350 réponses à ce sujet

[DirtyPhoenix]

I think control isn't the most hated one, synthesis is.

[CroGamer002]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...
I believe Synthesis is the most unpopular.

According to various polls, Control is the most unpopular. Synthesis is only singular in the level of hate it attracts from certain people.

As for why Control is unpopular, it may have to do with installing an AI god as ruler of the galaxy. That reduces the agency of the civilizations of the galaxy to shape the future unless the AI god shows a lot of restraint. I like that Control exists as an option and some of my Shepards use it, but it's not my preferred one.

Actually, it's because Destroy has massive dominance in support.


But Synthesis is the most despised, every day there's a new thread popping up against Synthesis.

For Control?
Just 1 active support thread.

Modifié par Mesina2, 16 juillet 2012 - 11:04 .

[kolibri_]

Destroy was never an option for me as I'm not sacrificing a whole population of intelligent beings. Especially if there are other ways to solve the problem. Synthesis was interesting, but after surviving so many battles and overcoming so many great enemies, I just didn't want my Shepard to get dissolved in some light stream. And then, there is control. The only guaranteed way to stay alive somehow and the only possibility to ever return to the crew. So yea, Control ftw! ^^

[ObserverStatus]

Baronesa wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...
You're saying being a dictator is like a bad thing.

It is
I know for many people living under a dictatorship is an hypothetical... for me it was a reality. Despite being  on my early years I do remember how it was.

With all due respect, I think that MY Shepard would make a much better dictator than whatever one you lived under.

[Harbinger of your Destiny]

bobobo878 wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...
You're saying being a dictator is like a bad thing.

It is
I know for many people living under a dictatorship is an hypothetical... for me it was a reality. Despite being  on my early years I do remember how it was.

With all due respect, I think that MY Shepard would make a much better dictator than whatever one you lived under.

The best dictators are the ones who relinquish their power when they are no longer needed. So here is the question why would we need a dictator with a reaper army?

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Mesina2 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Personally control disturbs me because it's basically Shepard using the Reapers to take over the galaxy.
The fact that a Paragon will be a benevolent dictator does not change the fact that they're a dictator.

Even if the Reapers never rebel from this control and everything is fine and dandy forever it still bothers me.
Granted, it's still better than synthesis.

You're saying being a dictator is like a bad thing.

I don't think so. I think it's the being DEAD part. See being a DEAD dictator is still DEAD. It is not a winning choice.

Remember it is NOT Shepard. It is an AI with a Shepard imprint. It is a thing. And a DEAD Shepard controls nothing.

[Uncle Jo]

Mesina2 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Personally control disturbs me because it's basically Shepard using the Reapers to take over the galaxy.
The fact that a Paragon will be a benevolent dictator does not change the fact that they're a dictator.

Even if the Reapers never rebel from this control and everything is fine and dandy forever it still bothers me.
Granted, it's still better than synthesis.

You're saying being a dictator is like a bad thing.

I can't believe that now even dictatorship found apologists.

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 21 juillet 2012 - 02:15 .

[TJBartlemus]

Why control is so dispised? It's because it makes Shepard a massive hypocrite. You are fighting TIM the entire game for him to end up right? No. Same with Synthesis. Why kill Saren if he was right? It just really makes Shepard into a massive jack***.

Major problem I have with people who choose control is that they are misinformed or blind to what they are choosing. In Control, Shepard is dead. He rules nothing. He becomes no dictator. The Reapers become the rulers of the galaxy effectively. And who rules them?? A copy of Shepard's memories inside the Catalyst or he is just a copy. (Proof it's not Shepard? In the CE or the strategy book the control decision is named - Become a Reaper) It's not even a solution. Reaper Shep's motivation is that he is watching over his friends. What happens after they are all dead and the races start fighting? He's not going to care about the consequences. It's like having another Catalyst but the result is that it only delayed the cycles again.

[JeffZero]

TJBartlemus wrote...

Why control is so dispised? It's because it makes Shepard a massive hypocrite. You are fighting TIM the entire game for him to end up right? No. Same with Synthesis. Why kill Saren if he was right? It just really makes Shepard into a massive jack***.

Major problem I have with people who choose control is that they are misinformed or blind to what they are choosing. In Control, Shepard is dead. He rules nothing. He becomes no dictator. The Reapers become the rulers of the galaxy effectively. And who rules them?? A copy of Shepard's memories inside the Catalyst or he is just a copy. (Proof it's not Shepard? In the CE or the strategy book the control decision is named - Become a Reaper) It's not even a solution. Reaper Shep's motivation is that he is watching over his friends. What happens after they are all dead and the races start fighting? He's not going to care about the consequences. It's like having another Catalyst but the result is that it only delayed the cycles again.

You seriously cannot use Prima Games' word choice as proof of anything. Not only was that written before EC, it's also... Prima. They're just as notorious as most strategy guide manufacturers for not getting things quite right.

