254 réponses à ce sujet

[Zebron is reaL]

I have this internal debate between synthesis and control, though I lean closer to the former because I haven't invented some insane head canon that goes against the clear implications of the closing cinematics.

I can understand the want for destroy, but the cost of victory is too high. My reasoning is that avoidable casualties are unacceptable and the idea of killing an entire species is abhorrent. So control works, but the closing narration for synthesis wins it out for me though.

[Laforgus]

Steelcan wrote...

If BioWare canonized an ending would you switch to that ending?

There is nothing as Switch to an Ending, since i am certain that everyoen have replayed the game and choosen a different ending each time they play.

But what we have is, a favoritism for one of them. "You have many clothes in the closet, but there is a set you like more" that are the Endings.

"Nothing is true, everything is permitted."

All of these are the Real Endings you just side to the one you like more; if Control is cannonized in the next game, is ok for me.

"I acept it, but i liked destroy more thought"

Modifié par Laforgus, 23 novembre 2012 - 07:48 .

[Sheridan31]

I picked destroy because i coudn´t relate to what starchilds problem was. He didn´t explained to me why "the created always rebell against the creators" makes it nessecary to do something to EDI and all others. I´d like to confront him about it but i saw no button to.

So i walked on with: "I dunno, just wanne end the reaper thread." Red seems to work to me. Don´t have nessecary a problem with controle or synthesis thought.

Just don´t understand why starchild coun´t just turn the plug and let me kiss and hug my teammates. At least i saw some folks again in the extend cut. Could someone rescue me? I am underneath the garbage? Hello?

[Shortstuff820]

I choose the ending based on my Shepard's character, but I favor Control for several reasons:

1. Everybody lives (more or less including Shepard).
2. It reflects a Paragon vs. Renegade Shepard.
3. It makes the most sense without being too simple or having too much space magic.
4. Shepard is immortal and has power over the galaxy, which is a cool and fitting fate for our protagonist whether you're Paragon or Renegade.
5. Under Shepard's control, the Reapers fix the relays and rebuild societies.

[Steelcan]

Shortstuff820 wrote...

I choose the ending based on my Shepard's character, but I favor Control for several reasons:

1. Everybody lives (more or less including Shepard).
2. It reflects a Paragon vs. Renegade Shepard.
3. It makes the most sense without being too simple or having too much space magic.
4. Shepard is immortal and has power over the galaxy, which is a cool and fitting fate for our protagonist whether you're Paragon or Renegade.
5. Under Shepard's control, the Reapers fix the relays and rebuild societies.

its not actually Shepard, Control is giving the Catalyst an update with Shepard's personality and memories but Shepard is dead as a door nail.

[Cactus11]

Steelcan wrote...

Shortstuff820 wrote...

I choose the ending based on my Shepard's character, but I favor Control for several reasons:

1. Everybody lives (more or less including Shepard).
2. It reflects a Paragon vs. Renegade Shepard.
3. It makes the most sense without being too simple or having too much space magic.
4. Shepard is immortal and has power over the galaxy, which is a cool and fitting fate for our protagonist whether you're Paragon or Renegade.
5. Under Shepard's control, the Reapers fix the relays and rebuild societies.

its not actually Shepard, Control is giving the Catalyst an update with Shepard's personality and memories but Shepard is dead as a door nail.

To be honest, I don't see it making too much sense. I agree that Shepard himself is dead as a doornail, and I think a tweet by Jessica at one point even made it clear that the Shepard we knew would be no more.  Secondly, we see the reapers rebuild , but can we honestly believe that the cycle will never start again?  I also dont agree that Paragon or Renegade makes much sense, because a Renegade Shepard would have used his power to continue the reapers work, in my opinion, and just turned on the alliance ships immediately.

At any rate, I chose the Destroy ending.  There is simply no way anyone in that situation should or could trust the Catalyst to tell the truth. It just made zero sense to trust him.  Destroy wipes out the geth, but people consistently mistake artificial intelligence (even REALLY REALLY good artificial intelligence) as a species or posessing "life."  I just don't believe that's the case whatsoever.   Humanity tends to give emotional attributes to things that do not have them and thus we feel compassion, perhaps foolishly.  What's funny to me is that some folks have no problem with choosing Control, which they believe will somehow incorporate Shepards will into the Reaper consciousness thus essentially taking control of all of the reapers and ELIMINATING reaper consciousness to a degree or Synthesis where Shepard makes the decision on behalf of ALL ORGANICS.  No one sees that these choices also amount to a kind of genocide, assuming you consider the elimination of artifical intelligence genoice, which I technically don't.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I pick my ending because the reapers are destroyed, Shepard lives and is reunited with her crew and her LI. The Geth and Quarians survive. EDI survives. See my signature.

