4520 réponses à ce sujet

[Seival]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

The greatest and most good choice doesn't necessarily have to involve martyrdom. Personally that's the way I feel about ME3 ending. But that's because I don't trust the catalyst, and the more he spoke the less my Shepard was MY Shepard.

I'm paragon to the bone, through and through, so to say that Destroy is the renegade choice I strongly disagree, this isn't because of my bias towards the catalyst but because I don't believe there is a paragon/renegade choice in any of the 3 as Bioware have left too little after the actions to determine the best result (except for Synthesis).

If you are really pure paragon, then you will prefer to sacrifice only yourself and save everyone else, instead of sacrificing millions people to save yourself, reunite with your love interest, and provide everyone with unknown future. Even dead Reapers are a great threat with unknown consequences.

...Tell me, how your "paragon" Shepard can look in the mirrior and into the love interest's eyes after Destroy? True paragon will commit suicide after that... Just like Tali, if you betrayed her on Rannoch.

I didn't betray her on Rannoch because I got the Quarians and Geth to work together. Which is one of the main reasons why I don't trust the Catalyst.
The problem here is everything you're basing your evidence of is the catalyst's word. It's sometimes that which is the hardest thing for a pure paragon person to deal with, filtering the bs from whats real.. the nicer you get, the more gullable you can become.
Also, for you to say that a "true" paragon would commit suicide after that is just completely false and going against any true Paragon's value of life. A true Paragon would never take their own life, period.
There is no difference in the casualty rate whether you choose control or destroy other than the synthetic lives. And that's also assuming you trust the Catalyst. In my destroy ending everyone survives.
Lastly, you said "Even dead Reapers are a great threat with unknown consequences."  It's quotes like these (making the Reapers seem so godlike) that really rules out control for me. Any attempt to control something like that, you're playing with fire.

True Paragon always thinks of suicide after that level of betrayal. Backstab the Geth, Quarians, millions people on the Citadel, all people with vital synthetic implants without a second thought... just for a bloodlust, revenge desire, anger on the Reapers... While she could stop the slaughter without killing anyone by choosing Control.

I'm sure you just want to justify Shepard's survival as a human being and reuniting with love interest... Believe me, your Shepard will no longer be a Paragon at the moment you choose the Destroy. Destroy is the most Renegade thing Shepard can do in the entire Trilogy... Even more Renegade than mass relay destruction in Arrival DLC... At least in Arrival she had no other options...

...Reapers under right control are not a threat to anyone. While the dead Reapers are available to everyone, even to all people, who desires a power. After Destroy the entire worlds will be full of mind-controlling dead constructs that will finally corrupt everyone. Uncontrolled corrupted, and very powerfull cyborgs = death to all leaving creatures in the galaxy... But it will be much later than Renegade Shepard will enjoy her last days with love interest on the brink of chaos, that galaxy had never seen before...

Modifié par Seival, 28 mai 2012 - 11:28 .

[jijeebo]

balance5050 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

estebanus wrote...

Slavery: Because that's what a paragon would do!

(thx Byne)

Genocide: Because that's what a paragon would do!



See, I can play the same game.

The catalyst was just bending the truth, to dissuade you from destruction, they didn't design the crucible to kill the geth, they designed it to kill the reapers.

It wasn't designed to set Earth on fire but it can...

Only fail Shep gets that ending.

HEY! Fail Shep deserves some love too.


Not everyone is up to the task of saving the galaxy y'know.

[estebanus]

jijeebo wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

estebanus wrote...

Slavery: Because that's what a paragon would do!

(thx Byne)

Genocide: Because that's what a paragon would do!



See, I can play the same game.

The catalyst was just bending the truth, to dissuade you from destruction, they didn't design the crucible to kill the geth, they designed it to kill the reapers.

It wasn't designed to set Earth on fire but it can...

Only fail Shep gets that ending.

HEY! Fail Shep deserves some love too.


Not everyone is up to the task of saving the galaxy y'know.

