1638 réponses à ce sujet

[SwobyJ]

The Reapers were never said to be beyond *our* comprehension.

They're beyond Shepard's comprehension. The human that the Reapers speak to. He cannot comprehend the magnitude of their.. presence. I wonder what that means.

[AlanC9]

But the ending, as it stands, doesn't give anyone a chance. The ending doesn't give you the option to sacrifice, it makes you sacrifice yourself. On top of that, it makes you sacrifice yourself for a reason that is not only illogical and nonsensical, but also not your primary goal. Your goal is to stop the Reapers, not understand what and why they do what they do, as Vigil said on Ilos. So we sacrifice ourselves to end a problem that we already solved, exemplified by the Geth/Quarian war, and on top of that it was never our mission to solve this secondary problem.

 
Wait a second. I agree that Shepard doesn't have a choice to not sacrifice herself -- since she doesn't know she's going to make it through Destroy, as far as she knows she's done for whatever she decides.But Shepard isn't sacrificing herself to solve the Catalyst's problem,  unless that's what you decide she's doing. Of the four options only one solves the problem (assuming it's a real problem in the first place); Destroy makes the situation worse, Refuse is a punt, and Control is a crapshoot.
 

On another note, the Reapers are meant to be beyond our comprehension, so any attempt to explain their motivation was doomed to fail and insults the very beings Bioware created.

 
That depends on what you mean by "meant to be." Bio didn't ever intend to not have a big reveal of the Reapers' origins and purpose at the end of the series, apparently. Whenever they talk about their writing process they talk about deciding what the reveal should be, as opposed to deciding whether there should be one at all. You were always going to see the man behind the curtain.

[SwobyJ]

Destroy is a solution.

For the short term.

Control is a solution.

For the mid term.

Synthesis is a solution.

The 'ideal' one.

A short term solution is still a solution. We don't know how long it'll be until enough synthetics are created that they would pose a threat to organic life again. Years? Decades? Centuries? Millenia - as long as constant watch over it is taken?

Catalyst says 'soon'. What does 'soon' entail, for something like that? And with the 'chaos' coming back, does that still mean organic life is screwed?

Destroy is the gamble option, not Control. With Control, you know that at least organics are dealing with Reapers (which by now they've learned a lot about), and can manipulate the situation to their benefit, if the Reapers do go against them. Destroy might create synthetics down the line that are utterly unknown.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Remember that the Catalyst is a machine that operates on logic and order. Organic life is chaos to begin with. The universe operates on chaos. The Catalyst is trying to impose order on chaos. It is doomed to fail. Entropy. The chaos coming back does not mean that organic life is screwed. It just means that chaos returns. Even his synthesis is doomed. Entropy.

[RZIBARA]

I have started to really dislike it, if that counts

[SwobyJ]

Remember that the Catalyst is a machine that operates on logic and order. Organic life is chaos to begin with. The universe operates on chaos. The Catalyst is trying to impose order on chaos. It is doomed to fail. Entropy. The chaos coming back does not mean that organic life is screwed. It just means that chaos returns. Even his synthesis is doomed. Entropy.

Organic life - Chaos, with some Order
Synthetic life - Order, with some Chaos
Universal life - Ordered Chaos/Chaotic Order.. or just call it something else entirely. Transcendent. Alien. Whatever.

I just call it Red Blue Green at this point. Feels like Bioware wants me to.

There is always an order to things, as far as we know. Always something to greater understand, and yes, feel a control over. Sometimes it is a good thing. Instead of leaving weather to the gods, we can understand it more, to the point of now manipulating it to an extent. Same thing with.. I guess pretty much everything.

It's just that there seems to always be something beyond us (even in the greatest extent of sci-fi capabilities for humanity), and that this Beyond at some point comes back down to Earth anyway (in our older literature, that would be God coming down to Earth as Jesus). Because without understanding the small scale, you cannot gain the healthy context for the larger scale.

The Cir--Cycle of Lifeeee.

[AlanC9]

Destroy is the gamble option, not Control. With Control, you know that at least organics are dealing with Reapers (which by now they've learned a lot about), and can manipulate the situation to their benefit, if the Reapers do go against them. Destroy might create synthetics down the line that are utterly unknown.

