223 réponses à ce sujet

[Linkenski]

Okay it's a clickbait name for a topic because this is merely a theory, but a VERY interesting one I found:

https://www.youtube....tion_1883281931

[Valmar]

Not going to lie, it lost me the moment it tried bringing the bible into it. I appreciate that he talks though and doesn't rely on the viewer to read a bunch of text flashing across the screen.

 

I don't really understand why people go to such insane lengths to find an explanation when the game already explains it. You don't need to use outside sources to piece it together, the pieces are in the lore.

[Alamar2078]

My theory-craft on why there's a need to "explain" the ending is that the original ending is handled so poorly that people have a hard time accepting what's presented to them.  This is especially bad when expectations and the results realized don't mesh well.

 

Summary:  It's not hard to follow the ending but it's handled so poorly that it's natural to want to look for "more" than is otherwise presented.

[ImaginaryMatter]

 

The relevant TV Tropes entry.

[Linkenski]

I don't buy it was the creator intent either, but stuff like Cerberus in name being a reference to the bible and that the 7 races are also, is something I won't dismiss. I can imagine Bioware locking down a decision like that when they're making a new IP. That was not sarcasm.

[Valmar]

My theory-craft on why there's a need to "explain" the ending is that the original ending is handled so poorly that people have a hard time accepting what's presented to them.  This is especially bad when expectations and the results realized don't mesh well.

 

Summary:  It's not hard to follow the ending but it's handled so poorly that it's natural to want to look for "more" than is otherwise presented.

 

I get that. I went over a year vehemently HATING the ending. I'm arguing that people should look for more IN THE LORE rather than outside sources. I was always super bitter about the ending and looked every where for answers. It wasn't until I turned my focus back on the lore did I realize that the answers were right there and I just never realized it.

[Jorji Costava]

Not going to lie, it lost me the moment it tried bringing the bible into it. I appreciate that he talks though and doesn't rely on the viewer to read a bunch of text flashing across the screen.

 

Well, as other posters have already pointed out, the game itself goes to considerable lengths to bring the Bible into it (i.e. The Lazarus Project, the ending's Garden of Eden imagery, "the Shepard," etc.).

 

@ImaginaryMatter:
 

In fairness, if we're living in a post-Barthes era, then what Mac Walters and company literally meant doesn't mean much as far as actually interpreting the texts, and if Walters' infamous ending notes are anything to go by, that's definitely a good thing.

 

Looking at the video itself, I did find it very interesting, although not ultimately persuasive. For one, I thought that ME3's emphasis on the Geth's search for individuality, which figures prominently in the video, was one of the series' major missteps. More to the point, I have a tough time with the idea that the ending is a symbolic stand-in for Nietzsche's 'death of God,' for a couple of reasons.

 

First, the death of God is about the gradual decay of a belief system that was widely entrenched and accepted (i.e. Western monotheism), whereas the ME3 ending introduces and then quickly deals with an alien value system that no one other than them believes (i.e. synthetic/organic conflict, the need for the harvest, etc.). Second, the ending strongly suggests that in fact, the Catalyst does have the answers to the universe, whereas Nietzsche's concept of the death of God isn't at all about how the great Western monotheisms were actually right about stuff. Anyways, I'm starting to sound like an a-hole, so I'll just go ahead and shut up now.

[Valmar]

I don't buy it was the creator intent either, but stuff like Cerberus in name being a reference to the bible

 

I will admit I don't know much about the bible but isn't Cerberus a greek myth? Something about being the guardian of Hades, if my Hercules knowledge is to be believed. Lol. I've never heard of Cerberus being in the bible.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Original Ending Explained:

 

 

[Alamar2078]

@Valmar:  if it matters my progression was:

 

-- Shock at the ending

-- Bitter hatred of the ending for a while

-- Dislike of how ME2 & ME3 were handled in general [in relation to the overall Reaper plot]

-- Realization that rewriting the whole thing [some ME1, lots of ME2, and lots of ME3] were required to fix some of the deeper story issues

[angol fear]

 

The relevant TV Tropes entry.

 

Great, why school? Why learning to read? Why new movements of critics? The pupils/students know better than expert readers : the teacher and the writer.

