1238 réponses à ce sujet

[The Twilight God]

Davik Kang wrote...

I don't agree with this actually.  I think choosing between Destroy and Refuse is a moral thing.  (In my story Shepard chose Destroy btw, and would do 1000 times over)

I made a post about this somewhere, I'll dig it up if I can.  In short, I think the ReaperChild is genuinely disappointed if you refuse, because you did refuse to follow his suggestions for a new solution.  So indoctrination failed.

Refuse can only be a good choice in the absence of Destroy. Getting everyone killed for no reason is not moral in any sense of the word.

Part IV: Refuse Analysis
Everything it has done demonstrates that it doesn't really want control or synthesis. The facts don't lie.

1. The Reapers retrieve the Citadel to prevent the Crucible from docking.
2. The Reapers consolidate forces around the Citadel to prevent the Crucible from docking.
3. The Reapers will inflict severe damage upon the Crucible, if Shield cannot hold them off, as it attempts to dock.
4. The Reapers do not drag an unwilling participant into the synthesis array if Shepard refuses. They shut down the array.
5. The Reapers destroy the Crucible after it has docked if Shepard dallies for too long without making a decision.

I have demonstrated in the Control and Synthesis Analysis that the Reapers are aware of the viability of both synthesis and control prior to the Crucible docking. If they really want synthesis why are they doing everything in their power to stop it? The only logical conclusion is that is is simply preferrable to being destroyed. It's a plan B if anyone makes it to the Citadel. And if everyone has reaper implants they are indoctrinated anyway. So they can still harvest people albiet they people won;t put up a fight.

Davik Kang wrote...

If Control and Synthesis are God-complex style choices, Destroy is still closer to that than Refuse.  Personally I think refuse is wrong because, even though Destroy is a terrible, terrible thing to do, letting everybody die just so Shepard can feel self-righteous is even worse.  

But just my opinion!  Not fact.

Why is Destroy horrible? Do you have a soft spot for the Reapers?

Modifié par The Twilight God, 01 octobre 2012 - 01:25 .

[The Twilight God]

starlitegirlx wrote...

Of course, I still think it's indoctrination if you choose it and that it never happens because you become a husk, but in the event that is not the case, I think there's the distinct possibility that being in control could take over. As much as the EC DLC for control sounds awesome, I don't buy it. I'd love to because it's kind of beautiful, but given all I know and having played ME so much, I just don't see anything but picking control is never going to work. Honestly, I think the only reason BW did that was because people wanted their endings to be the right one. So they took the main three and made them awesome each in their own right. I honestly think they were probably stunned by the outlash because it was a savvy trilogy. I'm not as much a fan of three because it's too far from its roots. ME2 is a nice upgrade from one minus suckiness with relationships. But the endings only bugged me in that I wanted some kind of big hero recognition to shepard because without shepard they'd all be dead. And for a while I wanted shepard to survive and see a future with his/her LI and children after all shepard went through. But I realize now that there really was no way to do that given that I feel the intent was always to choose destroy and if you missed that then you were indoctrinated or deceived by harbinger/reapers.

No ending shows how things turn out except Refuse. Just becuase Shepard is talking about what he's going to do doesn't mean he actually does any of it. TIM keeps saying he was going to control the Reapers... look how that turned out. Heck, Shepard's first words are those of a brainwashed reaper. Infinite? Eternal? Immortal? A guy who has been involved in the deaths of 4 reapers and was inches away from wiping them all out is not going to say that. He knows it's BS and says so himself in ME3. He's just as brainwashed as Soveriegn and the rest of the reapers. Control does not look good at all.

We have no idea what's going to happen in synthesis post credits. We see reaper nanides swarming over brain cells.


The Illusive Man once said to Paul Grayson, "You're being implanted with self replicating nanides. Their numbers will increase exponentially as they graft themselves onto your neurons and synapse. Eventually they will spread throughout your body, transforming you into into a tool of the Reapers. You will be repurposed into a synthetic-organic hybrid unlike any of the Council races could possibly create." - excerpt from Mass Effect: Retribution
This is the only way synthesis can work. The only way to solve the supposed AI problem is to remove organic weaknesses. The reasons we make machines cannot be overcome with a glowing eyes and circuit skin. Synthetics feeling organics' emotions will not solve the supposed problem. A pure machine will ALWAYS be stronger than an organic. It is the lack of emotional concerns that make use built machines as tools. It is our physically limitations and desire for pleasures that draw us to make machines to do the things we don't want to.

