199 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Well, at least Seival hasn't showed up yet.

Okay, I was being a bit flippant, but seriously the only way they could have fixed things with the EC was to completely redo the entire Priority Earth mission and completely change the ending. They were that messed up.

It wasn't simply changing a line of code here and there to fix that problem of the magical teleportation to the Normandy. It wasn't the fact that those glorious Thanix cannons we had in ME2 suddenly became Thanix missiles (WTF?).

And if you think the pickup scene was stupid, make it more stupid by taking EDI with you, and watch Shepard call for evac. Garrus or Javik is fine, and could fight on to the beam with you, but EDI is trashed. She could just vacate her sexbot and go back to the blue globe. But no. The ship has to be called to pick up the ship. It doesn't get any more stupid than this.

And let me explain the Conduit thing. Here's the reality behind it. Microsoft still owned the exclusive publishing rights on all things ME1.... like Ilos. Mass Effect 1 was not available on the PS3 until November 2012. ME3 was published in March 2012. Publisher rights overrule the writer. EA was not able to reach agreement with Microsoft during the dev time for ME3. Notice how Ilos is completely missing from ME3. People will say the mass relay on Ilos is no longer working or out of power, but the mass relays aren't plugged into a power source either. Vigil's power source was running out.

You had all the time in the world to get to that relay until you got to the top of that ramp, then it was always 38 seconds to the relay. What was most likely the issue was that it had to be activated by some panel, then you had a limited time to go through, and the place was crawling with geth. You would have died, or been delayed sufficiently, and Saren would have succeeded. But people would say "you would bounce off the closed citadel". The Citadel was closed then and you didn't bounce off. Nor did you bounce off the roof of the cavern. The relays work like jump gates regardless of what the codex says.

That would have been the perfect launching point for a full shuttle loaded with 14 for Suicide Mission II. But that never happened. Well, publishers have their own pissing contests.

Instead we got the Sword Fleet Assault - 1781 tactics in space. London - Hammer - 1914 tactics. Where was my Brodie and gas mask? Where were the Gerries? But I know it was all done for drama. And the idiotic charge to the beam with Harbinger shooting it's main gun (?) at us -- I still think it was its laser pointer. The entire purpose was to have you alone and feeling broken down at the end so that you would be vulnerable to Starboy's manipulation: you the player, not Shepard.

Once I realized that the only purpose of attaching "the Geth" or "the beam will not discriminate. All synthetics will be targetted" to the Destroy ending was to make the other two endings more palpable I had no problem shooting the tube. I think that was immediately when I heard Shepard's autodialogue the first time "there has to be another way" and "so The Illusive Man was right after all."

The entire Priority Earth Mission was a disaster. It was horribly written. The ending begins at the rim of the crater. It's a train wreck. Fixing it with the EC was like trying to to dig your way out of quicksand, but I'm "just an old soldier who can only see things down the barrel of a gun."

[Wayning_Star]

I wonder how many ME fans have library cards? If they tore out as many pages in novels/books, to rewrite as they do with VG's... those would be hard to come by, most likely..

[Eryri]

3DandBeyond wrote...

OP, your post is fantastic and most all of its reasons/questions are the relevant ones. Those things explain or give the foundation for just how bad much of ME3 is (and a lot of it is good but not as some coherent story). Your questioning of the Leviathans and why for Pete's sake they would ever create a synthetic without being able to control it when the whole issue of this ending is based upon the idea of killer synthetics they could not keep their controlled enthralled servants from creating, is a good one. What you will generally find is that some people think that's ok, the Leviathans were just arrogant (oh, and I think stupid). But the whole ending is based upon this idiotic story that had to be created after the fact to support the ending. My head hurts.

This could be the subject of a book because the flaws are just amazing-the flaws or the idiocy and illogic used to explain the existence of the reapers. The ending says that you must actually make a choice in order to help the beings (Leviathans) that created the being (the kid) that created the reapers by killing his creators in order to keep the original problem beings (synthetics) from killing his creators and all organic life. Wonderful.

And your assessment of what happens to Shepard's teammates and crew members on Earth is spot on. The EC was created in order to try and make some sense of the original ending that was sparse and definitely should have meant that afterward the galaxy was a steaming hot pile of rubble. Bioware had said it would be and then fans were appalled and also couldn't make sense of it because of the Shepard torso gasp moment (if the galaxy was destroyed, then what good will come of that) and a lot of other things. It said basically that people survived after the reapers' fate was decided but since the galaxy was destroyed, they'd starve to death and all. The EC exists in part to say, "we never meant that", but they did and they said so in a lot of different places.

