347 réponses à ce sujet

[andy6915]

So how do you explain all this then (bringing you up as low EMS and then complaining you coming up to it after it brought you up, why it tries to destroy the Crucible the whole time you're talking to it instead of just shutting it off, why it lets you destroy it even when low EMS destroy is the only option and it knows it, why it explains options it utterly HATES like explaining control and then immediately following up with that by telling you it hates the idea of being controlled)? Let's hear your brilliant theories. 10 bucks says you all just give a "it's just bad writing" cop-out instead of explaining an idea that actually fits the evidence.

[fr33stylez]

Because bad writing.

Why does the Catalyst tell you it tried Synthesis before, wants you to choose it, it's the ideal solution, and it will end the Catalyst's Problem?

Why would it destroy the Crucible saying after all that?

[Iakus]

I can't

I can't explain any of that at any EMS, let alone low EMS. The endings make no sense on any level.

You made up a reason which has no evidence, but I'm sorry, I don't think the Crucible was on the grassy knoll.

[andy6915]

No evidence? Did you even read any of my posts? There's tons of evidence, right there as plain as day.

@fr33stylez

Because it figured that if it was being forced to give info, it might as well at least throw in its own solution in there and see if Shepard goes for it, so at least it won't be a TOTAL defeat. It would rather the harvests keep going, but if something is going to happen then it may as well be the solution it thinks will do better then destroy or control at achieving peace. The Crucible didn't have an issue with it throwing the synthesis solution in there seeing as it wasn't even a Reapers-win scenario and the Crucible could indeed do it. Had it tried to say something actually false, it wouldn't have allowed it.

[GreyLycanTrope]

andy69156915 wrote...
If the Catalyst is being used as a mouthpiece and is actually speaking for the Crucible, then shooting the Catalyst is in effect shooting the Crucible. The Crucible reads the intention there as being a rejection, and it turns off in response. The Catalyst has no control over it being turned on or not, if it did it would just shut it off right off the bat. Instead, it commands the Reapers to attack and destroy the Crucible. Why would it bother making them destroy it the slow way and risk Shepard screwing everything up instead of just pressing the off switch and being done with it? Why would it bring Shepard up at low EMS and not just shut the Crucible off even when the only possible choice is the worst one to the Catalyst's perspective? Because it CAN'T.

Did Crucible programing tell him to use the angry Reaper voice when he did it too? He bring shepard up for the same exact reason he did it in the High EMS varient because when you plug in the Crucible it somehow proved to him his current Reaper solution won't work any more. He's trying to find a new solution beside them, his words. You're assumption that he's trying to destroy the Crucible whil'e symultaniously being directed by it contradictory, is he or is he not subjected to it's control? And remember he also tries to blow it up when his ideal soultion synthesis is on the table.
There's several problems with the assertion that you can hack him, here's a few off the top of my head:
-He's an unknown component, yet we can hack him perfectly

-Shepard is on the station by conicdence, if the Citadel arms weren't closed and Shepard didn't use the conduit constructed by the Reapers no one would have been there to open them. it's a batman's gambit if I've ever heard one and basing you're entire device firing on the mere chance that someone might turn be right there in that on spot is a hell of a gamble. Even Hackett the guy in charge of the project was confused and thought it was malfunctioning at first.

-It asserts that synthesis is something we could achieve but a more technologically advanced race like the Reapers could not.

[Iakus]

andy69156915 wrote...

No evidence? Did you even read any of my posts? There's tons of evidence, right there as plain as day.

No, there's plenty of conjecture.  Guesswork "This isn't directly contradicted by what's on the screen"  It's the same as saying Liara got pregnant when giving Shepard her "final gift" because, hey, it makes sense in the context

If you want to believe it, and it makes you feel better about the endings, go ahead.

[andy6915]

It got the angry Reaper voice because THE CRUCIBLE SHUT OFF. As in it STOPPED CONTROLLING IT. Crucible shuts off=Catalyst regains full control of itself and ends the charade and uses its real voice.

