238 réponses à ce sujet

[simonrana]

wright1978 wrote...

simonrana wrote...

If the Destroy option was "kill all Reapers but also wipe out Earth" I would still find it the best solution, since ensuring the Reapers are gone for good seems like the most important thing to me.

QFT

Thanks! (I had to google "QFT" to see if it was backup or some kind of insult!)

[CosmicGnosis]

pirate1802 wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

ZeCollectorDestroya wrote...

Sacrifice, it is needed in war.

Your paragraphs don't hold a match to my sentence.

My Shepard gives up his life to become the one who can save the many.

Good.. so you finally saw the (blue) light.

Eh, the jury's out on Synthesis. I hate "organic energy" and forced change!

[DirtyPhoenix]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

ZeCollectorDestroya wrote...

Sacrifice, it is needed in war.

Your paragraphs don't hold a match to my sentence.

My Shepard gives up his life to become the one who can save the many.

Good.. so you finally saw the (blue) light.

Eh, the jury's out on Synthesis. I hate "organic energy" and forced change!

Same here.

[CosmicGnosis]

simonrana wrote...

d-boy15 wrote...
It called sacrifice a few for many, every war have that sort of thing.

Destroy not necessary pro-organic, you can view it like that if it make you feel better. many peoples
who choose destroy see Geth and EDI as the price of freedom and they can accepted it. I don't see
many of them choose it just to kill synthetics. Destroy leave the galaxy in uncertain future, it get rid
of the influence from Reaper and allow galaxy to choose their own path. if their choice is to destroy
themselves then so be it. also, Freedom is never come cheap...

Seconded. If you happened to be playing an anti-synthetic Shepard then Destroy caters for your anti-synthetic viewpoint, but it also caters just as well for any Shepard that firmly believes in destroying the Reapers once and for all, no matter what the cost.

If the Destroy option was "kill all Reapers but also wipe out Earth" I would still find it the best solution, since ensuring the Reapers are gone for good seems like the most important thing to me.

But I don't blame the Reapers for their actions. The blame is all on the Catalyst. If you remove the Catalyst, then "justice has been served". The Reapers are just the avatars of the preserved civilizations, and we've never even spoken to one that wasn't under the influence of the Catalyst and its ideals.

I'd rather free the Reapers and restore the species contained within them. Of course, Reapers like Harbinger will have to be watched closely, but it's worth it if we can restore some benevolent species.

[Sebby]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

You act like this is a bad thing, OP.

+1

Killing the inconsistent and derpy synths of ME is not a bad thing. Now, if it involved Aegis and Labrys of Persona or Cortana of Halo, then it would have given me pause.

[Legbiter]

Yeah so? Problem?

[Nerevar-as]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

simonrana wrote...

d-boy15 wrote...
It called sacrifice a few for many, every war have that sort of thing.

Destroy not necessary pro-organic, you can view it like that if it make you feel better. many peoples
who choose destroy see Geth and EDI as the price of freedom and they can accepted it. I don't see
many of them choose it just to kill synthetics. Destroy leave the galaxy in uncertain future, it get rid
of the influence from Reaper and allow galaxy to choose their own path. if their choice is to destroy
themselves then so be it. also, Freedom is never come cheap...

Seconded. If you happened to be playing an anti-synthetic Shepard then Destroy caters for your anti-synthetic viewpoint, but it also caters just as well for any Shepard that firmly believes in destroying the Reapers once and for all, no matter what the cost.

If the Destroy option was "kill all Reapers but also wipe out Earth" I would still find it the best solution, since ensuring the Reapers are gone for good seems like the most important thing to me.

But I don't blame the Reapers for their actions. The blame is all on the Catalyst. If you remove the Catalyst, then "justice has been served". The Reapers are just the avatars of the preserved civilizations, and we've never even spoken to one that wasn't under the influence of the Catalyst and its ideals.

I'd rather free the Reapers and restore the species contained within them. Of course, Reapers like Harbinger will have to be watched closely, but it's worth it if we can restore some benevolent species.

That´s like saying removing Skynet solves the Terminators issue. It doesn´t. Reapers were built for one function, and that´s all they´ll ever do. Both Control and Synthesis consist in overriding their programing, not freeing them. I don´t see Starbrat controlling them, it just made them with that smug mindset (which says a lot about SB too). And let´s face it, a truly free Reaper would probably fly into the nearest star, what was done to them and then they did unto others would drive the original people to utter desperation.

[CosmicGnosis]

Nerevar-as wrote...

