925 réponses à ce sujet

[D24O]

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

Hmm, didn't see any yelling or accusations that Ischar was a terrible person for choosing that ending. Just that for people of a different opinion, his justifications didn't make sense. He's free to choose whatever, but that doesn't mean we all have to acquiese.

Perhaps I jumped the gun, but you know as well as I do that people get really posessive of their endings, and things usually get pretty ugly, especially where refuse and Synthesis are concerned. Now, I'm not saying you should give up your prefered ending choice, but if someone makes a decision, its their decision, you can disagree and debate, but that should be respected. 

[TsaiMeLemoni]

D24O wrote...

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

Hmm, didn't see any yelling or accusations that Ischar was a terrible person for choosing that ending. Just that for people of a different opinion, his justifications didn't make sense. He's free to choose whatever, but that doesn't mean we all have to acquiese.

Perhaps I jumped the gun, but you know as well as I do that people get really posessive of their endings, and things usually get pretty ugly, especially where refuse and Synthesis are concerned. Now, I'm not saying you should give up your prefered ending choice, but if someone makes a decision, its their decision, you can disagree and debate, but that should be respected. 

I do understand that point, and I do also think you might have jumped the gun on this thread by just a little. I am sure it'll devolve in no time, but so far I think it's been pretty civil.

I know I don't always make the most positive comments, but I do always try to at least respect the other person's opinion, and hopefully that continues to happen in this thread.

[hoodaticus]

The only moral justification for refuse is belief that the Reapers are correct (which proves IT - but not the way you think).

[D24O]

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

I do understand that point, and I do also think you might have jumped the gun on this thread by just a little. I am sure it'll devolve in no time, but so far I think it's been pretty civil.

I know I don't always make the most positive comments, but I do always try to at least respect the other person's opinion, and hopefully that continues to happen in this thread.

No, you're right, I really jumped the gun, but its something that does bother me, I just decided to post something now because f***. I'm not really calling anyone out, I just don't see the point in being a d*** to someone over a choice in a video game, its one thing to discuss, another to be rude. 

[TsaiMeLemoni]

Very good point. I think sometimes we all take things a bit too seriously on here and forget that this is just a piece of entertainment and not reality.

[Isichar]

What I find funny is that pro enders always turn this choice into "So you would rather let billions die rather then..." as if I am the one holding the gun to the galaxy's head. People are so quick to forget the reapers have destroyed many lives, and will continue to do so if you do not justify what they have done and submit to its reasoning.

You did not fire the crucible to make the galaxy a better place, you did so because when the reapers took the galaxy hostage, the people you cared about, suddenly everything else they had destroyed became expendable. People died, had their lives destroyed without even knowing why, because 1 AI decided to play god, not because Shepard decided not to fire the gun.

There are so many comparisons I can make for this to real life, most of which would probably get me banned from the forums, but people are trying to make Shepard out as been the trigger puller on the galaxy in refuse when it was always the catalyst. The catalyst killed those people, not Shepard, the Catalyst is the one who will continue to kill those people, not Shepard.

I refused to choose because it was never a solution to begin with. IDC if a 5 minute epilogue says "and then everybody lived happily ever after"

Infact I think its pretty sad the whole choice comes down to "Do you want the people your player cared about to live?" rather then an actual moral belief surrounding the choice your making.

Yet no one actually talks about how the reaper wiped out TRILLIONS of lives without a second thought, infact the best answer I have to address that so far is: Oh well, deal with it.

[Omni-Science2]

hoodaticus wrote...

The only moral justification for refuse is belief that the Reapers are correct (which proves IT - but not the way you think).

Elaborate. 

Between becoming self-appointed vanguard, forcing evolution, and wiping out your synthetic allies, I choose to fight and die. 

[Isichar]

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

Very good point. I think sometimes we all take things a bit too seriously on here and forget that this is just a piece of entertainment and not reality.

Well far be it from me to argue with a metagamer.

Asking "what would I think and do" in a situation is what I enjoy about these sort of games, games were you have choice and you actually have to think about the choice you are making and what that choice means.

Thats why the first playthrough is so important to me, once you already know how your choices effect everything then you only make a choice based on what you want in the end, not based on what you feel was right there and then.

