They can't control random bodies. This body needs to be implanted with Reaper tech that makes the control possible.
Anderson wasn't implanted with reaper tech but the Illusive Man could control him. But in any case, with the amount of resources Shepard then has, he/she could just have reaper bodies build an AI platform shaped in any manner he/she chooses, integrated with reaper tech!
Perhaps a few sexy indoctrinated phantoms
could suddenly ambush Kaidan (if you romanced him) and be like "DO NOT FEAR. THIS IS SHEPARD."
Also I get the jibblies thinking Shepard might start omnipresently stalking or haunting the dreams and/or thoughts of their love interest =/ and visit them through reaper-tech-controlled bodies of any sort.
I mean if Reapers can control bodies, if Shepard controls Reapers, then.... Shepard could kind of take control of some random body and then stalk their love interest, right?
Homestar Runner is the greatest web series of time. Good taste, Natureguy
Actually Occam's Razor tells you that the writing just sucks and makes no sense.
I just KNEW you would do that bullsh!t cop-out answer. Every. Freaking. Time. People always take the non-answer "it's just bad writing" excuse every freaking time I try to explain this in an in-universe and in-lore explanation, just deciding it's easier not to think of explanations and just cast it out of hand as bad writing rather than actually thinking. Well hell, may as well just not discuss ANY part of the game's plot then since the entire story has flaws all throughout it. May as well get rid of this entire section of the site, since bad writing means there's no point in trying to explain anything from a canon perspective.
I won't even respond to the rest. There's no point. After all, you're just discussing 'bad writing', right? I'll bother discussing further with you when you bother to actually give a damn about discussing the story instead of deciding it's pointless because it's all bad writing anyway. That mindset says you don't care, so why should I?
I just KNEW you would do that bullsh!t cop-out answer. Every. Freaking. Time. People always take the non-answer "it's just bad writing" excuse every freaking time I try to explain this in an in-universe and in-lore explanation, just deciding it's easier not to think of explanations and just cast it out of hand as bad writing rather than actually thinking. Well hell, may as well just not discuss ANY part of the game's plot then since the entire story has flaws all throughout it. May as well get rid of this entire section of the site, since bad writing means there's no point in trying to explain anything from a canon perspective.
I won't even respond to the rest. There's no point. After all, you're just discussing 'bad writing', right? I'll bother discussing further with you when you bother to actually give a damn about discussing the story instead of deciding it's pointless because it's all bad writing anyway. That mindset says you don't care, so why should I?
Of course I'd do that answer because it's correct. You're not thinking; you're imagining. You're not using canon; you're making things up. Write your head canon all you want, but admit that's what it is.
I do under stand the desire. It's like you have two pieces of equipment that don't plug into each other and you're trying to craft an adapter to make them fit. I just see that someone made a mistake and look for how to design things better in the first place.
Honestly, the writing isn't that bad. The direction and graphical execution were the main issues.
Lazily slapping green wires on everyone and calling it the final evolution of life. Extracting in the Normandy yards from the Citadel beam and Harbinger. Using swords. Giving reapers puny laser beams when they could just send out a pulse of energy that spreads out in all directions???
Those were dumb. But the overall plot and tying up the themes weren't that bad.
Don't confuse the script with the other departments like...art and animation, perhaps.
That the Catalyst and Synthesis exist were all writing and they are the worst parts of the ending. All of the stupid things the Catalyst says are writing. Cerberus and TIM are writing. Events like the evac are writing. It's only the art department's fault if they showed something other than how the writer wanted it.
That the Catalyst and Synthesis exist were all writing and they are the worst parts of the ending. All of the stupid things the Catalyst says are writing. Cerberus and TIM are writing. Events like the evac are writing. It's only the art department's fault if they showed something other than how the writer wanted it.
Of course I'd do that answer because it's correct. You're not thinking; you're imagining. You're not using canon; you're making things up. Write your head canon all you want, but admit that's what it is.
