978 réponses à ce sujet

[chris2365]

"His thoughts" not "My thoughts"

 

And while they provide "reason and direction" there is no emotional connection.  No sense of belonging.  No attachment.  This is an AI who essentially uses Shepard's diary as a guide on what to do.  No more Shepard than the Shepard VI

 

If the AI just uses Shepard's story as a reference for reason and direction, why would he care so much about his companions, the galaxy, etc.? This is not the same Catalyst with a Shepard how to be good guide. This is a bit like Justice and Anders in DA2 when they merged. Justice (Catalyst) merged with Anders (Shepard), and the influence is felt on both sides. It's not Justice using Anders like an organic textbook. Anders affects Justice also, and vice versa. They are also no longer separate, they are one. That is how the Shepard AI is. It might have AI coding, just like Justice's spiritual side, but Shepard's organic and human side definitely changed the AI to the point where it is no longer what it was before. This is a different and better being.

[Isac23]

If the AI just uses Shepard's story as a reference for reason and direction, why would he care so much about his companions, the galaxy, etc.? This is not the same Catalyst with a Shepard how to be good guide. This is a bit like Justice and Anders in DA2 when they merged. Justice (Catalyst) merged with Anders (Shepard), and the influence is felt on both sides. It's not Justice using Anders like an organic textbook. Anders affects Justice also, and vice versa. They are also no longer separate, they are one. That is how the Shepard AI is. It might have AI coding, just like Justice's spiritual side, but Shepard's organic and human side definitely changed the AI to the point where it is no longer what it was before. This is a different and better being.

 

 

I'm sorry I had to do it.

[chris2365]

 

I'm sorry I had to do it.

 

   

 

But seriously, that was one thing that ticked me off about ME3. I'm a full out Paragon, anti-Cerberus person. But when TIM brought up control as an option, I was never against it. I just didn't trust him to do it, and I wanted to be sure it was actually an option. It was clear he was indoctrinated, but he intended to use Control for the wrong things. Shepard on the other hand would've taken control of the Reapers, repaired the damage, and drove the Reapers into the Sun/dark space. What's not to like about that?

[Isac23]

   

 

But seriously, that was one thing that ticked me off about ME3. I'm a full out Paragon, anti-Cerberus person. But when TIM brought up control as an option, I was never against it. I just didn't trust him to do it, and I wanted to be sure it was actually an option. It was clear he was indoctrinated, but he intended to use Control for the wrong things. Shepard on the other hand would've taken control of the Reapers, repaired the damage, and drove the Reapers into the Sun/dark space. What's not to like about that?

 

I can't say I agree that's what ReaperShep actually did, given his final words, but I get where you're coming from.

 

The main reason I didn't pick Control, although I do disagree with the concept on a philosophical level, is that I simply didn't trust the Catalyst. I'm in the Anderson camp, we destroy them or they destroy us. It made no sense for the Catalyst to be giving me these three options out of the blue, especially since throughout the whole trilogy the Reapers have been going on and on about how they're so much more intelligent and perfect than you.

 

The only thing my mind could conceive was that maybe the Catalyst was already set to Destroy, and that was naturally what the Crucible would do. That's what would have automatically happened had I not chosen anything. And all the Catalyst wanted was to convince me to "change the setting" on the Catalyst so the Reapers wouldn't be destroyed. Of course now I know that wasn't actually the case, since the EC gave us the Rejection ending, But it's still the only thing that makes sense in my mind.

[chris2365]

I can't say I agree that's what ReaperShep actually did, given his final words, but I get where you're coming from.

 

The main reason I didn't pick Control, although I do disagree with the concept on a philosophical level, is that I simply didn't trust the Catalyst. I'm in the Anderson camp, we destroy them or they destroy us. It made no sense for the Catalyst to be giving me these three options out of the blue, especially since throughout the whole trilogy the Reapers have been going on and on about how they're so much more intelligent and perfect than you.

 

The only thing my mind could conceive was that maybe the Catalyst was already set to Destroy, and that was naturally what the Crucible would do. That's what would have automatically happened had I not chosen anything. And all the Catalyst wanted was to convince me to "change the setting" on the Catalyst so the Reapers wouldn't be destroyed. Of course now I know that wasn't actually the case, since the EC gave us the Rejection ending, But it's still the only thing that makes sense in my mind.