 

I was speaking from the Catalyst's perspective, since kavox' proposal was that these actions solve the Catalyst's problem. While Shepard's attitude towards that problem is not quite random -- it's highly unlikely that any Shepard would believe that synthetics surpassing and exterminating organics would be a good thing -- the Catalyst has no way of knowing what, if anything, Shepard will do about the issue.

[SwobyJ]

I was speaking from the Catalyst's perspective, since kavox' proposal was that these actions solve the Catalyst's problem. While Shepard's attitude towards that problem is not quite random -- it's highly unlikely that any Shepard would believe that synthetics surpassing and exterminating organics would be a good thing -- the Catalyst has no way of knowing what, if anything, Shepard will do about the issue.

I was speaking from the Catalyst's perspective.

[AlanC9]

Then you weren't making much sense. Destroy makes things much, much worse. Unless after Destroy tech levels really go back to pre-spaceflight levels -- something that never made much sense even pre-EC, and has now been wholly ruled out -- you've bought a few years? If that. The knowledge to create AIs hasn't gone anywhere. And now you don't have any Reapers to deal with the situation. Also note that a surviving Destroy Shep will tell his story, and the Catalyst's position will be wholly discredited among organics, in the same way that the Third Reich discredited eugenics.

 

I refer to Control as a crapshoot because Shepard could make things worse or better.

[KaiserShep]

Remember that the Catalyst is a machine that operates on logic and order. Organic life is chaos to begin with. The universe operates on chaos. The Catalyst is trying to impose order on chaos. It is doomed to fail. Entropy. The chaos coming back does not mean that organic life is screwed. It just means that chaos returns. Even his synthesis is doomed. Entropy.

More chaos means that Elkoss Combine will continue to roll in credits for years to come.

[SwobyJ]

Then you weren't making much sense. Destroy makes things much, much worse. Unless after Destroy tech levels really go back to pre-spaceflight levels -- something that never made much sense even pre-EC, and has now been wholly ruled out -- you've bought a few years? If that.The knowledge to create AIs hasn't gone anywhere. And now you don't have any Reapers to deal with the situation.

Which is why it doesn't support it. It is a solution, but to the Catalyst, it is a highly misguided and short-term one.

 

Organics can police AI development. Prothians became a society that did just that, stamping it out whenever it appeared. Leviathans appeared to do that as well. But it would require a harsh 'Renegade' approach towards it*. A Shepard that encouraged positive relations with AI but then picked Destroy may be just as 'bad' as a Renegade picking Control. A solution, but how good was it, and for how long does it last?

 

Keep in mind that I'm a player who did just that (Destory with friendly Geth haha).

 

 

 

*Is this cycle even capable of stamping out AI like the more dominating Leviathans and Prothians? Maybe, maybe not. That's the gamble. All the Catalyst knows is that if an organic can make it all the way to the 'seat of God', then it isn't 'long' before the Reapers just get replaced/overthrown/changed anyway (see Refuse's next cycle outcome).

[KaiserShep]

You'd think people would be really busy rebuilding their infrastructure and the relays before thinking about dicking about with AI's for a while.

I guess Xen would, though.

[SwobyJ]

You'd think people would be really busy rebuilding their infrastructure and the relays before dicking about with AI's for a while.

 

Well at least a galaxy that didn't see the Geth as allies.

 

I also want to add a bit to my last post:

High EMS Catalyst sees Destroy as a solution that he doesn't support. Which is fine, as that's not mutually exclusive.

Low EMS Catalyst however doesn't care. You're an annoyance, you wouldn't be there if he wasn't hacked to accept you being there (*cough* Leviathan style enthrallment *cough*), and he'd rather you die or something. "Pick Destroy, fine, I can't do anything about it" is what I get from him. He doesn't see Low EMS Destroy as either a solution or something to support. Heck, he doesn't even support Control, whereas in High EMS he'll at least acknowledge it as something he'll roll with, even if he doesn't want to accept it.

 

I'm going more off original ending here.