Also, the EC had to explain how people ended up back on the Normandy (how'd they leave Earth), but it makes it all ridiculous. This was truly an all or nothing gambit supposedly. If Shepard didn't make it, someone had to, and there's no way they could ever convince me that Shepard would have to go it alone at the end and that those friends would leave. Makes no sense that the Normandy would drop down for that either. I've said this quite often-why not have the Normandy create a distraction (uh, Tuchanka and the Turian fighters shows the same idea), to ensure Shepard gets to the conduit? But no, it drops down and picks up basically one badly injured teammate and another one who what-just wants to leave Earth? Also, no explanation for the rest of the team back at the FOB and how they ended up on the Normandy or why?

In the original ending, Joker also just ran away with everyone on the Normandy. No explanation given. The EC tries to give him one. However, anyone that understood Joker knows he'd never leave. And Garrus (the one in my game that tells him he has to go), wouldn't tell him that either. Idiocy. Also, Hackett says everyone has to meet at the rendevous point. Uh, who is everybody? I'm sure that all those ships could get through one mass relay all at the same time in order to make it to the elusive rendevous point-and quickly enough to avoid that blast. And how far is far enough away from that burst of energy? As if Hackett or anyone knew that. The Crucible in a real moment of logic was said to contain "untold amounts of energy". Seems to me nobody would know what that would mean.

The crucible. Idiot device in the sky. No one knows what it does. No one knows who created the plans for it. No one knows it changes this AI program (the kid). And yet, it's assumed it's a weapon to destroy the reapers. It's something everyone works, to the exclusion of all else, to make. And, no one knew it would change the kid, but it was created to change him, and it's been adapted by each subsequent cycle to work better. To do what? You cannot create something to do something if you don't know what you need it to do. And no one could adapt something to do something better if they don't know what it is supposed to do. Honestly, this is just a pile of garbage.

Then, the kid himself. He's supposed to be a logic device that is still following his programming (so Leviathan says). Ok, then if so, Leviathan should not want to destroy his solution or him. He is doing what he was created to do-that's what they say. But, he isn't/wasn't if they don't agree with what he did to them. He also is a pretty messed up little program, of course. If he is to be believed (and I can't see how anyone can listen to what he says and find him accurate or believable), then the reapers are no longer a solution and he would have stopped using them. He says his solution (the reapers) is no longer working. This statement alone (and it appears to be what he believes) means that the reapers would no longer be used by him. He is tasked with finding a solution, but every solution he finds is not THE solution, so he stops using it. Except when he doesn't and the writers needed to end the story in 4 flavors of dystopia topped off with slides that try to show them as utopias. This is a joke.

Q. F. Freaking T!

Arrogant over-confidence is one thing. But creating an apparently unshackled AI, to solve the problem of rebellious machines, when you have first hand experience of similar A.I.s destroying their creators, is just rank stupidity! And the Leviathans were supposedly the Apex Race of their era! The top of the tree! How thick must everyone else have been?!

Of course their synthetic progeny aren't much better. The Catalyst installs itself on the Citadel, but apparently has no way to control or repair his own home after the Protheans sabotage it, necessitating Sovereign's suicidal charge to reactivate the relay to Darkspace.

Then in ME3, after capturing the Citadel, which is the master control for the entire relay network, the Reapers somehow forget to shut the relays down, which would have prevented the Sword fleet from bringing the Crucible anywhere near it. In addition to this, they leak to the Alliance through TIM that they are planning to bring it to Earth, instead of attempting to hide the thing. They could even activate one of the supposedly inactive relays, send it through, then shut down the relay behind it. The Alliance would never find it, or be able to reach it even if they knew where it was. Instead they basically say "Come on if you think you're hard enough!" to Shepard.

Once at Earth, they conveniently install a back door into the lynchpin of their entire empire. Instead of just switching it off when Hammer arrives, they leave it on, and entrust Harbinger to guard it. It's clearly Friday afternoon for old Harby as he can't even summon the enthusiasm to shoot at the Normandy when it hovers in front of his face. He then takes a half hearted shot at Shepard, thinks "Oh that'll do." and slinks off before checking that Shepard is actually dead.

