Aller au contenu

Photo

Why is it OK for Shepard to live in extended cut Red ending if he still commits genocide?


808 réponses à ce sujet

#226
TSgt_ShaneV

TSgt_ShaneV
  • Members
  • 74 messages

Allan Schumacher wrote...

NoUserNameHere wrote...

... because after all that 'does this unit have a soul?' talk on Rannoch, it turns out it was them or us all along. Tali's character develoment is moot. Legion's sacrifice was meaningless. I want to ragemurder a kitten.



I actually don't see it this way, and I did pick the Destroy ending.  I saw the Reapers as a threat and one that ultimately needed to be destroyed.  I also loved that I was presented an option to make peace between the Geth and Quarians earlier in the game.  It (and Tuchanka) was probably one of my favourite moments in recent gaming history.  Probably since Planescape: Torment (my favourite game all time).


When I reached the conduit, I fully expected to have to sacrifice myself.  To be fair, I expected to sacrifice myself at the end of the previous two games too, so to me it's always something that I saw coming.  I also had no idea what to expect the Crucible to actually do.  Given the talks with Hackett, I felt it was us putting all our eggs in one basket because we only saw one basket to put our eggs into.

So I get to the Catalyst and start talking with him.  He presents the ways that the crucible can unleash its power.  I'm going into this thinking "Reapers. Must. Die!"  But then I'm told that choosing to destroy the Reapers will also destroy the Geth!  "Wait... WHAT?!  But I don't want to do that!!"  I found it very, very similar to Legion's loyalty mission in ME2 (one of my favourite parts of that game).  When presented with the Control ending, I was now a bit more considerate of it.  When presented with the synthesis ending, I was a bit more considerate of it.

It is because of the growth of the Geth and Quarians that my "obvious" choice was now not so obvious.  I also refused to believe the Catalyst's statements about the inevitability of synthetics and organics to destroy each other.  In fact, when Shepard says "Maybe" in response to the Catalyst's claims, it was my exact same thought.  I had grown to appreciate the Geth and Quarians because I was able to help resolve the 300 year conflict with them.  They were able to move on, which gave me hope that synthetic-organic conflict was not inevitable.

If Legion's sacrifice was meaningless, and Tali's character development irrelevant, I wouldn't have taken the time to think about whether or not I should destroy the reapers.  I wouldn't have cared at all.  I choked up when Tali told Legion it had a soul, and when Legion said "Keelah Se'lai" to her.  It was an amazing scene.  I thought it was awesome that the Geth were helping the Quarians adapt and retake Rannoch.  Which is what made the destroy option that much more impactful for me.  Rather than being a trivial, obvious choice, I hesitated and had an emotional response to the decision.

In the end, I chose the destroy ending.  I found it bittersweet because it came at the cost of the Geth, but ultimately freeing the galaxy of the Reapers is something my Shepard felt had to be done.  The "maybe" he said rang true for me, and I wanted to give the opportunity for organics to prove the Catalyst wrong in the future.  I actually preferred this ending to simply "destroy all reapers."  Though I can understand that people would have preferred something more ideal.


NOTE:  While my name has BioWare attached to it, I've only ever worked on the DA franchise and actually would close my eyes and go "LALALALALALA" during the ME parts of studio meetings so as to not spoil anything for myself :P

In other words, I played through the game as a fan of the franchise too :)


Cheers.

Allan


Wow Allan thanks for that incite. That was a great read and pretty much what I thought of the given situation (even though I have issues with the end)

#227
CronoDragoon

CronoDragoon
  • Members
  • 10 412 messages

Dandynermite wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

I'd like to point out I...

Killed the Baratians.
Killed all the hostages I could.
Re-steralized the Krogan
Killed Wrex
Killed Mordin
And wiped out the Geth and the Reapers...

the only thing I find morally wrong is femshep and Samantha don't get a place on earth living happily ever after, now THAT is wrong


Who the hell is saying that wiping them out shouldn't be an option.
You want to play the genocidal maniac? Good for you.

Now can I have the ending that fits my Shepard please?


Nope, that would go away from "artistic integuity"


I can tell from your sig you want better endings, so can we agree that the endings only fit one SPECIFIC type of Renegade playthrough?

#228
Jacobcus

Jacobcus
  • Members
  • 110 messages

Dandynermite wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

I'd like to point out I...

