75 réponses à ce sujet

[arathor_87]

Hey! After a long break from gaming I decided to play Mass Effect 3 again (with the extended cut). I decided to try all the endings except refuse. Here are my thoughts. And yes, maybe i analyze them to much. But it´s inevitable with these endings. ;- )

First of all. This is not a rant. It´s just my thoughts on the endings. When my Shepard asks about the destruction of the reapers, the catalyst says the following:
 

"Yes but the peace won’t last. Soon your children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back."

Okey. The chaos will come back. But isn´t this the case for all the endings? Synthesis is the catalyst ideal solution. Sure, organics will be perfected by integrating fully with synthetic technology. Synthetics in turn will finally have understanding of organics. But it doesn´t stop our children from developing new and more advanced synthetics. Or does it? Because new synthetics will propblably not be synthesised. And they could by definition surpass their creators and create chaos. Sure, it stops the conflict between synthetics and organics, but only because they got alterered.. But it will create new form of chaos, between the synthesised and the new synthetics. It´s only a temporary solution, just as destruction and control.

Because control is no different. Sure, Shepard will control the reapers. But it doesn´t stop the conflict between the synthetics and the organics. And what´s Shepards solution to the conflict? The intelleince turned on it´s creators and the reapers started to harvest organics. What if Shepard change his mind and use the same logic as the catalyst? Will he destroy synthetics or harvest organics? Or will he do nothing at all? He was only a rational human with flaws. In the epilogue Shephard says he will destroy those who threaten the future of the many. Is that not close to the catalysts logic? Because the conflict between synthetics and organics will threaten the future of the many. So no matter what, the cycle will continue, just in a different color and shape. The peace wont last no matter what Shepard do. Yes, I could be wrong. But it feels like there are no real conclusion on what will happen, even with the extended cut. It´s just speculation from Shepard (control), EDI (Synthesis) and Hackett (destruction) in the epilogue.

 

[JasonShepard]

Sounds like you played somewhat renegade if you got that quote out of Shepard in the Control epilogue

Personally, I feel that the cycle is broken IF you achieved peace between the Quarians and the Geth. It is frustrating that you can't point to it when chatting with the Catalyst. (I can guess what he'd say - that the peace may only be temporary - but I'd say it's worth that chance. The Quarian-Geth peace seems unique, considering that both sides chose to work together in the end, rather than one side forcing the peace upon the other.)

 

All three Crucible options provide possible routes out of the cycle though:

 

Destroy's route is the simplest, and it explains why Destroy needed to wipe out all synthetics. The next time that synthetics get to the point where they could endanger organics, the organics just need to build another Crucible and detonate it again. (This does necessitate repairing the Mass Relays, but I feel fairly confident that'll happen anyway.) No more cycle of organic evolution getting reset...

(Alternatively, don't build the Crucible again, and let the synthetics win. Hey, we lose, but it breaks the cycle of conflict!)

 

Control is slightly more complicated. Shepard needs to take an active role in ensuring synthetic-organic conflict doesn't pose a threat. Considering that the Shepard-AI is the single most powerful entity in the galaxy, mediating/enforcing peace shouldn't be terrifically difficult... at least until organics start catching up to the Reaper's technology level. The Shepard-AI will have to stay ahead - either by maintaining technological research of its own (Paragon) or by keeping the organics down (Renegade).

 

Synthesis. Hmm... Synthesis is annoying. The Catalyst is frustratingly vague about what it is that Synthesis does.

However, lets tackle this one from a different front. The problem with synthetics is that they advance faster than us. So they overtake us, and there comes a point where any conflict between us would result in synthetic victory. I feel the implication with Synthesis is that it levels the playing field - organics get to advance as fast as synthetics. Adding new synthetics to the mix wouldn't be a problem, since they still wouldn't advance faster than anyone else.