The convenient back door now even more conveniently deposits Shepard a mere 5 minutes stroll from the ward arm control panel. Basically the kill button for the entire Reaper species, without so much as a husk to guard it. Just an increasingly batty TIM, who Shepard manages to literally talk to death with relative ease.

The Reapers apparently go from fearsomly intelligent space Cuthulhus, to bumbling and incompetent idiots over the course of 3 games. Talk about Villain Decay!

Modifié par Eryri, 02 mai 2013 - 07:56 .

[JasonShepard]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

And let me explain the Conduit thing. Here's the reality behind it. Microsoft still owned the exclusive publishing rights on all things ME1.... like Ilos. Mass Effect 1 was not available on the PS3 until November 2012. ME3 was published in March 2012. Publisher rights overrule the writer. EA was not able to reach agreement with Microsoft during the dev time for ME3. Notice how Ilos is completely missing from ME3. People will say the mass relay on Ilos is no longer working or out of power, but the mass relays aren't plugged into a power source either. Vigil's power source was running out. 

Hang on. Eden Prime was exclusive to the plot of ME1. So was Noveria and Feros. All three of those planets got mentions in ME3 - we even got to visit Eden Prime and Noveria. Sovereign, the Citadel, the Council - all those other things that were vital to the plot of ME1 - they got through. And, in fact, Ilos gets mentioned in ME3 at least once - by whoever you take with you when waking up Javik.
I think it also gets mentioned by Hackett during the "Why Shepard?" conversation. And I think Liara has a conversation with Javik about the scientists there.

So overall, given that other stuff got through, I seriously doubt that IP rights were the issue here. I'll change my mind if you can provide me with a definitive source.

All that said, I can't provide a good reason why the Ilos Conduit didn't get mentioned other than "the writers forgot" (which seems unlikely). At the very least, it should have gotten a line of dialogue handwaving it before Priority: Earth.

[Mastone]

I wouldn't be surprised if the writers did forget, they lost their ability to write during the ME franchise so they had much bigger fish to fry and forgot about the details

[Mr. MannlyMan]

It's terrible writing, period. So bad that I have to admire the balls that were required to approve it.

There's more to pick apart and mock in this game than there was in Deception, and that's saying something.

[TheBorgPrincess]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

TheBorgPrincess wrote...
Regarding my question #3: The major takeaway I got from your thread was that you believe the Reapers/AI think on an infinite timescale and to them, preserving a race in reaper form = preserving life, because this way, they get to save it forever. The problem I have with this is that by transforming us into a Reaper, you are vitally altering us and so the argument that it's just a straightforward preservation technique really rings false to me.

I tried to address this in the section about immortal children (and their perspectives). There's no universal concept of preservation (look at our religions), so it's actually presumptuous to think that the Reapers (or the Catalyst as it were) would come to the same conclusions we do. There's also no universal definition of what constitutes life (especially in the Mass Effect Universe), so there's really no way for the Reapers to be (in an absolute sense) wrong. Preserving our genetic code (and nothing else) is what they've determined to constitute preservation.

I get what you're saying. But the Leviathans programmed/built the AI. I feel like to believe you, I need to believe the Leviathans were so crazed with arrogance that they not only were dumb enough to build an AI of their own, but also forgot how to program stuff properly. I would assume any sane organic would be sure to assign values to give their creation a sense of what they, as organics, thought was "preservation of life." Organics are the creators, after all right? So don't we necessarily impose our values onto our synthetic creations? I would theorize that the Leviathans, being concerned about thrall availability, would be likely to program the Reapers to value the maintainance of stable organic populations, the maintainance of natural life spans, etc, rather than just saying "Hey AI, preserve organic life and stop this organic/synthetic conflict. Kthanksbye." I suppose they could say this. But that is tremendously unsatisfying to me. How could they ever have become an apex race if they were really that stupid?

MyChemicalBromance...

TheBorgPrincess wrote...
I guess the real issue is the AI. Prior to ME3 I was able to accept the idea that the Reapers were this odd amalgam of synthetic and organic that had screwed up motivations. I imagined that maybe they suffered from some sort of groupthink twisting of reasoning, leading them to their current conclusions that harvesting was the best. But once BioWare told me that an AI was in charge, and that this AI's mandate was simply to “preserve life,”
I got totally lost. An AI has to at the very least, be logical and even from an infinite timescale perspective, harvesting does not seem like a logical solution to me. 

