1388 réponses à ce sujet

[Dessalines]

1)It is like World War !! ending with someone becoming a ****, but ruling over the entire world. Even if their motives were good, they still represent monsters. It is that simple. No matter what your intentions are you are flying around in living representation of something that has killed uncountable amount of life. Who is Shepard to decide what is good for the entire galaxy for all time. No one should have that power
But everyone should enjoy their choices they made. Lol, I didnt get mind, but it all right.

[OdanUrr]

@Finn the Jakey: Is your post directed at me?

[legion999]

CronoDragoon wrote...

I might be missing something here as a non-codex/ME1 expert, but why wouldn't they just say Vigil's virus also blocks the signal to shut the relays down? Or corrupted it? Or something?

They didn't as far as I know.

Anyway if the virus did block the signal then Sovereign and Saren wouldn't have been able to stop Alliance and Council reinforcements from arriving when they attacked the Citadel.

[3DandBeyond]

Finn the Jakey wrote...

Fine, you want an answer?

Shepard doesn't deserve that kind of power, in fact, nothing should hold that kind of authority at all. Why should Shepard, a random navy officer who happened to become the savior of the galaxy by accident, have the right to decide the future of all sentient life in the galaxy? Shepard could potentially be a inept, racist, genocidal psychopath and basing an AI that controls the most powerful weapon in the galaxy on him is a terrible idea. Shepard is only human.
Control Shepard basically says he will "guide" the galaxy (whatever that involves) towards "a future with limitless possibilities", sorry, no. That makes him sound like some kind of ridiculous God-like figure. Introducing an omnipotent, omniscient overseer into the galaxy may have disastrous results, as you are essentially forcing your own ideal future, evolution basically stops.
Forcing a 'guardian' onto the people of the galaxy essentially removes their right to decide their own future, by choosign control, you admit that galactic civilisation is too weak or stupid to create a future for itself.

I fail to see one example of an absolute dictator who didn't succumb to corruption, or just be completely corrupt already.

And don't give me that 'He'll just fix the Mass Relays and then fly into the sun' thing, the Control monologue makes it clear the Reapers are here to stay.

Even if the reapers are eventually flung into the sun, a lot of damage to people will have already been done.  They'd have to see these monsters and live their nightmares over and over again.

But you bring up other valid points-Shepard's special enough, but able to really handle controlling these things?  Absolute power corrupts, absolutely.  After all the kid is a bit of a moron as AIs go, so let the human do it seems tragically flawed indeed.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 décembre 2012 - 05:27 .

[o Ventus]

I don't choose Control because I genuinely believe it to be more "evil" (ugh) than Destroy. Yes, Destroy eradicates synthetics, but those same synthetics can be rebuilt, unless it also wiped the memories of all those technicians and engineers. In effect, EDI and other full AIs are the only real casualties, due to their blue boxes.

I also don't like the idea of the Catalyst still existing. Even with Shepards personality, there's literally nothing from deciding that harvesting would be the best course of action. Frankly, I don't care about the speech at the end, because its more a positive appeal to emotion than logic. There's also the issue of the various husk types. What happens to them?

Finally, who in the galaxy would be okay with the Reapers' continued existence? Even if they aren't immediately hostile, they have committed atrocities to innocent people. Those aren't going to be forgotten.

Modifié par o Ventus, 19 décembre 2012 - 05:20 .

[clennon8]

andy69156915 wrote...

kal_reegar wrote...

This galaxy will be destroyed in a distant future? Well, of course. If not by synthetics, by the reapers from another galaxy, or by synthetics from another galaxy (where, if the catalyst is rights, certainly there are organics who build synthetic who want to exterminate them), or by dark energy or by the dark lord of pyjak or, eventually, by the universe itself.

Yes it will, but not for any of those reasons. It will die when either-

A) The andromeda galaxy finally collides with ours

The heat death of the universe finally happens

C) Time runs out (Literally. Scientists have figured out that time itself, the very concept, is finite. In four out of five possible calculated scenarios, time is most likely to end in about 3.3 to 3.7 billion years. Whew. But in the fifth scenario, time could end before you finish this sentence. When this happens, everything will be frozen in place for eternity, like a video game freeze if you never shut the console off.)



