1256 réponses à ce sujet

[Taboo]

No they won't. The Catalyst presents a fallacy. Have you found it yet? He isn't lying, but he presents one. I'm not going to give it to you either, but only because I want you to figure it out for yourself.

The general consensus was the destruction of the Reapers, not to Synthesize all organic life. People wanted dead Reapers, not upgrades.

You justify your choice based upon an existential fear that is "backed", in-game, via a fallacy.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 11 juin 2012 - 05:55 .

[Kem1995]

About synthesis.. how do you know that rewriting DNA with reapers won't allow them to overpower you and just merely infuse you with them and they'd of just been improved and intact while all organic life preishes?

I'm no synthesis expert so bare with me, this idea has just always occured to me ever since the reaper code and the geth.. It would work in a similar way no?

[jtav]

They wanted not to be Reaper chow. I accomplished that and, by choosing Synthesis, am doing my best to ameliorate the impact of destroying the relays.

[jla0644]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The choice eliminates democracy. It overlooks the weak. You force things, all things in a promotion of your new place for the people. A populist view. Glamorized because they will have new ways of life. Where they not perfect before?

The choice is the issue.

In that case, all of the choices eliminate democracy. There is no option for "hold elections and see which color people want you to pick". You force your decision on the galaxy, no matter which option you take. Will they be happy you wiped out the geth? Will they rest easy with Shepard as the King/Queen of the Reapers? Will they be happy as hybrids? We have no idea, we have to choose, and no matter what, we force it on the rest of the galaxy. This is not exclusive to Synthesis.

And in what way are you NOT talking about the aftermath. Almost everything you've posted involves the aftermath. Your assumption about what people will be, what they will think, how they will act, how they will govern themselves -- that is all aftermath.

[MisterJB]

Taboo-XX wrote...

No they won't. The Catalyst presents a fallacy. Have you found it yet? He isn't lying, but he presents one. I'm not going to give it to you either, but only because I want you to figure it out for yourself.

The general consensus was the destruction of the Reapers, not to Synthesize all organic life. People wanted dead Reapers, not upgrades.

You justify your choice based upon an existential fear that is "backed", in-game, via a fallacy.

As if you haven't been shouting it to anyone who will listen to you.

People wanted to survive. Well, Synthesis is even better. The galaxy is not only saved, it is improved.

[Taboo]

Ameliorating the destruction of the Relays can be done better in Control. But you don't want to assume power and neither do I.

Perspicacity was not a strength of the ending, neither was Verisimilitude. Both are necessary in some degree for a story like Mass Effect's to work.

The Relays can be rebuilt in Destroy as they can in Synthesis, as we have some Reapers lying about, the difference is is that once the Relays are rebuilt, life will resume as it should in Destroy.

[Lookout1390]

Oh what do you know.

"why X decision is better than Y and Z" thread #32592, with a nice serving of more speculation.

Why do we keep doing this?

[Taboo]

Moral relativism does not take into account what a good and bad life is. That's the issue. You only care about success, nothing else matters.

You think it's good. Millions of others might not.

[jla0644]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I cannot tolerate the shameless promotion that Synthesis gets. It's romanticized to the nth degree.

Ah, finally, we get to the heart of the matter. You cannot tolerate that other people don't view Synthesis in the way you do. You cannot tolerate that other people choose to take it in a positive direction, without all the fascist overtones you want to force on them.

Why can't they romanticize it? What is wrong with not taking it to the horrible place you CHOOSE to take it? I certainly do not think Bioware intended it the way you took it, unless you really want to suggest that their "best" ending is an authoritarian nightmare scenario filled with mindless husks.

It is a video game. It is not a reflection on one's values and ethics. You're on your high horse, trying to make a self-righteous political statement.  Everyone else is playing a video game.

[MisterJB]

Taboo-XX wrote...
 the difference is is that once the Relays are rebuilt, life will resume as it should in Destroy.

Wonderful.

Taboo-XX wrote...

Moral relativism does not take into account what a good and bad life is. That's the issue. You only care about success, nothing else matters.

You think it's good. Millions of others might not.

Physical benefits can be, objectively, described as positive. There has to be a middle ground between respecting the wishes of other people and doing what is good not only for them but also for the whole.

