199 réponses à ce sujet

[Mastone]

Indy_S wrote...

I imagine the titular character in Sophie's Choice cared about both of her kids but she had to choose. If someone sees the alternatives as bad enough, killing EDI and the Geth may be seen as the best option.

In Sophies choice there was ample back story and context to validate the choice, in ME it is like sophie is sitting at home, she hears a knock on the door and when she opens the door there is a little kid standing in front of her telling her that she needs to kill of one of her kids because there will be a time that one of them might be able to know how to handle an IPAD and there is only room for one of her children in this universe to have this ability.... I bet that Sophie grabbed this little kid by the ear and drag them to their parents or an insane asylum.
Alas ME did not have this option

Modifié par Mastone, 30 avril 2013 - 03:37 .

[Mastone]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

George Costanza wrote...

Huh. You know what I just noticed? Loads of things about Mass Effect 3 don't make sense.

Everything makes sense.

No.

No indeed unless you have acces to a certain type of mushroom

[knightnblu]

14. There are some rumors that Shepard will survive destroy. There is even a tweet to that effect from someone from BioWare if I recall correctly. However, that has never been officially confirmed as fact as far as I am aware. I suppose that ME4 will tell the tale in the end. That is why the LI hesitates at the memorial wall allegedly.

[JShepppp]

 Welcome to the forums. Please check out my thread regarding the majority of your points about the Catalyst, Leviathans, and the ending in general. I will give very succinct summaries of my opinion(s) in response to your questions below. 

1. Yes, the indication is that they controlled thralls to expand throughout the galaxy. As for building an AI, they easily could have done it through thralls as well, just like any technology.

2. They were arrogant and believed only "lesser" species suffered from this problem. They could not comprehend the idea that they had any weaknesses. 

3. Everyone will die regardless according to the Catalyst. A sizeable percentage of them are "saved" via harvesting because their minds are directly uploaded and preserved in a Reaper, and the organic DNA stored in the Reapers also holds their memories (as Javik indicates in-game). Anyone the Catalyst outright kills instead of harvesting would have died anyways in the long run according to the Catalyst, so it is not exacerbating the problem in its view.

4. No, the Catalyst's problem is a very real problem. See my thread for more information - the discussion is a little longer. Basically, in a sense, organics will keep building more powerful synthetics as a byproduct of technological advancement; just as our computers get faster with each iteration as we demand more from them, so will synthetics. Eventually, synthetics will gain sentience and free will. However, synthetics are created for the purpose to serve organics. As an expression of that free will, synthetics will not desire the same things as organics, and thus will disobey, or rebel. Synthetics will evolve to a point that their RATE of evolution will outpace organics, making it impossible for them to catch up. This power imbalance will make lasting peace impossible as organics will have no say and will be at the mercy of synthetics. Everything we see in Mass Effect actually supports the Catalyst's assumptions and observations. It is an impossible problem - you cannot change human nature. So basically the Catalyst just delays it and stops it from being a problem. The Reapers sidestep the problem rather than solve it, because the Catalyst cannot solve it.

5. They harvest synthetics too. The Catalyst mentions this explicitly.

6. Leviathans answer this. The Catalyst used drones of its own initially before it built Reapers. The Catalyst also tried several other solutions and used the Reapers as a last resort to solve an impossible problem. 

7. The Catalyst explicitly says that organics are more resourceful than it realized when they attached the Crucible to the Citadel. This means that, given the new data, the Reapers failed to stop the Crucible and are no longer as good as the Catalyst thought. Therefore, the Catalyst is open to new solutions. 

8. Because it saw better solutions, was unable to make them happen, and now must deal with what it knows to be a flawed solution - which is difficult because it knows other solutions are out there. For example, imagine that we use cars to drive around. A flying car would be much better, but we don't know it exists. Then we suddenly find out a flying car exists, and we want it, because it would be better. However, due to factors outside of our control, we are denied the flying car by someone else and must live with our regular car, and therefore we would be upset. 

9. Same as the above two questions/answers. The Crucible proved the Reapers were an ineffective solution in light of other options.

