406 réponses à ce sujet

[Aylyese]

Xilizhra wrote...

The Bratalyst is holding a gun to your head and saying conform or die. Since when have we ever given into the demands of terrorists?

I did in ME1 above Terra Nova. And hey, more war assets in ME3 that way.

So should we all surrender to the terrorists of the world now and conform to whatever they want? O.o

[Geneaux486]

Actually, we are only told vague estimations by Hackett before we have gathered all the unified galaxy.

 
He straight up says that it's a war we can't win conventionally.  That's not a vague estimate, that's an honest assesment based on the fact that he's seeing the conflict first hand.

In only the two instances he makes this assessment, it comes across contrived, if only in a poor attempt to drive the Crucible plot.

 
And what about when we see first hand how well conventional tactics worked for the Turians or the Asari? 

At the eleven hour we do not know whether conventional means is feasible.

 
It wasn't feasible at the start of the war, at the eleventh hour people have already sustained heavy losses.

Shepard is making the assumption it is. While we do see numerous ships explode, this is true for Reapers as well.

We see one or two Reapers explode relative to a large number of ships.   

Therefore, one could theorize they are not nearly as imposing as we perceived Sovereign to be.

Literally everything we're shown first hand in ME3 proves that they are, in fact, that imposing.

That is honestly debatable, as the Crucible's construction was already underway and works without a wholly unified galaxy.

The additional aid of various other races sped the process along, and made it possible to build the thing even closer to specifications through the guidance of gifted minds and additional raw materials.  We're literally told each time a new ally joins in the construction of the Crucible and improves the process.

Furthermore, reaperfication could occur in any of the offered scenarios, especially Control and Synthesis. We have no reason to believe the Catalyst, which is the continuous flaw in the narrative design.

 
It's not a flaw.  Your mission is to activate the Crucible at all costs.  Not activating it will definetely result in death and reaperfication, whereas taking a chance and activating it holds the possibilty that something different will happen.  Shepard activates it not out of trust, but of necessity, and at that point the choice is between a guaranteed loss or a possible win.  Activating the Crucible means having nothing to lose but everything to gain.

It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

"You have it backwards.  It is better to live on your feet than to die on your knees." 

Modifié par Geneaux486, 01 juillet 2012 - 05:58 .

[Aylyese]

Geneaux486 wrote...

"You have it backwards.  It is better to live on your feet than to die on your knees." 

Indeed. But between Synthesis and Refusal, they are not options. 

[Xilizhra]

Aylyese wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

The Bratalyst is holding a gun to your head and saying conform or die. Since when have we ever given into the demands of terrorists?

I did in ME1 above Terra Nova. And hey, more war assets in ME3 that way.

So should we all surrender to the terrorists of the world now and conform to whatever they want? O.o

No, but I assumed that by "we" you meant those in the ME universe. In any case, the Reapers aren't terrorists so much as they are a vastly more powerful invading army, and even then, the Catalyst doesn't seem to be hostile per se.

[v TricKy v]

Geneaux486 wrote...

It's not a flaw.  Your mission is to activate the Crucible at all costs.  Not activating it will definetely result in death and reaperfication, whereas taking a chance and activating it holds the possibilty that something different will happen.  Shepard activates it not out of trust, but of necessity, and at that point the choice is between a guaranteed loss or a possible win.  Activating the Crucible means having nothing to lose but everything to gain.

See it from this point of view:
Doing nothing will mean your defeat but doing what the catalyst says could lead to your defeat and the defeat of every civilization after you, because it could make the Reapers even stronger than they are now. Is it really worth it to risk the future of the people after you?

Modifié par v TricKy v, 01 juillet 2012 - 06:10 .

[Aylyese]

Xilizhra wrote...

Aylyese wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

The Bratalyst is holding a gun to your head and saying conform or die. Since when have we ever given into the demands of terrorists?

I did in ME1 above Terra Nova. And hey, more war assets in ME3 that way.

So should we all surrender to the terrorists of the world now and conform to whatever they want? O.o

No, but I assumed that by "we" you meant those in the ME universe. In any case, the Reapers aren't terrorists so much as they are a vastly more powerful invading army, and even then, the Catalyst doesn't seem to be hostile per se.

