332 réponses à ce sujet

[Oransel]

thisisme8 wrote...

The Protheans shared similar victories and probably followed your same logic.

Speculations.

[PaoloModica]

StrawberryRainPop wrote...

PaoloModica wrote...

I don't know.
If the catalyst lie to you, why does he tells to you about the choice to destroy, control or synthesis.
He could simply do not show up and let Shepard die without knowning what to do, or telling him that there is only a choice, the one he want.
He has nothing to lose, because he's winning.
The entire galaxy fleet tried to save ONLY A single PLANET and was almost wiped out.
There was no possibility to lose for him, so there was no need to lie to Shepard.

Destroy is the a way for him to lose. If he didnt intefere, Shepard might have done that.

Synthesis is a compromise, so everyone becomes the reapers.
Control could be a trap, remember, you are trusting a reaper AI. Whos to say that it will work and not blow up in your face?


Refuse is staying true to shepards morals, that one man does not control the fate of the galaxy.

But HOW could you know that shoot to that pipe actually destroys the reapers?
Think of that.
You are there and see a beam, and two structures that you don't know
No one in the galaxy, knows how the crucible really works, what it does or how to activate him after connecting with the citadel.

You would really shoot a pipe without any reason?
For what you Know, this could break the crucible!
You'll never do that without knowing that this will destroy the reapers.
You know that, BECAUSE THE CATALYST TOLD THAT TO YOU.
You suppose he is lyeing due to information that he give to you.
The catalyst explain to you how to destroy.
If I was the catalyst and I were lyenig, I would never tell you how to destroy me.
And if a tell you, it's a lie, so the destruction option probably would not be the real destruction option


In the end, is convenient for me, the catalyst, to stay hidden and let you there not knowing what to do

[NeecHMonkeY]

While I don't mind each of the endings now for what they are, the 'Reject' ending just felt like the Shepard I have played as through 3 games.

When he says the line about 'dying knowing that he'll do so free' perfectly sums up what Shepard was about.

The 3 original choices at the end of Mass Effect 3 should never be left to just one person... even Commander Shepard. Sure, we all know he's the hero and the main character of the game but would everyone in the ME universe simply defer to Shepard's final decision on such a galaxy-changing choice?

The galaxy may have fallen in the end but it did so on it's own terms, not the Reapers.

[zyntifox]

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

While I don't mind each of the endings now for what they are, the 'Reject' ending just felt like the Shepard I have played as through 3 games.

When he says the line about 'dying knowing that he'll do so free' perfectly sums up what Shepard was about.

The 3 original choices at the end of Mass Effect 3 should never be left to just one person... even Commander Shepard. Sure, we all know he's the hero and the main character of the game but would everyone in the ME universe simply defer to Shepard's final decision on such a galaxy-changing choice?

The galaxy may have fallen in the end but it did so on it's own terms, not the Reapers.

Amen! (says the atheist :innocent:)

[thisisme8]

Oransel wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

The Protheans shared similar victories and probably followed your same logic.

Speculations.

No, It's not.

But anyway, all joking aside.  I honestly could go into a good amount of detail on this, but I'm just way too tired at the moment.  The truth is, at the very best, we would still lose the war to attrition.  We killed about 5 reapers total in all three games and in each game it was shown how a single reaper practically brought the entire galaxy to its knees.  Hell, Harbinger did it in ME2 from the comfort of his own home.  Sovereign did it in ME1 and it took the entire Allied fleet to take it down while it was distracted.  It took the entire Quarian fleet too take out a destroyer on Rannoch, meanwhile they kill us in the thousands with eye-beams.  At this point, you believe me or you're just being stubborn.

[RainbowDazed]

Talhydras wrote...

RainbowDazed wrote...
...Since she as a character does not know what results from the other choices, she has no reason to believe the blabberings of the god-child. Thus she'd tell him to **** off.

Section quoted for extreme relevance: It's extremely easy to berate Reject Shepard for not choosing Destroy, esp. if you believe the tweets. With the perspective granted by hindsight, Reject seems pointless.

