243 réponses à ce sujet

[Candidate 88766]

First time around I went for synthesis. The chance to make organics immortal and immune to disease etc, and to grant synthetics true life? Sounds great.

Then I began to think about how ridiculous the idea of synthesis was - it is essentially magic. I like the idea of it, but it doesn't fit with the universe.

Control doesn't make sense to me: Reapers are independent 'networks' of billions of organic minds. Not sure how they can simply be controlled. I thought control had the best cutscene for Shepard - you really see him struggle and fight to grasp the control rods. However, I didn't think it made all that much sense. Plus, the shockwave would've taken days to reach the Relay (it doesn't send out a beam like the other endings) so the Normandy crash makes even less sense.

Which just leaves destroy, which would be fantastic if it wasn't for the fact that it wipes out all synthetic life with it. Begs the question of why the Reapers don't use that technology to wipe out synthetics.

[Irx]

Because it is the only ending where Shepard lives.

[MutsX]

I choose destroy in my first (and only full) playtrough, because I thought synthesis was rubbish and I didnot want to control the reapers, I wanted to destroy them! (played 2 games to destroy them, not gonna chicken out last minute because that was suppose to be a "peace" offer..

[chevyguy87]

The reason I went with Destroy was because they showed Anderson shooting that power thing. Let me reiterate I chose it because it was the Paragon path (demonstrated by Anderson). I fully believe the Indoc Theory is correct because absolutely nothing in that entire sequence made any logical sense. That and because I wanted to nuke the hell out of the Reapers

I guess we will found out tomorrow if any of these discussions are relevant.

Modifié par chevyguy87, 05 avril 2012 - 11:16 .

[Drenick18]

I did it for the sake of consistency I think.. I just thought... why change the plan now? "Sorry legion.. Sorry geth.. Sorry EDI but well... I gotta make the hard choice and just wipe you all out. and screw you Starchild for making me do this." that was my original train of thought I think.

[Dark_Caduceus]

Iberius wrote...

why did you originally choose the destruction ending rather than the control or synthesis ending? Did you do it b/c you thought Shepard was potentially being indoctrinated? You just hate the Reapers? or something else.

Basically, I just want to know what was going through your mind and why you chose destruction.
 
*****FYI - If you chose a different ending (Control or Synthesis) feel free to put that line of reasoning as well and why you did not choose Destruction.

I originally chose Destruction because ever since I played Mass Effect for the first time, destroying the Reapers has always been the goal.

I refuse Saren and TIM's ideals and I refuse to turn everyone into a semi-robot/organic without their consent, cause the ehtical and moral implications of said decision would likely take decades of academia to unravel, not 2 minutes of deliberation by a half dead soldier.

My mission was to destroy the Reapers, I destroyed the Reapers.

[chevyguy87]

Drenick18 wrote...

I did it for the sake of consistency I think.. I just thought... why change the plan now? "Sorry legion.. Sorry geth.. Sorry EDI but well... I gotta make the hard choice and just wipe you all out. and screw you Starchild for making me do this." that was my original train of thought I think.

I for one was not thrilled at the idea to commit genocide against the Geth after settling their dispute with the Quarians nor did I want to space EDI who was beginning to know what being "alive" felt like.

Don't like the fact they "bundled" in that ending. I just wanted to exterminate the Reapers and let everybody else go on and rebuild.

[crawfs]

I chose destroy, I made the choice more or less based on common sense and past occurrences.

Saren, who was indoctrinated in ME1, believed he could control the reapers/ strike a deal with them.

The Illusive man, who was also indoctrinated, believed they could control the reapers and there was no reason to destroy them. He almost brought an end to all of organic civilisation in this cycle by hacking through the Prothean VI's security protocols.

And the final reasoning was the Prothean VI on Thessia also said that due to indoctrinated agents in the building of the crucible ruined their chance of using the crucible and they were all wiped out.

So basically to me the control option was completely out of the question, the "synthesis" ending stunk of space magic (also the "synthetics will always rebel against the created" bull**** was too much to swallow) so basically the only real logical decision to me was to destroy all synthetics including the reapers.

[Patchwork]

The big reason is destroying the Reapers has always been the goal my Shepard is unlikely to change her mind after hearing the King of the Reaper's twisted logic but I reasoned it out like this-

Control: If Shepard loses everything she is will she even remember why harvesting organic life is wrong? Indoctrination is what Reapers excel at, Shepard is strong willed but enough to hold out against the Reapers' unified belief that what they're doing is right forever?

"Your species, who ever they were, are long gone. Now they can rest in peace." Shepard to the Reaper on Rannoch. How do I combine that Shepard with a plan to become the new master of the Reapers?