Speaking of the ME universe and terrorists, I spent practically all of ME2 irritated that I couldn't NOT be in Cerberus. It got to the stage of fury then the paragon option was to say Cerberus arent all that bad... <_<

Anyway, the catalyst himself is not hostile, no. The gun he is holding however is the reapers and your head is the entire universe of advanced species. You can try rationalising it down all you want, but it is the same thing. Conform or die. 

The point is, this entire discussion thread is based upon the rights of people on your side of the war based upon your own personal feelings on such a situation. So my question stands. Should we comply with terrorists? and yes, you can use real life examples to see if this is generally a good idea. 

Synthesis is surrendering.

[Geneaux486]

v TricKy v wrote...
See it from this point of view:
Doing nothing will mean your defeat but doing what the catalyst says could lead to your defeat and the defeat of every civilization after you, because it could make the Reapers even stronger than they are now. Is it really worth it to risk the future of the people after you?

Irrelevant, the Reapers are already strong enough to carry out their extinction cycle (and if the Crucible really was meant to strengthen the Reapers, said Reapers would have built it themselves).  The only choice that risks the future is doing nothing, and letting the Reapers continue on with their plans (leading to your defeat and the defeat of every civilization after you), harvest Shepard and everyone else, and bolster their ranks, which makes them stronger anyway.  As I said, nothing to lose, everything to gain.  It's not like it's left ambiguous afterwards whether or not it was the right call, we know for a fact that it was.

Synthesis is surrendering.

Refusal is surrendering.  Synthesis is a non-Reaper solution to what is, in this fictional world, a real problem.  Even though that's kind of an oxymoron.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 01 juillet 2012 - 06:26 .

[Xilizhra]

In real life, we've never been granted the opportunity for anything like Synthesis. It's not just a threat by any means; to me, this is a tremendous gift and one I'd be happy to work on in any case.

[Aylyese]

 

Geneaux486 wrote...

Synthesis is surrendering.

Refusal is surrendering.  Synthesis is a non-Reaper solution to what is, in this fictional world, a real problem.  Even though that's kind of an oxymoron.

 

The real problem is the Catalyst. His logic is flawed. He is a rogue AI trying to fix a problem that doesn't yet exist by creating an even bigger problem - the REAL problem in this fictional world. It wasn't the geth or some imagined future AI killing trillions of lives.. it was the Reapers. 

Again, The catalyst is a terrorist. He is holding a gun (the reapers) to your head, telling you that because you aren't as smart as him you will make a stupid mistake so he has to kill you first.. but if you let him alter your DNA so you are more like him, then he won't kill you.

And this is the BEST option?

Xilizhra wrote...

In real life, we've never been granted the opportunity for anything like Synthesis. It's not just a threat by any means; to me, this is a tremendous gift and one I'd be happy to work on in any case.

Speculations! You can see all the roses, and I can see plenty of thorns.

Modifié par Aylyese, 01 juillet 2012 - 06:30 .

[Geneaux486]

The real problem is the Catalyst. His logic is flawed. He is a rogue AI trying to fix a problem that doesn't yet exist by creating an even bigger problem - the REAL problem in this fictional world. It wasn't the geth or some imagined future AI killing trillions of lives.. it was the Reapers.

The Catalyst's assesment of the problem was that synthetics will always try to wipe out organics, and the Catalyst based this on the repeated observation of synthetics trying to wipe out organics, even before he created the Reaper cycle. Obviously they never succeeded, because we still have organic life, what the Catalyst is saying is that in every cycle before ours they've *tried*.

Again, The catalyst is a terrorist. He is holding a gun (the reapers) to your head, telling you that because you aren't as smart as him you will make a stupid mistake so he has to kill you first.. but if you let him alter your DNA so you are more like him, then he won't kill you.

The Catalyst is an objective AI that accepts that the Crucible represents organics surpassing the Reapers, and as such surrenders to Shepard and helps him to use the thing, even if Shepard chooses to use it to destroy the Reapers.

And this is the BEST option?

There's no best option. I'm of the opinion that if synthesis truly is the final evolution of life, it will happen naturally in its own time. Basically, it's not a surrender, it's skipping the journey and going straight to the end.  That's my issue with it anyway.  I favor control myself, making my Shepard essentially the warden of the Reapers.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 01 juillet 2012 - 06:43 .

