458 réponses à ce sujet

[masster blaster]

What I find funny people say they picked synthesis for the mad science. Yet when people pick Destroy to kill the Reapers. The people who pick control, and synthesis always get on our case about you killed EDI and the Geth.

Well I am sorry to say that most of the destroyers would have everyone die to end the Reapers. If it means everyone dies again to end the Reapser, so the next cycle can make their own future, then so be it. Also I didn't want to kill EDI, or the Geth, but. I would not pick synthesis because one it's forced on everyone. 2 everyone is not ready for synthesis because nobody wanted synthesis, except the Catalyst, and Archer. 3 I will let synthesis happen on it's own.

I couldn't pick control because one TIM was controlled by the Reapers in the end. What's to say I, as well as Shepard are the fool, and I now gave Shepard over to the catalyst to control. 2. I made my Shepard the new dicator of the galaxy. Whether it's paragon Shepard, or renegade Shepard. Shepard is using force to keep the galaxy in order, and is unstable with power. And 3 my Shepard is enslaving the Reapers, the husk army, and the Indoctrinated agents for it's own gain. Paragon Shepard would have set them free, or order them to kill theirselves, yet Paragon Shepard uses the Reapers as "peace keepers".

[masster blaster]

xAmilli0n wrote...

I'd rather be a Reaper god, but you know, if you wanna pick destroy, I'm not gonna stop you.

1. You can't become a Reaper God. Only your former Shepard can.

2. This Shepard is power hungry, and forcing the galaxy to submit to it's will. It enslaves the Reapers, the husk, and the Indoctrinated agents.

3. This is not even your Shepard anymore, but a copy of the original Shepard.

4. Your fomrer Shepard is more of a dicator than a god.

5. If anyone trys to get in Shepard's way, then what would happen? Will Shepard have it's Reapers indoctrinate that person, or army, harvest them, have them killed, or huskify them?

Why thank you, and I can't stop you from picking Control. However I can give you at least some words of advice, and thought.

Modifié par masster blaster, 20 février 2013 - 01:56 .

[xAmilli0n]

masster blaster wrote...

What I find funny people say they picked synthesis for the mad science. Yet when people pick Destroy to kill the Reapers. The people who pick control, and synthesis always get on our case about you killed EDI and the Geth.

But, what if I killed the Geth and chose Control?  Does that make my Shep an even worse person? (I hope so!)

I made my Shepard the new dicator of the galaxy. Whether it's paragon Shepard, or renegade Shepard. Shepard is using force to keep the galaxy in order, and is unstable with power.

Very exciting isn't it?

[davishepard]

Getting everyone killed to stop the Reapers is just stupid considering all the things Shepard did (and refuse its there to the ones that want this outcome). Shepard set out to save his cycle. And one shouldn't fool yourself to think that destroy is least forced than control or synthesis. Shepard asks no one what choice should s/he pick, and everyone is bond to deal with Shepard's choice, no matter what is it. In other words, every choiced "it's forced on everyone".

[clennon8]

davishepard wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I find it amusing that some people turn off their critical thinking and call it open mindedness.

Because if someone doesn't see things how you see they are clearly not seeing right.
You can't just have your opinion without dismissing differing ones? Not good enough that way?

That fact that anybody can have an opinion and is capable of having their feelings hurt is not a reason to regard all opinions as gossamer butterfly wings, too delicate to be handled. 

[masster blaster]

xAmilli0n wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

What I find funny people say they picked synthesis for the mad science. Yet when people pick Destroy to kill the Reapers. The people who pick control, and synthesis always get on our case about you killed EDI and the Geth.

But, what if I killed the Geth and chose Control?  Does that make my Shep an even worse person? (I hope so!)

I made my Shepard the new dicator of the galaxy. Whether it's paragon Shepard, or renegade Shepard. Shepard is using force to keep the galaxy in order, and is unstable with power.

Very exciting isn't it?

Truth be told yes it does.

