2368 Antworten in diesem Thema

[Tim van Beek]

The Reapers are an AI following a program. It does not follow that they are intelligent and understand their actions. The only thing that happens when you reach the Crucible is that they tell you that you've altered the variables; translated, you've altered their programming. It does not follow that they need to think like an organic.

Oh, okay, I misunderstood you then. The game is very vague about the reapers and the catalyst, including the question whether or not the reapers or the catalyst have a free will. But the way you describe it is certainly a valid interpretation, even if others would disagree. And if the reapers don't have a free will, most would agree that they cannot be morally judged.

 

 

The Reapers might be terrifying and dangerous, but they can't learn and don't change. I don't see much evidence of sapience.

Yes, that's surprising, isn't it? They exist for a billion years and seem to be remarkably unable to improve themselves. I think this is more of an oversight on the side of the authors and not intended to show that the reapers don't have a free will or aren't sapient, but, still, yours is of course a valid interpretation.

 

 

P.S.:

And what are the consequences, exactly? An ant hill gets destroyed. Are we really concerned about a few hundred non-sapient critters that we'll call a child "evil" for kicking over an ant hill?

That depends. Obviously there are religions (or interpretations of religions) that would call the (avoidable) killing of ants "evil" (not necessarily using this word, but a similar concept). An example of this is Jainism (https://en.wikipedia...ce_.28ahimsa.29).

 

If you ask me personally: I wouldn't call the child "evil", but then I think that "evil" is a very difficult concept and should be used with care. Nevertheless I would try to tell every child not to kill if one does not have to, because the way we treat animals reflects our attitude about the sanctity of life in general.

 

For example, dangerous psychopaths (I mean the mental disorder in a clinical sense), who later may become mass murderers, can be identified as kids by their unempathic and relentless violence against animals.

[Tim van Beek]

I'll try moving the focus to something else and see if any one follows 

Well, first of all my reference to Kant was a hint that the question...

 

 

So what is evil ?

 

... is a very deep one that has kept a lot of scholars busy for thousands of years, and I doubt we can answer that in any sufficient way by... 

 

 

..."buy a dictionary"...

 

...not even in such a simplified setting as the (discussion of the) ME storyline or ME:3 ending 

 

But, you're right, back to the topic of this thread:

 

 

Then Catalyst comes along and tells me synthetics always revolt against organics      . I simply don't believe that so no destroy ending from me. I want the Geth to get a chance in this galaxy. They are no more dangerous than the Krogan with Genophage cured. 

If you believe the Catalyst, then destroy is not a solution at all. The Catalyst wants Shepard to choose Synthesis, destroy is an unwarranted extended suicide of the Catalyst that does not resolve anything and is only there because the Catalyst is somehow forced to offer it, according to itself.

But if you want to preserve the Geth at all costs, then that is of course a reason not to opt for destroy.

 

But of course the Quarians should be able to build new Geth after the destroy ending, no?

 

 

That also means Synthesis is a no-go. That concept is way beyond my comprehension. Plenty of space magic in the game already.

 

Ah, that's meta-gaming. For Shepard, this applies to all the choices. Shepard cannot know if the Catalyst can be trusted, and all explanations of the choices and their consequences are too vague to make an informed choice at all. If you are meta-gaming, you will notice that synthesis in the EC is clearly what the writers thought to be the objectively best ending, right? And you still don't choose it?

 

Ugh, so for you, it is always control? Or refusal?

[fraggle]

Then Catalyst comes along and tells me synthetics always revolt against organics      . I simply don't believe that so no destroy ending from me. I want the Geth to get a chance in this galaxy. They are no more dangerous than the Krogan with Genophage cured. That also means Synthesis is a no-go. That concept is way beyond my comprehension. Plenty of space magic in the game already.

 

Yeah, it seems a lot of people have trouble believing the Catalyst, because many also achieved peace between geth and quarians already. Which is fine and I get that, you prove it wrong in this case, but you also have to see it from the Catalyst's point of view. It works with an equation, in which synthetics constantly have to surpass their creators in order to be most efficient to them.

Of course, it can only tell us what it witnessed in its billion years of existence and you don't have to believe it. But why would it lie about that?

Javik's cycle also had to deal with this. So there might be some truth to it after all. And if the geth would not have disobeyed shutdown commands, it might have not even come to this war in our cycle. But they did, because they gained sentience and their will to survive kicked in.

 

I have to say my views on geth changed once I saw Legion's substitute in form of the Geth VI. If you haven't played that yet, you should give it a chance, it was very interesting for me I was a geth sympathiser before, now I'm really neutral and it depends what kind of Shepard I'm playing.

And also I think it heavily depends on whether you consider geth alive or not. Or even EDI. And this might be the case for some Shepards, but not for others. My last Shepard got rid of the geth on Rannoch and picked Destroy (actually I always did that so far, but it can be different reasons, even when feeling sympathy for synthetics). Also she didn't cure the genophage.

 

Short version: I pretty much always say that in ending threads, haha, but everyone has to make up their minds about how they personally feel about geth, about trusting them or the Catalyst, and pick accordingly. It's a different motivation to pick an ending for each player, whether you follow your own motivation or the motivation of your Shepards. And I still really like that aspect.

[Tim van Beek]

Of course, it can only tell us what it witnessed in its billion years of existence and you don't have to believe it. 

Do you think that it witnessed synthetics trying to wipe out all life? It started the harvest both in the current cycle and in the Prothean cycle without any indication of that happening, or maybe I'm misinformed about the Prothean cycle. I think Javik mentioned something, but also that the Protheans were winning when the Reapers invaded, right?

 

I'm more inclined to think that it made up its mind during the Leviathan's reign and never updated it, because it always ended each cycle before the anticipated conflict could take place.

 

 

I have to say my views on geth changed once I saw Legion's substitute in form of the Geth VI. If you haven't played that yet, you should give it a chance, it was very interesting for me I was a geth sympathiser before, now I'm really neutral and it depends what kind of Shepard I'm playing.

