201 réponses à ce sujet

[Taboo]

alec1898 wrote...

Wait, cynicism is art? That's freaking sw- Wait, what's happening to me.

I'm Van Gogh?

Wooooooooooooooooooooooah.

SUFFER AND BE HAPPY CONSUMER.

I'm going to talk about what MY perfect ending is tomorrow. Bittersweet but mature, at least in my opinion.

[Han Shot First]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

The objections that the Reapers might break free? Speculation, headcanon.
The objections that Shepard dies and doesn't have control? Speculation, headcanon, again.

The Reapers are definitely dead and unable to begin another cycle in destroy.

They're dead when I choose control. 

They're very much alive in the end game cinematic.

Choosing to believe they were later destroyed off camera is head canon, and not actual canon.

[The Night Mammoth]

Han Shot First wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

The objections that the Reapers might break free? Speculation, headcanon.
The objections that Shepard dies and doesn't have control? Speculation, headcanon, again.

The Reapers are definitely dead and unable to begin another cycle in destroy.

They're dead when I choose control. 

They're very much alive in the end game cinematic.

Choosing to believe they were later destroyed off camera is head canon, and not actual canon.

Yes.......... I know.

Headcanon, I believe I talked about that previously. 

[Lord Goose]

As far as I know slave is exploited regardless of consent, and slave have no rights. Its not a explotation when we make criminal to compensate for his crimes, and if we limit criminals rights its not the same as we taking rights away from him.

A criminal that is responsible for mass
murder is normally executed.

I would happily do that. But killing them requires killing the geth. And its against justice. As old principle said it is worse to punish the innocent, whan leave guilty. Imagine that to stop the killer you have to use virus which would kill three hundred people completely unrelated to him. Its unethical.

[Taboo]

Killing them does NOT require killing the Geth.

The Geth can just as easily be destroyed by the Quarians.

I had no option to make peace.

Sorry Legion.

[Han Shot First]

Head canon makes a poor argument for the superiority of Control.

In examining the endings you have to examine them only what we actually see in game. Based on what we actually see in game, Destroy is the only one that most resembles a win.

[Lord Goose]

As I said. If geth are already dead, yeup, Destroy is not a renegade solution. But your character is probably not 100% Paragon either.

[Erield]

Lord Goose wrote...

The reapers are also sapient, but they
deserve to be enslaved?

If they're truly sentient, they're resposible for devastating the galaxy. Putting them into dark space is quite mild punishment for such action.
And even if we make them repair Mass Relays its just a really small compensation for all of their atrocities.

The Star Child specifically, blatantly says "I Control them" when regarding the Reapers.  This means that he, not they, are directly responsible for their actions.  If your ability to choose, your ability to think for yourself, your ability to do anything that you want instead of what you "master" decides has been stripped away, then any action taken by you isn't really done by you--it's done by the person controlling you. 

That got a bit confusing to me while typing it, so I'll try again.  Guns don't kill people; people with guns kill people.  In this analogy, Reapers are the gun and the Star Child is the person using it to kill everyone else.  As long as the Star Child retains Control, we have no basis of determining if the Reapers are sentient (although I believe they are), if they're mad, if they're criminally insane, or perhaps just the genocidal war mongers that are being barely held in check. 

I find Destroying all the Reapers to be less evil, because I find forcibly stripping someone's self-determination away to be basically the worst evil possible.  There are justifiable reasons to kill someone; there is never a justifiable reason to enslave someone.  (Again, though, if Reapers aren't sentient/sapient, then it doesn't apply.  I just think that they are.)

[covertdrizzt]

I disagree with the way you categorize the choices. I see destroy as paragon. synethesis as neutral. Control as renegade. Synthesis and control both leave the reapers alive and thus they are still a threat for future generations. I don't know why anyone would think leaving them alive would be paragon. Shepards goal since the first game(at least my shep) is to put a stop to the reaper once and for all. If I were really in shepards place, I couldn't take a chance on the reapers continuing their genocidal destruction of organic life.

[Taboo]

Lord Goose wrote...

As I said. If geth are already dead, yeup, Destroy is not a renegade solution. But your character is probably not 100% Paragon either.

Or someone who made a mistake in number two.

Conflicted characters are deeper!

Sue me!

[Lord Goose]

Based on what we actually see
in game, Destroy is the only one that most
resembles a win.

Only if your goal is destroy the reapers. Not to save as much lives as possible.

[KevShep]

Lord Goose wrote...

As far as I know slave is exploited regardless of consent, and slave have no rights. Its not a explotation when we make criminal to compensate for his crimes, and if we limit criminals rights its not the same as we taking rights away from him.

A criminal that is responsible for mass
murder is normally executed.

I would happily do that. But killing them requires killing the geth. And its against justice. As old principle said it is worse to punish the innocent, whan leave guilty. Imagine that to stop the killer you have to use virus which would kill three hundred people completely unrelated to him. Its unethical.

