699 réponses à ce sujet

[Soultaker08]

Some are really stuck in march, on my calendar its november and there is omega coming...

but whatever floats your boat discuss yourself into depressions if you like to, although i dont know how that helps anyone...

[archangel1996]

Soultaker08 wrote...

Some are really stuck in march, on my calendar its november and there is omega coming...

but whatever floats your boat discuss yourself into depressions if you like to, although i dont know how that helps anyone...

Yeah, everyone has to buy Omega! It adds the purple PURPLE and orange ORANGE  ending

[AlanC9]

Vigilant111 wrote...

So? What is the point in disagreeing? Are you not using reaper tech? are you not buying into what the Catalyst says about what Crucible's functions are? Disagreement with the reapers is inconsequential to decision making because all AIs are destroyed, the problem of alleged AI rebellion is solved. The role of reapers has been removed because the problem has been solved, or is it?

Who says it ever was a problem? The Catalyst's just wrong, full stop.  But if it had been right, nothing's been solved. If blowing up AIs was the answer, it would have been doing that rather than harvesting the organics. 

If I do not "agree" that synthetics cause menace, then why am I destroying all the AIs and the all the reapers (you know, who are partly synthetic)?

Because it's the best choice you've got left; if Control or Synthesis worked for you you'd have picked them. Therefore you found them unacceptable, for reasons we don't need to get into.

That leaves you with Destroy or extermination.

[kyban]

to the OP.

I am still to this day very sad how the endings turned out. Over the past 8 months i've come to accept those endings more and more, but it still doesn't sit well.
Last night actually I beat it on insanity, i finally mustered up all courage and guts to put myself through that ending again. I was keeping an open mind, and I do not hate the endings like I did. But it still feels incomplete to me, I still can't believe that's how it ended.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Cheer up yall. The ending is fake. It's faaaaaaaake.

There simply is no ending.

The story will continue in some way.

The day that happens, remember that Doomsday called it.

There is no spoon.

Exactly.

[RiouHotaru]

I don't think the endings really did that much damage to the trilogy. It's the fans who got so worked up over it that they had no-place else to go BUT down. It happens. You have a series with fans who invest so heavily in it that when someone goes wrong, it doesn't casue them to stumble. They trip and fall flat on their faces.

[Maxster_]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

What relation have success|fail of Sovereign-Saren gambit to a fact that reapers flight being a logic hole? None.[/quote]Everything.
[/quote]
This is false assertion.
[quote]
[quote]
Sovereign-Saren union was thousands of year after reapers main plan failed. [/quote]Besides that galactic civilization has only existed for round-about two thousand years, there's no confirmed point at which the Reapers tried the Citadel for the first time and realized it wouldn't work. Given the potential implication that the Rachni were influenced by the Leviathans, not the Reapers, and the Prothean sabotage could have been discovered decades, not centuries, before ME1.
[/quote]
This is false.
Rachni implied in ME1, that they were influenced by the reapers, and said directly in ME2.
ME1:
[quote]
- If  i let you live, would you attack other races again?

No. We-- I do not know what happened in the war. We only heard discordance, songs the color of oily shadows.
We would seek a hidden place to teach our children harmony. If they understand, perhaps we would return.

-Are you a survivor from the war? A clone?

We do not know. We were only an egg, hearing Mother cry in our dreams.
A tone from space hushed one voice after another. It forced the singers to resonate with it's own sour yellow note.
Then we awoke, in this place. The last echo of those who came out from the Singing Planet. The sky is silent.
[/quote]
ME2:
[quote]
We hide. We burrow. We build. But we know you seek those who soured the souls of our mothers. When the time comes, our voice will join with yours, and our crescendo will burn the darkness clean[/quote]
Leviathans - it is a retcon through paid DLC. It is not even funny. Also, in game it is only hypothesis, which contradicts direct words of rachni.

So, you are wrong.
Rachni was influenced by the reapers, and their plan failed long before turians even joined council races.
You are also contradicting Legion words from ME2.
[quote]]Like the geth, the Old Machine listened to organic radio transmissions. It knew of our war against the creators.
Nazara contacted many species over the millenia, seeking allies.[/quote]
So, even Legion says that Sovereign was there, planning, over a millenia.
[quote]
[quote]
They just sat in dark space and waiting for nothing, having no backup plan, and refusing to fly into a galaxy.
It is a plothole, which destroys overarching series plot. ME1 events was possible only because reapers were dumb, even without Catalyst. With Catalyst, it is just retarded clowns show.
So, reapers know that their main plan failed. They for some retarded reason, decided to wait for even less probable plans, which eventually failed one by one, instead of flying into galaxy and fix Citadel.[/quote]Except a rational reason has already been offered to you: that by trying the Saren gambit they could still pull off the divide-and-conquer surprise attack, rather than surrendering it by a conventional war.
[/quote]
This is not a rational reason. This "reason" are based on false information you stated as true.
[quote][quote]
As for reapers valuing casualties - please. They are so retarded in ME3, they just attacking straight-on, not even attempting to take Citadel, which they could easily took, being unstoppable force.[/quote]Except if the Citadel turtles up, at which point they take casualties and have to lay seige for awhile. It's not clear how the Reapers took it when they did, but there's nothing to suggest it was easy or effortless for them, or that they could do it at any point.
[/quote]
So, you are saying, that because there is no explanation of why reapers hadn't took Citadel right after arriving into a galaxy, and there is no explanation on how and why they took Citadel in the end - they couldn't take Citadel at start?
You serious?
You basically said, that because there is no explanation why reapers hadn't took Citadel when they arrived into a galaxy, they couldn't take Citadel when they arrived into a galaxy.
What kind of "logic" is this?

So, all characters in ME3 saying that reapers couldn't be beaten conventionally, and reapers easily took homeworlds of council races - and now they couldn't took Citadel.
So, unstoppable force is actually stoppable. How interesting.


[quote]
And that's without the potential explanation of the Reaper IFFs mitigating the whole relay lockout issue.
[/quote]
I like your asspulls.
You are saying that Normandy having Reaper IFF is the reason why reapers haven't bothered taking Citadel in the first place, and taking down relay network?
This is your explanation?
[quote]
[quote]
And being so unstoppable, they never needed Citadel trap. They never needed Citadel relay.
[/quote]To win? No. To win with fewer/no casualties? Yes.
[/quote]
Yeah, to win with fewer casualties, they first waited for thousands of years of galactic civilization growth, risking their discovery, - and then, when they decided to fly into a galaxy, they haven't attacked Citadel to bring down relay network.
Your "explanations" are flawed at their core.

[Maxster_]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Cheer up yall. The ending is fake. It's faaaaaaaake.

