485 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Wait... you're not seriously suggesting that Destroy isn't supposed to be a conclusive victory too, are you? Control I can see, even if that's mostly you projecting, but what's inconclusive about Destroy?

 

"The chaos will come back", etc.

[Iakus]

 

Some of those were sort-of answered in the EC, but in the original there is a whole lot of guesswork involved. As I understand it, that was intentional--Mac wanted to leave people with the general sense that the civilization of the galaxy had been destroyed, figuratively nuked back to the stone age, leaving people to wonder how long it would take for a galaxy-spanning civilization to re-emerge and what it might look like.

 

 

That's actually one of the least-bad things I found about the endings

[Fixers0]

I wonder, are the war assets obtained at cerberus HQ (reaper heart/brain) actually added to the war assets total? Because afaik the war assets total is caluclate before the assault on cerberus HQ.

[dreamgazer]

"The chaos will come back", etc.

 

And? By our very nature, organics are always in a state of self-destructive chaos.

[wolfhowwl]

"The chaos will come back", etc.

Thank the Goddess I chose control.

Any sign of chaos returning will be met by an army that no one will dare oppose.

[Iakus]

And? By our very nature, organics are always in a state of self-destructive chaos.

 

Thus why anything but Synthesis is by implication "You're doing it wrong"

[CronoDragoon]

"The chaos will come back", etc.

 

Awww, I knew you always believed the Catalyst, Iakus.

[Iakus]

It's not a matter of what I believe. It's a matter of how something is portrayed

[themikefest]

I wonder, are the war assets obtained at cerberus HQ (reaper heart/brain) actually added to the war assets total? Because afaik the war assets total is caluclate before the assault on cerberus HQ.

Its added. Check before you start the mission and then check again after the mission

[CronoDragoon]

It's not a matter of what I believe. It's a matter of how something is portrayed

 

Ah, so the villain warns you of something that will happen and that means it's true.

[dreamgazer]

Thus why anything but Synthesis is by implication "You're doing it wrong"

 

To the Reapers, yeah, kinda.

 

You get to do with that information what you will, though, and that includes rolling the dice with chaos in the future, after learning from the mistakes of organic ancestors and the Morning War. But, yes, the decision to utterly defy their control comes at a price, and it only partially makes sense on a technological level (much like many other decisions in the trilogy that constrict your information and parameters).

[Iakus]

We are expected to take its word for it, which is part of why the scene fails for a lot of people, yes

[AlanC9]

"The chaos will come back", etc.

Except that doesn't, you know, actually happen. Turns out the Catalyst was just wrong.

If you really were taking the Catalyst's word for it, why would you pick Destroy?

[Iakus]

Except that doesn't, you know, actually happen. Turns out the Catalyst was just wrong.

 

Not in the few minutes left in the game, no.  But the implication is clearly this is the "punting" option.

[dreamgazer]

Turns out the Catalyst was just wrong.

 

... or that organics learned from their experiences and took measures to prevent it in future development of technology. 

 

Kinda like what we should, and hopefully are, doing right now. 

[KaiserShep]

"The chaos will come back", etc.

 

The beauty of having this be open ended is that you're free to draw your own conclusions. The Catalyst is not an infallible soothsayer. It can insist on its predictions all it wants, but even eons of experience won't automatically make it right, nor could it really judge on the probability of the same exact thing happening again. Like Mordin would say: "too many variables."

[Daemul]

It's not really open ended though, organics are stupid, or to put it more accurately, made up of many stupid individuals, it's a certainty that they will bring doom back onto themselves. 

[KaiserShep]

Sure it's open ended. However probable one may think their death-by-synthetics may be, there's no certainty that it'll actually happen.

[Iakus]

The beauty of having this be open ended is that you're free to draw your own conclusions. The Catalyst is not an infallible soothsayer. It can insist on its predictions all it wants, but even eons of experience won't automatically make it right, nor could it really judge on the probability of the same exact thing happening again. Like Mordin would say: "too many variables."

 

This is all correct.  But at the same time, this is clearly not what we are supposed to be thinking.  We're supposed to believe every word it says.  Even after EC, Bioware bends over backwards telling us PICK SYNTHESIS!  GREEN IS THE BESTEST!

[KaiserShep]

Whatever we're supposed to believe doesn't really matter to me. I believe or dismiss what I want, and act accordingly. I'm not obligated to believe in anything the Catalyst says beyond taking it on its word that the immediate effect of picking Destroy, Synthesis or Control will be as it says it would.

 

"The chaos will come back."

"Stubbing my toe in the dark is chaos too. Give me a break."

 

As for green being the "BESTEST", that's really up to personal interpretation as well. What makes it the best, and why should I care? Concepts like transcendence or controlled evolution or whatnot is of no interest to me either.

[themikefest]

As soon as the thing says destroy, I ignore everything else. Destroy gets rid of the reapers and thats what I pick. If chaos happens, I'll worry about it at that time.

[dreamgazer]

This is all correct.  But at the same time, this is clearly not what we are supposed to be thinking.  We're supposed to believe every word it says.  Even after EC, Bioware bends over backwards telling us PICK SYNTHESIS!  GREEN IS THE BESTEST!

 

The repetition of certain slides to show that things happen with or without Synthesis works against this theory.  

 

The EC also allows you to outright resist the idea of Synthesis ("You're asking me to change everything, everyone. I can't make that decision. I won't."), while continuing to emphasize its weirdness---husks' mentality altered, Reapers in background, green glow everywhere---as it showcases the positives.  That's not bending over backwards. 

[KaiserShep]

They should've shown husks working as Buy N Large greeters, banshees selling real estate and marauders joining the turian army.

[Iakus]

The repetition of certain slides to show that things happen with or without Synthesis works against this theory.  

 

The EC also allows you to outright resist the idea of Synthesis ("You're asking me to change everything, everyone. I can't make that decision. I won't."), while continuing to emphasize its weirdness---husks reanimated, Reapers in background, green glow everywhere---as it showcases the positives.  That's not bending over backwards. 

 

1) Synthesis has no Low EMS version

2) Synthesis requires the highest EMS (outside the breath easter egg) to achieve

3) No drawbacks or even potential downsides of any kind are given for Synthesis

4) EDI's EC speech is so sacharine and filled witih the rainbows and butterflies people claim the anti-ending crowd wanted it's enough to give one diabetes

 

Yes, EC backpedals slightly with the other two endings, denying the "galactic dark age" and whatnot.  But Synthesis is still demonstrably the "best" chocie as far as teh devs are concerned.

[KaiserShep]

I wouldn't say that the backpedaling was slight, since the galactic dark age was removed entirely in high EMS endings.

 

As for the saccharine speech, from a meta-perspective, that does make Synthesis the very worst lol