That´s like saying removing Skynet solves the Terminators issue. It doesn´t. Reapers were built for one function, and that´s all they´ll ever do. Both Control and Synthesis consist in overriding their programing, not freeing them. I don´t see Starbrat controlling them, it just made them with that smug mindset (which says a lot about SB too). And let´s face it, a truly free Reaper would probably fly into the nearest star, what was done to them and then they did unto others would drive the original people to utter desperation.

Then what is the purpose of replacing the Catalyst and controlling the Reapers? Your post renders Control completely meaningless.

Modifié par CosmicGnosis, 14 janvier 2013 - 12:53 .

[CosmicGnosis]

frudi wrote...

And insisting that synthetics do get destroyed, when there is clearly no evidence to unambiguously support such a position, is just an attempt to invalidate the clearly best choice (among the original three) and try and justify the other two monstrosities.

I accept the endings for what they are. BioWare implies that Shepard survives in High-EMS Destroy, just like they imply that synthetics are killed.

Modifié par CosmicGnosis, 14 janvier 2013 - 01:00 .

[Nerevar-as]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

That´s like saying removing Skynet solves the Terminators issue. It doesn´t. Reapers were built for one function, and that´s all they´ll ever do. Both Control and Synthesis consist in overriding their programing, not freeing them. I don´t see Starbrat controlling them, it just made them with that smug mindset (which says a lot about SB too). And let´s face it, a truly free Reaper would probably fly into the nearest star, what was done to them and then they did unto others would drive the original people to utter desperation.

Then what is the purpose of replacing the Catalyst and controlling the Reapers? Your post renders Control completely meaningless.

They are overridden, so they no longer reap. I disagree that they are freed, just that they were reprogrammed or more likely shackled by the ShepAIrd. And if you are very optimistic about the ShepAIrd, then it stops the war with only one sacrifice. I am not, so I don´t choose it, and I feel like I lose IQ points just considering Synthesis, so went with Destroy despite having nothing against synthetics (quite like them in fact).

[Steelcan]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

frudi wrote...

And insisting that synthetics do get destroyed, when there is clearly no evidence to unambiguously support such a position, is just an attempt to invalidate the clearly best choice (among the original three) and try and justify the other two monstrosities.

I accept the endings for what they are. BioWare implies that Shepard survives in High-EMS Destroy, just like they imply that synthetics are killed.

Only Reaper augmented synthetics.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

frudi wrote...
Rannoch? The post-Destroy Geth abandoned it after it was clear their Creators would never return to it again

Then why do they return to Rannoch in the control or synthesis ending if the Quarians are dead? Unless of course the Geth slide does not take place on Rannoch, but if that is the case, then why not show a destroy-version of said slide?

[Nerevar-as]

^ All synthetics according to Starbrat. It didn´t foresee Shepard surviving. I guess neither did Shep, who kept walking towards an explosion like a fool.

[Steelcan]

Destroy allows or a future where synthetic growth is unhindered by the reapers. It does kill most of them off in the beginning but it then brings about a future free from the cycle. Sy the tics and organics can then grow.

Plus I don't care if they die or not.

[Steelcan]

Nerevar-as wrote...

^ All synthetics according to Starbrat. It didn´t foresee Shepard surviving. I guess neither did Shep, who kept walking towards an explosion like a fool.

Starbrat said a lot of things.

[Sebby]

Nerevar-as wrote...

^ All synthetics according to Starbrat. It didn´t foresee Shepard surviving. I guess neither did Shep, who kept walking towards an explosion like a fool.

Like himself you mean, let's not forget who we're dealing with here. This is the same guy who compared the genophage to the FCW and utters such brillaint lines as "we fight or we die that's the plan!".

[gisle]

It is a sacrifice, just as trusting that ShepAI won't go rogue, or involuntary alteration of all life. All endings have something sour about them, which makes the choice so much heavier. There is no *right* choice; all are horrible in one way, good in another.

Seboist wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

^ All
synthetics according to Starbrat. It didn´t foresee Shepard surviving. I
guess neither did Shep, who kept walking towards an explosion like a fool.

Like
himself you mean, let's not forget who we're dealing with here. This is
the same guy who compared the genophage to the FCW and utters such
brillaint lines as "we fight or we die that's the plan!".

Or totally didn't notice anything strange about that astroid in the Levi DLC questline. ME3 Shepard is laughably stupid, and suffers the issue Liara suffers, but thousandfold; not being written by one writer.

Modifié par Gisle-Aune, 14 janvier 2013 - 01:36 .

[guacamayus]

I don't think destroy targets reaper tech, in my opinion it kills every artificial mind or "blue box". If not then why would the catalyst allow shepard to do this? it goes completely against its purpose.

