I'd include a fifth "Charm/Intimidate" ending, where you convince the Catalyst to send the Reapers back into Dark Space. You basically make an attempt to have the galaxy atone for the problems that gave the Reapers purpose, a "second chance" as it were. It's also a foreboding "we'll be watching you" ending, which threatens to have the Reapers return to finish the job if Shepard fails to bring peace or order to the galaxy. You lose the Citadel, but the relays would remain functional.
This is a very interesting concept, and one I could get behind, but I think that your comment, that the galaxy must "atone for the problems that gave the Reapers purpose" is a mistake. The galaxy never had to atone, the Reapers are a twisted entity that view chaos as a mistake. The galaxy is destined for chaos, so as long as there is life in the galaxy, there will be chaos. But that isn't bad. Ultimate order is a mistake, ultimate chaos is a mistake, the creation of the Reapers was an attempt to bring ultimate order to the galaxy with no regard for the balance. Sentient life needs to be trusted to create its own order and chaos, not the Reapers version of that.
@@toby7442 I'd agree but the Reapers were more than just a galactic purging tool. Chaos can escalate. It doesnt just go away. Countless organics species rise and fall, they reach their peak influence and power, but because of our tendency to act on emotion we choose to pursue beyond what we are meant to. Even now we as humans in 2021 we constantly try to find ways to cheat the expiration date of our bodies. Fight nature, change it, and care only for our own experiences, only ever showing a unified purpose in times of catastrophe. It's a flawed design but its ours. The catalyst sees this behaviour, this want to be greater at any cost so when we exhaust our abilities to change on our own, we turn to technology to do it for us. Make life easier, more convenient. We continue this until we realise the harm we are doing to our own future existence, letting machines think on a level resembling ours. Quarians, prime example. Also we challenge our own, try to force a pattern of behavior on others. Religious views, racial superiority, even something as pathetic and crude as fighting for control of resources that can be shared equally. This creates a possibility for war which evolves from swords, to guns to bombs and eventually nuclear warfare. Krogans, prime example.. The Reapers are a genocidal reminder of what we will do to each other if left unchecked. As is the pattern for millions of years prior to humanity's evolution. I dont believe the Reapers are the right way to solve the problem. But I understand their existence better than most. Order is good, as long as it's pure in its intention. Not corrupted, like our political leaders and billionaire corporation benefactors across the world today.
So what does that mean?! Catalyst (the kid) is in Shepard mind (because male and female react differently?! Left and right side of the brain...?!) Well... If so, that sounds too far conspiracy and way too far smart for the producers to have done such thing But yeah, I got recently convinced that this may be the case because if you shoot the kid his voice turn to a monster voice... So a dead giveaway... Which is unfortunate because i used to love the synthesis ending
Exactly! Heres what you should take from the conversation: The Catalyst is the ultimate representation of what happens when organics gets surpassed by synthetics, even if the synthetics percieve themselves as protecting organics. Bioware could have clarified that even more by implying that the catalyst was the original reaper AI which has been overruled and imprisoned on the citadel by the rest of the reaper AI's. This would let the reapers stay evil while giving cause to their existance.
You are on to something, but the whole creator/created stuff is not the point of the Mass Effect series, it is certainly a part of it. But if anything the central theme is "Assuming you have the right to rob people of their self-determination is a bad thing to do." It is very obvious, not only in the Geth story, but also very much so in the Genophage story, in Miranda's story, and of course the Reapers. And yet then the ending turns around and says "It's okay if YOU do it." That's the problem.
It's been 8 years but I have to point out, you've been doing exactly what you've said is wrong since the first game : in mass effect 1 you choose if the Thorian and Rachne queen live or not with the impression you'd be committing genocide/basically killing the leadership and reproduction of a hive colony ensuring genocide. you can to, if you choose, ensure6the council governing all life in the galaxy is wiped out and replaced by an all human one. In mass effect 2 Shepard has to chose whether or not to give a reaper creating platform to what is basically a private army of xenophobic asshats or destory it without consulting anyone else besides the crew who trust your direction. Then in the dlc stop the reapers from reaching them sooner does destory a mass relay, causing a genocide... even in 3, we get to potentially stop the genophage of sabotage it's curing, we get to potentially have peace between the quarians and geth or have one wiped out. we alway were making these decisions, they were just ones you agreed with.
"If there is to be a new solution, you must act." "I'm sorry, I'm rusty with my Shakespeare and Mordin died helping to cure the Genophage, so no Gilbert & Sullivan."
The catalyst is there to explain what the problem is, what the potential solutions are, and based on its programming and goal, which solution is the best and which one is the worst and so on. Then, YOU (not the catalyst)...YOU get to decide the fate of the ENTIRE galaxy and in doing so, you break the cycle and end the reaper threat. The very goal you sought to achieve has been achieved. The reapers have been defeated. Before, we only knew of destroy. Crucible shows more choices. Choice is yours
This scene, I feel, would be more effective if the "starchild" was not the child from the beginning of ME3, but instead looked like Shepard him/herself. Shepard was the biggest threat the Reapers had ever dealt with, as the starchild explained that his solution would no longer be viable, so, in my opinion, the AI should've looked like Shepard, as the child makes no sense in the first place.
It makes perfect sense. Shepard fixated on that boy because he/she watched him play under his/her window every day for months while they were under house arrest, then they saw the boy die because of the Reapers. And the reapers definitely weren't above using that sort of psychological manipulation against Shepard.
Yeah, it's kind of hard to view the reapers as an completely emotionless force, when they have on multiple occasions told us how superior they are and how we are imperfect, organic vermin, incapable of understanding them.
see to me that isnt a ME3 problem, thats a ME1 and ME2 problem. ME1 established the enemy, ME2 did not reveal anything new about them, so it had to happen in ME3. sovereigns one comment in ME1 however, is a VERY BASIC version of what the story turned out to be. "we impose order on the chaos of organic evolution, you exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it." now thats not much to go on, but that is what the catalyst explained to us. much better so in the extended cut.
The reaper origin plot is a sub plot. Slowly revealed throughout all 3 games. The main plot is uniting as a galaxy to ward off this threat and break the cycle. By the end of the game thats exactly what you do. Its up to you how the cycle is broken. Forget the origin part for a sec. That was just tying up a subplot about the reaper history. The main themes like overcoming impossible odds are still present and making that final choice, breaking the cycle, is when that all finally pays off imo.
No. because rebel doesnt necessarily mean stab creator. Just means to disobey like a teenager rebels against a parent. The reapers themselves do have free minds and can speak freely but their beliefs are grounded in their master, who is basically a collective intelligence of all those reapers. The Reapers appear to be a part of that collective intelligence. Only way to change their beliefs is to change the Catalyst (Control or Synthesis) Otherwise...you have to kill them
thanks. im not saying people have to like "twist" endings even though this wasnt exactly like that. but in ME1 after the conversation with sovereign that told me the reapers were sentient machines, my first thought was "who made them and why?" simply because "evil machines" for no reason is just plain bad. machines get made with a purpose. i expected to find this out and when ME2 revealed nothing new, i figured that would be "the big thing" about ME3 that would make the story.
