981 réponses à ce sujet

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Sadly, while this is true, by the time I got to that point, Bioware already had the money.  

 

Sure, same thing here. The important thing, though, is never giving them money again, ever. Before the Cluster-screw, I bought all ME2 DLC, including the Mattock and even the costumes - only because I wanted to fix Garrus's armor. It was a complete no-brainer. But I didn't buy Omega, didn't buy Leviathan, didn't buy the Citadel DLC - and I sold my copy of "ME3" to some poor bastard on my local counterpart of eBay.

[Deathsaurer]

Why do people say the Catalyst needs to make sense? I don't understand that. It's clearly jumped the shark. It was supposed to prevent the Leviathan's slaves from destroying themselves. That's it. Everything it's doing how is a very selective reinterpretation of its mandate that was stupidly vague from the start. While it's technically following its program it's doing so in a manor and scale never intended.

 

I think the real thing many of you should be complaining about is the Leviathans because they programmed it to think every species must be "preserved" and that synthetics are the root of the problem. The AI is simply a flawed creation of a monumentally flawed species.

[CronoDragoon]

Again, people only care about what the Catalyst says because they think Destroy invalidates Rannoch (correct or not, that is the thought process. I tend to think they are correct).

 

If synthetics aren't annihilated in Destroy, no one gives a crap how logically sound the Catalyst's claims are, or how much history supports his assertion. He's the goddamn villain; it would be a real issue if the player believed his argument to be sound.

[Deathsaurer]

Who designed destroy though? If the Protheans are any indication it very well have been organics. At which point the Catalyst ends up a victim of circumstances.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Okay you guys.....

 

First there was "fecal maelstrom." Now we have "fecal matter really hit the rotary impeller" which could be restated as "feces impacted the ventilation impeller." What are we going to have next?

[Kel Riever]

Again, people only care about what the Catalyst says because they think Destroy invalidates Rannoch (correct or not, that is the thought process. I tend to think they are correct).

 

If synthetics aren't annihilated in Destroy, no one gives a crap how logically sound the Catalyst's claims are, or how much history supports his assertion. He's the goddamn villain; it would be a real issue if the player believed his argument to be sound.

 

This is actually a separate issue, arising from the atrocious reasoning that the way 'Code' works is that you have to destroy every synthetic platform that it exists on.

 

You know, like how, when you send information to a computer, you can't possibly differentiate between computers when sending that information.

 

Wait...actually, you can do that.....

[Iakus]

Why do people say the Catalyst needs to make sense? I don't understand that. It's clearly jumped the shark. It was supposed to prevent the Leviathan's slaves from destroying themselves. That's it. Everything it's doing how is a very selective reinterpretation of its mandate that was stupidly vague from the start. While it's technically following its program it's doing so in a manor and scale never intended.

 

I think the real thing many of you should be complaining about is the Leviathans because they programmed it to think every species must be "preserved" and that synthetics are the root of the problem. The AI is simply a flawed creation of a monumentally flawed species.

 

Because in teh end, we're forced to go along with its "new solutions"

 

But there is no solution becasue THERE IS NO PROBLEM!

[Iakus]

Who designed destroy though? If the Protheans are any indication it very well have been organics. At which point the Catalyst ends up a victim of circumstances.

 

What organic race would make the on switch to the Crucible shooting a pipe full of volatile matter?

[BaladasDemnevanni]

If you made peace or destroyed the Geth, that story arc was pretty much resolved.

 

You can argue that it doesn't make it THE theme, but by the basics of narrative structure, making the organic-synthetic conflict the motivation of the Reapers automatically ascribes more thematic relevance to it than the other themes. Keeping the Reaper motivation more general like in the example I mentioned allows each of the major arcs to contribute on an equal level.

 

Very well said. The bolded actually encompasses my strongest criticism against the ending. The Catalyst's focus on Synthetic-Organic conflict elevates certain aspects of the narrative which, up until this point, had encompassed a sub-plot at best. Suddenly, Rannoch has higher importance/priority than Tuchanka or Thessia.

 

The best, most complete ending would have done its best to make the Catalyst's motivation touch on everything the player had experienced up until this point. This is why I've argued that the Reapers' motive should not have been Synthetic Organic conflict, but simply conflict in general. Given sufficient time, it's possible for a species to acquire such advanced weaponry that it will cause massive destruction.  It's something applicable to every moment in the game (since the player is always killing something it can function as a meta-commentary on the nature of games) and has a fair bit of arguments to support it. Hell, during the Cold War we were worried about nuclear weapons destroying our planet. Now imagine if even more advanced species got there hands on something similar.

