287 réponses à ce sujet

[KevShep]

Maaaze...

Why then did the catalyst bring Shep up on the platform to meet him if he was his enemy in the first place if he has no control? Just let shep die!

Second,(off topic a little) How can the catalyst's logic be right if he is stopping chaos by causing it a million times over instead of it just happening once if he just let organics/synthetics be?

[davidshooter]

maaaze wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

maaaze wrote...
Yes and the ground turned out to be an elevator.

Elevators activating through weight are quite common and there was a time delay for dramatic effect.

It makes sense (in this context only) because the Catalyst says the Citadel is a part of him. He can control it.

but why bring him up? If him standing here proves that his solution won´t work anymore.

The Catalyst walking up to him shows that he is aware of what is happening on the citadel. but it does not show us that he has control over it. Shaperd being able to open the arms even shows us that he has no control over it.

Elevators that activate through a pressure switch... whut?
I've been on elevators that you activate yourself, or that you operate manually through a lever. Never, ever, a pressure switch.

Super weapon designs have no use from "dramatic effect" so you can't use that.

The Catalyst controls the Citadel, you can't dance around this.

Yes, there are elevators that are activated via pressure or other means...like stairways.

Or Elevators that only move when somebody is in them.(for exemple to prevent holding on each floor)

It makes sense that the elevator only goes up if some is standing on it. 

The Game has a use for dramatic effect...there are many things in ME that are only there for dramatic effect.
You have to take that into consideration if you talk about what is shown in the Game.

In movies a car crash is often shown happening multiple times. that does not mean the cars crashed multiple time into each other. It is used that way to heightend the dramatic effect of the car crash.

I think Shaperd collapsing and the lift taking off shortly after that is in the same line as that.

LOL!

This is the most informative part of your:

"Maaaze: the ending actually makes sense - part 2"  thread.

So Shepard just happens to collapse on the secret automated lift?

It's in these little assumptions that we see the mental gymnastics necessary to have the ending actually make any kind of  sense, and what goes on in the mind of one who believes the writing for the ending of  this game was anything other than a complete and utter disconnected trainwreck.

Pressure activated lifts that heroes happen to collapse upon?

are you laughing when you type stuff like this?

seriously?

WTF?

Modifié par davidshooter, 30 juillet 2012 - 12:54 .

[3DandBeyond]

In one thread the catalyst is completely truthful and in this he's just a computer with a face and the reapers indoctrinated themselves. I'm not sure I get it.

The kid does take ownership of the choices. The reapers are his solution. They are no longer working and he needs a new solution and the choices are there as his solutions.

[GreyLycanTrope]

This argument again? Yeah, still don't buy it.

[3DandBeyond]

KevShep wrote...

Maaaze...

Why then did the catalyst bring Shep up on the platform to meet him if he was his enemy in the first place if he has no control? Just let shep die!

Second,(off topic a little) How can the catalyst's logic be right if he is stopping chaos by causing it a million times over instead of it just happening once if he just let organics/synthetics be?

Because he is made up abstract fantasy art.  It's why much of it is totally ambiguous.  I am pretty sure someone has a joke dictionary or something because art used to mean something other than this and ambiguous didn't used to mean batsh*t crazy.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 30 juillet 2012 - 01:04 .

[3DandBeyond]

maaaze wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...


I reluctantly agree. Otherwise ME1's plot makes no sense if he could have opened the citadel relay anyway. MThough he could have acquired the power to deactivate the crucible after it has docked? It explains why he managed to deactivate the crucible if you picked refuse.

even more...if he had actually control over the citadel...how was Shaperd able to open the arms?

Ok, ME1's "plot" is totally swished down the toilet by ME3's ending. 

[KevShep]

3DandBeyond wrote...

maaaze wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...


I reluctantly agree. Otherwise ME1's plot makes no sense if he could have opened the citadel relay anyway. MThough he could have acquired the power to deactivate the crucible after it has docked? It explains why he managed to deactivate the crucible if you picked refuse.

even more...if he had actually control over the citadel...how was Shaperd able to open the arms?

Ok, ME1's "plot" is totally swished down the toilet by ME3's ending. 

 forget ME1(which was an awesome game) what about  ME2's...ENTIRE PLOT...?

[3DandBeyond]

KevShep wrote...

 forget ME1(which was an awesome game) what about  ME2's...ENTIRE PLOT...?

Oh definitely, ME3 ignored everything in that except the Arrival (Mac Walters foray into impossible missions and genocide setting up the wasteland of the original ME3 endings).  And even the Arrival only matters as far as the crazy beginning is concerned-now with the EC endings, most of its meaning has been gutted.  ME2 and 1 are totally irrelevant. 

