395 réponses à ce sujet

[D24O]

Bill Casey wrote...

Twitter isn't canon...
It's one person who worked on the game pulling things out of their ass...

[SMichelle]

jojon2se wrote...

As said a few post up; all the endings could be interpreted and further fleshed out in many ways, good and bad, even after the addition of the EC slides and narration -- just pick your poison, be happy with it and let others be happy with theirs.

"They fought a terrible war, so we wouldn't have to."

But how will everyone know that MY DECISION IS THE ONLY RIGHT DECISION! 




/yup. sarcasm

[MegaSovereign]

The Angry One wrote...

Yes, because not wanting to commit genocide, start a galactic dictatorship or violate every living being's genetics is arrogant now.
Oh well, the young will learn..

It's not really genocide. You aren't actively seeking to exterminate a certain race (well, excluding the Reapers at least).

Higher EMS seems to target Reaper tech only. Which I guess would explain why Shepard survives but EDI/Geth don't.

Besides, the precedent of choosing to sacrifice a large mass of people in order to stop the Reapers was not set by the ME3 endings. They actually railroaded you into to doing this in the Arrival DLC.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 08 juillet 2012 - 07:50 .

[Bill Casey]

And that was only to slow them down...
They are a cosmic horror spanning over a billion years. A Robo-Cthuhlu plague that warps minds just by existing. No sacrifice is too great...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 08 juillet 2012 - 07:57 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

MegaSovereign wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Yes, because not wanting to commit genocide, start a galactic dictatorship or violate every living being's genetics is arrogant now.
Oh well, the young will learn..

It's not really genocide. You aren't actively seeking to exterminate a certain race (well, excluding the Reapers at least).

Higher EMS seems to target Reaper tech only. Which I guess would explain why Shepard survives but EDI/Geth don't.

Besides, the precedent of choosing to sacrifice a large mass of people in order to stop the Reapers was not set by the ME3 endings. They actually railroaded you into to doing this in the Arrival DLC.

You still knowingly shoot the tube the kills all synthetics, whether that was your original intent or not you still do it fully knowing the consequences. It also specifically singles out synthetic forms of life. It's genocide, not collateral damage or anything else.
Arrival railroaded us into mass murder not genocide. You're actions where directed towards a specific area of space. ANYONE who was in the area would have died regardless of what race they were, the area just happend to be filled with batarians. You're actions also didn't kill all batarians throughout the galaxy.

[Bill Casey]

Greylycantrope wrote...

It's genocide, not collateral damage or anything else.

I do not agree with your assessment...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 08 juillet 2012 - 07:59 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

It's genocide, don't try to justify it.

[Bill Casey]

I already have justified it...
It's fully justified, and there's nothing you can do about it...
It's right, it's good and it's moral...

I would gladly kill twenty races to eliminate the reapers, and would sleep like a baby...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 08 juillet 2012 - 08:02 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Bill Casey wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

It's genocide, not collateral damage or anything else.

I do not agree with your assessment...

Off topic question btw: Why do all your posts end in elipses?

[Obvakhi]

What the Refuse ending actually is:

[Khajiit Jzargo]

I wasn't talking to you. But anyway, you justified it illogically, not within the perimeters of common sense then.

[Bill Casey]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

It's genocide, not collateral damage or anything else.

I do not agree with your assessment...

Off topic question btw: Why do all your posts end in elipses?

I am the apostle of aposiopesis...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 08 juillet 2012 - 08:02 .

[MegaSovereign]

Greylycantrope wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Yes, because not wanting to commit genocide, start a galactic dictatorship or violate every living being's genetics is arrogant now.
Oh well, the young will learn..

It's not really genocide. You aren't actively seeking to exterminate a certain race (well, excluding the Reapers at least).

Higher EMS seems to target Reaper tech only. Which I guess would explain why Shepard survives but EDI/Geth don't.

Besides, the precedent of choosing to sacrifice a large mass of people in order to stop the Reapers was not set by the ME3 endings. They actually railroaded you into to doing this in the Arrival DLC.

You still knowingly shoot the tube the kills all synthetics, whether that was your original intent or not you still do it fully knowing the consequences. It also specifically singles out synthetic forms of life. It's genocide, not collateral damage or anything else.
Arrival railroaded us into mass murder not genocide. You're actions where directed towards a specific area of space. ANYONE who was in the area would have died regardless of what race they were, the area just happend to be filled with batarians. You're actions also didn't kill all batarians throughout the galaxy.

