4520 réponses à ce sujet

[The Angry One]

Seival wrote...

First -  by paragon options in the final conversation with TIM. The entire "you play with things you don't understand" thing was the proof that Shepard is ready.

So making a whole argument about how we shouldn't play with things we don't understand proves Shepard's ready to play with things she doesn't understand.

Wait what?

Second - in the final Control scene. Reapers fall back after receiving Shepherd's orders.

For what, 10 seconds? For control to work, Shepard must prevent them from starting their killing spree again for the rest of time.

And no, we can't just assume that Shepard can fly them into suns, what if they can't self-terminate? 
What if their survival instinct overrides Shepard's control? There are too many unknowns.

Modifié par The Angry One, 29 mai 2012 - 03:03 .

[killage_wizard]

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

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.

 - Control ending doesn't involve a possibility of Shepard's survival as a human being.
 - Synthesis ending doesn't involve a possibility of any kind of Shepard's survival.

So, adding similar hidden cutscenes to those will be against the endings' concept. 

The content of an extra cutscene is irrelevant.  The fact that Destroy is the only choice with an extra scene is what matters.  They could have easily done different teasers for each ending, but they chose not to.  My question is why?  Why is Destroy different from Control and Synthesis in this way only if your EMS is high enough?

Disagree. Content for a possible extra cutscene is very important. Control and Synthesis concepts just doesn't intend to have something "extra" (there is nothing to add to them, but detailed explanations). They just require more details right now, just like the Destroy ending.

"Secret scene" for Destroy is just a hidden achievement for task "almost impossible to complete". But it doesn't mean the task is "canon". It just requires a lot of EMS. Endings don't have to be a mirrors of each other.

...By the way. Synthesis requires more EMS then Control or Destroy. Actually, it requires the same EMS as the secret cutscene. But this doesn't make Synthesis a "canon" or "right" choice. In fact, Synthesis is the worst possible option.

You could easily create a secret scene for both Control and Synthesis.  In Control you can show a avatar of Shepard a la the Geth Virtual World leading the Reapers into the sun.  For synthesis you could show the Reapers just leaving, since the cycle is broken, and there is no longer a purpose for them.  The content of the cutscene is irrelevant.  Its the fact that Destroy is the only one with an extra scene is.  And the secret scene requires an EMS of 4000+.  Synthesis only requires an EMS of 2800+.  

[Jamie9]

The Angry One wrote...

Exactly, paragon acts and being a good person does not prove anything. You could be a saint and that still doesn't mean you have the capacity or understanding to control the billion year old Reapers.

They dummed the Reapers down in ME3 Angry One. They are no longer the incomprehensible beings we once knew, and are now glorified AIs that are tools of the Catalyst.

Apparently, they are pretty easy to understand.

[Seival]

The Angry One wrote...

frylock23 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

I'm just going to say that your banner in the OP highlights the problem with how BioWare told this story.

Where did Shepard prove she was ready?

Everything she does proves readiness. 

As a Paragon. 

There's an old saying that's very true. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. It doesn't matter how good you think your Shepard is; she is going to be stuck for untold millions or billions of years as a super-powerful, godlike being with all that power ... and in close proximity to all those indoctrinating Reaper minds ...

Exactly, paragon acts and being a good person does not prove anything. You could be a saint and that still doesn't mean you have the capacity or understanding to control the billion year old Reapers.

The final 10 minutes of the game and the following Control ending says otherwise...

[The Angry One]

Jamie9 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Exactly, paragon acts and being a good person does not prove anything. You could be a saint and that still doesn't mean you have the capacity or understanding to control the billion year old Reapers.

They dummed the Reapers down in ME3 Angry One. They are no longer the incomprehensible beings we once knew, and are now glorified AIs that are tools of the Catalyst.

Apparently, they are pretty easy to understand.

Yeah but even then we have a whole section on Legion calling their thoughts immense and unknowable.
Keep in mind this is immense and unknowable to another synthetic! And this is after the Geth were upgraded with Reaper code!
So one minute the Reapers are the closest thing to literal machine gods, the next they're toys that anyone with the right tools can control.

