178 réponses à ce sujet

[remydat]

DinoSteve wrote...

remydat wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

I don't understand how you can think Control or Synthesis is more morally correct than Destroy both those former choice are abhorrent and have more negative consequences.

Star Kid says Destory doesn't guarantee that organics will still not create other synthetics who without the Reapers won't ultimately destroy them.  Even if he didn't say it, that can obviously be understood as a threat by simply logic as every f**king cycle has created synthetics.

So basically I after being able to make peace between organics and synthetics decide to eradicate synthetics and basically agree with the Reapers that the only way to solve the problem is by harvesting but unlike them I choose to harvest just synthetics.

So once again, Control or Synthesis is more morally correct to me because whatevrer the risks it applies those risks to EVERYONE EQUALLY and it gives EVERYONE the chance to figure out how to resolve their issues without the Reapers or Shepard deciding they are the only ones who can solve it by harvesting sentient species.

You are free to disagree but if I have to impose my will on someone,  I will do so by trying to make a decision that is fair to all involved and gives them an opportunity to live and solve their own problems.

What? so what if they create synthetics? as the Geth/Quarian conflict proves there can be peace between them, and even if you ignore that there is Edi who is in love with an organic and cares deeply for her crew. The only fair decision is to Destroy the Reapers, Legion and Edi tell you multiple times its the only way. To profoundly change a person against there will is wrong, whether it is good for them or not, which going by what the catalyst and Edi says its not.

This is bull, if you told EDI, Legion or the Geth that control and synthesis were options there is no proof they would still say no kil Reapers.  They are unaware of the choices so using their positions on the Reapers that they said when they had no clue of other options is disingenuous.

Again, you are free to decide how you want.  I am not suggest you change your opinion.  What I am doing is attacking the parts of your argument that seem illogical.  If I spend the whole game thinking the only way to deal with a threat is to kill it then sure I might sacrifice myself.  If I find out in the end I have 2 choices that don't end in my extinction and the extinction of my people and which can be considered good or bad depending on one's perspective then my previous willingness to die is no proof I am still willing to do so now that there are options.  That is my point.  Doesn't mean you can't still choose destroy but that is a poor reason to do so IMO. 

By this logic, Shepard should have killed himself when Cerberus brought him back because he previously had been against Cerberus which is why Ash and Kaiden distrust him. 

Modifié par remydat, 23 mars 2013 - 08:43 .

[remydat]

DarthRic wrote...

remydat wrote...

DarthRic wrote...

[Its not a fact, its just my opinion that they're not the same people as before. Its really a subjective question because how much can you change a person until they are not the same person anymore?

My main reason for not choosing synthesis is it violatess everyones will and I can't do that.

My main reason for not choosing control is that the possibility exists that the reapers will become a problem in the future again (this is non debatable, the POSSIBILITY exists, and I can't risk the entire galaxy)

My main reason for choosing destroy is it ends the reapers once and for all and allows the galaxy the freedom to choose its future (albeit not without terrible loss).

I would choose destroy even if Shepard died in destroy and lived in control/synthesis, and I regret the loss of EDI and the Geth terribly (I really enjoyed the conversations with EDI and the development of her humanity), but the ending choice isn't about personal feelings, emotion, or sentiment, its about whats best for the galaxy overall, and thats why I will always choose destroy.

Edit: Its also annoying theres not an option to choose control and then fly the reapers into the sun along with the citadel.

It doesn't allow the galaxy to choose it's future.  It allows organics to by harvesting synthetics.  At least the Reapers had the decency to preserve their harvest by creating a Reaper.

Look, I understand where you are coming from.  You can decide however you like but just understand that trying to act like Destroy is the only reasonable choice is just bull.  I don't mean you but others.  You don't see every other thread on this forum being about why destroy sucks because despite my personal feelings on the matter, I don;t have a fanatical need to try and denigrate destory as an option.  The only time I ever discuss it is in threads like this where the but hurt fans want to cry because the game included an option they are not forced to choose.

I understand and respect your choice, we will just have to agree to disagree.

I did struggle between control and destroy for a while but I just choose what I thought was best.  Debate is healthy but everyone should respect each others choices.

Fair enough.

[Redbelle]

Destroy is my preferred choice...... but losing Edi and the Geth is a gut shot to it.

