145 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

One of the typical objections to the endings is that Control either shouldn't be available, or shouldn't work. Either because it violates the themes -- don't ask me what that's supposed to mean -- or because Shepard shouldn't think that TIM was right about anything because reasons.

Many of the other objections are of a similar nature

So BabyPuncher doesn't like it.

That's hardly a scathing indictment.

[Pasquale1234]

One of the typical objections to the endings is that Control either shouldn't be available, or shouldn't work. Either because it violates the themes -- don't ask me what that's supposed to mean -- or because Shepard shouldn't think that TIM was right about anything because reasons.

Many of the other objections are of a similar nature

I think there are other objections - including the fact that you were expected to take the Catalyst's word for everything. I also think some people took issue with the absence of a satisfactory ending where Shepard survived.

The Leviathan DLC released after the fact, and provided more background explanation of the origin of the reapers. Told, not shown. There were instances of synthetic hostility toward organics throughout the trilogy, but it was often the organics who were the initial aggressors. What we were actually shown in the trilogy did not really position organic/synthetic conflict as being any more of a concern than conflict between different groups of organics.

In short, the ending required us to take the Catalyst's explanations, justifications, and options offered at face value. How does synthesis even work? What would the net impact be? It left the player with more questions than answers. Plus, space magic.

[AlanC9]

That's why I said "many" rather than, say, "most."

By "take the Catalyst's word for everything" are you referring to the Crucible's functioning, the Catalyst's own motivations, or both? The former is interesting for Shepard, but it's hard to construct any kind of plausible rationale for his statements to be lies. People often do try to construct some sort of rationale that lets them believe just enough of what he's saying to end up picking Destroy, but it's usually transparent nonsense.

The Catalyst actually being right about anything besides the Crucible doing what he says it will do -- which he is right about about -- isn't necessary. If anything, ME3 undermines that, as you point out. But there's nothing wrong with the villain being wrong about stuff. Happens all the time.

I'm also not clear what's wrong with the Reaper origins being told about rather than shown in Leviathan. Shepard isn't living in the right era to see it for himself, after all.

[Sylvius the Mad]

How does synthesis even work? What would the net impact be?

I certainly agree that we're not given nearly enough information about Synthesis to justify choosing it.

[Elhanan]

I certainly agree that we're not given nearly enough information about Synthesis to justify choosing it.

I chose it most often because it was not one of the other choices. I neither wanted to set civilization back that far in technology only to repeat the cycle, nor desired to control things as some spirit; power corrupts and all that.

[AlanC9]

I agree that it's difficult to see imposing Synthesis via the Crucible as necessary or even desirableunless Shepard really does believe the Catalyst all the way down the line.  Plus, space magic, as Pasquale1234 says.

 

OTOH, it's hard to believe that this is worth making a fuss over.

[Pasquale1234]

By "take the Catalyst's word for everything" are you referring to the Crucible's functioning, the Catalyst's own motivations, or both? The former is interesting for Shepard, but it's hard to construct any kind of plausible rationale for his statements to be lies. People often do try to construct some sort of rationale that lets them believe just enough of what he's saying to end up picking Destroy, but it's usually transparent nonsense.

I would have been much more comfortable with the idea that organics need to be protected from synthetics if we'd seen some that were actively hostile sans outside influence. What we actually saw in-game were Pinnochios, friends and allies, and synthetics trying to defend themselves. And the heretics, which were really no more dangerous than any other merc group - and perhaps less so than an organization like Cerberus.

From my perspective, the entire premise for the reaper's very existence was not effectively demonstrated in-game. In fact, I'd say a genophage-free Krogan population could represent a bigger threat.
 

The Catalyst actually being right about anything besides the Crucible doing what he says it will do -- which he is right about about -- isn't necessary. If anything, ME3 undermines that, as you point out. But there's nothing wrong with the villain being wrong about stuff. Happens all the time.

I don't disagree with that; all Shepard really needs to know in that moment is her options.

Still, it's a huge info dump, some of which doesn't gel with what we've been shown throughout the trilogy. That's the basis of the "show, don't tell" comment. I very definitely had a WTF?! reaction to it the first time.

Playing through the Leviathan content prior to meeting the Catalyst makes for much better storytelling, imho.

[Youknow]

 

 

I don't disagree with that; all Shepard really needs to know in that moment is her options.