[megamacka]

Shepard - Whatever else it means that the reapers had a beginning...and now we'll provide them with an end.
Hackett - That's one way to look at it, I guess it's the only way.So go out there and make it happen.
This is a big step in the right direction shepard.

Yes Hackett, you are a wise man indeed.
Anyway I am unsure if this has already been mentioned but did anyone else notice the eyes of that guy that was indoctrinated during the conv with the Leviathans? Obvious liar hiding something is obvious?

And if you remove the A from Liara... Oh dear ..... Liar!!! SHE IS A LIAR!!!

Modifié par megamacka, 01 octobre 2012 - 01:54 .

[The Twilight God]

Fixers0 wrote...

Visable contradicton within a narrative aren't blind assumptions.

It is a blind asumption to presume the Reapers are incapable of deception; to think that villains within a story cannot lie. The vast majority of his so-called plot holes are the result of his own gullibility and ignorance.

http://social.biowar...8711/1#14018711

1. "Ultimately, the Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify its signals, manifesting as 'alien' voices in the mind."
2. Citadel, as I have proven.
3. Shepard wasn't engulfed and he has survived more powerful explosions. You forget his cybernetic upgrades.
4. Biotic ability: Dominate
5. He was unconscious. Fighting ensued while he was out. Duh!
6. Game mechanics which have nothing to do with story. The last part isn't intended to be a combat level. It's an interactive cinematic.
7. Two theories: Anderson arrived in a different corridor. There were more than one. Because he is not limping he would move faster and if that area of the Citadel can shift and move it may have moved to where Shepard was which signifies they were being corralled to that spot. The problem with this theory is that Anderson's dialog isn't paced realistically with the environment and they didn't fix it.
Which leads to theory two. Anderson died on the beam run. Anderson is a hallucination on the Citadel. He's pretty clean and Hackett say's "he did it", not "they did it". He says "someone" made it into the Citadel. That scene with Hackett was place explicitly to denounce dream theory. To show that Shepard did actually make it in the Citadel.
8. Harbinger doesn't want to kill Shepard. It clearly let's him live. It killed other runners and aircrat with pinpoint accuracy.
9. See #8
10. He doesn't know where Shepard is. You are assuming they came in at the same place even though it's said they didn't.
11. He was always wounded. You chose to focus on it only after Anderson is shot.
12. Astoboy isn't on the Citadel. Could just be Harbinger communicating via hullcination just like at the end of Arrival DLC.
13. Yes. You're problem is you're assuming the Kid is being 100% honest and isn't omitting any information.
14. Because they are programmed to think this way. Just like Shepard things the same thing in the opening of the Control narration. "Eternal. Inifinite. Immortal." anyone?
15. A hallucination or hologram cannot kill anyone.
16. See #14. You not liking a story doesn't make it bad writing.
17. You don't know what other cycles knew, rather or not the Leviathans played a role in the Crucible or any other data about how the Crucible came about. You cannot infer knowledge through ignorance. Furthermore, you continue to make the baseless assertion that the Kid = truth.
18. You're assuming the Kid is telling the truth and that characters within a story cannot lie.
19. Protheans got info from past cycles. It was passed down.
20. It had knowledge of it.
21. The same reason you can't just change a car so that a device that connects to the exhaust tip can't connect. Some parts are critical to the proper function of a device.
22. Vendetta
23. They couldn't get to it in time. The fleets held them at bay. Unless you have low numbers and they severly damage it. If shepard dallies for to long they will eventually destroy it after it has docked.
24. They make reapers within the citadel. They were sending humans and human goo up to the Citadel. This is stated in-game.
25. Because it was designed to lift up when the wards were open (15 degrees). Pressure activated. 
26. To convince Shepard not to destroy the Reapers. It would have gotten done one way or the other.
27. Again, you assume everything works like the Kid says and that it is incapable of lying.
28. See #27
29. Like every other reaper tech you've seen.
30. No crucible. Aslo, see #27.

Took me 16 minutes to respond to these weak arguments. Many of which are a product of sheer ignorance of the story and lore.

Fixers0 wrote...

