275 réponses à ce sujet

[shit's fucked cunts]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Terminus Echoes wrote...

If you pick Destroy with a high EMS, Shepard survives.

No, if you pick Destroy with a high EMS, Shepard is alive.

That does not mean they survive.

You wanna throw down?
I'll throw down.

[OdanUrr]

Nightwriter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

You did not answer my question. Why would you not choose Destroy?

You mean, jokes aside?

If I ever play ME3 again, I will roll Destroy. Not because I'm happy with it, though. It just seems like the lesser evil. Even then, the ending isn't satisfying. The Catalyst is still a last minute character who disrupts the dramatic momentum, Shepard is still too credulous when talking to it, all this pain and death and free will subversion was still just the result of a computer mishap, EDI and the geth still die unmourned and unmentioned, the Catalyst still talks Shepard into offing him/herself in 3.5/4 endings, and the climax of the space opera still shifts the series theme from "you make your own fate" to "you choose which fate the enemy gives you, and then die." Oh, and I still never found Miranda, I suppose.

There are people out there who are completely okay with all this, which is fine. I just won't ever be one of them.

So perhaps it's the context in which the options are given that's wrong? Imagine, for a minute, that the Catalyst didn't exist. That Shepard calls on EDI to figure out how to fire the Crucible and it is EDI who presents the three options because, for some reason, the Crucible's been designed for instant implementation of any of those options. Would your opinion of the choices or the ending change?

It's just a simple thought experiment.

[GreyLycanTrope]

dreman9999 wrote...

1. Destroy-End vs means.The theme was in ME meany time before.

2.Control-stops the reapers and make them slave to Shepard. No problem.

3. Synthesis- still stops the reapers the reaper form havesting everyone. Bu tif you don'tlike it don't pick it.

1. I  wasn't forced to agree with the ends justify the means before.
2. Slavery and a Reaper enforced police state isn't a problem?
3. Stops them by giving in to their demands, which are ridiulous and unnecassary. Don't like any of the options but I have to pick one.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 01 octobre 2012 - 09:03 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

mayrabgood wrote...

Totally understand how you feel. Even if you sacrifice yourself for everyone it just doesn't feel like you saved the galaxy or anything. It sucks, I know. Hope you feel better soon.

WHAT!?!?!? 

It doesn't feel like you saved the galaxy? Did you actually pay attention during the ending? Stuff is being rebuild and your friends are alive. How... what is... what!?

Reapers essentially rule the galaxy in one ending, you capitulate and alter the galaxy to please the Reaper overlord in another, and in the third you throw an entire race under the bus, nice job breaking them hero.

And you picked refuse and doomed everyone. Nice job, hero.

There are no heroes here.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 01 octobre 2012 - 04:43 .

[Nightwriter]

OdanUrr wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

You did not answer my question. Why would you not choose Destroy?

You mean, jokes aside?

If I ever play ME3 again, I will roll Destroy. Not because I'm happy with it, though. It just seems like the lesser evil. Even then, the ending isn't satisfying. The Catalyst is still a last minute character who disrupts the dramatic momentum, Shepard is still too credulous when talking to it, all this pain and death and free will subversion was still just the result of a computer mishap, EDI and the geth still die unmourned and unmentioned, the Catalyst still talks Shepard into offing him/herself in 3.5/4 endings, and the climax of the space opera still shifts the series theme from "you make your own fate" to "you choose which fate the enemy gives you, and then die." Oh, and I still never found Miranda, I suppose.

There are people out there who are completely okay with all this, which is fine. I just won't ever be one of them.

So perhaps it's the context in which the options are given that's wrong? Imagine, for a minute, that the Catalyst didn't exist. That Shepard calls on EDI to figure out how to fire the Crucible and it is EDI who presents the three options because, for some reason, the Crucible's been designed for instant implementation of any of those options. Would your opinion of the choices or the ending change?

It's just a simple thought experiment.

It would change everything, and I would likely feel much better about it.

The Crucible was designed to destroy the Reapers. Firing it myself would be like firing a gun. I would own that choice. I would be more accepting of the sacrifices. I would feel like despite them, it was I who won.

The Catalyst is a threat to the illusion of self-determination. It is a clouded enemy presenting choices to us on a platter, and it asks us to accept that these choices are real, necessary, and the only ones available to us. This creates the feeling that the only right action is to upend the platter and shoot the one holding it, because my instinct is not to let a possible enemy lead me by the bridle or feed my choices to me.

