985 réponses à ce sujet

[clennon8]

Stupid thread to end all stupid threads is stupid.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Kabooooom wrote...

Yes, they are innocent. But read what you wrote right here. They exist in a horrid, torturous state. The people that were used to make the Reapers did not wish it. It preserves the essence of their species but not the true species. I bet if you were to ask them, they would ask for a merciful death. And the mentally ill comparison is a false equivalency logical fallacy.

So, in light of that, Destroy is the most moral choice for me. Control subverts the Reapers further, in Synthesis they are still imprisoned within Reaper bodies - Destroy frees them.

All species go extinct with time, including our own. It is inevitable. It is the natural order of things. There comes a time when all of us have to fade from the universal stage. The Reapers are no different, and saving them - in my opinion - is naive and immoral.

Oh yeah, and then there's the Destroy "mercy" argument.

Simply put, it's silly moral-righteousness to assume what's best for someone. You cannot assume what's mercy for other people, you need to know from them.

For one, we don't even know if the old personalities are still alive and self-aware, or if it's all merely data stored within the Reaper. For two, it's too late to save them from the tragedy of being harvested now, so it's pointless to try to make up for it posthumously. For three, what if they don't want to die and are actually OK with living on in this state?

Again, if you want mercy, go Synthesis. If it's truly too horrible to live with, they can off themselves (it'll probably be no less horrific than how Destroy kills them). If not, they can live. But the key is choice.

[ManiacG]

Even if they dont want to kill everyone you will always be wrong on this point, they do deserve to be destroyed.

Why you ask?
Because they are so destructive themselves and obviously so amoral that they can fit no other definition than evil, pity them if you must but its you thats misguided.

One final say: the catalyst may be the factor but the reapers did the deed...your argument is invalid.

Modifié par ManiacG, 25 octobre 2012 - 06:03 .

[Soul8lighter]

Reapers Innocent?

http://gifsoup.com/i...?id=2332127&t=o GIFSoup

[Barquiel]

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

We talk to three different reapers throughout the series...and judging from these conversations, I don't think it's a great idea to unleash them on the galaxy.

That's because they were been kept prisoner by the Catalyst.

I had the impression they had different personalities (...and not exactly nice ones). But all three reapers were arrogant, in a god-complex way.

[Kabooooom]

jtav wrote...

I don't know what they want. Can't ask them. Let them committ suicide if they want. But I won't presume I know what they would want because I'm terrified of someone presuming for me.

A fair enough point, probably the first one in this thread so far. Except:

You only have one other choice that will allow the Reapers to be free - Synthesis. Control places them into a state of slavery again. I assume you would disagree with that. But Synthesis forcefully changes every living thing in the galaxy.

So, none of the ME endings are morally ideal. That was the entire point of them. You now have a choice - do you value the lives of the Reapers and their freedom to choose or the lives of every organic and their freedom to choose their fate? 

[DeinonSlayer]

CrutchCricket wrote...

Ugh. The tendency of some to victimize the Reapers is definitely one of the more loathsome effects of this crappy ending.

People who view the Reapers as "victims" are even worse than those who think the Geth are innocent little tin angels who can't be held accountable for anything they've done.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Foxhound2121 wrote...

They still need to answer for crimes. Given what they have racked up, destruction is the only way.

Obeying, taking orders, and being manipulated has never been an excuse.

Since when?

Have you ever heard the term "unwilling assailant" - ?

Or "framed" - ?

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 25 octobre 2012 - 06:08 .

[AresKeith]

jtav wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

jtav wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Shooting the tube would thus mean freeing them from their millions of years of torment.

"You. Whatever species was harvested to make you? They're dead. They died thousands of years ago. And now, they can rest in peace."

No. Killing a sapient being to "end their torment" is wrong. Killing them in self-defense wouldn't be, if it were necessary.

Do you really think they would want to be trap inside of a Reaper (who killed them) forever, I think not

I don't know what they want. Can't ask them. Let them committ suicide if they want. But I won't presume I know what they would want because I'm terrified of someone presuming for me.

Javik said killing the Collectors on the Collector base was an act of mercy because they were twisted

But as I said earlier Harbinger and Sovereign says otherwise

[teh DRUMPf!!]

A Bethesda Fan wrote...


Synthesis is not mercy.
The Reapers are still being controlled by the god king child of the galaxy(The catalyst).