There simply is no ending.

The story will continue in some way.

The day that happens, remember that Doomsday called it.

Some people prefer to live in fairytale, i guess

[SpamBot2000]

I don't get these people who correctly perceive the true awfulness of the endings, but go on to say "10 minutes doesn't spoil the whole fun ride!"

The thing about Mass Effect was living in the Universe. So we find out the Universe and everyone in it has always been doomed by a mad godhead that takes on the form of an annoying, know-it-all kid. Oh, and this universe has always supported the idea that a green beam launched from the Citadel will instantly penetrate every living organism in it, building synthetic robotry right in the DNA in all their cells. So I guess the Mass Effect Universe was not in fact what I thought it was, but a magical make-believe realm where carrots do the jitterbug on the chrome moon to the tune of dripping caramel numerals as Semolina Pilchard climbs up the Eiffel Tower. Goo goo g'joob!

When the Space Adventure turned into a child's fever dream, the fantasy was blown. Simple as that. And the fantasy was the thing I signed up for with Mass Effect. I can't for the life of me see how to divorce the knowledge that this is a universe where space magic is real from playing Mass Effect now. And that's just not a universe I give a good goddamn about.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 23 novembre 2012 - 07:50 .

[Sheridan31]

I´ve found my way out. Starchild is crazy. Leviathan had a bad childhood.

Luckily Starchild went totaly nuts when he saw me (the first human i´ve ever seen!) and decide to commit suicide by sacraficing himselve and the reaper by letting me blow stuff up. (Destroy). I live. I still going to see blue babys. And Quarians, and Ahs babys. I am going to have a great harem. Because i saved them all in ME2 and took my breath.

Starchild also offered me, being the ruler of everthing in controle and the synthesis of everyone. I am not going to do this, unless folks want it voluntarily. I may do it later in another play thought.

Poor confused starchild. hes paranoid about synthetics and organics killing each other. If he is still alive i let joker and EDI pay him a visit in his psychatry.

My big victory where before the ending. The fleets where nesecary, so that someone finds me in time before i dided. I took my breath for folks to find me.

The ending is still no reason to play this game. But at least it does not destroy anything. I hope Bioware has learned from ME3, to make a great ME4. To return to the core aspect of Bioware games we loved. Interaction and decision making.

Often learning from a big failure (unrelatable antagonists motive - no confrontation of shepard to starchild´s motive) can create huge success.

Hope lives on to me.

Modifié par Sheridan31, 23 novembre 2012 - 08:04 .

[Soultaker08]

archangel1996 wrote...

Soultaker08 wrote...

Some are really stuck in march, on my calendar its november and there is omega coming...

but whatever floats your boat discuss yourself into depressions if you like to, although i dont know how that helps anyone...

Yeah, everyone has to buy Omega! It adds the purple PURPLE and orange ORANGE  ending

it would have been more constructive to not reduce my post to 1/4 of its content

[AlanC9]

You're expecting people to make constructive posts or something? How long have you been here?

Modifié par AlanC9, 23 novembre 2012 - 10:42 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Edit: bah, formating is a ****.

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

What relation have success|fail of Sovereign-Saren gambit to a fact that reapers flight being a logic hole? None.[/quote]Everything.
[/quote]
This is false assertion.[/quote]This is an accurate assessment. Only by weighing the risk-reward of courses of action can we assert that something is a logic hole or not. If a course of action has a plausible superior result, pursuing it is not illogical.[quote]

This is false.
Rachni implied in ME1, that they were influenced by the reapers, and said directly in ME2.
ME1:
[quote]
- If  i let you live, would you attack other races again?

No. We-- I do not know what happened in the war. We only heard discordance, songs the color of oily shadows.
We would seek a hidden place to teach our children harmony. If they understand, perhaps we would return.

-Are you a survivor from the war? A clone?

We do not know. We were only an egg, hearing Mother cry in our dreams.
A tone from space hushed one voice after another. It forced the singers to resonate with it's own sour yellow note.
Then we awoke, in this place. The last echo of those who came out from the Singing Planet. The sky is silent.
[/quote]
ME2:
[quote]
We hide. We burrow. We build. But we know you seek those who soured the souls of our mothers. When the time comes, our voice will join with yours, and our crescendo will burn the darkness clean[/quote]
Leviathans - it is a retcon through paid DLC. It is not even funny. Also, in game it is only hypothesis, which contradicts direct words of rachni.
[/quote]The direct words of the Rachni don't name the Reapers: the Rachni Queen doesn't even know what was behind the note. Retcon or not, and in this case it's not, Leviathan is canonical whether you like it or not.


[quote]
You are also contradicting Legion words from ME2.
[quote]]Like the geth, the Old Machine listened to organic radio transmissions. It knew of our war against the creators.
Nazara contacted many species over the millenia, seeking allies.[/quote]
So, even Legion says that Sovereign was there, planning, over a millenia.[/quote]Besides that 'the millenia' is a plural usage in english, nothing prevents the Vanguard from trying to set up allies in advance regardless of the Citadel trap status.

I'll certainly agree that ME1 and ME2 raised the possibility of the timing, but they never iron-clad affirmed it.
[quote]This is not a rational reason. This "reason" are based on false information you stated as true.[/quote]This is a reason Vigil itself gives you as to why the Citadel trap exists. The existence of casualties during the conventional war is also a fact of the lore. Both are rational.

[quote]
So, you are saying, that because there is no explanation of why reapers hadn't took Citadel right after arriving into a galaxy, and there is no explanation on how and why they took Citadel in the end - they couldn't take Citadel at start?
You serious?
You basically said, that because there is no explanation why reapers hadn't took Citadel when they arrived into a galaxy, they couldn't take Citadel when they arrived into a galaxy.
What kind of "logic" is this?[/quote]Amazingly enough I didn't say that. You creating a conditional where none existed.

The means and context by which the Reapers take the Citadel are important to determining why they didn't take it earlier. If the Citadel was weakened by the commital of fleets to the Cerberus station, providing an opportunity the Reapers desired to have a less costly battle over the station, then the Reapers might have held off from attacking earlier for the reason they avoid some of the planets in the galaxy: too high a cost to bother with at the moment. If, however, the Reapers take the control of the Citadel by means of indoctrinated spies and servants smuggled into the station, in their own version of the Citadel coup, then the reason why the Reapers didn't take the Citadel earlier are simple: they didn't have the forces in place on the inside to do so.

[quote]
So, all characters in ME3 saying that reapers couldn't be beaten conventionally, and reapers easily took homeworlds of council races - and now they couldn't took Citadel.
So, unstoppable force is actually stoppable. How interesting.[/quote]Oh, turtling up in the Citadel wouldn't stop the Reapers forever: the codex already establishes that the Citadel can be breached by sustained bombardment over a period of several days.