 

If you don't trust the Catalyst, then what makes you think the tube you are shooting for Destroy isn't a power line for the Crucible, and destroying means no more Crucible. Then again, there are a lot of plotholes about the ending, like how the Crucible and Citadel fit perfectly, how we were able to get those 3 choices, where they come from and how they work, etc. Let's just leave it at that 

 

Your second paragraph makes sense, it follows IT lines a bit but I see your point. Obviously EC discredits your theory, but what makes you think the Catalyst wanted a different choice just because he wanted to avoid getting the Reapers killed? He states that the Reapers are now useless and that his solution would no longer work anymore. If he wants to keep the Reapers around, it would be in the state they are now, to avoid future synthetic-organic conflicts, yet Control and Synthesis actually end up with the Reapers helping us. and no longer capable of responding to such a threat the way the Catalyst has done in past cycles.

[Isac23]

If you don't trust the Catalyst, then what makes you think the tube you are shooting for Destroy isn't a power line for the Crucible, and destroying means no more Crucible. Then again, there are a lot of plotholes about the ending, like how the Crucible and Citadel fit perfectly, how we were able to get those 3 choices, where they come from and how they work, etc. Let's just leave it at that 

 

Your second paragraph makes sense, it follows IT lines a bit but I see your point. Obviously EC discredits your theory, but what makes you think the Catalyst wanted a different choice just because he wanted to avoid getting the Reapers killed? He states that the Reapers are now useless and that his solution would no longer work anymore. If he wants to keep the Reapers around, it would be in the state they are now, to avoid future synthetic-organic conflicts, yet Control and Synthesis actually end up with the Reapers helping us. and no longer capable of responding to such a threat the way the Catalyst has done in past cycles.

 

Sure, he does state that the solution was not working anymore. But he never really explains why, other than "the variables are changed" which was basically Bioware's way of saying "it just isn't ok!" ..so let's just say I didn't fully understand the Crucible's angle or where it was coming from.

 

Let's just say I had this quote in mind during that conversation with the Catalyst “All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.” -The Art of War

 

I had the feeling something was up. Something the Catalyst was hiding. And if I had the option to take them all out for good damnit I was gonna take it!

Turns out I was wrong in having that feeling, that all it really amounted to was really, really poor writing from Bioware lol. Still glad I got to stick it to those bastards though.

 

EDIT: Gonna stick another Art of War quote in there =P

“The whole secret lies in confusing the enemy, so that he cannot fathom our real intent.” 

And by God was I confused lol.

[Iakus]

If the AI just uses Shepard's story as a reference for reason and direction, why would he care so much about his companions, the galaxy, etc.? This is not the same Catalyst with a Shepard how to be good guide. This is a bit like Justice and Anders in DA2 when they merged. Justice (Catalyst) merged with Anders (Shepard), and the influence is felt on both sides. It's not Justice using Anders like an organic textbook. Anders affects Justice also, and vice versa. They are also no longer separate, they are one. That is how the Shepard AI is. It might have AI coding, just like Justice's spiritual side, but Shepard's organic and human side definitely changed the AI to the point where it is no longer what it was before. This is a different and better being.

Simple:  it doesn't.  It's just fulfilling its purpose.  The driving force behind synthetic life.  Just because it says it will "remember" doesn't mean it cares.  And while it is not the Catalyst, it is an AI like the Catalyst.  It is most definitely not Shepard.  Shepard is that pile of charred meat by the control rods.

 

And I really wouldn't compare the Shepalyst to Anders and Justice.  Last game I played Anders was suffering blackouts as Justice took over and ended up blowing up a Chantry and touching off a war, which led to Anders begging for death before he lost control again. 

[Iakus]

If you don't trust the Catalyst, then what makes you think the tube you are shooting for Destroy isn't a power line for the Crucible, and destroying means no more Crucible. Then again, there are a lot of plotholes about the ending, like how the Crucible and Citadel fit perfectly, how we were able to get those 3 choices, where they come from and how they work, etc. Let's just leave it at that 

 

 

You don't.  There is absolutely no reason to trust anything the Catalyst says besides "The writers put it in there, so it must be true"

[chris2365]

Sure, he does state that the solution was not working anymore. But he never really explains why, other than "the variables are changed" which was basically Bioware's way of saying "it just isn't ok!" ..so let's just say I didn't fully understand the Crucible's angle or where it was coming from.