So yeah, our galaxy is definitely on the way out someday.

Just feel the need to quibble with A above.  Neither the Milky Way nor the Andromeda will be destroyed when they "collide" a few billions years from now.  They'll simply merge together to form a larger galaxy.  It's extremely unlikely that any two stars will collide in the process.

[Han Shot First]

Control Shepard doesn't fly Reapers into the sun.

That is head canon and not game canon. The official canon is that if you choose Control, the Reaper fleet simply withdraws and continues to exist. The Reapers are canonically alive in Control, just as the Geth and EDI are canonically dead in Destroy.

The only ending where the Reapers are canonically destroyed is Destroy.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 19 décembre 2012 - 05:22 .

[JasonShepard]

andy69156915 wrote...

kal_reegar wrote...

This galaxy will be destroyed in a distant future? Well, of course. If not by synthetics, by the reapers from another galaxy, or by synthetics from another galaxy (where, if the catalyst is rights, certainly there are organics who build synthetic who want to exterminate them), or by dark energy or by the dark lord of pyjak or, eventually, by the universe itself.

Yes it will, but not for any of those reasons. It will die when either-

A) The andromeda galaxy finally collides with ours

The heat death of the universe finally happens

C) Time runs out (Literally. Scientists have figured out that time itself, the very concept, is finite. In four out of five possible calculated scenarios, time is most likely to end in about 3.3 to 3.7 billion years. Whew. But in the fifth scenario, time could end before you finish this sentence. When this happens, everything will be frozen in place for eternity, like a video game freeze if you never shut the console off.)



So yeah, our galaxy is definitely on the way out someday.

Agreed that the galaxy will no longer be inhabitable someday.
Disagree with ©. That's a new, young theory that hasn't even been tested yet, let alone proven. A handful of scientists came up with and published it - now let peer review do its job. Sure, it's based on science that we do understand, but I can guarrantee you that no scientist on Earth understands time.
Is it possible that time could end? Yes. If the paper is correct, then definitely yes.
Is it likely that time will end? At the moment, the best we have to go on is statistical evidence, so the only reply I can give is: It hasn't yet.

Modifié par JasonShepard, 19 décembre 2012 - 05:28 .

[shodiswe]

No matter how much of a mostrosity the reapers and their zombies are, saving the whole galaxy from them is an act of good. What matter is why you do it and what you accomplish. Shepard didn't create the Reapers, Shepard didn't create the Zombies. But Shepard can save the galaxy from the Reapers, the Zombies, and repair the relays in a timely fashion and help rebuild the galaxy so people can get on with their lives... Least the people who are still alive, including the Geth.... They can get back to cheating in turian MMO's or whatever they do to pass the time... And the Turian MMO GM's can go back to filing and dealing with the complaints about cheating Geth players.

And the "Asari" can go back to mind raping people in the streets! J/K Though im somewhat curious as to what will happen to that PTSD Asari commando in the hospital if you don't let her have a gun...

[CronoDragoon]

shodiswe wrote...
 including the Geth.... They can get back to cheating in turian MMO's or whatever they do to pass the time... And the Turian MMO GM's can go back to filing and dealing with the complaints about cheating Geth players.
.

LOL!

[Iakus]

I can only speak for myself but control is essentially enslaving the galaxy. The paragon version may be a more benevolent ruler, but in all cases, the Reapers are "guiding" the galaxy. The various peoples have traded their liberty for security. I seem to recall a saying about that. Who said that again? Ben somthingorother...

The entire trilogy has been about winning your freedom, breaking cycles, and developing along your own paths. Control flies in the face for that. The only question it asks are :Would you like your cages plain or gilded?"

Modifié par iakus, 19 décembre 2012 - 05:35 .

[Althix]

hmmm so we have gay ending like green one.

and we have a blue ending total control - which means that shep becomes a god child him self. also that means that it is now galaxy wide police force with god like abilities. and don't you dare to do something wrong mortal, godshep will slap you so hard so your world will die. i guess it's bad news for pirates, smugglers and even Aria. More to say moral level of Shepard will dictate how new god child will act in one situation or another.

red ending - retrebution, vengeance and justice. pick one. all human and xeno lives that were lost thanks for reapers would be avanged. By destruction of catalyst and reapers Shep secure future for galaxy species as we know it. and that society would evolve and grow as it did for 50k years. Even if galaxy of ME is doomed to destroy it self in one way or another - it would be deed done by living species with free will. Endure. In enduring we grow strong. After destruction of reapers galaxy is free. to good or bad but it is how it is.

p.s. honestly in think blue ending is actually red one, and red one is blue one.

