Remember back in ME1 when it was explained what Renegade was? Finish the mission at any cost. Saren blew up a chemical plant just to get some terrorist, poisoning all the factory workers with toxic smog. He killed or wounded dozens just to get a few bad guys. Maybe that was the only way to finish the mission, I dont know. But that was renegade.
Now Destroy is similar. Kill all the Reapers, but also billions or even trillions of Geth who are all potentially sentient. Finish the mission at any cost, no matter how many die in the process.
Paragons are like that choice in ME3 in the refugee bay. Should you let in that extra ship of refugees to live on the citadel? If you do, there will not be enough food for everyone and lots of people will starve and maybe a few will die later. If you dont, the refugees on the ship will starve and die.
Now Paragon is the idea that everyone can be saved, which is what happens with Synthesis. Everyone LIVES, but the consequences of that choice are not clear. Maybe it will lead to stagnation or even suicide, who knows? But paragons try to save everyone at the moment of the choice, without thinking of what will happen next. Nobody dies as a consequence of the choice except maybe Shepard. Even Reapers get saved for those people that literally want to save EVERYONE and think killing Reapers is wrong.
And Control is the neutral option, nothing really happens. Nobody dies, Reapers go away and it is not clear what will happen next. Maybe Shepard goes insane and uses the Reapers to wipe out life, maybe he protects it. It is the neutral wildcard.
Destroy is Renegade, Synthesis is Paragon
Débuté par
Adugan
, mai 30 2012 09:22
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:27
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
The jokes on you, the Geth are dead in my playthrough.
Also, violating the consent of every organic being in the galaxy doesn't sound very Pargonish to me.
NONE of the choices are good.
They just happen to have a color assigned to them.
Also, violating the consent of every organic being in the galaxy doesn't sound very Pargonish to me.
NONE of the choices are good.
They just happen to have a color assigned to them.
#3
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:29
Adugan
-
- Members
- 4 912 messages
Taboo-XX wrote...
The jokes on you, the Geth are dead in my playthrough.
Also, violating the consent of every organic being in the galaxy doesn't sound very Pargonish to me.
NONE of the choices are good.
They just happen to have a color assigned to them.
Yeah, just like there is no conscent to have all the people on the citadel starve so 1 refugee ship can get in. And obviously the choice is easy for the people that killed off the Geth.
#4
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:30
Xellith
-
- Members
- 3 606 messages
Asuming that what you see is actually real - I see the reapers as being too large of a threat. I play full paragon. I listened to Legion and EDI all this time. They would be upset if I compromised my beliefs and THEIR beliefs by allowing the reapers to continue to exist.
I reject synthesis on behalf of Legion. "The old machines offered to give us our future. The Geth will achieve their own future". "We will achieve it ourselves. The process is as important as the result".
Least thats what I believe he would have wanted. Synthesis is abhorant. Control is more paragon than synthesis. But control is still bad. Destroy is the way. I feel it in my bones.
I reject synthesis on behalf of Legion. "The old machines offered to give us our future. The Geth will achieve their own future". "We will achieve it ourselves. The process is as important as the result".
Least thats what I believe he would have wanted. Synthesis is abhorant. Control is more paragon than synthesis. But control is still bad. Destroy is the way. I feel it in my bones.
Modifié par Xellith, 30 mai 2012 - 09:32 .
#5
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:34
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
Ethics are...complicated.
When I think about it, I tend to choose the choice that will violate the least amount of people. I made a mistake in ME2, someone is going to be wiped out in Three regardless of what I do. I believe the Quarians are more trustworthy than the Geth are, because they are not prone to computing errors.
Now, take the Genophage into account. Do you believe it is ethical to keep them that way. I believe the Geneva Convention (correct me if I'm wrong) states that limiting a breeding population by force is also genocide.
Geno means family or race.
Phage means eat or consume
Translated, it means Race eater.
Pretty awful huh?
But what happens if Wreav is in charge and they go ballistic under his control?
