925 réponses à ce sujet

[Isichar]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Isichar wrote...

And there is no justifying trillions of deaths, but your doing that by using the crucible to give the catalyst what he wants. Both destroy and control are selfish and synthesis is simply unacceptable. Sacrafice has been a key theme since square one, but it seems people feel what they are willing to sacrafice is more morally justifiable then what others are.

Cute. But this isn't about what the Catalyst wants. This is about what the galaxy wants, which is the cycle stopped.

Shepards who don't believe in making hard decisions don't make it past Mass Effect 1.

If you want to ignore the catalysts goals for your own goals and reasons go right ahead, but the catalyst wants you to fire the crucible and doing so fits with its goals, which is unacceptable to me.

If you want to argue I should view it the same way as you then go right ahead, but you won't make much progress.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

LiarasShield wrote...

Once again you think differently but none of the endings are truely better then any of the others beside what the players believes and thinks  for their shepards

Their are many flaws to all the crucibles choices they only really work for metagaming or headcannoning to death

None are truely better then the others other then what ending suits you and your beliefs

Really? All my endings resulted in a galaxy where my cycle wasn't destroyed. So I'm pretty sure my ending was better than yours. And on the bright side, anyone who doesn't like this new world is free to end themselves. That's more freedom and choice than you decided to give them.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Isichar wrote...

If you want to ignore the catalysts goals for your own goals and reasons go right ahead, but the catalyst wants you to fire the crucible and doing so fits with its goals, which is unacceptable to me.

If you want to argue I should view it the same way as you then go right ahead, but you won't make much progress.

Hey, if you want to bury your head in the sand, go right ahead. Just cut the stuff about "selfish" and "justifying genocide". Last I checked, every other cycle intended to activate the Crucible. And they intentionally passed the files down to be used. By your tone, you seem to think activating the Crucible somehow gives those cycles the finger. If you don't think you can make that decision, you had no right to make it this far.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 16 août 2012 - 02:59 .

[LiarasShield]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Once again you think differently but none of the endings are truely better then any of the others beside what the players believes and thinks  for their shepards

Their are many flaws to all the crucibles choices they only really work for metagaming or headcannoning to death

None are truely better then the others other then what ending suits you and your beliefs

Really? All my endings resulted in a galaxy where my cycle wasn't destroyed. So I'm pretty sure my ending was better than yours. And on the bright side, anyone who doesn't like this new world is free to end themselves. That's more freedom and choice than you decided to give them.

But your ending isn't better then my it is your beliefd in that ending that makes you think it is better then mine

In destroy you destroy the geth you destroyed the reapers who had the knowledge to rebuild or make the relays in the first place you purposefully and knowingly intended to kill some of your own forces to kill the reapers and what has that done for you put you in a unknowing future where the races may slowly die in our solar system or the dead ones around us

Synthesis forces everybody to be the same in order for peace to exist

Control is terrible because the monsters that have caused the destruction of the galaxy are now our protectors their would be too much infighting to allow that to be ok that and if new catalyst goes rogue he or she could use the reapers to destroy the universe every 50 thousands years or so it makes you no better then anyone else other then what you believed was right

I believed in the freedom of everybody making their own decision instead of a universal altering one without permission from my forces to make these change they're wrong and no giving permission to defeat the reapers is very different then giving permission to rewrite someones dna or to severly damage the mass relays

[ATiBotka]

LiarasShield wrote...

Synthesis forces everybody to be the same in order for peace to exist

Fallacy.

[robertthebard]

Isichar wrote...

I am not merely about you specifically, infact, I have had quite a number of destroy enders make this argument to me.

The point is what your are willing to sacrifice and whether the cost is worth it comes down to personal ideals, and if people want to question mine, or lack of, then I will do the same, which usually results in them telling me how right they are and how wrong I am.

As for your question, I did not make the choice based on whether or not people would be greatful to me, I made it based on what I believed to be best for the galaxy, and I fully believe that anything to do with the crucible and catalyst is not in the galaxy's best interest. The Catalyst's actions have done nothing but cause misery and suffering to everyone and everything, and I refuse to help it continue its actions even if that means sacrifing my cycle.