I guess some would like a grilled galaxy more, huh?

[balance5050]

jijeebo wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Only fail Shep gets that ending.

HEY! Fail Shep deserves some love too.


Not everyone is up to the task of saving the galaxy y'know.

Yep, this entire thread is proof of that. 

[jijeebo]

estebanus wrote...

jijeebo wrote...



HEY! Fail Shep deserves some love too.


Not everyone is up to the task of saving the galaxy y'know.

I guess some would like a grilled galaxy more, huh?

To be honest, living in Scotland that ending looks like an improvement weather wise.

[Jamie9]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

But that's the problem, you wouldn't be letting the organics try again because you wouldn't be restarting anything, the only reason the 50,000 years thing works is because they don't know why they're being butchered.
If you swooped in to eliminate the Synthetics, it would raise a whole lot of new problems with the organics against you. Intelligent life is curious. They would want answers.

But I don't agree with killing everyone off. If technological singularity is a real worry, I'd deal with that when it starts happening. Literally when an army of synthetics begins to wipe out all life. Then kill the synthetics. The organics would realise they'd be close to extinction.

Maybe they'd make the same mistake again. And I'd save them again.

You're entirely correct. If an army of Reapers came in and wiped out a synthetic army, there'd be a LOT of trepidation there. But you're not wiping them out. You're just helping them then returning to Dark Space.

Life questioning things > Nothing alive.

[jijeebo]

balance5050 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Only fail Shep gets that ending.

HEY! Fail Shep deserves some love too.


Not everyone is up to the task of saving the galaxy y'know.

Yep, this entire thread is proof of that. 

You are such a meanie.

[estebanus]

MerchantGOL wrote...

estebanus wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

estebanus wrote...

Slavery: Because that's what a paragon would do!

(thx Byne)

Genocide: Because that's what a paragon would do!



See, I can play the same game.

Ah, you see, that is exactly what I was trying to point out.

You can't put paragon/renegade on control or destroy, because both are evil in their own way. If you think control is paragon because it's blue, you're an idiot, and the same goes with those who see destroy as renegade because it's red.

Fact is, you cannot apply paragon or renegade to either of them, because both have their negative sides.

In control, you enslave an entire sentient species.

In destroy, you commit genocide on synthetic life.

Both aren't renegade, and both aren't paragon. There are just different personal perceptions on what is right.

if Shepard is  willing to kill all the reapers despite alienment, i dont think he will give a **** about controling them.

You see? Neither paragon nor renegade factors into the endings, andd here is why:

Control: Enslavement of an entire sentient species .

Destroy: Genocide on synthetic life.

Synthesis: Forced evolution and destruction of genetic diversity.

So quit saying that control is paragon, because it isn't. Neither is it renegade.

Destroy isn't paragon, nor is it renegade.

Synthesis is just complete nonsense.

[CDRSkyShepard]

MerchantGOL wrote...
 Irony

Poorly-crafted irony, if anything else. It makes the situation look like Shepard's a giant hypocrite than anything actually ironic.

He is areaper so for them to rebel they would have to rebel aginst themselves, 

The Catalyst...is not a Reaper. I don't know where you got that one from. The Catalyst is an AI of unknown origin who created the Reapers.

By that logic a Pargaon shepard should neve use dominate , AI hack, or Sabatoge, Paragon Shepard is far morlikley to Take comand of the reapers then murder an entire race.

Paragon Shepard should never use Dominate because Paragon Shepard should never save Morinth at Samara's expense. But I digress.

Taking control of an enemy for a few seconds in combat is totally different than controlling an entire race of super-intelligent, super-powerful hybrids. That's splitting hairs. What it comes down to is the kind of power involved with controlling the Reapers. Paragon Shepard wouldn't accept that kind of power. Not any paragon Shepard I've ever seen, anyway.