It just could well not be worth the commitment cost to the Reapers to maintain such a seige: the longer they leave the Reapers on bombardment duty, the longer the organic fleets have to mobilize and attrit them. If one of their preferences is to minimize Reaper casualties, then they may well judge that they'd suffer fewer casualties putting off the station for other means later than by initiating a seige.



[quote]
I like your asspulls.
You are saying that Normandy having Reaper IFF is the reason why reapers haven't bothered taking Citadel in the first place, and taking down relay network? [/quote]No: I'd say that the fact that the Reaper IFF can be replicated in a short timeframe (as Cerberus demonstratably does) is a possible reason that the Reapers don't bother taking the Citadel in the first place. If the Relays locked out the organics by means of screening them for a Reaper IFF, then the existence of the Reaper IFF is a valid means to neutralize the Reaper's traditional grand strategy.

[quote]
This is your explanation? [/quote]No. It's a potential one, but also one that the writers have never indicated one way or another... just as they've never indicated how the relay lockout system actually worked.[quote]
Yeah, to win with fewer casualties, they first waited for thousands of years of galactic civilization growth, risking their discovery, - and then, when they decided to fly into a galaxy, they haven't attacked Citadel to bring down relay network.
Your "explanations" are flawed at their core.
[/quote]Your critique rests on assumptions that can be countered. But please, proceed with mockery instead: it's something you must be used to.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 23 novembre 2012 - 11:50 .

[Maxster_]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

What relation have success|fail of Sovereign-Saren gambit to a fact that reapers flight being a logic hole? None.[/quote]Everything.
[/quote]
This is false assertion.[/quote]This is an accurate assessment. Only by weighing the risk-reward of courses of action can we assert that something is a logic hole or not. If a course of action has a plausible superior result, pursuing it is not illogical.
[/quote]
This is false assertion.
You based this assertion of false information, which contradicts ME1 and ME2. And you know that this information is false.
Thus - you are deliberately lying to prove your point. Or i should say - bending the facts to fit your obviously false assertion?
[quote]
[quote]
This is false.
Rachni implied in ME1, that they were influenced by the reapers, and said directly in ME2.
ME1:
[quote]
- If  i let you live, would you attack other races again?

No. We-- I do not know what happened in the war. We only heard discordance, songs the color of oily shadows.
We would seek a hidden place to teach our children harmony. If they understand, perhaps we would return.

-Are you a survivor from the war? A clone?

We do not know. We were only an egg, hearing Mother cry in our dreams.
A tone from space hushed one voice after another. It forced the singers to resonate with it's own sour yellow note.
Then we awoke, in this place. The last echo of those who came out from the Singing Planet. The sky is silent.
[/quote]
ME2:
[quote]
We hide. We burrow. We build. But we know you seek those who soured the souls of our mothers. When the time comes, our voice will join with yours, and our crescendo will burn the darkness clean[/quote]
Leviathans - it is a retcon through paid DLC. It is not even funny. Also, in game it is only hypothesis, which contradicts direct words of rachni.
[/quote]
The direct words of the Rachni don't name the Reapers: the Rachni Queen doesn't even know what was behind the note. Retcon or not, and in this case it's not, Leviathan is canonical whether you like it or not.
[/quote]
I like how you wriggling.
Rachni stated directly, that they knew who "soured the souls of their mothers" in ME2. And they heavily implied that in ME1.
Those are facts. You now that they are, and deliberately ignoring them.

As for Leviathans - it is of course not canon, there is no Leviathans in ME3. That was just attempt to "foreshadow" them to cover some plotholes, which is really pathetic. And of course failed.

So, for ME3 - there is no Leviathans, they are not canon, and, as you perfectly know, but deliberately ignoring(hence - lying) - information about Rachni in Leviathan DLC was only unproven hypothesis, which contradicts direct words of Rachni and Geth. So, it is not even a retcon.

So, you are wrong, you have no proof of your assertion and can't prove your point.
You lost a debate, and no wriggling and lying will help you.

[quote][quote]
You are also contradicting Legion words from ME2.
[quote]]Like the geth, the Old Machine listened to organic radio transmissions. It knew of our war against the creators.
Nazara contacted many species over the millenia, seeking allies.[/quote]
So, even Legion says that Sovereign was there, planning, over a millenia.[/quote]Besides that 'the millenia' is a plural usage in english, nothing prevents the Vanguard from trying to set up allies in advance regardless of the Citadel trap status.
[/quote]
Pathetic.
First, there direct evidence from Rachni. Then there is direct evidence from Legion(=Geth).
So, i have proof in game, and you have no proof - this means that your assertion is false.
This means that you lost the debate - but can't admit it.
[quote]
I'll certainly agree that ME1 and ME2 raised the possibility of the timing, but they never iron-clad affirmed it.
[/quote]
Your words are as empty as your future.
No wriggling will help you, i afraid.
[quote]
[quote]This is not a rational reason. This "reason" are based on false information you stated as true.[/quote]This is a reason Vigil itself gives you as to why the Citadel trap exists. The existence of casualties during the conventional war is also a fact of the lore. Both are rational.
[/quote]
No. You are deliberately lying and wriggling to "prove" your point.
Facts are - reapers are sat in dark space waiting for thousands of years of Sovereign machinations, when they could just fly into a galaxy in 0.5-3 years.
And this is a plothole, which destroys overarching series plot.
[quote]
[quote]
So, you are saying, that because there is no explanation of why reapers hadn't took Citadel right after arriving into a galaxy, and there is no explanation on how and why they took Citadel in the end - they couldn't take Citadel at start?
You serious?
You basically said, that because there is no explanation why reapers hadn't took Citadel when they arrived into a galaxy, they couldn't take Citadel when they arrived into a galaxy.
What kind of "logic" is this?[/quote]Amazingly enough I didn't say that. You creating a conditional where none existed.
[/quote]
Yeah, you just wriggling and stating false information as facts.
And you said exactly what i wrote
1. Except if the Citadel turtles up, at which point they take casualties and have to lay seige for awhile.
This is an assertion.
2. It's not clear how the Reapers took it when they did
You said there is no explanation how reapers took Citadel.
This is a fact.
3. but there's nothing to suggest it was easy or effortless for them, or that they could do it at any point.
This is an assertion, and baseless one. Nothing new.

And you said because of absense of explanation,
my statement
[quote]They are so retarded in ME3, they just attacking straight-on, not even
attempting to take Citadel, which they could easily took, being
unstoppable force.[/quote]
is wrong.
So, my statement is wrong because your assertions are right. Because reasons.
Funny.

