256 réponses à ce sujet

[DeinonSlayer]

Xilizhra wrote...

My morality is all that can make this decision. I can only share this decision with one other person, and it doesn't seem to have a moral compass; I don't even know if the Catalyst has free will. Bereft of anyone else's input from the rather stunning revelation I just got, I only have my own judgment to use. I can certainly try to think of what other people would have wanted... but I don't, and never have, made decisions by consensus alone. I've taken unilateral risks before, after all, in my time as a Paragon; many of them. What's one more?

I'm sorry to say this, but when I hear someone say "they're a Paragon," I lose a lot of respect for their opinion. All you do by adhering to Paragon/Renegade is defer judgement about what's right or wrong to the writers instead of thinking for yourself. You can turn around and try to justify it later, using the reasoning that was fed to you to justify your actions, but that doesn't change the fact that you're letting the game play you ("you" here meaning Paragons in general, not Xilizhra specifically) instead of the other way around.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 07 novembre 2012 - 04:12 .

[ghost9191]

nothing like a new regime to give hope to the galaxy

pretty sure the races would be willing to give in and get rid of their free will , well in that choice at least

[Xilizhra]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

My morality is all that can make this decision. I can only share this decision with one other person, and it doesn't seem to have a moral compass; I don't even know if the Catalyst has free will. Bereft of anyone else's input from the rather stunning revelation I just got, I only have my own judgment to use. I can certainly try to think of what other people would have wanted... but I don't, and never have, made decisions by consensus alone. I've taken unilateral risks before, after all, in my time as a Paragon; many of them. What's one more?

I'm sorry to say this, but when I hear someone say "they're a Paragon," I lose a lot of respect for their opinion. All you do by adhering to Paragon/Renegade is defer judgement about what's right or wrong to the writers instead of thinking for yourself. You can turn around and try to justify it later, using the reasoning that was fed to you to justify your actions, but that doesn't change the fact that you're letting the game play you ("you" here meaning Paragons in general, not Xilizhra specifically) instead of the other way around.

Not on all things. I chose to keep the Collector base, for instance. It's just that most of my decisions have been Paragon.

[jtav]

I feel reasonably moral comfortable with Synthesis because I believe the genetic rewrite is balanced by the considerable good it does. It seems the option most in line with my RL values.

[Eckswhyzed]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

My morality is all that can make this decision. I can only share this decision with one other person, and it doesn't seem to have a moral compass; I don't even know if the Catalyst has free will. Bereft of anyone else's input from the rather stunning revelation I just got, I only have my own judgment to use. I can certainly try to think of what other people would have wanted... but I don't, and never have, made decisions by consensus alone. I've taken unilateral risks before, after all, in my time as a Paragon; many of them. What's one more?

I'm sorry to say this, but when I hear someone say "they're a Paragon," I lose a lot of respect for their opinion. All you do by adhering to Paragon/Renegade is defer judgement about what's right or wrong to the writers instead of thinking for yourself. You can turn around and try to justify it later, using the reasoning that was fed to you to justify your actions, but that doesn't change the fact that you're letting the game play you ("you" here meaning Paragons in general, not Xilizhra specifically) instead of the other way around.

I think you're being too harsh here. Whenever I see someone write that they are Paragon or Renegade, I interpret it as "I made decisions according to my own moral code, they all happened to be of the same P/R alignment" rather than "I made these decisions based on the fact one is Paragon and the other Renegade"

[SquirrelWiz]

 I only trusted the catalyst as far as I could throw it. Granted, it was a hologram...

The problem I found with the ending, and why I ultimately chose destroy, was that none of the other endings actually dealt with the Reaper threat.

First, I didn't trust the Catalyst. It built/constructed/ran the Reapers. It is invested in the ideology that its purpose is to preserve organic life from synthetic destruction. It is clearly intelligent, and of free will, therefore it is capable of fudging the truth as long as it suits its ends.