No it's not. I just forgot to put an "If" would never want my Shepard, well a copy of my Shepard using power, fear, and force to control the galaxy/ protect the organics, and synthetics.

[xAmilli0n]

masster blaster wrote...

xAmilli0n wrote...

I'd rather be a Reaper god, but you know, if you wanna pick destroy, I'm not gonna stop you.

1. Your not a Reaper God. Your former Shepard is.

2. This Shepard is power hungry, and forcing the galaxy to submit to it's will. It enslaves the Reapers, the husk, and the Indoctrinated agents.

3. This is not even your Shepard anymore, but a copy of the original Shepard.

4. Your fomrer Shepard is more of a dicator than a god.

5. If anyone trys to get in Shepard's way, then what would happen? Will Shepard have it's Reapers indoctrinate that person, or army, harvest them, have them killed, or huskify them?

Why thank you, and I can't stop you from picking Control. However I can give you at least some words of advice, and thought.

1. This is okay.
2. Also okay.
3. Kinda the same thing as number 1, but still okay.
4. An immortal dictator with an army immortal squid that shoot lasers.  Very okay.
5. Probably all of the above once she loses control of her 'mind.'  I have no problem with this.

I'm okay with all these implication.  I actually have an extensive post decision personal history I wrote up.  All these things happen.  Yet, a speculative ME4 can still occur afterwards.  Why must I solve all the problems now?

Plus Control is more fun. 

[Untold]

masster blaster wrote...

2. This Shepard is power hungry, and forcing the galaxy to submit to it's will. It enslaves the Reapers, the husk, and the Indoctrinated agents.

3. This is not even your Shepard anymore, but a copy of the original Shepard.

5. If anyone trys to get in Shepard's way, then what would happen? Will Shepard have it's Reapers indoctrinate that person, or army, harvest them, have them killed, or huskify them?

I never really thought about this until I finally replayed System Shock 2 the other night. And I will say this, after playing that game, those freaky comments that Shepard makes at the end of the Control choice about "The Many" become a lot freakier.

Modifié par Untold, 20 février 2013 - 02:09 .

[davishepard]

masster blaster wrote...

1. You can't become a Reaper God. Only your former Shepard can.

2. This Shepard is power hungry, and forcing the galaxy to submit to it's will. It enslaves the Reapers, the husk, and the Indoctrinated agents.

3. This is not even your Shepard anymore, but a copy of the original Shepard.

4. Your fomrer Shepard is more of a dicator than a god.

5. If anyone trys to get in Shepard's way, then what would happen? Will Shepard have it's Reapers indoctrinate that person, or army, harvest them, have them killed, or huskify them?

Why thank you, and I can't stop you from picking Control. However I can give you at least some words of advice, and thought.

I remember the days before EC came out.
Control was attacked with statements similar to this ones, because there wasn't proof that Shepard could indeed control the Reapers. Shepard was vaporized, and the Reapers left, but that was no proof that the control would last. Then EC came out, and the statements change: now Shepard can control the Reapers, but is power hungry and will become a dictator.
Well, not with my Paragons. It may seem what you think, but that doesn't really affect any Shepards beside yours, isn't right?
One of my Renegades indeed became a dictator, though.

[masster blaster]

davishepard wrote...

Getting everyone killed to stop the Reapers is just stupid considering all the things Shepard did (and refuse its there to the ones that want this outcome). Shepard set out to save his cycle. And one shouldn't fool yourself to think that destroy is least forced than control or synthesis. Shepard asks no one what choice should s/he pick, and everyone is bond to deal with Shepard's choice, no matter what is it. In other words, every choiced "it's forced on everyone".

And what of it. It's not stupid to have everyone die. What's stupid is the fact that you pick control and force everyone in the galaxy to fall in line dictator Shepard. Ya you saved the galaxy from the old dictator, and replaced the old dictator with your former Shepard's copy.