Maybe preferred is going to far. It's the best out of a lot of bad choices. But I remember EDI saying that her newly found desire to protect the ones she loved without comprimising her principles meant she would defend them to the death. So EDI get's sacrificed.....

The problem is that by choosing destroy I've done what EDI said she would not. Comprimised. I don't want EDI or the Geth to die. I want the Reapers to die and their influence ended so the galaxy will be free of them.

[Spartas Husky]

Space hamster, is my space hamster, I dont wana know why it licks itself to clean and it doesn't need to know my urges for LiaTaranda.

[Aaleel]

remydat wrote...

My apologies.  That line was a typo, I meant to say synthetics there.  I don't care about sacrificing Reapers. The species I was refering to was the Geth.  What I was trying to say is the following and not seeing the typo until you pointed it out I was like WTF is this person going on about, lol.

But like the Reaper, no you don't want to give people a chance to work
out their own issues, you want to sacrifice synthetics so just like them
you can arbitrarily decide to solve the problem by eradicating a
species ie the Geth and EDI.

I can understand where you're coming from but it's just all how you look at it as far as how free people feel to make their own way. 

In Control all you've really done is switched one all powerful being for another.  I personally would feel freer if that cloud was gone altogether, where I'm not constantly living in fear of when or what would make it step in.  It's not like people are unaware of it like before, everyone knows its there now.  How comfortable would someone feel going on the Citadel and establishing a new government knowing the whole time you're not really in control.  That's just how I see it.

And Synthesis, there is no freedom or choice involved in this IMHO.  Like I said in my earlier post, this is just one person saying you guys can't get along so I'm going to alter you the way I see fit to make you get along. 

In Destroy you lose the Geth, but everyone left and everyone who stumbles across a relay in the future is truly free to make their own way and solve their own conflicts.  Everyone retains their individuality and there's no cloud constantly hanging over the galaxy.

Just my 2 cents.

[Auld Wulf]

The problem I have with the endings is that so few people actually understand what misdirected rage is. The true rage should be at the Leviathans for creating the Catalyst and tying into it a ridiculous and almost impossible to follow doctrine. The Catalyst did what it was programmed to do. The Reapers were enslaved to do what the Catalyst was programmed to do.

The Reapers are nothing more than slaves.

As I pointed out originally, in Synthesis you see a Reaper with free will for the first time ever. And it was an oddly beautiful thing. It stumbled and looked from side to side -- confused, bewildered, but truly alive for the first time. Alive because of free will. Free will, freedoms, and being alive are the themes of Synthesis. Both Synthesis and Control end the war with the least amount of lives lost, but Synthesis truly frees everyone. Including the Reapers.

If you don't believe me, go and watch the Synthesis ending again and observe the Reapers very closely. Compare it with Control. I've recently (within the last couple of days) watched them all again. And in Control the Reapers leave very uniformally. In Synthesis there's a sense that the Reapers are now, finally thinking for themselves. You see it in them. The way they act, they way they move. Even the way the husks react. Everything in Synthesis is about free will.

There's a beauty to the freedom that Synthesis provides.

To see what was once presented as a soulless machine of death stumbling around like a baby, first exposed to the world. It's a shame that so few see it like I do. It's a brilliant paradigm shift, and one that I won't forget for years and years to come. It was meaningful, it was poignant, and yes, it was art.

Sadly, so many aim their rage at the Reapers. And their blind rage simplifies their minds and blinds them to the truth -- that the Reapers are slaves. That the Reapers deserve to die rather than being given a chance. In Synthesis, we are all aware of what the Reapers do if given that chance. To me, it seems like Destroy is damning an innocent peoples before they even truly have a chance to live.

Synthesis is the truly ethical ending that few understand, as it truly does provide freedom to all.

The galactic consensus, the ability to integrate synthetic technology to oneself easily (thus curing all ills and frailty without removing individuality), the ability for synthetics to truly have the full gamut of emotions and the understanding of them, and the empathy for every other being that would come with this. And it's a beautiful thing.

There are emotions other than anger. It's a true shame that so few have the ability to feel any other emotion than anger.

[remydat]

[quote]Aaleel wrote...

[quote]remydat wrote...

I can understand where you're coming from but it's just all how you look at it as far as how free people feel to make their own way. 

