CrutchCricket wrote...
None of which address the point at all: the morality of the choice itself. Though some of those issues are more valid than others, none of them are about the ethics of choosing control at all. Whether you personally like the idea or presentation has nothing to do with the ethics of it. Whether it works as intended is also irrelevant to the question "is it right to choose control?".
Morality is subjective. It was a point of contention when Morality missions showed up in City of Heroes. Some were happy with the status quo as presented; others thought that heroes going vigilante and then villain were decidely more evil than the equivalent villain missions.
For me the decisions of the chamber were reflected through the series:
AIs started as all-bad in ME1 but we were always pitted against them,. Geth, Reapers (since they were just AI by ME1 exposition) and all the other side-quest AIs. ME2 gave them a more greyish tone with Legion and EDI and that over time they could be friends if they were accepted as equals rather than treated as outcasts. ME3 painted the Geth as misunderstood and EDI as wanting to evolve and asking you for guidance. After all your input one thing was clear (for my mostly Paragon run); they were like children and with your guidance "they would rather risk no-functionality than be slaves to the Reapers". There's also Legion's loyalty mission that almost eveyrone is dead set against 'controlling' the heretics by rewriting them to be 'correct'.
ME2 basically proved Synthesis, by Reaper standards, was abhorrent. 'Everyone would be the same' and 'final evolution of life' were disgusting terms to me. I studied biology and the greatest strength of life is diversity not homogonisation. The only guy who mentions about everyone being the same is the Presidium Groundskeeper. That and it's a life-changing decision that shouldn't be made while under duress coupled with the Brat lecturing us that 'it is inevitable'.... well if it's inevitable then why aren't you waiting till it happens instead of killing everyone off every 50K years. He also makes no assurance that the cycleS plural will end. Saren was also the poster-child for synthesis and 'all his doubts disappeared' when he was implanted... then he either shoots himself because he realises he's wrong or tries to kill you and then his corpse is used as a golem by Sovereign to attack and kill Shepard.
This all leads to how the Reapers have presented themselves throughout the series; they think nothing of us and right at the point of victory their leader show up pretending to be a child to elicit sympathy, compassion, we're not sure because it's an AI that has no understanding of organics (bit like GlaDOS in Portal) beyond how to process them into putty and squish them into a crunchy Reaper shell. Then it goes 'yeah, you should be fine to control us'. Why? I just convinced TIM he was wrong and he shot himself because he couldn't stop the voices in his head from telling him 'Shepard is wrong, keep tell them that. Control is the key! Muahaha.... you can ignore that last bit'.
So I choose the common voice in all of my friends and allies summed up by my commander: "Dead Reapers is how we win this". We've tried for three games to destroy them. We halted and destroyed their Vanguard, we stopped their attempt at making the Human-Reaper and maybe blew up their foothold in the galaxy, the Collector base and for the bulk of ME3 we're gathering forces to stop them.
Then there was the change of character for Shepard. Barely five minutes after telling TIM he was wrong and a minute with this ghostly figure; he tells us 'you can do it Shepard' and then SHEPARD AGREES. My immersion at that point shattered. The child said 'you can do it', Shepard said 'okay' and then I went 'screw that'. Even my Paragon went red at that.
Retour en haut
:lol:
:whistle:![=]](https://lvlt.forum.bioware.com/public/style_emoticons/default/sideways.png)
