314 réponses à ce sujet

[SnapJackalPop]

It says we'd like to win.

[Baa Baa]

"Destruction leads to a very rough road but it also breeds creation"

Modifié par Baa Baa, 13 août 2012 - 12:47 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

You're an idiot OP

[Reorte]

Curunen wrote...

Troll thread or not you do hit on a valid point - most things are about "destroying" in one way or another, which I don't particularly like either. I wonder when games will start to move on from that to offer different challenges other than killing things.

But in the case of ME3 endings none of them are good choices; you've just got to pick the one you feel least disturbed by.

Most drama, particularly that that will really get the emotions going, is about conflict. The only time you're going to avoid that is by either having a straightforward puzzle game or by moving the conflict into a stylised form, e.g. sport.

[SeptimusMagistos]

Personally I could never pick Destroy. I didn't spend three games championing the rights of synthetics just to call them expendable at the last minute. Not when the Control ending is literally right there with no possible downsides.

But it still seems silly to question the moral character of everyone who picked Destroy.

[farhansdisplayname]

Jonata wrote...

The BSN is not a good place to start interesting topics, these days. If you start something nice, funny or even deep, but somewhere in your post the Geth, EDI or the Reapers are mentioned, chances are that 80% of the comments you'll get will be from angry players who chose Destroy and want everyone to know that in their playthough EDI died an horrible and painful death.

Now, what does that say about gamers as a whole? My answer to this question is simple: nothing that we didnt' already know. Gamers have a straight-forward mind, are often incline to violence, and take everything at face value. Oh, sure, they'll love the s*** out of a man in a red coat behaving like a 13 years old while fighting Space Demons, but please don't try to send them a message that isn't "kill the evil basterds".

Gamers knows only one thing: hate. To make a succesful game you just have to give them someone to hate and someone they can relate with, i.e. someone who's the best dude in the Universe because that's how they want to feel when they play a videogame.

I used to love videogames, and I really think that in their own way, games like Mass Effect 3, Heavy Rain and even Skyrim (from a gameplay perspective) are trying to elevate their genre. But guess what? Gamers are not ready. They don't want to understand the psychological deep of a character, they' don't want to question themselves about morality or what does it takes to be alive. They want to f*** bad people up because that's justified violence, glorified hate.

Gamers never creates. They Destroy.

It's not just gamers who are full of hate. Read the comments section on YouTube, or any news articles these days? Most people who are capable of making comments on the internet are ignorant jackasses full of hate. hating on each other because of bad info they are fed about each other through the media. But hey, as far as detroyers are concerned, I think they were thinking of ending ME the traditional video gamey way and they didn't get to do so.

[Jonata]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

You're an idiot OP

I genuinally bursted out laughing at this.

[Killer3000ad]

It says that sacrificing EDI and the Geth to destroy the Reapers once and for all is worth it, cause the Reapers deserve to be destroyed.

[LegacyOfTheAsh]

For me it is far more complicated than just hate. In fact, hate isn't the appropriate word. I play my primary character, Ash, to make decisions that I would see myself making in real life. Currently, I am on my second playthrough with this particular character. I originally chose the destroy option. On this playthrough however, I could not decide for the longest time between Synthesis and Destroy. Initially I chose Destroy based on the fact that in real life I could easily see myself being selfish and saying, "I want to see my love again. I want to see my friends...". Also, I have been fighting to destroy the Reapers for years and all of a sudden an AI that no one knew existed is telling me what my options are. Do I trust this unknown being that CLAIMS that this has all happened before and will happen again? No. I don't.

The Catalyst provides no proof, no visions to support its claims. For all I know, this THING is malicious and treacherous in nature. I have spent half a decade fighting enemies that's primary weapons are fear and deception. I cannot trust this new entity. So I chose to destroy. If EDI and the Geth die, I will live with this pain for the rest of my life, but my cycle is safe and I would continue to tell myself that there was no way I could have trusted the Catalyst. If I survive...

