301 réponses à ce sujet

[Redbelle]

Idling flicking through YouTube and came across a vid dating back to ME2 that probably voice's our expectation's through the words of Shepard.

[AlanC9]

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
You mean the EC material before Shepard acts, right?

I stated what I thought of the slides.  Technically if you believe the crap that is the super silly slideshows then sure, nothing is changed before Shepard makes a choice.  Afterward, the slides are just a way to make people "feel" like they done gooooood.  Smile for the camera.  It is to stop people from thinking the relays destroyed the galaxy and to provide some sort of epilog-type feeling, but the slides do not show authentic feeling consequences.
 

i guess I came in late. Thanks for the recap.

I'm not sure how seriously I'm supposed to take your hallucination headcanon, or how seriously you take it. But as snark it's pretty good.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Priss Blackburne wrote...
Before I can trust that the Catalyst isn't lying to me he needs to asnwer my questions that nag at me.

Questions I want to ask the Catalyst.

[snip]

These are all decent questions, but it's not as if the Catalyst gives you incorrect or misleading information about any of these issues - it doesn't address them because Shepard doesn't ask. That's probably a flaw in the writing, though I would observe that thousands are probably still dying by the minute from the looks of the space battles taking place outside, and that Shepard probably doesn't think (s)he can take time for a 4-hour philosophy and biotechnology seminar with the Catalyst.

I guess where I part from the pro-Destroy crowd is that, given the fact that the whole scene is somewhat rushed and abbreviated, I prefer to still work what is at least implied from the information available. For example:

How much control does he have over the reapers if they regard themselves as individuals and show signs of hatred towards organic species?

We do know that limited perspective can be an issue for synthetic collective intelligences in the ME universe, because we hear about it from Legion. It's fair to assume that the Reapers' perspective is deeply limited based on the Catalyst's programming.

And the Catalyst does say that there will be peace in Synthesis, even though the Reapers (Harbinger included, presumably) won't be destroyed or controlled. Sure, Shepard could press the Catalyst on this point, but if you think it's lying when it says there will be peace, why wouldn't it also be lying if asked to elaborate? And why wouldn't it lie about how Destroy is supposed to work and give Shepard a fake power source to shoot at instead?

So I'm left to work from what I do know, which is that (a) Shepard appears to be dealing with a deeply misguided and malfunctioning entity rather than a truly malevolent one, given what was learned from the Leviathans; ( if it was inclined to lie, it's not doing a very good job; © Destroy will *definitely* result in widespread collateral damage and the extinction of an entire species, while some of the risks of Control and Synthesis are more open-ended; and (d) the epilogues don't suggest some sort of galactic indoctrination nightmare as the result of rejecting Destroy.

Is that metagaming? I suppose it is up to a point, but haven't we all done some of that? Do you think nobody ever picked the "wrong" dialogue options on Virmire at first and then reloaded after seeing Ashley shoot Wrex, or similarly screwed up in trying to talk Talitha off the ledge in a Colonist playthrough and then tried again? Or convinced Bhatia to let the Alliance keep his wife's body after learning that ordering the body released hurts Alliance recruiting efforts in ME2?

[FlyingSquirrel]

3DandBeyond wrote...
Better to consider this: someone comes inside your home and kills most of your family and eats them, and tells you that he will not kill the others if you solve his problem.  Where would your level of trust be.  Consider that this person gives you or you find some unknown thing lying on the floor.  The killer tells you that this thing (that looks dangerous) will do certain things to solve his problem, but all you wanna do is kill him and his friends.  This killer tells you that unknown thing can kill his friends, or it will allow you to join them and will also join them with your remaining family members.  Or you can become the boss of the gang.  But you mostly must commit suicide to help him.  How much of that would make sense to you?

But the Catalyst is not a person. It is a powerful but badly designed AI that doesn't seem to understand the point of its own directives.

A better analogy would be if you came home and found a malfunctioning robot having killed and eaten most of your family, and the robot informs you that the unknown thing on the floor will vaporize a bunch of your friends if you use it to just turn the robot off. If, after talking to the robot, I determined that it does not appear programmed to lie and that one of the alternative methods could correct its faulty programming, I would not just go reaching for the off-switch anyway.