 

I don't need proof of everlasting peace between Synthetics and Organics.  I just need proof that peace in general is possible.  Just as it's possible to have beace between organic races.  We are none of us slaves to destiny.  And that is where the Catalyst is wrong.  Wrong.  WRONG!

 

Also this. ME2 and 3 go out of their way to deconstruct the notion that there is a fundamental difference between Organics and Synthetics. On that basis, there's no reason to fear Synthetic vs Organic conflicts any more than Synthetic vs Synthetic or Organic vs Organic.
 

[SporkFu]

Who designed destroy though? If the Protheans are any indication it very well have been organics. At which point the Catalyst ends up a victim of circumstances.

 

I wonder if an early build of the crucible is what created the Great Rift Valley on Klendagon. Maybe that's what the catalyst meant when it said (something like), "A similar solution was tried in the past."

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

"...ever heard that story about a professor who was giving a lecture on astronomy? After the lecture an old woman came up to him and said that he was wrong about everything he said - that the world was actually built on the back of a giant turtle.

He asked her: But what's the turtle standing on?

And she said: another turtle.

And he said: But what's THAT turtle standing on?

And she says: It's TURTLES all the way down.

If you're looking for a coherent, in-universe explanation for the Crucible's existence, there isn't one. IT'S NONSENSE ALL THE WAY DOWN"

 - MrBTongue

 

Same goes for the Starbrat.

[themikefest]

I wonder if an early build of the crucible is what created the Great Rift Valley on Klendagon. Maybe that's what the catalyst meant when it said (something like), "A similar solution was tried in the past."

Its too bad we couldn't investigate the weapon  or at least see the size of it. And if possible, mass produce it.

[Deathsaurer]

I wonder if an early build of the crucible is what created the Great Rift Valley on Klendagon. Maybe that's what the catalyst meant when it said (something like), "A similar solution was tried in the past."

Pretty sure it meant it tried turning people into hybrids and they weren't happy about it. Let's be honest anyone would be displeased if someone walked up to them and said take these implants or die.

 

Here's something else to think about with the Geth/Quarian thing. 64% of people didn't make peace, either because they couldn't import or something happened in ME2 that prevented it. It's simply something that can't by its very nature of being optional play a large part in the Reaper storyline. As it stands over half the player base would have been arbitrarily screwed over if it did.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Why do people say the Catalyst needs to make sense? I don't understand that. It's clearly jumped the shark. It was supposed to prevent the Leviathan's slaves from destroying themselves. That's it. Everything it's doing how is a very selective reinterpretation of its mandate that was stupidly vague from the start. While it's technically following its program it's doing so in a manor and scale never intended.

 

I think the real thing many of you should be complaining about is the Leviathans because they programmed it to think every species must be "preserved" and that synthetics are the root of the problem. The AI is simply a flawed creation of a monumentally flawed species.

 

The Catalyst not making sense could have worked, if he were actually presented as insane, more akin to Veetor than anything else. But the Catalyst, at least in terms of presentation, seems closer to an information source, like Vigil. It's just that in this case, Vigil's information helped the narrative make sense where as the Catalyst just makes me stare at the screen dumb-founded.

 

 It just comes off as mediocre. I'd rather have the Catalyst be validated in requiring my protagonist to commit a galactic atrocity or I'd rather my protagonist be able to successfully circumvent said atrocity altogether. Having the Catalyst be completely wrong, but still require that I make a moral decision on his terms just comes off as half-assed.
 

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Pretty sure it meant it tried turning people into hybrids and they weren't happy about it. Let's be honest anyone would be displeased if someone walked up to them and said take these implants or die.

 

Here's something else to think about with the Geth/Quarian thing. 64% of people didn't make peace, either because they couldn't import or something happened in ME2 that prevented it. It's simply something that can't by its very nature of being optional play a large part in the Reaper storyline. As it stands over half the player base would have been arbitrarily screwed over if it did.

 

Honestly, if that statistic is true, this is just more dirt to throw at the writers. They probably shouldn't have made that even an option, if there was concern about its impact on the storyline, especially when you consider how controversial a claim it would be.

