155 réponses à ce sujet

[Xamufam]

Bioware forced crucible in our faces instead of letting it come naturally in the story.
We have no idea how the crucible will work, How can we build it when we don't know how it works?
Did anyone understand why bioware put the crucible in the game in the first place.
You don't make a sudden change in the plot at the ending.

The crucible, synthesis & the catalyst creates a contrivance so you can ignore them & create your own story.

Catalyst
Just his pesence throws Mass effect 1 in the garbage, all the things sovereign was meningless
Why don't the catalyst control the citadel it's the most important thing to begin the cycle.

When we asked who created it we the only thing we got was, we don't have time to discuss it.
He says that the crucible altered him how? How did the organics know of
him to reprogram him , The catalyst says that shep is the first organic
that has come so far to his home.

We alredy disproved him in the war organics vs syntetics. We made peace with the geth
He also that the crucible is just a powersource, did he alredy have the capabilities then.
Who would design the crucible to do 3 specific things?


The citadel is a part of the catalyst can be interpreted that he was in
controll of the citadel & if it's a part of him why not control it

Why didn't the reapers  take the citadel from the beginning & shut down the realays as they did with the protheans

Synthesis
It makes no sense at all, It goes against biology & physics
Knowledge given too a race that isn' ready will destroy itself.

An underlying problem with Synthesis is its need for headcanon contrivances
Vigil

EDI and her humanity
Endgame goodbyes: EDI
Legion after the SM

Phyics & why it's not possible:
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11152094/1
social.bioware.com/forums/forum/1/topic/355/index/12177927/1

[quote]
My opinions: Don't bother to reading them if you like synthesis.
There is a line that disturbs me "There will be peace", like you will crete a utopia & it's controlled,
no free will nothing.
In synt ending every one seemed to get along. That would
never happen if it wasn't some kinda "sub mission/brainwashing" going
on. "There is just too much bad blood"

Reapers cooperating with organics would never happen voluntarily
maybe it's true,maye not[/quote]

Bioware failed at writing:
You don't introduce some new enemy at the end of the game & put new information information.
If you do that your art loses it's integrity

Even if the next dlc will answer the question it's too late, the information should have been on the disc day 1.
Lessons from Sherlock Holmes: How do you kill your hero?
You should never confuse
The Hero's Journey: Return with the Elixir
Idiot plot
Mass Effect 3: Check Out Mac Walter's Ending Notes... It'll Make You Cry
10 Important Differences Between Brains and Computers
Other threads:
Tragic and epic genres and how BW got them mixed... the opinion of a professional writer
"All Were Thematically Revolting". My Lit Professor's take on the Endings. (UPDATED)
An underlying problem with Synthesis is its need for headcanon contrivances
How do you sustain an indoctrinated population in Synthesis?
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/13627951
Control, Synthesis and Refusal: The Indoctrinated Endings?
This cycle deserves a Darwin Award
Writing tip: don't rely on contrivance or coincidence
Why we hate Shepard’s death so much
Debunking a Common Point: "It's Sci-fi, it's not supposed to be...


Here is vids that explains it:
www.youtube.com/watch   10 min
www.youtube.com/watch    39 min

Suspension of disbelief:
www.youtube.com/watch

extras:
Smudboy  3h+

[quote]Dr_Extrem wrote...
For an immidiate change, you would have to alter the existing cell. the
cell is made off proteins and sugars. to alter the cell, you would have
to rearrange every atom in every molecule of every cell. subatomic
parts, the charge and state would have to be altered as well. within a
4-dimensional system.

18g of water, contain roughly 6.022 x 10²³
oxygen atoms and 2 x 6.022 x 10²³ atoms of hydrogen. all of them would
need to be treated equally and rearranged without any mistake.

good luck with that .. the friction caused by the molecular movement alone would vapourize the cell.

this ending jumps the shark. there is no scientific principle in the
meu, that supports this method. altering the mass of somehing is one
thing - molecular and cellular rearrangement are alien to this universe.