If there were no platter, and no Catalyst, there would be only me and my choices.

[OdanUrr]

Nightwriter wrote...

If there were no platter, and no Catalyst, there would be only me and my choices. 

I thought as much. To be honest, I see no reason why the Catalyst should exist at all.

[danby]

Terminus Echoes wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

You only need 3100 to get the breath scene, so with over 5000 you'll be fine.

"That's Shepard's last breath!"

That doesn't sound like a last breath to me. That sounds like a "waking up from unconsciousness" breath. I never understood that speculation.

Not so hard to speculate.   Sheppard partialy hit by giant laser beam.  We see sheppard bleeding out.   Then sheppard gets exploded by the catalyst control panel.   Thats alot of MAJOR damage to take in such a small amount of time.   The human body can only take so much.  

Remember Harbies beam was hot enough to MELT OFF sheppards armor.  Radiation damage alone would probably have killed sheppard anyways in a day or so.  

[Nightwriter]

OdanUrr wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

If there were no platter, and no Catalyst, there would be only me and my choices. 

I thought as much. To be honest, I see no reason why the Catalyst should exist at all.

I can only assume BioWare needed a mouthpiece for their exposition dump.

[Morty Smith]

dreman9999 wrote...

Kroitz wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Kroitz wrote...

It´s a different feeling to fight for victory than be given the permission to win from your enemy.

Take sometime to understand you enemy. You find that they never wanted to fight you.

No they didn´t, they just wanted to get rid of us without a fuss. I understand that, we´re pals now.

Just like nationalist germany didn´t want to fight anyone, they just wanted to impose their twisted world-view on everything and everyone with force. It´s the other nations fault for resisting.

Get your mind out of the gutter.

You clearly don't get it. The catalystis just a machine doing what it's programed to do. It nas no morality. Any conflict it does is just a means to an end. It does not what to do no evil nor is inheritly evil. It has no concept of good or evil. It has no free will.

It just a mad dog that need to be put down. Stop trying to lokk atit as an evil thing.

You jump from de-personalisation and de-antagonising straight to justifing their enemy-status.

Dude, how am I supposed to "get" your argument, if you don´t even get what you are writing yourself?

[TNT1991]

dreman9999 wrote...

Open end ending mean I, you or anyone can imagine the results of that last moment with Shepard. 
AKA, if I say he is alive , I'm right. If you say he's dead, your right.
With subjective things, there never is only one truth.

 

This. 

[ld1449]

OdanUrr wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

You did not answer my question. Why would you not choose Destroy?

You mean, jokes aside?

If I ever play ME3 again, I will roll Destroy. Not because I'm happy with it, though. It just seems like the lesser evil. Even then, the ending isn't satisfying. The Catalyst is still a last minute character who disrupts the dramatic momentum, Shepard is still too credulous when talking to it, all this pain and death and free will subversion was still just the result of a computer mishap, EDI and the geth still die unmourned and unmentioned, the Catalyst still talks Shepard into offing him/herself in 3.5/4 endings, and the climax of the space opera still shifts the series theme from "you make your own fate" to "you choose which fate the enemy gives you, and then die." Oh, and I still never found Miranda, I suppose.

There are people out there who are completely okay with all this, which is fine. I just won't ever be one of them.

So perhaps it's the context in which the options are given that's wrong? Imagine, for a minute, that the Catalyst didn't exist. That Shepard calls on EDI to figure out how to fire the Crucible and it is EDI who presents the three options because, for some reason, the Crucible's been designed for instant implementation of any of those options. Would your opinion of the choices or the ending change?

It's just a simple thought experiment.

It would actually. It would jump the ending from a 3.5/10 that it is now, straight up to a 6 or a 7

maybe even more depending on the dialogue/explanation that they put in there that doesn't revolve around

"Yo dawg I heard you don't wanna be killed by Synthetics."

[BearlyHere]

Massa FX wrote...

Shepard lives but is in dire need of medical attention. I have hope that a future Citadel DLC reveals a rescue of Shepard and a reunion.

Its entirely possible AND the endings remain the same.

Cake for everyone!!!! Hip Hip Hooray! Shepard lives another day!

... too heavy on the cheesiness?

The cake is a lie.

