82210 réponses à ce sujet

[parthian]

I liked Liara's comment about Miranda...something to the effect of "Miranda struck me as a very driven woman..I think you two could be very happy together."

Meanwhile, Tali referred to her as a "genetically perfect cerebrus cheerleader bosh'tet"...pfft.

[Ieldra]

Tallis Lucienis wrote...

Melrache wrote...
@Tallis: Yes, it does. Not sure what's so bad about it, rather that than have everyone turn into something that isn't human.

Yes but your destroying and killing trusted allies, species you worked hard to free like the Geth or EDI. How could you justify that?

I'm thinking really hard upon Synthesis and Control. I think Miranda would understand why Shepard would choose Control...Even if it led to Shepard's death. It was what must be done to save the Galaxy.

I think so too. Unfortunately, you can't easily twist Control into a happy ending as you can with Synthesis, because it's pretty clear that Shepard will become removed from all human concerns. Not that any state of things is ever permanent, but it's a hard obstacle to overcome.

What I dislike about the whole setup that it brings people into deceiving themselves into believing Destroy is the best end, ignoring the genocide of the geth, the klling of EDI and the destruction of the relays (which doesn't happen in Control) just because there's a variant where Shepard can survive or come back. They should have given some hope for that to all endings. Then people would decide based on their personal ideology and we could have an interesting debate about which is best.

If you want a premise for Shepard coming back from the Synthesis, consider this: Shepard's mind is fragmented by the Synthesis but isn't destroyed. Here are infinite possibilities for a story where Shepard reunites with Miranda at some time in the near future. After all, he promised. So many promises they refused to give each other, and here - he just promises. How can you *not* headcanon that he'll keep that promise? It may take a little space magic, but seriously, after they presented us with the Synthesis everything else is small fry in comparison. I like it and its projected results as well as as some of the symbolic significance, but the process makes no sense at all to the point of complete craziness.

[Ieldra]

BTW did anyone notice a bug in the talk with Tali after Sanctuary? She talks as if Miranda was dead, as evidenced by "It's harder on you.....I know you *were* close". After hearing that I re-loaded and didn't talk with Tali.

I don't think I need to say Miranda was not dead in my game, right?

Modifié par Ieldra2, 12 mars 2012 - 08:35 .

[SilentK]

Don't generally post in this tread but I must say, I really like Miranda in ME3 and it feels like she has grown a bit as a person. Loved being able to talk to her about the control-chip because it irked me quite a bit in ME2. Like her more and more every time I meet her.

[parthian]

Ieldra2 wrote...

BTW did anyone notice a bug in the talk with Tali after Sanctuary? She talks as if Miranda was dead, as evidenced by "It's harder on you.....I know you *were* close". After hearing that I re-loaded and didn't talk with Tali.

I don't think I need to say Miranda was not dead in my game, right?

Ya I encountered the same bug..Shepard responded as if she had died. Got worried for a second there =o

[mereck7980]

@ Ieldra2 I have several problems with the Synthesis ending, and I don't agree that it is necessarily the "good" ending.

1. It doesn't make sense on a practical level. How would you meld inorganic and organic material together on a genetic level? Based on the "Starchild" conversation it sounds like the Crucible would rewrite the genes of all life in the galaxy in such a way that DNA is part synthetic. But what does that even mean? DNA is chemistry, a combination of several nucleic acids combined together to form the instructions for all cellular activity. Synthetic life would be based on electricity or light at its core. How would you combine these two types of building blocks together?

2. How could you rewrite the genes for all currently living beings and have them continue to live? Radically changing the DNA of an existing life form would most likely kill it (see people exposed to high does of radiation). This could make sense for the unborn, but not a grown person.

3. What gives Shepard the right to make a decision that will affect the very core of every living beings fundamental nature? This is much more involved than "they live or they die". This idea means that all life will be fundamentally changed forever. And for any existing sentient life form it means that they will not be able to assert any free will over this change in their core nature.

The only ending that makes any sense to me is the Destroy ending, even though it requires you to sacrifice the Geth and EDI (which really breaks my Shepard's heart since he was always been a strong advocate of the rights of synthetic life to determine its own course). Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I don't think anyone should except Synthesis as "good".

[ThomGau]

parthian wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

BTW did anyone notice a bug in the talk with Tali after Sanctuary? She talks as if Miranda was dead, as evidenced by "It's harder on you.....I know you *were* close". After hearing that I re-loaded and didn't talk with Tali.

I don't think I need to say Miranda was not dead in my game, right?

