4520 réponses à ce sujet

[KingZayd]

HagarIshay wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Well that's the thing. We know the Reapers are intelligent. The more control , the less likely it is. I think if the Reapers are controlled, it's through indoctrination. This would be how the Reapers are sentient, yet controlled and controlled without seeming to know that they are being controlled. But the degree of control is unclear. And controlling a Reaper's mind is one thing, knowing the structural details is another.

OK, but the Starchild also disappears between talking to you and your choice, so it disappearing doesn't really mean anything.

That's assuming the Reaping cycle is really all about synthetic vs organics. And yeah, that's why I suspect there's something else going on. The scene doesn't make sense at face value. Starchild says us being there proves his solution won't work anymore, but we're only there because he brought us. There was no reason to bring us upstairs (the crucible wasn't firing, convention victory was impossible. The Reapers had won), never mind tell us about destroy (which if true, is bad for the Reapers and does nothing about the hypothetical organics vs synthetics conflict it claims to care about). Nor is there any reason for the Starchild to care about organic life.

My first thoughts were: it's an overly elaborate way of getting us to similtaneously sabotage the Crucible and kill ourselves. But it seems to me that IT is the only way the scene makes any sense.

Maybe your'e right. Still, if find it likely that control also means to know about the reapers. The reapers indoctrinate organics through the mind. It means they know how it works (I don't believe they understand it, but that's another thing) If you believe the reapers are indoctrinated, or being control, then you should know WHERE or HOW the reaper's...mind... work. Could be that the catalyst and Shepard are just giving orders and nothing more. But it's just seems to me that you HAVE to know WHAT to control before you actually control it. 

True, I am taking the catalyst at it's word. You'll find very few people that chose control and still don't believe the catalyst. If there is something else going on, I don't see it. I think he brought Shepard up because he wanted to let an organic make the choice. Let the organics choose the path (though I think that the leaked scipt told us something about the crucible blocking the reapers or something). And the catalyst can care about organic lives as much as we care for animals. We see them as lower class than us, But we want to save them. There is no reason for us to care about animals, yet many  people do. Why can't the catalyst be similar at that aspect?

IT can make A LOT of sense. That I have on doubt. But I'd rather to take the ending at face value. Crazy and idiotic, I know. But from the start of the series I was interested in the reapers. While I think their reason of Creator/created is... stupid, I'd rather for them to have a reason for doing what they are doing. Unfourtenatly, the IT, as sensable and brilliant idea as it is, will not add an ending to the story of Mass Effect, but only of Shepard. If that makes sense .

Starchild wants an organic to choose even though it hasn't ever cared about what organics want? And sure, it can care about organic lives as we care for animals.. but why doesn't it care about synthetics then? And if this synthetic can care for us as much as we care for animals, why wouldn't others? Yeah, sure.. a lot of animals have become extinct because of us. But we've never wanted to kill them all. And I don't think we'll ever want to.

Well, if you're wanting to know about the Reapers, that's more of a beginning, than an ending I think the reason given is a misdirect at the very least, but you know that. But I also find the idea that a previous cyle decided an anti-reaper weapon really needed a synthesis option rather suspicious. To me, that's indicative of either some form of deception (IT or not) going on, or some ridiculously bad writing.  IT did predict that we would get DLC giving us the true ending (giving us both clarification and closure ). If the EC does this, I'll probably be very happy.

While I don't agree with your choices (bad face value vs IT) and (control vs destroy), I do understand your reasons for them.

[shadowkinz]

i figure once u have control of something so vast and beyond human comprehension, u will be enlightened.. kind of like in my other post where i'm commenting on a picture someone posted, saying how we are insignificant in the long run..

Shepard might realize this while controlling the reapers, and turn into a "bad person." Becoming a god that controls an army of that size and magnitude.. i dunno man..

But it's all moot, IT theory is the way for me, and all of these endings totally go against what's possible in the ME universe. Biotics makes some sense, god children? no.

I picked control my first time b/c i thought it was the only ending that saved the relays.. nope.

[Ageless Face]

KingZayd wrote...

Starchild wants an organic to choose even though it hasn't ever cared about what organics want? And sure, it can care about organic lives as we care for animals.. but why doesn't it care about synthetics then? And if this synthetic can care for us as much as we care for animals, why wouldn't others? Yeah, sure.. a lot of animals have become extinct because of us. But we've never wanted to kill them all. And I don't think we'll ever want to.

Well, if you're wanting to know about the Reapers, that's more of a beginning, than an ending I think the reason given is a misdirect at the very least, but you know that. But I also find the idea that a previous cyle decided an anti-reaper weapon really needed a synthesis option rather suspicious. To me, that's indicative of either some form of deception (IT or not) going on, or some ridiculously bad writing.  IT did predict that we would get DLC giving us the true ending (giving us both clarification and closure ). If the EC does this, I'll probably be very happy.

While I don't agree with your choices (bad face value vs IT) and (control vs destroy), I do understand your reasons for them.