But Shep doesn't have hindsight - all Shep can do is either trust a Reaper and pick an RGB ending or not. Trusting Reapers has up until this point literally never worked. Not for Saren, not for TIM. EVERY Reaper gadget, gizmo, and doorstop left behind has been a cunning piece of bait to mold people and render them helpless.

So from the point of view of Shep on the precipice of decision there is no way to know for sure that any of the RGB options will work, just like there's no way to know for sure if Hackett's assessment that victory is impossible is in fact true. Remember Hackett's a pretty flawed guy and this is his very first Reaper war. So in the end... it comes down to which crazy risk does Shep take?

Destroy/Control/Synthesis: The Reapers are breaking an established pattern hundreds of millions of years long and being truthful / forthright / altruistic instead of manipulative / deceptive / genocidal, or...

Rejection: You can't trust the Reapers. Anything they advocate is suspicious, therefore stick with what has been shown to destroy Reapers of all sizes in sufficient quantity: conventional weapons and unconventional tactics. The odds aren't good, but hey- there's no guarantee that any of the above aren't horrible traps just like Object Rho, the Mass Relays, and the Citadel.

Even Destroy is suspicious from the POV of Shep. Shep didn't make the Crucible - for all Shep knows, shooting that pipe just releases horrifying flesh-melting gas and then the Catalyst just laughs at your horrible, smoking bones for believing it would allow something so insignificant as a mortal human to damage its immortal perfection. Again, hindsight is the only way to rationally weigh the pros and cons of each ending. With that taken into account, not only is Rejection the only ending where Shep can actually come close to telling the Catalyst that its logic is bonanas, but it's arguable that the lessons learned in preparing and defeating the Reapers conventionally or through modifying the Crucible allow the next cycle to arrive at the singularity, or whatever else is next, on their own more natural terms. In that light I prefer Rejection over all else. It's the decision I would have made all along in a heartbeat. It doesn't require me as a player to metagame, to go back and view each video on youtube then cherrypick the combination of end results I view as best. I actually get to roleplay - to assess the state of the galaxy and compare what I've been told to what I know of the Reapers.

I agree with you - it seems to me that with c-rpgs many players disregard the roleplaying part of the experience. When the ending-discussion first began many were hoping for a possibility to say hell no to the star-child. But now that it is shown what happens after that choice many dislike it. I as a player know what will happen, but Shepard does not know what will follow. For my reckless renegade-Shepard refusal is still the best option.

And I like what follows. Shepard did just what I hoped she would - she died free as did the whole cycle. And before that they gathered lots of information for the cycles that follow. The Stargazer scene after credits shows that this sacrifice was not done in vain. It helped the next cycle to end the reaper threat once and for all - without becoming butt-monkeys for the Old Machines. 

The more I think about this, the refusal is my new favorite ending. Epic success, Bioware! 

Modifié par RainbowDazed, 27 juin 2012 - 11:28 .

[RainbowDazed]

<Accidental doublepost>

Modifié par RainbowDazed, 27 juin 2012 - 11:27 .

[BatmanPWNS]

The only reason I choose not to reject the stupid star brat is because it would be an insult to just die after so many characters and squadmates sacrificed their lives to get Shepard and co. this far.

[Vznzsixr]

Trying to put myself in Shepard's shoes, rejecting the choices at the moment the option was offered was indeed the most sensible option.
Starchild just acknowledged it was the one and only mastermind behind the Reaper threat, that is considered itself as a "natural hazard" (disregarding the PoV of others on consequences of its actions) and on-the-top of it, it postures promoting coexistence through the "green" ending. Hey, don't give me that crap, boy.

So I chose the reject dialogue option, and Shepard started telling nonsense again... Probably meaning the someone at the writing time didn't quite understand what's at stake.(or refused to, I don't really care which).
Of course there's a problem with some people's ideas of morals, but this should not be the crux of the "reject" option. Starchild being a unreliable, crazy machine-god narrative is.

As Shepard, I probably wouldn't have any problem with sacrificing Geths (because they tampered too much with Reaper tech in her opinion) provided I was sure that shooting the doomsday device would indeed have the consequences depicted in the ending epilogue.
But as a mere human Commander in an army, I'd have at least attempted to report to the chain-of-command what's going on and hopefully get confirmation of the consequences before selecting the apparently "best" option introduced by the very general representing the galactic scourge.