Modifié par secretsandlies, 19 décembre 2012 - 05:39 .

[clennon8]

iakus wrote...

I can only speak for myself but control is essentially enslaving the galaxy. The paragon version may be a more benevolent ruler, but in all cases, the Reapers are "guiding" the galaxy. The various peoples have traded their liberty for security. I seem to recall a saying about that. Who said that again? Ben somthingorother...

The entire trilogy has been about winning your freedom, breaking cycles, and developing along your own paths. Control flies in the face for that. The only question it asks are :Would you like your cages plain or gilded?"

inb4 "Free will is an illusion."

[andy6915]

clennon8 wrote...

Just feel the need to quibble with A above.  Neither the Milky Way nor the Andromeda will be destroyed when they "collide" a few billions years from now.  They'll simply merge together to form a larger galaxy.  It's extremely unlikely that any two stars will collide in the process.

Wouldn't the sheer amount of mass and gravity each galaxy has completely screw each other? For another thing, both have a singularity in the center (the giant black hole that manages to spin the galaxy) too. Planets will be knocked out of their several billion year old orbits, black holes will collide, entire solar systems would likely get ripped to shreds by other solar systems coming too close and literally pulling each other apart by taking pieces off with their respective star's gravity. It will be like a giant blender, with both galaxies put in on "puree". Doomsday scenario written all over it. Our only hope is hoping either we or some other sapient species in either galaxy to have the tech to somehow keep both galaxies from ripping each other apart with their respective gravity wells.

JasonShepard wrote...

Agreed that the galaxy will no longer be inhabitable someday.

Disagree with ©. That's a new, young theory that hasn't even been tested yet, let alone proven. A handful of scientists came up with and published it -now let peer review do its job. Sure, it's based on science that we do understand, but I can guarrantee you that no scientist on Earth understands time. Is it possible that time could end? Yes. If the paper is correct, then definitely yes. Is it likely that time will end? At the moment, the best we have to go on is statistical evidence, so the only reply I can give is: It hasn't yet.

Maybe. I don't know enough about physics to truly debate about this subject. I just posted what I read.

Modifié par andy69156915, 19 décembre 2012 - 05:43 .

[jtav]

And I (speaking as jtav here, not as any Shepard or offering any opinion on thematic consistency) think "Freedom above all" is a disaster of a philosophy. If a dictator is truly benevolent (which would exclude the usual police state tactics of torture and disappearances) what does it matter as long as people are happy and thriving.

[Han Shot First]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I don't choose it because Control doesn't end with dead Reapers.

I subscribe to the Hackett and Anderson school of thought. "Dead Reapers is how we win this thing."

And it turns out that both Hackett and Anderson are clearly wrong and the Illusive Man was right.

Sure... if you are fine with the Reaper War ending in a stalemate, the Catalyst being replaced by Catalyst 2.0, and an intact Reaper fleet continuing to pose a threat to galactic civilization by its very existence.

I think I'll stick with Destroy. Anderson and Hackett had it right.

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...


The only ending that can truly guarantee that galactic civilization is saved from the Reapers for all time, is Destroy. Both Control and Synthesis end with intact Reaper fleets and require the galaxy to trust that the Reapers won't one day attack them and begin the cycle anew.

Destroy is actually the most unsure and uncertain ending of them all. What if the Catalyst turns out to be right? What if the geth or other synthetics indeed turn against organics once again? The Destroy galaxy requires the galaxy to trust that the geth or new synthetics won't one day attack them and begin the cycle anew.

See, I can use your own argument against you. It goes both ways.

Every possible ending carries some uncertainties with it.

But looking at it logically, what poses a greater threat to galactic civilization? Catalyst 2.0 and an intact Reaper fleet, or the Catalyst's prediction that organics would eventually create synthetics who would in turn destroy them, without the Catalyst's 'solution?'