I see destroy as the renegade ending; the end justify the means. To stop the war you must sacrifice an ally who's sworn to help you. I don't think I would choose this because this line of thinking sets the stage for anything after... what kind of society are we going to build if we base it on these ideals? I understand however why some people will choose it, this is a game about choice after all.

Modifié par guacamayus, 14 janvier 2013 - 01:36 .

[Nerevar-as]

I think most of us destroyers see it as the lesser evil, we just find everything else is worse or has too much potential to become much worse. Which considering we are talking about genocide here, well, there´s a reason the endings are so hated.

[GreyLycanTrope]

It is thematically anti-synthetic, they all die with or without Reaper code. Catalyst clearly states the Crucible will not discriminate.

Only silver lining is that organics might build new synthetics in the future, after getting devestated by a synthetics fleet of cthulhus...right that'll happen <_<

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 14 janvier 2013 - 02:09 .

[Jassu1979]

Before I comment on this, let's make one thing perfectly clear: ALL of the "choices" given are railroaded abominations, extremely reprehensible in terms of morality, and not a fitting ending to Shepard's epic quest at all.

Now, what makes "Destroy" the least abominable stinker out of the original three choices?

For starters, it's the most thematically consistent with Shepard's journey, even if it fails to convey a clear sense of victory over the civilization-devouring horrors from dark space and has their gestalt-overlord basically hand you the self-destruct trigger on a golden platter.

But let's take a look at your objections.

CosmicGnosis wrote...
- Kills synthetics; prevents synthetics from continuing their quest for personhood

Arguing in-game, this happens for no good reason whatsoever.
Arguing on the meta-level of storytelling, it's clear that this massive drawback was added by Casey and Mac because they did not want people to choose "destroy" - they clearly want you to regard Synthesis as the Golden Solution, the Big Prize you have to work the hardest for.
Nevertheless, the Synthesis solution is so ill-written, hackneyed, implausible and morally problematic that it does not really qualify as an alternative.

The galaxy is prejudiced again synthetic intelligences; choosing Destroy does nothing to challenge this prejudice

In-game, there's no reason why the geth-quarian peace should not permanently change the synthetics' place within the galactic framework of civilizations. But that's not what Mac and Casey introduced as the Big Conflict to begin with. Their ultimate bogeyman introduced in the final five minutes was a monster we have never actually seen: a post-singularity AI that has basically outpaced organic evolution so much that it'd be safe to call it "divine". A being so exalted that it'd regard all other sapient life as little more than vermin polluting the galaxy, as far removed from itself as germs are from us.

Depending on EMS, it either destroys or damages technology; even if technology is merely damaged, there is a cleaner way to end the cycle (Control)

Becoming Space Dictator violates everything that Shepard is and stands for. Regardless of whether you play cosmic policeman (Paragon) or tyrant (Renegade).

Throws away the knowledge contained within the Reapers; in my opinion, conquering the Lovecraftian entities means understanding them, not killing them and treating them as mysterious, unknowable monsters

Control does not signify defeating the Reapers - it means JOINING them (even if you change their agenda), BECOMING them. Not an option.

[BD Manchild]

Greylycantrope wrote...

It is thematically anti-synthetic, they all die with or without Reaper code. Catalyst clearly states the Crucible will not discriminate.

Only silver lining is that organics might build new synthetics in the future, after getting devestated by a synthetics fleet of cthulhus...right that'll happen <_<

Agreed. Regardless of whether it's intentional or not, in Destroy you are basically saying that one form of life is more valid than any other. It's a ritual sacrifice, done against the will of the victims to further your own goals. You're at least in some measure validating the Catalyst's claim that synthetics are the problem. In that sense, it's pure Renegade.

A thought also occurs to me that, just with the other endings, the foundations of post-Reaper civilisation are irreversibly stained. What if a new race of synthetics is constructed in the future (though why would anyone build more synthetics after almost being wiped by a race of them?)? What if they learn that organics have shown that they're willing to sacrifice organics to save their own necks? I think that would cause them to try to wipe out organics for the sake of their own survival, thus proving Glow-boy's moronic, bigoted "logic" right.

Oh, and don't give any of that "it only targets Reaper code" trash. I don't recall there being anything to suggest that this is the case whatsoever, and even Glowboy himself says the Crucible won't discriminate. I find the very idea of that prepostrous and another example of the crap-tacular writing on display; the Crucible doesn't single out any particular synthetics for extermination, but in the same breath is able to directly interface with and manipulate DNA/AI code as its absolute basest level? How in flying **** hell does that work?!

Modifié par BD Manchild, 14 janvier 2013 - 02:38 .

[Legbiter]

Given the high toll the geth and Reapers took on organics the Crucible in it's destroy mode is the Gold Standard on how to deal with technological singularities from synthetics.