178 réponses à ce sujet

[Hudathan]

Control could have failed since Illusive Man showed the danger of that train of thought, Synthesis was a crap shoot and counter to the concept of freedom, Destroy was the only way to end the killing asap.

[stwu]

No. Destroy is the only real choice. I will not let the Reapers survive what happens if they can gain control of themselves again. And I will not alter every sapient being in the universe. It's beyond wrong. The Geth and EDI may be intelligent but their just fancy machines.

[jijeebo]

Lookout1390 wrote...

Control = Shepard dies, relays blow up, Reapers still exist = You lose
Synthesis = Shepard dies, relays blow up, Reapers still exist = You lose
Destroy = Shepard dies, relays blow up, Reapers die = You sort of win

Though to be honest, I don't think any of the endings was a 'victory' for Shepard.

Control = Shepard becomes the reapers, relays blow up, brainy people transfer Sheps mind from a Sheaper into a robot body like EDI did , Sheapers ferry everyone home then rebuild the relays and fly into sun = Everybody wins, cue a SEXY DANCE PARTY!! xD

Modifié par jijeebo, 08 avril 2012 - 03:18 .

[o Ventus]

Valentia X wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

I chose control as the least ethically horrifying of three very disturbing options.


I can never pick destroy. The second I heard that it would kill all synthetics, it became an non-issue for me. To sanction mass murder of an entire species- synthetic or otherwise- is anathema to me and my Shepard. I would never pick an ending that allowed me to destroy all asari, or turians, or krogan, etc.


I'm curious as to how many pro-destroyers would pick the destroy option if it meant killing every last human in the galaxy. You know, 'acceptable collateral damage' and all that.

The geth can be recreated. The quarians still exist after all.

Humans can't. Don't ever use that weak-ass argument again, please.

If you can't say anything nice...

Actually, you can't 'bring them back'. Not as the sentient, self-determining machines with individual personalities as they are now. They make a point of this with Legion; after he sacrifices himself, another Geth comes to speak to you, and when you ask if it's Legion, it reponds that Legion is gone and can't come back after his sacrifice. 

The Geth arose from from a section of routine VI programs that interfaced, then rose to sentience through what is essentially digital evolution. If you choose to destroy the geth, you effectively wipe out that entire synthetic race. You may be able to reprogram a new series of VI that eventually gain sentience in the same fashion, but that doesn't make them the same, no more than raising a new child in the fashion of the old makes them the same child. EDI is built from cannibalised reaper parts- she is not, however, a reaper herself.  There may be memories that can be brought up, but no reborn 'geth' that you would have made would be a survivor of the Morning War; it would be, at best, a facsimile of what used to be, and not an actual geth itself.


The crux of the argument is whether one believes that the geth are individuals with 'souls', unique personalities and true sentience. If you don't, then the 'rebuilding the geth' option probably sounds nice. If you do happen to believe it, then the destroy option is an act of genocide as henious as if you chose to destroy an organic race. 

EDI. The Alliance made her. The quarians are miles beyond the Alliance when it comes to engineering and mechanics. EDI never required a "personality dissemination" for her sentience.

[chevyguy87]

Virginian wrote...

Legion specifically showed that the geth conciously chose not to destroy their creators at the conclusion of The Morning War, because they 'feared' the potential deadly consequences to their own survival. That to me proved the geth were sentient and worthy of life more so than what accord to them after getting the reaper code making them true AI.

I chose destroy only becuase I wanted to see who would walk off the ship but my default choice is always what will keep the geth & EDI alive.

chevyguy87 wrote...

The problems of victory are more agreeable than those of defeat, but they are no less difficult.

-Winston Churchill
 
In
war it may be necessary to take life in order to ensure future
existence is possible. Look at the atomic bombs dropped to end WW2. Was
it necessary to prevent hundreds of thousands of additional casualties?
Yes it was. It may not have been a pretty solution but it indeed was
necessary to succeed.

With that being said in any future
playthroughs I do I will always choose destroy because in war casualties
are inevitable to acheive success.

Don't use such weak & pathetic arguments. Committing genocide is never acceptable no matter what.