The reason that I was having a problem choosing between Synthesis and Destroy on my second playthrough is simply hindsight. I know that in the fictional universe that sysnthesis ensures peace between synthetics and organics whereas Destroy kills EDI, the Geth and disgraces Legion's sacrifice. Also, Destroy does not ensure peace between organics and synthetics. The logical choice for me would be Synthesis. However, my final decision would most likely be Destroy, based on what I said earlier. In RL, I would not have this hindsight, I would not trust the Catalyst. I Destroy not because of hate but because of distrust of the unfamiliar, love for Ashley (equivalent to a lover in RL), love for my close friend Garrus and a need to remove that which threatens them from the equation. I'm only human. Ideally, I'd want to choose Synthesis, but I don't think I could have that type of trust in RL.

Modifié par LegacyOfTheAsh, 13 août 2012 - 03:47 .

[Legion of 1337]

LegacyOfTheAsh wrote...

For me it is far more complicated than just hate. In fact, hate isn't the appropriate word. I play my primary character, Ash, to make decisions that I would see myself making in real life. Currently, I am on my second playthrough with this particular character. I originally chose the destroy option. On this playthrough however, I could not decide for the longest time between Synthesis and Destroy. Initially I chose Destroy based on the fact that in real life I could easily see myself being selfish and saying, "I want to see my love again. I want to see my friends...". Also, I have been fighting to destroy the Reapers for years and all of a sudden an AI that no one knew existed is telling me what my options are. Do I trust this unknown being that CLAIMS that this has all happened before and will happen again? No. I don't.

The Catalyst provides no proof, no visions to support its claims. For all I know, this THING is malicious and treacherous in nature. I have spent half a decade fighting enemies that's primary weapons are fear and deception. I cannot trust this new entity. So I chose to destroy. If EDI and the Geth die, I will live with this pain for the rest of my life, but my cycle is safe and I would continue to tell myself that there was no way I could have trusted the Catalyst. If I survive...

The reason that I was having a problem choosing between Synthesis and Destroy on my second playthrough is simply hindsight. I know that in the fictional universe that sysnthesis ensures peace between synthetics and organics whereas Destroy kills EDI, the Geth and disgraces Legion's sacrifice. Also, Destroy does not ensure peace between organics and synthetics. The logical choice for me would be Synthesis. However, my final decision would most likely be Destroy, based on what I said earlier. In RL, I would not have this hindsight, I would not trust the Catalyst. I Destroy not because of hate but because of distrust of the unfamiliar, love for Ashley (equivalent to a lover in RL), love for my close friend Garrus and a need to remove that which threatens them from the equation. I'm only human. Ideally, I'd want to choose Synthesis, but I don't think I could have that type of trust in RL.

This post completely and utterly destroys the OP's point.

[ld1449]

Can't tell if the OP is trolling or is genuinely that presumptuously stupid.

[LegacyOfTheAsh]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

LegacyOfTheAsh wrote...

For me it is far more complicated than just hate. In fact, hate isn't the appropriate word. I play my primary character, Ash, to make decisions that I would see myself making in real life. Currently, I am on my second playthrough with this particular character. I originally chose the destroy option. On this playthrough however, I could not decide for the longest time between Synthesis and Destroy. Initially I chose Destroy based on the fact that in real life I could easily see myself being selfish and saying, "I want to see my love again. I want to see my friends...". Also, I have been fighting to destroy the Reapers for years and all of a sudden an AI that no one knew existed is telling me what my options are. Do I trust this unknown being that CLAIMS that this has all happened before and will happen again? No. I don't.

The Catalyst provides no proof, no visions to support its claims. For all I know, this THING is malicious and treacherous in nature. I have spent half a decade fighting enemies that's primary weapons are fear and deception. I cannot trust this new entity. So I chose to destroy. If EDI and the Geth die, I will live with this pain for the rest of my life, but my cycle is safe and I would continue to tell myself that there was no way I could have trusted the Catalyst. If I survive...

The reason that I was having a problem choosing between Synthesis and Destroy on my second playthrough is simply hindsight. I know that in the fictional universe that sysnthesis ensures peace between synthetics and organics whereas Destroy kills EDI, the Geth and disgraces Legion's sacrifice. Also, Destroy does not ensure peace between organics and synthetics. The logical choice for me would be Synthesis. However, my final decision would most likely be Destroy, based on what I said earlier. In RL, I would not have this hindsight, I would not trust the Catalyst. I Destroy not because of hate but because of distrust of the unfamiliar, love for Ashley (equivalent to a lover in RL), love for my close friend Garrus and a need to remove that which threatens them from the equation. I'm only human. Ideally, I'd want to choose Synthesis, but I don't think I could have that type of trust in RL.