It's even splitting hairs by trying to say what "true" paragon Shepard would or wouldn't do. Everyone plays Shepard differently, no matter if paragon, renegade, paragade, or renegon. That's why it's absurd to say that one option is truly paragon over the other. Paragon Shepard has committed at least cultural genocide on some level no matter what in ME2...you either kill all the heretic geth, or re-write them, essentially wiping them from existence. Paragon Shepard also will accept collateral damage if he/she feels it's the right decision. She/he may not like it, but sometimes you have to make hard decisions. With no guarantee besides trust in the Catalyst's word that he/she can actually control the Reapers, it's too big of a risk to keep the Reapers alive. You may lose the geth with destroy, but what do you stand to lose if you can't control the Reapers forever?

Modifié par CDRSkyShepard, 28 mai 2012 - 11:28 .

[draken-heart]

now i do not believe IT as much as the next guy on the fence, but there is enough evidence that i have seen in the forums/through vids that makes me think that the ending may be in Shepard's head all the same.

[estebanus]

jijeebo wrote...

estebanus wrote...

jijeebo wrote...



HEY! Fail Shep deserves some love too.


Not everyone is up to the task of saving the galaxy y'know.

I guess some would like a grilled galaxy more, huh?

To be honest, living in Scotland that ending looks like an improvement weather wise.

exactly, let's have some nice warm weather right before we all get vaporized!

Totally worth it!

[Bad King]

Jamie9 wrote...

The way I see it: Paragons are there to save people. Renegades are there to destroy their enemies, thus saving people.

It's that slight change in mindset that is the difference between the two. I've come to the conclusion that, as of what we know, control is the paragon option and destroy the renegade. Synthesis is the crazy option (none of my Sheps would take it).

Of course a renegade can pick control and justify it, and a paragon can pick destroy and justify it. But the choices were seemingly designed to counter each other.

I disagree. Based on the Shepard/Anderson/TIM scene alone, we know that paragon Shepard is opposed to the idea of controlling the reapers. See the following quotes:

Shepard: You're playing with things you don't understand. With power you shouldn't be able to use.
TIM: I don't believe that. If we can control it, why shouldn't it be ours?
Shepard: Because we're not ready.
Shepard: If we destroy the reapers this ends today. But if you can't control them...

So just as he/she was against using reaper tech from the collector base, paragon Shepard is also against the idea of humans controlling the reapers- mainly because of concerns regarding the risks and ethics of attempting to control such advanced and dangerous technology. This is strongly in line with the paragon's reasoning for destroying the collector base.

If we look then at renegade Shepard in the same scene, not once does she/he express disdain for the idea of controlling the reapers- rather, renegade Shepard accuses TIM of being powerhungry and indoctrinated (and so incapable of controlling the reapers). If we take into account renegade Shepard's willingness to use the collector base, we have no reason to believe that he/she would be against the idea of controlling the reapers.

So I would say that control falls onto the renegade side of the spectrum rather than the paragon side. Also, here's my post from earlier in the thread which discussed paragon Shepard's distrust of reaper tech:

Bad King wrote...

HagarIshay wrote...

Bad King wrote...


True, but control does seem to be more in line with the renegade ideals to me- its about ambition and harnessing dangerous reaper tech for the good of the galaxy (which is in line with preserving the collector base in ME2). The paragon ideal when it comes to reaper tech is more about caution and disdain towards the technology itself (which was the main reason why destroying the collector base was a paragon decision).

The fact that going renegade in ME2 points you towards achieving Control in ME3 is further evidence for this. Of course, the paragon and renegade paths are both very inconsistent, but the general trend of these paths does point to control being the more renegade option in my view.

I don't really think the destruction of the reaper base is about the reapers, not exactly. It's more about giving TIM the inforamtion or not. Throughout all ME2, paragon Shepard only disagreed with TIM. It's no wonder that in the final choice- Wether to leave the base intact or not and let cerberus study it- it's paragon Shepard who does decide to let the base be destroyed. If the base was left to the Alliance you can bet Shepard would have let them study it as they pleased. I can say for sure I would left the base intact if it was not TIM who wanted it.

