1388 réponses à ce sujet

[jtav]

And I'm saying there is nothing to imply that Paragon!Shepalyst is going to harvest or harm anyone the way Destroy implies Rannoch is a wasteland.

[Dr_Extrem]

Rifneno wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

*shrug* While otherwise mostly taking Rifneno's side, I think the geth are dead in the Destroy ending.

I'm not saying they aren't.  I'm saying that the negative parts of our choices are only implied rather than directly shown.  Which is why we don't see Shepbinger harvesting Palaven.

i dont even think, that the shep-ai will start a new cycle without a good reason ..

but i bet that it would, if a galaxy-wide infection threatens all civilisations, it is sworn to protect.

shepard got his/her job done - every shepard ... and the new entity will not hesitate to do so as well.


the only question is, what impulse in needed, to turn the shep-ai into catalyst 2.0 ?


but thats the downside of control ... synthesis violates the right of self determination and destroy kills friends and allies.

all endings suck in their own special way.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 22 décembre 2012 - 06:43 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Rifneno wrote...

I'm not saying they aren't.  I'm saying that the negative parts of our choices are only implied rather than directly shown.  Which is why we don't see Shepbinger harvesting Palaven.

There's a world of difference between what's implied in Destroy and what's implied (if anything even is) in Control.

As it stands, calling Control status-quo bad because of "sounds-like" nonsense reeks of confirmation bias.

Anyway, I'm heading out, so BSN can resume its regular programming while the voice-of-reason has left. xD

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 22 décembre 2012 - 06:46 .

[SpamBot2000]

BioWare softened all the endings to make people pick one of the atrocities on offer, and tried really hard to create a superficial 'balance' between the options to get a fairly even division of ending choices. This was just another way of saying 'look, we can't make a sequel, cos the people have made all these different end choices.' That's the extent of the artistic intent. So everyone has these 'head canons' to make sense of it.

Now that's backfired, since they've decided to continue the series after all.

[Dr_Extrem]

@ spambot ..

yeah .. i bet the first writer is already in hospital, because he tried to work with the endings.

[Ieldra]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
All we know that we have to shoot a tube, the thing explodes and all of the sudden the Crucible fires and the reapers are deactivated (yes, DEACTIVATED, they're not even completely destroyed).

Hehe, how come I didn't notice the importance of that fact earlier?

Next time people come here saying that Paragon Control!Shep will turn into the Evil Galactic Emperor against what the epilogue is telling us, I'll just answer that the Reapers will spontaneously reactivate in Destroy. We never see them not reactivating, so clearly that means that they wiil. /sarcasm

Modifié par Ieldra2, 22 décembre 2012 - 06:54 .

[SpamBot2000]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
All we know that we have to shoot a tube, the thing explodes and all of the sudden the Crucible fires and the reapers are deactivated (yes, DEACTIVATED, they're not even completely destroyed).

Hehe, how come I didn't notice the importance of that fact earlier?

Next time people come here saying that Paragon Control!Shep will turn into the Evil Galactic Emperor against what the epilogue is telling us, I'll just answer that the Reapers will spontaneously reactivate in Destroy. We never see them not reactivating, so clearly that means that they wiil. /sarcasm

And that's why you Refuse.

[Ieldra]

Nice way of missing the point.

[Bill Casey]

It's a distinct possibility the reapers aren't completely dead in destroy...
But at least I did everything I could...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 22 décembre 2012 - 07:11 .

[Iakus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
All we know that we have to shoot a tube, the thing explodes and all of the sudden the Crucible fires and the reapers are deactivated (yes, DEACTIVATED, they're not even completely destroyed).

Hehe, how come I didn't notice the importance of that fact earlier?

Next time people come here saying that Paragon Control!Shep will turn into the Evil Galactic Emperor against what the epilogue is telling us, I'll just answer that the Reapers will spontaneously reactivate in Destroy. We never see them not reactivating, so clearly that means that they wiil. /sarcasm

Well in Destroy all the Reapers do the same red lighning thing Sovereign did when teh Saren husk was destroyed, allowing the fleets to curb-stomp Sovereign.

