1388 réponses à ce sujet

[cyrexwingblade]

Madecologist wrote...

Obviously one of my Paragon Shepard decided that like he is unable to impose a new paradigm on the Galaxy, he can't commit genocide on the Geth. So he felt despite he doesn't trust himself he can only hope his ideals will survive for a long time after he makes the choice and took control.

Same here, basically. Didn't like any of them for all the usual reasons, but Control was the only 'risk' she could conscience.

[The Heretic of Time]

I guess I must be the only person who exclusively plays Renegade Shepards (one is more renegade than the other though).

My 60% Renegade Shepard chose Control (I played this Shepard mainly as myself and chose everything that I would do if I was Shepard).

My 100% Renegade Shepard chose Destroy (because I think Destroy is the most fitting decision for a 100% Renegade Shepard).


A pure renegade, who's mostly pragmatic, wouldn't choose something like Control. A pure renegade Shepard is too pragmatic for a decision with so many unknown variables at the time. Same goes for Synthesis. Destroy is the most direct and pragmatic solution, suiting the Renegade philosophy.

I think Control is the most interesting for mixed Shepards like my first Shepard. I think pure Paragons would rather go with Synthesis, which seems the most Paragon ending of them all. Any "paragade" or "renegon" might consider Control, which I personally find the most interesting decision myself.

[Bill Casey]

Interesting, as I play exclusively paragons...

[SeptimusMagistos]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
 I think pure Paragons would rather go with Synthesis, which seems the most Paragon ending of them all.

Maybe if someone could explain to me exactly what it is Synthesis does. As hard as we're arguing about the mechanisms of Control, at least the scope of confusion is narrower.

[clennon8]

I don't know. I doubt there's much of a correlation between paragon/renegade alignment and endings chosen.

I mostly play paragon Shepards, but I do have one or two renegadish ones.  None of them would ever pick anything but Destroy.

Modifié par clennon8, 23 décembre 2012 - 12:17 .

[chidingewe8036]

I rather pick a high EMS Destroy and have hope than to watch my Shepard dissolve into space molecules.

THATS WHY

Plus if Shepard was going to die they should have had him go out in a blaze of glory not some sacrifical painful acid dissolve electrocution...........Bioware you F***** up big time and you know it you just wont admit it because........well who knows lol gees.

[The Heretic of Time]

clennon8 wrote...

I don't know. I doubt there's much of a correlation between paragon/renegade alignment and endings chosen.

I think there is a correlation. At least when it comes to Synthesis I know a Renegade would never choose that. It's too much kumbaya nonsense that I, being a Renegade player, simply cannot stomach. All the Synthesis ending is missing is rainbows and unicorns. If it had that, the ending would be complete. It makes me sick really.  And to think that some players are still complaining that there aren't any happy or sweet endings in ME3. 


No, Synthesis is definitely more a Paragon thing. Control and Destroy are both much much much more interesting for a Renegade.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 23 décembre 2012 - 12:20 .

[Bill Casey]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I don't know. I doubt there's much of a correlation between paragon/renegade alignment and endings chosen.

I think there is a correlation. At least when it comes to Synthesis I know a Renegade would never choose that. It's too much kumbaya nonsense that I, being a Renegade player, simply cannot stomach. All the Synthesis ending is missing is rainbows and unicorns. If it had that, the ending would be complete. No, Synthesis is definitely more a Paragon thing. Control and Destroy are both much much much more interesting for a Renegade.

As someone who takes mostly paragon options, I can tell you Refuse is more of a Paragon thing...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 23 décembre 2012 - 12:20 .

[The Heretic of Time]

Bill Casey wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I don't know. I doubt there's much of a correlation between paragon/renegade alignment and endings chosen.

I think there is a correlation. At least when it comes to Synthesis I know a Renegade would never choose that. It's too much kumbaya nonsense that I, being a Renegade player, simply cannot stomach. All the Synthesis ending is missing is rainbows and unicorns. If it had that, the ending would be complete. No, Synthesis is definitely more a Paragon thing. Control and Destroy are both much much much more interesting for a Renegade.

Refuse is more of a Paragon thing...

