132 réponses à ce sujet

[Argable]

"good or bad" is entirely subjective.

It's the only ending I'll chose, because it's the only ending that leaves the ME universe feeling like Mass Effect, instead of some other sci-fi.

[AxStapleton]

To me, while I chose destroy, none of the endings are portrayed as inherently good or bad.

Destroy, while achieving your primary goal of defeating the Reapers, this is at the expense of the Geth and EDI when many Shepards would now consider them a valid form of life. And Organics go on being Organics meaning that conflict in some form is still a very probable possibility.

Control, the Geth and EDI are spared but so are the Reapers. The consequences of Control could go either way with Shepinger (my little nickname for Shep in this ending) maintaining peace throughout the Galaxy or eventually coming to the same conclusion that the Catalyst did.

Synthesis, same result as above for Geth, EDI and the Reapers except Reapers are not controlled and everything is at least partially organic and synthetic. The breaking down of the barriers between the two forms of life could lead to an unprecedented level of peace. However as we know with anything that is at least partially Organic, there are imperfections that could lead to conflict amongst the new hybrids regardless of whether its about the conflict of Organics or Synthetics.

I haven't gone into all the possibilities but that would take pages and pages to write all of them. I chose destroy simply because I wanted to destroy the Reapers from the outset.

[Peregrin25]

mireisen wrote...

I believe the destroy ending encompasses everything that the whole galaxy's been fighting for during each cycle, to obliterate the reapers at any cost. Most opponents believe that it's genocide, that the synthetics have finally grown to "feel alive", but each instance has been with the use of reaper tech.

Not saying reaper tech is all evil. But it just doesn't sound right. So OK, you feel alive because you've got some upgrades or were somehow conceived by the reapers? This didn't jive well with me. And although Legion and EDI were two of my favorites, they are essentially immortal. This goes into a whole other issue of godhood and mortality. The natural order of things is that all life must die at one point. That's the point of being alive. Things that can't die are considered things, not people.

So in a wicked way, I think, my Shepard granted the synthetics true life by showing that they can also die. The synthetics ending really bugged me because of the possibility of immortality. As if immortality is the last stage of evolution. I do not believe that. Evolution is change over time, improving. I do not believe that there is a last stage and I'd hate to think it'd be immortality.

If organics were granted immortality, it changes the whole galaxy's perception of life. Life becomes meaningless if you can't die. That's why I chose destroy. Although the catalyst says, "And then, your children will create synthetics, and the chaos returns," I'm like ppppftt. "You were created by a fallible organic, Star Kid. You don't know the future anymore than I do, so GTFO!"

So IMHO, destroy preserves life. Ironically.

Living knowing we can die makes our choices we make and the impact we have on the world more meaningfull too.

[Adamantium93]

I think the point is that no ending is purely good or bad, they're all different kinds of grey.

Destroy: Kill the reapers, save yourself, but wipe out an entire species and your pilot's GF to do it. Asks if its acceptable to sacrifice so many to save yourself. Is the death of the reapers the only acceptable outcome?

Control: Stop the reaper threat without any damage to the species of the galaxy, however brings up the question of whether Shep is deserving of the power he gets. Can you trust even someone as perfectly moral as Shepard with such power?

Synthesis: Merge synthetic and organics, bringing technology lightyears ahead and instilling galactic peace. However, asks the question if homogenization is truly acceptable. Can there ever be lasting peace? Isn't uncontrolled progress dangerous?

Refusal: Is honor and truth worth more than life? Is it acceptable to allow the death of the galaxy but give the next cycle the power to defeat the Reapers without the crucible? In other words, give them the victory you couldn't achieve.

No one option is without its drawbacks.

Modifié par Adamantium93, 29 juin 2012 - 03:41 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

[quote]Hackulator wrote...

You can easily turn it around and say its not Shepard's right to DENY everyone the Utopian world of synthesis, simply because he doesn't have the balls to make a hard decision. Ask EDI and the Geth which choice they'd like.[/quote]

[/quote]

But he has already got every race's permission to destroy the reapers, in fact that was the only reason he could gather such a large army. If he told everyone that he was going to merge organics with synthetics or become the reaper god, do you think anyone would have even give him a gun?

Modifié par DinoSteve, 29 juin 2012 - 03:43 .

[Peregrin25]

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

That may be possible, but you never know nothing is 100% certain, after all synthetics are only as perfect as it's creator. Meaning if Synthetics revolt it is our fault to begin with.

