303 réponses à ce sujet

[GreyLycanTrope]

Cyberfrog81 wrote...

v TricKy v wrote...

So he holds the cards. You can only end it the ways he presented you. He doesnt let you explore it further. Maybe there is an other possibility which he didnt mentioned? You have to take his word that there is nothing more to it.

Exactly. If synthesis is possible, magic is possible. A magical beam that ONLY destroys or disables Reapers is possible.

But that's not on the table. To destroy them, you have to destroy every synthetic life form. After two games building them up as a form of life just as valid as organic life. That sucks. And the other choices are worse.

Well there is a fourth option where you can tell him to sod off, only then he acutally turns off the Crucible. Dead serious.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 26 juillet 2012 - 12:02 .

[D24O]

Bathaius wrote...

They really wanted bittersweet for the ending.  I think for some Shepards who chose not to recognize synthetics are 'living', the destroy choice is easy.  For most of us, that choice is very, very hard.

I don't personally 'like' the choices we were given (I prefer happy endings), but my only qualm is how they are presented (through only one source, the same source who created the Reapers and likely indocrinated the Illusive Man).

In the end though, you can either choose to trust the catalyst (and pick a choice) or refuse (and have a future cycle win), so at least there is some sweet in the bitter.  I border on choosing Control (if I assume the catalyst is truthful) or refuse.  Refuse feels more logical to me to pick, but I prefer the resolution Control brings (if I metagame it).

Yeah, I'm pretty much in accordance with you. If they had made the Catalyst a more neutral party, instead of the avatar of the reapers, it would be much easier to make a more rational choice, not one based off the hatred of your enemy, and IMO it would've been much better recieved.

[Ticonderoga117]

D24O wrote...
Yeah, I'm pretty much in accordance with you. If they had made the Catalyst a more neutral party, instead of the avatar of the reapers, it would be much easier to make a more rational choice, not one based off the hatred of your enemy, and IMO it would've been much better recieved.

I still would've picked destroy. Why? Because the Reapers are the problem. They are a problem every 50K years, give or take.

Synthetics can't hold a candle to that. So the Reapers gotta go.

[v TricKy v]

D24O wrote...

Bathaius wrote...

They really wanted bittersweet for the ending.  I think for some Shepards who chose not to recognize synthetics are 'living', the destroy choice is easy.  For most of us, that choice is very, very hard.

I don't personally 'like' the choices we were given (I prefer happy endings), but my only qualm is how they are presented (through only one source, the same source who created the Reapers and likely indocrinated the Illusive Man).

In the end though, you can either choose to trust the catalyst (and pick a choice) or refuse (and have a future cycle win), so at least there is some sweet in the bitter.  I border on choosing Control (if I assume the catalyst is truthful) or refuse.  Refuse feels more logical to me to pick, but I prefer the resolution Control brings (if I metagame it).

Yeah, I'm pretty much in accordance with you. If they had made the Catalyst a more neutral party, instead of the avatar of the reapers, it would be much easier to make a more rational choice, not one based off the hatred of your enemy, and IMO it would've been much better recieved.

That what im thinking too. I dont know how the failed to see that an explanation from the enemy leader is just idiotic and cant work. They had so many characters at their disposal who could have all work in that scene 

[Memnon]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

"The Cruicible is little more than a power source."

Thus, the Citadel (and thus GlowBoy) actually provides the mechanism for the choices, the relays boost the range, the Crucible supplies the power

/thread

I don't understand what people don't understand about this statement ... it's an energy source. It provides power, the object consuming power does the work. If you have a battery powering a motor, you can remove the battery and replace it with a different one - you can power it via solar power, you could even power it with an anode and cathode in water ... but if you remove the motor and put a LED there, you have completely different functionality. The power source does not drive the functionality, it provides it power. Starbrat even said it was a "crude" power source, implying that it could be replaced with a more efficient version of the Crucible 

[Mazebook]

[quote]D24O wrote...

[quote]maaaze wrote...

Bolded. The Citadel is part of the catalyst, and is part of the reaper solution. The Crucible comes along and brings enough power to exploit it to a fuller potentiel, depending on how well the Crucible is constructed.

[/quote]

it uses the citadel against the reapers. turning their weapon against them...that was the point of the crucible.

[/quote]
Once more, I'll bold the pount of my argument. Remember the Catalyst is the citadel, this comes from the horses mouth, so unless you want to open the can of worms about trusting him, we have to agree on that.

[/quote]

It forces the Citadel to function in a way which are not in line with the goals of the catalyst.

The choices are only possible because of the crucible. The crucible was designed to end the reapers cycle.
ergo the choices originate from the crucible.

just because it uses the citadel and the catalyst in that matter to achive this goal does not mean the Catalyst had any influance on how this goal was achived.

it is not that complicated.

going to sleep now...goodnight everybody.

[D24O]

maaaze wrote...