 Welcome to Fixers' quick analysis to discover signs of bad writing:

Subject: Andersons problamatic Location
Catagory: Contradiction/inconsistancy.

Observed Fact A: Anderson is nowhere to be seen at the Conduit acces in London
Observed Fact B: Anderson claims to have followed Shepard up second after s/he arrives on the citadel


Conclusion: Anderson is clearly not at the conduit base in London though the narrative does claim that he enters the conduit just after Shepard.
 
Result: contradiction within the narrative.

There are many corridors. Not just one. Anderson says this himself. You can see the other doors and bridges. You are ignoring the very dialog in the scene you are intentionally trying to make seem contradicting. That area of the Citadel was capable of reconfiguring. Even this is stated. Of course you ignore it because you WANT it to be bad writing. Anderson could have come out of the different corridor, crossed a different bridge and the dias could have moved to the position in front of Shepard. But that would involve taking the evidence presented to come to a rational conclusion within the context of the story. What you are doing is shutting your eyes and just deeming it bad writing without any consideration to the in-game dialog and events.

Anderson could also be a hallucination as some believe. Hackett says "He did it" and that "someone" made it in. Not that they made it in. The walls shifting could have been a hallucination as we've heard of this before from the logs on the Derelict Reaper.
 
But by all means, ignore the lore because you want your sunshine and butterflies ending. Trust the Reapers and die to advance their goals. It's gotta work out because it's the ending you like the best. God forbid things don't work out like you would like them to.

 

Modifié par The Twilight God, 01 octobre 2012 - 05:39 .

[The Twilight God]

Update: Completely rewrote "Part III: Synthesis Analysis" with new arguments.

[megamacka]

Notice how he says '' They will succumb and ascend '' ?
Ascend like the Protheans did? I am guessing that they mean '' ascend '' as in. Ascend into reaper form from the harvest. Or ascend through Synthesis? .
  
  Speculating all over the screen.

Modifié par megamacka, 04 octobre 2012 - 04:45 .

[jasonxxsatanna]

I always assumed that when the starchild said they tried synthesis, that it meant they tried on the Protheans, failed so there for no prothean reapers.....does anyone else think this or was it just me.

[megamacka]

This DLC was on the '' leaked DLC plan '' right?
If this turns out to be true. Then I hope that the Earth SP DLC will be awesome. Priority: Earth sucks atm....

[Kabooooom]

jasonxxsatanna wrote...

I always assumed that when the starchild said they tried synthesis, that it meant they tried on the Protheans, failed so there for no prothean reapers.....does anyone else think this or was it just me.

The Leviathan DLC, combined with the Catalyst dialog pretty much strongly suggests this is not the case. It suggests that the Catalyst initially tried synthesis as a solution to the problem that the Leviathans bestowed upon him: preserve the thrall races and solve the organic-synthetic conflict. When this failed, he decided upon an imperfect solution - the harvest.

Also, it's my own personal headcanon that the Citadel was built around the original device that was intended to cause synthesis. This makes sense to me for the following reasons: 1) The Catalyst likely tried Synthesis prior to the first cycle, and 2) Synthesis involves the Citadel beam, whereas the other two choices do not. The Crucible was only necessary as a power source to synthesize the entire galaxy. But, like I said, that's just my own personal headcanon.

[jasonxxsatanna]

Thanks Kaboooom, I haven't played the Lev. DLC yet, im replaying the whole series , so i'm in the middle of ME2 at the moment

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...



Notice how he says '' They will succumb and ascend '' ?
Ascend like the Protheans did? I am guessing that they mean '' ascend '' as in. Ascend into reaper form from the harvest. Or ascend through Synthesis? .
  
  Speculating all over the screen.

Interesting enough, some lines that were cut from ME2 shed some light...



 
Why liquefy the colonist?
 
EDI: This explains why the captive humans were rendered into their basic components. Destructive analysis: they were dissected down to their atomic level. That data can be stored on an AI's neural network. The knowledge and essence of billions of individuals compiled into a single synthetic identity.
 
This isn't going to stop with the colonist, is it?
 
EDI: The colonies were probably a test sample. The ultimate goal would be to upload all humans into this reaper mind. The collectors would harvest every human settlement across the galaxy. The obvious final goal would be Earth.
 
Why would the Reapers do this?
 
