332 réponses à ce sujet

[MIBO765]

Talking sacrifice: Is it moral to sacrifice and condem a next cycle to endure the same fate? There is no security that somebody will find Liaras archive or even understand or believe the data in it... if the archive surpasses the eternity of some 10000 yeras.

Think at it for one moment. Why this cycle is still fighting? Because the protheans were able to dismantle the timebomb placed in the code of the Citadel, opening the gate for the Reapers to invade this galaxy. Something that probably never will happen again. There would be so much unknowns for the next cycles, so much variables, that there is no logic at all not to end the threat now. Shepard can not be sure that other cycles will get as far as this did. And do not forget, that the protheans did leave archives, some ai and even a living prothean and it nearly went wrong.

Modifié par MIBO765, 27 juin 2012 - 09:37 .

[Zine2]

Blarty wrote...

And being given the option to end the conflict and stop a war on a galactic scale that if not stopped will wipe out countless trillions of lives, which is ultimately what Shepard has to do, and standing by and doing nothing, irrespective of your view of moral stance, essentially makes Shepard complicit in the Reaper's atrocities; 'Hey everyone's dead, but at least I came out of it with some dignity'?

Again, "Utilitarian". Commit genocide. Kill one race. Save twenty more.

But not the same as a moral stand wherein you refuse to be party to genocide, forcible conformity, or taking the TIM option.

Winning is not the same as sticking by your principles. Sometimes, sticking by your principles leads to losing - but again, that's actually what makes the ending better and deeper than the others.

[monrapias]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

prog_bassist wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...
In the reject ending everyone dies and the Reapers win. If Shepard chooses anything else the Reapers lose and the galaxy is saved.


The reject ending is the loser ending.

The Reapers don't win.  The next cycle beats the Reapers with Liara's capsule.

There is zero proof of that. There's not even any proof that anyone even finds Liara's capsule.

there are proof.

[Blarty]

Zine2 wrote...

Blarty wrote...

And being given the option to end the conflict and stop a war on a galactic scale that if not stopped will wipe out countless trillions of lives, which is ultimately what Shepard has to do, and standing by and doing nothing, irrespective of your view of moral stance, essentially makes Shepard complicit in the Reaper's atrocities; 'Hey everyone's dead, but at least I came out of it with some dignity'?

Again, "Utilitarian". Commit genocide. Kill one race. Save twenty more.

But not the same as a moral stand wherein you refuse to be party to genocide, forcible conformity, or taking the TIM option.

Winning is not the same as sticking by your principles. Sometimes, sticking by your principles leads to losing - but again, that's actually what makes the ending better and deeper than the others.

Okay, well let's be pragmatic - how exactly does the Refuse ending benefit Shepard, the other races, and the war effort in general over and above giving you the moral high ground?

EDIT: remember here, given that we know that the Reapers cannot be destroyed by conventional weapons in the given timeframe with the available resources, Shepard knows that he is condemning to annihilation, at least, his own Galactic cycle, and, at that point, many many more.

Modifié par Blarty, 27 juin 2012 - 09:42 .

[WinterCrow]

Indeed, reject.

I was all "I'm gonna destroy the reapers once and for all" yesterday when I downloaded the EC. However, once the option of rejecting the starchild logic popped in the screen I couldn't help but choose that. Hell I wanted to see the cutscenes for the destroy ending, since for me it has always been the only viable option (despite annihilating the geth... maybe, it never gets confirmed anyway) but I just couldn't.

It is the correct ending, as hard as it might be. It sucks to have all your cycle wiped out, but that doesn't make it less right. I laugh at all that "reject is selfish" bull****, I don't see how giving a whole cycle the opportunity to correct both the reaper conflict AND the organic vs synthetic conflict is selfish at all. Everything the catalyst offers are partial, hurried solutions, and control doesn't even solve anything between synthetics and organics.

And by the way, where is it mentioned that the next cycle built and used the crucible? Makes no sense at all. "If it wasn't for them, we too would be threatened" made me understand they prevented the reapers from coming back from darkspace or something, or that they never engaged in a war at all.

[Zine2]

MIBO765 wrote...
There is no security that somebody will finde Liaras archive or even understand or believe the data in it... if the archive surpasses the eternity of some 10000 yeras.

If you are trapped on a desert island with five of your friends and you're all starving to death, would you kill one of your friends and eat him to give everyone else a chance to live?

You don't know if rescue is coming. You don't know if eating your friend will actually save everyone.

