319 réponses à ce sujet

[OH-UP-THIS!]

MisterJB wrote...

ohupthis wrote...
they're still in existence?

If you believe that the Reapers; who are clearly sapient creatures; will always kill organics; regardless of Control or Synthesis; you are then admitting that Synthetics will always kill organics and, therefore, the Catalyst was right.
Logic then dictates that what the Reapers do is necessary.

So I terminate the cycle, PERMANENTLY!! RED!!!

[ediskrad327]

The Angry One wrote...

Said it before and I'll say it again. They couldn't make control and synthesis appealing on their own merits, so they had to tack on penalties to destroy.

That's lazy writing. Their job was to sell these other options, not arbitrarily penalise people for picking the only option that even begins to resemble what we've been fighting for, for 3 whole games.

and once again the angry one makes total sense

[MisterJB]

ohupthis wrote...
We, Human and Turian, LOST enough during that war, time to move forward.

There were losses on both sides, so could you find me another example?

Would you claim the Reapers have not lost? For every Reaper destroyed, the last remnants of an entire civilization dies.

ohupthis wrote...
Uh HUH, yeah, killing trillions. sociopath.

It's better than having all organic life extinct because turns out the Reapers were right and the synthetics killed us all.

[KingZayd]

MisterJB wrote...

ohupthis wrote...
they're still in existence?

If you believe that the Reapers; who are clearly sapient creatures; will always kill organics; regardless of Control or Synthesis; you are then admitting that Synthetics will always kill organics and, therefore, the Catalyst was right.
Logic then dictates that what the Reapers do is necessary.

They also clearly don't hold us with much regard.

And no. Why do synthetics have to be like the the Reapers?

[OH-UP-THIS!]

MisterJB wrote...

ohupthis wrote...
We, Human and Turian, LOST enough during that war, time to move forward.

There were losses on both sides, so could you find me another example?

Would you claim the Reapers have not lost? For every Reaper destroyed, the last remnants of an entire civilization dies.

ohupthis wrote...
Uh HUH, yeah, killing trillions. sociopath.

It's better than having all organic life extinct because turns out the Reapers were right and the synthetics killed us all.

Those previous races, sorry but they didn't live long enough to stop the "bad guys"

Says who, star-twit?, yeah there's something we can put our faith in, yup.

So being a mass murderer, is ok if you get to live?, oh yeah up the dose again.PLEASE!

Modifié par ohupthis, 08 mai 2012 - 03:33 .

[KingZayd]

MisterJB wrote...

ohupthis wrote...
We, Human and Turian, LOST enough during that war, time to move forward.

There were losses on both sides, so could you find me another example?

Would you claim the Reapers have not lost? For every Reaper destroyed, the last remnants of an entire civilization dies.

Those civilisations are already long dead.

MisterJB wrote... 

ohupthis wrote...
Uh HUH, yeah, killing trillions. sociopath.

It's better than having all organic life extinct because turns out the Reapers were right and the synthetics killed us all.

Is it? Why?

[The_Other_M]

The Angry One wrote...

Said it before and I'll say it again. They couldn't make control and synthesis appealing on their own merits, so they had to tack on penalties to destroy.

That's lazy writing. Their job was to sell these other options, not arbitrarily penalise people for picking the only option that even begins to resemble what we've been fighting for, for 3 whole games.

^^I concur, however.....
That doesn't change the fact that the "Crucible" was still just the magic off-button for the Reapers.

[thesnake777]

Dude I will pick destroy every single time. It is the only one that guarantees a defeat of the Reapers. The other two...stink of Reaper Victory....

[vixvicco]

As much as I love the geth, I don't see how its genocide. Genocide is only relevant to organics in my opinon. I would feel guilty to choose synthesis just so I could save synthetics that can be easily re-created. It doesn't make sense to sacrifice organic life (through manipulating DNA) to save synthetic life-isn't that what the reapers were doing/ what they want? Destroy ending is the only ending that's not evil and what you should have been fighting to do from the start. Why consider anything else?

Modifié par vixvicco, 08 mai 2012 - 03:42 .

