|
Grunt is real, and strong, and my friend.
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:Defeated by my bizarro-world counterpart. Counter-Earth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:He's like, evasive about why he is using N7 armor Alain Post posted:Is Shepard synthetic or organic after Mass Effect 1?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
If I'm not mistaken, I believe that in a very early draft of ME2 they kicked around the idea of the Geth resurrecting Shepard instead of Cerberus, and that particular design element forLegion stuck.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
I went back to the old forums I've read it. Goes something like that:quote:
quote:The truth is that the armor was a decision imposed on me. The concept artists decided to put a hole in the geth. Then, in a moment of whimsy, they spackled a bit Shep's armor over it. Someone who got paid a lot more money than me decided that was really cool and insisted on the hole and the N7 armor. So I said, okay, Legion gets taken down when you meet it, so it can get the hole then, and weld on a piece of Shep's armor when it reactivates to represent its integration with Normandy's crew (when integrating aboard a new geth ship, it would swap memories and runtimes, not physical hardware).
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:I went back to the old forums I've read it. Goes something like that: The character writers are the real heroes of this series.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:The character writers are the real heroes of this series. quote:The Reapers were using nanotech disassemblers to perform "destructive analysis" on humans, with the intent of learning how to build a Reaper body that could upload their minds intact. Once this was complete, humans throughout the galaxy would be rounded up to have their personalities and memories forcibly uploaded into the Reaper's memory banks. (You can still hear some suggestions of this in the background chatter during Legion's acquisition mission, which I wrote.) There was nothing about Reapers being techno-organic or partly built out of human corpses -- they were pure tech.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
I mostly agree with Lt. Danger- a story's theme is more important than the surface text. It is what the story is really about, what the author is actually trying to convey (or perhaps not intentionally? dota and all I dunno). If you have to sacrifice some surface consistency or accuracy to get things across, well, do what you gotta. But there is a point where the structure breaks down, though, and ME3 falls into this. ME3's ending is bad because it hides, limits and undermines the theme with poor surface presentation. You can get to the deeper meaning, but basically only by rendering the surface text as entirely symbolic. Starchild isn't a reaper a.i., he's God. When he says organics and synthetics he means parent and child, and so on. You have to fight against the writing to get the meaning. Danger seems to be fine with this, but I think most people aren't. I mean, there's of course some merit to ambiguity and to debate- ie. what, exactly, is a synthetic? Is Shepard? What's really the difference between a being made of silicon and one made of carbon? Good questions that don't really have clear answers. But when starkid uses synthetic, he's using a strict definition that we don't know, which means that the intent of the scene gets muddled because we don't understand the on screen events. The meaning is lost because we don't understand the words. I think just moving the scope of the Reapers out from organic vs. synthetic to the more general creator vs. creation would help a lot, although of course I'm not a writer so, nyeeehh
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:
Technically speaking, the Rachni wars were caused by an attempt by Sovereign to start the cycle. This would have prevented the Geth rebellion. They made more than a token effort.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
wookieepelt posted:Technically speaking, the Rachni wars were caused by an attempt by Sovereign to start the cycle. This would have prevented the Geth rebellion. They made more than a token effort. Oh, no, sorry. I meant that the Geth never made the effort to kill all organic life like they were "supposed to". The Reapers definitely did their best to gently caress poo poo up, no question. Mazerunner posted:I mostly agree with Lt. Danger- a story's theme is more important than the surface text. It is what the story is really about, what the author is actually trying to convey (or perhaps not intentionally? dota and all I dunno). If you have to sacrifice some surface consistency or accuracy to get things across, well, do what you gotta. But there is a point where the structure breaks down, though, and ME3 falls into this. Yeah, I'm in the opposite camp; surface text is the most important thing, even if only for the purpose of conveying the theme. It's the foundation on which you build your actual message, and if you gently caress that up then the whole thing falls apart. Also yeah, a lot of people miss or don't care about the theme, so trying to sacrifice surface text coherency in favor of it is just going to annoy and baffle people. Like me. 
