226 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

zambot wrote...

Tkrun42 wrote...

zambot wrote...

What I don't understand is that you openly acknowledge the fact that you're working with "bad writing" and "space magic" yet you are still attempting to impose logic on it. Why? To what end? It's just as valid to say that Shepard isn't really human, and was one of the Creators sent forward in time on a magical time travelling unicorn which explains why his essence activates the space magic that he created billions of years ago to save the galaxy. What are you out to prove?

I vote new canon

Then why all these elaborate speculations designed to prove that the writers have plot holes with their endings?  Isn't this obvious?  We already have a billion threads that say "Wow, these endings make no sense"  Is it necessary to try to provide convoluted logical proof that the endings make no sense?

So that's why you visit those threads and try to derail them. IC.

[Wayning_Star]

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

The funny thing is, it's kinda like a big joke.

Look at the crucible, it's big, long and unwieldy.

Look at the Citadel, it's basically a hole (in space).

So really, Bioware did the biggest phallic joke ever. Really does suit the story doesnt it.

ofalltheplacestogointhemeuyoutakeusthere...

[GreyLycanTrope]

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

The funny thing is, it's kinda like a big joke.

Look at the crucible, it's big, long and unwieldy.

Look at the Citadel, it's basically a hole (in space).

So really, Bioware did the biggest phallic joke ever. Really does suit the story doesnt it.

Depends who your LI was

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 19 juillet 2012 - 06:51 .

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

We also know that the 3 platforms for the major functions are part of the Citadel and not of the Crucible. The brat left them there when it found out others built these or it built these itself.

We also know that firing the Crucible required the brat's intervention. So it was not a true weapon, because firing a weapon does not require the consent of its victims.

We also know that the brat had extensive knowledge of the working of these options. He is your perfect tour guide in explaining your options.

We also know that the brat knew that several cycles were attempting to create the Crucible. Did it built the platforms as a protection or did it leave the plans for the Crucible to be found, just like it left other tech and knowledge to be found?

Well this and the OP's post are all reasons as to why they whole thing is just a mess.  The goal is significantly changed from destroying the reapers to solving the kid's problem-implementing his new solutions.  He took ownership of them.  What do they all do to some equally inane extent?  They avoid conflict between synthetics and organics.  Yippee!!  But not forever and not for good.  Conflict is eternal if any diversity exists.  We actually always notice differences even when we are way more similar than we are different.

Synthesis inserts a new challenge - immortality.  Well, overpopulation might eventually be an issue and there is still diversity.  And someone could still create a wholly synthetic lifeform and someone else could create a wholly organic lifeform.
Control - meet your reaper daddy (mommie) - yeah no problems here ever right?  Except maybe for your husk and reaper neighbors, the ones that ate your family.  I'm thinking someone might want to fight these guys.
Destroy - kids says blah blah blah, conflict will begin again. 

What is extremely evident is the kid sees a problem (his purpose) but if he once and for all solves it, he is no longer ever needed again, so he needs the conflict to continue.  He has used the reapers in fact to create it.

He gives Shepard false choices that Shepard might not want to pick and while many may think he wants Shepard to choose Synthesis, I don't even think one is his favorite.  I think they all are.  Control replaces him, but he exists because he is the reapers.  And Shreaper is not Shepard.  The kid also is seemingly a warped program and may see a way to "get out" again.  Synthesis works as well because there's nothing that says the he can't remain even somewhat intact or augmented.  The reapers exist and they are his way back too.

Destroy is more complicated but other than killing the reapers (and maybe the kid), it does leave open the possibility of a need for his help in the future.  The dialogue with this is so confusing and ambiguous that just exactly what remains or is destroyed is debatable.  "There will be losses, but no more than you've already had" (paraphrased)-what?  "All synthetics will be targeted.  Even you are part synthetic."  uh oh.

Harbinger said something to the effect that they would find a new way.  The kid said he needed new solutions.  I just tend to think that the choices are his and none of them are good at all.

