472 réponses à ce sujet

[Storm258]

No, I never wanted to choose any of this.
Control is what TIM stood for and what my Shepard always was fighting against. He knew that nobody could control the Reapers and that any attempt to do so would only end up in being controlled by the Reapers, so the other way round.
Synthesis is on one hand what Saren stood for, what Shepard also fought. Plus, Shepard tries to defeat Reapers to save the galaxy and it's species. But Shep still is just a human, and I don't think he's got any right to decide the fate of billions, not only of the humans but of any species in the galaxy, that would mean playing god, and Shepard wouldn't want this.
Destroy is the ending I'd prefer if I'm forced to choose, but I also don't like it, as it means to destroy all the Geth and EDI. And I don't agree with Samtheman, I think the Geth feel alive and have a desire to live, just in a way we couldn't fully understand, but with EDI, it was obvious that synthetics can be "alive" as well.

Also, as any option destroys the Mass Relays and screws everybody, I wouldn't choose ...

[Eain]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

Maybe if things don't die we suddenly discover that the term "being alive" is actually pretty meaningless.

Also if humans die how does that differ from a machine shutting down? Pretty sure that if my PC's processor breaks my computer shuts off. If my brain breaks my body shuts off. No difference at all.

[Samtheman63]

The Angry One wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Vigil_N7 wrote...

None of the endings have redeeming factors? How about the cycle being broken once and for all? That is a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE factor, regardless of what happens with the mass relays.

I don't understand why people think right now its better to not use the catalyst and let the allied fleets get wiped out and allowing the reapers to win. g

If Shepard does not use the catalyst, then the sacrifices and deaths of Mordin/Ashley/Kaidan/Legion/Anderson/Thane/Kirrahe/Kal'Reegar/MILLIONS others, effectively means nothing because Shepard is indecisive and is unwilling to make a galaxy altering decision when it counts.

Who knows how the three choices will alter the galaxy's future, but surely giving organics/synthetics a CHANCE at a NEW future, a future that is free of the reapers, is superior than condemning quite possibly trillions of organics to the same fate thousands upon thousands of civilizations had faced before.

.....Only the destory choice brakes the cycle...And is the the star child telling the truth?

They all break the cycle

Control is too vague to determine what happens. Synthesis changes absolutely nothing.

Well if Shepard is in control it's pretty obvious to presume that he doesn't allow the reapers to kill everyone.  There is no need for the cycle to continue after synthesis as the starchilds problem has been solved.

[nitefyre410]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

 

lol... what? 

Thats equalivant to dying.. 

[Samtheman63]

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

Maybe if things don't die we suddenly discover that the term "being alive" is actually pretty meaningless.

Also if humans die how does that differ from a machine shutting down? Pretty sure that if my PC's processor breaks my computer shuts off. If my brain breaks my body shuts off. No difference at all.

lol

[Samtheman63]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

 

lol... what? 

Thats equalivant to dying.. 

No

[dreman9999]

Samtheman63 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Vigil_N7 wrote...

None of the endings have redeeming factors? How about the cycle being broken once and for all? That is a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE factor, regardless of what happens with the mass relays.

I don't understand why people think right now its better to not use the catalyst and let the allied fleets get wiped out and allowing the reapers to win. g

If Shepard does not use the catalyst, then the sacrifices and deaths of Mordin/Ashley/Kaidan/Legion/Anderson/Thane/Kirrahe/Kal'Reegar/MILLIONS others, effectively means nothing because Shepard is indecisive and is unwilling to make a galaxy altering decision when it counts.

Who knows how the three choices will alter the galaxy's future, but surely giving organics/synthetics a CHANCE at a NEW future, a future that is free of the reapers, is superior than condemning quite possibly trillions of organics to the same fate thousands upon thousands of civilizations had faced before.

.....Only the destory choice brakes the cycle...And is the the star child telling the truth?

They all break the cycle

1. Control: You get uploaded into the reaper system cantrol them but everything you are dies..... If the way Shepard thinks change being that everything about him/her dies, what the guarrenty Shepard won't come to the same conclustion the star child did and do the same thing being that he/she is no longer human.

2.Synthesis:It's exactly what the reapers want to do. Added, how do new races become a synthesis hybrid? Let's say a new star system is made and over time life come to one of it's planets....How do they become synthesis hybids.

Also, note that in these endings the reapers stay alive.....

[nitefyre410]

Samtheman63 wrote...

*snip* 

No
 

 

lol... alright... if you say  so 

Modifié par nitefyre410, 25 avril 2012 - 12:50 .

[CapnManx]

Shepard, as a character (as opposed to 'tool of the player') already demonstrated how far he/she is prepared to go to stop the Reapers in Arrival. Even though I play a Paragon Shep (I've tried Renegade, but I just couldn't get into it), I still consider picking the destroy ending to be entirely in character.