But that's NOT what genocide actually is. Genocide is literally the pursuit of wiping out a specific race. All synthetics (whether allies or foe) being destroyed is the very definition of collateral damage.

300,000 Batarians die in order to delay the Reapers. You sacrificed synthetic life in order to outright end the Reaper threat once and for all. The scale is still balanced. In fact, I could cautiously assert that the latter is more justified.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 08 juillet 2012 - 08:05 .

[Bill Casey]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

I wasn't talking to you. But anyway, you justified it illogically, not within the perimeters of common sense then.

I function on cold hard logic and statistical probability...
I am autistic...

The synthetics are the characters I most identify with. They are the ones I wanted to live the most...
So don't pretend you know me...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 08 juillet 2012 - 08:05 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Yes, because not wanting to commit genocide, start a galactic dictatorship or violate every living being's genetics is arrogant now.
Oh well, the young will learn..

It's not really genocide. You aren't actively seeking to exterminate a certain race (well, excluding the Reapers at least).

Higher EMS seems to target Reaper tech only. Which I guess would explain why Shepard survives but EDI/Geth don't.

Besides, the precedent of choosing to sacrifice a large mass of people in order to stop the Reapers was not set by the ME3 endings. They actually railroaded you into to doing this in the Arrival DLC.

You still knowingly shoot the tube the kills all synthetics, whether that was your original intent or not you still do it fully knowing the consequences. It also specifically singles out synthetic forms of life. It's genocide, not collateral damage or anything else.
Arrival railroaded us into mass murder not genocide. You're actions where directed towards a specific area of space. ANYONE who was in the area would have died regardless of what race they were, the area just happend to be filled with batarians. You're actions also didn't kill all batarians throughout the galaxy.

But that's NOT what genocide actually is. Genocide is literally the pursuit of wiping out a specific race. All synthetics (whether allies or foe) being destroyed is the very definition of collateral damage.

300,000 Batarians die in order to delay the Reapers. You sacrificed synthetic life in order to outright end the Reaper threat once and for all. The scale is still balanced.

Genocide-is defined as "the deliberate and systematic destruction"
Picking destroy it's both.

[SMichelle]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

It's genocide, don't try to justify it.

I have no problem saying I sacrificed the geth TO SAVE EVERYONE ELSE.  In Refuse EVERYONE  is goo.

If that's your decision and your fine with galactic extinction - good for you.  My Shepard likes to save lives, and is not afraid of making the difficult decisions. 

So in my Shepard's universe the humans, turians, krogans, quarians, salarians etc are alive....in yours apparently they're extinct.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Bill Casey wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

I wasn't talking to you. But anyway, you justified it illogically, not within the perimeters of common sense then.

I function on cold hard logic and statistical probability...
I am autistic...

The synthetics are the characters I most identify with. They are the ones I wanted to live the most...
So don't pretend you know me...

Whatever you say.

[SMichelle]

Obvakhi wrote...

What the Refuse ending actually is:

But at least we didn't sacrifice the Geth....or wait


/sarcasm again!

[Abraham_uk]

SMichelle wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Yes, because not wanting to commit genocide, start a galactic dictatorship or violate every living being's genetics is arrogant now.
Oh well, the young will learn..

There's a lot of things my Shepard didn't want to do and yet she still had to for the greater good.  I like humans and turians (although I'm pretty amivalent about the asari, quarians, salarians and I don't really like the batarians or vorcha) I think they're worth saving from extinction.

Not a fan of destroy.

But galactic dictorship! I actually loved that ending.
Violating every species! That was pretty badass. EDI even thanks you for violating her. She's never felt more alive after you changed her biology.

No seriously.

Reject ending: 5/10. I wanted a Reapers win ending so badly. But I wanted to see all my war assets getting destroyed. I wanted to see galactic mayhem as many species are exterminated. This could have been a 10/10. But all I got was Liara T'Soni saying "you failed".

Destroy: 6/10. I didn't enjoy betraying the Geth and EDI. I like Geth. I like EDI. Also the ending itself didn't blow me away. I get to live.

Synthesis: 9/10. My favourite ending. I'm not kidding. I'm not trolling. I've upgraded every species. I got synthetics and organics working together. Sure the implication of everlasting peace is false. There will still be wars, still be crime and still be troubles. But being the person who brought everyone together. I liked that. Also the Reapers were pretty helpful.

Control: 8/10. I liked it. I was able to control the Reapers. I helped rebuild society. I ended the cycle and brought hope. Also I can still impact the universe.


