242 réponses à ce sujet

[Micah3sixty]

You have to understand the reasons and intent behind the Catalyst's "solution" to grasp why Control or Synthesis is more desirable than Destroy. Ignore IT briefly and assume the endings were literal, as Bioware likely intended. The reapers aren't just some angry, genocidal self preserving, machine race according to the Catalyst. They are guardians of organic evolution, recycling advanced galactic civilizations to prevent synthetic singularities from being created by organics who would threaten all organic life, and subsequently making space for new species to evolve. It's not indoctrination. It's finding logic behind the Catalyst's solution assuming he isn't lying and wanting to trick you, which doesn't make much sense given the 3 options he presents which all subvert the Reapers domination. Just my 2 cents.

[poundoffleshaa]

Micah3sixty wrote...

You have to understand the reasons and intent behind the Catalyst's "solution" to grasp why Control or Synthesis is more desirable than Destroy. Ignore IT briefly and assume the endings were literal, as Bioware likely intended. The reapers aren't just some angry, genocidal self preserving, machine race according to the Catalyst. They are guardians of organic evolution, recycling advanced galactic civilizations to prevent synthetic singularities from being created by organics who would threaten all organic life, and subsequently making space for new species to evolve. It's not indoctrination. It's finding logic behind the Catalyst's solution assuming he isn't lying and wanting to trick you, which doesn't make much sense given the 3 options he presents which all subvert the Reapers domination. Just my 2 cents.

The moment you  accept the reaper discourse you fail, fighting the reapers and accepting there beliefs means you lose, the only victory is by denying them and their solution believing in organics lifes ability to build a better future. A solution that comes from the reapers to the reaper problem is no solution at all.

[PsyrenY]

Grimwick wrote...

Unless the geth were already dead... in which case then people who picked destroy simply 'won the war'.

Well yeah, if you've already failed then it's harder to fail even more.

Vigilant111 wrote...

yeah by allowing the reapers live!!!!!

And that's your problem - ending the Reaper THREAT doesn't necessarily mean ending the Reapers themselves.

dreamgazer wrote...

To be fair, that prompt screen is a nightmare in the spectrum of semantics.  "Commander Shepard has become a legend by ending the Reaper threat" implies that it has happened at some point, yes, but it never says when.  

The events that happen post-choice could still dictate that. 

Yeah, but if Control/Synthesis are really "losing the game" as IT-people insist, there's no way you could end the threat with them. So even if I didn't win in quite the way I thought I did when I made those choices, I still WON.

dreman9999 wrote...

And EC counters it...Moving on....

Nice try. EC FAQ:

"Are there going to be more/different endings or ending DLCs in the future?
No. BioWare strongly believes in the team’s artistic vision for the end of this arc of the Mass Effect franchise. The extended cut DLC will expand on the existing endings, but no further ending DLC is planned."

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 26 mai 2012 - 04:31 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

[Shepard Wins]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

Still indoctrinated Where is this "Shepard needs better HUSKS" signature when you need it...

Modifié par Shepard Wins, 26 mai 2012 - 04:40 .

[PsyrenY]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

Don't bother man, you can't argue rationally with the sheep.

"Indoctrinated BAAAAAAA indoctrinated BAAAAAAAA"

[Shepard Wins]

Optimystic_X wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

Don't bother man, you can't argue rationally with the sheep.

"Indoctrinated BAAAAAAA indoctrinated BAAAAAAAA"

Your eyes might look like in the uppermost and lowermost picture, I'd check them.


EDIT: And you even begin to sound like a husk (bolded fragments )

Modifié par Shepard Wins, 26 mai 2012 - 04:45 .

[Joe Del Toro]

Such a stupid thread seriously 

[dreman9999]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

It's visionary to trust the reapers?

[Ageless Face]

OK, It's really irritating to see this kinds of threads poping out every five minutes telling people that if they don't choose destroy the are wrong. Just create one big thread that say "If you didn't choose my choice, you are stupid and deserve to die painfully". Really, it'll make me respect you more (though not by much).

You are constently telling people they are wrong by choosing synthesis or control, yet saying "you are indoctrinated". Something that doesn't have ANY proof to it, only speculations. You are telling us our Shepard is working for the reapers, yet this statement is equally vailed to destroy.

Can't you just tell us WHY you think it's morally aside from speculations? Because that all there is to these kinds of statements. Or are you creating this kinds of threads just to insult us because we do not think like you do? That is unconsiderate, condescending, and just sad.

[dreman9999]

Optimystic_X wrote...



Nice try. EC FAQ:

"Are there going to be more/different endings or ending DLCs in the future?
No. BioWare strongly believes in the team’s artistic vision for the end of this arc of the Mass Effect franchise. The extended cut DLC will expand on the existing endings, but no further ending DLC is planned."