I don't know why the catalyst doesn't care about the synthetics. Maybe because he think the synthetics can take care of themselves. And maybe we don't want the animals killed, but it's not like we didn't try to kill them by helping them. Give enough meds to a sick dog and he will die. The catalyst is doing the same thing. Difference is, the catalyst doesn't see death as death. "We help them accend". Never did he say he killed the organics. I know it can sound as a trick to us. But it can also be the fact that the catalyst is not like us, he thinks a bit differently.

Yeah, the EC is either given us an explanation for the bad writing, or will do something like the IT, if not exactly that. It would have been great if it could go together, so everyone could be happy. Sadly it doesn't seem to work together. We all need to hope we'll get what we want in the EC.  

[Ageless Face]

Mingolo wrote...
Sorry for the following wall of text, but you asked.

No need for their resources at the beginning, maybe if I needed any I would go get them from "bad guys" in the terminus systems and underdeveloped planets. For non-sentient resource needs, reapers could colonize planets for themselves, just like regular organics do. For more large scale and sentient resource needs, read last  two paragraphs. And about the tech, I was actually thinking since the goal would be to make the alliance the ruler of the galaxy like the protheans were (and later extend that to other galaxies if possible), the Alliance could be taught some limited understanding of reaper tech, to give them an advantage over others. Emphasis, however, on LIMITED and SOME. It would be more important to keep the reapers much more advanced than organics, including through many regular upgrades of reaper tech to make them even more advanced, and such upgrades would not be shared with anyone.

Indoctrination, the slow kind that allows the victim to last many years, would be a regular practice to keep alien species submissive under humanity's rule, should be very effective at doing that. It might even extend to some top ranking humans as well, you never know if your apprentice will want to turn on you, Sith style.

Harvesting would be done to any prisoners the reapers take in wars. Harvesting of an entire species would be done when a species is deemed too problematic and rebellious to exist. For example, if a certain species declares war against the reapers and the Alliance and it becomes hard to put them down by diplomatic means or conventional warefare. Like I said earlier, however, this would be in the absolute worst cases. Ideally, the change to an imperial rule of the galaxy by the Alliance would be so slow (would be a gradual process over decades) and politically well done that there would not be much resistance to it. Violence inside your own territorry lowers morale, creates more conflicts, raises the probability of rebellions, and generally makes people not like the government; so the goal would be to keep everything as peaceful, or quiet, as possible inside the Milky Way itself.

Outside the Milky Way however...things would be different. If travel to other galaxies is found to be possible, the reapers would send scouts to galaxies which are deemed good candidates, analyze their technology level to make sure they do not stand a chance to win, and exterminate/harvest/indoctrinate them all to the last one, except the ones not very advanced. Not to be evil or anything, but to replenish our resources, ground forces, and navy. Once we are done with it, then the process of helping the Alliance colonize this other galaxy would begin.

One of the main goals would be to find how to travel to other galaxies, but if it is found that it is not possible at all, then I guess plan B would be to provoke certain species into wars through indoctrination and secret operations, make them attack us so that we have to fight back and harvest their worlds. But this would be bad for galactic stability and morale...so I really wouldn't like doing that, makes it a lot harder to rule when the people don't like the government. I'd try finding ways to replenish the reapers with as little violence as possible inside the Milky Way, but if it's unavoidable, it's unavoidable.



PS: @Seival, if you read the above and my other posts, you will find that it is indeed very possible to "abuse" the "ultimate power." There is this nice quote that says "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Wow. Must say, we all here only wanted to make nice for the galaxy. Pretty interesting to see a different opinion, as much as I dissagree with it. 

But why are you going to provoke other species  into wars? Would the Alliance even agree with what you will do?

Is your goal to advance the humans to be on top eventually WITH the help of the reapers, or will the humans be just another worshppers of the reapers, a bit more respectfull and "higher class" than the other races?

[Seival]

KingZayd wrote...

Seival wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

But let's not forget that not all Shepards who choose Control are Paragons or good.

"You will hand over ______ system to earth. No? Reap them!"

Who could stop you? Think of the power!

The point is that Shepard is smart enough to understand what kind of power she will gain by choosing Control. This is the Ultimate Power, no other "horizons" after you'll gain that. Power-hungry person will not want this power, because there will be nothing to hungry about anymore. It's as simple as that.

That's like saying a hungry person will have no interest in an All-you-can-eat buffet, because there's no reason to be hungry anymore.

No, that's like saying that if you don't have to eat (and have nothing to eat anyway) you have no reasons to be hungry anymore.

[sAxMoNkI]

Seival wrote...

sAxMoNkI wrote...

Seival wrote...

Actually there are some exceptional individuals who can withstand even torments without loosing themselves. There are such people in real life I mean. I don't remember any names right now, but you can stady the history of any major war in human history to find the names.

Being the Catalist is not even a torment. It's power... And there are no "practical" reasons to abuse this power, because this will achieve nothing. The only reason to abuse the power is to become even more powerful. But the Catalist can't become even more powerful than it is already... Shepard can actually use this power to help lesser races without harvesting them as the previous Catalist.

...And if 500000 years later harvest will begin again for the same reasons, this will only mean that the first Catalist was 100% right from the beginning, and Shepard was wrong to stop it... I want to repeat: if the harvest will begin again. And I'm afraid we have no way to know for sure. But what we really know for sure, is that in case of Synthesis or Destroy there will be no Reapers to start the Cycles if they were really inevitable.