But oh Reject is genocide. Destroy is genocide. Control is the robbing of free will. Synthesis is imposing your will on everyone. I have no problem with those endings. Just goes to show how rigid your morality is.

I can be flexible if a situation demands it. Why can't you?

[MegaSovereign]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Yes, because not wanting to commit genocide, start a galactic dictatorship or violate every living being's genetics is arrogant now.
Oh well, the young will learn..

It's not really genocide. You aren't actively seeking to exterminate a certain race (well, excluding the Reapers at least).

Higher EMS seems to target Reaper tech only. Which I guess would explain why Shepard survives but EDI/Geth don't.

Besides, the precedent of choosing to sacrifice a large mass of people in order to stop the Reapers was not set by the ME3 endings. They actually railroaded you into to doing this in the Arrival DLC.

You still knowingly shoot the tube the kills all synthetics, whether that was your original intent or not you still do it fully knowing the consequences. It also specifically singles out synthetic forms of life. It's genocide, not collateral damage or anything else.
Arrival railroaded us into mass murder not genocide. You're actions where directed towards a specific area of space. ANYONE who was in the area would have died regardless of what race they were, the area just happend to be filled with batarians. You're actions also didn't kill all batarians throughout the galaxy.

But that's NOT what genocide actually is. Genocide is literally the pursuit of wiping out a specific race. All synthetics (whether allies or foe) being destroyed is the very definition of collateral damage.

300,000 Batarians die in order to delay the Reapers. You sacrificed synthetic life in order to outright end the Reaper threat once and for all. The scale is still balanced.

Genocide-is defined as "the deliberate and systematic destruction"
Picking destroy it's both.

It's a sacrifice.

Calling it genocide is a stupid generalization for Destroy with its only purpose being to make Shepard look like the bad guy for choosing it.

If Control/Synthesis are non-options for you. Then destroy is the only way you can stop the Reapers and move on.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

SMichelle wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

It's genocide, don't try to justify it.

I have no problem saying I sacrificed the geth TO SAVE EVERYONE ELSE.  In Refuse EVERYONE  is goo.

If that's your decision and your fine with galactic extinction - good for you.  My Shepard likes to save lives, and is not afraid of making the difficult decisions. 

So in my Shepard's universe the humans, turians, krogans, quarians, salarians etc are alive....in yours apparently they're extinct.

You have no problem saying you commited a war crime, genocide, an atrocity to win a war. You submitted to the Catalyst's ultimatium, and make a decision you would have never made out of fear of extinction just to ensure victory. You believed your enemy that was trying to massacre you the whole game, and probaly killed million. Sorry, if you wanna commit genocide just so you can live, you betray everything about what Shepard has done the past three games, and is naive to think everyone was turned to reaper goo.

One of our traits as organics is persistence, we will not surrender even though we know we will lose, If we lose, but manage to lower down their numbers, pass useful information to the next cycle, and maybe a few of survive till the next cycle, then it's a victory to me, and our cycle.

[RenegonSQ]

No you don't, stop trying to justify your displeasure with the endings by making refuse look good. It's childish. Killing your entire cycle is not a "win", douche.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

@MegaSovereign

It can be called a "sacrifice" but it's genocide, and the whole galaxy can be blamed for it, because their all living knowing they commit genocide in order to live, but I see where your coming from and respect your opinion, I just completely disagree with it.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

RenegonSQ wrote...

No you don't, stop trying to justify your displeasure with the endings by making refuse look good. It's childish. Killing your entire cycle is not a "win", douche.

And calling a person a douche because you disagree with them and have no evidence to back it up makes you so mature.

[GreyLycanTrope]

MegaSovereign wrote...
But that's NOT what genocide actually is. Genocide is literally the pursuit of wiping out a specific race. All synthetics (whether allies or foe) being destroyed is the very definition of collateral damage.

300,000 Batarians die in order to delay the Reapers. You sacrificed synthetic life in order to outright end the Reaper threat once and for all. The scale is still balanced. In fact, I could cautiously assert that the latter is more justified.

We're working of different defnintions than.
I go by "a deliberate extermination of a racial, national, or religious group". Shepard shoots the tube delibratly, and knows what will happen to the specific group of lifeforms as a result. The minute you pull the trigger you are actively seeking to end all synthetic life, genocide.
Collateral damage "damage that incidently occurs from ones actions" , this would be the case if you set the crucible to kill the reapers but it ended up killing all synthetics anyway.