You know The Catalyst has severe deficiencies when he / she / it can't even determine that Shepard isn't actually sleeping but still tells him to "Wake up." The alarm bells be ringing.
Hovis Steve Hardly, Shepard had his eyes closed and in the verge of passing out, symptomatic of the situation ahead of us. Even before this, Shepard actually passed out. "Wake up" was code for "I need your attention"
The design decision for The Catalyst seems to have been made out of sheer spite! What better way than to piss many people off than by having a holographic kid talking in a patronizing voice down to you, flexing his / hers / its misplaced superiority complex, all the while the so-called 'intelligence' behind its reasoning seems to derive from having spent too much time existing in an intellectual wasteland. Loneliness can do strange things to you, but this is just ridiculous!
It just makes whatever coolness there was in the Reapers' motivation becoming reduced to "I had a crossed wire in my robot-brain, so that's why you have to die!" And it ignores the outright disdain for organic life that Sovereign's speech dripped with. And I supposed the "We are each a nation - independent, free of all weakness." are to be completely ignored then. Guess that was another crossed wire in a robot-brain.
I'm not asking you to like it. Make no mistake. However, I am asking to examine the situation more closely. Example. Sovereign assesses situation...signals Citadel (Catalyst) and then the Citadel(Catalyst) signals keepers to open the relay. As I said...it's all there
SPOILERS FOR ENDING • • • • • • The Blue is not the best because the Reapers stay and the Illusive Man can't control them, so how can Shepard. Yes it appears he controls them, but by how much? The Synchronization one is also terrible because it takes away the freedom of everyone and changes their minds. At the ending when it shows the Reapers and the two soldiers firing at the husks and the green flash happens they lower their weapons and appearance almost dead. The best choice is the Red because it gives freedom to all and does not change the minds of other. Yes the Geth and Reapers are destroyed, but all organic lifeforms are then given Free Will, which the other two choices do not allow. There is a forth choice, but its absolutely garbage. The developers truly were fools when it came the forth ending. SUMMARY If you were as hesitant as I was and did not make a decision for 30min and started asking others what you should go with. Then choose the Red decision (Anderson's). Trust me you will feel the most fulfilled by it.
SPOILER FOR THE RED DECISION • • • • • • When choosing the Red Decision (Anderson's) Shepard appears to be killed in the explosion, however based on my observations I believe he is still alive.
The only reason the Catalyst resorted to harvest is cuz Leviathan said "at any cost" and the Catalyst couldnt achieve its original goal (organic/synthetic peace) It tried other less extreme solutions and failed. It did as it was expected to do. The Catalyst GIVES you the option to kill it. Because it is an actual solution to the problem. The only reason the Catalyst asks Shep is because it cant do it itself. The choice is yours at the end of the day. The CRUCIBLE gives you the choice. Not the AI
Well, yeah, I agree. The more closely you know the lore and plot of the series, the more you notice how badly out of tune the ending is with the other 2.999 games.
Ending was supposed to be about resolving dark matter causing an early entropy of the universe, not synthetics . There were hints of this with the Quarian Sun that you find Tali at in mass effect 2 and the codex of the reapers described as “demons that consume entire suns.” But Casey Hudson has to go change the ending in a closed room meeting at the last second. 😓
It kinda brings it back around to the "So if the created will always raise against its creator, why haven't the Reapers gone against the Catalyst yet?" question. If they really have some degree of free will, you'd think they would start to question the fact that his whole thesis is based on an appeal to probability fallacy and circular logic.
And..take it a step further..throughout the game...Control is heavily implied as a viable option...we oppose it due to the Illusive Man's intent. What if that intent is changed from human dominance to galactic protection? Doesnt sound as bad. As for synthesis, Leviathan hints at that when it mentions that the harvests won't end till the Catalyst finds what it's looking for. What its looking for is the Crucible to change it. And its very goal happens to be one of the options..which you may reject
and you may be right. personally i would rather have something that makes me think and makes me want to talk about it with others than to have a typical blockbuster ending. if they really wanted that ending, they would have done it. they could have gotten michael bay to help them while theyre at it. i never once expected this to be that simple though. the conversations with sovereign and vigil from ME1 told me that this would not be as simple as just stopping the "enemy" like everything else.
The fact that Synthesis and Control as valid options only really works on a metagaming level. The fact that Shepard somehow manages to succeed at either if they are chosen is a huge fluke seen from the perspective from all of the previous story. I feel that Bioware was somewhat aware of that, because the Destroy option killing off the Geth seems like such an arbitrary consequence, like they had to add something bad to make sure people weren't heading straight for that one.
The only real remaining plot hole is why the Catalyst could not control the reapers itself from the Citadel, i.e. all the plot points from ME1. If the Catalyst controls the Citadel, why does the Citadel require activation to complete the cycle? Why would the Citadel evolve to need the Keepers? Where is the Catalyst housed if not the Citadel? These are the real remaining plot holes. Everything else, this dialogue answers.
i admit that the whole ABC ending comment was pretty much a technicality BS situation and they shouldnt have said it. but as for the actual story, that doesnt apply. there is nothing pretentious about it. i could say the same of you assuming that it has to stick to some "accepted" way of telling stories. its implying that it is 'lesser" because it didnt adhere to what you think is right. i experience stories that people want to tell, i dont try to dictate SOMEONE else story. thats pretentious.
Catalyst : "You have hope" Architect : "Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness..." Note the same spirit...
I still think the ending is full of nonsense, plotholes etc., but I can understand why most people would be happy with this seeing as it provides more clarification and closure.
Am I the only one who thinks that the kid that appears playing with a spaceship at the very beginning of the game it's an allegory to the Catalyst? He also is about to be rescued by Shepard and then disappears out of nothing. Maybe I'm crazy but I think it's the same character model Greetings from México :)
Es parte de la teoria del Adoctrinamiento, el Heraldo esta tratando de manipular a Shepard mostrandole al catalizador como aquel niño que no pudo salvar
Everybody likes to hate on the catalyst but why not think of it like this: in the control and destroy options you effectively kill it so that should provide people with some satisfaction since you know you defeated it.
To think the ending to the game was about "dark matter" which is what was destroying the universe and the reapers were harvesting life to look for a way to stop it.
No. You help the leader of your sworn enemy for the whole series to fully or at least partly fulfil his original goal. Add in the extended cut were he gets pissy if you dare to question the soundness of his logic in even the most feeble terms. You only get to complete the game at the Catalyst's mercy, or you get a glorified game over. You don't overcome any impossible odds by the power of cooperation. The bad guy just sort of lets you "win" as an act of charity.
the catayst is lying to you!!! he tells you if you destroy the reapers then shepard will die too! but in the :perfect" destroy ending shepard lives. thats just another reason for the reapers not et u destroy them. And this also is related to the indoctrination.
