116 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

Auld Wulf wrote...

@Dr_Extrem

No. If you don't cure the krogans, then EDI explicitly states within the ending that not all krogan were hit by the Synthesis wave. Why? They didn't want to be.

Can you provide said dialogue?

I mean, I know you can't because it doesn't exist, but I would love to see it.

[BD Manchild]

I chose Refuse. I would outline the reasons according to the template proposed in the OP, but for now it's enough for me to say that it was the only ending that fit the rest of the series narratively and thematically (because apparently expressing their plagiarism creativity is more important to Bioware than thematic or narrative consistency).

Or I could just shut off the game before the beam run and watch MEHEM instead. Either option works for me.

[Uncle Jo]

Auld Wulf wrote...

@Dr_Extrem

No. If you don't cure the krogans, then EDI explicitly states within the ending that not all krogan were hit by the Synthesis wave. Why? They didn't want to be.

But hey, apparently nothing is canon. That's the bloody argument, now. It's basically boiled down to a childish recitation of "the only things that are canon are the bits that suit our purposes, and anything that's contradictory to those purposes is non-canon, even if it was within the game."

I mean, seriously. I am losing all respect for BSN, and my expectation of intelligence here is lowering by the day. Because honestly? Saying that canon isn't canon is the most ridiculous and bloody asinine argument I've ever heard. On no other game forum, over the course of my overly long life, have I ever heard people embrace that.

Except here.

LOL! Epic trolling. If not, do you realize that you're the only one who says that synthesis is optional? Without giving any proof to back up your nonsensical blabber?

[mvaning]

Auld Wulf wrote...

@Dr_Extrem

Except that EDI said explicitly that they weren't synthesised. So you're being a truly asinine person by claiming that canon isn't canon, and then babbling some nonsense about projection. All I'm doing is repeating what EDI said, what you're doing is saying that canon isn't canon.

And, ow, I just took another hit to my average expectation of intelligence around these parts thanks to you. Really. This "canon isn't canon" bull is going to rank people as mere troglodytes if this keeps up. You keep making my brain recategorise you on a lower rung.

If you pay attention to what you're saying, you're saying "canon isn't canon." And you don't even have any idea of how patently ridiculous that is.

EDI does not explicitly state this.    How many people have told you this?   Have you even played the ending where the genophage is not cured?  

What EDI says is that the Krogan were not ready, but they still got the Synthesis change.   She states that it takes them a while to accept the change -- not that they had the choice.

Modifié par mvaning, 16 février 2013 - 02:36 .

[mvaning]

BD Manchild wrote...

I chose Refuse. I would outline the reasons according to the template proposed in the OP, but for now it's enough for me to say that it was the only ending that fit the rest of the series narratively and thematically (because apparently expressing their plagiarism creativity is more important to Bioware than thematic or narrative consistency).

Or I could just shut off the game before the beam run and watch MEHEM instead. Either option works for me.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Mercedes-Benz]

Why did you pick it? -- Because destroy is the only ending that makes sense.

How did you see it working out past the slides? - Humanity becoming the dominant species in an synthetic-free Milky Way Galaxy.

What happened within the game that influenced your choice? - My morality influenced my choice, not anything that happens in-game, even though the in-game Shepard tries since Mass Effect to destroy the Reapers and save humanity, so picking any ending other that destroy would be seriously out of character, since synthesis forces Humans to become cyborgs against their will, and control forces Shepard to needlessly give up his own life and his own humanity.

Why didn't you go for the other endings? - Synthesis basically forces every organic in the Milky Way Galaxy to become a Cyborg against their will, so it is deeply immoral, not to mention that Shepard needlessly sacrifices his own life as well,and the genocidal Reapers get to live. Control needlessly forces Shepard to sacrifice his own life and his own humanity (the very thing he has been fighting to preserve since the first Mass Effect game (if Shepard has nothing against 'ascension", then he should have just let Saren activate the Citadel Relay and have the Reapers harvest everyone in the first Mass Effect game, instead of wasting everyone's time in ME2 and ME3), the genocidal Reapers get to live, not to mention that there is no guarantee that the Shepard A.I. won't misuse it's power, or that somebody won't figure out a way to deactivate it, which would cause the Reapers to continue their cycles of galactic genocide.

[Mercedes-Benz]

My biggest problems with the endings are:

1) That the synthesis option even exists as it is presented, since it is space magic, not actual science.

2) That there in no conventional victory option, no matter what you did in the 3 games.

[Stalker]

Chose Destroy because it was the least worst option.

All sequences before and all of the possible outcomes are still choice-ignoring, theme-breaking, plothole-riddled, magic nonsense to me. And no, the pretty pictures of people standing around from the EC hasn't helped at all.

[Mouton_Alpha]

Mercedes-Benz wrote...

1) That the synthesis option even exists as it is presented, since it is space magic, not actual science.

Nothing personal, but I always laugh at this argument.

*flies off using FTL drive and biotically levitates a cup of water*

[Big I]

I always pick Control.

Why did you pick it?  To save the synthetics, preserve the relays, and allow Shepard to live on as a synthetic.

