244 réponses à ce sujet

[LeandroBraz]

I have no problem with it, really, none issue, I actually like the concept, even the crucible, I like it was build through the cycles. I only disliked it on mars, when I realized ME3 wasn't going to be the game I thought it would be, but once I was aware of it, I just tried to enjoy the game it was, and in the end I like it. It wasn't what I wanted, but it was satisfying...

Modifié par LeandroBraz, 03 mars 2013 - 03:33 .

[tracesaint]

Had the Catalyst taken the form of someone else, and the Extended Cut, From Ashes, and Leviathan been a part of the main game, I think this whole crap storm would have been avoided. If the Catalyst would have taken the form of the dead Virmire squad-mate, been Harbinger itself, or been a young woman or man instead of a child back on Earth, it probably would have gone over better.
It is just really hard to take kids seriously in these type of things because it's an obvious attempt to pull at the heart strings. Doesn't work though. I'll say it again: Road Warrior got kids right.

I have no problem with the Catalyst, But I do find the child annoying. 

Modifié par tracesaint, 03 mars 2013 - 03:35 .

[Auintus]

 I do. The Crucible is one really weird piece of machinery. Without the Catalyst, nobody would know how to operate the thing. It helps you understand the Crucible, then lets you make your choice. Naturally, it's biased, but it doesn't try to stop you once its little spiel is over.

[GreyLycanTrope]

dreman9999 wrote...
1.If a shackle is about limiting a syntetics  task then limiting a synthetic intelligence isa way to shacled them It's called a physical shackle.

2. And that does not mean it was cerberus... And that still proves my point.
3. Yes it was. The fact that it couldbe easly deleted and the paranoia people have over AI point to that it was shackled.
4.No. I'm say the hardware systems was forced to follow his orders.

5. With the mechs it does not matter if it was cause by a virus. The issue with shackled AI is that it blindly follows the programing given to it. A virus just warps it's code to do something else...It's still blindly following it's programing..Which is the issue of shackling AI's. And it was not just selfdetracting...We HAD TO FIGHT AN ENTIRE FACTORY OF THEM TO GET THEM TO BLOW UP.

1 Except they were allowed to actively break those limitation to improve funtionality. If they're allowed to overcome the limitations by design it's not a shackle by definition, a shackle would prevent the pratice all together.
2. It's suggested and it doesn't prove your point at all. There's nothing about it being shackled.
3 Because you say so? Again citation needed. The fact it could be easily deleted implies it was stored in hardware in which it had no physical defenses. Again nothing about shackled AI
4 So he's in control and not shackled, glad we established that we can now discard this as an example of a shackled AI.
5 Again mech are VIs not AIs, check the codex, VI do nothing but blindlty follow programing.

You're really not giving credence to your theory with any of these.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 03 mars 2013 - 04:34 .

[AlanC9]

Shadrach 88 wrote...

As far as its appearance goes, no, I don't hate the Catalyst.

As for spanner in the works it throws in the narrative, well, that's a COMPLETELY different story.

Hmmm.... you know, the reason I find the Catalyst OK -- like's too strong -- is that I always expected such a spanner in the works. The Reaper plan struck me as fundamentally irrational, and so I always figured that there was a colossal mistake at the bottom of it. So an AI with bad programming fits that just fine.

[Syroel13]

I think if the catalyst was in the form of Saren, it would have been more like able

[Redbelle]

Syroel13 wrote...

I think if the catalyst was in the form of Saren, it would have been more like able

Get the game to check it's flag thingee thing's, find the dead person Shepard was closest to and have the Cat become them.

Cause that kid is worse than Jar Jar Bink's in ep1. At least Jar Jar had to work to be annoying. That kid does it effortlessly!

[Luigitornado]

I do. Even though Shepard's dreams built up to the moment, I was a bit annoyed that it took the form of the child.

[Luigitornado]

Redbelle wrote...

Syroel13 wrote...

