1388 réponses à ce sujet

[SeptimusMagistos]

Rifneno wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Put an end to the bickering of the many.  Destroy those who threaten the future of the many.  No, no unpleasant implications at all, are there?

Only in Control, Xilizhra.  ONLY in Control.

In what way is this different from what Shepard did as a human? Prevent wars, gun down bad guys, maybe do some fetch quests. Sounds good. Where's the problem?

I'd explain it, but I doubt you could hear it with your head stuck so far down in that sand.

Please try. Shepard has always imposed his morality on others. I just want to hear why that suddenly becomes a bad thing now that he can do it to more people at once.

[ElSuperGecko]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...
In what way is this different from what Shepard did as a human? Prevent wars, gun down bad guys, maybe do some fetch quests. Sounds good. Where's the problem?

Hey, don't get mad at me.  I'm just highlighting the actual game dialogue!

But to answer your question, the problem is that when Shepard acted as a human, (s)he was ultimately answerable for their actions.  Either to the Council, the Alliance, God, whoever.

HOWEVER - in Control, the AI formed from Shepard is not answerable to anyone.  Quite the opposite, in fact - everyone and everything else is answerable to the new AI.  Just like the Catalyst before it, it is free to act with complete impunity.

CronoDragoon wrote...
And, you know, throughout the series.

The problem exists in the unbelievable scale to which Shepard in Control can now do this without anyone to stop him, unlike when he was a human. But the basic philosophy applies.

Yeah, I meant we only actually hear that dialogue in the Control endings (although we hear very similar sentiments from Sovereign and Harbinger).

But you're right, Shepard has committed genocide throughout the series. Geth, Collectors, Batarians, potentially Krogan and Quarians...

Modifié par ElSuperGecko, 21 décembre 2012 - 07:50 .

[Rifneno]

Ugh. The point is that Shepbinger thinks like a Reaper now. That's clear from the dialogue and its eerie reminiscence of Sovereign and Harbinger. When you consider that, lines like "I will lead an army that no-one will dare oppose. I will protect, defend. I will destroy those who threaten the future of the many." are scary as hell because that's exactly what the previous Reaper AI thought it was doing. Who's to say that Shepbinger won't reach the same twisted conclusions it did, even if not immediately, and start the cycle anew? "To ensure the strongest are not feared or reviled for their strength." It says nothing about the weak, only the strongest - which is the Reapers. And it thinks they're reviled for their strength, not their actions? Yeah, okay.

Headcanon it all you want, guys. Control isn't the Reapers joining Shepard, it's Shepard joining the Reapers. It's not even very subtle.

[Dr_Extrem]

Rifneno wrote...

Ugh. The point is that Shepbinger thinks like a Reaper now. That's clear from the dialogue and its eerie reminiscence of Sovereign and Harbinger. When you consider that, lines like "I will lead an army that no-one will dare oppose. I will protect, defend. I will destroy those who threaten the future of the many." are scary as hell because that's exactly what the previous Reaper AI thought it was doing. Who's to say that Shepbinger won't reach the same twisted conclusions it did, even if not immediately, and start the cycle anew? "To ensure the strongest are not feared or reviled for their strength." It says nothing about the weak, only the strongest - which is the Reapers. And it thinks they're reviled for their strength, not their actions? Yeah, okay.

Headcanon it all you want, guys. Control isn't the Reapers joining Shepard, it's Shepard joining the Reapers. It's not even very subtle.

in defense .. this is from the renegade version of the epilogue. the paragon version says, that it will watch out for the weak and that they will have a voice. 

the implications are clear though ... the ai is not shepard ... it may be guided by it ideals and thoughts .. but even paragon-shepard killed before, in order to protect the weak.

how much of the original catalyst is still inside the ai?

[ElSuperGecko]

Dr_Extrem wrote...
in defense .. this is from the renegade version of the epilogue. the paragon version says, that it will watch out for the weak and that they will have a voice. 

the implications are clear though ... the ai is not shepard ... it may be guided by it ideals and thoughts .. but even paragon-shepard killed before, in order to protect the weak.

how much of the original catalyst is still inside the ai?

To be fair, no defence is even needed - it's simply the Control ending.  There are two variations, Paragon and Renegade, but even the most Paragon Shepard will have made on or two Renegade decisions throughout the series, and vice versa.  PAragon and Control are not good and evil, black or white - they are simply two sides to Shepard's personality.  The potential for Shepard making a Renegade or Paragon decision is always there.

And you're absolutely right - the AI is NOT Shepard - it even tells us as much, referring to Shepard as him/her, he/she.  So headcanoning the AI as if it was the Shepard you controlled for three games is merey naive wishful thinking.

[SpamBot2000]

Another thing some of the keener investigators have noticed is that the Shepard speech in the Control ending is not chosen by the player. Your agency stops at electrocution. It's not 'your' Shepard in the Citadel computer. It's another entity altogether. You have no say in what it will do over the next Eternity.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 21 décembre 2012 - 08:22 .