So he brings you up because his solution won't work anymore... Yet has his Reapers going ape sh!t on the Crucible trying to destroy it? Right... That makes perfect sense. Not. It could still control its Reapers and direct them while still being the mouth of the Crucible. It forced it to give solutions against its will, but it couldn't control the Catalysts thoughts and orders. If it could, Control ending wouldn't have even been needed because you already controlled them all by proxy of the Catalyst.

It could hack it because the Catalyst IS the Citadel. You can't hack one without hacking the other. The Crucible needed to hack it to even make the Citadel work with it.

Modifié par andy69156915, 21 septembre 2013 - 12:32 .

[JasonShepard]

andy69156915 - what you have is a theory that fits the facts. You don't have direct evidence that proves that the Crucible hacked the Catalyst, just that hacking explains A LOT of stuff that otherwise goes unexplained.

Your theory isn't the only one out there that fits all the facts, though. I like the hacking theory, but it's not the one that I choose to go with. (My personal take on it is fairly close to the explanation offered in JShepppp's thread.)

[andy6915]

JasonShepard wrote...

andy69156915 - what you have is a theory that fits the facts. You don't have direct evidence that proves that the Crucible hacked the Catalyst, just that hacking explains A LOT of stuff that otherwise goes unexplained.

Your theory isn't the only one out there that fits all the facts, though. I like the hacking theory, but it's not the one that I choose to go with. (My personal take on it is fairly close to the explanation offered in JShepppp's thread.)

I am not aware of this JShepppp. Could you link to their thread?

[JasonShepard]

The link in my sig, on the left. Alternatively - here.

[andy6915]

Thanks, will read. People who actually try to come up with theories using in-canon explanations and not just using the "bad writing" excuse to just shoot everyone else down while not actually coming up with anything themselves get my respect.

[GreyLycanTrope]

andy69156915 wrote...
It got the angry Reaper voice because THE CRUCIBLE SHUT OFF. As in it STOPPED CONTROLLING IT. Crucible shuts off=Catalyst regains full control of itself and ends the charade and uses its real voice.

Fist of using caps for emphasis does nothing to strenghten your position. Second why did he go back to the regualt kid voice and didn't stick with the Reaper tone in the next line if he was only putting on a charade? And why bother putting on the charade at all if it's under control? There'd be no point to it.

So he brings you up because his solution won't work anymore... Yet has his Reapers going ape sh!t on the Crucible trying to destroy it? Right... That makes perfect sense. Not. It could still control its Reapers and direct them while still being the mouth of the Crucible. It forced it to give solutions against its will, but it couldn't control the Catalysts thoughts and orders. If it could, Control ending wouldn't have even been needed because you already controlled them all by proxy of the Catalyst.

To say it could force the Catalyst to offer up solutions but not control orders is contradictory, his funtionality has either been hijacked or it hasn't you can't have it both ways. And again they're still trying to destroy it even when Synthesis is on the table, there is an inherrent irony and contradition in their actions so I see two possiblities. Either the Catalyst doesn't have direct control over the Reapers past their initial programing which is why he can't turn them off when they've been discredited as a solution, and why Shepard needs to use the Crucible reprogram them instead of just using a "hacked Catalyst", or inconsitant writing. I personally lean towards the latter given the context of everything else that happens.

It could hack it because the Catalyst IS the Citadel. You can't hack one without hacking the other. The Crucible needed to hack it to even make the Citadel work with it.

Implying that we know enough about the Citadel so we could hack the Citadel. It's been flat out stated we know very little about it's inner workings that's why the keepers exist. And that still leaves you with two of my previous points unanswered.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 21 septembre 2013 - 01:43 .

