Poll
Note: I will refer to the child using his original title: The Guardian. I will also include information about the Leviathan DLC in this. If you don’t want spoilers, don’t read the marked sections.
So, I decided to try to objectively asses the performance of the Extended Cut DLC to see how it stacked up in actuality compared to their promises. That said, I know some will be subjective, so feel free to disagree, but I’m writing this from my point of view. I also want to note that this is strictly written from a literal point of view, so no IT, WNT, or other alternate-reality interpretations apply here. For the most part, this is not trying to persuade you to pick certain choices, nor will it touch the moral and ethical debates about the choices.
What did the EC promise? Simple. 2 things: For us to be able to see the consequences of our choices on the galaxy, and to provide additional closure.
Part I: Impacts of choices: The EC, in my opinion, did an merely adequate job of showing the impacts. It was passable, though a lot of parts were vague.
Destroy: Basically Hackett’s entire speech is vague. He doesn’t mention the Geth or EDI once. Why not? They have to die in this ending, supposedly. So why not mention them. On that note, why doesn’t he mention Shepard? I shouldn’t even have to say this. There is even a low EMS version of this ending, where Shepard dies. He doesn’t mention Shepard’s sacrifice in the low EMS version, and doesn’t mention any of his/her achievements is high EMS. How do you have an ending to a trilogy like this and not even mention the main character in the end speech? He also states quite confidently about how they can rebuild. When did they learn how to make mass relays? In fact, I remember a certain asari matriarch who suggested studying them, and she was essentially laughed at, which makes sense, considering the relays are reaper tech; the reapers wouldn’t want any organics to learn their secrets. So we can assume there has been next to no studying of relays. How would the decimated survivors be able to study and build them? A better question: how would they coordinate linking the relays, without the communication necessary to do so? The Crucible is a weapon battery precise enough to change the “matrix” of synthetic and organic life down to the DNA, yet it can’t target only reapers in destroy? Really? Levy spoilers: I don’t know about you, but I think the leviathans are almost as dangerous as the reapers. With the reapers gone, and the galaxy in utter ruins, this is a perfect opportunity for the leviathans to retake their former throne. Since there are no slides involving leviathans (why?) we can only guess at what happens, adding to the vagueness of this choice. [/Levy spoilers]
The breath scene: I suppose this would also be suited to the closure section, but I will group it with destroy. This deserves its own section easily.
1. I’ll start with a question. What was the point of it? If no further content is to be released, the scene seems not only like the world’s biggest cop-out –an excuse not to have to deal with fans who are angry Shepard has to die – but also quite mean. After being under the impression Shepard had died, you get a short scene showing that s/he didn’t, and then credits. The scene toys with your expectations and therefore your emotions regarding Shepard’s fate. Does Shepard actually survive? Well, Bioware won’t say, though most things point to survival, such as filenames, and inhalation (you would not breath in before dying) and the scene’s existence in itself, for you would not create a scene showing the hero alive (after thinking they were dead already) just to have them die again. Unless you are being sadistic. It seems like a cop-out of writing a meaningful epilogue to a 100 hour trilogy as well. There is also an element of manipulation exposed here, on the part of the Guardian. When explaining destroy, he (and the writers by proxy) heavily imply that Shepard will be killed if you fire the Crucible in that fashion. If the Guardian was manipulating you, dire consequences follow. If the writers are deceiving you, even more so.
2. Implausibility. Shepard is already badly wounded and suffering from blood loss, with non-functioning armour systems, when s/he arrives to make the final decision. I have no idea why Shepard thinks it is a good idea to walk towards the tube as s/he is firing at it, but that happens, so I will continue. Since Shepard is having a mentally slow day, s/he is walking into the ever-growing explosions of the tube, presumably doing a significant amount of damage to him/her. At the last explosion, you can see Shepard has been vapourized. That is obviously a minor point however, since Shepard survives this and wakes up in rubble later. The Crucible then fires, and according to the Guardian, is hazardous to Shepard’s health given that it would most likely disrupt their synthetic implants. Following this, and ignoring the fact that Shepard seems to be in a vacuum with no suit*, the crucible explodes in an explosion measured to be more powerful than several nuclear weapons, which Shepard in the epicentre near the presidium ring. When all of the mayhem is over and done with, we get a nice semi-comforting scene showing that –and in no way how – our hero survived. Score! Here’s a new question then: Is Shepard still on the Citadel, or in London. The scene appears to be near the conduit in London, and would explain Shepard surviving such impressive feats, but that would mean Shepard never left London, or survived yet another preposterous feat: Re-entry. The fact that we do not know for sure where Shepard is, and the implications of either, increases the vagueness of the end by that much more.
