185 réponses à ce sujet

[Pewter77]

Honestly destroy isn't that bad of a choice to make, it just is the hardest to make. You get to destroy the reapers but then you also have to destroy a race that you've worked to prove actually does have a soul (if you're paragon). Thats what makes the other options so enticing. But then you look at the other endings and you think... the whole time the game has been saying DIVERSITY then synthesis says you create non-diversity in one swoop, well thats terrible. Also with control you are constantly shown that people can't control what they don't understand with TIM and Saren, then it gives you that choice. You could say Shepard is superman and he can do whatever anyone else can't and that makes control viable but that's just lazy and lacks creativity. Destroy is the hardest but its the best choice. Its the only one thats any good and has you make a hard choice, but then they still have plot holes that ruins it.

Anyone actually complaining about destroy is just complaining that they had to make a hard decision which is good imo. No where in the ending does it say that Geth are lesser, in fact the star child tries to make it seem so hard to make that decision since you would have to kill the Geth after proving they have a soul. Anyone adding that theres a stigma around synthetics being lesser obviously weren't paying attention to the game or the ending.

Modifié par Pewter77, 26 juin 2012 - 03:56 .

[CuseGirl]

Maybe I'm a video game neanderthal but one of the other reasons I dont pick control or synthesis is Shepard is guaranteed to die in those choices. I can't watch him disintegrate....makes no sense, I have a self-preservation streak in me.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

CuseGirl wrote...

Maybe I'm a video game neanderthal but one of the other reasons I dont pick control or synthesis is Shepard is guaranteed to die in those choices. I can't watch him disintegrate....makes no sense, I have a self-preservation streak in me.

Join the club.

Maybe I should call this method "How to have your cake and eat it, too"

[Iakus]

Pewter77 wrote...

Honestly destroy isn't that bad of a choice to make, it just is the hardest to make. You get to destroy the reapers but then you also have to destroy a race that you've worked to prove actually does have a soul (if you're paragon). Thats what makes the other options so enticing. But then you look at the other endings and you think... the whole time the game has been saying DIVERSITY then synthesis says you create non-diversity in one swoop, well thats terrible. Also with control you are constantly shown that people can't control what they don't understand with TIM and Saren, then it gives you that choice. You could say Shepard is superman and he can do whatever anyone else can't and that makes control viable but that's just lazy and lacks creativity. Destroy is the hardest but its the best choice. Its the only one thats any good and has you make a hard choice, but then they still have plot holes that ruins it.

Anyone actually complaining about destroy is just complaining that they had to make a hard decision which is good imo. No where in the ending does it say that Geth are lesser, in fact the star child tries to make it seem so hard to make that decision since you would have to kill the Geth after proving they have a soul. Anyone adding that theres a stigma around synthetics being lesser obviously weren't paying attention to the game or the ending.

Umm, it's pretty much been outright stated that Bioware considers Synthesis the "best" ending.  Apparantly making everyone the same is considered better than genocide...

[Pewter77]

iakus wrote...

Pewter77 wrote...

Honestly destroy isn't that bad of a choice to make, it just is the hardest to make. You get to destroy the reapers but then you also have to destroy a race that you've worked to prove actually does have a soul (if you're paragon). Thats what makes the other options so enticing. But then you look at the other endings and you think... the whole time the game has been saying DIVERSITY then synthesis says you create non-diversity in one swoop, well thats terrible. Also with control you are constantly shown that people can't control what they don't understand with TIM and Saren, then it gives you that choice. You could say Shepard is superman and he can do whatever anyone else can't and that makes control viable but that's just lazy and lacks creativity. Destroy is the hardest but its the best choice. Its the only one thats any good and has you make a hard choice, but then they still have plot holes that ruins it.

Anyone actually complaining about destroy is just complaining that they had to make a hard decision which is good imo. No where in the ending does it say that Geth are lesser, in fact the star child tries to make it seem so hard to make that decision since you would have to kill the Geth after proving they have a soul. Anyone adding that theres a stigma around synthetics being lesser obviously weren't paying attention to the game or the ending.