 

Let's just say I had this quote in mind during that conversation with the Catalyst “All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.” -The Art of War

 

I had the feeling something was up. Something the Catalyst was hiding. And if I had the option to take them all out for good damnit I was gonna take it!

Turns out I was wrong in having that feeling, that all it really amounted to was really, really poor writing from Bioware lol. Still glad I got to stick it to those bastards though.

 

Yeah, it sucks that it was reduced to some poor decision making on the writing teams part.

 

Now that I think about, wouldn't it be cool if the Catalyst's personality depended on our decisions? If we made smart decisions to try and stop chaos (cure Genophage, peace Quarians-Geth), the Catalyst is more honest with us and tries to direct us towards destroy, because he trusts the state of civilization and Shepard.

 

If we made different decisions, like not curing the genophage and priming the galaxy for more war and difficult times, then the Catalyst would be more deceitful, and try to convince us that Synthesis and Control are real solutions to the problem, but in reality the Catalyst hopes he the Reapers will try and keep order in the galaxy, and maybe even restart the cycle should things go badly.

[chris2365]

Simple:  it doesn't.  It's just fulfilling its purpose.  The driving force behind synthetic life.  Just because it says it will "remember" doesn't mean it cares.  And while it is not the Catalyst, it is an AI like the Catalyst.  It is most definitely not Shepard.  Shepard is that pile of charred meat by the control rods.

 

I think Shepard AI is doing definitely more than remembering. The epilogue at the end states that Shepard AI says, for example, that he intends to ensure that all have a voice in the future. That's more of an action and less of a ''Oh yeah Shepard cares about freedom, whatever''. If the Shepard AI remembers that the galaxy is in ruins, why would he care to help organics out and fix the damage? If he was helping and saying what he intends to do, how is that not caring? He could just chill and let organics fix their own problems. Instead, he decides to intervene and help with reconstruction. Why would he do that if he didn't care about his friends, companions, different species, etc.?

[Isac23]

Yeah, it sucks that it was reduced to some poor decision making on the writing teams part.

 

Now that I think about, wouldn't it be cool if the Catalyst's personality depended on our decisions? If we made smart decisions to try and stop chaos (cure Genophage, peace Quarians-Geth), the Catalyst is more honest with us and tries to direct us towards destroy, because he trusts the state of civilization and Shepard.

 

If we made different decisions, like not curing the genophage and priming the galaxy for more war and difficult times, then the Catalyst would be more deceitful, and try to convince us that Synthesis and Control are real solutions to the problem, but in reality the Catalyst hopes he the Reapers will try and keep order in the galaxy, and maybe even restart the cycle should things go badly.

 

The problem is the Catalyst has no reason to trust Shepard at all, even if Shepard had made good decisions throughout the playthrough. After all, in the words of Sovereign, this is a "rudimentary creature of flesh and blood" standing before a being who is "beyond your comprehension"

 

All throughout ME1 and ME2 you have the Reapers basically saying "You are nothing. You're less than nothing. You don't even amount to the dirt on my boots" and all of a sudden the Catalyst turns around and goes "So, there's this really massive decision that will shape the fate of the universe forever and I really want you to make it :)"

 

There's just.. no way that this ending could be made right. 

[chris2365]

The problem is the Catalyst has no reason to trust Shepard at all, even if Shepard had made good decisions throughout the playthrough. After all, in the words of Sovereign, this is a "rudimentary creature of flesh and blood" standing before a being who is "beyond your comprehension"

 

All throughout ME1 and ME2 you have the Reapers basically saying "You are nothing. You're less than nothing. You don't even amount to the dirt on my boots" and all of a sudden the Catalyst turns around and goes "So, there's this really massive decision that will shape the fate of the universe forever and I really want you to make it :)"

 

There's just.. no way that this ending could be made right. 

 

Yeah, when you put it that way it really is jarring. I'm doing a trilogy playthrough right now and I'll probably notice it, but then again now that I think about it the whole tone of Reapers changed in ME3. They weren't trash talking us like ME1 and ME2. It's like the writers had a change of heart and wanted to make the Reapers less involved in the cycle, less directing the cycle and more like puppets of it, in order to fit the Catalyst's role.