Synthesis just felt wrong, it's ripping away peoples' freedom, diversity and perhaps even their creativity. Given the creator verses created spiel does Synthesis mean the new homogeneous race will be reliant on Reaper tech and lack the will or imagination to create something new or even re-build the relays?

Destroy wins because of cold calculas, a thousand and one die so the rest of the galaxy can live and be free of the Reapers. That it was synthetic life and not say the asari or batarians doesn't matter.

Modifié par Ser Bard, 05 avril 2012 - 11:43 .

[NurseMack]

Well, as I got to the end and was looking at the 3 choices I thought about choosing Synthesis first. I recently watched Transcendent Man (film). Some interesting points in that. But as I thought more, it would make everybody and everything that way, and I wouldn't want that forced on me, so I disgarded that choice.

So I considered Control, but when I had that final talk with the Illusive Man and I had some dialogue option where I told him "You didn't earn this power. We're not ready" and so on and so forth. Plus, despite it being in the paragon blue, it just didn't feel right, making a choice that the Illusive Man would after spending the entire game trying to convince him to see my side of things. I wasn't convinced that my Shepard would remain in control of the Reapers for ever.

Then I looked at Destroy and thought about a line I picked in Mass Effect 2. "I'm going to win this war, and I'll do it without sacrificing the soul of our species". I thought about how Hackett was firm in the belief that the way to win this was dead Reapers, not controlling them. Then I weighed the life of the Geth and EDI in the balance. I was able to make peace between the Quarians and the Geth.

Then there is the fact that no matter what choice I made the Mass Relays would be destroyed. I'm not sure what my feelings on that are, but what we have seen from Arrival is that the relays explode like a supernova. So no matter what choice I picked, my Shepard would become the worst war criminal in history, responsible for the deaths of maybe trillions. It just left a bad taste in my mouth no matter what choice I considered.

So in the end of after about 30 minutes of being idle and firing some shots at the Starchild, I walked up to the destroy and started firing. My goal was to always stop the Reapers and with this way, they wouldn't be coming back. EDI and the Geth would be gone too, and I genuinely felt bad. But to me, the other choices did not ensure the Reapers would not return at a later time.

So cue red cutscene without vaporizing Earth. Joker crashes, Shepard gasps in rubble, and I'm left with a WTF moment and I haven't been able to play campaign since. It's too bad since I love this universe. But that ending just kills all my desire to replay any Mass Effect.

[The man of myth]

It was pretty much the main goal consistently restated since game one. The entire ending sequence seemed very surreal to me. Why would Shepard Join or submit to the Reapers after a dialog with the Catalyst? Destroy to me seemed like the only viable option.

[ticklefist]

Picked red in case they come through with an expansion. Only reason. Prefer green. Don't have the moral hang-ups about it that others do. The speculations are more awesome with green.

[Fenrisfil]

Iberius wrote...

why did you originally choose the destruction ending rather than the control or synthesis ending? Did you do it b/c you thought Shepard was potentially being indoctrinated? You just hate the Reapers? or something else.

Basically, I just want to know what was going through your mind and why you chose destruction.
 
*****FYI - If you chose a different ending (Control or Synthesis) feel free to put that line of reasoning as well and why you did not choose Destruction.

I originally chose Destruction because ever since I played Mass Effect for the first time, destroying the Reapers has always been the goal.

Because it's the only way to be sure of destroying the Reapers, or at least of the options given and with the information at hand it's got the best odds.

In both the other two scenarios the Reapers are still around. That leaves open too many possibilities. It's too great a risk. The reapers are already part organic and synthetic, so technically they won't have actually changed with the synthesis ending. Can I trust that they'll just back off and leave life alone now? No I can't. For control it's just too great a risk to imagine a dead Shepard being able to maintain control over all Reapers without any corruption or madness or indoctrination entering in to the picture. Again it's too great a risk. There are far too many unknown variables involved in it.

So Destroy, whatever else it does, will destroy the Reapers, which will obviously stop the Reapers and that was the mission. Stop the Reapers, whatever the cost.

The good thing about this logic is it doesn't rely on IT and it doesn't mater how little sense anything else in the ending made. It's simply. Destroy is the only choice that doesn't leave the Reapers still around. Therefore it is the only choice.

[G00N3R7883]

Iberius wrote...

why did you originally choose the destruction ending rather than the control or synthesis ending? Did you do it b/c you thought Shepard was potentially being indoctrinated? You just hate the Reapers? or something else.

Basically, I just want to know what was going through your mind and why you chose destruction.
 
*****FYI - If you chose a different ending (Control or Synthesis) feel free to put that line of reasoning as well and why you did not choose Destruction.

I originally chose Destruction because ever since I played Mass Effect for the first time, destroying the Reapers has always been the goal.