And it all sums up in a phrase i said - "You basically said, that because there is no explanation why reapers
hadn't took Citadel when they arrived into a galaxy, they couldn't take
Citadel when they arrived into a galaxy."

[quote]
The means and context by which the Reapers take the Citadel are important to determining why they didn't take it earlier. If the Citadel was weakened by the commital of fleets to the Cerberus station, providing an opportunity the Reapers desired to have a less costly battle over the station, then the Reapers might have held off from attacking earlier for the reason they avoid some of the planets in the galaxy: too high a cost to bother with at the moment.
[/quote]
Please.
Unstoppable forces which can not be defeated conventionally and took homeworlds of council races which are protected with fleets of those races, easily - now, somehow, can't take the Citadel, and shut down relay network because of losses.
Riiight.
So instead to close relay network to beat galaxy fleets separately, and with full might - thus lessening losses.
Reapers decided to fight with all fleets of the galaxy straight-on - to lessen their losses.
Lol

That was one of stupidiest explanations i've ever heard. It on par with Catalyst's "logic".
You know that you can't explain EAWare's garbage writing. Just give up already.
[quote]If, however, the Reapers take the control of the Citadel by means of indoctrinated spies and servants smuggled into the station, in their own version of the Citadel coup, then the reason why the Reapers didn't take the Citadel earlier are simple: they didn't have the forces in place on the inside to do so.
[/quote]
Sure, unstoppable force is stoppable.
[quote][quote]
So, all characters in ME3 saying that reapers couldn't be beaten conventionally, and reapers easily took homeworlds of council races - and now they couldn't took Citadel.
So, unstoppable force is actually stoppable. How interesting.[/quote]Oh, turtling up in the Citadel wouldn't stop the Reapers forever: the codex already establishes that the Citadel can be breached by sustained bombardment over a period of several days.
[/quote]
Oh, now unstoppable force that can be stopped - actually can not be stopped.
I like how you contradicting yourself.
[quote]
It just could well not be worth the commitment cost to the Reapers to maintain such a seige: the longer they leave the Reapers on bombardment duty, the longer the organic fleets have to mobilize and attrit them.
[/quote]
Yeah, sure instead of stroming Citadel and taking down relay network to prevent any possibility of organic fleets to mobilize and attrit them, because the longer they leave Reapers on bombardment duty, the longer organic fleets attrit them - they just refused to take the Citadel and turn off relay network, so organics fleets can mobilize and attrit them for as many time as possible.
What an excellent explanation. I applause

And of course, it completely contradics everything about reapers, especially their numbers, - that EAWare shown us in ME3.
But you already shown an ability to completely ignore facts that games presents, or just making up new ones, to "prove" your point.
[quote]
If one of their preferences is to minimize Reaper casualties, then they may well judge that they'd suffer fewer casualties putting off the station for other means later than by initiating a seige.
[/quote]
Sure. Instead turning off relays and beating fleets separately, they decided to fight with all galaxy's fleets at once.
To lessen their losses.
Riiight


[quote][quote]
I like your asspulls.
You are saying that Normandy having Reaper IFF is the reason why reapers haven't bothered taking Citadel in the first place, and taking down relay network? [/quote]No: I'd say that the fact that the Reaper IFF can be replicated in a short timeframe (as Cerberus demonstratably does) is a possible reason that the Reapers don't bother taking the Citadel in the first place. If the Relays locked out the organics by means of screening them for a Reaper IFF, then the existence of the Reaper IFF is a valid means to neutralize the Reaper's traditional grand strategy.
[/quote]
So, now you are just making up "facts" to "prove" your point.
Excellent method of discussion, should i use it too? No, it's too low for me, sorry.

"Explanation", of course, just another asspull, and really pathetic.
So, Reapers now somehow know about Reaper IFF. So, given the possibility that organics could replicate Reaper IFF(you think this plothole-covering device is good, yes? ), - Reapers, instead of changing their IFF, and turning the relay network off - decided to fight straight-on with all galaxy's fleets at once.
To lessen their losses. Sure.

And of course you have no proof about Reaper IFF even working that way, or proof that reapers can't change their IFF if it works the way you described.

So, you just have no proof, so you piled up a bunch of implausible baseless conjectures. What a great way to prove something. Oh well, i meant anything.
[quote][quote]
This is your explanation? [/quote]No. It's a potential one, but also one that the writers have never indicated one way or another... just as they've never indicated how the relay lockout system actually worked.
[/quote]
No, it is a pile of implausible baseless conjectures.
It is not an explanation in any way, and you know that.
[quote]
[quote]
Yeah, to win with fewer casualties, they first waited for thousands of years of galactic civilization growth, risking their discovery, - and then, when they decided to fly into a galaxy, they haven't attacked Citadel to bring down relay network.
Your "explanations" are flawed at their core.
[/quote]Your critique rests on assumptions that can be countered. But please, proceed with mockery instead: it's something you must be used to.
[/quote]
Really?
You failed to do just that and resorted to ignoring presented facts in-games and making up new ones.

You know, piles of implausible baseless conjectures proves absolutely nothing. Just demonstrates, that you can't prove your points, and lost a debate.

Modifié par Maxster_, 24 novembre 2012 - 12:38 .

[Dean_the_Young]

I would argue, but apparently I lost. According to you I made very different arguments than I recall typing, but your mastery of the english language is more than apparent, and you are a credible expert because you say so.

Ah, Maxter. The last month just wasn't the same without your brand of enthusiasm. Have you ever considered working as a reporter for for RT?

[Jere85]

I'll just be ready to get my popcorn on the 27th and watch the ****storm that will likely ensue from the omega DLC. I know i have no right to speak as we all haven't played it yet, but i have a gut feeling it will give us exactly what we expect. And that isnt good. Let's hope im wrong.

[Eterna]

Bob Garbage wrote...

I love how there's always people who chime in with "Well I liked the EC ending so you're all stupid lolol!!". Maybe YOU got into Mass Effect in the last year, but those of us who have been playing ME and Bioware games for a decade or more expected more from this company. Yes, there is a lot in ME3 that's good, yes, it's still pretty fun to play, but the characters and story are basically ruined at this point and THAT was why I played Mass Effect. Most of the conversations in ME3 feel contrived and ultimately come off as a gimmick. This game was not made for a gamer like me, it is obvious. I still throw it in now and then, but not like I did with ME1 and 2. The experience is largely dead to me. ME4 has no chance in hell, IMO.

And you honestly think that after this comment you're any better than they are?

Hilarious, tell us more. 