 

Maybe this doesn't bug me for some reason, I can definitely choose any ending without trouble, but I definitely see now where some of the complaints are coming from and they make perfect sense.

[Isac23]

Yeah, when you put it that way it really is jarring. I'm doing a trilogy playthrough right now and I'll probably notice it, but then again now that I think about it the whole tone of Reapers changed in ME3. They weren't trash talking us like ME1 and ME2. It's like the writers had a change of heart and wanted to make the Reapers less involved in the cycle, less directing the cycle and more like puppets of it, in order to fit the Catalyst's role.

Maybe this doesn't bug me for some reason, I can definitely choose any ending without trouble, but I definitely see now where some of the complaints are coming from and they make perfect sense.

Precisely. I think a lot of people were so inclined to just pick an option without even questioning how ridiculous that proposition seemed simply because it's a video game, where you are constantly being presented choices, and constantly dictating how key events will turn out. So many players were just in the gamer mentality and accepted it.

And youre absolutely right on the writers completely changing the Reapers, which was a damn shame imo. That conversation with Sovereign in ME1 damn near gave me chills! He was ruthless, cold, intimidating and presented no sort of sympathy or empathy with our cause whatsoever. "Your words are as empty as your future. I am the vanguard of your destruction. This exchange is over" THAT is an amazing video game villain right there! ME3 just turned the Reapers into... well, a little boy's toys.

[chris2365]

Precisely. I think a lot of people were so inclined to just pick an option without even questioning how ridiculous that proposition seemed simply because it's a video game, where you are constantly being presented choices, and constantly dictating how key events will turn out. So many players were just in the gamer mentality and accepted it.

And youre absolutely right on the writers completely changing the Reapers, which was a damn shame imo. That conversation with Sovereign in ME1 damn near gave me chills! He was ruthless, cold, intimidating and presented no sort of sympathy or empathy with our cause whatsoever. "Your words are as empty as your future. I am the vanguard of your destruction. This exchange is over" THAT is an amazing video game villain right there! ME3 just turned the Reapers into... well, a little boy's toys.

 

Yes I wish the Reapers motives had remained vague. It should have just remained a good versus bad struggle, like it was in the first 2 games, to maintain consistency. The Reapers were pretty good villains, don't see why they needed to be changed.

 

I also see that  I might have that sort of gamer mentality you describe. Maybe it's the fact I hadn't played the other games in a long time, but when I had to make that decision I just thought of the consequences of each and made a choice. I hadn't thought of dumb the actual concept of the ending actually is. It might not bother me, maybe that will change, but now I can definitely see where some of the ME3 anti-ending people were coming from.

[ImaginaryMatter]

 

I'm sorry I had to do it.

 

I find it weird that Control is often considered a Paragon option (I personally think you can't view the choices through that lens, like at all) when the Paragon options about Control are often about how no one can control or is ready to control the power of the Reapers.

[KaiserShep]

I don't really ascribe the morality alignments to these choices. Control is easily the best example of why that doesn't work, seeing as how there are two paths for the Shepard-derived reaper wrangler. In Destroy, the only synthetic you know of that is always there no matter what is EDI, so it's possible that there's only a single casualty. Maybe there's other synthetics somewhere out there that we don't know of, but they don't matter.

[SporkFu]

The problem is the Catalyst has no reason to trust Shepard at all, even if Shepard had made good decisions throughout the playthrough. After all, in the words of Sovereign, this is a "rudimentary creature of flesh and blood" standing before a being who is "beyond your comprehension"

 

All throughout ME1 and ME2 you have the Reapers basically saying "You are nothing. You're less than nothing. You don't even amount to the dirt on my boots" and all of a sudden the Catalyst turns around and goes "So, there's this really massive decision that will shape the fate of the universe forever and I really want you to make it :)"

 

There's just.. no way that this ending could be made right. 

I think the catalyst is beyond matters like trust. Thing is, shep is right there standing beside it -- the first organic ever to do so -- and the crucible is powered up and ready to go. This means one of four things is going to happen. The catalyst may not have a choice in the matter either. 