[HNNNNNNG]

I like how shepard becomes space jesus if you choose control

[TJBartlemus]

JeffZero wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Why control is so dispised? It's because it makes Shepard a massive hypocrite. You are fighting TIM the entire game for him to end up right? No. Same with Synthesis. Why kill Saren if he was right? It just really makes Shepard into a massive jack***.

Major problem I have with people who choose control is that they are misinformed or blind to what they are choosing. In Control, Shepard is dead. He rules nothing. He becomes no dictator. The Reapers become the rulers of the galaxy effectively. And who rules them?? A copy of Shepard's memories inside the Catalyst or he is just a copy. (Proof it's not Shepard? In the CE or the strategy book the control decision is named - Become a Reaper) It's not even a solution. Reaper Shep's motivation is that he is watching over his friends. What happens after they are all dead and the races start fighting? He's not going to care about the consequences. It's like having another Catalyst but the result is that it only delayed the cycles again.

You seriously cannot use Prima Games' word choice as proof of anything. Not only was that written before EC, it's also... Prima. They're just as notorious as most strategy guide manufacturers for not getting things quite right.

I also said the Collectors Edition. (Which has the same thing and same format.) Besides it says on the book that it was reviewed and approved by BioWare and has the BioWare stamp on it. So it was made with BioWare's approval. 

[Genetic Destiny]

The game thoroughly drilled the "Control is bad" idea into my head, and like Cerberus, ideas can't be killed. Since the VI on Thessia said that there was an indoctrinated splinter group who wanted control, and the fact that there's 4 handle bars that can't be grabbed at once by the same person, I'll remain skeptical.

I'd definitely choose it over synthesis though.

Modifié par Genetic Destiny, 21 juillet 2012 - 01:35 .

[JeffZero]

TJBartlemus wrote...

JeffZero wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Why control is so dispised? It's because it makes Shepard a massive hypocrite. You are fighting TIM the entire game for him to end up right? No. Same with Synthesis. Why kill Saren if he was right? It just really makes Shepard into a massive jack***.

Major problem I have with people who choose control is that they are misinformed or blind to what they are choosing. In Control, Shepard is dead. He rules nothing. He becomes no dictator. The Reapers become the rulers of the galaxy effectively. And who rules them?? A copy of Shepard's memories inside the Catalyst or he is just a copy. (Proof it's not Shepard? In the CE or the strategy book the control decision is named - Become a Reaper) It's not even a solution. Reaper Shep's motivation is that he is watching over his friends. What happens after they are all dead and the races start fighting? He's not going to care about the consequences. It's like having another Catalyst but the result is that it only delayed the cycles again.

You seriously cannot use Prima Games' word choice as proof of anything. Not only was that written before EC, it's also... Prima. They're just as notorious as most strategy guide manufacturers for not getting things quite right.

I also said the Collectors Edition. (Which has the same thing and same format.) Besides it says on the book that it was reviewed and approved by BioWare and has the BioWare stamp on it. So it was made with BioWare's approval. 

Somehow I completely missed the mention of CE, don't ask me how. But what book are we talking about in that case? The CE version of the strategy guide is what I'm taking that to mean, which is, well, the same thing.

And I know it has their stamp and everything, it's official and wants to sell copies and whatnot, but MGS4's guide starts with a forward by Hideo Kojima and still gets 13 vital things wrong. I'm just saying, I wouldn't take it as scripture like that. Strategy guides are virtually never flawless.

[TJBartlemus]

JeffZero wrote...

Somehow I completely missed the mention of CE, don't ask me how. But what book are we talking about in that case? The CE version of the strategy guide is what I'm taking that to mean, which is, well, the same thing.

And I know it has their stamp and everything, it's official and wants to sell copies and whatnot, but MGS4's guide starts with a forward by Hideo Kojima and still gets 13 vital things wrong. I'm just saying, I wouldn't take it as scripture like that. Strategy guides are virtually never flawless.

The CE I'm talking about is the book that came with the Collectors Edition of ME3 that you got from Pre-Ordering it. Inside it covered a lot of things about the game, like the child and had pieces of concept art from the game only in that book. Inside there is a EMS explaination of the endings. It details how much EMS it requires for each ending. It destribes the endings as "destroy the Reapers", "synergy", and "become a reaper". It also includes a 1000 point difference in the endings with destory that includes if you saved anderson or not. (Anderson portion has yet to be explained by BioWare. But either saving him or not still has survival for Shepard.)  

[dns19]

How is Destroy "guaranteed" to end the Reapers ? You did listen to the Catalyst in both original , and Extended Cut ending right? The cycle MAY start again due to conflicts between organics and synthetics when a future race sees the inevitable as those who first created the Catalyst... Destroy is a temporary means to and end before it starts again.



Synthesis is the way to bring peace for ever, just between organics and synthetics. I mean , trust the Catalyst. It tried to bring peace itself during the "first" years after its creation and failed.Then , it created the Reapers to prevent the destruction of organics.Reapers are neither good nor evil. Just a means to bring order to chaos.They didnt lie.
And now , with Shepard , it found new purpose ~  synthesis=peace. Synthetics would feel and appreciate life as the organics do , so that they created wont rise against the creators.

