1388 réponses à ce sujet

[FlyingSquirrel]

clennon8 wrote...

I find dissonance in the self-attributed "open mindedness" of pro-Control and pro-Synthesis folks. Control and Synthesis both strike me as inherently cynical. It's as if you're saying organics are a bunch of doomed a-holes unless you impose a "solution" upon them. I say get rid of the effing Reapers and let the cards fall where they may.

Well, I don't believe that at all. My ideal solution would be to simply sever the Catalyst's link to the Reapers and deactivate the Reapers' advanced weaponry (so that if any of them *were* inclined to continue hostilities, they'd be unable to do so), and *then* let the cards fall where they may.

[o Ventus]

jtav wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I find dissonance in the self-attributed "open mindedness" of pro-Control and pro-Synthesis folks. Control and Synthesis both strike me as inherently cynical. It's as if you're saying organics are a bunch of doomed a-holes unless you impose a "solution" upon them. I say get rid of the effing Reapers and let the cards fall where they may.

Right about now I do beloeve that--that we are incapable of ruling ourselves with any degree of competence. It's anger talking but there it is. And I'd prefer to spare life in the hope that it eeventually grows up.

Please. Do us all a favor and don't even pretend to have any idea you know what you're talking about.

[clennon8]

FlyingSquirrel wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I find dissonance in the self-attributed "open mindedness" of pro-Control and pro-Synthesis folks. Control and Synthesis both strike me as inherently cynical. It's as if you're saying organics are a bunch of doomed a-holes unless you impose a "solution" upon them. I say get rid of the effing Reapers and let the cards fall where they may.

Well, I don't believe that at all. My ideal solution would be to simply sever the Catalyst's link to the Reapers and deactivate the Reapers' advanced weaponry (so that if any of them *were* inclined to continue hostilities, they'd be unable to do so), and *then* let the cards fall where they may.

But that isn't what happens, if the EC narration and slides are taken literally.  You guys can't pick and choose.  Are they literal or not?

[Iakus]

jtav wrote...

Absence of passion. The fact that it cannot be bought, intimidated our distracted. It has no vanity, no desire for anything other than to complete its onectives, but being based on a human mind should, in theory, prevent the same insanity as the Catalyst.

Ask me in a month and I'll be back to Synthesis, I'm sure.

The ShepReaper can't be bargained with, can't be reasoned with and absolutely will not stop.  Ever.

In other words, ShepReaper may lack passion, but also lacks COMpassion.  Having such a focus on its mandate is a terrifying prospect, as even to the paragon version, individual lives aare nothing but numbers to it.

[Samtheman63]

as long as the reapers are alive they are a threat

these arnt some chavs who got caught shop lifting, they are near indestructable death machines hell bend on cleansing the galaxy of advanced organic life. no one in the right mind would be fine with them still being around in any shape or form, this goes for control and synthesis.

Modifié par Samtheman63, 19 décembre 2012 - 07:08 .

[AlanC9]

CronoDragoon wrote...


Curious interpretations of Control and Synthesis. If Country A conquers Country B and instead of killing their soldiers assimilates them into their own army, that is hardly a status quo ante bellum. That's what happens in Control; The Reaper cycle is stopped and the Reapers are now controlled by Shepard-AI.

It's difficult to come up with a RW analog to the situation. After a civil war or failed secession the defeated forces can be integrated into the army of the victorious side, but by definition the defeated side has ceased to exist as a political entity. Though I guess it can still exist as a cultural force -- like the CSA, which has never really gone away.

[jtav]

@iakus

And right about now "freedom" looks like "the freedom to be stupid and cruel, to keep repeating the same mistakes because doing otherwise is just too much work and to crush each other to scramble for power and advance our own agendas. I'll take my chances with the machine. I know what we can do.

[Meltemph]

I didnt pick control, typically, because it was too perfect because of how little information we get at the end, and because of what happens.  The Mass Effect universe that I grew to love over 3 games would be changed beyond recognition with a overlord such as this.

My goal wasn't to stop the reapers, my goal was to save the universe that I grew to love inthe game, not turn it into something completely different. I guess I was being foolish the whole time I was playing these and hoping at the end of this, we could defeat the reapers, and then we would have new mass effect games that had more to do with the "setting" of mass effect.

The politics of a intergalactic community events, wars, politics, and ect, has much more appeal then anything else I could think of, BUT that is ruined by the ending.

Modifié par Meltemph, 19 décembre 2012 - 07:16 .

[AlanC9]

Meltemph wrote...


The politics of a intergalactic community events, wars, politics, and ect, has much more appeal then anything else I could think of, BUT that is ruined by the ending.

