Mass Effect 3: The Wall

[Innegativeion]

*snip*

Remember that he isn't "changed" until the crucible is actually hooked up to him, so up until get into the citadel(unnoticed by harbinger who is probably nearsighted or something) and hackett receives a convenient text message from faceless soldier mook B, the catalyst is still in complete control. He could've easily turned off the citadel beam, whathave you.

He fits the definition of deus ex machina to a "T". The term comes from greek plays in which a conflict of epic proportion would be neatly and conveniently solved by a god "deus" literally descending from on high via a pulley machine "machina" to wrap everything up. That is EXACTLY what the star child does. He can conveniently use the crucible to send out a giant "FUCK YALL" wave of destruction across the galaxy to fix everything, despite such functionality never being alluded to before.

He also fits the term literally as well, he is a "god" (of the reapers) that comes from a "machine" (the citadel).

Despite any explanation his existence still renders the entire conflict of Mass Effect 1 pointless by nullifying any purpose of the keepers, and renders the otherwise excellently characterized harbinger(up until he got no lines in the 3rd installment) redundant and pointless as well. Not to mention if he's the citadel he could easily at any point during the trilogy just have turned off all artificial environments, killing the entirety of his enemies' leadership.

 

[EnigmaticSevens]

To know that my dear Shepard advanced all creation to the supreme point of consciousness? Excellent! Behold Secher Nbiw! Behold the Golden Path!

I think Control embodies Secher Nbiw more than Synthesis. Remember the Golden Path was SUPPOSED to fail eventually. Likewise I give it a few millenia before Shep 'loses' his memories of humanity (They become subsumed in the yottabytes of new data his gestalt intelligence has processed) and starts actively fucking with sapient life for 'the good of the many'.

I can see that logic to an extent. But recall that Secher Nbiw translated roughly into 'pure survival', no more, no less. The extent to which one believes it was 'supposed to fail', ties into how much credence one gives those last two pieces of mediocre fan fiction cavorting about in the clothes of novels. I don't consider any of the works written by the son to be canon, ALL HAIL THE FATHER!

Secher Nbiw meant the survival of humanity until it reached the point where it no longer needed, and could no longer be controlled by a single oracular presence. Oddly enough, I think the whole 'loose touch with humanity' things is a rather forced assumption, imperfect figures transposing their qualities on an ascended being. The Star Child was the first, The Shepard is the second, a once organic intelligence becoming purely synthetic doesn't necessarily imply degradation in some far away future. Maybe the Shepard with the ludicrous amount of drive and will it took to become the new Catalyst in the first place, will make a pretty awesome god. There are too many variables. (Although, it feels sort've like making Roland of Gilead the new god, and I'm not sure how that would turn out....)

 

[pilouuuu]

*snip*

Remember that he isn't "changed" until the crucible is actually hooked up to him, so up until get into the citadel(unnoticed by harbinger who is probably nearsighted or something) and hackett receives a convenient text message from faceless soldier mook B, the catalyst is still in complete control. He could've easily turned off the citadel beam, whathave you.

He fits the definition of deus ex machina to a "T". The term comes from greek plays in which a conflict of epic proportion would be neatly and conveniently solved by a god "deus" literally descending from on high via a pulley machine "machina" to wrap everything up. That is EXACTLY what the star child does. He can conveniently use the crucible to send out a giant "FUCK YALL" wave of destruction across the galaxy to fix everything, despite such functionality never being alluded to before.

He also fits the term literally as well, he is a "god" (of the reapers) that comes from a "machine" (the citadel).

Despite any explanation his existence still renders the entire conflict of Mass Effect 1 pointless by nullifying any purpose of the keepers, and renders the otherwise excellently characterized harbinger(up until he got no lines in the 3rd installment) redundant and pointless as well. Not to mention if he's the citadel he could easily at any point during the trilogy just have turned off all artificial environments, killing the entirety of his enemies' leadership.