Ya I encountered the same bug..Shepard responded as if she had died. Got worried for a second there =o

Yeah, I was worried too.
Maybe she implies that Shepard must have been so much worried about her though to me, it sounds more like a bug than anything else.
Anyway, Quarians and alcohol don't match it seems

Modifié par ThomGau, 12 mars 2012 - 09:38 .

[Prudii Aden]

CastonFolarus wrote...

Prudii Aden wrote...

I honestly don't get how people are saying Shepard survives the "destroy" ending. In the "control" & "synthesis" endings, you obviously lose your body (and thus life), but with the "destroy" ending all you see is Shepard shooting it, it blowing up with Shepard being on the fringe of that explosion but still obscured by flames, followed by the Mass Relays & the Citadel blowing up. All with Shepard right at the epicentre.

So, showing some unidentifiable rubble, in which  there is what could be a chest in armour with an N7 dogtag on top of it and not showing the face means Shepard is alive?

[Prudii Aden]

ThomGau wrote...

parthian wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

BTW did anyone notice a bug in the talk with Tali after Sanctuary? She talks as if Miranda was dead, as evidenced by "It's harder on you.....I know you *were* close". After hearing that I re-loaded and didn't talk with Tali.

I don't think I need to say Miranda was not dead in my game, right?

Ya I encountered the same bug..Shepard responded as if she had died. Got worried for a second there =o

Yeah, I was worried too.
Maybe she implies that Shepard must have been so much worried about her though to me, it sounds more like a bug than anything else.
Anyway, Quarians and alcohol don't match it seems

Yeah, it does. You know the thing that irks? You can't say anything to Tali in counterpoint to it.

[Melra]

Tallis Lucienis wrote...

Melrache wrote...

@Tallis: Yes, it does. Not sure what's so bad about it, rather that than have everyone turn into something that isn't human.

Yes but your destroying and killing trusted allies, species you worked hard to free like the Geth or EDI. How could you justify that?

I'm thinking really hard upon Synthesis and Control. I think Miranda would understand why Shepard would choose Control...Even if it led to Shepard's death. It was what must be done to save the Galaxy. 

They're not living creatures. I'd never chose either of those two, since it would require sacrificing humanity in certain way, you don't simply "enhance" things. It's not natural. The destroy is the only option for me, in which humanity survives properly. Geth ain't living beings nor is EDI.

mereck7980 wrote...

@ Ieldra2 I have several problems with the Synthesis ending, and I don't agree that it is necessarily the "good" ending.

1.
It doesn't make sense on a practical level. How would you meld
inorganic and organic material together on a genetic level? Based on
the "Starchild" conversation it sounds like the Crucible would rewrite
the genes of all life in the galaxy in such a way that DNA is part
synthetic. But what does that even mean? DNA is chemistry, a
combination of several nucleic acids combined together to form the
instructions for all cellular activity. Synthetic life would be based
on electricity or light at its core. How would you combine these two
types of building blocks together?

2. How could you rewrite the
genes for all currently living beings and have them continue to live?
Radically changing the DNA of an existing life form would most likely
kill it (see people exposed to high does of radiation). This could
make sense for the unborn, but not a grown person.

3. What
gives Shepard the right to make a decision that will affect the very
core of every living beings fundamental nature? This is much more
involved than "they live or they die". This idea means that all life
will be fundamentally changed forever. And for any existing sentient
life form it means that they will not be able to assert any free will
over this change in their core nature.

The only ending that
makes any sense to me is the Destroy ending, even though it requires you
to sacrifice the Geth and EDI (which really breaks my Shepard's heart
since he was always been a strong advocate of the rights of synthetic
life to determine its own course). Everyone is entitled to their
opinion, but I don't think anyone should except Synthesis as "good".

I agree with this, though I didn't think the change at point 1 that deeply. It's just not Shepard's call. And the two other endings have Shepard lose his body, in Destroy ending there's some evidence pointing at possible survival and remaining the way he was before.

Besides, if Quarians could build Geth once, I am sure they'd be able to rebuild them again. It might not be the same thing, but still rather them than "us". I am not sure with the endings being confusing, if the reason for them being wiped out was because of the Reaper upgrades or simply because they were synthetics.

Modifié par Melrache, 12 mars 2012 - 12:34 .

[HectorB]

jbajcar wrote...

 

Awesome pic. Tis' be my new wallpaper!

[Ieldra]

This is a little OT, but I need to answer this:

mereck7980 wrote...
@ Ieldra2 I have several problems with the Synthesis ending, and I don't agree that it is necessarily the "good" ending.