[The Angry One]

Seival wrote...

The final 10 minutes of the game and the following Control ending says otherwise...

They say nothing.
We have the Catalyst (who lies about and misinterprets everything) saying you can, and Shepard assuming she can on the spot for no reason.
Again, 10 seconds of Reaper control say nothing. Yeah, sure. Shepard made the Reapers go away for that long. Control is about the long term by definition.

[nicksmi56]

@The Angry One Catalyst lied? So none of the endings worked as advertised? I didn't see an ending going differently than what he said

[killage_wizard]

Jamie9 wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

If the catalyst has been controlling the Reapers for millenia before Shepard gets a chance that means he wants the cycle to continue.  Why would he just let Shepard take control?  And for that matter why would Shepard just believe what he has been fighting so tough to stop?  And not everyone's playthoughs make synthetics out to be inherently dangerous.  My Shepard believes life is life whether is bones or circuits.  Why is it that just because a race is the latter they will eventually destory all organic life? 

He allows Shepard to take control because he believes Shepard will end up continuing the Cycle, because the Catalyst believes in the Cycle.

I believe the Geth are life. They're as alive as humanity. But they're still fundamentally different. Synthetics could turn violent because of a runtime error.

To be fair, if an organic species in 50,000 years were about to wipe out all life, I'd wipe them out too. To maintain diversity. But, again, only if absolutely necessary.

When you read it like that, you probably think "Wipe them out? That's a pretty renegade thing to do." And, ordinarily, you'd be 100% correct. But if they were about to wipe out 10 other races, they would need to be wiped out.

For instance, if we go by what Javik said about the Protheans, then the Protheans were as dangerous as any singularity.

Shepard has been fighting to stop the suffering. He wants everybody to be able to live a normal life. His goal is not to eradicate his enemies. That's ruthless, and not necessary. The Reapers can be used to safeguard all life in case of the worst case scenario. And only then. In which case, the galaxy would be rather happy I picked Control.

So you would continue the cycle that you have been trying desperatley to stop over the course of three games?  Why do the Reapers get to decide when a species becomes too dangerous?  What gives them that right?  To allow the cycle to continue is to create a galaxy ultimately devoid of free will.

[Seival]

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

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.

 - Control ending doesn't involve a possibility of Shepard's survival as a human being.
 - Synthesis ending doesn't involve a possibility of any kind of Shepard's survival.

So, adding similar hidden cutscenes to those will be against the endings' concept. 

The content of an extra cutscene is irrelevant.  The fact that Destroy is the only choice with an extra scene is what matters.  They could have easily done different teasers for each ending, but they chose not to.  My question is why?  Why is Destroy different from Control and Synthesis in this way only if your EMS is high enough?

Disagree. Content for a possible extra cutscene is very important. Control and Synthesis concepts just doesn't intend to have something "extra" (there is nothing to add to them, but detailed explanations). They just require more details right now, just like the Destroy ending.

"Secret scene" for Destroy is just a hidden achievement for task "almost impossible to complete". But it doesn't mean the task is "canon". It just requires a lot of EMS. Endings don't have to be a mirrors of each other.

...By the way. Synthesis requires more EMS then Control or Destroy. Actually, it requires the same EMS as the secret cutscene. But this doesn't make Synthesis a "canon" or "right" choice. In fact, Synthesis is the worst possible option.

You could easily create a secret scene for both Control and Synthesis.  In Control you can show a avatar of Shepard a la the Geth Virtual World leading the Reapers into the sun.  For synthesis you could show the Reapers just leaving, since the cycle is broken, and there is no longer a purpose for them.  The content of the cutscene is irrelevant.  Its the fact that Destroy is the only one with an extra scene is.  And the secret scene requires an EMS of 4000+.  Synthesis only requires an EMS of 2800+.  

Threre is no reason to create Control or Synthesis secret scenes. These endings just wasn't designed to have something unexpected in the end. And something unexpected in Destroy ending (i.e. Shepard's survival) doesn't make Destroy "canon" or "the only right" option. It just shows that with very high EMS Shepard can survive the Citadel's Destruction... Lucky Renegade Shepard... That's all. There is no inner meaning in it

[Jamie9]

killage_wizard wrote...