For some reason I don't dislike Starchild as much. Before EC his dialogues were nonsensical and ilogical, but now at least the fixed it a bit. I think of him more like the Arquitect in the Matrix whose function in the plot is to inform the hero about what's going on. And I also think that the Crucible is what allows the Catalyst to give different options to Shepard and find a new solution, that's why I consider the Crucible truly important and it has been talked about the whole game, so it's not like they added it at last time. For me Catalyst is like an advanced Avina and not much more. That though makes him much more tolerable.

 

[The.Bard]

-snip-

Its not that I have a problem with the indoctrination theory, I just don't subscribe to it. However of the points you just made there there is a couple that I am curious as to how they support it. Firstly, why does the child speaking with what sounds like Harbringers voice support indoctrination, it certainly makes sense with indoctrination but it also makes perfect sense without. Secondly I am yet to hear why, in light of the EC, Shepard wakes up in London, as now the citadel only completely explodes in synthesis and is otherwise only damaged, his waking up amid wreckage, while still fitting the IT no longer is evidence for it.

Well, the thing to remember is that we're talking about completely subjective things, so when I mention evidence, I'm not really talking about it as ipso facto proof of IT as much as I am evidence for me that supports my own interpretation. It's a minor difference, but worth noting, as the proof in this case only needs to convince me. 8D

I'll agree the Harbinger voice could easily be used to just show the AI child is a reaper, but for me, it immediately made me envision Harbinger chuckling to himself from a hiding spot beneath the floor, holding up a little boy puppet and thinking " oh man, is Shepard EVER going to fall for this! Hahahaha!"

As for Shepard, in Destroy the explosion goes off in his face and engulfs him, and when they show the Citadel later on, it's badly mangled. And the wreckage Shepard is in, as before, is clearly not Citadel in make. It's concrete. So my interpretation is Shepard is definitely waking up on Earth, and if the Citadel is no longer completely destroyed, then he would have to still be on it if all of that was reality. And he's not. Not to me.

Whatever ending each of us believes, I'm very glad Bioware left the evidence to go either way. Reminds me of an MC Escher drawing, where you see two different pictures depending how you look at it.

 

[JamesStone]

If you like the extended cut. Please do pick the refusal ending. I view that ending as Bioware venting it's rage at the fans for being loud enough that they had to go back into the box and edit the cut footage back in.

Just as a question. Why when you pick the fourth ending does the god child get angry? Isn't that what he wants you to do? Why does he find the other endings more preferable and the ending where you let things play out enrages him? The god child doesn't bat an eye at the destruction of his own creators, nor at millions of years of genocide.

But you refusing to play along makes him shout in the Harbinger voice? Quite amusing. I imagine that ending as being the middle finger of the bunch. Erected firmly up at the fans who didn't want to play along and rejected all three endings. Just goes to show, Bioware isn't above trolling the fans, so you shouldn't be above trolling Bioware.

It just amuses me so much.

Bioware, in this moment, is laughing quietly for giving all the Indocrination Theory supporters more arguments: THE KID IS ANGRY CAUSE YOU DIDN'T GET INDOCRINATED! we will hear. SHEPARD IS STILL ALIVE IN DESTROY, THERE IS STILL HOPE some might say. And Bioware is laughing at their desesperation.

I am obviously exagerating, but as a IT theorist this shit activates the red light in my head. But I know it's just Bioware being sloppy like usual and there is no chance in hell the IT is alive. ALthough many people in the ME forums are still ranting.


OT: C- at the ending. I really had no sense of closure. Maybe it's just me but I felt this EC was nothing more than taking the turd the original ending was and putting it in a pedestal for us to admire.

A shit, even if the most well lighted shit of them all, is still a shit.

 

[lord Claincy Ffnord]

-snip-

Its not that I have a problem with the indoctrination theory, I just don't subscribe to it. However of the points you just made there there is a couple that I am curious as to how they support it. Firstly, why does the child speaking with what sounds like Harbringers voice support indoctrination, it certainly makes sense with indoctrination but it also makes perfect sense without. Secondly I am yet to hear why, in light of the EC, Shepard wakes up in London, as now the citadel only completely explodes in synthesis and is otherwise only damaged, his waking up amid wreckage, while still fitting the IT no longer is evidence for it.