[v TricKy v]

Geneaux486 wrote...

v TricKy v wrote...
See it from this point of view:
Doing nothing will mean your defeat but doing what the catalyst says could lead to your defeat and the defeat of every civilization after you, because it could make the Reapers even stronger than they are now. Is it really worth it to risk the future of the people after you?

Irrelevant, the Reapers are already strong enough to carry out their extinction cycle (and if the Crucible really was meant to strengthen the Reapers, said Reapers would have built it themselves).  The only choice that risks the future is doing nothing, and letting the Reapers continue on with their plans (leading to your defeat and the defeat of every civilization after you), harvest Shepard and everyone else, and bolster their ranks, which makes them stronger anyway.  As I said, nothing to lose, everything to gain.  It's not like it's left ambiguous afterwards whether or not it was the right call, we know for a fact that it was.

The Protheans made the biggest trap that the the Reapers had, the Citadel trap, useless after they got beaten. Who says we cant weaken them even more?
The Reapers probably didnt build the crucible because they didnt need to. But this cycle gave them far more problems than they every had to face. The Crucible is a giant enery source its only logical you would use it to your advantage when is gets brought to you.
You also are forgetting that Player =/= Shepard
Shepard doesnt know the things you know.

[Geneaux486]

v TricKy v wrote...
The Protheans made the biggest trap that the the Reapers had, the Citadel trap, useless after they got beaten. Who says we cant weaken them even more?
The Reapers probably didnt build the crucible because they didnt need to. But this cycle gave them far more problems than they every had to face. The Crucible is a giant enery source its only logical you would use it to your advantage when is gets brought to you.
You also are forgetting that Player =/= Shepard
Shepard doesnt know the things you know.

The point still remains that after all the Protheans had done, after all the resistance the current cycle put up, the Reapers were still winning.  If the Crucible failed, the worst that could happen is that the Reapers complete the harvest, make more of themselves, then withdraw.  If the Crucible isn't used, that's the only thing that can happen.

[Aylyese]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The real problem is the Catalyst. His logic is flawed. He is a rogue AI trying to fix a problem that doesn't yet exist by creating an even bigger problem - the REAL problem in this fictional world. It wasn't the geth or some imagined future AI killing trillions of lives.. it was the Reapers.

The Catalyst's assesment of the problem was that synthetics will always try to wipe out organics, and the Catalyst based this on the repeated observation of synthetics trying to wipe out organics, even before he created the Reaper cycle. Obviously they never succeeded, because we still have organic life, what the Catalyst is saying is that in every cycle before ours they've *tried*.

A problem for which his solution is to create super-synthetics to wipe out organics... Because that wasn't the original problem?

Dear god this ending does my head in.

Geneaux486 wrote... 

Again, The catalyst is a terrorist. He is holding a gun (the reapers) to your head, telling you that because you aren't as smart as him you will make a stupid mistake so he has to kill you first.. but if you let him alter your DNA so you are more like him, then he won't kill you.

The Catalyst is an objective AI that accepts that the Crucible represents organics surpassing the Reapers, and as such surrenders to Shepard and helps him to use the thing, even if Shepard chooses to use it to destroy the Reapers.

Irrelevant. If the solution is to remove diversity to prevent war, is still should be rejected - even if it was the solution of a super-computer. A computer cannot understand humanity and pride.

Geneaux486 wrote... 

And this is the BEST option?

There's no best option. I'm of the opinion that if synthesis truly is the final evolution of life, it will happen naturally in its own time. Basically, it's not a surrender, it's skipping the journey and going straight to the end.  That's my issue with it anyway.  I favor control myself, making my Shepard essentially the warden of the Reapers,

Based on the fact that you need the higher EMS to unlock this ending, the developers placed it as better than Refuse, Destroy and Control... Since there is no others, that makes it, by default, the best option. This is not ingame politics. It's game mechanics.

[v TricKy v]

Geneaux486 wrote...

v TricKy v wrote...
The Protheans made the biggest trap that the the Reapers had, the Citadel trap, useless after they got beaten. Who says we cant weaken them even more?
The Reapers probably didnt build the crucible because they didnt need to. But this cycle gave them far more problems than they every had to face. The Crucible is a giant enery source its only logical you would use it to your advantage when is gets brought to you.
You also are forgetting that Player =/= Shepard
Shepard doesnt know the things you know.

