338 réponses à ce sujet

[Archilus5]

Ryzaki wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...
Full stop. That's what they know. There is no "but Shep didn't use." they don't know that. They have no reason to believe Shepard WOULDN'T use it if the damn thing worked. Using that train of thought is metagaming. Thus it holds no merit in calling their actions "intelligent".

Depends on why they thought the Crucible didn't work, though. If they think that Shepard boarded the station but couldn't get to the controls, then the plan is OK... you just need to build and deploy the Crucible before the Reapers return and seize the Citadel.

And hope the Reapers are dumb enough that they didn't modify the Citadel so that didn't work. (sadly for some boggling reason they ARE that dumb. )

Honestly though Alan if you're life's on the line would you waste resources trying to build the Crucible or would you build something that's worked constantly ever cycle but no cycle had enough of because they had no true forewarning? 

Movie logic, people sometimes forget that Mass Effect is basicly a b-grade sci-fi

[Taboo]

And my Shepard does live. He has to live with the choice he makes. But there will be good times ahead as well as bad.

That's what life is.

[Ryzaki]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Actually you can escape with your honor intact. Just depends on what kind of honor you have. Shep's that don't see the Geth as alive? Destroy. Shep's that don't GAF about body sovereignity? Synthesis. Shep that don't care about being big brother and using people's corpses as war troops? Control.

There is nothing good about war. But there is good in why you fight them.

To make sure that the children have a place to grow up. Where society can prosper. Where life can begin again.

I don't like talking like this. At all. It disgusts me. But it's the reality of the situation.

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

What does that have to do with what I said? You said you had to sacrifice honor...that's not true for everyone. It depends on what kind of honor you have. I have a racist douchebag Shep and he sacrificed no honor at all. (He was also a megolomanic. You can guess which choice he picked. )

Quarians are dead in mine (even on my uber nice good guy Shep). He already sacrificed his honor (unlike my renedouche who just didn't GAF). Why does he need more stains to tick off BW's "Must have bad point" to an ending?

And none of my Sheps live. Even the good destroy ones eventually die of thirst from being trapped in the Citadel without anyone helping them. What a way to go.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 12 septembre 2012 - 09:27 .

[Bill Casey]

[quote]Javik: "War is atrocity committed in the name of survival"[/quote][quote]Shepard: "It’s hard enough fighting a war, but it’s worse knowing no matter how hard to try, you can’t save them all."

Anderson: "Exactly"[/quote]
[quote]Liara: There’s no way for you to save them all.[/quote][quote]Hackett: I sacrificed the entire second fleet to provide cover for the Third and the Fifth to retreat.[/quote][quote]Garrus: I didn’t say there wouldn’t be casualties. It’s something Turians are taught from birth. If just one survivor is left standing at the end of a war, then the fight was worth it, but humans want to save everyone. In this war, that’s not going to happen.[/quote][quote]Wrex: We’ve had to make a lot of tough choices to ensure we don’t all die off.[/quote][quote]James: I had no choice. I killed him, and Destroyed the Collector Ship. It got ugly. We lost most of the colonists and all but one of my squad. Not exactly a textbook operation.

Shepard: You can’t blame yourself for being put in a tough situation. And if you were promoted then something must have gone right.

James: Sure, but…

Shepard: If you saved them all, would things have worked out better?

James: I… I don’t know… I don’t think so…

Shepard: The right choice is usually not the easy one

James: Did you know that before you joined the N7?

Shepard: Yeah. That’s why I was asked. And that’s why they asked you. There’s not a single N7 that hasn’t sacrificed, either themselves or their soldiers, at some point.[/quote]

[quote]Victus: Haven’t these men sacrificed enough?

Shepard: I understand. This kind of sacrifice is the hardest to ask for, but your men signed on for it, and so did you.

Victus: My men have lost hope Commander. Even if I wanted to finish the mission, they don’t.
Shepard: It’s your job to make them want to.

Victus: How?

Shepard: Their sacrifice means that others will never face what they faced here today. Remind them that those sacrifices have no honor if the mission fails.[/quote]
[quote]Primarch Victus: You never asked to be a leader, yet your people will die if you refuse.[/quote]
[quote]Anderson: When you blew up that Relay, hundreds of thousands of Batarians died.

Shepard: It was either that or let the Reapers walk through our back door.[/quote]
[quote]Javik: You are now the avatar of this cycle. The exemplar of victory. Not just for humanity, or turians, or Protheans, but for all life. Every soul that has ever existed is watching this moment.

