's tone. While it changed in type, the pitch was rather monotone and emotionless in that changed voice. Was not shouting or angry it just said so be it in an emotionless manner I think. A man with a husky voice just because it husky does not make it filled with emotion.

[Joe Del Toro]

Taboo-XX wrote...

He isn't deceptive.

Ever.

He's fallacious.

He is programmed to think he's right.

This is FALLACIOUS!

YES. YYYYES.

[Dragoonlordz]

Sniktchtherat wrote...

But if it is permitting you to destroy it, while acknowledging that doing so will essentially fail its entire existence because "it will happen again", then there's something more going on.  not only does it make no logical sense, it also makes no emotional sense.  The controller is surrendering control without a fight.  The ambassador is shutting down the embassy without a reason or an order.  And it is saying flat-out that "if you do this, you'll still get wiped out by synths.  It'll just take a little longer".  So why does everyone assume he's telling the truth about any of it?  I quote The Usual Suspects:  the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

And I've already gone over why Control and Synthesis are very, very suspect.  Unless you assume massive benefactorial altruism on the part of the being you've been locked in a life-or-death struggle with for the past 3ish years and ALL LIFE, organic and synthetic, has been battling for at least a billion years, you have to take his offers with a grain of salt the size of Everest.  When you sup with the devil, use a looooooong spoon.  And a multitude of other old-fogey-proving chestnuts all apply.  Nothing he offers you can be trusted, because HE cannot be trusted.  Everything he gives has a fishhook inside it - the simple fact of if you let the Reapers choose which paths you are allowed to walk on, you develop as they choose.  And that has always ended with harvesting before.  We know AI can lie.  We know they can omit.  We know they can twist, distort, bull**** and boast.  And yet we're to trust the kid.  The kid who faces his own death, a death that proves he is a failure at his sole core task, like most people face the task of lcipping their toenails.  And if you refuse to pick one of the three paths he offers...he reacts with rage.

It is not permitting you but more acknowledges it cannot stop you from making the choices at this stage. It said as much in dialogue itself. You built the catalyst not him, you created those choices, he merely explained the purpose of the things you made in this cycle based on what previous cycles designed it to do. If you do not like what the crucible does (which is not what the catalyst wants as the choices are not the catalysts they are the crucibles), then you can reject it and stand by your belief.

This does not mean should win in fact looking out the window in that very same scene you see that almost all your fleets are wiped out and now the Repears are picking them off one by one at leisure. You spent your time chatting instead of making a choice and as such by time finished chatting you had already lost. You stuck to your convictions and lost. Rightly so too. Every choice had vast consequence and that was yours. Without that level of consequence all other choices become meaningless and you are not and will not ever get that situation which nullifies everything they created in months and months at large expense just because you want story written your way instead of Biowares. I went into more detail here but I am not going to repeat it.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 juin 2012 - 06:23 .

[dreamgazer]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Neither of those prove emotion (imho). Belief is not required is an emotionless statement in itself and further points to a lack of emotion being that it does not care what you feel or think about what it is saying. The voice change did not have any emotion to it as far as I could tell after listening closely, I heard no anger in it's tone. While it changed in type, the pitch was rather monotone and emotionless in that changed voice. Was not shouting or angry it just said so be it in an emotionless manner I think. A man with a husky voice just because it husky does not make it filled with emotion.

Eh, I disagree, but I understand your point-of-view.

They placed emphasis on the shift in tone of the catalyst's "belief" line, both in camera movement and in a slight shift in his verbal intensity.  And the mere fact that the catalyst felt it opportune to change his voice to the Reaper registry for "So be it" shows frustration, as well as a degree of vindictiveness (he wanted Shepard to remember the Reapers' dominance in those last moments, to remember what they'll do to finish the cycle).

[Omega Torsk]

Not really. The reapers are defeated or at least stopped. You have the option to even kill the Catalyst (with destroy) or replace him through subjugation (with control). He's actually a real good sport about that.

