Some might be. There's no reason to think that they are all like that and the game offers nothing to challenge that. Like I said, the huge, big important difference between "some" and "all". The capacity for that line of thinking existing is fine. Saying it is is inevitable is stupid.
As usual, I'm not clear why this matters. The Catalyst's wrong, yep. Always has been. So what?
But the Catalyst will not let you pick destroy... 
I think someone needs to get a taste of the air lock's hospitality.
As usual, I'm not clear why this matters. The Catalyst's wrong, yep. Always has been. So what?
Yes, and they're looked down upon for doing so.
Here's the problem with the comparison between genetic uplifting and creation of artificial intelligence: the level of necessity behind the two technologies. Genetic advancing is another side of developments in medicine and physiology, which have been widely considered to be a necessity for the longevity of life. Creation of artificial intelligence, on the other hand, is derived directly from convenience, to handle remedial and/or dangerous jobs that could be done in other ways by organics.
And you, actually, are allowed to pave your own path in the ending, with the caveat that frying the Reapers will (logically) have repercussions. You have to build on the mistakes of this cycle to go forward.
And the quarians were looked down on for creating the geth. See the parallels here?
And I still don't see the distinction. Life is life. For whatever reason it gets created. Claiming that the struggle between organic and Synthetics is some kind of inevitable eternal struggle is, at the very least, overly simplistic. "Organic synthetics" via uplifting, genetic engineering, and artificial life, have been shown to be as great or greater threat to the galaxy than some uppity machines. But the Reapers sure aren't too concerned about them.
The ending choices are "solutions" to a problem they failed to convince me exists at all.
As usual, I'm not clear why this matters. The Catalyst's wrong, yep. Always has been. So what?
As I said, we're being forced to cure a healthy patient. We're forced to accede to its demands or "Rocks fall"
Better we received no explanation than a lame one like we got.
And the quarians were looked down on for creating the geth. See the parallels here?
And I still don't see the distinction. Life is life. For whatever reason it gets created. Claiming that the struggle between organic and Synthetics is some kind of inevitable eternal struggle is, at the very least, overly simplistic. "Organic synthetics" via uplifting, genetic engineering, and artificial life, have been shown to be as great or greater threat to the galaxy than some uppity machines. But the Reapers sure aren't too concerned about them.
The ending choices are "solutions" to a problem they failed to convince me exists at all.
Nobody is going to like any reason given for systematic harvesting/genocide.
it's not a matter of liking it, it's a matter of plausibility. in the Dark Energy version total genocide would've been even more pointless. I've already explained how.
I was convinced that there was a self-destruction problem from the moment Sovereign mentioned imposing order on chaos in the same conversation with technology, which has an interesting synergy with Tali's info-dump about the mutual history between the quarians and the geth.
Assuming that that's even true, what does the series do with the synthetic/organic conflict for the rest of its duration? It's explicitly subverted in ME2, with both the heretic/True Geth divide and the reveal that the Reapers aren't pure synthetics. The Rannoch arc in ME3 doesn't really help matters--as I've argued before, no version of the Rannoch outcome supports the Catalyst's vision of an inevitable destructive conflict between synthetics and organics that's bound to wipe out all organics. It's no coincidence that all the evidence used to prop up the Catalyst's thesis has to come from ME1; by the time we have gotten all the way through the series to the Catalyst, the best you can say about the organic/synthetic conflict is that it has been contextualized by the story as simply one conflict among others.
As usual, I'm not clear why this matters. The Catalyst's wrong, yep. Always has been. So what?
I've never really been convinced that the Catalyst is 'supposed' (for lack of a better term) to be wrong. We get all sorts of religious and symbolic imagery in the ending, as if Shepard is being lifted up into the heavens to be judged by a quasi-divine being. There's no opportunity, even in the EC, to explicitly challenge the Catalyst's hypothesis regarding synthetic/organic conflict. Choosing synthesis pretty much gives you teh awesomest outcome ever (heck, it even brings back Keiji), while choosing refuse, the Catalyst's least preferred option, gives you the worst possible ending. It's just really hard to explain these choices if you're trying to make the character seem nuts.
we're basically in this mess because of the Leviathan's stupidity. Leviathan created the Starbrat who in turn created the Reapers. there's always the one stupid person (species in this case) to ruin everybody else's fun.
It makes you wonder how spectacularly thick everyone else must have been back then, for the Leviathans to qualify as "apex race".we're basically in this mess because of the Leviathan's stupidity. Leviathan created the Starbrat who in turn created the Reapers. there's always the one stupid person (species in this case) to ruin everybody else's fun.
Hmm. I didn't really get judgement from the imagery; my take was more along the lines of Shepard being outside of History, above it all, blah blah blah. Not getting into a futile argument with the Catalyst suited me fine too. I suppose I was predisposed to see things this way because I'd always thought that the Reapers were some sort of massive AI failure.
Interesting. I'm not sure what it would mean to say that Shepard is outside of history. The whole "You are the first organic to blah blah blah," for instance, definitely gave me the vibe of having proven ourselves 'worthy' to the Catalyst. And for me, what not being able to argue with the Catalyst does is contextualize his dialogue as simply being true information about the universe that isn't to be questioned; not that I think having an argument would really help (it's a half-measure, whereas I'd strongly prefer it if the Catalyst had simply not existed), but the absence of one says something to be about how its exposition is to be regarded.
Anyways, I've got to wake up early for a long trip tomorrow, so I'm calling it a night.
EDIT: Fixed wording.
Guest_Magick_*
Sometimes I wonder if everyone in this game and on the Bioware staff are indoctrinated.
