587 réponses à ce sujet

[Wayning_Star]

Bill Casey wrote...

Auintus wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

They should have just locked Alex up or executed him...
What they did to him just wasn't right...

Won't argue with that. Having recently played Bioshock, "A man chooses. A slave obeys" is fitting in here quite well.
If you force someone to be good, it doesn't count.

Which eliminates Control and Synthesis as choices...

executing somone isn't forcing someone to be good,eh? Its forcing something on them..good has little to do with it tho..speaking of dominance..hmmm never mind.

[Bill Casey]

Are you trying to suggest what they did to Alex DeLarge was morally superior to shooting him?
Because I find it to be far far worse...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 21 février 2013 - 02:57 .

[Wayning_Star]

Bill Casey wrote...

Are you trying to suggest what they did to Alex DeLarge was morally superior to shooting him?
Because I find it to be far far worse...

I'm suggesting that considering the difference is domination.

(but, I have to admit, I don't know who Alex DeLarge is for sure?)

edit: I looked it up, haven't watched that show in yeaaarrrrrsss..sorry clockwork O is bizzarro tho..if'n I remember correctly. Abstract to the max. All kinds of reality vs headtrips, the pressures of existence vs common sense,etc.

Modifié par Wayning_Star, 21 février 2013 - 03:03 .

[Hadeedak]

To be fair, the endings are kind of a bizarre, reality vs. headtrip, so on and so forth.

One that has some hiccups in presentation, but just rereading this thread and going through the concepts in it (I skipped over the crabby bits) is pretty cool.

[Wayning_Star]

Hadeedak wrote...

To be fair, the endings are kind of a bizarre, reality vs. headtrip, so on and so forth.

One that has some hiccups in presentation, but just rereading this thread and going through the concepts in it (I skipped over the crabby bits) is pretty cool.

pink floyds 'the wall' is a generic (desexed musical) version of clockwork orange. I think they associated CO with indoctrination as well as the domination within war scripts. The guy in CO suffers from very poor medical care is about it. The story is kind of hyped to be some sort of revelation into the human conditon. In retrospect...

[Sc2mashimaro]

Hadeedak wrote...

To be fair, the endings are kind of a bizarre, reality vs. headtrip, so on and so forth.

One that has some hiccups in presentation, but just rereading this thread and going through the concepts in it (I skipped over the crabby bits) is pretty cool.

Totally agree. Really interesting opinions.

I'm still reeling from how you showed me a side to control I had totally not considered.

I still don't trust the Catalyst, but when a Shepard who is more inclined to trust that kid does the ending, Control seems like the most reasonable thing to do. We will see when I get there, running another playthrough now...

[Auintus]

Bill Casey wrote...
The catalyst doesn't need the Crucible to destroy the reapers...

So? The Catalyst wouldn't destroy the Reapers. I'd be like a farmer blowing up his own tractor. A reasonable individual doesn't destroy their own tools.

[Auintus]

Bill Casey wrote...

Which eliminates Control and Synthesis as choices...

Depends how you see things. If the Reapers are only tools, Control is merely putting those tools into different hands. And Synthesis doesn't force anyone to be good.

Modifié par Auintus, 21 février 2013 - 04:29 .

[Indy_S]

Auintus wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Which eliminates Control and Synthesis as choices...

Depends how you see things. If the Reapers are only tools, Control is merely putting those tools into different hands. And Synthesis doesn't make anyone be good.

I've got to ask at Synthesis, then, what is the point? If it doesn't remove conflict, why is it depicted as such a good solution?

[Auintus]

Indy_S wrote...

I've got to ask at Synthesis, then, what is the point? If it doesn't remove conflict, why is it depicted as such a good solution?

It does, but not by force.
Conflict is brought about by differences. There is an "Us vs. Them" in every scenerio. Synthetics vs. Organics is the only one that Synthesis deals with because it is the only one the Catalyst was made to deal with. It blurs the line and fades the "them" factor that caused the previous conflicts. It like if two people were fighting over food and you give extra food to both. They no longer have a reason to fight. Are you making them be good? No. Will they start fighting over something else? Probably.

Besides, Shepard was stronger and more durable in his reanimated state than he was as a pure organic. That upgrade alone could help in numerous ways.

Modifié par Auintus, 21 février 2013 - 04:34 .

[Indy_S]

Auintus wrote...