And yes I feel just as justified making that choice as anyone who decided to fire the crucible felt.

The question isn't whether you thought they'd be grateful, the question was do you think they would think you were selfish in saving their lives.  As far as I'm concerned, the only justification I need for choosing an ending, or choosing to not choose, is because I felt it was what my Shepard would do.  I don't have to tell everyone that they are selfish for choosing something other than what I chose, or that they are stupid, or any of the other items that get thrown around on a routine basis.  It just so happens that being selfish is exactly why my Self Righteous Paragon would choose Refusal.  He doesn't believe the galaxy is worth saving, and his opinion is all that matters.  That's all I need to say, people can agree, or disagree, they can see the logic, or not, it doesn't matter to that Shepard, as he's basing it entirely on the morals/motivations that I have assigned to him to get to that point.

In short, if you're confrontational, as the OP here is, people are going to respond accordingly, nature of the beast.  If you are assigning morals to your Shepard, and telling everyone that they should believe what you believe, they are going to respond accordingly.  Nothing that you do in game adversely or positively affects my game.  We are playing the same game, in alternate universes.  It's not like it's an MMO, and what you do kills all my characters.

I do, however, find that some of these conversations can be enlightening, and some can even be fun.  The problems start when people refuse to see any other view than their own as valid.  You have come across this way, from the OP on.  Is it surprising that people will vehemently disagree with you?  I have actually come to have common ground with people here that disagree with some of my ideas about varying topics.  Why?  Because I don't believe in absolutes in a CRPG.  I can, and will look beyond my experiences, and can and have stated that I would, for example in this topic, choose Refusal, although I did clarify that I don't see it as the morally right thing to do.  I understand the consequences for the galaxy, and have chosen it specifically because of them, if I ever get to where I actually finish that game, anyway.

[Isichar]

Dharvy wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

For me for standing up for what you believe in and wanting everyones choices or ideals to count is why my shepard chose refuse


Everyone has a reason for picking the particular ending that they like but if you keep trying to say which ending is better then another then you're asking for a flame war and one I will not back down from cause I could easily explain the flaws or issues that can plague the other ending and why any of the three choices are not signifigantly better then refuse just a different choice and believe of what we all feel for our shepards

I understand where you're coming from and as an individual it could be a terribly hard choice. But what some are trying to say is the choice to refuse is not really giving everyone else a choice. You're the only one with a choice. Everyone else choice is basically how do they want to die. They can't choose not to die, they can only choose how to die: fighting, running, or lying down. You're are effectively choosing that they do die, just not how they die.

If you were in a building and a bomb is about to go off and you had no way of stopping it what choice do you really have, but how you're going to die: crying, praying, waiting, screaming, fighting? The person that's able to stop the bomb actually have a choice to live or die. The person that stops the bomb is considered a hero because he just gave life to the people who had no other choice but to die.

Post galaxy with any of the 3 choices a person now has the ability to make a decent choice; how they want to live. With refuse their choice is how they want to die.

No one's choices or ideals count only yours. And you are the only one able to give them true freedom to make their own choices and ideals count. But you have to choice 1 of the 3 options.

Save the galaxy, let everyone choose how they want to live. Make a choice.

Ah finally a real argument that isn't just "Im right and your wrong"

Shepard is forced to make a choice, and that choice comes down to what they think is best for the galaxy. Its not a choice I am afraid of making, though it is certainly not one I enjoy making either. Simply living does not just automatically become the best choice because people survive another day, suriving in itself is not automatically the correct choice, even if it is what most individuals want.

The problem with what your saying is your assuming that I can look at the Catalysts options as choices that let others live the way they want, even though the Catalyst is only letting you choose so it can to some extent still control how the cycle and events progress, which again have never benefitted anyone or anything. If I give my cycle the choice to do whatever they want with their lives, but in turn only make things even worse because of the catalysts goals then is that really better?