When I think about it, I tend to choose the choice that will violate the least amount of people. I made a mistake in ME2, someone is going to be wiped out in Three regardless of what I do. I believe the Quarians are more trustworthy than the Geth are, because they are not prone to computing errors.
Now, take the Genophage into account. Do you believe it is ethical to keep them that way. I believe the Geneva Convention (correct me if I'm wrong) states that limiting a breeding population by force is also genocide.
Geno means family or race.
Phage means eat or consume
Translated, it means Race eater.
Pretty awful huh?
But what happens if Wreav is in charge and they go ballistic under his control?
#6
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:36
Adugan
-
- Members
- 4 912 messages
Yes, ethics are complicated. But you are getting off topic with the genophage. It has nothing to do with the final choice.
#7
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:36
M Hedonist
-
- Members
- 4 299 messages
That kind of behavior is called reckless. Something a chaotic or Renegade-type of character would do.Adugan wrote...
Now Paragon is the idea that everyone can be saved, which is what happens with Synthesis. Everyone LIVES, but the consequences of that choice are not clear. Maybe it will lead to stagnation or even suicide, who knows? But paragons try to save everyone at the moment of the choice, without thinking of what will happen next.
Can we really make such assumptions in a "lots of speculation for everyone" ending?Nobody dies as a consequence of the choice except maybe Shepard.
Maybe the 'tech upgrade' didn't go well for people with heart problems. Catalyst never says anything about people dying or not.
#8
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:38
NoUserNameHere
-
- Members
- 2 083 messages
There is no paragon option. There is no good option.
In the amazing technicolor ending of Mass Effect 3, there is only fail!
In the amazing technicolor ending of Mass Effect 3, there is only fail!
#9
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:39
TJX2045
-
- Members
- 1 111 messages
Oh god not this thread again.
BTW, Paragon is BLUE, not GREEN, so therefore Control is "Paragon" and congrats, you're letting the cycle stay and possibly Shepard's willpower can be overtaken by the Reaper collective to restart the cycle all over again in the future.
BTW, Paragon is BLUE, not GREEN, so therefore Control is "Paragon" and congrats, you're letting the cycle stay and possibly Shepard's willpower can be overtaken by the Reaper collective to restart the cycle all over again in the future.
Modifié par TJX2045, 30 mai 2012 - 09:41 .
#10
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:40
Twin_Jaded
-
- Members
- 40 messages
The mere fact that the Reapers survive in 2 of the 3 choices will always make my decision real, real easy.
I wont touch the ethical aspects or anything of the like beacuse Im lazy, & the above reason is quite enough for me to choose destroy each and every time, if for no other reason.
Reds the new blue, man.
I wont touch the ethical aspects or anything of the like beacuse Im lazy, & the above reason is quite enough for me to choose destroy each and every time, if for no other reason.
Reds the new blue, man.
#11
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:42
Anacronian Stryx
-
- Members
- 3 134 messages
Synthesis is the least Paragon option ever, It is revolting to force change on all life just to save some minor(in galactic term) races at top of the food chain.
It is outright evil and far far more vile than anything the reapers ever did, It is the sort of action usually only perpetrated by the most insane comic book villains.
It is outright evil and far far more vile than anything the reapers ever did, It is the sort of action usually only perpetrated by the most insane comic book villains.
#12
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:43
TheBull
-
- Members
- 315 messages
As much as we want the Geth to be their own race and sentients, they are simply not, so no Destroy isn't Renegade, clearly you didn't paid attention to the Villain of ME 1.
Saren was the clear definition of a renegade "saving organics at any cost" and he has been going a more lengthy route of Synthesis and he also experimented on Indoctrination just like TIM did.
Saren was the clear definition of a renegade "saving organics at any cost" and he has been going a more lengthy route of Synthesis and he also experimented on Indoctrination just like TIM did.
#13
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:43
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
For the final choice, I choose Destroy. I don't assume the sort of Randian egoism with Control or the Brave New World inspired Synthesis (that's a blunt comparison, but it IS listed as an influence in Final Hours).
Destroy...returns everything to normal, at least in part. The Reapers are not here anymore. The Geth, being dead in my playthrough will not suffer the blowback.
