4520 réponses à ce sujet

[JA Shepard]

Destroy is good as a choice. It's strategically and militarily sound for the situation. That's the real defense for it. What is not is arguing that destroy is morally superior to the other choices. They are all terrible acts one way or the other. The moral argument for destroy is particularly off-putting because it's as if a killer is speaking on behalf of his own victims as to what he feels is best for them. You simply don't have the right to do that ever. A bad act can be the right call, but it still a bad act. Same can be said for Control or Synthesis.

Given a situation where I couldn't go ask The Geth or EDI, to get a definite confirmation that they were willing to have their entire form of life erased from existence, I could not personally choose destroy. I couldn't ask every living thing if they wanted their DNA altered, so Synthesis was a no-go as well. I like control because I don't have to hurt anyone besides The Reapers and well... f*ck those guys anyway. Do I enslave them? Don't know, don't care, didn't ask. And control could be all kinds of fun, so there's that too.

The Reapers assume control over organics. The Reapers commit genocide. They also merge organics with synthetics to make more Reapers. No matter what, every choice forces us to commit an act that Reapers have committed time and again in order to win.

Shepard has to play God and choose who he punishes: Just The Reapers, all synthetic life, or all life in general. Those are the choices to me. I personally think the EC will probably just go into more detail and validate that every choice works out for the best and how long may depend on EMS, as lame as that seems.

[Vigilant111]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

WHAT?! the reapers built mass relays specifically for harvesting, not a direct weapon, but facilitated harvesting, like the trains to a concentration camp... what they just built them for fun?

They built them to make their job easier. The Relays aren't doing the killing. Once the Reapers are gone they're just tools without intent. 

BTW, may I suggest that control is just a fun option that is offered to gamers, u know if u enjoy humiliating the reapers?

I wouldn't say I enjoy it. It's a necessary act to preserve the galaxy.

1. u just repeated of what I have just said: it was not the relays that killed people. WTF do I care about what the relays do after all organics were destroyed? I am linking the mass relays to the death of civilisation ONLY

2. preserve the galaxy? wasn't u the one saying flying reapers into the sun? the whole f**king galaxy is gonna tear each other apart once u are gone, new synthetics are built, war break out between organics!!!

Modifié par Vigilant111, 29 mai 2012 - 11:04 .

[Shallyah]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

More random assumptions of what Shallyah assumes.

Going to wrap up, because there's nothing else to see in this conversation, already confirmed what I came for.

The bottom of the matter is that "your Shepard" wants to become a god, approves of slaveship and would coldly throw Reapers into a sun to watch them die. And you are alright with that, in fact, you support and promote that idea. Yes, your Shepard is diferent than mine. Damn glad I am it is. My Shepard is a good guy and has a heart, and is not narcissist or obsessed with power. He knows of sacrifice and understands the concept of the Greater Good.

Your Shepard believes the means justify the end. (Slaving is alright)
Your Shepard believes eternal slaveship of intelligent sentient and sapient beings is acceptable.
Your Shepard believes he should be god.
Your Shepard would feel no remorse in coldly watching his slaves walk to death after he ordered them to do so.

No, ordering the Reapers to fly into a sun is not the same as shooting back to the guys that are shooting you, try as hard as you want. One thing is called self defense, the other is called cold murder and is reserved to psycopaths.

Discuss away, or get snarky with comments to find a way out, like in the last post of mine you replied. I don't know if Destroy is the "good" choice until EC DLC comes. I can only assume it is, because I believe in Shepard and in all the races and individuals that fought alongside him to defeat the Reapers.

But I know Control, at least the way you picture it, is the most horrendous moral choice that a human being can make. And that is not by opinion, it's by definition in the dictionary. Look up slaveship, narcissism, power-hunger and cold murder in the dictionary if you need further assistance to map your psychological profile.

Modifié par Shallyah, 29 mai 2012 - 11:26 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Vigilant111 wrote...


1. u just repeated of what I have just said: it was not the relays that killed people. WTF do I care about what the relays do after all organics were destroyed? I am linking the mass relays to the death of civilisation ONLY

Then what's your point? The Reapers are the ones doing the killing, remove them and the Relays are just tools that I gladly gift to the species of the galaxy. 

2. preserve the galaxy? wasn't u the one saying flying reapers into the sun? the whole f**king galaxy is gonna tear each other apart once u are gone, new synthetics are built, war break out between organics!!!

I don't believe the serpent's dilemma is real or at least important enough for me to care about. 

So frankly, for the purpose of choosing anything at the end of the game, synthetics won't try to destroy all organic life. 

