808 réponses à ce sujet

[Chrillze]

legion999 wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

the geth are just talking toasters, they had to be sacrificed for the greater good

<facepalm> You do realise how dangerous thatline of thought is right?

really? how? I'm saving the galaxy,

[The Angry One]

Dandynermite wrote..]


No, because you can shoot them in the shoulder. If there is a way around it then obviously not. It also depends who the hostage is. If a gunman grabs a drug dealer or murderer as a hostage and your a police sniper, aren't you taking down two birds with one stone

TL;DR: You'd find another way.

If only Shepard would.

[webhead921]

I thought geth/quarian peace proved that the catalyst is wrong. The catalyst says that your children will build synthetics that will destroy organics, but shepard knows this is not true and choses destroy anyways. That's why the destroy ending makes sense for a paragon shepard. By choosing destroy, shepard is rejecting the catalyst's reasoning

[M0keys]

Dandynermite wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

Your still all ignoring the fact killing the reapers is also Genocide! Just because they are one the other team doesn't make them any less of a "being" than the Geth!

You don't know what genocide means. It doesn't mean "killing every member of a race/species." It means killing them because they belong to that race/species. No one is killing the Reapers because they belong to the Reaper race. They are doing it because THE REAPERS ARE TRYING TO KILL US ALL.

nobody is killing the geth just because they are geth, they are killing the geth because that's the only way to destroy the reapers. 

Tell me something. If a gunman holds an innocent person hostage, do you consider it acceptable to shoot the hostage to kill the gunman?

If you hit the hostage in the shoulder they will fall and leave yourself free to double tap the gunman before they can harm anybody, saving everybody and only applying superficial wounds to the hostage.

So yes. 

It's not the same, though.

A better comparison would be... there are 5 hostages and a bomb. One of those hostages is strapped to the bomb, and if they die, the bomb is defused (!?)

You can try to defuse the bomb yourself. This may or may not work. You can also just murder the hostage and through some kind of magic, the bomb is defused.

I believe a damaged man would kill the hostage.

[Alexius]

Honestly, no idea. Really, it makes no sense. I'd make some sense if the colours were assigned differently, or we had no colours at all (they all suck, they are all wrong, why not just colouring them all red? To make the ending sequences look a little more diverse?).

[Dandynermite]

M0keys wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

Your still all ignoring the fact killing the reapers is also Genocide! Just because they are one the other team doesn't make them any less of a "being" than the Geth!

You don't know what genocide means. It doesn't mean "killing every member of a race/species." It means killing them because they belong to that race/species. No one is killing the Reapers because they belong to the Reaper race. They are doing it because THE REAPERS ARE TRYING TO KILL US ALL.

nobody is killing the geth just because they are geth, they are killing the geth because that's the only way to destroy the reapers. 

Tell me something. If a gunman holds an innocent person hostage, do you consider it acceptable to shoot the hostage to kill the gunman?

No. Never. I might shoot the hostage in the leg, though, just to be cute and surprise the gunman enough to reveal himself and then take him out.

I'd pay for all medical bills for the hostage, of course.

Shooting them in the leg wouldn't topple the hostage, and your very likely to miss, causing the gunman to shoot you or the hostage or a bystander. You always go for the right shoulder. 

[AnImpossibleGirl]

Aramina wrote...

Poshible wrote...

Beside the fact that everybody is looking too far into this, what makes all the other species different than the Geth and Edi? Reproduction, natural reproduction-not factory assembly. Synthetic forms can not reproduce, sure they can gain intelliegence, but what does that matter when they can not truly experience what makes ALL the other "species" in the galaxy special? Real emotion, "HUMANITY" they call it. There is no love; there is a program. All other species are products of nature, natural--organic. The Geth and Edi? They were created. Don't get me started on Edi--she was that rogue VI in Luna in ME1, tried to KILL you. Geth--tried to KILL you. 

You do realize all emotions are based off random hormones and neurons firing, yes? How does that make organics are more "real" than synthetics? Because we were made completely by accident, with no way to control how we develop genetically? Oh wait...we're almost at the point where we CAN do gene-mods....so how exactly are we different? Just because synthetics can tailor-make themselves? Just watch the movie Gattaca. We can already see some "genetic elitism" coming into our society. And we practice social darwinism all the time....isolating people with "undesirable" traits in prisons and mental hospitals.

Maybe we're all secretly jealous of them...I mean, who wouldn't want to just hit the "off" button on a broken heart or an addiction.