Control - My gripe with this is I would be condensing Shepherd's essence into some sort of AI Being that will have total control over the most advanced and destructive force in the galaxy. Without knowing the ending, I had no indication that Shepherd would view the galaxy exactly the same as before. With all that power at its fingertips, it would be really easy for it to become a galactic dictator, or simply grow so detatched from organics that it lets the Reapers slip loose.

Synthesis - This was dubious for me when it was presented. First, Synthesis sounded a lot like indoctrination to me. Everybody becomes organic/synthetic hybrids... wait... aren't husk humans with synthetic components that are connected to Reapers? This brings up my second point. Reapers indoctrinate easily enough in close proximity, the last thing I want to do is stick a direct link in everybody's head that connects them to all the Reapers at once. Sure, if they play nice we get access to a wealth of knowledge far outstripping out own, but that is one big IF. Not to mention, it doesn't even touch what happens should we discover an outside organic race. Do we religiously take up arms to "convert" them? For me the decision of synthesis was too risky to implement.

Destroy - This was the only ending that dealt with the Reaper threat. Shoot the McGuffin and they go boom. That is a clear and definite solution. Do we loose the Geth? Yes, it is an unfortunant loss, but I secured a future where everybody has the chance to determine their own fate. In my game I had brokered a peace between Quarians and Geth, showing that the idea of a technological singularity is not entirely airtight. As we grow and understand the needs of synthetics we can design and raise future synthetic races in ways to reduce friction between organics and synthetics.

Is the possible threat that synthetics could plague the galaxy again?
Yes, but with the lessons we've learned from the Geth and Reapers, we have some basic tools and insights to help prevent it.

In the end, no choice was perfect, so I chose the one that I felt ENDED the Reaper threat.

Modifié par SquirrelWiz, 07 novembre 2012 - 04:18 .

[DeinonSlayer]

Xilizhra wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

My morality is all that can make this decision. I can only share this decision with one other person, and it doesn't seem to have a moral compass; I don't even know if the Catalyst has free will. Bereft of anyone else's input from the rather stunning revelation I just got, I only have my own judgment to use. I can certainly try to think of what other people would have wanted... but I don't, and never have, made decisions by consensus alone. I've taken unilateral risks before, after all, in my time as a Paragon; many of them. What's one more?

I'm sorry to say this, but when I hear someone say "they're a Paragon," I lose a lot of respect for their opinion. All you do by adhering to Paragon/Renegade is defer judgement about what's right or wrong to the writers instead of thinking for yourself. You can turn around and try to justify it later, using the reasoning that was fed to you to justify your actions, but that doesn't change the fact that you're letting the game play you ("you" here meaning Paragons in general, not Xilizhra specifically) instead of the other way around.

Not on all things. I chose to keep the Collector base, for instance. It's just that most of my decisions have been Paragon.

OK, maybe I jumped the gun a bit - I've just seen a lot of people on here who can only be described as compulsive paragons. It's pathetic to see people floundering when they hit the ending because the game isn't explicitly telling them what to do anymore. I've seen far too many threads on here asking "which is the Paragon ending?"

[BatmanTurian]

Xilizhra wrote...

TIM was controlled by the Reapers when he was trying to reach the Crucible, which is why it wouldn't work. I am not under control at this point in time, and hence that statement doesn't apply to me.

So if TIM was controlled by the reapers and TIM controlled you, then how do the Reapers not control you?

[Malanek]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

TIM was controlled by the Reapers when he was trying to reach the Crucible, which is why it wouldn't work. I am not under control at this point in time, and hence that statement doesn't apply to me.

So if TIM was controlled by the reapers and TIM controlled you, then how do the Reapers not control you?

TIM didn't have full control over you. He was trying to assert it and he failed.

[BatmanTurian]

Malanek999 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

TIM was controlled by the Reapers when he was trying to reach the Crucible, which is why it wouldn't work. I am not under control at this point in time, and hence that statement doesn't apply to me.

So if TIM was controlled by the reapers and TIM controlled you, then how do the Reapers not control you?

TIM didn't have full control over you. He was trying to assert it and he failed.

fair conclusion, I suppose.

