407 réponses à ce sujet

[Volc19]

Bill Casey wrote...

That's not Shepard at the end...
It's an AI imprint that wants to police the galaxy "for the many"...

The Shepard VI sounds more like the real Shepard does, and it can predict what the real Commander Shepard would say with seven percent accuracy...

Stop ending every line of text with elipses...
It makes everything you say sound forlorn...
Or perhaps apathetic...
Maybe you're falling asleep at the keyboard...

Also, you have a nasty habit of never backing up points with facts, just with conjecture and opinions. It doesn't add much to the conversation.

[futurepixels]

I also agree with the poster above, where exactly does it say that Control creates "an AI imprint that wants to police the galaxy "for the many"..."?

[Dessalines]

Remember back in Mass Effect 1, when there was a rogue AI on the citadel that was a thief and was going to blow up Shepard. He told Shepard that humans would either control or destroy intelligent life form if giving a chance. Then do you remember Saren how an indoctrinated Saren was giving his speech about how great synthesis was the best of both worlds.
We did see all of these concepts in first game, and the only that has ever made any sense is destroy.

[AlanC9]

dreman9999 wrote...

The out come that happen with control and destory are equal. There equal because they are both temporay solutions. Ether choice can have something simular to the reaper come up again.

Destroy could go wrong too. You don't have the Reapers anymore, but you have the exact same situation that led to the creation of the Reapers in the first place.

Control's like the DR in DA:O. A superior short-term outcome versus a possible long-term problem. Reasonable players can go either way with that bet.

Synthesis is an out-and-out crapshoot. However, since it makes the Reapers' original mission irrelevant, it's not quite clear why the risk is large.

[AlanC9]

Someone With Mass wrote...
But then you haven't really changed anything in Control, since the Renegade version of the AI pretty much rules the galaxy with an iron fist, destroying all who oppose it.

Destroying all who oppose it is better than destroying absolutely everyone, though. But yeah, I'm not a huge fan of Renegade Control.

And really, how long does it take before an AI starts to deteriorate and repeat it all over again? None of the solutions are eternal. Change is inevitable. For the better or worse.

Yep. Nothing's forever.

But why would an AI "deteriorate and repeat it all over again"? Why wouldn't it deteriorate and do something completely different?  What, the Catalyst's logic really is compelling after all?

[Subject M]

Bill Casey wrote...

That's not Shepard at the end...
It's an AI imprint that wants to police the galaxy "for the many"...

The Shepard VI sounds more like the real Shepard does, and it can predict what the real Commander Shepard would say with seven percent accuracy...

Since we do not know what exactly happened, Shepards status is somewhat unclear in the control-ending.
The "Shepalyst" does not seem that sure either given how it referes to itself and Shepard.
But if Shepard somehow could be "resurrected" in ME2 (it seems he was 100% necrotic) I guess it could be possible that Shepard "survived" the transition to becoming the "Shepalyst".

[Argolas]

AlanC9 wrote...

Destroy could go wrong too. You don't have the Reapers anymore, but you have the exact same situation that led to the creation of the Reapers in the first place.

Not that one :/

The situation that led to the creation to the reapers was the following:

A messed up racist and arrogant race created a just as messed up AI that came up with a messed up idea, and the creators of the AI (somehow) let themselves be overwhelmed by the AIs pawns.

Of course Destroy has its dangers as well, but do not repeat reaper kid´s crap, it is mad.

[zioninzion]

Argolas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Destroy could go wrong too. You don't have the Reapers anymore, but you have the exact same situation that led to the creation of the Reapers in the first place.

Not that one :/

The situation that led to the creation to the reapers was the following:

A messed up racist and arrogant race created a just as messed up AI that came up with a messed up idea, and the creators of the AI (somehow) let themselves be overwhelmed by the AIs pawns.

Of course Destroy has its dangers as well, but do not repeat reaper kid´s crap, it is mad.

Too add to this great answer, Destroy also implies free will! Which is the most important thing of all. War may be attrocious but we cannot take away the free will of living species everywhere.

What did we learn from ME and what is true in every conflict in our real world? Life is not black and white and there is a lot of grey. "Controlling" the Reapers and letting Shepard be an intergallactic UN keeping the peace is so morally wrong. Societies and species have to be allowed to make both wrong and right decisions. Not every intergallactic conflict or issue will be so black and white - and as cool as Shepard is he shouldn't have the final say.

Destroy may invite risk but it preserves free will.

[futurepixels]

zioninzion wrote...

Argolas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Destroy could go wrong too. You don't have the Reapers anymore, but you have the exact same situation that led to the creation of the Reapers in the first place.