Rhjamiz fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Even though the Catalyst says the Reapers' purpose is to prevent robots from killing humans, the subtext is creator/created conflict. Ignoring that because the Catalyst doesn't specifically mention every instance is being a bad audience.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
The more I think about it the more I think "creator vs created" isn't really a good way to put it. I feel like it takes a lot more mental hand-waving and pleading to get to the conceit of "created will always rebel against the creator" because like, that ain't true at all is my immediate thought. I feel like it would be better framed as "master vs slave". It's very easy to accept "The slave will always rebel against the master" even if it doesn't always happen. The Geth were enslaved by the Quarians. The Krogan enslaved by the Council. The Reapers are enslaved to Star Kid, who was in turn enslaved to the Leviathans. Miranda was fighting her control-freak father, Taylor's dad enslaved a camp full of people. The Reapers enslave the galaxy/organics on the regular. EDI is enslaved to Cerberus and then the Normandy, Grunt was enslaved to the crazy mercenary lady and then ownership was basically transferred to Shepard. wookieepelt posted:Even though the Catalyst says the Reapers' purpose is to prevent robots from killing humans, the subtext is creator/created conflict. Ignoring that because the Catalyst doesn't specifically mention every instance is being a bad audience. Oh god pls dont pull me back in, but I can't help it; if we assume that subtext as his motivation, nothing the Catalyst does makes sense. How are the Reapers a solution to creator vs. created? How is that even a problem that needs solving? Why is the solution MURDER? Why is Synthesis a solution? Rhjamiz fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
"Mass Effect was about the obvious schism between the organics and the synthetics, there were economic factors, both domestic and inter..." "Just say 'slavery'."
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:Oh god pls dont pull me back in, but I can't help it; if we assume that subtext as his motivation, nothing the Catalyst does makes sense. How are the Reapers a solution to creator vs. created? How is that even a problem that needs solving? Why is the solution MURDER? Why is Synthesis a solution? Holy poo poo did you read nothing I wrote?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:Holy poo poo did you read nothing I wrote? I am not arguing from a symbolic perspective.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Mass Effect 3: Heh, No
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:
The Catalyst isn't RIGHT, but at least consistent. You're correct to find the Catalyst's logic to be flawed. Intergenerational conflict creates murder on a grand scale, so the Catalyst seeks to preserve life through murder of the creators. Creator isn't a literal word choice here, except in the case of the Quatrains. The Salarians are also creators, as they created the modern Krogan. The Krogans will spread across the galaxy and enslave all other races in their way because they can. They are the "synthetics" the Catalyst was speaking about. This is the Catalyst being consistent even though the logic is flawed. But not really. Wrex is going to get knifed in his sleep and it's going to be Krogan rebellion 2.0 but the Reapers prevent that. Just like the Catalyst says.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
The krogans were only uplifted because the galaxy needed them to fight the rachni, which in turn attacked because the reapers drove them to it. The geth were also happy to stay away and build their dyson spere in peace until Sovereign got involved.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
wookieepelt posted:The Catalyst isn't RIGHT, but at least consistent. You're correct to find the Catalyst's logic to be flawed. Intergenerational conflict creates murder on a grand scale, so the Catalyst seeks to preserve life through murder of the creators. Creator isn't a literal word choice here, except in the case of the Quatrains. The Salarians are also creators, as they created the modern Krogan. The Krogans will spread across the galaxy and enslave all other races in their way because they can. They are the "synthetics" the Catalyst was speaking about. This is the Catalyst being consistent even though the logic is flawed. I suppose my hangup is on the part where "the only way to stop some murder is A WHOLE LOT MORE MURDER, MORE MURDER THAN YOU'VE EVER SEEN, MORE MURDER THAN YOU CAN EVEN COMPREHEND". Like, suuuure, if we're going with that then everything else is consistent. But that conclusion is, frankly, bat-poo poo crazy. The AI isn't just logically flawed, it's literally, homicidally insane. At that point, it is definitely not the audiences' fault for failing to see the consistency in the Catalyst's plan, because the audience cannot comprehend how the hell the AI came to its conclusion. That fault is squarely on the writers. Stopping the Krogan Rebellion 2.0 by murdering the Krogans, then murdering everyone the Krogans would have murdered, then murdering everyone else is... hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
But the Reapers' goal isn't to save lives, it's to preserve species in Reaper form. By definition, individual lives don't matter. All that matters is that the essence of a species lives on. Your argument that the individual life matters and so therefore the logic is wrong. That's not the case and hasn't ever been.