We actually have no idea who or what the kid is and he is ambiguous about it all.  But he clearly wants Shepard to make a choice.  He doesn't get mad if Shepard goes for Control or Destroy.  He only gets mad if Shepard refuses to choose.

the catalyst doesn't ever get mad, humans get mad,emotional. The reapers have this 'code' to exist by, onece activated, their power trip starts showing big time.. cosmic power is very ... loud..

[zambot]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

zambot wrote...

Tkrun42 wrote...

zambot wrote...

What I don't understand is that you openly acknowledge the fact that you're working with "bad writing" and "space magic" yet you are still attempting to impose logic on it. Why? To what end? It's just as valid to say that Shepard isn't really human, and was one of the Creators sent forward in time on a magical time travelling unicorn which explains why his essence activates the space magic that he created billions of years ago to save the galaxy. What are you out to prove?

I vote new canon

Then why all these elaborate speculations designed to prove that the writers have plot holes with their endings?  Isn't this obvious?  We already have a billion threads that say "Wow, these endings make no sense"  Is it necessary to try to provide convoluted logical proof that the endings make no sense?

So that's why you visit those threads and try to derail them. IC.

Are you strawmanning just to troll me or do you seriously not understand why I'm asking these questions?  

[3DandBeyond]

Ieldra2 wrote...

*sigh*

Another of *these* threads. A very transparent attempt to invalidate one option by associating it with an antagonist. That's an association fallacy. Very common around here. I say the merits and drawbacks of each of the ending options stand on their own. Their association with anyone in particular is completely irrelevant.

Also, if I may point out:

"You altered the variables".
"The Crucible changed me, created new....possibilities".

That sounds as if the Crucible made the new solutions possible, as well as Shepard's presence. If Shepard's sacrifice has any meaning, something of her will influence how exactly Synthesis works. The Catalyst promotes Synthesis as the best solution, but who designed it is anyone's guess. We simply do not know.

No their association with one new and improved antagonist is very much to the point, that association is part of what should inform Shepard as to their validity at the very least-the emphasis has changed, but this has always been the real problem with these choices without knowing their supposed meaning.

He has every reason to lie, because he needs to finish this cycle.  Shepard has caused problems.  He is the only being that has had any idea what the crucible, citadel combo will do.  He is the catalyst.  He knows and has known all about the crucible, but he is vague as to its origins.  He has been duplicitous-he's no kid and tries to appear innocuous by being a "kid".

If you go onto believing the choices are authentic, though they could just all very easily be make the harvest faster switches, their merits if any are tremendously outweighed by their drawbacks.  Destroy is ambiguous as to its scope based on what he says it will do and to whom.  And well Synthesis and Control are internal and external versions of each other with Synthesis being implemented without prior consent of individuals and Control requiring people live with mass murderers who burp people goo.  They have the effect of telling people they have no value unless internally or externally augmented by reaper tech or reaper helpers.

The dystopia express is boarding and leaving now.  You will believe you have a ticket to utopia, but just you wait and see.

[Wayning_Star]

we don't like the choices demanded by the creating race of the reapers, so we choose to misunderstand the meaning of it all. Finding fault in the obvious facts is the nature of a techno user? Last ditch effort to upend the creators of the reapers, or the fate of the MEU?

[AnsinJung]

So you've found another slightly different angle with which to ridicule the ending by "letting it speak for itself," never mind the fact you throw in plenty of negative remarks that are your own words.

I can't say I feel any different, but spending time away has been of more value to me.

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

*sigh*

Another of *these* threads. A very transparent attempt to invalidate one option by associating it with an antagonist. That's an association fallacy. Very common around here. I say the merits and drawbacks of each of the ending options stand on their own. Their association with anyone in particular is completely irrelevant.

Also, if I may point out:

"You altered the variables".
"The Crucible changed me, created new....possibilities".

That sounds as if the Crucible made the new solutions possible, as well as Shepard's presence. If Shepard's sacrifice has any meaning, something of her will influence how exactly Synthesis works. The Catalyst promotes Synthesis as the best solution, but who designed it is anyone's guess. We simply do not know.

No their association with one new and improved antagonist is very much to the point, that association is part of what should inform Shepard as to their validity at the very least-the emphasis has changed, but this has always been the real problem with these choices without knowing their supposed meaning.