Not that one :/

The situation that led to the creation to the reapers was the following:

A messed up racist and arrogant race created a just as messed up AI that came up with a messed up idea, and the creators of the AI (somehow) let themselves be overwhelmed by the AIs pawns.

Of course Destroy has its dangers as well, but do not repeat reaper kid´s crap, it is mad.

Too add to this great answer, Destroy also implies free will! Which is the most important thing of all. War may be attrocious but we cannot take away the free will of living species everywhere.

What did we learn from ME and what is true in every conflict in our real world? Life is not black and white and there is a lot of grey. "Controlling" the Reapers and letting Shepard be an intergallactic UN keeping the peace is so morally wrong. Societies and species have to be allowed to make both wrong and right decisions. Not every intergallactic conflict or issue will be so black and white - and as cool as Shepard is he shouldn't have the final say.

Destroy may invite risk but it preserves free will.

What exactly prevents a Control Shepard from allowing the galaxy to have free will?

[Argolas]

futurepixels wrote...

zioninzion wrote...

Argolas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Destroy could go wrong too. You don't have the Reapers anymore, but you have the exact same situation that led to the creation of the Reapers in the first place.

Not that one :/

The situation that led to the creation to the reapers was the following:

A messed up racist and arrogant race created a just as messed up AI that came up with a messed up idea, and the creators of the AI (somehow) let themselves be overwhelmed by the AIs pawns.

Of course Destroy has its dangers as well, but do not repeat reaper kid´s crap, it is mad.

Too add to this great answer, Destroy also implies free will! Which is the most important thing of all. War may be attrocious but we cannot take away the free will of living species everywhere.

What did we learn from ME and what is true in every conflict in our real world? Life is not black and white and there is a lot of grey. "Controlling" the Reapers and letting Shepard be an intergallactic UN keeping the peace is so morally wrong. Societies and species have to be allowed to make both wrong and right decisions. Not every intergallactic conflict or issue will be so black and white - and as cool as Shepard is he shouldn't have the final say.

Destroy may invite risk but it preserves free will.

What exactly prevents a Control Shepard from allowing the galaxy to have free will?

He has power, and a quite intimidating one that is. He is going to protect the galaxy, that sounds nice, but protection always involves control.

If there is any protection to be done, Shepard needs to use the reapers to harm or at least threaten those he considers dangerous. If he does not do that, he literally does nothing at all and that is not what is going to happen, he makes that quite clear in the monologue after the ending.
The Reapers are the most powerful fleet in the galaxy, they killed almost all organics countless times before.If someone (or something) uses this fleet in order to threaten or even harm someone, you will feel intimidated. Note that the most dangerous individuals are rarely most obviously dangerous, so for most people Holoshep´s motives will remain unclear.
No matter in what form Holoshep may contact the organics and tell them he has best intentions, they will feel intimidated by Holoshep, maybe even frightened because the reapers are still there and still active. Maybe they will worry if they are being indoctrinated right now. Or they will feel uneasy because there always might be someone watching from space- in order to protect, Holoshep will most likely place reapers near every single hub world so he can see when protection is needed.
All this leads to emotional pressure. Leaders have to think twice about their decision because they do not want to make Holoshep angry.
Finally, no matter how smart Holoshep is, his judgement might still be questionable. He is not omniscient, and sometimes, there is neither right or wrong in a decision. Example: Where is the line before Holoshep intervenes? The problem can be compared to politics: When should a democratic state respect the right of self-determination in foreign states, and when should it help the opressed in their struggle for freedom?

[futurepixels]

Argolas wrote...

futurepixels wrote...

zioninzion wrote...

Argolas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Destroy could go wrong too. You don't have the Reapers anymore, but you have the exact same situation that led to the creation of the Reapers in the first place.

Not that one :/

The situation that led to the creation to the reapers was the following:

A messed up racist and arrogant race created a just as messed up AI that came up with a messed up idea, and the creators of the AI (somehow) let themselves be overwhelmed by the AIs pawns.

Of course Destroy has its dangers as well, but do not repeat reaper kid´s crap, it is mad.

Too add to this great answer, Destroy also implies free will! Which is the most important thing of all. War may be attrocious but we cannot take away the free will of living species everywhere.

What did we learn from ME and what is true in every conflict in our real world? Life is not black and white and there is a lot of grey. "Controlling" the Reapers and letting Shepard be an intergallactic UN keeping the peace is so morally wrong. Societies and species have to be allowed to make both wrong and right decisions. Not every intergallactic conflict or issue will be so black and white - and as cool as Shepard is he shouldn't have the final say.

Destroy may invite risk but it preserves free will.

