447 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

So are Wendy's chicken nuggets the chicken form of ascension?

[Ravensword]

KaiserShep wrote...

So are Wendy's chicken nuggets the chicken form of ascension?

Are these chickens' genetic material being used to create more eldritch horrors?

[AlanC9]

KaiserShep wrote...

So are Wendy's chicken nuggets the chicken form of ascension?

Thomas Disch wrote a story called "The Happy Turnip"  about a turnip whose foremost desire is to be eaten by a human, so he can become part of something greater than himself. I suppose it's not a spoiler to say that he gets his wish.

There's also Douglas Adams' Dish of the Day. The way to ethically eat meat is to breed something that wants you to eat it.

Modifié par AlanC9, 08 novembre 2013 - 07:49 .

[dreamgazer]

KaiserShep wrote...

So are Wendy's chicken nuggets the chicken form of ascension?

Regulating the organic-avian conflict since 1983.

[Br3admax]

I suddenly have the urge to go to Wendy's and buy large amounts of processed chicken byproducts.

[Deathsaurer]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Except that you can put what Harbinger said into the same context as all that Sovereign said.

Without the rest of the story, sure. But in hindsight, and with the added context of various leaks, it's quite clear that was the first hint that the Reapers weren't being straight with their boasting.

dreamgazer wrote...

"We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution".

Not seeing how that can be interpreted as a "salvation" mission.

Modifié par Deathsaurer, 08 novembre 2013 - 08:39 .

[Ravensword]

dreamgazer wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

So are Wendy's chicken nuggets the chicken form of ascension?

Regulating the organic-avian conflict since 1983.

Mmmmm. Pink slime. More of a byproduct of beef, no?

[Iakus]

Ravensword wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

So are Wendy's chicken nuggets the chicken form of ascension?

Are these chickens' genetic material being used to create more eldritch horrors?

They're being made into chicken nuggets for a fast food chain, aren't they?

[Knuxson]

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


Does Destroy fix things, or not? Again, the substance of the Catalyst's postion is that it won't, not that it will.

This is where the contradictions within the catalyst seem to come to a point.  Destroy is a solution to the problem but the catalyst seems to say it is not because the chaos will return.  But nothing he has ever attempted has been a permanent solution, either.  He says as much.  And even if Synthesis is his preferred solution (if he prefers things-again an organic trait), it too can be seen as temporary as well.  

This is why I think destroy is the best ending (not a good ending necessarily, just the best of the three).  I feel like in the destroy ending, I get to say “screw you” to the kid and do what I set out to do: destroy the reapers.  The kid warns that if you choose destroy, there will eventually be an event where synthetics kill organics, with no reapers around to stop it from happening.  But my Shepard proved that this was not a forgone conclusion (EDI and the Geth).  This fact, coupled with the fact that the reapers are dead and Shepard is alive, makes destroy my ending of choice out of what we were offered.  It does suck though that EDI and the Geth are apparently destroyed by choosing destroy since they were “living” proof that the kid was wrong.  That part is kind of a slap in the face.

Modifié par Knuxson, 08 novembre 2013 - 10:38 .

[ElSuperGecko]

Unsatisfied?  Unhappy?  Watch this, it'll make everything better...

youtu.be/Yt8BTMtaYys

Modifié par ElSuperGecko, 09 novembre 2013 - 01:02 .

[Dr. Megaverse]

Knuxson wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


Does Destroy fix things, or not? Again, the substance of the Catalyst's postion is that it won't, not that it will.

This is where the contradictions within the catalyst seem to come to a point.  Destroy is a solution to the problem but the catalyst seems to say it is not because the chaos will return.  But nothing he has ever attempted has been a permanent solution, either.  He says as much.  And even if Synthesis is his preferred solution (if he prefers things-again an organic trait), it too can be seen as temporary as well.  

This is why I think destroy is the best ending (not a good ending necessarily, just the best of the three).  I feel like in the destroy ending, I get to say “screw you” to the kid and do what I set out to do: destroy the reapers.  The kid warns that if you choose destroy, there will eventually be an event where synthetics kill organics, with no reapers around to stop it from happening.  But my Shepard proved that this was not a forgone conclusion (EDI and the Geth).  This fact, coupled with the fact that the reapers are dead and Shepard is alive, makes destroy my ending of choice out of what we were offered.  It does suck though that EDI and the Geth are apparently destroyed by choosing destroy since they were “living” proof that the kid was wrong.  That part is kind of a slap in the face.