[/quote]
Found this
[quote]Iozeph wrote...
The trouble with narrative
storytelling as opposed to pictures, is that pictures/paintings are made
to be seen and it's acceptable for meaning to be left to the viewer.
Yet words are to writers as palette, paint, and inks to a illustrators.
And a blank page isn't enough.

There's a compact between the
writer and the reader. As readers we accept that a work of fiction is a
carefully constructed fabrication, yes. Yet it's one in which we, as
readers, are 'in on' with the writer. There's an understanding that
there will be consistency which adheres within that written framework.
As readers we give our trust to the writer. All we'll ever know of the
world he's created are the bits he's shown to us.

Bad or good, are of course, subjective. I would even argue irrelevant.

Where
integrity breaks downs is when the writer breaks that compact- where he
either deliberately leaves details out that are germain/central to
explaining the narrative, or forgets them without later addressing them;
when he breaks consistency, either in plot or in character development,
but without giving solid causation leading toward it. Worse yet are the
times when he handwaves- when he lies or omits, is caught out, and then
says it doesn't matter. Let me just say that it does matter. Being
subtle is one thing, so long as there is a progression the reader is
able to follow. It needn't be grand or sweeping- perhaps no more than a
simple sentence given in passing, so long as it's there.

You
don't hide from or deceive your reader. You don't tie a blindfold over
their eyes and expect them love you for it. You just don't. I don't care
who you are. That's the worst sin a writer could ever commit. It shows
utter contempt for the reader.

A teacher once said to me, 'Never
write something on a page that you wouldn't want someone to read. The
words you write come from you. They are your soul in print.' The
integrity of an author and his work are so tightly woven together as to
be one. When a writer deceives a reader, it's not a matter of whether
having his integrity attacked becomes reasonable. He loses what no angry
reader or critic could ever hope to steal from him. He has no integrity
left.[/quote]

The problem with synthesis isn't moral/ethical, it's just nonsensical


[quote]Mojenator12345 wrote...
I see a lot of discussions lately getting wrapped around the axle
about whether it's wrong to force synthesis on the galaxy.  Though there
are some very serious moral and ethical questions involved, those are
not the real problem with synthesis.  At least as far as I am concerned,
the problem is that it is lazy, shoddy, and incoherent.  It makes no
sense, even compared to everything else that happens in the endings. 

The theory is that synthesis merges organics and synthetics so that they no
longer feel separate from one another and want to destroy each other. 
And yet, the EC seems to show (and people on BSN argue) that everyone
still is more or less the same afterwards, but for the glowing eyes.  So
. . . if everyone is just the same as they were before, how did Starkid
meaningfully merge the distinction between synthetic and organic?  He
just waved a wand and declared all organics synthetic and all synthetics
are organic?  And all lived happily ever after? 

Do the people have wires and processors now?  Do the geth have beating hearts in their
chests?  Are human memories and cognitive abilities (and their previous
identities) still intact?  Or have the conscious minds of all organics
been wiped out and replaced by a hybrid processor system (and what
happened to their thoughts and memories and previous identity)?  Are all
the species now officially merged into a single species?  Can they
still reproduce organically, or do they need to build people factories
to reproduce (if so, I will LOL re: Krogans and the Genophage)?  Or do
Geth now reproduce organically?  And if the answer is that everyone
still thinks and acts and reproduces in more or less the same way as
they did before, why should we believe that their propensity to go to
war with and destroy one another would be in any way altered?

And if we're talking about restructuring entire organisms at the molecular
level, how the **** does a colored shockwave accomplish that?  A beam of
light can decode, recode, and surgically modify the DNA and physical
structure of every organic in the galaxy instantaneously (not to mention
whatever it does to the synthetics)?  Really?  My god, if the Reapers
had that kind of technology, why bother flying around in spaceships and
shooting red beams at people?  That seems inconceivably primitive.  The
whole ME2 rebuilding Shepard thing was ridiculous, but at least that was
just one person and it took two years, a whole scientific team, and
****loads of money.  That was silly, but (marginally) tolerable. 