It isn't logical. This was actually something I pointed out in a thread long before Leviathan, and before the Extended Cut: The Catalyst's creators have to be organics. Why? Because it values organic life simply for being organic life (as opposed to "logical" reasons such as resources).

But then we're back to the question of, if the Catalyst values organic life for simply being organic, then why change them into Reaper form? Even if the Catalyst values preservation of genetic code, there are far more logical ways to preserve pure organic DNA than to pump it into a giant Reaper body.

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

TheBorgPrincess wrote...
Regarding question #4: Maybe I should clarify slightly. I do understand the idea that organics and synthetics can be in conflict. I just don't understand why this is a conflict that supposedly will last forever, can never be solved, and must always result in all organics dying forever.

The Fermi Paradox (well.. Mass Effect's solution to it). If an Organic race rose to spacefaring status, it would dominate any race that rose after it (simply by virtue of time and technology). If the organic race was overthrown by synthetics (inevitable to the Catalyst because a malevolent AI could one day exist), then those synthetics would hold an advantage over any organic, and destroy them like they did their creators.

So, before we can talk more about this, I have to ask, how is the Fermi Paradox even applicable in the ME Universe? Fermi's question essentially boils down to "There should be aliens; why am I not seeing any aliens?" But in ME, we've got aliens everywhere, and we see them. There is no paradox.

Just so you know, if you answered this thread, I am reading it! Even if I can't respond to everyone. I'm trying to catch up page by page. Currently on page 5... Thanks for all the interesting perspectives everyone, even if I can't quite get behind some of them!

Modifié par TheBorgPrincess, 03 mai 2013 - 06:32 .

[MyChemicalBromance]

TheBorgPrincess wrote...

I get what you're saying. But the Leviathans programmed/built the AI. I feel like to believe you, I need to believe the Leviathans were so crazed with arrogance that they not only were dumb enough to build an AI of their own, but also forgot how to program stuff properly. I would assume any sane organic would be sure to assign values to give their creation a sense of what they, as organics, thought was "preservation of life." Organics are the creators, after all right? So don't we necessarily impose our values onto our synthetic creations? I would theorize that the Leviathans, being concerned about thrall availability, would be likely to program the Reapers to value the maintainance of stable organic populations, the maintainance of natural life spans, etc, rather than just saying "Hey AI, preserve organic life and stop this organic/synthetic conflict. Kthanksbye." I suppose they could say this. But that is tremendously unsatisfying to me; how could ever have become an apex race if you were really that stupid?

I feel like it actually fits the Leviathan's values quite well. Would they value their thralls as individuals? The only thing they valued was that they paid "tribute."

Remember that the Leviathans considered themselves above the concerns of lesser species; they didn't develop the Catalyst to save themselves, they did it to save their thralls. Genetic material, enough to produce clones in the same way the Collectors were maintained, is simply a more efficient way of "preserving" a species.

I guess my point is this: while the Leviathans may have valued their own lives on an individual basis, they did not value the lives of their thralls on an individual basis, and thus there is just as big of a disconnect between their view of us and our view of us as their is between us and the Reapers. It may even be the same.

TheBorgPrincess wrote...

But then we're back to the question of, if the Catalyst values organic life for simply organics, then why change them into Reaper form? Even if the Catalyst values DNA storage, there are far more logical ways to preserve pure organic DNA than to pump it into a giant Reaper body.

That I don't have an explicit answer for. The Reapers fill the role of enforcers to the Catalysts plans, but I think that's their only purely "logical" function. The fact that they look like Leviathans, and carry the genetic material seems cultural, and I would attribute it to preferences instilled by the Leviathans.

TheBorgPrincess wrote...

So, before we can talk more about this, I have to ask, how is the Fermi Paradox even applicable in the ME Universe? Fermi's question essentially boils down to "There should be aliens; why am I not seeing any aliens?" But in ME, we've got aliens everywhere, and we see them. There is no paradox.

There are aliens, but they're all relatively young (<<50,000 spacefaring years). Even if we found a species tomorrow that was the same age as ours, the paradox would still stand; what happened to the civilizations that should have formed billions of years ago?


Mass Effect says the Reapers killed them all.

Modifié par MyChemicalBromance, 03 mai 2013 - 06:27 .