It forces the Citadel to function in a way which are not in line with the goals of the catalyst.

The choices are only possible because of the crucible. The crucible was designed to end the reapers cycle.
ergo the choices originate from the crucible.

just because it uses the citadel and the catalyst in that matter to achive this goal does not mean the Catalyst had any influance on how this goal was achived.

it is not that complicated.

going to sleep now...goodnight everybody.

Of course he doesn't like them, which is why he tries to sell synthesis. But the choices are still reflections of the Catalyst's solutions, past and present, and they still originate from him. "Nothing more than a power source" "Its Changed ME" these come from him. 

[GreyLycanTrope]

D24O wrote...

maaaze wrote...

It forces the Citadel to function in a way which are not in line with the goals of the catalyst.

The choices are only possible because of the crucible. The crucible was designed to end the reapers cycle.
ergo the choices originate from the crucible.

just because it uses the citadel and the catalyst in that matter to achive this goal does not mean the Catalyst had any influance on how this goal was achived.

it is not that complicated.

going to sleep now...goodnight everybody.

Of course he doesn't like them, which is why he tries to sell synthesis. But the choices are still reflections of the Catalyst's solutions, past and present, and they still originate from him. "Nothing more than a power source" "Its Changed ME" these come from him. 

And if you don't play by his rules he turns off your toy, which begs the question if he could do that and he's really opposed to all these idea solutions why didn't he just turn it off to begin with? He saw the potential that was given him and uses it make Synthesis, his failed vision, a reality, along with two other options which he's less trilled about but can still use to fullfill the "stop the synthetics" criteria to some degree.

[davidshooter]

Synthesis alone is enough to trip any thinking person's stupid alarm, jumping into a beam of light to trigger it is just gravy.

I love a spirited defense of the indefensible though - very entertaining.

[Cyberfrog81]

"it is not that complicated."

Uploading a human's consciousness into a Reaper (Control) probably is pretty complicated (not to mention the galaxy-wide release of "obey the Shep!"-energy) though.

Pretty impressive to add such a feature to the Crucible without even trying. If you want to suggest that indoctrinated agents implemented it, then what does it matter where the choice originated physically - it's your enemy's feature either way.

[Kathleen321]

I still can't make sense out of any of this. :/ Catalyst = nonsense

[3DandBeyond]

OP,
Please explain where anything the kid says about the choices is substantiated anywhere else by anyone or anything else other than the kid.

The crucible in the EC is explained as little more than a power source. Who knows what it really is because it's the kid that says that. It could be a giant ham sandwich replicator for all anyone knows. All they know is that they've put a lot of resources in it that create energy, one of which is probably dark energy. But none of this explains the choices that are a part of the citadel that is the kid's home and a part of him.

[3DandBeyond]

davidshooter wrote...

Synthesis alone is enough to trip any thinking person's stupid alarm, jumping into a beam of light to trigger it is just gravy.

I love a spirited defense of the indefensible though - very entertaining.

You totally missed the coolness of green glowing eyes.  Who wouldn't want to screw the galaxy over for green glowing eyes.  On the one hand the endings were supposed to be intellectual and artsy, which means you might want to think about what they say and mean.  On the other hand they are supposed to encourage speculation from "everyone".  On the other hand, if you do actually expend brain cells and utilize synapses you will reveal their awesome truth-it's better to not think about them.  That's it. 

You need 3 hands to come to the conclusion that expending any mental activity on all the endings actually makes them less appealing, so in order to truly appreciate their intelligence you must view them superficially.

[drayfish]

maaaze wrote...

BigBadMammogram wrote...

maaaze wrote...

Don´t try to change my words...thank you.

Alright. Just trying to show that it doesnt matter who they picked to the be the catalyst. No one could have filled that role in a believable way because they catalyst is just... dumb.

I beg to differ. I find him very interessting and tragic.

@ maaaze:

Really?  How is that 'tragic'?

It's not just because he is wearing a dead child's face, is it?  Because he doesn't seem particularly conflicted about his actions - at any point.  He has turned his people into Reaper paste, slaughtered countless generations dispassionately, and then wants Shepard to kersplat herself based directly upon his theories of social engineering.  Where does the tragedy come?

Genuinely, I'm intrigued as to how you can read it that way.

Modifié par drayfish, 26 juillet 2012 - 01:28 .

[3DandBeyond]

drayfish wrote...

@ maaaze:

Really?  How is that 'tragic'?

It's not just because he is wearing a dead child's face, is it?  Because he doesn't seem particularly conflicted about his actions - at any point.  He has turned his people into Reaper paste, slaughtered countless generations dispassionately, and then wants Shepard to kersplat herself based directly upon his theories of social engineering.  Where does the tragedy come?

Genuinely, I'm intrigued as to how you can read it that way.