How did you see it working out past the slides? Impossible to say. If the next ME game is set after the trilogy I imagine it will have Shepard take a hands off approach to overseeing the galaxy and the Reapers retreating to dark space. I also see no reason for the benefits of the synthesis ending (e.g. the krogan rebuilding their city even better) to not also be present under control.

What happened within the game that influenced your choice?  The Catalyst telling me destroy kills all synthetics and synthesis changes everyone without their consent.

Why didn't you go for the other endings?  Destroy kills all synthetics and Synthesis violates the rights of people to choose what happens to their bodies.

Modifié par LookingGlass93, 16 février 2013 - 06:39 .

[Dr_Extrem]

Mouton_Alpha wrote...

Mercedes-Benz wrote...

1) That the synthesis option even exists as it is presented, since it is space magic, not actual science.

Nothing personal, but I always laugh at this argument.

*flies off using FTL drive and biotically levitates a cup of water*

ftl has been a part of the meu since day1. it is established lore / universe-science.

the transporter will never work - yet, it is an integral part of star trek. the force is space magic - but it is part of the star wars universe.

synthesis on the other hand, has no foundation within the science and esteblished lore of mass effect. in fact, it goes against thelore established in mass effect 1 (raphael vargas & rebekah petrovsky - dialogue and quaestlines).


if you create a science fiction universe, you can alter existing rl-laws of nature as you wish - but you have to stick to your created rules after doing it. 

[AdmiralCheez]

ENDING CHOSEN: Destruction/MEHEM

WHY: It sucked the least, and the galaxy deserves complete freedom from the Reapers forever.

HOW WILL IT WORK OUT: Galaxy rebuilds, political landscape changes as powers/technology shift and isolated colonies develop along their own paths.

INFLUENCES: Basically every line of dialogue concerning the Reapers from ME1 to ME3.

WHY NOT THE OTHERS: Synthesis is completely out of place in the trilogy, Control is creepy as hell, and Refusal makes you look like a jackass.

WHY MEHEM SPECIFICALLY AND NOT DEFAULT ENDING: Catalyst is stupid and the death of all synthetics is an unnecessary, unethical sacrifice.

[Mouton_Alpha]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Mouton_Alpha wrote...

Mercedes-Benz wrote...

1) That the synthesis option even exists as it is presented, since it is space magic, not actual science.

Nothing personal, but I always laugh at this argument.

*flies off using FTL drive and biotically levitates a cup of water*

ftl has been a part of the meu since day1. it is established lore / universe-science.

He said "actual science" not "lore".

Most of sci-fi is space magic. We got used to it long ago, but doesn't make it any less spatially magical or magically spatial.

[Dr_Extrem]

Mouton_Alpha wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Mouton_Alpha wrote...

Mercedes-Benz wrote...

1) That the synthesis option even exists as it is presented, since it is space magic, not actual science.

Nothing personal, but I always laugh at this argument.

*flies off using FTL drive and biotically levitates a cup of water*

ftl has been a part of the meu since day1. it is established lore / universe-science.

He said "actual science" not "lore".

Most of sci-fi is space magic. We got used to it long ago, but doesn't make it any less spatially magical or magically spatial.

sorry ... i though he was refering to mass effects science and lore.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 16 février 2013 - 07:07 .

[SurfaceBeneath]

I chose Control.

I chose it because I thought it provided the best outcome of the situation for the situation. I saw the Reapers as being as much victims of the cycle as they were the perpetrators of it. Each one was a previously harvested race containing its genetic data and possibly even more and I was curious what the Reapers would be capable of once broken from the cycle. Furthermore, I think that with the Reaper cycle gone and the Leviathans uncovered, the Galaxy still had threats to face and that Shepard could be the watchful guardian of the Galaxy. There was an element of selfishness to it too... Control offered the best chance Shepard has at what is essentially immortality. It was an opportunity too good for her to pass up.

How do I see it past the slides? If the Reapers did contain some element of the cultures and philosophies of the races that made them then I could see the Reapers becoming a library of information about those cultures available to the Galaxy's scholars. I see each Reaper finding a planet suitable for the life form of the race that made it, seeding that planet and helping cultivate that race back into existence, offering some form of redemption for the evils of the past. After seeding the planet the Reaper would remain as a guardian of its people.

Why didn't I do the other endings? I think that Destroy is too blunt of an outcome and results in too much destruction even though it is the "sure thing". And again I don't see the Reapers as this great evil that must be destroyed. While Shepard would be willing to risk the Geth and EDI for the safety of the Galaxy, she would prefer not to if possible. Destroy was just too much damage all around.

Synthesis on the other hand was confusing. I didn't really understand how it was supposed to work or what it meant. Shepard was bleeding out and wasn't in a position where she could really sit there and examine the philosophical ramifications behind it. Finally Synthesis was posed to be the "best" outcome by the same machine that decided the Reaper cycle was a great way to fulfill its original primary function, so that made that option more than a little suspect.

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 16 février 2013 - 07:33 .

[samgurl775]

We destroy them or they destroy us.

[Abraham_uk]

My take on the endings.


It's over.
The endings are not going to change.
Why are we still talking about the endings?