[MisterJB]

KingZayd wrote...
Those civilisations are already long dead.

Says you.
I remember Shepard engaging in conversation with one. It seemed quite alive to me.

Is it? Why?

...do you want me to explain why living is better than dying?

[BluSoldier]

 I just plain don't like synthetics.  I have been trying to wipe out all forms of AI since ME1.
SO I had no moral issues with destroy.  I wanted EDI shut off at the start of ME2, and even though I could have made peace, I decided to wipe out the Geth anyway.  
Screw AI.
DESTROY FTW!!!!!!!!!!!

[wantedman dan]

MisterJB wrote...

...do you want me to explain why living is better than dying?

Yes, please.

[MisterJB]

ohupthis wrote...
Those previous races, sorry but they didn't live long enough to stop the "bad guys"

They're still alive.

Says who, star-twit?, yeah there's something we can put our faith in, yup.

What it says is logic. War is inevitable when two different people share the same location.

So being a mass murderer, is ok if you get to live?,

Not just me. All of humanity.

[balance5050]

thesnake777 wrote...

Dude I will pick destroy every single time. It is the only one that guarantees a defeat of the Reapers. The other two...stink of Reaper Victory....

This ^^

[Hadeedak]

balance5050 wrote...

thesnake777 wrote...

Dude I will pick destroy every single time. It is the only one that guarantees a defeat of the Reapers. The other two...stink of Reaper Victory....

This ^^

Hah, Destroy's for cynics who want to admit synthetics and organics can't co-exist. QUITTER. 

[thesnake777]

Hadeedak wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

thesnake777 wrote...

Dude I will pick destroy every single time. It is the only one that guarantees a defeat of the Reapers. The other two...stink of Reaper Victory....

This ^^

Hah, Destroy's for cynics who want to admit synthetics and organics can't co-exist. QUITTER. 

Nah. I ithink the Reaper Kid was a liar, but even if its true Screw it. Red all day every day!!!

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Remember this fact: no matter which ending you choose, the relays are destroyed. Starbrat says so. After he tells you what each of your choices do, he tells you "Releasing the energy of the crucible will destroy the mass relays." This is on the high EMS ending. Until we see otherwise we have to take Starbrat at its word. You die in two of them -- Control and Synthesis. Destroy kills the geth and supposedly EDI, but EDI says non-functionality is worth it.

In Control you are not a slave. You are the boss. Do you have to continue the cycle? No. Will you? In 50,000 yrs you probably won't be able to because the current civilizations will probably kick your ass. Or they will have written you off as a myth again. The reapers will remain in the history books for maybe two to three thousand years, then will be put into mythology of ancient civilizations. You may have a war with the Geth and have to wipe them out.

If Destroy killed only the Reapers, it would be a very easy choice. No one would pick Control or Synthesis. See by having Control and Synthesis destroy the mass relays they screwed the pooch. They made those choices totally unappetizing. If with Control, the mass relays remained intact and fully functioning, then maybe it might be worth that sacrifice if you were to have full control over the Reapers forever. Same with Synthesis.

The problem is there is no give in any of the endings. Only take. Starbrat (Walters & Hudson) basically says "I win. You lose. Game over. Artistic integrity." That's the bitter part of the ending. The sweet part is when Buzz Aldrin says "my sweet." So now you have a bittersweet ending.

Note to writers: if you are going to tempt players you need to lead them down the primrose path gently. You need to seduce them, and they will fall into your trap willingly. It is not necessary to beat them over the head with a mallet. You don't seduce them by having the arch villains championing the bad choices. If you do that, then you have to resort to the heavy handed tactics used at the ending by putting negative consequences on the one choice the completes the player's mission. However if you have trusted friends championing the causes of alternatives, then you don't have to resort to that. You can branch the plot earlier and leave the player in a real dilemma.