[arathor_87]

Ye, synthesis is my least favourite ending. As you say new synthetics  problably wouldn´t overtake us. But even if it levels the playing field, it could still lead to conflict and chaos? And I see a lot of other problems with synthesis. The thing about synthetics is that they are immortal (more or less). So when the organics gets fully integrated with synthetic technology, wouldn´t it make them live longer by removing diseases (quarian walking around without maks)? Sure, it´s rainbows and unicorns. But wouldn´t this lead to overpopulation and resource depletion? And in the end create new conflicts. I need to stop analyzing the endings. It drives me crazy!     
 

[ImaginaryMatter]

Sounds like you played somewhat renegade if you got that quote out of Shepard in the Control epilogue

Personally, I feel that the cycle is broken IF you achieved peace between the Quarians and the Geth. It is frustrating that you can't point to it when chatting with the Catalyst. (I can guess what he'd say - that the peace may only be temporary - but I'd say it's worth that chance. The Quarian-Geth peace seems unique, considering that both sides chose to work together in the end, rather than one side forcing the peace upon the other.)

 

Stories also aren't just simple logic exercises, the authors presumably get to choose what they do and do not get to put into a game. What are the writers trying to say about or not about organic/synthetic relationships by offering a peaceful resolution on Rannoch and then the having the ending show up (I personally suspect the writer's did have some notion that Rannoch and the ending didn't mesh well so they simply avoided bringing it up altogether).

 

As for the endings I think it's implicit from the Catalyst that the Crucible isn't a permanent solution. It does not acknowledge any kind of change to the overall relationship, Synthetics will still evolve, overtake their creators, chaos, etc. It's comments after Destroy seem to denote that it is only a very temporary solution; that eventually the AI will out evolve the Crucible as well. Unless, it's comments about the cycles not working anymore as a solution implied that change and that organics and synthetics were still on a destined course for conflict but were now on equal footing. I don't know. This is where the lack of coherence and established continuity confuses me.

 

I chose Control pre-EC because I figured it was the best solution, permanently removing the Reapers by having... something order them to self destruct or fly into a sun, while sparing the Geth while only sacrificing Shepard. Post-EC the Control speech completely removed my desire from ever wanting to choose it again. I always played by Shepard as someone who only made tough choices by necessity of extreme situations and never wanted to serve in such an authoritarian capacity. The speech just leaves me with the vibes that the fusing process created a completely new and unknown entity.

 

Synthesis seems too divorced from any grounding in Mass Effect that it leaves the choice to me as an assessment of how much you value the Catalyst's opinion. Like it's deliberately obtuse and you choose it because the Catalyst says it's a good idea.

[dorktainian]

what ending?

[Quarian Master Race]

another ending thread?



 

 

Personally, I feel that the cycle is broken IF you achieved peace between the Quarians and the Geth. It is frustrating that you can't point to it when chatting with the Catalyst. (I can guess what he'd say - that the peace may only be temporary - but I'd say it's worth that chance. The Quarian-Geth peace seems unique, considering that both sides chose to work together in the end, rather than one side forcing the peace upon the other.)

How is the cycle broken? There was peace between quarians and geth before the uprising, after all. As for both sides choosing it, I would argue that peace was in a way forced on the quarians, since part of if not the primary reason Han'Gerrel relents from attacking is the persuasive power of space jesus/ Shepard convincing him that he won't win against the Reaperized geth. Obviously, there are differing opinions among the quarians since they are organics, and thus individuals, but all it takes is a dedicated minority to reignite the conflict.

This argument goes for the other side too. Remeber when a small minority of geth decided that the Reapers were gods that and all meatbags must die? Remeber how they were narrowly stopped from forcibly rewriting the entire geth consensus into accepting this ideology? What's to stop something similar from happening?  

 

Stories also aren't just simple logic exercises, the authors presumably get to choose what they do and do not get to put into a game. What are the writers trying to say about or not about organic/synthetic relationships by offering a peaceful resolution on Rannoch and then the having the ending show up (I personally suspect the writer's did have some notion that Rannoch and the ending didn't mesh well so they simply avoided bringing it up altogether).

They probably didn't bring it up because it was irrelevant and could have been easily dismissed. A likely temporary and one sided truce happening in a single 300 year long conflict does not throw billions of years of the same pattern out of the window.

