353 réponses à ce sujet

[Valmar]

At this point you need to ask yourself "who made the crucible to begin with" because if it was really some organic advanced race then how come they knew about the Catalyst? It simply makes no sense that the Crucible was designed by an advanced organic race who didn't know what their own creation would do at all.

 

The only explanation that makes sense is that the Crucible was a failsafe by the Leviathans when they created the Reaper solution or a desired solution they just couldn't finish at the time but they left it for the next cycles to find.

 

And if it is the Reapers who designed the Crucible then it's not really our cycle's 3 choices we get. Iakus is completely right. We're allowed to pick the choices the Catalyst offers because he or his creators made the Crucible (the Leviathan's messenger even looks away as if he's lying when he avoids the answer to Shepard. There are hints of this)

 

 

That explanation doesn't actually make sense because it is contradicted by the lore that has the Leviathan being ignorant of the Crucible. Infact, the lore makes it clear that the Leviathan had nothing to do with the crucible, therefor this is purely headcanon and not real.

 

Iakus is not completely right. This is just headcanon fanfiction. Which is fine, you're free to speculate and headcanon whatever you like. Don't get so enamored by your headcanon that you forget it isn't lore, however. None of this is true, its just fan fiction.

 

Why do we have two entire character arcs in Mass Effect 3 where our choices make a synthetic or a synthetic race get along with us and Joker or the quarians respectively, if it doesn't matter at all?

 

This is a bit unfair on two levels.

 

Firstly, there are multiple outcomes to the quarian-geth conflict. One has the quarians wiping out the geth.One has the geth wiping out the quarians. One has both sides making peace. Is it really fair to only count the one that favors your argument and ignore those that don't? 

Second, this can be said about practically all your choices in the trilogy. Why give us a choice to kill the rachni if they're just going to replace it with a clone? None of our choices really mattered to any significant degree, not just the rannoch arc. It isn't special in this regard. It's just one of a long list. So singling it out seems more like just fishing for excuses to complain more about the ending, no?

 

 

 I feel like the rannoch conflict loses significance because of the last 10 minutes and simultaniously they stand counterpoint to the theme we're supposed to believe in all of a sudden.

 

 

For me the rannoch conflict lost significance when I realized it was happening during the reaper invasion. Seriously, of all times to start a war with the geth... But I'll be reasonable, I'll give it a pass and ignore that bit. It still loses significance the moment Pinocchio-Legion decided to violate everything the geth stood for and give the reaper upgrade to all geth. Legion and the Geth are no longer the ones we knew in ME2. They're been replaced. They're just less hostile heretics now. Goody. I guess the heretic geth that sided with the reapers were right all along. So much for that "geth build out own future" thing. 

 

Also, just for coincidental derps, saying something doesn't suddenly make it so. Nothing about the rannoch arc clashes against the ending. Nor does the ending really clash against it in any reasonable way. Unless you're actually stunned at the notion that the peace with the geth won't last for all eternity. It's quite a revelation, that one.

[God]

The choice is also based on "Pick a color or I'll kill you all" from the Catalyst.  Yo really think those are the only three choices the Crucible is capable of, given the three radically difference effects?

 

And given the game and Bioware utterly failed to make their case concerning the "problem"  yeah I think I will ignore it and take my chances.  

 

 

the color of the sky is not a matter of "artistic integrity"

 

Yes. Why should it be capable of anything different? We built exactly what it was meant to be.

 

And since you decide to do that, you will reap the benefits of that stance. Or, more appropriately, wish the Reapers were around to save your ass when the synthetics inevitably come for your hide.

 

It's your delusion. At the end of the day, I can only shake my head at it.

 

No, but the ending outcome is not up for debate. You have no choice in what is available and what is not, nor what the ending means or represents or not. You can choose to take that or leave it. But you can't deny it. 

[TMA LIVE]

I do think the crucible is capable of other things, but the three choices are only what the Catalyst will allow, since that stations that cause either effect is on the Citadel side. That, or those stations were build by someone else who had control over the citadel at one point.

[Linkenski]

I simply think the three functions are housed in the citadel from when it was made originally and the crucible is just a power source like Catalyst says that unlocks those choices. Therefore I think the crucible was a reaper creation too that was discarded or unfinished before the catalyst wiped out its creators.

[Vazgen]

Personally, I think that they learned of Crucible plans, destroyed them (or so they thought), but also added a protective measure as a contingency plan. The Catalyst can deactivate the Crucible as seen in Refuse ending.