I think if the catalyst was in the form of Saren, it would have been more like able

Get the game to check it's flag thingee thing's, find the dead person Shepard was closest to and have the Cat become them.

Cause that kid is worse than Jar Jar Bink's in ep1. At least Jar Jar had to work to be annoying. That kid does it effortlessly!

Why because it speaks with a child's voice? I agree that it was a little silly that it took the form of a child, but to compare it to Jar Jar is a bit dramtic. 

[dreman9999]

Syroel13 wrote...

I think if the catalyst was in the form of Saren, it would have been more like able

I would make it shift through the form of the entire cast.

[ruggly]

zaalbar76 wrote...

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.

snipped

It`s just my opinion though.

Pretty much this.  I can understand what they were going for, but they completely botched it. In my opinion, that is.

[3DandBeyond]

geceka wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

A computer programmed to find the solution to an equation will not keep trying to make something that is not the solution be the solution.

Since I've seen this "the catalyst knows it's not the perfect solution, so it should stop" argument so often lately, I want to address it a bit with my own interpretation as someone who actually has a background in mathematics (and computer science)

snipped.

This is actually based upon what the kid and what other fans have said.  It's also based upon him constantly seeking ONE solution.  He by his own admission has before come to the conclusion that a solution does not work and stops using it and finds one that he thinks will be the one.

In your examples which are not to the point, you would then believe that a computer that is meant to try and make 1+1 equal 3 would keep on doing it even when it realized that would never happen.  The kid is either a shackled AI merely following straight line programming or he is a rogue program that creates a variety of crazy solutions and then tries to force them to work.

You used the idea of variables in trying to solve for x when x is known to have a limited number of solutions.  That's exactly what the kid says has happened.  Every solution he has come up with has failed-his variables end up not being THE solution, so he doesn't keep trying to get the variable that failed to be the solution.  If you take the equation x + 1 < 5, even though this has more than one answer, it has a finite number of answers that can solve it.  If you change it and say x + 1 > 5, there is an unlimited number of answers that will solve it, but no one would ever keep trying to assert that x = 3.  This is what the kid is doing.  He's not saying here that the reapers may still be one solution-he says they are not a solution.  He does not include them in the infinite list of possible solutions-he excludes them.

In terms of computers, they do discard things that do not solve a problem and do not discard things that as yet have not been proven to solve a problem.  You as a mathematician are not going to sit there and tell me that you'd keep trying to use some answer to solve a problem when you've proven and stated that it does not solve that problem/equation.  I may not have your advanced learning, but I know this.  It would have been like me trying to insist to my Algebra teacher that my solution for x was the correct one, when it isn't.  I'm sure that worked for you when studying Math in school-how many teachers let you tell them that your approximated solution is better than the one they know is right.

The kid specifically says his solution does not work.  In practical terms, this means it is not a solution.  It's not just that this says the reapers are not the PEFECT solution, they are not A solution.  They do not solve the problem.  He does not ever say they still do partly solve it or approximate a solution.  Not like Leviathan that says the kid is still following his programming.  It would be like Leviathan saying the kid is no longer following his programming.


And I so appreciate you assuming that I have no background in math or computer science.  Thank you for that-so glad that you actually do so that invalidates anything anyone else who might have a more limited brain might say.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 03 mars 2013 - 05:30 .

[3DandBeyond]

dreman9999 wrote...

Syroel13 wrote...

I think if the catalyst was in the form of Saren, it would have been more like able

I would make it shift through the form of the entire cast.

And that would make it even more clear that this ending was ripped in part from Babylon 5, since that is exactly what they did.  The Leviathan DLC uses that same thing when talking to Shepard.

[dreman9999]

3DandBeyond wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Syroel13 wrote...

I think if the catalyst was in the form of Saren, it would have been more like able

I would make it shift through the form of the entire cast.

And that would make it even more clear that this ending was ripped in part from Babylon 5, since that is exactly what they did.  The Leviathan DLC uses that same thing when talking to Shepard.