[TheN7Penguin]

Destroy is the only option which actually solves the problem, I feel.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Chances are that a reaperized Shepard after several millenia might come to the same conclusion as the Catalyst and harvest the galaxy.

 

The thing is that none of the endings solve anything. Not even synthesis. The Catalyst was deluding itself. The cycle ends only because its directive of preserving organic life at all costs ends. That ends because there is no longer any organic life. Everything is a hybrid. Now, does this stop the new hybridized life from creating synthetics? No. But it supposedly makes it so that the synthetics understand them. However - The created will always rebel against their creators.

 

Thus synthesis solves nothing.

 

Control solves nothing.

 

Destroy solves nothing except destroy the technology.

[Excella Gionne]

Worst ending is IT. It ends just like that! Ever watched The Sopranos? 

[arathor_87]

My post got messed up. Nvm, I repost it later. Problably. : )

[dorktainian]

destroy ftw.

 

We destroy them or they destroy us.  ergo the only choice is to destroy them.  Synthesis = Reaper win.  Control = Reaper win.

 

Remember the reapers are the bad guys.

[themikefest]

destroy ftw.

 

We destroy them or they destroy us.  ergo the only choice is to destroy them.  Synthesis = Reaper win.  Control = Reaper win.

 

Remember the reapers are the bad guys.

[ManleySteele]

I just finished my first ME3 playthrough. No wonder everyone hates the writer's guts. What a cheat. A 3 hour cut scene, with a little combat and dialog mixed in is not my idea of fun. I thought the Illusive man would never shut his pie hole. If they wanted to entertain me, they should have give me the option to shoot his dumb butt after his third word. They would have been entertaining.

 

But no. They have to try to advance some obscure philosophy that makes absolutely no sense. Give me a break.

 

If I wanted to hear idiots expound philosophically, I'd go to church.

[angol fear]

I just finished my first ME3 playthrough. No wonder everyone hates the writer's guts. What a cheat. A 3 hour cut scene, with a little combat and dialog mixed in is not my idea of fun. I thought the Illusive man would never shut his pie hole. If they wanted to entertain me, they should have give me the option to shoot his dumb butt after his third word. They would have been entertaining.

 

But no. They have to try to advance some obscure philosophy that makes absolutely no sense. Give me a break.

 

If I wanted to hear idiots expound philosophically, I'd go to church.

 

Maybe you misread the entire trilogy and should play other games, if you want to be entertained.

[Winterking]

Destroy solves nothing except destroy the technology.

Destroy solves the Reaper problem. As far as I'm concerned that was the bigger problem the galaxy was facing.

[ManleySteele]

Why else would I play a game except to be entertained? Your post makes no sense.

[arathor_87]

Regarding evolution. The catalyst talk about perfection. Organics will perfected by intergrating fully with synthetic technology. Sovereign says that they are eternal, the pinnacle of evolution and existance. He also sayt that organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. Organic lives are measured in years and decades. Organics wither and die.

The last part is true. Yes, organic life is a genetic mutation, an accident. Organic lives are measured in years and decades. But why is this a problem? Death is a part of life. My Shepard don´t want to be eternal. And about perfection. There´s no such thing as perfection in the universe. Why? Because the universe doesn´t allow it. Yes, humans, salarians, turians and quarians have flaws. But without flaws, there will be no growth. Yes, I know that this is just a video game, but when the Catalyst explained synthesis for me, I was thinking about the following qutoes:

"Why would would anyone want perfection when growth comes from flaws?"

“You were born to be real, not to be perfect. You're here to be you, not to be what someone else wants you to be.” 

“One of the basic rules of the universe is that nothing is perfect. Perfection simply doesn´t exist. Without imperfection, neither you nor I would exist.” - Stephen Hawking

"When you aim for perfectiom, you discover it´s a moving target."

"Perfection is overrated. Constant evolution is what create success."

Destroy (1) and control (2) are the only options for me. 

EDIT: Are for being the pinnacle of evolution, they reapers are kinda stupid.  Their answer to every question:

No, it´s beyond your comprehension"

I feel like this when I´m talking to a reaper:

https://www.youtube....h?v=wisHcuBzTCM