Its portrayed as shitty...in the wrong hands. Shepard does not equal TIM and most certainly does not equal Saren or the Reapers. You recall that I said it is Shepard in the driver's seat. The epilogues confirm that when someone responsible is making the choice...better outcomes. Is it really so hard to accept that there's more than one solution?
irrelevant. the reapers do what they were made to do. restore balance. as fucked up as their methods are, it is a solution doing what its designed to do nevertheless.
Well thats exactly what happened in Mass 1. Keepers were part of the plan. Leviathan explains how the Catalyst directed the reapers to build the relay network and such and when the keepers failed, he had to have the reaper Sovereign open the relay instead. No fan fiction here. If it were bs I'm telling you I wouldn't be so confident as to ask you to go into the trilogy and extract the answers. They are there. The Catalyst was designed to solve a problem, not build shit and activate relays
2of2- what you call disdain is not. its circumstantial. the enemy being machines dictates that their creators/the reason they were created will come into play. the very situation itself of creator/created relations is dictated by how the created react to their creators and the conditions in which they are created. int he case of machines, they are created as slaves in a world they took no part in shaping. it is literally one of the most toxic situations in which new life can be created.
Hell, I have nothing against stories that makes you think. The problem is that Mass Effect wasn't the kind of story to use as a platform for what the ending was trying to be. None of the necessary philosophical legwork to get there was done. What was done was about as appropriate as cutting out the last ten minutes of Return of the Jedi and replacing it with the ending of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
You don't get it, do you? This bullshit renders the conversation with Sovereign (one of the best gaming moments ever IMO) and his claim of "We are each a nation, independent" invalid, and removes a lot of the Reapers' menace, reducing them to mindless drones serving an insane AI in the process.
"Kid. No language on Earth has a word for how little I care. A quantum supercomputer calculating for a thousand years could not even approach the number of fucks I do not give." Well, Kirito, this Catalyst has been around at least since before the Reapers harvested the dinosaurs. Does it come close? Sorry, guys, just re-watched SAO Abridged 4.
You know, Bioware wouldn't be in half of the trouble they are in now, if Hack Walters and Casey "Too video-gamey" Hudson hadn't arrogantly decided that they didn't need input or dictating from the other writers on the team, and essentially went with what amounted to brute forcing a square peg into a round hole. Had Bioware went with a standard blockbuster ending, they could have landed the whole safely, and maybe even recovered from DA2 and TORtanic.
Immanuel Kant morality at its finest !!! Altruism , how does it feel to sacrifice yourself for other ? - For me it feels like shit , that is why ME3 was the worst
Here's your public posting. Catalyst controls reapers like a boss commands employees or a general commandes his army. A slave and puppet are not synonymous...there are still each a nation that is directed by the will of the Catalyst to preserve life at any cost. I admit that knowing the secrets makes it less scary...but that has nothing to do with consistency..that has to do with how you feel about it. I can empathize with the feeling but Id rather know the origins as opposed to nothing.
He had the reapers build the citadel..and there is a switch...the keepers use it..when that failed, sovereign was ordered to do it. I dont see whats so difficult about this. You just seem hellbent on sticking with your view and not even TRY to understand the other side.
Yes it INVOLVES it. Doesnt necessarily mean thats how it STARTS. Sometimes disobedience can be nonviolent. Sometimes its violent. HOWEVER, the point catalyst is making is that it is THAT rebellion that results in conflict, regardless of who initiates that conflict.
Well Geth and EDI die because they have reaper code At any rate, I view the final choice just like any other. At the end, I gain information I did not have before that point and once I have the information, I can decide whether or not to stick to my guns and blow them to hell (which I have done in some playthroughs), or decide there's a better way. (which I have done in other playthroughs) A lot of choices Ive made I base on the info I have at the time. ME3 ending is no different. For me anyway
Imagine Catalyst says yea Illusive Man was right...you can use this device to control the reapers if you want to...but guess what...its not an option. Just kill us lulz
Well the reaper origins were up in the air till the end...reaper plot was always kinda small. ME1, the reveal and what they do. ME2 how they are made. ME3, their origins. Leviathan does a good job at explaining things imo. Preps you for the reveal at the end. Yes it shouldve been there in the first place but Im glad its there now. I have deep knowledge of the lore as you do. Very big fan. And I'm telling you if you look closely at things like that Vigil example I gave you..you'll see its there
Child: "The cycle will end, the Reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilizations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us." This cycle will end, the Reapers will complete the harvest and the civilizations will be preserved in the Reaper forms and that way they are connected to the rest of them.
Like I keep saying man. Instead of just looking at it as a standalone event...dig deeper. Examine the trilogy closely. You'll find the answers you're looking for.
Cognitive dissonance because I disagree with you and can state arguments, which you can only disqualify with a "you're wrong - I'm right"? It is still preferable to biased ignorance and denial.. You should invest the same amount of effort you put into challenging me with explanations that you can't comprehend, into actually trying to understand that which you cannot. As simple as you are, I would expect you to get burned by a flame, and then blame it for decades, thinking it only wants you dead.
The problem is what Bioware ends up saying is incredibly dumb and backwards. "No, no, no. The series weren't what you though it was about for 2.999 games! It is actually about this whole other thing." But that is a huge fallacy in itself, because it implies that the points and themes the series seemed to had in play up until that point were purely unintentional and random, and that the series' success therefore rests on pure dumb luck. It is a goddamn cardinal sin when it comes to storytelling.
And, yes, Sovereign, the Reaper vanguard. Another horrible clash from the ending against the established lore. If the Catalyst lives on the Citadel, why does he rely so much on the overly convoluted process with a vanguard Reaper and the Keepers in order to activate the Citadel relay? If someone messes with just one of the steps in the process, then that whole thing is rendered completely meaningless. He can create advanced killer robots, but he can't install a simple switch on the Citadel?
@BadWolf117Returns That was the Catalyst's original purpose before the Reapers. According to it, it failed every time. Which is what led the Catalyst to the conclusion that the only possible solution was to melt down all of civilization and turn it into a Reaper
But you are forgetting what the real purpose of the "arsonist" is in this. He's not there to simply make more chaos or mindlessly destroy all human beings - his sole existence is to prevent the synthetics from completely wiping out the organics, by harvesting both and preserving them for the next cycle. The methods might be brutal, but since other solutions have always failed in past attempts. It now works as a fire, which CAN have positive uses; as it is in this case - a "cleansing fire".
That wasn't the point of the expression. It is about purpose, being that it does what it was intended to because that is its "nature". Fire burns and hurts as it is "meant" to, but are you holding grudges against it? The Reapers have a voice, so as a human being you can react accordingly to how they talk and what they say. An "attempt to make the Reapers sympathetic"? No, it is to make you better understand what the true meaning behind the Reapers is. Unfortunately, almost no one does.