Umm, it's pretty much been outright stated that Bioware considers Synthesis the "best" ending.  Apparantly making everyone the same is considered better than genocide...

First of all you gave no proof of them saying synthesis is the best ending according to bioware and even if it is, its quite possibly the worst out the three choices so that doesn't make it any better. Authority doesn't somehow fix the ending or make one ending better because they said its the right ending.

Second of all it doesn't really matter in the context that i'm arguing, thematically the only one that makes sense, but has you make a hard decision is destroy and thats what I'm saying. The other two go directly against the themes of Mass Effect but destroy really doesn't, the whole time they prop up the Geth as being life and then they give you this really hard choice of destroy that will kill them while saving the rest of the galaxy. Its an incredibly hard choice. Even the star child tries to make that decision hard because he implies that you think they are life. The others are thematically terrible unless you believe Shepard is a superman (which is just as bad as if he wasn't and lacks creativity). The lit professor that posted dr. dray or something says that destroy is thematically revolting and I disagree because he says the star child implies that the Geth are worthless when in fact he doesn't at all, he makes them seem like they actually have a soul and are life.

Honestly though the IT wraps this up so well, and leaves the actual ending to just flat out killing the reapers if you break it. Its really awesome. IT isn't an actual ending but it allows them to fix it without changing whats already there and I'm still not completely convinced that they have condemned it. As for those saying that they will leave the series if IT is real, I hope you do because you have poor taste in good storytelling and the series would be better off without you, as a fan, helping to direct which way Bioware goes with their games in the future.

Modifié par Pewter77, 26 juin 2012 - 05:33 .

[jules_vern18]

Aaleel wrote...

I didn't have an ethical problem at all.

I made a sacrifice to definitively ensure to continuity of many other species.

Killing an entire sentient race isn't your sacrifice to make.

Choosing control accomplishes the same goal (you can fly them into a star if you want, or have them rip out their cores, or whatever suits your fancy) and nobody else has to die.  Except for you - and that's what Destroy ending really boils down to...Sacrificing millions so you can reunite with your waifu.

[ZackG312]

Geth and EDI are just machines so no biggy for me

[Bill Casey]

jules_vern18 wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

I didn't have an ethical problem at all.

I made a sacrifice to definitively ensure to continuity of many other species.

Killing an entire sentient race isn't your sacrifice to make.

Choosing control accomplishes the same goal (you can fly them into a star if you want, or have them rip out their cores, or whatever suits your fancy) and nobody else has to die.  Except for you - and that's what Destroy ending really boils down to...Sacrificing millions so you can reunite with your waifu.

I can't Control the Reapers...
That's stupid...

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Pewter77 wrote...

Honestly though the IT wraps this up so well, and leaves the actual ending to just flat out killing the reapers if you break it. Its really awesome. IT isn't an actual ending but it allows them to fix it without changing whats already there and I'm still not completely convinced that they have condemned it. As for those saying that they will leave the series if IT is real, I hope you do because you have poor taste in good storytelling and the series would be better off without you, as a fan, helping to direct which way Bioware goes with their games in the future.

So you're saying that reducing diversity through committing genocide on an entire class of beings is preferable to reducing diversity by having different classes of beings intermingle? That's a rather monstrously xenophobic way of thinking, if you ask me. The forced nature of synthesis is horrible, but it doesn't reduce diversity any more than destroying every living synthetic in the entire universe does.

As for IT, it's equally horrifically badly written and thematically revolting, as it suggests that being a hateful xenophobe who is willing to sacrifice other races for your own advancement is the key to resisting indoctrination... something that has been specifically shown to target hateful xenophobes who are willing to sacrifice other races for their own advancement. If Saren or the Illusive man had been given the three choices before they were fully indoctrinated, both of them would have picked destroy even if it meant genociding every single race in the galaxy other than their own.

While they don't work for my main Paragon, or my Rengon, both Destroy and IT are thematically appropriate for my Dexter-meets-Zaphod-Beeblebrox-style sociopath Renegade, Crow Shepard. They're like a total perspective vortex where she learns that she was right all along: Sociopathy just makes you better than everyone else, it isn't wrong to commit genocide or murder, and more hatred and pain are always the answer. After she wakes up, she'll probably rule earth as a malevolent dictator.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 26 juin 2012 - 06:20 .

