69 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Liara explicitly states that from what data she's been able to decode it's a weapon built specifically for destroying the reapers, and Hackett tells Shepard that his scientists think it could definitely release enough energy to destroy them. As in enough of them at once or in quick succession to completely turn the tables. We later find out that it was modified by each cycle but has never been completed before because nobody could determine what the missing "Catalyst" was, possibly because the reapers immediately seized the Citadel as the first step in their invasion in each and every cycle.

 

What kind of weapon do they think it is though?  A gun?  A bomb?  A delivery system for a computer virus?  Portal to summon something bigger than the Reapers?  A command override for the Master System?  Time machine?

 

Not only do they not know what the "weapon" is, they have no idea how to deploy it.  Heck the Catalyst has to tell them how to turn the frakking thing on.  Nobody knew anything about the weapon, they were all monkeys with blueprints just doing what they were told.

[Il Divo]

 

Standing back and letting your gargantuan fleet do its best instead of messing with that AI when you have no idea what you're doing and nobody to advise you is a perfectly understandable choice of action.

 

But it's not presented as a possibility based on any in character perspective. 

As I've said, building the Crucible and using it only makes sense if you've given up on any hope of conventional victory. 

 

Point being, if we believe conventional victory is possible, why is Shepard bothering with a device whose functionality he has no understanding of? 

 

Why does conventional victory suddenly become more plausible after we've launched everything into deploying the Crucible? Iakus hits on this above, but Hackett's dialogue prior to Shepard meeting the Catalyst is pretty indicative: "Nothing's happening" - so what was supposed to happen exactly? 

 

Now that the Reapers have the Citadel, why do we believe we're going to beat them conventionally if and when they decided to shut down the whole network? There's nothing about the Refuse scenario that fits anything but the most insane character concept. 

 

That is not a meta standpoint. Shepard knows nothing about the data or the Crucible's technology, but everyone who does believes that the Crucible can win us the war if we build it and use it right, enough for Hackett to commision and prioritize its construction on top of everything else. That's called listening to your experts. Again, it's not Shepard's call to build it or launch a suicide mission to activate it, it's Hackett's, and Shepard is following orders because it'd be ridiculous not to given expert opinions.

 

 

To be clear, do we have a source for this?

 

Not to mention, we need the  "we can win this war conventionally" dialogue. Until we have that, Refuse is insanity, particularly once the suicide mission of deploying the Crucible is launched. 

 

Iakus also hit on this, if your experts can't even figure out basic design operations, like how to turn the machine on, why are we buying into the "we can destroy the Reapers with this" premise? This gets more ridiculous once the Reapers have taken the Citadel because now, if we want to test drive the Crucible as some weapon, we now have to sacrifice our fleet just to get the Catalyst back. I'm serious here: none of this sets us up for a narrative where conventional victory is a possibility. It's not mentioned, it's not weighed as an option, it's not given any consideration whatsoever as any sort of back-up option. 

[ThomasBlaine]

What kind of weapon do they think it is though?  A gun?  A bomb?  A delivery system for a computer virus?  Portal to summon something bigger than the Reapers?  A command override for the Master System?  Time machine?

 

Not only do they not know what the "weapon" is, they have no idea how to deploy it.  Heck the Catalyst has to tell them how to turn the frakking thing on.  Nobody knew anything about the weapon, they were all monkeys with blueprints just doing what they were told.

 

We don't know that. Shepard certainly has no idea how it's supposed to work, but Liara and Hackett's scientists all seem confident that it'll be a gamechanger even if they never tell us exactly why. And again, they're the experts.

 

 

When you believe victory is a possibility. But it's not presented as a possibility based on any in character perspective. 

As I've said, building the Crucible and using it only makes sense if you've given up on any hope of conventional victory. 

 

Point being, if we believe conventional victory is possible, why is Shepard bothering with a device whose functionality he has no understanding of? 

 

Why does conventional victory suddenly become more plausible after we've launched everything into deploying the Crucible? Iakus hits on this above, but Hackett's dialogue prior to Shepard meeting the Catalyst is pretty indicative: "Nothing's happening" - so what was supposed to happen exactly? 

 

Now that the Reapers have the Citadel, why do we believe we're going to beat them conventionally if and when they decided to shut down the whole network? There's nothing about the Refuse scenario that fits anything but the most insane character concept. 

 

Source?

 

Not to mention, we need the  "we can win this war conventionally" dialogue. Until we have that, Refuse is insanity, particularly once the suicide mission of deploying the Crucible is launched. 

 

Iakus also hit on this, if your experts can't even figure out basic design operations, like how to turn the machine on, why are we buying into the "we can destroy the Reapers with this" premise? This gets more ridiculous once the Reapers have taken the Citadel because now, if we want to test drive the Crucible as some weapon, we now have to sacrifice our fleet just to get the Catalyst back. I'm serious here: none of this sets us up for a narrative where conventional victory is a possibility. 