[AlanC9]

Nightwriter wrote...
The Catalyst is a threat to the illusion of self-determination. It is a clouded enemy presenting choices to us on a platter, and it asks us to accept that these choices are real, necessary, and the only ones available to us. This creates the feeling that the only right action is to upend the platter and shoot the one holding it, because my instinct is not to let a possible enemy lead me by the bridle or feed my choices to me. 

If there were no platter, and no Catalyst, there would be only me and my choices.

Thanks for putting "illusion" in there.

[3DandBeyond]

dreman9999 wrote...

What does it matter if people did not see it coming? Know one even knew whay the reapers did what they did before.

The point of the ending was to point out there really is no inherit good or evil.

Ok, I'm wondering what planet you live on?  On my planet, known as Earth there is definitely inherent good and evil.  Mother Theresa was good, and there have been many despots that were truly evil.  There have been some people that do evil things because they are ill, but there are some who truly like to do evil things for no reason at all.  Sovereign indicated they were inherently evil.  Shepard can be played as inherently good or not so good.

And so what?  Evil is as evil does.  Unless you can fix someone in a way that does not do damage to others, then evil needs to be put down in some way.  It doesn't deserve to be running around free as it digests people goo and imprisons people's thoughts within its structure.  I don't care if the Shepard AI is controlling the people goo eaters.  People wouldn't want the reapers flying around in their galaxy.  If you would that's particularly troubling.  Real humans even don't react that way with serial killers or mass murderers.  Some tear down their homes or the sites of where the atrocities happened-other create memorials to victims where the crimes took place.  No way they'd hire Jeffrey Dahmer if he was alive, to fix their car.  But, guess what, he isn't alive because people couldn't even stand it that he would rot in jail.  So sure they'd want the reapers, as big as sky scrapers, flying around after gooifying their families.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 02 octobre 2012 - 01:20 .

[3DandBeyond]

ld1449 wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

You did not answer my question. Why would you not choose Destroy?

You mean, jokes aside?

If I ever play ME3 again, I will roll Destroy. Not because I'm happy with it, though. It just seems like the lesser evil. Even then, the ending isn't satisfying. The Catalyst is still a last minute character who disrupts the dramatic momentum, Shepard is still too credulous when talking to it, all this pain and death and free will subversion was still just the result of a computer mishap, EDI and the geth still die unmourned and unmentioned, the Catalyst still talks Shepard into offing him/herself in 3.5/4 endings, and the climax of the space opera still shifts the series theme from "you make your own fate" to "you choose which fate the enemy gives you, and then die." Oh, and I still never found Miranda, I suppose.

There are people out there who are completely okay with all this, which is fine. I just won't ever be one of them.

So perhaps it's the context in which the options are given that's wrong? Imagine, for a minute, that the Catalyst didn't exist. That Shepard calls on EDI to figure out how to fire the Crucible and it is EDI who presents the three options because, for some reason, the Crucible's been designed for instant implementation of any of those options. Would your opinion of the choices or the ending change?

It's just a simple thought experiment.

It would actually. It would jump the ending from a 3.5/10 that it is now, straight up to a 6 or a 7

maybe even more depending on the dialogue/explanation that they put in there that doesn't revolve around

"Yo dawg I heard you don't wanna be killed by Synthetics."

This is similar to one thing I had wondered if the kid only was there (not only as a kid, but as other people) to explain what the crucible would do.  But there'd be no choice.  To do that they'd have to change things in the game.  If you believed in TIM's view of things, you'd only get to try to control the reapers.  If you thought the genophage was a good idea and didn't cure it, felt synthesis was good, you'd only get that.  Or if you always wanted to destroy the reapers, you'd only get that. 

[WhiteKnyght]

mrs_anomaly wrote...

SPOILERS:


I'm about to finish my second playthrough of ME3. I just landed on Earth....my husband wanted to watch football so I just saved and got on Youtube because I haven't spoiled myself on the newer extended cut endings yet. 



Wow. I am officially a hypocrite. I say this because I was a staunchly interested in having  a "good death" to save the Galaxy. I didn't care how- at least let me die to win if necessary and give me a good ending and let me know what happens a bit afterwards. An epilogue. 

Now that I've seen the variations that would apply to my Sheps- I'm just thinking...I want my Shepard to survive. But I know that really doesn't even make sense. Shepard had so little chance of surviving this entire time anyway and she made the final decision to save the Galaxy. But but but..  