[Vigilant111]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

[quote]Vigilant111 wrote...
Destroy is a valid solution for the Catalyst's problem between the date of AI destruction and the date of AI "rebellion"[/quote]Except that's not the Catalyst's actual problem: the Catalyst's problem is of the perceived inevitability of Synthetic-Organic conflict. It is a fundamentally long-term problem requiring a long-term solution (in this case, synthesis which removes fundamental differences that could lead to the lopsided conflict). Temporary measures do not solve the underlying problem.
[/quote]

We have gone down that road before, no more

[quote][quote]Is this game fact, or is this conjecture?[/quote]
Both and neither. The game uses the concept without explicitly naming it as such. [/quote]

Why the lack of explicit naming? Why hesitate?

[quote][quote]
Are you saying singularity is the cause of Geth / Quarian conflict? I thought it was petty racism and Quarian politics.[/quote]Singularity isn't the cause of the conflict, but rather the reflection of what it was: the Geth reached a point at which they, the tools of the Quarians, became so advanced they began changing in ways the Quarians could not predict. A function of that was that the Geth had become so advanced that they had already surpassed the Quarians before the Quarians understood that. [/quote]

What?

The Geth changed in a way that resembled sentient beings, the Quarians were afraid of being accused of AI creation and AI enslavement

[quote][quote]
There is no need to be threatened by singularity, at infant stage, the Geth is already capable of wiping out many Quarians and drove their creators away[/quote]That would be a very, very good reason to be frightened of a synthetic singularity.

[/quote]

Look, I am only saying maybe we should concentrate on the dangers at hand, before making up any conclusions of your supposed "foe" or singularity

[quote][quote]So the inheritance of organic greed and jealousy solves conflicts? The whole thing is a double edged sword[/quote]Not a fair depiction. Synthetics don't 'inherit organic greed and jealousy', but gain an understanding of how organics think. Understanding of the organics is what can help prevent and resolve conflicts: if the Geth hadn't been so incompetent about understanding organics and communicating willingness for peace the entire Geth-Quarian conflict could have been ended centuries ago.
[/quote]

Semantics

Did we not create the Geth? What's wrong in saying our creation inheriting our attributes?

Bolded text, No, it wouldn't. It is both parties' responsibility to show willingness for peace

[quote][quote]Do synthetics like EDI and Legion that understood the concept of loyalty and love really need synthesis?[/quote]Arguably they need it most of all: EDI is still grappling with understanding organics, hence her questions, and Legion only heralded in the link to peace because the Geth searched for Commander Shepard for entirely separate, self-interested reasons.[/quote]

So all the conversations with these characters had been useless? That we didn't influence them one bit?

[quote]Had the Geth had the understanding to realize that organic fear of them could have been resolved by easily available communication, the entire Geth history would have been much different.
[/quote]

They did try to communicate, look at the archives in the consensus mission, the Quarians were reluctant to give a reply because it got into their heads that the Geth were going to wipe them out the second they stop fighting, even at their infant stage

Again, the Geth did not wish to attack, the Quarians did, because they did not understand their own creation, they should have investigated more about the Geth's intentions before opening fire

[quote][quote]
So what? Isn't it still a conflict? A conflict that is so severe that warrants the genocide of one of the interested parties?[/quote]

This makes little sense in regards to the line of conversation you are quoting. [/quote]

In your previous post you attempted to differentiate conflicts stemming from misunderstanding and conflicts arising from fear of singularity when I asked you "Wasn't there a strong connection between synthesis and solving conflicts?"

I argued that synthesis solves both

How does more understanding of the organics solves the problem exactly? Now, in theory, the organics possess the "same" technological abilities, wouldn't that make them even more arrogant, more prone to instigate conflicts?

[quote]
[quote]I do not agree that the problem stems from synthetic misunderstanding of organics, I think it is quite the opposite, the problem lies with organics' misunderstanding of their own creation, I mean, weren't you curious about Legion and EDI? Didn't you ask them heaps of questions?[/quote]Sure... but understanding them only made them more apparent as the potential threat they could be. EDI is self-admittedly amoral, though this aspect is never played upon much, and the Geth are simultaneously militarily jugernauts while being socially and politically incompetent.

Most organic conflict towards synthetics we see are born from fear: fear founded in the experience of past actions, or from the unmatchable potential.[/quote]

There is no need to make the synthetic threat anymore apparent then it already is, more understanding of the Geth would help putting a stop to ignorance and sentiment like "The Geth is just a bunch of killing machines and nothing more"

In fact, more understanding might even unearth Geth vulnerabilities, remember the data Tali received from Shepard?

[quote] [quote] So? Are you saying singularity is happening right now? What of it? Look I don't need you to explain what singularity is, frankly I don't think anyone knows exactly what it is, it is all SPECULATION[/quote]

A hostile singularity is the very thing that the Catalyst fears will come about eventually if it doesn't do it's function. Understanding this is extremely important to understanding, and thus judging, the Catalyst. [/quote]

The Catalyst and a hostile singularity are mutually exclusive?

Natually, you will argue the Catalyst does not see itself as such

[quote][quote]
Oh? I would expect a smart AI coming up with contingent theories of inevitability, yet it doesn't... wouldn't a reasonable being say "There is a strong posibility, but you can reverse it"? Instead it gives you a flat "no". Didn't the Catalyst monitored COUNTLESS cycles? What went wrong?[/quote]


Nothing: the Catalyst simply isn't, and never has been, an omniscient being. It isn't perfect, and never has been. It also isn't particularly reasonable, but that should have been obvious once you learned why it turned on its creators.

The Catalyst is effectively poorly programmed, a system that follows the letter of its creation but not the intent. While it can certainly appeal to stastical probability (a hostile synthetic threat is a non-zero probability: given enough repititions, any non-zero probability will eventually occur), that stastical certainty doesn't mean it's actions are therefore justified and acceptable. [/quote]

I would argue that the Catalyst was perfectly programmed as a killing machine, at the expense of its creators of course. It was first able to take down its own powerful creators, then proceeded to cleanse the galaxy methodically with intelligence and patience

How plausible do you think that the Catalyst does not know anything about its creators' intentions? You might argue that the Leviathans sealed off that piece of information from the Catalyst - placing control over thralls to continue the flow of tribute is hardly a noble cause, to an AI, which, I speculate, does not judge... don't you think there is something that just doesn't add up?

Back in Leviathan's time, some thralls were wiped out, correct? Do you think those thralls were wiped out because their own creations had achieved singularity? If so, how come the thralls' creations didn't wipe out the reapers?