But yeah, mission accomplished and I get to see the fruit of my choices. That's all that matters. I really could care less that the Crucible was a big deus ex machina.

[Fresnor]

Han Shot First wrote...

Fresnor wrote...

Love how people say the 'Reject' ending is just 'letting' people die. That is more just Bioware getting to the point and saying"Ehh, I'm tired of writing, let's just write the ending and be done with this." All the Reject ending is, is Shepard saying "Screw your choices, we're doing things my way without giving up our freedom." The next thing that should have been done is calling Admiral Hackett to tell him that the crucible is a reaper trap, and that the citadel is not only a reaper, but the head reaper itself, so blow the damn thing up. I'd point out that everyone on the citadel is already dead, but we honestly don't freaking know since they never showed what happened with them... Kind of makes any and all war assets dealing with it completely worthless.

Conventional victory against the Reapers was simply not possible. Bioware went the correct route in having Shepard's attempt to win without a superweapon fail spectacularly.

And why isn't it possible?  Every reason people have been given has been full of fallacy and boiled down to 'Admiral Hackett says so.'  I remember him saying this but I forget when, was this before you unite everone and before they know the strength of the geth + quarian fleets?  Also if they blow the citadel, wouldn't you think it would have a similar effect on all the reapers like what happened when you took down Saren?   Those precious minutes of unshielded inactive reapers would have allowed the fleet to destroy hundreds if not thousands of them.

[comrade gando]

angry one's right. these endings still suck baawwllzz even with the pretty pictures and music. they make no sense and give shepard no hope to ever see his friends again. wth man

[Dragoonlordz]

dreamgazer wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Neither of those prove emotion (imho). Belief is not required is an emotionless statement in itself and further points to a lack of emotion being that it does not care what you feel or think about what it is saying. The voice change did not have any emotion to it as far as I could tell after listening closely, I heard no anger in it's tone. While it changed in type, the pitch was rather monotone and emotionless in that changed voice. Was not shouting or angry it just said so be it in an emotionless manner I think. A man with a husky voice just because it husky does not make it filled with emotion.

Eh, I disagree, but I understand your point-of-view.

They placed emphasis on the shift in tone of the catalyst's "belief" line, both in camera movement and in a slight shift in his verbal intensity.  And the mere fact that the catalyst felt it opportune to change his voice to the Reaper registry for "So be it" shows frustration, as well as a degree of vindictiveness (he wanted Shepard to remember the Reapers' dominance in those last moments, to remember what they'll do to finish the cycle).

I think that change in voice was reverting to his actual voice and that his actual voice in that part of the game showed no emotion like I said (imho), it used the child like voice to not appear confrontational and aggesive knowing Shepard would be more likely to listen to or be more receptive to a less hostile voice. It used its normal voice when realised nothign it said will make any diffference and Shepard was going to ignore it no matter what.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 juin 2012 - 06:45 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Fresnor wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Fresnor wrote...

Love how people say the 'Reject' ending is just 'letting' people die. That is more just Bioware getting to the point and saying"Ehh, I'm tired of writing, let's just write the ending and be done with this." All the Reject ending is, is Shepard saying "Screw your choices, we're doing things my way without giving up our freedom." The next thing that should have been done is calling Admiral Hackett to tell him that the crucible is a reaper trap, and that the citadel is not only a reaper, but the head reaper itself, so blow the damn thing up. I'd point out that everyone on the citadel is already dead, but we honestly don't freaking know since they never showed what happened with them... Kind of makes any and all war assets dealing with it completely worthless.

Conventional victory against the Reapers was simply not possible. Bioware went the correct route in having Shepard's attempt to win without a superweapon fail spectacularly.

And why isn't it possible?  Every reason people have been given has been full of fallacy and boiled down to 'Admiral Hackett says so.'  I remember him saying this but I forget when, was this before you unite everone and before they know the strength of the geth + quarian fleets?  Also if they blow the citadel, wouldn't you think it would have a similar effect on all the reapers like what happened when you took down Saren?   Those precious minutes of unshielded inactive reapers would have allowed the fleet to destroy hundreds if not thousands of them.