The point still remains that after all the Protheans had done, after all the resistance the current cycle put up, the Reapers were still winning.  If the Crucible failed, the worst that could happen is that the Reapers complete the harvest, make more of themselves, then withdraw.  If the Crucible isn't used, that's the only thing that can happen.

Yeah but the Prothean cycle just came before us. The Resistence just started recently from that point of view. The Protheans started it, we could do more damage to them, than the next cycle comes and does damage and so on until the Reapers got beaten. They cant replenish their number fast enough after all. The Crucible on the other hand could tip the favor back to the Reapers by making them stronger or in regard to synthesis by making us their permant slaves, making the attempt from the Protheans useless and put everything back to Status Quo

[Bill Casey]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Refusal is surrendering.

Incorrect...
Refusal is the polar opposite of surrendering...
It is the 300 Ending...


LastStand
DefiantToTheEnd

Modifié par Bill Casey, 01 juillet 2012 - 07:32 .

[nos_astra]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Actually, we are only told vague estimations by Hackett before we have gathered all the unified galaxy.

 
He straight up says that it's a war we can't win conventionally.  That's not a vague estimate, that's an honest assesment based on the fact that he's seeing the conflict first hand.

I don't see how this is more than a vague estimate. What is this based on? They don't really know the Reapers.

Bioware made a point of telling us that the Council is dumb, dumb, dumb ... as is the Alliance, as are the asari or the turians. No one bothered to really investigate.

When Hackett says they can't win conventionally this basically means they really don't know if they could win and that it's very late to find out. And they are now pouring all of their ressources into that convenient device Liara digged up in the Mars archives, so still no one bothers to find out.

We were told that the complete destruction of the Prothean Empire took decades, maybe centuries. (Originally there was little to no resistance because without the Citadel and the mass relays were lost.)

The strength of the Reapers is all over the place anyway. Whatever the writers found convenient. In ME1 they need this elaborate plan to create an advantage and it takes a long time to complete the cycle (years/decades/centuries), even with the Protheans largely unprepared. In ME3 they just fly in and wipe everything in a matter of weeks/months.
Sometimes one Reaper obliterates a fleet, sometimes it can be shot down with a Cain.



Based on what we've learned in ME1 and ignoring the inconsistencies (retcons?) introduced with ME2+3, Refusal could very well mean trying to fight back for years before ultimately failing.

Modifié par klarabella, 01 juillet 2012 - 08:11 .

[v TricKy v]

klarabella wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

Actually, we are only told vague estimations by Hackett before we have gathered all the unified galaxy.

 
He straight up says that it's a war we can't win conventionally.  That's not a vague estimate, that's an honest assesment based on the fact that he's seeing the conflict first hand.

I don't see how this is more than a vague estimate. What is this based on? They don't really know the Reapers.

Bioware made a point of telling us that the Council is dumb, dumb, dumb ... as is the Alliance, as are the asari or the turians. No one bothered to really investigate.

When Hackett says they can't win conventionally this basically means they really don't know if they could win and that it's very late to find out. And they are now pouring all of their ressources into that convenient device Liara digged up in the Mars archives, so still no one bothers to find out.

We were told that the complete destruction of the Prothean Empire took decades, maybe centuries. (Originally there was little to no resistance because without the Citadel and the mass relays were lost.)

The strength of the Reapers is all over the place anyway. Whatever the writers found convenient. In ME1 they need this elaborate plan to create an advantage and it takes a long time to complete the cycle (years/decades/centuries), even with the Protheans largely unprepared. In ME3 they just fly in and wipe everything in a matter of weeks/months.
Sometimes one Reaper obliterates a fleet, sometimes it can be shot down with a Cain.



Based on what we've learned in ME1 and ignoring the inconsistencies (retcons?) introduced with ME2+3, Refusal could very well mean trying to fight back for years before ultimately failing.

Exactly
I dont know where everyone gets the idea that everyone will drop dead immediately after refusing. We will make hell for the reapers when going down and it will take a long time too and there is still hope for survivors.
Look at the Asari and Krogans who both can get 1000 years old and Asari can mate with anyone while Krogans just spread like crazy.

