252 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

Bill Casey wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I propose a compromise: if you choose Destroy, your theory was right, whereas if I choose Control/Synthesis, mine was right. That way, both of us can be happy. Will this work?

That requires throwing out the entire trilogy...

Hardly. It just means that Shepard can do what was long thought impossible.

[Bill Casey]

No, it's a broken Aesop...
A complete abandonment of themes...

[clennon8]

Indoctrination? That's just silly. What about the Mass Effect games would make you think indoctrination had anything to do with the ending? You goose.

[Davik Kang]

Xilizhra wrote...

I propose a compromise: if you choose Destroy, your theory was right, whereas if I choose Control/Synthesis, mine was right. That way, both of us can be happy. Will this work?

I kind of covered this in another thread here.

In short yes it can work.  I definitely think the end was an indoctrination attempt.  I'm not trying to say I've proved it though.  If you look at what happens and decide it's not indoctrination at all, then Con or Syn could be considered right as well.  I think they're slightly crazy choices, because they seem to appeal to someone with a God complex, but equally you could argue that to choose Destroy is to throw away the opportunity to do something amazing.

[Xilizhra]

Davik Kang wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I propose a compromise: if you choose Destroy, your theory was right, whereas if I choose Control/Synthesis, mine was right. That way, both of us can be happy. Will this work?

I kind of covered this in another thread here.

In short yes it can work.  I definitely think the end was an indoctrination attempt.  I'm not trying to say I've proved it though.  If you look at what happens and decide it's not indoctrination at all, then Con or Syn could be considered right as well.  I think they're slightly crazy choices, because they seem to appeal to someone with a God complex, but equally you could argue that to choose Destroy is to throw away the opportunity to do something amazing.

What might work is that there was an indoctrination attempt, but Shepard broke it regardless of the ending. I could find this basically acceptable.

[clennon8]

Right. He "broke" indoctrination, and then said "TIM was right!" or "Saren was right!"  Seems legit.

Modifié par clennon8, 11 octobre 2012 - 07:43 .

[Xilizhra]

clennon8 wrote...

Right. He "broke" indoctrination, and then said "TIM was right!" or "Saren was right!"

TIM was kinda right, but lacked the means to accomplish his goal. Saren's idea was submission, not Synthesis.

[clennon8]

Saren was talking exactly about Synthesis. You can do a line by line comparison. He's talking about the exact. same. thing. And by choosing Synthesis, YOU are submitting.

[Xilizhra]

clennon8 wrote...

Saren was talking exactly about Synthesis. You can do a line by line comparison. He's talking about the exact. same. thing. And by choosing Synthesis, YOU are submitting.

Saren's means were faulty because of his prior indoctrination. Actual Synthesis is something else again. And submission never lasts; all it means is instant death, whereas in Synthesis, there still is a future for the current cycle, with the Reapers no longer violent.

[clennon8]

Oh, I see. The difference is that Saren was indoctrinated. But your Shepard "broke" indoctrination. How nice.

Modifié par clennon8, 11 octobre 2012 - 07:48 .

[Davik Kang]

Xilizhra wrote...
What might work is that there was an indoctrination attempt, but Shepard broke it regardless of the ending. I could find this basically acceptable.

Unfortunately I can't see how this works.  When Shepard is in the Decision Chamber, she's having ideas thrown at her that she finds difficult to comprehend.  If it occurs to you that you're being indoctrinated, then this would be the Child trying to put ideas in your mind that favour the Reapers.  Here those ideas are Control and Synthesis.  He can't hide Destroy, because although you're hallucinating you're still perfectly capable of activating the Crucible and destroying the Reapers.

I think if indoctrination is present, it conflicts with Con and Syn (not necessarily with Refuse).  So to go with those choices, at least as I see it, you'd have to decide that the Kid is not trying to indoctrinate you.  Though I guess you could say that the Kid is trying to indoctrinate you but that you'd choose Con or Syn anyway.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 06 novembre 2012 - 02:31 .

[Xilizhra]

I think if indoctrination is present, it conflicts with Con and Syn (not necessarily with Refuse). So to go with those choices, at least as I see it, you'd have to decide that the Kid is not trying to indoctrinate you. Though I guess you could say that the Kid is trying to indoctrinate you but that you'd choose Con or Syn anyway.