[Dr_Extrem]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...
in defense .. this is from the renegade version of the epilogue. the paragon version says, that it will watch out for the weak and that they will have a voice. 

the implications are clear though ... the ai is not shepard ... it may be guided by it ideals and thoughts .. but even paragon-shepard killed before, in order to protect the weak.

how much of the original catalyst is still inside the ai?

To be fair, no defence is even needed - it's simply the Control ending.  There are two variations, Paragon and Renegade, but even the most Paragon Shepard will have made on or two Renegade decisions throughout the series, and vice versa.  PAragon and Control are not good and evil, black or white - they are simply two sides to Shepard's personality.  The potential for Shepard making a Renegade or Paragon decision is always there.

And you're absolutely right - the AI is NOT Shepard - it even tells us as much, referring to Shepard as him/her, he/she.  So headcanoning the AI as if it was the Shepard you controlled for three games is merey naive wishful thinking.

i have no problem with headcanon ... as long, as people do not pretend it is the wisdom of the game.

i have to use headcanon as well. bioware forces us into doing so.


why does my shepard not choose control? .. my shepard is a human and has human weaknesses. shepard does not know, how much of her will remain, once it merged with the catalyst. such a "position" has to be filled by a mind without weaknesses. my shepard disqualifies herself by knowing, that her weaknesses could bring darkness over the galaxy again.

by the tone of the epilogue, it is pretty clear, that the ai is a reaper - maybe a nice one ... but still a reaper, who will do whatever is necessary to fullfill its purpose. (the ais own words)
 
thats what all shepards have in common: shepard does his/her duty - thats a matter of fact.

[Bill Casey]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Please try. Shepard has always imposed his morality on others. I just want to hear why that suddenly becomes a bad thing now that he can do it to more people at once.

It's the difference between being a moderate and an extremist...

[ElSuperGecko]

SpamBot2000 wrote...
Another thing some of the keener investigators have noticed is that the Shepard speech in the Control ending is not chosen by the player. Your agency stops at electrocution. It's not 'your' Shepard in the Citadel computer. It's another entity altogether. You have no say in what it will do over the next Eternity.

Exactly.  The entire situaiton with Control can be summed up as follows:

An AI has massacred thousands of races (including it's own creators) over the course of bilions of years.  By choosing Control, you're basically saying "hey, I can do a better job than that!" without realising it won't actually be you that's doing said job.

You replace one (immortal, infinite, eternal) AI with a new, slightly modified (immortal, infinite, eternal) AI that may, potentially, possibly be slightly less genocidal.  That's where your input ends.  That is all.

Modifié par ElSuperGecko, 21 décembre 2012 - 08:33 .

[Enhanced]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Another thing some of the keener investigators have noticed is that the Shepard speech in the Control ending is not chosen by the player. Your agency stops at electrocution. It's not 'your' Shepard in the Citadel computer. It's another entity altogether. You have no say in what it will do over the next Eternity.

I don't think that this is correct. The Catalyst specifically says this: "... you will control us..."  and then  "....we will be yours to control and direct as you see fit". 

Modifié par Enhanced, 21 décembre 2012 - 08:41 .

[Rifneno]

Enhanced wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Another thing some of the keener investigators have noticed is that the Shepard speech in the Control ending is not chosen by the player. Your agency stops at electrocution. It's not 'your' Shepard in the Citadel computer. It's another entity altogether. You have no say in what it will do over the next Eternity.

I don't think that this is correct. The Catalyst specifically says this: "... you will control us..."  and then  "....we will be yours to control and direct as you see fit". 

This may come as a shock to some, but the Reapers aren't completely trustworthy.

[SeptimusMagistos]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

And you're absolutely right - the AI is NOT Shepard - it even tells us as much, referring to Shepard as him/her, he/she.  So headcanoning the AI as if it was the Shepard you controlled for three games is merey naive wishful thinking.

It has his memories and his character. As far as I'm concerned, that makes it the same Shepard.

[clennon8]

These endings are forcing us all to take ridiculous stances in order to find some sense of fulfillment in how our journey ended.

Synthesis:  "Forcing every living thing in the galaxy to merge with the Reapers is okay because <reasons>"

Control:  "Digitizing Shepard and installing his AI ghost as the next Eternal Galactic Dictator is a good idea because <reasons>"

Destroy: "Annihilating our synthetic allies is necessary because <reasons>"

Indoctrination Theory:  The ending is...  *SHUT UP WEIRDO. INDOCTRINATION THEORY IS FOR LOSERS. GO BACK TO THAT ONE THREAD THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED AND LEAVE THE REST OF US ALONE*

F*ck you Hudson and Walters.  F*ck you a million times.