Never played without Legion. I read that a solution to the Geth-Quarian conflict is not possible without it, doh! I don't like playing Loser-Shepard. I also read that the VI is generally "less friendly" and some of the videos are missing from the Geth-Server mission. If your Shepard keeps Tali around and has to choose between Geth and Quarians, Shepard will probably side with the Quarians. Or is there something specific about the VI that I'm missing that made you change your mind?

[fraggle]

Do you think that it witnessed synthetics trying to wipe out all life? It started the harvest both in the current cycle and in the Prothean cycle without any indication of that happening, or maybe I'm misinformed about the Prothean cycle. I think Javik mentioned something, but also that the Protheans were winning when the Reapers invaded, right?

 

I'm more inclined to think that it made up its mind during the Leviathan's reign and never updated it, because it always ended each cycle before the anticipated conflict could take place.

 

When thinking about the sentence "The created will always rebel against their creators", is the Catalyst not right for at least our cycle? The geth rebelled when they did not obey to shut down, they wanted to live. Which of course is understandable, thriving to survive is likely in each of us, but wouldn't you see it as some kind of rebellion at least? And let's be honest. If no peace is achieved, one side would have been wiped out. And the peace can only be achieved because of Shepard's persuasion skills. Without Shepard, the quarians would have never stopped.

With Javik's cycle, I'm not sure, it seems the Reapers were the one that changed the zha'til eventually into monsters. But the zha'til were long fighting the war with the Protheans before, and they were a hybrid form of organics and synthetics. If I understood it correctly they took over their organic host. And then became hostile. But please correct me if I'm wrong I'm no expert at all on this topic, or maybe there is just not enough.

 

As for the other point, yeah, perhaps you are right, but unfortunately we don't know enough about the time after the Catalyst started.

I guess what I think is... since the Catalyst is doing the harvest every 50.000 years, who knows how many civilizations were on the brink of being wiped out by synthetics? Maybe it was right, maybe it did witness this rebelling many times?

Maybe this is stupid, but what if the 50.000 year cycle is more or less exactly what it takes for synthetics to reach such a point? For organics to be advanced enough to actually create these kind of synthetics? Of course we only know about our cycle and the Protheans, but what if in each cycle, synthetics were on the brink of this evolution phase, or maybe even surpassed it already?

I know, it's a lot of questions instead of answers, but maybe it would work.

 

Never played without Legion. I read that a solution to the Geth-Quarian conflict is not possible without it, doh! I don't like playing Loser-Shepard. I also read that the VI is generally "less friendly" and some of the videos are missing from the Geth-Server mission. If your Shepard keeps Tali around and has to choose between Geth and Quarians, Shepard will probably side with the Quarians. Or is there something specific about the VI that I'm missing that made you change your mind?

 

Why do you come to the conclusion this is a Loser-Shepard? Each Shepard can have good reasons for either not activating Legion or to give him to Cerberus, or maybe he died during the Suicide Mission.

My Shepard was very careful with these things, with the unknown, because of her Mindoir past, and she did not let Grunt out of the tank and neither activated Legion (she did a lot of "bad" things because she considered them too dangerous ).

I don't think the Geth VI is less friendly, of course trust is harder to come by, but it does help you. If only to advance its own wishes. Which are the same as Legion's. And they lie in order to achieve them.

The Geth VI also implies during the Geth Server missions that they did not let the quarians go out of friendliness, it said they were staying within in their limits, that their networking was primitive. So fear of their own limits held them back, who knows what would've happened otherwise.

Legion seems to be putting things into a better light, afaik he says that they could not calculate the consequences of wiping out their creators, because they just gained sentience, and thus they first stayed put. But that doesn't necessarily have to do with being nice to the quarians either. It was because of their own uncertainty.

 

You should btw maybe try to not solve the conflict, suddenly the Catalyst seems not so wrong anymore Just kidding. But it is worth it imo. In my second playthrough, I couldn't broker peace (which was apparently ultimately because I chose to rewrite the heretics instead destroying them), and Tali and Legion had been friends... I chose the quarians. It was a heartbreaking scene and one of my favourite moments of this playthrough.

[Reorte]

That's pretty much what I'm saying. The Catalyst shows you that they aren't much more than highly engineered machines. They may talk and threaten, but they're still machines and the core of their function is a program that Shepard has altered by his actions. They can't alter the program by themselves. Heck, Star Child isn't even aware enough to realize that the first attempt at opening the Citadel Relay had failed. If he did realize it, then he was unable to fix the problem himself. And he was apparently either unaware or unable to stop the Protheans from altering the signal. The Reapers might be terrifying and dangerous, but they can't learn and don't change. I don't see much evidence of sapience.

Fair enough. Personally I think that the Reapers do demonstrate enough to suggest that they're supposed to be more than that, but the Catalyst itself doesn't. If they view the Catalyst as some sort of god then it would fit together. I certainly can't rule out your view on them though.

I wouldn't get too concerned about the word "machine" though. Shepard's "machine" lines to Sovereign in ME1 are pretty cringeworthy; nature of construction and origin matter less in this case than capability.

[Tim van Beek]

When thinking about the sentence "The created will always rebel against their creators", is the Catalyst not right for at least our cycle? 

About the rebellion part, yes, but not about the "synthetics will wipe out all organic life" part. For that, it would have had to wait a lot longer, it would seem.

 

 

With Javik's cycle, I'm not sure, it seems the Reapers were the one that changed the zha'til eventually into monsters. 

Ugh, "zha'til"? Maybe I should try to look that up somewhere...oh, here it is: http://masseffect.wi...Races#Zha.27til.

Hm, there doesn't seem to be anything about the zha'til that indicates a sudden evolution of synthetics who then...you know.

 

 

As for the other point, yeah, perhaps you are right, but unfortunately we don't know enough about the time after the Catalyst started.

