407 réponses à ce sujet

[PPF65]

Their all bad.

Shepard dies no matter what you do, and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state, with most of the important people in the galaxy all stuck in our solar system and all of the Mass RElays broken.

Seems like a loss to me.

Destroy is just the best way to stick it to that little f**k the "star child," or whatever we're calling him these days.

[Dharvy]

PPF65 wrote...

Their all bad.

Shepard dies no matter what you do, and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state, with most of the important people in the galaxy all stuck in our solar system and all of the Mass RElays broken.

Seems like a loss to me.

Destroy is just the best way to stick it to that little f**k the "star child," or whatever we're calling him these days.

Off Topic I know, but if your sig is any indication are you a Sword of Truth fan?

[dreman9999]

PPF65 wrote...

Their all bad.

Shepard dies no matter what you do, and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state, with most of the important people in the galaxy all stuck in our solar system and all of the Mass RElays broken.

Seems like a loss to me.

Destroy is just the best way to stick it to that little f**k the "star child," or whatever we're calling him these days.

..."and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state ":mellow:....
Destory has all organic life alive and rebuilding the galexy with hope in the future.
Control has organic and synthetic life rebuilding the  galexy with hope in the future.
And Synthesis has upgraded 
organic and synthetic life rebuilding the  galexy with hope in the future. 

Which ending had the galexy in a terrible state? Added the mass relays are rebuild in all of those endings.

High ems destory has Shepard live, and Shepard living at the end is not his /her goal, It's stopping the reapers.

Having Shep die in the end does not mean it's a bad ending.

Modifié par dreman9999, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:28 .

[dreman9999]

Dharvy wrote...

PPF65 wrote...

Their all bad.

Shepard dies no matter what you do, and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state, with most of the important people in the galaxy all stuck in our solar system and all of the Mass RElays broken.

Seems like a loss to me.

Destroy is just the best way to stick it to that little f**k the "star child," or whatever we're calling him these days.

Off Topic I know, but if your sig is any indication are you a Sword of Truth fan?

I use to be a fan before it got all preachy. Orson scott Card is much better then Terry Goodkind.

[dreman9999]

Dharvy wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Dharvy wrote...

Come on people. So many give all kinds of alternate scenarios for Control and Synthesis to fail, when destroy have nearly the easiest chance of failing. Sure the Reapers are dead, but are they not machines? Did they all blow up or just basically go dormant, shut down? A whole bunch of the Galaxy's greatest machines are laying dormant all over the Galaxy, ripe for anyone with the ability to tamper with and to learn from and maybe even get them to work at some kind of level, perfect for rogue groups, mercenaries and all manner of evil that rises up in a galaxy that's as torn as a post-Destroy galaxy. We nearly all can imagine how bad the galaxy is fairing with the Mass Relays down, so galactic travel is greatly affected as well as most of the galactic governments being severely damaged. The major worlds are basically post-apocalyptic and are ripe for discord.

Destroy is a screwed up dark-age period of civilization. And if you wanna brag about self-determinism and free-will and deciding our own fate just watch how all that freedom and near anarchy cannibalize upon itself. Sure life would continue on but how much life and what kind of life would it be?

But if you want to imagine all these good things happening with Destroy, learning from our mistakes and being able to go about and achieving peace through understanding or whatever then those same things can easily be imagined in Control and Synthesis, even easier and more than likely. At least with Control and the Reapers rebuilding, the Galaxy can rebound better than they could in Destroy. And in Synthesis with everybody pretty much upgraded and getting information from previous civilizations cycles, they can rebound even better.

So for me based a little bit of reality-----

Synthesis>Control>Destroy

......:?Destroy is not a dark age.

Nearly all the major worlds are war torn, so bad that you can see it from orbit. The galactic fleet is mostly concentrated in the sol system with no imediate way out because of the destroyed relays. With the focus of the Reaper threat gone a possibility of internal conflict as a power struggle among galactic societies may emerge.

But thats all beside my point. My point was that if you can imagine a better galaxy with Destroy and so many bringing up all these horrible imagined things with the other endings than the same can be easily reversed. And if Destroy can be good than Control and Synthesis can be even better. But if Control and Synthesis can turn out bad over time than so can Destroy it a much quicker time frame.

So? In the epilogue we can see they rebuild it all. If it's restore that means no dark age. It not a dark age if other endings have better tech.