Refuse is more of a ****** thing. Only a complete ****** Paragon would choose refuse. Heck, refuse isn't even a choice. It's inaction really. Maybe a 100% Paragon pussy would refuse the 3 choices (Control, Synthesis, Destroy), but that particular Shepard really needs to grow a pair. It makes you wonder how that Shepard ever became Spectre in the first place....

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 23 décembre 2012 - 12:23 .

[clennon8]

As a chronic Destroy chooser, I can tell you that I look at it as an affirmation of self-determinism, which feels very Paragon to me.

I think you can spin any of the endings any way you want.

[The Heretic of Time]

clennon8 wrote...

As a chronic Destroy chooser, I can tell you that I look at it as an affirmation of self-determinism, which feels very Paragon to me.

I think you can spin any of the endings any way you want.

Except for Synthesis. I really see no way to spin that ending to fit the Renegade train of thought. It's way too idealistic for a Renegade.

[Madecologist]

Bill Casey wrote...

As someone who takes mostly paragon options, I can tell you Refuse is more of a Paragon thing...

I agree. At least Refuse via dialogue and getting the speech.

Refuse a la letting the choices coming up and then shooting the Catalyst is the Renegade variation for Refuse. You don't make any stance but take the fist chance you have to tell the Catalyst what you 'really think'. Or at least that is how I see it.

Modifié par Madecologist, 23 décembre 2012 - 12:30 .

[clennon8]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

As a chronic Destroy chooser, I can tell you that I look at it as an affirmation of self-determinism, which feels very Paragon to me.

I think you can spin any of the endings any way you want.

Except for Synthesis. I really see no way to spin that ending to fit the Renegade train of thought. It's way too idealistic for a Renegade.

Really?  The "violation of choice" aspect, which I think is most evident in Synthesis by far, is pretty easy to spin as Renegade.

[Bill Casey]

Synthesis doesn't fit with a Paragon Shepard either...

[StayFrosty05]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

As a chronic Destroy chooser, I can tell you that I look at it as an affirmation of self-determinism, which feels very Paragon to me.

I think you can spin any of the endings any way you want.

Except for Synthesis. I really see no way to spin that ending to fit the Renegade train of thought. It's way too idealistic for a Renegade.

As a once Paragon...now Paragade Player....I don't know how anyone one would even think Synthesis would be the Paragons preferred choice.

Synthesis: Rape of the natural world and condemnation to disfigurement and removal of freedom of choice for all life eternally.
Control: An eternity of I can trust myself never to corrupt and become the eternal Dictator with big guns....BullSh*t!
Refuse: Condemn's everyone to death for what?
Destroy: Yes, it comes with horrific genocide of one entire species...but what other choice is there?....It ends the reaper threat once and for all, for all life and all life to come.

[Madecologist]

Bill Casey wrote...

Synthesis doesn't fit with a Paragon Shepard either...

I agree again. Though Synthesis is the ideal solution for someone that happens to agree with what it does (I don't but that isn't my point now), it still imposes that choice directly onto everyone. What if people don't want to be Galaxy version 2.0.

I like using the B5 reference to solve the Telepath Crisis, you turn everyone into Telepaths as for the Telepaths you remove the medical conditions they tend to suffer from, so being a telepath has little effect on your physical well being. Except now everyone can read anyone's mind (unless you block of course). Would everyone want to live in that universe? Same with Synthesis, will everyone want to be life version 2.0? Even if the arguement can be made it will be better for everyone! A Paragon Shepard will understand this.

You kind of can make the same arguement for Refuse. Sure Refuse is the moral high road and Shepard can keep his honour and dignity against the immoral choices given to him by the Catalyst (assuming that is your view when you take Refuse), you will also see that this stance dooms everyone in this cycle. They will be free, but dead... all of them.

[The Heretic of Time]

clennon8 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

As a chronic Destroy chooser, I can tell you that I look at it as an affirmation of self-determinism, which feels very Paragon to me.

I think you can spin any of the endings any way you want.

Except for Synthesis. I really see no way to spin that ending to fit the Renegade train of thought. It's way too idealistic for a Renegade.

Really?  The "violation of choice" aspect, which I think is most evident in Synthesis by far, is pretty easy to spin as Renegade.