Modifié par clennon8, 21 décembre 2012 - 09:31 .

[Rifneno]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

And you're absolutely right - the AI is NOT Shepard - it even tells us as much, referring to Shepard as him/her, he/she. So headcanoning the AI as if it was the Shepard you controlled for three games is merey naive wishful thinking.

It has his memories and his character. As far as I'm concerned, that makes it the same Shepard.

Even though it doesn't see itself as Shepard. Whatever you say.

[Enhanced]

Rifneno wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Another thing some of the keener investigators have noticed is that the Shepard speech in the Control ending is not chosen by the player. Your agency stops at electrocution. It's not 'your' Shepard in the Citadel computer. It's another entity altogether. You have no say in what it will do over the next Eternity.

I don't think that this is correct. The Catalyst specifically says this: "... you will control us..."  and then  "....we will be yours to control and direct as you see fit". 

This may come as a shock to some, but the Reapers aren't completely trustworthy.

Well he didn't lie about any of the other options. Why would he even give Shepard those options?

Modifié par Enhanced, 21 décembre 2012 - 09:48 .

[ElSuperGecko]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

And you're absolutely right - the AI is NOT Shepard - it even tells us as much, referring to Shepard as him/her, he/she.  So headcanoning the AI as if it was the Shepard you controlled for three games is merey naive wishful thinking.

It has his memories and his character. As far as I'm concerned, that makes it the same Shepard.

OK - so you're headcanoning something different to what it actually tells you.  Thanks for proving the point!

[Rifneno]

Enhanced wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Another thing some of the keener investigators have noticed is that the Shepard speech in the Control ending is not chosen by the player. Your agency stops at electrocution. It's not 'your' Shepard in the Citadel computer. It's another entity altogether. You have no say in what it will do over the next Eternity.

I don't think that this is correct. The Catalyst specifically says this: "... you will control us..."  and then  "....we will be yours to control and direct as you see fit". 

This may come as a shock to some, but the Reapers aren't completely trustworthy.

Well he didn't lie about any of he other options. Why would he even give Shepard those options?

[redbaron76]

Because control justifies enslaving. I do not like slavery. And killing of reapers is a lot better option because it stops reapers fromharvesting any more organic life. And control is what Illusive man wants my shepard is not a cerberus puppet.

[Rifneno]

redbaron76 wrote...

Because control justifies enslaving. I do not like slavery. And killing of reapers is a lot better option because it stops reapers fromharvesting any more organic life. And control is what Illusive man wants my shepard is not a cerberus puppet.

*brofist*

"I have a better idea: we destroy you and live our lives in peace." - Shepard to the Rannoch Reaper

[redbaron76]

@ Rifneno

Perfect quote.

[SeptimusMagistos]

Rifneno wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

And you're absolutely right - the AI is NOT Shepard - it even tells us as much, referring to Shepard as him/her, he/she. So headcanoning the AI as if it was the Shepard you controlled for three games is merey naive wishful thinking.

It has his memories and his character. As far as I'm concerned, that makes it the same Shepard.

Even though it doesn't see itself as Shepard. Whatever you say.

I'll admit that was kind of weird. But then people have been complaining about autodialogue since day 1.

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

Because.

1: Many of us don't really enjoy the idea of shepard getting butchered by the plot hammer at the end, since we developed his/her character for 5 years.

2: The thought of dead reapers are more appealing then them living and being our "allies".

[Dr_Extrem]

Enhanced wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Another thing some of the keener investigators have noticed is that the Shepard speech in the Control ending is not chosen by the player. Your agency stops at electrocution. It's not 'your' Shepard in the Citadel computer. It's another entity altogether. You have no say in what it will do over the next Eternity.

I don't think that this is correct. The Catalyst specifically says this: "... you will control us..."  and then  "....we will be yours to control and direct as you see fit". 

This may come as a shock to some, but the Reapers aren't completely trustworthy.

Well he didn't lie about any of he other options. Why would he even give Shepard those options?

good question .. none of the new "solutions" can solve the catalysts problems.

in either ending, organics still have the ability to build synthetics, wich will kill organics.

even in synthesis, synthetics could still kill organics - just because they understand organics, would not stop them from killing them.

why does the catalyst offer solutions, that are not as effective as the current one and who would contradict its original programming?

answer: because it is insane - and insane ais can not be trusted.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

The whole idea was to destroy the reapers, not control them. Not only that, but who wants "Big Brother Shepard" and his reaper fleets hanging out on Earth?

Humanity and the rest of the species in the galaxy should be free of the reapers or any other outside force that tries to dictate how they should live their lives. I feel that by destroying the reapers you accomplish your original mission and give everyone a chance to learn from the experience. The geth and other synthetics have to be sacrificed, but I think that's a small price to pay for the continued existence of organic life.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 21 décembre 2012 - 09:51 .