So you would continue the cycle that you have been trying desperatley to stop over the course of three games?  Why do the Reapers get to decide when a species becomes too dangerous?  What gives them that right?  To allow the cycle to continue is to create a galaxy ultimately devoid of free will.

Yes. But I'd alter it, so that it's a last case scenario. A species becomes too dangerous when it's wiping out all life. And winning. Not just a war, a species systematically wiping out all other life.

Should you have free will to be able to wipe people out? Do you have the right to murder people?

I said before, it'd be an investigation. To see if the Cycle is actually true or not. It's not a cycle anymore in that I wouldn't be wiping out life every so many years. Hopefully, the Catalyst is wrong, but if he isn't, I must save life.

[Seival]

killage_wizard wrote...

In Control you can show a avatar of Shepard a la the Geth Virtual World leading the Reapers into the sun.

There is no reason to show obvious things like Shepard-Catalist Avatar as a "secret scene". This is not something unexpected, it's one of the points of Control ending concept. I hope EC will show that, but as a part of regular Control ending scene.

...And I don't think "leading the Reapers into the sun" is an option. I doubt the Reapers will obey suicidal orders. If they do, then Destroy ending will become completely pointless. All Destroy fans will just choose Control as an alt-destroy in this case.

Modifié par Seival, 29 mai 2012 - 03:35 .

[killage_wizard]

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

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.

 - Control ending doesn't involve a possibility of Shepard's survival as a human being.
 - Synthesis ending doesn't involve a possibility of any kind of Shepard's survival.

So, adding similar hidden cutscenes to those will be against the endings' concept. 

The content of an extra cutscene is irrelevant.  The fact that Destroy is the only choice with an extra scene is what matters.  They could have easily done different teasers for each ending, but they chose not to.  My question is why?  Why is Destroy different from Control and Synthesis in this way only if your EMS is high enough?

Disagree. Content for a possible extra cutscene is very important. Control and Synthesis concepts just doesn't intend to have something "extra" (there is nothing to add to them, but detailed explanations). They just require more details right now, just like the Destroy ending.

"Secret scene" for Destroy is just a hidden achievement for task "almost impossible to complete". But it doesn't mean the task is "canon". It just requires a lot of EMS. Endings don't have to be a mirrors of each other.

...By the way. Synthesis requires more EMS then Control or Destroy. Actually, it requires the same EMS as the secret cutscene. But this doesn't make Synthesis a "canon" or "right" choice. In fact, Synthesis is the worst possible option.

You could easily create a secret scene for both Control and Synthesis.  In Control you can show a avatar of Shepard a la the Geth Virtual World leading the Reapers into the sun.  For synthesis you could show the Reapers just leaving, since the cycle is broken, and there is no longer a purpose for them.  The content of the cutscene is irrelevant.  Its the fact that Destroy is the only one with an extra scene is.  And the secret scene requires an EMS of 4000+.  Synthesis only requires an EMS of 2800+.  

Threre is no reason to create Control or Synthesis secret scenes. These endings just wasn't designed to have something unexpected in the end. And something unexpected in Destroy ending (i.e. Shepard's survival) doesn't make Destroy "canon" or "the only right" option. It just shows that with very high EMS Shepard can survive the Citadel's Destruction... Lucky Renegade Shepard... That's all. There is no inner meaning in it

But why couldn't they have had some secret happen at the end of Control/Synthesis?  Everything in ME3 up to the ending happened for a reason, and to throw in and extra scene at the end of just one choice if your EMS is high enough makes zero sense.  Maybe my use of"canon" or "right choice" was necessarily appropriate in making my point, but there is something that we have yet to be told about all three options.  There is something drastically different beyond just face value between the outcomes of control/synthesis and destroy.

[killage_wizard]

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

In Control you can show a avatar of Shepard a la the Geth Virtual World leading the Reapers into the sun.

There is no reason to show obvious things like Shepard-Catalist Avatar as a "secret scene". This is not something unexpected, it's one of the points of Control ending concept. I hope EC will show that, but as a part of regular Control ending scene.

