108 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

Mr.House wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Deathsaurer wrote...

Calibrations Expert wrote...

I don't see how having more time with EDI and Joker means the game is leaning more toward having you kill her.

Various lines the other characters have, most notably the LI, are clearly pro Destroy fanservice. That said spending more time with EDI has had an impact on several people.

EDI was ready to die to destory the Reapers.

EDI was ready to die in battle against the Reapers, when it seemed that destruction was the only viable option. None of the people you're killing have gotten the information you have; you can't rely on past statements with incomplete information to gain their consent here. It's like getting married, having sex with your spouse, getting AIDS somehow, then continuing to have sex with your spouse without telling them because they'd agreed to do so before.

Please don't tell me you just compared a video game conflict to AIDS......

I'm catching up on all of the "Synthesis=rape" people. Do you believe it an invalid comparison, or are you putting on a facade of indignation because I made an IRL analogy?

[teh DRUMPf!!]

MassEffectFShep wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

EDI's death doesn't dissuade me from Destroy any more than Ashley's death makes me want to not blow up Saren's base on Virmire.

This is a good comparison. All players know that sacrifices have to be made, and when it comes to the ending, I'd sacrifice EDI & the geth before I'd sacrifice the whole galaxy via a complete genetic re-write (with little more reason to do so than a reaper manifestation telling me we're "ready" to do it), or to sacrifice the whole galaxy via controlling it...again with little more evidence that it can done than a reaper manifestation telling me that I can.

It's actually a terrible comparison.

Unless you think Ashley is equivalent to all synthetic life.

Most would not have her anywhere close. And I'm an Ash fan!

[ruggly]

I will admit that EDI's little bit in the apartment had me thinking about control for a while, synthesis is still too far out there for me. But after thinking about it, control still makes me uncomfortable as well.

Also read your ME3 Ending, Revised thread: I could have gone for endings like that.  Perhaps if there were three levels for each: bad, alright, and good, so that they balance out a bit.

Modifié par ruggly, 18 mars 2013 - 01:12 .

[TJBartlemus]

Auld Wulf wrote...

 Many see the Reapers as faceless, cthulhu-like killers. Not many realise that the Reapers are actually entire civilisations enslaved by a control program, and that they have no control over their own actions. Knowing that, the perspective of any non-sociopathic person should be sympathy.

 I'm sure by now everyone realizes that the Reapers are made up of past civilizations over the thousands of cycles in the past, but where at all In-Game does it point to that these machines still possess their former consciousness? Even further to assume that they have no control over their actions?  I feel these are just assumptions that you have created to attempt to make your arguement stronger.

[Bill Casey]

Samtheman63 wrote...

just like the rest of the trilogy

This...
They had you kill 300,000 innocent people on Aratoht and then handed you an achievement called "The Ultimate Sacrifice"...

For some god damn reason they think this is sacrifice...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 18 mars 2013 - 01:19 .

[MKfighter89]

The star child says in destroy that our tech will be affected due to the massive power surge caused. He also goes on to say that our Techs will be able to rebuild with minor trouble. So their you go everything can be rebuilt or reactivated with time. Of course its really all on how we take it in our minds, since we all think different.

[afgrdnq1]

... the citadel dlc made me try the control ending instead of my usual synthesis. If anything i now hate destroy more because of how EDI acts in the DLC. I refuse to pick anything that would destroy her or the geth.

[The Heretic of Time]

Steelcan wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

EDI's death doesn't dissuade me from Destroy any more than Ashley's death makes me want to not blow up Saren's base on Virmire.

[BleedingUranium]

MassEffectFShep wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

EDI's death doesn't dissuade me from Destroy any more than Ashley's death makes me want to not blow up Saren's base on Virmire.

This is a good comparison. All players know that sacrifices have to be made, and when it comes to the ending, I'd sacrifice EDI & the geth before I'd sacrifice the whole galaxy via a complete genetic re-write (with little more reason to do so than a reaper manifestation telling me we're "ready" to do it), or to sacrifice the whole galaxy via controlling it...again with little more evidence that it can done than a reaper manifestation telling me that I can.