There was an interesting headcanon here about the contraption acting as a block to the Crucible operation. Control and Synthesis might be there to alter the original goal of the device and Destroy destroys the contraption allowing the Crucible to fire freely.

[Valmar]

Personally, I think that they learned of Crucible plans, destroyed them (or so they thought), but also added a protective measure as a contingency plan. The Catalyst can deactivate the Crucible as seen in Refuse ending.

There was an interesting headcanon here about the contraption acting as a block to the Crucible operation. Control and Synthesis might be there to alter the original goal of the device and Destroy destroys the contraption allowing the Crucible to fire freely.

 

Certainly would explain why destroying a tube is the key to activating everything.

 

Oh no, the laptop isn't responding! Quickly, smash it with a hammer so it turns back on!

 

Funnily enough that cave-man approach actually had good results back in the CRT days of television.

 

Moral of Mass Effect: There is no problem a bullet cannot solve.

[Vazgen]

Certainly would explain why destroying a tube is the key to activating everything.

 

Oh no, the laptop isn't responding! Quickly, smash it with a hammer so it turns back on!

 

Funnily enough that cave-man approach actually had good results back in the CRT days of television.

 

Moral of Mass Effect: There is no problem a bullet cannot solve.

A bullet in the head solves everything. Unless the target is angry. Rage is a hell of an aesthetic.

Also this:

[ArabianIGoggles]

Where exactly in the lore does it say the Leviathan are ignorant of the crucible?  The conversation with Leviathan implies that it knows more than it's letting on.  

[Linkenski]

Where exactly on this page did anyone say that the leviathans are ignorant of the crucible?

[ArabianIGoggles]

Post 326.  Valamar's response to you.

[Linkenski]

Figures.

[Fixers0]

I took me some to dig up but I believe this post to be an excellent breakdown as to why Mass Effect's attempt to create and organic vs synthetic plot failed so miserably, and  thus why the Catalyst's story feels so bad:
 

In many respects, I feel that the organic vs. synthetic attempt was let down by the very limited cast of synthetics we have any real interaction with.

There are, for all intents and purposes, three 'races' of synthetics developed in the trilogy: Reapers, Geth, and EDI. There was also the AI on the ME1 side-mission, but it never had any further development and was an extremely isolated case.

The Reapers actually fulfill the 'incomprehensible differences' idea, the principle of innate differences driving conflict. Their perspectives and composition are both alien: they (credibly) see themselves on a higher-form of existence, there are virtually no attempts to anthropomorphize them, and they successfully mix an alien identity with a ruthless indiferrence.

The problem? They're not merely synthetic: they're half-organic as well. They are a hostile blending of synthetic and organic both.


EDI is the unequivocally sympathetic/supportive synthetic. Though she undergoes a radical anthromorphization in ME3, she serves an undisputed support-role throughout her appearance and development. The only conflict with organics she comes into are those brought about by being a loyal companion: not innate differences or ideology. As synthetics goes, she's pretty benign.

The Geth... the Geth dissappoint me on many levels. While they started alien and hostile, with the only real anthromorphization being their religious undertones, the appearance of Legion began a heavy anthro-morphization white-washing, one that continued with a radical re-casting of the nature of their identity in ME3. While Legion, between emotional eyebrow cues, did lay out an interesting and exotic philosophy of collectivation and unity and self-development, ME3 through that out: the Geth will die, or they embrace individuality, stealing other people's technologies, and otherwise have a history lesson so sympathetic that the very existence of the heretics is barely mentioned... as they were marginalized even more in ME2, in which they served no major role and were retroactively revealed to be a misguided minority.

The Geth? Besides the rapidly marginalized Heretics, represent the good little robots that want to be like organics. They're less alien than the Thorian.


Any series in which two-thirds of the main synthetic representatives are increasingly anthropomorphized supportive races, and in which the only innately hostile one isn't even synthetic as such, is going to have a hard time making a plausible case that there's a serious threat from a lack of co-existence with synthetics.

What Mass Effect really would have needed to sustain such a theme would have been a wider, more varied, cast of synthetic factions. Not marginalizing the Heretics, introducing an actively hostile machine race (perhaps something for the Council to really be concerned about), and otherwise more actual development of synthetic rebellions and breakdowns of co-existence that aren't simply the fault of stupid organics.

[Linkenski]

Exactly goes into what I've been saying this whole time too.

I think on the other hand and hence this topic it's more about finding evidence within the lore of the synthetic conflicts than about justifying the ending itself which I made the mistake to do a lot.

