| JWeinCom said: It came out of no where because it was off the top of my head. It was only a comparison. Nothing else. (Regarding the biblical comparison only). As for the Geth warring against themselves. I actually don't have an answer for that. The Heretics worshiped the "Old Machines", whom they saw as gods. That was the reason given for being the main enemies in Mass Effect 1. Much like the Inusannon's originally supposed to be the Protheans, a storyline which was dropped later in the series in favor for the other Protheans (The Inusannon's were changed to be the Protheans for the Protheans, they are the ones that the Protheans took their technology from). They also inhabited Ilos and you go their their ruins near the end of ME. I could be wrong here, but the change was to point that the Reapers were required to keep peace or dominate races like the Protheans would have complete control over the Galaxy. Off topic. Another ancient race that was supposed to play a more significant race and was forgotten in the sequels was the Thorian, who were basically ancient humans. I don't think they are related at all, but they are very similar. The point of the geth conflict was to show that true complete synthesis was not possible. Even with the hivemind, Geth eventually came to war with eachother like other species did.
If your interpretation cannot account for why there would be war among the Geth, then you need to rethink or abandon them. Your interpetation has to be consistent with the evidence.
I think the whole fact that you need high war assets to get the synthetic ending (brining people together is a major part of that and making peace). Is another hint toward my point. This is just my take. But again, it's a new age philosophy thing >.< I already addressed this. You need 2800 EMS for the synthesis ending. The destroy ending with Shepard living requires 4000 EMS, and 5000 if Anderson gets shot. So, you need the highest number of war assets for the Shepard lives ending.
I agree with what you are saying about a lot of things not making sense. The whole just being groggy doesn't add up. Such as waking up in an area that happens to look very much where he/she was knocked out. By dream sequence theory, are you referring to indoctrination? Or more on the line of the death and find peace theory. As for the dreams Shepard had. That was part of the Indoctrination ending. Which was cut. Again, the ending was made just prior to release, most of the content was left in. Take it or leave it on that. As for the Indoctrination theory. Even though it's cut, and BioWare won't confirm or deny it publicly. One reason for this is because the official ending was meant to be interrupted in any way you want it to be, it's YOUR story. So in that sense, if you believe in the indoctrination theory, it remains true to that particular player. But in reality, no it's not, it's content that was unfinished and cut to meet the release date. Just like the Illusive Man fight and a few other things. Taking evidence from earlier in the game is what keeps the theory alive and well, even to this day.
It still doesn't matter what Bioware says. I have no way of knowing Bioware's inner thoughts on the game. If you are suggesting we can just ignore certain things that the developers don't like, then to make any interpretation of any form of media, you'd have to sit down with the author and ask "oh did this part really happen? Or this part?"
The evidence is there. You can't say the dream sequences didn't happen, because they simply did. You can't just pick and choose parts of the game. What happened happened.
I have no reason why it was in both version. The extended cut in my opinion, was terrible. It removed the sense of mystery and tarnished it a little. Most of the significant stuff was presented as still frames.... ugh. I didn't feel like it added much to the story nor the ending, a lot of people on the contrary enjoyed it.
The original ending wasn't mysterious in a good way... It was just half finished and shitty. For example, you see your squadmates die, and then they're just chilling on some planet. The indoctrination theory was actually the ONLY way to make sense of the original ending.
The new ending is still just as shitty, but it at least closes some of the plotholes, and gets the events to a point where they almost make sense.
I need to disagree about the ending. It is very basic game design choice. BioWare often makes the dialogue wheel (not always) have a paragon choice on the top, and renegade on the bottom. BioWare again, try's to present it clear.
Rotate the wheel 90 degrees to the left and it will line up perfectly. The blue paragon choice will be where it should be to the left. The renegade choice is to the right. The path shepard has to walk to each is exactly the shape as the arms leading to each choice in the dialogue wheel.
If BioWare wanted to red ending to be canon (in their eyes) They would have had the player directed to it, being the middle choice. Things would obviously, have been built differently with that in mind.
Except that the "true" ending is often the one that is the most convoluted and off the beaten path. See for example, Bravely Default, Shin Megami Tensei IV, Half Life, or Braid. All of these games make you take an incredibly drawn out and roundabout path to see their true endings.
And many developers reward you for not taking the obvious path. For example, Shigeru Miyamoto...