I have yet to see anyone, anything that has not suffered because of the Catalyst, I don't think there is a single non indoctrinated person in the whole series who thought what the reapers were doing was right, and the reapers could not have cared less, and still don't. The same beliefs that led to the reapers creation is the same goals that lead up to you firing the crucible, you dont need to agree or disagree with these goals, regardless of how you feel that is what the catalyst wants.

If you activated the crucible and it actually ended up killing everyone faster then the reapers ever could have then you would have just taken away everyones ability to fight at all, can you honestly say that it would have still been the right choice?

[LiarasShield]

Again it is the believe of what ending suits you and your shepard depending on what you believe is right it doesn't make any of the endings better then any others

[Dharvy]

3DandBeyond wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

what is the cost of those morals, to save them would you sacrifice all known life, or would you sacrifice your morals to save life

funny thing is destroy is right along the lines of my morals so whatever, sacrifice the few to ensure happiness of the many

Happiness of the many, eh?  Destroy as it is leads you down a slippery slope which is one of the reasons genocide (besides being murder) is a particularly disgusting targeted form of murder.

It defines some lives as more valuable and others as more expendable.  EDI and the geth are allies that are thrown, pushed, shoved off a cliff.  So, afterward all is light and happy right?  Well, then the question might pop up as to what happened here.  And the Krogan that already feel under-appreciated may see a problem.  They have already been used as fodder and now they see a whole race that has been thrown away.  Others may have believed the reapers were impossible to beat, but the Krogan wouldn't have and would have wanted to fight to the last Krogan.  That's how they were built.  They are warriors first and thinkers somewhere a bit further down the line.  They would not be happy first off in not fighting the reapers.  Secondly, not that they loved the geth, they would see that if one race could be thrown away, who's next?  No one likes them.  No one likes the Batarians.  No one likes the Rachni.  And all of them could see that people at least thought the geth were valuable and Shepard liked EDI.

The Krogan would become protective at least.  The Batarians have always struck out when feeling defensive.  And the Rachni would want to be isolationists but might work to really build up their numbers.

Sure this is speculation but it is logical.  Destroy as it is is no panacea.  And just as the other choices can have awful future results so could Destroy.

Furthermore, there is acting to do something vs. the failure to do something.  Acting to kill the geth is an intentional part of an intentional act based on believing the kid.  Refusing to kill the geth is a failure to act based upon the unknown consequences of acting or not acting.  People see things differently.  But just for fun if you use current laws as a flimsy model, look at how it views things.  Intentional acts are always more serious than negligence is.  If Shepard acts and knowingly kills the geth using this flimsy model, s/he is far more guilty than if s/he just let people die.  It is further mitigated by not knowing for certain that the choices are real and thinking it possible that refusal might get rid of the kid and the choices and allow the crucible to do whatever it is supposed to do.

Given that the crucible has much that indicates it is a dark energy device which might be used to weaken the reapers and leave them vulnerable, it is possible to theorize without metagaming that it was meant to be used for that and not for the 3 choices.  So,  the kid could be there to deceive and not even be related to the crucible at all.  Refuse might be thought to be a "shut up, kid" vote.

I have a question if you're were talking to the Geth and EDI upon the platform and told them that you can Destroy the Reapers but the Crucible would also destroy them and then tell them you can refuse but we have no real hope in ending this war and everyone, all the lives of the galaxy would be loss, can you not see them sacraficing themselves? Especially being AI's that can calculate and know statistically it'll be the same result?

And even if they didn't I'll probably let it be known that they did just that, sacrifice themselves for the whole of the galaxy. And they'll go down as the galaxy's greatest heroes. And it'll inspire everyone to respect and admire synthetics and hopefully any future synthetics would be greatly appreciated and not feel so threatened by organics that and in turn prevent the catalyst's fears or at least make it a lot less likely.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

LiarasShield wrote...

But your ending isn't better then my it is your beliefd in that ending that makes you think it is better then mine

In destroy you destroy the geth you destroyed the reapers who had the knowledge to rebuild or make the relays in the first place you purposefully and knowingly intended to kill some of your own forces to kill the reapers and what has that done for you put you in a unknowing future where the races may slowly die in our solar system or the dead ones around us

All forces who die anyway, negating any kind of value to that decision.  