I  view Destroy as a "We'll choose our own destiny, even if it means the end of us" kind of ending.  Personally I'd rather live free and die, then live as a slave to either the Reaper cycle, dependance on the Reapers (or a fascimilie thereof), or force an irreversible decision on the denizens of the galaxy without a referendum from the majority of the galaxy's inhabitants showing support for such an idea.  At least with Destroy I feel as though I'm giving each and every race the choice to live or die as they will based on their own actions, the Galactic Imperative as it were, instead of the machinations of a machine which does not understand or empathize with each and every individual race's unique character, society, and moral values.  Considering that the aforementioned example of the Geth and Quarrians being able to acheive peace, and indeed a Synthesis of their own, I feel the "slap in the face" of killing them was especially painful. 

That being said I will forever look at product from both EA and BW with Caveat Emptor in mind. 

Modifié par Dr. Megaverse, 09 novembre 2013 - 04:06 .

[Dr. Megaverse]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Unsatisfied?  Unhappy?  Watch this, it'll make everything better...

youtu.be/Yt8BTMtaYys

BTW, this made me smile! 

+1

[Obadiah]

Ravensword wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

So are Wendy's chicken nuggets the chicken form of ascension?

Are these chickens' genetic material being used to create more eldritch horrors?

They live on inside us, and our children. The chickens sacrificed everything so we could go on... snacking.

[3DandBeyond]

AlanC9 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

True.  One of the big mistakes of ME3 is the lost opportunity in using Javik to really get some context as to all that happened during his time.  Since he was DLC, his content had to be dumbed down, so he had to be of course.  The Rachni too could have also helped to explain events that took place which could have been important.  The Rachni have racial memory and had been advanced by the Protheans to be warriors for them, so they might know something, but no one seems curious about any of this. 

This is only a mistake if you think the Protheans should have been important in the first place. I never saw them as anything really special. Except for getting lucky and sabotaging the Citadel, they're just another cycle.

As the last cycle to have come up against the reapers and one which resulted in some truly threatening reaper wannabes (the Collectors) there were things to learn from them, just as there would be from any previous races that came up against the reapers.  That is, if it was important at all to try and understand their motives (which up until the end doesn't really seem to matter and then their motives become THE story).  As it is, Javik knows zero about anything relevant except regarding Asari history.

The Protheans mattered a lot in ME1 and by the time ME3 rolls around it's like they're nothing.  Prettty stupid for a story that focused so heavily on them that a warning beacon of sorts that they placed seems to alter Shepard and leads to Vigil, the conduit to the Citadel, and then the Collectors, and then who the frick cares the Protheans are meaningless.

In fact, another big part of what's wrong in all of this is just exactly what did that beacon do to Shepard and how is it possibly related to what happens next?  Oh right, it didn't do anything because by the time ME3 starts up the beacon and how it changed Shepard is forgotten.

[GreyLycanTrope]

HYR 2.0 wrote...
There were two scripts: one that was drastically different, and one that predominantly matches what we got.

And the Catalyst was in both of them, it just wasn't always called "the Catalyst" (but "the Guardian").

If it didn't refer to itself as the Catalyst but the plot involving a Catalyst was still largely the same you're still looking at a different dynamic.

AlanC9 wrote...
How was the scenario actually different? I
don't remember the substance of the choices as being any different,
though the leaked script was a little vague.

We're talking about the Catalyst as being presented as ether strickly an exposition tool or than both a plot device and character. This does effect the story structure and how the audiances reacts to the presentation. It's the difference between say Vigil who provides exposition and a plan to twart Saren vs the Mira VI at Rift station which do nothing aside from telling you what's happening.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 10 novembre 2013 - 02:34 .

[3DandBeyond]

Deathsaurer wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Except that you can put what Harbinger said into the same context as all that Sovereign said.

Without the rest of the story, sure. But in hindsight, and with the added context of various leaks, it's quite clear that was the first hint that the Reapers weren't being straight with their boasting.

dreamgazer wrote...

"We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution".

Not seeing how that can be interpreted as a "salvation" mission.