What exactly prevents a Control Shepard from allowing the galaxy to have free will?

He has power, and a quite intimidating one that is. He is going to protect the galaxy, that sounds nice, but protection always involves control.

If there is any protection to be done, Shepard needs to use the reapers to harm or at least threaten those he considers dangerous. If he does not do that, he literally does nothing at all and that is not what is going to happen, he makes that quite clear in the monologue after the ending.
The Reapers are the most powerful fleet in the galaxy, they killed almost all organics countless times before.If someone (or something) uses this fleet in order to threaten or even harm someone, you will feel intimidated. Note that the most dangerous individuals are rarely most obviously dangerous, so for most people Holoshep´s motives will remain unclear.
No matter in what form Holoshep may contact the organics and tell them he has best intentions, they will feel intimidated by Holoshep, maybe even frightened because the reapers are still there and still active. Maybe they will worry if they are being indoctrinated right now. Or they will feel uneasy because there always might be someone watching from space- in order to protect, Holoshep will most likely place reapers near every single hub world so he can see when protection is needed.
All this leads to emotional pressure. Leaders have to think twice about their decision because they do not want to make Holoshep angry.
Finally, no matter how smart Holoshep is, his judgement might still be questionable. He is not omniscient, and sometimes, there is neither right or wrong in a decision. Example: Where is the line before Holoshep intervenes? The problem can be compared to politics: When should a democratic state respect the right of self-determination in foreign states, and when should it help the opressed in their struggle for freedom?

That doesn't change the fact that a Control Shepard could allow people to have free will.  They may feel emotional pressure and intimated, but that doesn't prevent them from making decisions.   

What you are saying is like saying that people who believe in god don't have free will because they are afraid of what god will do to them.

[zioninzion]

futurepixels wrote...

zioninzion wrote...

Argolas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Destroy could go wrong too. You don't have the Reapers anymore, but you have the exact same situation that led to the creation of the Reapers in the first place.

Not that one :/

The situation that led to the creation to the reapers was the following:

A messed up racist and arrogant race created a just as messed up AI that came up with a messed up idea, and the creators of the AI (somehow) let themselves be overwhelmed by the AIs pawns.

Of course Destroy has its dangers as well, but do not repeat reaper kid´s crap, it is mad.

Too add to this great answer, Destroy also implies free will! Which is the most important thing of all. War may be attrocious but we cannot take away the free will of living species everywhere.

What did we learn from ME and what is true in every conflict in our real world? Life is not black and white and there is a lot of grey. "Controlling" the Reapers and letting Shepard be an intergallactic UN keeping the peace is so morally wrong. Societies and species have to be allowed to make both wrong and right decisions. Not every intergallactic conflict or issue will be so black and white - and as cool as Shepard is he shouldn't have the final say.

Destroy may invite risk but it preserves free will.

What exactly prevents a Control Shepard from allowing the galaxy to have free will?

The fact that one entity has power over everyone else.  The whole point of control is so that Shepard can keep the peace via the help of the Reapers. But that takes away a free will. Not free will to go here or eat there but free will to evolve, expand, fail.

Bioware gives us a very big irony and dichotomy with the Reapers. On one hand they are super technologically advanced and most galactic technology is based off their technologies. Yet despite all their technologically superiority, they can't grasp the basic fundamentals of organic life - synthetic too for that matter. Where they are so technologically advanced they are intellectually and emotionally deficient. And thats why all their efforts to destroy the galaxy couldn't prevent the will of living and synthetic life to come together.

Control just hands over the reigns - it doesnt do anything for the galaxy. It just changes a supra control by a star-brat to Shepard. I just don't see Shepard doing that in my humble opinon.

I look towards Shepards discussions with EDI in ME3. I don't know what others chose but I usually chose the "EDI you have to figure it out for yourself, I cannot tell you what to do." All that dialogue speaks against control.

And Synthesis....we made peace without the need for space magic. We did it ourselves without the star-brats help.

[zioninzion]

Another thing I thought about. Millions and millions of fleets and species put their lives on the line and sacrificed to stop the reapers. They signed up to destroy the reapers and agreed to launch the main fight on Earth.

Well don't they get any say on how it ends? Your a Turian who left his home to come fight the Reapers and suddenly a human is in control of this undefeatable force and your people had no input in the matter? And if there is a dispute between humans and salarians in the future over a planet, how would the Salarians feel? Imagine if this is generations in the future with a generation that did not grow up with the Reaper war and don't know Shepard. But now they have to contend with a Reaper controlled by a human mind?

To me control is a big middle finger to the rest of the galaxy and their sacrifices.

