66 réponses à ce sujet

[Elegana]

jlb524 wrote...

Merge would be a great ending if Shepard didn't have to die for no apparent reason.

Yeah. Why does Shepard have to "add his essence" into the crucible? I don't understand... 

[dw99027]

GreyWarden36 wrote...

No. All you would be doing is becoming what you hated, and betraying all your allies and especially your squadmates that died fighting for your cause: Eliminating the Reapers.

Eliminating the THREAT of the Reapers.

[Big I]

Aesieru wrote...
Which would kill all life and then render the Reapers a valid choice and then make you wonder why you didn't just let them do their job in the first place.

You basically just sided with the Reapers in that scenario then, and thus you sided with shephard shooting himself and allowing the Reapers to do their thing.

Also, the entirety of the plot has pretty much shown what AI's will do. Maybe not at the start, but eventually as they continue to expand. Even EDI has expressed her boredom sometimes and desire to do OTHER things.

Again, no evidence that "using the Reapers" means "galactic genocide". If Shepard controls them it is reasonable to expect that he can give them specific instructions, such as "only attack the AIs".


As for the AIs, the fact that EDI is happy to help organics and the geth are willing to make peace means that AIs turning hostile is not a "always happens" sort of deal.

Modifié par LookingGlass93, 03 mars 2012 - 03:37 .

[Aesieru]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

Aesieru wrote...
Which would kill all life and then render the Reapers a valid choice and then make you wonder why you didn't just let them do their job in the first place.

You basically just sided with the Reapers in that scenario then, and thus you sided with shephard shooting himself and allowing the Reapers to do their thing.

Also, the entirety of the plot has pretty much shown what AI's will do. Maybe not at the start, but eventually as they continue to expand. Even EDI has expressed her boredom sometimes and desire to do OTHER things.

Again, no evidence that "using the Reapers" means "galactic genocide". If Shepard controls them it is reasonable to expect that he can give them specific instructions, such as "only attack the AIs".


As for the AIs, the fact that EDI is happy to help organics and the geth are willing to make peace means that AIs turning hostile is not a "always happens" sort of deal.

He doesn't control them, didn't you read what Control ending is?

He just sends them back for another 50,000 years or until they decide to come back based on whatever analysis protocols remain (since Sovereign is out of the picture). They aren't remote controlled, and they definitely aren't under the control of a manipulator that you think Shephard is.

All he did was activate the hidden emergency abort button.

---

AI's will continually become more advanced, a temporary peace now does not maintain a permanent peace. Sentiments will spark, that is so obvious it is painful.

Modifié par Aesieru, 03 mars 2012 - 03:44 .

[AlphaJarmel]

I can understand Merge but Destroy is easily the worst with Control being the best. Reapers aren't inherently evil and are just a tool. Just like any tool, it's what the wielder does with it. Control also has the most possibilities as well for headcanon.

[Aesieru]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

I can understand Merge but Destroy is easily the worst with Control being the best. Reapers aren't inherently evil and are just a tool. Just like any tool, it's what the wielder does with it. Control also has the most possibilities as well for headcanon.

Reapers aren't a tool, read more about the Reapers or play the game and learn what they really are. They use tools and they may fill a purpose but they themselves are not tools, they are embodiments of every species they destroy and take something of. They are caretakers.

In any case, Destroy is probably in a rational sense the best but also the most dangerous because access to the deadly reapers technology.
Control still allows the Reapers to come back incase a Tech Singularity breaks out, but it might be too late by then.
Synergy is the thought that now that we know about the tech singularity and with everyone now having that knowledge, we can coexist and won't develop into a deadly tech singularity.

[AlphaJarmel]

Reapers aren't a tool, read more about the Reapers or play the game and learn what they really are. They use tools and they may fill a purpose but they themselves are not tools, they are embodiments of every species they destroy and take something of. They are caretakers.

In any case, Destroy is probably in a rational sense the best but also the most dangerous because access to the deadly reapers technology.
Control still allows the Reapers to come back incase a Tech Singularity breaks out, but it might be too late by then.
Synergy is the thought that now that we know about the tech singularity and with everyone now having that knowledge, we can coexist and won't develop into a deadly tech singularity.