...And I don't think "leading the Reapers into the sun" is an option. I doubt the Reapers will obey suicidal orders. If they do, then Destroy ending will become completely pointless. All Destroy fans will just choose Control as an alt-destroy.

I'm not saying it would have to be "lead the reapers into the sun", but they could have just come up with something.  There is a reason why destory is the only ending with an extra scene that we have yet to discover.

[Vigilant111]

Seival wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

@Mammoth: u seem to think that mass relays are these benevolent things, u r wrong, they are traps for reapers to harvest, they made the organics to rely on them, its like an addictive drug

In ME universe Mass Relays are the only way to travel between clusters in seconds. Without Mass Relays ships have to spend years to get from one distant cluster to another, and it will require tons of fuel. It will be completely ineffective and VERY expensive.

Mass Relays destruction/disable means only that Galactic Civilization has to rebuild/reactivate the Relays. Galactic Civilization may even invent and build their own Mass Relays. But it will be the same technology Reapers used, just much less advanced.

Mass Effect universe can't exist without Mass Relays. Even without destroyed/disabled or WIP ones.

Not the ONLY way, harbingers don't need mass relays

[killage_wizard]

Jamie9 wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

So you would continue the cycle that you have been trying desperatley to stop over the course of three games?  Why do the Reapers get to decide when a species becomes too dangerous?  What gives them that right?  To allow the cycle to continue is to create a galaxy ultimately devoid of free will.

Yes. But I'd alter it, so that it's a last case scenario. A species becomes too dangerous when it's wiping out all life. And winning. Not just a war, a species systematically wiping out all other life.

Should you have free will to be able to wipe people out? Do you have the right to murder people?

I said before, it'd be an investigation. To see if the Cycle is actually true or not. It's not a cycle anymore in that I wouldn't be wiping out life every so many years. Hopefully, the Catalyst is wrong, but if he isn't, I must save life.

But life started from no life at some point somewhere.  Just because a species did destroy all other life does not mean it wouldn't start again.  To take control of the Reapers and continue their reason for existence is the arrogant choice (I'm not calling you arrogant personally, that's just what i believe the control choice is meant to be).

[Taboo]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Control gives an obscene amount of power to one individual. I cannot tolerate such an ending. Destroy is blunt and over quickly and there is no long lasting effects on the galaxy, as we have dismissed the singularity several pages back.

Who's to say there's lasting effects on the galaxy with control? 

I'd say the existence of the Catalyst is a pretty big indicator, as are the presence of the Reapers.

Control ends the threat, but only because Shepard has the gall to take the power for him/herself.

Even Patrick Weekes has alluded to the fact that it is the most hubris filled choice, something the Illusive Man wanted. You don't harm anyone, but you take all that power for yourself. VERY AYN RAND.

Destroy puts an end to everything and the Galaxy is allowed to rebuild as they see fit. The Geth are dead in my playthrough, I don't see a downside.

The fact that I live is just a plus. I wouldn't pick Control OR Synthesis even if I could live.

My job was to end the threat and create no lasting effects on the galaxy. I'd say that Catalyst Shepard is a big deal.

[Seival]

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

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.

 - Control ending doesn't involve a possibility of Shepard's survival as a human being.
 - Synthesis ending doesn't involve a possibility of any kind of Shepard's survival.

So, adding similar hidden cutscenes to those will be against the endings' concept. 

The content of an extra cutscene is irrelevant.  The fact that Destroy is the only choice with an extra scene is what matters.  They could have easily done different teasers for each ending, but they chose not to.  My question is why?  Why is Destroy different from Control and Synthesis in this way only if your EMS is high enough?

Disagree. Content for a possible extra cutscene is very important. Control and Synthesis concepts just doesn't intend to have something "extra" (there is nothing to add to them, but detailed explanations). They just require more details right now, just like the Destroy ending.

"Secret scene" for Destroy is just a hidden achievement for task "almost impossible to complete". But it doesn't mean the task is "canon". It just requires a lot of EMS. Endings don't have to be a mirrors of each other.

