1388 réponses à ce sujet

[DirtyPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Or he could simply be an authoritarian leader, which in itself is not wrong in my eyes and when I look at democracy right now and all it's failures...well then I wouldn' support it.

I 100% agree,

[Xilizhra]

Yes, of course. My Shepard believes in individual freedom and he was given a completely rotten deal. Consciously sacrifice a whole sentient speices, create an all-powerful tyrant in his own image, or violate the basic self of every living being in the Galaxy without their consent. I abhor killing the Geth, I just find that the other choices are even more unacceptable. I prefer destroy, but only as the lesser of three evils, but I was quite insulted that there was no mention of the death of the Geth even in the extended cut. I think I should have been forced to see the consequences of my actions.

Given that there's no reason to believe in actual tyranny, I consider Control by far the safest option. It may not be optimal, but it solves the problem with no death and without consequences that are impossible to predict.

Because, quite frankly, Control is a big bag of arse. You're replacing one AI with another AI. It solves nothing.

It solves every problem in the game that you set out to.

[AlexMBrennan]

In that case, you're using ignorance as a defense, and that only works in ME3 if you believe that the entire scene is a hallucination

It doesn't become truth if you state it emphatically. Either explain why "hallucination" is the only such reason, or don't bother bringing it up at all.

Because, quite frankly, Control is a big bag of arse. You're replacing one AI with another AI. It solves nothing

That is what Shepard can reasonably know at the point when the decision is made.

It solves every problem in the game that you set out to.

Whereas here you are assuming knowledge on the outcome.

What's your idea of solid investment advice - "Know the winning lottery numbers"?

Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 20 décembre 2012 - 02:37 .

[Xilizhra]

It doesn't become truth if you state it emphatically. Either explain why "hallucination" is the only such reason, or don't bother bringing it up at all.

It's the only reason because otherwise, you're trusting the Catalyst that the things will do what it says they'll do, and it says that synthetic life will be destroyed.

Whereas here you are assuming knowledge on the outcome.

What's your idea of solid investment advice - "Know the winning lottery numbers"?

As the Catalyst will have an imprint of Shepard's personality onto it, it can be assumed that Control will work to stop the Reapers' harvest.

[Someone With Mass]

Xilizhra wrote...

Given that there's no reason to believe in actual tyranny, I consider Control by far the safest option. It may not be optimal, but it solves the problem with no death and without consequences that are impossible to predict.

Unless Shepard is Renegade. Then there will be plenty of deaths, according to the AI's speech.

[Xandurpein]

Xilizhra wrote...

Yes, of course. My Shepard believes in individual freedom and he was given a completely rotten deal. Consciously sacrifice a whole sentient speices, create an all-powerful tyrant in his own image, or violate the basic self of every living being in the Galaxy without their consent. I abhor killing the Geth, I just find that the other choices are even more unacceptable. I prefer destroy, but only as the lesser of three evils, but I was quite insulted that there was no mention of the death of the Geth even in the extended cut. I think I should have been forced to see the consequences of my actions.

Given that there's no reason to believe in actual tyranny, I consider Control by far the safest option. It may not be optimal, but it solves the problem with no death and without consequences that are impossible to predict.

I believe there are plenty of reasons to believe differently from what you do, and I think I have explained why in other posts on this thread. And I think that creating a Reaper-shep falls precisely in the category of "consequences that are impossible to predict".

I believe that the whole idea of a "benevolent dictator" is an illusion based on the rather egocentric view  that "if only I could rule the world, everything would be fine".

[Xilizhra]

Unless Shepard is Renegade. Then there will be plenty of deaths, according to the AI's speech.

It could be, but I don't play Renegades and that outcome is not relevant to me.

I believe there are plenty of reasons to believe differently from what you do, and I think I have explained why in other posts on this thread. And I think that creating a Reaper-shep falls precisely in the category of "consequences that are impossible to predict".

I disagree; it's not more impossible to predict than Destroy. If you don't trust that the Catalyst's plans will stay within their confines, any could go horribly wrong; Destroy might attack all synthetic material somehow and not just all synthetic life, inflicting total technological apocalypse on the galaxy. For instance. Anything could lead to a horribly wrong outcome if you believe it might, and no choice is better than any other in that regard.