Modifié par Isichar, 14 août 2012 - 04:16 .

[TsaiMeLemoni]

Isichar wrote...

 ...but people are trying to make Shepard out as been the trigger puller on the galaxy in refuse when it was always the catalyst. The catalyst killed those people, not Shepard, the Catalyst is the one who will continue to kill those people, not Shepard.

This is an interesting snippet, and one I'll admit I didn't really think about til now. It still doesn't change my opinions about why I chose the ending I did, but it does help me understand a bit more why you did.

And though that is a very valid and true statement, I personally feel like my Shepard still has a responsibility to save as many lives as he can. Even if it were to mean bowing down to the Reaper wishes, in all the other three endings the Reaper threat is ended and Shepard has successfully saved many, many lives.

[D24O]

I just want to say, I love the concept of refuse, not just because I get to tell the Catalyst to f*** off, but because I think the Galaxy deserves to defeat the reapers on its own terms, and by its own merits rather than using Reaper tech. I think that in a way, its a beautiful, moving ending, reminiscent of the sacrifice the Protheans made on Ilos, it honestly moved me near to tears the first time I saw it. But of course it comes with the unfortunate implications of losing everyone and everything you've come to know and love for the past 5 years, something that, like the price of Synthetics in destroy, is something my canon Shepard doesn't want to lose without trying something else. So although I can appreciate why someone would choose it, its not for me.

[Omanisat]

Isichar wrote...

What I find funny is that pro enders always turn this choice into "So you would rather let billions die rather then..." as if I am the one holding the gun to the galaxy's head. People are so quick to forget the reapers have destroyed many lives, and will continue to do so if you do not justify what they have done and submit to its reasoning.

You did not fire the crucible to make the galaxy a better place, you did so because when the reapers took the galaxy hostage, the people you cared about, suddenly everything else they had destroyed became expendable. People died, had their lives destroyed without even knowing why, because 1 AI decided to play god, not because Shepard decided not to fire the gun.

There are so many comparisons I can make for this to real life, most of which would probably get me banned from the forums, but people are trying to make Shepard out as been the trigger puller on the galaxy in refuse when it was always the catalyst. The catalyst killed those people, not Shepard, the Catalyst is the one who will continue to kill those people, not Shepard.

I refused to choose because it was never a solution to begin with. IDC if a 5 minute epilogue says "and then everybody lived happily ever after"

Infact I think its pretty sad the whole choice comes down to "Do you want the people your player cared about to live?" rather then an actual moral belief surrounding the choice your making.

Yet no one actually talks about how the reaper wiped out TRILLIONS of lives without a second thought, infact the best answer I have to address that so far is: Oh well, deal with it.

To clarify, what ending are you talking about?

'Cause I pick Destroy specifically to make sure the reapers aren't going to continue the kill trillions of innocent people.

[comrade gando]

Isichar wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

You know that the Crucible does things other that Synthesis right?

Yeah, 1 option forces you to commit genocide and damage most technology (Ignoring the issue of how many races actually are dependant on tech to survive) and the other lets me kill myself to create a new catalyst, oh joy.

Speaking of damage, why in the name of hades does the crucible destroy the reapers, but then damage all technology? Whats the point? And to make it even more rediculous it damages the relays for no reason, then we repair them?! BETRAAAYAALL!! Its been established since ME1 those things are indestructible and are reaper tech so we know nothing about them. What did they find plans for them in the mars archives also? Maybe the writers need to pay a visit to the mars archives to find some plans for a better ending.

[Isichar]

D24O wrote...

I just want to say, I love the concept of refuse, not just because I get to tell the Catalyst to f*** off, but because I think the Galaxy deserves to defeat the reapers on its own terms, and by its own merits rather than using Reaper tech. I think that in a way, its a beautiful, moving ending, reminiscent of the sacrifice the Protheans made on Ilos, it honestly moved me near to tears the first time I saw it. But of course it comes with the unfortunate implications of losing everyone and everything you've come to know and love for the past 5 years, something that, like the price of Synthetics in destroy, is something my canon Shepard doesn't want to lose without trying something else. So although I can appreciate why someone would choose it, its not for me.

Its nice to see someone who sees that refuse is an option that can be made for reasons other then spite.

Telling the catalyst to **** off is a nice bonus, but its not why I would choose refuse.