Sure we practice "social darwinsim" but we do not practice eugenics. We occured through the evolution of our species, naturally. We weren't assmebled as servants for another race. We can not be reproduced into a machine form and be maintained as we are. There is a reason cloning is illegal. Human emotion is carried through our limbic system, through our blood. Hmm, blood, sythetics lack that too. The people in mental hospitals generally have chemical imbalances in their brain, an organ which all sythetics lack. 
I have seen Gattaca. I mentioned eugenics, Hitler tried this, they call it German Eugenics, he had plenty of people sterilized including those with disabilities.
We are not machines, we have a neural network but you can not seriously demean humans (aside from all their NATURAL, not hardwired, faults) for having broken hearts and addictions. That again is another thing which separates us from synthetic's.
When Legion ask's you if you want to rewrite the heretics there is no emotion, he has no emotion about it. When asked to upload reaper code, again he has no emotion even if it means wiping out the Quarians (didn't happen in my game, they made peace--because I was war asset hungry). Or if you say no, "I'm killing the Geth". So, if they can not feel as we do and regret and reflect as we do I will not hold them up high with the races that can. They calculate, and process--they do not think and rationalize.

Modifié par Poshible, 07 avril 2012 - 09:31 .

[CronoDragoon]

Dandynermite wrote...

The destroy option kills every reaper, because they are a reaper, including the reapers still entering the galaxy who haven't even engaged in combat and we don't know their motives.

So killing all the reapers is also GENOCIDE

Oh my head... We don't know their motives? Really? Even if that were true pre-Catalyst, it is not true post-Catalyst when we are flat out told that the purpose of every Reaper is to destroy advanced organic life. We know their motives. It is to exterminate us. Killing them is not genocide. You don't know what genocide means nor how it has been used throughout history.

[Village_Idiot]

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.

[Fawx9]

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

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


Cheers.

Allan

If possible, as a fan, can you answer a few questions?

Why do you think the Geth died if Tali(Quarians), Shepard and Edi are shown to be alive after the destroy option is chosen? If a race that uses synthetics to power it suits, a person who is basically a 1/4 synthetic and an AI are ok why aren't the Geth?

If you're willing to accept the possibility of the Geth living given the above, do you feel it's fair to question the believability of the Starchild's statements, or do you feel that he was telling the truth and the previous theory is one of those thing that might get clarified?

From my point of view, the evidence is stacked against the Starchild as of the current ending and the other 2 options are simply him not wanting to be blown up.

[Necrotron]

Not willing to sacrifice the soul of humanity to destroy the Reapers.

Better to die with integrity, than live as a mass murderer.

[Jacobcus]

Mallissin wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...
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. 

Murderer.

Well kudo's! Good job freeing the galaxy from the Reaper threat Commander Shepard! Now all you have to do is Solve the Galaxy from Mass Starvation epidemic! Mass Starvation! Coming December 2013!   :Ð!

[Aedan276]

 

I underline all this person said. Exactly my feelings, point by point. IF the Geth didn't have to be sacrificed, choosing Red would be really no brainer. Having to destroy the Geth after brokering a peaec between them and the Quarians is what makes it so hard. And EDI.

But I wanted the Galaxy to prove the Catalyst wrong. No way I came that far to let the Reapers have their way.

[

That kind of reasoning isn't adequete and just goes to show how the endings failed. The reason why the conflict between the Quarians and Geth was a tense was because the trilogy had built up to it and had clearly demonstrated what was a stake if a compromise couldn't be reached -- the genocide of one of two peoples players had come to care about. Resolution to that issue was obtained on Rannoch and shouldn't have been dragged out to add additional misery to the endings. It was a shallow revisitation to a settled sub-plot that killed a major player choice. 

Modifié par Aedan276, 07 avril 2012 - 09:33 .

[Shallyah]

legion999 wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

the geth are just talking toasters, they had to be sacrificed for the greater good

<facepalm> You do realise how dangerous thatline of thought is right?

Dangerous how?

They're robots, with Reaper code or not. In retrospect, best you can do is to exterminate them before Legion uploads the Reaper code. That way you don't even have to deal with the "guilt" of getting rid of individual sentient synthetics in the Destroy ending.

Sorry, but I have a hard time to see anything wrong with destroying space junk to save millions of races in the course of millions of years of the galactic course. And how many races had been exterminated by the Reapers before? How many cultures? How many mothers holding their newborn child, killed without asking why?

Stop being cynical, please.

Modifié par Shallyah, 07 avril 2012 - 09:33 .

[Lonsecia]

I see a lot of people believeing that the Geth are destined to turn on organics, with the only real evidence being what the Starchild says. Everything until that point indicates that most Geth would rather live in isolation than face organics (it's stated pretty clearly that when the Quarian's left Rannoch, the Geth remained as they had no desire to kill their masters).

With that in mind, only a very small minority of Geth were taken in by Sovereign's false promises.

My bigger issue with the strange belief of the Starchild is that it clearly is supposed to have some vague idea of what's going on in the galaxy, so why doesn't it realise that the real threat to organics is simply time. Living things keep expanding in numbers until eventually they're forced to fight for food and land. Irrelevant of whether there're synthetics about, organic life will pretty much always turn on each other. Humans have already done it countless times on Earth. Can the Starchild really say with any degree of certainty that it's not us that'd wipe out all life? Sentient organic life is also prone to more levels of stupidity than a synthetic, because we have irrational emotions and ties to things we can't even see or touch.