For that matter, deciding the fate of the Geth heretics could be seen as a parallel for the destroy and control endings (or destroy and synthesis, depending on how you view reprogramming them); though on a smaller scale.

In the end, I wanted to kill the Reapers, so that's what I did; shame about the Geth, but life isn't fair.

[Eain]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

Maybe if things don't die we suddenly discover that the term "being alive" is actually pretty meaningless.

Also if humans die how does that differ from a machine shutting down? Pretty sure that if my PC's processor breaks my computer shuts off. If my brain breaks my body shuts off. No difference at all.

lol

I was expecting we'd arrive back to this eventually. Proves my point, too. Not to you of course, but to other readers: your cognitive system isn't advanced enough to process the information you're being given, and so you revert to a default response when you can't generate semantically relevant output.

Yeah I just went there.

Modifié par Eain, 25 avril 2012 - 12:50 .

[dreman9999]

Samtheman63 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Vigil_N7 wrote...

None of the endings have redeeming factors? How about the cycle being broken once and for all? That is a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE factor, regardless of what happens with the mass relays.

I don't understand why people think right now its better to not use the catalyst and let the allied fleets get wiped out and allowing the reapers to win. g

If Shepard does not use the catalyst, then the sacrifices and deaths of Mordin/Ashley/Kaidan/Legion/Anderson/Thane/Kirrahe/Kal'Reegar/MILLIONS others, effectively means nothing because Shepard is indecisive and is unwilling to make a galaxy altering decision when it counts.

Who knows how the three choices will alter the galaxy's future, but surely giving organics/synthetics a CHANCE at a NEW future, a future that is free of the reapers, is superior than condemning quite possibly trillions of organics to the same fate thousands upon thousands of civilizations had faced before.

.....Only the destory choice brakes the cycle...And is the the star child telling the truth?

They all break the cycle

Control is too vague to determine what happens. Synthesis changes absolutely nothing.

Well if Shepard is in control it's pretty obvious to presume that he doesn't allow the reapers to kill everyone.  There is no need for the cycle to continue after synthesis as the starchilds problem has been solved.

Did you miss the part were he says"Lose everything you are"? What's the guarrantee Shepard will think the same afterward?

[Samtheman63]

Did you not watch the cut scene with the reapes leaving?

[Naerivar]

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

Maybe if things don't die we suddenly discover that the term "being alive" is actually pretty meaningless.

Also if humans die how does that differ from a machine shutting down? Pretty sure that if my PC's processor breaks my computer shuts off. If my brain breaks my body shuts off. No difference at all.

lol

I was expecting we'd arrive back to this eventually. Proves my point, too. Not to you of course, but to other readers: your cognitive system isn't advanced enough to process the information you're being given, and so you revert to a default response when you can't generate semantically relevant output.

Yeah I just went there.

I think I love you now...

[dreman9999]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

1. Legion died.
2.If Legion die during the suicide mission you meet his clone, but you find out he fail to upload himself  and only remebers from the time he was shot on eden prime and does not remeber his time on the normandy. A clear indecation that the legionyou met is dead.

3. Ask yourself this ...What is brain death and what does it mean for a person recover form it but lose all there memories forever.

4. What is the indecation of death? And what is what is brain death?

Modifié par dreman9999, 25 avril 2012 - 12:58 .

[Samtheman63]

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

Maybe if things don't die we suddenly discover that the term "being alive" is actually pretty meaningless.

Also if humans die how does that differ from a machine shutting down? Pretty sure that if my PC's processor breaks my computer shuts off. If my brain breaks my body shuts off. No difference at all.

lol

I was expecting we'd arrive back to this eventually. Proves my point, too. Not to you of course, but to other readers: your cognitive system isn't advanced enough to process the information you're being given, and so you revert to a default response when you can't generate semantically relevant output.

Yeah I just went there.

It's not the same.  Seriously if you PCs processor shut down I'm sure you'd go out and buy another, you can't do that with living things

[Ieldra]

Vigil_N7 wrote...

None of the endings have redeeming factors? How about the cycle being broken once and for all? That is a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE factor, regardless of what happens with the mass relays.

I don't understand why people think right now its better to not use the catalyst and let the allied fleets get wiped out and allowing the reapers to win. g

If Shepard does not use the catalyst, then the sacrifices and deaths of Mordin/Ashley/Kaidan/Legion/Anderson/Thane/Kirrahe/Kal'Reegar/MILLIONS others, effectively means nothing because Shepard is indecisive and is unwilling to make a galaxy altering decision when it counts.

Who knows how the three choices will alter the galaxy's future, but surely giving organics/synthetics a CHANCE at a NEW future, a future that is free of the reapers, is superior than condemning quite possibly trillions of organics to the same fate thousands upon thousands of civilizations had faced before.