You might also want to look into the capabilities of the Quarians/Geth/both in technology, that there are other alternatives to Mass Relay travel, the fact that every other species has a common goal in getting the relays back online, that other species have managed to build their own relays, and that the Catalyst confirmed that we will be able to recover from destroy, and that we now have a million Reaper bodies from which to reverse engineer their technology.

Synthesis forces everybody to be the same in order for peace to exist

Again, let all the people who hate being part robot kill themselves. This is a point you haven't been able to address. Anyone who hates synthesis has the freedom to die. Anyone who hates reject does not have the freedom to survive.

Control is terrible because the monsters that have caused the destruction of the galaxy are now our protectors their would be too much infighting to allow that to be ok that and if new catalyst goes rogue he or she could use the reapers to destroy the universe every 50 thousands years or so it makes you no better then anyone else other then what you believed was right

Then you're back at square one dealing with the same cycle again.

I believed in the freedom of everybody making their own decision instead of a universal altering one without permission from my forces to make these change they're wrong and no giving permission to defeat the reapers is very different then giving permission to rewrite someones dna or to severly damage the mass relays

No. Cut this crap about freedom. It's not getting you anywhere. A doctor who refuses to save a dying man doesn't believe in freedom. Freedom is the ability to make a choice for yourself. Where is this applicable in refuse? What exactly are people choosing? Whether they die to a husk or a capital ship?

Refuse results in every sentient everywhere condemned to one outcome: death. Death is still an option for anyone who dislikes synthesis. Ergo, my decision results in more freedom than yours.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 16 août 2012 - 03:12 .

[PanzerGr3nadier]

Isichar wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...For me for standing up for what you believe in and wanting everyones choices or ideals to count is why my shepard chose refuseEveryone has a reason for picking the particular ending that they like but if you keep trying to say which ending is better then another then you're asking for a flame war and one I will not back down from cause I could easily explain the flaws or issues that can plague the other ending and why any of the three choices are not signifigantly better then refuse just a different choice and believe of what we all feel for our shepardsIts funny how when you question others beliefs and what they sacrifice everything becomes justified, but when I make a choice for what is important to me, then all of a sudden those same people tell me I have no justifiable reason for choosing that.So much for the double standard.For example:I dont understand how someone who made the choice to kill EDI and the Geth knowing there was a solution that could get everyone out alive can tell me that its wrong to needlessly sacrifice others.

Get everyone out alive??


By choosing refusal, you're pissing on everyone's graves who gave up their lives to make sure that someday, somebody would kill the Reapers.... and that there would be tomorrow for those who are still alive...


EDI is reaper tech btw and geth are collateral damage because writers wanted it.

Modifié par PanzerGr3nadier, 16 août 2012 - 03:13 .

[LiarasShield]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

But your ending isn't better then my it is your beliefd in that ending that makes you think it is better then mine

In destroy you destroy the geth you destroyed the reapers who had the knowledge to rebuild or make the relays in the first place you purposefully and knowingly intended to kill some of your own forces to kill the reapers and what has that done for you put you in a unknowing future where the races may slowly die in our solar system or the dead ones around us

All forces who die anyway, negating any kind of value to that decision.  

You might also want to look into the capabilities of the Quarians/Geth/both in technology, that there are other alternatives to Mass Relay travel, the fact that every other species has a common goal in getting the relays back online, that other species have managed to build their own relays, and that the Catalyst confirmed that we will be able to recover from destroy, and that we now have a million Reaper bodies from which to reverse engineer their technology.

Synthesis forces everybody to be the same in order for peace to exist

Again, let all the people who hate being part robot kill themselves. This is a point you haven't been able to address. Anyone who hates synthesis has the freedom to die. Anyone who hates reject does not have the freedom to survive.

Control is terrible because the monsters that have caused the destruction of the galaxy are now our protectors their would be too much infighting to allow that to be ok that and if new catalyst goes rogue he or she could use the reapers to destroy the universe every 50 thousands years or so it makes you no better then anyone else other then what you believed was right

Then you're back at square one dealing with the same cycle again.