There is no violation of choice in Synthesis, unless you mean "the rest of the galaxy does not get the option to voice their opinion on Synthesis before you choose it". But if that is your reasoning, than the same could be applied to Control and Destroy, even to Refuse. ESPECIALLY to refuse.

Like I said, the whole idea behind Synthesis is waaaaaaaaaay to idealistic. it will never fit with a Renegade, who is rather pragmatic and to the point.


I think Synthesis is the most in line with the Paragon train of thought. Destroy is most in line with the Renegade train of thought. Control can be interesting for both Paragon and Renegade. I'd say Control is the most neutral option.

I know most Paragon players choose Destroy, but it makes me wonder though: Why do Paragons all of the sudden have no problem with betraying their allies and commiting genocide, especially when there are other options available that doesn't require genocide? Hypocricy? Double standards? Or is there something else that I've overlooked? Tell me, why are you, as a Paragon player, okay with genocide when you also have a different option that doesn't require genocide?

[StayFrosty05]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

As a chronic Destroy chooser, I can tell you that I look at it as an affirmation of self-determinism, which feels very Paragon to me.

I think you can spin any of the endings any way you want.

Except for Synthesis. I really see no way to spin that ending to fit the Renegade train of thought. It's way too idealistic for a Renegade.

Really?  The "violation of choice" aspect, which I think is most evident in Synthesis by far, is pretty easy to spin as Renegade.

There is no violation of choice in Synthesis, unless you mean "the rest of the galaxy does not get the option to voice their opinion on Synthesis before you choose it". But if that is your reasoning, than the same could be applied to Control and Destroy, even to Refuse. ESPECIALLY to refuse.

Like I said, the whole idea behind Synthesis is waaaaaaaaaay to idealistic. it will never fit with a Renegade, who is rather pragmatic and to the point.


I think Synthesis is the most in line with the Paragon train of thought. Destroy is most in line with the Renegade train of thought. Control can be interesting for both Paragon and Renegade. I'd say Control is the most neutral option.

I know most Paragon players choose Destroy, but it makes me wonder though: Why do Paragons all of the sudden have no problem with betraying their allies and commiting genocide, especially when there are other options available that doesn't require genocide? Hypocricy? Double standards? Or is there something else that I've overlooked? Tell me, why are you, as a Paragon player, okay with genocide when you also have a different option that doesn't require genocide?

It's the only option that ends the reaper threat once and for all....and that's what most needs to be achieved.

[The Heretic of Time]

Bill Casey wrote...

You kind of can make the same arguement for Refuse. Sure Refuse is the moral high road and Shepard can keep his honour and dignity against the immoral choices given to him by the Catalyst (assuming that is your view when you take Refuse), you will also see that this stance dooms everyone in this cycle. They will be free, but dead... all of them.

:lol::lol::lol:


Sorry, but 'Refuse', 'honor' and 'dignity' are 3 words that simply do not go well together in 1 sentence.  

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 23 décembre 2012 - 12:48 .

[PinkysPain]

Ieldra2 wrote...
In order to shed some light on the matter, I'm asking everyone who avoids Control: why do you avoid Control?

I avoid the endings altogether, but if I did make a choice I wouldn't chose control because I know it isn't really Shepard in control in the end ... either Shepard is indoctrinated or his control is too loose to matter much.

If my Shepard truly controlled the reapers they would be take a long walk off a short peer immediately, goodbye existence hello Sun.

Modifié par PinkysPain, 23 décembre 2012 - 12:57 .

[Madecologist]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

I actually wrote that...

You kind of can make the same arguement for Refuse. Sure Refuse is the moral high road and Shepard can keep his honour and dignity against the immoral choices given to him by the Catalyst (assuming that is your view when you take Refuse), you will also see that this stance dooms everyone in this cycle. They will be free, but dead... all of them.

:lol::lol::lol:


Sorry, but 'Refuse', 'honor' and 'dignity' are 3 words that simply do not go well together in 1 sentence.  

You did an error in the quote editting, I said that and not Bill Casey.

Incidently I actually agree with you. Hence why the comment was in tandem with the immorality of Synthesis. That Refuse has exactly the same level of immorality in my book. I thought my comment was cynical enough as is .

Modifié par Madecologist, 23 décembre 2012 - 12:57 .