Well, I agree but then if they weren't being straight about all that boasting then it all comes back around to lying.  Someone is and it's kind of like this--if the kid is lying (or however you want to parse it for a computer to be telling non-truths), then everything he says is subject to question (it is no matter what but lying forms a real imperative).  If the reapers are lying then well as their master commander supreme god of all things, then so too the kid is lying since he controls them and they represent him.  It's just that none of this says to me that I should in any way find what any of them say is believable, so evidence points to it being a big mistake to think the kid actually means to save organics or that the choices will do what he says they do. 

Then again even if he's being completely honest about everything, he's totally mixed up because he has a limited scope of knowledge.  Either he understands that we define life differently from us and that destruction is death or he does not care that we can hold different beliefs about all of this-one that is more religious where we live until our bodies die (perhaps even until natural death) and may be ascended spiritually (our souls) or one that is not so religious where we live until body death and there is no rebirth or afterlife.

He clearly understands that he is destroying bodies and we define that as death, no matter what he thinks.  And for crying out loud if the Leviathans did program him then since they were afraid of synthetics killing their organic pets, they would surely have programmed him to know that destroying organics is the opposite of helping them. 

If something happens after that ascension is not generally seen by "us" as something given to us by created beings or that heaven exists within created composite bodies made of organic components.  I can't envision anyone wanting to be ascended into THAT.

Oh and that quote of imposing order on the chaos of organic evolution--sure does not sound to me like anyone who said that was focused primarily on killer robots wiping out organics.  And funny thing--evolution itself is actually pretty orderly.  It seems random and chaotic but only because there are times when mutations jump in.  Evolution actually chooses from a variety of targeted options relating to some specific needs-scientists studying it tend to see it as creating a slew of possibilities that really are not at all random or chaotic.  It's done with a purpose--and that means it is fairly orderly.  But again, order and chaos are neutral concepts, not good and bad things. 

[3DandBeyond]

Greylycantrope wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...
There were two scripts: one that was drastically different, and one that predominantly matches what we got.

And the Catalyst was in both of them, it just wasn't always called "the Catalyst" (but "the Guardian").

If it didn't refer to itself as the Catalyst but the plot involving a Catalyst was still largely the same you're still looking at a different dynamic.

AlanC9 wrote...
How was the scenario actually different? I
don't remember the substance of the choices as being any different,
though the leaked script was a little vague.

We're talking about the Catalyst as being presented as ether strickly an exposition tool or than both a plot device and character. This does effect the story structure and how the audiances reacts to the presentation. It's the difference between say Vigil who provides exposition and a plan to twart Saren vs the Mira VI at Rift station which do nothing aside from telling you what's happening.

Yep, the fact that the Catalyst is the one searching for a solution to a specific problem and then the endings revolve around solving that problem with some new dynamic that he presents means he is more than just a tour guide. He is an integral part of the new goal and in fact he is changed by the crucible.  I could go back and describe why this alone calls into question the origin of the crucible and how it actually then is meant to solve the problem for which he was created, but more to the point is that he's not some bystander.  He needs a new solution since the reapers no longer work.  He gets 3 new solutions when the crucible changes him.

Even if you look at the term Catalyst, it means an acting agent that causes or helps a reaction to occur. 

[Deathsaurer]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Well, I agree but then if they weren't being straight about all that boasting then it all comes back around to lying.  Someone is and it's kind of like this--if the kid is lying (or however you want to parse it for a computer to be telling non-truths), then everything he says is subject to question (it is no matter what but lying forms a real imperative).  If the reapers are lying then well as their master commander supreme god of all things, then so too the kid is lying since he controls them and they represent him.  It's just that none of this says to me that I should in any way find what any of them say is believable, so evidence points to it being a big mistake to think the kid actually means to save organics or that the choices will do what he says they do.

And this is touching on what I think is the major issue with the ending, who is presenting it. It knows it has a PR problem and it has that PR problem because of the image it presented via the Reapers. Sovereign played the role of deranged killbot, Harbinged continued to play this role in a supremely hammy way only dropping the guise for a brief moment to deliever what many took as a throw away line. Then you have the siege of Earth and the broadcasting of the slaughter of the Turian colonies before they went threw the Palaven relay. Then there is the appearence... It has a crediblity problem and it knows it. This is part of the reason why I'd have preferred it to actually be developed as a character.

