748 réponses à ce sujet

[Reorte]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Or maybe not. I don't want to convince Control people that their ending will lead to failure any more than I will try and assert that Destroy will definitely lead to success. The point is that each side understands the reasoning behind the other while still disagreeing.

The problem I've had with this argument in the past is that some people seem to treat me saying that there's a lot of reason to think that it might go wrong as me saying that it definitely will.

[Gredd18]

How Can I Do This?
The Star-Child Is A ****, That's How.
One Sentence He Says Everything Electric-y Will Die
Next, It Will Be Easy To Repair
So, If I am Right, Memory Banks Have No Reaper Tech.
Just Rebuild The Broken Stuff
And
YAAAY
Just Don't touch the Reapers.

[Barquiel]

Reorte wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

If it was a tiny portion, why do they lose fully 1/3rd of their value as a war asset if you blow the heretics?

Because the quarians kill more of them. If the heretics are rewritten, their knowledge gives the geth an edge and they kill more of the quarians. In both cases, it's before Shepard shows up.

Do you get fewer quarian war assets if that's the case?

Rewrite = +150 Geth Assets, -150 Quarian Assets
Destroy = +150 Quarian Assets, -150 Geth Assets

According to the codex, the heretics consist of about five percent of the total geth population.

[Xilizhra]

Assumptions are kinda all we have. In any case, the new Shepard-AI will probably have the same logic-process as the old Intelligence since he's essentially replacing it. That logic programming led the Intelligence to take "preserve life at all cost" and create the Reaper cycle. Paragon Control Shepard's directive is either "ensure all have a voice for their own future" or alternatively "protect the many". It is entirely possible those directives can lead to an MO that would be considered morally reprehensible.

Those directives could lead to an MO that's morally reprehensible from a human as well. It depends on Shepard's own personality, and mine will not fall.

Do you get fewer quarian war assets if that's the case?

Yes.

And even believing that it is your own Shepard requires an absurdly huge leap of faith.

One that I can almost guarantee will never be contradicted by future games.

Oh, so it isn't your Shepard now...

My Shepard, vastly upgraded.

Why believe that Control isn't just asking Shepard to electrocute himself? At least it's (scantily) backed up by the rest of the story instead of just requiring complete trust in what the Catalyst says.

I have to trust the Catalyst to take any ending.

[o Ventus]

Pakundo wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Because the synthetics can be rebuilt to exact specifications.

It's a non-issue.

http://masseffect.wi...al_Intelligence

Synthetic =/= AI.

[Terraforming2154]

My reason for picking destroy is the same reason people pick Control or Synthesis: because it is the only choice that I agree with and that sits right with me.

I admit that it is a bitter victory because I like EDI and the Geth, and I would have rather had an ending where Shep sacrificed herself and the Reapers were nothing but rubble, but destroy is the closest I can get to that.

Plus OP, MEHEM is restricted to PC players, so I can't very well acknowledge it as anything other than fan-fiction in mod form.

Really these "which endings are better" threads just go round and round in circles at this point...

Modifié par Terraforming2154, 08 mars 2013 - 05:00 .

[CronoDragoon]

Xilizhra wrote...
Those directives could lead to an MO that's morally reprehensible from a human as well. It depends on Shepard's own personality, and mine will not fall.

I think that no matter the personality, when it is codified into prioritized directives there is always a chance for an unwanted conclusion. However, there is always a chance that the conclusions will be fine. I think the chance is greater that something terrible will go wrong regardless of Shepard's personality.

[Althix]

yeah, but in both blue and green endings reaper still present.

but in red ending - you can be damn sure that they are all dead.

[S.A.K]

And btw, it was clear that Legion was trying to bullsh!t Shepard for their own good and tried to kill him when he didn't buy it, the only bad thing about destroy is EDI's death imo.

[Xilizhra]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Those directives could lead to an MO that's morally reprehensible from a human as well. It depends on Shepard's own personality, and mine will not fall.

I think that no matter the personality, when it is codified into prioritized directives there is always a chance for an unwanted conclusion. However, there is always a chance that the conclusions will be fine. I think the chance is greater that something terrible will go wrong regardless of Shepard's personality.

The chance, as of now, is under my control, and I'll exercise it as such.

[Reorte]

Xilizhra wrote...

And even believing that it is your own Shepard requires an absurdly huge leap of faith.

One that I can almost guarantee will never be contradicted by future games.

Only because I rather suspect that they'll never even raise the issue (the same being true whatever choice is made). Besides, stories making the absurd acutally happen is something I'll instinctively reject unless they come up with very good explanations that I haven't thought of. Keep failing with the explanations and I'll evetually just abandon the entire story as being hopelessly written.

Oh, so it isn't your Shepard now...

My Shepard, vastly upgraded.

To the point of not being the same person. Everything we can logically infer suggests an accurate Shepard is very, very unlikely. The EC Control epilogue even backs up that whatever it is it isn't Shepard as he was (I thought that the EC voiceover got the tone of Control spot on - even Paragon it's downright creepy).

Why believe that Control isn't just asking Shepard to electrocute himself? At least it's (scantily) backed up by the rest of the story instead of just requiring complete trust in what the Catalyst says.

