Agreed with this one. I mean, what's the point?
"Oh they just want to screw with you some more before you die." Okay.
I've been waiting for an aswer on that for a while.
Once I get that, they can begin explaining to me why the Catalyst lets the only option be dependant on what Shepard does with the collector base.
I guess... just as I see that the Reaper problem themselves is really just the giant combination of all the problems we face otherwise in the series, I also consider Indoctrination to be just one of the things that make up what Shepard is experiencing.
I actually do think it's happening. But I also think that, at least plot wise, it's not all that's relevant to full understanding of the trilogy and the ending. It's important, and imo good and appropriate to RP on (which I think is why Merizan for example talked of how some Shep runs she keeps IT in mind), but it's not *everything*. Not in Shepard's unique case.
It's up to the player to decide what they put more emphasis on. For ITers, it's that there is a mental manipulation of some form happening, and they have to break out of it. (One thing I'm 100% sure of is that the Leviathan scene is shot incredibly similar to the Catalyst scene for a reason.)
But there are truly people who, even if they contemplate this possibility, are still more willing to take a chance and hear out the other side. They're the ones who at least enjoyed Contact more, instead of say.. the first Matrix.
In all of the endings except Refuse, you're 'accepting Reaper ideology'. If you're slowing the problem down by breaking everything that might be a threat (Destroy), you're doing exactly what the Reapers have been doing for the last umptikajillion years.
In all of the endings except Refuse, you're 'accepting Reaper ideology'. If you're slowing the problem down by breaking everything that might be a threat (Destroy), you're doing exactly what the Reapers have been doing for the last umptikajillion years.
As we move into the future of Bioware..
The future that has a Dragon Age protagonist that isn't a Warden, but a freaking Inquisitor (with heavy Chantry implications, despite how we can disassociate from them).
You represent Chaos. We represent Order..
In all of the endings except Refuse, you're 'accepting Reaper ideology'. If you're slowing the problem down by breaking everything that might be a threat (Destroy), you're doing exactly what the Reapers have been doing for the last umptikajillion years.
Destroy is rejecting the premise the Reapers' plan is based on (that not choosing Synthesis will inevitably result in the destruction of all life in the galaxy) whilst Refuse is just stupid (Shepard knows that everyone in the galaxy will die if he does not press a button, so if nothing else he could toss a coin or pick randomly - it's not like it could be worse than certain death for everyone in the galaxy)
Destroy is exactly what the Reapers have been doing. Wiping out the threat's the only way to deal with it.
The threat being the Reapers themselves, not synthetics in general. EDI is collateral damage. I liken Destroy to Bring Down the Sky, if you choose to capture/kill Balak instead of allowing his escape to save the hostages.Destroy is exactly what the Reapers have been doing. Wiping out the threat's the only way to deal with it.
We preserve organics from the inevitable conflict and death between organics and synthetics, in Reaper form.
All those who oppose us, who falsely believe they are warring against us, die in collateral damage. Like a cleansing fire, we provide balance.
Relinquish your form to us. You prolong the inevitable. We are the harbinger of your ascendance!
Hope is irrelevant. You don't need hope, but you have more than you know.
We are the beginning, you are the end.
"You think they're making a Reaper here?"
In all of the endings except Refuse, you're 'accepting Reaper ideology'. If you're slowing the problem down by breaking everything that might be a threat (Destroy), you're doing exactly what the Reapers have been doing for the last umptikajillion years.
If you choose Destroy, and actually accept the Catalyst's premise, you're basically saying "I don't care, bring it on, suckers". Otherwise, you wouldn't really be buying into its prediction of a future uprising that threatens all organics in the galaxy.
I hoped for IT ~ 3/2012.
~ EC release, I still hoped.
~ Leviathan release, I doubted.
~ Citadel DLC, I knew Bioware had no intention of allowing IT.
~ 2013 I had less hurt.
~ current timeframe - I'm OK not having IT, but still believe it made the most sense for the crazy non-Shepard behavior of the last 10 minutes of the game.
Reaper ideology = that they were needed in order to control organic (and thus synthetic) evolution, and harvest civilizations into Reaper form so that they are not entirely lost to the otherwise inevitable arising of conflict between both sides.
When you look at the actual lines, Shepard in Destroy doesn't openly and utterly utterly reject Reaper ideology, but he at least does not see it as required anymore. He only asks challenging questions, at most.
