Airaku said:
So if you don't take an authors word for it. Then you wouldn't take the word from anyone else. Developer or otherwise. The only thing I can do is talk, talk, and talk. Repeat what I was told. The show you a reference point (link i provided) to what the philosophy was based on. Which is why I continue to stand by my claims that it is the only ending where peace can last. Sure the star child is said to be Sovereign, presenting himself to Shepard in a familiar matter. That doesn't mean that he isn't telling the truth and giving Shepard a choice to make a difference. Hence the rejection ending which was later added and cleared this up. In that ending his voice turns into Sovereign and says "so be it". In a sense this ending is also not considered bad because the cycle continues and peace is preserved in the galaxy for another cycle for new races to develop, evolve, and live their lives. Of course this is subjective to the player but it on base logic. It makes sense. One of the things that Bioware seems to try and point out. Is that the Reapers are right. They aren't evil, but rather "gods" that serve for the sole purpose of preserving the galaxy. That is their function and they gave their solution. They are solely focused on logic. In the ending we got they propose alternative solutions for the player. They gave also presented us with the pros and cons, the effect and reactions. The percussions of all of the choices. From what I've understood and know, as well as my own interpretation of the game. There is no reason for the Reapers to lie under any circumstances. To be honest I don't remember them lying. They've controlled and operated unbeknown to the galaxy, but they spoke only of reality. |
If you choose to believe things without evidence, then that is your business. The truth value of a statement is , in most cases, not dependent on who says it.
If one of the authors actually said, "I intended the game to be about X", I'd have to accept that unless I saw an obvious reason for a lie. Because, the author is naturally the best source (although not a perfect source) regarding what goes on in his mind. However, saying "the game is actually about X" is a different claim.
For example, if you are familiar with marvel comics, Ant Man famously backhanded his wife, which became a big point in the character's story. However, the author never intended Hank to do this. The author's script mentioned Hank pushing his wife out of the way. The author did not intend this in an especially violent way, but the artist decided to draw it as a full on backhand to the Wasp's face.
So, the author could accurately say "in my mind, Hank never hit his wife". And that would be true. However, that doesn't change the fact that in the actual comic, Hank did hit his wife. If I'm sitting there reading the comic, looking at this happen, and the author tries to tell me it didn't, I have to go with the comic.
In short, I am only talking about the version of Mass Effect 3 that I played. The version I played is the version that made it to the disc. This is also a version that was influenced by hundreds of artists, multiple authors, and presumably dozens of executives. I did not, and cannot play the version in the developers head. The version in the author's head may be different, but that version is irrelevant to me, because I cannot experience it.
Again, canon only is an issue when two events within a story contradict. It doesn't deal with multiple interpretations.
The idea that reapers are not lying is a bit off. It would be more accurate to say that we don't have evidence of them lying. However, we speak to very few reapers. Sovereign tells us very little about their objectives, Harbinger only taunts us, and then there is the catalyst. So, we really don't know how truthful the reapers are.
We do know that the reapers are manipulative. They controlled the Illusive man, but he believed he was not being controlled. Sovereign also controls Benezia, as well as Sareen. We know that one of their main tools is indoctrination, which involved manipulating organics to think things that they would not normally think. While not technically lies, I would call this at the very least deceptive. We know reapers routinely manipulate organics. Knowing this, would you believe that they are always truthful?
Even IF the reapers are always honest, that does not mean they are always right. Obviously, the reapers are not omniscient, or they would not have been defeated in the first game, or on Rannoch, etc. So, they can miscalculate.
The reapers seem to be wrong about the inevitability of conflict between synthetics and organics. In the game, we have evidence that this is the case. The geth only act in self defense. They are able to make peace with the quarians. Edi is another example of synthetics coexisting peacefully.
Why do we see examples of synthetics and organics being able to live peacefully if the catalyst is telling us otherwise? There are two possible explanations. The first is that Bioware is trying to show us that the reapers are not right. The reapers were created in a particular time and place. It seems that their core programming has been the same since. Perhaps the reapers have seen in every cycle that their prediction comes true, and thus concluded that they are right.
However, it is heavily suggested that this cycle is different, largely due to humanity's involvement. We see clearly that this cycle is, at the very least, much different than the prothean cycle. It may be that the reaper's statements held true for other cycles, but not this one. This is another reason why the ending was so disappointing. In other cases, with Saren and the Illusive man, you can always convince them to see things your way. With the catalyst, Shepard doesn't even try (this was made slightly better in the extended ending).
Which is why the ending feels so disjointed and unsatisfying. The reapers are proposing a solution to a problem that simply doesn't exist in the galaxy. Assuming you played your cards right, there is simply no conflict between synthetics and organics. There *might* be conflict between them in the future, but that conflict doesn't happen in the game. At best, the reapers are solving a potential problem. At worst, they're trying to destory the galaxy for no real reason.
We also know that synthesis won't necessarily bring peace. This is shown with the geth. Even with a hive mind, it is still possible to have a conflict. This was the whole point of legion's arc in ME2. That you can never reach 100% understanding even with something like the geth. We can't guarantee that there WILL be conflict in a post-synthesis world, but we know that it's possible.
All of this evidence from the game indicates that the catalyst is not right.