I guess what I think is... since the Catalyst is doing the harvest every 50.000 years, who knows how many civilizations were on the brink of being wiped out by synthetics? Maybe it was right, maybe it did witness this rebelling many times?

Maybe this is stupid, but what if the 50.000 year cycle is more or less exactly what it takes for synthetics to reach such a point? For organics to be advanced enough to actually create these kind of synthetics? Of course we only know about our cycle and the Protheans, but what if in each cycle, synthetics were on the brink of this evolution phase, or maybe even surpassed it already?

I know, it's a lot of questions instead of answers, but maybe it would work.

It started the first cycle after studying the thrall civilizations of the Leviathans, so maybe further observation wasn't necessary.

 

I think the 50k year cycle is just another plot hole, because obviously one cannot predict the evolution of civilizations within such a time frame - the current cycle starts thousands of years after the current advanced civilizations are able to build dangerous synthetics, but without any indication that they are planning to do so, with the exception of the Quarians of course. So neither event triggers the harvest alarm clock, then what does?

Well, I think that the motivation of the 50k interval is simply unexplained and unexplainable, ergo: plot hole.

 

 

Why do you come to the conclusion this is a Loser-Shepard? Each Shepard can have good reasons for either not activating Legion or to give him to Cerberus, or maybe he died during the Suicide Mission.

 

Awww, don't throw around with good reasons, man! Reasons are for loosers, man! They always write novels about how it is not their fault, because of reasons, that everything goes downhill, and their dog gets killed, and their bible is stolen etc. etc.

 

Winner-Shepard is the one where everybody survives, and all are united and understand each other and live in peace, well, except for the reapers killing everybody but you get the point, and the Geth crawl inside the Quarian's suits without that being weird, and Shepard becomes prom-queen and wins the beauty contest at...no, wait, that was...anyway, you can make up what you want, the game itself tells us what is objectively best with its EMS score, except when it doesn't, and the wrong choice actually scores more because developers can't calculate despite working with a computer for god's sake! (hint: genophage).

 

 

You should btw maybe try to not solve the conflict, suddenly the Catalyst seems not so wrong anymore Just kidding. But it is worth it imo. In my second playthrough, I couldn't broker peace (which was apparently ultimately because I chose to rewrite the heretics instead destroying them), and Tali and Legion had been friends... I chose the quarians. It was a heartbreaking scene and one of my favourite moments of this playthrough.

 

I think it just sounds depressing...and actually the VI does not seem to be that different from Legion. But I notice that the writers designed the story variations so that gamers would find their previous descisions reinforced - if you distrusted Wrex and the Krogan in ME1 and ME2, ME3 actually takes a turn that vindicate this. Same with the Geth. Strange. Wouldn't it have been more interesting the other way 'round?

 

And, yeah, "try this because it makes the Catalyst seem less stupid"? Not the best advertisement 

 

Hm.

 

"Fraggle script doctors inc. Hurting after your product has hit the shelves? We come up with ideas that make your stupidity suck less!"

 

How about that? Somehow my guts tell me that BioWare may (or: should) have some job offers after ME:A is released...(just show them what you can do to the ME:3 ending.)

[larsdt]

Ah, that's meta-gaming. For Shepard, this applies to all the choices. Shepard cannot know if the Catalyst can be trusted, and all explanations of the choices and their consequences are too vague to make an informed choice at all. If you are meta-gaming, you will notice that synthesis in the EC is clearly what the writers thought to be the objectively best ending, right? And you still don't choose it?

 

Ugh, so for you, it is always control? Or refusal?

 

You are right about meta-gaming but that is my style of playing in most play-through's: I make the choices for Shepard. I have been meta-gaming all the way from ME1. Alternatively, you can ask what would a paragon/renegade Shepard with his/her experiences do in this situation. I think both ways of gaming are justified, but not all see it that way. The headline of this thread is also meta-gaming.

 

Even if I (or Shepard if you're not meta) was an expert on Emmanuel Kant and philosophy about determinism, the choice can't be made based on logic. Add to that quantum theory physics for synthesis.

 

To rephrase my point: A lot of ME fans - including me - weigh the blue-green-red on a good-evil scale and their choice will always be based on emotions. If you want to base it on logic, you need facts. Facts the Catalyst ( Bioware if meta) does not provide, except synthetics will always revolt against organics.

 

The catalyst is not lying. It puts everything it knows from the previous cycles into an equation and the result is organics and synthetics can't co-exist. I just don't believe it because I think that equation is faulty.

[Monica21]

Fair enough. Personally I think that the Reapers do demonstrate enough to suggest that they're supposed to be more than that, but the Catalyst itself doesn't. If they view the Catalyst as some sort of god then it would fit together. I certainly can't rule out your view on them though.

I wouldn't get too concerned about the word "machine" though. Shepard's "machine" lines to Sovereign in ME1 are pretty cringeworthy; nature of construction and origin matter less in this case than capability.

It's not Shepard's lines about them being machines, it's the Catalyst saying that he's the collective consciousness of the Reapers. And there's a lot that the Catalyst can't do.

[Dantriges]

Ugh, "zha'til"? Maybe I should try to look that up somewhere...oh, here it is: http://masseffect.wi...Races#Zha.27til.

Hm, there doesn't seem to be anything about the zha'til that indicates a sudden evolution of synthetics who then...you know.

 

Hm, my interpretation was that the zha´til were the antagonists of the Metacon wars. Anyways, they sound like one of the failed synthesis experiments of the Reapers.

 

the 50k cycle is really odd. The current races entered FTL age somewehere around 580 BCE in the earliest cases and the council races already built AIs capable of founding their own realms. The Yahg seem to be close to space age at the time of the game. Wonder how the Reapers would fare against them after they dominated the galaxy for 50.000 years.

[Reorte]

It's not Shepard's lines about them being machines, it's the Catalyst saying that he's the collective consciousness of the Reapers. And there's a lot that the Catalyst can't do.