This post completely and utterly destroys the OP's point.

Lol just given my 2 cents.

ld1449 wrote...

Can't tell if the OP is trolling or is genuinely that presumptuously stupid.

Yeah I can't tell either. Seems serious enough.

[spirosz]

Taboo-XX wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Eh, just because they pick destroy doesn't mean they don't ponder, consider, and do a bit of soul-searching over the other options on scientific and philosophical levels. Assuming they don't is woefully inaccurate.

Exactely this.

I've done more pondering about picking Destroy than anything else I've ever done in a videogame. While I think some of this stems from bad presentation, it's ability to keep you asking question is noteworthy.

Theeeeeeeeeeeeis.

[Yalision]

I enjoy Control very much. It's nice that players can create their own head canon for Destroy and why it works, just like I can for Control. =) I will never betray the Geth and EDI in such a terrible way by taking away their right to exist, especially after their contributions. Besides, in Control I can make fantasies all I want about synthetic bodies, running Reapers into stars, rebuilding the galaxy, sharing Reaper collective knowledge, etc, etc.

There are no ifs about the Catalyst to me, because it's my Shepard in his universe, and because I feel my Shepard wouldn't know ANY of the choices presented by the Catalyst would work at all. So instead of risking defeat and definitely killing his friends, he went with risking defeat by doing the impossible and seizing control of the Reapers. Epic stuff.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Some of us sided with the Quarians.

[KotorEffect3]

For some reason I assumed the title of the thread referred to the destroyer class reapers

[xxBabyMonkeyxx]

Wow umm thanks for pretty much saying the people who picked destroy are completely heartless. I picked destroy because it felt like that was something I would do in Shepard's position and I had a hard time doing it. I love the Geth and EDI, but I didn't want the Reapers surviving. Not after how many civilizations the Reapers and Catalyst destroyed. They don't deserve it. "We harvest advanced civilzations so other synthetics won't kill you." ...Really? That's like saying "Oh that guy murdered all those people to save them from a burning building. We should let the guy walk because he had a perfectly reasonable explanation." NO! I'm not going to sit there and reward the Catalyst for doing something so horrendous for millions of years. And as far as I'm concerned, I'm doing the Reapers a favor by picking Destroy. Think about how many people, unwilling, were turned into Reapers. That's not living. That's just another form of slavery. I would rather die than live like that. But that doesn't even work because the Reapers just come and process you anyway! I understand where you're coming from, but you're assuming way too much about people who picked Destroy. We picked because the rest were WAY worse.
Control- Shepard is turned into an A.I. Do you think that's going to be a great long term solution? I would be counting the days, just waiting for Shepard to become corrupted. Although that would make an awesome game idea...
Synthesis- Shepard uses his/her DNA to rewrite organic and synthetic life. That completely disrespects everything in the ME universe.
Refusal- Everyone dies and the next cycle wins. You pretty much just lost everything you fought to keep.
Destroy- The Geth and EDI die, but the Reapers are gone.
Pick your poison ladies and gentlemen!!

[LoneWolf3905]

I chose Destroy because the other two just didn't fit with me. Control gives Shep to much power and I don't believe in one person no matter how great should have that much power and who knows if shepard's mind starts to change for the worse. and synthesis just forces people to become somthing they had no say in when Shepard made that choice, that kinda go's against free will. thats why i went with destroy since its as close as i can get to working with these ending becouse choice number 4 just leads to galaxy dying anyway.

[NPH11]

Destroy destroy destroy. Losing the Geth and EDI truly sucks, but at least they died for the greatest possible cause.

Not going with Control. Leaving the Reapers around isn't an option in my eyes, especially not with one "man" (Even Shepard) at the controls to solve disputes as he sees fit.

Not going with Synthesis. Again, not leaving the Reapers around, also find making the galaxy genetically identical after spending my time uniting them despite their differences to be a waste of time and generally pretty repugnant from a moral standpoint.

[Deliboy009]

I like coming to these forums to read and absorb the ideas. It has made me enjoy the trilogy more and made ME a dinner table topic. I have never posted here before now, but it seems my first post has to satisfy the irresistible urge to thank the OP for posting simple narrow minded vitriol. Hopefully trolling is in the next Olympics - this was truly gold medal caliber. Ugh! Kudos to everyone else for turning this thread into something of interest.