Meaning that in Destroy you've got a bunch of fragments rather than a galactic community, right? The relays will get fixed, but not anytime soon.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I won't choose it for the following reasons:

1. I wouldn't trust myself with that much power.
2. I definitely wouldn't trust my personality uploaded into a cold logical AI with that much power because I would have no moral control over it, because I would be dead.
3. The reapers are still around and thus a threat to everyone.
4. I'd rather keep my own form. I refuse this option.

I fight for freedom. Mine and everyone's. And if I die, I'll die knowing that I did everything I could to stop you, and I'll die free.

[Meltemph]

AlanC9 wrote...

Meltemph wrote...


The politics of a intergalactic community events, wars, politics, and ect, has much more appeal then anything else I could think of, BUT that is ruined by the ending.

Meaning that in Destroy you've got a bunch of fragments rather than a galactic community, right? The relays will get fixed, but not anytime soon.

I dont care "when" the next games take place but, only with destroy is there a chance for the things I mentioned to happen.  I dont like ANY of the endings, and dont think there really is one I "like" over the others, which is why my preference isnt based on anything, but what keeps Mass Effect universe most in tact, with out "cleaning it up" and making it boring.

Modifié par Meltemph, 19 décembre 2012 - 07:24 .

[Iakus]

jtav wrote...

@iakus

And right about now "freedom" looks like "the freedom to be stupid and cruel, to keep repeating the same mistakes because doing otherwise is just too much work and to crush each other to scramble for power and advance our own agendas. I'll take my chances with the machine. I know what we can do.

And we know what the Reapers can do, if anything ever goes wonky with ShepReaper

And even if things don't go totally squirrelly, with the Reapers running the show, no race will ever really grow or achieve their full potential.  They'll always be dependant on the Reapers to protect them from their own mistakes. 

Yes people can be cruel and selfish, but unless they stand on their own, they'll never grow up.  Never learn for themselves.  Never stand up for themselves.

[DeinonSlayer]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

I won't choose it for the following reasons:

1. I wouldn't trust myself with that much power.
2. I definitely wouldn't trust my personality uploaded into a cold logical AI with that much power because I would have no moral control over it, because I would be dead.
3. The reapers are still around and thus a threat to everyone.
4. I'd rather keep my own form. I refuse this option.

I fight for freedom. Mine and everyone's. And if I die, I'll die knowing that I did everything I could to stop you, and I'll die free.

Agree with your reasons against Control, but that doesn't improve the argument for refuse.

[dgcatanisiri]

I see Control as the worse of all the possible options. It's not just because of the fact that it's what the Illusive Man planned to do, though that's a part of it. The bigger part is the fact that there's an old saying about the kind of power that controlling the Reapers would offer: "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." Who's to say that in a handful of years, centuries, whatever, the Shepard AI won't decide to exert more influence at Reaper-point on the people of the galaxy? The one Shepard I've had who chose control was also the most broken Shepard I'd RP'ed, and his thoughts, his by-that-point death seeking, would be what created that Shepard AI. And I can't see that as anything but a recipe for disaster.

We've seen what an AI does with the Reapers, and we know what happens when a person gets that kind of power.  If Synthesis is full of too many unknowns for me to be comfortable taking it, Control is full of too many ‘we’ve done this before and it NEVER ends well’s.

[clennon8]

jtav wrote...

@iakus

And right about now "freedom" looks like "the freedom to be stupid and cruel, to keep repeating the same mistakes because doing otherwise is just too much work and to crush each other to scramble for power and advance our own agendas. I'll take my chances with the machine. I know what we can do.

Man.  You are just determined to go all the way down the rabbit hole.

[XXIceColdXX]

Not sure if serious.

[The Night Mammoth]

Because the narrative takes extra special care to tell just how evil the Reapers are for controlling people, emphasize how bad Cerberus testing indoctrination at Sanctuary on people is, and has the Illusive Man (ie. the game's antagonist and a massive d*ck) advocate it pretty much every time you see him before making him indoctrinated and then having you shoot him for trying to achieve this or have him shoot himself so he can't.

Basically, there's lot's of things going on that paint control as a bad thing.

I think it's more reasonable to ask why anyone would ever choose control, not the other way round. The only answer is people making a psuedo-moral choice in a vaccum. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 19 décembre 2012 - 07:47 .

[jtav]

clennon8 wrote...

jtav wrote...

@iakus

And right about now "freedom" looks like "the freedom to be stupid and cruel, to keep repeating the same mistakes because doing otherwise is just too much work and to crush each other to scramble for power and advance our own agendas. I'll take my chances with the machine. I know what we can do.