And again, it is atrocious storytelling. The Illusive Man's attempt to control the Reapers is portrayed as blind arrogance that makes him lose his humanity and soul. The forcible merging of synthetics and organics have also always been portrayed as a really shitty and vile thing to do (Saren, the husks, Project Overlord). If these things are portrayed as "a very bad thing to do" throughout the whole story, you don't try to sell them as "right" in the last 5 minutes of the 11th hour.
And appealing to probability? It hasn't got an even remote relation to what is being said. At first I thought you had a clue, and it could develop into a good argument, yet now I get the feeling you are throwing out terms you've heard around, trying to fit them into the situation, but making a complete fool of yourself in the process. Ironically, it would appear that *your* fallacy is arguing out of ignorance.
What is not clear to you in the plain conversation with Sovereign? Everything was spoken clearly, and if anything, that is the least complicated statement he'd said. The Reapers have a purpose, which humans would obviously see as evil - ergo the war, and they also have a voice. Do you expect them to smooth talk you into submission? You are also ignoring everything I've said to you before. No counter-statements? I would love to take it to a Skype call if you find it so hard to understand :)
So wait couldnt The Cataylist tell the reapers to back off and perhaps guide humanity and all the races as protectors to prevent Organics and Synthetics from destroying each other. i mean if The Child is really in control of The Reapers than why does Sheppard really need to Sacrifice himself or what if Sheppard destroyed the A.I/Cataylist shouldnt the reapers stop?
the fact that you think its a trick to get money suggests the type of person you are. paranoid much? again, why would anyone presume to know the "why" of something that is in control of the very evolution of life? thats like saying you met god. regardless, we knew the reapers controlled life in this way from the first game. this alone suggests that we would only find this out if they chose to tell us. this is how i always expected to find out they "why" of the reapers.
Well, expanding on the Catalyst's metaphor, he's just the one who STARTED the fire. But then, he also controls the fire and directs it where to go. So it's like a guy with a flamethrower saying "When fire burns, is it at war?" before murdering his victims. Much worse than a Shyamalan twist.
And refusal is basically Hack Walters and Casey Hudson saying "You either play ball by our rules or you don't get to play at all! So fuck you! Rocks fall, everyone dies!"
because this is the first "things arent what they seem"scenario in storytelling history, right? either way, the reapers were always about control.. even of the very evolution of life in the galaxy... why wouldnt there be more to it. again, have fun letting a set of socially accepted standards dictate what you like. ill keep experiencing stories that people want to tell me for what they are instead of trying to impose my own thoughts of what they should be into them. have a nice day :)
There are rules for story-telling that have defined based on thousands years of experience, and according to them, Mass Effect 3's ending are objectively terrible especially in plot and tone. Mass Effect 3 is at its core a story about fighting for the right for self-determination, and over overwhelming odds, through the power of friendship and tolerance. What you are describing is the stuff that was pulled out of Mac Walters and Casey Hudson's collective asses in the last 5 minutes of the game.
Well, I must admit you actually have a point there. But to me the Leviathan DLC is a lame attempt at retroactive justification of the clusterfuck that was the ending. And that is always the cheapest kind of justification. I can take it about as seriously as that kid from pre-school who would cheat in cops-and-robbers by putting up his bullet-proof shield whenever he was shot.
i dont remember being there when they made the rules for telling stories. youll have to tell me about them. there may be things that are more socially acceptable than others, but nothing that is "wrong." personally id rather have something that made me think and/or surprised me in some way, than to "defeat the bad guys" like i have done countless times already. to each his own. thats better than letting a set of standards that i had nothing to do with dictate if something is "good" or not. :)
Don't mind him man, after shooting a few comments back and forth, it appears he's totally close-minded. He's so biased about his own opinions, he refuses to even try and consider others. Either that, or he denies their credibility by default because they differ from his. You are correct in your view, I am glad I keep finding more and more people who actually get the points presented in the game.
I still have that one up. You have proved nothing, bub. But yeah, I will be happy to stop speaking to you, as it is clear to me that you the result of the no-child-left-behind policy and too much Bioware-kool-aid. edgecrusherhalo at least tries to put some effort into this.
if you have to point out something like punctuation, this tells me the type of person i am talking to. this is the youtube comments section, not a term paper. "good writing" is subjective so to assume that there is one way to do it and other ways are wrong shows your close mindedness. at its base, this is the story of beings(both organic and synthetic) in positions of power making decisions on how to handle the organic synthetic conflict. people in power affecting life is just what happens.
Well, I wasn't really holding high hopes for a good argument either. People who genuinely defend the plot destroying powers of the Catalyst wouldn't recognize good, even if it painted itself purple and danced around naked in front of them.
The catalyst is just a avatar of the collective of alll reaper minds. Sort of how Legion was for the geth. Destroying the citadel wouldn't fix the problem.
It there is some very simple ones. "Don't introduce a new problem out of nowhere, when you are supposed to wrap up the story", "Don't abandon the central themes, when you are supposed to wrap up the story", and "Fulfil things you have promised your audience, you have an unspoken agreement, whether you like it or not." That is were the main problems lies really.
this is exactly why i have decided to stop a conversation with him in another video. its clear where it will be going so i opted out before it turned into us repeating the same things over and over again or name calling. i like talking about this, but only when its clear people are actually listening to what others are saying instead of sitting and waiting to try to prove them wrong.
The ending would probably be narrated by either Shepard, or by some important NPC like Joker or Liara. If Paragon, the galaxy acts united, and peace reigns supreme. Or if Renegade, Shepard's brutality and actions coerce the galaxy into order. It would be somewhat open-ended, since things like the Quarian/Geth conflict, the Genophage, the Urdnot Leader and Eve, and the events of ME-1 and ME-2 would factor into whether the Reapers would stay away for good... or potentially return.
I'd include a fifth "Charm/Intimidate" ending, where you convince the Catalyst to send the Reapers back into Dark Space. You basically make an attempt to have the galaxy atone for the problems that gave the Reapers purpose, a "second chance" as it were. It's also a foreboding "we'll be watching you" ending, which threatens to have the Reapers return to finish the job if Shepard fails to bring peace or order to the galaxy.
You lose the Citadel, but the relays would remain functional.
This is a very interesting concept, and one I could get behind, but I think that your comment, that the galaxy must "atone for the problems that gave the Reapers purpose" is a mistake. The galaxy never had to atone, the Reapers are a twisted entity that view chaos as a mistake. The galaxy is destined for chaos, so as long as there is life in the galaxy, there will be chaos. But that isn't bad. Ultimate order is a mistake, ultimate chaos is a mistake, the creation of the Reapers was an attempt to bring ultimate order to the galaxy with no regard for the balance. Sentient life needs to be trusted to create its own order and chaos, not the Reapers version of that.