[XqctaX]

maaaze wrote...

Isichar wrote...

OP likes his headcanon.

I have evidence for this. 


the fact that Shaperd was able to open the arms.

the fact that the reapers are independent from another (ranoch reaper :"harbinger told me of you")

The fact that he can´t make the choices happen.

I like to hear your evidence that this is not the case.

assumptions and missrepresentations of events...
all you really provide is evidence of bad writing and contradictions to established lore and speculation:sick:
 cool story bro. cheers:devil:

Edit: so much effort goes into the made up arguments of why the ending or part of it is logical or good by  some people i wonder if they accually enjoy spouting BS to incite anger.. or if its just brainfarts,

seriously headcanon argument like its a pressure sensor and not the catalyst controlling part of the citadel.
there for the catalyst has no control of the citadel.. :O:O

you didnt see it on screen but there an big warlock called merlin 500km to the left of the citadel holding up a sign
that says "Art, so suck it" and "bad writing" so here's evidence that the catalyst uses spacemagic :P

Modifié par XqctaX, 30 juillet 2012 - 01:26 .

[KevShep]

3DandBeyond wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Maaaze...

Why then did the catalyst bring Shep up on the platform to meet him if he was his enemy in the first place if he has no control? Just let shep die!

Second,(off topic a little) How can the catalyst's logic be right if he is stopping chaos by causing it a million times over instead of it just happening once if he just let organics/synthetics be?

Because he is made up abstract fantasy art.  It's why much of it is totally ambiguous.  I am pretty sure someone has a joke dictionary or something because art used to mean something other than this and ambiguous didn't used to mean batsh*t crazy.

Electronic "Arts" cant make anything that is more then art hence its in there name. They cant make games that transcend art itself.

Edit: I ment that they prevent game devs from making awesome games.

Modifié par KevShep, 30 juillet 2012 - 01:19 .

[AresKeith]

3DandBeyond wrote...

KevShep wrote...

 forget ME1(which was an awesome game) what about  ME2's...ENTIRE PLOT...?

Oh definitely, ME3 ignored everything in that except the Arrival (Mac Walters foray into impossible missions and genocide setting up the wasteland of the original ME3 endings).  And even the Arrival only matters as far as the crazy beginning is concerned-now with the EC endings, most of its meaning has been gutted.  ME2 and 1 are totally irrelevant. 

also the trial because you killed all those Batarians, and not that many people still believed you about the Reapers after Arrival

[Tritium315]

davidshooter wrote...

maaaze wrote...

Yes, there are elevators that are activated via pressure or other means...like stairways.

Or Elevators that only move when somebody is in them.(for exemple to prevent holding on each floor)

It makes sense that the elevator only goes up if some is standing on it. 

The Game has a use for dramatic effect...there are many things in ME that are only there for dramatic effect.
You have to take that into consideration if you talk about what is shown in the Game.

In movies a car crash is often shown happening multiple times. that does not mean the cars crashed multiple time into each other. It is used that way to heightend the dramatic effect of the car crash.

I think Shaperd collapsing and the lift taking off shortly after that is in the same line as that.

LOL!

This is the most informative part of your:

"Maaaze: the ending actually makes sense - part 2"  thread.

So Shepard just happens to collapse on the secret automated lift?

It's in these little assumptions that we see the mental gymnastics necessary to have the ending actually make any kind of  sense, and what goes on in the mind of one who believes the writing for the ending of  this game was anything other than a complete and utter disconnected trainwreck.

Pressure activated lifts that heroes happen to collapse upon?

are you laughing when you type stuff like this?

seriously?

WTF?

And that's why I've given up arguing with maaaze; he's either ****ing bonkers or an extremely dedicated troll.

[3DandBeyond]

AresKeith wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

KevShep wrote...

 forget ME1(which was an awesome game) what about  ME2's...ENTIRE PLOT...?

Oh definitely, ME3 ignored everything in that except the Arrival (Mac Walters foray into impossible missions and genocide setting up the wasteland of the original ME3 endings).  And even the Arrival only matters as far as the crazy beginning is concerned-now with the EC endings, most of its meaning has been gutted.  ME2 and 1 are totally irrelevant. 

also the trial because you killed all those Batarians, and not that many people still believed you about the Reapers after Arrival

Yeah no trial and no Mac Walter's wasteland means even the Arrival is meaningless except for that one line by Shepard and a batarian later on, but it has no meaning to anything else.

[Bill Casey]

So, after Shepard becomes the Catalyst... who closes the Citadel arms?

[KevShep]

Bill Casey wrote...

