4520 réponses à ce sujet

[xsdob]

Haters and trolls be damned, I picked control and I support this thread.

[CroGamer002]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

The evidence is literally Mass Effect 1, 2 and 3. Seriously, how can you talk about evidence when the only evidence that you're given in support of control/synthesis is about 2 sentences from the starkid? NOTHING else in the entire series up to that point says otherwise.

Point me to evidence that suggests the Reapers can't be controlled. 

And wasn't it established on Horizon they can be controlled?


Also, doesn't starbrat control Reapers?
Doesn't that prove as well they can be controlled?


Well, that's unless brat lied, but it can be said same for Destroy and Synthesis ending.

[Jamie9]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Bullsh*t. True objectivity is a social el dorado. Every opinion is lathered with varying degrees of bias. 

Well, you can't debate 100% objectively, obviously, otherwise it wouldn't be a debate, but you have to be somewhat objective. If everything you say is moral-based and subjective it holds no weight. I DID take Critical Thinking, and I think that a more basic version of it (one that's more relevant to Real Life), should be applied to education.

I know this is the internet. But If I wanted to, I could argue for synthesis. And I have done so on other threads. I'm just trying to point out how futile all this "I'm right, you're wrong" stuff is.

The irony in this is my own attempt is probably futile, but at least I tried.

[CroGamer002]

MASSEFFECTfanforlife101 wrote...

In Control, I didn't even see the Relays Destroyed. If the Relays were destroyed the the Citadel would have been gone as well, because it is a Relay as well. It just closed as all the Reapers left. And the shots of the Relays were cut shorter as well. So they couldn't have been destroyed.

Actually, Patrick Weekes in unofficial interview said Mass Relays are just disabled and Citadel is fine in Control ending.
Also, they can be activated lot sooner then be fixed with Destroy and Synthesis.

[111987]

Velocithon wrote...

111987 wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

So you like TIM and his ideals?

Okay.

What, you wouldn't want to increase humanity's power and safeguard their future as much as possible?

Okay.

You forgot to put "at the expense of everyone else in the galaxy" at the end. TIM would've been like Emperor Palpatine and the Reapers being the clones.

TIM was pro-human. He didn't care for any other species, and arguably doesn't care for humans since he turns them into abominations, or "improves" them.

Sorry. The entire notion of accepting his ideals are just nauseating. Plus, look at all the terrible things he did to accomplish that goal. It's horrific.

What, and the other species are all about a cosmopolitan society? Look at the structure of government in the galaxy. It's oppressive to all but a select few. It would be naive to NOT look out for humanity. TIM has shown time and again he is fine with working the other races.

I don't know about you, but I'd be glad to know that humanity has such a staunch defender. Because the galaxy is a ruthless place and if you are naively going to believe the other races will get along and live in some perfect, harmonious society, you are kidding yourself.

That said, I do not agree with TIM's methods. He hurts humanity by trying to save them. But the original question was whether or not people believed in his ideals, not his methods.

[MASSEFFECTfanforlife101]

IMO, none of the Endings should have had the destruction of the Relays.

[Cadeym]

Shepard Wins wrote...

Please accept this coupon my good man.

Modifié par Mouseraider, 27 mai 2012 - 06:16 .

[robertm2]

BOOOO!!!!!!

[CroGamer002]

MASSEFFECTfanforlife101 wrote...

IMO, none of the Endings should have had the destruction of the Relays.

I don't think anyone would disagree with you there.

[Shepard Wins]

Mesina2 wrote...

MASSEFFECTfanforlife101 wrote...

In Control, I didn't even see the Relays Destroyed. If the Relays were destroyed the the Citadel would have been gone as well, because it is a Relay as well. It just closed as all the Reapers left. And the shots of the Relays were cut shorter as well. So they couldn't have been destroyed.

Actually, Patrick Weekes in unofficial interview said Mass Relays are just disabled and Citadel is fine in Control ending.
Also, they can be activated lot sooner then be fixed with Destroy and Synthesis.

Isn't that by any chance the same interview in which he said EDI would live in the Destroy ending?

[Mooseboy0188]

Funkdrspot wrote...

I'm going to post this again to see if i can get a logical answer to WHY i should believe that control is a good ending:

On my first playthrough I thought control was a fitting way to go. " Yeah my Shep would totally give himself for the greater good of the galaxy"

But then I started thinking:

- I've spent something like 150 hours playing this Shep and his explicit goal was nothing less than the destruction of the reapers

- The goal of everyone else who has been indoctrinated has either been submission or control

- The reapers MAIN weapon isn't brute strength, it's coercion and manipulation.

- Before the starkid, we had JUST told TIM that the risk is too great to try control since he'd be betting the fate of the galaxy on it. We convinced him enough for him to an hero

- 5 min later the starkid utters 2 sentences and all of a sudden i'm supposed to take him, master of manipulation and coercion, at his word that Shep can control the reapers?! He says NOTHING of significance to make me suddenly change my beliefs and he offers even less proof. Even the way he introduces control is suspicious, "....or do you THINK you can control us?"