Just to chime in here but given enough time even something with a 0.00001% chance of happening will (eventually) happen. The point here is that with Shepard now being effectively immortal who's to say what will happen 10,000/50,000/1,000,000,000 years down the line.

Of course there's a high chance that he will remain "good" but it is not a 100% chance. Furthermore being in control of that much power, he would effectively become a deity-esque figure and in that situation what's to stop him/her becoming the moral arbiter of the galaxy?

By ceasing to be human it is then very reasonable to assume that given enough time Shep would cease to adhere to human morals, ethics or laws and utilise more relevant ones to his/her observations and experiences given his/her vastly expanded viewpoint.

....you know, unless being suddenly in control of that much processing power and that amount of information drove him completely insane instantly.

I understand that you prefer to think that power corrupts... And there is a huge difference between us, because I prefer to think that

*Snipped image*

Call me idealist if you want. Because this is who I am.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying you can't believe what you want or be an optimist, I'm just saying that looking at what has happened throughout history in situations where one person recieves total control, the outcome has never been beneficial in the long term.

Also the other side of my point was that with shepard now being in control of this vast amount of power the scope of his/her perspective has been vastly widened compared to how a single human views the world/galaxy/etc. Which is what I meant by Shep's sense of good and evil starting to differentiate from our perspective of good and evil.

For example Shep would be able to appreciate the cause and effect of things at a galactic level and while he/she would be making decisions that are ultimately for the greater good, they would percieved as bad or evil from our much more limited perspective. To quote Garrus "Sacrafice 10 billion over here to save 20 billion over there", problem is all we would be able to see is the 10 billion killed not the 20 billion saved.

Hope that makes as much sense as it did in my head

Modifié par sAxMoNkI, 20 juin 2012 - 11:55 .

[Jamie9]

sAxMoNkI wrote...

Just to chime in here but given enough time even something with a 0.00001% chance of happening will (eventually) happen. The point here is that with Shepard now being effectively immortal who's to say what will happen 10,000/50,000/1,000,000,000 years down the line.

That's the same logic that the Catalyst uses to wipe out all advanced organic life. I don't believe anything is truly inevitable, and even if it is, it is futile to spend millions of years preparing for it.

I'm also an optimist, however, so perhaps that clouds my judgement.

[sAxMoNkI]

Jamie9 wrote...

sAxMoNkI wrote...

Just to chime in here but given enough time even something with a 0.00001% chance of happening will (eventually) happen. The point here is that with Shepard now being effectively immortal who's to say what will happen 10,000/50,000/1,000,000,000 years down the line.

That's the same logic that the Catalyst uses to wipe out all advanced organic life. I don't believe anything is truly inevitable, and even if it is, it is futile to spend millions of years preparing for it.

I'm also an optimist, however, so perhaps that clouds my judgement.

To clarify, what I meant was that because Shep is effectively immortal now in this ending, that he/she has infinite time and its only given infinite time that the bolded statement is true .

For example if you flip a coin enough times it will land on its side at least once, given infinite time this outcome will occur at least once. However the problem with the catalyst is that it is saying "I am pre-emptively banning coins just in case one ever lands on its side even though overwhelming probability and practical observations (i.e only observing it to land either heads or tails) says it won't".

Ultimately I was saying that its possible that Shep could retain his/her 'humanity' indefinitely but given the fact he/she is now immortal and thus has infinite time surely there is an equally valid possibility that his/her thought processes become very alien to those of a human over time leading to scenarios I proposed above.

Modifié par sAxMoNkI, 20 juin 2012 - 12:33 .

[Seival]

Mingolo wrote...
Sorry for the following wall of text, but you asked.

No need for their resources at the beginning, maybe if I needed any I would go get them from "bad guys" in the terminus systems and underdeveloped planets. For non-sentient resource needs, reapers could colonize planets for themselves, just like regular organics do. For more large scale and sentient resource needs, read last  two paragraphs. And about the tech, I was actually thinking since the goal would be to make the alliance the ruler of the galaxy like the protheans were (and later extend that to other galaxies if possible), the Alliance could be taught some limited understanding of reaper tech, to give them an advantage over others. Emphasis, however, on LIMITED and SOME. It would be more important to keep the reapers much more advanced than organics, including through many regular upgrades of reaper tech to make them even more advanced, and such upgrades would not be shared with anyone.

Indoctrination, the slow kind that allows the victim to last many years, would be a regular practice to keep alien species submissive under humanity's rule, should be very effective at doing that. It might even extend to some top ranking humans as well, you never know if your apprentice will want to turn on you, Sith style.

Harvesting would be done to any prisoners the reapers take in wars. Harvesting of an entire species would be done when a species is deemed too problematic and rebellious to exist. For example, if a certain species declares war against the reapers and the Alliance and it becomes hard to put them down by diplomatic means or conventional warefare. Like I said earlier, however, this would be in the absolute worst cases. Ideally, the change to an imperial rule of the galaxy by the Alliance would be so slow (would be a gradual process over decades) and politically well done that there would not be much resistance to it. Violence inside your own territorry lowers morale, creates more conflicts, raises the probability of rebellions, and generally makes people not like the government; so the goal would be to keep everything as peaceful, or quiet, as possible inside the Milky Way itself.

