@AngelN7 said:
@Hailinel said:
@AngelN7: Look at it this way. The Reapers spent cycles upon cycles annhilating advanced, space-fairing civilizations, enacting the Xzibit Protocol of murdering organic life so that they could not be killed by synthetics (despite the Reapers murdering organics anyway). This cycle finally constructs the Crucible, and Shepard manages to make it all the way to the end, only to be confronted by Star Child; the creator and controller of the Reapers. Star Child then gives Shepard the option of stopping his own creations through three flavors of possible defeat. Why does he give Shepard these options? Because he was apparently the first organic being to stand on the choose-your-own-ending deck of the Crucible.
Further, why does Star Child even present these options to Shepard? He didn't build the Crucible. He didn't even design it. Yet he's playing Monty Hall with the outcome of organic and synthetic existence. ("And behind door number one is...!") He shows up at the very end and offers Shepard three options to stop his own creations from doing what they were designed to do based on hilariously arbitrary criteria.
Again it was tasked with finding a solution to the conflict, the Reapers were just the first and the only one who at the time 'solved' the problem it's porpuse wasn't to antagonize organics or synthetics (at least not in what bad/good sense means for us) but instead to understand them and bring some sort of balance (said balance wasn't all that fair to organics when view from their perspective , the Catalyst couldn't understand since it is an IA) , Shepard being in front of the him... it, just proved how his solution wasn't useful anymore if the Reapers where destroyed by pew-pew them then there was a need for another solution before that if not then a few cycles down the road said organics would build syntetics and be threatened by them again until they cease to exist, the Crucible (more like Shepard instead) gave the Catalyst new options on how to solve the conflict. Did all of those options make sense to you? maybe not, where they the best? maybe not, did you wanted more than 3 (4 now)? it seems like it , they chose to use the Paragon/Renegade colors to make "clear" wich choice corresponded to wich moral stance would have really matter what color they where or what each represented as long as it solved the problem? again that seems to matter to some . it didn't need to know what the Crucible did as he states how is just a big power source , and all except for syntesis in a way make sense in execution depending on how you interpret what could happen in the future.
Destroy doesn't really solve anything just kills the Reapers and the synthetics of that cycle, hopefully organics learned their lesson? hopefully the next synthetic creations will understand the value in organic life and how their inperfections doesn't make them obsolte in their brains; who knows the problem wasn't really gonna be solved that easely . Control makes the Shepard " Paragon of all organic life" be the new overmind of the Reapers using them for good instead of destroying them let's hope he doesn't get corrupted by the way IA thinks right? again doesn't really mater , and finally syntesis does actually solve the problem but is the one that makes the least sense from an execution perspective (it's space magic so it's dumb , the other space magic technobable wasn't dumb because they explained ... so sci-fi ) and Refusal isn't clear since we don't know how the new cycle defeated the Reapers maybe they had the best solution.
At the end it only matters how Shepard chose to deal with the Reapers and how when you get into the "do machines have soul" thing you're only talking from the perspective of one of the sides, and it gets so philosophical that you start blurring the lines with who's in the wrong and who isn't (Them machines don't know! we better killed them! even though we create them to be better than us). Mass Effect was always choose you're own adventure and it was either make 3 different games with 3 different philosophies to please those who disagree with the others or try to make convergence (wich is what they did but poorly explained) and go with : "there's hope alright we don't know how but there's hope for life be organic or syntethic".
Realistically, when it came time to use the Crucible, there shouldn't have been any choice beyond "Use it" or "Don't use it." It makes absolutely no sense for the anti-Reaper superweapon to come with more than one way of stopping the Reapers. It's a giant machine with a specific purpose in mind, not a Swiss Army knife. And then there's the whole question of how and why that elevator carried an unconscious Shepard from the control panel up onto the Crucible's deck. Why was the elevator even there? From a pure standpoint of usability design, the Crucible is a catastrophic failure. There's no simple button to press or lever to pull to get the desired result, even for the Destroy ending. You have to blow something up. And that's if you can find the hidden elevator to carry you up to the platform where the exploding barrel of a control unit is located.
Did the people building the Crucible seriously not know what it was that they were constructing? Was someone with horrible vision squinting at the schematics the whole time and just taking random guesses as to what parts went where? I'd say that the Crucible feels like it was designed by a seven-year-old, but even a child knows well enough that when you build a a giant weapon meant to thwart an entire invasion force, you give it one primary function, not three choices.
In short, this is a choice that should nor have never been offered in the first place.
Log in to comment