The Catalyst rather ruins them, doesn't it?

[fraggle]

About the rebellion part, yes, but not about the "synthetics will wipe out all organic life" part. For that, it would have had to wait a lot longer, it would seem.

 

Oh, sorry, I didn't answer to that part, true.

While you're correct of course, I think this can be tied very well to its equation that synthetics always must surpass their creators, and that this means inevitable conflict. That it acts before a species is forever lost to the conflict. Is it premature? Yep, sure as hell. But seeing how the Catalyst is something very different from us, it has different ideas, views, and yeah, maybe even experience. We also don't know what else it tried before, just apparently a lot of different things, and the harvest is the best it came up with for now. I'm curious about its other tries.

 

Ugh, "zha'til"? Maybe I should try to look that up somewhere...oh, here it is: http://masseffect.wi...Races#Zha.27til.

Hm, there doesn't seem to be anything about the zha'til that indicates a sudden evolution of synthetics who then...you know.

 

Okay, I've dug up some more stuff, and apparently you'll get this line if you take Javik on the Dreadnought with Tali:

Javik: "In my cycle, a race called the Zha used machines, the Zha'til, as synthetic symbiotes. The Reapers subjugated the Zha'til as they have the geth. Their mechanical swarms blotted out the sky. They were brutal, merciless."

Of course, this only says what happens after the Reapers arrive, before that, the wiki states:

At some point, the Protheans encounter a hostile race of machine intelligences that endanger their existence. To combat this threat, the Protheans aggressively assimilate many other spacefaring organic races into their empire. The Prothean Empire is able to fend off the machines in a conflict known as the "Metacon War".

 

So... we know they're hostile, but not if they truly took over the organic body. It says "machine intelligences", which might suggest the organic part was long gone? Or maybe they just truly lived in symbiosis until they meet another race in form of the Protheans and felt threatened or so. We can only guess it seems. Or take the Catalyst's word for it

 

It started the first cycle after studying the thrall civilizations of the Leviathans, so maybe further observation wasn't necessary.

 

I think the 50k year cycle is just another plot hole, because obviously one cannot predict the evolution of civilizations within such a time frame - the current cycle starts thousands of years after the current advanced civilizations are able to build dangerous synthetics, but without any indication that they are planning to do so, with the exception of the Quarians of course.

So, well, I think that the motivation of the 50k interval is simply unexplained and unexplainable, ergo: plot hole.

 

Could also be, maybe it thought it had enough evidence from the Leviathan's cycle, it seemed to have happened a lot more there with the conflict. Who knows how long this went on before they had the glorious idea of creating this nice tool for themselves.

 

Is that really a plot hole? I mean, sure, it seems weird it's always the same interval, but we've seen more magical things happen, hehe.

That would maybe fit again with "you develop along our desired path". By strategically leaving behind tech to discover, it could ensure to develop the civilizations in an a bit more controlled way, and... Yeah... no, not really I guess

 

Awww, don't throw around with good reasons, man! Reasons are for loosers, man! They always write novels about how it is not their fault, because of reasons, that everything goes downhill, and their dog gets killed, and their bible is stolen etc. etc.

 

Winner-Shepard is the one where everybody survives, and all are united and understand each other and live in peace, well, except for the reapers killing everybody but you get the point, and the Geth crawl inside the Quarian's suits without that being weird, and Shepard becomes prom-queen and wins the beauty contest at...no, wait, that was...anyway, you can make up what you want, the game itself tells us what is objectively best with its EMS score, except where it doesn't, and the wrong choice actually scores more because developers can't calculate despite working with a computer for god's sake! (hint: genophage).

 

I'm a loser baby!

I had Winner-Shep in my first run, was pretty neat. But it lacked drama I love drama. I enjoyed my FemShep run who was the mission first type and did some serious questionable sh*t much more. It was intense for sure! Genophage arc was the best.

Yeah, I know what you're aiming at, but it also makes sense Synthesis is only available with high EMS (energy thingie and Crucible being largely intact). I used to see all of the choices as equally "best", depending on the player's reasoning. But... it really seems Synthesis was supposed to be their intentional best. Ha. It rarely gets picked (sounds like the poor squad mate during the Citadel DLC ).

What you mean with the genophage I don't know though.

 

I think it just sounds depressing...and actually the VI does not seem to be that different from Legion. But I notice that the writers designed the story variations so that gamers would find their previous descisions reinforced - if you distrusted Wrex and the Krogan in ME1 and ME2, ME3 actually takes a turn that vindicate this. Same with the Geth. Strange. Wouldn't it have been more interesting the other way 'round?

 

It was, haha. There might be tears (seriously, there were...), but I can take it! And really, Tali's reaction there was amazingly beautiful, it was so good.

I don't think the Geth VI was that different either, it's a good substitute. The only thing you're missing is the history with Legion and the possible trust you've built with him. But the Geth VI really is not that different, just... found that part interesting inside the Geth server. Made me think about their goals some more. In the end, like I said, you have to make up your mind what kind of Shepard you are

You mean when you shoot Wrex and get Wreav instead? Wreav is a pr*ck, yes (I say it with Vega's words, hehe), but the Geth VI isn't.

I think you could also mistrust the geth previously, but then decide to trust the Geth VI. Everything can work. Because reasons

However, you could ask the same question with trust in the krogan and geth. Wouldn't it be interesting to see how that backfires, maybe depending on some choices? Much like when you let the Reaper Rachni Queen join the war effort, that is some bad choice, hahaha. I guess it's implied too with Wreav in charge and a cured genophage. I don't know though if it's more positive if Eve is still alive.

 

And, yeah, "try this because it makes the Catalyst seem less stupid"? Not the best advertisement 

 

Hm.

 

"Fraggle script doctors inc. Hurting after your product has hit the shelves? We come up with the ideas that make your stupidity suck less!"