That was never the main motivation for it as presented at the end of the game, see the following quotations:

"They liquified people, turned them into something horrible, we have to destroy the base!" -- Shepard

"I'm not so sure. Seeing it firsthand... using anything from this base seems like a betrayal." -- Miranda

"No matter what kind of technology we might find, it's not worth it." -- Shepard

"We'll fight and win without it. I won't let fear compromise who I am." -- Shepard

"Too many lives were lost at that base. I'm not sorry it's gone." -- Shepard

While you do briefly have the option of questioning TIM's motivations, the bulk of the reasoning revolves around the ethical questions and the dangers of using dangerous, even corrupted technology. The same paragon-esque argument can be applied to control- even if they are used for good, the reapers still slaughtered millions and were created by liquifying entire species: using them would be unethical in the paragon view. And control is a risk just like keeping the collector base was a risk- it's dabbling with tech we don't fully understand. So in my view, a paragon would be less inclined to pick this option (I however am personally more of a renegade player so control is a valid option for me).

Modifié par Bad King, 28 mai 2012 - 11:36 .

[estebanus]

Bad King wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

The way I see it: Paragons are there to save people. Renegades are there to destroy their enemies, thus saving people.

It's that slight change in mindset that is the difference between the two. I've come to the conclusion that, as of what we know, control is the paragon option and destroy the renegade. Synthesis is the crazy option (none of my Sheps would take it).

Of course a renegade can pick control and justify it, and a paragon can pick destroy and justify it. But the choices were seemingly designed to counter each other.

I disagree. Based on the Shepard/Anderson/TIM scene alone, we know that paragon Shepard is opposed to the idea of controlling the reapers. See the following quotes:

Shepard: You're playing with things you don't understand. With power you shouldn't be able to use.
TIM: I don't believe that. If we can control it, why shouldn't it be ours?
Shepard: Because we're not ready.
Shepard: If we destroy the reapers this ends today. But if you can't control them...

So just as he/she was against using reaper tech from the collector base, paragon Shepard is also against the idea of humans controlling the reapers- mainly because of concerns regarding the risks and ethics of attempting to control such advanced and dangerous technology. This is strongly in line with the paragon's reasoning for destroying the collector base.

If we look then at renegade Shepard in the same scene, not once does she/he express disdain for the idea of controlling the reapers- rather, renegade Shepard accuses TIM of being powerhungry and indoctrinated (and so incapable of controlling the reapers). If we take into account renegade Shepard's willingness to use the collector base, we have no reason to believe that he/she would be against the idea of controlling the reapers.

So I would say that control falls onto the renegade side of the spectrum rather than the paragon side.

I personally don't think that there is a renegade/paragon side in the endings, because all are too grey, but you do have a valid point.
It even furthers my own take on the endings!

[CDRSkyShepard]

Seival wrote...

True Paragon always thinks of suicide after that level of betrayal. Backstab the Geth, Quarians, millions people on the Citadel, all people with vital synthetic implants without a second thought... just for a bloodlust, revenge desire, anger on the Reapers... While she could stop the slaughter without killing anyone by choosing Control.

I'm sure you just want to justify Shepard's survival as a human being and reuniting with love interest... Believe me, your Shepard will no longer be a Paragon at the moment you choose the Destroy. Destroy is the most Renegade thing Shepard can do in the entire Trilogy... Even more Renegade than mass relay destruction in Arrival DLC... At least in Arrival she had no other options...

...Reapers under right control are not a threat to anyone. While the dead Reapers are available to everyone, even to all people, who desires a power. After Destroy the entire worlds will be full of mind-controlling dead constructs that will finally corrupt everyone. Uncontrolled corrupted, and very powerfull cyborgs = death to all leaving creatures in the galaxy... But it will be much later than Renegade Shepard will enjoy her last days with love interest on the brink of chaos, that galaxy had never seen before...