I believe that the whole idea of a "benevolent dictator" is an illusion based on the rather egocentric view that "if only I could rule the world, everything would be fine".

It's possible that there are better solutions in theory, but none of them are here when making this decision.

[AlexMBrennan]

As the Catalyst will have an imprint of Shepard's personality onto it, it can be assumed that Control will work to stop the Reapers' harvest.

No. Shepard set out to stop the Reapers without creating an even worse problem (by your argument, blowing up the entire galaxy would have been a viable solution since it stops the Reapers by wiping out all harvest-able targets)

Control leaves an AI entity (with an imprint of Shepard's personality) in control of the Reaper fleet. Without assuming knowledge of the epilogue, Shepard has no assurances that the AI entity won't come up with another mad scheme that's just as bad as Godchild's.

What reason do you have to believe that the AI entity (with an imprint of Shepard's personality) is any different from Godchild? Any such reason would necessarily require some knowledge over how Godchild was created - but we do not have any knowledge apart from what little Godchild (the series' designated villain) tells you.

This choice at the end is obviously reminiscent of the ToB ending where you are given a similar choice (good/evil divine or mortal). However, it is significantly different in the source of exposition (the solar has proven trustworthy whereas Godchild... not so much) and completely fails as a result.
You cannot expect the player to believe that the hero, having fought their way into the villain's lair and rigged it to explode, would just take the villain's word him not being a villain and leave.

Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 20 décembre 2012 - 02:54 .

[Xilizhra]

Control leaves an AI entity (with an imprint of Shepard's personality) in control of the Reaper fleet. Without assuming knowledge of the epilogue, Shepard has no assurances that the AI entity won't come up with another mad scheme that's just as bad as Godchild's.

Again, there's no actual knowledge of any ending's outcomes; any could go bad, if you assume that the Catalyst might be wrong.

What reason do you have to believe that the AI entity (with an imprint of Shepard's personality) is any different from Godchild? Any such reason would necessarily require some knowledge over how Godchild was created - but we do not have any knowledge apart from what little Godchild (the series' designated villain) tells you.

I don't see the Catalyst as a villain, per se; it doesn't seem to have enough volition or free will. It has a purpose, will not deviate from that purpose, and has no real compunctions about dying and being replaced if it would serve the purpose better. However, the Catalyst does seem to have a personality somewhat modeled after the Leviathans, which I can discern in the DLC and apply to the Catalyst; I can use this as a means of extrapolating differences with Shepard.

[The Heretic of Time]

klarabella wrote...

He is still the leader of an army. And the only thing the leader of an army can do is go to war against those who oppose him or threaten to go to war against those who oppose him (hoping they will back down before it comes to this).

No, that's not the right way to look at it. It's better to see the reapers as a police force in the control ending, especially in the Paragon control ending.

You might want to imagine that the Shepalyst will eventually become more than the leader of the Reaper forces but that's headcanon. Shepard's AI copy is probably not supposed to be a politician and get a holo emitter to speak in front of the Council. 

As much as in that your assumption that the Shepard AI can't be a diplomatic politician or can't create a hologram of himself is headcanon. If the Starchild Catalyst can do it, than so can the Shepard Catalyst.

What will Paragon Shep use for good and how? 

The reapers. And he'll use them as protectors of the weak and guardians of the many. Heck, even Renegade Shepard will do this.

The Reapers will help reconstruct. We know that. That's certainly a good thing. But Renegade Shep has them help rebuild, too, right? So beyond that, what can paragon Shep possibly do with an army of giant machines and an army of husks other than leaving them alone?

Use them as a police force when things get out of hand and the galaxy is unable to settle their own disputes.

Well, your imagination is pretty limited, too, it seems. You didn't answer, just waved your hands and explained earnestly: Paragon Shep will use his army of doom for good.

I waved my hand at what exactly? You say you can't imagine Shepard using the reapers for a good cause. That's obviously your limitation. Use your imagination a bit. It's not difficult to think of a way of how to use the reapers for good. Hell, we already see a fine example in the epilogue slides, where the reapers are used to help rebuilt the galaxy. That's certainly a good thing, isn't it?