Outside the Milky Way however...things would be different. If travel to other galaxies is found to be possible, the reapers would send scouts to galaxies which are deemed good candidates, analyze their technology level to make sure they do not stand a chance to win, and exterminate/harvest/indoctrinate them all to the last one, except the ones not very advanced. Not to be evil or anything, but to replenish our resources, ground forces, and navy. Once we are done with it, then the process of helping the Alliance colonize this other galaxy would begin.

One of the main goals would be to find how to travel to other galaxies, but if it is found that it is not possible at all, then I guess plan B would be to provoke certain species into wars through indoctrination and secret operations, make them attack us so that we have to fight back and harvest their worlds. But this would be bad for galactic stability and morale...so I really wouldn't like doing that, makes it a lot harder to rule when the people don't like the government. I'd try finding ways to replenish the reapers with as little violence as possible inside the Milky Way, but if it's unavoidable, it's unavoidable.



PS: @Seival, if you read the above and my other posts, you will find that it is indeed very possible to "abuse" the "ultimate power." There is this nice quote that says "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

You are talking about "playing a strategy game" with a "little toy", called Galactic Civilization. Only a person like Bender from Futurama will ever want this to happen. And this will only lead the person to a bitter lesson, when "little toy" eventually dies because of lack of "help", or too much "help".

Shepard is not that kind of person. She will definitely prefer making people to believe that the Reapers are just gone forever. And everything people are doing now is their own call and responsobility... But she might help lesser races in case of some inevitable catastrophical events (like asteroids threats) though.

Modifié par Seival, 20 juin 2012 - 01:27 .

[Ageless Face]

Seival wrote...

You are talking about "playing a strategy game" with a "little toy", called Galactic Civilization. Only a person like Bender from Futurama will ever want this to happen. And this will only lead the person to a bitter lesson, when "little toy" eventually dies because of lack of "help", or too much "help".

Shepard is not that kind of person. She will definitely prefer making people to believe that the Reapers are just gone forever. And everything people are doing now is their own call and responsobility... But she might help lesser races in case of some inevitable catastrophical events (like asteroids threats) though.

Seival, not everyone play the same Shepard. You play a person that will never kill someone without a reason. Someone else is playing a Shepard who will drop people out of windows because they annoyed him/her. Or shooting someone because "they talk too much". 

Shepard is build by the player, not by a specific person. That is what choices are for. The fact Mingolo here even considers to do all those things is a sign s/he allowed to do so in the game. There is nothing that says Shepard can't or won't do this things if the player wants to.

The end, BTW, is speculative. No one told us what Shepard is going to do with the reapers. Mingolo believe that what his/her Shepard will do, then Shepard will do it. 

[Seival]

HagarIshay wrote...

Seival wrote...

You are talking about "playing a strategy game" with a "little toy", called Galactic Civilization. Only a person like Bender from Futurama will ever want this to happen. And this will only lead the person to a bitter lesson, when "little toy" eventually dies because of lack of "help", or too much "help".

Shepard is not that kind of person. She will definitely prefer making people to believe that the Reapers are just gone forever. And everything people are doing now is their own call and responsobility... But she might help lesser races in case of some inevitable catastrophical events (like asteroids threats) though.

Seival, not everyone play the same Shepard. You play a person that will never kill someone without a reason. Someone else is playing a Shepard who will drop people out of windows because they annoyed him/her. Or shooting someone because "they talk too much". 

Shepard is build by the player, not by a specific person. That is what choices are for. The fact Mingolo here even considers to do all those things is a sign s/he allowed to do so in the game. There is nothing that says Shepard can't or won't do this things if the player wants to.

The end, BTW, is speculative. No one told us what Shepard is going to do with the reapers. Mingolo believe that what his/her Shepard will do, then Shepard will do it. 

Yes, but even different Shepards are actually restricted by some adequate game's rules. For example, Shepard can't go to the Citadel fully armed and start to shoot all civilians who stay in her way. Which means, that no matter which Shepard you roleplay, you will never be able to do something completely insane.

There are different Shepards indeed, but they all have some basics that is common for all of them. No matter Paragon or Renegade, Shepard is always remarkably strong willed and completely incorruptible. Both Paragon and Renegade can't go completely out of line because the character always is an unbreakable image of honorable, smart, and adequate person.

Modifié par Seival, 20 juin 2012 - 05:41 .

[Ageless Face]

Seival wrote...

Yes, but even different Shepards are actually restricted by some adequate game's rules. For example, Shepard can't go to the Citadel fully armed and start to shoot all civilians who stay in her way. Which means, that no matter which Shepard you roleplay, you will never be able to do something completely insane.

There are different Shepards indeed, but they all have some basics that is common for all of them. No matter Paragon or Renegade, Shepard is always remarkably strong willed and completely incorruptible. Both Paragon and Renegade can't go completely out of line because the character always is an unbreakable image of honorable, smart, and adequate person.

True, Shepard can't shoot people in the Citadel. But that doesn't mean s/he doesn't wants to. That depends on the player and what Shepard wants to do.