[themikefest]

   

 

But seriously, that was one thing that ticked me off about ME3. I'm a full out Paragon, anti-Cerberus person. But when TIM brought up control as an option, I was never against it. I just didn't trust him to do it, and I wanted to be sure it was actually an option. It was clear he was indoctrinated, but he intended to use Control for the wrong things. Shepard on the other hand would've taken control of the Reapers, repaired the damage, and drove the Reapers into the Sun/dark space. What's not to like about that?

The bolded part

 

I would pick control if that happened. Have the dialogue changed to Shepard saying it will rebuild the galaxy and fly the reapers into the nearest sun and then have a slide showing the reapers fly into a sun. Since that doesn't happen, I always pick destroy.

[Iakus]

I think Shepard AI is doing definitely more than remembering. The epilogue at the end states that Shepard AI says, for example, that he intends to ensure that all have a voice in the future. That's more of an action and less of a ''Oh yeah Shepard cares about freedom, whatever''. If the Shepard AI remembers that the galaxy is in ruins, why would he care to help organics out and fix the damage? If he was helping and saying what he intends to do, how is that not caring? He could just chill and let organics fix their own problems. Instead, he decides to intervene and help with reconstruction. Why would he do that if he didn't care about his friends, companions, different species, etc.?

Because its purpose is to "protect the many" and it intervenes to ensure the many are taken care of.  The galaxy is its office, and it wants to make sure its office is well-run.

 

And in the end, it's all a numbers game.  It will likely choose when to intervene and on who's behalf based on cold equations.  Just like how the Catalyst came up with its own "solution" based on the mandate to "preserve organic life"

[TheOneTrueBioticGod]

It would've been cool if there was an actual, full dialogue wheel for the speech, (6 options, not 2.)

Just a thought. 

[Zana]

Synthesis Pros:

Removes the synthetic vs organic problem

'Preserves' all of the currently existing factions (for a given definition of preserving after modifying)

 

Synthesis Cons:

Reapers survive

Non-consented mass modification of genetic code

Does not solve any problems not related to synthetic vs organic issue

Synthetic vs organic issue seems strained as no AI in game other than Reapers seems particularly aggressive or unwilling to cooperate

 

Control Pros:

Preserves all of the currently existing factions

 

Control Cons:

Reapers survive

 

Control Unknown:

Shepard playing God, which is extremely hypocritical after TIM

 

Destroy Pros:

Reapers destroyed

No external will is imposed on organic life and it's evolution

Shepard survives

 

Destroy Cons:

Geth and EDI destroyed

Synthetic vs Organic issue is not solved.

 

Personal opinion:

 

I find it strange that synthesis seems to be hinted as Paragon option.  In ME2 Paragon Shepard reluctantly agrees to modify the Geth that followed Reapers as the only other option is destroying them.  And yet somehow s/he would be willing to mass rewrite genetic code of every organic being when s/he does not NEED to?

 

I do not trust control.  A ~30(?) year old human being turned into an AI through unknown means and then having to live through millennia while controlling the Reapers seems a bit ambitious.  I have no idea if organics are ready for synthesis, but I have much bigger doubts about Shepard being ready to play God. 

 

I went with Destroy, as it (under given circumstances) allows biggest amount of free will for all organic races.  I also do not buy Catalyst's assertion that synthetics will always fight and defeat organics.  There has been a grand total of one instance where that proved to be true - the destruction of Leviathan by Catalyst.  Geth and quarians not only can make to co-exist, the Geth never posed a large enough threat to the galaxy as a whole to be an issue.  All previous cycles were aborted thanks to Catalyst and Co, so this scenario never played through.  Finally, if synthesis IS the necessary final step in organic vs synthetic debate, why do we need to force it through the will of a single human and an AI with slightly...unorthodox logic.

 

Also, what the hell IS synthesis?  Is it a direct human-machine interface? IE something like what Shepard does with Legion through a tank, only without a tank?  Ability to plug in technology in organic body?  Catalyst claims that Shepard is part synthetic already, is he implying that any skeletal reinforcement/reconstruction makes you synthetic? So um...would human brain in synthetic body be synthesis?  The description in game is just...completely unclear.  I am having very hard time on seeing how modifying ones DNA could suddenly turn one into synthetic/organic hybrid.  By that definition all GMO food has achieved synthesis, and Grunt is the epitome of Synthesis.