And yes Shepard did set out to save the galaxy, but to send the Reapers back to hell. Letting the Reapers live is not right. Those organics should have died many eons ago. Is it right for them to be trapped inside the monster that harvested millions of cycles, and killed trillions of organics, and synthetics in each cycle? No. In Destroy I set them free. They may be evil to the core, however they didn't ask to be this way, so this is my Shepard's way of putting those races to rest.

And yes it's forced on everyone, but it's HOW it's forced, and matters that count.

[davishepard]

clennon8 wrote...

That fact that anybody can have an opinion and is capable of having their feelings hurt is not a reason to regard all opinions as gossamer butterfly wings, too delicate to be handled. 

You fail to see what I meant and I guess is pointless to try and explain.

[masster blaster]

xAmilli0n wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

xAmilli0n wrote...

I'd rather be a Reaper god, but you know, if you wanna pick destroy, I'm not gonna stop you.

1. Your not a Reaper God. Your former Shepard is.

2. This Shepard is power hungry, and forcing the galaxy to submit to it's will. It enslaves the Reapers, the husk, and the Indoctrinated agents.

3. This is not even your Shepard anymore, but a copy of the original Shepard.

4. Your fomrer Shepard is more of a dicator than a god.

5. If anyone trys to get in Shepard's way, then what would happen? Will Shepard have it's Reapers indoctrinate that person, or army, harvest them, have them killed, or huskify them?

Why thank you, and I can't stop you from picking Control. However I can give you at least some words of advice, and thought.

1. This is okay.
2. Also okay.
3. Kinda the same thing as number 1, but still okay.
4. An immortal dictator with an army immortal squid that shoot lasers.  Very okay.
5. Probably all of the above once she loses control of her 'mind.'  I have no problem with this.

I'm okay with all these implication.  I actually have an extensive post decision personal history I wrote up.  All these things happen.  Yet, a speculative ME4 can still occur afterwards.  Why must I solve all the problems now?

Plus Control is more fun. 

We just have to wait and see then, and good to see you again. .

[chris2365]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

chris2365 wrote...
Might be wrong here, but the Catalyst controlled the Reapers. So Reapers-Catalyst= Unknown. Could be willing to integrate into society, share knowledge, who knows. Like the Batarians, who became much more agreable once the Hegenomy was destroyed in the beginning of ME3.

Or they could be aggressive, expansionist or empirical.  They could seek galactic domination, like the race they were based on.  And if so, what could possibly stop them?

And of course we know how they are created.  What if they decide to expand their numbers?

Are you willing to risk the wholesale extinction of species on a hope that the Reapers entire nature may change from what we currently know it to be?

Don't forget that a Reaper is composed of millions of minds and voices working in unison. Quadrillions of potential men, woman, children, etc. Don't they deserve a chance to speak before condemning them to because of what they were before, or the way they might be like in the future?  Would you condemn a whole species based on what might happen (Geth, Rachni, etc.) ?

Sometimes you have to take chances. When humans first arrived into the galactic stage, nobody expected the Humans to put up such a fight and they showed themselves to be agressive and tough. They took on the Turians, who could've blown humanity to bits, but the Council looked beyond this and invited them to join the community. Years later, humanity is a powerful ally and manages to keep the peace, sharing it's culture and expertise with the other species.

And even if it turns out bad, who's to say all Reapers were based on aggressive, expansionist or empirical species? The Reapers have shown that they are intelligent and capable of thought. With the Catalyst gone, they might see the flawed logic of the Catalyst along with the errors of their ways and stand with the rest of the galaxy should some reapers get any ideas. Besides, we've beaten them before. We know their tactics, their weapons, etc. In a future galaxy, we'd probably be able to handle the Reapers.

Modifié par chris2365, 20 février 2013 - 02:13 .

[davishepard]

masster blaster wrote...

And what of it. It's not stupid to have everyone die. What's stupid is the fact that you pick control and force everyone in the galaxy to fall in line dictator Shepard. Ya you saved the galaxy from the old dictator, and replaced the old dictator with your former Shepard's copy.