[ElSuperGecko]

Dharvy wrote...
Nearly all the major worlds are war torn, so bad that you can see it from orbit. The galactic fleet is mostly concentrated in the sol system with no imediate way out because of the destroyed relays. With the focus of the Reaper threat gone a possibility of internal conflict as a power struggle among galactic societies may emerge.

All this is true for every ending, not just Destroy.  With the exception of the galactic fleet being stranded that is - in the Extended Cut the ships all jump out before the Crucible is fired.

And you're suggesting the Reaper threat being gone is a bad thing?  Sure, the various races of the galaxy will have to rebuild, reorganise and restructure.  And there will be factions looking to take advantage of the disarray.  That's obvious.  But the Reapers are gone.  There is nothing dictacting their future for them.  They are FREE.  Unlike in Control (and Synthesis), where the Reapers loom large on the horizon, an ever-present threat...

But thats all beside my point. My point was that if you can imagine a better galaxy with Destroy and so many bringing up all these horrible imagined things with the other endings than the same can be easily reversed. And if Destroy can be good than Control and Synthesis can be even better. But if Control and Synthesis can turn out bad over time than so can Destroy it a much quicker time frame.

Yes, the endings can be spun to suit various arguments.  But the arguments for Control and Synthesis are so much weaker than the argument for Destroy.  And the implications of those choices are so much riskier, both short term and long term.

Here's a question.  There's a rabid dog in your street.  It's already savagely mauled a dozen of your neighbours, several of whom are in a critical condition.  Do you

a:  Shoot it.
b:  Lock it in your yard.
c:  Take it into your home and care for it.

....answers on a postcard, to the usual address please!

[dreman9999]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Dharvy wrote...
Nearly all the major worlds are war torn, so bad that you can see it from orbit. The galactic fleet is mostly concentrated in the sol system with no imediate way out because of the destroyed relays. With the focus of the Reaper threat gone a possibility of internal conflict as a power struggle among galactic societies may emerge.

All this is true for every ending, not just Destroy.  With the exception of the galactic fleet being stranded that is - in the Extended Cut the ships all jump out before the Crucible is fired.

And you're suggesting the Reaper threat being gone is a bad thing?  Sure, the various races of the galaxy will have to rebuild, reorganise and restructure.  And there will be factions looking to take advantage of the disarray.  That's obvious.  But the Reapers are gone.  There is nothing dictacting their future for them.  They are FREE.  Unlike in Control (and Synthesis), where the Reapers loom large on the horizon, an ever-present threat...

But thats all beside my point. My point was that if you can imagine a better galaxy with Destroy and so many bringing up all these horrible imagined things with the other endings than the same can be easily reversed. And if Destroy can be good than Control and Synthesis can be even better. But if Control and Synthesis can turn out bad over time than so can Destroy it a much quicker time frame.

Yes, the endings can be spun to suit various arguments.  But the arguments for Control and Synthesis are so much weaker than the argument for Destroy.  And the implications of those choices are so much riskier, both short term and long term.

Here's a question.  There's a rabid dog in your street.  It's already savagely mauled a dozen of your neighbours, several of whom are in a critical condition.  Do you

a:  Shoot it.
b:  Lock it in your yard.
c:  Take it into your home and care for it.

....answers on a postcard, to the usual address please!

This person understands the reapers perfectly.

[FOX216BC]

dreman9999 wrote...

PPF65 wrote...

Their all bad.

Shepard dies no matter what you do, and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state, with most of the important people in the galaxy all stuck in our solar system and all of the Mass RElays broken.

Seems like a loss to me.

Destroy is just the best way to stick it to that little f**k the "star child," or whatever we're calling him these days.

..."and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state ":mellow:....
Destory has all organic life alive and rebuilding the galexy with hope in the future.
Control has organic and synthetic life rebuilding the  galexy with hope in the future.
And Synthesis has upgraded 
organic and synthetic life rebuilding the  galexy with hope in the future. 

Which ending had the galexy in a terrible state? Added the mass relays are rebuild in all of those endings.

High ems destory has Shepard live, and Shepard living at the end is not his /her goal, It's stopping the reapers.

Having Shep die in the end does not mean it's a bad ending.

High ems destory has Shepard live, and Shepard living at the end is not his /her goal, It's stopping the reapers.
Well neither is controlling the Reapers or changing the galaxies dna.


All i read is "hope" no guarantee the Reapers won't become a threat again.

Destroy is no guarantee for peace, but at least the Reapers are gone.