Like ME is 100% original.

[3DandBeyond]

dreman9999 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Syroel13 wrote...

I think if the catalyst was in the form of Saren, it would have been more like able

I would make it shift through the form of the entire cast.

And that would make it even more clear that this ending was ripped in part from Babylon 5, since that is exactly what they did.  The Leviathan DLC uses that same thing when talking to Shepard.

Like ME is 100% original.

I never said it was or that it had to be, but the ending isn't just derivative it's almost a flat out copy of other endings and it was like someone just ripped it from some other game or movie or show and then patched it all together virtually unchanged without even considering how it fit with the story that came before.

Deriving ideas is one thing-using content that is almost identical in how it is shown is another.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 03 mars 2013 - 05:27 .

[dreman9999]

3DandBeyond wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Syroel13 wrote...

I think if the catalyst was in the form of Saren, it would have been more like able

I would make it shift through the form of the entire cast.

And that would make it even more clear that this ending was ripped in part from Babylon 5, since that is exactly what they did.  The Leviathan DLC uses that same thing when talking to Shepard.

Like ME is 100% original.

I never said it was or that it had to be, but the ending isn't just derivative it's almost a flat out copy of other endings and it was like someone just ripped it from some other game or movie or show and then patched it all together virtually unchanged without even considering how it fit with the story that came before.

Deriving ideas is one thing-using content that is almost identical in how it is shown is another.

I didn't even see the ending of bablon 5 and came up with the "entire cast as image of catalyst " image.

Trying to be 100% orginal is overrate being that everything has already been done before. Just do what is best to get the message across.

[Reorte]

LeandroBraz wrote...

I have no problem with it, really, none issue, I actually like the concept, even the crucible, I like it was build through the cycles. I only disliked it on mars, when I realized ME3 wasn't going to be the game I thought it would be, but once I was aware of it, I just tried to enjoy the game it was, and in the end I like it. It wasn't what I wanted, but it was satisfying...

I strongly dislike the Crucible too. It's a solution handed to us on a plate that neatly stops the Reapers in one shot. We've not had to do anything other than follow a set of instructions in order to achieve victory. I've always hated one-thing-stops-entire-enemy conclusions, they're incredibly unconvincing and smack of lack of imagination. The best you can hope for is for the story to work in spite of it (e.g. LotR).

[Applepie_Svk]

spirosz wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Seival wrote...

liggy002 wrote...

Is there anyone out there that actually likes the Catalyst?

Are you kidding?

I am sure there is someone out there that does.

(pause)

Let me know when you find one.

-Polaris

Well, Seival is the Catalyst. 

Read some of his threads and you will understand why he likes the Crapalyst...

[3DandBeyond]

Luigitornado wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

Syroel13 wrote...

I think if the catalyst was in the form of Saren, it would have been more like able

Get the game to check it's flag thingee thing's, find the dead person Shepard was closest to and have the Cat become them.

Cause that kid is worse than Jar Jar Bink's in ep1. At least Jar Jar had to work to be annoying. That kid does it effortlessly!

Why because it speaks with a child's voice? I agree that it was a little silly that it took the form of a child, but to compare it to Jar Jar is a bit dramtic. 

It depends on how one feels about both characters.  I detest the kid and didn't much like the supposed real version of him from the start.  I didn't like him in the dreams-Shepard had people s/he cared about and the kid was not needed.

The kid as catalyst was a big mistake, but it was done in part to "fool" fans as well as to make him seem more acceptable to Shepard.  It was to make fans really not fully pay attention to just what he represents and what Shepard's true reaction to him should be and it's quite funny that there are varying degrees of success with this.  In essence many do forgive any flaws in him (he's just a shackled AI, he's not lying, he just doesn't know any better about what killing means).  Seriously, this is one of the funniest aspects of it.  Even people that do not like him often are apologists for him and work hard to excuse him.  This also plays into the fact that Shepard in some people's minds should just automatically agree with him and realize he's just doing what he was told, er programmed to do, so the choices are really good ideas.

