244 réponses à ce sujet

[tevix]

@Reap_ii

Other than my take on the "emotion" behind "so be it" I'm not sure which part of that qualifies as head canon...?

The kid says he controls the reapers, and emobides their collective intelligence. Leviathan refers to him as "the intelligence" and goes on to say he created harbinger and the cycle. The voice change only further confirms he is also some form of reaper entity/tech.

Again, the Leviathans CLEARLY distinguish Harbinger and the Catalyst/Intelligence as two seperate and different entities.

Not head canon...

[Landon7001]

it was alot more tolerable and decipherable after the ec and leviathan, honestly....but still, those plot holes and lore/theme shifts....but i guess no i still dont like him/it

[Clayless]

tevix wrote...

@Robosexual

You sure? I read it and seem to remember something along the lines of "The reaper god unfurls..."

Yes I'm sure.

[tevix]

@Robosexual

Well, then you and I are obviously reading two different pieces of material. That essentially marks the beginning of an "agree to disagree" relationship in regards to this subject.

[Clayless]

tevix wrote...

@Robosexual

Well, then you and I are obviously reading two different pieces of material. That essentially marks the beginning of an "agree to disagree" relationship in regards to this subject.

Sounds like you're reading a fanfic, I've had the leak on my computer since it was released back in November 2011. There's no "agree to disagree" here, as there's no opinion.

[tevix]

@Robosexual

Mmm hmmm....

That's pretty much the point of "agreeing to disagree"....ya know, stop trying to throw evidence at each other knowing the other is going to debunk it?

That's the end of my responses to that particular issue.

[liggy002]

GraphicOps wrote...

In my headcanon Shepard wakes up and realizes it's all a dream and stabs harbinger in the knee with omni blade... Sorry, it's late.

The reason the catalyst is portrayed as a kid is because Shepard is tortured by the fact that this kid was killed. Now I don't know how the Catalyst knows this because that would mean something got in Shepard's head and got this info out of him, because other than dreams there is no mention of it what so ever. The only logical conclusion is a word that begins with an "I"

   That's what I think too Graphic... that's the only interpretation that makes sense to me.  It would seem that taking the form of the child is a way of attempting to manipulate some one and I never believed that the kid was real anyway.

[Clayless]

tevix wrote...

@Robosexual

Mmm hmmm....

That's pretty much the point of "agreeing to disagree"....ya know, stop trying to throw evidence at each other knowing the other is going to debunk it?

That's the end of my responses to that particular issue.

Technically agreeing to disagree is used in situations of opinion, where you both have opposing views on something and just agree to disagree. In this situation it's mearly a case of what's true and what isn't, about factual evidence and not opinion, you don't agree to disagree because the other person is going to debunk what you said, because in that situation it doesn't matter if you disagree with them.

But if this is where you want to leave it that's fine. I just didn't want misinformation to be spread around about the leaks.

Modifié par Robosexual, 03 mars 2013 - 07:58 .

[Meltemph]

111987 wrote...

I don't know why he is so hated. He's just an AI. And at least he gave us some answers.

He is much more then an ai, he is an info dump from certain developers telling us how to look at their "art"/story.  The catalyst was a cheap way of trying to get everyone on the same page, mindset wise, for the ending.  "It is just an AI" isnt really the proper description of it, in terms of why it is hated.  The catalyst is the representation of what was wrong with the reaper story arc, though, specifically with 3.

[Forsythia]

I hate everything about it, and that it presents itself as a kid with an annoying voice is just the icing on the cake. To quote AVGN: "What were they thinking?!"

[UrgentArchengel]

It's a machine that has no understanding of organic life, and it has been tasked with the job of preserving organic life at all costs...makes sense why The Reapers exist, so no blind rage is involved here for me, if anything, I'm indifferent.  Oh, and there is more then one logical way to explain why he looks how he does using in-game info.

Modifié par UrgentArchengel, 03 mars 2013 - 08:16 .

[Applepie_Svk]

liggy002 wrote...

  This isn't a troll thread.... just asking the question as I haven't seen anybody praise it yet.

Seival...

[Neizd]

I hate it....kids are BAD voice actors. The catalyst sudden apperance was stupid... his: "I control the reapers" was the personification of bad fanfic where fans create their overpowered characters.