And what happens in the future?  The Reapers, after all, have been around
for tens of millions of years.  Will all of the individuals of all the
races (or the one true race, if that is what everyone has become) be
unable to construct a new pure synthetic ever again?  And, why not, what
would stop them?  If they do, could conflict arise and the cycle start
again?  And what about new organics?  The Reapers always left primitive
organic species and societies alone.  Does synthesis modify them as
well?  I suppose the beam would have to identify species with the
potential to develop social intelligence and technology (given
everything else it does, hey why not, right?).  What are the primatives
supposed to think about that?  What happens when their synthetic parts
need tuning or repair?  If synthesis cripples their ability to reproduce
organically, I suppose they'd all just die out.  If synthesis does not
modify them, what's to stop them from maturing into a space-faring race
and then deciding that synthetics must be destroyed and restarting the
cycle?

The synthesis ending is just so much unexplained magical
bull**** stacked one layer on top of the other it's more than I can
handle.  I am sure someone is going to reply that, hey, it's a sci-fi
game.  What, you can believe in hyperdrives, but not this?  My response
is, yes, I can believe in hyperdrives (and laser guns and biotics and
super hot blue space babes) but not this.  Sure, you need to have a
certain amount of space magic to make a sci-fi space adventure go.  But
you can make some effort to explain that (which Mass Effect does at
length) and implement it in a way that is internally consistent and
operates by rules that the audience can understand.  ME's space travel
and pew pew and assorted space magic generally conform to this
approach.  Synthesis drops out of left field at the last moment with no
meaningful explanation and breaks all of the rules.  It smashes my
suspension of disbelief into oblivion.

The whole thing is just
utterly nonsensical.  It's amazing to me that BW would ever put this in
the game, and stunning that they clearly believe that it is the optimal
ending.  I could never choose it because it is insulting to me as a
member of their audience that they could foist such an ill-conceived,
half-baked piece of crap on us.  Any of the other endings (including
Refuse) look good by comparison.


TLDR:  Whatever difficult
moral issues synthesis raises, they pale in comparison to the insulting
stupidity and horrific implementation of the thing.


This also

The problem of synthesis resides in the logic presented...
Comprehension and fear are the same thing, emotions... The problem of
synthesis is that without a brain wash is unable to solve the real
problem... emotions...
The creation of synthetics is the problem presented that problem will
not be solved without the control of the emotions like, fear, love,
jealousy, desire for power, and on and on...
I never understood how the destruction of diversity solves problems!!!





The problem of synthesis resides in the logic presented...
Comprehension
and fear are the same thing, emotions... The problem of synthesis is
that without a brain wash is unable to solve the real problem...
emotions...
The creation of synthetics is the problem presented that
problem will not be solved without the control of the emotions like,
fear, love, jealousy, desire for power, and on and on...I never
understood how the destruction of diversity solves problems!!!

And why does everyone accept the reapers they just killed a billions of people destroyed worlds & more
How can the reapers help to rebuild they are designed to destroy, they would leave holes everywhere they go
The
greater the idea you have in scifi the greater & more complex the
answer has to be & it does not make any sense how it works

www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par Troxa, 30 mars 2013 - 04:59 .

[SubAstris]

I agree with you on everything except:

ME1 might be salvageable since we don't the Catalst's capabilities, although I think given the amount of complaints I'm surprised they didn't address this.

I think he is just reacting to the presence of the Crucible as a big dumb object that could defeat the Reapers.

[The Angry One]

The Crucible could've worked if your scientists throughout the game kept discovering things about it and revealing it's funcitons. Higher EMS leads to more discoveries and refinements.

With this you don't even need the character of the Catalyst to explain any damn thing because you already know, the choices are foreshadowed and maybe even made before the end, and things like the Geth being killed can be left up to the player to try and change or not through extra missions and such. For example "recruit x scientist who comes up with theory needing y artifact that will save the Geth."

[Applepie_Svk]

The Angry One wrote...

The Crucible could've worked if your scientists throughout the game kept discovering things about it and revealing it's funcitons. Higher EMS leads to more discoveries and refinements.