I do under stand the desire. It's like you have two pieces of equipment that don't plug into each other and you're trying to craft an adapter to make them fit. I just see that someone made a mistake and look for how to design things better in the first place.
So why the hell do you even bother posting in this topic? Just so that you can continue to beat the "bad writing" horse even though it's a skeleton by this point? You have definitely proven you're not worth arguing with though, since every single point of mine that you can't dismiss or find a better explanation than is just going to have you falling bad on your bad writing excuse. That's all it is, you know? You just trying to weasel out of my points because you know that you can't argue them since they make too much sense, so you just handwave it as bad writing so you don't have to confront the fact that you have no leg to stand on. Also, if you think it doesn't hack... You're wrong. Or do you think the Crucible can somehow magically use the Citadel's systems as part of its processes without overriding the Citadel's firewalls and mechanical systems? You do know how machines work, right? You can't have it dock with something without gaining access to systems, period. You especially can't dock and them somehow use what you're docked with without controlling the thing you're docked with, the Citadel's systems can't be re-purposed to support the Crucible without some kind of hack going on to make the Citadel do so. I suppose you think the Citadel just allows full access to any random device that attaches itself to it, even though tech doesn't work that way. So what is your argument to this point? Do you have one, or are you just going to 'bad writing fallacy' me again?
So it can hack the Citadel to force it to be compatible with the Crucible and allow the Crucible to do whatever it needs with the Citadel to make it work, but it can't hack the AI who is literally the Citadel like EDI is the Normandy? That. Makes. No. Sense. And you know it. So you can either just give up on even trying to explain anything and just consider ME3 too badly written to discuss any aspect of its story, or you'll find it interesting enough to want to try to. So far, you've only done the former.
So why the hell do you even bother posting in this topic? Just so that you can continue to beat the "bad writing" horse even though it's a skeleton by this point? You have definitely proven you're not worth arguing with though, since every single point of mine that you can't dismiss or find a better explanation than is just going to have you falling bad on your bad writing excuse. That's all it is, you know? You just trying to weasel out of my points because you know that you can't argue them since they make too much sense, so you just handwave it as bad writing so you don't have to confront the fact that you have no leg to stand on. Also, if you think it doesn't hack... You're wrong. Or do you think the Crucible can somehow magically use the Citadel's systems as part of its processes without overriding the Citadel's firewalls and mechanical systems? You do know how machines work, right? You can't have it dock with something without gaining access to systems, period. You especially can't dock and them somehow use what you're docked with without controlling the thing you're docked with, the Citadel's systems can't be re-purposed to support the Crucible without some kind of hack going on to make the Citadel do so. I suppose you think the Citadel just allows full access to any random device that attaches itself to it, even though tech doesn't work that way. So what is your argument to this point? Do you have one, or are you just going to 'bad writing fallacy' me again?
So it can hack the Citadel to force it to be compatible with the Crucible and allow the Crucible to do whatever it needs with the Citadel to make it work, but it can't hack the AI who is literally the Citadel like EDI is the Normandy? That. Makes. No. Sense. And you know it. So you can either just give up on even trying to explain anything and just consider ME3 too badly written to discuss any aspect of its story, or you'll find it interesting enough to want to try to. So far, you've only done the former.
Honest question: are you getting paid for all that effort you put into filling the blanks or do you just enjoy the process?
I don't want to be mean but why should we discuss your personal interpretations of the ending? They may make sense, but so what? You filled the blanks, props to you. You did a good job, not the Mass Effect writing team. I don't understand why would you give them credit for your creative work.
We prefer to judge the endings on what they are, not on someone else's interpretation. But I agree, there's no point in beating the dead horse.
I liked Cerberus and TIM but it's true they blew up from a small org in ME1 to some galactic conglomerate richer than entire civilizations by ME3. The writers should have included more Cerberus in the background of ME1. However, the basic function of Cerberus and its theme worked fine.
Catalyst is fine...it would've been better if it weren't a child. Synthesis is fine, just portrayed lazily. They should have fleshed out what synthesis means.