As for calling the Geth merely robots, I worry you've missed the point. To me if something has sentience, then it's an equal. At least the Geth aren't going to fight us for resources.

My point being, that the Starchild can in no way know what will happen. If his statement is true, then at some point, there must have been a precedent for him/it to believe such a thing. But the very fact there is organic life in existance counters the argument that they'll destroy all organic life.

If, in all the cycles the reapers have been around, this has never happened, solely because they're stopping it, then the Starchild would realise they're the very enemy he/it's supposedly protecting us from.

At least that's how I see it.

[frylock23]

FYI, despite my post earlier, I also chose control and will do so every time. I don't really see that there's an option since there isn't a choice to flip gawd child the bird which is what I'd really like to do. I don't believe in negotiating with terrorists which is what I feel is really going on on some level. The big problem here is that BioWare has gracelessly stripped all control from the player and ruthlessly forcing you to negotiate.

I don't trust control because TIM already took control of me once, and if TIM was too indoctrinated to control the Reapers, yet TIM controlled me ... Why am I able to control the Reapers again? At this point, I'm assuming that the gawd child is lying through his transparent teeth. And even if I do manage to control the Reapers enough to make them leave today, how long will I maintain my sanity and the will to keep them away? No, not enough guarantees in control.

Synthesis is IMO the worst option. Even if you leave aside the fact that the Reapers are already enforcing biosynthetic synthesis on every member of every advanced race in the galaxy, who am I to play God and completely re-write every living thing into something completely new and alien without their consent. How does that make me better than the Reapers and what they're doing now? And all that aside, what prevents bio-synthetic organisms from creating synthetic organisms who will eventually decide to destroy their parents? Nothing. And then the Reapers have to come back. Nope, not going there.

That brings me back to destroy which is the only one the gawd child works like mad to frighten me away from by threatening me with a genocide and a murder if I choose it. At least in this one, the Reapers are gone and never coming back no matter what. And since that's what I came to do, that's what I have to do. I will just have to take the risk that the gawd child was lying and that EDI and the Geth will in fact not be damaged by the destroy option, but at least, no matter what, the Reapers will never return.

Do I like that risk? No, but it's one I'm willing to take for the near-certainty of freedom from the Reapers.

[Chrillze]

M0keys wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

Your still all ignoring the fact killing the reapers is also Genocide! Just because they are one the other team doesn't make them any less of a "being" than the Geth!

You don't know what genocide means. It doesn't mean "killing every member of a race/species." It means killing them because they belong to that race/species. No one is killing the Reapers because they belong to the Reaper race. They are doing it because THE REAPERS ARE TRYING TO KILL US ALL.

nobody is killing the geth just because they are geth, they are killing the geth because that's the only way to destroy the reapers. 

Tell me something. If a gunman holds an innocent person hostage, do you consider it acceptable to shoot the hostage to kill the gunman?

If you hit the hostage in the shoulder they will fall and leave yourself free to double tap the gunman before they can harm anybody, saving everybody and only applying superficial wounds to the hostage.

So yes. 

It's not the same, though.

A better comparison would be... there are 5 hostages and a bomb. One of those hostages is strapped to the bomb, and if they die, the bomb is defused (!?)

You can try to defuse the bomb yourself. This may or may not work. You can also just murder the hostage and through some kind of magic, the bomb is defused.

I believe a damaged man would kill the hostage.

the safest and best choice is to kill the hostage, unless you know how to disarm a bomb of course

[The Angry One]

Shallyah wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

the geth are just talking toasters, they had to be sacrificed for the greater good

<facepalm> You do realise how dangerous thatline of thought is right?

Dangerous how?

They're robots, with Reaper code or not. In retrospect, best you can do is to extermiante them before Legion uploads the Reaper code. That way you don't even have to deal with the "guilt" of killing individual sentient beings in the Destroy ending.

Sorry, but I have a hard time to see anything wrong with destroying space junk to save millions of races in the course of millions of years of the galactic course. And how many races had been exterminated by the Reapers before? How many cultures? How many mothers holding their newborn child, killed without asking why?

Stop being cynical, please.

You'd destroy a unique race of pacifists, and possibly the Quarians too? And think it moral?
You'd give in to the Reapers terms without a fight? Really?

[The_Crazy_Hand]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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

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


Cheers.

Allan

While this is a good point, the fact remains Mass Effect has always given us the ability to chose a more ideal option, it just had to be earned (usually through Paragon/Renegade/Reputation).  The question is, why avoid doing so with the ending?

[M0keys]

Dandynermite wrote...