Well, in my head-canon, I'd consider Shepard actually did something useful after refusing, such as overflowing the citadel with energy so that it would choke starchild to its death, or having the fleet destroy the citadel. Considering what I have been told and can believe, once he is gone, at least some reapers may be "released" from the control it was imposing on them.

Modifié par Vznzsixr, 27 juin 2012 - 11:34 .

[Oransel]

thisisme8 wrote...

No, It's not.

But anyway, all joking aside.  I honestly could go into a good amount of detail on this, but I'm just way too tired at the moment.  The truth is, at the very best, we would still lose the war to attrition.  We killed about 5 reapers total in all three games and in each game it was shown how a single reaper practically brought the entire galaxy to its knees.  Hell, Harbinger did it in ME2 from the comfort of his own home.  Sovereign did it in ME1 and it took the entire Allied fleet to take it down while it was distracted.  It took the entire Quarian fleet too take out a destroyer on Rannoch, meanwhile they kill us in the thousands with eye-beams.  At this point, you believe me or you're just being stubborn.

Yet, there are many evidences of victories over the Reapers not witnessed by Shepard. Palaven, for example or Sur'Kesh. Multiplayer for some reason says that we hold the ground.
No, I do not underestimate Reaper's threat. I understand that they are nearly unbeatable.

That's why conventional victory should be impossible unless you have insanely high EMS. As I said, I do not want refusal to be instant victory, everyone is happy. I want to have an option for this. Yes, that would be a golden ending, but it should come as a reward.

[OnlyHazeRemains]

Dying as a free man blah blah rabble rabble.

Youre just trying to rationalize the incredibly dumb decision that "refuse" represents.
You get to a point where countless cycles before could not go and then you're like "screw you, im going home".
That riddicules the whole point of mass effect.
Sure, i agree that it is what Shepard would do if we would not control him as players.
Shepard is "a dumb move guy" after all.

But its still the dumbest move out of all the 4. I'd wager to say its the unique ignorance of ****** Sapiens. It is totally irrational, same as it was irrational to even hope being able to defeat the reapers (as pointed out in all conversations with Javik). And then you actually make it and like a miffed child you say
"buhuu i dont like this cataclyst, lets call it off, let all we did up until here be in vain and doom the galaxy to another 1000 year long slow and painful death"
Let thos who come after us clean up the mess we left for them cause we were too lazy to make a difficult decision.
Its the same with the current state of earths environment and the general direction of our society. Same blind ignorance disregarding anything that comes after us.

Dumbest. Move. Ever.

Modifié par Samurai_Smartie, 27 juin 2012 - 11:40 .

[StrawberryRainPop]

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

Dying as a free man blah blah rabble rabble.

Youre just trying to rationalize the incredibly dumb decision that "refuse" represents.
You get to a point where countless cycles before could not go and then you're like "screw you, im going home".
That riddicules the whole point of mass effect.
Sure, i agree that it is what Shepard would do if we would not control him as players.
Shepard is "a dumb move guy" after all.

But its still the dumbest move out of all the 4. I'd wager to say its the unique ignorance of ****** Sapiens. It is totally irrational, same as it was irrational to even hope being able to defeat the reapers (as pointed out in all conversations with Javik). And then you actually make it and like a miffed child you say
"buhuu i dont like this cataclyst, lets call it off, let all we did up until here be in vain and doom the galaxy to another 1000 year long slow and painful death"
Let thos who come after us clean up the mess we left for them cause we were too lazy to make a difficult decision.
Its the same with the current state of earths environment and the general direction of our society. Same blind ignorance disregarding anything that comes after us.

Dumbest. Move. Ever.

You must have hated Bravehearts ending then.

[NeecHMonkeY]

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

Dying as a free man blah blah rabble rabble.

Youre just trying to rationalize the incredibly dumb decision that "refuse" represents.
You get to a point where countless cycles before could not go and then you're like "screw you, im going home".
That riddicules the whole point of mass effect.
Sure, i agree that it is what Shepard would do if we would not control him as players.
Shepard is "a dumb move guy" after all.