[Archonsg]

@theborgprincess

Be thankful that this thread is actually "slow".
I remember threads that were 50-100 pages in a day easy.

Probably because there aren't that many of us left on the boards.
You'll see the same people posting. ;-)

[Wayning_Star]

I'm wondering if it's all terrible writing or terrible reading comprehension? Folks tend to expect the story to 'give' all the answers to questions they're not capable of reading into their ideology as they are. Doesn't matter if the 'villain' is altered by writers, but the idea that the readers are attempting to rewrite history to suit their respective canon is interesting fallacy. But, I'm thinking that the writers actually geared it that way. IF not, it was a devious accident of nature..lol (like the catalyst)

@MCB, the reapers didn't 'kill' everyone, the story says they harvest most. IF they did 'kill' everyone, there wouldn't be any reaperships nor an MEU to harry. And the firmi paradox thing is dependent upon the Leviathan still in existence, so ???

I find it strange that many compare the story without monitoring their own necessity. As if the Leviathan are clueless, for inventing the intelligence. All the while necessitating a computer to pose an argument against using a computer. Strange,eh?

[Xamufam]

@Wayning_Star
Heres the reason Bioware had an extremely complex ending in mind more complex than me 2 ending, but they didn't have time to implement it. It would have satisfied everyone. I don't blame the writing team anymore but those above them. But how they defended the endings I have no idea arrogance maybe
Read it & you will feel a click
social.bioware.com/forums/forum/1/topic/355/index/16621390/3#16624681

Modifié par Troxa, 03 mai 2013 - 01:57 .

[dreamgazer]

Troxa wrote...

Heres the reason Bioware had an extremely complex ending in mind more complex than me 2 ending, but they didn't have time to implement it. It would have satisfied everyone. I don't blame the writing team anymore but those above them. But how they defended the endings I have no idea arrogance maybe
Read it & you will feel a click
social.bioware.com/forums/forum/1/topic/355/index/16621390/3#16624681

Ah yes, that ever trusted source "guy on GameFaqs".

Also, I thought it was proven that the flowchart was, in fact, user-created to reflect what that individual wished would have happened. 

[Xamufam]

dreamgazer wrote...

Troxa wrote...

Heres the reason Bioware had an extremely complex ending in mind more complex than me 2 ending, but they didn't have time to implement it. It would have satisfied everyone. I don't blame the writing team anymore but those above them. But how they defended the endings I have no idea arrogance maybe
Read it & you will feel a click
social.bioware.com/forums/forum/1/topic/355/index/16621390/3#16624681

Ah yes, that ever trusted source "guy on GameFaqs".

Also, I thought it was proven that the flowchart was, in fact, user-created to reflect what that individual wished would have happened. 

extracted from the ending files http://www.mediafire...a9hk2ha5xpqp3tk 
http://www.mediafire...l4yz1rt1dfwd6fi
www.youtube.com/watch

http://www.mediafire...a9hk2ha5xpqp3tk 
http://www.mediafire...l4yz1rt1dfwd6fi
http://www.mediafire...m19xma7bzqf727m
Shep and Anderson Cut Dialogue
FemShep and Anderson Cut Dialogue
[/list]

Modifié par Troxa, 03 mai 2013 - 02:10 .

[dreamgazer]

Troxa wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Troxa wrote...

Heres the reason Bioware had an extremely complex ending in mind more complex than me 2 ending, but they didn't have time to implement it. It would have satisfied everyone. I don't blame the writing team anymore but those above them. But how they defended the endings I have no idea arrogance maybe
Read it & you will feel a click
social.bioware.com/forums/forum/1/topic/355/index/16621390/3#16624681

Ah yes, that ever trusted source "guy on GameFaqs".

Also, I thought it was proven that the flowchart was, in fact, user-created to reflect what that individual wished would have happened. 

extracted from the ending files http://www.mediafire...a9hk2ha5xpqp3tk 
http://www.mediafire...l4yz1rt1dfwd6fi

Sorry, not dowloading some random files from mediafire. Use words.

[Xamufam]

dreamgazer wrote...

Troxa wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Troxa wrote...

Heres the reason Bioware had an extremely complex ending in mind more complex than me 2 ending, but they didn't have time to implement it. It would have satisfied everyone. I don't blame the writing team anymore but those above them. But how they defended the endings I have no idea arrogance maybe
Read it & you will feel a click
social.bioware.com/forums/forum/1/topic/355/index/16621390/3#16624681

Ah yes, that ever trusted source "guy on GameFaqs".