[Ieldra]

CosmicGnosis wrote...
I just finished another playthrough of Jade Empire after many years, and I found myself somewhat uncomfortable with the story's message. It seems to condemn anyone who wishes to move beyond their station because it will disrupt the natural order of things. The Way of the Open Palm is all about harmony with the natural order, and the Way of the Closed Fist is all about discord and chaos. Open Palm often involves helping everyone no matter what, and Closed Fist is supposed to be about standing up for yourself no matter what. The game has some issues with Closed Fist, however, and the ending throws it off a cliff. The Closed Fist ending is clearly evil and tyrannical; you really do become the villain. And it's unfortunate, because I think it taints the whole concept of the Closed Fist.

Maybe that wasn't really the intended message, but I suspect that Ieldra's head would still explode.

It takes a little more to make my head explode, CosmicGnosis, but perhaps it's just as well I haven't played Jade Empire - and it is indeed very, very depressing to see the desire to overcome the traditional boundaries of the human condition (or just of your culture) being presented as evil in stories told through visual media again and again. 

Modifié par Ieldra2, 24 septembre 2013 - 09:11 .

[andy6915]

I really need to play Jade Empire again. Maybe I should hook my Xbox up. I would buy and download the digital version, but 360's have a fairly limited lifespan. My 360 has made it several years, but I'd rather not force wear and tear on it playing a game that I could play on another console with my disk copy.

[Chashan]

andy69156915 wrote...

I really need to play Jade Empire again. Maybe I should hook my Xbox up. I would buy and download the digital version, but 360's have a fairly limited lifespan. My 360 has made it several years, but I'd rather not force wear and tear on it playing a game that I could play on another console with my disk copy.

To be had, if you got a somewhat stable PC you may want to grab JE for that platform. Found its way to DRM-free sites not too long ago.

Game's also a good reminder of what makes or breaks a game's story: a rock-solid antagonist. And one I'd rather lend my ear to than a certain kiddo...

Modifié par Chashan, 24 septembre 2013 - 02:43 .

[AlanC9]

Ieldra2 wrote...

It takes a little more to make my head explode, CosmicGnosis, but perhaps it's just as well I haven't played Jade Empire - and it is indeed very, very depressing to see the desire to overcome the traditional boundaries of the human condition (or just of your culture) being presented as evil in stories told through visual media again and again. 

This isn't specific to visual media. It's one of the typical conventions of heroic literature; there's a pre-existing natural order and the hero's job is to defend or restore it. There are more exceptions in print media, but that's because there are more exceptions to everything in print media.

(Suddenly I want to dig out my copy of Camus' The Rebel.)

I wonder how much money it would take to get, say, Charles Stross or Dan Simmons to write a game? (Bio already ripped off Simmons a bit). Accelerando would work as a game; since people have multiple state vectors, saving and reloading could be an in-universe activity with a bit of work.

[Estelindis]

Your detailed, nuanced thoughts make an excellent read. Thank you for sharing.

[Obadiah]

AlanC9 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

It takes a little more to make my head explode, CosmicGnosis, but perhaps it's just as well I haven't played Jade Empire - and it is indeed very, very depressing to see the desire to overcome the traditional boundaries of the human condition (or just of your culture) being presented as evil in stories told through visual media again and again. 

This isn't specific to visual media. It's one of the typical conventions of heroic literature; there's a pre-existing natural order and the hero's job is to defend or restore it. There are more exceptions in print media, but that's because there are more exceptions to everything in print media.

(Suddenly I want to dig out my copy of Camus' The Rebel.)

I wonder how much money it would take to get, say, Charles Stross or Dan Simmons to write a game? (Bio already ripped off Simmons a bit). Accelerando would work as a game; since people have multiple state vectors, saving and reloading could be an in-universe activity with a bit of work.

Yeah, I guess the trick is which order in the story is the "natural" one.

[RiouHotaru]

cap and gown wrote...

While I disagree on some points, I find many of your critiques spot-on. Most of all, however, I just want to thank you for your excellent review. Gave me some things to think about. Great work.