But its still the dumbest move out of all the 4. I'd wager to say its the unique ignorance of ****** Sapiens. It is totally irrational, same as it was irrational to even hope being able to defeat the reapers (as pointed out in all conversations with Javik). And then you actually make it and like a miffed child you say
"buhuu i dont like this cataclyst, lets call it off, let all we did up until here be in vain and doom the galaxy to another 1000 year long slow and painful death"
Let thos who come after us clean up the mess we left for them cause we were too lazy to make a difficult decision.
Its the same with the current state of earths environment and the general direction of our society. Same blind ignorance disregarding anything that comes after us.

Dumbest. Move. Ever.

Yes, because choosing one of the options laid out for you by the very race that is currently annihilating you is 'smart'.

[thisisme8]

Oransel wrote...

Yet, there are many evidences of victories over the Reapers not witnessed by Shepard. Palaven, for example or Sur'Kesh. Multiplayer for some reason says that we hold the ground.
No, I do not underestimate Reaper's threat. I understand that they are nearly unbeatable.

That's why conventional victory should be impossible unless you have insanely high EMS. As I said, I do not want refusal to be instant victory, everyone is happy. I want to have an option for this. Yes, that would be a golden ending, but it should come as a reward.

Defeating "reaper forces" is different than defeating a reaper, and in none of those instances do they ever say they defeated an actual reaper.

You're basically asking for an ending that competes with the very nature of the game.

[StrawberryRainPop]

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

Dying as a free man blah blah rabble rabble.

Youre just trying to rationalize the incredibly dumb decision that "refuse" represents.
You get to a point where countless cycles before could not go and then you're like "screw you, im going home".
That riddicules the whole point of mass effect.
Sure, i agree that it is what Shepard would do if we would not control him as players.
Shepard is "a dumb move guy" after all.

But its still the dumbest move out of all the 4. I'd wager to say its the unique ignorance of ****** Sapiens. It is totally irrational, same as it was irrational to even hope being able to defeat the reapers (as pointed out in all conversations with Javik). And then you actually make it and like a miffed child you say
"buhuu i dont like this cataclyst, lets call it off, let all we did up until here be in vain and doom the galaxy to another 1000 year long slow and painful death"
Let thos who come after us clean up the mess we left for them cause we were too lazy to make a difficult decision.
Its the same with the current state of earths environment and the general direction of our society. Same blind ignorance disregarding anything that comes after us.

Dumbest. Move. Ever.

Yes, because choosing one of the options laid out for you by the very race that is currently annihilating you is 'smart'.

dude you mind if i quote that? Couldnt say it better myself

[thisisme8]

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

Yes, because choosing one of the options laid out for you by the very race that is currently annihilating you is 'smart'.

Actually, yes...  it is smart when considering the consequence.  Not risky, maybe?  But smart?  Yes.

[Aubairjin]

I thought of a simple thing about the next cycle.

The fist race discovers the citadel. They dont have the technologie yet to build AI. They discovers soon after Liara's data. They build the crucible. They choose destroy.

Thus, reapers are ****ed up in dark space, without any war to be done, and any sacrifice to be done since they are no AI yet.

Moral preserved; cycle ended, and a BIG middle finger to the reapers.

That's my headcannon.

Modifié par Aubairjin, 27 juin 2012 - 11:51 .

[NeecHMonkeY]

StrawberryRainPop wrote...

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

Dying as a free man blah blah rabble rabble.

Youre just trying to rationalize the incredibly dumb decision that "refuse" represents.
You get to a point where countless cycles before could not go and then you're like "screw you, im going home".
That riddicules the whole point of mass effect.
Sure, i agree that it is what Shepard would do if we would not control him as players.
Shepard is "a dumb move guy" after all.

But its still the dumbest move out of all the 4. I'd wager to say its the unique ignorance of ****** Sapiens. It is totally irrational, same as it was irrational to even hope being able to defeat the reapers (as pointed out in all conversations with Javik). And then you actually make it and like a miffed child you say
"buhuu i dont like this cataclyst, lets call it off, let all we did up until here be in vain and doom the galaxy to another 1000 year long slow and painful death"
Let thos who come after us clean up the mess we left for them cause we were too lazy to make a difficult decision.
Its the same with the current state of earths environment and the general direction of our society. Same blind ignorance disregarding anything that comes after us.