Sometimes I wonder if everyone in this game and on the Bioware staff are indoctrinated.
speak for yourself, sister. I'm way too blatantly honest to be indoc.
Does it prove IT?
We should be so lucky
Assuming that that's even true, what does the series do with the synthetic/organic conflict for the rest of its duration? It's explicitly subverted in ME2, with both the heretic/True Geth divide and the reveal that the Reapers aren't pure synthetics. The Rannoch arc in ME3 doesn't really help matters--as I've argued before, no version of the Rannoch outcome supports the Catalyst's vision of an inevitable destructive conflict between synthetics and organics that's bound to wipe out all organics. It's no coincidence that all the evidence used to prop up the Catalyst's thesis has to come from ME1; by the time we have gotten all the way through the series to the Catalyst, the best you can say about the organic/synthetic conflict is that it has been contextualized by the story as simply one conflict among others.
The heretic geth were still a significant problem in ME2 (assuming you underwent Tali's recruitment and Legion's loyalty mission), to a point where they had to be forcibly eradicated either by rewriting or destruction. There are also a number of other side-missions in ME2 that focus on synthetic intelligence gone haywire. The war itself in ME3 is built on the conflict between organics and synthetics, since the quarians are aiming to recapture the homeworld that was taken from them during the Morning War (where billions of their kind were killed). Rannoch itself wouldn't have happened at all without the creation of synthetic lives that rebelled against their chaotic creators, no matter the nuance of how it started.
Alas, the main "plot" for ME2 focuses on defeating the Collectors, full-stop, which intentionally redirects the writing from the Reapers' still-present agenda that was alluded to in ME1. ME2 was a stalling tactic, not proof that the problem doesn't exist.
Alas, the main "plot" for ME2 focuses on defeating the Collectors, full-stop, which intentionally redirects the writing from the Reapers' still-present agenda that was alluded to in ME1. ME2 was a stalling tactic, not proof that the problem doesn't exist.
You mean if Shepard didn't die in the beginning; never went to work for Cerberus; the Council assigned Shepard to look deeper into the Reaper threat; find out what they were up to and make the Arrival DLC less of an ass pull? I don't know.
We do know that pragmatic heroes who insist that their unit stay together during a zombie apocalypse must die quickly because the idiots have to prevail so that they split up and more die to demonstrate the effectiveness of the monsters. Thus it would have to be with a pragmatic Shepard. Good must be dumb, otherwise it isn't much of a story. Or the pragmatic ones are painted as monsters and are made into characters no one likes. You can write a story with smart heroes, but that means you have to write more sophisticated villains and that doesn't work in comic books.
I wonder what the series would have looked like if me2 hadn't been a "sideshow attraction" (figuratively speaking)?
If they did that, then the overarching story may have ended up just being a duology. If you remove the dirty dozen plot, you take the hours and hours of gameplay involved in their recruitment and subsequent loyalty missions. Basically, you'd just have to jump straight to the reapers about to approach the Alpha Relay, and either the discovery of the Crucible or some consequence that serves against the reapers for having to take the long way round. Of course, that would get rid of the dumb death and resurrection. I actually would not mind having the Collectors remain as a part of this story, and they'd basically be one of the primary troops in front of the other monsters the reapers create when they arrive.
I was thinking more along the lines of... how the story would have evolved if me2 actually continued the focus of me1's plot, and properly continued the story, instead of just kind of wondering off to look at the pretty murderous flowers? assuming that the writers could progress the storyline without going right to a reaper invasion all halfcocked.
Well, I think in that case, they'd have to basically keep Shepard in the Alliance, which would have been my preference. I actually like the idea of destroying the SR1 in the prologue to introduce the Collector threat, but there's no reason why the Alliance couldn't be written to replace this thing. Hell, how many times has the USS Enterprise been destroyed and replaced over the years in Star Trek? But anyway, not changing alignments would mean that some of your crew is still with you, though some could leave for whatever reason in the time between the attack, the Normandy's replacement and Shepard's return to full health (rather than pointless death). I imagine that there would have to be bigger colony missions that focus on the Collectors and possibly the heretic geth.
I would have wrapped up the entire Cerberus arch in ME1, with the discovery of the frozen corpse of Armistan Banes as the head of the organization... dunno how exactly, Lol, but it's an idea of mine. Then I would make TIM the shadow broker... and I haven't really thought of a way to connect him to shep yet, in a way that shep doesn't die in the beginning. Then incorporate all the ME3 Cerberus missions -- minus the indoctrination stuff -- into ME2, and have them switch places with the collectors.
Interesting. I'm not sure what it would mean to say that Shepard is outside of history. The whole "You are the first organic to blah blah blah," for instance, definitely gave me the vibe of having proven ourselves 'worthy' to the Catalyst. And for me, what not being able to argue with the Catalyst does is contextualize his dialogue as simply being true information about the universe that isn't to be questioned; not that I think having an argument would really help (it's a half-measure, whereas I'd strongly prefer it if the Catalyst had simply not existed), but the absence of one says something to be about how its exposition is to be regarded.
By "outside of history" I was referring to the "pattern," the cyclical history that the galaxy had been locked into since the Reapers were created. After the conversation with Vendetta it was pretty obvious to me that the Reapers were going to turn out to be, in a sense, victims of this pattern, just like all the organics were. Though obviously the Reapers had a more comfortable position assigned to them.
Right, the Reapers are concerned with monitoring the progression of advanced technology before it destroys organic life, not the progression of genetic / medical enhancements since that has a very clear and necessary flipside that, as evidenced, works itself out.
And how many garden worlds were destroyed in the Morning War? Compared to the Krogan Rebellions.
Retour en haut