285 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

 I've pondered why EDI's death bothered me, and I think I've figured it out.

It's because her death goes entirely without comment.

Her character has been loyal to Shepard for two games, proven her worth and has been a steadfast companion.  Others like these were given a heroic and/or touching sendoff:  Mordin, Thane, Legion, Anderson, even other characters who can die but their deaths are preventable.  We get to see them dying for the cause.  They get to say a few last words and have a meaningful death scene.

EDI (and, by extension, the geth) get no such scene in the Destroy ending.  They die to firendly fire, offscreen.  Hackett doesn't even mention them in his last speech.  There's no scene of EDI and Joker comforting each other in her last moments.  No final goodbye from the geth fleet as they sacrifice themselves to stop the Old Machines.  The synthetics were just hostages being held by Bioware so you'd choose a different color (green) and once they're dead, their purpose was served.  Very disappointing.  Grunt had a better scene.

[Ozida]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
Who said anything about us attacking them, I'm just saying they weren't enemies because they were evil, they became enemies because they were put into a tight situation by the Quarians. You can't hold grudges, especially when is very clear you a united galaxy to win the war.

OK, I really don’t want to bring extreme examples, but World War 2 is the only one that comes to minds right now…

You know that many German people believed in 1938 that they were put in a tough situation after World War 1? They have participated in the war they didn’t want to in the first place, but were pushed by Austria as an “ally”.
Instead Austria was left unpunished and all the **storm came down to Germany. Technically, Europe
brought it upon itself with its moratoriums toward Germany. So who to blame for World War 2? European government? German people? All together? Who is the evil guy here? And who is to blame for ****sts acts during the war?

Same for geths. Maybe they were a victim in this war, but they have chosen to go against all organics, not only Quarians. Until ME2 we didn't even know that there are "heretics" and accodring to Mass Effect Wiki: "It should be stressed, however, that practically all geth encountered  outside the veil likely belong to a violent faction of the geth and will react with hostility to any organic not working for the Reapers". So the only "true" geth are hidden somwhere in the vils in the first place, meaning that those who we killed earlier were, in fact, enemies.

And talking about "You can't hold grudges, especially when is very clear you a united galaxy to win the war.", did you free Sayn by any chance? You know, to win at any cost?

Modifié par Ozida, 04 août 2012 - 05:15 .

[The Twilight God]

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

...Probably because they're not. I can't think of a single reason you would pointlessly vaporise yourself when you can destroy the reapers and walk away unscathed cooked to perfection.

The geth and EDI dying were just artificial limits bioware imposed so that most people wouldn't chose destroy. It's clear they favored Synthesis. And still it didn't work, most people here at least chose destroy even with those absurd consequences.

I love how only synthesis shows turians or quarians and geth together. They really want to make galaxy wide huskfication stand out as "da bestest".

[The Twilight God]

Ozida wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Ozida wrote...
Did you count all the Geth you've killed during ME1?

But they weren't allied with me 

So you are fine with past crimes as long as your enemies suddenly turn friendly? Like with Reapers in  Synthesis?
You know, my grand-grand father was a World War 2 veteran (sadly he has passed away several years ago). He hold grudge over German people even after the war was over. I am just saying, this is not a typical reaction of a solder to forgive his enemy like that.

When your mind is linked to the reapers and they are influencing your perception it's pretty damn easy to get over it. I think control epiligue takes place from the deluded perspective of a shepardized starchild. The cycle continues after a small break inthe fighting to fix the relays. All narrators in al 3 endings are speaking about "what if's". None of that stuff actually happened, but is what they hope will happen in the future at the time of the narration.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Ozida wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
Who said anything about us attacking them, I'm just saying they weren't enemies because they were evil, they became enemies because they were put into a tight situation by the Quarians. You can't hold grudges, especially when is very clear you a united galaxy to win the war.

OK, I really don’t want to bring extreme examples, but World War 2 is the only one that comes to minds right now…

You know that many German people believed in 1938 that they were put in a tough situation after World War 1? They have participated in the war they didn’t want to in the first place, but were pushed by Austria as an “ally”.
Instead Austria was left unpunished and all the **storm came down to Germany. Technically, Europe
brought it upon itself with its moratoriums toward Germany. So who to blame for World War 2? European government? German people? All together? Who is the evil guy here? And who is to blame for ****sts acts during the war?

