329 réponses à ce sujet

[Kingthlayer]

I picked destroy because when I walked towards it I was magically locked in place and couldn't change my direction to pick control. Haven't got to that point a second time.

[Kendar Fleetfoot]

ThaDPG wrote...

I pick destroy because it's what Shep set out to do, whether he lives or not

This

[Elite Trooper]

I laugh and find it ironic how some people think Destroy is the 'paragon' option.

Why? Well in ME1 you have a conversation with Anderson about Saren. He says "Saren wouldn't hesitate to kill 1000 people in an instant just to end a war." and i'm assuming all you 'Paragons' out there, in response, would choose the option "Then he needs to be stopped" (or something like that).

IF you say that "You would too" then Anderson says that Saren would do it even if their were other options.

What are you doing with destroy? Killing millions to end a war. Even with other options available. So, in that sense, your no better than Saren.

Me? I chose Control. Like The Illusive Man says "Control is a means to survival."

[Y3Y00]

I chose Control Pre-EC, and now, it's even better.

[MegaSovereign]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Elite Trooper wrote...

What are you doing with destroy? Killing millions to end a war.

I only killed EDI.

You bastard.

[darthnick427]

ThaDPG wrote...

I pick destroy because it's what Shep set out to do, whether he lives or not

This

[Elite Trooper]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Elite Trooper wrote...

What are you doing with destroy? Killing millions to end a war.

I only killed EDI.

You killed THE GETH YOU EVIL BASTARD!

[JG The Gamer]

Elite Trooper wrote...

I laugh and find it ironic how some people think Destroy is the 'paragon' option.

Why?
Well in ME1 you have a conversation with Anderson about Saren. He says
"Saren wouldn't hesitate to kill 1000 people in an instant just to end a
war." and i'm assuming all you 'Paragons' out there, in response, would
choose the option "Then he needs to be stopped" (or something like
that).

IF you say that "You would too" then Anderson says that Saren would do it even if their were other options.

What
are you doing with destroy? Killing millions to end a war. Even with
other options available. So, in that sense, your no better than Saren.

Me? I chose Control. Like The Illusive Man says "Control is a means to survival."

Prior
to ME1 Saren has never (outside of Sovereign's indoctrination) faced an
enemy he couldn't beat. And even then, he took shortcuts which lead to
the deaths of many innocents. He never had to make the hard choices with
a galaxy on the line. Sovereign made the hard choice for Saren more like.

Shepard on the other hand has his/her back to the wall with the fate of a galaxy on the line. If the Reapers aren't destroyed, they will destroy all organic life. Over and over. Don't like the cost, but it rids the galaxy of the Reapers forever.

If it were any other species on the line, humans included, I'm still putting a dozen holes in that tube.

[Arcadian Legend]

I picked Destroy not as a means to keep Shep alive, that's just a bonus. I'd have done it if Shep were to have died without a chance for survival. I picked Destroy as a means to end it, once and for all. It may be the Renegade choice, and thus my headcanon always sees it as Shep dying in that rubble regardless of EMS. It only seems right that way considering the sudden massacre of an allied synthetic race and one of Shepard's most loyal companions. In that sense I can understand why the Commander walked into those explosions. If she's gonna wipe out a whole race and a dear friend, with the reapers, it's only fitting she goes along with them.

Though I have to say Paragon Control is appealing too.

Modifié par Arcadian Legend, 28 juillet 2012 - 12:15 .

[Chaotic-Fusion]

I chose destroy because it's what we set out to do, and what was agreed for. Shepard surviving is a nice bonus, if you chose to interpret it that way. But even if he didn't, I would not hesitate to shot the tube. That the geth had to die for the rest of us to survive is unfortunate, but everyone was prepared for the worst when the entered the sol relay, not everyone agreed to be synthesised nor controlled by a probably emotionally scarred Shepard. Destroy is the only way to escape the Reapers' control.

[Elorin Silverblade]

Truthfully it is part of the reason, yes, the other part being I don't see my Shepard playing god in synthesis or taking a chance with another AI in control.

[CHALET]

Ieldra2 wrote...

CHALET wrote...
 ...Just because it's the one where Shepard lives?

Do you really expect an honest answer to that?

Probably not.

[Cuddlezarro]

picked destroy because its the only one the reapers die in shep living is just a nice bonus I could get after the ec (yes I know it existed pre EC but I never had the EMS for it before I played the extended endings and I only started MP after my playthrough)

[zakaryzb]

For those of you that chose destroy? What was your though on the synthetics vs organics problem? While EDI and the Geth are clear examples of how starbrat was wrong, this was not always the case, as seen from your conversations with Javik. Did you just headcannon that down the road, synthetics like the geth would be created again that wouldn't harm organics? With destroy, the only two "good" synthetics we know of are now gone.