Edit: I should probably clarify here that I tried to avoid spoilers as much as possible until I'd finished, so although I was aware of a controversy about the ending, I didn't know the full details until after I'd made my choice.

- I didn't get the chance to pick Synthesis as my war assets were too low. I think I was just below the threshold. I hadn't really been playing with the mindset of "gotta maximise my assets", I was just making decisions that I thought were justified, some of which lost me points. And I couldn't be bothered with any of the artifact hunting, partly because they were low quality missions, but also because I was kinda thinking about how the ME2 suicide mission worked, where if you do alot of side missions, it can lead to the deaths of some Normandy crew. I figured the longer it took me to get to Earth, the more civilians would be dead.

- If I did get the option, I wouldn't have chosen Synthesis anyway. I think its the worst option. I think its the "you lose" option. We've been fighting for years to protect organic life from the Reapers. Synthesis means the end of all organic life.

- As the game progressed, particularly while I was playing the Cerberus HQ mission, I had a feeling that I was going to get the option to side with the Illusive Man's control plan. So I'd already had plenty of time to decide against this. Its mainly out of fear. I worry about what would happen if the control failed at a later date, if the Reapers broke free and resumed their Harvesting. On that day, every organic would be thinking "why didn't we just finish them off when we had the chance?"

- The only downside to selecting the destruction option, is the Catalyst AI's claim that it will lead to more synthetics wiping out organics in the future. I don't believe it. I think its a lie, the Catalyst/Reapers know they're moments away from losing the war and are trying to confuse Shepard (whether its Indoctrination or not doesn't matter). I trust Admirals Anderson and Hackett more, and they told me to show no mercy. IF the Catalyst is telling the truth, IF some synthetics cause a problem in the future ... we'll just defeat them too.

- I felt kind of bad about killing the Geth and EDI. But to be honest, before ME3 started, I was prepared for a situation where I had to choose between saving Earth or saving everyone else. I already decided if it came down to it, I would sacrifice Earth. Like Garrus said, its a numbers game - sacrifice 10 billion over here to save 20 billion over there. So I didn't hesitate about sacrificing the Geth to save everyone else.

Modifié par G00N3R7883, 05 avril 2012 - 11:59 .

[Ravellion]

I chose synthesis because I felt control was evil, and gave me no guarantees, and I thought that synthesis would keep the mass relays in tact (I misheard). I also didn't really want to kill the Geth. I reloaded and switched to destroy when the mass relays were destroyed with synthesis anyway.

[N7Gold]

Iberius wrote...

why did you originally choose the destruction ending rather than the control or synthesis ending? Did you do it b/c you thought Shepard was potentially being indoctrinated? You just hate the Reapers? or something else.

Basically, I just want to know what was going through your mind and why you chose destruction.
 
*****FYI - If you chose a different ending (Control or Synthesis) feel free to put that line of reasoning as well and why you did not choose Destruction.

I originally chose Destruction because ever since I played Mass Effect for the first time, destroying the Reapers has always been the goal.

I chose it because it has been Shepard's goal ever since ME1. I was angry about the possibility of losing one of my allies, the Geth, but I had to make that sacrifice. Choosing control or synthesis is a complete betrayal to your lifelong goal. When I learned about the indoctrination, I had another good reason why I decided to choose the destroy ending. Besides, why would the Reapers want Illusive Man and Shepard to believe that they can be controlled? The control ending is an obvious trap when you think about it. Synthesis just helps complete the Reapers' goal, and destroy is an outcome that the Reapers and their indoctrinated allies oppose.

[RenderedToast]

Same as everyone here - it's what I set out to do, it was clear that Starchild really favoured the other two options over Destroy which meant it had to be the best choice, and it was Anderson doing it in the hallucination. Simple really. Can't understand anyone who'd choose the others.

[Total Biscuit]

Phategod1 wrote...

Total Biscuit wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

I chose synthesis, One reason I did not choose destroy is because The starchild basically said the process would start all over again and there would be basically be no force to keep synthetic life from destoying all biological life. I kept thinking that in a fit of blind guilt the Quarians would make a new AI based off of the Reaper left on Rannoch and then your right back to square one. Synthesis makes us all equal no BS not pettiness, besides destruction invalidates everything I told EDI and everything I did for the Geth.

Yep, nothing like removing all diversity and forcing everyone to conform to a genocidal maniacs idea of racial purity and evolutionary perfection for a happy ending eh? I mean thats the only way to prevent bigotry and intolernce in real life, forcing everyone to be the same, because diversity is totally a weakness, and no two different groups can ever coexist, and never have.

And it's not like anyone will evolve down divergent paths now, because Evolution is totally a straight line, from bad to good everyone is heading for the same end result with, right?

And no one could possibly build a new AI either from purely mechanical parts that everyone still has the knowledge and means to create or a build techno-organic one, that would be just as likely to freak out and see everyone else as a threat.