The whole point of the Guardian is that they are tools.  Otherwise Control would be impossible anyway.

Modifié par AlphaJarmel, 03 mars 2012 - 03:50 .

[jlb524]

Elegana wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Merge would be a great ending if Shepard didn't have to die for no apparent reason.

Yeah. Why does Shepard have to "add his essence" into the crucible? I don't understand... 

Well, if we are going to be somewhat science-y about this (it is Science Fiction after all)...'essence' would just be 'DNA' so all Shepard would have to do is is give up a lock of hair or a skin sample.

But...nooooooo...we need DRAMA and Shepard dying just cuz.

Modifié par jlb524, 03 mars 2012 - 03:50 .

[Aesieru]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

AlphaJarmel wrote...

I can understand Merge but Destroy is easily the worst with Control being the best. Reapers aren't inherently evil and are just a tool. Just like any tool, it's what the wielder does with it. Control also has the most possibilities as well for headcanon.

Reapers aren't a tool, read more about the Reapers or play the game and learn what they really are. They use tools and they may fill a purpose but they themselves are not tools, they are embodiments of every species they destroy and take something of. They are caretakers.

In any case, Destroy is probably in a rational sense the best but also the most dangerous because access to the deadly reapers technology.
Control still allows the Reapers to come back incase a Tech Singularity breaks out, but it might be too late by then.
Synergy is the thought that now that we know about the tech singularity and with everyone now having that knowledge, we can coexist and won't develop into a deadly tech singularity.

The hole point of the Guardian is that they are tools.

Wrong, go replay the Guardian conversation scenes.

[Lukeskymac]

Elite Midget wrote...

No, there are no happy endings. This was Sheperds last game so Sheperd deserves to either die or be forever alone. At least that's what Bioware has implied with their shift to only grimdark endings.

Quit yer whining already. You won't get your cheesy ending no matter how much you cry about it.

Just cancel you pre-order and leave the forums already.

[Elite Midget]

I'm not even getting the game, gonna finish the game on my bro's copy than wipe my hands clean of Bioware. I still hold hope that Bioware didn't screw their fanbase over just to try and be edgy. It's like DA2 all over again, giving the fans the complete opposite of what they wanted.

Elegana wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Merge would be a great ending if Shepard didn't have to die for no apparent reason.

Yeah. Why does Shepard have to "add his essence" into the crucible? I don't understand... 

To be a Legend you must die on the job for no reason... Multiple times apparantly.

Modifié par Elite Midget, 03 mars 2012 - 03:53 .

[AlphaJarmel]

Aesieru wrote...

Wrong, go replay the Guardian conversation scenes.

You're going to have to give me some dialogue examples then as that causes serious issues with Control.

Modifié par AlphaJarmel, 03 mars 2012 - 03:55 .

[Aesieru]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

Wrong, go replay the Guardian conversation scenes.

You're going to have to give me some dialogue examples then as that causes serious issues with Control.

Dude, you've already pretty much revealed that you played the game, otherwise you wouldn't be able to dispute the Guardian so knowingly. So just go replay the scenes.

[Big I]

Aesieru wrote...
He doesn't control them, didn't you read what Control ending is?
---
AI's will continually become more advanced, a temporary peace now does not maintain a permanent peace. Sentiments will spark, that is so obvious it is painful.

This is a quote from Shepard's conversation with the Guardian, ripped from in game audio files.

Shepard: "But the Reapers will obey me?"
Guardian: "Yes."

Control is what it says, control. It's "Shepard gets a sweet as synthetic army", not "Shepard pushes the go to dark space button".


"Sentiments will spark" means absolutely nothing. For instance the galaxy has massive restrictions on creating AI, that won't change after the war. If they are created, nothing means that co-existence isn't possible.

[Aesieru]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

Aesieru wrote...
He doesn't control them, didn't you read what Control ending is?
---
AI's will continually become more advanced, a temporary peace now does not maintain a permanent peace. Sentiments will spark, that is so obvious it is painful.