There's no way the catalyst is still controlling them in Synthesis.

The Citadel blew up in the original ending, and explosions around it can be seen in EC so it probably wasn't retconned. Also, the green beam seems to affect the Reapers as well, which is probably the only other place the catalyst would have located himself.

There's nothing to suggest he's still in control.

[Kabooooom]

HYR 2.0 wrote...


Simply put, it's silly moral-righteousness to assume what's best for someone. You cannot assume what's mercy for other people, you need to know from them.

I disagree. Why? Because I have a degree in veterinary medicine. Integral in that is making moral decisions that require assumptions about what is right for another living being. Is it an ideal situation to make a moral choice somewhat blindly? No, of course not. But it is pure illogical foolishness to take the stance that it is moral-righteousness or cannot be done.

Modifié par Kabooooom, 25 octobre 2012 - 06:09 .

[Mr.House]

*Looks at Harbinger and Sovereign* Yup, they are really innocent and don't enjoy what they where doing.

[AresKeith]

Mr.House wrote...

*Looks at Harbinger and Sovereign* Yup, they are really innocent and don't enjoy what they where doing.

"Your worlds will become our laboratories", yep very innocent

[Mr.House]

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

*Looks at Harbinger and Sovereign* Yup, they are really innocent and don't enjoy what they where doing.

Did you not play ME3?
They were put on a leash and tried like animals by the catalsyt

No, starbrat gave them purpose and gives them orders, that's it. When they start enjoying it and love to do it and think organics are trash, then yes, they are not innocent. We have seen this by two major Reapers(which already contradict starbrat) All of their dialog shows Reapers are not innocent, but hey if you want to think so be my guest. They are war crimminals just like starbrat and thus, tube shooting.

Modifié par Mr.House, 25 octobre 2012 - 06:18 .

[AresKeith]

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

*Looks at Harbinger and Sovereign* Yup, they are really innocent and don't enjoy what they where doing.

Did you not play ME3?
They were put on a leash and treated like animals by the catalsyt

Harbinger: "We are superior, they are vermin"

[Steelcan]

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

*Looks at Harbinger and Sovereign* Yup, they are really innocent and don't enjoy what they where doing.

Did you not play ME3?
They were put on a leash and treated like animals by the catalsyt

. Reaper on Rannoch disagrees

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Kabooooom wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...


Simply put, it's silly moral-righteousness to assume what's best for someone. You cannot assume what's mercy for other people, you need to know from them.

I disagree. Why? Because I have a degree in veterinary medicine. Integral in that is making moral decisions that require assumptions about what is right for another living being. Is it an ideal situation to make a moral choice somewhat blindly? No, of course not. But it is pure illogical foolishness to take the stance that it is moral-righteousness or cannot be done.

I should rephrase:

In this case, you cannot assume to know what's mercy for other people (as many Destroyers do).

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

And there's nothing to suggest is hasn't indoctrinated every organic and synthetic in the galaxy.

No, there's a lot to suggest they're not indoctrinated.

A LOT.

Giving them the goals he wants them to achieve without them knowing.

You cannot argue against "you're insane, you just don't know it, because you're insane." But that doesn't make it true.

[fil009]

<=- Destroyer since March 2012.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Mr.House wrote...

*Looks at Harbinger and Sovereign* Yup, they are really innocent and don't enjoy what they where doing.

Yeah, and I'm sure Dr. Amanda Kenson was always a trecherous murder. How could Hackett not clearly see that?

[Steelcan]

The Reapers are NOT innocent. Sovereign and Harbinger make it perfectly clear that they are acting they way they do because they are above our understanding. If you want to use the "but they were indoctrinated!!!!" Arguement, when has it ever been shown that indoctrinated people can ever recover. They are either acting of their own free will, as seen by Sovereign, Harbinger, reaper on Rannoch, or they are indoctrinated but the Catalyst, in which case the only option is to kill them

[Nightwriter]

Sorry jtav, but they didn't successfully flip the Reapers. It seems really clear from Sovereign and Harbinger's behavior that the Reapers were mustache-twirling villains until the writers had a change of heart and decided to make a sudden reversal. So at the last minute I am asked to accept a revelation that contradicts the emotion the writers had been trying to build up in me for the last two games.

Homey don't play that game. I'd be happy to discuss their innocence if the flip had been well written. Sadly it was not.