Same for geths. Maybe they were a victim in this war, but they have chosen to go against all organics, not only Quarians. Until ME2 we didn't even know that there are "heretics" and accodring to Mass Effect Wiki: "It should be stressed, however, that practically all geth encountered  outside the veil likely belong to a violent faction of the geth and will react with hostility to any organic not working for the Reapers". So the only "true" geth are hidden somwhere in the vils in the first place, meaning that those who we killed earlier were, in fact, enemies.

And talking about "You can't hold grudges, especially when is very clear you a united galaxy to win the war.", did you free Sayn by any chance? You know, to win at any cost?

So your logic goes like this. We (US) fought against Japan before, but if one days a situation happens that we must team up to defeat an enemy together, we should not care for them and think their enemies because we had conflict with them in the past? That's absurd.

[Chaotic-Fusion]

Seival wrote...

I believe the original Catalist was created the same way as Catalist-Shepard. Original Catalist was based on a person of some organic living being. And the person was obviously unstable. Or, the original Catalist was programmed, and the programmers were unstable.

Only Renegade-Shepard-Catalist is a Dictator. Paragon-Shepard-Catalist is a Guardian. Do you know there are actually 4 different variants of Control Ending? They describe pretty clear who will be a dictator, and who will not.

If that's the case, don't you believe the creators would have chosen the best there was? Even today we have crude (I assume the creators were very advanced in all fields) psychological tests that reveal if someone is unstable or not. The candidate was the best they may have had, and how has that turned out? Shepard is still human, he isn't perfect. No Shepard is perfect.
If the programmers were unstable, the process with which Shepard is converted would also be unstable.
I thought there were only 2 (paragon/renegade), or are you referring to EMS variations? They don't really affect God-Shep personality. And you're missing my point. "Dictator" doesn't refer to actions, to be a dictator you must detain absolute power. And both God-Sheps control the reapers. Both have the last word. "Paragon" is subjective, you can never satisfy everyone, a benevolent dictator seems an oxymoron. Their MO may be different, but they will always be dictators, no matter what you call them. And Shepard is a military man, and ME3 makes it clear he is emotionally unstable with those (however awful) nightmares. He has lost a lot, he didn't escape emotionally unscathed, no matter what your choices may have been.
There reason I would consider control would be to save the geth, since I have no other choice. Not on the notion that Shepard could make the galaxy a better place.

[Ozida]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
So your logic goes like this. We (US) fought against Japan before, but if one days a situation happens that we must team up to defeat an enemy together, we should not care for them and think their enemies because we had conflict with them in the past? That's absurd.

It's not absurd, it's a human psychology. I know that everyone wants to play peacemakers, but, God forbid, we go to a real war you'll see how people change and pretty fast. When someone kills your family and destroys your city, you hold the grundge pretty long, believe me. And if you are forced to unite with your ex-enemies to overcome a stronger enemy, you don't fall in love with either of them. And, like it or not, but most people would prefer to betray their "allies" if they have a chance to get rid of both.

Now, I am not saying this is a typical Shepard's behaviour. To be honest, I wasn't even intended to go into this debate, as I have said before, I think they just used it as an excuse for people not to pick Destroy in the first place.

[Funkdrspot]

v TricKy v wrote...

You can save a lot of people but you have to kill one of your best friends for it. Would you still push the button in real life? Let me answer that right away because you wouldnt. Nobody of us would do it. Humans are emotion driven. So seeing things with cold logic is the wrong way to do it.

actually, you sholuld only speak for yourself because its quite obvious you lack the will or backbone to make hard decisions. If the choice was 2 friends or BILLIONS of people, i choose the billions. 

[D24O]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Fair enough I guess. To be honest the narrative direction for the Geth was brilliant to me, as it showed that a true progression for the Geth from simple grunts you kill to sophisticated, alien beings that are not necessarily bad. And the Geth achieving sentinence shows the confidence shepard and his team had in them to be trusted, instead of being more grunts to kill.