That's ridiculous!

Once again, just like Asimov said : anti intellectualism etc...

[ImaginaryMatter]

Great, why school? Why learning to read? Why new movements of critics? The pupils/students know better than expert readers : the teacher and the writer.

That's ridiculous!

Once again, just like Asimov said : anti intellectualism etc...

 

Um... no one said that, or implied that.

 

I think you might have given this little trope lots of justification. Over zealous indeed.

[Rusted Cage]

I get that. I went over a year vehemently HATING the ending. I'm arguing that people should look for more IN THE LORE rather than outside sources. I was always super bitter about the ending and looked every where for answers. It wasn't until I turned my focus back on the lore did I realize that the answers were right there and I just never realized it.

Have you come up with anything that could potentially explain the elephant in the room, the Synthesis ending? I have come to terms with the others and have come to a "technically viable" reason why they could work but I still don't get the green one.

[Reorte]

Well, as other posters have already pointed out, the game itself goes to considerable lengths to bring the Bible into it (i.e. The Lazarus Project, the ending's Garden of Eden imagery, "the Shepard," etc.).

The Garden of Eden and "the Shepard" were blatant and became incredibly face-palm deserving as a result. The rest appeared as useful commonly known cultural reference points, nothing more. Perhaps I was being too kind to them in assuming that (I generally despise symbolism).

[Probe Away]

I will admit I don't know much about the bible but isn't Cerberus a greek myth? Something about being the guardian of Hades, if my Hercules knowledge is to be believed. Lol. I've never heard of Cerberus being in the bible.

Yep, Cerberus was the 3-headed watchdog guarding the entrance to Hades. My Bible knowledge is very rusty but I'm pretty sure it doesn't reference Greek mythology!

[Valmar]

Have you come up with anything that could potentially explain the elephant in the room, the Synthesis ending? I have come to terms with the others and have come to a "technically viable" reason why they could work but I still don't get the green one.

 

Unfortunately no. Not from lack of trying, mind you. Synthesis could be plausible... but it requires a lot, lot of headcanon stuff. If your only bases is what is in the lore, which mine is, I can see NO justification or explanation for Synthesis. It is not an exaggeration, imo, when people call it space magic. The only explanation the story gives is essentially just that  - magic. Again there are headcanons you can use to try to make sense for it - some better than others. The lore doesn't explain it at all though. Well, maybe it does a little... the starbrat tries to explain it. The issue is that the explanation makes no sense whatsoever. Saying words like "framework" and "dna" doesn't suddenly make any of the nonsense it sprouted sound any more convincing. Its akin to people adding "its only logical" at the end of their argument. Words don't suddenly make the claim any less nonsensical, be they authoritative or otherwise.

 

 

The Garden of Eden and "the Shepard" were blatant and became incredibly face-palm deserving as a result. The rest appeared as useful commonly known cultural reference points, nothing more. Perhaps I was being too kind to them in assuming that (I generally despise symbolism).

 

I have to agree. Personally it wasn't until a few years ago that I realized Lazarus was a biblical reference. Yet I've always known of the trope and what the word represents generally. I grew up with cartoons that incorporated it - like Batman and the Lazarus Pit. For me the phrase 'Lazarus' is so common-place in culture that you don't necessarily have to draw connection to the bible to understand it. Same with Cerberus, actually. I know practically jack squat about greek mythology yet I still know about Hades and Cerberus being the watchdog. Not because I read the greek mythology or whatever but because Cerberus is a rather popular theme in our culture. I've seen him in many cartoons, games and storybooks - many of which had no connection to the greek mythology specifically.

 

IMO these references have risen above just being "oh thats in the bible, oh thats greek" and have sort of taken a life of their own. I see Lazarus I don't think "oh, bible" I think "oh, Lazarus." I see Cerberus and I don't think "oh, greek mythology" I think "oh, three headed dog". Kinda like Medusa or the kraken. 

[von uber]

True. It's not like in me2 you have 12 disciples to take with you on a sacrificial journey to save humanity is it.

[NeonFlux117]

It's so obvious what's going on at the end of Mass Effect 3, I still get many lulz and WTF moments when people fail or choose not to see what's going on. 