If the ending would have told us "The only thing you can do with the reapers is fly them into the sun" Then you're right. The player doesn't have a say in what Shepard will do.

But the thing is, the player can choose to do whatever they imagine with the reapers. If they want it, Shepard wants it. If everything is left for imagination, then Shepard can do in the player's mind whatever s/he pleases to do. There is no restriction.

Besides, Shpeard we have in the game is also the Shepard who told throughout all the game the she wants to blow the reapers. Yet we both chose otherwise when we had the chance. If we did it, even when it's out of character for what Shepard told for 3 whole games, why can't someone else go a bit out of the typical Shepard?  

We both don't see our Shepards kill the reapers. Someone else sees his/her Shepard controling the galaxy.

[KingZayd]

Seival wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Seival wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

But let's not forget that not all Shepards who choose Control are Paragons or good.

"You will hand over ______ system to earth. No? Reap them!"

Who could stop you? Think of the power!

The point is that Shepard is smart enough to understand what kind of power she will gain by choosing Control. This is the Ultimate Power, no other "horizons" after you'll gain that. Power-hungry person will not want this power, because there will be nothing to hungry about anymore. It's as simple as that.

That's like saying a hungry person will have no interest in an All-you-can-eat buffet, because there's no reason to be hungry anymore.

No, that's like saying that if you don't have to eat (and have nothing to eat anyway) you have no reasons to be hungry anymore.

And how is that bad in any way? Not needing food seems like an advantage.

Modifié par KingZayd, 20 juin 2012 - 07:34 .

[Seival]

KingZayd wrote...

Seival wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Seival wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

But let's not forget that not all Shepards who choose Control are Paragons or good.

"You will hand over ______ system to earth. No? Reap them!"

Who could stop you? Think of the power!

The point is that Shepard is smart enough to understand what kind of power she will gain by choosing Control. This is the Ultimate Power, no other "horizons" after you'll gain that. Power-hungry person will not want this power, because there will be nothing to hungry about anymore. It's as simple as that.

That's like saying a hungry person will have no interest in an All-you-can-eat buffet, because there's no reason to be hungry anymore.

No, that's like saying that if you don't have to eat (and have nothing to eat anyway) you have no reasons to be hungry anymore.

And how is that bad in any way? Not needing food seems like an advantage.

Yes, and you just aren't interested in food anymore in that case.

The same with the power. Power-hungry person only needs power to gain even more power, and keep all power he already gained. Power can be taken from the Catalist only if it will give it willingly. And Catalist can't get more power. Especially from the lesser races. Which means that Catalist has no reasons to abuse the power. Even power-hungry person who became the Catalist will come to that conclusion eventually.

So, you can say that Ultimate Power can actually pacify power-hunger

[Seival]

HagarIshay wrote...

Seival wrote...

Yes, but even different Shepards are actually restricted by some adequate game's rules. For example, Shepard can't go to the Citadel fully armed and start to shoot all civilians who stay in her way. Which means, that no matter which Shepard you roleplay, you will never be able to do something completely insane.

There are different Shepards indeed, but they all have some basics that is common for all of them. No matter Paragon or Renegade, Shepard is always remarkably strong willed and completely incorruptible. Both Paragon and Renegade can't go completely out of line because the character always is an unbreakable image of honorable, smart, and adequate person.

True, Shepard can't shoot people in the Citadel. But that doesn't mean s/he doesn't wants to. That depends on the player and what Shepard wants to do.

If the ending would have told us "The only thing you can do with the reapers is fly them into the sun" Then you're right. The player doesn't have a say in what Shepard will do.

But the thing is, the player can choose to do whatever they imagine with the reapers. If they want it, Shepard wants it. If everything is left for imagination, then Shepard can do in the player's mind whatever s/he pleases to do. There is no restriction.

Besides, Shpeard we have in the game is also the Shepard who told throughout all the game the she wants to blow the reapers. Yet we both chose otherwise when we had the chance. If we did it, even when it's out of character for what Shepard told for 3 whole games, why can't someone else go a bit out of the typical Shepard?  

We both don't see our Shepards kill the reapers. Someone else sees his/her Shepard controling the galaxy.

Yes, you are absolutely correct. Player can "do" anything that game doesn't allow him only in his own imagination. That was exactly my point.

Game have rules. Rules that you just can't brake. Shepard can make different choices, but the core concept of the main character will remain the same. Shepard can reach nobile goals with very different methods, but she will never do something completely insane. My opinion is that ME Trilogy set this concept in stone, and player's imagination can't brake this rule.

[Mingolo]

HagarIshay wrote...

Wow. Must say, we all here only wanted to make nice for the galaxy. Pretty interesting to see a different opinion, as much as I dissagree with it. 

But why are you going to provoke other species  into wars? Would the Alliance even agree with what you will do?

Is your goal to advance the humans to be on top eventually WITH the help of the reapers, or will the humans be just another worshppers of the reapers, a bit more respectfull and "higher class" than the other races?