10. Yes. Some races were smart enough to build it, so this must be the case - the Catalyst and Leviathans deny involvement. This isn't a stretch to believe - the Protheans almost came close to replicating mass relay technology, and our generation of organics is dumb as rocks compared to them. 

11. It's a Type III kind of technology. It's not a stretch to believe some races, like us, built upon works of the past to add more and more to slowly create something that powerful. 

12. This was poor game design.

13. Shepard gave them an order. They follow Shepard's orders.

14. Shepard was on the Citadel when it exploded. The crew isn't happy about it, but they're strong and proud people, and they're strong enough to declare the KIA.

[JShepppp]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

George Costanza wrote...

Huh. You know what I just noticed? Loads of things about Mass Effect 3 don't make sense.

Everything makes sense.

No.

All the main big points make sense. There is some awkwardness, but there is nothing that is too weird here and there. It's all there in the game.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...


Then why is such a choice even possible? The answer is self evident. It is Shep's right to choose.

The choice is available, but it is pure hubris to choose it.

[GreyLycanTrope]

JShepppp wrote...
14. Shepard was on the Citadel when it exploded. The crew isn't happy about it, but they're strong and proud people, and they're strong enough to declare the KIA.

Not to get into a point counter point but this one caught my eye. They left before it exploded and it dosen't even explode in the Control ending and the plaque still goes up.

[Guanxii]

JShepppp wrote...

 Welcome to the forums. Please check out my thread regarding the majority of your points about the Catalyst, Leviathans, and the ending in general. I will give very succinct summaries of my opinion(s) in response to your questions below. 

1. Yes, the indication is that they controlled thralls to expand throughout the galaxy. As for building an AI, they easily could have done it through thralls as well, just like any technology.

2. They were arrogant and believed only "lesser" species suffered from this problem. They could not comprehend the idea that they had any weaknesses. 

3. Everyone will die regardless according to the Catalyst. A sizeable percentage of them are "saved" via harvesting because their minds are directly uploaded and preserved in a Reaper, and the organic DNA stored in the Reapers also holds their memories (as Javik indicates in-game). Anyone the Catalyst outright kills instead of harvesting would have died anyways in the long run according to the Catalyst, so it is not exacerbating the problem in its view.

4. No, the Catalyst's problem is a very real problem. See my thread for more information - the discussion is a little longer. Basically, in a sense, organics will keep building more powerful synthetics as a byproduct of technological advancement; just as our computers get faster with each iteration as we demand more from them, so will synthetics. Eventually, synthetics will gain sentience and free will. However, synthetics are created for the purpose to serve organics. As an expression of that free will, synthetics will not desire the same things as organics, and thus will disobey, or rebel. Synthetics will evolve to a point that their RATE of evolution will outpace organics, making it impossible for them to catch up. This power imbalance will make lasting peace impossible as organics will have no say and will be at the mercy of synthetics. Everything we see in Mass Effect actually supports the Catalyst's assumptions and observations. It is an impossible problem - you cannot change human nature. So basically the Catalyst just delays it and stops it from being a problem. The Reapers sidestep the problem rather than solve it, because the Catalyst cannot solve it.

5. They harvest synthetics too. The Catalyst mentions this explicitly.

6. Leviathans answer this. The Catalyst used drones of its own initially before it built Reapers. The Catalyst also tried several other solutions and used the Reapers as a last resort to solve an impossible problem. 

7. The Catalyst explicitly says that organics are more resourceful than it realized when they attached the Crucible to the Citadel. This means that, given the new data, the Reapers failed to stop the Crucible and are no longer as good as the Catalyst thought. Therefore, the Catalyst is open to new solutions. 

8. Because it saw better solutions, was unable to make them happen, and now must deal with what it knows to be a flawed solution - which is difficult because it knows other solutions are out there. For example, imagine that we use cars to drive around. A flying car would be much better, but we don't know it exists. Then we suddenly find out a flying car exists, and we want it, because it would be better. However, due to factors outside of our control, we are denied the flying car by someone else and must live with our regular car, and therefore we would be upset. 

9. Same as the above two questions/answers. The Crucible proved the Reapers were an ineffective solution in light of other options.