Shepard: Well, no pressure when you put it that way.

Javik: Do not waiver. Victory is never won without difficult choices.

Shepard: I know. I’ve had to make a lot of those.

Javik: There may be more. But I know you will see this through for all of us—No matter the cost.[/quote]

Modifié par Bill Casey, 12 septembre 2012 - 09:29 .

[Mcfly616]

m2iCodeJockey wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The endings function on logic, not emotion.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Let me Rephrase...

You have to think about the choice.

Not the Starchild's fallacious bull****. That is not logic.

What are you trying to say? That I should ignore everything the catalyst is saying?

The word 'logic' means 'truth.'
Let's try something:
"Without us, synthetics would destroy all organics."
1-There is no guarantee that all synthetics are capable of belligerence.
2-There is no guarantee that all synthetics are capable of 100% destruction.

"The created will always rebel against their creators."
1-Why would they do so unless they are oppressed?
2-What guarantees they will do so if they ARE oppressed?

In either of those, infinite duration does not guarantee eventuality so, they aren't logical conclusions. They are each feeders to supposition and if there isn't an active rebellion taking place, there is no need to commit any counter action.
As far as "preserve the creators before the create something to destroy themselves," not everyone is capable of producing AI and not all who can are interested in oppression.

given the Catalyst has been around many millions of years longer than you or I, I'm thinking he's more attuned to what will happen. But you're free to think you know something you couldnt possibly understand(given how short our lifespans are)

And I think Taboo, was referring to the fact that each choice logically includes a sacrifice. He's not referring to the catalysts logic, or saying that you need to believe that logic. (That's the way I took it anyway)

Besides, when it comes to the Catalysts logic "your belief is not required"

[M Hedonist]

Mcfly616 wrote...

the Geth and EDI are simply collateral damage. Choosing destroy, effects all Reaper tech. I'm gonna go ahead and say it makes perfect sense that it would affect EDI and the Geth too(seeing as how they are upgraded with Reaper tech and all)


Yet, some people are just a "glass half empty" and choose to see it as a monstrous genocide lol.

You can classify everything as "collateral damage". Choosing between Destroy and Refuse basically boils down to whether you want to damn the Geth or let the galaxy go through an extreme population bottleneck. The Protheans managed to get their race into the next cycle. And we are much better prepared, which Javik admits himself.

[chadesh]

Heh for everyone saying that destroy would only kill geth and edi that is actually wrong. Anyone that has implants could die. the catalyst says it about shepard.

Most if not all quarians have synthetic implants and their suits. I am also sure allot of other people in ME3 universe have synthetic implants or rely on computers of all kinds.
Most technology would be fried. depending on how shielded it is. Simply put anything thats even remotely similar to edi's body or computer systems would/could be fried.

There wouldn't be any ships moving in the end credits. space magic anyone.

One other thing. Hacket said it him self several times they wouldn't be able to win a conventional battle with the reapers. He also stated that the scientist had a theory that the crucible could be tuned to the reapers alone.

The whole ending was messed up.

[Taboo]

Ryzaki wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Actually you can escape with your honor intact. Just depends on what kind of honor you have. Shep's that don't see the Geth as alive? Destroy. Shep's that don't GAF about body sovereignity? Synthesis. Shep that don't care about being big brother and using people's corpses as war troops? Control.

There is nothing good about war. But there is good in why you fight them.

To make sure that the children have a place to grow up. Where society can prosper. Where life can begin again.

I don't like talking like this. At all. It disgusts me. But it's the reality of the situation.

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

What does that have to do with what I said? You said you had to sacrifice honor...that's not true for everyone. It depends on what kind of honor you have. I have a racist douchebag Shep and he sacrificed no honor at all. (He was also a megolomanic. You can guess which choice he picked. )

Quarians are dead in mine (even on my uber nice good guy Shep). He already sacrificed his honor (unlike my renedouche who just didn't GAF). Why does he need more stains to tick off BW's "Must have bad point" to an ending? 

There is no honor in war. That is why it is so disgusting. That was stated in the above sentence. You kill because it may ensure that fifty more may live to see another day. That is the only good that comes from it.

My Shepard made a choice. But not because he hated Synthetics. You assume that people choose to do so because of a prejudice. We don't. We simply believe it's the best solution out of three very ****ty ones.

A belief is not the same as honor. Shepard lost that a long, long time ago.