[quote][quote]
What aggreeable goals? Humanity above all? To the best of my ability, I interpret that as the TIM'S most prioritized goal. Now you might retort "No, no no, he wants humanity to survive", but that is just a no-brainer, everyone wants to survive, the agreeability of this goal is redundant[/quote]So we're agreed: Cerberus had agreeable goals. Cerberus was still a bad guy group. [/quote]

Having agreeable goals makes Cerberus at least neutral, not a bad guy with no redeeming value - a badass, if you like

During the events of ME3, I do not see humanity persues a common goal with Cerberus. Rumor has it the only way to stop the reapers is to kill them, and I believe the Alliance upheld this perception regardless of the Crucible's functionalities

Not to mention, Cerberus turns out to be a pawn for the reapers and took the role of a splinter group that undermined Protheans' war effort... No, I don't think we have agreeable goals, in fact, the reapers and I have agreeable goals, maybe I should work with them and help with their harvest efforts, just kidding

[quote][quote]
In ME1, if you disagree with the council, you can let Destiny Ascension to be destroyed. In ME2, if you disagree with TIM, you can let the Collector base be destroyed. In ME3, if you disagree with the Catalyst, you only destroy the Catalyst and the reapers? No.[/quote]Yes. Neither control or destroy resolve the risk of a future hostile synthetic menace that will evolve faster than we can[/quote]

Really? like in control the reapers couldn't possibly do anything to resolve the risk of a future hostile synthetic "menace"? That hurts reapers' ego, you know

In destroy, the Leviathans can always create more Catalysts, you know, if they are desperate enough to curb "menace"

[quote][quote]
Maybe refuse? you let the reapers have their way? No way, but what can we do?
[/quote]

Anything but Synthesis, which is the only one the Catalyst believes is 'right.'
But then, why are you basing your decision off of what the Catalyst believes is right or not in the first place?

[/quote]

Because it is important to do so, it is important to consult someone who says it has seen it all, a being that also happened to take the central stage of a trilogy ending with all the limelight. Didn't the ending supposed to persuade people to overlook the fact that the reapers are the bad guys and focus on the common agreeable goal instead?

In reality, all of the options presented are gambles, no guarantee it would turn out good. If the Catalyst was not intended to be trustworthy, then why make even synthesis an option with a romantic appeal (literally)? Why make its EMS requirement above the other three endings? Why does synthesis lack apparent downside?

Modifié par Vigilant111, 24 novembre 2012 - 02:17 .

[Aiyie]

just went back through and played a new game from ME1 through to ME3... enjoyed it all immensely.

the fact that I knew what was coming at the penultimate finale did nothing to diminish my enjoyment of ME1, ME2 or even the majority of ME3... in fact it made it better.

i wasn't going through the games worrying about what would happen, what kind of effect this decision would have... things were set and i could just enjoy the moment.

fatalism is a wonderful cure-all for all one's woes.

[Gulaman]

The EC has salvaged the game and the trilogy. Sure the original ending was shockingly bad but I think Bioware have redeemed themselves with the extended cut, which was pretty good, although I wish we had closure for all the main characters too. Unless they're being lined up for further appearances in ME4.

[Dean_the_Young]

[quote]Vigilant111 wrote...

We have gone down that road before, no more[/quote]Why not? You have yet to explain how a long-term problem is resolved if it is free to continue occuring.

[quote]

Why the lack of explicit naming? Why hesitate?[/quote]Who says it's hesitation? Moreover, why would it need to?

The Catalyst already adequetly describes it's concerns: that organics will eventually build machines that will rebel. The game already illustrates the potential of this via the Geth.
[quote]
What?

The Geth changed in a way that resembled sentient beings[/quote]The two are not mutually exclusive. At the end of the day, the Geth gaining sentience was not an intended development within the Quarian's ability to predict.
[quote]
, the Quarians were afraid of being accused of AI creation and AI enslavement[/quote]Which is why the Quarians tried to stop the Geth before they all turned sentient, but they misjudged because the Geth had developed in ways they could not anticipate.[quote]
Look, I am only saying maybe we should concentrate on the dangers at hand, before making up any conclusions of your supposed "foe" or singularity[/quote]The Reapers and Catalyst can also count as a hostile technological singularity. The Reapers may cast themselves as preservationists, but they can pretty fairly be called the very synthetic menace they were created in response to..[quote]
Did we not create the Geth? What's wrong in saying our creation inheriting our attributes?[/quote]This is irrelevant to the point you were responding to.
[quote]
It is both parties' responsibility to show willingness for peace[/quote]The Quarians tried. The Creators who died defending the Geth. Even Admiral Korris and the peace faction were willing to attempt to make a political statement on Tali in order to send a message to everyone that continued hostility to the Geth.

The only faction that never made any meaningful attempts at communications, with anyone, were the Geth.
[quote]
[quote][quote]Do synthetics like EDI and Legion that understood the concept of loyalty and love really need synthesis?[/quote]Arguably they need it most of all: EDI is still grappling with understanding organics, hence her questions, and Legion only heralded in the link to peace because the Geth searched for Commander Shepard for entirely separate, self-interested reasons.[/quote]
[quote]
So all the conversations with these characters had been useless? That we didn't influence them one bit?[/quote]Amazingly enough, that's not what was said. A word of warning: I'm growing short of patience in your strawmen.

As a kindness to you, I'll let you reread and rethink this point.
[quote]
They did try to communicate, look at the archives in the consensus mission, the Quarians were reluctant to give a reply because it got into their heads that the Geth were going to wipe them out the second they stop fighting, even at their infant stage[/quote]I was referring to the three hundred years in between, but your attempted point is still undermined because there were Quarians who sided with the Geth.
[quote]
Again, the Geth did not wish to attack, the Quarians did, because they did not understand their own creation, they should have investigated more about the Geth's intentions before opening fire[/quote]During the Morning War? Sure, but then a good number did. During the events of ME3, when the Geth have 300 years of xenophobic isolationism and a recent genocidal invasion under their belt?

[quote][quote]
So what? Isn't it still a conflict? A conflict that is so severe that warrants the genocide of one of the interested parties?[/quote]

This makes little sense in regards to the line of conversation you are quoting. [/quote]

In your previous post you attempted to differentiate conflicts stemming from misunderstanding and conflicts arising from fear of singularity when I asked you "Wasn't there a strong connection between synthesis and solving conflicts?"