Second paragraph in my reply here and including the link provided at bottom. Not a single person has come up with a valid reason to make a conventional victory possible. There will never be one for reasons I stated in that link plus link within it. If you want a conventional victory at this stage you will have to rely on fan fiction alone. In fan fiction you can write it the way you want to end it, in the game it is how Bioware want to tell it and create it.

[dreamgazer]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Neither of those prove emotion (imho). Belief is not required is an emotionless statement in itself and further points to a lack of emotion being that it does not care what you feel or think about what it is saying. The voice change did not have any emotion to it as far as I could tell after listening closely, I heard no anger in it's tone. While it changed in type, the pitch was rather monotone and emotionless in that changed voice. Was not shouting or angry it just said so be it in an emotionless manner I think. A man with a husky voice just because it husky does not make it filled with emotion.

Eh, I disagree, but I understand your point-of-view.

They placed emphasis on the shift in tone of the catalyst's "belief" line, both in camera movement and in a slight shift in his verbal intensity.  And the mere fact that the catalyst felt it opportune to change his voice to the Reaper registry for "So be it" shows frustration, as well as a degree of vindictiveness (he wanted Shepard to remember the Reapers' dominance in those last moments, to remember what they'll do to finish the cycle).

I think that change in voice was reverting to his actual voice and that his actual voice in that part of the game showed no emotion like I said, it used the child like voice to not appear confrontational and aggesive knowing Shepard would be more likely to listen to or be more receptive to a less hostile voice. It used its normal voice when realised nothign it said will make any diffference and Shepard was going to ignore it no matter what.

*shoot Catalyst*

"SO BE IT."

... and then he happens to revert back to the child's voice for 'the cycle continues". I see intent there. Even in the dialogue version of refusal, it feels like a knee-jerk, purpose-driven action to me.  But, again, to each his own.

[Dragoonlordz]

dreamgazer wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Neither of those prove emotion (imho). Belief is not required is an emotionless statement in itself and further points to a lack of emotion being that it does not care what you feel or think about what it is saying. The voice change did not have any emotion to it as far as I could tell after listening closely, I heard no anger in it's tone. While it changed in type, the pitch was rather monotone and emotionless in that changed voice. Was not shouting or angry it just said so be it in an emotionless manner I think. A man with a husky voice just because it husky does not make it filled with emotion.

Eh, I disagree, but I understand your point-of-view.

They placed emphasis on the shift in tone of the catalyst's "belief" line, both in camera movement and in a slight shift in his verbal intensity.  And the mere fact that the catalyst felt it opportune to change his voice to the Reaper registry for "So be it" shows frustration, as well as a degree of vindictiveness (he wanted Shepard to remember the Reapers' dominance in those last moments, to remember what they'll do to finish the cycle).

I think that change in voice was reverting to his actual voice and that his actual voice in that part of the game showed no emotion like I said, it used the child like voice to not appear confrontational and aggesive knowing Shepard would be more likely to listen to or be more receptive to a less hostile voice. It used its normal voice when realised nothign it said will make any diffference and Shepard was going to ignore it no matter what.

*shoot Catalyst*

"SO BE IT."

... and then he happens to revert back to the child's voice for 'the cycle continues". I see intent there. Even in the dialogue version of refusal, it feels like a knee-jerk, purpose-driven action to me.  But, again, to each his own.

It's just how I saw it, I am not saying I am right it just came across that way to me which in turn goes back to the HAL 9000 reference and perception. People can percieve it in different ways, this is just my percepetion.

[Femlob]

dreamgazer wrote...

*shoot Catalyst*

"SO BE IT."

... and then he happens to revert back to the child's voice for 'the cycle continues". I see intent there. Even in the dialogue version of refusal, it feels like a knee-jerk, purpose-driven action to me.  But, again, to each his own.