In Control all you've really done is switched one all powerful being for another.  I personally would feel freer if that cloud was gone altogether, where I'm not constantly living in fear of when or what would make it step in.  It's not like people are unaware of it like before, everyone knows its there now.  How comfortable would someone feel going on the Citadel and establishing a new government knowing the whole time you're not really in control.  That's just how I see it.

And Synthesis, there is no freedom or choice involved in this IMHO.  Like I said in my earlier post, this is just one person saying you guys can't get along so I'm going to alter you the way I see fit to make you get along. 

In Destroy you lose the Geth, but everyone left and everyone who stumbles across a relay in the future is truly free to make their own way and solve their own conflicts.  Everyone retains their individuality and there's no cloud constantly hanging over the galaxy.

Just my 2 cents.

[/quote]

My morality demands I save everyone I can and prove to the Reapers that Destroy is not the only way by allowing Synthetics and Organics the chance to prove they can co-exist whether that by via Synthesis or Control.  If I culd destroy just the reapers then that would be the preferred option but I can't and so I make the decision that while morally questionable it is a morally questionable decision that applies to everyone not just synthetics.

Everyone is free to decide based on their own morality.  I just to get people getting made that Synthesis is an option or even the preferred option by the writers when the writers give you the option to choose another alternative.  It's like they want their choice in the game but want to get mad that someone else's choice is in the game.  You don't see a bunch of threads talking about why Destroy sucks because you know what even if I think it sucks, my solution is to choose a different ending that the game allows.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

remydat wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

remydat wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

I don't understand how you can think Control or Synthesis is more morally correct than Destroy both those former choice are abhorrent and have more negative consequences.

Star Kid says Destory doesn't guarantee that organics will still not create other synthetics who without the Reapers won't ultimately destroy them.  Even if he didn't say it, that can obviously be understood as a threat by simply logic as every f**king cycle has created synthetics.

So basically I after being able to make peace between organics and synthetics decide to eradicate synthetics and basically agree with the Reapers that the only way to solve the problem is by harvesting but unlike them I choose to harvest just synthetics.

So once again, Control or Synthesis is more morally correct to me because whatevrer the risks it applies those risks to EVERYONE EQUALLY and it gives EVERYONE the chance to figure out how to resolve their issues without the Reapers or Shepard deciding they are the only ones who can solve it by harvesting sentient species.

You are free to disagree but if I have to impose my will on someone,  I will do so by trying to make a decision that is fair to all involved and gives them an opportunity to live and solve their own problems.

What? so what if they create synthetics? as the Geth/Quarian conflict proves there can be peace between them, and even if you ignore that there is Edi who is in love with an organic and cares deeply for her crew. The only fair decision is to Destroy the Reapers, Legion and Edi tell you multiple times its the only way. To profoundly change a person against there will is wrong, whether it is good for them or not, which going by what the catalyst and Edi says its not.

This is bull, if you told EDI, Legion or the Geth that control and synthesis were options there is no proof they would still say no kil Reapers.  They are unaware of the choices so using their positions on the Reapers that they said when they had no clue of other options is disingenuous.

Again, you are free to decide how you want.  I am not suggest you change your opinion.  What I am doing is attacking the parts of your argument that seem illogical.  If I spend the whole game thinking the only way to deal with a threat is to kill it then sure I might sacrifice myself.  If I find out in the end I have 2 choices that don't end in my extinction and the extinction of my people and which can be considered good or bad depending on one's perspective then my previous willingness to die is no proof I am still willing to do so now that there are options.  That is my point.  Doesn't mean you can't still choose destroy but that is a poor reason to do so IMO. 

By this logic, Shepard should have killed himself when Cerberus brought him back because he previously had been against Cerberus which is why Ash and Kaiden distrust him. 

But Synthesis does end with the extinction of all the species, you profoundly change who and what they where, you kill what they were and change them in something else, against there will, and going by what the catalyst says you are dooming everyone in the new species to stagnation and extinction anyway. Plus they did know about control isn't it what TIM wanted throughout the whole game and yet they still advocated Destroy.

[cerberus1701]

remydat wrote...

cerberus1701 wrote...


What part of, "What makes you think you have any right to choose to alter the galaxy without their knowledge and consent?, don't you understand?

Yes,. I do think that. because it is. This race. All the races, are prepared to die facing the Reapers. Even the Geth announce that there will be no more reasoning with the Old Machines.  EDI says she's ready to die to beat them.