[Priss Blackburne]

I tend not to Metagame and choose options that have the best outcomes and choose ones that I believe my Shepard would take. Sometimes It has burned me but it's part of the immersion for me.

[Priss Blackburne]

FlyingSquirrel wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
Better to consider this: someone comes inside your home and kills most of your family and eats them, and tells you that he will not kill the others if you solve his problem.  Where would your level of trust be.  Consider that this person gives you or you find some unknown thing lying on the floor.  The killer tells you that this thing (that looks dangerous) will do certain things to solve his problem, but all you wanna do is kill him and his friends.  This killer tells you that unknown thing can kill his friends, or it will allow you to join them and will also join them with your remaining family members.  Or you can become the boss of the gang.  But you mostly must commit suicide to help him.  How much of that would make sense to you?

But the Catalyst is not a person. It is a powerful but badly designed AI that doesn't seem to understand the point of its own directives.

A better analogy would be if you came home and found a malfunctioning robot having killed and eaten most of your family, and the robot informs you that the unknown thing on the floor will vaporize a bunch of your friends if you use it to just turn the robot off. If, after talking to the robot, I determined that it does not appear programmed to lie and that one of the alternative methods could correct its faulty programming, I would not just go reaching for the off-switch anyway.

Given the evolution and understanding that Legion and EDI have shown you don't believe that the billion year old Reaper AI could evolve past simple logistics. EDI has lied. The Reapers have lied to gain allies like Saren before. But the creator and leader of the Reapers can't?

Modifié par Priss Blackburne, 07 janvier 2013 - 10:45 .

[knightnblu]

You are metagaming. You only have that position because you have already witnessed the endings, but what you don't know is if Shepard's values are retained or if Shepard and all life has been re-written to accpet the Catalyst as master. As for control, who's to say that Shepard won't one day unleash the Reapers on the galaxy again? He is no longer human and as the years roll by he will grow less and less so. Who's to say that he will always be the friend of the organic?

As far as the original choice is concerned, what reason did you have to believe the Catalyst? If you will recall he was trying his best to kill you not ten minutes ago and nearly got you.

[tanisha__unknown]

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...

 The extended endings show that the reaper AI did infact speak the truth. Why are some people hellbent on still saying that the reaper AI is deceiving you to take control or Synthesis?

*sigh, this again

Control ends in peace and prosperity for the galaxy.
Synthesis ends in peace and prosperity for the galaxy.
Destroy only resets everything and puts the galaxy back to square one.

metagamers metagame....

Some people say the Reaper AI is trying to "manipulate" you into going anything but destroy, but he is merely giving advice - and with good reason. Controlling the Reapers and Synthesis both leads to good endings. Only bad ending is destroy imo, with this - the galaxy has no ensurance against further war or synthetics as a new threat later on.

You're kidding, right ?

Also bear in mind that the reapers arent evil. They did what they were programmed to do. They dont take pleasure or grievance in destroying civilizations. In their eyes they are the guardians of the universe, and races "destroyed" are actually kept "alive" through reapers.

Even if they do not enjoy their deeds, they ARE evil. If you do something bad with the best intentions at heart, it is still bad and if it's a crime by law it will remain a crime regardless of your intentions.

The reaper AI has no motivations or malevolent intent. And Control and Synthesis leads to positive outcomes. The "Shepards mission to destroy the reapers" argument for taking destroy is narrowminded and short sighted imo.

As it stands, the reaper AI spoke the truth. Whats with the people saying he deceives and tries to manipulate you? He didnt. And destroy ending still stays as the least good ending imo. Choosing destroy is something I imagine a selfish and childish renegade I-want-revenge Shepard would pick.

Yeah, you don't really have convincing arguments.

[tanisha__unknown]

Steelcan wrote...

Because he is nonsensical and illogical.

The end credits show that he was full of it.  Destroy EC slides and Stargazer scene show that synthetics do not rise up or anything.  The Catalyst is wrong.

I see nothing illogical or nonsensical in what the Catalyst said. It was there for millions of years, and it spent enough time on investigating and attempts to solve the problem.