It's wrong to say "The writers should have included more Cerberus in the background of ME1" because it was just supposed to be a small group used for one string of side missions. The writer(s) of ME2 and 3 decided to take it and blow it up into the massive thing it became in those two games. Cerberus could have worked fine as a reluctant ally if we hadn't been so forcibly railroaded into working with them. Having a secondary antagonist in the third game was a good idea, but Cerberus dwarfs the Reapers as the main antagonist, even if they aren't the ultimate threat. More time is spent fighting them and the encounter with TIM is more dramatic than the encounter with the Catalyst.
The Catalyst doesn't work on any level. It's foreshadowed only on the Cerberus base and breaks the plot of the first game unless you invent silly excuses. It's a dull exposition machine. While you're right that they should have given a better description of Synthesis, I find it to be the most thematically offensive ending.
So why the hell do you even bother posting in this topic? Just so that you can continue to beat the "bad writing" horse even though it's a skeleton by this point? You have definitely proven you're not worth arguing with though, since every single point of mine that you can't dismiss or find a better explanation than is just going to have you falling bad on your bad writing excuse. That's all it is, you know? You just trying to weasel out of my points because you know that you can't argue them since they make too much sense, so you just handwave it as bad writing so you don't have to confront the fact that you have no leg to stand on. Also, if you think it doesn't hack... You're wrong. Or do you think the Crucible can somehow magically use the Citadel's systems as part of its processes without overriding the Citadel's firewalls and mechanical systems? You do know how machines work, right? You can't have it dock with something without gaining access to systems, period. You especially can't dock and them somehow use what you're docked with without controlling the thing you're docked with, the Citadel's systems can't be re-purposed to support the Crucible without some kind of hack going on to make the Citadel do so. I suppose you think the Citadel just allows full access to any random device that attaches itself to it, even though tech doesn't work that way. So what is your argument to this point? Do you have one, or are you just going to 'bad writing fallacy' me again?
So it can hack the Citadel to force it to be compatible with the Crucible and allow the Crucible to do whatever it needs with the Citadel to make it work, but it can't hack the AI who is literally the Citadel like EDI is the Normandy? That. Makes. No. Sense. And you know it. So you can either just give up on even trying to explain anything and just consider ME3 too badly written to discuss any aspect of its story, or you'll find it interesting enough to want to try to. So far, you've only done the former.
I post to answer the initial question and talk about he ending, and writing in general. Why do you post? Acknowledging what was bad is key to improving. I don't just say "bad writing" and leave it at that. I and others discuss exactly what was bad, why, and how it could have been improved. Often it's a series of suggestions on what could have been better rather than having one, concrete "best" answer. This is a big thread so I don't expect you to hunt down all my posts, but I highly recommend you read the articles and watch the videos in my signature, along with Shamus Young's Mass Effect Retrospective. If you chose only one thing, I'd recommend the one from the screen writer. He gives a good outline for an alternative ending idea. It would need fleshing out and other ideas could work, of course, but it's a fun read.
I don't have to dismiss every point of your wild imaginings. I can't dismiss or explain away everything in Indoctrination Theory, but can do enough to know the theory doesn't hold. I grabbed a few that jumped out at me.
You're still looking at the system backwards. The Citadel uses the Crucible, not the other way around. The Destroy Tube, the Control handles, and the Synthesis pit are all on the Citadel. The Control panel Shepard activates that you claim gives Shepard mental control over the Crucible is on the Citadel.
I noticed you didn't actually address any of the specific problems I raised with what you posted. It's clear you took the fact that I told you that you're wrong very personally. Take a deep breath, calm down, and let's discuss.
I don't have to dismiss every point of your wild imaginings. I can't dismiss or explain away everything in Indoctrination Theory, but can do enough to know the theory doesn't hold. I grabbed a few that jumped out at me.You're still looking at the system backwards. The Citadel uses the Crucible, not the other way around. The Destroy Tube, the Control handles, and the Synthesis pit are all on the Citadel. The Control panel Shepard activates that you claim gives Shepard mental control over the Crucible is on the Citadel.