Like Valmar brought up, the Geth quarian morning war is plenty evidence of the danger of creating sentient synthetic species and it does indeed play into the reaper logic that without them, it's a matter of time before all organics could wipe out themselves completely by creating AI species.

But as per the post above me, the argument is about the ending itself and why it fails to conclude the trilogy in an effective way.

I'm all for the backstory of the reapers if it had been foreshadowed enough and been a more active theme throughout ME3. ME1 has it, ME2 has it but ME3 until its ending was all about showing us how synthetics can be like organics, hence EDI's development and Geth becoming "true AIs" and brokering peace with Quarians.

The ending pretends synthetics versus organics was always a big thing... and it is certainly one of the central themes but it was never quite THE theme which it suddenly is in the ending and it isolates the ending from the rest of the plot.

[dreamgazer]

A shame AIs are illegal in Citadel space due to the threat they pose. 

[Iakus]

A shame AIs are illegal in Citadel space due to the threat they pose. 

Krogan tend to get thrown out of the nicer establishments too.

[Linkenski]

Okay, okay I admit I can see it.

 

Synthetic conflict is there and the Catalyst's assertion does "make sense".

 

Whether or not it makes for a good ending is debatable... in another topic or 1000 other topics on this forum, I guess.

[Iakus]

Okay, okay I admit I can see it.

 

Synthetic conflict is there and the Catalyst's assertion does "make sense".

 

Whether or not it makes for a good ending is debatable... in another topic or 1000 other topics on this forum, I guess.

Makes for a bad ending, given the conflict is almost entirely in the codex

[NeroonWilliams]

Exactly goes into what I've been saying this whole time too.

I think on the other hand and hence this topic it's more about finding evidence within the lore of the synthetic conflicts than about justifying the ending itself which I made the mistake to do a lot.

Like Valmar brought up, the Geth quarian morning war is plenty evidence of the danger of creating sentient synthetic species and it does indeed play into the reaper logic that without them, it's a matter of time before all organics could wipe out themselves completely by creating AI species.

But as per the post above me, the argument is about the ending itself and why it fails to conclude the trilogy in an effective way.

I'm all for the backstory of the reapers if it had been foreshadowed enough and been a more active theme throughout ME3. ME1 has it, ME2 has it but ME3 until its ending was all about showing us how synthetics can be like organics, hence EDI's development and Geth becoming "true AIs" and brokering peace with Quarians.

The ending pretends synthetics versus organics was always a big thing... and it is certainly one of the central themes but it was never quite THE theme which it suddenly is in the ending and it isolates the ending from the rest of the plot.

For the most part, the AI storylines in ME3 were SUPPOSED to bring you as the player around to the "correct" solution to the Catalyst's problem: Synthesis.

 

Many people continually point out that the Catalyst is "incorrect" in its assumption about AIs vs Organics because "I made peace between the Quarians and the Geth" (I would point out that no, you made a ceasefire.  Look at the 2 Koreas.)  The negative consequence of choosing to Destroy the Reapers goes at least somewhat against the character of any Shepard who has saved every species they could along the way (Krogan, Rachni, Geth, Quarians).  You weren't supposed to pick Destroy.

 

You also weren't supposed to pick Control either.  I have no evidence to support this negative statement EXCEPT:

 

The fact that Synthesis is the CHOICE that is the "hardest" (not so much after all DLC) to unlock marks it as BioWare's "best" solution.

[Linkenski]

Makes for a bad ending, given the conflict is almost entirely in the codex

It's kind of the same problem as Halo 4's plot where the majority of the actual plot context was locked away in external media and not presented through cutscenes like the rest.

 

Bodes well for ME4! (I kid, I kid. They aren't going to externalize the story this time. Bioware isn't 343i)

[Iakus]

For the most part, the AI storylines in ME3 were SUPPOSED to bring you as the player around to the "correct" solution to the Catalyst's problem: Synthesis.

 

Many people continually point out that the Catalyst is "incorrect" in its assumption about AIs vs Organics because "I made peace between the Quarians and the Geth" (I would point out that no, you made a ceasefire.  Look at the 2 Koreas.)  The negative consequence of choosing to Destroy the Reapers goes at least somewhat against the character of any Shepard who has saved every species they could along the way (Krogan, Rachni, Geth, Quarians).  You weren't supposed to pick Destroy.

 

You also weren't supposed to pick Control either.  I have no evidence to support this negative statement EXCEPT:

 

The fact that Synthesis is the CHOICE that is the "hardest" (not so much after all DLC) to unlock marks it as BioWare's "best" solution.