The difference is: We certainly expect the Renegade Shepalyst to have a shorter fuse. And we expect him to be all "DO OR ELSE" while we probably see a Paragon Shepalyst saying "DON'T OR ELSE": The difference is very small because after that the Reapers will start to shoot or begin to indoctrinate. 

So? The police in real-life does exactly the same. So does the army. Got a problem with that?

[Ticonderoga117]

Why do I not like Control?

1. It's contrived? Want me to control the Reapers? I'll just tell GlowBoy there. No need for the idiot test.
2. It's only a copy of Shep's mind. Not actually him.
3. No guarantee that fake!Shep won't fall into the same idiot loop the GlowBoy did.
4. Reapers are still around.

[Xandurpein]

Xilizhra wrote...

I disagree; it's not more impossible to predict than Destroy. If you don't trust that the Catalyst's plans will stay within their confines, any could go horribly wrong; Destroy might attack all synthetic material somehow and not just all synthetic life, inflicting total technological apocalypse on the galaxy. For instance. Anything could lead to a horribly wrong outcome if you believe it might, and no choice is better than any other in that regard.

And I believe that leaving a gigantic machine god still at large in the Galaxy is a far too great threat to the freedom of everyone else. Even if Reaper-Shep keeps a large portion of the original paragon Shepard's mind, the problems would outweigh the gains by far. Instead of rebuilding the Galaxy peacefully, all races will funnel enormous recources into arms research, because everyone will want to build a Reaper-killer weapon to balance them and so on.

If I knew with certainty that Reaper-Shepard would accept seeing his reapers become marginalized when the races of the galaxy overtake the reapers technologically and then surpass them, I might consider it. Then time would make Reaper-shep just a paranthesis in history. Unfortunately the Catalyst own words are a bit too chilling here, when he predicts that in time Reaper-shep will think like him.

[The Heretic of Time]

Xandurpein wrote...

Which is why I believe that Control is a really, really bad choice. Just the fact that you assume Robo-Shep is near omni-scient is kind of scary. Since when does the fusion of a deeply flawed AI and human become omni-scient?

Since the fact that Robo-Shep will have eyes and ears all over the galaxy (all the reaper forces function as an extention of him, they are his eyes and ears). That makes him rather close to being omniscient, doesn't it? And there is nothing wrong with that.

Also, nothing is fused in the Control ending. The idea that Shepard is fused with the Catalyst AI is pure headcanon, very bad headcanon too. You seem to have a very flawed understanding of how the Control ending works. When I upgrade my PC from Windows 7 to Windows 8 I'm most certainly not fusing anything.

I know it's just a game, but I have to say that I'm a bit disturbed by the lack of respect for and understanding of the basic principles of democracy I see on this thread.

I understand democracy well enough to know that it's a flawed system. That's all I need to say about it. It's also completely unrelated to this topic by the way.

[The Heretic of Time]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Given that there's no reason to believe in actual tyranny, I consider Control by far the safest option. It may not be optimal, but it solves the problem with no death and without consequences that are impossible to predict.

Unless Shepard is Renegade. Then there will be plenty of deaths, according to the AI's speech.

Lets not mix up our headcanons with actual canon here. No where does anyone in ME3 say that the Renegade Control ending will end with a massacre.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 20 décembre 2012 - 03:09 .

[Xandurpein]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

klarabella wrote...

The difference is: We certainly expect the Renegade Shepalyst to have a shorter fuse. And we expect him to be all "DO OR ELSE" while we probably see a Paragon Shepalyst saying "DON'T OR ELSE": The difference is very small because after that the Reapers will start to shoot or begin to indoctrinate. 

So? The police in real-life does exactly the same. So does the army. Got a problem with that?

Once again, you are confusing the power to enforce laws with the power to make them. If Shepard only enforces laws he can be imagined as a galactic police. It's the fact that he also makes the laws that are the problem. Robo-Shepard is a two milliion ton lazor-destructor armed Judge Dredd, answerable to no one, and yes - I do have a problem with that!

Modifié par Xandurpein, 20 décembre 2012 - 03:10 .

[The Heretic of Time]

Xandurpein wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

klarabella wrote...

The difference is: We certainly expect the Renegade Shepalyst to have a shorter fuse. And we expect him to be all "DO OR ELSE" while we probably see a Paragon Shepalyst saying "DON'T OR ELSE": The difference is very small because after that the Reapers will start to shoot or begin to indoctrinate. 