EDI: Collectors may see humans as a unique threat. Absorbing them would allow the Reapers to both destroy and understand humanity.
 
The Kid says, "Synthetics, in turn, will have full understanding of organics."

Synthesis is Reaperhood. There is nothing in the description of synthesis that is in conflict with becoming a Reaper. This is what people don't understand about indoctrination. It's not all about mind changing. Manipulation and decption are also in the definition. The player is duped.
 
EDI says, "As the line between synthetic and organic disappears, we may transcend mortality itself to reach a level of existence I cannot even imagine."
Sovereign said, "There is a realm of existence so far beyond your own, you cannot even imagine it. I am beyond your comprehension. I am Sovereign."

Legion says, "Transcended flesh. Billions of organic minds, uploaded and conjoined within immortal machine bodies. 'Each a nation.' We did not 'know.' It was one hypothesis among many. When Nazara corrupted the heretics, we touched its minds. We perceived they were different from ours, but could not tell how."
EDI says, "Reapers are sapient constructs. A hybrid of organic and inorganic material. The exact construction methods are unclear, but it seems probable the Reaper absorbs the essence of a species.

Look at what Synthesis does. Adds nanites to people. What do synthetic nanites have to do with Shepard's organic energy? Your guess is as good as mine. Is your guess "nothing"? That's mine.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 05 octobre 2012 - 02:18 .

[megamacka]

http://www.clevernoo...timetable-leak/

The new Retaliation DLC turned out to be true.
What do you think about '' Mass Effect 3 Rebirth DLC:free DLC{required all DLC} '' and Project X?

Mass Effect 3 Take Earth back DLC: free DLC
Expand your experience in the battle for Earth -

Sounds awesome, I want this to be true. Priority:earth sucks atm.

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...

http://www.clevernoo...timetable-leak/

The new Retaliation DLC turned out to be true.
What do you think about '' Mass Effect 3 Rebirth DLC:free DLC{required all DLC} '' and Project X?

Mass Effect 3 Take Earth back DLC: free DLC
Expand your experience in the battle for Earth -

Sounds awesome, I want this to be true. Priority:earth sucks atm.

Multiplayer DLC isn't much proof of the entirety of it. MP DLC is always leaked by multiple sources and was leaked prior to the Noob's leak. I won't take it seriously until the Citadel DLC's plot or title is confirmed. They can change the title, but the plot description not so much. 

Guardian DLC: "The truth is close.Discover the mysteries and secrets hidden in the heart of every civilization"

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Retaliation was leaked long before that time table.

Lol Free DLC that requires all DLC

Lol no mention of Omega on the list.

That list fails so much.

[Ithurael]

The Twilight God wrote...

megamacka wrote...

http://www.clevernoo...timetable-leak/

The new Retaliation DLC turned out to be true.
What do you think about '' Mass Effect 3 Rebirth DLC:free DLC{required all DLC} '' and Project X?

Mass Effect 3 Take Earth back DLC: free DLC
Expand your experience in the battle for Earth -

Sounds awesome, I want this to be true. Priority:earth sucks atm.

Multiplayer DLC isn't much proof of the entirety of it. MP DLC is always leaked by multiple sources and was leaked prior to the Noob's leak. I won't take it seriously until the Citadel DLC's plot or title is confirmed. They can change the title, but the plot description not so much. 

Guardian DLC: "The truth is close.Discover the mysteries and secrets hidden in the heart of every civilization"

We all know it is BS fueld by wishful thinking and false hope.

The Retaliation leak came out WAY before the noob leak and was dead on. Honestly at this point I think clevernoob is trying to build popularity amongst the gamer community to get more attention.

And, ME:Rebirth? A free DLC that requires all paid for DLC? seriously?

[megamacka]

And, ME:Rebirth? A free DLC that requires all paid for DLC? seriously?

Exactly my thought rofl. I don't like '' Clever '' Noob either.
I just really want them to '' fix '' Priority: Earth. It's almost offensive to even consider it to be the final push. It's such a lacking conclusion overall.

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...

And, ME:Rebirth? A free DLC that requires all paid for DLC? seriously?

Exactly my thought rofl. I don't like '' Clever '' Noob either.
I just really want them to '' fix '' Priority: Earth. It's almost offensive to even consider it to be the final push. It's such a lacking conclusion overall.