I believed in the freedom of everybody making their own decision instead of a universal altering one without permission from my forces to make these change they're wrong and no giving permission to defeat the reapers is very different then giving permission to rewrite someones dna or to severly damage the mass relays

No. Cut this crap about freedom. It's not getting you anywhere. A doctor who refuses to save a dying man doesn't believe in freedom. Freedom is the ability to make a choice for yourself. Where is this applicable in refuse? What exactly are people choosing? Whether they die to a husk or a capital ship?

Not it isn't crap you've been making poor excuses or using your own ideals to try to say the refuse ending is terrible but none of your endings are any better so why don't you cut the nonsense the relays didn't get rebuild in any of the extended slides other then control

Your the one making the excuse as to say which ending is better

Modifié par LiarasShield, 16 août 2012 - 03:13 .

[robertthebard]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

But your ending isn't better then my it is your beliefd in that ending that makes you think it is better then mine

In destroy you destroy the geth you destroyed the reapers who had the knowledge to rebuild or make the relays in the first place you purposefully and knowingly intended to kill some of your own forces to kill the reapers and what has that done for you put you in a unknowing future where the races may slowly die in our solar system or the dead ones around us

All forces who die anyway, negating any kind of value to that decision.  

You might also want to look into the capabilities of the Quarians/Geth/both in technology, that there are other alternatives to Mass Relay travel, the fact that every other species has a common goal in getting the relays back online, that other species have managed to build their own relays, and that the Catalyst confirmed that we will be able to recover from destroy, and that we now have a million Reaper bodies from which to reverse engineer their technology.

Synthesis forces everybody to be the same in order for peace to exist

Again, let all the people who hate being part robot kill themselves. This is a point you haven't been able to address. Anyone who hates synthesis has the freedom to die. Anyone who hates reject does not have the freedom to survive.

Control is terrible because the monsters that have caused the destruction of the galaxy are now our protectors their would be too much infighting to allow that to be ok that and if new catalyst goes rogue he or she could use the reapers to destroy the universe every 50 thousands years or so it makes you no better then anyone else other then what you believed was right

Then you're back at square one dealing with the same cycle again.

I believed in the freedom of everybody making their own decision instead of a universal altering one without permission from my forces to make these change they're wrong and no giving permission to defeat the reapers is very different then giving permission to rewrite someones dna or to severly damage the mass relays

No. Cut this crap about freedom. It's not getting you anywhere. A doctor who refuses to save a dying man doesn't believe in freedom. Freedom is the ability to make a choice for yourself. Where is this applicable in refuse? What exactly are people choosing? Whether they die to a husk or a capital ship?

Refuse results in every sentient everywhere condemned to one outcome: death. Death is still an option for anyone who dislikes synthesis. Ergo, my decision results in more freedom than yours.

I'm with Kal Reegar though, I don't know how I'm going to die, but it isn't going to be to some infection, that's just insulting.

[LiarasShield]

Not only are the reapers beyond your understanding like harbinger and soverign have mentioned but also people as well

Modifié par LiarasShield, 16 août 2012 - 03:15 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

LiarasShield wrote...

Not it isn't crap you've been making poor excuses or using your own ideals to try to say the refuse ending is terrible but none of your endings are any better so why don't you cut the nonsense the relays didn't get rebuild in any of the extended slides other then control

Your the one making the excuse as to say which ending is better

Really? You're going with the "No, you" argument? I've outlined why the alternates are better. You keep using the phrase freedom...but have no idea what freedom actually is. When you outline how forcing someone to die is a better option than giving them the option to live or die, then you can base an argument around freedom.

Edit: And I should point out, if you thought rebuilding the relays with little difficulties meant "in a few weeks", that's just woefully optimistic.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 16 août 2012 - 03:21 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

robertthebard wrote...

I'm with Kal Reegar though, I don't know how I'm going to die, but it isn't going to be to some infection, that's just insulting.

Damn good line. Good shotgun, too.