I have to trust the Catalyst to take any ending.

Up to a point. The basics of what it says they do seem well-enough given (destroy Reapers, replace Catalyst, engage Space Magic).

[wright1978]

I'm sad that that the beam that kills the reapers and sets the galaxy free hasn't been calibrated well enough to solely kill the reapers. It is still the best choice in my mind. Shep living afterwards is just the cherry whilst synthetics is the bitter in the sweet.

P.s Of course the endings are also a pathetic trainwreck.

[HiddenInWar]

DanHarbinger wrote...

Because the alternatives are even more abhorrent.

[futurepixels]

They are just machines.

[Reorte]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Those directives could lead to an MO that's morally reprehensible from a human as well. It depends on Shepard's own personality, and mine will not fall.

I think that no matter the personality, when it is codified into prioritized directives there is always a chance for an unwanted conclusion. However, there is always a chance that the conclusions will be fine. I think the chance is greater that something terrible will go wrong regardless of Shepard's personality.

Ditto. Everything tells me that Control will probably go terribly wrong, not definitely. If it doesn't then it's unarguably the best choice. Should you take a gamble that big? Personally I think not, but I do get worried when people seem to deny that it's even a gamble.

[Lenimph]

Because everything can be rebuilt, but under our own terms.

[Reorte]

wright1978 wrote...

I'm sad that that the beam that kills the reapers and sets the galaxy free hasn't been calibrated well enough to solely kill the reapers. It is still the best choice in my mind. Shep living afterwards is just the cherry whilst synthetics is the bitter in the sweet.

P.s Of course the endings are also a pathetic trainwreck.

Well the beam has also been incredibly well-calibrated if it can discriminate between identical (totally alien to it) hardware running different software, in one case not doing anything particularly clever and in the other running an AI. It's sad when even my preferred ending makes little sense. Control is actually the ending with the fewest absurdities.

Modifié par Reorte, 08 mars 2013 - 05:13 .

[DeinonSlayer]

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...

[quote]If it was a tiny portion, why do they lose fully 1/3rd of their value as a war asset if you blow the heretics?[/quote]
Because the quarians kill more of them. If the heretics are rewritten, their knowledge gives the geth an edge and they kill more of the quarians. In both cases, it's before Shepard shows up.[/quote]That's one interpretation.

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...
[quote]Both sides acted under duress in the modern war, I'm not denying the Geth were pressured. It doesn't change the fact that they chose to side with the Reapers, though - that Reaper destroyer was there before the Quarians attacked.[/quote]
Source?[/quote]I'll assume you're asking about the second point. The Reaper was already there. The Geth facility it was housed in was already there. The Quarians entered the system and began their attack, after which the signal began broadcasting - do you suggest it snuck past both fleets undetected after the attack was underway? It "made an offer" to the Geth, which they refrained from accepting until it was evident that they would lose.

Also, pay close attention to Legion's dialogue. Shepard asks if the Geth believed him about the Reapers, to which Legion replies in the affirmative. Legion says the Geth were preparing for war, but never specifies against whom. He says the decision to side with the Reapers "would have been unnecessary" were it not for the Quarian attack (the VI merely laments that the interface was "unproductive."). Legion never suggests the Geth were going to leave the Veil and aid the organic war effort. He never even says that the Geth would have opposed the Reapers, just that they were "preparing."

Bottom line, the Geth plan before the Reaper invasion was to ride out the war in isolation, as they. have for the last three centuries. Their only concern was their own survival (which, to them, was worth becoming a bludgeon to be used against every other race before being disposed of themselves).

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...

[quote]Shepard isnt aware he/she would live in Destroy. S/he was willing to sacrifice herself. Her job, her orders, her reason for being alive after two years dead... destroy the Reapers. Her sole purpose in life is in front of her(to the slight right) and shes going to let an intelligence she doesnt know derail her objective in 5-10 minutes of odd conversation? [/quote]
My objective is to stop the cycle. Destroying the Reapers is just a means to an end, and I'm happy to take another one if presented.[/quote]More power to you... I think.

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...

[quote]Their nature as galactic overlords is a major problem. They are all powerful war machines designed to protect life from itself by enforcing one being's idea of what is good. Why should any one being have the power to decide what is good for the galaxy? Even a total paragon Shepard should not be given that kind of power. IMO, of course.[/quote]
It's not optimal, just better than the other choices. And my own Shepard is one of the better people to take such power, I feel.

[quote]IMO, it's better that some sacrifice so that the rest can have a better world. It's not a storybook ending, but it is how real wars work out throughout history. [/quote]
And I will make it work better.[/quote]I... sorry, the arrogance on display here is astounding. It's your playthrough, your decision, but still...

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...

[quote] To quote General Hummel, "you've made a grave mistake, and more of our brothers have died in vain. Damn you for forcing me into this position." [/quote]
Thus indeed, you have made a grave mistake. Several, actually, if your canon playthrough is any indication.[/quote]
PerfectShep is boring. ParagonShep is boring. I roleplay human characters with their own strengths and flaws and see more of the game for it. You, admittedly, do the exact same thing and romance the same person every single time, only changing your class from one playthrough to the next. That's your right, but it doesn't make you right. Difference is, I acknowledge my Shepards have flaws. That's half the fun. JayneShep (the most renegade of the bunch) is an absolute troll, but that doesn't make him a monster.