But it's not just a matter of knowing your options. You need to understand them as well. The choices are meaningless without any form of understanding. It'd be like if I asked you "by boat, by air, or by land?" You're given 3 options, but without any real context for what on earth they are supposed to mean, you can't even begin to choose. I can't even ask "what if he's lying" really because I don't even really know what he's talking about. 

 

 

 

Still, it's a huge info dump, some of which doesn't gel with what we've been shown throughout the trilogy. That's the basis of the "show, don't tell" comment. I very definitely had a WTF?! reaction to it the first time.

Info dumps are generally a bad sign, but it's especially bad here because it's an endgame info dump, and it's after the writing already gets fairly haphazard before then. So all that happens is an onslaught of confusion that never really ends. 

 

 

Playing through the Leviathan content prior to meeting the Catalyst makes for much better storytelling, imho. 

 

 

Which most people won't even see. I know I haven't because it's DLC and I didn't feel like buying it. Even if it did fix the story, I feel like I shouldn't have to buy something to fix a story.

[Sylvius the Mad]

But it's not just a matter of knowing your options. You need to understand them as well. The choices are meaningless without any form of understanding. It'd be like if I asked you "by boat, by air, or by land?" You're given 3 options, but without any real context for what on earth they are supposed to mean, you can't even begin to choose. I can't even ask "what if he's lying" really because I don't even really know what he's talking about.

There's no reason why Shepard would understand. The Catalyst only revealed itself moments earlier, and suddenly Shepard is asked to choose among three options, only one of which the game actually expects her to have considered previously (Destroy). Synthesis is entirely new, and Control is something the game clearly expects Shepard tonhave rejected throughout the game.

I would generally expect Shepard to choose destroy. The other options are either something preferred by an indoctrinated enemy, or something where her knly source of information is an ancient alien VI. Why would any Shepard trust that Control or Synthesis were what the Catalyst claimed they were?

The only people Shepard actually knows and ostensibly trust sent her up there to Destroy. Given no new information that is at all trustworthy, only Destroy makes sense. Her mission was to Destroy.

I chose Control because I had pre-existing headcanon which made Shepard agree with TIM about Control from the beginning. But without that, Destroy it would have had to be.

[AlanC9]

I would generally expect Shepard to choose destroy. The other options are either something preferred by an indoctrinated enemy, or something where her knly source of information is an ancient alien VI. Why would any Shepard trust that Control or Synthesis were what the Catalyst claimed they were?

Of course, if Shepard goes too far in that direction the question becomes whether picking Destroy will actually lead to Destroy......

[Sylvius the Mad]

Of course, if Shepard goes too far in that direction the question becomes whether picking Destroy will actually lead to Destroy......

Even if the Catalyst hadn't appeared, there was always the risk of that.  But Destroy was the mission.  Shepard has orders.

[AlanC9]

I was specifically referring to the likelihood of the options not being what they're presented to be. Can you trust Destroy to really Destroy if you can't trust Control to really Control? There's more of a case for Synthesis since the effects described are pretty vague..

[Monica21]

I was specifically referring to the likelihood of the options not being what they're presented to be. Can you trust Destroy to really Destroy if you can't trust Control to really Control? There's more of a case for Synthesis since the effects described are pretty vague..

 

Well, does it? At least the way the Catalyst describes it? Shepard can live with high EMS even though the Catalyst strongly implies that Shepard with die because of his cybernetic implants.

 

And I just watched a YouTube video of the Control ending and it's by far the creepiest ending of the three. The voiceover that switches from Harbinger to Shepard, to the images that switch from Shepard to the Reapers make me wonder who's really doing what and what kind of "control" the galaxy is actually going to be under. I mean, I'm sure Stalin thought he was protecting the innocent and giving hope for the future too.

[Sylvius the Mad]

And I just watched a YouTube video of the Control ending and it's by far the creepiest ending of the three. The voiceover that switches from Harbinger to Shepard, to the images that switch from Shepard to the Reapers make me wonder who's really doing what and what kind of "control" the galaxy is actually going to be under. I mean, I'm sure Stalin thought he was protecting the innocent and giving hope for the future too.

Since I'm making the decision from Shepard's point of view, and Shepard will probably think he's doing the right thing, it seems like a no brainer. Sure, Shepard might become a mad tyrant, but Shepard isn't likely to foresee that.

[Monica21]

Since I'm making the decision from Shepard's point of view, and Shepard will probably think he's doing the right thing, it seems like a no brainer. Sure, Shepard might become a mad tyrant, but Shepard isn't likely to foresee that.

 

The mad tyrants never do.