I thought EA's new "If it doesn't have MP it doesn't go into production" motto was silly. I'd have thought cutting important story related content out of the game and repackaging it as DLC was below Bioware. I'd have though Bioware releasing the game with the ending it had unconscionable. But there it was (really glad I waited so long to play it. I'd have lost my damn mind if that was the first ending I'd seen). Honestly, I don't know what to think anymore. As silly as it sounds I could honestly see them doing it.

I'm not saying that I believe the noob's DLC schedule, but at the same time I don't have the level of respect in Bioware to dismiss it on the basis that it sounds a little odd. I can already see Preistly's repsonse...

"It's free DLC for are devoted fans who enjoy the content we've provided. It's gift to the fans. The content only makes sense with all DLC installed. There is no way it can fit into the story otherwise. If it encourages further DLC purchases I don;t see how we, as a company, should not seek this outcome. We understand some people may be mad, but we hope you will get over it and we can win you over with future products. "

[megamacka]

The Twilight God wrote...

megamacka wrote...

And, ME:Rebirth? A free DLC that requires all paid for DLC? seriously?

Exactly my thought rofl. I don't like '' Clever '' Noob either.
I just really want them to '' fix '' Priority: Earth. It's almost offensive to even consider it to be the final push. It's such a lacking conclusion overall.

I thought EA's new "If it doesn't have MP it doesn't go into production" motto was silly. I'd have thought cutting important story related content out of the game and repackaging it as DLC was below Bioware. I'd have though Bioware releasing the game with the ending it had unconscionable. But there it was (really glad I waited so long to play it. I'd have lost my damn mind if that was the first ending I'd seen). Honestly, I don't know what to think anymore. As silly as it sounds I could honestly see them doing it.

I'm not saying that I believe the noob's DLC schedule, but at the same time I don't have the level of respect in Bioware to dismiss it on the basis that it sounds a little odd. I can already see Preistly's repsonse...

"It's free DLC for are devoted fans who enjoy the content we've provided. It's gift to the fans. The content only makes sense with all DLC installed. There is no way it can fit into the story otherwise. If it encourages further DLC purchases I don;t see how we, as a company, should not seek this outcome. We understand some people may be mad, but we hope you will get over it and we can win you over with future products. "

   I am actually enjoying the MP a ton. I think it was a fantastic addition. But I think it should've been a DLC added on later, I would happily have paid for it too. I  just don't like that resources / people were spent on it pre release, ME has always been about SP.

   Well, the word '' fan '' basically is from the word '' fanatic ''. I want to be treated as a respectable customer not a mindless fanboy that is there to be milked. I think that the gaming industry needs a '' We can exist without you, but you can NOT exist without us '' reality check.

 But in reality it is:

Modifié par megamacka, 06 octobre 2012 - 02:10 .

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...

   I am actually enjoying the MP a ton. I think it was a fantastic addition. But I think it should've been a DLC added on later, I would happily have paid for it too. I  just don't like that resources / people were spent on it pre release, ME has always been about SP.

If I was in charge the multiplayer would be the only DLC. It would contain story elements that tied into the SP missions, but it would not add anything important to the story (like ME1 & 2 DLC) . It would simply depict the war that is being fought and the desperation. You'd have horde mode (as it currently is) and then a storymode were you'd be prompted during the SP game to inform players that this would be the best time to do a particular MP mission. It would have dialog that all characters could pick, but you'd only see your character's dialog and your choices would effect War Assets and how things turn out in the SP campaign (mainly Earth).  

[mass perfection]

Needs more Lorik Qui'in.

Modifié par mass perfection, 07 octobre 2012 - 05:29 .

[Lunch Box1912]

That’s awesome!

Modifié par Lunch Box1912, 15 octobre 2012 - 03:54 .

[The Twilight God]

Lunch Box1912 wrote...




That’s awesome!

Umm.. thanks?

[ealeander]

This is a magnificent thread, and first of all, I want to thank you for writing it. This aligns closely with my first impression of the ending, and I would like to add a few thoughts on how this sort of interpretation ties into the underlying moral/ethical themes of the series as a whole.

