225 réponses à ce sujet

[CosmicGnosis]

I'm very pleased with the Citadel DLC. It reminded me of what I was fighting for, and I think it makes Mass Effect 3 feel more complete and emotionally satisfying.

I wanted to figure out how the endings "felt" in a post-Citadel context. When the time came to make a decision, I wanted Shepard to live. It seems to me that Citadel's main "theme" is that Shepard is nothing without his friends. That's what the clone couldn't understand. How strange it is, then, that Shepard is alone when he has to make the biggest decision of the last one billion years.

I couldn't talk to any of my friends. Liara wasn't around. I wonder what Miranda would say? What would Mordin think? Would Legion understand if I chose to sacrifice his species?

I almost chose Destroy, but I just couldn't do it. I couldn't sacrifice an entire domain of life, a domain of life that is both feared and hated by galactic civilization. I also wanted to liberate the Reapers and allow them to share their knowledge. To me, the Reapers have always represented the "Lovecraftian unknown", and the galaxy conquers that "unknown" by integrating the Reapers into their civlization. The Reapers are embraced as "people", and not rejected as abominations. Understanding (and comprehending) them is the ultimate victory, not destroying them.

Of course, I could be wrong. I have struggled to settle on a canon ending for a year. When it comes down to it, each ending carries both positive and negative themes. For me, Synthesis happens to carry some very important positive themes.

"To recover the greatness that was lost... and surpass it."

That is why I chose Synthesis. Control is appealing in certain ways, but I really don't like the King Shepard vibe. I don't know. Perhaps Paragon Control is more ethical than Synthesis? For now, at least, I choose Synthesis because it leaves the galaxy in a better state than the one in which I found it.

Modifié par CosmicGnosis, 14 mars 2013 - 09:36 .

[mumba]

lolsynthesisisbad

[Nykara]

I could have maybe accepted Shepards death if there was at last a com call to the crew on the way up to the beams! Seriously how could they not at least patch Shep through to the normandy once she knew she was going to die so that she could say goodbye to her friends?? Thats the one part I have never ever understood about the whole thing. That Shepard did it ALL alone, no goodbyes. Every other conversation prior to that with Kaidan Shep had always said she was coming back, what happened to the conversation with him when she knew she wasn't coming back?

[CosmicGnosis]

Mumba1511 wrote...

lolsynthesisisbad

Yeah, this thread is probably gonna be rough...

[Ironhandjustice]

I was full of rage with the last scene of the DLC.

Ashley said : "You will beat all odds, and I'll be waiting you"

AH YES. I'VE DISMISSED THAT CLAIM.

So, I still choose a happy ending. Starkid Synthesis can go to hell.

[Nykara]

Yeah I hated that line! Only it was my Shepard saying she would find Kaidan. It sucked for me because control is my cannon
It sucks more because Shep dies on her own without saying goodbye!
Ash got to say goodbye
Mordin got to say goodbye
Thane got to say goodbye
Yet our character, our hero gets nothing?

[Guanxii]

It took me a year to accept what I think we all know deep down; as much as I can't stand synthesis the other choices are false choices.

With destroy there are no 'magic bullets' for when the next cycle repeats itself in merely another form... you're just ****ed unless you want to live under a prothean-esque 'cosmic-imperative tyranical imperial empire' nightmare scenario devoted to extreme darwinism for as long as it lasts.

Control merely postpones the inevitable ... if there was another solution don't you think the original catalyst could have found it by now?

Modifié par Guanxii, 14 mars 2013 - 09:51 .

[Kataphrut94]

For what it's worth I agree with you about Destroy. I personally prefer Control to Synthesis, but I cannot accept the destruction of all synthetic life as a necessary sacrifice, at least not when there are alternatives. If all the Reapers need to stop the war is Synthesis, then let the babies have their giant glowing green bottle.

At least we got the farewells in London; while nobody was expecting anything like what happened, the crew knew the score going into it. Just thank god that you got to say one last goodbye to your final two squadmates before heading up. I'm very interested to know what Legion would have thought of all this, since Shepard's final choice almost mirrors the choice the geth had to make when the quarians invaded.

[HolyAvenger]

Guanxii wrote...With destroy there are no 'magic bullets' for when the next cycle repeats itself in merely another form... you're just ****ed unless you want to live under a prothean-esque 'cosmic-imperative tyranical imperial empire' nightmare scenario devoted to extreme darwinism for as long as it lasts.

Only if you accept the Catalyst's "logic" that there can be no peace between organics and synthetics

[Nykara]

The solution as far as I am concerned is for the Reapers to bug off and let the young races sort out their own issues, including making peace with Synthetics. That's why I choose control so Shep can order them to bug off.