That last one is probably the case. With or without the Catalyst's message, if I knew the three functions beforehand, I would choose Control and Synthesis before Destroy, due to the genocide factor. Even if there was an indoctrination attempt, I wouldn't succumb to the end that the Reapers wanted.

I don't want to destroy the Reapers. I want to stop the harvest. If there had ever been a decent means presented beforehand of finding some way to let the Reapers live and become not dangerous, I'd have taken that earlier, but it didn't pop up until the very end.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 11 octobre 2012 - 07:52 .

[Bill Casey]

Saren: "The transformation from ally to servant can be subtle. I will not let it happen to me."

[clennon8]

Yes, let us worry about the plight of the poor Reapers. That is certainly what we should be prioritizing.

[Bill Casey]

Xilizhra wrote...

I don't want to destroy the Reapers.

The game says you do...
You're thinking of the Illusive Man...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 11 octobre 2012 - 07:59 .

[Sauron001]

The lack of explanation for the choices at the end makes it very clear my Shepard would not have made a choice except destroy. Synthesis was the worst one explained and their was no scientifcal evidence to back it up.

Also can someone explain how turning talking computers off is Genocide? Legion* was alive but the other Geth were not they still refered to themselves as it. I like the Geth and EDI but seriously their computers.

[Xilizhra]

Bill Casey wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I don't want to destroy the Reapers.

The game says you do...
You're thinking of the Illusive Man...

I want to stop the harvest. Those things are different. I just thought destruction was the only way to do so at first.

[clennon8]

Shepard always wanted to destroy the Reapers. Until the Reaper Overlord gave him the same options he gave TIM and Saren.

[Xilizhra]

clennon8 wrote...

Shepard always wanted to destroy the Reapers. Until the Reaper Overlord gave him the same options he gave TIM and Saren.

You reach quite far in an attempt to control my own roleplaying. I'm curious as to why.

[clennon8]

If you want to roleplay your Shepard getting indoctrinated, go right ahead. No skin off my back.

[Xilizhra]

clennon8 wrote...

If you want to roleplay your Shepard getting indoctrinated, go right ahead. No skin off my back.

Not everyone who believed in control was indoctrinated. Henry Lawson showed no signs of it.

[clennon8]

Yeah, it's possible Henry Lawson was just an a-hole, not indoctrinated. Hard to be sure.

[mauro2222]

Sauron001 wrote...

Also can someone explain how turning talking computers off is Genocide? Legion* was alive but the other Geth were not they still refered to themselves as it. I like the Geth and EDI but seriously their computers.

This would require you to know what life is, and what you are. If you can diminish another form of life to talking computer, you are not going to understand anything, you're also a talking computer made of differente components, should I feel pity if I kill you?

If you are genderless, would you refer to you as he or she?

Modifié par mauro2222, 11 octobre 2012 - 08:16 .

[Davik Kang]

Sauron001 wrote...
...Also can someone explain how turning talking computers off is Genocide? Legion* was alive but the other Geth were not they still refered to themselves as it. I like the Geth and EDI but seriously their computers.

There was a very interesting discussion on this in-game, between Engineer Adams and Dr. Chakwas.  You have to support one or the other to make them stop.  Chakwas was saying that living organisms are truly alove, and that to give machines the same rights would set a dangerous precedent.  Adams said that ultimately, you could consider living organisms machines too, and that there's no special reason to value an organic life over a synthetic life.  It was really well presented in game and I had a lot of trouble siding with one, and ultimately this conversation influenced me a great deal in making my final choice.

I don't think the issue is as simple as a lot of people make it out to be.  It's quite complex imo.

[ATiBotka]

clennon8 wrote...

Saren was talking exactly about Synthesis. You can do a line by line comparison. He's talking about the exact. same. thing. And by choosing Synthesis, YOU are submitting.

No, Saren implanted himself with Reaper tech to survive. He thought the Reapers would spare him, he was wrong, he was indoctrinated. And no, if you chose Synthesis you're not submitting to the Reapers.