Suicide isn't a good way out. Paragon Shepard would live with her decisions. End of story.

It isn't fair to say that it's backstabbing, because Shepard only knows that Destroy will kill synthetics, not the Citadel. It will hamper the quarians a bit, but they lived centuries without geth involvement. They will adapt. It is also not clear what happened to everyone on the Citadel before it was transported to Earth. If Mac Walters is to be believed, they're all dead anyway. :/ So that discussion point is moot.

If we're going to go into speculation about what happens with dead Reapers, then we can just as easily go into speculation about what happens after Control. What if Shepard can't control them forever and they become unchecked? How can we know that Shepard controlling them won't corrupt his/her mind? They say absolute power corrupts absolutely, and why would you trust the Catalyst . There is only one way to make sure the Reapers don't ever come back, and that's to destroy them. Sure, their debris would cause issues, but if a Reaper is dead, it can still Indoctrinate people, but it won't have a death laser. There will be plenty of hazmat zones after the war because of crashed ships and other hazards, the Reaper debris will just have to be dealt with carefully.

But if Shep cannot maintain control for the rest of time on the Reapers...here we go again.

[Jamie9]

Bad King wrote...

I disagree. Based on the Shepard/Anderson/TIM scene alone, we know that paragon Shepard is opposed to the idea of controlling the reapers. See the following quotes:

Shepard: You're playing with things you don't understand. With power you shouldn't be able to use.
TIM: I don't believe that. If we can control it, why shouldn't it be ours?
Shepard: Because we're not ready.
Shepard: If we destroy the reapers this ends today. But if you can't control them...

So just as he/she was against using reaper tech from the collector base, paragon Shepard is also against the idea of humans controlling the reapers- mainly because of concerns regarding the risks and ethics of attempting to control such advanced and dangerous technology. This is strongly in line with the paragon's reasoning for destroying the collector base.

If we look then at renegade Shepard in the same scene, not once does she/he express disdain for the idea of controlling the reapers- rather, renegade Shepard accuses TIM of being powerhungry and indoctrinated (and so incapable of controlling the reapers). If we take into account renegade Shepard's willingness to use the collector base, we have no reason to believe that he/she would be against the idea of controlling the reapers.

So I would say that control falls onto the renegade side of the spectrum rather than the paragon side.

I agree up until that point. I see TIM as the anti-Shepard of the Mass Effect Trilogy. In fact I see TIM as the main antagonist, though most would disagree. I prefer relatable antagonists to space-Cthulhu's anyhow. Don't get me wrong, I love the Reaper plotline (why would I play Mass Effect otherwise?), but I loved the greyness of TIM, especially in ME2.

Whether we like it or not, the Crucible scene contextualises everything differently. Up until then, Shepard wanted to destroy the Reapers. Every Shepard wanted that. But then we find out that the Geth will die too. And EDI. Also, technological singularity may be a problem, a millions of years old being thinks so. Surely he must have seen it about to happen at least once?

Taking the options at face value (If you believe the Catalyst is lying or in IT then there is no discussion to be had), then Control allows for the greatest paragon actions. Don't use the Reapers unless ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. Like, end of all life necessary.

We don't have enough evidence to know whether technological singularity is a threat, therefore we must investigate. And no, not by wiping out all life. The Reapers methods were incredibly unethical, horiffic and stupid. But perhaps their reasoning for doing so was valid. In which case, my new solution would provide no harm to organic life, because I'm not cruel, psychopathic or stupid.

[MerchantGOL]

[quote]CDRSkyShepard wrote...

Poorly-crafted irony, if anything else. It makes the situation look like Shepard's a giant hypocrite than anything actually ironic.[/quote] i think its  good irony actualy. further underscore the complexity of the choice
[quote]
The Catalyst...is not a Reaper. I don't know where you got that one from. The Catalyst is an AI of unknown origin who created the Reapers.
[/quote] yes it is he says as much.