Man.  You are just determined to go all the way down the rabbit hole.

No, I'm just really really angry right now. If you want to know what's going on PM me here, TCR, or just email me.

[AlanC9]

Meltemph wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Meltemph wrote...
The politics of a intergalactic community events, wars, politics, and ect, has much more appeal then anything else I could think of, BUT that is ruined by the ending.

Meaning that in Destroy you've got a bunch of fragments rather than a galactic community, right? The relays will get fixed, but not anytime soon.

I dont care "when" the next games take place but, only with destroy is there a chance for the things I mentioned to happen.  I dont like ANY of the endings, and dont think there really is one I "like" over the others, which is why my preference isnt based on anything, but what keeps Mass Effect universe most in tact, with out "cleaning it up" and making it boring.

There's no particular reason to think that the Sheplyst would lead the galaxy into either stagnation or submission. There are plenty of SF examples of superior alien intelligences who don't do that even though they could do that. Including a fair number of AIs. 

But Destroy wouldn't be a bad way to continue the series.

[FlyingSquirrel]

clennon8 wrote...

FlyingSquirrel wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I find dissonance in the self-attributed "open mindedness" of pro-Control and pro-Synthesis folks. Control and Synthesis both strike me as inherently cynical. It's as if you're saying organics are a bunch of doomed a-holes unless you impose a "solution" upon them. I say get rid of the effing Reapers and let the cards fall where they may.

Well, I don't believe that at all. My ideal solution would be to simply sever the Catalyst's link to the Reapers and deactivate the Reapers' advanced weaponry (so that if any of them *were* inclined to continue hostilities, they'd be unable to do so), and *then* let the cards fall where they may.

But that isn't what happens, if the EC narration and slides are taken literally.  You guys can't pick and choose.  Are they literal or not?

No, it isn't, but Destroy and Refuse are even further away from that solution, at least IMO. I'm just saying that there are reasons for choosing Control or Synthesis that don't involve believing organics are inevitably self-destructive.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

There's no particular reason to think that the Sheplyst would lead the galaxy into either stagnation or submission. There are plenty of SF examples of superior alien intelligences who don't do that even though they could do that. Including a fair number of AIs. 

But Destroy wouldn't be a bad way to continue the series.

ShepReaper's closing speech makes it pretty clear it won't be a "hands off" technogod

Paragon version it talks of "building a future" for the rest of the galaxy

Renegade version talks of "being a strong leader" for the galaxy/

[Ieldra]

jtav wrote...
@iakus

And right about now "freedom" looks like "the freedom to be stupid and cruel, to keep repeating the same mistakes because doing otherwise is just too much work and to crush each other to scramble for power and advance our own agendas. I'll take my chances with the machine. I know what we can do.

Strange how from this perspective Control and Synthesis look like polar opposites: here the cynical choice, based on the idea that we're unable to govern ourselves without destroying ourselves, there the idealistic choice which empowers even the most jaded individual in the hope something better will emerge from it overall. 

As I see it, there is an evolutionary trend to more co-operation. Society grows more interdependent, what we do is becoming more complex. As a species, we are as children and we need to grow up. Eventually, some of the old mindsets will die out. Whether we need a more heavy-handed guide until we get to that point is an open question. Control asserts yes and keeps us in the nest for a while. Synthesis throws us out of the nest, kicking and screaming, into a bigger reality. The open question here is whether we can survive that.

[Meltemph]

There's no particular reason to think that the Sheplyst would lead the galaxy into either stagnation or submission. There are plenty of SF examples of superior alien intelligences who don't do that even though they could do that. Including a fair number of AIs.

Either way Mass Effect would be permanently changed with a super ai "in charge". I would like to keep it the way it was before the ending so I can actually experience the Mass Effect universe without some "black hole bad guy". I know hoping for that now though, based on what we got with 3 is a dream that will probably never happen, but still.

[Clayless]

They like to headcanon it as being bad.

That's your answer OP.

[HTTP 404]

my first ending choice was destroy because I truly didn't trust the control ending. If TIM thought control was possible then the Star child tells shepard he couldn't control because he was indoctrinated but TIM didn't realize it. I initially thought well I can't trust this kid or the reapers so I chose destroy. I know you said no indoctrination theory but this is what I was thinking when I finished the game the week it came out.

I do see the OP's point if only I can take everything at face value, I have a gut reaction to question everything. Control left too many questions unanswered to me. But with the Extended Cut, I have more answers but its too late I made my first choice that week Mass Effect 3 came out.

But with the extended cut I have a shepard that has a control ending but my main shepard will stick with destroy. 

Modifié par HTTP 404, 19 décembre 2012 - 07:54 .