And yes Shepard did set out to save the galaxy, but to send the Reapers back to hell. Letting the Reapers live is not right. Those organics should have died many eons ago. Is it right for them to be trapped inside the monster that harvested millions of cycles, and killed trillions of organics, and synthetics in each cycle? No. In Destroy I set them free. They may be evil to the core, however they didn't ask to be this way, so this is my Shepard's way of putting those races to rest.

And yes it's forced on everyone, but it's HOW it's forced, and matters that count.

So, you think that killing everyone is the smart move, but controlling the Reapers is stupid? Interesting.
Could you point to me what bits of Shepard's epilogue in the control paragon ending made Shepard AI sound like the Catalyst?

One may argue that Shepard set out to STOP the Reapers. I can't compute how many times I heard "stop the Reapers" in the trilogy, even. Killing them is one way to stop them, yes, but why other options shoudn't be considered if presented? Legion presented the option to rewrite the herectics when Shepard boarded their vessel, so that option should just be ignored because wasn't the original plan? One can't analyze the options and change stances? Really?

I don't see a difference between any of the choices in terms of "forcing it on everyone". As I said, all the choices do this, being "refuse" the worst outcome, that is, do nothing.
Its valid to note that the destroy in the game doesn't kill everyone, so it's a good option given certain lines of thought. I chose it sometimes because of this (if it killed everyone, I never wouldn't chose, as I have already made clear).

Modifié par davishepard, 20 février 2013 - 02:26 .

[masster blaster]

chris2365 wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

chris2365 wrote...
Might be wrong here, but the Catalyst controlled the Reapers. So Reapers-Catalyst= Unknown. Could be willing to integrate into society, share knowledge, who knows. Like the Batarians, who became much more agreable once the Hegenomy was destroyed in the beginning of ME3.

Or they could be aggressive, expansionist or empirical.  They could seek galactic domination, like the race they were based on.  And if so, what could possibly stop them?

And of course we know how they are created.  What if they decide to expand their numbers?

Are you willing to risk the wholesale extinction of species on a hope that the Reapers entire nature may change from what we currently know it to be?

Don't forget that a Reaper is composed of millions of minds and voices working in unison. Quadrillions of potential men, woman, children, etc. Don't they deserve a chance to speak before condemning them to because of what they were before, or the way they might be like in the future?  Would you condemn a whole species based on what might happen (Geth, Rachni, etc.) ?

Sometimes you have to take chances. When humans first arrived into the galactic stage, nobody expected the Humans to put up such a fight and they showed themselves to be agressive and tough. They took on the Turians, who could've blown humanity to bits, but the Council looked beyond this and invited them to join the community. Years later, humanity is a powerful ally and manages to keep the peace, sharing it's culture and expertise with the other species.

And even if it turns out bad, who's to say all Reapers were based on aggressive, expansionist or empirical species? The Reapers have shown that they are intelligent and capable of thought. With the Catalyst gone, they might see the flawed logic of the Catalyst along with the errors of their ways and stand with the rest of the galaxy should some reapers get any ideas. Besides, we've beaten them before. We know their tactics, their weapons, etc. In a future galaxy, we'd probably be able to handle the Reapers.

Yet this is a chance one most not take. The Reaper in general are evil. It wasn't the catalyst control over them, but their minds/egos. I mean look at Nazara, Harbinger, and The Destroyer Reaper on the Geth homeworld. You mean to tell me that neither one of them said those words out of free speech, and mind? Why should the galaxy have to fight the Reapers again if it happens again? Wouldn't have been very easy to kill them in Destroy. Yes the price is high, but you also have to think about the Reapers. If they are "good" I mean the once former organics, then wouldn't they want to die? To live in a monster that killed trillions in each cycle, and harvested millions of organics in each cycle. Do you think it's right to let them live like that forever? My Shepard picked Destroy for five reasons.