[AlanC9]

ElSuperGecko wrote...
Yes, the endings can be spun to suit various arguments.  But the arguments for Control and Synthesis are so much weaker than the argument for Destroy.  And the implications of those choices are so much riskier, both short term and long term.

Here's a question.  There's a rabid dog in your street.  It's already savagely mauled a dozen of your neighbours, several of whom are in a critical condition.  Do you

a:  Shoot it.
b:  Lock it in your yard.
c:  Take it into your home and care for it.

....answers on a postcard, to the usual address please!

Does locking the dog in my yard still help me rebuild the neighborhood?

Also, another neighbor's in my line of fire when shooting the dog. GuessI'm using a machine-gun, or maybe grenades.

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 septembre 2012 - 04:20 .

[zioninzion]

What happens to the catalyst for each decision? If this psycho-brat who has no remorse of murdering species in the gabillions, what happens to him? Is he lingering in the background? Or does he go if the reapers are destroyed too?

[zioninzion]

Also what I don't get about control and why I think it is the wrong choice:

"Has epic argument with TIM about the wrongs of trying to control such a power...goes up magic elevator and chooses control"

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and shaping their own galaxy the way they want. I am not trying to negate anyone. But can't your decisions also be wrong or at least lead to a reaper victory?

[Xilizhra]

TIM couldn't do it because he was already indoctrinated. Shepard hasn't fallen to this yet.

[RiouHotaru]

Just because your enemy makes a good point doesn't invalidate the point.

[zioninzion]

Xilizhra wrote...

TIM couldn't do it because he was already indoctrinated. Shepard hasn't fallen to this yet.

Unless he was :innocent:

[Bill Casey]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Here's a question.  There's a rabid dog in your street.  It's already savagely mauled a dozen of your neighbours, several of whom are in a critical condition.  Do you

a:  Shoot it.
b:  Lock it in your yard.
c:  Take it into your home and care for it.

....answers on a postcard, to the usual address please!

Modifié par Bill Casey, 27 septembre 2012 - 05:01 .

[dreman9999]

FOX216BC wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

PPF65 wrote...

Their all bad.

Shepard dies no matter what you do, and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state, with most of the important people in the galaxy all stuck in our solar system and all of the Mass RElays broken.

Seems like a loss to me.

Destroy is just the best way to stick it to that little f**k the "star child," or whatever we're calling him these days.

..."and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state ":mellow:....
Destory has all organic life alive and rebuilding the galexy with hope in the future.
Control has organic and synthetic life rebuilding the  galexy with hope in the future.
And Synthesis has upgraded 
organic and synthetic life rebuilding the  galexy with hope in the future. 

Which ending had the galexy in a terrible state? Added the mass relays are rebuild in all of those endings.

High ems destory has Shepard live, and Shepard living at the end is not his /her goal, It's stopping the reapers.

Having Shep die in the end does not mean it's a bad ending.

High ems destory has Shepard live, and Shepard living at the end is not his /her goal, It's stopping the reapers.
Well neither is controlling the Reapers or changing the galaxies dna.


All i read is "hope" no guarantee the Reapers won't become a threat again.

Destroy is no guarantee for peace, but at least the Reapers are gone.

Controling the reapers is a way to stop the reapers. Remeber, are goal is tostop them, how is not stated. Controling them is as good as destroying them.

Modifié par dreman9999, 27 septembre 2012 - 05:03 .

[dreman9999]

AlanC9 wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...
Yes, the endings can be spun to suit various arguments.  But the arguments for Control and Synthesis are so much weaker than the argument for Destroy.  And the implications of those choices are so much riskier, both short term and long term.

Here's a question.  There's a rabid dog in your street.  It's already savagely mauled a dozen of your neighbours, several of whom are in a critical condition.  Do you

a:  Shoot it.
b:  Lock it in your yard.
c:  Take it into your home and care for it.

....answers on a postcard, to the usual address please!

Does locking the dog in my yard still help me rebuild the neighborhood?

Also, another neighbor's in my line of fire when shooting the dog. GuessI'm using a machine-gun, or maybe grenades.

That does not defer his point. The catalyst is a mad dog. Why should you hold back to stop it?

[dreman9999]

zioninzion wrote...

Also what I don't get about control and why I think it is the wrong choice:

"Has epic argument with TIM about the wrongs of trying to control such a power...goes up magic elevator and chooses control"

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and shaping their own galaxy the way they want. I am not trying to negate anyone. But can't your decisions also be wrong or at least lead to a reaper victory?

