This is because though the Reapers are advanced beyond our comprehension they are still slaves to their programming. The Catalyst speaks of this when it mentions the solution. Sovereign, Harbinger, the Destroyer all speak of this when they mention "the cycle cannot be broken". This means they cannot deviate from their programming, regardless of their individual sentience.
The extended cut affirmed what I had suspected from the beginning. The ending is far to easy for Shepard. Many other naysayers and myself have pointed this fact out in numerous threads how the Reapers literally, hold Shepard's hand and guides him/her through the conflict though on multiple occasions, when it is blatantly clear they have won. However, I and other detractors of this fact have been viewing it from the wrong perspective. We have been viewing the Reapers as willing villains as they were presented in ME1 and ME2, their motivations completely malicious in nature. The Reapers of ME3 are AI constructs fulfilling a base programming, nothing more...except...
They no longer wish to fulfill that programming. Consider this; why would the combined consciousness of entire species, all throughout eons of time be willing to repetitively commit mass genocide without even one rebelling? Unless they are incapable of rebelling. "The cycle cannot be broken." In ME1 Shepard impresses Sovereign with his/her skill, wit, cunning and unfaltering morality (whether para or ren). In ME2 Shepard impresses Harbinger with the same and the Reapers even try to recover Shepard's dead body. We all assume for nefarious purposes. But it's not. The Reapers cannot break their own programming, they cannot break the cycle, and neither can the Catalyst. It says so itself, it cannot change it's solution.
Therefore the Reapers need Shepard to do it. Proof that they guide Shepard below:
On the final beam run Harbinger never fires at Shepard until the final AOE shot that incapacitates Shepard. Let's be clear here. Harbinger DOES NOT MISS. Stand back and watch the soldiers all making the charge to the beam run. Harbinger is a crack shot. Yet the extend cut defines it even more clearly by showing how blatantly bad Harbinger misses Shepard. Secondly I have railed against Harbinger not firing on the Normandy, but others have made what I thought was assanign points that "Harbinger is only concerned with those rushing the beam". Truthfully, they're right! Harbinger acs EVERYONE that draws even remotely close to the beam because Harbinger has selected Shepard to reach the beam, and Shepard alone. Yet Harbinger can only achieve this while still fulfilling it's programming (defend the beam). So Harbinger must stop hammer squad and incapacitate Shepard long enough to satisfy Harbinger's programming so it can fly away, leaving the beam open to Shepard.
Next we have the extended cut moment that fleshes this Reaper act of rebellion so exquisitely. Just before firing in Shepard's general viscinity. Harbinger literally musters up the ability to say "save us", before firing. This act of rebelliion on Harbinger's part is extremely difficult.
Once inside the Citadel and after the confrontation with TIM Shepard has lost...completely. Shepard is passed out and dying without activating the Crucible. At this point the cycle will continue unimpeded. Yet the Catalyst willingly raises Shepard up to the decision platform. The collective intelligence of ALL REAPERS gives Shepard a chance to choose how to stop them. This is the most obvious act of rebellion against its programming.
Then the Catalyst spells out 3 options, even going so far as to willingly option Reaper destruction because even the uncertainty of final death is better to the Catalyst than continuing with the cycle and endless slaughter. This also explains the game breaking color switch of blue and red on control and destroy. The Catalyst would have to be using out of game knowledge to know the player is associating these colors with paragon or renegade choices. It has no validity in game. This is a design choice by Bioware to paint destroy as unfortunately renegade because it is the most selfish and narrow minded where you save the least lives (which includes Reapers).
Remember Reapers are sentient ships made up the combined matter of entire species...there is no argument that could be logically made that EVERY species harvested by the Reapers is inherently evil and prone to willingly continuing with the cycle.
Skipping my favorite evidence for the moment, I note the Synthesis ending first. In this ending the cycle is broken. The Crucible fires and the programming of the Reapers is changed through understanding. This allows the Reapers to act on their own nature and HELP rebuild the galaxy. In Synthesis the Reapers are not being ordered by a God Emperor Shepard to rebuild, they CHOOSE to rebuild because they are freed from the programming lock of the cycle and can now act upon their nature...the nature of entire sentient species which would be benevolent in most cases.
My favorite evidence is the Catalyst's response to Shepard choosing Reject. There can be no more definitive proof that the Reapers allowed Shepard to reach the decision room than this. The Catalyst reacts to Shepard's voice out of anger and walks away, objectively stating "the cycle continues" because the Reapers' programming did not change. They gave Shepard the chance to break the cycle and he/she chooses not to. Frustrated that the Reapers' hope is shattered the Catalyst spouts "so be it" dropping the friendly facade it took to appeal to Shepard. The Catalyst is akin to all Reapers, but in hopes Shepard would react more favorably to a friendly face/persona the Catalyst took the form of a child. In this form Shepard would hopefully at least hear the Catalyst's explanations and not abjectly refuse the doom and gloom voice of a Reaper saying "pick your ending".
There is plenty of evidence throughout the mass effect series to point to the fact the Reapers see Shepard as a possible savior. This is is the truth of Mass Effect's ending:
"Shepard is not only saving the galaxy. Shepard is also unknowingly saving the Reapers."
Edit: The argument has risen that the Catalyst is capable of changing it's own programming because it did so once before. Actually it did not:
Catalyst: "I was first created to oversee the relations between Synthetic and Organic life, to establish a connection, but our efforts always ended in conflict, so a new solution was required."
The "our" the Catalyst is referring to is it's designers. The Reapers do not exist at this point. It is still acting within it's programming with the Reaper Solution.
The solution still acts within the Catalyst's programming. From the logical, rational, objective viewpoint of an AI devoid of emotion (at the time, before it became the combined consciousness of the Reapers and gained a conscience) the cycle is a valid solution and the "desires" of the designers is irrelevant. Whether or not they wish to be made into the solution does not demean the solutions relevance to a completely logic based entity.
Modifié par JustinElenbaas, 02 juillet 2012 - 06:41 .
Retour en haut