You have to work on your logical thinking. The errors and absurdness of the choices and the way they are chose have been pointed out many times

And who is Shepard to judge that?

(S)he's Shepard, saviour of the citadel, conqueror of the collectors and humanities best hope for survival.

Sooner or later after Destroy new synthetics will be built and everything will start from the beginning. Just give galactic civilization some time. History just loves to repeat itself.

You don't know that.

Modifié par Jinx1720, 07 janvier 2013 - 11:18 .

[FlyingSquirrel]

@Priss Blackburne

I tend not to Metagame and choose options that have the best outcomes and choose ones that I believe my Shepard would take. Sometimes It has burned me but it's part of the immersion for me.

I get what you're saying. On the other hand, I can't play Shepard exactly the way I'd like to in the first place (in that I can only pick from a series of actions and dialogue choices scripted by Bioware), and I also approach a game like ME from the perspective of crafting a story as well as playing a character.

Destroy, to me, is a tragic miscalculation in the context of an overall story. It wipes out a species that was pretty generous in its terms for joining the fight: the geth immediately offer the quarians peace if you save them both, and their only "demands" are the use of two things they already have - the Reaper code and their settlements on Rannoch. It also obliterates whatever is left of the harvested species even though the Reapers may not be malevolent or destructive once free of the Catalyst.

So I can play Shepard as either taking a leap of faith or causing what turns out to be a lot of unnecessary death and destruction. Sure, I'd *like* to play Shepard as being able to make a 100% rational, air-tight decision based on having all the necessary facts in place, but that option isn't there.

Given the evolution and understanding that Legion and EDI have shown you don't believe that the billion year old Reaper AI could evolve past simple logistics. EDI has lied. The Reapers have lied to gain allies like Saren before. But the creator and leader of the Reapers can't?

Not so much "can't" as "wouldn't," if the only thing it would gain is self-preservation or some sort of ego boost from being the Reapers' leader. I don't think it cares about that.

@ knightnblu

You are metagaming. You only have that position because you have already witnessed the endings, but what you don't know is if Shepard's values are retained or if Shepard and all life has been re-written to accpet the Catalyst as master.

No, I don't *know* that, but I also don't know what unforeseen consequences could result from Destroy. What if Destroy leads to acceptance of the idea that collateral genocide is an acceptable way to win a war, and warfare turns even more brutal and destructive in the future? Or, what if the quarians have a much longer and more painful transition on Rannoch because they're denied the geth's assistance in rebuilding and strengthening their immune systems?

As Shepard can tell the Dalatrass, I won't condemn an entire species based on what *might* happen (that might be paraphrased, but I know Shepard can say something along those lines).

And, really, as for metagaming - how many people sometimes pick Mordin to lead the Normandy survivors back to the ship at the end of ME2? Does it really make sense that, out of all the crewmates you could pick, Mordin would be the best candidate as a one-man fighting machine trying to protect a group of exhausted noncombatants from the Collectors?

[Hazegurl]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

Gewehr_fr wrote...

Yes I agree that what the catalyst AI says must be taken at face value, you have no choice but to trust it anyway.

However to say reapers aren't evil you must be either trolling or indoctrinated. They certainly don't perceive it as evil acts, they're just doing what they've been programmed for "when fire burns, is it war?", but facts are that they're killing everyone, turning men women and children of every civilization in the galaxy into glue or mindless zombies ground forces. Individuals are plain killed. Only their DNA is preserved which is useless, and also assumes the capital ship doesn't get destroyed in future cycles.

The way I see reapers are abominations that must be destroyed no matter the cost. If the synthetics must one day or another inevitably takeover the galaxy, then so be it. I have not seen an evidence of this happening in this current cycle.

Right, besides reapers are not fire, they are not mother nature nor are they a natural event. They are created unatural beings that are in fact starting a war. They don't preserve life, they just know how to destory it. Good riddance.

inaccurate, as they contain life and their DNA of past harvests. Their intellect it's self is from past civilizations.

Not inaccurate. They destory humanity, they take away who were are and what makes us individuals. This is something Shepard has been arguing with the reapers since ME1. DNA is nothing more than data to the reapers. Human beings and organic life period is more than that.