Well, the thing to remember is that we're talking about completely subjective things, so when I mention evidence, I'm not really talking about it as ipso facto proof of IT as much as I am evidence for me that supports my own interpretation. It's a minor difference, but worth noting, as the proof in this case only needs to convince me. 8D

I'll agree the Harbinger voice could easily be used to just show the AI child is a reaper, but for me, it immediately made me envision Harbinger chuckling to himself from a hiding spot beneath the floor, holding up a little boy puppet and thinking " oh man, is Shepard EVER going to fall for this! Hahahaha!"

As for Shepard, in Destroy the explosion goes off in his face and engulfs him, and when they show the Citadel later on, it's badly mangled. And the wreckage Shepard is in, as before, is clearly not Citadel in make. It's concrete. So my interpretation is Shepard is definitely waking up on Earth, and if the Citadel is no longer completely destroyed, then he would have to still be on it if all of that was reality. And he's not. Not to me.

Whatever ending each of us believes, I'm very glad Bioware left the evidence to go either way. Reminds me of an MC Escher drawing, where you see two different pictures depending how you look at it.

I would not be remotelty surprised to learn that Bioware intentionally structured the EC such that it did nothing to contradict the IT. So that people who wanted that ending could have it =)

 

[Scars Unseen]

Hey! We got our little blue babies after all! I mean, sure, they're little Krogan babies only wearing blue clothing, but that still meets the literal demand of all the Liara fans, right? I bet they're so happy.

 

[Rad Party God]

My problem is that the new endings would never be as exciting or as cool as the indoctrination theory. As I tweeted to Grey, nothing can beat a mountain dew fueled conspiracy theory.

I was right for the most part the new endings with the plot holes dry walled and patched just doesn't leave me disappointed but it doesn't excite me either.

Now that the ending is out I would like to see Casey Hudson give a play by play on why this video is completely wrong.


Like why are the piles of bodies next to the pillar of light, why are the dead bodies wearing the same default armors as Ashley and Kaiden.

Why you see the oily shadows during the confrontation with TIM and Anderson. Why when you shoot Anderson you are then wounded and why when you reach the top of the light you arn't wounded anymore?

There are tons of tiny details that are still left unexplained and I would really like some answers.

I might recall that they said that, even with the extended endings, there would still be space for mindless speculation, so, if proven wrong, there's still room for the Indoctrination believers and theorize to their heart's content.

As for myself, I'm in the same stance as Susan, the Synthesis ending, although a bit wierd and silly, it's the closest to a "happily ever after" ending we could ever wished for and a fairly satisfactory one at that.

And yes, I almost cried when Liara puts Shepard's name on the wall.

 

[Halvhir]

The main thing that pushed the original ending over the edge for me was the insinuation that we were actually blowing up all the Relays, and by extension obliterating the solar systems they were next to. Just taking that away, making the repair job to get the entire universe connected again a matter of years or decades instead of millenia, soothes a great deal of the frustration I had to begin with.

While there's still a lot I don't like about the pick-a-button, any button endings to epic games like this, it's bearable now. I had the same issue with Deus Ex: HR's ending, but now I think I like this one better. Tolerable, though I'd still like to actually DO something to get my ending, instead of getting a dialogue selection.

 

[Joccaren]

like for instance bioware said in writing that the camera is a character. After Anderson dies, it purposefully shows you holding you side, taking your hand away seeing blood and being surprised. In close up.

Being surprised? Hardly. From the look on Shepard's face it seemed like he knew he was hurt, and he was going to die alongside Anderson. There was no surprise. There was a "So this is how it ends" moment.
Even now, after having had this whole thing explained to me numerous times, I cannot see a correlation here. There is basically nothing to suggest it.

after he goes up the beam, he can now dash short bursts and even semi-jump. Objectively he is much healthier after he goes up the beam after the TIM confrontation than before.