He has every reason to lie, because he needs to finish this cycle.  Shepard has caused problems.  He is the only being that has had any idea what the crucible, citadel combo will do.  He is the catalyst.  He knows and has known all about the crucible, but he is vague as to its origins.  He has been duplicitous-he's no kid and tries to appear innocuous by being a "kid".

If you go onto believing the choices are authentic, though they could just all very easily be make the harvest faster switches, their merits if any are tremendously outweighed by their drawbacks.  Destroy is ambiguous as to its scope based on what he says it will do and to whom.  And well Synthesis and Control are internal and external versions of each other with Synthesis being implemented without prior consent of individuals and Control requiring people live with mass murderers who burp people goo.  They have the effect of telling people they have no value unless internally or externally augmented by reaper tech or reaper helpers.

The dystopia express is boarding and leaving now.  You will believe you have a ticket to utopia, but just you wait and see.

actually, the utopia thing is created by anti synthesis players, not the mission nor the creators of the reapers, the REAL antagonists in the MEU. Catalyst is merely a tool of theirs that got..out of hand. They still exist you know, the builders of the catalyst, only a machine thinks in absolutes. Organics inherently know that anything can happen and it doesn't really matter to the space time conundrum. The creators of the whole mess runs the show and you will do as you're told...sucks but there it is. Utopia..lol talk about indoctrinated.(the organic race of builders designed indoctrination, part of the reaper programming as a defense agains enemy organics of 'the realm'.. Don't believe me, ask Jarvik..

[v3paR]

The Angry One wrote...
[...]

if only the devs were not so lazy and made the cinematics better we wouldn't have to guess which is what.

it seems that Control was the original way to control Catalyst/Reapers by its creators. thats why we have handles. they just didn't have time to use it before they were wiped. Destroy option is Shepard basicaly break the whole device thus destroying Catalyst/Reapers (pretty much similar to Sovereign being destroyed by glitch which disabled his shields aka "You're just a machine, and machines can be broken!")

As for Synthesis it is option added by Catalyst. He tried that earlier but failed because of his faulty logic. And for the same reason he just didn't need to invent anything. For him everything worked just fine. Tried few variations of his logic but failed each time so he stoped trying. But now someone build the Crucible (or whatever we call it) and this added completely new variable to his faulty logic. A variable that seems to fix his original problem. The Crucible is for the Catalyst something like the apple was for Newton (this is myth ofc but you should get my point)

the only thing bad is the way he speaks of it. he should have only mention synthesis as this is his utlimate goal. the other two options should be Shepard's choices. but since he had to explain each option to player it all turns out into one big mess.

in short, he didn't designed Synthesis but the situation (and new variables) made it possible for him.

[AngryFrozenWater]

zambot wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

zambot wrote...

Tkrun42 wrote...

zambot wrote...

What I don't understand is that you openly acknowledge the fact that you're working with "bad writing" and "space magic" yet you are still attempting to impose logic on it. Why? To what end? It's just as valid to say that Shepard isn't really human, and was one of the Creators sent forward in time on a magical time travelling unicorn which explains why his essence activates the space magic that he created billions of years ago to save the galaxy. What are you out to prove?

I vote new canon

Then why all these elaborate speculations designed to prove that the writers have plot holes with their endings?  Isn't this obvious?  We already have a billion threads that say "Wow, these endings make no sense"  Is it necessary to try to provide convoluted logical proof that the endings make no sense?

So that's why you visit those threads and try to derail them. IC.

Are you strawmanning just to troll me or do you seriously not understand why I'm asking these questions?

Quit the buzz words. The writers did make booboos. The writers also allowed for different interpretations. Obviously the writers also integrated their view of the story and its events. It is fun to try to find consistencies or inconsistencies. All you seem to do is derail this thread for no apparent reason.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 19 juillet 2012 - 07:09 .

[The Angry One]

Ieldra2 wrote...

*sigh*

Another of *these* threads. A very transparent attempt to invalidate one option by associating it with an antagonist. That's an association fallacy. Very common around here. I say the merits and drawbacks of each of the ending options stand on their own. Their association with anyone in particular is completely irrelevant.