[quote]By that logic a Pargaon shepard should neve use dominate , AI hack, or Sabatoge, Paragon Shepard is far morlikley to Take comand of the reapers then murder an entire race.[/quote]
Paragon Shepard should never use Dominate because Paragon Shepard should never save Morinth at Samara's expense. But I digress.[/quote] you can still get it as a bonus power.

[quote]Taking control of an enemy for a few seconds in combat is totally different than controlling an entire race of super-intelligent, super-powerful hybrids. That's splitting hairs. What it comes down to is the kind of power involved with controlling the Reapers. Paragon Shepard wouldn't accept that kind of power. Not any paragon Shepard I've ever seen, anyway.[/quote] Its not splitting hairs, whether its a year or a minute you are still subveritng a creatures will.

[quote]It's even splitting hairs by trying to say what "true" paragon Shepard would or wouldn't do. Everyone plays Shepard differently, no matter if paragon, renegade, paragade, or renegon. That's why it's absurd to say that one option is truly paragon over the other. Paragon Shepard has committed at least cultural genocide on some level no matter what in ME2...you either kill all the heretic geth, or re-write them, essentially wiping them from existence. Paragon Shepard also will accept collateral damage if he/she feels it's the right decision. She/he may not like it, but sometimes you have to make hard decisions. With no guarantee besides trust in the Catalyst's word that he/she can actually control the Reapers, it's too big of a risk to keep the Reapers alive. 
[/quote] a true pargon shepard will never take an action that will lead to the needless deaths of inocent people and freinds. this is some thing prove, while we can debate if he would take control of the reapes. i think he would.


[quote]
You may lose the geth with destroy, but what do you stand to lose if you can't control the Reapers forever? [/quote] nothign the stargazer endign shows every thing is just fine. but ignorign that, Paragon is all about taking ona  risk  of some thing bad happenign in order to prevent lives from being lost , See bahlak, see the rachni, see the collector base. 

Modifié par MerchantGOL, 28 mai 2012 - 11:40 .

[PSjoh]

Control, is the best idea i think. I picked destroy.
what happened to me was really complex, I was sidding with illusive man about control, unfortunate we had no choice but to disagree with his genius idea.
But then I had the talk with the catalyst, to actually have to choice to control blew my mind.
But than i Tought... in the end the endings became:
Destroy: reapers are crazy, there synthetics will not innevitably wipe out organics. I beleive in organics!
Control: not so crazy, but i don't want our civilisation to go down, I will find a better way!

So in a very full of faith move, I put my trust in organics, but really i don't trust them at all.
They will build stronger synthetics until, one goes crazy, i mean isn't that what we always do? Improve, improve, improve... oh... theres a problem with that... remove problem, restart.
To me the problem is not with the synthetics themselves as with the organics, who simply are doomed by nature.

So either synthesis or control is good for a pessimistic (realist) person. Synthesis is the permanent answer, it just fixes the problem, but in a pretty awful way.
Control, doesn't fix it, it allows you to do as you see best. Honestly I think you too will realize the cycle (but thats not granted) is the best solution; reapers were once organics (likely speculation) and i doubt they sacrificed themselves and made such an awful solution, unless the gentler ones didn't work.

and since it allows the cycle to come back, if you ever return to it, one day (after millions of years) another civilisation, will plug a crucible in you and hopefully, wiser than you ever were, will have a better solution than the ones we had.

[Reptilian Rob]

If the endings stay as is, Control is definitely the "lesser" evil. It leaves the Citadel intact, the Relays intact and for better or worse the Reapers are under control for an undetermined amount of time. Also, you are not commiting an act of either genocice nor changing the fabric of DNA.

If the endings are changed, then Control becomes just evil and not a lesser evil.

Modifié par Reptilian Rob, 29 mai 2012 - 12:14 .

[Bad King]

Jamie9 wrote...

Bad King wrote...