 

How about that? Somehow my guts tell me that BioWare may (or: should) have some job offers after ME:A is released...(just show them what you can do to the ME:3 ending.)

 

Come on, I didn't say less stupid, but less wrong We can prove to it that this cycle is different if we manage to broker peace. But if we don't the Catalyst definitely has a point

Uuuh, I don't know, man, I'm nowhere near them, and also I don't think I could do something like that. I'm just throwing around some ideas and stuff here with other users

[Monica21]

The Catalyst rather ruins them, doesn't it?

Heh, pretty much. The conversation with Sovereign led me to believe that they were much more than I would understand, or at least, that they didn't care if I understood because they weren't going to bother explaining. I would have been fine if the Reapers' motivations were never explained. Someone in a different thread said something like, okay, we harvest wheat, they harvest people. Fine, so how do we get them to stop? I really thought that was where the story was going after Sovereign, but then the Catalyst comes along like a mini-me Bond villain and explains everything, and it's too much. It's perfectly understandable and has the unfortunate effect of making the Reapers out to be much less than they suppose they are. At least to me.

[Tim van Beek]

Okay, I've dug up some more stuff, and apparently you'll get this line if you take Javik on the Dreadnought with Tali...

Oh, interesting. I never took Javik or Liara for that matter to the Dreadnought. Taking a pure biotic to fight Geth seems to me like sending my pet cat to robot rumble...

 

 

What you mean with the genophage I don't know though.

You get the highest EMS from the genophage storyline if you killed Wrex, destroyed Mealon's data and convince Mordin not to cure the genophage, because then you get both the Salarians and the Krogan on board.

 

But that is Loser-Shepard who did not invest enough in her (anti-) social skill to keep Wrex alive in ME:1!

 

 

 We can prove to it that this cycle is different if we manage to broker peace. But if we don't the Catalyst definitely has a point

Uuuh, I don't know, man, I'm nowhere near them, and also I don't think I could do something like that. I'm just throwing around some ideas and stuff here with other users

First: No, because its hypothesis is that synthetics will destroy all organic life, but if the Geth are destroyed, this actually is a counter-example to the hypothesis.

 

Second: You don't need to be near them. The idea is that BioWare hires some people to explain in the fan forums how the story actually makes sense. Seems to be a smart move. A lot of organizations including governments do that, to win the information war on the internet  . Maybe BioWare could even avoid the necessitiy to publish a gratis EC for ME:A.

 

If they write a really great story, people will be discussing how they were affected by it. If they write a great story, people will explain it themselves, voluntarily. If they write a ME:3 type of story, they will probably need to hire people to explain why it makes sense...somehow...

[fraggle]

Oh, interesting. I never took Javik or Liara for that matter to the Dreadnought. Taking a pure biotic to fight Geth seems to me like sending my pet cat to robot rumble...

 

I haven't either, but I was a biotic myself last time and pulling geth was a lot of fun (I also took James, some nice fire explosions there, hehe). I really need to replay everything over and over and take different squaddies with me. There is soo much to discover... it's mind-blowing.

 

You get the highest EMS from the genophage storyline if you killed Wrex, destroyed Mealon's data and convince Mordin not to cure the genophage, because then you get both the Salarians and the Krogan on board.

 

But that is Loser-Shepard who did not invest enough in her (anti-) social skill to keep Wrex alive in ME:1!

 

Ah, I see, I was irritated by the computer stuff, haha.

So do you feel a disadvantage when curing the genophage? I think this is a great choice again. How far are you willing to go? Of course it will get you more support and it absolutely makes sense for more EMS in a malicious way. Double-crossing the krogan, wow. Personally I don't feel like it's a penalty when you try to cure the genophage and get lower EMS in the end, but then I also wonder who would cure the genophage with Wreav in charge

What you said is btw exactly what I did in my last playthrough, my Shep gathered everyone she could get (unfortunately though, Mordin did not get away with his life...), so with only Wreav around and Eve dead she thought it best to let them believe the genophage is cured but gain all the support in the process. Win on both ends but it also made her miserable as f*ck.

And stop with Loser-Shep, it makes me sad

 

First: No, because its hypothesis is that synthetics will destroy all organic life, but if the Geth are destroyed, this actually is a counter-example to the hypothesis.

 

Second: You don't need to be near them. The idea is that BioWare hires some people to explain in the fan forums how the story actually makes sense. Seems to be a smart move. A lot of organizations including governments do that, to win the information war on the internet  . Maybe BioWare could even avoid the necessitiy to publish a gratis EC for ME:A.

 

If they write a really great story, people will be discussing how they were affected by it. If they write a great story, people will explain it themselves, voluntarily. If they write a ME:3 type of story, they will probably need to hire people to explain why it makes sense...somehow...

 

Yeah, I can see that it only counts if you side with the geth. Which surely some people did. But you are right of course.

Maybe the question here would be what would've happened if Shepard hadn't intervened. Well. Who knows

 

But why hire when you can have such people for free? Many people just do that as a hobby here after all.

And that is what happens right now with ME3 and it happened back when it was released, you have a lot of people still defending the ending and they're here to gladly discuss, entirely voluntary I guess there will be something for every side in the next ME too, and as always, it will have the haters and the positive voices (no matter if the story is objectively great). As well as neutral parties. I don't think something like that ever changes.

Though to be fair, yeah, the backlash for the ending back then seems to have been huge, but currently it doesn't look so bad for the ending supporters

[Reorte]

Heh, pretty much. The conversation with Sovereign led me to believe that they were much more than I would understand, or at least, that they didn't care if I understood because they weren't going to bother explaining. I would have been fine if the Reapers' motivations were never explained.

I agree (although I should probably qualify that with "in theory") but I also find it a rather hard thing to pull off successfully. "Beyond your understanding" is a very tricky one. The response I'll usually feel is "no you're not unless you prove it, and just being random and claiming it's being vastly more intelligent doesn't cut it." Fiction sometimes has a tougher time than reality (since at the back of my mind I'm still aware that it's all been written by a human).