@@toby7442 I'd agree but the Reapers were more than just a galactic purging tool. Chaos can escalate. It doesnt just go away. Countless organics species rise and fall, they reach their peak influence and power, but because of our tendency to act on emotion we choose to pursue beyond what we are meant to. Even now we as humans in 2021 we constantly try to find ways to cheat the expiration date of our bodies. Fight nature, change it, and care only for our own experiences, only ever showing a unified purpose in times of catastrophe. It's a flawed design but its ours. The catalyst sees this behaviour, this want to be greater at any cost so when we exhaust our abilities to change on our own, we turn to technology to do it for us. Make life easier, more convenient. We continue this until we realise the harm we are doing to our own future existence, letting machines think on a level resembling ours. Quarians, prime example.
Also we challenge our own, try to force a pattern of behavior on others. Religious views, racial superiority, even something as pathetic and crude as fighting for control of resources that can be shared equally. This creates a possibility for war which evolves from swords, to guns to bombs and eventually nuclear warfare. Krogans, prime example..
The Reapers are a genocidal reminder of what we will do to each other if left unchecked. As is the pattern for millions of years prior to humanity's evolution.
I dont believe the Reapers are the right way to solve the problem. But I understand their existence better than most.
Order is good, as long as it's pure in its intention. Not corrupted, like our political leaders and billionaire corporation benefactors across the world today.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke
Well god help the reapers if they encountered something like the Xeelee or Photino Birds
He straight up admits that he made the first Reaper OUT OF his creators.
And then expects us to just blindly trust him when he tells us what will happen if we pick each ending
@@bmobmo6438... I mean by that logic we shouldn't trust the destory ending because why would he give us the keys to destory him?
@@AnarchicArachnid And by the same logic why would we believe he would let us control the reapers?
@@zmazanac707 so yeah either you have to trust him on this or know you all will die by refusing any choices he presents....which to me is kind of meh.
If you listen close you can hear male Shepard speaking through the right side of your speaker and fem Shep on the left when the kid speaks
Lightning Leveler I can't.
I can hear it.
LMAO wth. its true. child voice is in the middle of the soundimage but fem and male shepard are in the left & right ear
So what does that mean?! Catalyst (the kid) is in Shepard mind (because male and female react differently?! Left and right side of the brain...?!)
Well... If so, that sounds too far conspiracy and way too far smart for the producers to have done such thing
But yeah, I got recently convinced that this may be the case because if you shoot the kid his voice turn to a monster voice... So a dead giveaway... Which is unfortunate because i used to love the synthesis ending
This scene just give me "THE EPIC" vibe. Forcing us to think that we are nothing in this vast reality or nature
Exactly! Heres what you should take from the conversation:
The Catalyst is the ultimate representation of what happens when organics gets surpassed by synthetics, even if the synthetics percieve themselves as protecting organics.
Bioware could have clarified that even more by implying that the catalyst was the original reaper AI which has been overruled and imprisoned on the citadel by the rest of the reaper AI's. This would let the reapers stay evil while giving cause to their existance.
Shepard: "who are you?"
Catalyst: "the most hated videogame character in the past 10 years"
You are on to something, but the whole creator/created stuff is not the point of the Mass Effect series, it is certainly a part of it. But if anything the central theme is "Assuming you have the right to rob people of their self-determination is a bad thing to do." It is very obvious, not only in the Geth story, but also very much so in the Genophage story, in Miranda's story, and of course the Reapers.
And yet then the ending turns around and says "It's okay if YOU do it." That's the problem.
It's been 8 years but I have to point out, you've been doing exactly what you've said is wrong since the first game : in mass effect 1 you choose if the Thorian and Rachne queen live or not with the impression you'd be committing genocide/basically killing the leadership and reproduction of a hive colony ensuring genocide. you can to, if you choose, ensure6the council governing all life in the galaxy is wiped out and replaced by an all human one.
In mass effect 2 Shepard has to chose whether or not to give a reaper creating platform to what is basically a private army of xenophobic asshats or destory it without consulting anyone else besides the crew who trust your direction. Then in the dlc stop the reapers from reaching them sooner does destory a mass relay, causing a genocide... even in 3, we get to potentially stop the genophage of sabotage it's curing, we get to potentially have peace between the quarians and geth or have one wiped out. we alway were making these decisions, they were just ones you agreed with.
"If there is to be a new solution, you must act." "I'm sorry, I'm rusty with my Shakespeare and Mordin died helping to cure the Genophage, so no Gilbert & Sullivan."
The catalyst is there to explain what the problem is, what the potential solutions are, and based on its programming and goal, which solution is the best and which one is the worst and so on. Then, YOU (not the catalyst)...YOU get to decide the fate of the ENTIRE galaxy and in doing so, you break the cycle and end the reaper threat. The very goal you sought to achieve has been achieved. The reapers have been defeated. Before, we only knew of destroy. Crucible shows more choices. Choice is yours
This scene, I feel, would be more effective if the "starchild" was not the child from the beginning of ME3, but instead looked like Shepard him/herself. Shepard was the biggest threat the Reapers had ever dealt with, as the starchild explained that his solution would no longer be viable, so, in my opinion, the AI should've looked like Shepard, as the child makes no sense in the first place.
The Inexplicable Rage ID theory boy
It makes perfect sense. Shepard fixated on that boy because he/she watched him play under his/her window every day for months while they were under house arrest, then they saw the boy die because of the Reapers. And the reapers definitely weren't above using that sort of psychological manipulation against Shepard.
First created to oversee the relations between synthetic and organic life...
Oh my god, the Catalyst is C-3PO!
"I think we'd rather keep our own form." "No, you can't! Because you're shit and I am considerably, considerably, SMARTER THAN YOU!"
Yeah, it's kind of hard to view the reapers as an completely emotionless force, when they have on multiple occasions told us how superior they are and how we are imperfect, organic vermin, incapable of understanding them.
see to me that isnt a ME3 problem, thats a ME1 and ME2 problem. ME1 established the enemy, ME2 did not reveal anything new about them, so it had to happen in ME3. sovereigns one comment in ME1 however, is a VERY BASIC version of what the story turned out to be. "we impose order on the chaos of organic evolution, you exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it." now thats not much to go on, but that is what the catalyst explained to us. much better so in the extended cut.
This was some heavy shit when I fist encountered it.
The reaper origin plot is a sub plot. Slowly revealed throughout all 3 games. The main plot is uniting as a galaxy to ward off this threat and break the cycle. By the end of the game thats exactly what you do. Its up to you how the cycle is broken. Forget the origin part for a sec. That was just tying up a subplot about the reaper history. The main themes like overcoming impossible odds are still present and making that final choice, breaking the cycle, is when that all finally pays off imo.
No. because rebel doesnt necessarily mean stab creator. Just means to disobey like a teenager rebels against a parent. The reapers themselves do have free minds and can speak freely but their beliefs are grounded in their master, who is basically a collective intelligence of all those reapers. The Reapers appear to be a part of that collective intelligence. Only way to change their beliefs is to change the Catalyst (Control or Synthesis) Otherwise...you have to kill them
thanks. im not saying people have to like "twist" endings even though this wasnt exactly like that. but in ME1 after the conversation with sovereign that told me the reapers were sentient machines, my first thought was "who made them and why?" simply because "evil machines" for no reason is just plain bad. machines get made with a purpose. i expected to find this out and when ME2 revealed nothing new, i figured that would be "the big thing" about ME3 that would make the story.