Dumbest. Move. Ever.

Yes, because choosing one of the options laid out for you by the very race that is currently annihilating you is 'smart'.

dude you mind if i quote that? Couldnt say it better myself

Haha, go for it.

[Oransel]

thisisme8 wrote...

Defeating "reaper forces" is different than defeating a reaper, and in none of those instances do they ever say they defeated an actual reaper.

You're basically asking for an ending that competes with the very nature of the game.

Seeing Reapers being nerfed in ME3 to the point where you kill destroyer with a gun from the roof... Well, artists already compromised "unbeatable" part. Just as they compromised "beatable" part with Hackett shouting about Crucible out of nowhere in the beginning of the game. ME3 became horrible mess, actually.

[OnlyHazeRemains]

NeecHMonkeY wrote...

Yes, because choosing one of the options laid out for you by the very race that is currently annihilating you is 'smart'.

So what. They explain in detail why theyre "annihilating you". Not for the purpose of actually destroying you, no they try to preserve.

And theyre offering you new ways of ending this obviously flawed cycle. But you refuse, because youre too ignorant, too narrow minded to try and understand the being you call "enemies", because they want something else than you. Talk about empathy and the subjective view on what is "right" and what is "wrong".

Refusal includes so many implications. If you actually accept the theme that is laid out under the ending, technological singularity, then picking the refusal option means you volutarily shaft the next cycle, as with your help they may be able to "repel" the reapers (its not said what actually happens) but they will then inevitably reach the technological singularity that the reapers tried to avoid, possibly creating all new super-reapers.
Youre just continuing the cycle on a bigger scale.

Refusal is totally irrational given the information that you get in the ending sequence (as flawed and superficially made up as it might be).

Modifié par Samurai_Smartie, 27 juin 2012 - 12:00 .

[ThatDancingTurian]

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

Dying as a free man blah blah rabble rabble.

Youre just trying to rationalize the incredibly dumb decision that "refuse" represents.
You get to a point where countless cycles before could not go and then you're like "screw you, im going home"

That's actually what the Catalyst is doing. Shepard stands up to it (or heaven forbid, shoots it) and this unfeeling AI gets offended and goes "WELL FINE THEN, YOU LOSE. >:("

If it was fine with destroying the Reapers, if it believed organics were worth saving, and knowing that it is now willing to consider new solutions, it wouldn't have just said 'NO U' and left. The very fact that it reacted that way proved Shepard right that it couldn't be trusted.

Modifié par Aris Ravenstar, 27 juin 2012 - 11:58 .

[Oransel]

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

So what. They explain in detail why theyre "annihilating you". Not for the purpose of actually destroying you, no they try to preserve.
And theyre offering you new ways of ending this obviously flawed cycle. But you refuse, because youre too ignorant, too narrow minded to try and understand the being you call "enemies", because they want something else than you. Talk about empathy and the subjective view on what is "right" and what is "wrong".
Refusal includes so many implications. If you actually accept the theme that is laid out under the ending, technological singularity, then picking the refusal option means you volutarily shaft the next cycle, as with your help they may be able to "repel" the reapers (its not said what actually happens) but they will then inevitably reach the technological singularity that the reapers tried to avoid, possibly creating all new super-reapers.
Youre just continuing the cycle on a bigger scale. I still claim its simply a dumb move.

Question is, why are you trusting your enemy which is using mind manipulations and lies all the time?

[ArthurVon]

LoL

[OnlyHazeRemains]

Show me where a reaper has been "lying" in the ME series. They have no reason to lie.
They indoctrinate, they only give pieces of information that can be misunderstood. They never lied.

My Shepard trusts the catalyst because he has no other option other than to throw his arms up and die in vain. Wich is riddiculous.

[Aubairjin]

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

Show me where a reaper has been "lying" in the ME series. They have no reason to lie.
They indoctrinate, they only give pieces of information that can be misunderstood. They never lied.

My Shepard trusts the catalyst because he has no other option other than to throw his arms up and die in vain. Wich is riddiculous.

Sovereign lied, or was stupid, when he said they were each a nation, answering to none.

They all answers to the almighthy Starbrat.