[jules_vern18]

Bill Casey wrote...

jules_vern18 wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

I didn't have an ethical problem at all.

I made a sacrifice to definitively ensure to continuity of many other species.

Killing an entire sentient race isn't your sacrifice to make.

Choosing control accomplishes the same goal (you can fly them into a star if you want, or have them rip out their cores, or whatever suits your fancy) and nobody else has to die.  Except for you - and that's what Destroy ending really boils down to...Sacrificing millions so you can reunite with your waifu.

I can't Control the Reapers...
That's stupid...

Game says you can, then shows you doing it, then shows the Reapers leaving under your command.  Just because TIM was a villain and you have been fighting against him doesn't mean he wasn't right about there being the ability to do so.  But hey, whatever you need to do to render the other endings invalid so you can justify committing genocide in exchange for a house on Rannoch/blue babies/whatever.

[Pewter77]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Pewter77 wrote...

Honestly though the IT wraps this up so well, and leaves the actual ending to just flat out killing the reapers if you break it. Its really awesome. IT isn't an actual ending but it allows them to fix it without changing whats already there and I'm still not completely convinced that they have condemned it. As for those saying that they will leave the series if IT is real, I hope you do because you have poor taste in good storytelling and the series would be better off without you, as a fan, helping to direct which way Bioware goes with their games in the future.

So you're saying that reducing diversity through committing genocide on an entire class of beings is preferable to reducing diversity by having different classes of beings intermingle? That's a rather monstrously xenophobic way of thinking, if you ask me. The forced nature of synthesis is horrible, but it doesn't reduce diversity any more than destroying every living synthetic in the entire universe does.

As for IT, it's equally horrifically badly written and thematically revolting, as it suggests that being a hateful xenophobe who is willing to sacrifice other races for your own advancement is the key to resisting indoctrination... something that has been specifically shown to target hateful xenophobes who are willing to sacrifice other races for their own advancement. If Saren or the Illusive man had been given the three choices before they were fully indoctrinated, both of them would have picked destroy even if it meant genociding every single race in the galaxy other than their own.

While they don't work for my main Paragon, or my Rengon, both Destroy and IT are thematically appropriate for my Dexter-meets-Zaphod-Beeblebrox-style sociopath Renegade, Crow Shepard. They're like a total perspective vortex where she learns that she was right all along: Sociopathy just makes you better than everyone else, it isn't wrong to commit genocide or murder, and more hatred and pain are always the answer. After she wakes up, she'll probably rule earth as a malevolent dictator.

Not at all, but the game doesn't say that its ok to kill an entire race and commit suicide. The kid even tries to make that option not seem very good at all because of that. Its the hard option to take but it does match with themes of the game and the choice that you have to make is written in such a way to make it very hard. On the other hand synthesis goes against you bringing everyone together however diverse they are to come and defeat a common foe whereas non-diversity killed the protheans faster and easier because they were so easy to predict.

In fact its not thematically revolting in IT to have Destroy as the right option to take, simply because of how I've outlined it. The game never says to you that its right to kill them, only that its a side effect for saving the world (according to the child). It never says they are lesser, in the case of IT you have to remember that you are in a very weakened state of mind as well. Synthesis is worse because simply it destroys diversity in the galaxy creating one type of DNA that everyone will be made from (with who knows what effects it has or what it actually does to you) not to mention its pretty lazy writing (space magic in a sci-fi setting that just doesn't have that beyond eezo). Control isn't really an option for most unless again like I said you are superman and always do things that others just can't (which makes sense in terms of the the game) but its lazy and/or not very creative writing again imo. It makes IT even better because I was tricked by the game into not wanting to destroy the reapers by the child construct and that I failed to see the clues. Also EDI has said that she is repulsed by the reapers and would want to see them dead and becomes even more dedicated to stopping them.