Now, if only you understood what that means...

[Micah3sixty]

poundoffleshaa wrote...

Micah3sixty wrote...

You have to understand the reasons and intent behind the Catalyst's "solution" to grasp why Control or Synthesis is more desirable than Destroy. Ignore IT briefly and assume the endings were literal, as Bioware likely intended. The reapers aren't just some angry, genocidal self preserving, machine race according to the Catalyst. They are guardians of organic evolution, recycling advanced galactic civilizations to prevent synthetic singularities from being created by organics who would threaten all organic life, and subsequently making space for new species to evolve. It's not indoctrination. It's finding logic behind the Catalyst's solution assuming he isn't lying and wanting to trick you, which doesn't make much sense given the 3 options he presents which all subvert the Reapers domination. Just my 2 cents.

The moment you  accept the reaper discourse you fail, fighting the reapers and accepting there beliefs means you lose, the only victory is by denying them and their solution believing in organics lifes ability to build a better future. A solution that comes from the reapers to the reaper problem is no solution at all.

That is your opinion, but it is not supported by in-game facts.  Fact: All 3 decisions stop the Reapers from destroying organics.  Fact: Organics appear to continue to live with same free will and appearance as before, celebrating the reapers falling/leaving.  Fact: Synthesis only changes DNA structure but not husks or indoctrinated reapers.  

Until EC comes out, anything outside of what is presented in-game is just speculation.  All 3 ending options serve to end the Reaper threat in 3 very different ways.  You may not agree with the options you didn't choose, but it doesn't change the facts presented in game that they are also successful interventions against the reapers.

[dreman9999]

Micah3sixty wrote...

poundoffleshaa wrote...

Micah3sixty wrote...

You have to understand the reasons and intent behind the Catalyst's "solution" to grasp why Control or Synthesis is more desirable than Destroy. Ignore IT briefly and assume the endings were literal, as Bioware likely intended. The reapers aren't just some angry, genocidal self preserving, machine race according to the Catalyst. They are guardians of organic evolution, recycling advanced galactic civilizations to prevent synthetic singularities from being created by organics who would threaten all organic life, and subsequently making space for new species to evolve. It's not indoctrination. It's finding logic behind the Catalyst's solution assuming he isn't lying and wanting to trick you, which doesn't make much sense given the 3 options he presents which all subvert the Reapers domination. Just my 2 cents.

The moment you  accept the reaper discourse you fail, fighting the reapers and accepting there beliefs means you lose, the only victory is by denying them and their solution believing in organics lifes ability to build a better future. A solution that comes from the reapers to the reaper problem is no solution at all.

That is your opinion, but it is not supported by in-game facts.  Fact: All 3 decisions stop the Reapers from destroying organics.  Fact: Organics appear to continue to live with same free will and appearance as before, celebrating the reapers falling/leaving.  Fact: Synthesis only changes DNA structure but not husks or indoctrinated reapers.  

Until EC comes out, anything outside of what is presented in-game is just speculation.  All 3 ending options serve to end the Reaper threat in 3 very different ways.  You may not agree with the options you didn't choose, but it doesn't change the facts presented in game that they are also successful interventions against the reapers.

1. What the reaper want is not to destroy organics.
2.WHa the reaper want is the force evolution and advancement on organics so they won't fight synthetics.

3. None of the 3 choices do that.

[davishepard]

Destroy is that option where Shepard gives the finger to his synthetics allies, destroying them along with the Reapers, and the only option where he keeps his own life intact?

Aw, yeah.

[Helios969]

We've all been indoctrinated. Since the day we started playing in the ME universe.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Shepard Wins wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

Still indoctrinated Where is this "Shepard needs better HUSKS" signature when you need it...

Visionary. All you ever see from pro-Destroy camp is pathos arguments: catalyst is the enemy and we musn't trust him!, we can't work with him!, traitor!, indoctrinated!, look at the bad examples of what Reaper tech has done!, (and please, only the bad examples, never the good ones).

Logos? Almost never.

[Micah3sixty]

davishepard wrote...

Destroy is that option where Shepard gives the finger to his synthetics allies, destroying them along with the Reapers, and the only option where he keeps his own life intact?

Aw, yeah.

Shepard can't surive in physical form from Control or Synthesis, but that isn't proof to those being indoctrination or poor choices.  Sometimes self-sacrifice is required for the best outcome for all.  If Organics really are doomed to creating synthetics who in turn destroy organics, Control or Synthesis seem to be better options than Destroy because either Shepard will continue as the new Catalyst to call upon the Reapers to fight off rogue synthetics, or with synthesis, Synthetics will see the newly structured Organics as equals.  Those are the facts presented in Game and explained by the Catalyst and Reapers.