I noticed you didn't actually address any of the specific problems I raised with what you posted. It's clear you took the fact that I told you that you're wrong very personally. Take a deep breath, calm down, and let's discuss.
But you're the one objectively wrong. Period. It's a fact that the Catalyst contradicts itself, does self-harming actions, acts just like a lot of indoctrinated humans do throughout the series, that he has a sudden personality shift the moment the Crucible shuts down, gives you options that it outright states that it detests but gives you them anyway, and that it's actively trying to destroy the Crucible with all the firepower it has available via the Reapers throughout the ENTIRE conversation, and that it brings you up on an elevator even when destroy is the only option and then gets angry and blames you for it activating the elevator. But nope, nothing weird or unusual here. No hack, just "bad writing". I can't believe people actually liked your post, I question their judgement.
"Wild imaginings"?... Interesting. You used the exact same wording as the Turian Councilor about the Reapers, and just like with that guy the "wild imaginings" are actually correct. You? Yes, you. Give me an explanation that explains everything in the above paragraph. Go ahead. And no, you can't use your favorite fallacy about bad writing. You can't give a counter-explanation. Know why? Because my explanation is the only one that fits, and there's clear evidence for it (that you like to ignore). You even know this, the fact that you tried to back out by saying it's all just bad writing is proof.
But you're the one objectively wrong. Period. It's a fact that the Catalyst contradicts itself, does self-harming actions, acts just like a lot of indoctrinated humans do throughout the series, that he has a sudden personality shift the moment the Crucible shuts down, gives you options that it outright states that it detests but gives you them anyway, and that it's actively trying to destroy the Crucible with all the firepower it has available via the Reapers throughout the ENTIRE conversation, and that it brings you up on an elevator even when destroy is the only option and then gets angry and blames you for it activating the elevator. But nope, nothing weird or unusual here. No hack, just "bad writing". I can't believe people actually liked your post, I question their judgement.
"Wild imaginings"?... Interesting. You used the exact same wording as the Turian Councilor about the Reapers, and just like with that guy the "wild imaginings" are actually correct. You? Yes, you. Give me an explanation that explains everything in the above paragraph. Go ahead. And no, you can't use your favorite fallacy about bad writing. You can't give a counter-explanation. Know why? Because my explanation is the only one that fits, and there's clear evidence for it (that you like to ignore). You even know this, the fact that you tried to back out by saying it's all just bad writing is proof.
Are you posting here to have your ego stroked? Is that it?
You clearly didn't read everything, or you'd know that one of those self-quotes was responding to this exact question someone asked last time I brought it up.
Call it a mere power source all you want, but that doesn't actually fit the facts. Fact is, the people building it still had no freaking clue what they were building. All they had was speculation. The fact that it can control the Citadel also adds to it, it can control the Citadel but not the AI that basically is the Citadel's avatar? Doesn't add up, the Citadel and Catalyst kid are connected, he's the software to the Citadel's hardware. You hack one, you hack both, and this is something I said in one of my self-quotes. Next time, read all of them before asking questions that were already asked and answered last time. Occams Razor and Howe's egg principle both fit this explanation. It acts in a self destructive and split-personality way when you talk to it, depending on your choices. It acts and says to do things that it then immediately says it hates the idea of, like control. Occam's Razor says the simplest explanation usually is the best, and Howe's principle says "If you leave an egg in an empty box and said egg gets crushed, the cause must lie within the egg itself. If you eliminate the impossible, whatever left, no matter how improbable it is, must be the truth". The hack of the Catalyst by the Crucible is just that, it's improbable but it's also the only explanation that explains the Catalyst's schizophrenic behavior ("let's have a friendly chat while I make sure to not order my Reapers to stop trying to destroy the very machine I'm acting like I want to use", "Why are you up here after I brought you up here?!", "I brought you up despite knowing destroy is the only option and I think that AI will just wipe you out eventually, so I'll bring you up and explain how to do the destroy function even though I think it's a massive mistake", "You denied the choices so now I'm suddenly going to have a personality change and speak with a Reaper voice and tell you in a satisfied tone that I'm going to keep killing everyone after all").
