381 réponses à ce sujet

[TamiBx]

 Wait. I thought Jessica Merizan and Michael Gamble had already said on twitter that neither the Geth nor EDI dies on the destroy ending and that they are just "disabled"...

http://cs5928.userap.../x_8618bc37.jpg

[Taboo]

TamiBx wrote...

 Wait. I thought Jessica Merizan and Michael Gamble had already said on twitter that neither the Geth nor EDI dies on the destroy ending and that they are just "disabled"...

http://cs5928.userap.../x_8618bc37.jpg

SPECULATIONS!

[TaradosGon]

I wouldn't chose Destroy because it's just a short term solution. If the Catalyst is telling me that a synthetic vs. organic conflict is inevitable, and has existed long enough to see this trend repeated countless times, and the Prothean VI also validates this claim, then killing the Reapers and Geth is just a short term solution and it would be arrogant/ignorant for Shepard to go "nuh uh!" Then a later generation will just have to deal with the problem themselves.

[frylock23]

Arondell wrote...

Reorte wrote...
Who knows? There must be some changes if it's going to do what Starbrat claims it'll do (even then it's very far-fetched to think that there any changes that could achieve that). Even if you can somehow ignore the ethical and space magic problems there's no sensible explanation as to why it'll stop the Reapers from trying to kill everyone.

I would not characterize choosing synthesis as ignoring the ethical issues it brings up.  Anymore then I would characterize choosing destroy as ignoring the ethcial issues that crop up there.  That being said I do wonder how palatable destroy would be in general if it was the Human races head on the chopping block rather then the Geth.

Edit : Its obvious that the writer in order to prevent an overwhelming majority of people from picking destroy had to put something into that choice that made it have a perceived downside.  Something that would make some people hesitate to do so but not most.  Killing off some *other* race for the greater good more or less accomplishes this.

We've had this thread, and most people in it still would pick Destroy.

We are playing for the right of all life, synthetic and organic, to grow, develop and self-determine. If you are viewing all life, the life of all races, as equally valuable, then if you must sacrifice one race, no one race is inherently more valuable than any other, that means that if you will sacrifice the Geth, then you would likewise sacrifice humanity to save all the rest and give them the chance.

Now, if the only race was humanity, it would change things, but since that is not the case ...

Don't put your negative impressions of people on the rest of us.

[Kunari801]

Taboo-XX wrote...

TamiBx wrote...

 Wait. I thought Jessica Merizan and Michael Gamble had already said on twitter that neither the Geth nor EDI dies on the destroy ending and that they are just "disabled"...

http://cs5928.userap.../x_8618bc37.jpg

SPECULATIONS!  

I know they said there wouldn't be a "galatic dark age" and that the Relays don't go super nova like the one in Arrival. 

[Taboo]

He has no data. He has not factored in data for millions of years. He is a machine in a feedback loop.

You can't bet against the infinite either. That is a fallacy.

A is probable/Therefore A is absolute.

Shoot the pipe and go home, seriously.

[MegaSovereign]

If the Geth survives, then why the **** does the Catalyst tell you all synthetic life will die.

The **** is Bioware trying to pull.

God ****ing dammit I hate how ****ing vague this ****ing ending is.

I'm all out of ****s to give.

Excuse my french.

[Taboo]

MegaSovereign wrote...

If the Geth survives, then why the **** does the Catalyst tell you all synthetic life will die.

The **** is Bioware trying to pull.

God ****ing dammit I hate how ****ing vague this ****ing ending is.

I'm all out of ****s to give.

Excuse my french.

He says you CAN kill the Geth.

CAN.

Problem?

[MegaSovereign]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

If the Geth survives, then why the **** does the Catalyst tell you all synthetic life will die.

The **** is Bioware trying to pull.

God ****ing dammit I hate how ****ing vague this ****ing ending is.

I'm all out of ****s to give.

Excuse my french.

He says you CAN kill the Geth.

CAN.

Problem?

Then SHOW US the Geth surviving and or dying. That's my problem with the ending. It's too VAGUE.

EDIT:

And the fact that there is not a single video on the internet showing EDI walking out of the destroy ending makes it hard to believe synthetic life survives.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 17 juin 2012 - 06:32 .

[Iakus]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

If the Geth survives, then why the **** does the Catalyst tell you all synthetic life will die.

The **** is Bioware trying to pull.

God ****ing dammit I hate how ****ing vague this ****ing ending is.

I'm all out of ****s to give.

Excuse my french.

He says you CAN kill the Geth.

CAN.

Problem?

I'm sure what synthetic life dies depends on what part of the pipe yu shoot 

[Taboo]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Then SHOW US the Geth surviving and or dying. That's my problem with the ending. It's too VAGUE.

You will suffer consumer, and be happy with the art Bioware has given you.

You WILL speculate consumer, and be happy Bioware has given you the ability.

[MegaSovereign]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Then SHOW US the Geth surviving and or dying. That's my problem with the ending. It's too VAGUE.

You will suffer consumer, and be happy with the art Bioware has given you.

You WILL speculate consumer, and be happy Bioware has given you the ability.

Consumers and companies don't have to fight each other!

[Taboo]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Then SHOW US the Geth surviving and or dying. That's my problem with the ending. It's too VAGUE.

You will suffer consumer, and be happy with the art Bioware has given you.

You WILL speculate consumer, and be happy Bioware has given you the ability.

Consumers and companies don't have to fight each other!

It is inevitable. My logic is flawless. You WILL choose to merge consumers and companies. This is the only way to prevent conflict.