[Keatstwo]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Keatstwo wrote...

Every time I want somebody to trust me I'm actually lying to them. Flawless logic. Maybe he just wants you to trust him because he wants you to help him action a better solution to the problem? Hell, he TELLS you right off the bat that he created and controls the reapers, if he really wanted to trick you why would he tell you that?

Well let me ask you how many murders you have committed and then if you tried to get the victims to do you a favor to keep you from killing?  How many people have you turned into goo?  If you say more than zero then your credibility is toilet bound, especially if you want me to help you enact a new solution to replace the goo-making process.

Of course he must tell you he controls the reapers and after Leviathan that's a given that this "intelligence" created them.  He is trying to manipulate in order to make himself believable.  He thinks this all makes some sort of sense but does seem aware that it does not all make sense to Shepard.  Except BW forgot that Shepard should act like it doesn't make sense.

Better to consider this: someone comes inside your home and kills most of your family and eats them, and tells you that he will not kill the others if you solve his problem.  Where would your level of trust be.  Consider that this person gives you or you find some unknown thing lying on the floor.  The killer tells you that this thing (that looks dangerous) will do certain things to solve his problem, but all you wanna do is kill him and his friends.  This killer tells you that unknown thing can kill his friends, or it will allow you to join them and will also join them with your remaining family members.  Or you can become the boss of the gang.  But you mostly must commit suicide to help him.  How much of that would make sense to you?

Real people don't just trust the veracity of serial killers that eat people or someone that makes that happen.  Again, why is it so hard to believe that a thing that is turning people into goo could also deceive?

Basically I tend to be a little more trusting of people that don't make people goo skyscrapers, and not so trusting of those that do.  I'm funny that way.

What a perfect anology.

Oh wait.

What the catalyst / reapers are doing is logical, the situation you've outlined is not. Just accept that you're intended to take the ending at face value and move on. Or do you need a few more locked indoctrination threads before you finally get the point?

[Hazegurl]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...
inaccurate, as they contain life and their DNA of past harvests. Their intellect it's self is from past civilizations.

No.

Inaccurate, merely self-justifying headcanon and wishful thinking.

Right, Collectors can't kick back and talk about "old times" with Javik. They are soulless husk like slaves under reaper control.  As Shepard says Killing a Collector is doing it a favor. 

[Keatstwo]

Collectors =/= Reapers.

[Priss Blackburne]

FlyingSquirrel wrote...


Not so much "can't" as "wouldn't," if the only thing it would gain is self-preservation or some sort of ego boost from being the Reapers' leader. I don't think it cares about that.

By Taking Synthesis you are doing just what the Catalyst wants you to, what he has tried to do in the past. Which Reaper are part synthetic part organic.

You can Destroy me yes, but you will destroy these people and yourself ... or you can control me( like we let the Illusive man believe he could)... or you can become like one of us the pinnacle of evoultion a melding of organic and synthetic (like we told Saren.)

FlyingSquirrel wrote...


As Shepard can tell the Dalatrass, I won't condemn an entire species based on what *might* happen (that might be paraphrased, but I know Shepard can say something along those lines).

Same can be said about choosing an option where the reapers are still around. You don't know for sure that you can control them. Just like you previously talked Illusive man out of taking that chance that it may not work betting humanity's existence on it. The Reapers also might still continue with their rampage in synthesis.

In Destroy ( if you believe the Catalyst that is)  you know the Reaper threat is over for good.

No one choice guaranties peace but at least one removes the beings who have been exterminating organics for a billion years.



But I originaly started about how I don't trust the Catalyst and I'm starting to sound like I'm telling people which choice they should choose and I don't like that so I'll stop.

Edit: By the way just like to mention incase it seem otherwise I like the points you made however and how you made them. Reading them made me think for a while about them and probably will still, especially about the Catalyst and impossing organic like thinking on a AI. I'll have to ponder thinking of the catalyst in a more analytical way.

Modifié par Priss Blackburne, 07 janvier 2013 - 11:49 .

[3DandBeyond]

Keatstwo wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Keatstwo wrote...