Pretty much my stance on this.  I disagree with quite a few of your points, but then I realize that:

A) My Shepard was different from your Shepard so the "railroading" that bothered you wouldn't necessarily bother me and vice versa
I hold a different view on several points just as a matter of principle.

But I respect your view and the review of the game.  I'd almost be tempted to give my take on it as well, but I don't want to seem like I'm directly copy-pasting your review-style.  But I like the format and method you used quite a bit.

[RiouHotaru]

Ieldra2 wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...
I just finished another playthrough of Jade Empire after many years, and I found myself somewhat uncomfortable with the story's message. It seems to condemn anyone who wishes to move beyond their station because it will disrupt the natural order of things. The Way of the Open Palm is all about harmony with the natural order, and the Way of the Closed Fist is all about discord and chaos. Open Palm often involves helping everyone no matter what, and Closed Fist is supposed to be about standing up for yourself no matter what. The game has some issues with Closed Fist, however, and the ending throws it off a cliff. The Closed Fist ending is clearly evil and tyrannical; you really do become the villain. And it's unfortunate, because I think it taints the whole concept of the Closed Fist.

Maybe that wasn't really the intended message, but I suspect that Ieldra's head would still explode.

It takes a little more to make my head explode, CosmicGnosis, but perhaps it's just as well I haven't played Jade Empire - and it is indeed very, very depressing to see the desire to overcome the traditional boundaries of the human condition (or just of your culture) being presented as evil in stories told through visual media again and again. 

I think it's less the idea of overcoming the boundaries themselves that's evil and more the methods used to overcome those boundaries.  Cerberus may have pushed boundaries and made important discoveries, but their methods involved kidnapping, torture, inhumane experimentation on humans and aliens alike, and several acts of outright terrorism.  The problem is that in popular media, no-one pushes boundaries in small, measured steps.  It's always an "all-or-nothing" affair, with the extreme methods being justified with the "we're moving forward" message.

The same thing with Jade Empire.  The issue is that the Open Palm and Closed Fist are presented as two very opposite views.  Open Palm is perhaps far too orderly, but Closed Fist is far too chaotic and extreme.  Now, for the average gamer, the very polarized stances are easy to gauge and measure.  You know what you're doing, it's very clear-cut and dry.  But for the non-average gamer, there's a desire for things to be a bit less clear.  This is why the auto-dialogue is so much an issue, why the P/R System often gets nothing but criticism flung at it (ME2 was notorious for the arguments that Paragons got more than Renegades despite the fact this was only true for specific reasons).

[Ieldra]

@RioutHotaru:
That's just it. I can reason my way through things and differentiate between goals and methods, but the picture itself is simplistic - there aren't any factions with the same goals and different methods, you always get the "evil package" - so the message comes across as "trying to overcome the traditional boundaries of the human condition is evil" not just to the average gamer but to me as well. It annoys me, and casual players and those who aren't interested in thinking about this are either conditioned into the same view or their prejudices are confirmed.

That's why I think it's important to present things in a way that players are asked to take a position towards things instead of bludgeoning them with a pre-conceived message. The DA games have been rather good at this in spite of some heavy-handed storytelling. ME...not so much, even though it started much more moderate in ME1 and only got blatant in its traditionalism with ME3.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 25 septembre 2013 - 08:25 .

[David7204]

Stories are made better by the inclusion of decisive themes. Not worse. And it's incredibly tragic that the mere inclusion of such themes is derided as 'blugeoning.' A terrible waste of narrative potential for role playing games, and hopefully an attitude that will vanish as the medium matures.

Mass Effect takes a very open stance towards cybernetics, artificial intelligence, and biological augmentation in general. I really fail to see how the series as a whole supports 'traditionalism.'

Modifié par David7204, 25 septembre 2013 - 08:37 .

[CynicalShep]

David7204 wrote...
and hopefully an attitude that will vanish as the medium matures. 

You just can't help it, can you? 

[David7204]

Help what?

[Hey]

 https://i.chzbgr.com...5568/h6DF15228/