In Control, all we know is Shepard-AI takes control of the Reapers with the mandate to "Protect the Many" just as the original Catalyst had the mandate to "Protect Organic Life" and ensured that by the reaper cycles.

[Ieldra]

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

[Rifneno]

Ieldra2 wrote...

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

Well that settles that.  Because you're clearly unbiased.

[Iakus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

Yeah and I'm sure the Leviathans thought the Ai they made would never turn on them either.

[Ieldra]

Rifneno wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

Well that settles that.  Because you're clearly unbiased.

Because I think the original Shepard would never restart the Reaper cycle? I mean, how much more out-of-character can you get?

[Rifneno]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

Well that settles that.  Because you're clearly unbiased.

Because I think the original Shepard would never restart the Reaper cycle? I mean, how much more out-of-character can you get?

Are we really going back to the "new Reaper isn't the same Shepard" point?

[Ieldra]

iakus wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

Yeah and I'm sure the Leviathans thought the Ai they made would never turn on them either.

I have no idea why people insist with such stubbornness that it *will* happen. The epilogue suggests it won't, and what happens in a billion years we can't say. But neither can we say what will happen in a billion years as a result of your choice in the other endings.

As I said, arguing against Control by measuring it against perfection doesn't work. I'm just as justified in claiming the Reapers will spontaneously reawaken post-Destroy.

[Ieldra]

Rifneno wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

Well that settles that.  Because you're clearly unbiased.

Because I think the original Shepard would never restart the Reaper cycle? I mean, how much more out-of-character can you get?

Are we really going back to the "new Reaper isn't the same Shepard" point?

*sigh*

The. Epilogue. Tells. Us. Control!Shep . Is. Guided. By. Its. Original's. Thoughts.

It's spelled out for you. Clearly, unmistakably. So if you're thinking of claiming otherwise, just stop. You do not have a point. None, nada, nothing at all. Summarily dismissed, not done the research. F.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 22 décembre 2012 - 08:00 .

[Dr_Extrem]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

Well that settles that.  Because you're clearly unbiased.

Because I think the original Shepard would never restart the Reaper cycle? I mean, how much more out-of-character can you get?

the original shepard would not do it - that is certain. the new ai is based on shepards thoughts and memories ... and therefore, shepards determination to get the job done.

i think the question is: "how far will the shep-ai go, to fullfill its purpose (protect the many)?"


sidenote: 
the last three years of shepards life were composed of inhuman pain (dying in vacuum and being stiched back together), being questioned, sidelined, betrayed and dismissed by 99% of the galaxy, the new ai is going to protect ..

no matter what way shepard chooses (paragon/renegade), some people are going to have a bad time.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 22 décembre 2012 - 07:59 .

[Dysjong]

Based upon the control ending, it could go many ways, for better or worse, in the near or far future.

Same goes for the other endings.

[Ieldra]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

Well that settles that.  Because you're clearly unbiased.

Because I think the original Shepard would never restart the Reaper cycle? I mean, how much more out-of-character can you get?

the original shepard would not do it - that is certain. the new ai is based on shepards thoughts and memories ... and therefore, shepards determination to get the job done.

i think the question is: "how far will the shep-ai go, to fullfill its purpose (protect the many)?"

Yes, that's the question. There is a risk. However, if you get the epilogue "I will ensure that all get a say in their future", can you really connect that to "Evil Reaper Emperor 2.0"? There will be some "necessary evil", because no rulership has ever done without that, but destroying what it wants to protect doesn't appear to be on the table. 

Modifié par Ieldra2, 22 décembre 2012 - 08:05 .

[Madecologist]

I doubt Control Shep will go Old School Reaper ever. However a Renegade Control Shep might do things that might not sit well with some people.

Even if you argue that after 100K+ years Control Shep might develop an 'odd' solution one must consider what the true problem is. If people really believe the Synthetics versus Organics conflict can be resolved, then the problem that would drive Shep 'insane' would have to be something else.

Even if it is the same problem, who is to say the solution will be the same. Shepard and as such Control Shep has a different 'original' parameter on how to operate. Also we are really getting ahead of ourselves considering what happens 100K years from now. As for the forseeable future it is very unlikely Shep will go old school Reaper.