This is a bit late, but I still wanted to respond to your point. I feel that the Geth already had sapience, sentience is debatable, because they don't think in the same way we do, but I don't see that as a problem. In fact, I think it would have made for a better story if the Galaxy had to come to accept the Geth for the different form of thinking that they were. Coming to terms with, and embracing something that is differnt, out of the norm, is much harder than accepting one of "us" so to speak, and I think it makes for a better story if they remain different.

And sorry if anyone made a point like this, I can't be bothered to skim through after getting back from leg day .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Ozida wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
So your logic goes like this. We (US) fought against Japan before, but if one days a situation happens that we must team up to defeat an enemy together, we should not care for them and think their enemies because we had conflict with them in the past? That's absurd.

It's not absurd, it's a human psychology. I know that everyone wants to play peacemakers, but, God forbid, we go to a real war you'll see how people change and pretty fast. When someone kills your family and destroys your city, you hold the grundge pretty long, believe me. And if you are forced to unite with your ex-enemies to overcome a stronger enemy, you don't fall in love with either of them. And, like it or not, but most people would prefer to betray their "allies" if they have a chance to get rid of both.

Now, I am not saying this is a typical Shepard's behaviour. To be honest, I wasn't even intended to go into this debate, as I have said before, I think they just used it as an excuse for people not to pick Destroy in the first place.

It's not human psychology, it's witless thinking. Yes, I would hold a grudge, but when they're next to me fighting helping my people, I would not be so quick to "sell" them because they were former enemies.

[Seival]

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Seival wrote...

I believe the original Catalist was created the same way as Catalist-Shepard. Original Catalist was based on a person of some organic living being. And the person was obviously unstable. Or, the original Catalist was programmed, and the programmers were unstable.

Only Renegade-Shepard-Catalist is a Dictator. Paragon-Shepard-Catalist is a Guardian. Do you know there are actually 4 different variants of Control Ending? They describe pretty clear who will be a dictator, and who will not.

If that's the case, don't you believe the creators would have chosen the best there was? Even today we have crude (I assume the creators were very advanced in all fields) psychological tests that reveal if someone is unstable or not. The candidate was the best they may have had, and how has that turned out? Shepard is still human, he isn't perfect. No Shepard is perfect.
If the programmers were unstable, the process with which Shepard is converted would also be unstable.
I thought there were only 2 (paragon/renegade), or are you referring to EMS variations? They don't really affect God-Shep personality. And you're missing my point. "Dictator" doesn't refer to actions, to be a dictator you must detain absolute power. And both God-Sheps control the reapers. Both have the last word. "Paragon" is subjective, you can never satisfy everyone, a benevolent dictator seems an oxymoron. Their MO may be different, but they will always be dictators, no matter what you call them. And Shepard is a military man, and ME3 makes it clear he is emotionally unstable with those (however awful) nightmares. He has lost a lot, he didn't escape emotionally unscathed, no matter what your choices may have been.
There reason I would consider control would be to save the geth, since I have no other choice. Not on the notion that Shepard could make the galaxy a better place.

Well, I suppose they believed that was the best person... Poor Reapers' creators...

If the original Catalist's personality was programmed in a regular way, and the programmers were unstable, then the original Catalist became unstable as well. But in case of Control, original Catalist's personality was replaced by Shepard's personality. Which means that the original Calatalist's personality was erased.

The point of guarding the Galactic Civilization is not in "pleasing everyone". The point is in helping during some major catastrophical events, and preventing them from killing each other.

Modifié par Seival, 04 août 2012 - 05:44 .

[zeypher]

Shepard in control has absolute power and absolute power generally corrupts the person absolutely. In the end shepard has final say in galatic politics, im sry i do not know how you cannot see that situation arising and being a bad one.

Modifié par zeypher, 04 août 2012 - 05:47 .

[Seival]

[Chaotic-Fusion]

Seival wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Seival wrote...

I believe the original Catalist was created the same way as Catalist-Shepard. Original Catalist was based on a person of some organic living being. And the person was obviously unstable. Or, the original Catalist was programmed, and the programmers were unstable.

Only Renegade-Shepard-Catalist is a Dictator. Paragon-Shepard-Catalist is a Guardian. Do you know there are actually 4 different variants of Control Ending? They describe pretty clear who will be a dictator, and who will not.