Killed the Baratians.
Killed all the hostages I could.
Re-steralized the Krogan
Killed Wrex
Killed Mordin
And wiped out the Geth and the Reapers...

the only thing I find morally wrong is femshep and Samantha don't get a place on earth living happily ever after, now THAT is wrong


Who the hell is saying that wiping them out shouldn't be an option.
You want to play the genocidal maniac? Good for you.

Now can I have the ending that fits my Shepard please?


Nope, that would go away from "artistic integuity"

Next thing you know were going to found out that their "artistic integuity" is that Biotics are born with their ability because they have little things called Midichlorians in their blood.

#229
xsdob

xsdob
  • Members
  • 8 575 messages

The Angry One wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Well, two things,

1. If your ems is high enough, you probably just kill the geth on earth, and the ones in space or on rannoch are fine. That would be the easiest way to do it, and would play out more like arrival, that last sacrifice to stop the reapers once and for all, the pragmatic renegade choice.

2. Shepard already commits mass murder throughout the games, You can genocide the rachni twice, wipe out the geth or quarians, and you inadvertently killed 60,000 batarians to stop the repaers for a few months, so that the other races could prepare for war.

Also, if you really want to get technical, think of all the thousands of mercenaries you killed throughout the game, all of their grieving families and all that blood is on shepard and his crews hands. Not to mention that each reaper is technically an entire species civilization stored into a single entity, so you basically wiped out five civilizations throughout the course of mass effect 1 and 3, 2 of them in the last mission alone. Not to mention that with destroy, all those reapers containing all those species entire history, people, culture, and genetic information are all wiped out in an single stroke.

Basically, if a video game asks you to kill people, regardless of the situation or if they are really that bad or not. If a game has killing people to get from objective a to point b, than you pretty much are playing a mass murderer, just one who could get away with the self-defense claim all of the time.


Because killing people who are attacking you, and betraying and murdering your own allies are exactly the same thing.


I forgot about how you can doom the krogan to a slow extinction, and kill one of your best friends to get the slarains support.

But, you are right in your opinion that you are right. Just know that much like sacrificing your friend or creating the next demon spawn in dragon age origins, actions that lead to you living often come back and bite you in the ass.

#230
Village_Idiot

Village_Idiot
  • Members
  • 2 219 messages

The Angry One wrote...

But that doesn't make destroy the "best". It might look that way superficially, but it isn't
It's still a victory for the Reaper agenda, that the Reapers themselves are killed is largely irrelevant.


The alternatives are to either hand the Reapers over to an entirely fallible ruler, or potentially sacrifice the very traits that made life worth saving in the first place.

As for a "Reaper Agenda victory", the remaining intelligent life still gets to exist, and to self-determinate. The Reapers no longer exist, and so their "agenda" cannot be enforced in the future. I'd call that pretty relevant.

#231
ScaredPeach

ScaredPeach
  • Members
  • 77 messages

Bathaius wrote...

Is it okay if I nuke civilians along with these evil dictators in order to stop them from taking over the world? Is that moral?

Of course its moral, your not intending the death of civilians, your directly intending the death of the dictator, civilians deaths are indirect. The good effect (no world domination) is bigger than the bad effect ( city worth of dead civilians), AND the good effect (no world domination) is not BECAUSE of the bad effect (dead civilians)

Moral Stamp Approved.

Modifié par ScaredPeach, 07 avril 2012 - 09:48 .


#232
legion999

legion999
  • Members
  • 5 315 messages

Chrillze wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Do you think a renegade lets fear compromise who they are?

the renegade does what's necessary


Punching reporters, killing Falere and choosing Morinth are necessary aren't they?

#233
Chrillze

Chrillze
  • Members
  • 553 messages

The Angry One wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

zovoes wrote...

Shadrach 88 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Eschew negociation, get right to the killin'?
You'd make the stranger who replaced Commander Shepard in the last 5 minutes of the game proud.


I don't like the endings any more than the next guy. But I'll work with what I've got. As much as I'd like to take a fourth option, that isn't possible at this point.

that when you flip the board and make your own man. genocide is not an opiton it's a crime
against humanity.

It's the geth, its a race of robots not humans. If you have to choose between saving the galaxy but killing the geth or let the repaers win you choose sacrificing the geth. it's unfortunate but sacrifices has to be made for the greater good


The Geth are alive. The entire game establishes the fact that they are alive.
Surrendering to the Reapers and agreeing to kill them is betrayal and murder.

It's letting fear compromise who you are.
It's sacrificing the soul of your species.

I'm not a paragon, 


Do you think a renegade lets fear compromise who they are?

the renegade does what's necessary


My Renegade doesn't. Ever.