I think the circumstanses and situation would dictate really. Who is to say that the next generation and the next and the next etc. Won't learn from past mistakes. Actually surviving the reapers may mentally mature each race realising what could be at stake if they failed to live up to the destruction of the reapers.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

It maybe temporary, but they will still have time at least to find a solution.
Control and Synthesis are final there is no way back.

[mireisen]

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

This. Picking destroy will eventually lead to synthetics destroying all organics, it is inevitable. Synthesis stops this from happening, and that's is why I picked it.

https://twitter.com/...107278174339073

If you two were in my writing class I would facepalm and write "fallacy" on the front page, with possibly an F. The fact is...the destruction of all organics has never happened (obviously because where would this war be if they were ever completely wiped out?), so the Star Kid is going on an assumption, not a fact.

[Peregrin25]

ShadowJ20 wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

This. Picking destroy will eventually lead to synthetics destroying all organics, it is inevitable. Synthesis stops this from happening, and that's is why I picked it.

https://twitter.com/...107278174339073

LOL You would have more violence in a world where everyone is the same on a more evolved level. You won't have war between synthetics and organics but will have the possible outcome of creating something even more devestating than possible reaper invation. Unending conflict is just one possibility.

Modifié par Peregrin25, 29 juin 2012 - 03:52 .

[Reorte]

Peregrin25 wrote...

Yeah, it was the choice I made as well. I did pick others just to see the outcomes, but something deep down in myself it just felt wrong.

Your mention of Garrus's ruthless calculus is perfect example.

I do like the fact that even though Geth and EDI were sacrifieced, I have no prejudice in honoring them even though they are not organic. They were willing to die to fight the reapers and they also wanted them destroyed.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

I don't like EDI and the geth being sacrificed because it seems rather arbitrary. As far as I'm aware there's no fundamental property of a synthetic lifeform that the Destroy beam could target. I can (just) about accept that it could be tuned to some fundamental property of the Reapers (or anything else electronic). I'd be less annoyed about it if it flowed better out of the story.

As for rebuilding, I doubt that they would be rebuilt from scratch. If, on the other hand, there's enough left - enough databases that form their memory and therefore shape their (for want of a better word) their personality then the galaxy owes it to them to try to bring them back to life. The personality question is rather difficult for the geth anyway, particularly in their far more interesting pre-Reaper update form when it would be an amorphous, constantly shifting thing.

[Drakien]

I never considered the Quarians to be good or evil, just desperate because not having a home planet is slowly and steadily weakening the species, they are discriminated (they are called suit rats) and their fleets are old as hell (if it doesn't make any noise, it could kill you).

The geth were given more depth in the second and third game, but they were, maybe. given too much 'good exposition' and they geth that were not heretics were portrayed more like victims.

I believe that both races had their reasons and that both deserved to exist. I chose synthesis since control is technically brainwash for the geth.

[Peregrin25]

Reorte wrote...

Peregrin25 wrote...

Yeah, it was the choice I made as well. I did pick others just to see the outcomes, but something deep down in myself it just felt wrong.

Your mention of Garrus's ruthless calculus is perfect example.

I do like the fact that even though Geth and EDI were sacrifieced, I have no prejudice in honoring them even though they are not organic. They were willing to die to fight the reapers and they also wanted them destroyed.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

I don't like EDI and the geth being sacrificed because it seems rather arbitrary. As far as I'm aware there's no fundamental property of a synthetic lifeform that the Destroy beam could target. I can (just) about accept that it could be tuned to some fundamental property of the Reapers (or anything else electronic). I'd be less annoyed about it if it flowed better out of the story.

As for rebuilding, I doubt that they would be rebuilt from scratch. If, on the other hand, there's enough left - enough databases that form their memory and therefore shape their (for want of a better word) their personality then the galaxy owes it to them to try to bring them back to life. The personality question is rather difficult for the geth anyway, particularly in their far more interesting pre-Reaper update form when it would be an amorphous, constantly shifting thing.

Yeah, I agree. If Mass Relays can be rebuilt then so can the Geth, post reaper upgrades.

[Bfler]

Good.
Destroy the Reapers (the bad guys) is what I wanted to do when I bought the game in the store.
There is nothing that states, that Geth and EDI can't be rebuild or that they are completely dead.
Shepard alive, crew alive, reunion (although they could have shown it)
So everything is fine and the normal life can go on..

Modifié par Bfler, 29 juin 2012 - 03:58 .

[Reorte]

ShadowJ20 wrote...

This. Picking destroy will eventually lead to synthetics destroying all organics, it is inevitable.

No it isn't.