...By the way. Synthesis requires more EMS then Control or Destroy. Actually, it requires the same EMS as the secret cutscene. But this doesn't make Synthesis a "canon" or "right" choice. In fact, Synthesis is the worst possible option.

You could easily create a secret scene for both Control and Synthesis.  In Control you can show a avatar of Shepard a la the Geth Virtual World leading the Reapers into the sun.  For synthesis you could show the Reapers just leaving, since the cycle is broken, and there is no longer a purpose for them.  The content of the cutscene is irrelevant.  Its the fact that Destroy is the only one with an extra scene is.  And the secret scene requires an EMS of 4000+.  Synthesis only requires an EMS of 2800+.  

Threre is no reason to create Control or Synthesis secret scenes. These endings just wasn't designed to have something unexpected in the end. And something unexpected in Destroy ending (i.e. Shepard's survival) doesn't make Destroy "canon" or "the only right" option. It just shows that with very high EMS Shepard can survive the Citadel's Destruction... Lucky Renegade Shepard... That's all. There is no inner meaning in it

But why couldn't they have had some secret happen at the end of Control/Synthesis?  Everything in ME3 up to the ending happened for a reason, and to throw in and extra scene at the end of just one choice if your EMS is high enough makes zero sense.  Maybe my use of"canon" or "right choice" was necessarily appropriate in making my point, but there is something that we have yet to be told about all three options.  There is something drastically different beyond just face value between the outcomes of control/synthesis and destroy.

Personally, I see no reason to add secret scenes to finals that don't fit for such scenes. And it looks like BioWare also don't see the reason to add more secret scenes. Also, BioWare said many times that there are no "the best choices" in ME Trilogy. There are different options. Some people prefer some particular options. It's as easy as that.

Modifié par Seival, 29 mai 2012 - 03:45 .

[Taboo]

Seival wrote...
Personally, I see no reason to add secret scenes to finals that don't fit for such scenes. And it looks like BioWare also don't see the reason to add more secret scenes. Also, BioWare said many times that there are no "the best choices" in ME Trilogy. There are different options. Some people prefer some particular options. It's as easy as that.

This.

There is no "best" ending. It's what you, the player want.

[killage_wizard]

Seival wrote...

Personally, I see no reason to add secret scenes to finals that don't fit for such scenes. And it looks like BioWare also don't see the reason to add more secret scenes. Also, BioWare said many times that there are no "the best choices" in ME Trilogy. There are different options. Some people prefer some particular options. It's as easy as that.

So how does Shepard waking up in the rubble "fit" the Destroy ending?  And again I am not saying that Destroy is the best because of the extra scene.  I am only saying that there is something we have not been told about that particular choice.  In order to see the scene you not only have to get most of the game's war assets, but you have to play the multiplayer as well.  That's a lot of work for an 15 seconds of footage if its nothing more than showing him surving the explosion.

Modifié par killage_wizard, 29 mai 2012 - 04:04 .

[Jackums]

The Angry One wrote...

Seival wrote...

The final 10 minutes of the game and the following Control ending says otherwise...

They say nothing.
We have the Catalyst (who lies about and misinterprets everything) saying you can, and Shepard assuming she can on the spot for no reason.
Again, 10 seconds of Reaper control say nothing. Yeah, sure. Shepard made the Reapers go away for that long. Control is about the long term by definition.

What was that again?

[Taboo]

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

Personally, I see no reason to add secret scenes to finals that don't fit for such scenes. And it looks like BioWare also don't see the reason to add more secret scenes. Also, BioWare said many times that there are no "the best choices" in ME Trilogy. There are different options. Some people prefer some particular options. It's as easy as that.

So how does Shepard waking up in the rubble "fit" the Destroy ending?  And again I am not saying that Destroy is the best because of the extra scene.  I am only saying that there is something we have not been told about that particular choice.  In order to see the scene you not only have to get most of the game's war assets, but you have to play the multiplayer as well.  That's a lot of work for an 15 seconds of footage if its nothing more than showing him surving the explosion.

I have a theory, if you'll hear me out. Destroy is the only ending were Shepard isn't visibly disintegrated. The scene were he/she breathes is pre-rendered, meaning some effort went into it.

