Aller au contenu

Photo

The most compelling argument against Destroy: it is utterly, smotheringly boring!


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
617 réponses à ce sujet

#1
Ieldra

Ieldra
  • Members
  • 25 182 messages
More specifically:

High EMS Destroy in the EC version is utterly boring and unworthy of the story that came before.
Why? Well, who of you thought the ME trilogy would end as a standard "kill the evil monsters and go home" story? Who of you all thought it *should* end that way? If you did, then perhaps you're satisfied with Destroy, but I could never be. After all the interesting themes touched by the story, after hours and hours of story that made me think, discussing the themes involved with many others, story that triggered emotions and intellectual curiosity, made me angry at people's narrow-mindedness in and out of the story or appreciative of how others were handled, after almost living in this fictional world in spite of the occasional silliness, this is how it ends? Kill the evil monsters and go home to friends and family, nothing else really changes, the relays are rebuilt in time and everything goes back to normal? This is how it ends, with Hackett giving an epilogue speech that sounds like cobbled together from every alien invasion B-movie since the 1950s? To say it with Jon Irenicus: To end....like this?

Never. A story that ends like this could never be my story. At least, in the original Destroy ending, there was some change since the relays were destroyed. Good or bad, civilization went of into a new direction. There was something to think about. Was it worth the price? What would happen now? An ending like that sends my imagination into overdrive, triggering countless story hooks in my mind, just as the other endings do. High-EMS-Destroy? Triggers nothing. Instead, it smothers my imagination with its utter conventionality. And don't tell me about a "missing" reunion scene, that would have made it worse, adding yet another conventional stereotype.

So, dear Destroyers, don't tell me how appropriate this ending is, how it's the only reasonable choice, a matter of military necessity etc.. etc.. That is all very subjective, and completely irrelevant in the face of one single fact: The game gives me an opportunity to shape the future of the galaxy, and I do not want the future that Destroy creates. I want change, I want things to happen that have never happened before, new wonders and new horrors both, a challenge for the civilization that emerges after the war, something to look forward to, something to think about, some cool stuff to happen. So if you want to turn your ME trilogy into a standard "kill the evil
monsters and go gome" story, that's your choice, but don't tell me it should be mine as well. For me, Destroy (the high EMS EC version) is the bad choice, the one that devalues everything that came before, thematically, symbolically, and drowns it all in an ocean of conventionalist crap.

Bioware has gone to great pains to assure us that whatever we do, it ends reasonably well. With the possible exception of Renegade Control, Destroy ends reasonably well, Control ends reasonably well, Synthesis ends reasonably well, even if you Refuse, things eventually end reasonably well. We all win, the endings just show us the style of the future we are creating, the themes and memes that will dominate civilization. None of them can be objectively considered bad, you can only disagree with the dominating themes and memes.

I am not saying that Destroy is objectively bad, but I do not care for the style of future created by Destroy. I disagree with most of its dominating themes and memes, and I do not like the kind of story that choosing Destroy makes of the ME trilogy. Because it's boring and conventional. In the end, that's why I choose a different ending, with almost all of my many Shepards.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 14 février 2013 - 12:17 .


#2
Indy_S

Indy_S
  • Members
  • 2 092 messages
What? Destroy is totally objectively bad in that respect. Narrative payoff is a fine way of looking at things. It goes some way towards our total judgement. I can prefer it for other reasons.

#3
dorktainian

dorktainian
  • Members
  • 4 410 messages
so the main objective at the beginning of the game is bad? why then did you play the game?

#4
Guest_LineHolder_*

Guest_LineHolder_*
  • Guests
oh dear, the gameshow with the brat is unworthy of the story that came before it. By extension everything that happens after is unworthy too.

Why have you guys turned those three choices into such a philosophical debate? I feel dizzy after the amount of rolling my eyes do whenever I stumble upon these expositions.

#5
Linkforlife

Linkforlife
  • Members
  • 548 messages
All we have at this point is speculation as to what happens post-decision chamber, speculation and head-canon. It makes it extremely difficult to defend one ending or say that another is boring when everything is head-canon after Shepard makes a choice and the EC scenes are done. People can just rationalize the other options away and choose the one that they like best and then believe the right choice.

Whereas you do make some good points, some people can argue till the cows come home that Synthesis, Control or Refuse are also boring endings. It is all a matter of perspective and what you want to pick and how you determine how events of the galaxy play out post-EC scenes because it is all head-canon.

#6
fchopin

fchopin
  • Members
  • 5 066 messages
I like destroy so i guess i am a boring person.

#7
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 676 messages
I disagree that you give a compelling argument, though I don't challenge your beliefs. I simply disagree: I think Destroy offers the most interesting route for continuing the franchise, and the post-Reaper, post-Relay galaxy as filled with potential in its own right.