It's only in Refuse that Shepard actively disagrees with Reaper ideology, instead of simply questioning it and wanting the Reapers gone.
If we take the Catalyst at it's word ( 
), even *it* disagrees with Reaper ideology *at this point*, and seeks a new direction.
For some reason... it cannot choose, but it is left up to Shepard.
We can try to take the Reapers and all those with Reaper code out of the equation entirely.
We can try to involve the Reapers under a new ruler and guidance.
We can try to fully integrate the Reapers into galactic civilization.
The first person we hear the Catalyst's argument from is a hardcore Destroyer (Javik).
Only difference there is preferred solution -- Javik would choose to fight/kill the synthetics in question every time -- but his views otherwise agree with the Catalyst's. So no, you can't infer disagreement even there.
"Accepting Reaper ideology" is too squishy a concept to bother arguing about. There's no real content.
That was kind of what I was shooting for, yeah. You can argue any of them are WHAT THE REAPERS WANT. It's artificial to label one as the 'right' one, and that's always what's annoyed me about IT.
Have to actually agree with you there HYR... :S
It's basically (and with some personal conjecture):
Organics are always gonna evolve to make synthetics. They won't deal with those synthetics properly, so those synthetics will end up killing at least a great many of them from the ensuing conflict.
Since organics live finite lives, these masses of lives are forever lost.
Leviathans thrive on a form of tribute from organics. It could honestly be anything, but my morbid side just wonders if some sort of blood sacrifice happens 0_0.
So anyway, they themselves create an Intelligence (aka they apex *organics* make an apex *synthetic*) to find a different solution then the Leviathans did (they would destroy synthetics after every event, wasting lives over and over).
The Intelligence, from its apex synthetic perspective, viewed Leviathans, organics, and other Natural Intelligences as as much part of the problem as the Levis probably viewed AI as the problem.
It doesn't view virtuality as much different than organic physical perspective, and may even view it as an improvement, so it harvests as many organics as it can, and preserves them in Reaper form (whatever that is...).
The Leviathan-Reaper mix, Harbinger, however, continues his experiments to seek greater 'perfection', possibly not happy with just the Cycle as it is.
The Prothians, if we take Javik's word, also view the conflict as inevitable, and err on the side of destroying all sentient machines whenever possible, and with as early as possible. Reminds me of what seemed to be Levi's first approach to things.
The Council may take a somewhat softer approach (leaving the Geth alone), but otherwise is strictly on the 'shoot first to contain situation' approach with AI.
In one way, EDI is similar to Harbinger. Both may be seeking a higher relationship between organics and synthetics. The difference is that Harbinger takes things to god-tier and makes it grotesque, while EDI seems to value a more even ground of communication.
Then we have that whole Control path of TIM for the bad guys, but also some philosophies from various Quarian, human, squad characters. EDI herself doesn't deny that controlling another synthetic form, despite its wishes, was useful.
Various approaches to a single problem. But it's agreed by all that it is a problem. One that surpasses any conflict that organics could make by themselves between themselves, but turns into utter disaster everywhere due to how damn *efficient* synthetics can be, even if they may always be fighting for their own existence as well.
WE may not see it to understand, but I wonder what things were like during the Leviathans' 'Cycle'.
One thing that seems to go against this is the Rannoch Peace scenario. A possible rebuttal to that is that so far, the two species are in a very temporary alliance and in a unified force to oppose the Reaper horde. There is no long term testing to see if this is a viable solution, given Javik's story of an organic species that integrated a synthetic species into themselves and only caused problems.
It's a bit like seeing the various factions of Ferelden, including Mages and Templar, group together to fight the Darkspawn in DA:O. Yes, they're working together right now. Yay. You win best result. Clap clap. But then when the immediate threat is gone, it doesn't mean a thing. They never decided to join under one banner and code of conduct, so their relationship was temporary and relatively small scale. A cleansing fire to the Darkspawn, but one that quickly extinguishes.
So that's the next step... the one banner for every major faction. The Inquisition against Fade Demons. The Order to preserve the peace, instead of the Chaos uniting to stop the oppressive Order of things (DA:O/DAII). And if I'm right about DA:I, this Inquisition won't be a short term unification, but a Thedas changing experience.