[Taboo]

Because Romanticism is wrong. All the choices are unethical. Face the reality of the situation.

The purpose of art is to tell a truth, not disguise it. When used for the latter it is known as propaganda. American Cinema is particularly good and it, especially Fox News.

Some people are going to be very upset with this choice and if they aren't they're going to be forced to be happy. You cannot have it both ways. Which is it? Accept the reality of the choice.

[MisterJB]

Ethics should not take precedence over the practical results.

And you can never please everyone.

[Taboo]

MisterJB wrote...

Ethics should not take precedence over the practical results.

And you can never please everyone.

That is terrifying.

Absolutely terrifying.

[The Night Mammoth]

MisterJB wrote...

Ethics should not take precedence over the practical results.

Then how do you judge the result? 

[spirosz]

ReggarBlane wrote...

Filling the speculations with your own head-canon works for your own logic. You made guesses as to what each choice actually does, but they're still just guesses.

[Joe Del Toro]

MisterJB wrote...

Ethics should not take precedence over the practical results..

Alright, Frank Castle

[General User]

MisterJB wrote...

Ethics should not take precedence over the practical results.

And you can never please everyone.

One of the "practical results" of Synthesis is that thousands of uncontrolled Reapers are let loose in to the galaxy to do as they will.  How in the world is that remotely acceptable?

Modifié par General User, 11 juin 2012 - 06:29 .

[dorktainian]

Destroy is the only ending i could choose.

Control? Why would you want to control the reapers / merge with the reapers? Seriously?

Synthesis? I know lets merge all organic and synthetic life into one framework. Thats a really good idea NOT!! Wheres Genetic Diversity?

The reapers have to die. End of. Only then will we be able to figure it out for ourselves.

[Killzone250]

I just recently finished my first playthrough of ME3.

I was really disappointed with the choices I was presented with. Hmmm, no I hated them, and the more I thought about them the more I hated them.

In fact I didn't make a choice the first time around, I reloaded and went through the final misery just to hear what 'starkid' had to say again.

My next reaction was to say no,no,no,no,no,no and give the 'starkid' 10 head-shots with my pistol.

Starkid, you ARE the reapers, you ARE the problem, you LIE, The fact that my femshep is here before you means your 'solution' is WRONG and you just admitted that.

The reapers and therefore YOU are of a scale of evilness that is beyond comprehension. I cannot and will not accept your rationale, your options or your continued existence.

Each of the three choices presented have unacceptable consequences.

Control.
Control the reapers, be the reapers, be the 'starkid'. No.No.No.No.No.Just No. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Not going there.

Synthesis.
Let me see, my Femshep gets to play God and turn everything and everyone into a lifeform that no one, anywhere, anytime has expressed an interest to be. Without their consent. On the the advice of the King Reaper himself, no less. And the Reapers are still around. And in this all new touchy-feely universe why would the most highly evolved species by some distance, the Reapers, be benign?

Destroy
Now my Femshep has to commit genocide and wipe out the Geth and any other synthetic life like EDI. Hardly a rainbow and pony ending. But at least the 'Starkid' and the Reapers are destroyed. The really true evilness of the universe has been purged. The evilness that has taken 3 games and so many sacrifices has been eradicated.

"What's that, Starkid? You say that the cycle is bound is bound to repeat with this option. I simply choose not to believe you, you can't predict the future, you are not a God...in fact you are the direct opposite, you are the most abhorrent obscene and repulsive entity imaginable. I believe nothing in the future can match or exceed the evilness and wrongness of what has happened under your watch.

If I must choose, I choose the lessor of the 3 evils. I choose Destroy.

But... I feel...dirty. The Reapers and the 'Starkid' have to go, regardless of the cost. I/my femshep accept that. Even if Femshep had to die, I still choose destroy.

In my mind, I made the right decision and I still feel like @#$%. Really, Bioware, is this art? Really?

I understand the anger out there now. I await the EC and hopefully that will make me feel better about the choice I made.

[MisterJB]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Ethics should not take precedence over the practical results..

Alright, Frank Castle

*one quick google search later*
The...Punisher?