So? The police in real-life does exactly the same. So does the army. Got a problem with that?

Once again, you are confusing the power to enforce laws with the power to make them. If Shepard only enforces laws he can be imagined as a galactic police. It's the fact that he also makes the laws that are the problem. Shepard is a two thousand ton lazor-destructor armed Judge Dredd, answerable to no one, and yes - I do have a problem with that!

I'm not confusing anything. You do realize the police force and the army are an extension of the politicians who make the laws, right? They're essentialy the same as the reapers if you look at it like this:


Shepard = government/politicians

Reapers = army/police


I think it's you who's confusing how real-life works.



if you're religious (or even if you aren't), you could also see it like this:


Shepard = God

Reapers = angels

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 20 décembre 2012 - 03:13 .

[Vigilant111]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
I'm not confusing anything. You do realize the police force and the army are an extension of the politicians who make the laws, right? They're essentialy the same as the reapers if you look at it like this:


Shepard = government/politicians

Reapers = army/police


I think it's you who's confusing how real-life works.

Who does this "government" answer to?

Modifié par Vigilant111, 20 décembre 2012 - 03:15 .

[The Heretic of Time]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

klarabella wrote...

The difference is: We certainly expect the Renegade Shepalyst to have a shorter fuse. And we expect him to be all "DO OR ELSE" while we probably see a Paragon Shepalyst saying "DON'T OR ELSE": The difference is very small because after that the Reapers will start to shoot or begin to indoctrinate. 

So? The police in real-life does exactly the same. So does the army. Got a problem with that?

Once again, you are confusing the power to enforce laws with the power to make them. If Shepard only enforces laws he can be imagined as a galactic police. It's the fact that he also makes the laws that are the problem. Shepard is a two thousand ton lazor-destructor armed Judge Dredd, answerable to no one, and yes - I do have a problem with that!

I'm not confusing anything. You do realize the police force and the army are an extension of the politicians who make the laws, right? They're essentialy the same as the reapers if you look at it like this:


Shepard = government/politicians

Reapers = army/police


I think it's you who's confusing how real-life works.

Who does this government answer to?

You mean Shepard Catalyst? That depends on him. I wouldn't know that and neither do you. All we can do is speculate or headcanon what our own Shepard would do in that ending.


Edit: But since Shepard Catalyst could easily start reaping again, I assume that in the end, he answers to no-one but himself.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 20 décembre 2012 - 03:19 .

[Xandurpein]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

klarabella wrote...

The difference is: We certainly expect the Renegade Shepalyst to have a shorter fuse. And we expect him to be all "DO OR ELSE" while we probably see a Paragon Shepalyst saying "DON'T OR ELSE": The difference is very small because after that the Reapers will start to shoot or begin to indoctrinate. 

So? The police in real-life does exactly the same. So does the army. Got a problem with that?

Once again, you are confusing the power to enforce laws with the power to make them. If Shepard only enforces laws he can be imagined as a galactic police. It's the fact that he also makes the laws that are the problem. Shepard is a two thousand ton lazor-destructor armed Judge Dredd, answerable to no one, and yes - I do have a problem with that!

I'm not confusing anything. You do realize the police force and the army are an extension of the politicians who make the laws, right? They're essentialy the same as the reapers if you look at it like this:

Shepard = government/politicians

Reapers = army/police

I think it's you who's confusing how real-life works.

I still don't see an electorate. All I see is a general Robo-shep whose sole authority rests on his ability to wield supreme force. He makes his own laws and is answerable to no one. That's still a pretty scary outlook to me.

[CronoDragoon]

The Reapers are more tools for Shepard than separate entities agreeing to obey his commands. Armies can rebel and pull coups. The Reapers can't. They are more weapons than anything. Shepard is both lawmaker and law-enforcer.

It's entirely possible that he will be detached and a great ruler. In some sense I think gamers will be more okay with this than they realize; how many RPGs have you played where there is a monarch on the good side, and he still rules at the end of the game? But the player is okay with it because they are a great person who respects the people. I didn't see many DA Origins threads upset you couldn't overthrow the Thedas monarchy and install a democracy.