I'm going to have to read a novel with an HEA to get me out of this post ME3 blues . At least ..the galaxy was saved.  

Changing your mind about something doesn't make you a hypocrite. It makes you a person who changed their mind.

In Mass Effect 1, Tali hated the Geth and believed they all needed to die to reconquer Rannoch.

In Mass Effect 3, Tali's experience with Legion made her believe want a peaceful settlement was possible and she was completely open to it.

Does that make her a hypocrite? no.

[Oni Changas]

dreman9999 wrote...

OniTYME wrote...

Garrus and some quarians are "partially synthetic" too yet they're lollygaggin' it up in the picture show endings. Destroy should have been targeting reaper tech, which would make sense.

1.They are not intradependent on tech.

2. As the catalyst stated. All tech will easill be repaired.

3. It's brain death for synthetics.

1. Yawn... Garrus had a cybernetic hookup to survive a rocket to the face. He was an adventurer before.

2. And...? **** does that have to do with what I posted?

3. k? c above lol

[dreman9999]

Greylycantrope wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1. Destroy-End vs means.The theme was in ME meany time before.

2.Control-stops the reapers and make them slave to Shepard. No problem.

3. Synthesis- still stops the reapers the reaper form havesting everyone. Bu tif you don'tlike it don't pick it.

1. I  wasn't forced to agree with the ends justify the means before.
2. Slavery and a Reaper enforced police state isn't a problem?
3. Stops them by giving in to their demands, which are ridiulous and unnecassary. Don't like any of the options but I have to pick one.

1. virmire, bring down the sky, the citadel choice, the geth choice, the collector base choice, and tuchanke were no endvs means choices?

2.That only a renagade shep. A paragon would not have a police state.

3.If you don't like synthesis don't pick it.

[dreman9999]

OniTYME wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

OniTYME wrote...

Garrus and some quarians are "partially synthetic" too yet they're lollygaggin' it up in the picture show endings. Destroy should have been targeting reaper tech, which would make sense.

1.They are not intradependent on tech.

2. As the catalyst stated. All tech will easill be repaired.

3. It's brain death for synthetics.

1. Yawn... Garrus had a cybernetic hookup to survive a rocket to the face. He was an adventurer before.

2. And...? **** does that have to do with what I posted?

3. k? c above lol

1.It;s not there for him to servive.
2. It means the destroy choice would not be a hamperto them.

[dreman9999]

3DandBeyond wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

What does it matter if people did not see it coming? Know one even knew whay the reapers did what they did before.

The point of the ending was to point out there really is no inherit good or evil.

Ok, I'm wondering what planet you live on?  On my planet, known as Earth there is definitely inherent good and evil.  Mother Theresa was good, and there have been many despots that were truly evil.  There have been some people that do evil things because they are ill, but there are some who truly like to do evil things for no reason at all.  Sovereign indicated they were inherently evil.  Shepard can be played as inherently good or not so good.

And so what?  Evil is as evil does.  Unless you can fix someone in a way that does not do damage to others, then evil needs to be put down in some way.  It doesn't deserve to be running around free as it digests people goo and imprisons people's thoughts within its structure.  I don't care if the Shepard AI is controlling the people goo eaters.  People wouldn't want the reapers flying around in their galaxy.  If you would that's particularly troubling.  Real humans even don't react that way with serial killers or mass murderers.  Some tear down their homes or the sites of where the atrocities happened-other create memorials to victims where the crimes took place.  No way they'd hire Jeffrey Dahmer if he was alive, to fix their car.  But, guess what, he isn't alive because people couldn't even stand it that he would rot in jail.  So sure they'd want the reapers, as big as sky scrapers, flying around after gooifying their families.

The universe, including earth, is not build on inheate goods and evil. It shades of grey. It's never that simple. If you look at the world in black and white I feel sad for you. You problem is that your looking at things in the extremes.

Modifié par dreman9999, 02 octobre 2012 - 02:47 .

[dreman9999]

Kroitz wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Kroitz wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Kroitz wrote...

It´s a different feeling to fight for victory than be given the permission to win from your enemy.

Take sometime to understand you enemy. You find that they never wanted to fight you.

No they didn´t, they just wanted to get rid of us without a fuss. I understand that, we´re pals now.