It does, but not by force.
Conflict is brought about by differences. There is an "Us vs. Them" in every scenerio. Synthetics vs. Organics is the only one that Synthesis deals with because it is the only one the Catalyst was made to deal with. It blurs the line and fades the "them" factor that caused the previous conflicts. It like if two people were fighting over food and you give extra food to both. They no longer have a reason to fight. Are you making them be good? No. Will they start fighting over something else? Probably.

Besides, Shepard was stronger and more durable in his reanimated state than he was as a pure organic. That upgrade alone could help in numerous ways.

I don't think preventing that one conflict is worth such a significant change. But I do see where you are coming from. Giving them extra food is a good solution. I think offering it would be a better one, though.

[Sc2mashimaro]

Auintus wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

I've got to ask at Synthesis, then, what is the point? If it doesn't remove conflict, why is it depicted as such a good solution?

It does, but not by force.
Conflict is brought about by differences. There is an "Us vs. Them" in every scenerio. Synthetics vs. Organics is the only one that Synthesis deals with because it is the only one the Catalyst was made to deal with. It blurs the line and fades the "them" factor that caused the previous conflicts. It like if two people were fighting over food and you give extra food to both. They no longer have a reason to fight. Are you making them be good? No. Will they start fighting over something else? Probably.

But it DOES use force to create the change that removes the us vs. them status. It creates homogeny where there used to be diversity. If it was an image of the Borg abducting everyone and adding implants, more people would object, but it's still force because nobody is given the option to opt out of becoming a part of this new "life-form". Not saying that necissarily invalidates it, but it does invalidate the option if you believe in voluntarism. If you think the use of force is justified to bring everyone in line with that new paradigm, well, I disagree, but then it would be justifiable.

[Auintus]

Indy_S wrote...

I don't think preventing that one conflict is worth such a significant change. But I do see where you are coming from. Giving them extra food is a good solution. I think offering it would be a better one, though.

True, but remember that the Catalyst had tried it already. Until the Crucible came into play, it didn't have a reason to think it would work to attempt it again. And by the time they knew what it could do, **** already hit the fan.

As for the one conflict and the significant change: If synthetics eventually won out over organics, they would "rule" the galaxy. More organic life would develop and would likely come into conflict with the synthetics in time. So the synthetics would come to reason that any and all organic life would eventually become hostile and would scour the galaxy clean of any and all organic life, removing organic evolution from the equation for good. There were a few other possible scenerios, I think, but they all wound up about the same.

[Indy_S]

Auintus wrote...

True, but remember that the Catalyst had tried it already. Until the Crucible came into play, it didn't have a reason to think it would work to attempt it again. And by the time they knew what it could do, **** already hit the fan.

As for the one conflict and the significant change: If synthetics eventually won out over organics, they would "rule" the galaxy. More organic life would develop and would likely come into conflict with the synthetics in time. So the synthetics would come to reason that any and all organic life would eventually become hostile and would scour the galaxy clean of any and all organic life, removing organic evolution from the equation for good. There were a few other possible scenerios, I think, but they all wound up about the same.

The Protheans were on the same track. They were coming into conflict with a great many species and either subjugated them or exterminated them. Eventually, we could say that they realised they had enough species subjugated and would just wipe out the rest as they encountered them. In an attempt to stop encountering species, they just bombed whatever planets they hadn't colonised.

Now, a lot of that is speculation. But the synthetic thing is the same thing.

[Auintus]

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

But it DOES use force to create the change that removes the us vs. them status. It creates homogeny where there used to be diversity. If it was an image of the Borg abducting everyone and adding implants, more people would object, but it's still force because nobody is given the option to opt out of becoming a part of this new "life-form". Not saying that necissarily invalidates it, but it does invalidate the option if you believe in voluntarism. If you think the use of force is justified to bring everyone in line with that new paradigm, well, I disagree, but then it would be justifiable.

Given the opportunity, would it be better to let each individual decide? Definately. If only to avoid this kind of backlash. Unfortunately, as I've noted, the Catalyst had no reason to believe that a synthesis solution, voluntary or not, would work after the last failure. By the time it became aware of such a possibility, it was already commited to the battle. Additionally, the Crucible was not the precision device necessary to make that kind of change on a small scale. Kinda like how you can't use a nuke to clear a room.
Had everyone been willing to set things down, combine Reaper tech with Crucible tech, and build the kind of device necessary, things may have gone much smoother. But after all that had happened, would anyone accept that? I don't think it could have happened any other way.