Every time I want somebody to trust me I'm actually lying to them. Flawless logic. Maybe he just wants you to trust him because he wants you to help him action a better solution to the problem? Hell, he TELLS you right off the bat that he created and controls the reapers, if he really wanted to trick you why would he tell you that?

Well let me ask you how many murders you have committed and then if you tried to get the victims to do you a favor to keep you from killing?  How many people have you turned into goo?  If you say more than zero then your credibility is toilet bound, especially if you want me to help you enact a new solution to replace the goo-making process.

Of course he must tell you he controls the reapers and after Leviathan that's a given that this "intelligence" created them.  He is trying to manipulate in order to make himself believable.  He thinks this all makes some sort of sense but does seem aware that it does not all make sense to Shepard.  Except BW forgot that Shepard should act like it doesn't make sense.

Better to consider this: someone comes inside your home and kills most of your family and eats them, and tells you that he will not kill the others if you solve his problem.  Where would your level of trust be.  Consider that this person gives you or you find some unknown thing lying on the floor.  The killer tells you that this thing (that looks dangerous) will do certain things to solve his problem, but all you wanna do is kill him and his friends.  This killer tells you that unknown thing can kill his friends, or it will allow you to join them and will also join them with your remaining family members.  Or you can become the boss of the gang.  But you mostly must commit suicide to help him.  How much of that would make sense to you?

Real people don't just trust the veracity of serial killers that eat people or someone that makes that happen.  Again, why is it so hard to believe that a thing that is turning people into goo could also deceive?

Basically I tend to be a little more trusting of people that don't make people goo skyscrapers, and not so trusting of those that do.  I'm funny that way.

What a perfect anology.

Oh wait.

What the catalyst / reapers are doing is logical, the situation you've outlined is not. Just accept that you're intended to take the ending at face value and move on. Or do you need a few more locked indoctrination threads before you finally get the point?

Nice try, where did I mention indoctrination.  I gave a real analogy to what the catalyst is and is telling you to do, instead of the crap you stated that people that you want to trust you just think you are lying.  You never answered the question-how many people have you turned to goo? 

But you won't answer the question because you prefer to just belittle people and act like this actually makes sense.  It's patently clear that what the kid and the reapers are doing is nowhere near logical at all and it is very much like my analogy.  State the flaws in what I have said and answer questions rather than trying to imply people are all talking about clearly something they are not talking about.  Use the skill of reading.

[3DandBeyond]

Priss Blackburne wrote...

FlyingSquirrel wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
Better to consider this: someone comes inside your home and kills most of your family and eats them, and tells you that he will not kill the others if you solve his problem.  Where would your level of trust be.  Consider that this person gives you or you find some unknown thing lying on the floor.  The killer tells you that this thing (that looks dangerous) will do certain things to solve his problem, but all you wanna do is kill him and his friends.  This killer tells you that unknown thing can kill his friends, or it will allow you to join them and will also join them with your remaining family members.  Or you can become the boss of the gang.  But you mostly must commit suicide to help him.  How much of that would make sense to you?

But the Catalyst is not a person. It is a powerful but badly designed AI that doesn't seem to understand the point of its own directives.

A better analogy would be if you came home and found a malfunctioning robot having killed and eaten most of your family, and the robot informs you that the unknown thing on the floor will vaporize a bunch of your friends if you use it to just turn the robot off. If, after talking to the robot, I determined that it does not appear programmed to lie and that one of the alternative methods could correct its faulty programming, I would not just go reaching for the off-switch anyway.

Given the evolution and understanding that Legion and EDI have shown you don't believe that the billion year old Reaper AI could evolve past simple logistics. EDI has lied. The Reapers have lied to gain allies like Saren before. But the creator and leader of the Reapers can't?

Exactly the point.  The kid (catalyst/AI/glow boy) either is or is not a capable and adaptable thing that can interpret new situations.  If he is then he should be able to learn as he goes and he's had plenty of time to learn, but has seemingly not done so and so he is too flawed to be allowed to go on.  If he is not able to learn and adapt then he is poorly suited to the task he was given and is too flawed to be allowed to continue on.