[Shallyah]

Can't believe these threads are still popping up. Bored much?

[Xilizhra]

Well don't they get any say on how it ends? Your a Turian who left his home to come fight the Reapers and suddenly a human is in control of this undefeatable force and your people had no input in the matter?

Are snap military decisions ever made by popular civilian vote? The turians don't even choose their own government that way. If anything, the turians would be among the most understanding race, regardless of what decision Shepard made, as long as it beat the Reapers.

And if there is a dispute between humans and salarians in the future over a planet, how would the Salarians feel? Imagine if this is generations in the future with a generation that did not grow up with the Reaper war and don't know Shepard. But now they have to contend with a Reaper controlled by a human mind?

It just had some base personality elements from a human mind; it itself is a Leviathan-made AI. In any case, my Shepard has no intention of showing human bias in making decisions.

To me control is a big middle finger to the rest of the galaxy and their sacrifices.

A middle finger is less damaging, to me, than genocide.

[zioninzion]

Xilizhra wrote...

Well don't they get any say on how it ends? Your a Turian who left his home to come fight the Reapers and suddenly a human is in control of this undefeatable force and your people had no input in the matter?

Are snap military decisions ever made by popular civilian vote? The turians don't even choose their own government that way. If anything, the turians would be among the most understanding race, regardless of what decision Shepard made, as long as it beat the Reapers.

And if there is a dispute between humans and salarians in the future over a planet, how would the Salarians feel? Imagine if this is generations in the future with a generation that did not grow up with the Reaper war and don't know Shepard. But now they have to contend with a Reaper controlled by a human mind?

It just had some base personality elements from a human mind; it itself is a Leviathan-made AI. In any case, my Shepard has no intention of showing human bias in making decisions.

To me control is a big middle finger to the rest of the galaxy and their sacrifices.

A middle finger is less damaging, to me, than genocide.

I just feel making such a dramatic ending or future for the rest of the galaxy without consulting the rest of the galaxy seems unfair to me.

[Argolas]

futurepixels wrote...

That doesn't change the fact that a Control Shepard could allow people to have free will.  They may feel emotional pressure and intimated, but that doesn't prevent them from making decisions. 

Of course fear can prevent you from making decisions. 

futurepixels wrote...

What you are saying is like saying that people who believe in god don't have free will because they are afraid of what god will do to them.

That is actually true in some cases. In some forms of religion, children learn that god always watches and that he will punish anyone who does something wrong or even thinks something wrong. Afterwards, they often feel intimidated are afraid of many things so they will not dare to do them or even think of them, and not all of those are truly bad. This limits their free will.

[ElSuperGecko]

Argolas wrote...
Of course fear can prevent you from making decisions...

Exactly this.  Have you never heard of the phrase "God-fearing folk"?  Now imagine if you not only believed God existed, but you KNEW God existed... and he had an unstoppable army of giant mechanical space cuttlefish at his command.

The species of the galaxy wouldn't just be intimidated, they'd be cowering under the shadow of the Reapers and the Almighty Shepard.

Destroy is the ONLY ending choice that leaves the (surviving) people of the galaxy independent and free.  For the first time since before the Leviathan, the races of the galaxy are truly free to pursue their own destiny and determine their own fate.

Control replaces an AI with a human-AI hybrid.  The Reapers are still there.  The races of the galaxy are still being watched over, guided and their fate is NOT their own.

Synthesis... well, you're basically making decisions for everyone.  They have no choice in the matter, no free will.  Their ultimate fate is being arbitarily decided for them.  And this is true whether you believe Synthesis is good or bad.

[zioninzion]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Argolas wrote...
Of course fear can prevent you from making decisions...

Exactly this.  Have you never heard of the phrase "God-fearing folk"?  Now imagine if you not only believed God existed, but you KNEW God existed... and he had an unstoppable army of giant mechanical space cuttlefish at his command.

The species of the galaxy wouldn't just be intimidated, they'd be cowering under the shadow of the Reapers and the Almighty Shepard.

Destroy is the ONLY ending choice that leaves the (surviving) people of the galaxy independent and free.  For the first time since before the Leviathan, the races of the galaxy are truly free to pursue their own destiny and determine their own fate.

Control replaces an AI with a human-AI hybrid.  The Reapers are still there.  The races of the galaxy are still being watched over, guided and their fate is NOT their own.

Synthesis... well, you're basically making decisions for everyone.  They have no choice in the matter, no free will.  Their ultimate fate is being arbitarily decided for them.  And this is true whether you believe Synthesis is good or bad.