Also thanks for admitting there's no Paragon option.

I would say control is the paragon choice. My character is a renagon, I pick the choices that I would have picked, and when I had to choose between sacrificing myself and take control of giant murder machines, force everyone to become cyborgs/husks or destroy the reapers and sacrifice the geth I picked the destroy option. It's the best option between the three of them

#234
Jacobcus

Jacobcus
  • Members
  • 110 messages

ScaredPeach wrote...

Bathaius wrote...

Is it okay if I nuke civilians along with these evil dictators in order to stop them from taking over the world? Is that moral?

Of course its moral, your not intending the death of civilians, your directly intending the death of the dictator, civilians deaths are indirect. The good effect (no world domination) is bigger than the bad effect ( city worth of dead civilians), AND the bad effect (dead civilians) dosnt cause the good effect (no world domination)

Moral Stamp Approved.

Moral Stamp Denied. Imagine if everyone thought like that? We'd nuked Germany, Iraq, and everyone else by now.

#235
Dandynermite

Dandynermite
  • Members
  • 497 messages

CronoDragoon wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

I'd like to point out I...

Killed the Baratians.
Killed all the hostages I could.
Re-steralized the Krogan
Killed Wrex
Killed Mordin
And wiped out the Geth and the Reapers...

the only thing I find morally wrong is femshep and Samantha don't get a place on earth living happily ever after, now THAT is wrong


Who the hell is saying that wiping them out shouldn't be an option.
You want to play the genocidal maniac? Good for you.

Now can I have the ending that fits my Shepard please?


Nope, that would go away from "artistic integuity"


I can tell from your sig you want better endings, so can we agree that the endings only fit one SPECIFIC type of Renegade playthrough?


I do want better endings. I want Samantha and Femshep to have a house and their kids on Earth and live happily ever after with a nice ending cutscene like the DA:O wedding (I can't even remember if that was Bioware or fan-made) and then a nice little epilogue.

I really don't care about much other than Shepard and LI reunion in happy circumstances. 

#236
CronoDragoon

CronoDragoon
  • Members
  • 10 412 messages

ScaredPeach wrote...

Bathaius wrote...

Is it okay if I nuke civilians along with these evil dictators in order to stop them from taking over the world? Is that moral?

Of course its moral, your not intending the death of civilians, your directly intending the death of the dictator, civilians deaths are indirect. The good effect (no world domination) is bigger than the bad effect ( city worth of dead civilians), AND the bad effect (dead civilians) dosnt cause the good effect (no world domination)

Moral Stamp Approved.


It's only moral by consequentialist argument.

#237
Strange Aeons

Strange Aeons
  • Members
  • 247 messages

Chrillze wrote...

It's the geth, its a race of robots not humans. If you have to choose between saving the galaxy but killing the geth or let the repaers win you choose sacrificing the geth. it's unfortunate but sacrifices has to be made for the greater good


The greater good...

Crusty jugglers...

Anyway, I don't think people are clear on the concept of "sacrifice."  They just use the word because it sounds nobler than the alternatives.

The Geth choosing to kill themselves to save the galazy is a sacrifice.

Shepard choosing to kill the Geth to save the galaxy is murder.

It's not "unfortunate," either.  It's a deliberate choice.

This is not the military, where each individual soldier consents with an oath to follow the legal orders of a superior officer knowing that they may be sent into a deadly situation.  The Geth never consented to anything like this.

Of course, that being said, the whole space magic premise of the choice is absurd and internally inconsistent to begin with, so why the hell am I even wasting my time thinking about this?

#238
Mims

Mims
  • Members
  • 4 395 messages
Well, a minor victory. They're dead. I'm not saying its the "best" option, as I'm not a fan of the endings. But its the only viable option in my mind of the endings I have been handed. All the others have too much potential to ruin.

If you believe that the Catalyst is right, and organics will eventually make synthetics and they'll destroy the galaxy...then, its our own damn fault. We don't need a puppet master in the form of the catalyst playing god. I'm not of the belief that life can EVER be completely destroyed. Even if synthetics end up winning out...what, they're going to stop bacteria from growing? Creatures from evolving?

Control has some good points, but it still leaves the reapers alive. Its like a bomb. You can disable the bomb but you've still got a bomb in your house. I'd rather it just be gone.

#239
M0keys

M0keys
  • Members
  • 1 297 messages

ScaredPeach wrote...

Bathaius wrote...

Is it okay if I nuke civilians along with these evil dictators in order to stop them from taking over the world? Is that moral?