Yea been looking up videos nothing seems to show the Catalyst being unhappy that Shepard is there. Unless you got a video showing the Catalyst being unhappy and forced to talk to Shepard. Cause I couldn't find one.
Like wise this game like many others have good ending and bad endings. Low EMS is the bad endings. High EMS is the good endings. While there is no offical cannon ending the game is pretty clearly set up that having high EMS is the ending for people to aim for. Hence why low EMS destroy burns a large chunk of Earth and completely destroys all the Relays. While high EMS destroy leaves Earth along and only damages Relay.
True they don't know what they are building but there seems to be no knowledge that the Citadel has an intelligence program in it. To over ride or reprogram any program you have to understand the basics of it to create a another program to control it. Which would mean some were a long the line and certainly not the Protheans needed to have learned not only of the Catalyst's existence but also understand the fundamental of it's programing to be able to create a device capable of corrupting it and controlling it.
Or if you look at all the items that you can collect from planet scanning none of them even hint at some sort of computer. They are all based around creating, storing and controlling large amounts of energy.
Are you posting here to have your ego stroked? Is that it?
Irony of irony
Are you posting here to have your ego stroked? Is that it?
That sure seems to be it since all he's done is quote himself. Then there was this:
While I disagree with your conclusion in the spoiler (I obviously go with my own conclusion about the hacking), I'm glad somebody actually noted it. I was feeling rather ignored there for a bit
.
When I challenged him, all he did was rant and didn't address my challenges.
Are you posting here to have your ego stroked? Is that it?
Not at all. More like to discuss better explanations than my own, but all I got met with was "it's bad writing so who cares". That's what ticked me off. I try to give my idea and discuss, and the discussion just turned into some complaint about the story because complaining is seemingly all anyone can do on here.
Yea been looking up videos nothing seems to show the Catalyst being unhappy that Shepard is there. Unless you got a video showing the Catalyst being unhappy and forced to talk to Shepard. Cause I couldn't find one.
Like wise this game like many others have good ending and bad endings. Low EMS is the bad endings. High EMS is the good endings. While there is no offical cannon ending the game is pretty clearly set up that having high EMS is the ending for people to aim for. Hence why low EMS destroy burns a large chunk of Earth and completely destroys all the Relays. While high EMS destroy leaves Earth along and only damages Relay.
True they don't know what they are building but there seems to be no knowledge that the Citadel has an intelligence program in it. To over ride or reprogram any program you have to understand the basics of it to create a another program to control it. Which would mean some were a long the line and certainly not the Protheans needed to have learned not only of the Catalyst's existence but also understand the fundamental of it's programing to be able to create a device capable of corrupting it and controlling it.
Or if you look at all the items that you can collect from planet scanning none of them even hint at some sort of computer. They are all based around creating, storing and controlling large amounts of energy.
You haven't seen the videos of the Catalyst yelling "Why are you here?!" at low EMS? Then you didn't search very hard. Or how about it bringing up control and then immediately followed it up with it saying it doesn't want to be controlled by Shepard (in a rather disgusted tone at that). So it brought up control even though it clearly detests the very idea? Sounds legit. Again, can you think of an explanation for this weirdness in its behavior besides it being bad writing? I got asked if I want my ego stroked, but all I really want is somebody to give a counter-idea that is at least plausible. So far, I've gotten NOTHING. Note that I didn't get like this with Kal_Reeger, and that's because he at least had a counter-idea to my own that at least tried to make sense of the Catalyst's strange behavior. I told him I disagreed, and he did partially disagree with me too. So why didn't I attack him like I did you? Because he actually discussed and gave a good alternate idea to my own, whereas you have not given any ideas and your explanation to everything is just saying the writing sucked. See the difference?
