Honestly, OP after all these months of people saying why they don't choose it, you really have to ask again about this?
Since you don't think it makes sense to not like something your enemy does like, most of the reasons have been lost on you.
The reasons are very well known to you, though most of your past emphasis has been pro-synthesis. Some of the same reasons exist for control that exist for synthesis.
The kid could be lying or wrong or merely inept, badly programmed. The choices may not be authentic. If they are, though, they are still awful things to do to large groups of people. At the risk of being told, once again that I'm trying to force my morals on others, I will also state that the choices feature immoral acts. Synthesis is an invasion of the bodies of others. Control is an invasion of their minds and hearts. Control also alludes to something not so benevolent will very likely take place; something heard in both the speech Shepard reaper commander gives and the music used in the cutscenes. Music exists for a reason. And that Shreaper is not Shepard. Bioware made that clear in the game-even removing a synthetic's data files and putting them into another blue box creates a different personality. Imagine what happens in removing a person's "data files" and putting them into a blue box or wherever the Shepard consciousness will reside. The voice that speaks in that cutscene is also not just Shepard. Who knows who or what is in there along with Shepard and Shepard's consciousness will reside within the same flawed tech in which the kid's programming exists. It's like putting a new processor in a broken computer and expecting it to act like a nextgen computer.
The other thing is (and please never tell anyone they cannot reference an idea or topic that exists within the subject matter), TIM was under control and made to believe that he could control the reapers. Why is it illogical to consider that the kid and reapers would not use this technique on Shepard to get what they want? It's at least a logical consideration to think that TIM believed that was possible because he was indoctrinated, that Shepard would wonder if they were doing the same thing to him/her.
Another thing is that no rational person in the story (including the Shepard Bioware allowed me to create and play-they created the dialogue options, not me) ever considered controlling them to be a worthwhile or decent idea. Hackett even discusses this with Shepard and specifically says this and says TIM's crazy and orders Shepard to kill him.
The Protheans failed because some wanted to try and control the reapers. Saren failed because he was trying to placate Sovereign and used Control on others who died because of it. Miranda wanted TIM to control Shepard, but even TIM recognized that in so doing this, he would have made Shepard into something that was no longer Shepard-he wanted Shepard to be able to make decisions freely based upon his/her own desires and thoughts. This is a microcosm of what controlling the reapers would do.
But, even further consider the events that would take place and think about what other people might do (not just your own reactions, but other people with their own ideas). Shepard chooses control and the reapers stop fighting. No one would know what happened. They might think Shepard was able to shut the reapers down, giving the allied forces time to attack and Hackett wants them destroyed. The forces would continue attacking, no matter what, and would actually have a chance to do this, since the reapers would not be fighting back. How long would this go on? Well, that depends. How long would Shreaper allow it? Just why would Hackett and all the rest stop attacking the reapers if they see they can destroy them, even if slowly?
Ok, so they see the reapers move to rebuild or work on damaged relays and tech. Well, no one knows how to make a relay (or very few people understand the tech) so how would they know they are doing anything to help people, since they could be rebuilding them for many reasons-even to use them to help harvest people. They would have no idea why the reapers are doing this. If they did figure out that the reapers are fixing things and nothing more, they've been under a lot of stress-is it possible or probable that every person would think the reapers are now friendly? Might not some think they are messed up, whack, or just temporarily acting crazy?
Then, consider that everyone just suddenly understands the reapers are there to help. Can you not even conceive of large groups of people not wanting them to even exist anymore? I know you want to become friends with them and wanted to understand them, but I have different views of this and that's the point. People don't all act as automatons and agree about all this. A great many people would want the reapers destroyed, no matter what, no matter how futile that might be. But, would it be futile to try and destroy reapers? Well, Shepard controls them, so if people like Hackett, Joker, Garrus, Liara, Jack, Samara, Javik, Wrex, and so on, all decide they want to exact revenge would Shepard reaper have the reapers fight back? If not, then people actually might begin to destroy reapers.
Then too there could be complacency among a lot of people. The reapers created and fix the tech, so why should they do anything for themselves. There'd also be fear. People would wonder if the reapers that exist could start attacking again at some point. And they'd wonder and want to avoid what might make the reapers hostile. So, everything for some people could revolve around the reapers.
Still others might think it would be great if only they could figure out how to control them themselves and rule the galaxy.
Beyond all this is the question of maintenance. Just what exactly do reapers need to maintain themselves? Do they require more people goo? Or do they just die?
My feelings about all this are as they've always been. A great many people would be horrified, haunted, angry, and/or reactive in seeing living reapers as part of their existence. They turned people into goo and Shreaper is forcing people to live with them.
OP, you are fond of saying that people should never get new endings even if they are optional because even if you never bought the new endings they would exist and you'd know about them. So for you that would ruin the game, something unseen would ruin your game, and that's just a game. However, thinking of this as if these are real living people, you are really unable to see how horrified most would be to have monsters that turned billions of people (many they may know or have empathy for) this cycle into goo and that have over many cycles turned trillions of people into goo, with no remorse, no feeling, and some intent. The geth had remorse and yet, many quarians (who were the aggressors) don't want them to live. I can't understand how you can't see that foes that are far worse and nightmarish than the geth might elicit similar feelings from people and deserve far more retribution.
Your opinions have tended toward believing the kid's logic to be right (that synthetics will kill people), but to me that doesn't even matter. As I see it that problem if it is a problem is an argument and a fight for another day. The fight today is against an even bigger horror that is not of our making and it intends to and has been intentionally killing us.
You've even said that you think it's highly likely synthetics will eventually kill organics, but they might do it accidentally. Wow, so by all means appease and let live those foes that have intentionally been killing people, in order to help solve a problem where synthetics might unintentionally kill people. That makes sense to me.
And I really don't know where you get your information from, but Control is not the least liked choice. Synthesis is. Very few people like synthesis because of the reasons you listed. I know that personally if I could and had to only choose between the two, I'd pick control. At least it makes sense that it's possible. Synthesis is just a joke. Control could be achieved, but there's no way as it is explained, that synthesis could happen and the morality of it is a big deal too. Not just my view of morality, but the general consensus of what you do and do not have the right to do (ever heard of the genophage), or even how and why it is achieved. It's intrusive and is nothing Shepard ever showed a desire to do (no Shepard ever did) or else Saren would be alive.
Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 décembre 2012 - 04:21 .
Retour en haut