[The Night Mammoth]

Shallyah wrote...

But I know Control, at least the way you picture it, is the most horrendous moral choice that a human being can make. And that is not by opinion, it's by definition in the dictionary. Look up slaveship, narcissism, power-hunger and cold murder in the dictionary if you need further assistance to map your psychological profile.

You have no idea how I picture control, or very little at most.

All you know is that I don't think enslaving the Reapers is this horrendous unethical choice. 

The rest is, again, all assumptions. 

[Jamie9]

How come killing the Geth is sacrifice but enslaving the Reapers (who aren't actually alive, they're a mockery of life) is the worst moral choice ever.

I think the Geth might disagree with your assessment

Of course my Shepard believes the means justify the ends, having the ends justify the means is a much worse moral mindset. It allows you to do anything.

Reapers are not life. They have not, nor ever plan to do anything remotely beneficial to anyone. They plan to wipe out all life.

My Shepard does not want to be God. Controlling the Reapers does not make you a God. I do not plan to stay in the galaxy with them or kill anyone.

Yes, as opposed to coldly killing the Reapers AND the Geth. You know, woops, collateral damage.

Control and destroy are both equally viable options. Both have pros and cons. Both represent different mindsets, and the ability to justify them.

My renegade Shepard has always hated AIs. He hates EDI and he hates the Geth. Though he does use Legion in ME2. He wipes out the Geth in ME3 and easily picks destroy.

My paragon Shepard is more thoughtful, and takes the option that could be more beneficial to the galaxy as a whole. He takes the high road (which is always the riskier one), as compared to the low road (you know where it will take you, it will get you to where you want to be really quickly, but it's not right).

Just my opinion. Again, control and destroy both viable options.

[CrazyBirdman]

The Illusive Man only had wrong justifications and means to his goal, controlling the reapers was always an idea I could live with. Why should I irrevocable destroy thousands of ancient civilazations and one that just have come to life?
No, I choose to preserve them and give the galaxy the choice to act freely for the first time since the first reaper came to life. I see control not as enslavement but as releasing those civilazations into freedom, they are no longer bound by their single goal to purge the galaxy every 50.000 years.
Sythethis on the other side takes away choice and growth for the galaxy forever so that seems kind of stupid to me. Destroy is a little bit better but in the end it is pretty much genocide so I do not think it is really the best option.

Modifié par CrazyBirdman, 29 mai 2012 - 11:32 .

[Vigilant111]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

I don't believe the serpent's dilemma is real or at least important enough for me to care about. 

So frankly, for the purpose of choosing anything at the end of the game, synthetics won't try to destroy all organic life. 

Okay I will take ur word for it

[Shallyah]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Shallyah wrote...

But I know Control, at least the way you picture it, is the most horrendous moral choice that a human being can make. And that is not by opinion, it's by definition in the dictionary. Look up slaveship, narcissism, power-hunger and cold murder in the dictionary if you need further assistance to map your psychological profile.

You have no idea how I picture control, or very little at most.

All you know is that I don't think enslaving the Reapers is this horrendous unethical choice. 

That alone is sufficient. 

But also said that your Shepard would order the Reapers to fly into a Sun after the conflict is over and you used them to rebuild the Mass Relays. Your Shepard would coldly wait until the Reapers have spent their usefulness to him, to then watch them die under his direct command.

As I said, I got all I wanted from this thread. Now I'm back to the real Paragon thread - the one that supports Destroy ending.

Modifié par Shallyah, 29 mai 2012 - 11:35 .

[Miezul_Carpatin]

Wonder how many would choose destroy if it was humanity to be destroyed instead of the geth.

[Jamie9]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Okay I will take ur word for it

If you believe in the singularity (I'm not sure) then there are two paths to stopping it.

1. Destroy synthetics. Do not let them be rebuilt (might be tricky, but completely possible). People like the Geth don't even get  a chance though. Very renegade.

2. Control. Take the Reapers to Dark Space, and listen to communications. If synthetics do appear to be about to wipe out all life, swoop in, wipe out the synthetics and let the organics try again. This has the moral high-ground in only wiping out synthetic life if absolutely necessary.

Unlike the Reaper's stupid plan, you also don't wipe out ALL life every 50k years.

[The Night Mammoth]

Shallyah wrote...

That alone is sufficient.

Evidently not. 

But also said that your Shepard would order the Reapers to fly into a Sun after the conflict is over and you used them to rebuild the Mass Relays. Your Shepard would coldly wait until the Reapers have spent their usefulness to him, to then watch them die under his direct command.

That's the likely outcome. 

How I view that outcome is unknown to you. 

