I'll go ahead and start.
I picked Destroy for several reasons.
First and foremost I picked it because I reject the Catalyst and it's beliefs. The Catalyst maintains that the Reaper Cycles are necessary to preserve organic and synthetic life. Without the Reapers to intervene organics are doomed to extinction by their creations. I have several reasons for believing this.
- Reaper interventionism. In ME3 the problem of synthetic organic onflict is brought up in two places, most notably by the Geth and Quarians. It is also brought up by Javik. He mentions a war called the Metacon War. He describes it as a galaxy consuming conflict between organics and synthetics. The Protheans in order to win the war tried to unite all organic life in the galaxy against the machines. Javik says that they were succesful and they had turned the tide when the Reapers arrived. This is very similar to the Quarian/Geth conflict because in both cases the organics were winning the war untl the Reapers interfered. To me this proves that organics are not doomed to extinction at the hands of synthetics.
- Peace between the Quarians and Geth. This one seems pretty self-explanatory. It proves that synthetics and organics can get along. Whether the peace will last is another matter entirely. The point is peace is possible without having to kill off both sides. This proves that Reaper Cycles are unnecessary to keep the peace.
Another reason I pick Destroy is because I am a strong believer in letting nature take its own course. We should allow the evolutionary process of natural selection to sort out the problems of the galaxy. We should not impose an artificially created solution to a problem of nature. This parallels the Salarian influence on the Krogan and the deployment of the Genophage. It may have been a good idea at the time, but in the end it should be up to nature to decide the fate of species. Essentially we do not have to go around imposing our own will on other beings.
- You may argue that my picking Destroy is hypocritical in this case because it kills the Geth and Reapers off. It seemingly invalidates them as living entities worthy of respect. I disagre with this. The Reapers have made a choice that does not allow for peaceful coexistence without either fundamentally altering every living being (Synthesis) or forcing an invalid conclusion on them to suit others (Control). I will not be responsible for changing every single living being without ther own consent, even iif it results in a good thing, and I do not think that changing the Catalyst is the solution to its "problem". I think the solution to its "problem" is to eliminate the Catalyst.
- Another reason that I do not see Destroy as hypocritical for wanting to maintain life is that I also see the ends being justified. I'm sorry to say it but I would rather sacrifice the Geth and Reapers than enslave them (Control) or change all life in the galaxy to suit them (Synthesis). As terrible as it ma seem to some of you, I think that their sacrifice is worth it in the end.
Those are the two main reasons that I pick Destroy over the other endings. I do not accept the Catalyst and its rasonings, and I believe in the right for life to self determinate and not be subject to the wills of another. I also have reasons for not picking Control, Synthesis, or Refuse, but that is not what this topic is for. I want to to know why you picked one ending over the others.
Hopefullt this will not get buried and we can all get a little perspective on why people made the decisions they did.
Thoughts?
Modifié par Steelcan, 14 novembre 2012 - 10:09 .
Retour en haut