Damn, another wall of text, I just can't keep these explanations of what I'd like to do after the control ending short...<_<

I don't want to provoke other species into wars. Violence inside your own territorry, like I said, creates many problems that make ruling harder. Wars create dead people, but if the war is far away from your own subjects and you censor what is published about it, they will barely feel it. If the violence is, however, inside your own territory, then those dead people are friends and family of your subjects, and they will hate you for it, which makes ruling ten times harder. Because of this, the last thing I'd want is intentional wars in the Milky Way.

I would try obtaining the resources the reapers need to stay at their top strength, sentient and otherwise, from battles against terrorist groups, criminal organizations, reaper settled colonies, and ultimately, by finding other galaxies to harvest like I explained (this would be one of the top priorities, a whole galaxy of harvesting brings a lot of resources, more than we could ever get conventionally). However, if it comes to choosing between the reapers weakening because of lack of resources or your subjects possibly becoming rebellious against you, I'd have to choose the latter and provoke some species into attacking the alliance so we can "defend" ourselves against them and harvest them.

Would everybody in the Alliance agree? No, some politicians actually want to do the right thing. Some wheels would need to be greased to get the right people on power first, people like Udina (I do regret having to kill him, he was a great asset, he was the one who suggested we should try to take control of the galaxy by forcing an all human council, and my Shepard answered that that was his plan all along by having killed the original council). Once you have the right people in power that agree with your views, it gets easy, because they can corruptly change laws to keep themselves and others sharing their views in power, backdoor politics kind of stuff. You see it all around the world, once power hungry people reach power, only violence will push them out. Over time, I'd hope and work the "backdoor politics" to make the alliance a much more united union of humanity in its entirety (instead of a lose group of Earth's nations), with only a few leaders in control, a much more Imperial type of system. I would avoid at all costs using indocrination for this, and I don't think I'd need it, finding more politicians like Udina and helping them rise through "shady" deals and cloak and dagger missions (assassinations, blackmail, kidnapping, etc.) would give a much better end result than brainwashing people. Then, it'd just take time...but time would be very abundant for an immortal being.

The goal is to make the Alliance and humanity as powerful as the protheans used to be, and eventually surpass them by taking over other galaxies. The fastest way to do that is by using the reapers. The problem is that because I will be supporting backstabbing, power hungry people with no morals and a lot of political cunning and helping them reach power, it is inevitable if they reach the same power as the reapers, they will see them as a threat and push them aside, destroying them and Shepard. So, they cannot be allowed to do that, and that's why the second main goal would be to make sure the reapers always stay hundreds of years ahead of organic tech. Shepard himself would have a little android body to talk in person to the humans in the citadel, and the reapers would officially be a special Alliance "fleet" under Spectre Shepard's command that is not obligated to follow council rules, and he would coordinate with other alliance admirals for all military operations and such. Unofficially though, they'd owe all their power to Shepard...Shepard wouldn't be the one governing, but he'd still have an immense amount of power in the government. Leading from the shadows kind of thing.

[Ageless Face]

Seival wrote...

Yes, you are absolutely correct. Player can "do" anything that game doesn't allow him only in his own imagination. That was exactly my point.

Game have rules. Rules that you just can't brake. Shepard can make different choices, but the core concept of the main character will remain the same. Shepard can reach nobile goals with very different methods, but she will never do something completely insane. My opinion is that ME Trilogy set this concept in stone, and player's imagination can't brake this rule.

That is COMPLETLEY untrue. Mass Effect is not a game where Shepard's pesonality is set. Maybe in ME3 Shepard is showing certain feelings from time to time. But we can never truly tell what Shepard's mind is actually about. Play a renegade Shepard once. You'll see how different it plays out in your head. You simply CAN'T say how Shepard will react when you only have your own expirence with the game. Other people have their own thoughts. If Shepard was all paragon, we wouldn't have dialuge wheel. We wouldn't have choices. But we have. 

By the logic of Shepard won't do something "bad", then the choice of keeping the Genophage should not be there. Or killing the geth/quarians. Or killng the rachni queen. Or keeping the collector base. All of them are renegade choices. Might look wrong to you. But people who played and chose this choices didn't choose it because they thought they were wrong. They simply did it out of idealism. So are all this people wrong? I doubt it. You can disagree with them, you can't tell them they are wrong. 

Someone who wants to dominate the galaxy is not as you play your Shepard. Doesn't mean it's not how they play their Shepard. What makes how you play it more true than how they do?

What if control by BioWare POV actually means to dominate the galaxy in the end? Does it mean what YOU thought, protecting the galaxy, is false?

[Seival]

HagarIshay wrote...

Seival wrote...

Yes, you are absolutely correct. Player can "do" anything that game doesn't allow him only in his own imagination. That was exactly my point.

Game have rules. Rules that you just can't brake. Shepard can make different choices, but the core concept of the main character will remain the same. Shepard can reach nobile goals with very different methods, but she will never do something completely insane. My opinion is that ME Trilogy set this concept in stone, and player's imagination can't brake this rule.

That is COMPLETLEY untrue. Mass Effect is not a game where Shepard's pesonality is set. Maybe in ME3 Shepard is showing certain feelings from time to time. But we can never truly tell what Shepard's mind is actually about. Play a renegade Shepard once. You'll see how different it plays out in your head. You simply CAN'T say how Shepard will react when you only have your own expirence with the game. Other people have their own thoughts. If Shepard was all paragon, we wouldn't have dialuge wheel. We wouldn't have choices. But we have. 