[Auintus]

Indy_S wrote...

The Protheans were on the same track. They were coming into conflict with a great many species and either subjugated them or exterminated them. Eventually, we could say that they realised they had enough species subjugated and would just wipe out the rest as they encountered them. In an attempt to stop encountering species, they just bombed whatever planets they hadn't colonised.

Now, a lot of that is speculation. But the synthetic thing is the same thing.

Very true.
Something I noticed that actually stands in favor of continuing the harvest is that...Well, look at humanity. New on the galactic scale, ambitious, trying to gain favor and power. The only reason they really got anywhere was because of the reaper war. Now consider in a milion years, with hundreds of species vying for power and influence. Eventually only the top dogs, the first there, would have any sort of power and everyone else would be left out to dry. Reseting things as the Reapers do gives the next round a fighting chance.

[Bill Casey]

Auintus wrote...

Very true.
Something I noticed that actually stands in favor of continuing the harvest is that...Well, look at humanity. New on the galactic scale, ambitious, trying to gain favor and power. The only reason they really got anywhere was because of the reaper war. Now consider in a milion years, with hundreds of species vying for power and influence. Eventually only the top dogs, the first there, would have any sort of power and everyone else would be left out to dry. Reseting things as the Reapers do gives the next round a fighting chance.

*cough*

Rome

*cough*

Power and influence rises and falls...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 21 février 2013 - 05:19 .

[Indy_S]

Bill Casey wrote...

Power and influence rises and falls...

Very true. If a new idea comes up, it threatens to tear worlds apart.

[Auintus]

Bill Casey wrote...

*cough*

Rome

*cough*

Power and influence rises and falls...

Over years? Certainly. Over centuries? I suppose. Over eons, against species tens of thousands of years more advanced than you? I remain sceptical. Consider the technological advantages of European explorers and the inevitable fates of the original American inhabitants.

[Indy_S]

Auintus wrote...

Over years? Certainly. Over centuries? I suppose. Over eons, against species tens of thousands of years more advanced than you? I remain sceptical. Consider the technological advantages of European explorers and the inevitable fates of the original American inhabitants.

The Europeans were splintered. Eventually their grip on the America's fell apart because of their own issues rather than conflict with an external force. The same is true of Rome. Power and influence rises and falls.

[Auintus]

Indy_S wrote...

The Europeans were splintered. Eventually their grip on the America's fell apart because of their own issues rather than conflict with an external force. The same is true of Rome. Power and influence rises and falls.

Correct, but again, the time span. A group in power for a few millenia will undoubtably have far more stable systems in place. The Turians, Salarians, and Asari had been running the galaxy, for the most part, for quite some time, as I recall. They were less than eager to let humans in and if it weren't for the crisis with the Reapers, who knows how long it would have taken. In time, the Council and the Citadel will just no longer have the patience or the space for so many species vying for power.

[Indy_S]

Auintus wrote...

Correct, but again, the time span. A group in power for a few millenia will undoubtably have far more stable systems in place. The Turians, Salarians, and Asari had been running the galaxy, for the most part, for quite some time, as I recall. They were less than eager to let humans in and if it weren't for the crisis with the Reapers, who knows how long it would have taken. In time, the Council and the Citadel will just no longer have the patience or the space for so many species vying for power.

But that line won't be obvious to all observers. There would be debates about the actions they would take and if the issue was divissive enough, the conflict threatens to remove the Citadel from the situation they are pondering. Eventually, one action or another would tear the world down for them.

[ofarrell]

This one thread... perfection.

[Hadeedak]

My suggestion, Sc2, is to have Shepards with different personalities as much as you can. I found I had a Shep who suited each ending. Though I still haven't gotten to renegade control.... It's kind of opened my mind to each option, and how I can see someone going for them.

[Sc2mashimaro]

Hadeedak wrote...

My suggestion, Sc2, is to have Shepards with different personalities as much as you can. I found I had a Shep who suited each ending. Though I still haven't gotten to renegade control.... It's kind of opened my mind to each option, and how I can see someone going for them.

I agree with that. There is a certain kind of Shepard that would do each of the endings, paragon or renegade and whether you think, personally, that one of the choices is smarter or better than the others.