[o Ventus]

Because I know the geth can be rebuilt. EDI's loss will be sad, but that's war. EDI, Glyph, and the Shepard VI are the only real casualties of Destroy.

[Falcon084]

Synthesis because:

[AlanC9]

o Ventus wrote...

Because I know the geth can be rebuilt. EDI's loss will be sad, but that's war. EDI, Glyph, and the Shepard VI are the only real casualties of Destroy.

How do you know that?

Yeah, I know...... headcanon rules.

Modifié par AlanC9, 24 novembre 2012 - 05:56 .

[AlanC9]

Cactus11 wrote...

At any rate, I chose the Destroy ending.  There is simply no way anyone in that situation should or could trust the Catalyst to tell the truth. It just made zero sense to trust him.  Destroy wipes out the geth, 

So you don't trust the Catalyst except when he tells you that shooting the tube will destroy the Reapers? That part you trust?

As for me, most of my Sheps found Destroy unacceptable, Synthesis unnecessary, and Refuse idiotic. Which leaves Control.

Modifié par AlanC9, 24 novembre 2012 - 06:01 .

[Davik Kang]

AlanC9 wrote...
So you don't trust the Catalyst except when he tells you that shooting the tube will destroy the Reapers? That part you trust?

He doesn't tell you that at any point.

[AlanC9]

Davik Kang wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
So you don't trust the Catalyst except when he tells you that shooting the tube will destroy the Reapers? That part you trust?

He doesn't tell you that at any point.

Heh. Right. Point still stands. If you don't trust the other options are what they're supposed to be, why trust Destroy?

[Davik Kang]

AlanC9 wrote...
Heh. Right. Point still stands. If you don't trust the other options are what they're supposed to be, why trust Destroy?

Personally I don't know if Control or Synthesis were possible, I just wasn't comfortable with becoming the Reaper Overlord after we'd fought against TIM the entire game and his quest to control them.  And altering everyone's DNA seems completely insane.  I could be wrong of course, this was just my reasoning at the time.

This made me think the Kid might be trying to trick us (indoctrinate if you like, convince if you don't).

The reason I think Destroy is possible is because we built the Crucible to Destroy the Reapers.  If it isn't capable of doing so, what else can we do?  If Destroy isn't possible then we've been had anyway.

[Bob Garbage]

I've picked all of them in different play throughs. None of them are my Shepard's ending ,he'll never get one unfortunately.

[AlanC9]

Davik Kang wrote...
Personally I don't know if Control or Synthesis were possible, I just wasn't comfortable with becoming the Reaper Overlord after we'd fought against TIM the entire game and his quest to control them.  And altering everyone's DNA seems completely insane.  I could be wrong of course, this was just my reasoning at the time.

This made me think the Kid might be trying to trick us (indoctrinate if you like, convince if you don't).

I don't follow the logic here. Not being comfortable with becoming the Reaper Overlord is reasonable, but how does that mean that becoming the Reaper overlord is a trick? As opposed to just being a choice that you aren't comfortable with.

The reason I think Destroy is possible is because we built the Crucible to Destroy the Reapers.  If it isn't capable of doing so, what else can we do?  If Destroy isn't possible then we've been had anyway.

This doesn't have anything to do with what Shepard does when he's at the Crucible. If you don't trust in what he's told is going on there, then how can you trust that the action you think is going to trigger Destroy will actually trigger Destroy? Why wouldn't it trigger Synthesis instead? Or do nothing at all?

Also note that in low EMS Control may be your only choice, depending on your ME2 end choice.

[Davik Kang]

AlanC9 wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...
Personally I don't know if Control or Synthesis were possible, I just wasn't comfortable with becoming the Reaper Overlord after we'd fought against TIM the entire game and his quest to control them.  And altering everyone's DNA seems completely insane.  I could be wrong of course, this was just my reasoning at the time.

This made me think the Kid might be trying to trick us (indoctrinate if you like, convince if you don't).

I don't follow the logic here. Not being comfortable with becoming the Reaper Overlord is reasonable, but how does that mean that becoming the Reaper overlord is a trick? As opposed to just being a choice that you aren't comfortable with.

It doesn't mean it's a trick, it's something that made something click.  I can't demonstrate that it was a trick, I just thought it might be (which is what I said).  It made sense so I went with it.  I might have been wrong, I don't know.  It's what I thought.

The reasoning I guess is along the lines of 'too good to be true'.  I'm being presented with a previously unavailable choice of controlling the Reapers.  Who will "obey me".  It came out of nowhere, and is now bring presented by a hologram who looks like a child I see in my dreams.  There options seemed so bizarre as to make me think that something might not be as it seemed.