Suppose maybe you had Anderson championing the possibility of control? Or had maybe Garrus championing it? Synthesis would fall easily into Joker's area but that would be too obvious..... hmmm.... maybe.... Dr. Chakwas or Dr. Michel? Maybe Liara also thinking about control, but Javik heavily in favor of Destroy, and Liara is your LI. Now there's a conflict. Tali maybe about synthesis since the Quarians have so many cybernetic implants already. See and if Tali is you LI you have another potential conflict. These people instead of dealing with the evil Illusive Man, and the evil Saren only. You don't know what to think. The player might start thinking, are these alternatives really that bad? I know TIM and Saren are but these other people are good people. Now it's not so black or white.

[balance5050]

Hadeedak wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

thesnake777 wrote...

Dude I will pick destroy every single time. It is the only one that guarantees a defeat of the Reapers. The other two...stink of Reaper Victory....

This ^^

Hah, Destroy's for cynics who want to admit synthetics and organics can't co-exist. QUITTER. 

Destroy is for... Shepard
Control is for TIM
Synthesis is for Saren

2 of those 3 people were indoctrinated.

[Hadeedak]

Says you. Maybe my Shepard doesn't throw her allies under the bus to live.

(Little bit of hyperbole, but honestly... Each endings has its downsides and upsides, and they all are kind of borked and underexplained).

[wantedman dan]

Hadeedak wrote...

Says you. Maybe my Shepard doesn't throw her allies under the bus to live.

(Little bit of hyperbole, but honestly... Each endings has its downsides and upsides, and they all are kind of borked and underexplained).

The base assumption being that the sole reason to pick destroy is to live.

[111987]

thesnake777 wrote...

Dude I will pick destroy every single time. It is the only one that guarantees a defeat of the Reapers. The other two...stink of Reaper Victory....

If you choose Control, your Shepard could always decide down the line to send them into a Sun or something.

[Hadeedak]

wantedman dan wrote...

Hadeedak wrote...

Says you. Maybe my Shepard doesn't throw her allies under the bus to live.

(Little bit of hyperbole, but honestly... Each endings has its downsides and upsides, and they all are kind of borked and underexplained).

The base assumption being that the sole reason to pick destroy is to live.

Well, I've said a few times in this thread that the big bonus of destroy is that it's assured. It's not a gamble. You're going to be rid of reapers forever and ever. But Shepard living is one hell of a bonus if you're as attached to yours as I am to mine (who I electrocuted, but the next one gets to live). That's why I don't think destroy needs additional carrots to make it tempting, to bring this home. Nor do I think control does. It's a pretty good ending, capable of being as interesting as destroy. They both suffer from not being clarified.

And then... there's synthesis.... Hrrrgh. That needs a carrot or six and a metric ton of clarification.

[balance5050]

111987 wrote...

thesnake777 wrote...

Dude I will pick destroy every single time. It is the only one that guarantees a defeat of the Reapers. The other two...stink of Reaper Victory....

If you choose Control, your Shepard could always decide down the line to send them into a Sun or something.

Yep, all you gotta do is die first. Great plan right?

"You wanna control these weapons of mass destruction?"

"Uhh, yeah, sure I gu.."

"Electrocute yourself until you die first."



Don't DERP people...

Modifié par balance5050, 08 mai 2012 - 04:34 .

[Ring1]

MisterJB wrote...

Would you claim the Reapers have not lost? For every Reaper destroyed, the last remnants of an entire civilization dies. 

Wouldn't the civilization be destroyed after the reapers harvest them? Isn't civilization more than physical existence? The example I am thinking of is the Native Americans and the United States on the reservations. With the United States trying to incorporate the Native Americans into the US. Of course this gets into identity and nationalism (even though that idea does not exist until the 20th century)

[111987]

balance5050 wrote...

111987 wrote...

thesnake777 wrote...

Dude I will pick destroy every single time. It is the only one that guarantees a defeat of the Reapers. The other two...stink of Reaper Victory....

If you choose Control, your Shepard could always decide down the line to send them into a Sun or something.

Yep, all you gotta do is die first. Great plan right?

"You wanna control these weapons of mass destruction?"

"Uhh, yeah, sure I gu.."

"Electrocute yourself until you die first."



Don't DERP people...

Umm, well you also die in 'Destroy', so I am not sure what your point is here.

And actually in Control, your mind lives on.