[Vigilant111]

Eckswhyzed wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

My morality is all that can make this decision. I can only share this decision with one other person, and it doesn't seem to have a moral compass; I don't even know if the Catalyst has free will. Bereft of anyone else's input from the rather stunning revelation I just got, I only have my own judgment to use. I can certainly try to think of what other people would have wanted... but I don't, and never have, made decisions by consensus alone. I've taken unilateral risks before, after all, in my time as a Paragon; many of them. What's one more?

I'm sorry to say this, but when I hear someone say "they're a Paragon," I lose a lot of respect for their opinion. All you do by adhering to Paragon/Renegade is defer judgement about what's right or wrong to the writers instead of thinking for yourself. You can turn around and try to justify it later, using the reasoning that was fed to you to justify your actions, but that doesn't change the fact that you're letting the game play you ("you" here meaning Paragons in general, not Xilizhra specifically) instead of the other way around.

I think you're being too harsh here. Whenever I see someone write that they are Paragon or Renegade, I interpret it as "I made decisions according to my own moral code, they all happened to be of the same P/R alignment" rather than "I made these decisions based on the fact one is Paragon and the other Renegade"

I myself do not think DeinonSlayer is being harsh here

It seems some people (myself included) like to use paragon / renegade as a badge to legitimize our actions. I agree with the sentiment made by DeinonSlayer about writers dictating what is paragon or what is renegade, where they all held subjective opinions themselves... Is picking control really a paragon action for everyone?

[SquirrelWiz]

A more dubious thought.

If the Reapers controlled the TIM how do we know that they said, "hey... just wondering... why are we giving him a Reaper Controller that works?" and just made the device kill whoever used it without uploading their conciousness?

[BatmanTurian]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Eckswhyzed wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

My morality is all that can make this decision. I can only share this decision with one other person, and it doesn't seem to have a moral compass; I don't even know if the Catalyst has free will. Bereft of anyone else's input from the rather stunning revelation I just got, I only have my own judgment to use. I can certainly try to think of what other people would have wanted... but I don't, and never have, made decisions by consensus alone. I've taken unilateral risks before, after all, in my time as a Paragon; many of them. What's one more?

I'm sorry to say this, but when I hear someone say "they're a Paragon," I lose a lot of respect for their opinion. All you do by adhering to Paragon/Renegade is defer judgement about what's right or wrong to the writers instead of thinking for yourself. You can turn around and try to justify it later, using the reasoning that was fed to you to justify your actions, but that doesn't change the fact that you're letting the game play you ("you" here meaning Paragons in general, not Xilizhra specifically) instead of the other way around.

I think you're being too harsh here. Whenever I see someone write that they are Paragon or Renegade, I interpret it as "I made decisions according to my own moral code, they all happened to be of the same P/R alignment" rather than "I made these decisions based on the fact one is Paragon and the other Renegade"

I myself do not think DeinonSlayer is being harsh here

It seems some people (myself included) like to use paragon / renegade as a badge to legitimize our actions. I agree with the sentiment made by DeinonSlayer about writers dictating what is paragon or what is renegade, where they all held subjective opinions themselves... Is picking control really a paragon action for everyone?

Clearly, it is not for everyone.

[ghost9191]

it has 2 possible outcomes depending on your alignment but none are truly paragon or renegade. just as you have low/high ems destroy and well that synthesis option

[ghost9191]

SquirrelWiz wrote...

A more dubious thought.

If the Reapers controlled the TIM how do we know that they said, "hey... just wondering... why are we giving him a Reaper Controller that works?" and just made the device kill whoever used it without uploading their conciousness?

well catalyst isn't suppose to have any control over it . and probably thought that the united fleets wouldn't get the crucible to the catalyst idk

[Vigilant111]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Clearly, it is not for everyone.