If that's the case, don't you believe the creators would have chosen the best there was? Even today we have crude (I assume the creators were very advanced in all fields) psychological tests that reveal if someone is unstable or not. The candidate was the best they may have had, and how has that turned out? Shepard is still human, he isn't perfect. No Shepard is perfect.
If the programmers were unstable, the process with which Shepard is converted would also be unstable.
I thought there were only 2 (paragon/renegade), or are you referring to EMS variations? They don't really affect God-Shep personality. And you're missing my point. "Dictator" doesn't refer to actions, to be a dictator you must detain absolute power. And both God-Sheps control the reapers. Both have the last word. "Paragon" is subjective, you can never satisfy everyone, a benevolent dictator seems an oxymoron. Their MO may be different, but they will always be dictators, no matter what you call them. And Shepard is a military man, and ME3 makes it clear he is emotionally unstable with those (however awful) nightmares. He has lost a lot, he didn't escape emotionally unscathed, no matter what your choices may have been.
There reason I would consider control would be to save the geth, since I have no other choice. Not on the notion that Shepard could make the galaxy a better place.

Well, I suppose they believed that was the best person... Poor Reapers' creators...

If the original Catalist's personality was programmed in a regular way, and the programmers were unstable, then the original Catalist became unstable as well. But in case of Control, original Catalist's personality was replaced by Shepard's personality. Which means that the original Calatalist's personality was erased.

The point of guarding the Galactic Civilization is not in "pleasing everyone". The point is in helping in some major catastrophical events and preventing them from killing each other.

What makes you believe Shepard is the best person? What if you're wrong? What happens then? It's a huge gamble. Though if you believe your Shepard is ready, I can't argue with that. But it's still a huge gamble. Either way you're changing galactic society in a huge way.
A guardian is a dictator. He may not intervene when everything is going according to plan, but rest assured that when something does, he will have the last word. And power corrupts even the best men.
If two races were about to go to war, both wrong in their reasons and neither side right, how would god-Shep intervene? Using the reapers? Therefore by intimidation or outright force? He isn't a god, he is just an A.I.

[What a Succulent Ass]

How can you "prove" you are ready for absolute power? Shepard practically had a mental breakdown over an ugly brat in an air duct. Quadrillions of enslaved minds subjugated against their will seems a bit more dire.

[Seival]

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Seival wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Seival wrote...

I believe the original Catalist was created the same way as Catalist-Shepard. Original Catalist was based on a person of some organic living being. And the person was obviously unstable. Or, the original Catalist was programmed, and the programmers were unstable.

Only Renegade-Shepard-Catalist is a Dictator. Paragon-Shepard-Catalist is a Guardian. Do you know there are actually 4 different variants of Control Ending? They describe pretty clear who will be a dictator, and who will not.

If that's the case, don't you believe the creators would have chosen the best there was? Even today we have crude (I assume the creators were very advanced in all fields) psychological tests that reveal if someone is unstable or not. The candidate was the best they may have had, and how has that turned out? Shepard is still human, he isn't perfect. No Shepard is perfect.
If the programmers were unstable, the process with which Shepard is converted would also be unstable.
I thought there were only 2 (paragon/renegade), or are you referring to EMS variations? They don't really affect God-Shep personality. And you're missing my point. "Dictator" doesn't refer to actions, to be a dictator you must detain absolute power. And both God-Sheps control the reapers. Both have the last word. "Paragon" is subjective, you can never satisfy everyone, a benevolent dictator seems an oxymoron. Their MO may be different, but they will always be dictators, no matter what you call them. And Shepard is a military man, and ME3 makes it clear he is emotionally unstable with those (however awful) nightmares. He has lost a lot, he didn't escape emotionally unscathed, no matter what your choices may have been.
There reason I would consider control would be to save the geth, since I have no other choice. Not on the notion that Shepard could make the galaxy a better place.

Well, I suppose they believed that was the best person... Poor Reapers' creators...

If the original Catalist's personality was programmed in a regular way, and the programmers were unstable, then the original Catalist became unstable as well. But in case of Control, original Catalist's personality was replaced by Shepard's personality. Which means that the original Calatalist's personality was erased.

The point of guarding the Galactic Civilization is not in "pleasing everyone". The point is in helping in some major catastrophical events and preventing them from killing each other.

