ZombieChad wrote...
Sorry it took so long to reply, lost connection then accidentally my original reply without posting like a muppet.
What source says the Geth and EDI are all dead? The Catalyst or a source I've missed? If it's The Catalyst, why do you trust it? It started the entire mess in the first place. As two of its apparent victims are still around. (Shep and EDI) Why should the Geth be any different?
The point on Ruthless Calculus should be intrinsically tied to your decision, as it isn't made in a little bubble devoid from the rest of the plot. The galaxy is burning as a race of AI dreadnoughts slaughter and corrupt everything they can get their grubby little mits on. This war is unprecedented (at least in our cycle) in scale and level of deaths. Instead of armies mobilising species are mobilising, it's the Total War concept taken to the next level. The Geth like everyone else joined Shepard as they are prepared to die rather than submit to the Old Machines. Turian's and Krogan are allies (WTF!), even the Asari are getting off their asses. The Salarian Dalatresses are begrudgingly helping whilst STG are flooding in droves... and so on and so on....
So what right does Shepard have? The right of the chief opponent of the Reapers and a military officer. The scale is horrifically different but ultimately it's ordering a unit's (read: species) death so that more unit's (read: species) survive. War doesn't allow for normal moral choices as it is far from a normal situation and even further from morals.
I would say then that she is is more empowered to destroy the Reapers regardless of cost than she is to choose Control or Synthesis. Each and every ally signed up to kill the Reapers. None signed up to give Control to Shepard or suddenly sprout metal bits or organic bits. They all wanted their own future. The Geth are the price tag on that goal and it's bloody high, but they have already stated they want nothing to do with the Reapers. I reckon teleporting bits into them and surgically/mechanically grafting them onto them is liable to ****** them off. Personally, though the Geth are AI they are still logic driven and I think that any Geth would've happily flipped the Destroy switch/shot tube despite their own death as they would recognise that their sacrifice gives the galaxy back to it's surviving inhabitants as well as disproving the Catalyst's logic. The deaths of the Geth are tragic casualties of war just like every other species the Reaper's have claimed through countless cycles and every other individual in this cycle. I think a fundamental difference in our thoughts behind the endings is that I feel the responsibility for every death and extinction, including the geth, belongs not with Shepard nor anyone else but the Catalyst and Reapers for it's flawed assumptions about all AI and it's even more broken plan to fix it.
So that leaves us at Synthesis where you're relying on their good will not to change their mind (and ties into the point that new synthetics can be made anyway) Destroy on the other hand ends the threat very permanently unless the long hinted at stuff from Bioware is "Mass Effect: Reaper Zombie Multiplayer Mode".
You are right that the choice is the lesser of 3 evils but I'll choose the death of the Geth to get the better future for those who come afterwards without any chance of Reaper influence thanks.
Well, of course, for any endings to make sense we have to take the brat's word for granted. If we doubted his every word we'd be totally ****ed because we wouldn't even know which option would be destroy/control or synthesis.
If Shepard has the right (or has been given the right) to choose for the extinction of an entire specie, then she also has the right to choose synthesis. Yes, there might be a ****load of problems with it. But unless it takes away your free will (which I don't elieve it does, husks and synthesized organics are two totally different things in my book) life is preferable to death.
We don't know what conclusion the Geth would reach. They may choose extinction above synthesis. But I personally wouldn't.This is the same problem I had with Garrus wanting to shoot Dr Saleon's shuttje way back in ME1. He states that he'd rather be dead than be a monster with extra organs growing in them. And I'd agree. But we can't actually make that decision for them, we don't have that right.
Now, all the other races trust shepard to make the right decisions, true. But preparing for a last ditch attempt, willing to die if it could help, that is one thing. But knowing, from the start, that you will not survive the fight, just because someone is going to take the destroy option... I don't think that would sit well with everybody, even geth.
Of course they don't know what would happen. It shows that while you could trust someone enough to take a chance to die for them, it's totally different if you know you will die, no matter what. And only because Shepard chose destroy rather than synthesis.
You can't really prepare for such a choice. And therefore you can't actually give your trust rightfully. And as such Shepard can't have the right to do it (destroy). Or you just waltz over everything I said, but then you have to accept that Synthesis is also an option which shepard has the right to choose.
in some sense the ultimate responsibility lays with the Catalys, true. If a murder tells me to choose whether person A or B has to die, or if I don't choose he chooses he'll kill an entire village. I am not responsible for any death. Except maybe the entire village because I could have prevented that.
And shepard can prevent the entire village, By picking synthesis.
Retour en haut
Everyone everywhere slowly becomes a cyborg. This so called "Evolution" shouldn't happen so damn fast. ANNND....I don't like the idea of being dead, leaving my Love Interest to unwillingly become a cyborg.