Hence I do not understand why BW used a colour that is closely associated with paragons to dress control, if they really wanted an open-ended ending (Ironic, I know)

[clennon8]

Responding to OP... Destroy isn't a validation of an anti-Synthetic philosophy. At least, not for me. It's actually a vote for self-determination. Destroy is the only one of the RGB endings that you can say that about. Nope, not Control. Nope, not Synthesis. And I'm being kind and leaving IT out of the picture. I choose Destroy precisely because I *don't* believe organics and synthetics cannot get along. It is a frustrating perversity that the Destroy choice forces me to sacrifice the geth in order to stand up for that principle.

[DeinonSlayer]

Vigilant111 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Clearly, it is not for everyone.

Hence I do not understand why BW used a colour that is closely associated with paragons to dress control, if they really wanted an open-ended ending (Ironic, I know)

In ME2, the blast produced by purging the base (renegade) is blue and the one produced by destroying it (paragon) is red.

[BatmanTurian]

...

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 07 novembre 2012 - 04:46 .

[AdmiralCheez]

On a less serious note, I could validate Javik all night long, yannowhuddimean?

[BatmanTurian]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

On a less serious note, I could validate Javik all night long, yannowhuddimean?

Everyone has their kinks...

[Vigilant111]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Clearly, it is not for everyone.

Hence I do not understand why BW used a colour that is closely associated with paragons to dress control, if they really wanted an open-ended ending (Ironic, I know)

In ME2, the blast produced by purging the base (renegade) is blue and the one produced by destroying it (paragon) is red.

Yet it is a blue sun in front of TIM in the destroy ending

[CosmicGnosis]

clennon8 wrote...

Responding to OP... Destroy isn't a validation of an anti-Synthetic philosophy. At least, not for me. It's actually a vote for self-determination. Destroy is the only one of the RGB endings that you can say that about. Nope, not Control. Nope, not Synthesis. And I'm being kind and leaving IT out of the picture. I choose Destroy precisely because I *don't* believe organics and synthetics cannot get along. It is a frustrating perversity that the Destroy choice forces me to sacrifice the geth in order to stand up for that principle.

And it sucks that choosing Destroy places me in the same crowd that includes people who don't accept the concept of synthetic "life".

[BatmanTurian]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Responding to OP... Destroy isn't a validation of an anti-Synthetic philosophy. At least, not for me. It's actually a vote for self-determination. Destroy is the only one of the RGB endings that you can say that about. Nope, not Control. Nope, not Synthesis. And I'm being kind and leaving IT out of the picture. I choose Destroy precisely because I *don't* believe organics and synthetics cannot get along. It is a frustrating perversity that the Destroy choice forces me to sacrifice the geth in order to stand up for that principle.

And it sucks that choosing Destroy places me in the same crowd that includes people who don't accept the concept of synthetic "life".

I think that's an unfair characterization. I accept synthetic " life ". I think EDI is awesome and Legion is really cool even though he goes schizo and compromises with the Old Machines. I like the Geth and I chose to make peace between the Quarians and the Geth.

But my detestation for the Reapers is much stronger. If it didn't kill EDI and The Geth, that would be great. Unfortunately, the choice I believe is right and has been my goal the entire series has been tainted by the writers with a consequence that didn't even have to exist. It only exists to make you want to choose the other two. There is no reason for the Crucible not to discriminate.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 07 novembre 2012 - 05:16 .

[Vigilant111]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Responding to OP... Destroy isn't a validation of an anti-Synthetic philosophy. At least, not for me. It's actually a vote for self-determination. Destroy is the only one of the RGB endings that you can say that about. Nope, not Control. Nope, not Synthesis. And I'm being kind and leaving IT out of the picture. I choose Destroy precisely because I *don't* believe organics and synthetics cannot get along. It is a frustrating perversity that the Destroy choice forces me to sacrifice the geth in order to stand up for that principle.

And it sucks that choosing Destroy places me in the same crowd that includes people who don't accept the concept of synthetic "life".

To be fair, he did use the word "sacrifice", you don't sacrifice things that are not alive, hence there is so much noise being made about the Geth and EDI dying in destroy. If people did not accept synthetics as alive then they would'nt whine about it