If we Destroy the reapers then we will achieve our own future without reaper influence. This is a safer bet because we dont know if the reapers will turn on us or not if we let them live in the future. The price of the geth will be one of sacrifice for the greater good rather then pointless murder(there is a difference).

As long as the reapers live there is no way of knowing what they will do to us because...How can we know that they will listen to shepard when shepard is dead?

[The Night Mammoth]

Han Shot First wrote...

Head canon makes a poor argument for the superiority of Control.

Just as well I'm not trying to argue superiority of one ending over another. 

In examining the endings you have to examine them only what we actually see in game. Based on what we actually see in game, Destroy is the only one that most resembles a win.

To you maybe. 

Not that I think anything else does either. 

[Lord Goose]

This means that he, not they,
are directly responsible for their actions.

Pay attention to ''if''. In my opinion its kind of controversial. Original concepted would have them sentient on their own. Current that they are not. But if they're not truly sentient and just VI, why they shouldn't be used?

Shepards goal since the first game(at
least my shep) is to put a stop to the
reaper once and for all.

I think thats the main difference. Mine was about saving lives and killing was just a means, not a goal.

[111987]

Han Shot First wrote...

Head canon makes a poor argument for the superiority of Control.

In examining the endings you have to examine them only what we actually see in game. Based on what we actually see in game, Destroy is the only one that most resembles a win.

We are told in game that Control defeats the Reapers. It is canon that Shepard gains control of the Reapers.

[mjh417]

Destroy is the ONLY option that can ever be said to be good, but even that one sucks, and like the other two, but not as much so, falls horribly victim to the fascist thinking of the God Child.

[Lord Goose]

This is a safer bet because we
dont know if the reapers will turn on us or
not if we let them live in the future. The
price of the geth will be one of sacrifice for the greater good rather then
pointless murder(there is a difference).

I'm sorry, but this is exactly what Paragon morality is about. End (dead Reapers) justifing means (sacrificing your allies).

And anything about Reapers who would rebel in the future is speculation. All we know that Shepard ended their threat. Its directly said to players.

[KevShep]

Lord Goose wrote...

This means that he, not they,
are directly responsible for their actions.

Pay attention to ''if''. In my opinion its kind of controversial. Original concepted would have them sentient on their own. Current that they are not. But if they're not truly sentient and just VI, why they shouldn't be used?

Shepards goal since the first game(at
least my shep) is to put a stop to the
reaper once and for all.

I think thats the main difference. Mine was about saving lives and killing was just a means, not a goal.

You mean to tell me that you thought about "hugging" the reapers way back in ME1 and not to destroy them?

You can hug them and burn content with a smile then. I find it shocking that 5 minutes of the catalyst talking can convince people to change there goals that were there since ME1 to kill them all.

[KevShep]

Lord Goose wrote...

This is a safer bet because we
dont know if the reapers will turn on us or
not if we let them live in the future. The
price of the geth will be one of sacrifice for the greater good rather then
pointless murder(there is a difference).

I'm sorry, but this is exactly what Paragon morality is about. End (dead Reapers) justifing means (sacrificing your allies).

And anything about Reapers who would rebel in the future is speculation. All we know that Shepard ended their threat. Its directly said to players.

point is that it ends for good without speculation. Also we will build our own future on OUR OWN TERMS.

Do you remember what Legion said about acquiring reaper tech on the reapers terms? That it was not worth it no matter what. He says this after you destroy the collector base and says that you are like the geth after all.

[Han Shot First]

111987 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Head canon makes a poor argument for the superiority of Control.

In examining the endings you have to examine them only what we actually see in game. Based on what we actually see in game, Destroy is the only one that most resembles a win.

We are told in game that Control defeats the Reapers. It is canon that Shepard gains control of the Reapers.

You are told that by the Star Child, a being that if not a Reaper himself, is closely aligned with them. When he speaks about the Reapers he refers to them as "we" rather than "them.' If Harbinger and Sovereign cannot be trusted, than neither can the Star Child.

The only guarantee you have that the Reapers will not destroy civilizations again, is one given to you by a being that Shepard had just met, and one that is responsible for the annihilation of every space faring civilization for at least a billion years. He is an antagonist, not an ally.

There is no evidence that Control will actually prevent the Reapers from never again attacking organics. It rests entirely on hope and the word of the Star Child.

[Byronic-Knight]

TheBull wrote...

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.

Sentient (adj)

1. having the power of perception by the senses; conscious

2. characterised by sensation or consciousness

[dictionary.reference.com/browse/sentient]

Consciousness (n)

1. the state of being conscious; aware of one’s own existence, sensations, thoughts, surroundings, etc.