[dreamgazer]

Optimystic_X wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

Don't bother man, you can't argue rationally with the sheep.

"Indoctrinated BAAAAAAA indoctrinated BAAAAAAAA"

Let's not combat generalization with generalization. 

[Christianswe]

They are all bad endings. The entire layout of the the ending part of ME3 is rushed, does´t make any sense, as feels glued together a the last minute. And the options you get, are broken, since you get no variation, and no real rection to your decison or any feedback. It just ends. It is a BAD ending, you really can debate to the end of the world, but it is just bad, they made a mistake by half assing the ending of ME3. Peace.

[dreman9999]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Shepard Wins wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

Still indoctrinated Where is this "Shepard needs better HUSKS" signature when you need it...

Visionary. All you ever see from pro-Destroy camp is pathos arguments: catalyst is the enemy and we musn't trust him!, we can't work with him!, traitor!, indoctrinated!, look at the bad examples of what Reaper tech has done!, (and please, only the bad examples, never the good ones).

Logos? Almost never.

Let's see....Even example of reaper tech helping us lead ether...
A)Leading us to reaper mass realay trap.
b)Indoctrination
...Sure , we can fight bat with this tech but wouldwe be be fighting in the first place if we never touch the tech in the first place?

Visonary my foot. You're trusting an enemy that want to mind control everyone and turn them to paste to "help" them. 

[Shepard Wins]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Shepard Wins wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

Still indoctrinated Where is this "Shepard needs better HUSKS" signature when you need it...

Visionary. All you ever see from pro-Destroy camp is pathos arguments: catalyst is the enemy and we musn't trust him!, we can't work with him!, traitor!, indoctrinated!, look at the bad examples of what Reaper tech has done!, (and please, only the bad examples, never the good ones).

Logos? Almost never.

Indoctrinated. Name one example of Reaper Tech that brought about something good.

[Helios969]

Micah3sixty wrote...

davishepard wrote...

Destroy is that option where Shepard gives the finger to his synthetics allies, destroying them along with the Reapers, and the only option where he keeps his own life intact?

Aw, yeah.

Shepard can't surive in physical form from Control or Synthesis, but that isn't proof to those being indoctrination or poor choices.  Sometimes self-sacrifice is required for the best outcome for all.  If Organics really are doomed to creating synthetics who in turn destroy organics, Control or Synthesis seem to be better options than Destroy because either Shepard will continue as the new Catalyst to call upon the Reapers to fight off rogue synthetics, or with synthesis, Synthetics will see the newly structured Organics as equals.  Those are the facts presented in Game and explained by the Catalyst and Reapers.

Yeah, if you accept what star child as truth.  I have no reason to believe the word of a psychopathic entity who sends out his genocidal forces every 50K years to wipe out all advanced civilizations in the galaxy.

[xsdob]

Shepard Wins wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Shepard Wins wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

Still indoctrinated Where is this "Shepard needs better HUSKS" signature when you need it...

Visionary. All you ever see from pro-Destroy camp is pathos arguments: catalyst is the enemy and we musn't trust him!, we can't work with him!, traitor!, indoctrinated!, look at the bad examples of what Reaper tech has done!, (and please, only the bad examples, never the good ones).

Logos? Almost never.

Indoctrinated. Name one example of Reaper Tech that brought about something good.

Thanix cannon's and EDI

[dreman9999]

xsdob wrote...

Shepard Wins wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Shepard Wins wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Not indoctrinated, just visionary. Which beats cowardly every day.

Destroy path is for the masses who can't handle the burden of leadership. Fear power, fear change, live in fear.

Still indoctrinated Where is this "Shepard needs better HUSKS" signature when you need it...

Visionary. All you ever see from pro-Destroy camp is pathos arguments: catalyst is the enemy and we musn't trust him!, we can't work with him!, traitor!, indoctrinated!, look at the bad examples of what Reaper tech has done!, (and please, only the bad examples, never the good ones).

Logos? Almost never.

Indoctrinated. Name one example of Reaper Tech that brought about something good.

Thanix cannon's and EDI

Again, we never would of been fighing this war if we never touched their tech.

Modifié par dreman9999, 26 mai 2012 - 05:01 .

[MrPuschel]

Seriously, everyone should be free to believe what he wants to. But could you guys please stop to open "OMG IM SO AWESOME CUZ I BELIEVE IN INDOC AND U GUYS ARE ALL SO STUPID CUZ YOU DONT" threads? It's not even fine trolling anfter the first 100.