[Lockler]

Quick chime in - the way I see it, the Catalyst only explains the choices. He didn't create them. In fact, he tried suppressing it as the Reapers sought at one point to eradicate anything resembling the Crucible. Organics created the choice/options by building the Crucible. That isn't to say the Catalyst doesn't have a preferable option in it when it sees that Synthesis is a true possibility now, but Shepard still has free will. The choice is clearly his to make (assuming that indoctrination isn't involved). So in that light, I fail to see how refusal is the only method for self-determination as we created the possibilities.

[v TricKy v]

Lockler wrote...

Quick chime in - the way I see it, the Catalyst only explains the choices. He didn't create them. In fact, he tried suppressing it as the Reapers sought at one point to eradicate anything resembling the Crucible. Organics created the choice/options by building the Crucible. That isn't to say the Catalyst doesn't have a preferable option in it when it sees that Synthesis is a true possibility now, but Shepard still has free will. The choice is clearly his to make (assuming that indoctrination isn't involved). So in that light, I fail to see how refusal is the only method for self-determination as we created the possibilities.

Because you dont know if its the truth. If Hackett or someone else on crucible told you about your choices then everything would be fine but they know nothing and only the leader of your enemys can say what is does.
Do you see the problem?
He didnt even earn your trust beforehand. If he would have actually halted the Reaper attack while you are speaking than you could start to argue if he is speaken the truth. But the way it is now, no way atleast for me.

[Lockler]

I gauged two things from him: 1. He will continue the cycle unabated as that is his duty/motivation. 2. Now that new options are presented, the past is null; he's now willing to modify his operandi but can't on his own. The leader of the enemy is also not organic, his lines of logic and reasoning are completely different .. even if he is a rogue AI. I trust that he wants change, and he says that if there is one option you choose, it should be synthesis (he even appeals on it's behalf, he's honest in that). We know what he wants, and he does skew the other options by painting the geth genocide and Shepard being vaporized into software. Synthesis is the happy ending, for him and he tries damn hard to sell it.

The fact is, we don't know. Now here comes the obligatory but ... but I find that there is something of merit when a being whose sole purpose is to harvest sapient organics finally decides to talk to one and reveal it's existence (regardless if it's a hated plot device). It's time to take note that it may probably be more honest when it lays the cards on the table. And it is, in appearance to me.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

Bill Casey wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

Refusal is surrendering.

Incorrect...
Refusal is the polar opposite of surrendering...
It is the 300 Ending...


LastStand
DefiantToTheEnd

People just don't get it.

I bet they will come to 300 Spartans and say "Hey, guys, you know, you can't win it will be just pointless suicide. You should negotiate with Xerxes while you still have some leverage over him".

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 01 juillet 2012 - 09:46 .

[Geneaux486]

[quote]A problem for which his solution is to create super-synthetics to wipe out organics... Because that wasn't the original problem?[/quote]

They don't wipe out organics, they convert them into Reaper form once they've hit what the Catalyst believes to be the pinnacle of technological developement, leaving room for the next group of species to advance and evolve.  Organics are preserved in Reaper form, mind and body.  It's a terrible solution not because it's illogical, because the problem is it is logical, but because it ignores the value of the individual and has no regard for the pain and suffering inflicted in the process of Reaperfication. 

[quote]Irrelevant. If the solution is to remove diversity to prevent war, is still should be rejected - even if it was the solution of a super-computer. A computer cannot understand humanity and pride.[/quote]

Synthesis does not remove diversity.  Humans are still humans, krogan are still krogan, turians are still turians, etc.  Synthesis grants understanding, and a strengthened genetic framework, nothing more.

[quote]Based on the fact that you need the higher EMS to unlock this ending, the developers placed it as better than Refuse, Destroy and Control... Since there is no others, that makes it, by default, the best option. This is not ingame politics. It's game mechanics.[/quote]

Yet the highest EMS earns you the survival ending, so by your logic perfect destroy is technically the best ending, even though it kills the Geth and EDI.  See my point?  It's left up to personal choice for a reason.  The epilogue paints an optimistic picture with any of the choices for a reason.

[quote]Yeah but the Prothean cycle just came before us. The Resistence just started recently from that point of view. The Protheans started it, we could do more damage to them, than the next cycle comes and does damage and so on until the Reapers got beaten.[/quote]
 
But that's not how it was going.  The Reapers were winning our cycle and taking relatively small losses.  Plus, after the cycle was over, they'd be able to evaluate how the Protheans were able to mess things up and correct it.  They would become stronger in that way.