Yep.

I hate the relay destruction with a passion, but letting the Reapers win is not an alternative. I also like the main effects of the three final choice options, all are acceptable ends depending on how you view things. 

Give me a better exposition of the Catalyst's reasoning so that it makes sense, give me a less nonsensical description of the Synthesis, plus closure about the fate of the places and characters I care about, and an option that doesn't destroy the relays, and I'll be content. The starchild isn't the best idea Bioware has ever had, but I can live with it if it doesn't require my Shepard to act out of character, believing every piece of crap set before him in spite of evidence to the contrary.

[dreman9999]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Did you not watch the cut scene with the reapes leaving?

Do you have any proof that really happened?

[ZIPO396]

Samtheman63 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Vigil_N7 wrote...

None of the endings have redeeming factors? How about the cycle being broken once and for all? That is a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE factor, regardless of what happens with the mass relays.

I don't understand why people think right now its better to not use the catalyst and let the allied fleets get wiped out and allowing the reapers to win. g

If Shepard does not use the catalyst, then the sacrifices and deaths of Mordin/Ashley/Kaidan/Legion/Anderson/Thane/Kirrahe/Kal'Reegar/MILLIONS others, effectively means nothing because Shepard is indecisive and is unwilling to make a galaxy altering decision when it counts.

Who knows how the three choices will alter the galaxy's future, but surely giving organics/synthetics a CHANCE at a NEW future, a future that is free of the reapers, is superior than condemning quite possibly trillions of organics to the same fate thousands upon thousands of civilizations had faced before.

.....Only the destory choice brakes the cycle...And is the the star child telling the truth?

They all break the cycle

Control is too vague to determine what happens. Synthesis changes absolutely nothing.

Well if Shepard is in control it's pretty obvious to presume that he doesn't allow the reapers to kill everyone.  There is no need for the cycle to continue after synthesis as the starchilds problem has been solved.

No it hasn't been solved as the new hybrid people could still make synthetics that could still kill them.

Modifié par ZIPO396, 25 avril 2012 - 12:57 .

[Alexius]

It's not the options that annoy me per se, it's their context and how they were presented. The kid barely says anything that gives you any insight about the decision you are about to make.

If Shepard has to choose, so be it. I still think the argument doesn't really stand, but oh well. At least let me pick something fully aware of its consequences, all of them. Of course, I'd go for a fourth option if given the choice but I can only hope for that.

[Eain]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

Maybe if things don't die we suddenly discover that the term "being alive" is actually pretty meaningless.

Also if humans die how does that differ from a machine shutting down? Pretty sure that if my PC's processor breaks my computer shuts off. If my brain breaks my body shuts off. No difference at all.

lol

I was expecting we'd arrive back to this eventually. Proves my point, too. Not to you of course, but to other readers: your cognitive system isn't advanced enough to process the information you're being given, and so you revert to a default response when you can't generate semantically relevant output.

Yeah I just went there.

It's not the same.  Seriously if you PCs processor shut down I'm sure you'd go out and buy another, you can't do that with living things

The only reason we can't is because medical science isn't far enough yet. There's nothing magical about us, you know. There will come a day where science can artificially grow hearts and put them into people's bodies to replace crappy ones. We already know how to translate neural information to digital code, and then use that code to control machines with. In fact that knowledge is being used in a control system for a medical exoskeleton in development as we speak.

Science is capable of doing amazing things, and the more we learn about controlling our biological side the more we discover that we don't differ that much from any other sort of machinery. If you don't want to believe that, that's your call, but your agreement is of little relevance to what modern science is doing today.

[fainmaca]

All three options violate my personal values, and completely break with the previous pattern established in the series. Think about it. With every choice you've faced before, its almost always been a decision between the moral high ground and the most pragmatic approach. With this, there is no moral high ground vs most expedient path to choose. All three choices are morally reprehensible.

Control- you become the Reaper central consciousness, dominating the galaxy-killing force. Star Wars didn't end with Luke becoming the new Emperor, because that would be Wrong.

Destroy- Genocide of every synthetic being in the Galaxy. Not just the Reaper force who have made it clear that you cannot coexist with them, but everything synthetic. That's like wiping out an invading alien force but also anyone with green eyes because the aliens have green eyes.

Synthesis- forced upgrade of every being in the Galaxy. If there's a more heinous example of violating a person's free will, I don't want to know about it.

Ultimately all three choices violate a prime principle of the franchise- the ability to self-determinate. They all take away the free will of someone in the franchise and they all stink of Wrong.

So no, I don't take either of the three skittles put in front of me.

Personally, I don't think the ending should have had a Big Choice like ME1 or 2. I thinkl the ending should be solely determined by past actions, and the ending is basically a series of events detailing all of these consequences, right down to the final cutscene where we see Shepard either defeat the Reapers or fail miserably. Having a choice at this point that decides the fate of the story simply negates all the work put in beforehand.