1. It doesn't make sense on a practical level. How would you meld inorganic and organic material together on a genetic level? Based on the "Starchild" conversation it sounds like the Crucible would rewrite the genes of all life in the galaxy in such a way that DNA is part synthetic. But what does that even mean? DNA is chemistry, a combination of several nucleic acids combined together to form the instructions for all cellular activity. Synthetic life would be based on electricity or light at its core. How would you combine these two types of building blocks together?

I agree the way it's phrased makes no kind of scientific sense at all. I'd rather stick to the phrasing of the leaked script "You will become more like us, and we will become more like you", implying that one gets desirable traits from the other. I don't know why they changed the phrasing. The original was even more vague, but at least you could imagine a way it makes sense.

2. How could you rewrite the genes for all currently living beings and have them continue to live? Radically changing the DNA of an existing life form would most likely kill it (see people exposed to high does of radiation). This could make sense for the unborn, but not a grown person.

*Shrug* As I said, don't ask about the science. The important thing is to imagine what the result may be. The rest...is space magic. I don't like that fact and could've come up with a better explanation, detailed, in less than an hour, but changing all life in the galaxy is a ludicrous proposition anyway, so I'm not too bothered about it. I fill in the blanks with my own imagination.

3. What gives Shepard the right to make a decision that will affect the very core of every living beings fundamental nature? This is much more involved than "they live or they die". This idea means that all life will be fundamentally changed forever. And for any existing sentient life form it means that they will not be able to assert any free will over this change in their core nature.

Do we have any choice about fundamentally changing what we are? Of course we have, we just don't have the means yet. And so will the post-Synthesis life. Another flaw in the presentation is that there is no "final" evolution of life, no "changed forever". Life goes on until it doesn't, and change is always possible. Otherwise it wouldn't be life.

The only ending that makes any sense to me is the Destroy ending, even though it requires you to sacrifice the Geth and EDI (which really breaks my Shepard's heart since he was always been a strong advocate of the rights of synthetic life to determine its own course). Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I don't think anyone should except Synthesis as "good".

Of course there won't be a consensus about it. But I see the structure of the choices. Synthesis is overcoming two fundamental opposites (organic and synthetic, chaos and order etc) and uniting them on a higher level. You might not agree with the ethics of the decision - it's a fair complaint - but the result is clearly intended to be perceived as good.

@Melrache:
As for synthetics not being real life: of course you can follow this stance to its inevitable conclusion by killing the geth in the quarian/geth conflict, and then Destroy is a valid option, but the game makes every effort to disprove this with EDI and the geth. About the so-called "unnaturalness" of being part synthetic: that's based on an absurd notion of naturalness. I get that it might feel creepy to some people, but I think that's an attitude that needs to be overcome. Synthetic life is no less natural than organic life or a combination of both. We aren't living in a world with some sacred notion of what's natural. What is, is. Nature is what is.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 12 mars 2012 - 01:04 .

[Shadow of Terror]

When do I meet Miranda for the second time? It's been a long time since the first meeting where she mentions everything.

Modifié par Shadow of Terror, 12 mars 2012 - 01:13 .

[Melra]

I don't see there being any reason to overcome it, it's not right in anyway, if something like that was ever approved of, then what would be the purpose of having living organic beings? They'd cease to exist simply because people think too much about effectiveness and such. Life doesn't have to be "effective". That's what kinda creeps the hell out of me when I read some of the stuff written here.

Geth are expendable, they ain't unique nor living. EDI was created to serve a function on Normandy, she is expendable, she's not a living organic being. She's an AI. Sure they have the right to disagree and fight against, but I'll still end them regardless, if it saves organic lifeforms.

Quarian vs Geth scenario doesn't really work here, since the attacker was only after a planet and wanted to wipe out the Geth in the process without even considering peaceful routes. My options were either to horribly change all organics in the galaxy and have my Shep melt into goo in the process or just have him melt into goo and take charge of Reapers.

Can't see how those two could be in anyway more appealing than giving up some non organic creations, that can be possibly rebuilt.

@Shadow: She'll send you an email about it, just check after every mission.. You may have missed it, if it's been long since the first one, I don't remember there being long delay. Though my whole playthrough lasted only 23 hours.

Modifié par Melrache, 12 mars 2012 - 01:36 .

[jtav]

Notes from a FShep game. Miranda spoke to Ori and the base was destroyed. There's only a minor line change for Ori, but more variation for the CB decision. Miranda didn't mention being Cerberus 2IC, so the promotion is post-CB, not a retcon. She's been in hiding for months. She also gets a badass line:

Shepard: You're a dangerous enemy.
Miranda: I am.