#8
Ieldra

Ieldra
  • Members
  • 25 182 messages

dorktainian wrote...
so the main objective at the beginning of the game is bad? why then did you play the game?

The main objective is to end the harvesting cycle. In the end, I have achieved that objective just as you have. I just don't care for the way you did it.

#9
Indy_S

Indy_S
  • Members
  • 2 092 messages

dorktainian wrote...

so the main objective at the beginning of the game is bad? why then did you play the game?


... I have a feeling you don't know what narrative payoff is. Or is it that you can't tell that it's a perspective after the fact? Another possibility is you're just being objectionable. I suppose there are others, maybe you could enlighten me?

#10
The Night Mammoth

The Night Mammoth
  • Members
  • 7 476 messages
So you know exactly what happens in the Destroy ending?

#11
dorktainian

dorktainian
  • Members
  • 4 410 messages

Ieldra2 wrote...

dorktainian wrote...
so the main objective at the beginning of the game is bad? why then did you play the game?

The main objective is to end the harvesting cycle. In the end, I have achieved that objective just as you have. I just don't care for the way you did it.


It was my aim beofre ME3 and it was my aim at the end of ME3.  Each to their own.  

you obviously were not listening to shepard in the commitee chambers then.  I'd blow the reapers to kingdom come for their crimes against all life.  Not just for those they squishied, but for the countless races obliterated for no reason whatsoever.  saving the reapers is a bit like letting a killer go with only a caution /facepalm.

Modifié par dorktainian, 14 février 2013 - 12:30 .


#12
Ieldra

Ieldra
  • Members
  • 25 182 messages

Linkforlife wrote...
All we have at this point is speculation as to what happens post-decision chamber, speculation and head-canon. It makes it extremely difficult to defend one ending or say that another is boring when everything is head-canon after Shepard makes a choice and the EC scenes are done. People can just rationalize the other options away and choose the one that they like best and then believe the right choice.

Well, "boring" is a subjective judgment. My OP is, obviously and intentionally, an opinion piece. I'm just sick of others making claims that their takes on the endings are more than that. 

#13
Linkforlife

Linkforlife
  • Members
  • 548 messages

Ieldra2 wrote...

Linkforlife wrote...
All we have at this point is speculation as to what happens post-decision chamber, speculation and head-canon. It makes it extremely difficult to defend one ending or say that another is boring when everything is head-canon after Shepard makes a choice and the EC scenes are done. People can just rationalize the other options away and choose the one that they like best and then believe the right choice.

Well, "boring" is a subjective judgment. My OP is, obviously and intentionally, an opinion piece. I'm just sick of others making claims that their takes on the endings are more than that. 


I am aware that the OP is your personal opinion and I respect that and cannot change it. Just like I do not like choosing Control because it makes *my* Shepard a hypocrite since *I* spent the entire game battling TIM just to become him in the last 10 minutes, that is simply my opinion and other can disagree with me and that is fine.

There are also others that think Synthesis is an abomination, which is their opinions and that is fine as well.

There are others that like Control because they are the protectors of the galaxy and that is fine as well. I could go on like this, but I think you get my point: people have varying opinions on what their Shepard would do.

#14
Steelcan

Steelcan
  • Members
  • 23 290 messages
Well of the Catalyst is right, which I don't think he is, Destroy will result in a future forever in conflict. Massive intragalactic conflict, synthetics VS organics.

And I do not see how Destroy does not fit the story. The mission has always been stop the reapers with big guns. Victory despite sacrifice, defiance, all prevalent themes.

You dislike Destroy for its connection to "Romanticism" "sacred Nature" etc.... And while those are not the reasons I Destroy, what is so inherently bad about them?

#15
Steelcan

Steelcan
  • Members
  • 23 290 messages

Linkforlife wrote...

I am aware that the OP is your personal opinion and I respect that and cannot change it. Just like I do not like choosing Control because it makes *my* Shepard a hypocrite since *I* spent the entire game battling TIM just to become him in the last 10 minutes, that is simply my opinion and other can disagree with me and that is fine.
.

. My biggest issue with ME3

#16
kyles3

kyles3
  • Members
  • 1 984 messages
I don't think it's boring--I think it's tremendously satisfying. The game doesn't always let you get what you want, but I'll take the wins when I can get them. Killing the monsters and going home is a big win in my book.

It's pretty much exactly the ending I wanted, but I'd never tell the OP what ending they should want. Hooray, choices!

#17
Spallboy

Spallboy
  • Members
  • 235 messages
TL:DR

#18
Indy_S

Indy_S
  • Members
  • 2 092 messages

Steelcan wrote...

Well of the Catalyst is right, which I don't think he is, Destroy will result in a future forever in conflict. Massive intragalactic conflict, synthetics VS organics.