 

Again, Liara and Hackett's experts agree that the Crucible seems viable as a gamechanging weapon, even if they never tell Shepard exactly why that is. Thus we build it and focus our strategy around it because a "conventional victory" doesn't seem possible. But when the time comes for Shepard to actually use it in one of three ways, s/he is instructed in how to do so basically by the collective consciousness of the reapers. Two out of three of those uses as presented are insanely dangerous with potential for making things much worse, and the third still takes the reaper AI at its word that it'll destroy them - along with causing catastrophic damage and collapsing the galactic infrastructure.

 

At this point Shepard has consistently performed the "impossible" several times over and s/he's potentially gathered a fleet a LOT bigger than anyone dared hope for at the outset when people were still talking about that "conventional victory" as seeming impossible. How is it insanity to decide not to trust the reaper AI over the allied fleet's chances of turning things around?

 

And that's just one reason to choose Refuse. A Shepard who's just paralyzed by indecision could go that way too, which would be a very human response to the pressure and the impossibility of the decision. The Control and Synthesis endings are only appropriate for ridiculously extreme, reckless and trusting Shepards, but Refuse is a lot easier to rationalize.

 

If you work from the premise that the combined fleet vs the reapers is an utterly hopeless battle with zero possibility of victory then sure, it's a stupid call compared to Destroy, but if you read the situation as Shepard having gathered enough military strength for the fleet to at least have a fighting chance, while deploying the Crucible because the implied advantage is just too good to pass up, and take the dangers of trusting the Catalyst seriously, then Refuse is an understandable choice for Shepard to make.

[AlanC9]

One can argue that Synthesis turns everyone into fundamentally different creatures anyway. The changes are at the genetic, even molecular level, altering the physical and metal capabilities of all life in the galaxy.

In the end, what's the difference between turning them into husks, or turning them Green?

The difference is the difference between being a husk and being Green. They are distinguishable states.

I am reminded of a Deep Space 9 episode dealing with Doctor bashir being genetically modified as a child. Part of it was to alter his mind, making him smarter. And he resented what was done to him, even saying that he is not in fact the same person after being modified:

"Jules Bashir died in that hospital because you couldn't live with the shame of having a son who didn't measure up."

It's a good example, but I think Bashir was being a fool there. There is no reason to privilege the inferior version of Bashir just because it came first. Though I certainly agree that some people would have this reaction.

Not that the reaction is necessarily important. See, for instance, the ST:Voyager episode "Tuvix." Or is that episode about Janeway playing God the same way a Synthesis Shepard does? ( She did do that from time to time. Actually, I think I liked Janeway best in her more out-of-control moments.)

[ZipZap2000]

Oh, and the Catalyst is a big fat liar. He says you will die because you are partly synthetic. Yet you wake up at the end if your EMS is high enough.

There's an explanation for this but it has nothing to do with the story.

[AlanC9]

Again, Liara and Hackett's experts agree that the Crucible seems viable as a gamechanging weapon, even if they never tell Shepard exactly why that is. Thus we build it and focus our strategy around it because a "conventional victory" doesn't seem possible.

Seem? By the time of the Battle of Earth the war has been going on for many months. There's not going to be any uncertainty left about Reaper capabilities or the ability of Citadel forces to resist them. It's September 1944 and we're the Axis December 1864 and we're the Confederacy. (I'm trying to avoid unnecessary Godwinning.)

[ThomasBlaine]

Seem? By the time of the Battle of Earth the war has been going on for many months. There's not going to be any uncertainty left about Reaper capabilities or the ability of Citadel forces to resist them. It's September 1944 and we're the Axis December 1864 and we're the Confederacy. (I'm trying to avoid unnecessary Godwinning.)

 

As I said, if that's how you read the situation. There's nothing in the actual lead-up to the battle for Earth that says it's a completely hopeless fight without the Crucible.

 

Many months, though? What makes you so sure of that?

[Iakus]

The difference is the difference between being a husk and being Green. They are distinguishable states.
 

Huskies and terriers have differences too.  But they are still dogs.

 

 

 

It's a good example, but I think Bashir was being a fool there. There is no reason to privilege the inferior version of Bashir just because it came first. Though I certainly agree that some people would have this reaction.

 

Then how about Deathwalker in Babylon 5?  Immortality at the price of another's death?  Same deal, really.

 

 

Not that the reaction is necessarily important. See, for instance, the ST:Voyager episode "Tuvix." Or is that episode about Janeway playing God the same way a Synthesis Shepard does? ( She did do that from time to time. Actually, I think I liked Janeway best in her more out-of-control moments.)