You wanted to define the "Essence of Mario". That’s right. I wrote these things in an email, and I sent them to everyone that was involved, That’s an very interesting way to do things. I wanted to take those fundamental elements that were created at that time, and place it in our game building process. For example, when Mario would always travel from left to right in a 2D Mario game. In one out of the ten times that you go left, you’ll find a little prize. Everybody usually would think that they are supposed to go to the right, but we wanted to reward those people that decided to travel and investigate the other side. So we tried implementing these fundamental things in every course in the game, but the team would lose balance if everyone did that, so I used my email to maintain coordination between the staff. So, the most obvious path isn't the correct one.
Back to my point. BioWare heavily implies direction in their level design. Trying to point where to go, in this sense. It is highly more likely than not to consider that BioWare was pointing out to the player that the Synthetic ending is the best ending. I don't see why it isn't when BioWare considers it to be.
... We've already established that I do not believe your claims about Bioware. So, please stop bringing it up, because it's pointless. Unless you can show me some official comment from Bioware or evidence from the game that indicates this is the best ending, then you cannot show that it is.
|
Hello. I know you don't care if I apoligise for the late reply or not, but that just me. So I apologise for the late reply xD If what you say about "the most convoluted" path is often the correct one, then that suggest Synthesis. You seem to me to have a bit of a misconception of it. It was tried before on past cycles and failed because they were not ready to accept such a thing, too many differences. Synthesis CANNOT be forced. It needs to be accepted by critical mass. The game itself actually goes into this. The new ending is still just as shitty, but it at least closes some of the plotholes, and gets the events to a point where they almost make sense."
I'm going to adress a few of your things first.
"Except that the "true" ending is often the one that is the most convoluted and off the beaten path."
There is nothing even remotely convuluted with the destroy ending. Well, there is actually two things. Which I will outline.
1) You commit mass genocide. I'm not talking about just on the Geth and synthetics. I'm talking about millinas worth of organics from previous cycles. Their knowledge and genertic material. They theortically can be brought, their knowledge is capable to be accessed in the control ending by the new Catalyst (more on this soon) and in the Synthesis ending all living beings can access that knowledge.
2) Shepard doesn't actually live, even with full war assets. Common misconception. Mass Effect 2 and 3 confirm this. Shepard is part sysnthetic and if these sysnthetic parts fail (which they do) Shepard can, and will die. I'm not sure why Ackland said otherwise, there is some talk that it was a remant left over of the planed indoctrination ending. Interesting enough, the seems there were some last minute changes to the script. Removing the "good, bad, neautral" ending and even reduced the explaintion. If you watch all the endings you'll notice that the sysnthesis ending is polished, polished, polished. The Control ending is fairly polished, and the destroy ending.... well.... looks fucked up and you can see through the explosions. It wasn't very polished. This is an interesting take on it http://forum.bioware.com/topic/339232-did-post-leak-changes-ruin-the-endings-exposition-and-the-control-and-synthesis-options/
Mass Effect also has no real villains in the series. All opposing factors and even The Illusive Man was once a hero. This is proven when he and Saren stopped Desolace. Both of them came in contact with the monolith, Saren was indoctrinated first, but Jack Harper (The Illusive Man) got his blue eyes. The Illusive Man went on to claim that Desolace was right and technology MUST be embraced and humanity needs to take it's place. He essentially became the man he stopped. This is a pretty pivotal part of the canon.
One more important note. BioWare enforces the level design rule. So... I'm sorry but I can't actually accept that rule by BioWare standards. In addition it's also level design 101 as I had pointed out before. Most of your examples are either Japanese games or games that tried to challenge the status quo. I feel that you walked in a comeplete circle here with the claim of convoluted = simple, and obvious = close minded. Interesting enough the close minded observations of Lovecraftian philosphy is quite amazin :)
"The original ending wasn't mysterious in a good way... It was just half finished and shitty. For example, you see your squadmates die, and then they're just chilling on some planet. The indoctrination theory was actually the ONLY way to make sense of the original ending.
Must disagree here. I had very little issues with understanding the original ending. Can't see how it was shitty, nor the faulse indoctination theory must be applied. Sorry :/
"The point of the geth conflict was to show that true complete synthesis was not possible. Even with the hivemind, Geth eventually came to war with eachother like other species did."
I would like to point out that the Geth would have become the dominate race in the galaxy. I have a little link I'll provide at the end of the post. One that I feel will explain a lot of things. Very well worded with a lot of research. From what I DO know... this guy nailed the nail on the head and pounded it down hard. Again... you don't believe my on my sources so. I shall drop that.