[TsaiMeLemoni]

Isichar wrote...

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

Very good point. I think sometimes we all take things a bit too seriously on here and forget that this is just a piece of entertainment and not reality.

Well far be it from me to argue with a metagamer.

Asking "what would I think and do" in a situation is what I enjoy about these sort of games, games were you have choice and you actually have to think about the choice you are making and what that choice means.

Thats why the first playthrough is so important to me, once you already know how your choices effect everything then you only make a choice based on what you want in the end, not based on what you feel was right there and then.

I am not sure I would classify myself as a metagamer. I try to create a personality for my Shepard that, while obviously influenced by my own leanings, sticks to said personality. I am mainly a Renegade player, but my Renegades have made many differerny choices depending on how I wanted their personality to be, even if it wasn't a choice I'd choose IRL.

For example, I would never let Samara kill herself and then proceed to shoot her daughter in cold blood, but I do have a Renegade that did. And for whatever difference it makes, I do have one Shep that I chose the Refuse ending (I wanted to experience them myself and not through YT). I'll never make that choice again.

Modifié par TsaiMeLemoni, 14 août 2012 - 04:22 .

[MegaSovereign]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Destroying the Reapers justifies what they've done? That's like saying if I steal a murderer's weapon and kill him with it, I've justified all the murders he committed.

[Tealjaker94]

The way I see it I see it is this: I'm a strategist. I'm looking for a way to win this war. I'm given a way to destroy my enemies at the cost of the geth(assuming they survived Rannoch). The other option is to hope that my allies are able to find another way to defeat the Reapers. I don't think they can win without the crucible. If you disagree, go right ahead and refuse. As Jacob would say: "Heavy risk. But the priiize..."

[D24O]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

 As Jacob would say: "Heavy risk. But the priiize..."

Oh no, it looks like you dun goofed. Your priiize:
https://encrypted-tb...tHcCcI0eyJiNdA 

[Omni-Science2]

HATING U.

CANNOT UNHEAR WHEN PLAYING REFUSAL ON YOUTUBE

[Isichar]

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

Isichar wrote...

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

Very good point. I think sometimes we all take things a bit too seriously on here and forget that this is just a piece of entertainment and not reality.

Well far be it from me to argue with a metagamer.

Asking "what would I think and do" in a situation is what I enjoy about these sort of games, games were you have choice and you actually have to think about the choice you are making and what that choice means.

Thats why the first playthrough is so important to me, once you already know how your choices effect everything then you only make a choice based on what you want in the end, not based on what you feel was right there and then.

I am not sure I would classify myself as a metagamer. I try to create a personality for my Shepard that, while obviously influenced by my own leanings, sticks to said personality. I am mainly a Renegade player, but my Renegades have made many differerny choices depending on how I wanted their personality to be, even if it wasn't a choice I'd choose IRL.

For example, I would never let Samara kill herself and then proceed to shoot her daughter in cold blood, but I do have a Renegade that did.

I just meant in regards to taking the choices seriously, I enjoy been able to pretend like this is a RL situation.

A while back a poster claimed that people would not choose refuse because most would just want to go back to living, or as he put it "Most people would just want to go on living and eating their grilled cheese sandwiches" which is very true. Most people in real life would not be able to choose refuse because they would just want the reaper threat to end, regardless of their beliefs. 

However since most people don't have to take it seriously the choice itself changes because the end result has no effect on them. Now you may ask why I am bringing up a point that goes against my own (and I think it is a very true point).

That is because I like to take it seriously. I like to ask what people would choose IRL, and what would be important. And IRL people forget that you dont even know if choosing destroy or any other crucible function actually would stop the reapers. We know ingame we will be able to stop the reapers because we can simply reload and go back, but if you were there choosing you would not know the result of your actions.

Modifié par Isichar, 14 août 2012 - 04:35 .

[Isichar]

Omanisat wrote...

Isichar wrote...

What I find funny is that pro enders always turn this choice into "So you would rather let billions die rather then..." as if I am the one holding the gun to the galaxy's head. People are so quick to forget the reapers have destroyed many lives, and will continue to do so if you do not justify what they have done and submit to its reasoning.