[themikefest]

If you do a default ME3 playthrough, you will never make peace between the Geth and Quarians.

[Mcfly616]

 
If synthetics aren't annihilated in Destroy, no one gives a crap how logically sound the Catalyst's claims are, or how much history supports his assertion. He's the goddamn villain; it would be a real issue if the player believed his argument to be sound.

its logic is sound.

[CronoDragoon]

This is actually a separate issue, arising from the atrocious reasoning that the way 'Code' works is that you have to destroy every synthetic platform that it exists on.

 

It's not that's it's a separate issue, it's just that there's more than one issue with Destroy.

[CronoDragoon]

its logic is sound.

 

Its logic is valid. If it were sound you'd agree with the cycles.

[Deathsaurer]

 

The Catalyst not making sense could have worked, if he were actually presented as insane, more akin to Veetor than anything else. But the Catalyst, at least in terms of presentation, seems closer to an information source, like Vigil. It's just that in this case, Vigil's information helped the narrative make sense where as the Catalyst just makes me stare at the screen dumb-founded.

I'd argue it does come off as insane by the very nature of what it's trying to do. But I've certainly critiqued the thing for not being a developed character given its importance.

 

 It just comes off as mediocre. I'd rather have the Catalyst be validated in requiring my protagonist to commit a galactic atrocity or I'd rather my protagonist be able to successfully circumvent said atrocity altogether. Having the Catalyst be completely wrong, but still require that I make a moral decision on his terms just comes off as half-assed.

I certainly agree it could have been done better. But at the end of the day it's completely off the rails and had a metaphorical gun pointed at the galaxy.

[Deathsaurer]

Honestly, if that statistic is true, this is just more dirt to throw at the writers. They probably shouldn't have made that even an option, if there was concern about its impact on the storyline, especially when you consider how controversial a claim it would be.

It's the official statistic they released last year. 27% sided with the Quarians, 37% with the Geth, 36% made peace.

 

http://vr-zone.com/a...tics/19342.html

[CronoDragoon]

I'd argue it does come off as insane by the very nature of what it's trying to do. But I've certainly critiqued the thing for not being a developed character given its importance.

 

It does, but the presentation makes it confusing. Shepard can't argue with it, and all three choices appear, on the surface, to benefit its argument, with Synthesis being visually presented as the best choice in the center. Pre-Leviathan, we didn't even have the context of, "Oh, it was programmed by idiots that thought they were hot-**** programmers, and that's why it's doing this."

 

I think one of the improvements of the EC and Leviathan was mitigating this assumption that the Catalyst was a mouthpiece for the writers' beliefs, but it's still an issue for some.

[Mcfly616]

Its logic is valid. If it were sound you'd agree with the cycles.

I understand what it was trying to do with the Cycles. I believe that if it were not for the Cycles, life most likely would've been extinguished long ago. However, I'm a human. I'm not machine. As much as I try to inject logic into any decision I make, ultimately my emotions are what drives my actions (especially, when the entire Galaxy and everyone I know is at stake).


I understand the Catalyst. It makes sense. Doesn't make it my buddy.

[Deathsaurer]

It does, but the presentation makes it confusing. Shepard can't argue with it, and all three choices appear, on the surface, to benefit its argument, with Synthesis being visually presented as the best choice in the center. Pre-Leviathan, we didn't even have the context of, "Oh, it was programmed by idiots that thought they were hot-**** programmers, and that's why it's doing this."

 

I think one of the improvements of the EC and Leviathan was mitigating this assumption that the Catalyst was a mouthpiece for the writers' beliefs, but it's still an issue for some.

Well I'm certainly not going to defend the original endings. I get the idea they wanted everyone to headcanon their ending because they couldn't do everyone's Shepard justice but man that was some seriously lacking nonsense.

[SporkFu]

Pretty sure it meant it tried turning people into hybrids and they weren't happy about it. Let's be honest anyone would be displeased if someone walked up to them and said take these implants or die.

 

Here's something else to think about with the Geth/Quarian thing. 64% of people didn't make peace, either because they couldn't import or something happened in ME2 that prevented it. It's simply something that can't by its very nature of being optional play a large part in the Reaper storyline. As it stands over half the player base would have been arbitrarily screwed over if it did.

Maybe that's what the species of that cycle were trying to do when they created the Great Rift Valley?