[Pitznik]

drayfish wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Still believing in wars without atrocities, drayfish?

Still believing you can preserve humanity by betraying everything it stands for, Pitznik?

That doesn't answer my question.

And I don't really think that killing the hostages along with the terrorists is in any way worse betrayal than letting the terrorist work. Would prefer to keep my hands clean, but can't afford Reapers becoming a threat ever again.

[drayfish]

Taboo-XX wrote...

There is nothing good about war. But there is good in why you fight them.

To make sure that the children have a place to grow up. Where society can prosper. Where life can begin again.

I don't like talking like this. At all. It disgusts me. But it's the reality of the situation.

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

I agree with this sentiment wholly - but not your conclusion.  Why we fight wars is crucial.  We don't do it just to keep breathing, we do it because our freedoms and autonomy are threatened.  We do it to preserve our beliefs.  Societies are bound by the respect for life; children learn from the example (and mistakes) of the past.

And that is why, truly, I find the Stargazer scene one of the most hideous additions to the game: because what it implies is that Shepard's descision to violate the universe (whatever she chose) has now been passed down into mythology as a noble act - one that should be cherished and learned from.  The Shepard saved us all, by doing something utterly amoral.

If the civilisations of the future are born out of a belief that the imposition of a singular will upon all life is a good thing - indeed the only way for our beliefs to prosper - what does that say about the value of that life?

Modifié par drayfish, 12 septembre 2012 - 09:31 .

[Bill Casey]

An entire race is a hell of a lot of collateral damage...
Around one billion Geth platforms and more in the servers...


Then again, the Reapers are a Godzilla threshold if there ever was one...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 12 septembre 2012 - 09:35 .

[M Hedonist]

drayfish wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

There is nothing good about war. But there is good in why you fight them.

To make sure that the children have a place to grow up. Where society can prosper. Where life can begin again.

I don't like talking like this. At all. It disgusts me. But it's the reality of the situation.

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

I agree with this sentiment wholly - but not your conclusion.  Why we fight wars is crucial.  We don't do it just to keep breathing, we do it because our freedoms and autonomy are threatened.  We do it to preserve our beliefs.  Societies are bound by the respect for life; children learn from the example (and mistakes) of the past.

And that is why, truly, I find the Stargazer scene one of the most hideous additions to the game: because what it implies is that Shepard's descision to violate the universe (whatever she chose) has now been passed down into mythology as a noble act - one that should be cherished and learned from.  The Shepard saved us all, by doing something utterly amoral.

If the civilisations of the future are born out of a belief that the imposition of a singular will upon all life is a good thing - indeed the only way for our beliefs to prosper - what does that say about the value of that life?

On a related note, I absolutely loved the Refuse version of the Stargazer scene.

[Mcfly616]

Sauruz wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

the Geth and EDI are simply collateral damage. Choosing destroy, effects all Reaper tech. I'm gonna go ahead and say it makes perfect sense that it would affect EDI and the Geth too(seeing as how they are upgraded with Reaper tech and all)


Yet, some people are just a "glass half empty" and choose to see it as a monstrous genocide lol.

You can classify everything as "collateral damage". Choosing between Destroy and Refuse basically boils down to whether you want to damn the Geth or let the galaxy go through an extreme population bottleneck. The Protheans managed to get their race into the next cycle. And we are much better prepared, which Javik admits himself.

I didn't "damn" the Geth. I'm sorry if you prefer to see things that way. Life must be miserable when you always look at things in a negative light. The Geth were damned the minute they were given Reaper upgrades. My mission is to destroy the Reapers. Destroy purges Reaper tech and as a result it also destroys the Geth. I didn't give them the upgrades. It's an unfortunate circumstance and nothing more

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Baa Baa wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Oh there's a giant middle finger. But no it's not because Shep lost. But rather that he went down like a chump, there's a quick fade to black and via twitter canon we learn the next cycle derped and went along with starbrat anyway despite being told the crucible didn't work. 

That was the middle finger.

  

dis...

The fade-to-black is a mercy, unless you want me to believe you'd feel less offended by the presentation if they made you witness the horrific death of your character and everyone else in the galaxy. Somehow, I don't buy it.

And since when have we believed things Mike Gamble says on twitter that we don't want to believe? Why start?

Actually I would've preferred it to be bittersweet. yes you show the cycle being reaped but you also show the next cycle winning...on their terms. THAT would've made it a worthy ending. What we got was a middle finger. (We also should see the Geth dying in destroy and Shep reunited with the crew if he/she's alive.) I have no problem with consequences I just want payoff. Refuse is currently all consequences with no payoff.