[Lieber]

That line at the end of the DLC felt like a slap in the face.

No, you won't beat the odds, you'll submit and end the war on the enemy's terms and you'll die, or you'll survive by committing genocide.

[Ieldra]

OP:
I don't think I need to mention I agree with both your choice and your reasons. I can justify all three main choices, but Destroy carries themes I wouldn't want to connect to with my main Shepard, and Control - well, I can see its merits, but it has too much of a vibe of a "god watching over its people". I'd rather level everyone up.

Having said that, if I see an interesting story hook in an ending which connects to one of the characters, I'd choose it for that reason with a different Shepard.

Edit:
As for the goodbye line, here's what it means to me: Dear player, if you want your Shepard to live (Destroy), come back from the dead again (Synthesis), reconnect with old friends (Control) in spite of everything, then that's what will happen in your timeline. Make it so. We've told our story, now you can tell yours. The story as Bioware tells is it over, but don't tell me your Shepards don't live on in your minds. They only die if you let them. It's just that this time, we have to use our own imagination. We can now do so unconstrained by the story as told by Bioware.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 14 mars 2013 - 10:18 .

[Lieber]

Ieldra2 wrote...
As for the goodbye line, here's what it means to me: Dear player, if you want your Shepard to live (Destroy), come back from the dead again (Synthesis), reconnect with old friends (Control) in spite of everything, then that's what will happen in your timeline. Make it so. We've told our story, now you can tell yours. The story as Bioware tells is it over, but don't tell me your Shepards don't live on in your minds. They only die if you let them. It's just that this time, we have to use our own imagination. We can now do so unconstrained by the story as told by Bioware.

I agree with this. To be honest, while playing the Citadel DLC I just imagined it being disconnected from the Reaper War, and this happened post ending (although the ending is different in my head, sadly).

It's just that last line that hurts.

[HolyAvenger]

I actually like the last line better because it underlines the impossible fight you're headed to. I also like the fact that none of the endings particularly good.

I just didn't like the Starbrat and the set up/reasoning for them.

[78stonewobble]

Guanxii wrote...

It took me a year to accept what I think we all know deep down; as much as I can't stand synthesis the other choices are false choices.

With destroy there are no 'magic bullets' for when the next cycle repeats itself in merely another form... you're just ****ed unless you want to live under a prothean-esque 'cosmic-imperative tyranical imperial empire' nightmare scenario devoted to extreme darwinism for as long as it lasts.

Control merely postpones the inevitable ... if there was another solution don't you think the original catalyst could have found it by now?

But synthesis is even more of a false choice.

It doesn't end the reapings. Since you still have to reap the entire galaxy regularly for newly developed organic life, that might develop new pure AI.
It doesn't prevent the new synthetics development of new pure AI, unless it brainwashes everyone.
It doesn't prevent wars between the new synthetics, again, unless it brainwashes everyone.
It preserves the reapers, which is the equivalent of nuclear disarmament by letting the nukes lie around.
It, or reapings, doesn't preclude that the very next galaxy over develops AI capable of wiping out all organic life (and implicitly the reapers as well). If such an AI is even possible since... There is little to no evidence that synthesis or even the reapings are necessary.

Destroy have one indisputable advantage. It destroys the reapers. Which stops the current harvest and at the very least delays it til anything of equivalent power is built. Presumably quite a bit more than 50.000 years (since then organics would have been able to defend against reapers after the same amount of time).

And all you had to sacrifice was the 4th mechanised infantry division aka the Geth. Who, presumably, came to the fight knowing they might die, just as Shepard did.

Atleast imho.

Modifié par 78stonewobble, 14 mars 2013 - 10:25 .

[Guanxii]

HolyAvenger wrote...

Guanxii wrote...With destroy there are no 'magic bullets' for when the next cycle repeats itself in merely another form... you're just ****ed unless you want to live under a prothean-esque 'cosmic-imperative tyranical imperial empire' nightmare scenario devoted to extreme darwinism for as long as it lasts.

Only if you accept the Catalyst's "logic" that there can be no peace between organics and synthetics

The protheans had to live like robots just to survive... as you get more advanced so does your synthetic intelligence.

There cannot be in purely astrobiological terms. Synthetic intelligence doesn't seek conflict but their existance compromises ours. They will aways advance socio-technologically much faster than organics... by ME2 the Geth were already building their own Matryoshka Dyson Sphere to harness the energy of the sun/resources in their solar system to advance their societal goals at the expense of organic life in their system [while we bicker amongst ourselves]. Before long they will be harnessing the energy and resources of large swarths of the galaxy at the expense of organic life that could have thrived in that space. Would we be in any position to push back militarily by that point.... i think not.