Just because your enemy makes a good point doesn't invalidate the point. 

[Bill Casey]

dreman9999 wrote...

Controling the reapers is a way to stop the reapers. Remeber, are goal is tostop them, how is not stated. Controling them is as good as destroying them.

That's blatantly not true...
The whole reason we're at odds with Cerberus is they want to control the reapers and we want to destroy the reapers. Our goals are too disparate...

This is a conflict that seems to spring up every cycle. The last cycle there was a splinter group that argued we should control the reapers rather than destroy them, and later it was found out they were indoctrinated...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 27 septembre 2012 - 05:07 .

[Xilizhra]

Destroy's cost is too high for me to actually like it. Control makes for a better stopgap; whom should I trust but myself to watch over the galaxy for the time being? Synthesis... is tricky and still under consideration.

That's blatantly not true...
The whole reason we're at odds with
Cerberus is they want to control the reapers and we want to destroy the
reapers. Our goals are too disparate...

Cerberus has two problems. One is that they want to specifically put humanity on top, but the real problem is that they're indoctrinated and using the wrong methods to fight the Reapers. This doesn't make controlling them completely unviable, just saying that Cerberus is doing it wrong.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 27 septembre 2012 - 05:06 .

[AlanC9]

zioninzion wrote...

What happens to the catalyst for each decision? If this psycho-brat who has no remorse of murdering species in the gabillions, what happens to him? Is he lingering in the background? Or does he go if the reapers are destroyed too?

In Destroy he's wiped out like any other AI. 

In Control he's overwritten by Shepard's memory and personality.

In Synthesis.... beats me. Maybe he shuts down since he's fulfilled his function?

[dreman9999]

AlanC9 wrote...

zioninzion wrote...

What happens to the catalyst for each decision? If this psycho-brat who has no remorse of murdering species in the gabillions, what happens to him? Is he lingering in the background? Or does he go if the reapers are destroyed too?

In Destroy he's wiped out like any other AI. 

In Control he's overwritten by Shepard's memory and personality.

In Synthesis.... beats me. Maybe he shuts down since he's fulfilled his function?

In synthesis he controls everything silently.

[Bill Casey]

Preservation of life at any cost is a never ending goal...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 27 septembre 2012 - 05:09 .

[FOX216BC]

dreman9999 wrote...

FOX216BC wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

PPF65 wrote...

Their all bad.

Shepard dies no matter what you do, and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state, with most of the important people in the galaxy all stuck in our solar system and all of the Mass RElays broken.

Seems like a loss to me.

Destroy is just the best way to stick it to that little f**k the "star child," or whatever we're calling him these days.

..."and the galaxy ends up in a terrible state ":mellow:....
Destory has all organic life alive and rebuilding the galexy with hope in the future.
Control has organic and synthetic life rebuilding the  galexy with hope in the future.
And Synthesis has upgraded 
organic and synthetic life rebuilding the  galexy with hope in the future. 

Which ending had the galexy in a terrible state? Added the mass relays are rebuild in all of those endings.

High ems destory has Shepard live, and Shepard living at the end is not his /her goal, It's stopping the reapers.

Having Shep die in the end does not mean it's a bad ending.

High ems destory has Shepard live, and Shepard living at the end is not his /her goal, It's stopping the reapers.
Well neither is controlling the Reapers or changing the galaxies dna.


All i read is "hope" no guarantee the Reapers won't become a threat again.

Destroy is no guarantee for peace, but at least the Reapers are gone.

Controling the reapers is a way to stop the reapers. Remeber, are goal is tostop them, how is not stated. Controling them is as good as destroying them.

Well if Shepard can do it, there is no way we can be sure no one else will in the future.
And perhaps this on character doesn't have peaceful intentions.

[AlanC9]

dreman9999 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...
Here's a question.  There's a rabid dog in your street.  It's already savagely mauled a dozen of your neighbours, several of whom are in a critical condition.  Do you

a:  Shoot it.
b:  Lock it in your yard.
c:  Take it into your home and care for it.

....answers on a postcard, to the usual address please!

Does locking the dog in my yard still help me rebuild the neighborhood?

Also, another neighbor's in my line of fire when shooting the dog. GuessI'm using a machine-gun, or maybe grenades.

That does not defer his point. The catalyst is a mad dog. Why should you hold back to stop it?

Because the other methods of dealing with the problem lead to better outcomes. That's why the dog is a lousy metaphor. Unless you're trying to confuse the issue, in which case it's a great metaphor.