If you believe the kid (and that's what this is about) then he even says he is more than just an AI.  If you believe him he also says his solution no longer works.  If he's a simple "robot", his programming then would note that the solution (reapers) isn't working and would stop implementing it.  If he's adaptable and understands a lot (as he should) then he would see the error of continuing with a non-working solution.  Or you don't believe him when he says that the reapers no longer work.

He cannot be everything that he must be in order for all of this to be true.  He's flawed, shackled, controlled, or autonomous, does not lie, logical, and learns and adapts.  But neither of these fit with everything he says, so something he says is a lie or mistaken and either one is not something to commit suicide for. 

And in the robot analogy, where in all that you are shown are you given proof the kid is never lying or deceitful, without meta-gaming or even with meta-gaming?  Remember, one example of something that does not fit is either a mistake at best and a lie or deceit at worst.  People really need to go through the list of all that the kid says and what they know to be true in the game.  But then in several cases the kid does show evasiveness.  However, no matter if he tells the truth or not, what do you actually know for certain (with proof and no meta-gaming) will happen when you make a choice?  No one can say and that's the problem.  But Shepard must commit suicide on the say so of the thing that has been turning people into goo.

[Slayer299]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

He's the leader of the Reapers.

The people trying to destroy the galaxy.

The people who are known to use mind control.

The people who have never done anything nice ever.

The people who's only purpose is killing other beings.

The people who have been trying to kill Shepard since the first game.

Yeah.

[Paranoidal nemesis]

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...

 The extended endings show that the reaper AI did infact speak the truth. Why are some people hellbent on still saying that the reaper AI is deceiving you to take control or Synthesis?

Control ends in peace and prosperity for the galaxy.
Synthesis ends in peace and prosperity for the galaxy.
Destroy only resets everything and puts the galaxy back to square one.

Some people say the Reaper AI is trying to "manipulate" you into going anything but destroy, but he is merely giving advice - and with good reason. Controlling the Reapers and Synthesis both leads to good endings. Only bad ending is destroy imo, with this - the galaxy has no ensurance against further war or synthetics as a new threat later on. 

Also bear in mind that the reapers arent evil. They did what they were programmed to do. They dont take pleasure or grievance in destroying civilizations. In their eyes they are the guardians of the universe, and races "destroyed" are actually kept "alive" through reapers. 

The reaper AI has no motivations or malevolent intent. And Control and Synthesis leads to positive outcomes. The "Shepards mission to destroy the reapers" argument for taking destroy is narrowminded and short sighted imo.

As it stands, the reaper AI spoke the truth. Whats with the people saying he deceives and tries to manipulate you? He didnt. And destroy ending still stays as the least good ending imo. Choosing destroy is something I imagine a selfish and childish renegade I-want-revenge Shepard would pick.

Its trying to tell you that peace between organics and synthetics is impossible, despite the fact that you made peace between organics and synthetics on Rannoch. 

[Paranoidal nemesis]

Doesn't the catalyst say that with synthesis, synthetics will understand organics? The AI being a synthetic itself, indirectly acknowledges that it doesn't understand organics. It views organic life as flawed, too inferior to save itself from its own creations. Its ideal solution (synthesis) is to change organic dna, essentially making organic life forms extinct.

[3DandBeyond]

AlanC9 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
You mean the EC material before Shepard acts, right?

I stated what I thought of the slides.  Technically if you believe the crap that is the super silly slideshows then sure, nothing is changed before Shepard makes a choice.  Afterward, the slides are just a way to make people "feel" like they done gooooood.  Smile for the camera.  It is to stop people from thinking the relays destroyed the galaxy and to provide some sort of epilog-type feeling, but the slides do not show authentic feeling consequences.
 

i guess I came in late. Thanks for the recap.

I'm not sure how seriously I'm supposed to take your hallucination headcanon, or how seriously you take it. But as snark it's pretty good.

Sure belittle and ascribe things to hallucinations.  Especially when you are the one that consistently stated that you wished the endings had shown more real consequences.  Nice now to forget that-you wished they stuck with the idea that the relays destroyed the galaxy and felt the new endings were too soft.  Where's your own hallucination now?

[3DandBeyond]

Paranoidal nemesis wrote...