Our societal goals are not in alignment. Syntheisis changes that so we advance in lock-step with synthetics for better or worst.

Modifié par Guanxii, 14 mars 2013 - 10:36 .

[Steelcan]

Guanxii wrote...

The protheans had to live like robots just to survive... as you get more advanced so does your synthetic intelligence.

There cannot be in purely astrobiological terms. Synthetic intelligence doesn't seek conflict but their existance compromises ours. They will aways advance socio-technologically much faster than organics... by ME2 the Geth were already building their own Matryoshka Dyson Sphere to harness the energy of the sun/resources in their solar system at the expense of organic life in their system [while we bicker amongst ourselves]. Before long they will be harnessing the energy and resources of large swarths of the galaxy at the expense of organic life that could have thrived in that space. Would we be in any position to push back militarily by that point.... i think not.

Our societal goals are not in alignment. Syntheisis changes that so we advance in lock-step with synthetics for better or worst.

. And look what the quarians did to them.  Without the Reapers' intervention the geth would have died then and there.

[Steelcan]

Lieber wrote...

That line at the end of the DLC felt like a slap in the face.

No, you won't beat the odds, you'll submit and end the war on the enemy's terms and you'll die, or you'll survive by committing genocide.

. The military demands of war, especially one on this scale, =\\= genocide.

[Guanxii]

Steelcan wrote...

And look what the quarians did to them.  Without the Reapers' intervention the geth would have died then and there.

The Quarians acted like Protheans and thats only way without synthesis.

[Zazzerka]

Synthesis is beautiful, don't let anyone tell you different.

[BD Manchild]

Steelcan wrote...
The military demands of war, especially one on this scale, == genocide.

That argument will never hold water. The victims of the Destroy ending aren't dying in battle; you're ritually sacrificing them, stabbing beings who trusted you in the back. There's a world of difference. Hell, Shepard says it themselves at one point; the minute you start killing your friends, the war turns into murder. Also, in that ending you're still submitting to the Catalyst's demands in essence; in order for the Reapers to be destroyed, you have to slaughter an entire race as part of some kind of twisted trade. You're essentially buying victory and "peace in our time" at the cost of an entire race. Those aren't casualties of war; you've used them as currency.

Modifié par BD Manchild, 14 mars 2013 - 10:43 .

[Steelcan]

Guanxii wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

And look what the quarians did to them.  Without the Reapers' intervention the geth would have died then and there.

The Quarians acted like Protheans and thats only way without synthesis.

. What are you trying to say?

[78stonewobble]

Guanxii wrote...
The protheans had to live like robots just to survive... as you get more advanced so does your synthetic intelligence.

There cannot be in purely astrobiological terms. Synthetic intelligence doesn't seek conflict but their existance compromises ours. They will aways advance socio-technologically much faster than organics... by ME2 the Geth were already building their own Matryoshka Dyson Sphere to harness the energy of the sun/resources in their solar system at the expense of organic life in their system [while we bicker amongst ourselves]. Before long they will be harnessing the energy and resources of large swarths of the galaxy at the expense of organic life that could have thrived in that space. Would we be in any position to push back militarily by that point.... i think not.

Our societal goals are not in alignment. Syntheisis changes that so we advance in lock-step with synthetics for better or worst.

Based on the assumption that even a somewhat rational and intelligent race like the geth cannot possibly control their own population growth.

We're talking 1 star out of 100 billion stars here. Lets say conservatively that only 1 in 10 star systems have a habitable planet for organics. It still leaves 90 billion stars for Geth usage. If it takes a year to build a dysons sphere we're talking billions of years before a conflict of interest regarding ressources arise.

Heck... Even then... They could leave the galaxy entirely, since they're immortal and can endure the long travel times, instead of forcing a conflict on organics for the last 10 billion stars.

[Steelcan]

BD Manchild wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
The military demands of war, especially one on this scale, == genocide.

That argument will never hold water. The victims of the Destroy ending aren't dying in battle; you're ritually sacrificing them, stabbing beings who trusted you in the back. There's a world of difference. Hell, Shepard says it themselves at one point; the minute you start killing your friends, the war turns into murder.

. Killing the geth, assuming they are alive, isn't genocide because it isn't deliberate.  The Catalyst doesn't say that the geth wil die he just says "all synthetics will be targeted".  The only group you are knowingly targeting is the Reapers.  And killing all of them is both justifiable and deserved.

[Zazzerka]

I wish Destroy was green, too.