[Mcfly616]

The Catalyst doesn't see Destroy or Control as a 'solution'. The Catalyst just recognizes that by Shepard reaching that point, that he has rendered it obsolete. So he is free to choose.


Synthesis is the solution to the organic/synthetic conflict. That is why it is 'ideal' to the Catalyst.

[Mcfly616]

You'd think people would be really busy rebuilding their infrastructure and the relays before thinking about dicking about with AI's for a while.

People be dumb.

[CaIIisto]

Last time I checked, the Reapers were the most advanced and powerful form of artificial intelligence that the galaxy's ever seen/known. Didn't stop them from getting an ass-whooping with Destroy though.....We're expecting a lesser form of AI to succeed where the Reapers couldn't? The Geth were knocked over by one Human ship and a fleet of galactic hobos......

 

The Reapers, as far as I can remember, achieved their state of dominance over the galaxy by catching the solitary apex race of their time, with their collective pants down. Once they'd reset the galaxy to zero the odds have always been stacked heavily in their favour thanks to the Citadel trap and the galactic reliance on the mass relays. No new AI threat is going to have odds that favourable, and they face a trickier proposition already than one solitary race to catch out.

[SwobyJ]

The Catalyst doesn't see Destroy or Control as a 'solution'. The Catalyst just recognizes that by Shepard reaching that point, that he has rendered it obsolete. So he is free to choose.


Synthesis is the solution to the organic/synthetic conflict. That is why it is 'ideal' to the Catalyst.

 

"We find a new solution" --> *Shepard uses the Catalyst's information to shoot the Destroy tube*

 

A solution doesn't have to ideal. In fact, depending on POV, some solutions are as good as any other. Shepard can vocally disagree with what comes with Synthesis, and the Catalyst has its own position on it. Synthesis doesn't even need to appear in a given playthrough. In fact, if we take Bioware's data that over half of players basically just rushed through it without even a save import, Synthesis likely wasn't even a thing for them. It is also, in its exact form, new to the Catalyst, who 'forced' it before. Instead, without Synthesis being shown, we have a Catalyst that begrudgingly understands Destroy as a solution (though he would never support it), and begrudgingly accepts Control as a solution (though he would never willingly relinquish it). The solution until then, was to use the Reapers to create more Reapers that would store almost all the information of organic societies inside it in preservation. That was still a solution, but one that put everyone else under the Reapers' stomping foot, so to speak.

 

All 3 choices are considered viable. That's how solutions work. The degree of confidence Shepard and the Catalyst can have in each of them, varies. As does the considered success rate into the longer terms (decades, centuries, millenia). Especially with Destroy, you can just disregard the presented problem as a 'red herring', and stick to finding a solution to the more original problem, defeating the Reapers and making sure they never return - as least as they previously existed.

[KaiserShep]

Heh, "galactic hobos".

[Mcfly616]

No. They're viable because as I said, the Catalyst recognizes the fact that Shepard has just rendered it obsolete. They are only 'solutions' from Shepard's POV. He/she is here to 'stop the Reapers'. All 3 choices achieve that. The Catalyst exists for a very specific reason. Synthesis is what it's been seeking to achieve. It is the solution to the Organic/synthetic problem. Neither Destroy or Control achieve this.

It doesn't matter if Synthesis appears or not. That just means you didn't gather enough resources in order to achieve it in the process of stopping the Reapers. Shepards POV is different from the Catalysts. Shepard can achieve his/her goals without achieving the Catalysts. Synthesis is the only way the Catalyst can achieve its goal.


(Also, I think Synthesis is the only choice that the Catalyst specifically refers to as a 'solution' when individually describing each choice. I'll double check.)

[SwobyJ]

 

No. They're viable because as I said, the Catalyst recognizes the fact that Shepard has just rendered it obsolete.

 

Yes. That's what I was saying. Until then, it was cool with Reaping no matter what. Even Synthesis wasn't something that it was going for - only a 'similar' form of it, but never successfully. And never was it phrased as that similar solution being any sort of directed plan, only as something that was attempted.