It's there to make the people who didn't want Shepard to die, feel better.

They will have to clarify it now though.

[The Night Mammoth]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Control gives an obscene amount of power to one individual. I cannot tolerate such an ending. Destroy is blunt and over quickly and there is no long lasting effects on the galaxy, as we have dismissed the singularity several pages back.

Who's to say there's lasting effects on the galaxy with control? 

I'd say the existence of the Catalyst is a pretty big indicator, as are the presence of the Reapers.

There wont be Reapers present for long. 

Control ends the threat, but only because Shepard has the gall to take the power for him/herself.

Even Patrick Weekes has alluded to the fact that it is the most hubris filled choice, something the Illusive Man wanted. You don't harm anyone, but you take all that power for yourself. VERY AYN RAND.

Motivation and intent is everything. Action is everything. Shepard takes the power, uses it for good, then discards it once the work is done. 

Ayn Rand to start with, but then not Ayn Rand at the end. 

Still haven't read Atlas Shrugged, will do sometime just out of a matter of interest, I'm aware that it isn't perceived as a great book. 

Destroy puts an end to everything and the Galaxy is allowed to rebuild as they see fit. The Geth are dead in my playthrough, I don't see a downside.

The Geth are alive in mine, so the downside remains. I'd rather no exterminate an entire sapient species to sate my need for revenge. 

The fact that I live is just a plus. I wouldn't pick Control OR Synthesis even if I could live.

My job was to end the threat and create no lasting effects on the galaxy. I'd say that Catalyst Shepard is a big deal.

How big a deal and exactly what kind of deal is yours to interpet. I have mine, it's not very good, I don't even like control. I just accept it as the option I'm forced to choose. 

[Seival]

The Angry One wrote...

Seival wrote...

First -  by paragon options in the final conversation with TIM. The entire "you play with things you don't understand" thing was the proof that Shepard is ready.

So making a whole argument about how we shouldn't play with things we don't understand proves Shepard's ready to play with things she doesn't understand.

Wait what?

Second - in the final Control scene. Reapers fall back after receiving Shepherd's orders.

For what, 10 seconds? For control to work, Shepard must prevent them from starting their killing spree again for the rest of time.

And no, we can't just assume that Shepard can fly them into suns, what if they can't self-terminate? 
What if their survival instinct overrides Shepard's control? There are too many unknowns.

You know, in real life (when it comes to some very important moral decisions), the paragon-people who say that they are not ready are actually the ones, who are the most ready. The same goes for understanding some complicated moral things. So when Paragon Shepard says that "you are trying to play with things you don't understand", she proves that she is ready to understand these things correctly. She only needs a person, who explain all these things to her... And this person is a Catalist - the "Deus Ex Machina of ME Trilogy". 

Yes, current Control cutscene is short and needs more details. BioWare will give them to us with EC. And as they said, the endings' concept will remain the same. Finally, even right now it's obvious that Shepard gains full control of Reapers and becomes a new Catalist in the Control Ending.

[Taboo]

 Ayn Rand is a blight.

The Reapers being flown into a sun isn't a good idea, as adding mass to a star isn't a good thing. The issue is that Shepard still has all that power. 

As for the Reapers being Destroyed? We lose nothing. This is addressed on Rannoch, in the PARAGON choice. There is nothing left in the Reapers, they are the monument to millions of lost souls. Shepard states that they can finally rest in peace. There is no such "retrieving info" nonense that those Pro-Cerberus people seem to have a hard on for.

Nothing that is done in Control can't be done in Destroy, if you play your cards right.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 29 mai 2012 - 04:18 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Taboo-XX wrote...

 Ayn Rand is a blight.

The Reapers being flown into a sun isn't a good idea, as adding mass to a star isn't a good thing. The issue is that Shepard still has all that power.

Black holes it is then, or maybe Haestrom's star. 

Not that the mass added by Reapers is going to be significant in any way. 

Nothing that is done in Control can't be done in Destroy, if you play your cards right.

There are things in control that can't be done in destroy, good or bad.

It's a gamble, but every choice is a gamble before you make it. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 29 mai 2012 - 04:25 .