I disagree. Based on the Shepard/Anderson/TIM scene alone, we know that paragon Shepard is opposed to the idea of controlling the reapers. See the following quotes:

Shepard: You're playing with things you don't understand. With power you shouldn't be able to use.
TIM: I don't believe that. If we can control it, why shouldn't it be ours?
Shepard: Because we're not ready.
Shepard: If we destroy the reapers this ends today. But if you can't control them...

So just as he/she was against using reaper tech from the collector base, paragon Shepard is also against the idea of humans controlling the reapers- mainly because of concerns regarding the risks and ethics of attempting to control such advanced and dangerous technology. This is strongly in line with the paragon's reasoning for destroying the collector base.

If we look then at renegade Shepard in the same scene, not once does she/he express disdain for the idea of controlling the reapers- rather, renegade Shepard accuses TIM of being powerhungry and indoctrinated (and so incapable of controlling the reapers). If we take into account renegade Shepard's willingness to use the collector base, we have no reason to believe that he/she would be against the idea of controlling the reapers.

So I would say that control falls onto the renegade side of the spectrum rather than the paragon side.

I agree up until that point. I see TIM as the anti-Shepard of the Mass Effect Trilogy. In fact I see TIM as the main antagonist, though most would disagree. I prefer relatable antagonists to space-Cthulhu's anyhow. Don't get me wrong, I love the Reaper plotline (why would I play Mass Effect otherwise?), but I loved the greyness of TIM, especially in ME2.

Whether we like it or not, the Crucible scene contextualises everything differently. Up until then, Shepard wanted to destroy the Reapers. Every Shepard wanted that. But then we find out that the Geth will die too. And EDI. Also, technological singularity may be a problem, a millions of years old being thinks so. Surely he must have seen it about to happen at least once?

Taking the options at face value (If you believe the Catalyst is lying or in IT then there is no discussion to be had), then Control allows for the greatest paragon actions. Don't use the Reapers unless ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. Like, end of all life necessary.

We don't have enough evidence to know whether technological singularity is a threat, therefore we must investigate. And no, not by wiping out all life. The Reapers methods were incredibly unethical, horiffic and stupid. But perhaps their reasoning for doing so was valid. In which case, my new solution would provide no harm to organic life, because I'm not cruel, psychopathic or stupid.

Interesting take, but we have no idea what was going through Shepard's head in the final scene with the catalyst, mainly due to the lack of dialogue that Shepard gets- we don't see what the paragon or renegade take is on the decision in light of the new context. Now this might be changed in the EC (who knows!) but until then, the only concrete evidence we have reflecting the paragon or renegade take on controlling the reapers is dialogue prior to that final scene.

[Aaleel]

MerchantGOL wrote...

CDRSkyShepard wrote...

The Catalyst...is not a Reaper. I don't know where you got that one from. The Catalyst is an AI of unknown origin who created the Reapers.

yes it is he says as much.

The Catalyst is not a reaper because it says 'us'.  When Shepard is talking to Sovereign he/she says there is an entire galaxy of races united and ready to stop you, and says we than, and more times after that/.  That doesn't mean everyone is one race now, 'we' just means a group of people with one goal.  Just like 'us' means the group with one singular goal of continuing the cycle.    

[Jamie9]

Bad King wrote...

Interesting take, but we have no idea what was going through Shepard's head in the final scene with the catalyst, mainly due to the lack of dialogue that Shepard gets- we don't see what the paragon or renegade take is on the decision in light of the new context. Now this might be changed in the EC (who knows!) but until then, the only concrete evidence we have reflecting the paragon or renegade take on controlling the reapers is dialogue prior to that final scene.

Hopefully, yes. The EC will make debating easier if it does as intended. As is, you can't argue for any of the three endings without using a little bit of headcanon. Intentions post control, consequences post synthesis, Geth's fate post destroy. Indoctrination for all three endings.

We don't have enough info to debate properly.

[Rip504]

Interesting. We do not have all of the information concerning the ending,but we have numerous experts knowing exactly what they mean. EC=More information to clarify the endings. Anything past the black and white we have now,is nothing more then speculation.