If we're talking about the synthesis run up - cinematic magic. Bioware goes with what looks cool rather than what is 100% lore correct, as evidenced by the Sword fight. Otherwise, shift did not allow you to sprint throughout the entire sequence. You still had to limp.

Also those oily black shadows, the same kind of shadows the Raachni queen talked about in ME1 when the reapers were controlling the Raachni before.

Aaaand? The Rachni Queen references oily black shadows souring the songs of her mothers or W/E, therefore all oily black shadows are indoctrination?
Also, do remember that TIM is there using Reaper control methods to try and control Shepard.

Again people seemed to have missed my point that the "default" armors I was talking about haven't been seen since ME1. The light beam I mean the one leading up from earth to the citadel. Surely if they were going to lazily throw bodies around it would have been a re-hash of the collector body piles or a use of the current generic soldier that was running down the hill with you.

http://social.bioware.com/forums/forum/1/topic/355/index/12186544/1

Already been addressed.


As I said, were I to send "Proof" of a similar level at IT, for example, the fact that the higher your EMS the more options you unlock - both of which the IT counts as the "False" options - I would be met with an explanation from the perspective of IT that the Reapers don't think they need to Indoctrinate Shepard if your EMS is too low, thus they give the only right option to him as his only option, or something else along similar lines.
Likewise, this "Evidence" you are levelling can be dispelled if you look at some of these things without the IT glasses, and try to actually find a straight forward explanation for them. To date I have not seen one example where there hasn't been a face value explanation for something in IT. Its just whether you're willing to accept that there can be or not.

 

[Ferrious]

I'm with Susan on this. I'm much happier with the endings now. My only concern is that Harbinger is a bit of a Bond villain now - SHOOT THE NORMANDY, IT'S THE SHIP THAT'S BEEN MESSING UP YOUR PLANS SINCE FOREVER, SHOOT IT! A ten-second scene of Joker battering Harbinger away just long enough for pickup would have done it, but instead Harbinger just sits there "Oh, you're having a moment? Sorry, let me know when you're done".

The endings are obviously papered-over, but if I'd seen those first time I would have been happy. I'm only disappointed because I see where the cracks used to lie, and I know they tried to sell that to me as a finished product. I would also have liked Anderson's "You'd have made a great mother" speech to have made it in.

For me Sythesis is my "happy" ending. The cycle is over and those lost in previous cycles are honoured by their living monuments in the Reapers. The Reapers contain the knowledge and culture of those cycles - the "Yo I heard you don't like being killed by Synthetics" argument ignores the fact that the Reapers "harvest", they don't eradicate. The clue is in the name.

But watching Liara put Penethé's name on the wall and listening to EDI narrate while she looked on the brink of breakdown... well, manly tears were had.

Requiescat in pace, Commander Shepard.

 

[Diana Kingston-Gabai]

While this still isn't the ending the trilogy deserved, I have to agree with Susan that the emotional component here is powerful enough that I can just roll my eyes at the Catalyst rather than fly into a rage.

It's enough, really, to have that last goodbye right before the beam, to see Falere and Samara reunited, asari rejoicing on Thessia, krogan babies, Zaeed relaxing on a beach somewhere... and, of course, the minute difference in whether your love interest actually puts your name on the memorial wall or hesitates, as if uncertain... it's closure, and it's satisfying, and it's enough.

Not sure if BioWare stands redeemed in my eyes - the "secret" fourth ending just reeks of immature resentment on the part of the creators - but perhaps it's enough for me to keep an open mind as to whatever their next project may be.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

I prefer Pink Floyd's version.

 

[Diana Kingston-Gabai]

Actually, this raises an interesting question for me: can anyone confirm who actually wrote the Extended Cut? I have a hard time believing it was actually the product of Casey Hudson and Mac Walters - the EC may not be intellectually satisfying but it's a damn sight more emotionally satisfying than the original...

 

[saintdane05]

Great, your title made me think of Pink Floyd.