2. the thoughts and feelings, collectively, of an individual or aggregate of people

3. full activity of the mind and senses, as in waking life

4. awareness of something for what it is; internal knowledge

5. concern, interest, or acute awareness 

[dictionary.reference.com/browse/consciousness]

Mind (n)

1. (in a human or other conscious being) the element, part, substance, or process that reasons, thinks, feels, wills, perceives, judges, etc.

2. (psychology) the totality of conscious and unconscious mental processes and activities

3. intellect or understanding, as distinguished from the faculties of feeling and willing; intelligence

4. a particular instance of the intellect or intelligence, as in a person

5. a person considered with reference to intellectual power



EDI and the Geth have demonstrated sentience as far as I’m concerned in their efforts to contemplate their own existences and understand the things around them. They are as much ‘alive’ as any organic being in so far as they perceive the world and ask themselves what place they have in it, how they relate to those around them, how they can understand the motivations of others and avoid conflict.

EDI’s infatuation with Joker is a developmental marker of true emotion, which is really all that separates a ‘person’ from a machine. 

The only thing they lack is artistic expression to be equivalent to any other culture or race. They have demonstrated themselves to be as much a valid form of life as any other race you encounter.

That being said, I still pick Destroy every time, because---as starkid implies---you can always remake them, which would have been a cool epilogue (without the being stranded on a jungle-world bit):

(after credits)

<Black screen>

<looks as though you just turned on an old television set>

<uneven footsteps approach and Joker’s face appears>

EDI: Hello, Jeff. 

[KevShep]

Han Shot First wrote...

111987 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Head canon makes a poor argument for the superiority of Control.

In examining the endings you have to examine them only what we actually see in game. Based on what we actually see in game, Destroy is the only one that most resembles a win.

We are told in game that Control defeats the Reapers. It is canon that Shepard gains control of the Reapers.

You are told that by the Star Child, a being that if not a Reaper himself, is closely aligned with them. When he speaks about the Reapers he refers to them as "we" rather than "them.' If Harbinger and Sovereign cannot be trusted, than neither can the Star Child.

The only guarantee you have that the Reapers will not destroy civilizations again, is one given to you by a being that Shepard had just met, and one that is responsible for the annihilation of every space faring civilization for at least a billion years. He is an antagonist, not an ally.

There is no evidence that Control will actually prevent the Reapers from never again attacking organics. It rests entirely on hope and the word of the Star Child.

This^ He is a reaper after all. Why pick control or synthesis if that is what he is "suggesting"? He is trying to get you away from destroy so that is the one that I will pick!

[Erield]

KevShep wrote...

point is that it ends for good without speculation. Also we will build our own future on OUR OWN TERMS.

Do you remember what Legion said about acquiring reaper tech on the reapers terms? That it was not worth it no matter what. He says this after you destroy the collector base and says that you are like the geth after all.

Ah, yes.  Legion and the Geth, who later decide to use Reaper code to become "real little boys."  I guess it's still them progressing on their own terms because they took the code, instead of being given the code or having the code forced on them.

I still find Destroy to be the best, and most moral, option because most of the necessary variables are known.  We know the Reapers are defeated/destroyed/gone.  We know the Geth are killed off as well. (At first, and for a long time, I thought it was just a bolted on addition to make other choices more appealing, but now I've started to think they die because of that code the uploaded to themselves.)  With Control we don't know how long Shepard can hold out (sure, he makes the Reapers go away, but does he maintain Control?  Or does he only have Control until he disintegrates?), and Synthesis is a Mad God's dream to avoid.

[KevShep]

Erield wrote...

KevShep wrote...

point is that it ends for good without speculation. Also we will build our own future on OUR OWN TERMS.

Do you remember what Legion said about acquiring reaper tech on the reapers terms? That it was not worth it no matter what. He says this after you destroy the collector base and says that you are like the geth after all.

Ah, yes.  Legion and the Geth, who later decide to use Reaper code to become "real little boys."  I guess it's still them progressing on their own terms because they took the code, instead of being given the code or having the code forced on them.

I still find Destroy to be the best, and most moral, option because most of the necessary variables are known.  We know the Reapers are defeated/destroyed/gone.  We know the Geth are killed off as well. (At first, and for a long time, I thought it was just a bolted on addition to make other choices more appealing, but now I've started to think they die because of that code the uploaded to themselves.)  With Control we don't know how long Shepard can hold out (sure, he makes the Reapers go away, but does he maintain Control?  Or does he only have Control until he disintegrates?), and Synthesis is a Mad God's dream to avoid.

no one said that the geth were perfect! As I said(and Legion says)...we are more like them then we thought.

[111987]

Han Shot First wrote...

111987 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Head canon makes a poor argument for the superiority of Control.

In examining the endings you have to examine them only what we actually see in game. Based on what we actually see in game, Destroy is the only one that most resembles a win.

We are told in game that Control defeats the Reapers. It is canon that Shepard gains control of the Reapers.

You are told that by the Star Child

No, I am referring to the message at the end of the game telling me my Shepard became a legend by defeating the Reapers.