1. To save everyone from the Reapers.

2. To stick it to the catalyst, that fear of my Shepard's friends dying would not make my Shepard pick synthesis, nor control.

3. To free all those organics inside the Reaper, so they could finally rest in peace/ move on to the next life, if there is one.

4. To take revenge on all of those who have died to end the Reapers, and STOP the catalyst once and for all.

5. For the galaxy to make their OWN future. They have the power to either restart the cycle again, OR learn from the past, and try not to restart the cycle again. Plus if the catalyst said synthesis is going to happen, then let it happen natually.

[Obadiah]

Only reason I brought up the Geth and EDI is that there were two threads on Destroy on the first page, and neither mentioned them. In fact, when I brought them up in the other thread I basically got trolled with some foolishness about "giggles" etc.

Their death was not insignificant, and any half-serious discussion about Destroy should acknowledge that.

Er, so that's done. Carry on.

[noobcannon]

[masster blaster]

Obadiah wrote...

Only reason I brought up the Geth and EDI is that there were two threads on Destroy on the first page, and neither mentioned them. In fact, when I brought them up in the other thread I basically got trolled with some foolishness about "giggles" etc.

Their death was not insignificant, and any half-serious discussion about Destroy should acknowledge that.

Er, so that's done. Carry on.

I don't consider the Geth, and EDI's death's insignigicant, but there is nothing to really get all worked up over. Yes they died, but they died to stop the Reapers. If the organics had to die to save the synthetics, I would have still picked Destroy. But back to what I was saying. Yes they are a big outcome in Destroy, but really it's not serious. EDI was okay with dying to save Shepard, Joker, and the Normandy crew. The Geth were fighting for a future, not just for the Geth, but for everyone else. There is also the fact, were if you let the quarians die you hear a Geth prime tell Shepard that " Today there will be no more comprimising with the old machins." In other words all bets are off.

Look I am sorry the destroyers in those threads treated you like crap, but can you blame them. For the past eleven months synthesis fans, and control fans have been using nothing but genocid to justify why you should pick destroy, or see you commited genocid by killing EDI, and the Geth.

1. It's not genocid. Genocid can only be used, if the player wanted to "kill EDI, and the Geth". Thus genocid can be used. I didn't want to have them die, but I would not have the galaxy submit to dictator Shepard in control, nor would I mess with evoultion, the races DNA, give the catalyst what it wanted, and let everyone have their personalitys rewriten. So they died in the line of duty. I can't change the fact in Destroy all synthetics died, however the galaxy's races/ the organics now have the power to either start the cycle all over again, or learn from the past. I am sure depending on Shepard's chocies there can be peace between synthetics, and organics if they can learn.

[survivor_686]

@ OP:

You're preaching to the choir buddy.

[Untold]

Obadiah wrote...

Only reason I brought up the Geth and EDI is that there were two threads on Destroy on the first page, and neither mentioned them. In fact, when I brought them up in the other thread I basically got trolled with some foolishness about "giggles" etc.

Their death was not insignificant, and any half-serious discussion about Destroy should acknowledge that.

Er, so that's done. Carry on.

Meh we're all adults here so a civil discussion is possible. At least most of the time. These pro-choice endings tend to fuel a lot of debate.

On the issue of EDI and the Geth, most that chose destroy didn't do so and jump with joy and I don't think their death was insignificant. Heck, I don't believe a word that that little blue glowing bastage said to be honest. He clearly states that we can easily repair our tech which should also mean EDI and the geth. Oddly enough, probably the reapers too.

If they did die then it is unfortunate and the if so they were the unfortunate price that had to be paid for victory.

As I said in my earlier post. I just have no reason to believe a word that comes out of the catalyst's mouth. He has zero credibility and has provided virtually no historical or rational fact about anything other than he said so. And the more I think about this atrotious ending, the more I keep feeling like it's probably some plot point in the overall narrative of the Mass Effect universe that BioWare just isn't telling us about. I could be dead wrong but who knows right. The old guy at the end did say "one more story" did he not?