They CHOOSE die to the last for the chance to CHOOSE their own path.

And, lastly, I'm sick of Synthesis/Controllers throwing out the breath scene. The fact that Shep lives in HEMSD is fine, but if I literally saw his body fly apart in chunks, I'd still pick Destroy.  

The part where doing so results in me having to exterminate a sentient species and continue the organic prejudice that helped create the Reapers.

Yes they choose to die for a chance to choose their own path and then you Sheppard decide for them to exterminate them and remove their choice.  Edi and the Geth don't know that they have the option of Synthesis or Control.  Unless you called them on vid com and asked them then you are using this disingenuous argument to kill them.  I see no evidence Edi or the Geth would choose to die if they knew Synthesis or Control were options.   They choose to fight the Reapers and risk death in a show of unity among all races.  You then want to completely obliterate that act of good faith by then choosing to chill them when you have the option not to.  That is ridiculous and a betrayal.

And I will end with this.  If I could choose Destroy without killing them I would.  I can't because the game makes it a condition that Synthetics must die.  So I choose the options that imposes my will on EVERYONE EQUALLY AND WHERE EVERYONE LIVES.  That is either synthesis or control.  So please, the only way you can justify OPTIONALLY deciding to wipe out a Sentitent species is by prejudice.  You don't get to OPTIONALLY decide to kill a sentient race when you have 2 choices not to and claim to be a hero.

They are willing to potentially die as a race based on the choices I make.

Whether you like it or not, that IS fundamentally different from choosing to have your very nature altered. That's not up to me to pick for them and the game doesn't allow me to ask them for permission.

I see the evidence that they would choose to die than agree to be Reaperized via Synthesis. The Geth alone tell you they will no longer negotiate with the Old Machines.

Yes, your will on everyone, glad you get it. Now we just have to work on you seeing that no one empowered you to impose your will on everyone.

There's also, the little fact that, certainly NO ONE empowered you to BRAINWASH everyone in the galaxy. Because that absolutely would be required to create the Utopia of Synthesis. Think just because everybody has glowing green eyes now that everyone is going to start loving Batarians?

Or that Salarians and Krogan are going to be pals?

No. Not unless you alter their minds as well as bodies. And in order for those little slides at the end to be true, that's what gets done.

Quote: So please, the only way you can justify OPTIONALLY deciding to wipe out a Sentitent species is by prejudice. 

There is no prejudice because that implies that I would choose one *in particular* over others. The game only forces a choice between organics and the Geth, but there is no prejudice in my choice because if Destroy would spare the Geth and everyone else, but kill the Quarians or Humans, or Turians, I'd STILL shoot the pipe....

...and still be the hero because then those that remain can actually live and choose to be as they choose to be without Shep God imposing his will or being altered in body AND mind in the most fundamental ways.

[remydat]

DinoSteve wrote...

But Synthesis does end with the extinction of all the species, you profoundly change who and what they where, you kill what they were and change them in something else, against there will, and going by what the catalyst says you are dooming everyone in the new species to stagnation and extinction anyway. Plus they did know about control isn't it what TIM wanted throughout the whole game and yet they still advocated Destroy.

No it does not IMO.  You are asking me to make a decision based on your opinion that it ends in the extinction of a species.  I don't hold that view and I can only decide based on what I think it is not you.

TIM was indoctrinated and a fanatical idiot.  I am pretty sure EDI and the Geth especially with Legion know Shepard is not TIM.  This would be like me saying it is bad for me to eat peanuts because some people are allergic to them.  That has nothing to do with me because I am not them.  Shepard is not TIM.  He is better.  People are individuals and what was bad for one may not be bad for the other.

[remydat]

cerberus1701 wrote...


They are willing to potentially die as a race based on the choices I make.

Whether you like it or not, that IS fundamentally different from choosing to have your very nature altered. That's not up to me to pick for them and the game doesn't allow me to ask them for permission.

I see the evidence that they would choose to die than agree to be Reaperized via Synthesis. The Geth alone tell you they will no longer negotiate with the Old Machines.

Yes, your will on everyone, glad you get it. Now we just have to work on you seeing that no one empowered you to impose your will on everyone.

There's also, the little fact that, certainly NO ONE empowered you to BRAINWASH everyone in the galaxy. Because that absolutely would be required to create the Utopia of Synthesis. Think just because everybody has glowing green eyes now that everyone is going to start loving Batarians?