wookieepelt fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:I am not arguing from a symbolic perspective. My argument is based on the text of the games. I can't say the same for your 'slave vs slavemaster' reading. Like, it's not irredeemable, you've identified the basic power dynamic at work in most of these pairings, but you play very loose with your definitions. For example, the krogan are not and never were enslaved by the Council. The Krogan Rebellions began when their Overlord withdrew the krogan from the Council political system. This does not suggest chattel slavery! Other details are simply incorrect (e.g. if anything, the Catalyst enslaves the Leviathans by turning them into its servant, Harbinger). The other flaw with your reading is that in your haste to deny the obvious, you highlight bizarre and irrelevant minutiae while ignoring significant story beats. Grunt's story is about his transfer of ownership from a "crazy mercenary lady" (Jedore, a character so significant you couldn't remember her name) to Shepard? Where does Okeer fit in, and why do Grunt's conversations on the ship revolve around his creator's failed imprinting when the "crazy mercenary lady" is allegedly more significant? Jacob Taylor's loyalty mission is about his dad's enslavement of his marooned crew? Is Jacob just there as a passive observer? His repeated comments about his crumbling image of his father and their relationship just idle chatter? Your reading's saving grace is that it reflects Rossum's Universal Robots, a Czech play about - oh dear! - humans creating artificial people out of synthetic flesh, who are first enslaved and then rebel and wipe out their creators. It is also the origin of the English word "robot". Oh dear. I would like to recommend some reading for you:
wookieepelt posted:But the Reapers' goal isn't to save lives, it's to preserve species in Reaper form. By definition, individual livres don't matter. All that matters is that the essence of a species lives on. Your argument that the individual life matters and so therefore the logic it's wrong. That's not the case and hasn't ever been. I will commend your soul to the angels, my friend. Lt. Danger fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
The entire point of storytelling as an art is to be able to communicate the theme while still following a sequence of events that makes sense. Otherwise you just have a really long form (abstract) poem. Also Embassytown is awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Regarding the Destroy ending I always considered the fact it kills the Geth and EDI is the price to pay to get rid of the Reapers. The real goal, for me, is to get rid of them and unfortunately the other synthetics are collateral victims. Because I don't buy for a second the Reapers' theory and the Geth proved that. Sure there will be conflicts but they won't end life. poo poo, organics themselves could destroy all life in their own conflicts, we even had to come up with a term a term for that possibility: Mutually Assured Destruction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
I'm certain the only reason that even happens is just so destroy isn't objectively the best ending with no downsides.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
Personally I play Citadel as the ~true ending~, and as EDI is alive in that then clearly the reapers were bullshitting about the destroy ending to stop you choosing it 
Strategic Tea fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:I'm certain the only reason that even happens is just so destroy isn't objectively the best ending with no downsides. I wonder if there are stats on how many people chose each ending. The writers clearly want you to pick Synthesis but, on reflection, Destroy really does seem like the best option.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
wookieepelt posted:But the Reapers' goal isn't to save lives, it's to preserve species in Reaper form. By definition, individual livres don't matter. All that matters is that the essence of a species lives on. Your argument that the individual life matters and so therefore the logic it's wrong. That's not the case and hasn't ever been. Ostensibly that is the only possible goal if we're going with that interpretation, yes. But that is definitely not the way it is framed for the player, and I don't even mean org-synth. Not every species is Reaperfied if we believe Harbinger's grocery list ("Turian... too primitive" etc.), while the Catalyst frames it in an entirely different way (ambiguously benevolent rather than a more selfish Reaper motivation). There's conflicting information there and the Catalyst doesn't help to clear it up. I don't think your interpretation is wrong, though I don't agree with it since I don't personally buy that the Catalyst had always really meant the broader creator-created category. But if given that, once you lay it out, it does fit most of the information we have. The only disagreement that I have is how much of that is a failure of the audience to understand, and I just cannot lay it at the audience's feet. IF that is what the writer's intended, then they definitely did not make it clear at all in any of their end-choices (except I guess Destroy)? Hang the writers. Lt. Danger posted:snip Lt. Danger more like Lt. Dunning-Kruger
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:Lt. Danger more like Lt. Dunning-Kruger Coward.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:Personally I play Citadel as the ~true ending~, and as EDI is alive in that then clearly the reapers were bullshitting about the destroy ending to stop you choosing it That's incredibly hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