Doesn't the catalyst say that with synthesis, synthetics will understand organics? The AI being a synthetic itself, indirectly acknowledges that it doesn't understand organics. It views organic life as flawed, too inferior to save itself from its own creations. Its ideal solution (synthesis) is to change organic dna, essentially making organic life forms extinct.

Exactly.  Organics no longer exist so synthetics are being given full understanding of things that don't exist anymore, and they are getting that full understanding from where???

[3DandBeyond]

Redbelle wrote...

Idling flicking through YouTube and came across a vid dating back to ME2 that probably voice's our expectation's through the words of Shepard.

Awesome video with some awesome foes.  Wonder where you can get a game with foes like that?

"When the Alpha relay breaks some people will see that we can fight the reapers and win."  Wow, the galaxy needs more people like that.

[Enhanced]

Paranoidal nemesis wrote...

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...

 The extended endings show that the reaper AI did infact speak the truth. Why are some people hellbent on still saying that the reaper AI is deceiving you to take control or Synthesis?

Control ends in peace and prosperity for the galaxy.
Synthesis ends in peace and prosperity for the galaxy.
Destroy only resets everything and puts the galaxy back to square one.

Some people say the Reaper AI is trying to "manipulate" you into going anything but destroy, but he is merely giving advice - and with good reason. Controlling the Reapers and Synthesis both leads to good endings. Only bad ending is destroy imo, with this - the galaxy has no ensurance against further war or synthetics as a new threat later on. 

Also bear in mind that the reapers arent evil. They did what they were programmed to do. They dont take pleasure or grievance in destroying civilizations. In their eyes they are the guardians of the universe, and races "destroyed" are actually kept "alive" through reapers. 

The reaper AI has no motivations or malevolent intent. And Control and Synthesis leads to positive outcomes. The "Shepards mission to destroy the reapers" argument for taking destroy is narrowminded and short sighted imo.

As it stands, the reaper AI spoke the truth. Whats with the people saying he deceives and tries to manipulate you? He didnt. And destroy ending still stays as the least good ending imo. Choosing destroy is something I imagine a selfish and childish renegade I-want-revenge Shepard would pick.

Its trying to tell you that peace between organics and synthetics is impossible, despite the fact that you made peace between organics and synthetics on Rannoch. 

The peace won't last.  The type of synthetic rebellions that the Catalyst and Leviathans were speaking of haven't happened yet. The Geth were mainly a threat to the Quarians, not the entire galaxy. The cycles were designed to prevent the synthetics from eliminating all organic in the galaxy by harvesting advanced civilizations before it gets to that point.

Modifié par Enhanced, 08 janvier 2013 - 02:14 .

[Keatstwo]

Paranoidal nemesis wrote...

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...

 The extended endings show that the reaper AI did infact speak the truth. Why are some people hellbent on still saying that the reaper AI is deceiving you to take control or Synthesis?

Control ends in peace and prosperity for the galaxy.
Synthesis ends in peace and prosperity for the galaxy.
Destroy only resets everything and puts the galaxy back to square one.

Some people say the Reaper AI is trying to "manipulate" you into going anything but destroy, but he is merely giving advice - and with good reason. Controlling the Reapers and Synthesis both leads to good endings. Only bad ending is destroy imo, with this - the galaxy has no ensurance against further war or synthetics as a new threat later on. 

Also bear in mind that the reapers arent evil. They did what they were programmed to do. They dont take pleasure or grievance in destroying civilizations. In their eyes they are the guardians of the universe, and races "destroyed" are actually kept "alive" through reapers. 

The reaper AI has no motivations or malevolent intent. And Control and Synthesis leads to positive outcomes. The "Shepards mission to destroy the reapers" argument for taking destroy is narrowminded and short sighted imo.

As it stands, the reaper AI spoke the truth. Whats with the people saying he deceives and tries to manipulate you? He didnt. And destroy ending still stays as the least good ending imo. Choosing destroy is something I imagine a selfish and childish renegade I-want-revenge Shepard would pick.

Its trying to tell you that peace between organics and synthetics is impossible, despite the fact that you made peace between organics and synthetics on Rannoch. 

No, it isn't. It tells you that long term peace is impossible. You have no evidence to the contrary so it really isn't as contradictory as you're making it out to be.