As for the singularity, I choose to believe that SOME level of understanding has happen in that ten thousand year time frame.
People seem to think that people only choose Destroy to survive. No, I do it because it really truly feels like what I was trying to do since the first game.
Destroy...returns everything to normal, at least in part. The Reapers are not here anymore. The Geth, being dead in my playthrough will not suffer the blowback.
As for the singularity, I choose to believe that SOME level of understanding has happen in that ten thousand year time frame.
People seem to think that people only choose Destroy to survive. No, I do it because it really truly feels like what I was trying to do since the first game.
#14
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:44
Baa Baa
-
- Members
- 4 209 messages
THISXellith wrote...
Asuming that what you see is actually real - I see the reapers as being too large of a threat. I play full paragon. I listened to Legion and EDI all this time. They would be upset if I compromised my beliefs and THEIR beliefs by allowing the reapers to continue to exist.
I reject synthesis on behalf of Legion. "The old machines offered to give us our future. The Geth will achieve their own future". "We will achieve it ourselves. The process is as important as the result".
Least thats what I believe he would have wanted. Synthesis is abhorant. Control is more paragon than synthesis. But control is still bad. Destroy is the way. I feel it in my bones.
#15
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:48
TJX2045
-
- Members
- 1 111 messages
Xellith wrote...
Asuming that what you see is actually real - I see the reapers as being too large of a threat. I play full paragon. I listened to Legion and EDI all this time. They would be upset if I compromised my beliefs and THEIR beliefs by allowing the reapers to continue to exist.
I reject synthesis on behalf of Legion. "The old machines offered to give us our future. The Geth will achieve their own future". "We will achieve it ourselves. The process is as important as the result".
Least thats what I believe he would have wanted. Synthesis is abhorant. Control is more paragon than synthesis. But control is still bad. Destroy is the way. I feel it in my bones.
You know, now that you mention that, that basically seems like what Starchild is trying to do. He's offering Shepard a chance to give the organics their future back...at what cost? The loss of their technology and a dark age. *facepalm*
Modifié par TJX2045, 30 mai 2012 - 09:48 .
#16
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:49
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
We don't lose technology in Destroy....
We lose Synthetics and the Relays.
THAT'S IT.
We lose Synthetics and the Relays.
THAT'S IT.
#17
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:53
The Night Mammoth
-
- Members
- 7 476 messages
Taboo-XX wrote...
We don't lose technology in Destroy....
We lose Synthetics and the Relays.
THAT'S IT.
A dark age isn't a 'loss' of technology.
#18
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:54
M Hedonist
-
- Members
- 4 299 messages
Loss of synthetics isn't a 'dark age'.The Night Mammoth wrote...
Taboo-XX wrote...
We don't lose technology in Destroy....
We lose Synthetics and the Relays.
THAT'S IT.
A dark age isn't a 'loss' of technology.
#19
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:54
Shallyah
-
- Members
- 1 357 messages
It's possible that when they wrote the ending, they meant that Control may be the "paragon-ish" choice. But they failed to evaluate the scale of the conflict. And I'll explain why.
When I played Mass Effect 1, there was a DLC mission in which a batarian (Korlak?) held a few prisoners, and you had to choose whether shooting the batarian down, or saving the prisoners and letting the batarian go. As full paragon Shepard, I saved the prisoners, and the batarian escaped.
Because seriously, what could the batarian do? Next time he does something you find him and he pays. It might weight in your conscience that he might kill a few more people while he managed to escape in last encounter, but such are the burdens that a Paragon has to live with.
That one mission reminds me a lot to the ending choice in Mass Effect 3. Only that the Geth are the "prisoners", and it's not a scrubby batarian you're letting go this time. If the Reapers return in one or another way, we're talking about the extermination of the Galaxy as a whole, like it's been happening for at least a billion years, and like it would happen for the rest of eternity.
I played full paragon, I hit the blue option even in conversations and options that seemed cheesy and way too soft. But with the Reapers you can take no risks. It's not "well, if it goes wrong, we beat them again...". If it goes wrong, and in the flow of eternity it will, sooner or later, it's kaput, end of line, game over.