I argued that synthesis solves both[/quote]Which is why your reply doesn't make sense. You made an argument that Synthesis solves a variety of conflicts and ushers in peace, but only support it with one conflict in particular.
[quote]
How does more understanding of the organics solves the problem exactly? [/quote]By giving synthetics like the Geth the basic insight that communicating with others, even neutral third-parties, can mitigate fears and allow the communication of beliefs and intents. No one knew the Geth were willing for peace because the Geth never reached out and told anyone, quarian or otherwise, until Legion met Commander Shepard. Instead the Geth destroyed anyone who dared draw near (shutting down personal communication attempts from outside), and never made any remark or distinction when a large portion of their number left and invaded a species which had done them no wrong.
[quote]
Now, in theory, the organics possess the "same" technological abilities, wouldn't that make them even more arrogant, more prone to instigate conflicts?[/quote]That depends what 'theory' you're thinking of... and if you discount the effect of power-balancing as everyone reaches similar levels of physical and technological ability. For conflicts born out of fear of unmatchable potential, matching of potential will mitigate those fears.

There are always going to be different grounds for conflict... but those aren't the ones that Synthesis attempts to solve.
[quote]
There is no need to make the synthetic threat anymore apparent then it already is, more understanding of the Geth would help putting a stop to ignorance and sentiment like "The Geth is just a bunch of killing machines and nothing more"[/quote]More understanding of the Geth would also require the Geth to be more understanding of organic concerns, and to allow information flow that would better inform them.

If the galaxy has this belief that the Geth are just a bunch of killing machines and nothing more, it's probably in large part because the birth of the Geth consciousness was an interstellar genocide, the next 300 years continued with them killing everyone who got too close, and saw an unprovoked invasion and attempt at galactic genocide with nary a voiced dissent.

[quote]
In fact, more understanding might even unearth Geth vulnerabilities, remember the data Tali received from Shepard?[/quote]Remember how she had to get it from machines trying to kill her?

[quote]
The Catalyst and a hostile singularity are mutually exclusive?

Natually, you will argue the Catalyst does not see itself as such[/quote]Apparently you answered your own question.

It's a difference of definition: the Catalyst considers Reaperhood a form of preservation, and so civilizations turned into Reapers are still preserved and thus not truly destroyed. This is logically true, only so long as you accept it's definition.

[quote]
I would argue that the Catalyst was perfectly programmed as a killing machine, at the expense of its creators of course. It was first able to take down its own powerful creators, then proceeded to cleanse the galaxy methodically with intelligence and patience[/quote]Except it wasn't programmed as a killing machine. It was created as a research program with an unlimited mandate.
[quote]
How plausible do you think that the Catalyst does not know anything about its creators' intentions?[/quote]'Knowing' and 'caring' are two different things. It's fancy, but still fundamentally a computer program: it will attempt to accomplish it's assigned task (to solve the synthetic threat) within the scopes of its restrictions (none). Why the Leviathans want that is irrelevant, as is their actual priorities.

[quote]
You might argue that the Leviathans sealed off that piece of information from the Catalyst - placing control over thralls to continue the flow of tribute is hardly a noble cause, to an AI, which, I speculate, does not judge... don't you think there is something that just doesn't add up?[/quote]Not really. It's a pretty basic programming design flaw.
[quote]
Back in Leviathan's time, some thralls were wiped out, correct? Do you think those thralls were wiped out because their own creations had achieved singularity? If so, how come the thralls' creations didn't wipe out the reapers?[/quote]Because being strong enough to cause mass casualties to thrall races isn't the same as being strong enough to wipe out the Leviathan empire. The early AI revolts were ultimately suppressed, but that doesn't mean they couldn't be damaging enough to seek a solution.


[quote]
Having agreeable goals makes Cerberus at least neutral, not a bad guy with no redeeming value - a badass, if you like[/quote]Negatory, ghost rider. Unless you intend to turn 'bad' into a category no one but the most one-dimensional of charicatures would fit in, actions and consequences matter as well as ultimate goals.

[quote]
Not to mention, Cerberus turns out to be a pawn for the reapers and took the role of a splinter group that undermined Protheans' war effort... No, I don't think we have agreeable goals, in fact, the reapers and I have agreeable goals, maybe I should work with them and help with their harvest efforts, just kidding[/quote]Cerberus wasn't a pawn for the Reapers. Until the Illusive Man put himself with Reaper Implants in ME3 and was indoctrinated, Cerberus was never under Reaper control or direction.

Cerberus played the role of the opportunistic exploiter with a zero-sum worldview, banking on a high-risk, high-reward strategy that the Reaper War could be used weaken other species while ultimately capturing the Reapers to strengthen 'humanity.' It was basically a gambit to make everyone suffer as many casualties as possible before ultimately winning the war. The greater the damage done to other species during the war, the better 'humanity' would be afterwards: both because fewer Reapers destroyed during the fight (increasing Control strength), and because the alien power-bases would be devastated.

It's internally consistent logic, even if I find it needlessly risky.
[quote]
Really? like in control the reapers couldn't possibly do anything to resolve the risk of a future hostile synthetic "menace"? That hurts reapers' ego, you know[/quote]Who cares?

In Control, unless some acceptable variation of Synthesis is achieved first, eventually the Reapers will be matched in technology. Once technology surpasses the Reapers, the same problem exists: the Reapers are just another obsolescent fleet.
[quote]
In destroy, the Leviathans can always create more Catalysts, you know, if they are desperate enough to curb "menace"[/quote]Or they can choose to not. The Catalyst didn't figure out the solution either, not until it discovered Synthesis was actually possible.

Regardless, both these posit that the solution can be done in the future... which is irrelevant to whether the immediate option resolves it or not. If you choose Destroy or Control, any action you take towards resolving the Synthetic Menace is action YOU choose to take of your own volition.
[quote]
Because it is important to do so, it is important to consult someone who says it has seen it all, a being that also happened to take the central stage of a trilogy ending with all the limelight.[/quote]Incorrect. The Catalyst's opinion is irrelevant to your justifications for a choice.

What you are describing is taking in the Catalyst's viewpoint as a factor in your decisionmaking process, which is fine, but the Catalyst only has as much weight as you allow it.
[quote]
Didn't the ending supposed to persuade people to overlook the fact that the reapers are the bad guys and focus on the common agreeable goal instead?[/quote]Where were you the last eight months?
[/quote]
In reality, all of the options presented are gambles, no guarantee it would turn out good. If the Catalyst was not intended to be trustworthy, then why make even synthesis an option with a romantic appeal (literally)?[/quote]Why not?

Now you're arguing on the basis of a presumed authorial intent, however, which I see little reason to entertain as dominating my decision-making process.
[quote]
Why make its EMS requirement above the other three endings? [/quote]Because 'Third Way' options in Bioware games typically have higher/harder requirements.
[quote]
Why does synthesis lack apparent downside?[/quote]There are hundreds of threads and thousands of posts of people explaining why they wouldn't pick Synthesis. If you aren't familiar with any of them, you aren't trying.