Reject could've been spectacular. And if BioWare'll eat their words, it's the only ending that can still be improved to the point where it could become the kind of ending we should've had to begin with. They've lied about practically everything thus far, so it doesn't require a leap of faith to imagine they're lying about not wanting to change or add upon the endings as well. Who knows. It's the kind of hope against hope that sustains people in the face of a despicable truth, but it's not as if we have anything else to go on by this point.

[Sniktchtherat]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Sniktchtherat wrote...

But if it is permitting you to destroy it, while acknowledging that doing so will essentially fail its entire existence because "it will happen again", then there's something more going on.  not only does it make no logical sense, it also makes no emotional sense.  The controller is surrendering control without a fight.  The ambassador is shutting down the embassy without a reason or an order.  And it is saying flat-out that "if you do this, you'll still get wiped out by synths.  It'll just take a little longer".  So why does everyone assume he's telling the truth about any of it?  I quote The Usual Suspects:  the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

And I've already gone over why Control and Synthesis are very, very suspect.  Unless you assume massive benefactorial altruism on the part of the being you've been locked in a life-or-death struggle with for the past 3ish years and ALL LIFE, organic and synthetic, has been battling for at least a billion years, you have to take his offers with a grain of salt the size of Everest.  When you sup with the devil, use a looooooong spoon.  And a multitude of other old-fogey-proving chestnuts all apply.  Nothing he offers you can be trusted, because HE cannot be trusted.  Everything he gives has a fishhook inside it - the simple fact of if you let the Reapers choose which paths you are allowed to walk on, you develop as they choose.  And that has always ended with harvesting before.  We know AI can lie.  We know they can omit.  We know they can twist, distort, bull**** and boast.  And yet we're to trust the kid.  The kid who faces his own death, a death that proves he is a failure at his sole core task, like most people face the task of lcipping their toenails.  And if you refuse to pick one of the three paths he offers...he reacts with rage.

It is not permitting you but more acknowledges it cannot stop you from making the choices at this stage. It said as much in dialogue itself. You built the catalyst not him, you created those choices, he merely explained the purpose of the things you made in this cycle based on what previous cycles designed it to do. If you do not like what the crucible does (which is not what the catalyst wants as the choices are not the catalysts they are the crucibles), then you can reject it and stand by your belief.

This does not mean should win in fact looking out the window in that very same scene you see that almost all your fleets are wiped out and now the Repears are picking them off one by one at leisure. You spent your time chatting instead of making a choice and as such by time finished chatting you had already lost. You stuck to your convictions and lost. Rightly so too. Every choice had vast consequence and that was yours. Without that level of consequence all other choices become meaningless and you are not and will not ever get that situation which nullifies everything they created in months and months at large expense just because you want story written your way instead of Biowares. I went into more detail here but I am not going to repeat it.

It could have easily stopped you from making those choices.  It's called don't push the up switch on the glowy elevator, letting Shepard bleed out while the Reapers pick off the fleets.  And I am not arguing that we should win.  I'm arguing that ALL CHOICES=LOSE.  If you pick the Reaper-offered choices, you allow them to control your evolution along the paths they desire, as they have done countless times in the past - and that is the tool they have used to ensure the harvest is easiest.  If you deny CaseMaclyst's choices, then you get harvested anyway.  And yes, I know that "the endings show such-and-such"...but unless you've watched videos ahead of time, YOU DON'T KNOW THAT.  All you have is the being who has hounded your existence for the past 3 years offering three paths, one nonsensical from any intelligent standpoint, two that Shepard has been presented with before and rejected.  And the option to tell the kid to go to hell...and thus everyone dies.  Do you sacrifice freedom for safety?  Life for lives?  Lives for Life?  Or do you try to stand for what Legion says - "all life has the right to self-determinate"?  