Also, I thought it was proven that the flowchart was, in fact, user-created to reflect what that individual wished would have happened. 

extracted from the ending files http://www.mediafire...a9hk2ha5xpqp3tk 
http://www.mediafire...l4yz1rt1dfwd6fi

Sorry, not dowloading some random files from mediafire. Use words.

www.youtube.com/watch

[dreamgazer]

Troxa wrote...

www.youtube.com/watch

That is your smoking gun?

Because, really, that could just go to show that the EC was actually planned. 

Modifié par dreamgazer, 03 mai 2013 - 02:13 .

[MegaSovereign]

Harbinger presenting the choices to Shepard pretty much preserves 80% of the main issues I have with the current ending. The 3 choices also seem to be the same, except Destroy is the only one with the destroyed mass relays. It really isn't any different. I guess it would have satisfied liggy so there's a win.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 03 mai 2013 - 02:20 .

[dreamgazer]

MegaSovereign wrote...

I guess it would have satisfied liggy so there's a win.

liggy wanted to curb-stomp Harbinger.  I doubt having a conversation with King Reaper and the opportunity to agree with it would've really jibed with him.

[Archonsg]

That other link with the "other original ending" (non dark energy) is a much better one.

How did we get Synthesis as the Reaper desired end to Synthesis as the "best choice for compromise" is still a rather huge leap in logic.

But yes, I would have been very happy with that other original ending.
Now why can't they redo this as an alternate ending DLC? I would have paid good money for it.

[AlanC9]

Eryri wrote...
And the Leviathans were supposedly the Apex Race of their era! The top of the tree! How thick must everyone else have been?!

Maybe they weren't all that smart. Larry Niven did something like that; thrintun aren't as intelligent as humans, but they don't need to be since they have mind-control powers, so they just enslave other races and have them do the hard work.

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 mai 2013 - 06:26 .

[Eryri]

AlanC9 wrote...

Eryri wrote...
And the Leviathans were supposedly the Apex Race of their era! The top of the tree! How thick must everyone else have been?!

Maybe they weren't all that smart. Larry Niven did something like that; thrintun aren't as intelligent as humans, but they don't need to be since they have mind-control powers, so they just enslave other races and have them do the hard work.

Are they from the Ring World series? I remember reading a few of those, many years ago. They were rather good as I recall.

However, I'm afraid I still don't enjoy the thought that the Reapers essentially exist because a somewhat dense race of giant squid made a silly mistake that defies everyday common sense. It rather robs them of their mystique, such as it was.

I have tried to head canon that the Leviathans perhaps created an organic computer as their intelligence. This, at least, they would have reasonably expected to maintain control over, given their ability to enthrall organic life. It's a pity that the narrative itself is so vague about what the Catalyst actually is though.

Modifié par Eryri, 03 mai 2013 - 06:53 .

[JShepppp]

TheBorgPrincess wrote...

On #3

JShepppp wrote...
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.

I understand what you're saying. The problem is, there are many other ways to "save" DNA besides grinding a whole race up into DNA soup. Also, harvesting may not be exacerbating the deaths of organics, since as you say, they would all die anyway. But it's certainly not helping anything either. Thus, it seems to be a solution with no real benefit (besides the DNA storage, yes).

The DNA storage IS the benefit. Basically, the Catalyst believes there are two choices:

1. Do nothing and have everyone die.
2. Do the solution and save some people, but the rest will still die anyways.

It does not see a possibility where everyone does NOT die. As for other ways to save organics, we have seen no other ways other than uploading consciousnesses to Reapers. You are right to say that the Catalyst isn't solving the problem, but the thing is, it cannot solve the problem it was created to solve. It's doing the best it can to solve an impossible problem. Please feel free to read more about this in my Catalyst thread (in my sig) for more elaboration on my opinions of the Catalyst, especially this topic of the impossible problem.

On #4

JShepppp wrote...
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.

I think I just think fundamentally differently. I don't believe that just because you think differently, you are doomed to conflict. The real problem is the resolution of the Geth conflict, which provides an in-game counterpoint to the idea that synthetics and organics cannot work together peacefully. So the Catalyst may tell me that organics/synthetics can never get along, but I don't see any evidence of that other than his word.