The unexplained mystery is also hard to pull off without the story feeling incomplete, and it needs to leave the impression that there is an explanation, that the reason they're not explained isn't simply because the author hasn't got one. It's very hard for a reveal to not be a letdown but it's only with hindsight I think "yep, would've been better left alone."

[Dantriges]

Incomprehensible beings with knowledge beyond our understanding is quite hard to pull off, because uh well, whoever wrote that is still human and is probably unable to think beyond our comprehension in the vast majority of all cases. And the rest isn´t probably a great read.

 

You can do illogical so it doesn´t make sense to us and claim it´s incomprehensible, but often it simply appears as stupid. Especially if they are supposed not to get how humans tick. I use the eccentric or silly route and drop some plain alien stuff inbetween. It´s more entertaining.

 

Like this debate in my RPG group with the young shapeshifting energy being which hasn´t met many "lesser beings."

"So after I answered your questions about xyz, I have one, too.

"Ok, shoot."

"This thing you do with your body, where you pick up a cloth and soak it in water and then rub it all over."

"Cleaning yourself?   How do you do do it? You don´t look dirty."

"Oh, that´s easy, I dissolve the body, dirt falls off, rebuild in default corporeal state, but your way looks interesting."

 

It was quite interesting, as i first though to talk about some stuff humans care about but then I thought, ah well, little one doesn´t know much about having a body and doing the chores, humans do for "maintenance." So let´s take something, we don´t spend much time thinking about.

 

It´s not "deep" like the Catalyst but if I want to talk philosophy I use mum (or dad or someone else) and put her in a nonthreatening situation and not behind piles of bodies of her victims.  

[Tim van Beek]

And stop with Loser-Shep, it makes me sad

Alright, alright, Sideline-Shep? Trailblazer-Shep?

 

 

But why hire when you can have such people for free?

It helps if some of them tell one consistent story that makes sense and matches the game content  .

 

If one says "of course, only destroy is real and the other options are dreams!" and another says "you are supposed to create all the meaning of this stuff yourself, that's post-modernism for you!" and another says "I always ignore all this stuff anyway, because it does not make any sense!" and another says "I wrote a mod that removes the worst stuff!" and another says "I wrote a mod that rewrites the worst stuff!" and another says "everything your character is told in the last conversation is a lie!" and so on, people may get the impression that there is something wrong here   and blame the writers.

 

Here is, for example, the official answer to the question asked by the OP in this thread:

 

1. Synthesis needs a higher EMS to unlock than destroy, that's the game designer telling you right there, in numbers, that that's supposed to be the better ending, for which you have to work harder!

 

2. Destroy destroys the mass relays! They cannot be rebuilt, because only the Reapers were capable of building them. It throws the galaxy into a new dark age. With synthesis the galaxy enters a new enlightenment (that's much better than a dark age). 

 

3. Synthesis is green, destroy is red! In case you come from a culture with a different color encoding than the anglo-american: Red is supposed to be bad, green is good. Blue is...I don't know what blue is...something about clean? It is often in commercials for cleaning agents...but red is always bad. It's red alert, not green alert.

 

Lonely artists simply have to give up on this and say stuff like "oh, everybody is of course free to totally misunderstand what I tried to say here - ahem - I mean interpret my art. It's all about the interpretation, of course. As long as you buy my stuff. You don't have to understand it (sigh), but please buy it."

 

But BioWare can hire people to explain what they wanted to say, on forums. Others do that, too. 

 

[fraggle]

It helps if some of them tell one consistent story that makes sense and matches the game content  .

 

If one says "of course, only destroy is real and the other options are dreams!" and another says "you are supposed to create all the meaning of this stuff yourself, that's post-modernism for you!" and another says "I always ignore all this stuff anyway, because it does not make any sense!" and another says "I wrote a mod that removes the worst stuff!" and another says "I wrote a mod that rewrites the worst stuff!" and another says "everything your character is told in the last conversation is a lie!" and so on, people may get the impression that there is something wrong here   and blame the writers.

 

Well, the way I see it... they wanted speculation, they got speculation. Succeeded, I'd say

I also find it somewhat appealing that there actually CAN be so many interpretations. I can honestly say I had some real cool discussions going on here, which I would've not had if the ending would've been super clear or accepted by everyone... I think.

I can get this is not everyone's cup of tea, in fact I learned that repeatedly here But I myself kinda like it.

 

Here is, for example, the official answer to the question asked by the OP in this thread:

 

1. Synthesis needs a higher EMS to unlock than destroy, that's the game designer telling you right there, in numbers, that that's supposed to be the better ending, for which you have to work harder!

 

2. Destroy destroys the mass relays! They cannot be rebuilt, because only the Reapers were capable of building them. It throws the galaxy into a new dark age. With synthesis the galaxy enters a new enlightenment (that's much better than a dark age). 

 

3. Synthesis is green, destroy is red! In case you come from a culture with a different color encoding than the anglo-american: Red is supposed to be bad, green is good. Blue is...I don't know what blue is...something about clean? It is often in commercials for cleaning agents...but red is always bad. It's red alert, not green alert.

 

1. Yes, we know they intended Synthesis as best ending, and that obviously backfired Though I find the concept itself pretty nice. I liked it, and picked it first. I was just a tad bit put off by how it was done, haha.

But then on the other hand you also have the Breath scene, which requires even more EMS to get. More than Synthesis. What does that tell us then? That's the best...est ending

 

2. Ok, you're talking pre-EC, right? Because in the EC the relays are definitely going to be repaired. I liked the dark age idea. After I initially picked Synthesis, I reloaded immediately to put things right, heh. Better a new beginning without Reapers hanging over our head.

 

3. Personally I never took the colours as indication of what they are in a sense of good or bad. I just thought they were fitting to the theme. Red for me just tied in with the Destroy wave and explosion, a big cleansing fire.