M0keys wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

Your still all ignoring the fact killing the reapers is also Genocide! Just because they are one the other team doesn't make them any less of a "being" than the Geth!

You don't know what genocide means. It doesn't mean "killing every member of a race/species." It means killing them because they belong to that race/species. No one is killing the Reapers because they belong to the Reaper race. They are doing it because THE REAPERS ARE TRYING TO KILL US ALL.

nobody is killing the geth just because they are geth, they are killing the geth because that's the only way to destroy the reapers. 

Tell me something. If a gunman holds an innocent person hostage, do you consider it acceptable to shoot the hostage to kill the gunman?

No. Never. I might shoot the hostage in the leg, though, just to be cute and surprise the gunman enough to reveal himself and then take him out.

I'd pay for all medical bills for the hostage, of course.

Shooting them in the leg wouldn't topple the hostage, and your very likely to miss, causing the gunman to shoot you or the hostage or a bystander. You always go for the right shoulder. 

Hey, I'm not going into technically accurate specifics here. Shoot *hostage in random place that gets the killer to reveal himself* is the idea

[Jacobcus]

Chrillze wrote...

M0keys wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

Your still all ignoring the fact killing the reapers is also Genocide! Just because they are one the other team doesn't make them any less of a "being" than the Geth!

You don't know what genocide means. It doesn't mean "killing every member of a race/species." It means killing them because they belong to that race/species. No one is killing the Reapers because they belong to the Reaper race. They are doing it because THE REAPERS ARE TRYING TO KILL US ALL.

nobody is killing the geth just because they are geth, they are killing the geth because that's the only way to destroy the reapers. 

Tell me something. If a gunman holds an innocent person hostage, do you consider it acceptable to shoot the hostage to kill the gunman?

If you hit the hostage in the shoulder they will fall and leave yourself free to double tap the gunman before they can harm anybody, saving everybody and only applying superficial wounds to the hostage.

So yes. 

It's not the same, though.

A better comparison would be... there are 5 hostages and a bomb. One of those hostages is strapped to the bomb, and if they die, the bomb is defused (!?)

You can try to defuse the bomb yourself. This may or may not work. You can also just murder the hostage and through some kind of magic, the bomb is defused.

I believe a damaged man would kill the hostage.

the safest and best choice is to kill the hostage, unless you know how to disarm a bomb of course

How will killing the Hostage disarm the bomb again lol?

[flexxdk]

Artking3 wrote...

Kill a few million to save a few trillion.

War is about hard choices.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Dranks]

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" - Mr. Spock moments before death

The geth were a very unfortunate sacrifice, but one that needed to be made so life can continue unhindered. I hated the endings but this is not one of the problems I have with them.

Modifié par Dranks, 07 avril 2012 - 09:33 .

[Dandynermite]

Jacobcus wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

M0keys wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Dandynermite wrote...

Your still all ignoring the fact killing the reapers is also Genocide! Just because they are one the other team doesn't make them any less of a "being" than the Geth!

You don't know what genocide means. It doesn't mean "killing every member of a race/species." It means killing them because they belong to that race/species. No one is killing the Reapers because they belong to the Reaper race. They are doing it because THE REAPERS ARE TRYING TO KILL US ALL.

nobody is killing the geth just because they are geth, they are killing the geth because that's the only way to destroy the reapers. 

Tell me something. If a gunman holds an innocent person hostage, do you consider it acceptable to shoot the hostage to kill the gunman?

If you hit the hostage in the shoulder they will fall and leave yourself free to double tap the gunman before they can harm anybody, saving everybody and only applying superficial wounds to the hostage.

So yes. 

It's not the same, though.

A better comparison would be... there are 5 hostages and a bomb. One of those hostages is strapped to the bomb, and if they die, the bomb is defused (!?)

You can try to defuse the bomb yourself. This may or may not work. You can also just murder the hostage and through some kind of magic, the bomb is defused.

I believe a damaged man would kill the hostage.

the safest and best choice is to kill the hostage, unless you know how to disarm a bomb of course

How will killing the Hostage disarm the bomb again lol?

Space Magic. 

[FatalX7.0]

Shallyah wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Chrillze wrote...

the geth are just talking toasters, they had to be sacrificed for the greater good

<facepalm> You do realise how dangerous thatline of thought is right?

Dangerous how?

They're robots, with Reaper code or not. In retrospect, best you can do is to exterminate them before Legion uploads the Reaper code. That way you don't even have to deal with the "guilt" of killing individual sentient syntehtics in the Destroy ending.

Sorry, but I have a hard time to see anything wrong with destroying space junk to save millions of races in the course of millions of years of the galactic course. And how many races had been exterminated by the Reapers before? How many cultures? How many mothers holding their newborn child, killed without asking why?

Stop being cynical, please.

Robots?

What a naive term to describe synthetic beings.