I am not associating anything with the antagonist. The game is.
Also, this thread is not to discuss that, of course you would think otherwise.

Also, if I may point out:

"You altered the variables".
"The Crucible changed me, created new....possibilities".

That sounds as if the Crucible made the new solutions possible, as well as Shepard's presence. If Shepard's sacrifice has any meaning, something of her will influence how exactly Synthesis works. The Catalyst promotes Synthesis as the best solution, but who designed it is anyone's guess. We simply do not know.

It makes it possible by being a power source. I thought that part of the theory was clear. No power, no possibilities.
Shepard has nothing to do with this. You may want to pretend otherwise, but you could likely shove any cyborg into that beam and achieve the same result.

Modifié par The Angry One, 19 juillet 2012 - 07:14 .

[elitehunter34]

Ieldra2 wrote...

*sigh*

Another of *these* threads. A very transparent attempt to invalidate one option by associating it with an antagonist. That's an association fallacy. Very common around here. I say the merits and drawbacks of each of the ending options stand on their own. Their association with anyone in particular is completely irrelevant.

Also, if I may point out:

"You altered the variables".
"The Crucible changed me, created new....possibilities".

That sounds as if the Crucible made the new solutions possible, as well as Shepard's presence. If Shepard's sacrifice has any meaning, something of her will influence how exactly Synthesis works. The Catalyst promotes Synthesis as the best solution, but who designed it is anyone's guess. We simply do not know.

Dude, did you even read the OP?  TAO never invalidated any of the options by associating it with the Catalyst. 

As for the thread at hand point 1 just doesn't make sense.  We have no evidence to suggest that the Citadel was created when the Catalyst's creators were still alive.  In Mass Effect 1 it was stated that the Citadel and the Relays were constructed by the Reapers.  If that is true then that means the creators did not build it, so destroy and control being failsafes don't really make sense.

Not only that, but if they were in fact failsafes by the creators, how come the Catalyst did not know about them?  Seriously I'm really sick of this cognitive dissonance people have when it comes to the Catalyst.  Not saying you are TAO, but seriously, does it make sense to anyone how the creator and controller of the Reapers has no effective control or knowledge of the Citadel?  The Citadel was created by the Reapers.  C'mon guys, don't let bad writing make you turn off critical thinking.

[Wayning_Star]

v3paR wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
[...]

if only the devs were not so lazy and made the cinematics better we wouldn't have to guess which is what.

it seems that Control was the original way to control Catalyst/Reapers by its creators. thats why we have handles. they just didn't have time to use it before they were wiped. Destroy option is Shepard basicaly break the whole device thus destroying Catalyst/Reapers (pretty much similar to Sovereign being destroyed by glitch which disabled his shields aka "You're just a machine, and machines can be broken!")

As for Synthesis it is option added by Catalyst. He tried that earlier but failed because of his faulty logic. And for the same reason he just didn't need to invent anything. For him everything worked just fine. Tried few variations of his logic but failed each time so he stoped trying. But now someone build the Crucible (or whatever we call it) and this added completely new variable to his faulty logic. A variable that seems to fix his original problem. The Crucible is for the Catalyst something like the apple was for Newton (this is myth ofc but you should get my point)

the only thing bad is the way he speaks of it. he should have only mention synthesis as this is his utlimate goal. the other two options should be Shepard's choices. but since he had to explain each option to player it all turns out into one big mess.

in short, he didn't designed Synthesis but the situation (and new variables) made it possible for him.

 very astute, who said catalyst was a super being!! Just a cosmic recording device with too much time on it's hands,er..sensors.. but I still think the reaper makers are pulling all the string theories around the MEU and out here where reality really gets fuzzy..lol

[zambot]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Quit the buzz words. The writers did make booboos. The writers also allowed for different interpretations. Obviously the writers also integrated their view of the story and its events. It is fun to try to find consistencies or inconsistencies. All you seem to do is derail this thread for no apparent reason.

I thought my reason was transparant, apparantly not.  You cannot impose logic on something illogical, so I'm trying to figure out why people insist on trying.   According to you it is fun.  Ok, I guess I can accept that.  Is it fun just for fun's sake or is it fun to try to make Bioware look incompetent?  Or is it fun to grief synthesis supporters?  All three?