I'm not saying at all that genocide is right, but freeing the galaxy from something that wants to kill all organic life and possible dispose of the geth anway is way better than synthesis (which might as well be joining up with them) or control (which is trying to control something you can't even though the ending says you can its still like having someone tell you a hundred times not to press that button and you did it anyway) Its a hard choice to make, no doubt about it and if there were other options that made actually good endings it wouldn't even be a hard choice, but it is, and we have tons of plot holes that need filling with goodness hopefully in the EC which xbox players will see in about 2 hours.

Modifié par Pewter77, 26 juin 2012 - 07:08 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Pewter77 wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Pewter77 wrote...

Honestly though the IT wraps this up so well, and leaves the actual ending to just flat out killing the reapers if you break it. Its really awesome. IT isn't an actual ending but it allows them to fix it without changing whats already there and I'm still not completely convinced that they have condemned it. As for those saying that they will leave the series if IT is real, I hope you do because you have poor taste in good storytelling and the series would be better off without you, as a fan, helping to direct which way Bioware goes with their games in the future.

So you're saying that reducing diversity through committing genocide on an entire class of beings is preferable to reducing diversity by having different classes of beings intermingle? That's a rather monstrously xenophobic way of thinking, if you ask me. The forced nature of synthesis is horrible, but it doesn't reduce diversity any more than destroying every living synthetic in the entire universe does.

As for IT, it's equally horrifically badly written and thematically revolting, as it suggests that being a hateful xenophobe who is willing to sacrifice other races for your own advancement is the key to resisting indoctrination... something that has been specifically shown to target hateful xenophobes who are willing to sacrifice other races for their own advancement. If Saren or the Illusive man had been given the three choices before they were fully indoctrinated, both of them would have picked destroy even if it meant genociding every single race in the galaxy other than their own.

While they don't work for my main Paragon, or my Rengon, both Destroy and IT are thematically appropriate for my Dexter-meets-Zaphod-Beeblebrox-style sociopath Renegade, Crow Shepard. They're like a total perspective vortex where she learns that she was right all along: Sociopathy just makes you better than everyone else, it isn't wrong to commit genocide or murder, and more hatred and pain are always the answer. After she wakes up, she'll probably rule earth as a malevolent dictator.

Not at all, but the game doesn't say that its ok to kill an entire race and commit suicide. The kid even tries to make that option not seem very good at all because of that. Its the hard option to take but it does match with themes of the game and the choice that you have to make is written in such a way to make it very hard. On the other hand synthesis goes against you bringing everyone together however diverse they are to come and defeat a common foe whereas non-diversity killed the protheans faster and easier because they were so easy to predict.

In fact its not thematically revolting in IT to have Destroy as the right option to take, simply because of how I've outlined it. The game never says to you that its right to kill them, only that its a side effect for saving the world (according to the child). It never says they are lesser, in the case of IT you have to remember that you are in a very weakened state of mind as well. Synthesis is worse because simply it destroys diversity in the galaxy creating one type of DNA that everyone will be made from (with who knows what effects it has or what it actually does to you) not to mention its pretty lazy writing (space magic in a sci-fi setting that just doesn't have that beyond eezo). Control isn't really an option for most unless again like I said you are superman and always do things that others just can't (which makes sense in terms of the the game) but its lazy and/or not very creative writing again imo. It makes IT even better because I was tricked by the game into not wanting to destroy the reapers by the child construct and that I failed to see the clues. Also EDI has said that she is repulsed by the reapers and would want to see them dead and becomes even more dedicated to stopping them.

I'm not saying at all that genocide is right, but freeing the galaxy from something that wants to kill all organic life and possible dispose of the geth anway is way better than synthesis (which might as well be joining up with them) or control (which is trying to control something you can't even though the ending says you can its still like having someone tell you a hundred times not to press that button and you did it anyway) Its a hard choice to make, no doubt about it and if there were other options that made actually good endings it wouldn't even be a hard choice, but it is, and we have tons of plot holes that need filling with goodness hopefully in the EC which xbox players will see in about 2 hours.

By choosing it rather than picking the other endings, or instead of just walking toward one ending and stopping, letting the Reapers destroy the Citadel, you're saying that committing genocide is better than having organics become a little more like Synthetics and Synthetics becoming a little more like organics.