By the logic of Shepard won't do something "bad", then the choice of keeping the Genophage should not be there. Or killing the geth/quarians. Or killng the rachni queen. Or keeping the collector base. All of them are renegade choices. Might look wrong to you. But people who played and chose this choices didn't choose it because they thought they were wrong. They simply did it out of idealism. So are all this people wrong? I doubt it. You can disagree with them, you can't tell them they are wrong. 

Someone who wants to dominate the galaxy is not as you play your Shepard. Doesn't mean it's not how they play their Shepard. What makes how you play it more true than how they do?

What if control by BioWare POV actually means to dominate the galaxy in the end? Does it mean what YOU thought, protecting the galaxy, is false?

Yes, I understand your point. But my opinion is that Shepard can't do anything bad indeed. She can resolve different situations in different ways. And I just choose methods I like more...

...I tried to play Renegade Shepard 5 times or more. But each time I was stopped by the same question: "What the hell am I doing? How could I do THAT?!". Renegade and Paragon are different, yes. I can't accept pure Renegade ways, but I still think both Renagade and Paragon are sane.

[Mingolo]

Abusing your power is not insane, it just means you're not very morally "good." Abusing your power in ways that make no sense and only make people pissed off at you with very little logical reason, like say...killing all the jews because you don't like them (Hitler) or burning all the non-catholics because you want everyone to be catholic (Spanish Inquisition), is insane.

Modifié par Mingolo, 20 juin 2012 - 09:54 .

[Seival]

Do you know what I really love in the ME Trilogy Ending? Any constructive discussion about it ends up in discussing real life's ways of thinking, morality, responsibility, honor, heroism, etc...

...Does anyone knows any other game, that can really teach you some lessons, and force you to think about such important things? It looks like ME Trilogy is not just the best. It's also unique

[KingZayd]

Seival wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Seival wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Seival wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

But let's not forget that not all Shepards who choose Control are Paragons or good.

"You will hand over ______ system to earth. No? Reap them!"

Who could stop you? Think of the power!

The point is that Shepard is smart enough to understand what kind of power she will gain by choosing Control. This is the Ultimate Power, no other "horizons" after you'll gain that. Power-hungry person will not want this power, because there will be nothing to hungry about anymore. It's as simple as that.

That's like saying a hungry person will have no interest in an All-you-can-eat buffet, because there's no reason to be hungry anymore.

No, that's like saying that if you don't have to eat (and have nothing to eat anyway) you have no reasons to be hungry anymore.

And how is that bad in any way? Not needing food seems like an advantage.

Yes, and you just aren't interested in food anymore in that case.

The same with the power. Power-hungry person only needs power to gain even more power, and keep all power he already gained. Power can be taken from the Catalist only if it will give it willingly. And Catalist can't get more power. Especially from the lesser races. Which means that Catalist has no reasons to abuse the power. Even power-hungry person who became the Catalist will come to that conclusion eventually.

So, you can say that Ultimate Power can actually pacify power-hunger

a) Being King of the galaxy is more power than simply being King of the Reapers. A truly power hungry person, would want to take over the galaxy, and then maybe look into taking other galaxies.
Power is meaningless unless you use it (unless all you care about is power, in which case, see a)

[3DandBeyond]

The thing is that a Shepard could in ME1 decide not to care about Wrex before ME3 even existed and the decision was more about strategy to save Mordin's life in ME3. This Shepard could decide the Krogans were jerks and deserved what they got and might tell Wrex that, too. A Shepard could decide to romance or try to romance different people with no regard for someone else. That Shepard could also make some decisions with loyalty missions for Garrus and Zaeed and even Miranda. With Garrus, just step aside. With Zaeed, allow people to burn to death.

A Shepard could also decide to make some decisions early on-Garrus wants Dr. Heart dead, but my Shepard wanted him arrested. Dr. Heart decides to fight and dies and my Shepard teaches Garrus something in that moment.

That lady that wants the two drug running bosses dead has two possible options at the end-one makes her dead, the other makes her a social worker.

The Rachni Queen, twice could be destroyed, though the Rachni have always been pawns and not at fault.

Shepard can make a lot of serious nasty decisions and that Shepard could decide that Control works great for all the wrong reasons, just like TIM.

Consider that an Earthborn Shepard is instantly seen as a renegade-given a bump in renegade points to begin with. This is because the writers perhaps felt it necessary to make this type more prone to a human's first (Cerberus) philosophy. If you play with this character (even if the person is a War Hero, but especially if Ruthless), try setting the game to casual and "no decisions" mode after loading a save game. Even if you romanced Liara through all 3 games, Shepard will basically give all renegade answers to Liara before the assault on TIM's base. And, you will get renegade interrupts even if you never got them before.

What that means is this Shepard could decide to be like TIM. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. OP, that is the original saying and not the one you posted. As well, the Spiderman one is "with great power comes great responsibility."

There may even have been some good reason for the creation originally of the reapers-they may have been made in response to a very real threat. But, if so, something went very wrong along the way. And there's nothing to suggest that things would be any different even with someone with strong and good character.