Atomic bombs in WW2 didn't end destroy all humans in the universe of a specific ethnicity, it wiped out cities, gave people cancer, and made land uninhabitable for a long time. It is nowhere near compatable to wiping out an entire species.

Ahh you completely misunderstand the point yet I suppose that should not come as much surprise. 

I will not waste my breath in a petty argument that will go nowhere.

If you fail to see the similarities between the two events then I feel quite sorry for you.

Modifié par chevyguy87, 08 avril 2012 - 03:33 .

[DashRunner92]

Relays are destroyed ("Overloaded") in all three endings. It's in the script.

[SlyTF1]

All the endings suck, but I like the destroy ending because there's a possiblity that Shepard lives. I would pick the control ending, but Shepard dies and that's unacceptable.

[J-Sheridan]

Control = Shepard is demonstrating Synthetics and Organics can live together and dying to ensure they get the chance. Space Jesus incarnate.

Synthesis = Shepard is demonstrating the Starchild is right and the only solution is to remove diversity to ensure peace

Destroy = Shepard is conducting ethnic cleansing on a galactic scale and obliterating technology to boot. Again supporting Starchild's idea that Man and Machine will always turn on the other.


Shepard dies in all the endings. The BS breathing clip proves nothing and anyone that isnt an idiot would understand even if that IS Shepard he is going to die.
Bioware want Shepard dead so they can bury him along with anything they dont want to carry on into the next garbage they make.

Destroy is going to likely end up being the canon choice and Bioware want you to choose that by giving you the little hope of breathing Shepard.
However, Control is the much more ethical and significant choice to make.

TIM wanted to Control the Reapers for personal dominance
Shepard... can want to control the Reapers to tell them all to commit suicide = TADA Reapers destroyed AND Geth etc. live.

[Zix13]

Synthesis is the most morally questionable, without a doubt. However. That's not the reason for picking destroy.
Control: Reapers win, cycle continues.
Synthesis: Reapers win, what starchild says they want anyways
Destroy: Reapers die, Shep wins.

[Raiil]

o Ventus wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

I chose control as the least ethically horrifying of three very disturbing options.


I can never pick destroy. The second I heard that it would kill all synthetics, it became an non-issue for me. To sanction mass murder of an entire species- synthetic or otherwise- is anathema to me and my Shepard. I would never pick an ending that allowed me to destroy all asari, or turians, or krogan, etc.


I'm curious as to how many pro-destroyers would pick the destroy option if it meant killing every last human in the galaxy. You know, 'acceptable collateral damage' and all that.

The geth can be recreated. The quarians still exist after all.

Humans can't. Don't ever use that weak-ass argument again, please.

If you can't say anything nice...

Actually, you can't 'bring them back'. Not as the sentient, self-determining machines with individual personalities as they are now. They make a point of this with Legion; after he sacrifices himself, another Geth comes to speak to you, and when you ask if it's Legion, it reponds that Legion is gone and can't come back after his sacrifice. 

The Geth arose from from a section of routine VI programs that interfaced, then rose to sentience through what is essentially digital evolution. If you choose to destroy the geth, you effectively wipe out that entire synthetic race. You may be able to reprogram a new series of VI that eventually gain sentience in the same fashion, but that doesn't make them the same, no more than raising a new child in the fashion of the old makes them the same child. EDI is built from cannibalised reaper parts- she is not, however, a reaper herself.  There may be memories that can be brought up, but no reborn 'geth' that you would have made would be a survivor of the Morning War; it would be, at best, a facsimile of what used to be, and not an actual geth itself.


The crux of the argument is whether one believes that the geth are individuals with 'souls', unique personalities and true sentience. If you don't, then the 'rebuilding the geth' option probably sounds nice. If you do happen to believe it, then the destroy option is an act of genocide as henious as if you chose to destroy an organic race. 

EDI. The Alliance made her. The quarians are miles beyond the Alliance when it comes to engineering and mechanics. EDI never required a "personality dissemination" for her sentience.

EDI herself is comprised of Reaper tech and parts taken from the Hannibal VI from the Rogue VI mission. She herself states that it was frightening to gain sentience in that manner, essentially while under siege. They didn't just pop out an AI. And neither did the Quarians- they networked VIs and allowed them a modicum of independence, and sentience grew out of that. It was't programmed in. 