Of course its moral, your not intending the death of civilians, your directly intending the death of the dictator, civilians deaths are indirect. The good effect (no world domination) is bigger than the bad effect ( city worth of dead civilians), AND the bad effect (dead civilians) dosnt cause the good effect (no world domination)

Moral Stamp Approved.


It's certainly not moral. It may be practical, yes, but DEFINITELY not moral.

It is the choice made by America in WW2 when they decided to nuke the Japanese, and I'm sure through some kind of 7-degrees-of-Kevin-Bacon way that Casey Hudson decided to go for ME3's ending in this fashion. The idea of an ending that challenges you in that way.

But America was limited to certain kinds of things. Shepard is a single hero in a mythical setting, so his options have to be different.

#240
Chrillze

Chrillze
  • Members
  • 553 messages

legion999 wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Do you think a renegade lets fear compromise who they are?

the renegade does what's necessary


Punching reporters, killing Falere and choosing Morinth are necessary aren't they?

I never picked those options.

#241
NormanRawn

NormanRawn
  • Members
  • 328 messages

Chrillze wrote...

zovoes wrote...

Shadrach 88 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Eschew negociation, get right to the killin'?
You'd make the stranger who replaced Commander Shepard in the last 5 minutes of the game proud.


I don't like the endings any more than the next guy. But I'll work with what I've got. As much as I'd like to take a fourth option, that isn't possible at this point.

that when you flip the board and make your own man. genocide is not an opiton it's a crime
against humanity.

It's the geth, its a race of robots not humans. If you have to choose between saving the galaxy but killing the geth or let the repaers win you choose sacrificing the geth. it's unfortunate but sacrifices has to be made for the greater good


Yes, lets kill a species that has the right to live just as much as humans do.

Your saying you wouldn't have picked Humans to die if that was the choice raised by Destroy?

That is..disappointing

You seem to not agree, but I am not willing to sacrifice the soul of our species to achieve victory. I'd rather go down fighting, then give into the Catalysts madness.

#242
The Angry One

The Angry One
  • Members
  • 22 246 messages

Shadrach 88 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

But that doesn't make destroy the "best". It might look that way superficially, but it isn't
It's still a victory for the Reaper agenda, that the Reapers themselves are killed is largely irrelevant.


The alternatives are to either hand the Reapers over to an entirely fallible ruler, or potentially sacrifice the very traits that made life worth saving in the first place.

As for a "Reaper Agenda victory", the remaining intelligent life still gets to exist, and to self-determinate. The Reapers no longer exist, and so their "agenda" cannot be enforced in the future. I'd call that pretty relevant.


Yeah self-determinate in a galaxy where they will all wither and die.
The Geth would at least  help with survival somewhat, oh but wait they're all dead. So are the Quarians, and anyone else with an implant.

It's Battlestar Galactica logic "Let's jab the reset button and just assume they won't make the same mistakes again, nevermind that those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it!"

#243
Aramina

Aramina
  • Members
  • 336 messages

Shallyah wrote...

Creating artificial sentient life is even forbidden by the intergalactic law. The Geth are an error. Tali explains in Mass Effect 1 why them gaining self awareness is not intended and causes panic in Quarian society, because if they become self ware they stop being tools, and become slaves. The Quarians are not slavers, they only wanted tools for labourl like a hammer or a screwdriver are. Just slightly more automated.

That the Geth evolved to be more than that is an offense to nature itself. Destroying them to save trillions? Hell, the only sad part is that the choice wasn't given earlier, so the many millions of incredible and fascinating races that you can imagine that were exterminated had been spared, and the galaxy and the universe would be an incredibly richer setting.


Organic life was also an error. We are a random mutation of proteins. Maybe someone should have rectified this error too? :blink:

Seriously though, why does it matter how life comes about? The only thing that matters is that it is around. And no one has the right to take something's life away just because it has the audacity to exist. And using the Quarians as an example of what you should do....remember the memories Legion showed us? A lot of the Quarians sided with the Geth...and their own people wiped them out too without a second thought. I don't think I want to be using them as my role model.

#244
Village_Idiot

Village_Idiot
  • Members
  • 2 219 messages

Mims wrote...

Control has some good points, but it still leaves the reapers alive. Its like a bomb. You can disable the bomb but you've still got a bomb in your house. I'd rather it just be gone.


This. The Reapers are unquestionably powerful. Shepard may be the goddamn hero of the galaxy. but that doesn't qualify him/her to be capable of wielding something like the Reapers. It's far safer to remove them entirely.

