234 réponses à ce sujet

[Memnon]

So basically - if we liked ME1 and ME2 and were able to overlook minor plot holes and "space magic" because it fit in the theme and didn't break our suspension of disbelief, then we're phony? Got it

I guess we just can't dislike the endings because we thought they were stupid, huh

[Heeden]

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

1. You're right Sovereign is just an old cynical Reaper who actually doesn't know what he is talking about....

What point are you trying to make? Sovereign doesn't contradict the Catalyst apart from when he says he "has no beginning", but that would be bollocks no matter how the series progressed (unless you thought the Reapers were daemons or something, but they're not).

2. You're right, EDI is probably just wrong in her asseration.... 

EDI didn't make an assertion she put forth a hypothesis, one that was not proven either way.

3. Okay, it is no streach to say the Catalyst can control himself.  He controls Reapers, he is the Citadel, why is it hard to believe he could access his relay?

Do you really not know the difference between the capability of doing something and the will to do something? The difference between "does not" and "can not"? In that case, he was asleep waiting for the signal from Sovereign, like all the Reapers beyond the galaxy.

Modifié par Heeden, 08 juillet 2012 - 04:17 .

[TheCrazyHobo]

Heeden wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

1. You're right Sovereign is just an old cynical Reaper who actually doesn't know what he is talking about....

What point are you trying to make? Sovereign doesn't contradict the Catalyst apart from when he says he "has no beginning", but that would be bollocks no matter how the series progressed (unless you thought the Reapers were daemons or something, but they're not).

2. You're right, EDI is probably just wrong in her asseration.... 

EDI didn't make an assertion she put forth a hypothesis, one that was not proven either way.

3. Okay, it is no streach to say the Catalyst can control himself.  He controls Reapers, he is the Citadel, why is it hard to believe he could access his relay?

Do you really not know the difference between the capability of doing something and the will to do something? The different between "does not" and "can not"? In that case, he was asleep waiting for the signal from Sovereign, like all the Reapers beyond the galaxy.

1. His disdain for organic life, claiming it as only a nuisance, does not contradict the Catalyst at all? 

2. So if we can't trust EDI, what is the truth about the Collectors?

3. So now your only premise is that he didn't want to start to his beloved cycle? 

[DGMockingJay]

Heeden wrote...

Do you really not know the difference between the capability of doing something and the will to do something? The difference between "does not" and "can not"? In that case, he was asleep waiting for the signal from Sovereign, like all the Reapers beyond the galaxy.

The only explanation that comes to my mind is that Catalyst WAS NOT in the storyline during ME1 and ME2. He was just conceptualized in the story in 3rd.. There is just NO EVIDENCE AT all that might point to his existence in ME1 and ME2.. And it shows.. Catalyst rather looks like an ass pull to me, that is why it has no link whatso ever to previous games!!!

Modifié par DGMockingJay, 08 juillet 2012 - 04:46 .

[Heeden]

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

1. His disdain for organic life, claiming it as only a nuisance, does not contradict the Catalyst at all?

He doesn't call it a nuisance, the closest he comes is "genetic accident", which is true.

2. So if we can't trust EDI, what is the truth about the Collectors?

The truth is the Collectors are the remnants of Protheans, but that was not the issue. The question is whether any Protheans were interred in a Reaper. It's not a matter of whether we trust EDI, she makes a hypothesis not an assertion. There is no evidence that can be used to prove or disprove her hypothesis.

3. So now your only premise is that he didn't want to start to his beloved cycle? 

The cycle is far from beloved, it is an imperfect solution to the Catalyst's problem and it is well aware of this. The Catalyst's cycle is enacted by the Reapers, it is perfectly feasible that the Catalyst takes no part in it whatsoever, we simply have no idea as to how the cycle is managed or what role the Catalyst plays but blind speculation does not prove dishonesty.

[Thore2k10]

DGMockingJay wrote...

Heeden wrote...

Do you really not know the difference between the capability of doing something and the will to do something? The difference between "does not" and "can not"? In that case, he was asleep waiting for the signal from Sovereign, like all the Reapers beyond the galaxy.

The only explanation that comes to my mind is that Catalyst WAS NOT in the storyline during ME1 and ME2. He was just conceptualized in the story in 3rd.. There is just NO EVIDENCE AT all that might point to his existence in ME1 and ME2.. And it shows.. Catalyst rather looks like an ass pull to me, that is why it has no link whatso ever to previous games!!!

why whould they need a vanguard like sovereign, when the catalyst exactly knows how far galactic civilization has evolved... and as the citadel, the heart of galactic civilization, he must know that!

[Heeden]

DGMockingJay wrote...

The only explanation that comes to my mind is that Catalyst WAS NOT in the storyline during ME1 and ME2. He was just conceptualized in the story in 3rd.. There is just NO EVIDENCE AT all that might point to his existence in ME1 and ME2.. And it shows.. Catalyst rather looks like an ass pull to me, that is why it has no link whatso ever to previous games!!!

That's likely, though when I first saw the Catalyst I could have slapped myself for not realising that the Citadel, as a large structure key to the Reaper-cycle, would have it's own form of AI. However it could stay dormant through each cycle until the Reapers take control of the CItadel, either to evade detection or cover plot-holes. If the idea did only come about for ME3 the ret-con of no AI to an inactive AI are not too dramatic.

[MB957]

I like space magic! I even like space magic that makes some sense...lol! its sci fi...I give it lots of room to tech magic. the science of how sythn could possibly happen doesnt bother me.

what bothers me is the abuse of said science, by imposing it upon non consenting senteint beings.

hmmm..I wonder if sythn could help me spell better...lol! now that would be real space magic!!

[DGMockingJay]

Heeden wrote...

DGMockingJay wrote...

The only explanation that comes to my mind is that Catalyst WAS NOT in the storyline during ME1 and ME2. He was just conceptualized in the story in 3rd.. There is just NO EVIDENCE AT all that might point to his existence in ME1 and ME2.. And it shows.. Catalyst rather looks like an ass pull to me, that is why it has no link whatso ever to previous games!!!

That's likely, though when I first saw the Catalyst I could have slapped myself for not realising that the Citadel, as a large structure key to the Reaper-cycle, would have it's own form of AI. However it could stay dormant through each cycle until the Reapers take control of the CItadel, either to evade detection or cover plot-holes. If the idea did only come about for ME3 the ret-con of no AI to an inactive AI are not too dramatic.

Catalyst says that conflict b/w Synthetics and Organics is inevitable. He must have watched this happen in numerous cycles, that is why he keeps continuing the cycle. If he is inactive, how can he say conflict is inevitable?? With the info provided by his Reaper, once he is active??

Anyway, this makes us make more and more assumptions to make sense of his presence here. A good storyline would introduce a new character who is this essential to the plot of this and previous stories by requiring least assumptions from the player. Not like Catalyst, which literally requires a whole DLC just to explain his presence and link to previous games... I think BW kinda pulled a boner with the DEM plot conclusion

Modifié par DGMockingJay, 08 juillet 2012 - 05:30 .

[Heeden]

DGMockingJay wrote...
Catalyst says that conflict b/w Synthetics and Organics is inevitable. He must have watched this happen in numerous cycles, that is why he keeps continuing the cycle. If he is inactive, how can he say conflict is inevitable?? With the info provided by his Reaper, once he is active??

The Catalyst's assurance that synth-org conflict is inevitable comes from his creators and is supported by observations made before the cycle was enacted. Further support for this could come from data stored on the Citadel and from the Reaper(s) who keep an eye on the galaxy.