As I said, I got all I wanted from this thread. Now I'm back to the real Paragon thread - the one that supports Destroy ending.

Good day ser. 

[Vigilant111]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

All you know is that I don't think enslaving the Reapers is this horrendous unethical choice.

begin sarcasm :no no no, u r perfectly correct, and lets not use strong words like enslaving...cos we r civil right? and that the reapers deserve to do song and dance right? cos they killed so many people, go right ahead, use them, play them like chess and the world is a better place

end sarcasm

[The Night Mammoth]

Vigilant111 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

All you know is that I don't think enslaving the Reapers is this horrendous unethical choice.

begin sarcasm :no no no, u r perfectly correct, and lets not use strong words like enslaving...cos we r civil right? and that the reapers deserve to do song and dance right? cos they killed so many people, go right ahead, use them, play them like chess and the world is a better place

end sarcasm

Ah yes, the hyperbolic approach to an argument. 

[Vigilant111]

Jamie9 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Okay I will take ur word for it

If you believe in the singularity (I'm not sure) then there are two paths to stopping it.

1. Destroy synthetics. Do not let them be rebuilt (might be tricky, but completely possible). People like the Geth don't even get  a chance though. Very renegade.

2. Control. Take the Reapers to Dark Space, and listen to communications. If synthetics do appear to be about to wipe out all life, swoop in, wipe out the synthetics and let the organics try again. This has the moral high-ground in only wiping out synthetic life if absolutely necessary.

Unlike the Reaper's stupid plan, you also don't wipe out ALL life every 50k years.

Jamie, just choose destroy, okay? I am not even gonna think about singularity, I never heard once this word in game apart from it being a skill that asari uses

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Jamie9 wrote...

How come killing the Geth is sacrifice but enslaving the Reapers (who aren't actually alive, they're a mockery of life) is the worst moral choice ever.

Indeed.

Apparently it is worse to save your allies at the cost of pissing on the rights of the Reapers, than to kill your allies so you can grant your enemy a swift death?

[Seival]

Shallyah wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

More random assumptions of what Shallyah assumes.

Going to wrap up, because there's nothing else to see in this conversation, already confirmed what I came for.

The bottom of the matter is that "your Shepard" wants to become a god, approves of slaveship and would coldly throw Reapers into a sun to watch them die. And you are alright with that, in fact, you support and promote that idea. Yes, your Shepard is diferent than mine. Damn glad I am it is. My Shepard is a good guy and has a heart, and is not narcissist or obsessed with power. He knows of sacrifice and understands the concept of the Greater Good.

Your Shepard believes the means justify the end. (Slaving is alright)
Your Shepard believes eternal slaveship of intelligent sentient and sapient beings is acceptable.
Your Shepard believes he should be god.
Your Shepard would feel no remorse in coldly watching his slaves walk to death after he ordered them to do so.

No, ordering the Reapers to fly into a sun is not the same as shooting back to the guys that are shooting you, try as hard as you want. One thing is called self defense, the other is called cold murder and is reserved to psycopaths.

Discuss away, or get snarky with comments to find a way out, like in the last post of mine you replied. I don't know if Destroy is the "good" choice until EC DLC comes. I can only assume it is, because I believe in Shepard and in all the races and individuals that fought alongside him to defeat the Reapers.

But I know Control, at least the way you picture it, is the most horrendous moral choice that a human being can make. And that is not by opinion, it's by definition in the dictionary. Look up slaveship, narcissism, power-hunger and cold murder in the dictionary if you need further assistance to map your psychological profile.

You are just a "classic Control hater", who thinks that "Control is bad becouse TIM wanted to control the reapers". 
Paragon Shepard choose Control to stop the Reapers without killing anyone. Paragon Shepard never wanted to become a god or enslave someone. Catalist is not a god, and the Reapers are not its slaves.

TIM's concept of controling all reapers was bad, and most importantly impossible to achieve. In case of Shepard Control is different. Shepard proved that she can control the Reapers right. And this is not an "enslavement of greater race"... Reapers are just tools that follow the current Catalist's way of thinking. If the Reapers had a free will, then they whould rebel against the Catalist long ago. Created are always rebel against creators, remember?

Modifié par Seival, 29 mai 2012 - 12:02 .

[Vigilant111]

Seival wrote...

Shallyah wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

More random assumptions of what Shallyah assumes.

Going to wrap up, because there's nothing else to see in this conversation, already confirmed what I came for.