While a lot of people have apparently dismissed the child (i.e., the actual child) as a cheap dramatic device, I actually think it represents the core moral conflict of the series (i.e., Shepard's inability to save everyone and the inevitability of morally problematic decisions in times of conflict) and, to me, one of the most important questions is why the Guardian/pseudo-Catalyst chooses to appear as that child. To quote from my earlier thoughts on this (posted yesterday shortly after I completed my first playthrough):

1) The Catalyst appeared as the child at the beginning who, to me, represented the fact that Shepard can't save everyone (in fact, the child's one line of dialogue is "You can't save me"). When the child is encountered in the vent after the Reaper attack, it represents the threat of Shepard being lured down a semi-literal "rabbit hole" in a futile attempt to save the child rather than making the hard decision to leave someone behind so she could escape Earth and save the galaxy. The subsequent dreams represented Shepard contending with this guilt, and the final appearance of the child as the manifestation of the Catalyst  was an attempt, by the Reapers, to play on Shepard's guilt and attempt to convince her that she could save everyone by not destroying the Reapers. After reading this thread, I can see how some would see the early encounters with the child and the dreams as earlier indoctrination attempts, and while that seems possible, I can go either way. To me, what the child symbolizes works for the story regardless of whether or not the earlier encounter was a Reaper indoctrination attempt.

2) This idea of the central moral conflict being Shepard's inability to save everyone is reinforced in three ways. First, Saren's indoctrination was based on his notion that he could save everyone by joining the Reapers, but it was made clear in the first game that this was a false choice. Second, the first game reinforced that there isn't always an obvious "Paragon" choice by forcing Shepard to sacrifice either Kaidan or Ashley. Third, in the final conversations with your squadmates (most notably Javik), it is made clear that Shepard still has one more difficult decision to make, implying that victory will demand Shepard make one more Kaidan/Ashley style decision.

3) As I interpreted it, there were actually two forms of indoctrination that Shepard is presented with. The first is "willing indoctrination" of the sort represented by Saren and the so-called "synthesis" option in which Shepard submits to willing integration with synthetic life. The second is "delusional indoctrination" of the sort represented by the Illusive Man and the so-called "control" option in which Shepard believes she is controlling the Reapers (but, in fact, I believe would merely be turned into the "essence" of a new Shepard-reaper under the Catalyst's control). Interestingly, the "I Refuse These Choices" represents the "bad" good ending, as Shepard resists indoctrination but succumbs to a final failure of nerve and leadership as she proves unable to make that final, difficult decision. Either way, it serves the Reapers' purposes.

4) Thus, "destroy" represents overcoming the last attempt at indoctrination in which Shepard recognizes that a final, ugly Kaidan/Ashley-style decision is necessary to put an end to the Reaper threat.

5) At the same time, the "reversal" of the  paragon/renegade alignment (i.e.,the Catalyst presents the Illusive Man
as the Paragon and Anderson as the Renegade) was not simply a deceptive reversal of the "true" options but a further indication that there was no easy, Paragon out just as there was no way to "Paragon" the survival of both Kaidan and Ashley. While the Catalyst was obviously trying to urge Shepard away from "destroy," "destroy" itself wasn't really a true Paragon option but an affirmation that, sometimes, there are no easy decisions.

First, I would note that these were my earliest thoughts after completing the first game, and I've been questioning them since. Your argument that the so-called "Catalyst" was actually a Reaper safeguard against the Crucible is excellent and ties up a lot of apparent plot holes that had been troubling me. Your analysis of "refusal" as evidence of indoctrination was also excellent and persuasive, though in the context of an RPG, I still think there is room for it to be interpreted as mere stupidity or moral failure, not just indoctrination.

Now, adding to my earlier thoughts, we see this theme of "hard choices" repeated in ongoing conversations with multiple characters (Mordin obviously, Garrus's discussion about leadership and leading people to their deaths, Vega's back story) as well as multiple situations where both Paragon/Renegade have obvious drawbacks that don't make them obviously/purely Paragon or Renegade (saving the Rachni, curing the Genophage, overriding/destroying the Heretics, etc.)

In summary, the Starchild's manifestation as the child ties the themes running through the entire series into the "deception" and makes "Destroy" not only the right decision but an affirmation of the series' central recurring theme about how there are no truly unproblematic, purely happy choices (and in doing so, affirms its persistent and clever subversion of traditional obvious good/obvious evil decision mechanics in other RPGs).