 

 

The most obvious question, that ultimately leads you to the ONLY "path" and only interpretation of the ending of ME3, is yet so simple and literally.... RIGHT. IN. FRONT. OF. YOU. 

 

How does the "catalyst" know what the child looks and sounds like???

 

 

Again....

 

 

HOW DOES THE CATALYST, KNOW WHAT THE CHILD LOOKS AND SOUNDS LIKE????

 

There was ONLY one person who saw the "child". And that same person happens to be the ONLY person to have unified the galaxy against the reaper horde. The same person brought all the galaxies Military might and factions to one final battle. The same person who found the plans for the "Crucible". The same person who found the remaining leviathan. The same person who ACTIVATED THE CITADEL CONTROL PANEL and "ascended" to the decision chamber to make the single most important choice in the history of the universe. 

 

 

This person, who did all the above. 

 

 

ALSO HAS DREAMS OF OILY SHADOWS AND WHISPERS IN THE DARK, IN A DARK AND FOREBODING FOREST OF DEAD TREES..... STARING....... THE CHILD, AKA THE "CATALYST". 

 

So using our deductive reasoning, we come to the ONLY LOGICAL answer of:

 

-The Catalyst has access to Shepard's subconscious and memories........ 

 

Now we ask:

 

How does the Catalyst have access to Shepard's memories and subconscious?

 

And this is when a very strong grasp and knowledge of the lore comes into play- Paul Grayson, Rachni Queen, Leviathan orbs, Saren Arterius, Arca Monolith, Eletania, Derelict Reaper, Shared memories, Jack Harper and much more. 

 

 

Then the question arises. 

 

Why???? Why would the Catalyst take the child's form when talking to Shepard at the end of ME3 right before Shepard is about to choose a "path". Why? 

 

 

Unless......

 

It has ulterior motives.... And wanted to appear and sound like the child... A child.... That Shepard failed to save......

 

And what do we know of the "Catalyst"?

 

It was a highly advanced AI super program that wast created. CREATED. By.... The Leviathan to solve the problem of synthetic vs. organic confrontations. It was made by the Leviathan....... Gee... What happened to them???

 

 

Maybe..... Just maybe, the Catalyst....... Is all about SELF PRESERVATION.

 

You might want to double down on that idea. 

 

 

Or..... It's just probably- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Probably. 

[Valmar]

 

The most obvious question, that ultimately leads you to the ONLY "path" and only interpretation of the ending of ME3, is yet so simple and literally.... RIGHT. IN. FRONT. OF. YOU. 

 

I take offense to that.

 

 

ALSO HAS DREAMS OF OILY SHADOWS AND WHISPERS IN THE DARK, IN A DARK AND FOREBODING FOREST OF DEAD TREES..... STARING....... THE CHILD, AKA THE "CATALYST". 

 

 

 

Does the revelation that it likely WASN'T the reapers who caused the rachni wars but was rather instead the Leviathan take way from this "oily shadow" significance?

 

 

 

So using our deductive reasoning, we come to the ONLY LOGICAL answer of:

 

-The Catalyst has access to Shepard's subconscious and memories........ 

 

 

 

Ugh, as if it wasn't bad enough you spit at everyone's interpretations and proclaim yours the only real one, now you're touting the 'only logical' card. Joy.

 

Why is it that the catalyst speaks with both male and female Shepard's voice actors echoing in the background? Femshep doesn't exist in my Mass Effect. Could it be, possibly, that this has no real significance and is just done for artistic purposes? Is it possible we're looking too deeply into this and drawing conclusions? Great Scott!

 

 

Maybe..... Just maybe, the Catalyst....... Is all about SELF PRESERVATION.

 

You might want to double down on that idea. 

 

This is objectively false, as made clear by the endings. If this was, indeed, true then none of the choices you make would have had any effect. Its not going tell you how to kill it if its only about self preservation. If you in turn don't believe anything it says then you have to pick refusal since its the only ending that doesn't have you putting faith in the starbrats claim. Because if it really is lying to us and is just  trying to save its own ass then why would you believe it about shooting the tube? Destroying some random, possibly crucial part of the citadel is going to somehow set off the chain reaction that destroys all reapers? Why would you believe that if you don't believe the starbrat is telling the truth?