[Joe Del Toro]

MisterJB wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Ethics should not take precedence over the practical results..

Alright, Frank Castle

*one quick google search later*
The...Punisher?

Aye, mate. Not known for his ethics, but rather his results, yes?

[jtav]

No one wants evil. We all pursue good, even if by disordered means. In this case, the good of consent is conflicting with the desire for improvement. I view that good as higher than consent. Because consent is not the highest good. It can't be, or governments could never compel its citizenry to do anything.

And I'm rejecting Destroy on deontological grounds btw. I will not kill the geth. End of story.

You'll excuse me if I refuse to interpret the end as a hellish nightmare and treat all choices as good in their own way.

[antares_sublight]

jtav wrote...

My Shep has been brought to the final room. All choices are open to me. I can live in Destroy. Not only that, I have a LI on Earth. And yet, I chose Synthesis. Why? I could have my happy ending. All I have to do is blow the Reapers to hell. It would be so simple…

Shepard doesn't know any of that at decision-time, you know. He has ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what Synthesis is or does. Choosing it is a "winning" ending according to BioWare, but it's a Galaxy-sized rash, irresponsible decision for Shepard to make. Possibly the most irresponsible decision in the history of the galaxy because it would affect ALL LIFE in a totally unknown and unknowable way, based on a brief chat with the most evil force in the galaxy.

jtav wrote...
Except it's not just about me. I've been handed an earthshaking revelation about my enemy. The Reapers are controlled by the Catalyst. Not led. Controlled. They have, at worst, diminished capacity for their actions, and may be de facto indoctrinated themselves. They are victims. Killing them isn't justice. It's vengeance. A couple of major choices excepted, I'm a Paragon. I've tried throughout the series to steer people away from vengeance and offer redemption where I could. If I can't offer my enemy mercy, then I become a hypocrite. No matter what I do, the Catalyst is gone, either because I replaced him or because the Citadel blew up. The one responsible for the mass genocides has been dealt with. And the Reapers leave. They are free to do as they please. The geth who are now well and truly alive will live on and hopefully there will be true peace.
And what about the life that I fought so hard to save? I just altered
them in a fundamental way. How dare I? Well, first, humility and seeking
consensus really isn't an option here. All choices thrust an enormous
change on life in the galaxy. The death of every single synthetic who
has chosen to fight by my side. Usurping the power of the closest thing
the universe has to a god. I have to choose and choose alone. I'm a
Paragon, so killing synthetics when there are other options on the table
is right out. Which means the Reapers are still going to be around.

Paragon is also about doing the least amount of harm. If anything, Control is way more Paragon than Synthesis if you want to approach it that way. But this is a personal call.

jtav wrote...
And if I the player go back to the leaked script, the fact that the Catalyst is trying to stop the technological singularity is made explicit. So Synthesis must make it possible for organics to keep up with synthetics. Since the Reapers are still out there, I consider that a very bad thing.
And just in case someone decides to create something else along similar lines,organics can contend with them as equals. No more techno-gods cowing us and using technology we can't hope to understand. And we didn't do it by killing them. We took their power for our own and now they must recognize us as equals.

So that implies that you've had to create a singularity of hybrids instead of pure synthetics. Congrats, I guess? What has been solved exactly? There are 3 tiers of life now instead of just 2. Pure synthetics will still be made, pure organics will still arise over time and your hybrids. If Synthesis means that hybrids can "keep up" with a singularity of pure synthetics, that means the hybrids reached their own singularity. Therefore, any pure organics are facing the exact same dangers they did before, except this time from both hybrids and pure synthetics. You are the "techno-gods" now, Congrats???

Pro-Synthites... sigh.

[antares_sublight]

jtav wrote...
And I'm rejecting Destroy on deontological grounds btw. I will not kill the geth. End of story.

Synthesis eliminates countless species across the entire galaxy by fundamentally altering every niche of every life form. Congrats?

[Taboo]

All the choices are terrible. Rationalizing them is unacceptable.

The Geth are dead in my playthrough, a result of my mismanagement in ME2. Someone has to die on Rannoch or I cannot continue.

I'm making the choice that affects the least amount of beings, and for the least amount of time.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 11 juin 2012 - 06:38 .