Stop spamming your logic.  It's destroying my love for artistic integrity.

Modifié par Mooseboy0188, 27 mai 2012 - 06:17 .

[111987]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

111987 wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

So you like TIM and his ideals?

Okay.

What, you wouldn't want to increase humanity's power and safeguard their future as much as possible?

Okay.

By subjugating the other species.

Which is no different from how the galaxy always works. Except instead of the Asari, Salarians, and Turians on top, it's humanity.

As a human, I'd rather be on top than not. In a perfect world we'd all share the power, but you're kidding yourself if you truly believe that is possible.

[Velocithon]

Regardless, all the endings are still crap lol.

Pick control, you don't actually see this happening or Shepard controlling them
Pick Synthesis, you don't actually see the benefit of this so-called "best" ending.
Pick Destroy, well you see a few Reapers die. But of course so many other questions rise up...

We just have to hope and pray the EC actually fixes this mess. Until then, we're just arguing which turd smells better.

[Funkdrspot]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

The evidence is literally Mass Effect 1, 2 and 3. Seriously, how can you talk about evidence when the only evidence that you're given in support of control/synthesis is about 2 sentences from the starkid? NOTHING else in the entire series up to that point says otherwise.

Point me to evidence that suggests the Reapers can't be controlled. 

Point me to concrete evidence that they can be controlled indefinitely. Be logical. The burden of proof is on you at this point.

In the words of Paragon Shepard: 
" If we destroy the reapers this ends today, but if you can't control them...."
"BUT I CAN!"
" Are you willing to bet humanity's existance on it?"

Modifié par Funkdrspot, 27 mai 2012 - 06:21 .

[Velocithon]

111987 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

111987 wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

So you like TIM and his ideals?

Okay.

What, you wouldn't want to increase humanity's power and safeguard their future as much as possible?

Okay.

By subjugating the other species.

Which is no different from how the galaxy always works. Except instead of the Asari, Salarians, and Turians on top, it's humanity.

As a human, I'd rather be on top than not. In a perfect world we'd all share the power, but you're kidding yourself if you truly believe that is possible.

Yeah...but the other species subjugated like, one other species. The Salarians nerfed the Krogan, the Turian also help nerf the Krogran. Other than that no one really subjugated any one too much. The other races just weren't predominant yet and probably weren't as far along the evolutionary cycle as the others were.

The humans though, with the Reapers, would just utterly dominate the entire galaxy. It wouldn't even be fair!

So I'm not sure you can really compare the two.

[CroGamer002]

Shepard Wins wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

MASSEFFECTfanforlife101 wrote...

In Control, I didn't even see the Relays Destroyed. If the Relays were destroyed the the Citadel would have been gone as well, because it is a Relay as well. It just closed as all the Reapers left. And the shots of the Relays were cut shorter as well. So they couldn't have been destroyed.

Actually, Patrick Weekes in unofficial interview said Mass Relays are just disabled and Citadel is fine in Control ending.
Also, they can be activated lot sooner then be fixed with Destroy and Synthesis.

Isn't that by any chance the same interview in which he said EDI would live in the Destroy ending?

Nope, he said he had no idea on why do you see EDI alive in Destroy ending, since she and geth had to die due to those Reaper upgrades.

I did asked him on Twitter can they be saved if EMS is high.
He didn't know the answer at the time and wouldn't answer it anyway until EC is out.

[MisterJB]

Mesina2 wrote...

MASSEFFECTfanforlife101 wrote...

IMO, none of the Endings should have had the destruction of the Relays.

I don't think anyone would disagree with you there.

I disagree. I approve of the decision of destroying the Relays in all endings but Control.

[Ageless Face]

Funkdrspot wrote...

I'm going to post this again to see if i can get a logical answer to WHY i should believe that control is a good ending:

On my first playthrough I thought control was a fitting way to go. " Yeah my Shep would totally give himself for the greater good of the galaxy"

But then I started thinking:

- I've spent something like 150 hours playing this Shep and his explicit goal was nothing less than the destruction of the reapers

- The goal of everyone else who has been indoctrinated has either been submission or control

- The reapers MAIN weapon isn't brute strength, it's coercion and manipulation.

- Before the starkid, we had JUST told TIM that the risk is too great to try control since he'd be betting the fate of the galaxy on it. We convinced him enough for him to an hero

- 5 min later the starkid utters 2 sentences and all of a sudden i'm supposed to take him, master of manipulation and coercion, at his word that Shep can control the reapers?! He says NOTHING of significance to make me suddenly change my beliefs and he offers even less proof. Even the way he introduces control is suspicious, "....or do you THINK you can control us?"

- There are two goals in Shepard's story: Destroying the reapers and saving lives. Both of the goals are equally important. 

- People who have been indoctrinated wanted to please the reapers, and submission to them is one way to please them. TIM seemed conflicted about pleasing the reapers ( like giving information to them). None of the ending choices are about pleasing the reapers.