That sure seems to be it since all he's done is quote himself. Then there was this:
When I challenged him, all he did was rant and didn't address my challenges.
Not at all. More like to discuss better explanations than my own, but all I got met with was "it's bad writing so who cares". That's what ticked me off. I try to give my idea and discuss, and the discussion just turned into some complaint about the story because complaining is seemingly all anyone can do on here.
You haven't seen the videos of the Catalyst yelling "Why are you here?!" at low EMS? Then you didn't search very hard. Or how about it bringing up control and then immediately followed it up with it saying it doesn't want to be controlled by Shepard (in a rather disgusted tone at that). So it brought up control even though it clearly detests the very idea? Sounds legit. Again, can you think of an explanation for this weirdness in its behavior besides it being bad writing? I got asked if I want my ego stroked, but all I really want is somebody to give a counter-idea that is at least plausible. So far, I've gotten NOTHING. Note that I didn't get like this with Kal_Reeger, and that's because he at least had a counter-idea to my own that at least tried to make sense of the Catalyst's strange behavior. I told him I disagreed, and he did partially disagree with me too. So why didn't I attack him like I did you? Because he actually discussed and gave a good alternate idea to my own, whereas you have not given any ideas and your explanation to everything is just saying the writing sucked. See the difference?
Nothing really supports your statement all that well. Granted the video text is in another language but it seems pretty clear they picked the renegade option and the Catalyst responding as such. Perhaps you could show a better video because I tried searching before I posted and nothing came up.
Bad writing is a very generic terminology when it comes to this game series. Everyone says bad writing but can mean half a dozen different things.
Is the basic concept that the Catalyst has been sitting in the Citadel using the Reapers to act out a grand galaxy wide experiment to try and change the factors it see's in the conflict between organic and synthetic though continual development of new and unique life. Once they show they are doomed to follow the same path they are removed from the galaxy to allow new race to take their place. Once Shepard how ever get there the variables have altered enough to provide a different out come and Shepard as the catalyst for those changes. Since this has been the first opportunity for this change this explains both high EMS interaction and low EMS interaction.
Exact quote, as I've said a couple times now.
"Why are you here?!"
...Uh... Because you brought me up? Why did you bring me up and then ask why I'm here? Did you not want to bring me up? Then why did you? Was you forced or something?
That's basically the thought process I have to that line.
But you're the one objectively wrong. Period. It's a fact that the Catalyst contradicts itself, does self-harming actions, acts just like a lot of indoctrinated humans do throughout the series, that he has a sudden personality shift the moment the Crucible shuts down, gives you options that it outright states that it detests but gives you them anyway, and that it's actively trying to destroy the Crucible with all the firepower it has available via the Reapers throughout the ENTIRE conversation, and that it brings you up on an elevator even when destroy is the only option and then gets angry and blames you for it activating the elevator. But nope, nothing weird or unusual here. No hack, just "bad writing". I can't believe people actually liked your post, I question their judgement.
"Wild imaginings"?... Interesting. You used the exact same wording as the Turian Councilor about the Reapers, and just like with that guy the "wild imaginings" are actually correct. You? Yes, you. Give me an explanation that explains everything in the above paragraph. Go ahead. And no, you can't use your favorite fallacy about bad writing. You can't give a counter-explanation. Know why? Because my explanation is the only one that fits, and there's clear evidence for it (that you like to ignore). You even know this, the fact that you tried to back out by saying it's all just bad writing is proof.
Where does the Catalyst contradict itself? It does give options it doesn't like, but there are several possible explanations for that. In high EMS, the best explanation is because you need alternatives in order to choose Synthesis. Otherwise, it could be hacking, like you said, though I'd question how that is possible or works. It could be his core programming to explain things. That is his story role, after all. As a character, he exists only to present the new central conflict and lay out the ending options to the player.