No, you made peace with the geth and the quarians.  They are inhabiting Rannoch together and the geth are actively helping the quarins rebuild their society.

 

hether the peace loasts or not is, of course another matter entirely.  It might or might not.  But for now, it's holding.  And without green space magic.

[God]

No, you made peace with the geth and the quarians.  They are inhabiting Rannoch together and the geth are actively helping the quarins rebuild their society.

 

hether the peace loasts or not is, of course another matter entirely.  It might or might not.  But for now, it's holding.  And without green space magic.

 

The Catalyst never denied that peace might exist at some point.

 

When that finally breaks, green space magic will prevent the ensuing war from wiping out organics. Mainly by preventing the entire issue from ever occurring again.

 

In the long-run, green is the way to go. 

[NeroonWilliams]

No, you made peace with the geth and the quarians.  They are inhabiting Rannoch together and the geth are actively helping the quarins rebuild their society.

 

hether the peace loasts or not is, of course another matter entirely.  It might or might not.  But for now, it's holding.  And without green space magic.

Just in case you missed it, I DON'T agree that Synthesis is the way to go.  I'm just saying that that is what BioWare WANTED you to do.

 

And now at the risk of REALLY inflaming this particular thread.

 

Israel vs Palestinians

 

The Geth have proven their good faith by not firing until fired upon, but they have also shown their resolve to defend themselves with maximum prejudice.  The Quarians started the Morning War and there are sure to be plenty of them that still want to "finish" it because the Geth left them planetless for 300 years.  There will not be true PEACE between the Quarians and the Geth so long as people like Han Gerrel and Daro Xen exist.  They will never accept the Geth as equals with the same right to exist as Quarians.  Every time a Geth platform refuses a request made by such people, there will be fuel added to the fire.  Eventually, the only way PEACE will be achieved is if as many of those Quarians are identified immediately and isolated in a different society (or for a more total "solution", executed), or else their children will inherit their hatred and spread the idea to others.  So those are the options: Totalitarian rooting out of "undesirables", or no lasting peace.

[Valmar]

Where exactly in the lore does it say the Leviathan are ignorant of the crucible?  The conversation with Leviathan implies that it knows more than it's letting on.  

 

Shepard: What do you know about the Crucible?

Leviathan: We have watched its construction before. It has never been completed. Those who have tried fell victim to the harvest. It's outcome is unknown.

 

Literal interpretation that lore gives us: the Leviathan didn't build the crucible and thus have no idea what it actually does.

 

Your speculation: They're lying and know more than they let on.

 

It's possible. But it's purely speculation and headcanon. The lore tells us they don't. You can assume they're lying, or you can accept lore at face-value.

 

 

Figures.

 

I know right? That obnoxious lore hound. derp.

 

 

Okay, okay I admit I can see it.

 

Synthetic conflict is there and the Catalyst's assertion does "make sense".

 

There, there. If it makes you feel any better even I, the derp rally leader, wish Bioware had came up with something else other than the synthetic-organic arc. Though its just one of many elements of the game that feel like they didn't achieve their full potential.

 

 

No, you made peace with the geth and the quarians.  They are inhabiting Rannoch together and the geth are actively helping the quarins rebuild their society.

 

hether the peace loasts or not is, of course another matter entirely.  It might or might not.  But for now, it's holding.  And without green space magic.

 

It's a good thing, then, that the catalyst never claimed peace was impossible and only that it wouldn't last.

[Iakus]

Just in case you missed it, I DON'T agree that Synthesis is the way to go.  I'm just saying that that is what BioWare WANTED you to do.

 

 

Well, I can certainly agree with that assesment.

 

But I'm not touching that comparison with a tenn foot poll, except to say that yes, there will definitely be hard feelings.  But in time, the two societies can grow to become peaceful neighbors.  It's happened before in real world societies societies.

[God]

Well, I can certainly agree with that assesment.

 

But I'm not touching that comparison with a tenn foot poll, except to say that yes, there will definitely be hard feelings.  But in time, the two societies can grow to become peaceful neighbors.  It's happened before in real world societies societies.

 

And just as likely to end up with one side outright annihilating the other. Like Bosnia, Rwanda, Turkey and the Levant region, Sudan, Manchuria, Sri Lanka and the Tamil Tigers, Sierra Leone, Liberia, the Congo, Chechnya, and of course, the Holocaust.

 

In fact, it's occurred so often that I'm more inclined to think that it would end up with the Geth eventually finishing the job.