4520 réponses à ce sujet

[CynicalShep]

Hadeedak wrote...

I think there's a lot of reasons control freaks people out. I don't know that it's the least popular, but it's got some strong authoritarian themes (in fact, it's the only one I like less after the Extended Cut). That being said, there's plenty of room for interpretation, and I think the message in the end is one of sacrifice to preserve the status quo, as opposed to the unknowns of synthesis and destroy.

I like Control a lot. I wish AIShep was a bit more mechanical and alien in her dialogue at the end, but there's only so much time for that, after all.

I doubt it's the least popular. Control has a couple of shady points which make many uncomfortable. Other endings aren't faultless but I will concentrate on Control here.
First - assuming you are Shepard and you only arrived there you can't really know how it will work out. You saw TIM fail to do that, the Prothean VI tells you that they didn't finish the Crucible because they were betrayed by indoctrinated agents who wanted to control them, etc. I'd be secondguessing myself in this situation.
Second - it's a Shepard AI. I can hardly be sure of what I'll do in a particular situation in the future - nevermind what would an AI based on me do. What if it "learns" and comes to the same conclusion the ghost kid did? Incertainty is what bothers me most. What if I'm a revenge-driven renegade but I keep most of my urges under control. Will the Shepard AI do the same?
Third - Some don't like the idea of playing the big galactic scarecrow. I, for one, recognize that there are big advantages to that because many races like shooting themselves in the foot. Turians bomb problems away, Krogan are aggressive, Batarians are terrorists, Quarians are suicidal, Asari and Salarians are manipulative, Yahg are vicious, etc. On the other hand you stand in the way of natural selection. So it's not all good or bad.

I thought synthesis was the least popular choice

[Hadeedak]

I'd bet good money refuse is the least popular.

But Control is my personal favorite.

[DirtyPhoenix]

"uncertain future" exists in every ending so it cancels out really.

[CynicalShep]

Hadeedak wrote...

I'd bet good money refuse is the least popular.

But Control is my personal favorite.

I didn't even consider refuse. I meant the least popular out of the three

pirate1802 wrote...

"uncertain future" exists in every ending so it cancels out really.

I said as much. I said that other endings are not faultless, Control was just the topic of the discussion

Modifié par CynicalShep, 23 janvier 2013 - 08:17 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

pirate1802 wrote...

Just finished DE: HR a few days ago. What a game. Interestingly, I ended up choosing control there as well

By control, you mean Taggart's ending?

I always choose Sarif's ending in that game.

[Ieldra]

As for popularity: Almost all polls show Control being the least popular (not counting Refuse), slightly less than Synthesis, while Synthesis is more controversial, i.e. the opinions about it are more extreme.

I find that surprising, since Control is the ending where nothing really objectionable happens, but it supports my hypothesis that peoples' likes and dislikes are influenced less by the tangible good or bad consequences rather than by thematic aspects.

Personally, I prefer Control to Destroy because Destroy has that romantic, Lovecraftian vibe of resetting everything and kicking out the unknown which had come knocking at our doors. Control at least tries to do something with the new perspectives introduced by the existence of the Reapers and their knowledge and technology, even if it restricts it to the new AI god. I don't exactly like the paternalistic theme but it can reasonably be argued that civilization is not mature enough yet to survive on its own.

I prefer Synthesis to Control because it makes those new perspectives available to everyone. Although choosing Control with a plan to pave the path to a Synthesis using less drastic means is probably the most appealing from a roleplaying perspective, being only headcanon, it has less memetic impact than choosing Synthesis in the game.

Edit:
Yep, I also choose Sarif's ending in DXHR. I didn't like the writing though, in all endings. Button ABC and a preachy epilogue. Yuck.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 23 janvier 2013 - 11:36 .

[Argolas]

Ieldra2 wrote...

As for popularity: Almost all polls show Control being the least popular (not counting Refuse), slightly less than Synthesis, while Synthesis is more controversial, i.e. the opinions about it are more extreme.

I find that surprising, since Control is the ending where nothing really objectionable happens, but it supports my hypothesis that peoples' likes and dislikes are influenced less by the tangible good or bad consequences rather than by thematic aspects.

Of course something objectionable happens. The Reapers are allowed to continue their existance, and an AI is born with power that nobody or, if you are religious, only God should have.

[Ageless Face]

Argolas wrote...

Of course something objectionable happens. The Reapers are allowed to continue their existance, and an AI is born with power that nobody or, if you are religious, only God should have.

Aren't you taking it a bit far? Controlling gaint machines is a "power" eventually eveyone in the galaxy will be able to hold, it's tech after all. Not magic.

[Argolas]

HagarIshay wrote...

Argolas wrote...

Of course something objectionable happens. The Reapers are allowed to continue their existance, and an AI is born with power that nobody or, if you are religious, only God should have.

Aren't you taking it a bit far? Controlling gaint machines is a "power" eventually eveyone in the galaxy will be able to hold, it's tech after all. Not magic.

It gets close to magic through indoctrination. The Reapers are everywhere in the Control ending, the EC slides prove that. If Shepalyst wants, it can make the whole galaxy agree to it since Reapers are no longer considered hostile and can be anywhere without raising suspision.