Put it this way- if you kill a person and then create a clone from their DNA, are they, metaphysically, the same person? Is a person the summation of their parts, or a mix of their body and experiences, which is unique to every individual?

[SilentK]

Hmmm....

I have FemShep's who will choose destroy, and those who will go for synthesis.

* The first one who took destroy was so hellbent on getting rid of the reapers at that point that she would have given up pretty much everything. Kill them dead.

* The second one who will pick destroy, she never activated Legion in ME2, so she doesn't know him. She also won't have time to do the q in which you see the beginning of the geth and how the quarians became scared of them. She chooses to save admiral Korris and them she runs out of time. She has only seen the geth as a threat.

edit: And the geth will not even be around when the destroy-option comes up for her. They were sacrficed to save the Quarians. Not all Shepard's will have the possibility of getting peace between the quarians and the geth. Meaning, one of these two races will already be gone. In this case, the geth. Not all Shepard's will have heard Legion refer to himself as "I".

* FemShep who trusts Legion, really has become a good friend of EDI will go for synthesis.

Basically, different things will work for different Shepards. I see no problem going for the destroy-option with a Shepard, either because the see the sacrifice as necessary to rid the galaxy of the reapers or not trusting the geth. It comes down to how your Shepard reacts. And I see little point in telling people how play their Shepard's, but I really like to hear the reasoning for why they made the choices they did.

Modifié par SilentK, 08 avril 2012 - 03:31 .

[Nobrandminda]

 I love how everyone always talks about the three endings like they're picking the lesser of 3 evils.

It's never, "I picked Control because it felt right."  It's, "I picked Control because it felt the least wrong."

Very satisfying, wouldn't you agree?

[pharsti]

Why is this such a discussed point ?

During the course of the game you can kill how many races? Rachni, Geth, give a nice kick in the balls for the Krogan.... its... a moral choice, like so many others youve been doing for the past 3 games.

And depending on the type of person who plays it, and how he\\she plays it, then Shepard might not even accept the Geth as more than toasters, i know i had a Shepard like that. And if they are alive or not are also debatable, but i also had a Shepard who believed they are, indeed alive.

Bottomline, its up to the player and how he\\she made Shepard out to be, maybe Shepard is really pro-human, maybe she loves everyone (like Kelly XD), maybe she doesnt care as long as they win, maybe she thinks the Geths are toasters, theres more than one Shepard, but as long as its yours, then its "right".

[mattp516]

Ieldra2 wrote...

The destruction of the relays (which doesn't happen in Control) is bad enough, but the real sticking point is this:

For three games, we've been confronted with questions about the nature of synthetic life. We've seen the rogue "VI" on Luna post "Help me" in binary code. We've met Legion and EDI and we can say with conviction that synthetics can be people. Now in ME3, if you broker peace between the quarians and the geth, the geth gain individuality, and Legion sacrifices his life for the species. Thus, a new species is formed, synthetics in the image of organics, having attained personhood. It is a species in its infancy, all the potential for its future as yet unrealized. 

Seeing this is an awe-inspiring experience. If you value intelligent life and its diversity at all, it is a sublime moment, a small island of hope in the horrors of a galactic war. And as opposed to the genophage cure, there are no lingering doubts about bad consequences down the road, since the geth have proven by their actions past and present that they're not naturally aggressive. 

If you choose Destroy, you also destroy all synthetic life including the geth, destroying all that potential and making a lie of that sublime moment when Legion spoke of himself as "I". You are destroying the future of a newborn species, the same Shepard accuses the Catalyst of if you choose the Paragon responses, only worse, because this new species has had no time at all. 

And don't tell me it doesn't actually happen. If you choose Destroy, EDI will not appear in the ending scenes. Synthetics being destroyed is well in line with the theme of the Destroy ending and supported by dialogue and visual evidence.

Taking this option makes me feel as if I just killed a child. 

Agreed! This is why I've said from day one: Destroy is the renegade option. Who cares if anderson was shown taking it? It's still the renegade option.

[Cobretti ftw]

I stopped at "The destruction of the relays (which doesn't happen in Control)"

Lol.