[DirtyPhoenix]

dorktainian wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Except they do give us other choices. You just let your passions and need for revenge get in the way of your judgement.

How primitive.

Yes, "other choices".

-Serve us. (Succumb)

-Become like us. (Ascend)

-Die. (Be Annihilated)

-Do what you came here to do. (Reapers never considered this possible)

Don't blame others because you've misinterpreted what the endings actually are. 

oh dear.  reported.

Ain't that a little rich. You taking offense at something so trivial as that when your group keeps calling out people who don't agree with your viewpoint?

[maximusffxii]

Kill all the reapers, if you really but your head in Shepard’s shoes, how could you possibly trust what starchild is telling you. You have to trust the machine, which has countlessly destroyed organic civilizations. I'd say we give them the same treatment.

In retrospect, if Shep jumps in the beam or decides to control the reapers it will kill him and lose the only opportunity to end the reapers all together. The Control and Synthesis option could just eliminate the threat, which is Shepard being dangerously close to destroying the Reapers. Of course we know that not to be true but being shep's shoes at that point; how could you trust the reaper's to even consider killing yourself for what could a complete falsely on the reaper’s part... just another reaper trick ><

[masster blaster]

pirate1802 wrote...

dorktainian wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Except they do give us other choices. You just let your passions and need for revenge get in the way of your judgement.

How primitive.

Yes, "other choices".

-Serve us. (Succumb)

-Become like us. (Ascend)

-Die. (Be Annihilated)

-Do what you came here to do. (Reapers never considered this possible)

Don't blame others because you've misinterpreted what the endings actually are. 

oh dear.  reported.

Ain't that a little rich. You taking offense at something so trivial as that when your group keeps calling out people who don't agree with your viewpoint?

Just like some of your groups are doing right now? I fail to see why you are pinning this on Dork/ us Destroyers, yet your group, and synthesis fans do the same thing. Look nobdy here her can't say all of us are to blame, but each has their own opinions, yet coming into a destroy thread, and you try to talk about synthesis in here, then what do you expect. Not to mention when a Destroyer goes into a synthesis thread, you wonder why this always happens. However I may be a destroyer, yet I am an...ITer.

[valkulon]

cool story bro

not that i care you're a destroyer fan, i personally don't care what ending anyone supports, so long as people realize that their ending of choice is not everyone's ending of choice.

Modifié par Valhart, 20 février 2013 - 06:10 .

[DirtyPhoenix]

masster blaster wrote...

Just like some of your groups are doing right now? I fail to see why you are pinning this on Dork/ us Destroyers, yet your group, and synthesis fans do the same thing. Look nobdy here her can't say all of us are to blame, but each has their own opinions, yet coming into a destroy thread, and you try to talk about synthesis in here, then what do you expect. Not to mention when a Destroyer goes into a synthesis thread, you wonder why this always happens. However I may be a destroyer, yet I am an...ITer.

My group? What is this "my broup" you speak of? I belong to no group and only speak for myself. I have Shepards pick all four endings and all are more or less good, imo. By your group i meant that group that we shall not name, not all destroyers. Even I am partially a destroyer. It is no secret how some ITers view other's viewpoints. Sorry but a group is always judged by its worst example, whether fair or not and this applies to all of us. So when I see a fanatic ITer the respect of the whole IT group decreases in my eyes. But hey, don't mind my opinion! because I've been told I'm a gullible retard whose opinion doesnt count because he chose control/synthesis. So please, carry on.

And yes, I wasnt here to talk about synthesis or control. I know better. And I'm not talking either. So not sure why you brought that up. But nonetheless, you'll find there are plenty of destroyers in the synthesis thread engaged in a healthy debate. Taboo is a big contributor and he's no lover of synthesis. the only ones who get the flak are the ones who enter the thread with te sole intention of trolling.