- If Sheapard would have gone with TIM's way, then yes. It would not be worth it. But even though the goal is the same, the methods to it are different. TIM and Shepard would not control in the same way, and not for the same reasons

-It's the ending of the game. If the catalsyt is lying about control, it does not matter anyway. Because there would be nothing more to Mass Effect. That is why I don't believe he is lyiing, anyway. What will be the point of that?

Hope it's answer your questions.

Modifié par HagarIshay, 27 mai 2012 - 06:21 .

[CroGamer002]

MisterJB wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

MASSEFFECTfanforlife101 wrote...

IMO, none of the Endings should have had the destruction of the Relays.

I don't think anyone would disagree with you there.

I disagree. I approve of the decision of destroying the Relays in all endings but Control.

OK, besides him and probably few other people, nobody else would disagree with you there.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Shepard Wins wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

lol, pro-Destroy camp is insufferable. What's so wrong with making a thread supporting Control? They just attack everything that isn't their path.

You realize the same can be said for just about every thread about 'my choice was right because'.

Everyone is trying to make their choice sound like the correct one, when really it's just left up to us to decide what is right.

Even though I think all 3 are equally ****ty, and don't really solve the over-arching problem.

This, thank you.

I know YOU ain't talking: entering this thread and contributing nothing more than "Lol no."

But when I alledge something against Destroy supporters (something they prove right by their posts on the first page of this very thread) you run to this guy and agree with this guy that "it's up to us to decide, we shouldn't make our choice sound like the correct one."

Denial - not a river in Africa.

[mango smoothie]

I chose Destroy, but I do support Control as a viable option. The only reason why I didn't choose Control was because my Shepard didn't want to take the risk. It's why I feel that Control is paragon because you take a risk in controlling the Reapers in order to save the Geth, Edi, and a chance to rebuild galactic civilization. While Destroy feels more renegade to me as you sacrifice the Geth and Edi to ensure that no problems come from the Reapers.

Modifié par mango smoothie, 27 mai 2012 - 06:31 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Funkdrspot wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

The evidence is literally Mass Effect 1, 2 and 3. Seriously, how can you talk about evidence when the only evidence that you're given in support of control/synthesis is about 2 sentences from the starkid? NOTHING else in the entire series up to that point says otherwise.

Point me to evidence that suggests the Reapers can't be controlled. 

Point me to concrete evidence that they can be controlled indefinitely.

In the words of Paragon Shepard: 
" If we destroy the reapers this ends today, but if you can't control them...."
"BUT I CAN!"
" Are you willing to bet humanity's existance on it?"

Henry Lawson discovers controlling Reaper forces via a form of 'reverse indoctrination' is viable.

The Catalyst has been doing so for millions of years. 

Evidence exists that they can be controlled. 

Whether it lasts is complete speculation. Whether Shepard can take control for any meaningful amount of time or to any worthwhile extent is unknown. 

But I never suggested anything different. Control is a leap of faith. 

[Funkdrspot]

HagarIshay wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

I'm going to post this again to see if i can get a logical answer to WHY i should believe that control is a good ending:

On my first playthrough I thought control was a fitting way to go. " Yeah my Shep would totally give himself for the greater good of the galaxy"

But then I started thinking:

- I've spent something like 150 hours playing this Shep and his explicit goal was nothing less than the destruction of the reapers

- The goal of everyone else who has been indoctrinated has either been submission or control

- The reapers MAIN weapon isn't brute strength, it's coercion and manipulation.

- Before the starkid, we had JUST told TIM that the risk is too great to try control since he'd be betting the fate of the galaxy on it. We convinced him enough for him to an hero

- 5 min later the starkid utters 2 sentences and all of a sudden i'm supposed to take him, master of manipulation and coercion, at his word that Shep can control the reapers?! He says NOTHING of significance to make me suddenly change my beliefs and he offers even less proof. Even the way he introduces control is suspicious, "....or do you THINK you can control us?"

- There are two goals in Shepard's story: Destroying the reapers and saving lives. Both of the goals are equally important. 

- People who have been indoctrinated wanted to please the reapers, and submission to them is one way to please them. TIM seemed conflicted about pleasing the reapers ( like giving information to them). None of the ending choices are about pleasing the reapers.

- If Sheapard would have gone with TIM's way, then yes. It would not be worth it. But even though the goal is the same, the methods to it are different. TIM and Shepard would not control in the same way, and not for the same reasons

-It's the ending of the game. If the catalsyt is lying about control, it does not matter anyway. Because there would be nothing more to Mass Effect. That is why I don't believe he is lyiing, anyway. What will be the point of that?

Hope it's answer your questions.

- So the catalyst isn't lying because it's the end of the game? That's the most contrived storyline in the history of existence.

[Ieldra]

Good, OP. Control is very good choice for several reasons. Not my favorite, but from a reasonably objective point of view probably the wisest and the one that leaves the most options open for the future.

[Bat32391]

So does anyone know what actually happens to Shepard in the control ending? Does s/he like upload his/her brain and becomes a robot or something like that?

Modifié par Bat32391, 27 mai 2012 - 06:26 .