Mr.House wrote...

EDI was ready to die to destory the Reapers.

All this.

HYR 2.0 wrote...

It's actually a terrible comparison.

Unless you think Ashley is equivalent to all synthetic life.

Most would not have her anywhere close. And I'm an Ash fan!

Ashley/Kaidan for Shepard, the other five squadmates, the crew of the Normandy, a Salarian STG squad, and the success of the mission.

EDI, the Geth, the Alliance Infiltration Units, and likely some other synthetic life, for the Humans, Asari, Salarians, Turians, Krogan, Quarians, Drell, Batarians, Rachni, Volus, Elcor, Hanar, Vorcha, the last Prothean, likely some other organic life, and the success of the mission.

It is a valid comparison.

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 18 mars 2013 - 02:07 .

[darthnick427]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

EDI's death doesn't dissuade me from Destroy any more than Ashley's death makes me want to not blow up Saren's base on Virmire.

Damn right.

[Reptilian Rob]

KingNothing125 wrote...

I'm all for pro-Destroy messages, because the other options are awful.

Control is thematically awful because you end up siding with the Illusive Man, the guy you've been trying to stop this whole time. Control is mechanically awful because you become a soulless, detached guardian of the galaxy for who knows how long. Eternity? Who knows. Listen to Shepard during the Control epilogue. He talks about himself in the 3rd person. He's not even himself anymore. Added benefits: getting to linger on while all your mortal friends and love ones die off.

If you thought Will Turner becoming the new Davy Jones at the end of Pirates 3 was a good ending, you'd probably like Control. And you'd be a crazy person.

Synthesis is thematically awful because you accept the Reapers' flawed premise that the cycle of organic-synthetic violence is inevitable (even after you've proven that it isn't, by brokering peace between the Geth and the Quarians, and fostering a relationship between Joker and EDI... two obvious examples of organics and synthetics living harmoniously). Synthesis is mechanically awful for a number of reasons, including having a hand-wavy, nonsensical explanation of how it works. Add your energy to the Crucible? How? What energy? Shepard is nought but flesh and bone. But I digress; let's talk about other flawed mechanics. Forget about Citadel DLC for a moment. Let's take a trip back to Leviathan. The Leviathan says the intelligence is just doing what it was made to do. The "intelligence" admits as much at the end if you tell it that the Leviathans have joined the war. The "intelligence" says it welcomes their involvement because it's just doing what they made it to do. Furthermore, the "intelligence" goes on to say that synthetics seek perfection through understanding. Hello? the "intelligence" just admitted that its kind doesn't understand everything. How does it know this is the way it has to be? It's just a machine, working with parameters it was given over a billion years ago. How does it know conflict is inevitable? It doesn't, quite simply.

Don't go kill yourself and change every living thing in the galaxy into some kind of weird organic-synthetic hybrid just because a limited machine told you to. Use your critical thinking skills.

If you thought the ending of Matrix 3 was a good ending, where Shepard Neo sacrifices himself and organics and synthetics humans and machines learn to live peacefully with one another, then you'd probably like Synthesis. And you'd be a crazy person.

Being pro-Destroy doesn't necessarily mean you're anti-Synthetic. I certainly am not. I am sad the Geth and EDI had to die. But EDI was, at least unofficially, a member of the Alliance military. And the Geth volunteered to fight against the Reapers. They were not victims of genocide, they are casualties of war. It is not Shepard's fault the Crucible doesn't discriminate between forms of synthetic life. That is a design flaw by the Crucible construction team, or the Protheans, or whoever added that functionality in a cycle long past.

And synthetics don't have to be dead forever. We can make new ones. And we will be free to do so without the spectre (no pun intended) of genocidal machines coming to stop us. We will be wholly responsible for the outcome, good or ill. And Shepard will be there to see it because he survives, gorramit.

