232 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Assuming you believe the Catalyst of course...

Or the epilogue, which clearly shows Shepard in control of the reapers.

[Laughing_Man]

Or the epilogue, which clearly shows Shepard in control of the reapers.

 

I'm talking about Shepard's knowledge at the the time of the choice (player knowledge Vs. character knowledge, you should be familiar with the concepts...), and the likelihood and logic of the Catalyst just allowing Shepard to destroy it or take over as the dominant controlling personality matrix, without sufficient reason.

 

Assuming the Catalyst actually lied, the epilogue could be just part of the Matrix...

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm talking about Shepard's knowledge at the the time of the choice (player knowledge Vs. character knowledge, you should be familiar with the concepts...), and the likelihood and logic of the Catalyst just allowing Shepard to destroy it or take over as the dominant controlling personality matrix, without sufficient reason.

Oh, sure. But whether Shepard expects to win has no bearing on whether she actually does.

I thought we were talking about the ending, not the choice.

Assuming the Catalyst actually lied, the epilogue could be just part of the Matrix...

That could be said of any aspect of reality, so I don't think it's relevant.

[Draining Dragon]

If anything, I would prefer that the Renegade options be less obviously evil. It annoys me that Renegade in ME1 was presented as a pragmatic "do whatever it takes" type, but the Renegade in ME3 is an omnicidal maniac.

[Laughing_Man]

I thought we were talking about the ending, not the choice.

 

The way I see it, it's all tied together.

 

I don't see a construct of pure logic allowing itself to be destroyed or controlled by an inferior being, especially not when "giving up" will not achieve the original mandate, nor will it prevent eventual destruction by synthetics. (as insane as this particular part is...)

 

Triggering the giant Frankenstein machine by shooting a pipe out of all things, is about as logical as being allowed to do so by the Catalyst.

Having to die an overly dramatic death via electrocution merely in order leave a digital personality imprint, is about as logical as the Catalyst admitting its logical inferiority to Shepard.

 

The reason is that Shepard and his cycle present nothing more than an anomaly, a quirk of the cosmic dice, there's nothing truly special about this cycle or Shepard himself, nor is a temporary peace between organics and synthetics an indication for an error in the Catalyst's assumption that war and extinction are inevitable due to their creation.

 

At this point I'm more or less forced to conclude that I can't take the Catalyst conversation at face value.

 

It's a big giant mess, most of it makes no sense to me. I find that ignoring the entire thing is for the best.

[KaiserShep]

If anything, I would prefer that the Renegade options be less obviously evil. It annoys me that Renegade in ME1 was presented as a pragmatic "do whatever it takes" type, but the Renegade in ME3 is an omnicidal maniac.

I don't get it. ME1 and 2's Renegade was more often malicious seemingly for the heck of it. ME3's scale was definitely larger, but it's clearly not a for-the-lulz affair either, like ME2's was.

[Red Panda]

Well, you can be evil and paragon. Just following orders you know, listening to the chain of command.

[Ahriman]

Oh Shepherd, why we are at endings again? It's been four years already, let it go.

I don't get it. ME1 and 2's Renegade was more often malicious seemingly for the heck of it. ME3's scale was definitely larger, but it's clearly not a for-the-lulz affair either, like ME2's was.

Yep, though "malicious" is a bit too strong for ME1-ME2 Shepard, more like excess of dickness and testosterone in his blood.