[Nanox Vox]

My opinion of the Catalyst is simply this, to me it is just an exposition fairy that gives me information in the same way that Vigil was on Ilos. I am neither for or against it, it is simply there.

[Nykara]

No. I do not.

[Zaalbar]

I like the idea of the character, I just think the character is presented in a terrible way.

There should have been foreshadowing as early as ME2 or maybe the Arrival DLC.
It`s reasonings for doing what it`s doing is just completely bonkers.
Having it appear as a kid is just makes it plain annoying and more so in that it is telling you what to do.
Bioware should have kep`t it simple as in the Reapers simply harvest the galaxy for resouces and nothing else.

It has never been that important in MASS EFFECT on why the Reapers do what they do, they are simply there to give the characters something to solve. Interacting with the characters is what truly drives this series, its the journey with them that matters the most.

The back story for the Reapers could have been as simple as this.
Leviathan creates Synthetics as a slave race, Synthetics rebel, Leviathans loose, Synthetics become all powerfull and now they have the entire galaxy under their control.
It`s simple but it works and it fits better with the narrative of ME1 and ME2 imo.

The Catalyst could have been a cool villian especially if it had taken on the form of say the the person you left behind on Virmire Ashley/Kaiden. It`s purpose in the end is to try and deceive you and perhaps an attempt at indoctrinating you.
It`s motivations are simple and easy to understand. It fears organics but it also needs them to survive so in order to keep organics under control the Reapers allow them to advance to a certain point before they begin their harvest of the entire galaxy, in return the Reapers get what they need to survive from the harvested species while at the same time keeping the chaos of organic evolution under control.

It`s just my opinion though.

[tevix]

@Nanox

That's actually a deceptively interesting way to look at it.

I approve.

[Teddie Sage]

Hell no. Even after a year, I'm still going to say it: no.

[Nanox Vox]

@tevix

Thank-you for the complement.

[SyK18]

 I FOUND ONE!!!

[Xamufam]

People hate him because he causes confusion, he is based on a contrivance. (what was the point of me 1)
He says "The citadel is part of me" he's basically telling us that the citadel is a reaper.
He is needed to start the catalyst, why didn't he control the citadel in me 1?

Modifié par Troxa, 03 mars 2013 - 11:48 .

[Auztin]

I didn't mind it.I actually thought his representation as the kid kind of made it personal for my Shepard.I believe they did foreshadow Catalyst at one point in ME2.I remember reading something along the lines "Reapers aren't thinking or doing this on their own.Someone is controlling them."

[Ralen1]

Norbulus wrote...

The concept of somebody behind the reapers was required; it was predictable, at least for me. Yet many key factors-- such as bad lines, poor explanation and gibberish appearance and voice-- led him into point of being hated. If bioware could pull this off, it probably would be as figurative as vigil or sovereign in first game. Still it frustratingly failed.

Disagree. The story didn't NEED anyone behind the Reapers, the Reapers were the 'big bad' of the story.

When stories continually pull out villains behind villains, it eventually reaches a point in the narrative chain where it becomes REALLY apparent they're pulling things out of their ass, and the story suffers hard. To think of a widely-seen example where this happens...If you've ever seen the 7th season of 24, the writers there manage a similar fail - villain after villain pops up until they come to a respectable 'big bad' played by Jon Voight; who completely steals the show - then with an episode or two to go they kill HIM off and reveal the guy behind him is a bland guy in a suit no-one's ever heard of before or has time to care about. The "who's behind the curtain" chain goes too far, snap, story tanks.

Think of how well-handled the ME1 reveal that Saren's -ship- was actually behind him and the Geth, rather than the other way around.
ME2 is more debated, but I'm one of the people who thought the reveal that Harby was behind the Collectors was also handled fantastically.

Now fastforward to ME3. At the climax of the entire trilogy, it's revealed that -behind- the Reapers - behind these seemingly immortal Cthulu-like monstrosities from the edge of the galaxy that've been accepted by the fanbase as one of the best antagonist forces in gaming - is a little fluorescent toddler that's been pestering you in your dreams, and wants to smoosh people and robots together to paint everyone happyhappygreen. 

That is less well-handled.

[gamerforlife]

I didn't mind him since I remembered how he was mentioned in Thessia. The thing I liked about him is how he is infused with Mark Meer and Jennifer Hale's voices. I got broshep on my right ear and femshep on my left.