[Eain]

AlexiusDAlex wrote...

It's not the options that annoy me per se, it's their context and how they were presented. The kid barely says anything that gives you any insight about the decision you are about to make.

If Shepard has to choose, so be it. I still think the argument doesn't really stand, but oh well. At least let me pick something fully aware of its consequences, all of them. Of course, I'd go for a fourth option if given the choice but I can only hope for that.

Well it's true that he has atrociously little dialogue. But I also feel like he does sort of tells us enough in terms of each choice. If I choose destroy, reapers and geth die. If I choose control, I control. If I choose synthesis, organics and synthetics merge through space magic. It's pretty clear what happens, I think.

[Vigil_N7]

The Angry One wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Vigil_N7 wrote...

None of the endings have redeeming factors? How about the cycle being broken once and for all? That is a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE factor, regardless of what happens with the mass relays.

I don't understand why people think right now its better to not use the catalyst and let the allied fleets get wiped out and allowing the reapers to win. g

If Shepard does not use the catalyst, then the sacrifices and deaths of Mordin/Ashley/Kaidan/Legion/Anderson/Thane/Kirrahe/Kal'Reegar/MILLIONS others, effectively means nothing because Shepard is indecisive and is unwilling to make a galaxy altering decision when it counts.

Who knows how the three choices will alter the galaxy's future, but surely giving organics/synthetics a CHANCE at a NEW future, a future that is free of the reapers, is superior than condemning quite possibly trillions of organics to the same fate thousands upon thousands of civilizations had faced before.

.....Only the destory choice brakes the cycle...And is the the star child telling the truth?

They all break the cycle

Control is too vague to determine what happens. Synthesis changes absolutely nothing.

Patrick Weekes pretty much suggests that Shepard CAN and WILL be able to control the reapers. 

"
-Will long-distance superluminal travel still be possible post-Ending? (will Tali or Wrex or Garrus see their homeworlds again? Will everyone starve?)

Galactic civilization will rebuild. The mass relays were not necessary for interstellar flight. Remember, what does it say in the Codex about the speed of ships? That's right, 12 lightyears per (day? hour? minute?). And that's only the cruising speed, not the maximum speed.

People have never needed to research basic FTL improvements before because they have mass relays. With the relays gone, new technology will increase that speed. Additionally, the element zero cores of the dead/controlled Reapers can be used to improve FTL drives. Starflight will continue using conventional FTL "

Emphasis on the "element zero cores of dead/controlled reapers can be used to improve FTL drives."

If it was never intended for Shepard to control the reapers, then Weekes wouldn't have alluded to controlled reapers being used as FTL drives. So essentially, given the information, we can deduct that with control, the citadel remains intact, the relays are destroyed, synthetics (geth and EDI) function per the norm, the cycle is broken and the reapers can be used for whatever purpose Shepard wishes. 

Synthesis is less clear, and is such a galaxy-altering event that its nigh on impossible to determine what will happen next, as we have no idea even what being an organic-synthetic is like. 

Modifié par Vigil_N7, 25 avril 2012 - 01:03 .

[ZIPO396]

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

Maybe if things don't die we suddenly discover that the term "being alive" is actually pretty meaningless.

Also if humans die how does that differ from a machine shutting down? Pretty sure that if my PC's processor breaks my computer shuts off. If my brain breaks my body shuts off. No difference at all.

lol

I was expecting we'd arrive back to this eventually. Proves my point, too. Not to you of course, but to other readers: your cognitive system isn't advanced enough to process the information you're being given, and so you revert to a default response when you can't generate semantically relevant output.

Yeah I just went there.

It's not the same.  Seriously if you PCs processor shut down I'm sure you'd go out and buy another, you can't do that with living things

The only reason we can't is because medical science isn't far enough yet. There's nothing magical about us, you know. There will come a day where science can artificially grow hearts and put them into people's bodies to replace crappy ones. We already know how to translate neural information to digital code, and then use that code to control machines with. In fact that knowledge is being used in a control system for a medical exoskeleton in development as we speak.

Science is capable of doing amazing things, and the more we learn about controlling our biological side the more we discover that we don't differ that much from any other sort of machinery. If you don't want to believe that, that's your call, but your agreement is of little relevance to what modern science is doing today.

Only problem with that currently is the way people learn is slightly different so the area of the brain is slightly differen't but at least we're landing in the ball park with it currently. Which is pretty cool. But yeah we're just biological extremely machines is all.

[Pelle6666]

Destroy kinda works, but I'd want the geth and Edi to survive if readiness was over 4000, that would have made that the ultimate ending.
Any way the last cut scenes still destroys the entire series by declaring that space travel is a thing of the passed and that the crew of Normandy was stranded on a random planet.