Or that Salarians and Krogan are going to be pals?

No. Not unless you alter their minds as well as bodies. And in order for those little slides at the end to be true, that's what gets done.

Quote: So please, the only way you can justify OPTIONALLY deciding to wipe out a Sentitent species is by prejudice. 

There is no prejudice because that implies that I would choose one *in particular* over others. The game only forces a choice between organics and the Geth, but there is no prejudice in my choice because if Destroy would spare the Geth and everyone else, but kill the Quarians or Humans, or Turians, I'd STILL shoot the pipe....

...and still be the hero because then those that remain can actually live and choose to be as they choose to be without Shep God imposing his will or being altered in body AND mind in the most fundamental ways.

It was never stated they were willing to die when they had a choices to live. The circumstances are different now because 2 choices no one thought were available are now available.  So don't kid youself, choosing destroy is imposing your will on a group of people except in this scenario they all die for sure 100%.

And you haven't read my posts.  I don't think Synthesis means everyong gets along.  I have in fact argued the opposite.  I don't choose it because I think it solves everything, I choose it because my conscience won't let me exterminate another race when synthesis or control allows everyone to live.

And fine, if you would choose Destroy if organics died then you are not prejudiced.  You are just imposing you will on organics and deciding they should die because allowing them and synthetics to live is apparently wrong or controlling the Reapers is wrong.

You say you don't want to impose synthesis on others but how are you not imposing you will on whoever dies under Destroy?  In fact, how do you know that the organics would not have chosen to spare synthetics now that they finally made peace.  You are basically decided for everyone one way or another which of the 3 options is best so trying to pretend like only Synthesis does this is what I object too. 

Tali just finished telling Legion he has a soul and the Quarians just saw what peace with the Geth is like and you decide for them f**k that kill them all.  So look, choose destroy, that is your choice but stop pretending lke you are not imposing your will because you are.  You are wiping out a race because YOU DECIDE that is better than giving everyone a chance to live.  You choose physical death over whatever you imagine a living hybrid when we can all agree physical death is physical death while there is no doubt organics would disagree on what synthesis or control means.  Furthermore you assume that all organics would agree with that decision when that is not a fact because a) not everyone is going to be ok with exterminating another species when there were other options and some orgnanics might actually like the idea of a near immortal body.  The mere fact that we as humans ie organic are disagreeing over this is proof that realistically not everyone would agree Destroy is the best option or that synthesis and getting a new immortal body is bad so yes you are imposing your will on everyone. 

Joker and pretty much anyone like him who can't shake hands with someone without risk of breaking a bone or who have some debilitating or terminal disease or illness might actually want synthesis.  So again, no one has proof of what the majority of people would have decided so I opt for the one that causes less physical death.

Modifié par remydat, 23 mars 2013 - 09:50 .

[Auld Wulf]

@remydat

I hear you. I'm in the same position. I can't force death on people. There's already been so much death already. If I force death on people, then am I any better than the Leviathans? Am I any better than the monsters people believed the Reapers to be? No. I can't force death. I can't do it. Especially now that I know that the Reapers aren't evil, but enslaved.

It all comes down to conscience. My guilt is often very overbearing, I feel things. The thought of killing so many people would make me cry. I don't understand how they can do it. I accept that they do, but I can't understand why.

[remydat]

Auld Wulf wrote...

@remydat

I hear you. I'm in the same position. I can't force death on people. There's already been so much death already. If I force death on people, then am I any better than the Leviathans? Am I any better than the monsters people believed the Reapers to be? No. I can't force death. I can't do it. Especially now that I know that the Reapers aren't evil, but enslaved.

It all comes down to conscience. My guilt is often very overbearing, I feel things. The thought of killing so many people would make me cry. I don't understand how they can do it. I accept that they do, but I can't understand why.

Exactly, if you can live with it then fine go ahead and do it.  But I know the synthetics die.  I know it 100%.  I don't know what will happen with synthesis or control but I know at that point in time everyone lives.  So I opt for the certainty that death is not a desirable outcome and choose the uncertain futures that synthesis and control provided. 

[SeptimusMagistos]

I choose Control. Why? Because I reject the Catalyst's thinking. I reject the idea that organics and synthetics are destined to fight. I don't think synthetics need to be destroyed. I don't think they need to become part organic. I think it's fine for them to remain exactly as they are. It doesn't preclude coexistence. It doesn't preclude understanding.