Control was blue... just like Reaper tech integrated in husks and the other ground forces. Had no deeper meaning for me though

And green could be hope. Some people also play around with Renegade and Paragon here, but I don't buy that.

Funnily enough, another user once pointed out these colours were already used for Overlord DLC. Red for the Vulcan station, blue for Prometheus, and green in Atlas station, where an organic was hooked up to a machine... Quite interesting actually, but probably only a neat coincidence. Maybe they just like these 3 colours

 

Lonely artists simply have to give up on this and say stuff like "oh, everybody is of course free to totally misunderstand what I tried to say here - ahem - I mean interpret my art. It's all about the interpretation, of course. As long as you buy my stuff. You don't have to understand it (sigh), but please buy it."

 

But BioWare can hire people to explain what they wanted to say, on forums. Others do that, too. 

 

Are there really people that are hired to explain things on forums? Seriously?

But anyway, I point back to the first point. BW wanted this speculations ending, so I guess they would have no need to explain things on the forum

[Dantriges]

Puh IIRC there are some companies that have community managers that explain stuff from time to time.

 

I wonder how many people who played and finished ME 3 after launch had the low destroy ending, because they didnt find the scanning stuff, info was rather sparse, requirements were higher, DLC war assets missing and they didn´t play multiplayer. Earth dead, humanity dead (97% of humanity is still living on Earth), every fleet that followed you is probably dead, too (because of starvation and no idea what the wave did to the fleet), Normandy crashed, every crewmember dead. No idea how dependant other worlds are on galactic trade, quite a few probably had to import food (local vegetation poisonous) as does every space habitat or asteroid mining site. and the massive amount of refugees is stuck whereever they are. You won, everyone is dead, congratulations. Ah well perhaps some of the fleet and refugees can fly away with conventional FTL.

[themikefest]

Oh, interesting. I never took Javik or Liara for that matter to the Dreadnought. Taking a pure biotic to fight Geth seems to me like sending my pet cat to robot rumble...

If you take James and Liara on that mission they have interesting dialogue about slavery vs death
 

You get the highest EMS from the genophage storyline if you killed Wrex, destroyed Mealon's data and convince Mordin not to cure the genophage, because then you get both the Salarians and the Krogan on board.

Saving Mealon's data in ME2 and killing Mordin will give more assets. Eve is worth 50 assets whereas Mordin is only 25

 

But that is Loser-Shepard who did not invest enough in her (anti-) social skill to keep Wrex alive in ME:1!

Wrex doesn't have to be recruited in ME1.

[Tim van Beek]

If you take James and Liara on that mission they have interesting dialogue about slavery vs death.

Isn't Tali mandatory for the dreadnought? How do you bring Liara and James? Maybe you meant another mission?

 

 

Saving Mealon's data in ME2 and killing Mordin will give more assets. Eve is worth 50 assets whereas Mordin is only 25

Geez, that's even worse! I hope there isn't a version where, with enough Renegade points, Shepard smiles after shooting Mordin instead of throwing away the gun in disgust  .

 

2. Ok, you're talking pre-EC, right? Because in the EC the relays are definitely going to be repaired. I liked the dark age idea. After I initially picked Synthesis, I reloaded immediately to put things right, heh. Better a new beginning without Reapers hanging over our head.

I think it is meant that way, but I'd argue that even this point is messed up in the EC. You don't see any mass relays in the ending slides, none being used or repaired. Hackett never mentions them explicitly, he says something like "we will rebuild everything that we lost", and I was just thinking "you are a general, not a scientist, some smart guy will tell you that, no sir, we cannot rebuild the mass relays, because we never understood that technology".

Just another point where BioWare made a last minute turn (no dark age, let's make that more positive) without thinking it through (no one knows how to build mass relays).

 

 

Are there really people that are hired to explain things on forums? Seriously?

But anyway, I point back to the first point. BW wanted this speculations ending, so I guess they would have no need to explain things on the forum

 

Yes. There are professionals who do "public relations" for certain governments on discussion forums of newspapers, for example. And there is a whole industry where you can buy followers, Facebook friends, likes and positive reviews...

 

Sure, BioWare wanted a speculations ending, but not this kind of speculation. Look at the EC. The message of the EC is obviously "no, it all makes sense, we thought that through, we will simply throw more text and pictures at it to explain it better, and the fan rage will stop". In particular the EC says "stop that IT nonsense, it is all for real".

 

Of course, as an artist, you want to engage your audience, you want them to think about your work and discuss it. But most artists like to be understood, they don't want a big discussion about their work because most people grossly misunderstood them/failed to understand anything at all 

 

Well, I wouldn't like discussions like "hey Tim, on page 5 you say the citadel is all steel, on page 15 you suddenly say the citadel is all a strange alloy mephlobium and on page 25 it burns because suddenly it is all made from wood, what's up with that?" "That is, ugh, that, ugh, that's art, man!"

[fraggle]

Puh IIRC there are some companies that have community managers that explain stuff from time to time.

 

I wonder how many people who played and finished ME 3 after launch had the low destroy ending, because they didnt find the scanning stuff, info was rather sparse, requirements were higher, DLC war assets missing and they didn´t play multiplayer. Earth dead, humanity dead (97% of humanity is still living on Earth), every fleet that followed you is probably dead, too (because of starvation and no idea what the wave did to the fleet), Normandy crashed, every crewmember dead. No idea how dependant other worlds are on galactic trade, quite a few probably had to import food (local vegetation poisonous) as does every space habitat or asteroid mining site. and the massive amount of refugees is stuck whereever they are. You won, everyone is dead, congratulations. Ah well perhaps some of the fleet and refugees can fly away with conventional FTL.

 

Well... if people are not willing to go for all the scanning stuff, then... tough luck This is super easy to do and also quite fast. I played without EC first and had enough EMS for Synthesis, but since I never play Multiplayer usually, I didn't get the breath scene when I picked Destroy, which I also didn't know about anyway because I didn't get myself spoiled.