Wow, the first post I've read in countless months that is actually intelligent. 

*Claps*

[Reptilian Rob]

Xilizhra wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Deathsaurer wrote...

Calibrations Expert wrote...

I don't see how having more time with EDI and Joker means the game is leaning more toward having you kill her.

Various lines the other characters have, most notably the LI, are clearly pro Destroy fanservice. That said spending more time with EDI has had an impact on several people.

EDI was ready to die to destory the Reapers.

EDI was ready to die in battle against the Reapers, when it seemed that destruction was the only viable option. None of the people you're killing have gotten the information you have; you can't rely on past statements with incomplete information to gain their consent here. It's like getting married, having sex with your spouse, getting AIDS somehow, then continuing to have sex with your spouse without telling them because they'd agreed to do so before.

Please don't tell me you just compared a video game conflict to AIDS......

I'm catching up on all of the "Synthesis=rape" people. Do you believe it an invalid comparison, or are you putting on a facade of indignation because I made an IRL analogy?

I feel like we've all become less intelligent from reading your posts.

Oh, my head. 

[Stakrin]

Guys quote me more.

I am lonely.

[Warlord_Thuran]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

EDI's death doesn't dissuade me from Destroy any more than Ashley's death makes me want to not blow up Saren's base on Virmire.

If the result was turning all the races into another single race, then everything we had fought for would have been for nothing. it was a hard choise due to EDI and the Geth, but ultimately it was better than turning them into something they were not, and we went into the fight knowing fully well that ALL could die, so while it hurts to kill one, it is ultimately better than the alternative.

That said, I would gladly have Sacrificed Ashley in the place of EDI 

[CronoDragoon]

I really don't think Citadel DLC was pro-any ending. If you chose an ending with the intent to save the ones you loved and preserve the things about the galaxy worth protecting, then it seems to me Citadel DLC would enhance that notion for any ending.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 18 mars 2013 - 03:55 .

[Stakrin]

IMO Ashley>Kaidan>EDI.
I like humans more than Mechs . They freak me out.

(JK, I just preferred EDI as a little ball than a squadmate)

[Raanz]

Stakrin wrote...

IMO Ashley>Kaidan>EDI.
I like humans more than Mechs . They freak me out.

(JK, I just preferred EDI as a little ball than a squadmate)

There ya go..QFT.

[Eterna]

The Citadel strengthened my conviction to Control. My Shepard sacrifices herself to protect them forevermore. If I choose Destroy I kill some of my friends to accomplish a temporary fix just so I can live, I cannot do that.

And frankly, the people who choose Destroy just so they can live... what kind of hero are you?

Modifié par Eterna5, 18 mars 2013 - 04:07 .

[Xilizhra]

I feel like we've all become less intelligent from reading your posts.

Oh, my head.

Ah, clearly I damaged it so much you can't write a halfway decent reply. You may want to get that checked.

[Reap_ii]

citadel was pro-party, not pro-ending anything.

[HiddenInWar]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

EDI's death doesn't dissuade me from Destroy any more than Ashley's death makes me want to not blow up Saren's base on Virmire.

[Wayning_Star]

I didn't know Shepard was all wrapped up in self love'n stuff.. must be some kind of evolutionary ladder thing?

[Wayning_Star]

Reap_ii wrote...

citadel was pro-party, not pro-ending anything.

it did make Edi look kind of stupid when the ship was locked out of her/its connection, eventhough earlier in the story, she had the same thing happen without such a reaction...

can we all say dehumanization ...

[Wayning_Star]

Eterna5 wrote...

The Citadel strengthened my conviction to Control. My Shepard sacrifices herself to protect them forevermore. If I choose Destroy I kill some of my friends to accomplish a temporary fix just so I can live, I cannot do that.

And frankly, the people who choose Destroy just so they can live... what kind of hero are you?

winning isn't everything but losing Shep sucks?