Yep, she was.  Especially given, if I recall the episode right (it's been years since I saw it)  Tuvix was begging for his life

[ThomasBlaine]

Huskies and terriers have differences too.  But they are still dogs.

 

Yes, but between huskification and synthesis there's the difference of getting skewered on a metal pole while you're slowly turned into a mindless robot zombie. Not insignificant. Although Shepard has no way of knowing that. And really, the fact that the people who are turned into husks don't give their consent beforehand is the least terrible thing about the process or the result.

[Iakus]

Yes, but between huskification and synthesis there's the difference of getting skewered on a metal pole while you're slowly turned into a mindless robot zombie. Not insignificant. Although Shepard has no way of knowing that. And really, the fact that the people who are turned into husks don't give their consent beforehand is the least terrible thing about the process or the result.

And being rewritten at the molecular level to fit someone else's concept of "better", while perhaps involving less body horror, is still pretty freaking horrible.  Particularly if your capacity to object is removed in the process.

[Lucca_de_Neon]

1- I get to give the middle finger to the starbrat.
2- I get to see my blue daughters grow up.
3- I get to see my son, Grunt, be a father.

Nuff said. 

[ThomasBlaine]

And being rewritten at the molecular level to fit someone else's concept of "better", while perhaps involving less body horror, is still pretty freaking horrible.  Particularly if your capacity to object is removed in the process.

 

Yes, but even then the violation of your right to decide what happens to your own body is still nearly irrelevant compared to the horror of what you could actually be turned into, like something without the capacity to speak, or think, or feel as we understand it. If you were turned into a miserable creature only halfway alive, in constant pain or even entirely nonsentient people's first objection wouldn't be "Who had the gall to make that decision for him?!"

 

I'm just saying that to talk about the Synthesis ending like the ethical violation of people's rights is the main problem with that decision is to seriously underestimate the potential horror of what Shepard could be agreeing to turn all life into and the actual ramifications of that.

[Iakus]

Yes, but even then the violation of your right to decide what happens to your own body is still nearly irrelevant compared to the horror of what you could actually be turned into, like something without the capacity to speak, or think, or feel as we understand it. If you were turned into a miserable creature only halfway alive, in constant pain or even entirely nonsentient people's first objection wouldn't be "Who had the gall to make that decision for him?!"

 

I'm just saying that to talk about the Synthesis ending like the ethical violation of people's rights is the main problem with that decision is to seriously underestimate the potential horror of what Shepard could be agreeing to turn all life into and the actual ramifications of that.

And what does it turn you into?  It does change how you think and feel.  Else how could the conflict end?

 

Getting Smilies Painted on Your Soul

[AlanC9]

Huskies and terriers have differences too.  But they are still dogs.

That's cute rhetoric, but not much of an argument. Unless you're only talking about some sort of moral aspect here, instead of the substance of the condition?
 

Then how about Deathwalker in Babylon 5?  Immortality at the price of another's death?  Same deal, really.

The causality is a bit different, though -- future Bashir didn't choose to create himself at the expense of past Bashir.
 

Yep, she was.  Especially given, if I recall the episode right (it's been years since I saw it)  Tuvix was begging for his life

That's correct. Though in Janeway's favor, she's saving two beings at the expense of one.

[capn233]

This was the only ending I ever took.

[SentinelMacDeath]

1- I get to give the middle finger to the starbrat.
2- I get to see my blue daughters grow up.
3- I get to see my son, Grunt, be a father.

Nuff said. 

4- I get to adopt 1 or 2 orphans and move to Vancouver with my husband dearest, drinking beer and eating meat

 

But seriously, every ending but high EMS gets rid of Shep as the anomaly, making way for whatever Starkid or the Reapers could have in store. Thank you but no thank you 

[ThomasBlaine]

And what does it turn you into?  It does change how you think and feel.  Else how could the conflict end?

 

Getting Smilies Painted on Your Soul

 

That's my point. The only thing Shepard knows is that the Catalyst says the crucible will turn all life into something partly organic and partly synthetic. S/he has no idea what that even means, much less if creatures like that are actually alive and sentient. Personally facilitating that transformation without knowing the specifics is so monstrously stupid and dangerous that it can't even be expressed.

 

The potential feelings of moral outrage of living, perfectly functional and safe people who just didn't get a choice in the matter of being turned into vague half-machines isn't much of a consideration compared to the actual damage "synthesis" could have done if it'd turned out not to work exactly as the Catalyst said with zero drawbacks.

[JohnDoe60]

Destroy or refuse are the only "proper" options. Not because of some lore, personality, or logical story telling reasons, but simply because the Control and Synthesis options are magic.