Maybe we'll see something like that in the Mass Effect series..
Oh wait, green lines, green eyes, and Reapers everywhere. Nevermind 
That was kind of what I was shooting for, yeah. You can argue any of them are WHAT THE REAPERS WANT. It's artificial to label one as the 'right' one, and that's always what's annoyed me about IT.
Seemingly..
Destroy - What the Intelligence will finally but pessimistically accept
Control - What the Intelligence will finally but grudgingly allow
Synthesis - What the Intelligence will finally and optimistically encourage
I'm not sure the Reapers themselves are in on this decision. In fact, I don't think they are. But that's just me
I know ITers and others will go on a 'Catalyst is lying all the time' thing, but I've done that foreverrrr and hit enough walls that it's not fun anymore, so if we take it at its word (even if it uses semantics to its benefit), then Synthesis IS new.
The Reapers use a lil' Red on organics, but only those who resist and wage war against them.
The Reapers use a lotta Blue on organics (their specialty?), to control the galaxy and prepare it the 'best' for their arrival.
The Reapers use a lil' Green on organics, to create more of themselves and utilize organic vessels as troops.
But I don't think the exact ending choices are the same things that the Reapers do each cycle. I think all the approaches that the Reapers take are half-effective, because they lack any empathy, and.. *wipes tear*... humanityyy.
I also think that, say, the colored galactic waves and the Extended Cut slides are only more true from an artistic perspective . But I think they're true enough. In a way. Sorta.
As in topic. After the dust has settled and the last DLC is in the can, do people still believe the ending to ME3 was a hallucination cooked up by Shepard's indoctrination? Just curious.
There was once this thread about "Intoxication Theory". That was the best one.
Shepard is unindoctrinable, that's what the ending of ME is saying. The Reapers weren't as big of a threat everyone thought they were. Shepard and his team found the blue prints to a super weapon too late, but still managed to defeat the reapers. All the other civilizations before were missing was Shepard.
So, no I don't believe in the IT theory because Shepard can not be indoctrinated all this is evidence by his various contacts with reaper tech that have indoctrinated others but not shepard and his team. Once, you come into contact with Shepard you for a time become unindoctrinable until you leave his side.
As for being intoxicated...
Shepard is unindoctrinable, that's what the ending of ME is saying.
Why?
(unless you're saying that the next game(s) may explain this; otherwise it's the worst example of 'bad riting' I've ever heard of in a Bioware game)
There was once this thread about "Intoxication Theory". That was the best one.
I subscribe to it.
As for the Reapers using Red: they use a whole lotta red. Every cycle. On all machines. Shepard's red is actually tamer, because it doesn't break all the machines ever, just the smart ones. That's what the cycles are: destroying what the Reapers see as a potential threat.
On the bright side, I'm assuming red takes out Avina, which is pretty much the best reason to use it.
On the bright side, I'm assuming red takes out Avina.
Somehow, I don't think so. I took 'synthetics' as 'synthetic life' AKA fully fledged AI, AKA EDI+Geth (if Geth are around).
I know the Catalyst insinuates that Shepard is included in this, but well.. yeah, I'm not gonna get into my ideas on that in this post.
But I'm at least more sure that it doesn't include VI like Avina. In fact, VI evolving into AI (especially 'life'/Reaper-coded AI) is a part of this 'chaos' that would hypothetically 'return'.
I dunno. I just really hate Avina. It'd be nice to take it out!
Nothing I say is ever silly.
I subscribe to it.
As for the Reapers using Red: they use a whole lotta red. Every cycle. On all machines. Shepard's red is actually tamer, because it doesn't break all the machines ever, just the smart ones. That's what the cycles are: destroying what the Reapers see as a potential threat.
Shepard becomes Reaper-Lite
I dunno. I just really hate Avina. It'd be nice to take it out!
Nothing I say is ever silly.
I avoid Avina.
Do we even get Codex entries from her? I forget. I just spacebar through her stuff the first time around now, just in case.
Shepard becomes Reaper-Lite
I have to give a personal meh to that though.
Despite our wishes, Shepard does the following:
A lot of what Shepard does is 'galaxy scale' and with potentially gigantic implications in the MEU. He can even take on Reaper upgrades as at least a tool, *before* the whole Crucible choice.
Retour en haut