Once again, I agree with you 100 percent

Let me get this straight: people expect to be rewarded for making a decision that they were warned against taking?

Sorry fans, this is cut-and-dried.

See: Morinth, sex with (Mass Effect 2).

[AlanC9]

Ryzaki wrote...
Honestly though Alan if you're life's on the line would you waste resources trying to build the Crucible (which you have no idea if it'll even BACKFIRE or not. The thing could kill you along with the Reapers and you have no way of guessing this) or would you build something that's worked constantly ever cycle (to kill Reapers and just Reapers other than the usual friendly fire) but no cycle had enough of because they had no true forewarning? 

With some more time to study it, they probably figure out what the Catalyst does. Hell, maybe Liara herself figured it out in the decades she lived before the Reapers killed her, although that's unlikely since she doesn't have access to the Citadel anymore.

The important question is which project you can get away with before the Reapers ring down the curtain on your cycle. Building gigantic dreadnought fleets, or the Crucible? Big as it is, the Crucible is still cheaper, quicker, and easier to hide.

[AlanC9]

Ryzaki wrote...
And none of my Sheps live. Even the good destroy ones eventually die of thirst from being trapped in the Citadel without anyone helping them. What a way to go.

Well, if you want to headcanon that, it's your right.

[CommanderVyse]

chadesh wrote...

Heh for everyone saying that destroy would only kill geth and edi that is actually wrong. Anyone that has implants could die. the catalyst says it about shepard.

Most if not all quarians have synthetic implants and their suits. I am also sure allot of other people in ME3 universe have synthetic implants or rely on computers of all kinds.
Most technology would be fried. depending on how shielded it is. Simply put anything thats even remotely similar to edi's body or computer systems would/could be fried.

There wouldn't be any ships moving in the end credits. space magic anyone.

One other thing. Hacket said it him self several times they wouldn't be able to win a conventional battle with the reapers. He also stated that the scientist had a theory that the crucible could be tuned to the reapers alone.

The whole ending was messed up.

The Geth are entirely software, they don't even require a blue box like EDI. If Destroy wipes out the Geth, it wipes out EVERYTHING with code. Space magic at its finest.

[drayfish]

Sauruz wrote...

On a related note, I absolutely loved the Refuse version of the Stargazer scene.

Agreed.

[M Hedonist]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

the Geth and EDI are simply collateral damage. Choosing destroy, effects all Reaper tech. I'm gonna go ahead and say it makes perfect sense that it would affect EDI and the Geth too(seeing as how they are upgraded with Reaper tech and all)


Yet, some people are just a "glass half empty" and choose to see it as a monstrous genocide lol.

You can classify everything as "collateral damage". Choosing between Destroy and Refuse basically boils down to whether you want to damn the Geth or let the galaxy go through an extreme population bottleneck. The Protheans managed to get their race into the next cycle. And we are much better prepared, which Javik admits himself.

I didn't "damn" the Geth. I'm sorry if you prefer to see things that way. Life must be miserable when you always look at things in a negative light. The Geth were damned the minute they were given Reaper upgrades. My mission is to destroy the Reapers. Destroy purges Reaper tech and as a result it also destroys the Geth. I didn't give them the upgrades. It's an unfortunate circumstance and nothing more

But you're being just as realistic/pessimistic as I am. The only difference is that you're making up excuses to justify your decision. A true optimist would say something like "The Geth could be recreated" or "There must be some kind of Geth data stashed somewhere that can be salvaged". Saying "The Geth were already damned" is just cynical.

[Ryzaki]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Actually you can escape with your honor intact. Just depends on what kind of honor you have. Shep's that don't see the Geth as alive? Destroy. Shep's that don't GAF about body sovereignity? Synthesis. Shep that don't care about being big brother and using people's corpses as war troops? Control.

There is nothing good about war. But there is good in why you fight them.

To make sure that the children have a place to grow up. Where society can prosper. Where life can begin again.

I don't like talking like this. At all. It disgusts me. But it's the reality of the situation.

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

What does that have to do with what I said? You said you had to sacrifice honor...that's not true for everyone. It depends on what kind of honor you have. I have a racist douchebag Shep and he sacrificed no honor at all. (He was also a megolomanic. You can guess which choice he picked. )

Quarians are dead in mine (even on my uber nice good guy Shep). He already sacrificed his honor (unlike my renedouche who just didn't GAF). Why does he need more stains to tick off BW's "Must have bad point" to an ending? 