[Xilizhra]

Only because I rather suspect that they'll never even raise the issue (the same being true whatever choice is made). Besides, stories making the absurd acutally happen is something I'll instinctively reject unless they come up with very good explanations that I haven't thought of. Keep failing with the explanations and I'll evetually just abandon the entire story as being hopelessly written.

So in other words, you have nothing to back up your position that my Shepard is doomed aside from being bitter that the story wouldn't meet your expectations for inevitable corruption.

To the point of not being the same person. Everything we can logically infer suggests an accurate Shepard is very, very unlikely. The EC Control epilogue even backs up that whatever it is it isn't Shepard as he was (I thought that the EC voiceover got the tone of Control spot on - even Paragon it's downright creepy).

Subjective; I didn't consider it creepy at all, nor do I consider it that far removed from Shepard in motivation or actions, only perspective (which won't lead to anything bad).

Ditto. Everything tells me that Control will probably go terribly wrong, not definitely. If it doesn't then it's unarguably the best choice. Should you take a gamble that big? Personally I think not, but I do get worried when people seem to deny that it's even a gamble.

It's not a gamble, because the outcome is still roleplayed by me and under my control.

[Bfler]

Strange is, that in Control the Geth with their Reaper upgrades and also Edi seem to be free from the influence of the Shepard AI, while the Reapers are under control. So, why is the Crucible able to differentiate in Control but not Destroy?

[Steelcan]

Well Jayne refusing makes a bit of a monster

[Reorte]

DeinonSlayer wrote...
JayneShep (the most renegade of the bunch) is an absolute troll, but that doesn't make him a monster.

JayneShep, I love it! I imagine he might've got a little confused when he met Kal'Reegar though...

[Xilizhra]

That's one interpretation.

The canon one.

I'll assume you're asking about the second point. The Reaper was already there. The Geth facility it was housed in was already there. The Quarians entered the system and began their attack, after which the signal began broadcasting - do you suggest it snuck past both fleets undetected after the attack was underway? It "made an offer" to the Geth, which they refrained from accepting until it was evident that they would lose.

The Reaper entered after the geth accepted its deal and entered that facility while the geth dreadnaught tied up the quarian fleet.

Also, pay close attention to Legion's dialogue. Shepard asks if the Geth believed him about the Reapers, to which Legion replies in the affirmative. Legion says the Geth were preparing for war, but never specifies against whom. He says the decision to side with the Reapers "would have been unnecessary" were it not for the Quarian attack (the VI merely laments that the interface was "unproductive."). Legion never suggests the Geth were going to leave the Veil and aid the organic war effort. He never even says that the Geth would have opposed the Reapers, just that they were "preparing."

There's also no reason in particular to disbelieve that the geth were going to be opposed to the Reapers, which they already were in thought in ME2.

Bottom line, the Geth plan before the Reaper invasion was to ride out the war in isolation, as they. have for the last three centuries. Their only concern was their own survival (which, to them, was worth becoming a bludgeon to be used against every other race before being disposed of themselves).

Their own survival, like every single other race in the galaxy? The only reason humans reached out to anyone else is because they got hit first.

I... sorry, the arrogance on display here is astounding. It's your playthrough, your decision, but still...

Arrogance born of necessity. Synthesis is too vague and Destroy's cost is far too high. My own Shepard is a better person than I, clearly, and I trust her in this matter.

PerfectShep is boring. ParagonShep is boring. I roleplay human characters with their own strengths and flaws and see more of the game for it. You, admittedly, do the exact same thing and romance the same person every single time, only changing your class from one playthrough to the next. That's your right, but it doesn't make you right. Difference is, I acknowledge my Shepards have flaws. That's half the fun. JayneShep (the most renegade of the bunch) is an absolute troll, but that doesn't make him a monster.

Obviously my Shepard has flaws, otherwise she'd have been able to win on Thessia, bring TIM back into the fold, etc. I just don't consider her to be sufficiently flawed as to go irrevocably hostile as the Catalyst.

[Hexley UK]

I can accept the loss of all synthetics in destroy because slavery or forced mindrape/eugenics on that scale is worse.

Don't get me wrong though...all the endings are morally abhorrent.

MEHEM is okay...but it's not canon and therefore I have a hard time accepting it....I don't really know why.

Modifié par Hexley UK, 08 mars 2013 - 05:22 .

[CronoDragoon]

Bfler wrote...

Strange is, that in Control the Geth with their Reaper upgrades and also Edi seem to be free from the influence of the Shepard AI, while the Reapers are under control. So, why is the Crucible able to differentiate in Control but not Destroy?

The best explanation I've heard is that the Control wave is actually just sending a signal to the already-established connection between the Intelligence and the Reapers.

The real explanation is because that's what the writers wanted each ending to do.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 08 mars 2013 - 05:21 .