What makes you believe Shepard is the best person? What if you're wrong? What happens then? It's a huge gamble. Though if you believe your Shepard is ready, I can't argue with that. But it's still a huge gamble. Either way you're changing galactic society in a huge way.
A guardian is a dictator. He may not intervene when everything is going according to plan, but rest assured that when something does, he will have the last word. And power corrupts even the best men.
If two races were about to go to war, both wrong in their reasons and neither side right, how would god-Shep intervene? Using the reapers? Therefore by intimidation or outright force? He isn't a god, he is just an A.I.

What makes me believe? Good question. My personality I suppose

That's the point. It's a matter of faith. Your entire history is you trying to kill the Reapers. You don't have to kill them and all synthetic life in the galaxy. If you can believe that for just one minute, then you can assume direct control... You have a choice... Keelah Se'lai!

[Chaotic-Fusion]

Seival wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Seival wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Seival wrote...

I believe the original Catalist was created the same way as Catalist-Shepard. Original Catalist was based on a person of some organic living being. And the person was obviously unstable. Or, the original Catalist was programmed, and the programmers were unstable.

Only Renegade-Shepard-Catalist is a Dictator. Paragon-Shepard-Catalist is a Guardian. Do you know there are actually 4 different variants of Control Ending? They describe pretty clear who will be a dictator, and who will not.

If that's the case, don't you believe the creators would have chosen the best there was? Even today we have crude (I assume the creators were very advanced in all fields) psychological tests that reveal if someone is unstable or not. The candidate was the best they may have had, and how has that turned out? Shepard is still human, he isn't perfect. No Shepard is perfect.
If the programmers were unstable, the process with which Shepard is converted would also be unstable.
I thought there were only 2 (paragon/renegade), or are you referring to EMS variations? They don't really affect God-Shep personality. And you're missing my point. "Dictator" doesn't refer to actions, to be a dictator you must detain absolute power. And both God-Sheps control the reapers. Both have the last word. "Paragon" is subjective, you can never satisfy everyone, a benevolent dictator seems an oxymoron. Their MO may be different, but they will always be dictators, no matter what you call them. And Shepard is a military man, and ME3 makes it clear he is emotionally unstable with those (however awful) nightmares. He has lost a lot, he didn't escape emotionally unscathed, no matter what your choices may have been.
There reason I would consider control would be to save the geth, since I have no other choice. Not on the notion that Shepard could make the galaxy a better place.

Well, I suppose they believed that was the best person... Poor Reapers' creators...

If the original Catalist's personality was programmed in a regular way, and the programmers were unstable, then the original Catalist became unstable as well. But in case of Control, original Catalist's personality was replaced by Shepard's personality. Which means that the original Calatalist's personality was erased.

The point of guarding the Galactic Civilization is not in "pleasing everyone". The point is in helping in some major catastrophical events and preventing them from killing each other.

What makes you believe Shepard is the best person? What if you're wrong? What happens then? It's a huge gamble. Though if you believe your Shepard is ready, I can't argue with that. But it's still a huge gamble. Either way you're changing galactic society in a huge way.
A guardian is a dictator. He may not intervene when everything is going according to plan, but rest assured that when something does, he will have the last word. And power corrupts even the best men.
If two races were about to go to war, both wrong in their reasons and neither side right, how would god-Shep intervene? Using the reapers? Therefore by intimidation or outright force? He isn't a god, he is just an A.I.

What makes me believe? Good question. My personality I suppose

That's the point. It's a matter of faith. Your entire history is you trying to kill the Reapers. You don't have to kill them and all synthetic life in the galaxy. If you can believe that for just one minute, then you can assume direct control... You have a choice... Keelah Se'lai!

Fair enough. Well, I enjoyed this discussion.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

EricChase88 wrote...

Seriously, why does her death even matter? I can't believe people will not choose destroy just because of a sexbot. Lots of people die, so why should people even care about her in particular? She is just one individual. The entire galaxy is at stake.

Because for me Trica Helfer, the voice actor for EDI, is an extremely beautiful woman.

[Seival]

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Seival wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Seival wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Seival wrote...

I believe the original Catalist was created the same way as Catalist-Shepard. Original Catalist was based on a person of some organic living being. And the person was obviously unstable. Or, the original Catalist was programmed, and the programmers were unstable.