That's the reality of moral dilemmas, not this certainty about how "If I do X, I will kill the Geth but save everyone!"

Sometimes all you can do when facing the end is to stick by your principles. Sometimes you lose. Maybe you all die because you refused to kill and eat your friend. But refusing to sacrifice your soul and morals does, in fact, represent a morally correct choice.

[tonnactus]

Astartes Marine wrote...

Sure the Catalyst/Reapers may have started the conflict but when presented with an opportunity to end the threat once and for all you think the best ending is to do nothing and let everyone else die at the hands of said Reapers?

I question your sanity if that is truly the case.

I question the sanity of everyone who would trust a reaper to provide honest solution(to an invented problem that doesnt exist anywhere in the series)

[MrMcDoll]

I found it funny that we couldn't reject the crucible idea from the get-go and win by spending the ludicrous amount of resources we spent on constructing it, then guarding it, then escorting it etc etc on just blowing up reapers.
Even if we could instead evacuate as much of earth as possible and then blow up the sol relay with the reapers still inside the system, that would have felt better to me.
Mind you, the reapers wouldn't have even BEEN in the sol system if not for the crucible.

I loathed that plot device/crutch from the outset.

The whole game would have been better if it was more about uniting the galaxy by assisting extractions etc during a systematic obliteration of major homeworlds by the reapers, only to attack and finally defeat them before they killed everyone on say the citidel.
That way the cost would have involved the loss of most homeworlds but the galaxy would have won together.

Meh. What's done is done, and although better with the EC, ME3 is not IMHO a great way for the series to have ended.

Also, I'd have loved the dark energy plot line to have been used. / reapers to have remained an incomprehensible and mysterious force, not just galaxy destroying vacuum cleaners working on behalf of an old AI that was made by the species that became the first vacuum cleaner.

[Astartes Marine]

Zine2 wrote...
In which case Control is best for you.

No it's not actually.  The Reapers still exist and you only have the illusion of control. 

Destroy is the best for me;
Reapers - Dead
Relays - Damaged but can be repaired
Races - Alive, rebuilding, flourishing (Krogan actually constructing things?! I'm impressed)
Geth and EDI - I doubt their demise as the only proof, if you can call it that, was from the Catalyst itself...an abomination.
Shepard - Alive and probably going to retire on Rannoch to help with reconstruction efforts.

[Oransel]

For me no option except for Refusal is utilitarian. Utilitarian means - get the job done by all means. Sacrifice few to save many. Believing starkid is the most non-utilitarian thing to do. You can't trust him. Maybe his options all lead to destruction of everything, but Reapers (you have no info, yet)? No, sir.

[TODD9999]

monrapias wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...

prog_bassist wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...
In the reject ending everyone dies and the Reapers win. If Shepard chooses anything else the Reapers lose and the galaxy is saved.


The reject ending is the loser ending.

The Reapers don't win.  The next cycle beats the Reapers with Liara's capsule.

There is zero proof of that. There's not even any proof that anyone even finds Liara's capsule.

there are proof.

youtu.be/MjYm31aTHaI  is the Reject ending.  While in the scene that actually shows the Liara holoimage there is no evidence it was found, the "Grandmother" at the end talks about the Archives and the knowledge contained within.  While you could argue that this is not referencing Liara's time capsules, I think that seems a bit excessive.  It may not have been in the next cycle, and it may not have been the capsule that we were shown, but the most likely interpretation seems to be that someone found Liara's capsule and used the information at a later date to best the Reapers.

[Five1thOUsanD]

Veneke wrote...

commandergodchild wrote...

Youmu wrote...

If the next cycle just picks R, G or B anyways, Shepard not picking one when he had the chance just leads to the current cycle to die off for... nothing. Being forced in to the dilemma matters little, when Shepard changes nothing, the next cycle is placed into that dilemma, and actually picks their favorite color. Reject would be a good ending, if it actually allowed the next cycle to defeat the reapers without the starchild, thanks to the detailed information and much, much more time to prepare. But nope. 

Guess one can always headcanon it to be that the next cycle doesn't use the crucible - at which point one might just as well headcanon that Destroy ending leaves EDI and Geth fixable.

In the reject ending Liara tells the next cycle that the crucible didnt work.  It seems really unlikely they would then go ahead and build it for the hell of it given how many resources were required.  I think logically the next cycle defeats the reapers without the crucible. 

I initially thought that as well, however, it would appear that tweets by Gamble and posts by Jessica Merizan pretty much confirm that the established ending for Rejection is that the next cycle picks one of the RGB.