That said, it could be worst actually. I mean again we are entering the realm of hypothesis. I am just arguing that it won't be the same one.

Modifié par Madecologist, 22 décembre 2012 - 08:07 .

[Rifneno]

Ieldra2 wrote...

*sigh*

The. Epilogue. Tells. Us. Control!Shep . Is. Guided. By. Its. Original's. Thoughts.

It's spelled out for you. Clearly, unmistakably. So if you're thinking of claiming otherwise, just stop. You do not have a point. None, nada, nothing at all. Summarily dismissed, not done the research. F.

Right.  Because Reapers have never reached derpy conclusions like "let's kill all the organics to save the organics".  Have fun with that headcanon.

Modifié par Rifneno, 22 décembre 2012 - 08:05 .

[greengroove]

I'm not comfortable with Shepard basically being assimilated into the reaper 'higher consciousness' . Your original organic consciousness is being upgraded with processing power that's more complex by orders of magnitude. There's a risk that your original consciousness would eventually be superceded in the wake of the insurmountable processing power given to you by the reapers. You may start out with the most benevolent goals in mind, using the reapers to rebuild galactic society as the extended ending cutscene suggests, but there's no way of knowing what would happen further down the line. It's this ambiguity that makes the 'destroy' ending seem the wisest to me. I don't see any sure fire way to solve the synthetic/organic conflict the reapers are so worried about, so you may as well get rid of those meddling bastards once and for all, and give the next cycle a slim chance to solve the problem, or perhaps evolve along different lines.

I don't really how synthesis would solve things either. It's awfully presumptuous to let a bunch of spage magic do its thing and change the genetic makeup of everyone in the galaxy. What's to stop this new combination of synethetic/organic DNA from eventually creating their own AI, and eventually warring with it?  Eventually they'd see their new DNA as natural or 'organic', and there'd be another schism between the 'synthetics and organics'', continuing the cycle of destruction Haley Joel Osment warned you about.

There can never be an ending that provides the ideal solution, but destroy seems like the best move to me.

Modifié par greengroove, 22 décembre 2012 - 08:09 .

[Schachmatt123]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Because I think the original Shepard would never restart the Reaper cycle? I mean, how much more out-of-character can you get?

Are we really going back to the "new Reaper isn't the same Shepard" point?

*sigh*

The. Epilogue. Tells. Us. Control!Shep . Is. Guided. By. Its. Original's. Thoughts.

It's spelled out for you. Clearly, unmistakably. So if you're thinking of claiming otherwise, just stop. You do not have a point. None, nada, nothing at all. Summarily dismissed, not done the research. F.

New A.I. =/= Shepard. Plain. Simple. Otherwise it says itself that it now starts to understand what Shepard couldn't comprehend before. It's not guided by Sheps original thoughts anymore.

Modifié par Schachmatt, 22 décembre 2012 - 08:13 .

[Dr_Extrem]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

With the inconvenient little detail that Control!Shep says it's guided by the thoughts of the original Shepard. I'd say that rules out something like the Reaper cycles.

Well that settles that.  Because you're clearly unbiased.

Because I think the original Shepard would never restart the Reaper cycle? I mean, how much more out-of-character can you get?

the original shepard would not do it - that is certain. the new ai is based on shepards thoughts and memories ... and therefore, shepards determination to get the job done.

i think the question is: "how far will the shep-ai go, to fullfill its purpose (protect the many)?"

Yes, that's the question. There is a risk. However, if you get the epilogue "I will ensure that all get a say in their future", can you really connect that to "Evil Reaper Emperor 2.0"? There will be some "necessary evil", because no rulership has ever done without that, but destroying what it wants to protect doesn't appear to be on the table. 

on the other hand, the original catalyst never did its job out of spite or evil intention. it did its job, to save organic life. its ironic and illogical - but true.

what will shepard do, if the only way to protect the many, is to kill the few or preserve the many from death by illness?

we only know that the shep-ai will protect the many and make sure that everyone will have a say - the epilogue however does not show, how the new ai is going to ensure this.


this is up to headcanon.


i find it strange, that we dont see any non reaper spaceships in the epilogue.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 22 décembre 2012 - 08:13 .