Speculation:
Maybe the Reapers hold some freewill. Like the GETH whom the Quarians decided to destroy after their usefulness is null and void. They (Reapers) may rebel against Shepard, after Shepard enslaves them and decides to murder them all. Heck the Geth may consider this wrong and help disconnect the Reapers from their new Catalyst Shepard. As the Geth(and others) may sympathize with the Reapers after being used and controlled for countless ages,then destroyed for only wanting to live. Geth now hold Reaper code,and may understand the Reapers more then any other race does.

90% of what I have personally read concerning the endings(posted by BSN users) is pure speculation.

[Jamie9]

Rip504 wrote...

Interesting. We do not have all of the information concerning the ending,but we have numerous experts knowing exactly what they mean. EC=More information to clarify the endings. Anything past the black and white we have now,is nothing more then speculation.

Speculation:
Maybe the Reapers hold some freewill. Like the GETH whom the Quarians decided to destroy after their usefulness is null and void. They (Reapers) may rebel against Shepard, after Shepard enslaves them and decides to murder them all. Heck the Geth may consider this wrong and help disconnect the Reapers from their new Catalyst Shepard. As the Geth(and others) may sympathize with the Reapers after being used and controlled for countless ages,then destroyed for only wanting to live. Geth now hold Reaper code,and may understand the Reapers more then any other race does.

90% of what I have personally read concerning the endings(posted by BSN users) is pure speculation.

True. We work with the tools we were given. We're all arguing in hypotheticals because we bring the consequences in (which aren't explicitly shown).

Anyone claiming their opinion is superior to anyone else's is wrong. They're all equal. This is how it will be until the EC is released, unfortunately.

In fact, I'm considering making a sig showing my ambivalence towards people's opinions. Sometimes when I argue for control, it seems like I overdo it, but I'm absolutely fine with people picking destroy. It's their game, they can do whatever the heck they want. Who am I to dictate otherwise?

[SoxFilledWithMashedPotatoes]

CDRSkyShepard wrote...

Seival wrote...
Reapers were intended to be just tools. It's clear that they use current Catalist way of thinking. So Control is not an enslavement. If the Reapers ever had an independent mind, they would rebel agains the Catalist long long ago.

TIM was right about Control possibility indeed, and this doesn't make Control a renegade option, no matter the TIM is pure renegade. TIM insisted that the Reapers CAN be Controlled, but almost noone believed him... But he WAS right.

In the end Shepard understood that Control is really possible and started to consider it as a valid option. And everything that Paragon Shepard told to TIM on the Citadel just proves that Shepard is truly ready to Control the Reapers.



Control is true Paragon option. That's why the blue color is used for it. It's not a mistake, it was intended.

The radiation pulse used to destroy the Collector base was also blue. Color is irrelevant.

The color of the Collector Base explosion has no significance. It's the color of the star behind TIM thats important...

[Reptilian Rob]

SoxFilledWithMashedPotatoes wrote...

CDRSkyShepard wrote...

Seival wrote...
Reapers were intended to be just tools. It's clear that they use current Catalist way of thinking. So Control is not an enslavement. If the Reapers ever had an independent mind, they would rebel agains the Catalist long long ago.

TIM was right about Control possibility indeed, and this doesn't make Control a renegade option, no matter the TIM is pure renegade. TIM insisted that the Reapers CAN be Controlled, but almost noone believed him... But he WAS right.

In the end Shepard understood that Control is really possible and started to consider it as a valid option. And everything that Paragon Shepard told to TIM on the Citadel just proves that Shepard is truly ready to Control the Reapers.



Control is true Paragon option. That's why the blue color is used for it. It's not a mistake, it was intended.

The radiation pulse used to destroy the Collector base was also blue. Color is irrelevant.

The color of the Collector Base explosion has no significance. It's the color of the star behind TIM thats important...

Yep, very true. The color of the Collector base explosion is the same in both endings, it's only the star which changes color.