Just like nationalist germany didn´t want to fight anyone, they just wanted to impose their twisted world-view on everything and everyone with force. It´s the other nations fault for resisting.

Get your mind out of the gutter.

You clearly don't get it. The catalystis just a machine doing what it's programed to do. It nas no morality. Any conflict it does is just a means to an end. It does not what to do no evil nor is inheritly evil. It has no concept of good or evil. It has no free will.

It just a mad dog that need to be put down. Stop trying to lokk atit as an evil thing.

You jump from de-personalisation and de-antagonising straight to justifing their enemy-status.

Dude, how am I supposed to "get" your argument, if you don´t even get what you are writing yourself?

You clearly not understanding what I'm saying. Nothing I said justifies the enemies actions, The fact I said it just a mad dog that need to be put down point to the fact that we still have to stop it.
You're right to say that I'm de-antagonising it. That because it's not really an antagonist. It just a tool doing what it programed to do. As long as you see the catalyst as an antagonist, you'll never understand it.

Modifié par dreman9999, 02 octobre 2012 - 03:06 .

[The Spamming Troll]

GT Zazzerka wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Terminus Echoes wrote...

If you pick Destroy with a high EMS, Shepard survives.

No, if you pick Destroy with a high EMS, Shepard is alive.

That does not mean they survive.

You wanna throw down?
I'll throw down.

i loled.

[The Spamming Troll]

TNT1991 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Open end ending mean I, you or anyone can imagine the results of that last moment with Shepard. 
AKA, if I say he is alive , I'm right. If you say he's dead, your right.
With subjective things, there never is only one truth.

 

This. 

thats about as rewarding to my journey as making my choices a tally point under EMS.

pft.

i guess hudson wasnt lieing when he said there would be alot of endings. he just forgot to mention its all headcanon endings.

again, pft.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 02 octobre 2012 - 03:11 .

[dreman9999]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

TNT1991 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Open end ending mean I, you or anyone can imagine the results of that last moment with Shepard. 
AKA, if I say he is alive , I'm right. If you say he's dead, your right.
With subjective things, there never is only one truth.

 

This. 

thats about as rewarding to my journey as making my choices a tally point under EMS.

pft.

i guess hudson wasnt lieing when he said there would be alot of endings. he just forgot to mention its all headcanon endings.

again, pft.

AKA....I want a happy ending.


Just for you to know how different the results of the ending can be....

 EMS is between 0-1749, only the Destroy or Control option will be available (determined by whether or not the Collector Base was destroyed or preserved in Mass Effect 2). If the Collector base was left intact, only the Control option is possible, if it was destroyed, only the Destroy ending will be available and both will result in massive physical damage to Earth, with Destroy killing everyone on Earth.

If EMS is between 1750-2349, the choice between Destroy or Control options becomes available, but either choice will cause some substantial damage to the galaxy.If EMS is between 2350-2649, the Control option will cause no physical damage and the Destroy option will still massively damage the galaxy.

If EMS is 2650+ the Destroy and Control options will no longer cause any physical harm to the galaxy.If EMS is 2800+ the Synthesis ending becomes available.

If EMS is 4000+ and the Destroy option is chosen, Shepard is seen barely alive, gasping for breath (if Anderson is shot by the Illusive Man, the player needs 5000+ EMS to see this short scene).

In every ending, the Crucible's blast causes the Normandy to crash land on an unknown planet. The survival of the Normandy's crew will rely solely on EMS:

If EMS is substantially low (below ~2000), nobody exits the Normandy.
If EMS is moderately high (above minimum, below maximum) and Destroy or Control are chosen, Joker and the player's most-favored crew mate will exit the ship.

If Synthesis is chosen, Joker, EDI, and the player's most-favored crew member will exit the ship. Joker and EDI will embrace.
If EMS is 4000+ then three crew members will exit in the Destroy and Control endings; Joker and two of the player's most-favored crew mates. 

So not having the ending you want means you don't have many endings?

Modifié par dreman9999, 02 octobre 2012 - 03:20 .

[The Twilight God]

dreman9999 wrote...

If EMS is 4000+ and the Destroy option is chosen, Shepard is seen barely alive, gasping for breath (if Anderson is shot by the Illusive Man, the player needs 5000+ EMS to see this short scene).

It's now 3100 for breathe scene and 4000 (or 4100) if anderson is killed. 

Modifié par The Twilight God, 02 octobre 2012 - 03:25 .