[quote]They cant replenish their number fast enough after all.[/quote]
 
They weren't taking enough losses for that to matter.

[quote]The Crucible on the other hand could tip the favor back to the Reapers by making them stronger or in regard to synthesis by making us their permant slaves, making the attempt from the Protheans useless and put everything back to Status Quo[/quote]

There's no reason to suspect that the Crucible would do anything like that.  Plus, refusal definetely returns things to the status quo, which is still only a small risk in using the Crucible.  As I said, nothing to lose, everything to gain.  The worst that could happen as a result of using the Crucible is what would definetely happen by refusing to use it.

[quote]Incorrect...
Refusal is the polar opposite of surrendering...
It is the 300 Ending...[/quote]

Oh?  'Cause I don't remember the spartans having a weapon capable of stopping all of their enemies at once and then refusing to use it because said enemy surrendered.  You can't twist refusal, it's straight forward, cut and dry.  You walk away from the Crucible, the cycle continues, the Reapers harvest everyone, everything's left to the next cycle.  And you're choosing that as opposed to stopping them once and for all.  It is a complete and utter surrender to the Reapers and their pattern.  It's fortunate that Liara's capsule contained enough information for the next cycle to use the Crucible, but the fact remains that everyone in our cycle dies needlessely.

[quote]I don't see how this is more than a vague estimate. What is this based on? They don't really know the Reapers.[/quote]
 
It's based on the fact that Hackett is watching it happen.  He's seeing the might of the Reapers first hand.  Shepard sees it first hand at Palaven and on Thessia.  It's not an estimate, it's an observation.

[quote]When Hackett says they can't win conventionally this basically means they really don't know if they could win and that it's very late to find out. And they are now pouring all of their ressources into that convenient device Liara digged up in the Mars archives, so still no one bothers to find out.[/quote]

The Turians are fighting them conventionally when Shepard intervenes.  They're losing.  Badly.  Hackett's not an idiot, he can see what the Reapers are doing to his fleets. 

[quote]The strength of the Reapers is all over the place anyway. Whatever the writers found convenient. In ME1 they need this elaborate plan to create an advantage and it takes a long time to complete the cycle (years/decades/centuries), even with the Protheans largely unprepared. In ME3 they just fly in and wipe everything in a matter of weeks/months.
Sometimes one Reaper obliterates a fleet, sometimes it can be shot down with a Cain.[/quote]

The Reapers' strength is actually consistent.  Our extinction cycle would have taken as long as the Prothean's because there are hundreds of populated worlds, maybe thousands, and the Reapers take it upon themselves to wipe out every last living being on each of them.  Not only that, but they have to be slow and careful about it, because they need a certain percentage of living specimens in order to make more of their kind.  Basically, the only reason it takes so long is because the Reapers need lots of people alive.  Also, a Sovereign class Reaper can obliterate a fleet, it's a Destroy class, notably smaller and much weaker, that is destroyed with a Cain.

[quote]Based on what we've learned in ME1 and ignoring the inconsistencies (retcons?) introduced with ME2+3, Refusal could very well mean trying to fight back for years before ultimately failing. [/quote]

They probably did fight back for years, the same way the Protheans did, but it probably didn't do them any good, same way it didn't do the Protheans any good.  The advantage the Protheans gave us by closing down the Citadel Relay was wasted because nobody in positions of power got their **** together and prepared.

[Reptilian Rob]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

Refusal is surrendering.

Incorrect...
Refusal is the polar opposite of surrendering...
It is the 300 Ending...


LastStand
DefiantToTheEnd

People just don't get it.

I bet they will come to 300 Spartans and say "Hey, guys, you know, you can't win it will be just pointless suicide. You should negotiate with Xerxes while you still have some leverage over him".

Sparta had no other option, Shepard had three. 

[Geneaux486]

Reptilian Rob wrote...
Sparta had no other option, Shepard had three. 

A much more efficient response.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

I wouldn't go into history lessons, but did you even watch the said movie?
They had several options, but abhorred them. Had they taken them, they would being left alive. But it was not their only goal.