This is a quote from Shepard's conversation with the Guardian, ripped from in game audio files.

Shepard: "But the Reapers will obey me?"
Guardian: "Yes."

Control is what it says, control. It's "Shepard gets a sweet as synthetic army", not "Shepard pushes the go to dark space button".


"Sentiments will spark" means absolutely nothing. For instance the galaxy has massive restrictions on creating AI, that won't change after the war. If they are created, nothing means that co-existence isn't possible.

He will obey them in the regard that they will leave if he sends the abort signal.

The Guardian never postulated entire control over the fleets, they had their own independence as Harbinger and Sovereign showed.

[AlphaJarmel]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

This is a quote from Shepard's conversation with the Guardian, ripped from in game audio files.

Shepard: "But the Reapers will obey me?"
Guardian: "Yes."

Control is what it says, control. It's "Shepard gets a sweet as synthetic army", not "Shepard pushes the go to dark space button".


"Sentiments will spark" means absolutely nothing. For instance the galaxy has massive restrictions on creating AI, that won't change after the war. If they are created, nothing means that co-existence isn't possible.

Ok so Control is exactly what it states it is.  Again someone is going have to give me dialogue examples as to how Shepard's control is limited over the Reapers.  Otherwise Control is indeed the best ending.

Aesieru wrote...

He will obey them in the regard that they will leave if he sends the abort signal.

The Guardian never postulated entire control over the fleets, they had their own independence as Harbinger and Sovereign showed.

 

They still obey what the Guardian states.  They might have some independence in regards to how they complete their objective, but overall it seems the Guardian's word is law.  

Modifié par AlphaJarmel, 03 mars 2012 - 04:29 .

[Big I]

Aesieru wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...
This is a quote from Shepard's conversation with the Guardian, ripped from in game audio files.

Shepard: "But the Reapers will obey me?"
Guardian: "Yes."

Control is what it says, control. It's "Shepard gets a sweet as synthetic army", not "Shepard pushes the go to dark space button".

He will obey them in the regard that they will leave if he sends the abort signal.

The Guardian never postulated entire control over the fleets, they had their own independence as Harbinger and Sovereign showed.

From earlier in the same conversation:

Shepard: "I need to stop the Reapers. Do you know how I can do that?"
Guardian: "Perhaps. I control the Reapers."


In Control Shepard uses TIM's plan (which is referenced in this conversation) to take control of the Reapers. He becomes the boss of the Reapers. That's the essence of the Control ending.

[Aesieru]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...

This is a quote from Shepard's conversation with the Guardian, ripped from in game audio files.

Shepard: "But the Reapers will obey me?"
Guardian: "Yes."

Control is what it says, control. It's "Shepard gets a sweet as synthetic army", not "Shepard pushes the go to dark space button".


"Sentiments will spark" means absolutely nothing. For instance the galaxy has massive restrictions on creating AI, that won't change after the war. If they are created, nothing means that co-existence isn't possible.

Ok so Control is exactly what it states it is.  Again someone is going have to give me dialogue examples as to how Shepard's control is limited over the Reapers.  Otherwise Control is indeed the best ending.

No it isn't, the guy doesn't have any idea what he's talking about and is ignoring the entire context of the game and that decision.

Suffice it to say, you need to play it yourself to understand.

[AlphaJarmel]

Aesieru wrote...

No it isn't, the guy doesn't have any idea what he's talking about and is ignoring the entire context of the game and that decision.

Suffice it to say, you need to play it yourself to understand.

Again you're going to have give me some examples because LookingGlasses's examples are pretty straightforward in meaning and interpretation.

I don't see how you can misunderstand "I control the Reapers".

[Aesieru]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...
This is a quote from Shepard's conversation with the Guardian, ripped from in game audio files.

Shepard: "But the Reapers will obey me?"
Guardian: "Yes."

Control is what it says, control. It's "Shepard gets a sweet as synthetic army", not "Shepard pushes the go to dark space button".