Call it headcanon if you like, but I'll take the evidence from the game over evidence from twitter this time around.

[Zine2]

Blarty wrote...


Okay, well let's be pragmatic - how exactly does the Refuse ending benefit Shepard, the other races, and the war effort in general over and above giving you the moral high ground?

The whole pont of a moral choice is that it not necessarily the pragmatic choice. Otherwise, the choice has no meaning. If you have the pragmatic and moral choice rolled into one, why choose anything else?

You are NOT looking at the benefits when making a moral choice. A moral choice is to say "This is who we are. This is what we believe in. We believe that uniting the galaxy makes us stronger. If Casey Hudson thinks otherwise, screw him, we die free!"

Moral choices that are the same as the pragmatic choice are not meaningful choices. That's why I rated the Control ending - which is the best utilitarian ending - as less good than the Reject one.

[commandergodchild]

Veneke wrote...

commandergodchild wrote...

Youmu wrote...

If the next cycle just picks R, G or B anyways, Shepard not picking one when he had the chance just leads to the current cycle to die off for... nothing. Being forced in to the dilemma matters little, when Shepard changes nothing, the next cycle is placed into that dilemma, and actually picks their favorite color. Reject would be a good ending, if it actually allowed the next cycle to defeat the reapers without the starchild, thanks to the detailed information and much, much more time to prepare. But nope. 

Guess one can always headcanon it to be that the next cycle doesn't use the crucible - at which point one might just as well headcanon that Destroy ending leaves EDI and Geth fixable.

In the reject ending Liara tells the next cycle that the crucible didnt work.  It seems really unlikely they would then go ahead and build it for the hell of it given how many resources were required.  I think logically the next cycle defeats the reapers without the crucible. 

I initially thought that as well, however, it would appear that tweets by Gamble and posts by Jessica Merizan pretty much confirm that the established ending for Rejection is that the next cycle picks one of the RGB.

Ok well what The Voice of God is tweeting is totally illogical, so I reject it.  Just like I reject the totally illogical crap godchild spouted. 

[Jadebaby]

I'm going to leave this here..

[Zine2]

Oransel wrote...

For me no option except for Refusal is utilitarian. Utilitarian means - get the job done by all means. Sacrifice few to save many. Believing starkid is the most non-utilitarian thing to do. You can't trust him. Maybe his options all lead to destruction of everything, but Reapers (you have no info, yet)? No, sir.

I'd agree and only say that Control is best from a utilitarian perspective based on hindsight .

Modifié par Zine2, 27 juin 2012 - 09:44 .

[JeosDinas]

 

Oransel wrote...

For me no option except for Refusal is utilitarian. Utilitarian means - get the job done by all means. Sacrifice few to save many. Believing starkid is the most non-utilitarian thing to do. You can't trust him. Maybe his options all lead to destruction of everything, but Reapers (you have no info, yet)? No, sir.

 

You don't know what the term means then. Utilitarianism is based solely on the greatest number of good for the greatest number of people. I suppose you could spin in into thinking this means "The greatest number of principled deaths for everyone" but that's not really the case. Utilitarianism is not based on emotional moral choices. It's math. And every other ending ends up with an equation better than zero by default.

Modifié par JeosDinas, 27 juin 2012 - 09:44 .

[Simocrates]

Speaking of hard truths OP, your post comes across just as "childish" as the artist's visions. You claim their logic is stupid, I disagree, in fact after the new content I feel I truly understand the Reaper's purpose. I suppose I'll throw in another hard truth; it doesn't matter if the galaxy shouldn't of been subjected to the Reapers, they have been and it is the fault of the denizens how they react to it. Much like in real life the galaxy is full of hardships.

[Zine2]

JeosDinas wrote...

You don't know what the term means then. Utilitarianism is based solely on the greatest number of good for the greatest number of people. I suppose you could spin in into thinking this means "The greatest number of principled deaths for everyone" but that's not really the case. Utilitarianism is not based on emotional moral choices. It's math. And every other ending ends up with an equation better than zero by default.

No, he's saying that the other three aren't valid choices because you can't trust the Star Kid to actually be honest about what he says. Hence you can't make a utilitarian choice based on the information presented by the Star Kid at the time.

With hindsight though (i.e. you've seen all 3 endings), one CAN make a utilitarian choice that puts Control as the best ending.

[Blarty]

Oransel wrote...

For me no option except for Refusal is utilitarian. Utilitarian means - get the job done by all means. Sacrifice few to save many. Believing starkid is the most non-utilitarian thing to do. You can't trust him. Maybe his options all lead to destruction of everything, but Reapers (you have no info, yet)? No, sir.