[EnvyTB075]

>mfw i've seen a grand total of two destroyers actually brag about killing her off.

[Hendrik.III]

Why I picked destroy:

1) I wanted Shepard to survive. He deserves to enjoy the fruit of his labour.
2) Control, Synthesis and Refusal do not mean victory but a compromise with the reaper's "leader".

There were too many variables that still made control and synthesis an accident waiting to happen, in my view. The only way to stop them - was Destroy. Refusal is just batsh*t crazy if I have to choose between sacrificing geth & EDI or forfeiting the entire cycle and killing everyone - the choice wasn't that hard.

I think most Destroyer supporters wanted Shep to live and to finish the series with the goal they started it with: Destroying the Reapers. The other endings just too video-gamey.

[Master Xanthan]

Jonata wrote...

The BSN is not a good place to start interesting topics, these days. If you start something nice, funny or even deep, but somewhere in your post the Geth, EDI or the Reapers are mentioned, chances are that 80% of the comments you'll get will be from angry players who chose Destroy and want everyone to know that in their playthough EDI died an horrible and painful death.

Now, what does that say about gamers as a whole? My answer to this question is simple: nothing that we didnt' already know. Gamers have a straight-forward mind, are often incline to violence, and take everything at face value. Oh, sure, they'll love the s*** out of a man in a red coat behaving like a 13 years old while fighting Space Demons, but please don't try to send them a message that isn't "kill the evil basterds".

Gamers knows only one thing: hate. To make a succesful game you just have to give them someone to hate and someone they can relate with, i.e. someone who's the best dude in the Universe because that's how they want to feel when they play a videogame.

I used to love videogames, and I really think that in their own way, games like Mass Effect 3, Heavy Rain and even Skyrim (from a gameplay perspective) are trying to elevate their genre. But guess what? Gamers are not ready. They don't want to understand the psychological deep of a character, they' don't want to question themselves about morality or what does it takes to be alive. They want to f*** bad people up because that's justified violence, glorified hate.

Gamers never creates. They Destroy.

Gamers only know hatred? Gee, last time I checked I'm pretty sure human beings can feel mulitiple emotions. Honestly I like Destroy because it eliminates the Reaper threat, though I regreat that the Geth and Edi get killed off. But anyway, if you hate violent games so much, play a game that isn't violent, rather than critisizing others for their preferences in games.

Modifié par Master Xanthan, 13 août 2012 - 06:54 .

[Jassu1979]

Making peace and forming an alliance with unrepentant mass murder machines does not strike me as a viable option.

Plus, I find that synthesis belittles both the geth and EDI, suggesting that they were not "properly" alive before, and needed that magical organic compound in order to be - I don't know, more emotional?

I've said it before: the idea of resolving a potential future conflict by transcending the limitations of the flesh is not necessarily a bad one. But not this way. Not with instant space magic. Not with the Reapers hanging around singing Kumbayah.
It is an option that requires some serious work and determination, something that needs to result from an extended process.

Pro-Synthesizers often insist that synthesis does NOT turn all people into the same kind of entity and preserves diversity. Okay, so how exactly will this even remotely prevent future conflicts, then? If the changes are indeed THAT small, and people have not changed profoundly in their way of thinking, then what does this "new DNA" (*groan*), this "final step in evolution" (*GROAN*) achieve?
It's like trying to achieve world peace by having a magical ray give all people around the world the same skin colour.

[Sweawm]

I found the OP quite cynical in his post. SOME gamer's are ready for this kind of stuff, NOT ALL gamer's play crap like Dante's Inferno (My opinion, I'm entitled to it), and not all are in the non-stop search of the next trigger happy gun em up.

Believe it or not, if Gamer's weren't ready for this kind of stuff, I doubt Mass Effect would have ever been as successful as it is now. Continue like this on your cynical path and you will find only despair, because it sounds like you DON'T want a new era of more games with mature themes, you only want to bash the ME3 ending some more in denial of how much it conflicted you.

Just because someone choose Destroy, it dosn't mean they never cared about those sacrificed to achieve a Reaperless victory. Control has a multidude of problems surrounding it, and Sythesis dosn't seem right for some people.
There is no 'perfect' ending, and I think that's what Mass Effect deserves. 

Modifié par Sweawm, 13 août 2012 - 07:01 .