Synthesis is vacuous.  It can mean anything you want it to mean.

[Ownedbacon]

The Angry One wrote...

It makes it possible by being a power source. I thought that part of the theory was clear. No power, no possibilities.
Shepard has nothing to do with this. You may want to pretend otherwise, but you could likely shove any cyborg into that beam and achieve the same result.

Couldn't Shepard have just cut off a hand threw it in to make synthesis happen? Since it must copy Shepard's "essence" anyways. Why would it need his/her whole body?

[RavenEyry]

I still want to know how no one ever visited the bottom of the tower for any reason over thousands of cycles.

And why the device has such a terrible user interface.

[The Angry One]

elitehunter34 wrote...

As for the thread at hand point 1 just doesn't make sense.  We have no evidence to suggest that the Citadel was created when the Catalyst's creators were still alive.  In Mass Effect 1 it was stated that the Citadel and the Relays were constructed by the Reapers.  If that is true then that means the creators did not build it, so destroy and control being failsafes don't really make sense.

Sovereign told us this. Sovereign also told us the Reapers had no creators and always were.

Not only that, but if they were in fact failsafes by the creators, how come the Catalyst did not know about them?  Seriously I'm really sick of this cognitive dissonance people have when it comes to the Catalyst.  Not saying you are TAO, but seriously, does it make sense to anyone how the creator and controller of the Reapers has no effective control or knowledge of the Citadel?  The Citadel was created by the Reapers.  C'mon guys, don't let bad writing make you turn off critical thinking.

How does any part of my theory rely on the Catalyst not knowing about these functions?
A control override and a destruction mechanism aren't exactly outlandish concepts. They've just never been required by the Catalyst until now because suddenly things are so different apparently.

Modifié par The Angry One, 19 juillet 2012 - 07:30 .

[Shaigunjoe]

Pausanias wrote...

 OP, we don't know that the Catalyst designed Synthesis. It could have been the creators that designed it.

Here's what I do know for sure

We'll never find out

Hahaha, yea, pretty much this, but the thread continues.

[Wayning_Star]

elitehunter34 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

*sigh*

Another of *these* threads. A very transparent attempt to invalidate one option by associating it with an antagonist. That's an association fallacy. Very common around here. I say the merits and drawbacks of each of the ending options stand on their own. Their association with anyone in particular is completely irrelevant.

Also, if I may point out:

"You altered the variables".
"The Crucible changed me, created new....possibilities".

That sounds as if the Crucible made the new solutions possible, as well as Shepard's presence. If Shepard's sacrifice has any meaning, something of her will influence how exactly Synthesis works. The Catalyst promotes Synthesis as the best solution, but who designed it is anyone's guess. We simply do not know.

Dude, did you even read the OP?  TAO never invalidated any of the options by associating it with the Catalyst. 

As for the thread at hand point 1 just doesn't make sense.  We have no evidence to suggest that the Citadel was created when the Catalyst's creators were still alive.  In Mass Effect 1 it was stated that the Citadel and the Relays were constructed by the Reapers.  If that is true then that means the creators did not build it, so destroy and control being failsafes don't really make sense.

Not only that, but if they were in fact failsafes by the creators, how come the Catalyst did not know about them?  Seriously I'm really sick of this cognitive dissonance people have when it comes to the Catalyst.  Not saying you are TAO, but seriously, does it make sense to anyone how the creator and controller of the Reapers has no effective control or knowledge of the Citadel?  The Citadel was created by the Reapers.  C'mon guys, don't let bad writing make you turn off critical thinking.

communication is the first step in evolution, but the 'dissonance' is the basis for and the begining of learning. 1 and 0's vs maybe yes maybe no. Did you know that the human brain actually has a special area that handles 'just that'? Who in their right mind would creat a creature without one of those nifty areas in a brain..er logic circuits..uh..? (( shrugg ))

(the actual funny part about it is just how that area of the brain 'handles' dissonance. It lies to us.)

[Wayning_Star]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

Pausanias wrote...