You know The Catalyst has severe deficiencies when he / she / it can't even determine that Shepard isn't actually sleeping but still tells him to "Wake up."
The alarm bells be ringing.
Hovis Steve Hardly, Shepard had his eyes closed and in the verge of passing out, symptomatic of the situation ahead of us. Even before this, Shepard actually passed out. "Wake up" was code for "I need your attention"
I found it interesting how the Catalyst didn't give Shepard an answer when he asked if there will be peace if he chooses synthesis for all life.
The design decision for The Catalyst seems to have been made out of sheer spite! What better way than to piss many people off than by having a holographic kid talking in a patronizing voice down to you, flexing his / hers / its misplaced superiority complex, all the while the so-called 'intelligence' behind its reasoning seems to derive from having spent too much time existing in an intellectual wasteland. Loneliness can do strange things to you, but this is just ridiculous!
It just makes whatever coolness there was in the Reapers' motivation becoming reduced to "I had a crossed wire in my robot-brain, so that's why you have to die!" And it ignores the outright disdain for organic life that Sovereign's speech dripped with.
And I supposed the "We are each a nation - independent, free of all weakness." are to be completely ignored then. Guess that was another crossed wire in a robot-brain.
I'm not asking you to like it. Make no mistake. However, I am asking to examine the situation more closely. Example. Sovereign assesses situation...signals Citadel (Catalyst) and then the Citadel(Catalyst) signals keepers to open the relay. As I said...it's all there
SPOILERS FOR ENDING
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Blue is not the best because the Reapers stay and the Illusive Man can't control them, so how can Shepard. Yes it appears he controls them, but by how much?
The Synchronization one is also terrible because it takes away the freedom of everyone and changes their minds. At the ending when it shows the Reapers and the two soldiers firing at the husks and the green flash happens they lower their weapons and appearance almost dead.
The best choice is the Red because it gives freedom to all and does not change the minds of other. Yes the Geth and Reapers are destroyed, but all organic lifeforms are then given Free Will, which the other two choices do not allow.
There is a forth choice, but its absolutely garbage. The developers truly were fools when it came the forth ending.
SUMMARY
If you were as hesitant as I was and did not make a decision for 30min and started asking others what you should go with. Then choose the Red decision (Anderson's). Trust me you will feel the most fulfilled by it.
SPOILER FOR THE RED DECISION
•
•
•
•
•
•
When choosing the Red Decision (Anderson's) Shepard appears to be killed in the explosion, however based on my observations I believe he is still alive.
The only reason the Catalyst resorted to harvest is cuz Leviathan said "at any cost" and the Catalyst couldnt achieve its original goal (organic/synthetic peace) It tried other less extreme solutions and failed. It did as it was expected to do. The Catalyst GIVES you the option to kill it. Because it is an actual solution to the problem. The only reason the Catalyst asks Shep is because it cant do it itself. The choice is yours at the end of the day. The CRUCIBLE gives you the choice. Not the AI
The created will Rebel.. understand this
Well, yeah, I agree.
The more closely you know the lore and plot of the series, the more you notice how badly out of tune the ending is with the other 2.999 games.
Ending was supposed to be about resolving dark matter causing an early entropy of the universe, not synthetics . There were hints of this with the Quarian Sun that you find Tali at in mass effect 2 and the codex of the reapers described as “demons that consume entire suns.” But Casey Hudson has to go change the ending in a closed room meeting at the last second. 😓
@@SirDomblesan must be why the ending makes absolutely no sense
It kinda brings it back around to the "So if the created will always raise against its creator, why haven't the Reapers gone against the Catalyst yet?" question.
If they really have some degree of free will, you'd think they would start to question the fact that his whole thesis is based on an appeal to probability fallacy and circular logic.
And..take it a step further..throughout the game...Control is heavily implied as a viable option...we oppose it due to the Illusive Man's intent. What if that intent is changed from human dominance to galactic protection? Doesnt sound as bad. As for synthesis, Leviathan hints at that when it mentions that the harvests won't end till the Catalyst finds what it's looking for. What its looking for is the Crucible to change it. And its very goal happens to be one of the options..which you may reject
Thank you for replying. That was my choice also.
this game changed my life forever, and this was the moment it was irrevocably altered
and you may be right. personally i would rather have something that makes me think and makes me want to talk about it with others than to have a typical blockbuster ending. if they really wanted that ending, they would have done it. they could have gotten michael bay to help them while theyre at it. i never once expected this to be that simple though. the conversations with sovereign and vigil from ME1 told me that this would not be as simple as just stopping the "enemy" like everything else.
The fact that Synthesis and Control as valid options only really works on a metagaming level. The fact that Shepard somehow manages to succeed at either if they are chosen is a huge fluke seen from the perspective from all of the previous story. I feel that Bioware was somewhat aware of that, because the Destroy option killing off the Geth seems like such an arbitrary consequence, like they had to add something bad to make sure people weren't heading straight for that one.
Oh I did, long ago. It is edgecrusherhalo's turn to endure you again.
The only real remaining plot hole is why the Catalyst could not control the reapers itself from the Citadel, i.e. all the plot points from ME1. If the Catalyst controls the Citadel, why does the Citadel require activation to complete the cycle? Why would the Citadel evolve to need the Keepers? Where is the Catalyst housed if not the Citadel? These are the real remaining plot holes. Everything else, this dialogue answers.
i admit that the whole ABC ending comment was pretty much a technicality BS situation and they shouldnt have said it. but as for the actual story, that doesnt apply. there is nothing pretentious about it. i could say the same of you assuming that it has to stick to some "accepted" way of telling stories. its implying that it is 'lesser" because it didnt adhere to what you think is right. i experience stories that people want to tell, i dont try to dictate SOMEONE else story. thats pretentious.
Catalyst : "You have hope"
Architect : "Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness..."
Note the same spirit...
I still think the ending is full of nonsense, plotholes etc., but I can understand why most people would be happy with this seeing as it provides more clarification and closure.
Am I the only one who thinks that the kid that appears playing with a spaceship at the very beginning of the game it's an allegory to the Catalyst? He also is about to be rescued by Shepard and then disappears out of nothing. Maybe I'm crazy but I think it's the same character model
Greetings from México :)
Es parte de la teoria del Adoctrinamiento, el Heraldo esta tratando de manipular a Shepard mostrandole al catalizador como aquel niño que no pudo salvar
Everybody likes to hate on the catalyst but why not think of it like this: in the control and destroy options you effectively kill it so that should provide people with some satisfaction since you know you defeated it.
To think the ending to the game was about "dark matter" which is what was destroying the universe and the reapers were harvesting life to look for a way to stop it.