I'll take my chances with the synthetics, considering they don't have a record of destroying thousands of civilizations and being the cause of countless mass extinctions. The Reapers are a much bigger threat and the uncertainties of Control, are potentially far more dangerous.

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...
 
Also both Control and Synthesis lead to the Reaper War concluding in a stalemate, with neither side having achieved its goal of destroying the other.

Nonsense. There is no stalemate in Control. We organics win. The Catalyst is defeated and replaced by Shepard. There is no longer conflict.  In both Control and Destroy we achieve our goal. We stop the reapers and we create a new future on our terms.

Control is a textbook stalemate.

Both the Reapers and the civilizations of the galaxy had the goal of destroying the other, and they both fail in achieving their main war aim. The Reapers also remain undefeated in the 'field' of battle, and the peace is a return to the status quo ante bellum. The Reapers continue to exist, and so does galactic civilization. Essentially the galaxy reverts to the conditions of the day before the Eden Prime attack.

The only way to win the Reaper War is to choose Destroy.

Refuse is an outright defeat, and Control and Synthesis are stalemates.

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

It is a return to the status quo antebellum, and as such an inconclusive outcome to the war. Destroy is preferable in that the Reaper War ends in a total victory for galactic civilization.

Wrong. Destroy is in fact the only ending that ends in a status quo. Destroy is only a short-term solution. it sets us back to the very beginning, but the organic v.s synthetic problem possibly still exists. What if one day synthetics rise up and start attacking organics once again? Then the whole cycle starts all over again.

I'm sorry but you seem to not to understand what status quo ante bellum means. Status quo ante bellum is a return to the conditions that existed before the outbreak of war. Control meets that criteria. So does Synthesis.

Destroy does not, because both the Catalyst and the Reaper fleet are destroyed.

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Finally, I wasn't about to turn Shepard into some form of Reaper abomination or trust that Catalyst 2.0 could manage the galaxy better than the version it replaced. Dead Catalysts is also how we win this thing.

A dead Catalyst will gain you a temporary victory, sure. But what will you do when the synthetics start rebelling again?

Control is a more secure and permanent solution. In Control we have the reapers as our guardians. Under Shepards command they'll protect us against future threats.

The only real permanent solution seems to be Sythesis, as much as I hate to admit it (I really don't like Synthesis).

First, Catalyst 2.0 is *not* Shepard. It is an A.I. that mimics Shepard's personality. What is to stop that A.I. from not eventually reaching the same conclusions as the A.I. it replaced?

And even if it was Shepard, it still couldn't be trusted. After all every Reaper that was ever created was created from organics who had once raged against their own destruction.

As for synthetics rebelling aginst organics, I choose not to pay attention to the predictions of a malfunctioning A.I. that betrayed and destroyed its own creators, before annihilating every space faring civilization in existence for billions of years as its 'solution' to this problem. Isn't that a case of the cure being worse than the disease?

It is better to take your chances with synthetics than to continue to allow any form of the Catalyst or the Reapers to continue to exist. The Reapers have destroyed countless civilizations and have annihilated countless species, where we have no record of synthetics doing either.
 
The Geth spared the Quarians and only wanted peace with them. The Protheans destroyed their rebellious synthetics, and so did the Leviathans. There is nothing to suggest that synthetics are any more dangerous than any other organic civilization. In fact I'd go so far as to say that cured Krogan would worry me more than the Geth.

As for Synthesis, it leaves the original Catalyst operational and in control of the Reapers. It arguably even more dangerous than Control.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 19 décembre 2012 - 05:54 .

[Xandurpein]

I think the ethical reason why I abhor Control is that Shepard's role as ruler of the Galaxy rests on might of arms and I think that is ethically wrong. Take away the real or implied threat of force and Reaper Shepard will hardly be able to control the Galaxy. Might doesn't make right.

[clennon8]

andy69156915 wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Just feel the need to quibble with A above.  Neither the Milky Way nor the Andromeda will be destroyed when they "collide" a few billions years from now.  They'll simply merge together to form a larger galaxy.  It's extremely unlikely that any two stars will collide in the process.