I couldn't know for sure that the final scene was an illusion or trick, but it made sense to me.  It was a new goal contrary to the goal all along (destroying the Reapers) and it was being presented by a being who admitted to controlling the Reapers - i.e. the kid represented the Reapers as a leader figure.  We know they use indoctrination as a primary tool, and we'd just spoken to TIM about his belief that Control was possible being a result of his indoctrination at the Reapers' hands.

So in other words, I didn't discover it was definitely deceit - it just occured to me and helped make sense of an otherwordly situation.

AlanC9 wrote...

The reason I think Destroy is possible is because we built the Crucible to Destroy the Reapers.  If it isn't capable of doing so, what else can we do?  If Destroy isn't possible then we've been had anyway.

This doesn't have anything to do with what Shepard does when he's at the Crucible. If you don't trust in what he's told is going on there, then how can you trust that the action you think is going to trigger Destroy will actually trigger Destroy? Why wouldn't it trigger Synthesis instead? Or do nothing at all?

Also note that in low EMS Control may be your only choice, depending on your ME2 end choice.

It does though.  We came here to destroy the Reapers.  How can we try to destroy the Reapers other than selecting the option that supposedly destroys the Reapers?  We don't know it will work, sure, but what else can we do?

The different effects of EMS and the limited choices at low EMS definitely suggest that the Crucible itself does have an impact on the choices, and so suggests that they are at least somewhat real.  I agree with that (you probably don't remember but you've posted in the thread I made where I explained what I think happened, it's not the same as IT).

[Steelcan]

Bump

[Spectreshadow]

Since the beginning my goal has been to destroy the Reapers regardless of causalities. It was an easy selection for me.

[RiptideX1090]

Because I fight for freedom. Mine, and everyone's. And if I die, I'll die knowing I did everything I could to stop the Catalyst.

And I'll die knowing I succeeded.

That's why I pick destruction. For freedom. To free the galaxy of the Reapers once and for all.

[T-Raks]

Because destroying the Reapers is the best solution for the galactic community enabling a natural evolution without the fear of the return of the Reapers.

[The Spamming Troll]

i dont understand how people can say they picked their ending based off of knowing what the other endings ended up with.

within that decision you dont know what refusing would lead to or what the heck synthesis is.

its like pople are basing their ending ideas by comparing the 4 endings one agsisnt the other. i dont get it.

the answer to this question should be the ending that you first picked, the one where you didnt know what the other endings would lead to. for me, i picked destroy simply because its labeled destroy. that made enough sense to me and thts precisely why i shot the tube.

[Kawamura]

I picked synthesis because it was 2:00 AM and I like the colour green.

At that point, I was certain it wasn't going to matter because my Shep was going to wake up and the fight was going to continue. So I waited and .. uh. It kept getting stupider. And I waited. I left the credits up and waited for the post-"credits" gaming sequence and got the "Buy our DLC! 8D" message.

So I reloaded and tried each and each was the same.

Then I mocked the ending with a lab partner who had been waiting for me to see it (we both agreed it was complete ****), went home, mentally rewrote the ending and, tada! I picked the ending that sounded a lot like IT and at the end, Shep's crew snapped him out of it, they fought the Reapers and, after heavy losses, they won. And Shep and Kaidan were permanent "room mates" and Shep continued his brOTP with Garrus and everyone mourned what they had lost, celebrated in their victory and set about rebuilding while that ME main theme picked up in the background.

It was a pretty good ending, I think. Shame BW couldn't think of it.It gave me the same fuzzy feels from the end of ME1 and ME2.

[Falcon084]

This is what I hate. Why does anyone pick one ending? Do you only have one character?

[millahnna]

My first shep went with Destroy (both pre and post extended cut) but really had to debate about it. Actually I had to put down the controller and walk away for a bit I was so torn by the choice (mostly the obvious stuff, edi and geth, yada yada). She was tempted by synthesis but just selfish enough to want to stand a chance at survival and she felt really uncomfortable forcing the synthesis choice on the galaxy. It sort of ran counter to how I played her (she always let her squaddies make their own mistakes when given the option).

Xbox ate my save games so now I'm replaying the whole trilogy with a different shep but one who has a similar moral compass to the first one I played with. I think that this one will be tempted by control more than synthesis but I'm a theatre nerd so my rpgs are always informed by the roleplay aspect more than anything else. We'll see what happens when I get that far.

I want to do a male shep (if I can handle Meer's voice which has never really worked for me) that's more renegade than my other characters have been. He'll probably go with control but I'm not sure yet. I've never written fanfiction but if I did he'd be the character I wrote about.