You are, of course, correct... however each of the four endings has huge degrees of ambiguity over the actual effect of the given choice.

But what surprises me the most about the Refuse ending is that the star child/whatever is completely ambivalent to it, the AI suppositions have changed, and instead of force Shepard down one particular route, he just kind of thinks 'Ah well... okay , SO BE IT, I'm off for a latte'..... it actually made me think that the Catalyst itself wants the cycle to end one way or another, that it's just bored of it all now.

[Adanu]

Zine2 wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...

In the reject ending everyone dies and the Reapers win. If Shepard chooses anything else the Reapers lose and the galaxy is saved.


The reject ending is the loser ending.

Heroism is often not about how you win, but how you face defeat.

Heroism means nothing if you are dead and so is everyone else.

Screw you for calling me childish for disagreeing with you.

[WinterCrow]

Blarty wrote...

Zine2 wrote...

Blarty wrote...

And being given the option to end the conflict and stop a war on a galactic scale that if not stopped will wipe out countless trillions of lives, which is ultimately what Shepard has to do, and standing by and doing nothing, irrespective of your view of moral stance, essentially makes Shepard complicit in the Reaper's atrocities; 'Hey everyone's dead, but at least I came out of it with some dignity'?

Again, "Utilitarian". Commit genocide. Kill one race. Save twenty more.

But not the same as a moral stand wherein you refuse to be party to genocide, forcible conformity, or taking the TIM option.

Winning is not the same as sticking by your principles. Sometimes, sticking by your principles leads to losing - but again, that's actually what makes the ending better and deeper than the others.

Okay, well let's be pragmatic - how exactly does the Refuse ending benefit Shepard, the other races, and the war effort in general over and above giving you the moral high ground?

EDIT: remember here, given that we know that the Reapers cannot be destroyed by conventional weapons in the given timeframe with the available resources, Shepard knows that he is condemning to annihilation, at least, his own Galactic cycle, and, at that point, many many more.

It does benefit the ones that will come next. And anyway, you know reject is going to end up with everyone dead just because Mac Walters and Casey Hudson want it to be so.

If you were Shepard and you had assembled a whole damn galaxy to fight the reapers you would at least believe you had a chance.

It's not only about morals, my Shepard was convinced unity could defeat the reapers, so he stood true to his morals and gave it a shot. I, as a player, knew I would "lose", but not my Shepard. That's what roleplaying is about, actually...

[Zine2]

Zanza86 wrote...

Speaking of hard truths OP, your post comes across just as "childish" as the artist's visions. You claim their logic is stupid, I disagree, in fact after the new content I feel I truly understand the Reaper's purpose. I suppose I'll throw in another hard truth; it doesn't matter if the galaxy shouldn't of been subjected to the Reapers, they have been and it is the fault of the denizens how they react to it. Much like in real life the galaxy is full of hardships.

Actually, the Reapers have admitted in the EC that their logic is stupid, finally putting to rest the ridiculous claims that the Reapers were acting in a sane manner.

They were a idiot AI that went crazy and OMNOMed their own masters. This stated canonically by the Star Kid. They are ****ed up intelligences; little more than rabid dogs that need to be put down.

[monrapias]

TODD9999 wrote...

monrapias wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...

prog_bassist wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...
In the reject ending everyone dies and the Reapers win. If Shepard chooses anything else the Reapers lose and the galaxy is saved.


The reject ending is the loser ending.

The Reapers don't win.  The next cycle beats the Reapers with Liara's capsule.

There is zero proof of that. There's not even any proof that anyone even finds Liara's capsule.

there are proof.

youtu.be/MjYm31aTHaI  is the Reject ending.  While in the scene that actually shows the Liara holoimage there is no evidence it was found, the "Grandmother" at the end talks about the Archives and the knowledge contained within.  While you could argue that this is not referencing Liara's time capsules, I think that seems a bit excessive.  It may not have been in the next cycle, and it may not have been the capsule that we were shown, but the most likely interpretation seems to be that someone found Liara's capsule and used the information at a later date to best the Reapers.

https://twitter.com/...849473949376512

[OrphanMakrBebop]

Perhaps this has already been mentioned, but doesn't it seem plausible that the next civilization actually paid attention to Liara's time capsule/archives? She told them the Crucible didn't work, so instead of wasting time and resources on rubbish, they built weapons and defenses to destroy the Reapers?