No. You help the leader of your sworn enemy for the whole series to fully or at least partly fulfil his original goal. Add in the extended cut were he gets pissy if you dare to question the soundness of his logic in even the most feeble terms. You only get to complete the game at the Catalyst's mercy, or you get a glorified game over. You don't overcome any impossible odds by the power of cooperation. The bad guy just sort of lets you "win" as an act of charity.
This is epic
the catayst is lying to you!!! he tells you if you destroy the reapers then shepard will die too! but in the :perfect" destroy ending shepard lives. thats just another reason for the reapers not et u destroy them. And this also is related to the indoctrination.
Do you guys even know who voiced the catalyst, I do, they are one of my best friends
Its portrayed as shitty...in the wrong hands. Shepard does not equal TIM and most certainly does not equal Saren or the Reapers. You recall that I said it is Shepard in the driver's seat. The epilogues confirm that when someone responsible is making the choice...better outcomes. Is it really so hard to accept that there's more than one solution?
irrelevant. the reapers do what they were made to do. restore balance. as fucked up as their methods are, it is a solution doing what its designed to do nevertheless.
Well thats exactly what happened in Mass 1. Keepers were part of the plan. Leviathan explains how the Catalyst directed the reapers to build the relay network and such and when the keepers failed, he had to have the reaper Sovereign open the relay instead. No fan fiction here. If it were bs I'm telling you I wouldn't be so confident as to ask you to go into the trilogy and extract the answers. They are there. The Catalyst was designed to solve a problem, not build shit and activate relays
2of2- what you call disdain is not. its circumstantial. the enemy being machines dictates that their creators/the reason they were created will come into play. the very situation itself of creator/created relations is dictated by how the created react to their creators and the conditions in which they are created. int he case of machines, they are created as slaves in a world they took no part in shaping. it is literally one of the most toxic situations in which new life can be created.
Hell, I have nothing against stories that makes you think. The problem is that Mass Effect wasn't the kind of story to use as a platform for what the ending was trying to be. None of the necessary philosophical legwork to get there was done.
What was done was about as appropriate as cutting out the last ten minutes of Return of the Jedi and replacing it with the ending of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
You don't get it, do you? This bullshit renders the conversation with Sovereign (one of the best gaming moments ever IMO) and his claim of "We are each a nation, independent" invalid, and removes a lot of the Reapers' menace, reducing them to mindless drones serving an insane AI in the process.
"Kid. No language on Earth has a word for how little I care. A quantum supercomputer calculating for a thousand years could not even approach the number of fucks I do not give."
Well, Kirito, this Catalyst has been around at least since before the Reapers harvested the dinosaurs. Does it come close?
Sorry, guys, just re-watched SAO Abridged 4.
You know, Bioware wouldn't be in half of the trouble they are in now, if Hack Walters and Casey "Too video-gamey" Hudson hadn't arrogantly decided that they didn't need input or dictating from the other writers on the team, and essentially went with what amounted to brute forcing a square peg into a round hole.
Had Bioware went with a standard blockbuster ending, they could have landed the whole safely, and maybe even recovered from DA2 and TORtanic.
Why do you keep coming back then? Is it really so important to you to have the last word?
I can keep this up longer than you.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
How does the Catalyst know about the kid?
Indeed.
Immanuel Kant morality at its finest !!!
Altruism , how does it feel to sacrifice yourself for other ?
- For me it feels like shit , that is why ME3 was the worst
It make sense after now after the leviathan dlc ----
Here's your public posting. Catalyst controls reapers like a boss commands employees or a general commandes his army. A slave and puppet are not synonymous...there are still each a nation that is directed by the will of the Catalyst to preserve life at any cost. I admit that knowing the secrets makes it less scary...but that has nothing to do with consistency..that has to do with how you feel about it. I can empathize with the feeling but Id rather know the origins as opposed to nothing.
He had the reapers build the citadel..and there is a switch...the keepers use it..when that failed, sovereign was ordered to do it. I dont see whats so difficult about this. You just seem hellbent on sticking with your view and not even TRY to understand the other side.
Yes it INVOLVES it. Doesnt necessarily mean thats how it STARTS. Sometimes disobedience can be nonviolent. Sometimes its violent. HOWEVER, the point catalyst is making is that it is THAT rebellion that results in conflict, regardless of who initiates that conflict.
As you should've done with the ending - think about it :)
Well Geth and EDI die because they have reaper code At any rate, I view the final choice just like any other. At the end, I gain information I did not have before that point and once I have the information, I can decide whether or not to stick to my guns and blow them to hell (which I have done in some playthroughs), or decide there's a better way. (which I have done in other playthroughs) A lot of choices Ive made I base on the info I have at the time. ME3 ending is no different. For me anyway
Imagine Catalyst says yea Illusive Man was right...you can use this device to control the reapers if you want to...but guess what...its not an option. Just kill us lulz
Control
Well the reaper origins were up in the air till the end...reaper plot was always kinda small. ME1, the reveal and what they do. ME2 how they are made. ME3, their origins. Leviathan does a good job at explaining things imo. Preps you for the reveal at the end. Yes it shouldve been there in the first place but Im glad its there now. I have deep knowledge of the lore as you do. Very big fan. And I'm telling you if you look closely at things like that Vigil example I gave you..you'll see its there
Child: "The cycle will end, the Reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilizations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us."
This cycle will end, the Reapers will complete the harvest and the civilizations will be preserved in the Reaper forms and that way they are connected to the rest of them.
Like I keep saying man. Instead of just looking at it as a standalone event...dig deeper. Examine the trilogy closely. You'll find the answers you're looking for.
Cognitive dissonance because I disagree with you and can state arguments, which you can only disqualify with a "you're wrong - I'm right"? It is still preferable to biased ignorance and denial..
You should invest the same amount of effort you put into challenging me with explanations that you can't comprehend, into actually trying to understand that which you cannot.
As simple as you are, I would expect you to get burned by a flame, and then blame it for decades, thinking it only wants you dead.
The problem is what Bioware ends up saying is incredibly dumb and backwards. "No, no, no. The series weren't what you though it was about for 2.999 games! It is actually about this whole other thing." But that is a huge fallacy in itself, because it implies that the points and themes the series seemed to had in play up until that point were purely unintentional and random, and that the series' success therefore rests on pure dumb luck.
It is a goddamn cardinal sin when it comes to storytelling.
And, yes, Sovereign, the Reaper vanguard. Another horrible clash from the ending against the established lore. If the Catalyst lives on the Citadel, why does he rely so much on the overly convoluted process with a vanguard Reaper and the Keepers in order to activate the Citadel relay? If someone messes with just one of the steps in the process, then that whole thing is rendered completely meaningless. He can create advanced killer robots, but he can't install a simple switch on the Citadel?
@BadWolf117Returns That was the Catalyst's original purpose before the Reapers. According to it, it failed every time. Which is what led the Catalyst to the conclusion that the only possible solution was to melt down all of civilization and turn it into a Reaper
But you are forgetting what the real purpose of the "arsonist" is in this. He's not there to simply make more chaos or mindlessly destroy all human beings - his sole existence is to prevent the synthetics from completely wiping out the organics, by harvesting both and preserving them for the next cycle.