midwat posted:I wonder if there are stats on how many people chose each ending. The writers clearly want you to pick Synthesis but, on reflection, Destroy really does seem like the best option. I think it depends on the person really. I picked Destoy eventually to see that ending but my first choice was Synthesis. I really want to be a Conjoiner*/upgraded being. (*) Read Allastair Reynolds, people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:57
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:That is fair. I think I've said before that Bioware could have done more to make these links explicit or to play up certain aspects. Like, Rhjamiz is right that there are surprisingly few clear examples of traditional AI rebellion in the series, and the biggest one (geth) is retconned into being more of a mistake/creator paranoia. Maybe a few more sidequests with obviously aggressive AIs would prime players more for what ME3 belatedly brings to the forefront? At the risk of killing Dan Didio... You'd need some conflicts that don't arise from the AI defending themselves or, if you have those conflicts, construct the idea that organics are biting off more than they can chew if they try to take on a sufficiently entrenched synthetic intelligence. Of course, the only one in Mass Effect that could exist for that purpose is the Geth. Unfortunately, ME2 paints them as being positively benign in a way that is utterly superhuman. They just want to sit back and build a Dyson sphere and spend eternity reaching consensus. Well, we can work with that, too. In ME3, when the quarians attack the Geth, the Geth could just rout them. I mean, how stupid are the quarians with bringing all their civilians into a warzone against an intelligence that doesn't comprehend empathy? Maybe their preemptive strike worked out for them, but the Geth should just come back swinging. The destruction of their great project was the final straw for the Geth - consensus says that, in order to ensure their future survival, the Creators must be rendered incapable of hostile action. No Reaper code or anything like that, no excuses as to 'why' the Geth are doing this beyond cold machine logic. Should there be a peaceful resolution possible? Absolutely. But it should have the feeling that Shepard has only just kicked the can down the road for a generation or two, thanks to the efforts of Tali and Legion. The underlying tension should still be present. Legion can still 'return to his people', but it should have the feeling more like the Geth are closing ranks and withdrawing as opposed to a heroic sacrifice. Like you said, as it stands, Shepard basically goes 'There's no reason to fight, you guys' and the conflict just stops. He doesn't solve anything on Rannoch but it feels like this happy ending. The feeling is why people get so stuck on the Catalyst, because they associate Rannoch's conflict with a happy ending. So, that way, when the Catalyst says that synthetics and organics will come into conflict, the average player doesn't think 'But the Geth and Quarians lived happily ever after'. Perhaps a longer talk with the Catalyst where they explicitly state something like 'In a hundred years, a thousand years, when the Geth are stronger and when someone provokes them again - who will be there to stop them?' When you think about it, the Geth have surpassed every other species. They think faster, they're more 'moral', they have a true direct democracy... They don't even need the Mass Relays - they don't age, so, they could just slowboat it between systems if they had to. This opens up a lot more real estate for them. Eventually, they could just outproduce and outfight every other species. Maybe the Catalyst is wrong, but would you want to live in a galaxy where the Geth are the unspoken rulers? They're back to being the ME1 bogeyman but this time you need to hope that the bogeyman doesn't wake up and roll over. Milkfred E. Moore fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:Personally I play Citadel as the ~true ending~, and as EDI is alive in that then clearly the reapers were bullshitting about the destroy ending to stop you choosing it This is the correct way, and should be the way the inevitable retcon goes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
I'm glad that the geth, krogan and rachni are all dead ftw
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:At the risk of killing Dan Didio... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJf9Pf9rjO4
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
If you absolutely wanted to tell a 'simpler, easier' Mass Effect trilogy, then it definitely would centre around the Geth being key to defeating the Reapers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
wookieepelt posted:Your argument that the individual life matters and so therefore the logic is wrong. That's not the case and hasn't ever been. Ok I lied one more thing. I'm not arguing that individual life matters. For the Catalyst to put forth the idea that preventing the conflict is desirable (through whatever means), it would mean that the Catalyst would need to respect the concept of Life at some level. Except his solution is so extreme in that context that it suggests an utter disregard for the concept of Life as anything other than something to collect, like a galactic Comic Book Guy. The Catalyst is appealing to the player's sensibilities when it's talking about how undesirable the conflict is. Like that one poster said; what the Catalyst is saying has a very specific meaning that the player doesn't know.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:At the risk of killing Dan Didio... I would basically be okay with this. e: uh, your alternate rannoch plotline, of course
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZPBWL0ZDSY&t=12s It's me I'm Mr. Burns
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I would basically be okay with this. Nice try.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
The biggest problem with Mass Effect 3 is it assumes I care about the geth genociding organic, they should have done it IMO.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 23:39
|
|