[Totally Not Swaggacide]

I always choose destroy. I believe it's the best option

[Lookout1390]

If you don't want the Reapers to win, then destroy is the only option that allows this.

[o Ventus]

Valentia X wrote...

EDI herself is comprised of Reaper tech and parts taken from the Hannibal VI from the Rogue VI mission. She herself states that it was frightening to gain sentience in that manner, essentially while under siege. They didn't just pop out an AI. And neither did the Quarians- they networked VIs and allowed them a modicum of independence, and sentience grew out of that. It was't programmed in. 

Put it this way- if you kill a person and then create a clone from their DNA, are they, metaphysically, the same person? Is a person the summation of their parts, or a mix of their body and experiences, which is unique to every individual?

I'm aware of that. I'm saying that the geth can be recreated -- sentience and all.

It happened once, it can happen again.

[Stardozen]

To be Honest I can't trust one man with such power, like the reapers. Not even Shepard. "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" Shepard won't be the same after the control that is certain. We don't know what will happen exactly all we know is that we control the repears the ambiguity makes me Nervous how do we truly know Shepard won't start another cycle, we don't. With the destroy you are certain the reaper threat is over, but the cost is great. In the End all the endings challenge you morally which is what they are men't to do, they are all evil endings non of them are better then the other.

[spirosz]

If I could do anything to prevent the death of the Geth and still pick the "Destroy Option," I would, but I personally don't like the other two options. Maybe, the middle, but control, not for me.

Modifié par spiros9110, 08 avril 2012 - 03:38 .

[Raiil]

o Ventus wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

EDI herself is comprised of Reaper tech and parts taken from the Hannibal VI from the Rogue VI mission. She herself states that it was frightening to gain sentience in that manner, essentially while under siege. They didn't just pop out an AI. And neither did the Quarians- they networked VIs and allowed them a modicum of independence, and sentience grew out of that. It was't programmed in. 

Put it this way- if you kill a person and then create a clone from their DNA, are they, metaphysically, the same person? Is a person the summation of their parts, or a mix of their body and experiences, which is unique to every individual?

I'm aware of that. I'm saying that the geth can be recreated -- sentience and all.

It happened once, it can happen again.

And humans could probably be cloned (as it's possible in-lore) at some point, but does that somehow make killing all of them the correct solution? You could write new VI interfaces, connect them, and expect sentience at some point since that seems to be the way synthetic beings evolve, but it doesn't a) replace the personalities who were permanently destroyed and doesn't change the fact that the deaths happened already.

Jesus, who would want to rebuild them, knowing they'd find out that we'd nuked them out of existence once already?

[DisAdEv]

Destroy left a bad taste in my mouth. It felt like just wiping the slate clean while not really solving the issue. What if what the starchild says is canon, and that organics will rebell against their creators? What if a new synthetic race rises, and they learn that the last major conflict totally wiped out all intelligent synthetic life? The cycle just continues.

[GnusmasTHX]

Little does OP know, the method by which you can destroy the Reapers while sparing the geth and EDI is by touching the destroy mechanism with a pole exactly 10 feet in length.

[xxskyshadowxx]

What I don't get is how the writers would think that players would just accept the Star Kid's logic on any level. Hell, depending on how you played your Shepard, Shepard should have an option to basically just say "everything I've done in the past several weeks pretty much knocks your theory on it's ass."

And the Star Kid even admits it to a degree when he says his solution no longer works. Yet he basically throws out three variations of basically the same solution that is broken to begin with, and Shepard is like "'kay" and stumbles off to choose one. It would have made more sense for the Star Kid to look to Shepard to come up with a new solution, then offer a buncha ideas for the player to pick from based on how Shepard had been played up to that point.

[Olueq]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...
Geth die, that's enough for me not to ever choose that ending, unless I side with Quarians with one of my other Shep's.

Yes. If you roleplay a Shepard with a consequent "Synthetics are machines, not people" attitude and side with the quarians, then Destroy is a viable option in the end.

BTW, apparently supporting the idea that synthetics are people is Renegade. I got +2 Renegade from supporting Adams in his debate with Chakwas. Does that make any sense to anyone?

...or if you dont have a choice for peace.