Now, before I make myself sound totally indoctrinated, I will offer one criticism:

I disagree that synthesis is just a contigency plan and not what the Reapers want. Rather, I think it’s exactly what the Reapers want: mass, willing indoctrination of the sort that created the Collectors and Keepers. The main counterargument to this seems to be that Synthesis would prevent the Reapers from harvesting and creating a new Reaper, but we saw in ME2 that the Reapers do not need to harvest an entire species to create a baby Reaper. And by the end of ME3, they had already harvested billions more than they had by the end of ME2. Essentially, Synthesis seems to be the culmination of the Reapers’ plan: billions harvested to serve as the foundation of a new Reaper and the rest turned into a servant race.

Beyond that, there is some indication that the Reapers DON’T seek to create a new Reaper from every harvested species. Keep in mind, we never see a Prothean Reaper nor a vast array of Reapers from other species. Of course, you could argue that not all Reapers resemble the harvested species, but then, is it possible that some of the Reapers on Earth are already human Reapers?

There is a possible symbolic indication of this as well hinted at in the structure and coloration of the final "decision device." Namely, the "contraption" (as you call it) is clearly intended to resemble the dialogue decision wheel, but whereas Control/Destroy are presented as Paragon/Renegade options, Synthesis falls outside this framework.

It is, in other words, something alien to the framework that Shepard has operated within up to that point and the mechanisms of her will as we’ve known it. But if this is not the (misguided/false) “Paragon” option or the “Renegade” option, which option is it? To me, the clear suggestion is that the Starchild's "ideal solution" is the Reaper option, an alien intrusion upon the framework of Shepard’s will and a complete turnaround from the paths Shepard had been following up to that point. While Control is dually meant to appeal to the Paragon (it's blue and everyone lives) and the Renegade (sure, it's blue, but you get absolute power) while leading Shepard to believe she is still "defeating" the Reapers, Synthesis blatantly represents a betrayal of every prior decision Shepard has made and a willing acceptance of the Reaper's doctrine (i.e., true indoctrination).

Anyway, again, brilliant thread!

Modifié par ealeander, 16 octobre 2012 - 12:07 .

[Davik Kang]

ealeander wrote...
snip

I agree about the Kid, I think he represents Shepard's guilt and desire to save the innocent, which is played on by the Reapers.  Your rabbit hole point is really nice: you make it an example of where a Paragon choice is the wrong choice.  Sensational.

Also agree about the final choice being a subversion of more starightforward RPGs, where there is no choice except to be good or evil.  The final choice is really what made me like this game so much.  And the way you present synthesis is pretty interesting: it's outside the Paragon/Renegade dichtomy, perhaps even outside any possible kind of moral code.  I've said before that while Destroy is the soldier's choice, Control is the business magnate's choice (or the megalomaniac's choice, taken to extreme), but Synthesis is the choice only a god can make.  A choice that is not knowable.  And this makes sense in your desciption of the Synthesis option being outside the traditional dialogue wheel formation.  I wonder if it is relevant that the Synthesis option is below, and well beyond, the position of the others, also therefore being not just neutral, but outside the wheel.

Refuse is more like a neutral choice, and one of the things I figured when given the final choice is that ME was always about choice, and not about trying to find a compromise.  You have to make a decision and stand by it.  Not play the politician.  Be a soldier.  Which is why I think Destroy is the best choice, and while the others are bad, I;d probably go with Control next.  

The last two are tough to choose between, especially if you know the consequences.  Synthesis saves lives but makes an abomination of life.  Refuse kills everyone just to stand your ground, but future civilisations do live on and have a chance to fight the Reapers again, amplified by Liara's message.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 15 octobre 2012 - 11:52 .

[Davik Kang]

The Twilight God wrote...
Why is Destroy horrible? Do you have a soft spot for the Reapers?

Didn't see this reply before.  No soft spot, just that if you accept that catalyst's logic, you're gonna kill a whole bunch of people, including effectively eradicating synthetic life, which could be considered genocide.  EDI will die too.  Sure you don't have to take his word for it, but if you factor it in as a risk, then it's a horrible choice imo.

Just thought of another thing about the endings.  (I'm comparing the various endings at the moment).  With only one choice the Kid says "there is only one path ahead" but still says you must choose.  Kind of implying that the Refuse option (behind you) is a step backwards  (or giant leap etc. etc.)  Kind of a pointless observation and I've no idea how this fits pre-EC but still...