[LiarasShield]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Not it isn't crap you've been making poor excuses or using your own ideals to try to say the refuse ending is terrible but none of your endings are any better so why don't you cut the nonsense the relays didn't get rebuild in any of the extended slides other then control

Your the one making the excuse as to say which ending is better

Really? You're going with the "No, you" argument? I've outlined why the alternates are better. You keep using the phrase freedom...but have no idea what freedom actually is. When you outline how forcing someone to die is a better option than giving them the option to live or die, then you can start talking about freedom.

When I give people the option to think for themselves and allow them to do what they want that is freedom altering dna not listening to anyone to control the reapers have them as protectors or be the one controling these monsters that burned their worlds

Destroying the geth without their consent

I gave them more freedom then what your even considering


So do not act like your ending was better then mine or act like you're a better person friend because your not

Modifié par LiarasShield, 16 août 2012 - 03:24 .

[Dharvy]

Isichar wrote...

Dharvy wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

For me for standing up for what you believe in and wanting everyones choices or ideals to count is why my shepard chose refuse


Everyone has a reason for picking the particular ending that they like but if you keep trying to say which ending is better then another then you're asking for a flame war and one I will not back down from cause I could easily explain the flaws or issues that can plague the other ending and why any of the three choices are not signifigantly better then refuse just a different choice and believe of what we all feel for our shepards

I understand where you're coming from and as an individual it could be a terribly hard choice. But what some are trying to say is the choice to refuse is not really giving everyone else a choice. You're the only one with a choice. Everyone else choice is basically how do they want to die. They can't choose not to die, they can only choose how to die: fighting, running, or lying down. You're are effectively choosing that they do die, just not how they die.

If you were in a building and a bomb is about to go off and you had no way of stopping it what choice do you really have, but how you're going to die: crying, praying, waiting, screaming, fighting? The person that's able to stop the bomb actually have a choice to live or die. The person that stops the bomb is considered a hero because he just gave life to the people who had no other choice but to die.

Post galaxy with any of the 3 choices a person now has the ability to make a decent choice; how they want to live. With refuse their choice is how they want to die.

No one's choices or ideals count only yours. And you are the only one able to give them true freedom to make their own choices and ideals count. But you have to choice 1 of the 3 options.

Save the galaxy, let everyone choose how they want to live. Make a choice.

Ah finally a real argument that isn't just "Im right and your wrong"

Shepard is forced to make a choice, and that choice comes down to what they think is best for the galaxy. Its not a choice I am afraid of making, though it is certainly not one I enjoy making either. Simply living does not just automatically become the best choice because people survive another day, suriving in itself is not automatically the correct choice, even if it is what most individuals want.

The problem with what your saying is your assuming that I can look at the Catalysts options as choices that let others live the way they want, even though the Catalyst is only letting you choose so it can to some extent still control how the cycle and events progress, which again have never benefitted anyone or anything. If I give my cycle the choice to do whatever they want with their lives, but in turn only make things even worse because of the catalysts goals then is that really better?

I have yet to see anyone, anything that has not suffered because of the Catalyst, I don't think there is a single non indoctrinated person in the whole series who thought what the reapers were doing was right, and the reapers could not have cared less, and still don't. The same beliefs that led to the reapers creation is the same goals that lead up to you firing the crucible, you dont need to agree or disagree with these goals, regardless of how you feel that is what the catalyst wants.

If you activated the crucible and it actually ended up killing everyone faster then the reapers ever could have then you would have just taken away everyones ability to fight at all, can you honestly say that it would have still been the right choice?

If you're refusing because of ignorance and distrust I can understand that. If you're saying I couldn't trust the catalyst and I didn't know what would happened and I didn't want to make a mistake and speed up the reaping and I thought it was some kind of elaborate trap I can understand that line of thinking. I can understand refuse based on them thoughts.

But the simple fact is we are all fighting a hopeless battle in that we are all going to die and we can only choose how we are going to die, fighting, running, or lying down. The Crucible is glimmer of hope that'll we make it out of this battle alive. Scared maybe, dirty maybe, damaged maybe, but alive. Do you go down the path of hope? Well you built the thing so you're at least making it reality choice.