Too many people in here try to make the Thermopylae or Alamo comparison - sacrificing the few for the good of the many.  The more valid comparison would instead be the Kobayashi Maru.  No matter what you do, you CANNOT WIN.  Your offered chices all subjugate life to the Reapers in one way or another - otherwise, the kid wouldn't have brought you up and handed them to you.  Choosing to defy him results in mass death.  What do you do when all choices are equally bad?  This is actually an interesting premise, and if it had been written a lot better, I'd be ecstatic about it.  A good version of that particular dilemma-set - placate a monster or die - can be seen in Steven King's "Storm Of The Century" mini-series or the script thereof.  The main antagonist, Linoge, tells the storm-trapped inhabitants of a Maine island "give me what I want, and I'll go away".  What he wants is one of their children.  The alternative he gives is he exterminates the town, just as he did with the Roanoke colony.  Live as monsters, die as men.  Which do you choose?

And I do not refer to the Catalyst as CaseMaclyst because I think "there needs to be a conventional victory!!!" - I don't.  I refer to the kid as that because in both classic and EC versions, he's little more than an author-avatar unless you suspend your disbelief from a skyhook attached to Pluto.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Femlob wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

*shoot Catalyst*

"SO BE IT."

... and then he happens to revert back to the child's voice for 'the cycle continues". I see intent there. Even in the dialogue version of refusal, it feels like a knee-jerk, purpose-driven action to me.  But, again, to each his own.

Reject could've been spectacular. And if BioWare'll eat their words, it's the only ending that can still be improved to the point where it could become the kind of ending we should've had to begin with. They've lied about practically everything thus far, so it doesn't require a leap of faith to imagine they're lying about not wanting to change or add upon the endings as well. Who knows. It's the kind of hope against hope that sustains people in the face of a despicable truth, but it's not as if we have anything else to go on by this point.

I admit I'd still like to see that. Otherwise EMS was entirely f*cking pointless.

[Dragoonlordz]

Femlob wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

*shoot Catalyst*

"SO BE IT."

... and then he happens to revert back to the child's voice for 'the cycle continues". I see intent there. Even in the dialogue version of refusal, it feels like a knee-jerk, purpose-driven action to me.  But, again, to each his own.

Reject could've been spectacular. And if BioWare'll eat their words, it's the only ending that can still be improved to the point where it could become the kind of ending we should've had to begin with. They've lied about practically everything thus far, so it doesn't require a leap of faith to imagine they're lying about not wanting to change or add upon the endings as well. Who knows. It's the kind of hope against hope that sustains people in the face of a despicable truth, but it's not as if we have anything else to go on by this point.

They did not lie when they said will be only one ending DLC, they gave you one DLC. They did not lie about when told you they are not removing or cutting out choices they kept their word and kept those three choices in game along with catalyst and kept to the story they wanted to tell vs story you wanted to play. There will not be another ending DLC no matter how much some people complain. If want another ending you have to rely on fanfic at this point. Fanfic allows you to imagine the story play out the way you want, the game however is the story Bioware wants to tell.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 juin 2012 - 07:12 .

[mumwaldee369]

We fight or we die became we compromise like a little biotch.

[dreamgazer]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Femlob wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

*shoot Catalyst*

"SO BE IT."

... and then he happens to revert back to the child's voice for 'the cycle continues". I see intent there. Even in the dialogue version of refusal, it feels like a knee-jerk, purpose-driven action to me.  But, again, to each his own.

Reject could've been spectacular. And if BioWare'll eat their words, it's the only ending that can still be improved to the point where it could become the kind of ending we should've had to begin with. They've lied about practically everything thus far, so it doesn't require a leap of faith to imagine they're lying about not wanting to change or add upon the endings as well. Who knows. It's the kind of hope against hope that sustains people in the face of a despicable truth, but it's not as if we have anything else to go on by this point.

I admit I'd still like to see that. Otherwise EMS was entirely f*cking pointless.

I don't think EMS was pointless (tech implementation, morale, etc. filter into it), but, if they wanted, I definitely feel like there's still room to move in the refusal ending's writing and somewhat open nature---given that we might be led to assume a thing or two that aren't entirely accurate.

[M920CAIN]

I'm hoping the potential Leviathan DLC will expand on the refuse ending. If it's anywhere close to what I think or hope it is, refuse ending should become a lot more interesting.