Thus, within the context in which all the 3 choices are morally wrong in one or another way, as full Paragon with about 97% of my ME3 bar blue-colored, the only real choice is Destroy. Control is, if nothing else, short sighted (even assuming Shepard really becomes the new catalyst). I suppose a Paragon can be short sighted, but there's still the facts that Shepard agrees to become nothing short of a god and enslave a race for eternity when he chooses control. Hardly something to be written down in the defining lines of the word "Paragon".
When I played Mass Effect 1, there was a DLC mission in which a batarian (Korlak?) held a few prisoners, and you had to choose whether shooting the batarian down, or saving the prisoners and letting the batarian go. As full paragon Shepard, I saved the prisoners, and the batarian escaped.
Because seriously, what could the batarian do? Next time he does something you find him and he pays. It might weight in your conscience that he might kill a few more people while he managed to escape in last encounter, but such are the burdens that a Paragon has to live with.
That one mission reminds me a lot to the ending choice in Mass Effect 3. Only that the Geth are the "prisoners", and it's not a scrubby batarian you're letting go this time. If the Reapers return in one or another way, we're talking about the extermination of the Galaxy as a whole, like it's been happening for at least a billion years, and like it would happen for the rest of eternity.
I played full paragon, I hit the blue option even in conversations and options that seemed cheesy and way too soft. But with the Reapers you can take no risks. It's not "well, if it goes wrong, we beat them again...". If it goes wrong, and in the flow of eternity it will, sooner or later, it's kaput, end of line, game over.
Thus, within the context in which all the 3 choices are morally wrong in one or another way, as full Paragon with about 97% of my ME3 bar blue-colored, the only real choice is Destroy. Control is, if nothing else, short sighted (even assuming Shepard really becomes the new catalyst). I suppose a Paragon can be short sighted, but there's still the facts that Shepard agrees to become nothing short of a god and enslave a race for eternity when he chooses control. Hardly something to be written down in the defining lines of the word "Paragon".
Modifié par Shallyah, 30 mai 2012 - 10:01 .
#20
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:55
The Night Mammoth
-
- Members
- 7 476 messages
Sauruz wrote...
Loss of synthetics isn't a 'dark age'.The Night Mammoth wrote...
Taboo-XX wrote...
We don't lose technology in Destroy....
We lose Synthetics and the Relays.
THAT'S IT.
A dark age isn't a 'loss' of technology.
Never said it was.
#21
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:56
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
We assume we can't rebuild the relays.
I'd say the data was right there for us.
There are no.......REAPERCUSSIONS.
I'd say the data was right there for us.
There are no.......REAPERCUSSIONS.
#22
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:56
PsyrenY
-
- Members
- 5 238 messages
Actually, low-EMS Destroy does take out "most of the technology you rely on." This interestingly does not apply to low-EMS Control.
#23
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:56
Leonardo the Magnificent
-
- Members
- 1 920 messages
Taboo-XX wrote...
We don't lose technology in Destroy....
We lose Synthetics and the Relays.
THAT'S IT.
The relays are the very backbone of galactic society. No relays = no commerce (at least not near the scale it was before). Control, however, allows the relays to be rebuilt within a resonable timeframe. You also have an army of Reaper thralls to police the galaxy. Ideally, which is pretty much what Paragon is, Control is the best.
#24
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:56
PsyrenY
-
- Members
- 5 238 messages
Taboo-XX wrote...
We assume we can't rebuild the relays.
I'd say the data was right there for us.
There are no.......REAPERCUSSIONS.
B-)
YEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH
#25
Posté 30 mai 2012 - 09:57
The Night Mammoth
-
- Members
- 7 476 messages
Taboo-XX wrote...
We assume we can't rebuild the relays.
I'd say the data was right there for us.
I don't assume that, so count me out of that plural.
There are no.......REAPERCUSSIONS.
Must.......... think of.............. clever......... pun.
Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 30 mai 2012 - 09:57 .