You did not fire the crucible to make the galaxy a better place, you did so because when the reapers took the galaxy hostage, the people you cared about, suddenly everything else they had destroyed became expendable. People died, had their lives destroyed without even knowing why, because 1 AI decided to play god, not because Shepard decided not to fire the gun.

There are so many comparisons I can make for this to real life, most of which would probably get me banned from the forums, but people are trying to make Shepard out as been the trigger puller on the galaxy in refuse when it was always the catalyst. The catalyst killed those people, not Shepard, the Catalyst is the one who will continue to kill those people, not Shepard.

I refused to choose because it was never a solution to begin with. IDC if a 5 minute epilogue says "and then everybody lived happily ever after"

Infact I think its pretty sad the whole choice comes down to "Do you want the people your player cared about to live?" rather then an actual moral belief surrounding the choice your making.

Yet no one actually talks about how the reaper wiped out TRILLIONS of lives without a second thought, infact the best answer I have to address that so far is: Oh well, deal with it.

To clarify, what ending are you talking about?

'Cause I pick Destroy specifically to make sure the reapers aren't going to continue the kill trillions of innocent people.

And you destroyed a race because the catalysts logic demanded it in result.

Ask yourself this: Why is the Catalyst ok with destroy but not refuse?

[Ziguehart]

Refuse and let the yagh win the reapers in the next cycle with liara`s computer

[TsaiMeLemoni]

Thinking about it as a real life choice, I would probably go with Destroy simply because the other three leave me with more questions than Destroy does.

With Destroy, I know that there is a chance to stop the Reapers once and for all. I don't really know what Synthesis will do long term, and I have an inkling that the long term consequence of Control is that I eventually become the soul-less machine that comes back to destroy everything. With Refusal, I know that we're back to fighting a conventional war, which I've been told repeatedly we cannot win.

I have different Sheps that choose different endings, but that's pretty much my run down on my own thoughts of the endings.

As for the 'genocide' of the Geth, I have a couple of runs where I can't make peace due to events in ME2, and I have one that chooses the Geth and one that chooses the Quarians. For the one that sees the decimation of the Geth before the end of the game, Destroy is actually made that much sweeter (I can handle only losing EDI).

Modifié par TsaiMeLemoni, 14 août 2012 - 04:39 .

[SeptimusMagistos]

Isichar wrote...

Yet no one actually talks about how the reaper wiped out TRILLIONS of lives without a second thought, infact the best answer I have to address that so far is: Oh well, deal with it.

That's because no one needs to talk about it. What the Reapers did is bad. We pick a solution that lets us stop them from doing it again. You refused to pick one of those solutions and were therefore left without the power to stop them from doing it again. That's what it comes down to. Not justifying anything the Reapers have done, but stopping them through whatever means is available at the lowest possible cost.

[memorysquid]

Isichar wrote...

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

Isichar wrote...

Cobalt2113 wrote...

Better to just let the horrible deaths continue then?

Yes. Reapers will fail no matter what you do, At least then the sacrfices actually meant something and all those people who died fighting the reapers did not do so just for someone to ultimately say "hey catalyst you were right to do what you did"

Yes I would much rather die fighting for what I believed in then justify the murdering of trillions of lives, just so I can live.

So it's better for later generations to use the Crucible instead of Shepard? I am not sure I understand the logic here.

Thats because you assume that future generations will actually use the crucible, I think they stopped the reapers the correct way, seeing as how the game does not actually state that future generations use the crucible to win.

No they go synthesis all the way next cycle and you wasted our galaxy's one shot for nothing.  "Pulling a Shepard" becomes the next cycle's metaphor for a total **** up resulting in needless galacticide.

[Isichar]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Isichar wrote...

Yet no one actually talks about how the reaper wiped out TRILLIONS of lives without a second thought, infact the best answer I have to address that so far is: Oh well, deal with it.

That's because no one needs to talk about it. What the Reapers did is bad. We pick a solution that lets us stop them from doing it again. You refused to pick one of those solutions and were therefore left without the power to stop them from doing it again. That's what it comes down to. Not justifying anything the Reapers have done, but stopping them through whatever means is available at the lowest possible cost.

That is easy to say when you can save and reload and see what your choices have done. You dont actually know if firing the crucible would even stop the reapers until you actually fired it.