What the starkid thinks doesn't matter. The final choice you make is an expression of what Shepard thinks. If your Shepard picks destroy, you are saying that your Shepard believes that genocide is acceptable in this case, and that it's better to horribly genocide a peaceful race than to force synthetics to become more like organics and organics to become more like synthetics.

Shepard has three choices: hubristically believe that he can control the reapers, commit genocide, or have organics and synthetics become more similar. By picking any one of these endings, you are saying it is the least bad.

Thus if you pick destroy, you, through Shepard, are saying that sometimes genocide is acceptable. There is no way of escaping that implication, It is inherent in that choice.

[SlyTF1]

Where the hell does this "genocide" **** come from? The geth are machines, they aren't alive!!!

[CulturalGeekGirl]

SlyTF1 wrote...

Where the hell does this "genocide" **** come from? The geth are machines, they aren't alive!!!

And this proves my other point: the ending rewards people who are prejudiced against those who are not in their percieved "in-group", leading them to believe they were "right" all along. 

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 26 juin 2012 - 07:28 .

[SlyTF1]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

SlyTF1 wrote...

Where the hell does this "genocide" **** come from? The geth are machines, they aren't alive!!!

And this proves my other point: the ending rewards people who are bigoted against synthetics, leading them to believe they were "right" all along. 

I like the geth hell, I like my laptop, but it can't die!!!

[CulturalGeekGirl]

What is your definition of life and death, then?

[SlyTF1]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

What is your definition of life and death, then?

Something with a soul is alive. Geth where processed.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

SlyTF1 wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

What is your definition of life and death, then?

Something with a soul is alive. Geth where processed.

The CNN in Mass Effect 2 has a story about a society of organics who digitized their consciousnesses and uploaded them to a server before their world was destroyed. Do you think they still have souls? What gives a being a soul? Does a space cow have a soul? Does a pyjak?

[Peranor]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

SlyTF1 wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

What is your definition of life and death, then?

Something with a soul is alive. Geth where processed.

The CNN in Mass Effect 2 has a story about a society of organics who digitized their consciousnesses and uploaded them to a server before their world was destroyed. Do you think they still have souls? What gives a being a soul? Does a space cow have a soul? Does a pyjak?

Only Shifty Looking Cows have a soul

[Computer_God91]

 Destroy is the only option. It has been said before. No race deserves to be wiped out entirely but in order to save the galaxy from the Reapers sacrifices must be made.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Computer_God91 wrote...

 Destroy is the only option. It has been said before. No race deserves to be wiped out entirely but in order to save the galaxy from the Reapers sacrifices must be made.

And in order to protect organics from complete anhiliation by Synthetics, sacrifices must be made.

I'm glad to see you agree that the Reapers were just doing what they believed to be right. They were exercising the only option possible: the same one you just endorsed.

It is the only option... until someone builds a crucible for you. Welcome to reaper philosophy one oh one, you can sit next to Sovereign.

[Legbiter]

Geth and EDI are just talking toasters. throwing them under the bus is acceptable.

"Does this unit have a soul"?

"No, Legion, you're a machine".

[SlyTF1]

Legbiter wrote...

Geth and EDI are just talking toasters. throwing them under the bus is acceptable.

"Does this unit have a soul"?

"No, Legion, you're a machine".

THIS!!!

[CulturalGeekGirl]

You still haven't answered my question about who has souls. Is it all organic life, all sentient organic life, or what? If you gave a chimp sentience, would it gain a soul? Or do they start with souls?

You've given no reason other than racism for why one entity would have a soul and one wouldn't.

[chester013]

I also didn't have an ethical problem with destroy, ethics can vary widely from person to person.

I have a strong ethical type which includes egoism & utilitarianism. The deaths of the Reapers, EDI and the Geth benefit a greater number of individuals, which satisfies the utilitarian. The fact that I am included in the type of individual I save (organics) satisfies the egoist.

So you see, your ethical dilemma isn't something I'd sweat over, the debate over whether "this unit has a soul" is moot in my view but I appreciate how others will consider that.

Modifié par chester013, 26 juin 2012 - 08:15 .