So, after Shepard becomes the Catalyst... who closes the Citadel arms?

good point!

[Tritium315]

KevShep wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

So, after Shepard becomes the Catalyst... who closes the Citadel arms?

good point!

According to maaaze, in another thread, "Shepard-Catalyst" can control the Reapers and the Citadel directly because he's "different." This should be obvious to anyone with a brain.

I **** you not that's what he said (although much more long winded, and with a lot of "...").

[KevShep]

Tritium315 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

So, after Shepard becomes the Catalyst... who closes the Citadel arms?

good point!

According to maaaze, in another thread, "Shepard-Catalyst" can control the Reapers and the Citadel directly because he's "different." This should be obvious to anyone with a brain.

I **** you not that's what he said (although much more long winded, and with a lot of "...").

 I would like to know how that is obvious.

Bioware gave us sh*t and with the E.C. they gave us sh*t with sparkly glitter on it. Now I have sparkly sh*t for my thanks from bioware. Then they go and put it in a bag and light it on fire if you shoot the catalyst. There response....we did not put that in there to ****** off the haters we only put that in there because thats what people asked for. REALLY!...not ONCE did I see anyone that asked for that.

Shame on you BioWare we AAALLL know your REALL reason.


Edit: Sorry, I rant sometimes.

Modifié par KevShep, 30 juillet 2012 - 02:18 .

[3DandBeyond]

Bill Casey wrote...

So, after Shepard becomes the Catalyst... who closes the Citadel arms?

They automatically close in a big symbolic hug because everyone's happy again.<3

[3DandBeyond]

KevShep wrote...


 I would like to know how that is obvious.

Bioware gave us sh*t and with the E.C. they gave us sh*t with sparkly glitter on it. Now I have sparkly sh*t for my thanks from bioware. Then they go and put it in a bag and light it on fire if you shoot the catalyst. There response....we did not put that in there to ****** off the haters we only put that in there because thats what people asked for. REALLY!...not ONCE did I see anyone that asked for that.

Shame on you BioWare we AAALLL know your REALL reason.


Edit: Sorry, I rant sometimes.

They are misstating what did happen.  On youtube people hated the endings so much and everyone tried to shoot the kid.  And in threads people did say that Shepard needed to get a backbone and tell the kid to F off.  That's all Bioware read.  But every post that said that went on after that.  I said it several times myself.

We wanted to tell the kid his choices were uh stupid and reject them and we said what could happen next.

Every post that I recall said. 
If IT was true(not saying it was), rejecting the kid might mean Shepard would wake up from it at that point and a real fight would begin.

That what should happen is you could reject the kid and get Shepard's character back (because any Shepard that listened to the kid and made a choice was not Shepard) and then:

Fight a real fight with the reapers that would either end in victory or even defeat, but all based upon your decisions and play. The real endings.

Reject the kid and cause him to glitch and maybe start shutting down the reaper's shields so they might be vulnerable and then a fight.

No one ever said they wanted reject that lead to a loss and future win for someone else.  They are using that as cover.  They are in effect saying, "quit complaining.  We gave you what you asked for."  That's lying by omission.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 30 juillet 2012 - 02:40 .

[KevShep]

3DandBeyond wrote...

KevShep wrote...


 I would like to know how that is obvious.

Bioware gave us sh*t and with the E.C. they gave us sh*t with sparkly glitter on it. Now I have sparkly sh*t for my thanks from bioware. Then they go and put it in a bag and light it on fire if you shoot the catalyst. There response....we did not put that in there to ****** off the haters we only put that in there because thats what people asked for. REALLY!...not ONCE did I see anyone that asked for that.

Shame on you BioWare we AAALLL know your REALL reason.


Edit: Sorry, I rant sometimes.

They are misstating what did happen.  On youtube people hated the endings so much and everyone tried to shoot the kid.  And in threads people did say that Shepard needed to get a backbone and tell the kid to F off.  That's all Bioware read.  But every post that said that went on after that.  I said it several times myself.

We wanted to tell the kid his choices were uh stupid and reject them and we said what could happen next.

Every post that I recall said. 
If IT was true(not saying it was), rejecting the kid might mean Shepard would wake up from it at that point and a real fight would begin.

That what should happen is you could reject the kid and get Shepard's character back (because any Shepard that listened to the kid and made a choice was not Shepard) and then:

Fight a real fight with the reapers that would either end in victory or even defeat, but all based upon your decisions and play. The real endings.

Reject the kid and cause him to glitch and maybe start shutting down the reaper's shields so they might be vulnerable and then a fight.

No one ever said they wanted reject that lead to a loss and future win for someone else.  They are using that as cover.  They are in effect saying, "quit complaining.  We gave you what you asked for."  That's lying by omission.