Control , although is what i choose and is my personal favourite.It is just bad-ass. Shepard is the new Catalyst with many of his/her past life memories.He/She/It will eventually in the far future resume the cycles if there are no other way to prevent the galaxy and races from a full scale war.Simply twisted and magnificent  
(Control is also what happens in real life. The strongest ,using every recourse under command, supress those weaker who are about to rise and rebel against authority.)

And to those who say that Saren is something like Synthesis and Control is The Illusive Man , i think it is clearly stated that Reapers had no intention of merging the races-they would HARVEST the advanced and move to dark space again- , and TIM was not capable of controlling them so they knew that was no option either
.The variables all changed when the Catalyst wanted to meet Shepard. If that didnt happen , there was no possible way for the races to beat the Reapers , even united. They all relied to the Crucible as a means to an end ( this is why in Deny option , they lose )
.As i said above , the Catalyst has no intention of lying. It tried to bring peace itself when it was created but ultimatelly resorted to Reapers.

Modifié par dns19, 23 juillet 2012 - 03:58 .

[FlyingSquirrel]

Well, my canon Shepard is about as Paragon and anti-Cerberus as they come, and she chose Control because it was the option that would end the war and let everyone continue to make their own choices and develop and advance freely. Destroy was just too much collateral damage, and Synthesis was too much of putting her thumb on the scales of evolution and forcing a change that many might strongly oppose (and, metagaming aside, I figured Shepard has no way of knowing whether it will really turn out as well as what we eventually see in EDI's narration).

The only person who really gets the short end of the stick in Control is Shepard, since (s)he has to die for the new AI to be created. We don't know if the Reapers are even capable of independent thought without something there to play the role of the Catalyst, and if they are, the AI could allow them to operate with free will as long as they don't attack anybody.

Now, is it possible that the new AI could eventually go nuts and start harvesting again? Maybe, though I'd argue that one that absorbs a Paragon Shepard's values and ideals probably wouldn't - but even then, rejecting Control on the basis of something that *might* happen is hard to justify when you know beyond a doubt that Destroy will kill billions of synthetics and Synthesis will force a major evolutionary change on the entire galaxy.

Control does *not* mean you agree with TIM or you shouldn't have fought him, IMO - not only is he indoctrinated, but he's also not very trustworthy. An AI based on TIM (and it's hard to tell if he'd have gone through with it if he'd known that was the outcome) would be a much bigger risk to turn malevolent, especially towards aliens that he perceives as a threat or an obstacle to humans.

[JPN17]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

For many people, it's because Control is contaminated by icky Cerberus and Illusive Man.

And the fact Shepard never considers it and tell TIM he's a moron for attempting it.

Pretty much. The entire game Shepard tells TIM he can't control the reapers and vehemently fights against the idea. Then the catalyst says it and with no thought or argument Shepard goes "derp oh okay then."

[sth128]

I just head canon that Shepard took control, repaired all the relays and planets, then flew the Reapers into a black hole.

TIM wanted the Reapers for his own gain. Shepard just took control to prevent total annihilation.

Besides, I didn't want to kill the Geth or turn everyone in the galaxy into the *bleep* Borg.

[JeffZero]

Control rocks.

Some people can't stand rock. They prefer paper... scissors. Such is life.

[darthnick427]

I like Control but I like Destroy more. Destroy and Control are the only ending options I deem acceptable. Luckily Control is still more popular than that abomination people call Synthesis

[FlamingBoy]

I though synthesis was the most unpopular

but lets face none of the endings were bloody popular

[Zaire Taylor]

Power corrupts. If my Shepard, even though he was fairly paragon, took control of the Reapers how can I trust him never to ever snap and abuse his power?

[Old Books]

darthnick427 wrote...

I like Control but I like Destroy more. Destroy and Control are the only ending options I deem acceptable. Luckily Control is still more popular than that abomination people call Synthesis

This. Control would have be an acceptable option for the ME universe IMO, but only if it was presented as a 'failure' option; i.e. Shepherd loses and the Reapers complete the cycle. Synthesis is just plain fail. We can debate the intricacies of the endings all we want, but the real issue will always be that we got presented with these 3 (4) endings at all and that the whole organics vs synthetics premise is fundamentally flawed and stupid.

[Bill Casey]

JeffZero wrote...

You seriously cannot use Prima Games' word choice as proof of anything. Not only was that written before EC, it's also... Prima. They're just as notorious as most strategy guide manufacturers for not getting things quite right.

The game files were also called becomeareaper...

[k0xfilter]

my problem with control and synthesis is that you get introduced to a new character who claims to be the mastermind behind the cycles and he tells you that you can take over control over the reapers by touching that power line something or end all of this synthetics vs organics and cycle **** by jumping into a giant laser.


...no way hosay