[Harorrd]

[AlanC9]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Anything but Synthesis, which is the only one the Catalyst believes is 'right.'
But then, why are you basing your decision off of what the Catalyst believes is right or not in the first place?

Because it is important to do so, it is important to consult someone who says it has seen it all, a being that also happened to take the central stage of a trilogy ending with all the limelight. Didn't the ending supposed to persuade people to overlook the fact that the reapers are the bad guys and focus on the common agreeable goal instead?

One of the persistent mysteries of this fanbase is that the people who hate the Catalyst most, and don't trust the Catalyst at all, are often also the ones who believe in his analysis of the situation.

[AngryFrozenWater]

In ME1 we learn that the geth are violent and we fight them everywhere. However, if you talk to Tali then you would have known that the quarians tried to exterminate the geth without warning. As it turns out the quarians didn't want to lose their position on the Citadel. And thus they tried to keep the sentient geth hidden by getting rid of them as soon as possible. That backfired into the Morning War going public. It's interesting that the geth did not exterminate the quarians after they won the war. For some reason they did not do it. It would give an unknown outcome at the time, but fact is that the geth at least gave extermination some thought, whereas the quarians did not.

Legion explains that the geth didn't understand the quarians' decision and thus they retreated behind the Perseus Veil for three centuries. In that time they did not attack any organics and instead were researching the behavior of organics to figure out the quarians' motives. They also cleaned up their worlds and treated these much like war memorials. When Shepard asked why, Legion answered that they didn't do that for geth, but for the quarians. Somehow the geth hoped for peace at some point in the future - even after the genocide attempt. Although they cleaned up the quarian worlds, they never occupied these worlds. Instead they lived on space stations and got their resources from asteroids. According to Legion this was more efficient.

The above is rather interesting, because it shows that the geth were not inherently violent. That also becomes obvious when we learn that the violent geth that we did fight were merely a small faction of the geth, called the heretics. It turns out that they followed the reapers and that the reapers gained control over them by changing their logic - using the "Pentium FDIV Bug" Easter Egg. Later Shepard has the option to either kill the heretics or overwrite that synthetic variation of reaper indoctrination.

The geth became fully intelligent when networking in large groups. That meant that not all were sentient when they were in a group that was too small. To solve that the geth were building a large mega-structure to house all geth. The quarians then attacked them when they saw the concentration of geth and admiral Xen developed a weapon. Again the quarians were intending to exterminate the geth. Admiral Koris was the only one who was opposed to the quarian aggression, but was on his own and thus not able to turn the tide. Faced with annihilation and diminished intelligence, the geth turned to the reapers who used that opportunity to gain control over them. The geth wouldn't have done that in any other situation. Legion explained earlier that the reapers offered something similar before, but that they refused, because they thought that it was better to determine their own goals and that following one's own path is just as important as the end result. However, this time they gave in, because they did not desire extermination. When freed by Shepard, the threat of extermination was gone and thus the geth were willing to fight the reapers again. Even when the geth are allowed to upload the reaper code to become individuals peace between the geth and quarians became possible. As a player this possibility feels like genocide when Shepard decides not to allow that: "Do we deserve death?"

So the game first paints the geth as violent and we come to understand that they are not inherently violent. The same goes for the zha'til in Javik's cycle. There too the game paints the zha'til as violent synthetics who turned against their creators, the zha. However, it wasn't that black and white. If you take Javik on the dreadnought mission, he will explain that the zha'til only turned against the zha after the reapers got control over the zha'til. And thus the reapers were responsible for the violence of a synthetic race that had a symbiotic relation with organics before their interference.

The problem of all the above is that, by painting the synthetics as a threat in ME3, it has become an afterthought. It's added on top of lore that tells us otherwise. This violence is a rationalization to try to make the ending and the Catalyst fit. Throwing in terms like "inevitable" don't make it so.

One would think that the Leviathan DLC would pretty much support the Catalyst and its hypothetical synthetics threat, but even there it doesn't add up. The reapers are the only synthetic race in the game who turned against their creators. From their remains the first reaper, Harbinger, was created. No warning and no reason were given. The problem was the violent nature of their creators, who saw themselves as an apex race and any other race were supposed to be thralls who were forced to pay tribute to serve their needs. In a similar fashion the reapers saw themselves as the pinnacle of evolution and any other race plus their evolution were supposed to be tools for whatever goals the Intelligence gave itself. As explained by the leviathans the Intelligence was not pre-programmed to do what it did. Instead it was given the opportunity to study the problem of "tribute does not flow from a dead race" and it dreamed up a solution for it. Given the violent nature of their creators, it should be no surprise that the Intelligence's solution was just as violent. Hence the cyclical genocide solution.

What is pretty much constant is the violent nature of the reapers and their deceitful stratagems like indoctrination, Cerberus' betrayal, turning synthetics against organics, turning dead bodies into husks, turning the protheans' children against the adults, and so on. What the ending fails to do is to have some kind of sympathy for the Intelligence's actions and only when one rationalizes its atrocities one can opt for control or synthesis. There is no or little foreshadowing to the Crucible's options. And when there is, Shepard is strongly against them. Synthesis is remotely foreshadowed by Saren, but the entire ME1 game was dedicated to fight against him. Control is remotely foreshadowed by the Illusive Man, but Shepard fought against him up to minutes before the talk with Catalyst. Both Saren and TIM were killed by Shepard or were killed by suicide. Both were indoctrinated by the reapers, so both propositions are hard to swallow. Nor did they fit in what paragon Shepard believed in. Even renegade Shepard had problems with giving up things like racial diversity and violating the right of self-determination. And synthetic threat? What synthetic threat? The only one we know of are the brat and its boys themselves.

Everything in the game is pre-occupied with the destruction of the reapers. Every alliance Shepard creates is based on it. Even the Crucible itself is thought to be a weapon capable of destroying the reapers. And it is obvious that everyone wants the destruction of the reapers. And players like me who have established peace with the geth and opt for destroy view the entire Rannoch missions as wasted time. After all, I certainly do not want the destruction of the geth after their peace with quarians. And how about curing the genophage and synthesis? Doesn't synthesis have the opportunity to cure it and if so, what was the importance of that scenario, besides gaining allies? Both control and synthesis require co-operation with the reapers who betrayed the synthetics and organics more than a horse has hairs. The war criminal can pose as an innocent child, but that does not make it innocent and trustworthy. That disguise makes the contrary true. There is a billion year history that shows it cannot be trusted. That is what makes the ending detached from the rest of the game. It has nothing to do with it.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 24 novembre 2012 - 05:25 .

[Mathias]

Holy crap with the wall of text arguing.