[D24O]

Uncle Jo wrote...
Even if it's off topic I completely agree with you that the brat should have been, at worst, a simple VI explaining the choices. At best never been on the Citadel to begin with. But he's there, spits out his c**p and even with my best will, I can't get him out of the picture. I wish I'd have enough of your wisdom.

I'd have chosen Destroy even if it was the humans who will be wiped out. Any other organic race being at stake wouldn't have changed my mind. In our case, it just happened that the Geth and EDI were the "chosen ones".
And it's not impossible that other synthetic races will see the light in the future.

But I do see your point. Still being forced to ignore a important character and headcanon the ending to make it a bit plausible, is pretty sad.

Well the fact that they have to add the caviet of killing off synthetic life for people to even consider the other choices suggests that they're weak. But IMO the Catalyst is a bad character, and I try, although not always succesfully, to ignore it and not let it ruin the game.

[Uncle Jo]

Elite Trooper wrote...

I laugh and find it ironic how some people think Destroy is the 'paragon' option.

I laugh and find it ironic how some people think any option is parangon. Especially control.

Why? Well in ME1 you have a conversation with Anderson about Saren. He says "Saren wouldn't hesitate to kill 1000 people in an instant just to end a war." and i'm assuming all you 'Paragons' out there, in response, would choose the option "Then he needs to be stopped" (or something like that).

IF you say that "You would too" then Anderson says that Saren would do it even if their were other options.

What are you doing with destroy? Killing millions to end a war. Even with other options available. So, in that sense, your no better
than Saren.

I never thought that someone who chose Control would ever have the nerves to bring morality as argument.

Saren... Was it the guy who hated humans, didn't want Anderson to become a spectre because of his hatred, and collaborated with the Reapers ? Quoting just one sentence is enough for you to make this kind of analogy ?

TIM... Wasn't it the guy who, amongst other funny things, experimented the indoc process on his own people?

The others options are: Fullfilling the wet dreams of the Reapers or replacing a catalyst with an "improved" one, which changes absolutely nothing in the long-term, since you still have the Reapers AND the danger of a probable tech sing. No matter who controls them, the Reapers break the balance of the Galaxy. They're unmatched killing machines. No one can sleep well, knowing that they're out there.

Do you think even one second, that the Galaxy will be happy to see you hanging around with your new buddies, trust you, or won't try someday to get rid of you ? Do you like to play the galactic cop?

Don't you think that every one has the right to evolve the way they should, without some god-like machines interfering in any way ?

It's not a simple war, it's a programmed extermination. Your enemy is a billion years old race, who never gave a damn about organic nor synthetics and is just using you for their own selfish purposes. They have no place in the Galaxy.

The outcomes of all the options are unknown in the long-term. In Destroy you have at least the biggest problem fewer.

Me? I chose Control. Like The Illusive Man says "Control is a means to survival."

The same guy you've told five minute before that we're not ready for this kind of power (parangon option BTW) and shot right after that. Cool story bro.

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 28 juillet 2012 - 02:09 .

[fchopin]

CHALET wrote...

 ...Just because it's the one where Shepard lives?

I will always pick destroy with or without shepard surviving.
 
Fact is no person knows if shepard survives or not.

[The Mega Cake]

My first choice was synthesis, then after seeing how bad the ending is... Well let's just say that I pick destroy out of spite for the god-child.

[D24O]

Actually, with the goal of the endings being "lotsa speculation" the player is the one who determines if Shep lives, even with that s***tily executed breath scene.

[Taboo]

D24O wrote...

Actually, with the goal of the endings being "lotsa speculation" the player is the one who determines if Shep lives, even with that s***tily executed breath scene.

That give you a lot more power than most people realize.

But yeah, it's pretty awful.

[Genetic Destiny]

I only got the breath scene when the EC came out, so no.

[Randy1012]

zakaryzb wrote...

For those of you that chose destroy? What was your though on the synthetics vs organics problem? While EDI and the Geth are clear examples of how starbrat was wrong, this was not always the case, as seen from your conversations with Javik. Did you just headcannon that down the road, synthetics like the geth would be created again that wouldn't harm organics? With destroy, the only two "good" synthetics we know of are now gone.

This is how I feel about it: The geth and EDI disprove the Catalyst's assertion that organics and synthetics cannot coexist. Maybe some day in the future organics and synthetics will come into conflict again, but it shouldn't be up to the Catalyst or even Shepard to decide how everyone else, both those who are living and those still to come, should live their lives. Life is random and chaotic; it's not something upon which you can (or should) try to impose order. People (both organic and not) should be allowed to live their own lives and make their own choices, good or bad. And just because something happened in the past, that doesn't mean it must happen again in the future. With the existence of the Reapers now a commonly known fact throughout the galaxy, perhaps future generations will avoid the mistakes made by those who came before. Maybe they won't. But whatever happens, they should be given the chance to decide for themselves.

[D24O]

Taboo-XX wrote...

That give you a lot more power than most people realize.

But yeah, it's pretty awful.

Yeah, honestly with what we got, part of me is glad to headcanon my own endings.