If the AI had been Harbinger or even Anderson, the decepton of Shepard and of fans would have been way more obvious.  But, as a kid even though he has been examined, ripped apart, discussed repeatedly and has been called flawed, rogue, demented, deceptive, and more, there are many that are still deceived and think that what he says is right, what he wants Shepard to do is right, even when they say the kid himself is an obvious form of deceit.  This is hilarious. 

I'm not saying people are stupid because this truly is something that is difficult to overcome.  We are all pre-disposed to give deference and wide latitude to kids.  You can look back at some child molestation scandals that occurred in the US in the 1980's-in one case, people from a daycare center/school were accused even of taking kids on airplane trips to perform satanic rituals with them.  And all of it was initially believed, people's lives were ruined, many were put in jail over something that much later was determined to be untrue.  And this was because people believed wild and outlandish tales that kids were telling them-they were hardwired to believe the children. 

The catalyst is a mess.  He is the very embodiment of deception and how anyone can think he is incapable of lying or deceit is really missing this main point.

[3DandBeyond]

dreman9999 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...



I never said it was or that it had to be, but the ending isn't just derivative it's almost a flat out copy of other endings and it was like someone just ripped it from some other game or movie or show and then patched it all together virtually unchanged without even considering how it fit with the story that came before.

Deriving ideas is one thing-using content that is almost identical in how it is shown is another.

I didn't even see the ending of bablon 5 and came up with the "entire cast as image of catalyst " image.

Trying to be 100% orginal is overrate being that everything has already been done before. Just do what is best to get the message across.

But you played leviathan.  That is used there.  Or did you miss that part in my post to you that said that.

And it's really sad that you think that everything that could ever be thought up has already been thought of, so nothing original can ever be done again.  I happen to think that's really a silly statement.  That has ramifications not just in writing stories, but in all aspects of life.  So, no new scientific breakthroughs will ever happen because everything that can be learned has already been learned and no one will ever have a new idea again.

The imagination is limitless; so sad you think otherwise.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 03 mars 2013 - 05:48 .

[ratzerman]

Aaleel wrote...

But I dislike the Catalyst because it's the symbol of my biggest problem with the ending, it robbed me of my sense of accomplishment as far as finishing my journey. I didn't defeat the reapers, didn't achieve victory. The enemy saved me and ALLOWED me to prevail. 

Exactly this. 

[3DandBeyond]

ratzerman wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

But I dislike the Catalyst because it's the symbol of my biggest problem with the ending, it robbed me of my sense of accomplishment as far as finishing my journey. I didn't defeat the reapers, didn't achieve victory. The enemy saved me and ALLOWED me to prevail. 

Exactly this. 

Yes.  Retake Earth ads should have been renamed, "Ask the enemy to please give Earth back and play nice."

[geceka]

3DandBeyond wrote...

You used the idea of variables in trying to solve for x when x is known to have a limited number of solutions.  That's exactly what the kid says has happened.  Every solution he has come up with has failed-his variables end up not being THE solution, so he doesn't keep trying to get the variable that failed to be the solution.  If you take the equation x + 1 < 5, even though this has more than one answer, it has a finite number of answers that can solve it.  If you change it and say x + 1 > 5, there is an unlimited number of answers that will solve it, but no one would ever keep trying to assert that x = 3.  This is what the kid is doing.  He's not saying here that the reapers may still be one solution-he says they are not a solution.  He does not include them in the infinite list of possible solutions-he excludes them.

No, you are missing my point: If you formalize a problem mathematically and find multiple solutions, none are "less valid" than others. It is just that mathematical validity doesn't necessarily refer to anything that works out in the expected way in the real world. If you are using Pythagoras (as an example) to build a structure somewhere, the negative solution won't help you, since you can't apply it in the real world. Yet it's still a perfectly fine mathematical solution. You can also calculate a solution to string theory (quite) quickly on the computer you are currently using to type this, yet it probably won't be the one solution explaining our universe.