Control: This one probably wins for being explained the best. It is much better in EC than it was originally. It definitely still has some vague elements though. For instance: does Shepard replace the Guardian, or just exist at the same time? If he betrayed his creators, who’s to say he won’t betray Shepard too? The Guardian stated that he was the “collective intelligence of all reapers”. Does this mean when Shepard becomes the new reaper-guiding AI, that (s)he becomes the reapers? Or does it mean Shepard kills the reapers and personally uses all of their bodies? Does Shepard simply replace the Guardian and the reapers simply obey him/her? An interesting question: If the crucible does not discriminate, and therefore targets all synthetics in destroy, this leaves us with 2 options.
1. Shepard also controls the Geth, as well as EDI, because the control beam will not discriminate and will target all synthetics. If the destroy beam also destroys/disables VI systems as well as ships and weapons as stated by the Guardian., that would also mean Shepard should basically control all starships and computers, as well as weapons. That’s a lot of power for one entity.
2. The crucible does in fact discriminate, and will only target reapers. This in turn means the Guardian was lying to you.
Levy spoilers: We really have no idea how powerful the leviathans are, but we do know they can destroy a sovereign-class reaper with their minds. I can see how this could be problematic for Shepard in control. I also think they would employ thralls to counter Shep-reapers, seeing as how they are essentially the same as normal reapers. Not good. [/Levy spoilers]
Refuse: This is an extremely vague ending “choice”. It raises about as many questions as synthesis. The reason many people can’t really achieve consensus about this ending is because it is too vague to make conclusions about. I mean, it itself is vague as a choice, because we a lot of stuff is implied to happen, but we don’t get to see anything. For instance, what does Shepard do after refusing to activate the crucible? Does (s)he just stand there, watching the allied fleets get destroyed? It’s well established that Shepard’s radio is acting extremely inconsistently is the ending, but why doesn’t Shepard try to contact Hackett at any point? It can be assumed that everyone dies in this ending, but it does not show anything. No heroic last stands of important characters, no fleets being destroyed save one shot of a reaper destroying an alliance vessel. The only way to know what for sure what happens in this ending, is to look through the game files to show all squadmates being dead. That’s not what I would call a clear ending. It is not clear why the Guardian continues to fight the fleets if he wants Shepard to choose an option. Even if Shepard refused, why wouldn’t he just get any other person to do it? How did Liara (especially if she’s dead) manage to have the time capsules say that the Crucible didn’t work? How would she even know that? If it fired, but didn’t kill the reapers, it would be logical to assume it didn’t work. However, for all anyone but Shepard knows, the crucible, for whatever reason, simply didn’t fire. That’s no reason to say that. How did the next cycle defeat the reapers? I know Mike Gamble said that, they use the crucible, but that is a fallacy. Also, Twitter =/= canon. Here's how I see it:
1. The next cycle used the crucible to beat the reapers. Which option did they pick? They didn’t pick synthesis (no glowing things), so presumably destroy. But it's so vague. We fought a battle (and lost horribly) so the next cycle could win 50000 years later? Makes no sense. Plus if they used the crucible to beat them that just makes refuse pointless. Actually, that means in half of the endings (destroy and refuse) Shepard is too stubborn to accept their enemies logic...
2. How did they use the crucible? It's completely implausible that the reapers would allow them to come anywhere near that end. They even knew about its existence “several cycles ago” and failed to eliminate the evidence. Logic would dictate they would try much harder next time. This leaves 2 possibilities:
A. The crucible is of reaper design, used every cycle to trick the resistance. They next cycle then uses that reaper tech. Great idea.
B. The reapers are retarded and even though they failed at hiding the crucible before, they didn't learn from their mistakes and let the next cycle use it?