[MegaSovereign]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Then SHOW US the Geth surviving and or dying. That's my problem with the ending. It's too VAGUE.

You will suffer consumer, and be happy with the art Bioware has given you.

You WILL speculate consumer, and be happy Bioware has given you the ability.

Consumers and companies don't have to fight each other!

It is inevitable. My logic is flawless. You WILL choose to merge consumers and companies. This is the only way to prevent conflict.

But you're taking away our money. Without money, we can't buy any games. Without any games, we might as well be machines, programmed to be bored.

[frylock23]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

If the Geth survives, then why the **** does the Catalyst tell you all synthetic life will die.

The **** is Bioware trying to pull.

God ****ing dammit I hate how ****ing vague this ****ing ending is.

I'm all out of ****s to give.

Excuse my french.

He says you CAN kill the Geth.

CAN.

Problem?

Maybe he says you "can" because if you're willing to kill the Reapers then you would clearly be willing to utterly wipe out any other synthetic race, too? Thus, if you "can" kill the Reapers, then you "can" kill the Geth? It's a stretch ...

[TamiBx]

MegaSovereign wrote...


Then SHOW US the Geth surviving and or dying. That's my problem with the ending. It's too VAGUE.

EDIT:

And the fact that there is not a single video on the internet showing EDI walking out of the destroy ending makes it hard to believe synthetic life survives.

I find it vague too, and I want to see them dying as well.
But if you want answers before the EC, you can always look at what writers/Bioware say about it. Read the interview.

http://social.biowar.../index/11154234

It is up to you to believe it, but since they are the ones who wrote/made the game, it is kind of hard to say otherwise...

Also, since when did ME3 become a game for moral choices? We've always done things that were "morally wrong" (i.e. Arrival, joining Cerberus, etc). All the options are bad anyways...

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

If the Geth survives, then why the **** does the Catalyst tell you all synthetic life will die.

The **** is Bioware trying to pull.

God ****ing dammit I hate how ****ing vague this ****ing ending is.

I'm all out of ****s to give.

Excuse my french.

He says you CAN kill the Geth.

CAN.

Problem?

Key word. Have the ability to. This does not mean it will happen.

Nor does the conflict between organics and synthetics necessarily happen. It is an insufficient data. Still in that case, by choosing something like "Control" or "Synthesis" aren't you saying "I'm being the supreme being and taking that responsibility away from you measely organic simpletons." by either 1) reaping you and destroying the synthetics because you screwed up -- just like the catalyst does. 2) make everything the same (although I really think I hit the nail on the head with the Dark Helmet version of Synthesis).

Who thinks Dark Helmet would have made a better Catalyst?

[frylock23]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Then SHOW US the Geth surviving and or dying. That's my problem with the ending. It's too VAGUE.

You will suffer consumer, and be happy with the art Bioware has given you.

You WILL speculate consumer, and be happy Bioware has given you the ability.

EAland-BioTani here we come!! Now all we need are some Gethomorphs.

EAland-BioTani here we come!

Consumers and companies don't have to fight each other!

It is inevitable. My logic is flawless. You WILL choose to merge consumers and companies. This is the only way to prevent conflict.

EAland-BioTani .... HERE WE COME!

I hope I'm not just repeating this post because I can't see my own edits on the forum.

Modifié par frylock23, 17 juin 2012 - 06:45 .

[Taboo]

Dark Helmet can only run if Mr. Coffee runs with him.

At LUDICROUS SPEED.

[frylock23]

jtav wrote...

Does Synthesis seem unpleasant to you from the few seconds we see? Do you have any reason to believe it is unpleasant, particularly? More unpleasant than erasing an entire class of people? I say no. And I will not kill an innocent or ally while other options remain.

And killing the Reapers was never our goal. Let me explain: suppose the Crucible wiped out all life in the galaxy along with the Reapers. Would you not say it's better for the non-spacefaring species to exist another 50k years? For more life to evolve. So no, our goal was to prevent the Reapers from harvesting us. I choose the leasy violent method.

I've seen some **** and communist propoganda films and that didn't look unpleasant to me either. Just sayin' ...

It's not like that final scene on "Eden Planet" was exactly a hard hitting documentary of what life after any of the choices is going to be like.  So, basing your decision on that and saying "Seems legit!" is kind of weak.

[Taboo]

Propaganda films can do just as much damage.

Non Violent =/= Not being damaging.

[Subject M]

>OP

The problem is that we do not know enough of what the consequences are of our choices and that what little we do know appears like a no-win situations or too costly solutions. For someone who believes what the catalyst claims, destroy is not much of an option, as it does not solve the main problem in the long run. Someone else might give the catalyst the benefit of a doubt, or at least think the scenario it portray is one of many possibilities, but then, destroying your allied synthetics might be viewed as destroying the best chance to break this cycle of destruction, and so on and so forth.

Modifié par Subject M, 17 juin 2012 - 06:57 .

[mass perfection]

Control.Save them all!

[Reorte]

mass perfection wrote...

Control.Save them all!

Possibly, although a renegade Shepard controlling the Reapers isn't going to be much better than a Reaper victory. If you trust that it works at all...

[syllogi]

This thread is a perfect example of why the endings suck and the Mass Effect series is no longer worth debating over.

The endings are so badly written and confusing, everything is open to interpretation. When there's no conclusive proof of anything, players are pretty much making up fanfiction in these kinds of threads.

You all know that there are some really well written books, games, movies and television shows that deserve your attention more than this hot mess, right?