102 réponses à ce sujet

[God]

Appeal to credulity fallacy on your part, thinking that peace is likely to be permanently everlasting. 

[RatThing]

Being able to make peace does not mean it will last forever. The conficts will come again.

 

But it shows that it is an option especially given how easily it was achieved. The point is, if synthetics are supposed to be like all the other species up to the point that they even romance organics, how does the catalysts message about organic extinction by synthetics make sence?

[GalacticWolf5]

But it shows that it is an option especially given how easily it was achieved. The point is, if synthetics are supposed to be like all the other species up to the point that they even romance organics, how does the catalysts message about organic extinction by synthetics makes sence?

To answer that question, you have to go back to before the harvest cycles began. Every species of the galaxy were the Leviathans' thralls. They were not in conflict with each others because the Leviathans controlled all of them. But those species built synthetics and then there was conflict between organics and synthetics. During this time, synthetics were the only ones who caused organic extinction. The Leviathans built the Catalyst with the idea that synthetics caused organic extinction, but they also wanted to keep alive both organics and synthetics in peace.

[dreamgazer]

But it shows that it is an option especially given how easily it was achieved.

... easily?

[RatThing]

To answer that question, you have to go back to before the harvest cycles began. Every species of the galaxy were the Leviathans' thralls. They were not in conflict with each others because the Leviathans controlled all of them. But those species built synthetics and then there was conflict between organics and synthetics. During this time, synthetics were the only ones who caused organic extinction. The Leviathans built the Catalyst with the idea that synthetics caused organic extinction, but they also wanted to keep alive both organics and synthetics in peace.

 

That doesn't answer the question why synthetics would want to cause organic extinction when they are just another species. I wasn't about whether the catalyst is right or wrong but rather that the ending and the writing of the Geth and EDI doesn't fit, which leads me to the suspicion that not the same people are responsible for that.

 

@ dreamgazer,  come on, the Quarians break off one attack and all of a sudden the Geth are like "let's all be friends" just moments after that? Without even conditions or further negotiations the same people who wanted to destroy them minutes before are allowed on their planet? (And people complain about the flawed logic of the ending).   

[dreamgazer]

@ dreamgazer,  come on, the Quarians break off one attack and all of a sudden the Geth are like "let's all be friends" just moments after that? Without even conditions or further negotiations the same people who wanted to destroy them minutes before are allowed on their planet? (And people complain about the flawed logic of the ending).

Many other factors led up to the ceasefire, though, and the geth's programming isn't static, especially during wartime.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Many other factors led up to the ceasefire, though, and the geth's programming isn't static, especially during wartime.

 

Those factors are almost purely mechanical though. It's only complex from a meta-game stand point where you can stand back to look at what, somewhat arbitrary, save file flags the game looks at. In the story peace is achieved by Shepard yelling at the Quarians and having Admiral Tali support him. There's no deep political, social, moral, etc. changes. All it takes is for the Quarians to stop doing actions that the game repeatedly hammers home as irrational.

[dreamgazer]

Those factors are almost purely mechanical though.

Why does that matter? It's still integral to the story.

[GalacticWolf5]

That doesn't answer the question why synthetics would want to cause organic extinction when they are just another species. I wasn't about whether the catalyst is right or wrong but rather that the ending and the writing of the Geth and EDI doesn't fit, which leads me to the suspicion that not the same people are responsible for that.

 

Synthetics don't want to cause Organic extinction. From what we've seen in our cycle, the conflict starts because Organics are scared of Synthetics. They don't understand each other, they don't see the world the same way. Synthetics also have a self-preservation instinct, if they are attacked, they'll fight back. They'll kill you if you're trying to kill them.

[RatThing]

A simple fight for self defence does not cause total organic extinction like described by the catalyst.

[Based Prothean]

Those factors are almost purely mechanical though. It's only complex from a meta-game stand point where you can stand back to look at what, somewhat arbitrary, save file flags the game looks at. In the story peace is achieved by Shepard yelling at the Quarians and having Admiral Tali support him. There's no deep political, social, moral, etc. changes. All it takes is for the Quarians to stop doing actions that the game repeatedly hammers home as irrational.

 

Talking down the Quarians is half of what it takes to get a successful cease fire. Peace is only achieveable if Legion is your Geth companion, as he gives the Geth consencus a better understanding of their creators and organics in general. It's not like the Geth were always willing to simply stand down, the end of the Rannoch arc was the first time in their entire history that the Geth didn't shoot down any organic(not counting Saren) on sight like they did for the past 300 years.

 

But it's a much different story with the Geth VI accompaning you. Peace is not possible, nether side will stand down, and if the Migrant Fleet did cease fire, it's safe to say that the Geth fleet most likely wouldn't, due to the VI's vengful behavior.

[GalacticWolf5]

A simple fight for self defence does not cause total organic extinction like described by the catalyst.

 

''The battle for Rannoch disproves your assertion.''

[grey_wind]

The Catalyst having eons worth of data is completely meaningless from a storytelling perspective, because nothing in the actual narrative supports his claim, and that's all that matters to the people consuming said story.