All these conversations might be a tad bit different if the "kid" had looked like Benny Hill or Harbinger or TIM.  To me, he's "evil" enough because I never had a connection with the real kid.  I felt he was oddly inserted and I knew he was contrived to create a connection for Shepard to Earth.  But I think ME3 failed in trying too hard to make Earth be the center of what mattered.  I'd think TIM would be patting Hackett and Anderson on the back for worrying more about humanity than anyone else.  I cringed when having to agree with Udina about trying to get others to ignore the reapers fond looks at their home worlds while demanding they care about mine.  Where is my Shepard and what have you done with her?

[Memnon]

3DandBeyond wrote...

I felt he was oddly inserted and I knew he was contrived to create a connection for Shepard to Earth.

This drove me absolutely nuts - I hated the scenes with vent kid on earth, because I knew the writers were trying way too hard to make me feel this connection. I hated the dream scenes ... freaking hated them. Then when I met the Catalyst and saw that he was the vent kid I wanted to flip my desk in rage

[comrade gando]

just looking at the 'decision chamber' it just looks illogical. like who the heck- did we build this? how can we build these walkways, hang up red LED's over here, blue LED's over there, a tube for no reason except to shoot at, and these electric handles? well blueprints say they just go there, maybe you're supposed to grab em and shock yourself to death? well the blueprints said so! oh wait they didnt, we spent all this time and resources building a giant mystery machine and had no idea it would fix something we had no idea existed? It's like, you gotta TRY to write that badly, you have to out of your way to make it make the least sense possible.

well it's best not to think about it, pick a color and listen to the pretty music, GOOD ENDING RITE!?

[Mazebook]

D24O wrote...

maaaze wrote...

It forces the Citadel to function in a way which are not in line with the goals of the catalyst.

The choices are only possible because of the crucible. The crucible was designed to end the reapers cycle.
ergo the choices originate from the crucible.

just because it uses the citadel and the catalyst in that matter to achive this goal does not mean the Catalyst had any influance on how this goal was achived.

it is not that complicated.

going to sleep now...goodnight everybody.

Of course he doesn't like them, which is why he tries to sell synthesis. But the choices are still reflections of the Catalyst's solutions, past and present, and they still originate from him. "Nothing more than a power source" "Its Changed ME" these come from him. 

The only conection is that they used the weapons of the reapers against them self.

It is like if in WWII japan had devolped atomic bombs first. and where about to use them.

And america redirected the bombers so they bomb their own citys...
would this still be in line with what Japan wanted.

Synthetics are unfortunate colleteral damage...but they were all ready to give their life to end the reapers thread.

[Mazebook]

drayfish wrote...

maaaze wrote...

BigBadMammogram wrote...

maaaze wrote...

Don´t try to change my words...thank you.

Alright. Just trying to show that it doesnt matter who they picked to the be the catalyst. No one could have filled that role in a believable way because they catalyst is just... dumb.

I beg to differ. I find him very interessting and tragic.

@ maaaze:

Really?  How is that 'tragic'?

It's not just because he is wearing a dead child's face, is it?  Because he doesn't seem particularly conflicted about his actions - at any point.  He has turned his people into Reaper paste, slaughtered countless generations dispassionately, and then wants Shepard to kersplat herself based directly upon his theories of social engineering.  Where does the tragedy come?

Genuinely, I'm intrigued as to how you can read it that way.

read the thread in my signature "are the Reapers, the catalyst and its creators evil?...I argue No"

there i argue that the catalyst never had free will...and is therefore a tragic figure.

Modifié par maaaze, 26 juillet 2012 - 01:03 .

[Carlthestrange]

I love these threads. Always end the same way.

-Opinion
-Opinion
-How dare you have an alternating opinion!
-Well how dare you!
-Rage
-Rage
(Repeat ad infinitum)

*Cracks out the popcorn*

[Mazebook]

Carlthestrange wrote...

I love these threads. Always end the same way.

-Opinion
-Opinion
-How dare you have an alternating opinion!
-Well how dare you!
-Rage
-Rage
(Repeat ad infinitum)

*Cracks out the popcorn*

the question always is if these opinions are based on factual truth or not.

[Carlthestrange]

maaaze wrote...
the question always is if these opinions are based on factual truth or not.

And without solid proof, neither side will ever know. All we can do is speculate.

[Mazebook]

Carlthestrange wrote...

maaaze wrote...
the question always is if these opinions are based on factual truth or not.

And without solid proof, neither side will ever know. All we can do is speculate.

well...there is always common sense...and your own perspective...this is true for everything in life.

you always can only speculate. in every narrative and in real life

Modifié par maaaze, 26 juillet 2012 - 01:23 .

[RavenEyry]

maaaze wrote...

So please, stop pretending otherwise.

I see you're at it again with the 'only my opinion could possibly be right and don't dare try to contradict me' angle. It's really not making you any friends.

[Carlthestrange]

Even those with common sense can have conflicting opinions of interest.

Just find it weird that people are going for each others jugular over differences of perspective.