Now onto what the catalyst wants. Its already reaping, and its been doing it for thousands of cycles. Now it specifically tells you that if you refuse the cycle would continue. Now since its been reaping for all these years I guess reaping is also what it wants to a certain degree. So you effectively have 4 options that the catalyst wants and now you just must choose what do you want?

So I ask you, what do you want? And what are you willing to sacrifice to get it?

[BaladasDemnevanni]

LiarasShield wrote...

When I give people the option to think for themselves

You gave them the option to die, nothing more.

and allow them to do what they want that is freedom

altering dna not listening to anyone to control the reapers have them as protectors or be the one controling these monsters that burned their worlds

Again, forced death is not freedom.

Destroying the geth without their consent

Dead anyway. No net freedom here.

I gave them more freedom then what your even considering

So do not act like your ending was better then mine or act like you're a better person friend because your not

You really need to take a math course. Every decision results in more "net freedom to choose" than your option. By your own moral code, you've failed. As long as people have the option to kill themselves in all three endings, and they do, then you have but words.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 16 août 2012 - 03:54 .

[Ice Cold J]

I WOULD refuse, but obviously my "cycle" would die.

I MIGHT choose control, since now I'm an intergalactic peacekeeper force. But I see where you're coming from.

[Shalaska]

 This thread made me laugh so hard, there are soooooo many logical fallicies being thrown around as to render many of the arguments logically unsound and thus useless.

And just to point it out under Title 18 Section 2 of the United States Code:

Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

So in the US, your choice to do nothing when you could have stopped it makes you guilty of mass genocide as if you were the one doing the killing. Most first world countries have similar statues in order to stop people from not acting to stop atrocities from happening.

Overall I do not have a problem with people choosing whatever ending they want, but most of the arguments presented here as "good" reasons to choose refusal are just wrong. You are not helping the galaxy by refusing, you are not giving them "choices" or freedom, you are not "giving in" to the reapers by activating the crucible.

Source: uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe

Modifié par Shalaska, 16 août 2012 - 03:55 .

[SpamBot2000]

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when trying to make the endings work. We don't like to see everyone in the galaxy reaped, so we make up reasons to accept what the leader of our omnicidal enemy is telling us to do. For me, the solution is not to play ME3. As I really love the ME series, this is deeply aggravating.

[LiarasShield]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

When I give people the option to think for themselves

You gave them the option to die, nothing more.

and allow them to do what they want that is freedom

altering dna not listening to anyone to control the reapers have them as protectors or be the one controling these monsters that burned their worlds

Again, forced death is not freedom.

Destroying the geth without their consent

Dead anyway. No net freedom here.

I gave them more freedom then what your even considering

So do not act like your ending was better then mine or act like you're a better person friend because your not

You really need to take a math course. Every decision results in more "net freedom to choose" than your option. By your own moral code, you've failed. As long as people have the option to kill themselves in all three endings, and they do, then you have but words.

No I have given the freedom you killed the geth and trapt your forces none of the other endings are much better it is

Just your believe vs mine that is all their is

[BaladasDemnevanni]

LiarasShield wrote...

No I have given the freedom you killed the geth and trapt your forces none of the other endings are much better it is

Just your believe vs mine that is all their is

Again, your claims are worthless. Arguments are all that is relevant. You can keep repeating "I've given them freedom" to yourself. You can cling to it like a shield, as your name foreshadows. But no one is free once they are dead. So for someone who's so obsessed with freedom, it's odd that you would deny it to the entire galaxy.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 16 août 2012 - 04:03 .

[LiarasShield]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

No I have given the freedom you killed the geth and trapt your forces none of the other endings are much better it is

Just your believe vs mine that is all their is

Again, your claims are worthless. Arguments are all that is relevant. You can keep repeating "I've given them freedom" to yourself. You can cling to it like a shield, as your name foreshadows. But no one is free once they are dead. So for someone who's so obsessed with freedom, it's odd that you would deny it to the entire galaxy.

But I have not denied to the entire galaxy killing geth is not giving them freedom manipulating peoples dna is not freedom controling our enemies when alot of the galaxy would want them dead is not freedom and having the new catalsyt go rogue and killing more cycles would not be freedom

Once again it is your belief vs mine nothing more nothing less