Frankly synthesis is an appallingly bad message for Bioware to be promoting as their 'perfect' ending, as well as displaying their complete ignorance on so many scientific fields, while giving no explanation at all for how it works (not least of all because it's completely impossible) that I'm insulted by its inclusion in the game. It's just abhorrent and retarded

1st who decided that the Synthesis was "The 'perfect' ending"" and 2nd. could you sound like a bigger douche. Do yourself a favor play another game and get over yourself. 

1st, Bioware said it was the ending for a perfe playthrough.

22nd, yes I could, I'm English.

[Pedro Costa]

Iberius wrote...

why did you originally choose the destruction ending rather than the control or synthesis ending? Did you do it b/c you thought Shepard was potentially being indoctrinated? You just hate the Reapers? or something else.

Basically, I just want to know what was going through your mind and why you chose destruction.
 
*****FYI - If you chose a different ending (Control or Synthesis) feel free to put that line of reasoning as well and why you did not choose Destruction.

I originally chose Destruction because ever since I played Mass Effect for the first time, destroying the Reapers has always been the goal.

I did it for several reasons:
1. If I took Control, I couldn't know for sure I'd take control over the Reapers: it was really heavy gamble - yes, I *may* control the Reapers, or I just killed myself and the Reapers now can go unopposed.

2. Synthesis, adding to the unknown factor of if killing myself would in fact, do what the StarChild (the very source of my enemy, the creator of the grief and genocide of countless organics) said it would, I couldn't bring myself to FORCE such a fundamental, eugenic change into every being in the Galaxy, disregarding their own feelings and opinions, especially when my hand wasn't being forced into it. It'd, in fact, make me not that much better than the Catalyst, while not even explaining why it would be impossible for this homogenized entity to create new synthetic life more capable than they were. Javik's story on the species that implanted themselves and in the process destroyed themselves didn't help this option. THEN I remembered Mordin's comments about the Collectors, and how their tech implants destroyed who they were. And then I hated this option. A hate I carry still. Also, Saren was for it, and Saren... well, we all know Saren.

3. Destroy, of all the options, it was the one that proposed my ability to:
a) Destroy the Reapers, the very thing I had set out to do.
Not die on the spot should it not really kill the Reapers, so I could still press on and fight them.
c) Sadly, if it worked, it'd cost me the Geth. Taking into account I had killed 300,000 batarians and destroyed a Solar System just to DELAY them, the death of a species, when compared to the life of every other, seemed the lesser of three evils if it did allow me to destroy the Reapers, once and for all.
d) I had brokered peace between the Geth and the Quarians, I saw how the Geth DECIDED TO SPARE the Quarians, multiple times. The StarChild's very premise didn't hold water. Besides, I heard about how the Krogan almost overran the Galaxy, destroying every other organic species out there. I heard how the Protheans were killing every species that opposed them, the death of organic life might well be caused by other organic life - again, the StarChild's logic rang hollow. The circular logic of creating synthetic constructs to destroy organics in order for them to not create synthetic constructs that would destroy organics only cemented the fact that this kid didn't get to play outside much.

And so I took Destroy. And would take it again if I could bring myself to bear that aweful, aweful ending sequence.

[Khallos]

Honestly, it was the only one where Shepard "lived". I wanted my happy ending, dangit!

Modifié par Khallos, 05 avril 2012 - 12:21 .

[d-boy15]

because if I want to has an ending that nearly "bittersweet", destroy choice is way to go for me.

it's feel like Rorschach from watchmen which's my favorite character would do, no compromise...

all reaper and synthatic destroy (according to vent kid) but organic are now control their faith no
AI-God to interfere anymore, future is left to be uncertain but it's in our hands.

Modifié par d-boy15, 05 avril 2012 - 12:28 .

[ungodlike]

I saw red red and now the Reapers are dead dead...... I hope.

[jvara]

Here is how I chose it:
Once the spacebrat told all three choices I was so ****ing pissed off and disturbed I just Alt-F4'ed and went to "sleep" (as if I could) then my brother, who had already told me two days before "don't finish ME3 all endings really suck balls", told how all three endings went on and I was mostly like this O.o Wtf? So he told me that with the destruction one at least Shepard lives, for no good reason bu she lives, so I chose the least unpleasant assrape for my Shepard ¬¬

[Zeratul20]

TGOW wrote...

Because it looked like it would ****** off star Hitler the most. However, when given a choice of mind control, eugenics or genocide I found genocide the least repulsive. Anyone who chose eugenics as the star child's final solution for peace in the galaxy sickens me.

That's a bit excessive, don't you think...? For starters, it's a video game. Second, the endings are open to interpretation, I believe, and you are choosing to interpret them in the worst possible way...