With this you don't even need the character of the Catalyst to explain any damn thing because you already know, the choices are foreshadowed and maybe even made before the end, and things like the Geth being killed can be left up to the player to try and change or not through extra missions and such. For example "recruit x scientist who comes up with theory needing y artifact that will save the Geth."

It´s not an artistic...

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 08 juillet 2012 - 10:56 .

[grey_wind]

The Angry One wrote...

The Crucible could've worked if your scientists throughout the game kept discovering things about it and revealing it's funcitons. Higher EMS leads to more discoveries and refinements.

With this you don't even need the character of the Catalyst to explain any damn thing because you already know, the choices are foreshadowed and maybe even made before the end, and things like the Geth being killed can be left up to the player to try and change or not through extra missions and such. For example "recruit x scientist who comes up with theory needing y artifact that will save the Geth."

While that could have made the Crucible more palatable, by no stetch of the imagination would it have made the Crucible work as a plot device.
It would stll be a horrendously contrived Deus ex Machina that gnaws at the rest of the narrative like a growing cancer.

[Vox Draco]

I am really torn on the whole crucible thing...

First, I don't mind having a superweapon to help destroy the Reapers, not at all. And I also kind of like the idea of all cycles building and improving the device, hoping it might work for them first, but then they stored their data so at least future cycles might have a chance. Using this weapon would feel like a nice revenge not only by our cycle, but all cycles. I like this idea for the dramatic effect...

But that would have required the crucible either is foreshadowed in previous games, or at least that the entire ME3-game is all about finding clues about the crucible. For a device so important for the war the game should have focused entirely on the crucible. Finding more clues, more information, more background-data, everything!

And then the possibilities in the end: The crucible is a superweapon, alright. But of course previous cycles already used it in vain to stop the Reapers, and so they knowof it of course, and use it as a device to give the cycles false hope and waste ressources building it, only to find out it is in fact a trap and is used AGAINST the cycle, NOT the Reapers...

Of course, our Cmdr. would have found a last minute way out and redeem the default-functions of the crucible to make a victory possible, and the outcome is based on our EMS etc...

So, even with the crucible as Reaper-off-device I can imagine a very satisfying conclusion to ME3, only starbinger and Biowares obsession with the Deus-Ex-Rip-off-endings make this MCGuffin so silly and senseless

[Xamufam]

SubAstris wrote...

I agree with you on everything except:

ME1 might be salvageable since we don't the Catalst's capabilities, although I think given the amount of complaints I'm surprised they didn't address this.

I think he is just reacting to the presence of the Crucible as a big dumb object that could defeat the Reapers.

The citadel isa part of me can be interpreted that he was in controll of the citadel & if it's a part of him why not control it

[Kataphrut94]

I don't mind the Crucible too much. It was established early in the game, provided a nice long term goal and about a third of the War Assets you gathered during the game contributed to it's development and construction. It would have been better if we learned more about it though. "We don't know what it does, but we're building it anyway" works fine at the start of the game, but if you carry that right to the end of the game, it just suspends disbelief. Maybe by the time it was completed, the scientists actually did have some idea about how it worked. Would've been nice if they could've told us though...Codex entries, updates from Hacket, Element Zero, anything.

As for the Catalyst...using the Citadel to transmit the Crucible's energy through the Mass Relays to the entire galaxy? Nice idea. Crucible energy can be released in one of several different ways that each have a different effect on the galaxy and linked to your War Assets? Cool.

Citadel housing AI that's responsible for the Reaper cycle? Okay, a bit an ass pull, but not totally unworkable. Said AI communicating via hologram of a dead 8-year old having a badly voice acted, one-sided conversation about why he did what he did? No. No, not good. Actually pretty terrible and the people who came up with it should be ashamed.

[Dean_the_Young]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

It´s not an artistic...

Hey, a meme replacing a thought-out and unbiased argument? I think I can do that to.


'Occupation,' 'Enforced Vaccination,' and 'Collateral Damage.'

'That's War, you idiot.'


Somehow, I suspect my categorization is a bit more accurate than yours.

[The Angry One]

Yeah. "Enforced vaccination" doesn't change the bodies of everyone in the galaxy into something else and force them to like living next door to the Reapers.