[DirtyPhoenix]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

Just finished DE: HR a few days ago. What a game. Interestingly, I ended up choosing control there as well

By control, you mean Taggart's ending?

I always choose Sarif's ending in that game.

Yup Taggart's. I was making up my mind to pick Sarif's ending, but then I saw what hyron really was.

[Ieldra]

Argolas wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

As for popularity: Almost all polls show Control being the least popular (not counting Refuse), slightly less than Synthesis, while Synthesis is more controversial, i.e. the opinions about it are more extreme.

I find that surprising, since Control is the ending where nothing really objectionable happens, but it supports my hypothesis that peoples' likes and dislikes are influenced less by the tangible good or bad consequences rather than by thematic aspects.

Of course something objectionable happens. The Reapers are allowed to continue their existance, and an AI is born with power that nobody or, if you are religious, only God should have.

(1) "Nobody should have that power" is not a self-evident statement. "Someone must have that power to prevent the immature civilization of the galaxy from destroying itself" is just as valid.

(2) "The Reapers shouldn't be allowed to continue their existence" is not a self-evident statement, especially with the Catalyst's exposition in the background, it may be argued that they're all that's left from past civilizations. "They should be allowed to continue to exist as long as they don't continue to harvest civilizations" is an equally valid stance, and actually preferable from an ethical point of view.  

I repeat: there is nothing objectionable happening in Control. Nothing tangibly evil, to be more precise. From a moral perspective, Control can reasonably be said to be the best ending.

[Argolas]

Ieldra2 wrote...

(1) "Nobody should have that power" is not a self-evident statement. "Someone must have that power to prevent the immature civilization of the galaxy from destroying itself" is just as valid.

(2) "The Reapers shouldn't be allowed to continue their existence" is not a self-evident statement, especially with the Catalyst's exposition in the background, it may be argued that they're all that's left from past civilizations. "They should be allowed to continue to exist as long as they don't continue to harvest civilizations" is an equally valid stance, and actually preferable from an ethical point of view.  

I repeat: there is nothing objectionable happening in Control. Nothing tangibly evil, to be more precise. From a moral perspective, Control can reasonably be said to be the best ending.

Just because a different view on those things is possible does not mean those are not objectionable.

[Ageless Face]

Argolas wrote...
It gets close to magic through indoctrination. The Reapers are everywhere in the Control ending, the EC slides prove that. If Shepalyst wants, it can make the whole galaxy agree to it since Reapers are no longer considered hostile and can be anywhere without raising suspision.

Yep, AIShep can make the whole galaxy agree to it. Doesn't mean s/he will. And if AIShep doesn't have any intentions to indoctrinate anyone, then I really don't see the problem.

Not anything that is potentially dangerous requires you to use it in this mean, you know.

[JasonShepard]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Yep, I also choose Sarif's ending in DXHR. I didn't like the writing though, in all endings. Button ABC and a preachy epilogue. Yuck.

Oh, don't remind me. If ME3 intially had no closure, that game took the very idea of closure and threw it out the window.

In any case, I dislike picking Sarif's ending, but I still do so. None of the endings there are particularly appealing - I'd rather just get on the line and tell everyone the truth, and then get someone out there working on making unhackable biochips.

Anyway, I also don't quite understand why Control is the least popular. I mean, it's the one with the most freedom over what happens next, nobody (besides Shepard) gets sacrificed, the galaxy is left in a reasonable state, and everyone's personal rights don't get violated.
The only issue with the ending is that people don't like how much power the Shep-AI ends up with. Which is understandable, but if you trust your Shepard... eh. Who cares. It doesn't really matter how many people like Control.

Modifié par JasonShepard, 23 janvier 2013 - 12:28 .

[Ieldra]

Argolas wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

(1) "Nobody should have that power" is not a self-evident statement. "Someone must have that power to prevent the immature civilization of the galaxy from destroying itself" is just as valid.

(2) "The Reapers shouldn't be allowed to continue their existence" is not a self-evident statement, especially with the Catalyst's exposition in the background, it may be argued that they're all that's left from past civilizations. "They should be allowed to continue to exist as long as they don't continue to harvest civilizations" is an equally valid stance, and actually preferable from an ethical point of view.  

I repeat: there is nothing objectionable happening in Control. Nothing tangibly evil, to be more precise. From a moral perspective, Control can reasonably be said to be the best ending.

Just because a different view on those things is possible does not mean those are not objectionable.

That *you* object to them has no bearing on their intrinsic qualities, or on their validity within a system of rational ethics. Any system of rational ethics counts intent, action and outcome to judge what you do. No such system of ethics ever counts mere potential as bad. Your argument comes down to "Power is bad" and "Some things must be punished by death". I challenge you to defend those statements. You may feel that Control is objectionable, but your feelings are not the measure of its validity, both in ethical and pragmatic terms.

[Argolas]

HagarIshay wrote...