As a side note, Shepard now gives her motive for destroying the CB as not trusting TIM. No "soul of our species." And "no promises" occurs for all Sheps.

[jtav]

After consulting the wiki, I think I've figured out how to get Miranda to survive or die.

1. She must be loyal. Leng will mortally wound her otherwise.
2. If you don't take the first meeting, she is killed by Cerberus troopers. I presume this is during the coup.
3. Warn her about Leng and give her the Alliance data. I presume failing to do so gets you the extended death scene.
4. If romanced, do not break up with her.
5. Pass the rep check or take the Renegade interrupt. Failing to do so will get Miranda shot and a short death scene. If you want her dead, take this option. Her death is sad, but the other version is soul-crushing.

[Ieldra]

Thanks, jtav. That makes me wish I had a "CB destroyed" game. Maybe now that I know almost nothing will come of keeping it except 5 points more war assets, I may be able to replay the SM for one of my Shepards.

The information about making Miranda survive is OP material *hint*

BTW, I'm wondering how you manage to get through a second game so fast.

[ThomGau]

I destroyed the base in one of my games (and she was romanced) but she did mention a "visit by the former Cerberus 2IC would have been disatrous..." is this romance specific ?

Thank you for this info. Yet again I have to say I'm surprised to see all these variables regarding her survival compared with other ME2 characters.
I don't really like the second one, standard troopers killing Miranda, I can't imagine that happening. How are you able to know she is dead then, is there an e-mail or something ?

Modifié par ThomGau, 12 mars 2012 - 04:28 .

[GaffOrigami]

I like Miranda .

Shame looks like things are going to kick off with Ashley for me, she annoys the hell out of me but at the time I thought she was the only human I could mate (not into inter-species stuff). 

Then Miranda shows up . Didn't show too much interest in her sister though so that might have killed my chances. 

[mereck7980]

@jtav Just to satisfy my curiosity what is the "soul-crushing" version of Miranda dying? She lived to the end of the game in my play through, and I haven't read the leaked script.

[MASSEFFECTfanforlife101]

jtav wrote...

5. Pass the rep check or take the Renegade interrupt. Failing to do so will get Miranda shot and a short death scene. If you want her dead, take this option. Her death is sad, but the other version is soul-crushing.

Umm...I passed the Reputation Check and used the Charm Option, and Miri Survived.

The way I see it. I used the Charm to lie to Henry Lawson, so that he could Release Oriana. I had a feeling Miri would kill her father regardless, so I bluffed and had him release Oriana allowing Miri to finish him.

I wonder if Oriana was Voiced by Yvonne as well.

Modifié par MASSEFFECTfanforlife101, 12 mars 2012 - 05:14 .

[MASSEFFECTfanforlife101]

OT: I need your help with this: What if I saved Anderson from being shot down by TIM using the Charm Options Towards TIM? My EMS is like 6000-something? What if I save Anderson and Destroy the Reapers? Do I still live? What Effective Military strength did you have?

[mereck7980]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Of course there won't be a consensus about it. But I see the structure of the choices. Synthesis is overcoming two fundamental opposites (organic and synthetic, chaos and order etc) and uniting them on a higher level. You might not agree with the ethics of the decision - it's a fair complaint - but the result is clearly intended to be perceived as good.

I see what BW was trying to do, but I think it is short sited to assume that the outcome of this choice is "good".  There is another fundamental problem that isn't addressed by choosing this option.  

The Reapers are still alive and the bulk of their forces are in the Sol system with the remenants of the organic fleet.   Given the fact that, as Legion says, the Reaper's intelligence is "several orders of magnitude higher than the Geth" wouldn't it stand to reason that the Reapers would simply dominate the new order of things?  

If you think about the past interactions between the Geth and Reapers it was always been one of master and servant.  The Reapers gave the Geth upgrades that allowed them to be dominated and controled.  Wouldn't it make sense that they would quickly be able to ascertain the structure of the newly meshed creatures and figure out a way to infect them with code that would make all formerly organic life subservient to them?  

Remeber that the Reapers were already a mesh of organic and synthetic life.  All the Crucible did is stop them from harvesting life.  It doesn't say anything about them "playing nice" now that they don't have to kill or process their former enemies.  It makes much more sense to assume, given their track record, that they would still be a malevolent force in the galaxy.   

Modifié par mereck7980, 12 mars 2012 - 05:25 .

[Tallis Lucienis]

Ieldra2 wrote...

This is a little OT, but I need to answer this:

mereck7980 wrote...
@ Ieldra2 I have several problems with the Synthesis ending, and I don't agree that it is necessarily the "good" ending.