The methods might be brutal, but since other solutions have always failed in past attempts. It now works as a fire, which CAN have positive uses; as it is in this case - a "cleansing fire".
That wasn't the point of the expression.
It is about purpose, being that it does what it was intended to because that is its "nature". Fire burns and hurts as it is "meant" to, but are you holding grudges against it? The Reapers have a voice, so as a human being you can react accordingly to how they talk and what they say.
An "attempt to make the Reapers sympathetic"? No, it is to make you better understand what the true meaning behind the Reapers is.
Unfortunately, almost no one does.
And again, it is atrocious storytelling. The Illusive Man's attempt to control the Reapers is portrayed as blind arrogance that makes him lose his humanity and soul. The forcible merging of synthetics and organics have also always been portrayed as a really shitty and vile thing to do (Saren, the husks, Project Overlord). If these things are portrayed as "a very bad thing to do" throughout the whole story, you don't try to sell them as "right" in the last 5 minutes of the 11th hour.
What did I do to have it yelling "why are you here?" at me instead of "wake up"?
And appealing to probability? It hasn't got an even remote relation to what is being said. At first I thought you had a clue, and it could develop into a good argument, yet now I get the feeling you are throwing out terms you've heard around, trying to fit them into the situation, but making a complete fool of yourself in the process.
Ironically, it would appear that *your* fallacy is arguing out of ignorance.
What is not clear to you in the plain conversation with Sovereign? Everything was spoken clearly, and if anything, that is the least complicated statement he'd said. The Reapers have a purpose, which humans would obviously see as evil - ergo the war, and they also have a voice. Do you expect them to smooth talk you into submission?
You are also ignoring everything I've said to you before. No counter-statements?
I would love to take it to a Skype call if you find it so hard to understand :)
So wait couldnt The Cataylist tell the reapers to back off and perhaps guide humanity and all the races as protectors to prevent Organics and Synthetics from destroying each other. i mean if The Child is really in control of The Reapers than why does Sheppard really need to Sacrifice himself or what if Sheppard destroyed the A.I/Cataylist shouldnt the reapers stop?
the fact that you think its a trick to get money suggests the type of person you are. paranoid much? again, why would anyone presume to know the "why" of something that is in control of the very evolution of life? thats like saying you met god. regardless, we knew the reapers controlled life in this way from the first game. this alone suggests that we would only find this out if they chose to tell us. this is how i always expected to find out they "why" of the reapers.
Well, expanding on the Catalyst's metaphor, he's just the one who STARTED the fire. But then, he also controls the fire and directs it where to go.
So it's like a guy with a flamethrower saying "When fire burns, is it at war?" before murdering his victims. Much worse than a Shyamalan twist.
And refusal is basically Hack Walters and Casey Hudson saying "You either play ball by our rules or you don't get to play at all! So fuck you! Rocks fall, everyone dies!"
because this is the first "things arent what they seem"scenario in storytelling history, right? either way, the reapers were always about control.. even of the very evolution of life in the galaxy... why wouldnt there be more to it. again, have fun letting a set of socially accepted standards dictate what you like. ill keep experiencing stories that people want to tell me for what they are instead of trying to impose my own thoughts of what they should be into them. have a nice day :)
There are rules for story-telling that have defined based on thousands years of experience, and according to them, Mass Effect 3's ending are objectively terrible especially in plot and tone.
Mass Effect 3 is at its core a story about fighting for the right for self-determination, and over overwhelming odds, through the power of friendship and tolerance. What you are describing is the stuff that was pulled out of Mac Walters and Casey Hudson's collective asses in the last 5 minutes of the game.
Well, I must admit you actually have a point there. But to me the Leviathan DLC is a lame attempt at retroactive justification of the clusterfuck that was the ending. And that is always the cheapest kind of justification. I can take it about as seriously as that kid from pre-school who would cheat in cops-and-robbers by putting up his bullet-proof shield whenever he was shot.
i dont remember being there when they made the rules for telling stories. youll have to tell me about them. there may be things that are more socially acceptable than others, but nothing that is "wrong." personally id rather have something that made me think and/or surprised me in some way, than to "defeat the bad guys" like i have done countless times already. to each his own. thats better than letting a set of standards that i had nothing to do with dictate if something is "good" or not. :)
Don't mind him man, after shooting a few comments back and forth, it appears he's totally close-minded. He's so biased about his own opinions, he refuses to even try and consider others. Either that, or he denies their credibility by default because they differ from his.
You are correct in your view, I am glad I keep finding more and more people who actually get the points presented in the game.
I still have that one up. You have proved nothing, bub.
But yeah, I will be happy to stop speaking to you, as it is clear to me that you the result of the no-child-left-behind policy and too much Bioware-kool-aid. edgecrusherhalo at least tries to put some effort into this.
if you have to point out something like punctuation, this tells me the type of person i am talking to. this is the youtube comments section, not a term paper. "good writing" is subjective so to assume that there is one way to do it and other ways are wrong shows your close mindedness. at its base, this is the story of beings(both organic and synthetic) in positions of power making decisions on how to handle the organic synthetic conflict. people in power affecting life is just what happens.
Well, I wasn't really holding high hopes for a good argument either.
People who genuinely defend the plot destroying powers of the Catalyst wouldn't recognize good, even if it painted itself purple and danced around naked in front of them.
Jeez guys, it is clear that the Catalyst is a rogue A.I. He really thinks he's helping, I guess the creators of the Catalyst forget about empathy.
The catalyst is just a avatar of the collective of alll reaper minds. Sort of how Legion was for the geth. Destroying the citadel wouldn't fix the problem.
It there is some very simple ones. "Don't introduce a new problem out of nowhere, when you are supposed to wrap up the story", "Don't abandon the central themes, when you are supposed to wrap up the story", and "Fulfil things you have promised your audience, you have an unspoken agreement, whether you like it or not." That is were the main problems lies really.
Why the catalyst is from the fnaf?
this is exactly why i have decided to stop a conversation with him in another video. its clear where it will be going so i opted out before it turned into us repeating the same things over and over again or name calling. i like talking about this, but only when its clear people are actually listening to what others are saying instead of sitting and waiting to try to prove them wrong.
And the feeling is mutual, bucko. Now that we have established that, how about we end this pointless conversation?
The ending would probably be narrated by either Shepard, or by some important NPC like Joker or Liara. If Paragon, the galaxy acts united, and peace reigns supreme. Or if Renegade, Shepard's brutality and actions coerce the galaxy into order.
It would be somewhat open-ended, since things like the Quarian/Geth conflict, the Genophage, the Urdnot Leader and Eve, and the events of ME-1 and ME-2 would factor into whether the Reapers would stay away for good... or potentially return.
I am very pleased with Bioware. The extended cut satisfied all of my gripes about the ending.
10 years later, ME3 aged like milk. Plot holes and cringe galore.