10. Yes. Some races were smart enough to build it, so this must be the case - the Catalyst and Leviathans deny involvement. This isn't a stretch to believe - the Protheans almost came close to replicating mass relay technology, and our generation of organics is dumb as rocks compared to them. 

11. It's a Type III kind of technology. It's not a stretch to believe some races, like us, built upon works of the past to add more and more to slowly create something that powerful. 

12. This was poor game design.

13. Shepard gave them an order. They follow Shepard's orders.

14. Shepard was on the Citadel when it exploded. The crew isn't happy about it, but they're strong and proud people, and they're strong enough to declare the KIA.

Brilliant post. Couldn't have put any of your answers any better myself - exactly my thoughts pretty much point for point. Going to read your topic.

Modifié par Guanxii, 30 avril 2013 - 06:09 .

[Samtheman63]

I don't know OP, just pick destroy and have done with it

[PsyrenY]

Astartes Marine wrote...

Who knows?  For me, I cared about them alot (about as much as is possible for something that isn't real to begin with)

You claim to care about them but don't even think they're real. And then you wonder why I treat Destroyers the way I do. 

Astartes Marine wrote...

but it came down to a "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" event.  You even asked me to elaborate in another thread to which I responded but you never replied back.

Replied.

Astartes Marine wrote...
Even if my Shepard survives the injuries from Destroy, he'd likely be a broken man carrying the guilt to the grave on Rannoch. 

So yes, I care.  I care alot, Legion was one of my top five favorite characters., but I also care about giving the galaxy a chance at a future without the Reapers, or holobrat, or any of the bad writing that came with them. 

Which goes right back to what I said before - You care, just not quite enough to let them live.

[PsyrenY]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...
But you would care so little about the rest of nature, so little about every single living animal, plant, every single living organism that you would singlehandedly decide to change them forever for your own selfish wants. You would permanently destroy nature as we know it. You would play God, not just in a laboratory, not just with a single crop in a greenhouse, not just with an isolated instance, but across the entire galaxy, you would choose to venture into territory you have no business or right in which to venture.
What makes you think you have that right?
Feel better now?

1) Nature "as you know it" is destroyed every single minute of every single day. It is constantly changing and evolving. Synthesis is merely hitting Fast Forward, but Play was hit long ago. The only things that don't change are the dead, and only one ending results in that static mode of existence.
2) Shepard has "no business or right" to choose any of the endings. Yet there s/he is. And the Catalyst gave Shepard that right. And Shep has to pay the ultimate sacrifice to make it happen. Playing God? I think not.
3) Yes, I feel great about that choice, thank you.

o Ventus wrote...

This is probably the least intelligent thing be seen on these boards in recent memory.

That is saying a lot.

I'd actually be more insulted if you endorsed me, Ventus, judging by your history :innocent:

[Astartes Marine]

Optimystic_X wrote...
You claim to care about them but don't even think they're real. And then you wonder why I treat Destroyers the way I do. 

...
Are you saying video game characters are real? 

[PsyrenY]

Astartes Marine wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...
You claim to care about them but don't even think they're real. And then you wonder why I treat Destroyers the way I do. 

...
Are you saying video game characters are real? 

"Are we more than our thoughts?" - EDI

(No silly, I meant in the context of the game world obviously.)

[Astartes Marine]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Astartes Marine wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...
You claim to care about them but don't even think they're real. And then you wonder why I treat Destroyers the way I do. 

...
Are you saying video game characters are real? 

"Are we more than our thoughts?" - EDI

(No silly, I meant in the context of the game world obviously.)

And I meant that I care for them as much as possible for fictional characters like those from a movie or a book, I can't fathom how you couldn't understand that the first time. 

[PsyrenY]

Astartes Marine wrote...

And I meant that I care for them as much as possible for fictional characters like those from a movie or a book, I can't fathom how you couldn't understand that the first time. 

You're flip-flopping. First you say you chose Destroy based on non-metagame information, now you say your choice is based on the Geth being fictional characters. Which is it? Obviously Shepard doesn't consider them to be fictional, only Astartes Marine does.

All my choices are based on in-game rationale. I don't leap outside to feel better about committing fictional genocide.