And I do not see how Destroy does not fit the story. The mission has always been stop the reapers with big guns. Victory despite sacrifice, defiance, all prevalent themes.

You dislike Destroy for its connection to "Romanticism" "sacred Nature" etc.... And while those are not the reasons I Destroy, what is so inherently bad about them?


If I understand Ieldra right, it's the feeling of conventionalism that makes it so unappealing. It's up front, there's almost no twist to the decision. The galaxy just appears to fall back to the status quo rather than having to adapt to something like the other choices.

#19
Steelcan

Steelcan
  • Members
  • 23 290 messages

Indy_S wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Well of the Catalyst is right, which I don't think he is, Destroy will result in a future forever in conflict. Massive intragalactic conflict, synthetics VS organics.

And I do not see how Destroy does not fit the story. The mission has always been stop the reapers with big guns. Victory despite sacrifice, defiance, all prevalent themes.

You dislike Destroy for its connection to "Romanticism" "sacred Nature" etc.... And while those are not the reasons I Destroy, what is so inherently bad about them?


If I understand Ieldra right, it's the feeling of conventionalism that makes it so unappealing. It's up front, there's almost no twist to the decision. The galaxy just appears to fall back to the status quo rather than having to adapt to something like the other choices.

. How is the status quo boring?  The galaxy can't go a few centuries without some massive galaxy spanning conflict

#20
Zazzerka

Zazzerka
  • Members
  • 9 532 messages

fchopin wrote...

I like destroy so i guess i am a boring person.

Yeah. This thread hurts my feelings.

#21
Ieldra

Ieldra
  • Members
  • 25 182 messages
@Linkforlife:
We're all writing the stories of our Shepards when we play. Of course you and I will write different ones. I may not like your story, but I have no agency over it. I just wish others would limit themselves to telling me that they (don't) like my story and why, and not try to assume agency over it. In fact, I have no idea how many of those who choose Destroy see their story as "kill the evil monsters and go home", but I've seen variants of it often enough to know it's rather common.

#22
Indy_S

Indy_S
  • Members
  • 2 092 messages

Steelcan wrote...
. How is the status quo boring?  The galaxy can't go a few centuries without some massive galaxy spanning conflict


None of them seem to be setup before the endings, though. Maybe if Wreav wanted to get his revenge, there's one. Sacrificing the Geth for the galaxy changes nothing since the Geth were already outside everybody else's concern. Except for the Quarians, who were preparing for the eventuality that the Geth would be gone. Sure, conflicts could start up but there's nothing of them in the endings.

#23
Steelcan

Steelcan
  • Members
  • 23 290 messages

Indy_S wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
. How is the status quo boring?  The galaxy can't go a few centuries without some massive galaxy spanning conflict


None of them seem to be setup before the endings, though. Maybe if Wreav wanted to get his revenge, there's one. Sacrificing the Geth for the galaxy changes nothing since the Geth were already outside everybody else's concern. Except for the Quarians, who were preparing for the eventuality that the Geth would be gone. Sure, conflicts could start up but there's nothing of them in the endings.

. Just because the EC slides show the aftermath doesn't mean it details every little event that might arise.  Salarian conflict with a resurgent krogan, the Terminus systems are still there, synthetic rebellions maybe.

#24
Guest_john_sheparrd_*

Guest_john_sheparrd_*
  • Guests
you are trolling right??
because if not than you are crazy
synthesis is the biggest bull**** I have ever seen I can't understand how someone
can pick this ****ty choice and turn everyone to mindless husks

Modifié par john_sheparrd, 14 février 2013 - 12:55 .


#25
Ieldra

Ieldra
  • Members
  • 25 182 messages

Indy_S wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Well of the Catalyst is right, which I don't think he is, Destroy will result in a future forever in conflict. Massive intragalactic conflict, synthetics VS organics.

And I do not see how Destroy does not fit the story. The mission has always been stop the reapers with big guns. Victory despite sacrifice, defiance, all prevalent themes.

You dislike Destroy for its connection to "Romanticism" "sacred Nature" etc.... And while those are not the reasons I Destroy, what is so inherently bad about them?


If I understand Ieldra right, it's the feeling of conventionalism that makes it so unappealing. It's up front, there's almost no twist to the decision. The galaxy just appears to fall back to the status quo rather than having to adapt to something like the other choices.

Exactly.

@Steelcan:
The dislike of "Romanticism" and "sacred nature" is an ideological preference, while the dislike for conventionalism is a narrative preference. The themes are actually interesting, and I'd like to debate them, but they don't appear in the high EMS Destroy epilogue. I am, if you haven't noticed before, a person who appreciates most of the philosophical undercurrents of the story and the endings.