Only Renegade-Shepard-Catalist is a Dictator. Paragon-Shepard-Catalist is a Guardian. Do you know there are actually 4 different variants of Control Ending? They describe pretty clear who will be a dictator, and who will not.

If that's the case, don't you believe the creators would have chosen the best there was? Even today we have crude (I assume the creators were very advanced in all fields) psychological tests that reveal if someone is unstable or not. The candidate was the best they may have had, and how has that turned out? Shepard is still human, he isn't perfect. No Shepard is perfect.
If the programmers were unstable, the process with which Shepard is converted would also be unstable.
I thought there were only 2 (paragon/renegade), or are you referring to EMS variations? They don't really affect God-Shep personality. And you're missing my point. "Dictator" doesn't refer to actions, to be a dictator you must detain absolute power. And both God-Sheps control the reapers. Both have the last word. "Paragon" is subjective, you can never satisfy everyone, a benevolent dictator seems an oxymoron. Their MO may be different, but they will always be dictators, no matter what you call them. And Shepard is a military man, and ME3 makes it clear he is emotionally unstable with those (however awful) nightmares. He has lost a lot, he didn't escape emotionally unscathed, no matter what your choices may have been.
There reason I would consider control would be to save the geth, since I have no other choice. Not on the notion that Shepard could make the galaxy a better place.

Well, I suppose they believed that was the best person... Poor Reapers' creators...

If the original Catalist's personality was programmed in a regular way, and the programmers were unstable, then the original Catalist became unstable as well. But in case of Control, original Catalist's personality was replaced by Shepard's personality. Which means that the original Calatalist's personality was erased.

The point of guarding the Galactic Civilization is not in "pleasing everyone". The point is in helping in some major catastrophical events and preventing them from killing each other.

What makes you believe Shepard is the best person? What if you're wrong? What happens then? It's a huge gamble. Though if you believe your Shepard is ready, I can't argue with that. But it's still a huge gamble. Either way you're changing galactic society in a huge way.
A guardian is a dictator. He may not intervene when everything is going according to plan, but rest assured that when something does, he will have the last word. And power corrupts even the best men.
If two races were about to go to war, both wrong in their reasons and neither side right, how would god-Shep intervene? Using the reapers? Therefore by intimidation or outright force? He isn't a god, he is just an A.I.

What makes me believe? Good question. My personality I suppose

That's the point. It's a matter of faith. Your entire history is you trying to kill the Reapers. You don't have to kill them and all synthetic life in the galaxy. If you can believe that for just one minute, then you can assume direct control... You have a choice... Keelah Se'lai!

Fair enough. Well, I enjoyed this discussion.

Me too

[D24O]

Augh, the pyramids!

[Funkdrspot]

Also, power doesn't corrupt. Power just exposes your true personality. It takes strong conviction, willpower and morality to hold true to your ideals when there are no checks and balances. Shepard is YOU, the player. If you lack those attributes, then 'control' was never meant for you

[zeypher]

Well for me as i told harbinger at end of arrival, that i would destroy the reapers even if i lost half the galaxy. Euthanize everyone isnt a choice for me nor is having a overlord dictator. Life is interesting because of the differences in it, different perspectives ideas etc. So synthesis was definitly out, same with control where shep is always right. Sorry for me that is a boring universe

[What a Succulent Ass]

Funkdrspot wrote...

Also, power doesn't corrupt.

That's an incredibly rosy view you have there. Ever heard of the Lucifer Effect?

And a dictator is still a dictator, even if s/he rules with cotton candy and rainbows.

Modifié par Random Jerkface, 04 août 2012 - 06:17 .

[Taboo]

Random Jerkface wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

Also, power doesn't corrupt.

That's an incredibly rosy view you have there.

And a dictator is still a dictator, even if s/he rules with cotton candy and rainbows.

Don't worry, our beloved dictator DEMANDS you consume this cotton candy.

[Chaotic-Fusion]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

Also, power doesn't corrupt.

That's an incredibly rosy view you have there.

And a dictator is still a dictator, even if s/he rules with cotton candy and rainbows.

Don't worry, our beloved dictator DEMANDS you consume this cotton candy.

What, you have diabetes? Nonsense, everyone loves cotton candy.