There are a few differences. One is that Shepard is forever the ruler, whereas mortal rulers change (for better or worse). Another is that Shepard is not really Shepard; he's a data simulation of Shepard's beliefs and morals. It's not really a human at all ruling. Things could suddenly go horribly wrong at the drop of a hat.

Edit: Perhaps the most important difference is the possibility for correction. Mortal monarchs can be overthrown. Can Shepard-AI? It's an interesting question and the more I think about it the more fascinating an ME4 with Control would be.

(I'm a canon Destroy guy but IF ME4 continues the story, Control seems the most fertile ending to me)

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 20 décembre 2012 - 03:23 .

[Xandurpein]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

if you're religious (or even if you aren't), you could also see it like this:

Shepard = God

Reapers = angels

Which is one more reason why I will not chose Control.

[Xilizhra]

Xandurpein wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I disagree; it's not more impossible to predict than Destroy. If you don't trust that the Catalyst's plans will stay within their confines, any could go horribly wrong; Destroy might attack all synthetic material somehow and not just all synthetic life, inflicting total technological apocalypse on the galaxy. For instance. Anything could lead to a horribly wrong outcome if you believe it might, and no choice is better than any other in that regard.

And I believe that leaving a gigantic machine god still at large in the Galaxy is a far too great threat to the freedom of everyone else. Even if Reaper-Shep keeps a large portion of the original paragon Shepard's mind, the problems would outweigh the gains by far. Instead of rebuilding the Galaxy peacefully, all races will funnel enormous recources into arms research, because everyone will want to build a Reaper-killer weapon to balance them and so on.

If I knew with certainty that Reaper-Shepard would accept seeing his reapers become marginalized when the races of the galaxy overtake the reapers technologically and then surpass them, I might consider it. Then time would make Reaper-shep just a paranthesis in history. Unfortunately the Catalyst own words are a bit too chilling here, when he predicts that in time Reaper-shep will think like him.

Why would there be such a need? I would think it more likely that many would want to work to upgrade the Reapers even more, so that they can stay on the most winning side. It isn't as though I'd allow the Reapers to stagnate technologically.

[The Heretic of Time]

Xandurpein wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

klarabella wrote...

The difference is: We certainly expect the Renegade Shepalyst to have a shorter fuse. And we expect him to be all "DO OR ELSE" while we probably see a Paragon Shepalyst saying "DON'T OR ELSE": The difference is very small because after that the Reapers will start to shoot or begin to indoctrinate. 

So? The police in real-life does exactly the same. So does the army. Got a problem with that?

Once again, you are confusing the power to enforce laws with the power to make them. If Shepard only enforces laws he can be imagined as a galactic police. It's the fact that he also makes the laws that are the problem. Shepard is a two thousand ton lazor-destructor armed Judge Dredd, answerable to no one, and yes - I do have a problem with that!

I'm not confusing anything. You do realize the police force and the army are an extension of the politicians who make the laws, right? They're essentialy the same as the reapers if you look at it like this:

Shepard = government/politicians

Reapers = army/police

I think it's you who's confusing how real-life works.

I still don't see an electorate. All I see is a general Robo-shep whose sole authority rests on his ability to wield supreme force. He makes his own laws and is answerable to no one. That's still a pretty scary outlook to me.

I guess you find the idea of an almighty God watching over us also pretty scary? Not that I'm a believer by the way, I'm pretty much an atheist. But in hindsight I think The Shepard Catalyst is closer to a God than an actual political leader.

[Xandurpein]

CronoDragoon wrote...

It's entirely possible that he will be detached and a great ruler. In some sense I think gamers will be more okay with this than they realize; how many RPGs have you played where there is a monarch on the good side, and he still rules at the end of the game? But the player is okay with it because they are a great person who respects the people. I didn't see many DA Origins threads upset you couldn't overthrow the Thedas monarchy and install a democracy.

Apparently the only real objection that a lot of people have about dictatorship is that it's not they who are the dictator.

[The Heretic of Time]

Xandurpein wrote...

Unfortunately the Catalyst own words are a bit too chilling here, when he predicts that in time Reaper-shep will think like him.

And where exactly does the Catalyst say that? I don't recall him saying any such thing in my game. Care to quote him or show me where he says it in a video?