1. It doesn't make sense on a practical level. How would you meld inorganic and organic material together on a genetic level? Based on the "Starchild" conversation it sounds like the Crucible would rewrite the genes of all life in the galaxy in such a way that DNA is part synthetic. But what does that even mean? DNA is chemistry, a combination of several nucleic acids combined together to form the instructions for all cellular activity. Synthetic life would be based on electricity or light at its core. How would you combine these two types of building blocks together?

I agree the way it's phrased makes no kind of scientific sense at all. I'd rather stick to the phrasing of the leaked script "You will become more like us, and we will become more like you", implying that one gets desirable traits from the other. I don't know why they changed the phrasing. The original was even more vague, but at least you could imagine a way it makes sense.

2. How could you rewrite the genes for all currently living beings and have them continue to live? Radically changing the DNA of an existing life form would most likely kill it (see people exposed to high does of radiation). This could make sense for the unborn, but not a grown person.

*Shrug* As I said, don't ask about the science. The important thing is to imagine what the result may be. The rest...is space magic. I don't like that fact and could've come up with a better explanation, detailed, in less than an hour, but changing all life in the galaxy is a ludicrous proposition anyway, so I'm not too bothered about it. I fill in the blanks with my own imagination.

3. What gives Shepard the right to make a decision that will affect the very core of every living beings fundamental nature? This is much more involved than "they live or they die". This idea means that all life will be fundamentally changed forever. And for any existing sentient life form it means that they will not be able to assert any free will over this change in their core nature.

Do we have any choice about fundamentally changing what we are? Of course we have, we just don't have the means yet. And so will the post-Synthesis life. Another flaw in the presentation is that there is no "final" evolution of life, no "changed forever". Life goes on until it doesn't, and change is always possible. Otherwise it wouldn't be life.

The only ending that makes any sense to me is the Destroy ending, even though it requires you to sacrifice the Geth and EDI (which really breaks my Shepard's heart since he was always been a strong advocate of the rights of synthetic life to determine its own course). Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I don't think anyone should except Synthesis as "good".

Of course there won't be a consensus about it. But I see the structure of the choices. Synthesis is overcoming two fundamental opposites (organic and synthetic, chaos and order etc) and uniting them on a higher level. You might not agree with the ethics of the decision - it's a fair complaint - but the result is clearly intended to be perceived as good.

@Melrache:
As for synthetics not being real life: of course you can follow this stance to its inevitable conclusion by killing the geth in the quarian/geth conflict, and then Destroy is a valid option, but the game makes every effort to disprove this with EDI and the geth. About the so-called "unnaturalness" of being part synthetic: that's based on an absurd notion of naturalness. I get that it might feel creepy to some people, but I think that's an attitude that needs to be overcome. Synthetic life is no less natural than organic life or a combination of both. We aren't living in a world with some sacred notion of what's natural. What is, is. Nature is what is.

Your refering to the destruction of a species which has evolved to the extent that Synthesis provides though. EDI and the Geth are no longer just sentient platforms. Before Legion himself died he referred to himself as "I" instead of "We", they had become self-aware, they had personalities and had freedom. 

There is also the fact that following the endgame sequence, we see absolutely no change to Normandy or it's crew involving the choice of Synthesis. Maybe life in this galaxy had already reached the apex, the peak of evolution and the Guardian was wrong about Synthesis.

I feel like regardless of our choice the Reapers still win here: They make us either Destroy half of the galaxy to destroy them, they make us become what they are or they make us believe we can control them and wait another 50,000 years placing our civilizations on a war building path much like the Protheans would have done to us to prepare for the next cycle. 

This is why I agree with the general consensus there needs to be a "**** you Guardian" paragon choice where you need MAXIUMUM war assests, MAXIMUM Reputation and either MAXIMUM Renegade/Paragon and destroy the Reapers without consequences to the galaxy, it could lead to your death but hey at least you did not sacfirice your morality and morales to get there. 

[kevinywong]

parthian wrote...

I liked Liara's comment about Miranda...something to the effect of "Miranda struck me as a very driven woman..I think you two could be very happy together."

Meanwhile, Tali referred to her as a "genetically perfect cerebrus cheerleader bosh'tet"...pfft.

Keep in mind though that they have verrry different perspectives on both Miranda and Cerberus. Tali already had a chip on her shoulder after what Cerberus did offscreen to the Quarian fleet, and then her first experience of Miranda had them at odds over what to do with Veetor. 

Contrast that with Liara, whose initial experience of Miranda really had them working together, as she retrieved Shepard's body and turned it over to Cerberus to resurrect him.