Also, your example is not an equation, but an inequality, where totally different calculus rules apply. This is not the same thing as an equation with multiple solutions. 

3DandBeyond wrote...

You as a mathematician are not going to sit there and tell me that you'd keep trying to use some answer to solve a problem when you've proven and stated that it does not solve that problem/equation.  I may not have your advanced learning, but I know this.

This is not correct. Especially physics uses hypotheses frequently that have not yet been mathematically proven in their entirety, but are widely believed to be correct and – in terms of physics – manage to explain and predict certain phenomena. PhD students in mathematics frequently tackle such conjectures in order to prove them, as to complete the theoretical underbody.

Also, did you read the part about Newtonian physics vs. relativity? We use Newtonian physics practically everywhere in the real world, knowing fully that there is a "better" model out there, yet the differences are so miniscule that they have little practical relevance.

When the catalyst reverts to the cycles, it doesn't mean the cycles do not "work anymore", it just means that there was an anomaly that escaped its hitherto applicable model, and unless this anomaly leads to an unforeseen consequence (e.g. Shepard choosing a different solution), there is no reason to dismiss the cycle as a solution. If anything, the catalyst should now be even more motivated to continue the cycle, because Shepard standing there where no organic has stood before (albeit failing to end the cycle) only proves that the chance to find the new solution the catalyst is craving in the future through an avatar similar to Shepard, but willing to choose a new solution, exactly by continuing the cycle is real and non-zero.

3DandBeyond wrote...

It would have been like me trying to insist to my Algebra teacher that my solution for x was the correct one, when it isn't.  I'm sure that worked for you when studying Math in school-how many teachers let you tell them that your approximated solution is better than the one they know is right.

I'm not sure where you're going here? You seem to be confusing a "solution of a calculation" with a "solution of a symbolic problem" – If what you need is a number, your solution will always be an approximation for the simple fact that you can't calculate with infinite numbers – If you are asked to calculate the area of a circle as a number, you are using an approximation, unless you express it symbolically.

As an example, if someone asks you what "pi" is, do you say 3.14 or "the proportion between a circle's perimeter and its diameter"?

3DandBeyond wrote...

The kid specifically says his solution does not work.  In practical terms, this means it is not a solution.  It's not just that this says the reapers are not the PEFECT solution, they are not A solution.  They do not solve the problem.

Your interpretation is backwards, see above: The fact that Shepard stands there is a consequence of the cycle. If Shepard doesn't pick a new solution, the proof remains that by continually applying the cycle, there is a non-zero chance that an organic individual will – in the future – pick the "better" solution the catalyst is craving (Remember the whole "I can't make it happen by myself" talk the catalyst gave you?). If anything, the catalyst will be happy if Shepard refuses: It doesn't really care about having to wait for another number of cycles, but now it knows that eventually someone will indeed have the chance (again) to make a better solution happen. Shepard being where he is proves that the cycles are a winning strategy for the Reapers.

3DandBeyond wrote...

And I so appreciate you assuming that I have no background in math or computer science.  Thank you for that-so glad that you actually do so that invalidates anything anyone else who might have a more limited brain might say.

I did not assume anything about your background, I only told you about mine. Please tell me where I claim to know anything about your background or make any sort of dismissive statements towards your background ad-hominem, so that I can apologize properly. Until then, you'll only get an unspecific apology from me, because I certainly did not intend to attack you personally.

Modifié par geceka, 03 mars 2013 - 06:00 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

I don't think hate is the right word, most people think it is badly implemented and had no foreshadowing, and the options it offers are pure nonsense. There are also many people that see it as the poster boy for everything that is wrong with the ending and the overarching plot to the entire trilogy.

[geceka]

posted by mistake

Modifié par geceka, 03 mars 2013 - 05:59 .