Wouldn't the sheer amount of mass and gravity each galaxy has completely screw each other? For another thing, both have a singularity in the center (the giant black hole that manages to spin the galaxy) too. Planets will be knocked out of their several billion year old orbits, black holes will collide, entire solar systems would likely get ripped to shreds by other solar systems coming too close and literally pulling each other apart by taking pieces off with their respective star's gravity. It will be like a giant blender, with both galaxies put in on "puree". Doomsday scenario written all over it. Our only hope is hoping either we or some other sapient species in either galaxy to have the tech to somehow keep both galaxies from ripping each other apart with their respective gravity wells.

JasonShepard wrote...

Agreed that the galaxy will no longer be inhabitable someday.

Disagree with ©. That's a new, young theory that hasn't even been tested yet, let alone proven. A handful of scientists came up with and published it -now let peer review do its job. Sure, it's based on science that we do understand, but I can guarrantee you that no scientist on Earth understands time. Is it possible that time could end? Yes. If the paper is correct, then definitely yes. Is it likely that time will end? At the moment, the best we have to go on is statistical evidence, so the only reply I can give is: It hasn't yet.

Maybe. I don't know enough about physics to truly debate about this subject. I just posted what I read.

http://en.wikipedia....y_Way_collision

[CronoDragoon]

jtav wrote...

And I (speaking as jtav here, not as any Shepard or offering any opinion on thematic consistency) think "Freedom above all" is a disaster of a philosophy. If a dictator is truly benevolent (which would exclude the usual police state tactics of torture and disappearances) what does it matter as long as people are happy and thriving.

It's an abstract and highly dependent argument, but it can matter. It can stagnate the mental growth of a species, make them reliant upon Shepard instead of themselves, etc. In that sense "happy" can also be dependant on your definition. Certainly they will be safer. Does that equate to happiness? Maybe. Perhaps happiness is also the pursuit of personal projects such that existentialists believe. In this case only certain projects can be approved, namely ones that don't "threaten the many." In which case any dangerous or potentially disastrous ideas will be rejected for peace. Again, stagnation.

[Ieldra]

jtav wrote...
Shepard can also ask Hackett "Well what if it's possible to control the Reapers?" Hackett gets livid, but Shepard doesn't. The man can come just shy of defending Sanctuary. So the game certainly provides enough RP space to play a Shepard who likes the idea in theory but doesn't believe it's possible until the endgame.

Indeed. The only problematic conversation is on Mars. I'm still trying to find a way to negotiate that one without my Shepard getting out of character. You don't have to endorse destroying the Reapers, but if you don't, there's a different kind of stupidity I don't recall.

[CronoDragoon]

Han Shot First wrote...

I'm sorry but you seem to not to understand what status quo ante bellum means. Status quo ante bellum is a return to the conditions that existed before the outbreak of war. Control meets that criteria. So does Synthesis.

Destroy does not, because both the Catalyst and the Reaper fleet are destroyed.

No ending fits that description. Synthesis is the ending that LEAST fits that description, considering the basic nature of physical being in the universe has been altered.

[CroGamer002]

iakus wrote...

I can only speak for myself but control is essentially enslaving the galaxy. The paragon version may be a more benevolent ruler, but in all cases, the Reapers are "guiding" the galaxy. The various peoples have traded their liberty for security. I seem to recall a saying about that. Who said that again? Ben somthingorother...

The entire trilogy has been about winning your freedom, breaking cycles, and developing along your own paths. Control flies in the face for that. The only question it asks are :Would you like your cages plain or gilded?"

How is it a slavery when you just don't allow governments to do any war?


Reapers don't start watching everyone like it's some Big Brother society.
They can't do that, they're just huge warships.


Only thing they can do is not allow any military action by any government body without dealing with Reapers.


That's all that can Reapers do.


Only way for actual slavery you describe is the Council or some other big government get's Catalyst Shepard to support that idea.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Optimus Prime sums up my disagreement with control perfectly. "Freedom is the right of all sentient beings."

[andy6915]

http://en.wikipedia....y_Way_collision

Interesting. I never did the proper research then (spare time wiki research I mean, I'm no scientist). I always assumed it was gameover for both galaxies when the collision happened, that the gravity of both would rip, tear, and pull each other apart..