[ToJKa1]

Well, i've no brained the decision by the colors. Control for paragon, destroy for renegade, and synthesis for mixed

 

Personally i think paragon control is the best ending. No one or nothing gets mutated or killed and yet the Reapers stop reaping and their accumulated knowledge can be used for the greater good. And should the synthetic/organic conflict happen again like the Catalyst, Leviathans and Javik keep saying, there's a force that can end it before anything goes extinct.

Though i also think, given the circumstances, destroy would be the only one that makes sense for Shepard to choose.

 

Well, whatever. It's a poor ending, but hardly the crime against humanity it was made to be back when the game was released. And i actually preferred it before the extended cut, as the original left more room for interpretation.

And didn't make Harbinger look stupid; "There's that ship whose crew has screwed up our plans in this cycle. What was i supposed to do again? Shoot it? That doesn't sound right. Assume direct control? No, that's not it. Oh, it got away. Well i'm sure it won't matter."

[aoibhealfae]

Paragon choosing Synthesis is exactly like Paragons who let Rana live (and she was indoctrinated, got batshit crazy and kill a lot of people), brainwash Geth (and strengthen the Geth fleet and end up killing a lot of Quarians) and said to Kelly to continue the way she is and get her killed and made Javik see the shard and make him suicidal. This is my first playthrough, I call her bad decisions Shepard. Good intention from the start but lack foresight.

 

That's why I go Renegon and Paragade.

[KaiserShep]

Well, i've no brained the decision by the colors. Control for paragon, destroy for renegade, and synthesis for mixed

 

Personally i think paragon control is the best ending. No one or nothing gets mutated or killed and yet the Reapers stop reaping and their accumulated knowledge can be used for the greater good. And should the synthetic/organic conflict happen again like the Catalyst, Leviathans and Javik keep saying, there's a force that can end it before anything goes extinct.

Though i also think, given the circumstances, destroy would be the only one that makes sense for Shepard to choose.

 

Well, whatever. It's a poor ending, but hardly the crime against humanity it was made to be back when the game was released. And i actually preferred it before the extended cut, as the original left more room for interpretation.

And didn't make Harbinger look stupid; "There's that ship whose crew has screwed up our plans in this cycle. What was i supposed to do again? Shoot it? That doesn't sound right. Assume direct control? No, that's not it. Oh, it got away. Well i'm sure it won't matter."

 

Nah, Renegade Control is better.

 

THEY WILL DO WHAT I SAY, OR I WILL F'N SPANK 'EM. 

[AlanC9]

Since I'm making the decision from Shepard's point of view, and Shepard will probably think he's doing the right thing, it seems like a no brainer. Sure, Shepard might become a mad tyrant, but Shepard isn't likely to foresee that.

Sure. A Shepard who did foresee that would make another choice, right?

[AlanC9]

Well, does it? At least the way the Catalyst describes it? Shepard can live with high EMS even though the Catalyst strongly implies that Shepard with die because of his cybernetic implants.
 

Yep. I'm just arguing for applying uncertainty equally when thinking about the decision between Control and Destroy.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sure. A Shepard who did foresee that would make another choice, right?

I'm not sure a Shepard could foresee that.  Fear it, perhaps.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Yep. I'm just arguing for applying uncertainty equally when thinking about the decision between Control and Destroy.

And I agree completely with that.  The Catalyst offers no trustworthy information at all.

[CavalierToast]

Well, i've no brained the decision by the colors. Control for paragon, destroy for renegade, and synthesis for mixed

The situation becomes more complicated if Shepard has red-green color blindness.

[ToJKa1]

Nah, Renegade Control is better.

 

THEY WILL DO WHAT I SAY, OR I WILL F'N SPANK 'EM. 

 

Yeah, i've seen it; "this galaxy now ran by an evil god. ".

I rather prefer a benevolent god

 

The situation becomes more complicated if Shepard has red-green color blindness.

Someone who was color blind complained before the EC that he could only see one ending

 

And i agree, i feel very uncomfortable taking the Catalyst by his word. Though it is an AI created for a single purpose, what motive it would have to lie? And the endings themselves do not contradict what it says

 

Everything about the game after the missile fight is just... "crappy", for the lack of better word. Then again, before that you have to deal with the ridiculous, plot-armored, cutscene incomptence aura emitting space ninja. And he is worse   

[CavalierToast]

Someone who was color blind complained before the EC that he could only see one ending

One Ending to rule them all, One Ending to find them, One Ending to (not) see them all, and in the darkness find them...