3. Ignore Gamble; they didn't use the crucible. Basically impossible. The Vanguard would not let them amass such an enormous fleet large enough to take on the reaper armada and put the device in place. More importantly, if the Guardian is (in) the Citadel, would that not render the job of the Vanguard redundant? It would also mean the reapers would instantly know the Crucible would be on its way to dock, and most likely stop it. As well, if the Crucible docked in our cycle it would presumably be there when our forces are wiped out. So, the reapers could then analyze it and counter it in some fashion, making it even more unlikely the next cycle could successfully deploy it.
4. They only reason the council cycle did so well was because of Shepard, Sovereign's failures, competent protheans, and a lot of luck. The reapers wouldn't let that happen again.
5. Which brings me to what the stargzer says in refuse: "They fought a terrible war, so we wouldn't have to." That implies the next cycle doesn't fight at all, rather, they simply win. The only way that could happen is by using the Crucible. Now, I already explained why that doesn't make sense. So, it implies they set off the device before the reapers so up at all, which obviously would not do anything useful; they would be out of range. Well, except for the Guardian.
6. I’ll let you all wonder how the Leviathans existing and their heavy influence would do to this.
Synthesis: It is close to refuse in terms of vagueness, but probably takes the cake for Most vague ending ever. Of all time™. It doesn’t do a good job showing how synthesis actually changes things, besides adding green circuit boards to everything. How does it work? There isn’t even a codex entry on this attempting to explain it. What are its actual impacts, besides, apparently, creating instant utopia? Are plants sentient now? If not, then is it saying plants could never become sentient? What about the Thorian? And if plants do become sentient, what does that do to herbivores? Are they murdering other sentient life when they eat? The same can now be asked about all life. How do we eat anything, if we’re murdering it? Or does synthesis make food no longer a necessity? Or, once again, is it implying certain things just can’t evolve? That’s not how evolution works. Nor does evolution just stop as soon as we get circuit boards. If synthesis doesn’t make all humans able to see in infrared, use echo-location, or grow gills then it is not the end of evolution. I don’t even think there is an end to evolution. Maybe we don’t need to breath anymore in synthesis? EDI also mentioned that the reapers, and the species that they are based on, are now connected to all of us. Does that remind anyone of indoctrination? This would also contradict what Shepard said earlier about this topic.
“You-– Whatever species you came from, before the reapers decided to preserve them? They’re dead. They died thousands of years ago. *Reaper dies* And now they can rest in peace.” – Shepard
So was Shepard wrong, and the reapers do actually preserve species properly? Or was the Guardian wrong? If the latter is true, we should doubt much more than just that thought. Many questions.
Levy spoilers: Again, we have no slides of the leviathans, so we can only guess as to what they would try to do in synthesis. I am going to take a wild guess here and say they would definitely not appreciate being “synthesized”. They already consider themselves to be an “apex race”. Seeing as they are an “apex race”, and care not for any “lesser” species, one could assume they would attempt to regain their former authority. Like EDI said, all races are now supposed to be “connected”. To me, that just sounds like an easier way for the Leviathans to hijack people’s minds. I don’t think they’d like being connected to lesser species either. [/Levy spoilers]
What about the Synthehusk™? Is it, not to mention other reaper thralls like banshees, a part of galactic society now? What about the reapers? If we believe the Guardian about synthesis working, and the reapers actually being benevolent saviours, then we should also believe what Sovereign said about the reapers being at the “pinnacle of evolution”. Or should we just pick and choose what parts of what the reapers tell us to believe? If “synthesis is the final evolution of all life” according to the Guardian, then what how could the reapers, who are already there, be elevated?
One more question among many, and perhaps the most important one: Does synthesis change the way people think; rewrite them? I believe the short answer is yes, based on in-game evidence. Since there are many, many, many, quotes from characters stating they would only accept the reapers if they were dead, I’ll only cite what I thought to be the most important ones.
“Dead reapers are how we win this.” – Hackett
“Because the Reapers are repulsive. They are dedicated to nothing but self-preservation. I am different.” – EDI
“I am here to fight the Reapers. That is my purpose. My only purpose. I am the avatar of vengeance, the last voice of a dead race. I will avenge my people, no matter the cost.” – Javik
I chose these because, as far as I can remember, it is impossible to achieve synthesis with low enough EMS to have squadmates die, therefore Javik must survive. EDI and Hackett also must survive. What do squadmates think of being rewritten?