The Catalyst is not saying that conflict is inevitable because people think differently (though that itself can be a fair assumption). It is saying conflict between synthetics and organics is inevitable because they want different things and organics will expect the synthetics to serve them and will force their beliefs on the synthetics as synthetics were originally created to serve organics. This does not mean organics will not acquiesce - they may eventually. But there will be a rebellion when a synthetic first disobeys organics in order to make that change happen. The Quarians/Geth show us clearly that the Quarians refused to allow the Geth to disobey them. The Geth did rebel - they disobeyed. It doesn't matter whether they were right or wrong; the Catalyst makes no judgment on that. All it says is that the synthetics will rebel.

Also, the Reapers rebelling against the Catalyst will never happen because the Reapers aren't the kind of synthetics that will rebel. The Catalyst explicitly notes that synthetics created out of a byproduct of technological advancement are the ones that will eventually overpower their creators. The Reapers were not created for a purpose that demands their evolution, so they will never evolve. The Catalyst did not rebel against the Leviathans as it still follows its programming (the Leviathans themselves note this) and the Catalyst was not created to serve the Leviathans; it was created to find a way to create synthetic/organic peace. 

The Morning War proves the Catalyst's assertion that synthetics created to serve organics will always rebel. However, the Geth/Quarian peace option does not disprove the Catalyst. The Catalyst has already seen synthetic/organic peace come and go, and it has only seen temporary peace, nothing lasting. Peace in-game exists for less than a year - how can we say it will actually last? It was also only with the Reapers' intervention that they found peace, for three reasons: (a) the Geth with the Reaper code were a big enough threat that the Quarians were forced to make peace or get obliterated, ( the Reaper threat provides a common enemy to unite against, and © the Reaper threat means the rest of the galaxy, like Shepard, actually gives a sh*t about what's going on between the Geth/Quarians and try to actively make peace between them, constituting an external factor. The key is that we cannot say that the peace will last, especially against the Catalyst's timeline of a billion years, and possibly more before the Leviathans. 

Regarding the idea of synthetics evolving to become more powerful that organics and then dominating us forever... many people who have answered here seem to have made this assumption. Again, I just can't see why it is rational to assume this, but isn't just as rational to assume the opposite. Synthetics can certainly replicate themselves faster than organics since they can just pop out fully functional new units as fast as they can build them (while we have to go through all that pesky growing up), but replication is NOT evolution. Synthetics change by changing themselves. Organics can change by changing themselves (gene modification, bioengineering, etc) but we're also shaped by physical realities. These physical realities provide us with selection pressures that force us to adapt and diversify in ways that are often illogical, but ultimately, result in great gains for us as a species. My point basically is just that synthetics do not really evolve in the sense that they are shaped by the universe around them and therefore must adapt in a "survival of the fittest" sort of way. Organics' ability to do this (over long periods of time, yes) may be a powerful tool and would potentially allow us to adapt in ways that synthetics would never think of. So basically, I'm not sure if we can really be certain that synthetics will dominate us to begin with.

In general, cybernetic enhancements, gene splicing, etc. can possibly give equivalent results in sci fi fiction as a whole, but we are talking here about Mass Effect. Unfortunately, all the examples we have seen (the Geth, the Reapers) show that synthetics have the potential to evolve faster than their superiors. They may not realize it, but the assumption is that they will become sufficiently advanced to take advantage of their superiority and self-evolve (duplication is one thing, but you are right, the argument is about self-evolution). Legion's talk of the Dyson sphere was an allusion to this in my humble opinion, but I may be wrong.

On #10

JShepppp wrote...
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.

The problem is that each cycle adds to the Crucible. I'm not sure how you could add to something in any meaningful way without understanding what the heck it does or what it is for. So even if we did assume that some races knew the Citadel was actually a weapon, it's difficult to understand how the Protheans, or our cycle, were able to contribute anything to the project.

Adding doesn't have to necessarily mean adding something new; it could mean finding something that didn't work, recording a failure, etc. You don't necessarily have to add to the weapon's power or fully understand it to contribute to it. It's clear though that there were races much more advanced than the Protheans, as evidenced by the Crucible's inclusion of Synthesis, the Derelict Reaper from ME2, and so forth. The Protheans themselves learned everything from the Insuannon before them. 

[TheBorgPrincess]

Hi thread buddies! Sorry for being away for a few days. I had finals.