Amen, could not have said it better. Also millions and millions of aliens agreed to fight by your side and sacrifice their lives and leave their families behind to help you destroy the Reapers. All that sacrifice and they dont even get a say in the end about whether or not something else will control the reapers - or if they will all turn into robo-mutants?

No thanks. If we saved this galaxy together we can rebuild it together. There is no need for shady control of synthesis.

[Wayning_Star]

The ONLY way to destroy reaper tech in the MEU is to destroy reaper tech in the MEU. If you don't, you'll still end up serving reaper tech in the MEU. Its the nature of reaper tech. Too advanced for general audience. Its that dosing primitives with advanced tech that many 'destroy' folks insist on.

Besides, you end up destroying millions of reaper war casualties as well. Many of which never asked to be culled by their leaders squatting on reaper technology..ever. So in that regard, the leaders of the MEU keep the cycle going by being that which they hope to destroy. Reapers.

YOU are the Reaper threat..

[Argolas]

Wayning_Star wrote...

The ONLY way to destroy reaper tech in the MEU is to destroy reaper tech in the MEU. If you don't, you'll still end up serving reaper tech in the MEU.

Close, but not quite. It´s  "The ONLY way to destroy the reapers in the MEU is to destroy the reapers in the MEU. If you don't, you'll still end up serving the reapers in the MEU."

Nothing wrong with Mass Relays, the Citadel and stuff. They are rebuild in high EMS Destroy, remember?

Modifié par Argolas, 28 septembre 2012 - 01:15 .

[Xilizhra]

Destroy is the ONLY ending choice that leaves the (surviving) people of the galaxy independent and free. For the first time since before the Leviathan, the races of the galaxy are truly free to pursue their own destiny and determine their own fate.

Well, except for all the people it leaves dead. Do you no longer remember this?

Amen, could not have said it better. Also millions and millions of aliens agreed to fight by your side and sacrifice their lives and leave their families behind to help you destroy the Reapers. All that sacrifice and they dont even get a say in the end about whether or not something else will control the reapers - or if they will all turn into robo-mutants?

No. They don't. They signed up knowing that a chain of command was going to exist, and that people higher up would be making the tough decisions; that's just how the military works. You can't call for a vote before doing something like this. And not only would I be killing off the geth, but destroying the quarians' future.

[zioninzion]

Xilizhra wrote...

No. They don't. They signed up knowing that a chain of command was going to exist, and that people higher up would be making the tough decisions; that's just how the military works. You can't call for a vote before doing something like this. And not only would I be killing off the geth, but destroying the quarians' future.

I respectively disagree. I think there is a difference between a chain of command and military making tactical decisions and that of making strategic decisions which should not be left to the military. On a side not Eliot Cohen wrote a great book called "Supreme Command: Soldiers, Statesmen and Leadership" and it debates who should make the big decisions, the military or the political leadership. Sorry off topic

I just think making tough decisions higher up and permanently altering the universe (and all DNA for that matter) should not be left to one person - who isnt even at the top of the chain of command.

As per the Geth, I hold on to the possibility they are still alive by not believing the star-child. But thats total speculation and up to the individual.

[ElSuperGecko]

Xilizhra wrote...
Well, except for all the people it leaves dead. Do you no longer remember this?

Did I not say "surviving"?  I'm pretty sure I said "surviving".  Do you no longer remember this?

And EDI is the only one that Destroy has to leave dead. The Quarians defeated the Geth in my playthrough, and won back their homeworld on their own terms.

Xilizhra wrote...
No. They don't. They signed up knowing that a chain of command was going to exist, and that people higher up would be making the tough decisions; that's just how the military works. You can't call for a vote before doing something like this. And not only would I be killing off the geth, but destroying the quarians' future.

Right, so now you're contradicting your previous argument, which implied that you were worried about those that died.  Now you're saying they need to respect the chain of command.  Either the races you recruit are willing to do everything it takes to stop the Reapers, at the cost of their own lives, or they're not - you can't have it both ways.

And in any case, you're wrong. The indivudal races all signed up for the war effort believing they were in a kill or be killed situation, that they were fighting for the survival of their species, and they were willing and ready to give their lives fighting for the cause. They're fighting for a chance at a free future, and preserving their way of life. They're fighting to stop the Reapers once and for all.

What they're NOT fighting for is for someone to arbitarily make a decision on their behalf which irrevocably changes everything they are and everything they know, or to simply replace one AI controlling the Reapers with another AI controlling the Reapers.

Modifié par ElSuperGecko, 28 septembre 2012 - 01:43 .

[JBPBRC]

Destroy is the best choice for one reason. All you have to do is ask yourself, if someone else replaced Shepard in that final room...

What would the Krogan do?