"You can't say the dream sequences didn't happen, because they simply did. You can't just pick and choose parts of the game. What happened happened."
Never said this. I thought you were talking about another theory. This is cut stuff from the indoctrination ending. Here's a little cool thing from Mass Effect 2 that I should have brought up earlier. http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Codex/The_Reapers
"Organics undergoing indoctrination may complain of headaches and buzzing or ringing in their ears. As time passes, they have feelings of "being watched" and hallucinations of "ghostly" presences. Ultimately, the Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify its signals, manifesting as "alien" voices in the mind."
If that sounds familar to you. That's because it is.
I'm still trying to figure out where you figure the Reapers are bad. You understand their function correct? To preserve live at ANY cost. If that means harvesting, and preserving the material and knowledge of past cycles so new life can floursih... then so be it! If it wasn't for the Reapers. The Leviathans would have tried to become the dominate races. If it wasn't for the Reapers then the Protheans would have been the dominate race with it's empire. GG no humanity in that timeline. Yippie, sounds fun to me. We can assume, theoritically of course, that other races tried the same in other cycles. The Reapers were pretty nescarry lmfao. The game even states that the Destroy ending WILL result in extinction in the future. Let's go with this one. At the end of the Destroy ending, they need to rebuild everything. Trapped on Earth with many difference races with cultural differences. You just set the doomsday clock and the hand is getting closer to midnight every year after. Turchunka Earth style sounds pretty interseting in this setting. Mass effect Mad Max lol.
The Geth would have been dominate this cycle because of the Matrioshka Brain. Send you this soon. Hell, they wouldn't even need to attack any organics.
As I stated earlier, synthesis cannot be forced and must be obtained. It has been tried in the past. I'm still trying to figure out why you figure otherwise or why you think the Catalyst is lying when the A.I. is essentially programed to find solutions. Shepard is the FIRST organic to set foot on the crucible. This is PROOF that this cycle is different and has achieved a higher level of enlightment. This is now possible, but you are allowed to choose other fates. Some are shitty as hell. Control is rather neutral since Shepard transcends and becomes the catalyst and is very much alive. We see this happen, it's just not clear. It's still in the game. He loses his body and becomes one with the crucible (citadel). A very different cycle. You can be an asshole, you can be judge jury executioner. OR you can fit the desires of both races. Organics desire to perfect themselves and attain a higher state, they create synthetics to reach a higher logical functioning. Synthetics want to know what it's like to feel. They want to love, feel happy, sad, etc. A MAJOR theme of the game from the first game. It also goes into racism and genitc differences, unity. You bring people together and form trust throughout all the games. There is also an assumtion that the ascension process turns everyone into mindless drones? Wtf? Where do people get this? Theya re very much their own individuals who are connected and unconditionally understand one another. You'll notice there is more happieness in that ending. Peace and harmony is balanced and there is just love really.
I don't understand the morals of genocide or killing millions of years of knowledge. Raping the people hense sending them back to the stone age. Killing a whole subgroup and past cycles. Where the hell is their any morality in this? I would like an explanation, because I've certainly never got this one from my sources who smiled and confirmed the synthesis ending. Sorry I bring this up again... believe or not. That's up to you, but it still means something to me. Either way.
Now I definitely would recommend this read. This is the link that I wanted to provide (not my source) but it provides a HUGE understanding of the synthesis ending and it's moralities. I am very glad I was able to find this. A few years of knowledge and research on the subject. I feel that this offers a lot of evidence that is provided by the game and extra sources itself. It's a LONG read and it's been updated a lot.
http://forum.bioware.com/topic/343336-a-different-ascension-the-synthesis-compendium-now-with-ec-material-integrated/page-1 Very good stuff and have fun :) You might want some popcorn for this one.
Also I want to leave this message with a famous quote from Sovereign that could not ring any more true to the core fundamentals of the Reapers and where I feel that you stand. This is in my eyes of course. " My kind transcends your very understanding. We are each a nation - independent, free of all weakness. You cannot grasp the nature of our existence. " Very true, very true. Also keep in mind one thing. There were lots of changes to the story game to game. One example of this is the Inusannon issue in regards with the Protheans. A HUGE rewrite there and after the fact. This partially helped understanding the Reapers and their necessity.