And if we are to believe that Shepard dies and then becomes the new Catalyst, in order for Shepard to remain a Paragon for at least some duration, Shepard's mind would have to remain intact somewhere. I can't envision any thinking being wanting to remain indefinitely in charge of and having to smell reaper butt all day long, every day. And maybe that's what the Star Kid wants-an end to being forced to control these things. But he can't die so Shepard is his way out.

No matter what, I think all 3 choices are equally abhorrent and stupid. It's far easier to find flaws with them, than it is finding anything redeeming.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 21 juin 2012 - 01:00 .

[Seival]

KingZayd wrote...

Seival wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Seival wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Seival wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

But let's not forget that not all Shepards who choose Control are Paragons or good.

"You will hand over ______ system to earth. No? Reap them!"

Who could stop you? Think of the power!

The point is that Shepard is smart enough to understand what kind of power she will gain by choosing Control. This is the Ultimate Power, no other "horizons" after you'll gain that. Power-hungry person will not want this power, because there will be nothing to hungry about anymore. It's as simple as that.

That's like saying a hungry person will have no interest in an All-you-can-eat buffet, because there's no reason to be hungry anymore.

No, that's like saying that if you don't have to eat (and have nothing to eat anyway) you have no reasons to be hungry anymore.

And how is that bad in any way? Not needing food seems like an advantage.

Yes, and you just aren't interested in food anymore in that case.

The same with the power. Power-hungry person only needs power to gain even more power, and keep all power he already gained. Power can be taken from the Catalist only if it will give it willingly. And Catalist can't get more power. Especially from the lesser races. Which means that Catalist has no reasons to abuse the power. Even power-hungry person who became the Catalist will come to that conclusion eventually.

So, you can say that Ultimate Power can actually pacify power-hunger

a) Being King of the galaxy is more power than simply being King of the Reapers. A truly power hungry person, would want to take over the galaxy, and then maybe look into taking other galaxies.
Power is meaningless unless you use it (unless all you care about is power, in which case, see a)

With millions upon millions of Reapers at your command you actually have the Ultimate Power. The problem is that using this power will achieve nothing. What will you do with the lesser races? Play with them as "cat with the mouse"? Catalist is not a beast to play such "games".

Shepard can still care about lesser races though. So, Catalist-Shepard can help lesser races to overcome some inevitable catastrophical events (like asteroid threats). I see absolutely no ways to use such power even for Renegade Shepard. Reapers are just too powerfull for that...

Modifié par Seival, 21 juin 2012 - 10:48 .

[Seival]

What I want to say to reply all thoughts about power-abuse here, is that I think the Catalist and its Reapers are just above everything that happens with lesser races. Reapers don't need food or other resources. Reapers don't need additional "recruits", because their numbers already "can darken the sky of every world".

With Cycles broken Catalist-Shepard really has nothing left to do, but just to observe the situation... And "playing a god" is not an option, because even previous Catalist finally admitted that such "games" doesn't work. No matter if the "game" is a harvest, or anything else (like placing humanity atop all other races), this is just completely pointless.

...So, I think that Shepard-Catalist (no matter Paragon or Renegade) way consider only some local help, like overcoming some inevitable catastrophical events (like asteroid threats).

[3DandBeyond]

Seival wrote...

What I want to say to reply all thoughts about power-abuse here, is that I think the Catalist and its Reapers are just above everything that happens with lesser races. Reapers don't need food or other resources. Reapers don't need additional "recruits", because their numbers already "can darken the sky of every world".

With Cycles broken Catalist-Shepard really has nothing left to do, but just to observe the situation... And "playing a god" is not an option, because even previous Catalist finally admitted that such "games" doesn't work. No matter if the "game" is a harvest, or anything else (like placing humanity atop all other races), this is just completely pointless.

...So, I think that Shepard-Catalist (no matter Paragon or Renegade) way consider only some local help, like overcoming some inevitable catastrophical events (like asteroid threats).

Uh, wrong.  Reapers do need nourishment.  Perhaps not like you and I, but they need something that replenishes them.  It's perhaps the case that they in some way use the mental capacity of people harvested, but most certainly do use some of the organic goo for that purpose.

They are only "above" other races in that they are the largest and most threatening.  Yes, they are seen as more intelligent, but true intellect is more than adding 2+2 or processing power, it's also understanding of nuance and true meaning.  They are the dumbest smart guys.

The catalyst had millions of years of godhood and he learned nothing.  I think the only thing he learned is that he was tired of it.  But, he did exactly what many people do as kids.  They stomp on ants, pick up earthworms, squish bugs, pour salt on slugs.  And they play with their food.  At some point people grow up and grow tired of this stuff and move on to other more interesting things.

The other problem is the writers had all these different reasons out there as to why the reapers did what they did, but they abandoned these for something they thought was more intellectual.  The reapers come out every 50k years to eat and reproduce.  This is implied and stated throughout the games.

They "hibernate" at the edge of the galaxy in a hidden spot until they are ready to come back.  What they do is similar to baiting a trap and fattening up food to be harvested.  They leave tech lying around so that people develop along a certain path (like farm grown fish) or like people do when baiting for deer. 

This made way more sense to me than what we got.