 

Shepard can also run off the Destroy assumption until the trilogy story continues and Shepard can even outright be curious about the prospect of controlling the Reapers. His 'ideal solution' is Destroy, but a more Paragon path can be curious about another way - just as the Catalyst can be curious about Synthesis, and finally seeing it as possible, it'll advocate it.

 

Reaping was the Catalyst's solution before. Anything past that was *experimentation*, which both organics and synthetics attempt in their own ways for their own problems. The galaxy is an *experiment*, but only at the Crucible does the Catalyst see that Synthesis is actually a possible thing and see it as the ideal. It never said that it viewed it as ideal previous to the Crucible encounter. You can also disagree with its logic, just as you can disagree with several of the 'ideal solutions' to conflicts previously in the trilogy.

 

TLDR; the Catalyst recognizes Destroy and Control as solutions, but not his proposed solution. Synthesis is his solution, whereas previously it was to just keep making Reapers until a new solution may or may not arise - until then, the Harvest must continue. The Harvest != Synthesis. Synthesis just = the current Reaper position when standing at the Crucible.

 

Before the Crucible, the Catalyst was just fine as seeing the Harvest Cycle as its solution. That doesn't mean that experimentation doesn't happen - just that nothing has borne fruit so far, so as far as its considers it, organics must be harvested, not living in lovey lala synthesis utopia. We can all work towards a perfect world, but understand current circumstances as not being good enough to produce that perfect world, so we manage expectations into what we got, not what we don't.

 

My ideal solution about the world involves every nation being disarmed and everyone peacefully cooperating in a human society that expands beyond the world and into the stars and universe. Is that gonna happen this year? No. But it can still be my ideal solution. How would it happen though? I could attempt it to happen somehow (become world leader? heck I dunno, but it would probably be seen as evil if it involves disarming), but if a similar solution showed itself and seemed to be great, I'd then adjust my expectations, the altered variables, and go "Okay, THIS is actually the ideal solution. I would have tried something else, but it probably wouldn't have worked."

[Mcfly616]

You got it backwards. Reaping was not the Catalysts solution. It's a stalling action. The harvests are a galactic experiment in order to find the solution. It found the solution and determined that it 'cannot be forced'.
(insert the Civilization Benchmark theory here; I.e. the Catalyst introduced the Crucible blueprints. And no, I don't subscribe to this theory. Well, not this particular version of it)


You see all 3 as 'solutions' because you are here to 'stop the Reapers'. The Catalyst is here to solve a problem. Control and Destroy don't solve its problem, therefore they are not 'solutions' from the Catalysts POV.

'Perspective'

[SwobyJ]

I think you need to look up what a 'solution' is.

 

"The Reapers are mine. I control them. They are my solution."

 

A stalling action, the Reapers, can be a solution. Not a perfect one, but we rarely have those. Organic or Synthetic, even in the MEU.

 

Only when Synthesis appears, does the Catalyst view Synthesis as the solution - no earlier. Until then, the experiment itself is the solution. They are connected, but not the exact same as you seem to be putting it.

 

You don't know the solution until you find it. Until Synthesis is there, the Reapers are the solution. Not the means to the end. They were the end and the beginning.

[CaIIisto]

I wouldn't. Regardless of what the User Interface trying to sell this looked like.

 

Presumably you went with Refuse?

 

That was my preferred option, but given that I know it's insta-fail, I go with Destroy instead.

[Iakus]

You got it backwards. Reaping was not the Catalysts solution. It's a stalling action. The harvests are a galactic experiment in order to find the solution. It found the solution and determined that it 'cannot be forced'.
(insert the Civilization Benchmark theory here; I.e. the Catalyst introduced the Crucible blueprints. And no, I don't subscribe to this theory. Well, not this particular version of it)


You see all 3 as 'solutions' because you are here to 'stop the Reapers'. The Catalyst is here to solve a problem. Control and Destroy don't solve its problem, therefore they are not 'solutions' from the Catalysts POV.

'Perspective'

 

"I control the Reapers.  They are my solution"

 

"The fact that you are standing here, the first organic ever, proves it.  But it also proves that my solution won't work anymore"