So, I've come to the conclusion that I'm just not going to be able to have satisfying answers (satisfying to me) for some of my questions. I feel like we could just keep debating about things on here forever!

I think the bottom line is that some people seem content to work within the framework of the story we were given to extrapolate reasons to back things up. Others are less ok with this because they either felt the framework of the story was illogical, the extrapolated reasons are illogical, or they they feel a good story should give you these things to begin with and not require you to conjecture quite so much.

I'm probably falling more towards the 2nd group overall. While I do understand that in any story, sometimes you just have to accept things that the author tells you about the world or about the rules of the universe, in ME3, this seems to happen an awful lot and the things I'm required to accept just don't make much sense to me. Out of my 14 big questions, 3 were totally resolved - questions 1, 5, and 6. Thank you for that everyone who helped! The rest... well I've read everyone's explanations. I can take those and use them to "accept" the rest of my questions at least (so thanks for that as well). But it all does still feel a bit unsatisfying to me. In my opinion, when I'm experiencing a story that requires me to frequently use a "because the story said so" explanation to justify things, it's generally a sign that I thought the story was poorly constructed.

So... I don't know what happened with ME3 exactly. I definitely don't feel like this was the best that BioWare was capable of, but perhaps that was just me expecting way too much from a game. I've only ever played the Mass Effect series, so I'm definitely no expert on these things and I think I had really started to treat it like a book by the end there.

Everyone seems to agree that ME3 got rushed during production and that this was detrimental to the final product. Do you guys think that that's likely to happen again with future BioWare games? I'm not sure if this is just a reality of the game industry.

Modifié par TheBorgPrincess, 08 mai 2013 - 07:48 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

TheBorgPrincess wrote...

Hi thread buddies! Sorry for being away for a few days. I had finals.

So, I've come to the conclusion that I'm just not going to be able to have satisfying answers (satisfying to me) for some of my questions. I feel like we could just keep debating about things on here forever!

You now know exactly what you've missed on this forum the past year.

I think the bottom line is that some people seem content to work within the framework of the story we were given to extrapolate reasons to back things up. Others are less ok with this because they either felt the framework of the story was illogical, the extrapolated reasons are illogical, or they they feel a good story should give you these things to begin with and not require you to conjecture quite so much.

I'm probably falling more towards the 2nd group overall. While I do understand that in any story, sometimes you just have to accept things that the author tells you about the world or about the rules of the universe, in ME3, this seems to happen an awful lot and the things I'm required to accept just don't make much sense to me. Out of my 14 big questions, 3 were totally resolved - questions 1, 5, and 6. Thank you for that everyone who helped! The rest... well I've read everyone's explanations. I can take those and use them to "accept" the rest of my questions at least (so thanks for that as well). But it all does still feel a bit unsatisfying to me. In my opinion, when I'm experiencing a story that requires me to frequently use a "because the story said so" explanation to justify things, it's generally a sign that I thought the story was poorly constructed.

So... I don't know what happened with ME3 exactly. I definitely don't feel like this was the best that BioWare was capable of, but perhaps that was just me expecting way too much from a game. I've only ever played the Mass Effect series, so I'm definitely no expert on these things and I think I had really started to treat it like a book by the end there.

Everyone seems to agree that ME3 got rushed during production and that this was detrimental to the final product. Do you guys think that that's likely to happen again with future BioWare games? I'm not sure if this is just a reality of the game industry.

Depends on if they get overly ambitious again. I've certainly had experiances in gaming that took me to places from a story perspective which I didn't expect but were satifying. How this is executed is key though, so really it could go either way for them depending on what they hope to achieve with their future games and what expectations they themselve build up.

Personally they seem to be largely shifting away from my style of preferred gameplay, so I'm likely to be persuing my niche elsewhere, unless I'm really thrilled by their pitch for their upcoming projects.

[Megaton_Hope]

TheBorgPrincess wrote...

Everyone seems to agree that ME3 got rushed during production and that this was detrimental to the final product. Do you guys think that that's likely to happen again with future BioWare games? I'm not sure if this is just a reality of the game industry.

That seems likely. I can't say that I'm much surprised about the ways Mass Effect 3 is flawed after playing Dragon Age 2.

EA in particular is fairly notorious for deadline pressure:

http://ea-spouse.livejournal.com/

This made some waves about nine years ago. While the leadership has changed in that time, the corporate culture probably hasn't.