Then again even if he's being completely honest about everything, he's totally mixed up because he has a limited scope of knowledge.  Either he understands that we define life differently from us and that destruction is death or he does not care that we can hold different beliefs about all of this-one that is more religious where we live until our bodies die (perhaps even until natural death) and may be ascended spiritually (our souls) or one that is not so religious where we live until body death and there is no rebirth or afterlife.

I'm reminded of an exchange between Legion and Liara during the Geth/Quarian Arc

Legion: Shepard-Commander placed faith in us. We will do the same for Normandy.

Liara: You mean the Normandy's crew?

Legion: We do not see a meaningful distinction.

In short I'd say yes, its definition is entirely different and not in a good way. I doubt the people that were forcibly convereted into AIs, if they even qualifiy as that, are anything like the people they once were. Even Shepard in Control has a radical change but I view that more akin to Barkley when he hooked himself into the Enterprise's main computer.

He clearly understands that he is destroying bodies and we define that as death, no matter what he thinks.  And for crying out loud if the Leviathans did program him then since they were afraid of synthetics killing their organic pets, they would surely have programmed him to know that destroying organics is the opposite of helping them.

 
This is something I feel needed to be explored quite badly. What made it conclude this was better? What did it see that we didn't? It could have been done in a way that makes you consider maybe it has a point but without pushing the idea that it is absolutely right.

If something happens after that ascension is not generally seen by "us" as something given to us by created beings or that heaven exists within created composite bodies made of organic components.  I can't envision anyone wanting to be ascended into THAT.

Maybe not via that method but the idea of uploading minds into computers isn't exactly new.

EDI: Are we more than our thoughts?

I don't think we can answer that yet.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Greylycantrope wrote...

If it didn't refer to itself as the Catalyst but the plot involving a Catalyst was still largely the same you're still looking at a different dynamic.

Would a Reaper-conrolling AI by any other name smell differently?

We're talking about the Catalyst as being presented as ether strickly an exposition tool or than both a plot device and character. This does effect the story structure and how the audiances reacts to the presentation. It's the difference between say Vigil who provides exposition and a plan to twart Saren vs the Mira VI at Rift station which do nothing aside from telling you what's happening.

Vigil most certainly is not a character. Mira isn't one, either.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 10 novembre 2013 - 04:28 .

[Deathsaurer]

The Catalyst, whether it wants to call itself the Intelligence or the Guardian, is still tainted by the actions of its creations. Actions it defended to a large degree as necessary. As long as it is connected to the Reapers, without developing its personality prior to the ending, the problem would remain.

[KaiserShep]

HYR 2.0 wrote...
Vigil most certainly is not a character. Mira isn't one, either.

Glyph is a character and I won't hear otherwise! 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 10 novembre 2013 - 04:58 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

If it didn't refer to itself as the Catalyst but the plot involving a Catalyst was still largely the same you're still looking at a different dynamic.

Would a Reaper-conrolling AI by any other name smell differently?

Yes actually the name change is significant otherwise they wouldn't bother.

Vigil most certainly is not a character. Mira isn't one, either.

Mira isn't one Vigil is. He blocks your path leads you too him, you converse with him can question his judgement in turning off the pods, he even defends his position, hell he's got his own theme music. He might be one note but he does more than just provide exposition, he is a character.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Mira isn't one Vigil is. He blocks your path leads you too him, you converse with him can question his judgement in turning off the pods, he even defends his position, hell he's got his own theme music. He might be one note but he does more than just provide exposition, he is a character.

It's a VI, and a malfunctioning one at that -- nothing more than a glorified computer.

More to the point: nothing "he" does is exclusive to the role of a character, either.

You can replace all of it with decidedly non-character entities, IMO. Let's try it...


-- Blocking the path? Replace with indoctrination-scanning device. Saren goes. Shepard is stopped.
-- Conversation? Replace with a recorded message from a Prothean. All the same information is given. If you must have Shepard talk here, have the companions chime with their opinions on the matter, and have Shepard respond to them.
-- Theme song? Pfft! Virmire has a track. Is the planet or mission a character?

[David7204]

The same is true of many characters that are undeniably alive.

What difference does it make?

[GreyLycanTrope]

Technically speaking an AI is also a glorified computer, how many AI characters do we have? You realize could replace Anderson and Hackett in much the same fashion, they technically don't do much other than tell Shepard what to do and where to go, are they somehow no longer characters?