 

They had a pretty good sci-fi story going on (eezo interacts with the Higgs boson -> the mass effect -> the how's and why's of the created world), then offer up a couple of endings which have absolutely no scientific basis - because they rely on "energy" being something other than what the scientific understanding of energy is. Specifically, `adding your energy to the Crucible's' to either control the Reapers or transform organics relies on energy being more than simply a relative measure of the state some matter happens to be in. Energy is a property that only makes sense in conjunction with comparisons between distinct things or distinct states of a thing, it is not a thing itself which can have distinct states.

 

Shepard could theoretically be transformed into energy, and that energy could then be used to do the work necessary for the Control and Synthesis options, but the energy could also potentially come from a really big battery. Stating or implying anything other than that moves those options out of the realm of science and into that of the supernatural.

[themikefest]

We don't know that. Shepard certainly has no idea how it's supposed to work, but Liara and Hackett's scientists all seem confident that it'll be a gamechanger even if they never tell us exactly why. And again, they're the experts.

If Liara is an expert, wouldn't it of been better to send her to Hackett to help with the crucible?
 
 
 

 

[ThomasBlaine]

If Liara is an expert, wouldn't it of been better to send her to Hackett to help with the crucible?

 

Maybe, but I doubt it. Liara is an archaeologist who specializes in Prothean culture, not an engineer or physicist. She was probably brought to the ruins on Mars to help decode and translate the Prothean data about the Crucible, and wouldn't be of much help in actually constructing it outside of that. It seems silly to take her into combat over an actual trained soldier so I agree that her presence on the Normandy is a bit unnecessary if she could do her Shadow Broker stuff somewhere safer, although I think I remember EDI helping her with her work. And if she and Shepard have a strong connection then that's at least valuable emotional support.

[themikefest]

Maybe, but I doubt it. Liara is an archaeologist, not an engineer or physicist. She was probably brought to the ruins on Mars to help translate the Prothean data about the Crucible, and wouldn't be of much help in actually constructing it outside of that.

If that's the case, how can she say she discovered something that can wipeout the reapers if she's never seen the plans to verify that the reapers can be wiped out?

[ThomasBlaine]

If that's the case, how can she say she discovered something that can wipeout the reapers if she's never seen the plans to verify that the reapers can be wiped out?

 

She's personally translated Prothean texts talking about what they at least thought Crucible was going to do? We can use it to launch what is effectively a galaxy-wide EMP, and the capability of something along those lines has to be evident in the blueprint even if they can't figure out exactly how it will take effect.

 

I mean, we're talking about what is combined alien tech from millions of different spacefaring civilizations over billions of years. It's plausible for our scientists to be a little stumped until they actually see it at work.

[themikefest]

She's personally translated Prothean texts talking about what they at least thought Crucible was going to do? We can use it to launch what is effectively a galaxy-wide EMP, and the capability of something along those lines has to be evident in the blueprint even if they can't figure out exactly how it will take effect.

So no. She never found the plans. She only found clues that led her to Mars that might have plans that might be able to defeat the reapers. Had she found the plans in the archives for her to make that comment, she would've noticed that a piece was missing, the catalyst, and that going to Thessia would reveal what the catalyst is. Its also revealed later in the game that the plans were not prothean specific. My question would be, what was she doing for the time she was on Mars? She had access to the archives. She's been on Mars at least a week.

[ThomasBlaine]

So no. She never found the plans. She only found clues that led her to Mars that might have plans that might be able to defeat the reapers. Had she found the plans in the archives for her to make that comment, she would've noticed that a piece was missing, the catalyst, and that going to Thessia would reveal what the catalyst is. Its also revealed later in the game that the plans were not prothean specific. My question would be, what was she doing for the time she was on Mars? She had access to the archives. She's been on Mars at least a week.

 

She does say that information about the crucible was jumbled in with an "overwhelming" amount of data that had never been studied before. If she hadn't found clues elsewhere that led her to the Archives and told her what to look for, data about the Crucible would never have been found. Thus, she found it. And we're not told what the process of isolating, translating and studying Prothean data contained in the Archives even entails. Could be slow and difficult work. The size and scope of the base and the fact that all that data still hadn't been processed after all these years would suggest that. And Cerberus probably timed the attack to retrieve the data immediately after it was fully translated, leaving Liara no time to study it properly beyond gleaning the general purpose. And again, she's no engineer.

[Han Shot First]

So no. She never found the plans. She only found clues that led her to Mars that might have plans that might be able to defeat the reapers. Had she found the plans in the archives for her to make that comment, she would've noticed that a piece was missing, the catalyst, and that going to Thessia would reveal what the catalyst is. Its also revealed later in the game that the plans were not prothean specific. My question would be, what was she doing for the time she was on Mars? She had access to the archives. She's been on Mars at least a week.

 

Liara is the only reason the plans were found, even if she isn't the one that personally dug them up. The Alliance team knew to look for the plans only because Liara had informed Hackett of the clues unearthed on Khaje.