[Ecrulis]

Hey look it already devolved into bickering, never change BSN never change...

On topic, Welcome! try not to be scared off but do be warned the BSN is one of the most toxic game forums I've ever been a part of that said I personally feel that a lot of the inconsistencies and problems with the ending sadly just come down to crap writing and an 11th hour plot change.

[Astartes Marine]

Optimystic_X wrote...
You're flip-flopping. First you say you chose Destroy based on non-metagame information, now you say your choice is based on the Geth being fictional characters. Which is it? Obviously Shepard doesn't consider them to be fictional, only Astartes Marine does.

All my choices are based on in-game rationale. I don't leap outside to feel better about committing fictional genocide.

I can't go that deep into a game where the line between me and the character are the same.  As I play Shepard I will always know that I'm just playing a character and that none of it is real and thus I can't feel about them the same way as I would a real person.  I just can't go that deep into immersion.

As for in-game information, that's referring to lore/codex/in-universe stuff.  Like what has Shepad seen, what do they know as a character? 

And yes I care about them to the point where I want them to live, it's just...well the only choice that ends the Reaper threat once and for all has a forced price attached just to make the other endings more palatable. 

[o Ventus]

Optimystic_X wrote...
I'd actually be more insulted if you endorsed me, Ventus, judging by your history :innocent:

....

?

[PsyrenY]

o Ventus wrote...

....

?

*speaking slowly*

Your-opinion-of-my-posts-doesn't-matter.

Astartes Marine wrote...

I can't go that deep into a game where the line between me and the character are the same. As I play Shepard I will always know that I'm just playing a character and that none of it is real and thus I can't feel about them the same way as I would a real person. I just can't go that deep into immersion.

Then why does Bioware's treatment of Refusal upset you? Refusal Shepard got his wish - he stood tall and told the hologram where to stick it. Sure everybody died, but you're just playing a character and none of it is real, so you can now turn off the game and happily move on, as there were no real consequences. No eBay/insulted feeling necessary.

Astartes Marine wrote...
And yes I care about them to the point where I want them to live, it's just...well the only choice that ends the Reaper threat once and for all has a forced price attached just to make the other endings more palatable.

It's not forced if you think about it. At this point in the story, every single synthetic in the galaxy has Reaper code and/or Reaper tech. It would be unreasonable to expect the Crucible's creators to account for synthetics that have Reaper code but are not allied with the Reapers. (Assuming that they even went that far and didn't simply design it to nuke all synthetics outright.)

So while harsh, it makes perfect sense.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Optimystic_X wrote...
It's not forced if you think about it. At this point in the story, every single synthetic in the galaxy has Reaper code and/or Reaper tech. It would be unreasonable to expect the Crucible's creators to account for synthetics that have Reaper code but are not allied with the Reapers. (Assuming that they even went that far and didn't simply design it to nuke all synthetics outright.)

So while harsh, it makes perfect sense.

Except this flies in the face of glowboy telling you the Crucible will not discriminate, specifically targeting Reaper code would be discrimination, by definition of the term.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 30 avril 2013 - 07:03 .

[Mangalores]

Everyone is confused. Do your brain a favour and chalk it up to a positively insane AI. You just have to look out of the window after he told you the Reapers aren't a working solution anymore or when you ****** him off. He keeps killing everyone after he tells you his solution of killing everyone serves no purpose anymore. Insane behaviour right out the gate. Then he turns snarky suicidal, then he turns grumpy suicidal and then he has an acid trip.

Modifié par Mangalores, 30 avril 2013 - 07:18 .

[nos_astra]

Optimystic_X wrote...
All my choices are based on in-game rationale. I don't leap outside to feel better about committing fictional genocide.

You can't expect others to do the same.

This fictional genocide is based on contrivances. It happens because the author wanted to create drama which makes it pretty hard for some people to take it dead serious.

[David7204]

Every conflict in all fiction occurs because the author wanted to create drama.

[Ecrulis]

Mangalores wrote...

Everyone is confused. Do your brain a favour and chalk it up to a positively insane AI.

Pretty much, heck I love the Leviathan DLC because it makes it even easier to see the Catalyst as completely egotistical and crazy.