[Jenonax]

I'm still bemused by the whole the Crucible is a power source but somehow still changes the function of the Catalyst.

The AAA batteries in my remote don't make it suddenly turn into a frying pan.

[Applepie_Svk]

Dean_the_Young wrote...


'That's War, you idiot.'


Somehow, I suspect my categorization is a bit more accurate than yours.

You can keep it for yourself, I am done with argumentation about same thing again and again, it´s simple as it is - Catalyst is one of the worst thing which I ever encounter in games, if I am not counting C&C4 which is fighting with Catalyst for the failure pedestal of this generation.

That´s war, huh ? And which war ever you won by using space magic? None ?... Catalyst explanations are full of self negations and lack of logic argumentations, if you like it fine but lot of people leave supporting of BioWare or they are keep fighting on forums. We are simply not vocal minority as some expert named us and we will not stay aside and watch how 10 minutes of stupidity can ruin hours of jorney which only and main goal was unity against evil.

[Adanu]

Jenonax wrote...

I'm still bemused by the whole the Crucible is a power source but somehow still changes the function of the Catalyst.

The AAA batteries in my remote don't make it suddenly turn into a frying pan.

.... seriously, are you really that dense?

The Citadel is a mass relay control center. it does not have the energy to send massive Galaxy wide signals on it's own. The crucible does.

Honestly, people need to think sometimes.

[Xamufam]

Vox Draco wrote...

I am really torn on the whole crucible thing...

First, I don't mind having a superweapon to help destroy the Reapers, not at all. And I also kind of like the idea of all cycles building and improving the device, hoping it might work for them first, but then they stored their data so at least future cycles might have a chance. Using this weapon would feel like a nice revenge not only by our cycle, but all cycles. I like this idea for the dramatic effect...

But that would have required the crucible either is foreshadowed in previous games, or at least that the entire ME3-game is all about finding clues about the crucible. For a device so important for the war the game should have focused entirely on the crucible. Finding more clues, more information, more background-data, everything!

And then the possibilities in the end: The crucible is a superweapon, alright. But of course previous cycles already used it in vain to stop the Reapers, and so they knowof it of course, and use it as a device to give the cycles false hope and waste ressources building it, only to find out it is in fact a trap and is used AGAINST the cycle, NOT the Reapers...

Of course, our Cmdr. would have found a last minute way out and redeem the default-functions of the crucible to make a victory possible, and the outcome is based on our EMS etc...

So, even with the crucible as Reaper-off-device I can imagine a very satisfying conclusion to ME3, only starbinger and Biowares obsession with the Deus-Ex-Rip-off-endings make this MCGuffin so silly and senseless

That was interesting

[Dean_the_Young]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...


'That's War, you idiot.'


Somehow, I suspect my categorization is a bit more accurate than yours.

You can keep it for yourself, I am done with argumentation about same thing again and again, it´s simple as it is - Catalyst is one of the worst thing which I ever encounter in games, if I am not counting C&C4 which is fighting with Catalyst for the failure pedestal of this generation.

And yet here you are, talking back. So much for being done with arguing. Will you respond in your next post with a blistering retort about how you'll leave with the last word?

That´s war, huh ? And which war ever you won by using space magic? None ?

I've also never fought a war with FTL ships, Mary Sue protagonists, and aliens. There are universal aspects of war that apply, however.

... Catalyst explanations are full of self negations and lack of logic argumentations, if you like it fine but lot of people leave supporting of BioWare or they are keep fighting on forums.

A lot of people are also quite silly. They don't understand the actual flaws of what they oppose, and invent new flaws in place of them.

We are simply not vocal minority as some expert named us and we will not stay aside and watch how 10 minutes of stupidity can ruin hours of jorney which only and main goal was unity against evil.

You did have unity against evil. You also had a game series in which the Final Word was always with Commander Shepard.