[The Heretic of Time]

StayFrosty05 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

As a chronic Destroy chooser, I can tell you that I look at it as an affirmation of self-determinism, which feels very Paragon to me.

I think you can spin any of the endings any way you want.

Except for Synthesis. I really see no way to spin that ending to fit the Renegade train of thought. It's way too idealistic for a Renegade.

Really?  The "violation of choice" aspect, which I think is most evident in Synthesis by far, is pretty easy to spin as Renegade.

There is no violation of choice in Synthesis, unless you mean "the rest of the galaxy does not get the option to voice their opinion on Synthesis before you choose it". But if that is your reasoning, than the same could be applied to Control and Destroy, even to Refuse. ESPECIALLY to refuse.

Like I said, the whole idea behind Synthesis is waaaaaaaaaay to idealistic. it will never fit with a Renegade, who is rather pragmatic and to the point.


I think Synthesis is the most in line with the Paragon train of thought. Destroy is most in line with the Renegade train of thought. Control can be interesting for both Paragon and Renegade. I'd say Control is the most neutral option.

I know most Paragon players choose Destroy, but it makes me wonder though: Why do Paragons all of the sudden have no problem with betraying their allies and commiting genocide, especially when there are other options available that doesn't require genocide? Hypocricy? Double standards? Or is there something else that I've overlooked? Tell me, why are you, as a Paragon player, okay with genocide when you also have a different option that doesn't require genocide?

It's the only option that ends the reaper threat once and for all....and that's what most needs to be achieved.

First of all, that is false: Synthesis is advocated as the only option that end the reaper thread for once and for all. However, Control and Destroy also both seem to succesfully end the reaper thread.

Second: That train of reasoning is more fitting for a Renegade. The Renegade killed the Rachni queen because it's the only option that will certainly end the Rachni threat for once and for all. The Renegade sabotaged the genophage cure because it's the only way to know for certain that the Krogan won't mass-breed and overtake the galaxy at one point. It's the reason why Renegade destroys the heretic geth instead of rewriting them. It's the reason why Renegade kills the Zhu's Hope colonists instead of sparing them. It's why the Renegade rather sacrifices the Council to go directly after Sovereign. Etc. etc. etc.

A Renagade is clearly capable and willing to commit autrocities for the greater good. Renegade solutions are pragmatic solutions that sometimes requires great sacrifices, such as commiting genocide on the geth, to make sure the goal is met swiftly, smoothly and most of all, thouroughly.

A Paragon simply isn't like that. Paragons are more willing to take risks for the greater good. Paragons are more willing to give people, species or situations the benefit of the doubt. The Paragon gives the Rachni queen the benefit of the doubt and releases her, fully realizing it might bite him in the ass later. The Paragon gives the krogan the benefit of the doubt and cures the genophage. The Paragon gives the geth the benefit of the doubt. He gives the Council the benefit of the doubt and is even willing to risk a reaper invasion (Sovereign opening to Citadel relay) for the sake of saving this Council.


I'm telling you, Destroy is totally not in line with the general Paragon train of thought. Control is much closer to the Paragon train of thought. Synthesis is also rather Paragon.


It makes me wonder though: Most Paragons refuse to choose Synthesis on the basis that it changes everyone against their will. But what about Destroy? You're about to commit genocide on an entire species against their will. How is this okay and Synthesis isn't? Following this logic, Control would be the most suitable option for you. From this perspective, Control seems to be the most Paragon of all options.

[Bat32391]

I usually only go with it on my pure paragon characters, as in not even a little bit of renegade at all, I feel if he was not "incorruptible" so the whole thing doesn't backfire.

[The Heretic of Time]

PinkysPain wrote...

If my Shepard truly controlled the reapers they would be take a long walk off a short peer immediately, goodbye existence hello Sun.

By your logic, my Shepard must have been indoctrinated from the very beginning of ME3. If my Shepard truly controlled himself, he would never go against TIM the way he did in ME3. He would rather support TIM and help TIM to find out how to gain Control over the reapers.

[SeptimusMagistos]

StayFrosty05 wrote...

It's the only option that ends the reaper threat once and for all....and that's what most needs to be achieved.

Since when are Paragons concerned with endings a threat once and for all no matter what the cost? Pretty sure that's mostly a Renegade thing.