“If you change who someone is, how they think, you have killed them. They will be something new in the same body.” – Samara
“That sounds dangerously close to indoctrination, unless there’s something I’m missing.” – Garrus
And perhaps the most applicable, seeing as how synthesis seems to create a utopia:
“If you screwed with my head, made me nod and smile at everything... I’d rather you blew my head off. Let me die as me.” - Jack
My point is, synthesis is a no win scenario. If it does not rewrite people, then Javik, Hackett, logically EDI, and many others would continue to fight the reapers. If they do not, they are rewritten and are therefore dead. As you can see, synthesis now raises more questions, and answers few. Not exactly what I’d call viewing the impacts of our choices.
So what do you think? For the first part of EC’s promises, showing the consequences of our choices, does EC pass or fail?
Part II: Providing additional (any) closure: I can actually represent this half using some numbers, but we’ll get to that. Probably the most wanted thing in the extended cut was more closure. I for one, just wanted to see my little blue babies, and I know I’m not alone. I’ve spoken to many people, and virtually all of them said they don’t even care how nonsensical the ending is anymore; they just want closure and be done with it. Personally I don’t think that’s too much to ask at all, so let’s get started in actually discussing how well the EC did in fixing this problem.
By the numbers: I am going start my analysis by simply stating whether or not each squadmate had a slide, in reverse order.
ME3: Liara: NO
Garrus: NO
Tali: NO
EDI: NO, although she is featured heavily in Synthesis and dead in destroy
Javik: NO (Personal note: This one really bothered me because he has 3 possibilities for things he would do after the war.)
Ashley: NO
Kaidan: NO
James: NO
ME2: Legion: NO, but is dead
Mordin: YES
Jack: YES, 2
Grunt: YES, but not in synthesis (?)
Thane: NO, but is dead
Samara: YES, 2
Jacob: YES, 2
Miranda: YES, 2
Kasumi: YES, 2
Zaeed: YES (Personal note: I loved his slide. If there is one thing I’ve heard after the EC, it’s “What the hell was up with the slides? Zaeed’s was awesome though!”
Morinth: NO, but is dead.
ME1: Wrex: YES
So, out of 20 squadmates, only 9 have slides. That’s a whopping 45% Bioware. Nice. Let’s remove the ones who have to die. – Legion, Thane, and Morinth. 9/17 is still only 53%. Come on Bioware; you can do better than that!
Now, I know the ME3 squadmates were in the Shepard memorial scene. Well that’s all well and good, but that scene says less (for them) than a slide does. The slides at least give us a glimpse of what the characters do after it’s all said and done. That scene simply shows that they are mourning for Shepard. That’s not a glimpse at what they will do. At least, I hope they won’t spend all of their collective time doing that. The part that really gets me though, is some of the stuff that was easily foreshadowed or plainly said. Like Javik. He had 3 different outcomes. He would either travel to his comrades’ graves and commit suicide, become King of the Hanar™ or write a book with Liara. There you go; 3 easy slides. Not sure why those weren’t made. You could even say that Garrus helping to rebuild (with a hammer) was foreshadowed, or that he would become a primarch. Of all the squadmates, EDI gets the most closure because of her speech in synthesis. But that is only one ending. Why isn’t she in control? Is it because control affects all synthetics like I mentioned above? I mean, I like EDI – but I would prefer to have seen some closure of some of the squadmates I have been with since ME1. Can you believe Wrex is the only ME1 squadmate with a slide? Wrex is awesome too, but what about a slide of my LI? Is that too much to ask?
Some of the closure felt a bit forced too. This is just me, but the fact that EDI is the only squadmate to get any real closure is odd, considering she is only a squadmate in ME3. The other thing I thought was forced was that Coats is the first slide in all endings. What? Coats isn’t even a squadmate, nor is he a character we have all known and trusted for years. In-game, he was only introduced in the second-last mission and is kind of forced on us until the end. This is especially odd when you consider that he can be seen dead on the citadel without flycam.
I lost my train of thought here, so...
TL;DR: It's devided into sections, so just read those.
Modifié par BansheeOwnage, 16 mars 2013 - 07:48 .
Retour en haut