 

So the Catalyst may be right when he says the peace won't last, but his words hold no weight for the player when the two most significant synthetic story arcs in the game (Rannoch and EDI) completely disprove him. The Catalyst's assertion, and its significance from having the entire conclusion hinge on it, is a complete failure in storytelling. It doesn't matter one iota whether he's right or wrong.

[Linkenski]

''The battle for Rannoch disproves your assertion.''

Ugh I hated that line. IT'S THE EXACT OPPOSITE! And even worse was probably Shepard going "Organics and Synthetics don't have to desteoy each other!"... The hell Shepard? First of stop autodialoging, secondly what the hell makes you jump to that line of logic? Quarians and Geth... Organics and synthetics. Reaper: organic and machine hybrid. Why is Shepard arguing with the reaper about Geths not having to kill Quarians?

In every subsequent replay I always noticed these bits and felt that it was probably iterations made after the ending had been written to foreshadow it (by making the characters lie)

Wait. What topic am I posting in again? It's like "Is the Catalyst's assertion wrong?" now. I thought the discussion was about the focus on earth.

If Mass Effect 3's multitude of errors don't make us all rambling idiots trying to comprehend it all :3

[GalacticWolf5]

Ugh I hated that line. IT'S THE EXACT OPPOSITE!

 

How so? Because I have the Reapers (who have seen the pattern repeating itself numerous times) telling me that conflict is inevitable and also an almost 300 hundred years long conflict.

 

You might have accomplished peace between the Geth and the Quarians (I did too), but that peace won't last forever. I'm not saying that there will be conflict in a few years, but something is bound to happen in the futur.

[GalacticWolf5]

lol you actually believe starchilds bs?

 

Yes I do because it's not ''bs'' as you call it. If you'd actually get that stupid false idea of the Catalyst you have out of your head and actually took the time to understand it, you probably wouldn't whine about the ending as much as I see you doing in these forums.

 

EDIT: Forgot to talk about something. Pretty much everything the Catalyst says is also said by the Leviathan. So you're telling me that you don't believe the Leviathan too? I wonder why you even bother to play this game.

[GalacticWolf5]

lol what?

Leviathan was freaking DLC and I didn't buy it (bought only Citadel) it was created after the backlash so clearly they tried to expand on the ending and make it so the whole catalyst idea isn't forced so much

 

Yes it was a DLC, so what? It still adds to the lore. Leviathan is a really good thing because, like you said, it prepares you for the Catalyst and reveals some stuff about the Reapers and all that.

 

And of course 90% who played ME3 and hated the endings (like me) just weren't "smart" enough to understand the endings

thats the most ridiculous thing I have heard in quite some time 

you have to do better than that

 

Wait a minute. Are you saying 90% of the people who played ME3 hated the endings? Hahahaha don't be silly.

Also, I never said you weren't smart enough to understand the endings, just that you didn't take the time to. You're stuck in the mindset of pre-EC anti-ending people.

 

I didn't want to become the reaper god or sacrifice the geth and EDI

 

No one is forcing you to become the new Reaper master consciousness.

 

Loosing the geth and EDI is a sacrifice, if you're not willing to make that sacrifice to save every organic that's all on you. It's not bad writting because you're not happy about it.

 

also your fanboyism is pretty strong I mean jeez

 

you're clearly butthurt about the endings even though the game is almost 3 years old. Can't you just move on with your life?

[RatThing]

''The battle for Rannoch disproves your assertion.''

 

Lol, sure. If you value the flawed logic of a video game more than common sence. I'm sure in real life people would also attack with their whole race squeezed in one fleet . 

[angol fear]

Lol, sure. If you value the flawed logic of a video game more than common sence. I'm sure in real life people would also attack with their whole race squeezed in one fleet . 

 

Lol. Let's go back to Aristotle and let's misunderstand him again.

[RatThing]

Lol. Let's go back to Aristotle and let's misunderstand him again.

 

If anything, then you misunderstood the whole point of the debate. Nothing on Rannoch happened that logically proves how simple self defence from one side will automatically cause total extinction (especially total extinction of all organics). You want to discuss whether starchild is right or not? I don't give a dusty ****, I will destroy anyways if synthesis is my only alternative. What I'm saying is that if he's right then the humanization of synthetics as happened in ME3 doesn't make sence.  

[themikefest]

Yeah Shepard does talk of Earth a few too many times. 

 

How different would the game be if the Citadel was taken to Thessia? Would that mean an asari would be telling Shepard to go where the resistance is the heaviest? Would that mean we would see asari running to the beam and getting killed? 

 

Would it be the same if the Citadel was taken to Palaven?

[Reorte]

Fine, the Reapers are focussing more on Earth than elsewhere. It seems rather contrived, as does the whole "humans are special" thing, but it just about fits in with all the other events in the trilogy. The problem is that the talk isn't about "It's all about Earth because that's where the Reapers are", it's that it's "Earth for Earth's sake." For the human characters to be more affected by Earth is fine but it feels like they're just outright blind to the big picture.