 OP, we don't know that the Catalyst designed Synthesis. It could have been the creators that designed it.

Here's what I do know for sure

We'll never find out

Hahaha, yea, pretty much this, but the thread continues.

well, synthesis could only be thought up by an organic, as they really(are capable of?) understand the problematics of not choosing it.. or choosing it.

[Wayning_Star]

Mass Effect isn't a vide0 game at all.. it's a friggen class assignment with field trip sims...sheesh.

[Haiyato]

Pausanias wrote...

 OP, we don't know that the Catalyst designed Synthesis. It could have been the creators that designed it.

Here's what I do know for sure

We'll never find out

I don't know, it is highly plausible the catalyst designed Synthesis. From what I was told by star child, he forced his solution on his creators against their will.  Which resulted them in being harvested. Could be they were offered the same solutions and just flat out rejected them. But I think we will eventually find out what exactly happened  to them through...

You know it...

DLC

[AngryFrozenWater]

Wayning_Star wrote...

v3paR wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
[...]

if only the devs were not so lazy and made the cinematics better we wouldn't have to guess which is what.

it seems that Control was the original way to control Catalyst/Reapers by its creators. thats why we have handles. they just didn't have time to use it before they were wiped. Destroy option is Shepard basicaly break the whole device thus destroying Catalyst/Reapers (pretty much similar to Sovereign being destroyed by glitch which disabled his shields aka "You're just a machine, and machines can be broken!")

As for Synthesis it is option added by Catalyst. He tried that earlier but failed because of his faulty logic. And for the same reason he just didn't need to invent anything. For him everything worked just fine. Tried few variations of his logic but failed each time so he stoped trying. But now someone build the Crucible (or whatever we call it) and this added completely new variable to his faulty logic. A variable that seems to fix his original problem. The Crucible is for the Catalyst something like the apple was for Newton (this is myth ofc but you should get my point)

the only thing bad is the way he speaks of it. he should have only mention synthesis as this is his utlimate goal. the other two options should be Shepard's choices. but since he had to explain each option to player it all turns out into one big mess.

in short, he didn't designed Synthesis but the situation (and new variables) made it possible for him.

 very astute, who said catalyst was a super being!! Just a cosmic recording device with too much time on it's hands,er..sensors.. but I still think the reaper makers are pulling all the string theories around the MEU and out here where reality really gets fuzzy..lol

Ghehe. Well, the brat mentioned it was very smart. It was supposed to combine the intelligence of all reapers:

Child: I embody the collective intelligence of all reapers.

And we already know that the reapers were not very humble.

Sovereign: We are eternal. The pinnacle of evolution and existence. Before us, you are nothing. Your extinction is inevitable. We are the end of everything.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 19 juillet 2012 - 07:59 .

[Wayning_Star]

Haiyato wrote...

Pausanias wrote...

 OP, we don't know that the Catalyst designed Synthesis. It could have been the creators that designed it.

Here's what I do know for sure

We'll never find out

I don't know, it is highly plausible the catalyst designed Synthesis. From what I was told by star child, he forced his solution on his creators against their will.  Which resulted them in being harvested. Could be they were offered the same solutions and just flat out rejected them. But I think we will eventually find out what exactly happened  to them through...

You know it...

DLC

the 'solution' for the catalyst was programmed by it's creators, but..only when the catalyst became self aware, that is, became a hunter gatherer.. too bad about what it decided to .. collect.  The builders didn't 'decide' they were the original programmers who got caught up in rouge AI perogatives. Too smart for their own britches, as it were... or so decided, fundimentally, by the catalyst.  There were no choices at that time tho, they just clobbered their creators and kept the cycle going, as it was all they knew. The new program has to be originated with the creators, as they and they alone know how to reprogram a catalyst.. the Prothieans are, my guess only, distant cousins of the original creators with only the slightest hint of thier mentality. That's why I cannot accept that the original builder actually were wiped out by the catalyst, no matter how powerful it is/was at their time..They still are somwhere/when in the MEU...waiting for the correct 'formulae' to present it's self. http://www.moviesoun...nt/importnt.wav <old taxi driver saying