Argolas wrote...
It gets close to magic through indoctrination. The Reapers are everywhere in the Control ending, the EC slides prove that. If Shepalyst wants, it can make the whole galaxy agree to it since Reapers are no longer considered hostile and can be anywhere without raising suspision.

Yep, AIShep can make the whole galaxy agree to it. Doesn't mean s/he will. And if AIShep doesn't have any intentions to indoctrinate anyone, then I really don't see the problem.

Not anything that is potentially dangerous requires you to use it in this mean, you know.

We can agree that far. I'm only saying Control is dangerous, not bad by definition.

[Ageless Face]

JasonShepard wrote...
 It doesn't really matter how many people like Control.

Unfourtenatly, it does. Apperantly the fanbase decided the unpopular endings don't get to be in the next game.

And if BioWare will listen to them too much, they might see it as a sign of approval.

Modifié par HagarIshay, 23 janvier 2013 - 12:32 .

[CosmicGnosis]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Personally, I prefer Control to Destroy because Destroy has that romantic, Lovecraftian vibe of resetting everything and kicking out the unknown which had come knocking at our doors.

I agree, but what if there is a way to extract knowledge about the Reapers from their remains? Sovereign's remains were used to develop Thanix cannons, and even EDI. Perhaps intact Reaper corpses could still be useful?

[Steelcan]

Control and Destroy are my top ending choices. The only thing that pushes Destroy ahead is Shepard's survival in mind and body.

Still waiting for Cerberus style Control

[JasonShepard]

HagarIshay wrote...

JasonShepard wrote...
 It doesn't really matter how many people like Control.

Unfourtenatly, it does. Apperantly the fanbase decided the unpopular endings don't get to be in the next game.

And if BioWare will listen to them to much, they might see it as a sign of approval.

Ah. Well I think that's where we disagree - or at least, see things differently.

First off, we don't yet know what Bioware has planned. I hold that it is possible to account for all endings in one game with a bit off effort. Sure, the Geth would be in a background role if alive, as would the Shep-AI, while Synthesis would involve a green sheen everywhere.

Second - I genuinely wouldn't mind if Bioware chose one ending as canon and ran with it. I'd just count ME4 as non-canon/ alternate universe. If they do allow for Control in ME4, they'll almost certainly take things in a different direction to my own post-Control headcanon, so that's likely to happen anyway.

Third - even if we do come last in the polls (ignoring Refuse), we're still usually about 10-15%. That's a substantial amount of players for Bioware to consider.

Mostly I was just refering to the fact that, at the end of the day, I like ME3. In fact, it was probably my 2012 GOTY (tied with Dishonoured). And part of that is the fact that I found I could make a good and interesting ending out of Control. At the end of the day, it makes no difference to me whether other people like Control.

[Argolas]

Ieldra2 wrote...

That *you* object to them has no bearing on their intrinsic qualities, or on their validity within a system of rational ethics. Any system of rational ethics counts intent, action and outcome to judge what you do. No such system of ethics ever counts mere potential as bad. Your argument comes down to "Power is bad" and "Some things must be punished by death". I challenge you to defend those statements. You may feel that Control is objectionable, but your feelings are not the measure of its validity, both in ethical and pragmatic terms.

First, I'm not the only one thinking Control is objoctionable.

Second, there are many systems of rational ethics, not all of them work as you describe it. Kant, for example, only values the action and neither intent nor outcome. But that's not the point here, I'll adress those two statements here.

"Power is bad."

I'd like to extend this one. Power is bad if not shared with those affected by it. This is an accepted principle of democracy and true at least for people who consider each other equal, for example this includes humans and excludes animals in many democracies. The Shepalyst has almost unlimited power over the whole known galaxy but is itself not controlled by anyone.

"Some things must be punished by death."

This is a misunderstanding, I do not have that belief. The thing is that I do not grant the Reapers the quality of being alive. They are constructs filled with the DNA of the dead, under direct control of anyone who has the means to do so. They have no culture, no means of reproduction without "stealing" the life of organics, there is absolutely nothing. The closest thing in real world that I can think of are viruses, and those are not considered alive as well.

[JasonShepard]

Argolas wrote...

The thing is that I do not grant the Reapers the quality of being alive. They are constructs filled with the DNA of the dead, under direct control of anyone who has the means to do so. They have no culture, no means of reproduction without "stealing" the life of organics, there is absolutely nothing. The closest thing in real world that I can think of are viruses, and those are not considered alive as well.

If, as suggested in game, the minds of those cultures are somehow still inside the Reapers, then I would consider them alive. Maybe they've been indoctrinated to believe that being a Reaper is awesome-sauce and everyone should share it... but they're still there. And if possible, I'd do my level best to save them too.

[Argolas]

JasonShepard wrote...

If, as suggested in game, the minds of those cultures are somehow still inside the Reapers, then I would consider them alive. Maybe they've been indoctrinated to believe that being a Reaper is awesome-sauce and everyone should share it... but they're still there. And if possible, I'd do my level best to save them too.

What's inside the Reapers is not the people that once lived.



They're dead.

[CosmicGnosis]

"Minds" are uploaded into the Reapers. Something is indeed there.

[Steelcan]

I doubt it's those destroyed to make one.