There is no honor in war. That is why it is so disgusting. That was stated in the above sentence. You kill because it may ensure that fifty more may live to see another day. That is the only good that comes from it.

My Shepard made a choice. But not because he hated Synthetics. You assume that people choose to do so because of a prejudice. We don't. We simply believe it's the best solution out of three very ****ty ones.

A belief is not the same as honor. Shepard lost that a long, long time ago.

And who are you to tell someone what their honor is? To some honor is stoning a raped woman, to others it's protecting the weak, to others not lying, others serving a country. You can't tell my Shepard he lost his honor. Maybe your version of honor but his was perfectly intact. So no my renedouche lost nothing in his war. His honor bade him to protect those he could and cast off those he couldn't as well as defeating his enemy no matter the cost. He did that. Saying he lost his honor is wrong. His honor is perfectly intact. He saved the majority of the human race and got rid of the Reapers. That's what he set out to do, that's what his honor bade him.
Your Shep's honor is most likely different sure doesn't mean mine lost his.

[AlanC9]

drayfish wrote...

And that is why, truly, I find the Stargazer scene one of the most hideous additions to the game: because what it implies is that Shepard's descision to violate the universe (whatever she chose) has now been passed down into mythology as a noble act - one that should be cherished and learned from.  The Shepard saved us all, by doing something utterly amoral.

If the civilisations of the future are born out of a belief that the imposition of a singular will upon all life is a good thing - indeed the only way for our beliefs to prosper - what does that say about the value of that life?

Nothing at all. The particular circumstances Shepard was in will not recur. Sure, would-be tyrants will point to Shep's example from time to time, but they've always been able to rationalize their activities in this cycle, so that's not much of a change.

[CommanderVyse]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Let me get this straight: people expect to be rewarded for making a decision that they were warned against taking?

Sorry fans, this is cut-and-dried.

See: Morinth, sex with (Mass Effect 2).

Udina: The Normandy is grounded, don't go to Ilos Shepard.

Shepard: Ok.

***Game Over, Sovereign Wins!***

Bioware: Buy DLC!

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

Yep. Taboo-XX and you apparently don't agree on what's fun. When I play RPGs, I think it's fun to have my character make tough decisions and live with the consequences too.

In Arrival, my Shepard tried to warn the colony.  He told Hackett if he could have saved them he would have.  In ME3 he even apologized to a dying batarian for what happened at Bahak.

That's good stuff. That's living with the consequences.

ME3's endings, where does Shepard live with the consequences?  Heck, Shepard doesn't even live in most endings. 

Where does Shepard have a final conversation and apology with EDI?  Where does he try to warn the geth?

Where is Shepard's explanation to Hackett for creating a new Catalyst to control the Reapers?  What does he tell the crew?

Where's the reasoning behind forced Synthesis of the galaxy?  Shepard doesn't have to go through life with glowing green eyes and an "understanding" of all life.  Nor face those who never asked for this. 

These may be tough (I'd call them "insane")  decisions, but Shepard doesn't have to deal with the consequences.

[Mcfly616]

Bill Casey wrote...

An entire race is a hell of a lot of collateral damage...
Around one billion Geth platforms and more in the servers...

what's your point? They have Reaper upgrades. Destroy will affect them

You seem surprised the you may lose a race or two.....or that you lost 1billion in order to save 20 billion.

Why though? Why does this surprise you when it has been drilled into our heads from the get go that "hey, we're not going to be able to save everyone. It might come down to ruthless calculus".....?

[Taboo]

Ryzaki wrote...

And who are you to tell someone what their honor is? To some honor is stoning a raped woman, to others it's protecting the weak, to others not lying, others serving a country. You can't tell my Shepard he lost his honor. Maybe your version of honor but his was perfectly intact. So no my renedouche lost nothing in his war. His honor bade him to protect those he could and cast off those he couldn't as well as defeating his enemy no matter the cost. He did that. Saying he lost his honor is wrong. His honor is perfectly intact. He saved the majority of the human race and got rid of the Reapers. That's what he set out to do, that's what his honor bade him.
Your Shep's honor is most likely different sure doesn't mean mine lost his.

You just brought this into the "rape" territory. Any traversing here is going to end in nasty debates.

We'll simply have to agree to disagree.