[Isac23]

I think the catalyst is beyond matters like trust. Thing is, shep is right there standing beside it -- the first organic ever to do so -- and the crucible is powered up and ready to go. This means one of four things is going to happen. The catalyst may not have a choice in the matter either. 

 

To the bold part I ask: why?

Why, other than "because the game said so" are these four options available to you? 

How is this explained in the narrative?

Short answer, it's not.

 

In regards to the catalyst not having any choice in the matter, that's also very unlikely, since the catalyst was the one who lifted you up on the platform in the first place. It's also clear due to the refusal ending that if you do nothing the cycle will simply continue. And it's also clear that that's not what the Catalyst wanted, since it quite angrily replies "SO BE IT!"

 

It just doesn't make sense.

[chris2365]

Because its purpose is to "protect the many" and it intervenes to ensure the many are taken care of.  The galaxy is its office, and it wants to make sure its office is well-run.

 

And in the end, it's all a numbers game.  It will likely choose when to intervene and on who's behalf based on cold equations.  Just like how the Catalyst came up with its own "solution" based on the mandate to "preserve organic life"

 

While it's true it comes down to numbers somewhat, like you said he's also using Shepard's story, actions, etc. to give him reason and direction. For example, if the Shepard AI thought about restarting the reaper harvest, no doubt he would look at Shepard's experiences and say ''Yeah, let's see if we can find something different''. That's the difference between the Catalyst and the Shepard AI, and no doubt that's an improvement to the cold hard calculations and trillions of deaths the Catalyst thought of as a ''solution''

[Isac23]

While it's true it comes down to numbers somewhat, like you said he's also using Shepard's story, actions, etc. to give him reason and direction. For example, if the Shepard AI thought about restarting the reaper harvest, no doubt he would look at Shepard's experiences and say ''Yeah, let's see if we can find something different''. That's the difference between the Catalyst and the Shepard AI, and no doubt that's an improvement to the cold hard calculations and trillions of deaths the Catalyst thought of as a ''solution''

 

The thing is Shepard did not want the cycle to continue because he only saw it from his own point of view. Now he's changed, he says as much himself. From the point of view of a vastly superior entity who is eternal and no longer has any human emotion, it's very uncertain on whether he would not look at the cycle and eventually come back to the conclusion that it was the most efficient thing to do after all.

 

We have to remember that the Reapers only saw the cycle as the best means to control the synthetic vs organics conflict because it was an AI void of human emotion. Empathy, sympathy, remorse, these are things neither the Catalyst nor the Reapers ever felt. They were perfectly fine in turning humans into sludge and pumping them into a giant new AI, this to them was a "preservation of life" because all they saw was the science and numbers behind it, the fact that in some way, shape or form the organics' dna would still live on. What they couldn't understand is that dna is not what constitutes a life.

 

The way I see it, Shepard can't maintain his humanity and become an immortal, all powerful AI. And the losing his humanity part, therein lies the real danger.

[SporkFu]

To the bold part I ask: why?

Why, other than "because the game said so" are these four options available to you? 

How is this explained in the narrative?

Short answer, it's not.

 

In regards to the catalyst not having any choice in the matter, that's also very unlikely, since the catalyst was the one who lifted you up on the platform in the first place. It's also clear due to the refusal ending that if you do nothing the cycle will simply continue. And it's also clear that that's not what the Catalyst wanted, since it quite angrily replies "SO BE IT!"

 

It just doesn't make sense.

I try to keep in mind that the catalyst is still searching for a solution to the problem. The crucible has never been attached to the citadel in the past, and no other organic ever got as close to the catalyst as shep did. shep "altered the variables" and so opened up new possibilities for a solution. The catalyst does explain what will happen next, and thanks to the EC its explanation has a little more depth to it, and it's like in those old 'choose your own adventure' books:

 

To destroy the reapers, turn to page 67

To control the reapers, turn to page 92

To merge with the reapers, turn to page 137

To do nothing or to shoot the catalyst, turn to page 1.

 

There's no fifth option to fill in the blanks, so 'because the game said so' is all we've got to go on.