I know this is why Iam a hater of BioWare because they did NOT give us what we wanted....an ending without the catalyst and is very wrong logic.

[davidshooter]

3DandBeyond wrote...

KevShep wrote...


 I would like to know how that is obvious.

Bioware gave us sh*t and with the E.C. they gave us sh*t with sparkly glitter on it. Now I have sparkly sh*t for my thanks from bioware. Then they go and put it in a bag and light it on fire if you shoot the catalyst. There response....we did not put that in there to ****** off the haters we only put that in there because thats what people asked for. REALLY!...not ONCE did I see anyone that asked for that.

Shame on you BioWare we AAALLL know your REALL reason.


Edit: Sorry, I rant sometimes.

They are misstating what did happen.  On youtube people hated the endings so much and everyone tried to shoot the kid.  And in threads people did say that Shepard needed to get a backbone and tell the kid to F off.  That's all Bioware read.  But every post that said that went on after that.  I said it several times myself.

We wanted to tell the kid his choices were uh stupid and reject them and we said what could happen next.

Every post that I recall said. 
If IT was true(not saying it was), rejecting the kid might mean Shepard would wake up from it at that point and a real fight would begin.

That what should happen is you could reject the kid and get Shepard's character back (because any Shepard that listened to the kid and made a choice was not Shepard) and then:

Fight a real fight with the reapers that would either end in victory or even defeat, but all based upon your decisions and play. The real endings.

Reject the kid and cause him to glitch and maybe start shutting down the reaper's shields so they might be vulnerable and then a fight.

No one ever said they wanted reject that lead to a loss and future win for someone else.  They are using that as cover.  They are in effect saying, "quit complaining.  We gave you what you asked for."  That's lying by omission.

To me, it was a definite F*** you to all the people who complained about the endings.

Shooting the kid became an online symbol of rejecting the very concept of the ending.

This was even a feature in the Understated Nerdrage video that has almost 1/2 a million views as well as a feature of many other ending videos.

Shooting the kid in the EC was Mac and Casey showing once and for all they resented the criticism they recieved from the fans - shoot the kid and Shep loses - someone else wins in the future by doing what  you could have done but  refused to do because you didn't like the ending.

It was the ultimate middle finger as many on this board and elsewhere have noted.

[KevShep]

davidshooter wrote...


It was the ultimate middle finger as many on this board and elsewhere have noted.

Thing is, we all know it too.

Its the responsibility of the writers and devs at least stay within there OWN lore and please there fans while at the same time keeping it unexpected...instead they slap ...US... in the face for THERE mistake! 

[dreman9999]

KevShep wrote...

Maaaze...

Why then did the catalyst bring Shep up on the platform to meet him if he was his enemy in the first place if he has no control? Just let shep die!

Second,(off topic a little) How can the catalyst's logic be right if he is stopping chaos by causing it a million times over instead of it just happening once if he just let organics/synthetics be?

Because his programing is forcing him to find a new salution.

[dreman9999]

Bill Casey wrote...

So, after Shepard becomes the Catalyst... who closes the Citadel arms?

The crucible most likely reprogramed the citadel for direct control.

[dreman9999]

AresKeith wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

maaaze wrote...

But he is...because he has no other purpose...that is what EDI´s arc is all about...she wants to be more than just the A.I. on the ship...the Catalyst was never able to evolve past his purpose. He was never encouraged to do so.

His only purpose was to find a solution that works indefinitely

Shepard: So you're just an AI?
Catalyst: Inasmuch that you are just an animal

This means the Catalyst is MUCH more than a shackled AI

He makes it clear that he is shackled...

he wasn't programmed to turn people into Reapers

How many time do I have to say this?

He was give a problem to solve which he was never give any statement to how to solve it out side not killing off organic and syntheticsand it has to be the best salution. How he solves the problem is left open to him. That mean the salution can be anything as long it's the best salution on hand and does not kill anything off. Preseving organics does that. It a salution. He is just programed to find a saltion not programed to find a salution in a limited moral perspective.Machines don't hvave moral unless the have the freedom to find them and gain them. The catalyst has no morals so no moral ground will every prevent him from selcting a salution no matter how horrible it is. That the very reason HAL FOR SPACE ODYSSY 2001 killed off his crew.

if he had to solve the problem itself and chose to do this, then the Starbrat has more control than a Shackled AI would

Even a shakled Ai has the freedom to how it does it's programing. Every AI does no matter what. The only limit is what it's programing tells it not to do. If a shackled AI is not told to not do something and the condition dirct to that action as a salution, it will do it.