 

On the other hand if you actually choose any of the endings other than refusal you realize that it was telling the truth. Destroy did destroy the reapers. Control did make Shepard reaper god. Synthesis did do... whatever the hell that was.

[Alamar2078]

We've already discussed different ways that the writers could have easily avoided guess-work.  The ideas to fix some of the more glaring problems are quite trivial.  I imagine I'm going to become very unpopular by wondering how much of the decisions made weren't made in service of the story [or the art] but were instead made to amp up controversy && discussion??

 

If "lively discussion" was the primary goal and NOT necessarily a good ending to the series then they may well have achieved what they're looking for.  It's been almost 2 years now and we're still in heated discussions over the endings ; their significance ; how it would have been difficult to botch up the endings more ; etc..

 

I imagine the only downside is some of their otherwise loyal fans haven't laid out money for a micro-transaction, purchased DLC, or purchased anything Bioware-related since.  I doubt this is more than a blip on their radar ...

[Valmar]

I imagine the only downside is some of their otherwise loyal fans haven't laid out money for a micro-transaction, purchased DLC, or purchased anything Bioware-related since.  I doubt this is more than a blip on their radar ...

 

Actually I know a lot of people who were woefully upset and disappointed with the ending but kept buying all the DLC with the expectation that it will make the ending better somehow. I still remember how many people thought the 'Citadel' dlc was going to bring with it revelations about the ending. You had entire little communities of people who analyzed every teaser screenshot and went through the previous DLC's coding just hoping to find something. 

 

 

IMO the only DLC that really added to the ending in any meaningful way was Leviathan - though From Ashes does add a few nuggets of insight.

[Alamar2078]

I seem to recall that myself.  As someone that believes you should vote with your wallet I did find that amusing.  Then again I fell in to the IT camp myself as saw that as a least a way to say "oops nevermind" to the endings we got.  Then again a drowning man will cling to almost anything

 

To be honest the residual bitterness inside me would be tickled pink if we actually got confirmation that there was going to be a planned, paid DLC with the "true ending" for ME3.  I'm not saying I believe this at all but IF true I would love watching the $h|t storm that would ensue.

[Valmar]

I believed the IT for a while there myself. Right up until Extended Cut. For me, extended cut obliterate any real hope of getting IT confirmation. The original ending was so bland, so simple and without any substance to speak of that it practically demanded you to be suspicious that there is more to it. IT asked you to pretend it was a dream, sure, but look at what it asks you to disregard as not being real. The endings were each identical with no real depth to them at all. Its easy to pretend they're just fake dreams, Bioware put zero effort in making them feel like anything other than lazy copy/paste. It was almost as if we weren't suppose to feel like any of them had any credibility of being 'real' in the first place. Then EC comes out and makes each ending quite distinctive from the others.

[ImaginaryMatter]

The most obvious question, that ultimately leads you to the ONLY "path" and only interpretation of the ending of ME3, is yet so simple and literally.... RIGHT. IN. FRONT. OF. YOU. 

 

How does the "catalyst" know what the child looks and sounds like???

 

 

Again....

 

 

HOW DOES THE CATALYST, KNOW WHAT THE CHILD LOOKS AND SOUNDS LIKE????

 

It's not actually confirmed that the Catalyst is taking the actual form of the kid. It's the same model to be sure but BioWare reuses models all the time. Add in the wisp affect that makes it hard to see that it's the actual character model the kid uses, that it doesn't actually sound like the kid (due to the voice overlays), that Shepard doesn't recognize the thing or give any recognition, and it's a stretch to assume Shepard is being affected at all or if the Catalyst is assuming the kid's actual form (again, if it was trying to do so why add the wisp affect and multiple voices? "Okay, I got to emotional manipulate this guy with this child form, better do my best to disguise it.").

 

IT isn't about logical reasoning. Although it is about logical fallacies.

[eldor_loreseeker]

 though From Ashes does add a few nuggets of insight.

Genuin curiosity; such as?