[Dean_the_Young]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

I don't mind the Crucible too much. It was established early in the game, provided a nice long term goal and about a third of the War Assets you gathered during the game contributed to it's development and construction. It would have been better if we learned more about it though. "We don't know what it does, but we're building it anyway" works fine at the start of the game, but if you carry that right to the end of the game, it just suspends disbelief. Maybe by the time it was completed, the scientists actually did have some idea about how it worked. Would've been nice if they could've told us though...Codex entries, updates from Hacket, Element Zero, anything.

Agreed. It's the handling of a plot device that really gives it value, and the Crucible's 'mystery' wasn't necessary.

What if we had known the effects of the Crucible from the start, upto or including the destruction of the Relays? In a 'we know Destroy from the start' scenario, you could make a viable story in which the Council resists the idea of destroying the galactic community, but comes around and supports the Crucible as the war goes worse and worse for them.


Or you could switch it around: imagine if Control was the only known application of the Crucible. Balancing salvation with any one species getting its hand on it would be a huge issue with plenty of opportunity for intrigue, especially if the Reapers indoctrinate/set up a 'Destroy' faction that repudiates the idea of Control without knowing if Destroy is even a viable option.

As for the Catalyst...using the Citadel to transmit the Crucible's energy through the Mass Relays to the entire galaxy? Nice idea. Crucible energy can be released in one of several different ways that each have a different effect on the galaxy and linked to your War Assets? Cool.

Citadel housing AI that's responsible for the Reaper cycle? Okay, a bit an ass pull, but not totally unworkable. Said AI communicating via hologram of a dead 8-year old having a badly voice acted, one-sided conversation about why he did what he did? No. No, not good. Actually pretty terrible and the people who came up with it should be ashamed.

Agreed again. Since the main purpose of the Star Child was as an exposition device, the form of it was never required. We could have had a big three-way argument showdown between TIM, Anderson, and Harbinger in which eash advocated their own preferred way after Harbinger gave a history lecture.

[Jenonax]

Adanu wrote...

Jenonax wrote...

I'm still bemused by the whole the Crucible is a power source but somehow still changes the function of the Catalyst.

The AAA batteries in my remote don't make it suddenly turn into a frying pan.

.... seriously, are you really that dense?

The Citadel is a mass relay control center. it does not have the energy to send massive Galaxy wide signals on it's own. The crucible does.

Honestly, people need to think sometimes.

What a wonderfully pleasant human being you are 

I am perfectly aware of the intention behind the abomnible Crucible, I merely hate the line.  Its a terriblely written line which makes the purpose and intent of the Crucible even more ambiguous.

[Blue Liara]

Agreed. The endings are were crap before and are still crap now. We have crap with sprinkles.

[jstme]

Enforced vaccination against deadly "organic life" desease. lol. This is what Mass Effect was all about. Shepard and his squad,Catalyst and his reapers - all together, trying to find the vaccine against organic chaos. )))))
Dean_the_Young - you are awesome. Cause i am in awe.

[SubAstris]

Troxa wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

I agree with you on everything except:

ME1 might be salvageable since we don't the Catalst's capabilities, although I think given the amount of complaints I'm surprised they didn't address this.

I think he is just reacting to the presence of the Crucible as a big dumb object that could defeat the Reapers.

The citadel isa part of me can be interpreted that he was in controll of the citadel & if it's a part of him why not control it

It's a bit of a stretch

[tanisha__unknown]

OP: Totally agree with every point.

Modifié par Jinx1720, 08 juillet 2012 - 01:13 .

[Brovikk Rasputin]

For how long are you people going to say the same thing over and over? Until Bioware changes the ending? Because, you know, that's not going to happen.

[Mazebook]

It feels like a echo echo echo echo chamber mber mber ber er er in here...sorry to derail you thread...continue.

[Heeden]

The Angry One wrote...

Yeah. "Enforced vaccination" doesn't change the bodies of everyone in the galaxy into something else and force them to like living next door to the Reapers.

"Mass molestation" doesn't do that either, the idea was to replace a stupid and clearly hostile analogy with a stupid and clearly supportive one.

The difference is vaccination does bear some resemblance to the aims of Synthesis (i.e. the idea of prevention) whereas "molestation" is more a regretable insight in to the mind of the poster.

[Xamufam]

Updated