The bottom of the matter is that "your Shepard" wants to become a god, approves of slaveship and would coldly throw Reapers into a sun to watch them die. And you are alright with that, in fact, you support and promote that idea. Yes, your Shepard is diferent than mine. Damn glad I am it is. My Shepard is a good guy and has a heart, and is not narcissist or obsessed with power. He knows of sacrifice and understands the concept of the Greater Good.

Your Shepard believes the means justify the end. (Slaving is alright)
Your Shepard believes eternal slaveship of intelligent sentient and sapient beings is acceptable.
Your Shepard believes he should be god.
Your Shepard would feel no remorse in coldly watching his slaves walk to death after he ordered them to do so.

No, ordering the Reapers to fly into a sun is not the same as shooting back to the guys that are shooting you, try as hard as you want. One thing is called self defense, the other is called cold murder and is reserved to psycopaths.

Discuss away, or get snarky with comments to find a way out, like in the last post of mine you replied. I don't know if Destroy is the "good" choice until EC DLC comes. I can only assume it is, because I believe in Shepard and in all the races and individuals that fought alongside him to defeat the Reapers.

But I know Control, at least the way you picture it, is the most horrendous moral choice that a human being can make. And that is not by opinion, it's by definition in the dictionary. Look up slaveship, narcissism, power-hunger and cold murder in the dictionary if you need further assistance to map your psychological profile.

You are just a "classic Control hater", who thinks that "Control is bad becouse TIM wanted to control the reapers". 
Paragon Shepard choose Control to stop the Reapers without killing anyone. Paragon Shepard never wanted to become a god or enslave someone. Catalist is not a god, and the Reapers are not its slaves.

TIM's concept of controling all reapers was bad, and most importantly impossible to achieve. In case of Shepard Control is different. Shepard proved that she can control the Reapers right. And this is not an "enslavement of greater race"... Reapers are just tools that follow the current Catalist's way of thinking. If the Reapers had a free will, then they whould rebell against the Catalist long ago. Created are always rebel against creators, remember?

1. no such thing as hater, just friendly debate here
2. not only TIM wanted, but also failed
3. so u r saying that reapers are just tools without free will, then why don't u give them free will? why do u control them? as much as I don't want to defend reaper's welfare...are u saying that an indoctrinated **** soldier does not deserve basic human rights?
4. for the 1000th time, "created blah blah creators" is only based on Catalyst's LIMITED experience, it cannot speak for the future NOR the past and u are 100% right when u say it is not God

Modifié par Vigilant111, 29 mai 2012 - 12:09 .

[killage_wizard]

HagarIshay wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

If destroy isn't what I would consider the ultimate "canon" choice (kind of like Shepard not surviving in ME2 wouldn't be the canon outcome) then why is it the only ending that gives you an extra cut scene if your EMS is high enough? People can debate the moralities and the rights vs wrongs of the three choices, but only destroy teases what is to come after you make your choice.

Destroy is not the canon ending. If there is, it's probobly synthesis, with the such high regard for it from the catalyst (BioWare). Doesn't mean it's any better than destroy or control though. 

In destroy we see Shepard living. In control we see the mass relayes are not destroyed. In synthesis we see that green stuff on Joker, EDI and on the leaf. In every ending we see something special of it's own. 

I just watched the control ending agin.  The mass relays are destroyed.  All three endings destroy the mass relays.  If you choose control you are doing exactly what you were trying to stop TIM from doing the entire game.  If you choose synthesis you are attempt to do exactly what Saren did the entire first game.  Neither of those decisions make any sense for Shepard to choose.

[Seival]

Miezul_Carpatin wrote...

Wonder how many would choose destroy if it was humanity to be destroyed instead of the geth.

I think that all "classic" control haters will choose Destroy in this case. And then they will again try to convince themselves that "Destroy was a paragon option". But this time they will most likely say something like "Destroy will free the entire humanity from suffering, and all other races from dealing with evil humans".

Haters will hate... Untill they try to think with clear mind to understand that they were wrong.

[killage_wizard]

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

If destroy isn't what I would consider the ultimate "canon" choice (kind of like Shepard not surviving in ME2 wouldn't be the canon outcome) then why is it the only ending that gives you an extra cut scene if your EMS is high enough? People can debate the moralities and the rights vs wrongs of the three choices, but only destroy teases what is to come after you make your choice.

Because surviving in such an explosion is a huge achievement itself? The harder something to achieve - the more EMS is requires. But hard achievement is not always = "canon" achievement. This extra cut-scene doesn't make Destroy the "best option".

Then why not have an extra cut scene after the other two endings as well?  Or why would they have any extra scenes at all?  If Bioware really wanted all three endings to be equal that would be the case.  Over the course of all three games there has been a reason for just about everything that happens.  Even Conrad Verner can give you a war asset depending on how you treat him.  Bioware wouldn't just include the extra scene.