You're exaggerating bit though. It's a bit after the Catalyst storms off that the Crucible/Citadel connection shuts down. I assume that's the Catalyst exerting its control over the Citadel, not anything to do with the Crucible. I'd still like an explanation for your claim that touching the Citadel panel gives Shepard a mental control over the Crucible. I don't recall any indication that the Reapers are attacking the Crucible during the conversation. If you try to walk back you just get a message that they did. The Catalyst just says "time's up."
I never said their was nothing weird or unusual. I just don't give them any hidden meaning. I'm not using a fallacy. Bad writing does explain everything, though you don't have to be satisfied with that answer. Sometimes I can explain everything and it's bad. However, here I don't have a good explanation that works. It's nonsense. But that doesn't mean I can't challenge the explanation you presented. Instead of answering my challenges, you got angry and ranted. I'm holding your ideas up to the light of scrutiny. It's perfectly fine to defend your ideas, but address my specific issues. Don't throw a tantrum like a toddler and claim that yours is the only way.
The best, and only concrete, evidence that could be interpreted to point right at hacking is the line "The Crucible changed me." I'm surprised you didn't bring that up.
Not at all. More like to discuss better explanations than my own, but all I got met with was "it's bad writing so who cares". That's what ticked me off. I try to give my idea and discuss, and the discussion just turned into some complaint about the story because complaining is seemingly all anyone can do on here.
I never said "who cares." I just pointed out that bad writing is the simplest explanation for the things that don't make sense. And the writing really is bad. I've detailed it many times and have great links in my signature to people who lay it out better than I do. My method of "fixing" the problems is to rewrite the bad parts, in a "Mass Effect: Reimagined" sort of way. I want to think up a proper story utilizing what ME did well, not patch this one together in a Frankenstein's Monster sort of way.
I quoted myself since I'd already brought it up a long time ago and doing that is lot easier than gathering all my thoughts to explain it again. Why retype the whole idea when I've already made 3 or 4 posts in the past that can save me the trouble?
All you've done is declare bad writing and tell me I'm wrong without giving me your own position on anything about this subject.
That depends on what you mean by "this subject." I've given more detail on why the writing is bad previously, provided links explaining it further, and I've listed challenges and problems I have regarding what you laid out.
I went back and watched low EMS destroy. I like how the Catalyst sounds less benevolent toward Organics with the "you bring it on yourselves" line. it makes him sound more like Sovereign, the best Reaper. He also is more definitive that "The Reapers are mine. I control them," harming the idea proposed earlier here that it doesn't have direct control over the Reapers
The collective intelligence of the anthill/hive controls the worker bees/ants? Do the ants/bees belong to the anthill/hive? We can say so. They work and live and act and kill in harmony and amazing coordination, in order to fullfill a higher e complex purpose.
But they cannot divert from that purpose: the individual workers bees will always try pollinate in spring, and if under attack, the individual ant will always try to defend the anthill and the queen.
So the reapers. The fact that there is a "higher" collective intelligence, which gave them purpose and coordination (the catalyst), doesn't necessarly mean that the catalyst is able to control them like puppets.
So, in order to stop the extinction cycle and let this special cycle survive, the "bees/ants" need to
a. evolve (synthesis)
b. be enslaved/controlled (sheparlyst)
c. be destroyed
And if a. and b. are not possible/rejected by Shepard, c. is still better than refusal ending (this special cycle - and not the next one - is allowed reset tech and "take it's chances")
Exact quote, as I've said a couple times now.
"Why are you here?!"
...Uh... Because you brought me up? Why did you bring me up and then ask why I'm here? Did you not want to bring me up? Then why did you? Was you forced or something?
That's basically the thought process I have to that line.
So one line and you build an entire set up around it?
I'd say that line is perfectly set up with the rest of the low EMS Prioriy Earth set up. Shield and Sword Fleets getting stomped on, galaxy splintered into small groups, Geth or Quarians possibly killed.
low EMS regardless of which ending you pick is the bad ending. The catalyst being snippy with you during the bad ending not really a surprise or proof of anything.
Retour en haut