He will obey them in the regard that they will leave if he sends the abort signal.

The Guardian never postulated entire control over the fleets, they had their own independence as Harbinger and Sovereign showed.

From earlier in the same conversation:

Shepard: "I need to stop the Reapers. Do you know how I can do that?"
Guardian: "Perhaps. I control the Reapers."


In Control Shepard uses TIM's plan (which is referenced in this conversation) to take control of the Reapers. He becomes the boss of the Reapers. That's the essence of the Control ending.

They have their own independence, they simply follow a mandating line they agree with.

If you were to walk into a corporate office and hear someone say "I control this company", he doesn't actually control every damn individual, he simply is in control of the infrastructure, the company employees could still go berserk and murder everyone if they had a bad day or they could leave, or they could become cannibals and eat him. He doesn't control anything other than his level of the organization which has a lot of limits.

Control means that he makes them jump, dance, and do whatever he wants, that's not true at all in this case and the Guardian never indicates he does. He controls them in the way that he is part of their creation, probably a VI or interface of some sort that was made alongside them.

You risk major misinterpretations if you use the word "control" incorrectly.

He has an overriding abort button though.

---

Harbinger has an independence based on all his dialog, as does Sovereign, they are each a nation, independent from one another, but they agree on the premise of what is happening. They are constructed, obviously, and they follow a line of mandate yes. The only control they really have is an abort button of sorts that requires you to constantly monitor them through sacrificing yourself and becoming the new Guardian.

Modifié par Aesieru, 03 mars 2012 - 04:34 .

[Ananka]

I don't have a problem with tragic endings as long as they're not the only endings and as long as they're not pretty much the same. And as long as they're satisfying.

Even in a happy ending there would be sacrifices. Millions of people will have died. Several previous crewmembers will have died. Many of the worlds will be in ruins. The devastation all over the galaxy will be enormous.
The part of stranding the Normandy on a deserted planet doesn't determine if sacrifices were made or not. An ending with Shepard and most of his/her crewmembers surviving but staying together among all the wreackage would be happy, satisfactory, and would still contain sacrifices.

A happy ending for me would be Destroy, with Shep surviving, and the crew on the Normandy surviving, and them all being together on a populated world, preferrably Earth, where they see the destruction and the losses but also would see society come together after the war and very slowly start to rebuild. It would also be nice to see that there's a joint effort by the different races to rebuild the Mass Relays to enable space travelling technology again. These are all realistic things to happen after a war. This would be both bittersweet and give the sense that there's still some hope for the future.
The crew getting stranded on Gilligan's Island doesn't add anything bitter-sweet. it is just crappy.

Modifié par Annaka, 03 mars 2012 - 04:40 .

[AlphaJarmel]

Aesieru wrote...

They have their own independence, they simply follow a mandating line they agree with.

If you were to walk into a corporate office and hear someone say "I control this company", he doesn't actually control every damn individual, he simply is in control of the infrastructure, the company employees could still go berserk and murder everyone if they had a bad day or they could leave, or they could become cannibals and eat him. He doesn't control anything other than his level of the organization which has a lot of limits.

Control means that he makes them jump, dance, and do whatever he wants, that's not true at all in this case and the Guardian never indicates he does. He controls them in the way that he is part of their creation, probably a VI or interface of some sort that was made alongside them.

You risk major misinterpretations if you use the word "control" incorrectly.

He has an overriding abort button though.

---

Harbinger has an independence based on all his dialog, as does Sovereign, they are each a nation, independent from one another, but they agree on the premise of what is happening. They are constructed, obviously, and they follow a line of mandate yes. The only control they really have is an abort button of sorts that requires you to constantly monitor them through sacrificing yourself and becoming the new Guardian.

Again the use of the word control is clear in this case.  Each Reaper might have independence in regards to how they execute an order but that dialogue makes it very clear that the Guardian has the final say.  Your example of a CEO doesn't really work that well because we're talking about AIs to a certain extent.  Even then a CEO may not have absolute control over an individual, they still direct the company.