Synthesis stops this from happening, and that's why I picked it.

https://twitter.com/...107278174339073

It's sad that he hasn't thought it through. There's never been a really convincing "How?" given to Synthesis. When unlikely or downright impossible things happen in your story just because you said that's what's happening you've failed as a writer, as has anyone backing that position.

[TheMiffins]

I chose Destroy because it stops the character from going above who they are, without sacrificing much of my Shepard's own morals. The loss of the Geth and EDI is, to me, a necessary sacrifice - war is not won without sacrifice. Hacket even say's that everything destroyed can be rebuilt, so there is always hope that they can come back.

ShadowJ20 wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

This. Picking destroy will eventually lead to synthetics destroying all organics, it is inevitable. Synthesis stops this from happening, and that's why I picked it.

https://twitter.com/...107278174339073

I don't feel that would happen, or atleast it not being that bad of a deal. To me Destroy was the one that left humanity, and organics as a whole, intact and free. Is there a possibility that synthetics and organics may fight again? Yes, but fighting is a natural thing in the galaxy. I refuse to take control or combine the different species just because of something they might do.

[Reorte]

ShadowJ20 wrote...

mireisen wrote...
The fact is...the destruction of all organics has never happened (obviously because where would this war be if they were ever completely wiped out?), so the Star Kid is going on an assumption, not a fact.

Obviously it never happened because the Catalyst's has stopped it from happening. 

If I ever go insane and murder someone I'll claim in court that I stopped their even bigger murdering spree. Somehow I don't think that'll let me off.

[Peregrin25]

ShadowJ20 wrote...

Peregrin25 wrote...
LOL You would have more violence in a world where everyone is the same on a more evolved level. You won't have war between synthetics and organics but will have the possible outcome of creating something even more devestating than possible reaper invation. Unending conflict is just one possibility.

Maybe but I at least preserve organics.

That's like saying God decided everything for everyone, taking away freedom of choice and making everyone the same.

Part of being organic means we can die, becoming more than that makes us no better than synthetics. Becoming both would make all civilization immortal, By our curentl scientific logic immortality is the only evolutional advance for all life.

Being able to die makes living and being imprefct worth it. Knowing we can die is what makes organics more capable of great things. Yes, some will do bad things, but the good has always outweighed the bad even thouh we don't see it.

I sure as hell know I don't want to become part of a supreme race of beings if somthing like that happened.

Modifié par Peregrin25, 29 juin 2012 - 04:01 .

[Clayless]

mireisen wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

This. Picking destroy will eventually lead to synthetics destroying all organics, it is inevitable. Synthesis stops this from happening, and that's is why I picked it.

https://twitter.com/...107278174339073

If you two were in my writing class I would facepalm and write "fallacy" on the front page, with possibly an F. The fact is...the destruction of all organics has never happened (obviously because where would this war be if they were ever completely wiped out?), so the Star Kid is going on an assumption, not a fact.

Saying something wont happened because it hasn't had the ability to succeed yet is a bigger fallacy.

[eye basher]

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

Really i'm sorry but the catalyst is designed to believe the bull**** he tries to sell you why would i take it for the truth he turned on his own creators and turned them into reapers.

[AxStapleton]

ShadowJ20 wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

This. Picking destroy will eventually lead to synthetics destroying all organics, it is inevitable. Synthesis stops this from happening, and that's why I picked it.

https://twitter.com/...107278174339073

The question asked  in twitter is irrelevant to your point because now there are technically no Organics or Synthetics, just different amalgations of both so if one is killing another it can't be called technically a synthetic killing an organic or vice versa. Also If you think what the Catalyst said is the end all and be all, have you payed the least bit attention to the Quarian/Geth arc? The Quarians started it, the Geth just wanted to understand who they were exactly. Other Quarians even defended the Geth's right to live. The Geth begrudingly defended themselves and when they could have wiped out the Quarians completely, they chose not to, even if this would endanger their own existence in the future.
Nothing in Mass Effect is ever black and white, right or wrong. Thinking otherwise to me seems chidish and too idealistic.

[ashwind]

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

Shutup stupid AI that is created by cuttlefish - die :devil:

Even if you were right, even if we die, we would die in the hands of OUR own creation. +And knowing that you die before us is very satisfying.


p/s:I have no preference of endings. Each of them have something that I cant swallow.

Modifié par ashwind, 29 juin 2012 - 04:09 .

[Bomma72]

Enhanced wrote...

Destroy is bad. It is just a temporary solution. Synthetics will eventually try to wipe out all organics, and the reapers won't be around to stop them.
 
"...the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back."

This, you don't win with destroy.