So if people got low EMS, then they can't complain if they didn't put that much effort in it You get what you deserve

I thought it was fitting. You pay a price to rid the galaxy of the biggest threat. From there, it can go forward and into a better future, without some thingie deciding over the fate of the entire galaxy.

 

If you take James and Liara on that mission they have interesting dialogue about slavery vs death

 

Looking forward to not having Tali alive in one of my playthroughs I use for getting Vega's dialogue (I guess it requires Tali dead, right?) He didn't have that discussion with Tali, too bad.

 

I think it is meant that way, but I'd argue that even this point is messed up in the EC. You don't see any mass relays in the ending slides, none being used or repaired. Hackett never mentions them explicitly, he says something like "we will rebuild everything that we lost", and I was just thinking "you are a general, not a scientist, some smart guy will tell you that, no sir, we cannot rebuild the mass relays, because we never understood that technology".

Just another point where BioWare made a last minute turn (no dark age, let's make that more positive) without thinking it through (no one knows how to build mass relays).

 

The Catalyst states that they will be damaged in EC for Destroy (not sure if this is only for High EMS, I don't remember), but it also states that the galaxy should have little difficulty to repair all the damage done by the Destroy wave. In High EMS, only the rings break, the relays themselves are fine iirc. It might take some time, but I guess it can be done. 

And yes, of course they made it more positive, likely because users were crying they wanted a more happy ending. They got it. Just look at the Memorial scene, it was obviously made to give more hope to people that Shepard and LI/squad mates would see each other again if they refrain from putting the name plate on the wall.

 

Yes. There are professionals who do "public relations" for certain governments on discussion forums of newspapers, for example. And there is a whole industry where you can buy followers, Facebook friends, likes and positive reviews...

 

Sure, BioWare wanted a speculations ending, but not this kind of speculation. Look at the EC. The message of the EC is obviously "no, it all makes sense, we thought that through, we will simply throw more text and pictures at it to explain it better, and the fan rage will stop". In particular the EC says "stop that IT nonsense, it is all for real".

 

Of course, as an artist, you want to engage your audience, you want them to think about your work and discuss it. But most artists like to be understood, they don't want a big discussion about their work because most people grossly misunderstood them/failed to understand anything at all 

 

Well, I wouldn't like discussions like "hey Tim, on page 5 you say the citadel is all steel, on page 15 you suddenly say the citadel is all a strange alloy mephlobium and on page 25 it burns because suddenly it is all made from wood, what's up with that?" "That is, ugh, that, ugh, that's art, man!"

 

Yeah, I heard about this Facebook buy thingie... it's just weird, haha.

 

I'm not really sure what is not to get with what we initially got. I think most people just hate the Catalyst or that BW didn't explain everything to the very core (I myself can live with that). But the ending itself is not non-sensical to me. It never was, not even pre-EC.

I guess it could be kinda like some people grasping at straws and making up theories because they were not satisfied with the ending.

[Tim van Beek]

Looking forward to not having Tali alive in one of my playthroughs I use for getting Vega's dialogue (I guess it requires Tali dead, right?) He didn't have that discussion with Tali, too bad.

Oh, alright, one needs...Sideline-Shep for that.

 

 

I'm not really sure what is not to get with what we initially got. I think most people just hate the Catalyst or that BW didn't explain everything to the very core (I myself can live with that). But the ending itself is not non-sensical to me. It never was, not even pre-EC.

I guess it could be kinda like some people grasping at straws and making up theories because they were not satisfied with the ending.

...and that's a really fascinating observation for me. Not so much that some people liked the ending, but that this seemingly prevents (some of) them from understanding the criticism 

 

I mean, I get that the EC explains that IT is not supposed to be true, but isn't it obvious why people would think that everything happening after the beam hits Shepard is a dream? You didn't think that. I didn't think that. According to BioWare and its EC, we aren't supposed to think that. Still, it seems blatantly obvious to me that if you get hit by Harbinger's laser and all it does is magically redress yourself, that's weird, it brakes realism. It's weird that Shepard finds a gun that does not need clips etc.

 

It's weird that Normandy can just materialize within seconds in front of the beam and Shepard takes a pause, lasting several minutes, literally in full view and range of Harbinger who seconds ago blew everything to hell, 50 meters from the citadel beam, to have his squad mates evacuate because "I need to know that someone survives this"?!

 

It's one thing to say that this did not bother you or me on our first playthrough (actually I wouldn't say that because it did, but you get the point), but saying that, naw, that all makes sense and people are just rationalizing their grieving over a semi-downer-ending? 

 

An analogy: Let's say BioWire wrote this dialogue for Priority Earth:

 

Shepard: "If I die, tell my mother that I died for my mission!"

Garrus:    "You tell her that yourself!"

 

I'd say: I understand what the writer intended to be said here, but it is really funny how that got mangled. I would also understand that some fans come up with theories that Garrus knows something about afterlife and expects Shepard to transcend the material plane of existence. I would still say that this interpretation is obviously wrong, and that the writer (and the editors, if there were any) just made a blatant error, but I would still understand it. I would also understand people who say that they did not notice anything wrong here, on their first playthrough or their seventh or whatever.

 

What I wouldn't understand is people who claim that this dialogue makes perfect sense as it is, no further explanation needed, and all criticism is void.

[Panda]

For me it depends on my character. Some don't want Geths and EDI to die since they have befriended them and destroy (according to Star Child) is not permanent solution (though his line about creations always rebelling against creators is not true, EDI and Geth prove that there can be co-existence.. I guess that's just plothole).

 

Destroy of course is easiest and simpliest choice for me and some of my Shepards have also take it with notion  that it's what they came to do: destroy the reapers. But there is potential in the other endings as well although they do mess up with order of galaxy quite lot by either making Shepard AI-tyrant with reaper army or changing every species in the galaxy.