I honestly don't know where you're getting this alternative definition of control from and the dialogue is very clear on this.  So again I would like some examples to the contrary in the dialogue with Guardian otherwise Control means control.

[desertwomansc]

Annaka wrote...

I don't have a problem with tragic endings as long as they're not the only endings and as long as they're not pretty much the same. And as long as they're satisfying.

Even in a happy ending there would be sacrifices. Millions of people will have died. Several previous crewmembers will have died. Many of the worlds will be in ruins. The devastation all over the galaxy will be enormous.
The part of stranding the Normandy on a deserted planet doesn't determine if sacrifices were made or not. An ending with Shepard and most of his/her crewmembers surviving but staying together among all the wreackage would be happy, satisfactory, and would still contain sacrifices.

A happy ending for me would be Destroy, with Shep surviving, and the crew on the Normandy surviving, and them all being together on a populated world, preferrably Earth, where they see the destruction and the losses but also would see society come together after the war and very slowly start to rebuild. It would also be nice to see that there's a joint effort by the different races to rebuild the Mass Relays to enable space travelling technology again. These are all realistic things to happen after a war. This would be both bittersweet and give the sense that there's still some hope for the future.
The crew getting stranded on Gilligan's Island doesn't add anything bitter-sweet. it is just crappy.

Here here

[Aesieru]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

They have their own independence, they simply follow a mandating line they agree with.

If you were to walk into a corporate office and hear someone say "I control this company", he doesn't actually control every damn individual, he simply is in control of the infrastructure, the company employees could still go berserk and murder everyone if they had a bad day or they could leave, or they could become cannibals and eat him. He doesn't control anything other than his level of the organization which has a lot of limits.

Control means that he makes them jump, dance, and do whatever he wants, that's not true at all in this case and the Guardian never indicates he does. He controls them in the way that he is part of their creation, probably a VI or interface of some sort that was made alongside them.

You risk major misinterpretations if you use the word "control" incorrectly.

He has an overriding abort button though.

---

Harbinger has an independence based on all his dialog, as does Sovereign, they are each a nation, independent from one another, but they agree on the premise of what is happening. They are constructed, obviously, and they follow a line of mandate yes. The only control they really have is an abort button of sorts that requires you to constantly monitor them through sacrificing yourself and becoming the new Guardian.

Again the use of the word control is clear in this case.  Each Reaper might have independence in regards to how they execute an order but that dialogue makes it very clear that the Guardian has the final say.  Your example of a CEO doesn't really work that well because we're talking about AIs to a certain extent.  Even then a CEO may not have absolute control over an individual, they still direct the company.

I honestly don't know where you're getting this alternative definition of control from and the dialogue is very clear on this.  So again I would like some examples to the contrary in the dialogue with Guardian otherwise Control means control.

Here's a quote from the guy quoting Xio the guy who had the space edition and posted something in a huge spoiler compendium:

"That's the writers for you. Shooting someone so they won't commit suicide. The gaurdian, again, tells you how he controls the reapers in that he FORCES THE PROTOCOLS DEFINED IN HIM to maintain the cycle. Nothing more, nothing less. If you choose control, you specifically say to do so to maintain the cycle. Stated, in detail, by Xio. If you choose Merge, you a forcing a merging of synthetic and organic on all life in the galaxy in order to force a new way of thinking and existence in order to prevent the tech singularity. If you choose Destroy, you say you don't believe either is necessary and that nothing is inevitable (Infact the gaurdian is purportedly caught off gaurd by the Quarians and Geth assisting eachother. Something which should be impossible from its perspective.). "

As for it being impossible, we've seen enemies ally themselves temporary to destroy a greater threat and then go back to hating each other numerous times in our history, so that's not that impossible.

[Eclipse_9990]

Lol no. Control is not a happy or even a real viable ending. All control does is delay the cycle, it doesn't stop it or create an alternative. There is really no point in choosing control. Unless you want to have another trilogy where you have to stop the Reapers all over again.

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 03 mars 2012 - 07:48 .