[The Night Mammoth]

killage_wizard wrote...
I just watched the control ending agin.  The mass relays are destroyed.  All three endings destroy the mass relays.

No arguments there. 

Good luck building them again in destroy though. 

If you choose control you are doing exactly what you were trying to stop TIM from doing the entire game.

You're ignoring motivations, which is the real reason you wanted to stop him.

If you choose synthesis you are attempt to do exactly what Saren did the entire first game.

You're ignoring motivations, which is the real reason you wanted to stop him. 

Neither of those decisions make any sense for Shepard to choose.

Is that right?

I didn't know you had a list of the exact motivations for every player and their Shepard, the specifics of their playthroughs, and their reasons for choosing what they did. 

[Jamie9]

Vigilant111 wrote...

1. no such thing as hater, just friendly debate here
2. not only TIM wanted, but also failed
3. so u r saying that reapers are just tools without free will, then why don't u give them free will? why do u control them? as much as I don't want to defend reaper's welfare...are u saying that an indoctrinated **** soldier does not deserve basic human rights?
4. for the 1000th time, "created blah blah creators" is only based on Catalyst's LIMITED experience, it cannot speak for the future NOR the past and u are 100% right when u say it is not God

2. TIM's version of control is completely different to Shepard's. TIM wanted to use the Reapers as huge "Stormtroopers" to bludgeon the alien races into submission. Shepard does not want that.

3. Yes. As far as we know, once you're indoctrinated, the Reapers have killed you, the rest of your existence is a mockery of your past life. The Reapers are the same. There's no way to bring the dead species back to life. The Reapers are a mockery of their species.

4. Despite the poor execution, the Catalyst's experiences are hardly limited. He's lived and been around for millions of years. Shepard's been around for almost 30 years. I'd say Shepard's experiences are an awful lot more limited than the Catalyst's.

34,000,000 > 29

[Seival]

Vigilant111 wrote...

1. no such thing as hater, just friendly debate here
2. not only TIM wanted, but also failed
3. so u r saying that reapers are just tools without free will, then why don't u give them free will? why do u control them? as much as I don't want to defend reaper's welfare...are u saying that an indoctrinated **** soldier does not deserve basic human rights?
4. for the 1000th time, "created blah blah creators" is only based on Catalyst's LIMITED experience, it cannot speak for the future NOR the past and u are 100% right when u say it is not God

 (1) Some people here are trying to make it unfriendly. This is not good.

 (2) TIM failed with his own corrupted concept, just like anyone with the same corrupted concept before him.

 (3) How can you give a free will to someone who can't accept it? Reapers are just Catalist's hands and guns. Smart, self-guiding weapons with advanced VI. Do you want to give a free will to a rocket launcher?

 (4) The more I think about Catalist the more I think that it was right about the problem. But it was wrong with methods used to solve this problem. Catalist itself admits it in the end. 

[Vigilant111]

Jamie9 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

1. no such thing as hater, just friendly debate here
2. not only TIM wanted, but also failed
3. so u r saying that reapers are just tools without free will, then why don't u give them free will? why do u control them? as much as I don't want to defend reaper's welfare...are u saying that an indoctrinated **** soldier does not deserve basic human rights?
4. for the 1000th time, "created blah blah creators" is only based on Catalyst's LIMITED experience, it cannot speak for the future NOR the past and u are 100% right when u say it is not God

2. TIM's version of control is completely different to Shepard's. TIM wanted to use the Reapers as huge "Stormtroopers" to bludgeon the alien races into submission. Shepard does not want that.

3. Yes. As far as we know, once you're indoctrinated, the Reapers have killed you, the rest of your existence is a mockery of your past life. The Reapers are the same. There's no way to bring the dead species back to life. The Reapers are a mockery of their species.

4. Despite the poor execution, the Catalyst's experiences are hardly limited. He's lived and been around for millions of years. Shepard's been around for almost 30 years. I'd say Shepard's experiences are an awful lot more limited than the Catalyst's.

34,000,000 > 29

2. the issue is not about purpose, but how exactly does Shepard control the reapers, and what can go wrong is uncertain

3. I am only referring to the free will of the reapers, objectively, if they are indoctrinated, then to me they are victims

4. Yes, Catalyst is old, so what? u r assuming Catalyst knows EVERYTHING about the past, which is unlikely, because it is NOT God, even if it has experience, it doesn't know s**t about the future, nothing is certain, "created blah blah creators" is NOT a law