#245
Chrillze

Chrillze
  • Members
  • 553 messages

NormanRawn wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

zovoes wrote...

Shadrach 88 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Eschew negociation, get right to the killin'?
You'd make the stranger who replaced Commander Shepard in the last 5 minutes of the game proud.


I don't like the endings any more than the next guy. But I'll work with what I've got. As much as I'd like to take a fourth option, that isn't possible at this point.

that when you flip the board and make your own man. genocide is not an opiton it's a crime
against humanity.

It's the geth, its a race of robots not humans. If you have to choose between saving the galaxy but killing the geth or let the repaers win you choose sacrificing the geth. it's unfortunate but sacrifices has to be made for the greater good


Yes, lets kill a species that has the right to live just as much as humans do.

Your saying you wouldn't have picked Humans to die if that was the choice raised by Destroy?

That is..disappointing

You seem to not agree, but I am not willing to sacrifice the soul of our species to achieve victory. I'd rather go down fighting, then give into the Catalysts madness.


If there would have been a better option I would have picked it(I didn't like the endings myself) also thhey would have died anyway because the reapers would have killed them

#246
Shallyah

Shallyah
  • Members
  • 1 357 messages

The Angry One wrote...

But that doesn't make destroy the "best". It might look that way superficially, but it isn't
It's still a victory for the Reaper agenda, that the Reapers themselves are killed is largely irrelevant.



No, Destroy is the defeat of the Reapers, and especifically, the catalyst.

He tells you doom and gloom about the red ending so you don't pick it. He even implies that you will die (nice lying kiddo) and organic life will be doomed in the end, since they will create new synthetics, yadda yadda.

The story of Shepard is about proving wrong those who think themselves better. And this is the time to prove the godchild wrong by letting organic life take the reins of the galaxy once and for all, and striving for eternity.

If you don't believe that organics are capable, if you don't have faith in Shepard and his legacy, then you're a coward. Pick the Control ending, where you're basically told you'll become a god, I'm sure that's appealing. Or rape everyone's DNA without their consent if that'll make you feel better. Still a coward that never had faith in humankind or other organic life, and with your choices you sided with the Reapers in their reasoning.

Modifié par Shallyah, 07 avril 2012 - 09:51 .


#247
Zardoc

Zardoc
  • Members
  • 3 570 messages

goose2989 wrote...

Siibi wrote...

Starbrat is lying, the Geth and EDI are fine.


Don't get your hopes up, buddy. Bioware, most specifically Jessica, has stated that Shepard can live with "sacrifices." I'll bet you wiping the Geth out is one of those sacrifices 

I want Shepard to live just as much as anyone, but from Shepard's perspective, it can be viewed as selfish. Within the confines of the current ending choices, that is. "I'd rather wipe the Geth out than die!" See what I mean? Just don't think that I like it, though.


If our mostly synthetic Shepard can survive Destroy, then so can the geth and EDI.

#248
SpartenN7

SpartenN7
  • Members
  • 91 messages
Are you saying that Shepard is a menace to everyone just because he chose the Destroy option to stop and destroy an ancient Hyper Machine Race/ Organic Race that has destroyed countless galactic civilizations for millions or even billions of years and harvested their own existence into their selfish selves? No, what Shepard did chose the Destroy Ending is absolutely right. The Reapers Needed to be stopped no matter the cost. And there's always time to rebuild and populate

#249
The Angry One

The Angry One
  • Members
  • 22 246 messages

Chrillze wrote...

If there would have been a better option I would have picked it(I didn't like the endings myself) also thhey would have died anyway because the reapers would have killed them


Better to die a broken piece of jade than to live a life of clay.

#250
Guest_LuckyIronAxe_*

Guest_LuckyIronAxe_*
  • Guests

The Angry One wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

I'd like to point out I...

Killed the Baratians.
Killed all the hostages I could.
Re-steralized the Krogan
Killed Wrex
Killed Mordin
And wiped out the Geth and the Reapers...

the only thing I find morally wrong is femshep and Samantha don't get a place on earth living happily ever after, now THAT is wrong


Who the hell is saying that wiping them out shouldn't be an option.
You want to play the genocidal maniac? Good for you.

Now can I have the ending that fits my Shepard please?


Hey, we Renegades had to deal with a lot of Paragon BS in ME3. Auto-Shepard says he/she is sorry for losing Thessia, HEY I AIN'T SORRY, the Asari shouldn't have my sympathy after they told the War Council that we are on our own.