And Shepard proves this by joining the synthetics. Born an organic, he uploads his mind to become an intelligent machine With his body and mind expanded a billionfold he lives on to safeguard the galaxy from those who would do harm to others, no matter whether the victim or perpetrator is synthetic, organic, or half protoplasm half pure energy.

Plus, think of how many fetch quests can get done.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

remydat wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

But Synthesis does end with the extinction of all the species, you profoundly change who and what they where, you kill what they were and change them in something else, against there will, and going by what the catalyst says you are dooming everyone in the new species to stagnation and extinction anyway. Plus they did know about control isn't it what TIM wanted throughout the whole game and yet they still advocated Destroy.

No it does not IMO.  You are asking me to make a decision based on your opinion that it ends in the extinction of a species.  I don't hold that view and I can only decide based on what I think it is not you.

TIM was indoctrinated and a fanatical idiot.  I am pretty sure EDI and the Geth especially with Legion know Shepard is not TIM.  This would be like me saying it is bad for me to eat peanuts because some people are allergic to them.  That has nothing to do with me because I am not them.  Shepard is not TIM.  He is better.  People are individuals and what was bad for one may not be bad for the other.

It is not my opinion, its what the catalyst says, it says FINAL, that means the end there is nothing after, the final evolution of something is never good. Besides that point, you are still killing what everyone was and changing them into something else without their permission, that is not ok, I can think of nothing worse to do to someone, death would be more preferable.

TIM might have been insane but Shepard is not without his faults and remember he is nothing more than a software patch for the catalyst, there is nothing stopping the Shepard catalyst from drawing the same conclusion again and although its nothing but a idiom it is still important "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Modifié par DinoSteve, 23 mars 2013 - 10:01 .

[Aaleel]

Auld Wulf wrote...

@remydat

I hear you. I'm in the same position. I can't force death on people. There's already been so much death already. If I force death on people, then am I any better than the Leviathans? Am I any better than the monsters people believed the Reapers to be? No. I can't force death. I can't do it. Especially now that I know that the Reapers aren't evil, but enslaved.

It all comes down to conscience. My guilt is often very overbearing, I feel things. The thought of killing so many people would make me cry. I don't understand how they can do it. I accept that they do, but I can't understand why.

You have no guilt about fundamentally changing every person in the galaxy, those who are part of the war and those who haven't even discovered a relay yet.  You're fine with everyone just waking up one day forever changed because you decided that they couldn't get along so you're going to change everyone because you think that's the only way.

I know everyone has their own reasons for their choice, and they're entitled to them.  But I honestly don't understand how people can do this.  To each his/her own though.

Modifié par Aaleel, 23 mars 2013 - 10:01 .

[remydat]

Aaleel wrote...

You have no guilt about fundamentally changing every person in the galaxy, those who are part of the war and those who haven't even discovered a relay yet.  You're fine with everyone just waking up one day forever changed because you decided that they couldn't get along so you're going to change everyone because you think that's the only way.

I know everyone has their own reasons for their choice, and they're entitled to them.  But I honestly don't understand how people can do this.  To each his/her own though.

Of course he has guilt but that guilt is over people still alive no matter how people may want to pretend it isn't life.  That is entirely different than the guilt that comes with condemning a race to be exterminated.  

When I think of the guilt of forcing synthesis on people I think about the fact Joker might like not limping around all the time and being able to have EDI hug him without his bones being crushed.  I think about all the people affected by my decision who realistically would probably like being a hybrid and not have to worry about sickness or being paralyzed etc.

When I think about the guilt of Destroy, I can't imagine any of the affected thanking me because they can't.  I killed them.  There is not coming back from that.  So in one scenario, there has got to be people who I changed who will love it.  In the other, I will never know because the people I changed, I changed by killing them all so they can't tell me if I made the right choice.

Modifié par remydat, 23 mars 2013 - 10:13 .

[xsamplexample]

 Destroy.  because IT is true. Durrr.

[Aaleel]

remydat wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

You have no guilt about fundamentally changing every person in the galaxy, those who are part of the war and those who haven't even discovered a relay yet.  You're fine with everyone just waking up one day forever changed because you decided that they couldn't get along so you're going to change everyone because you think that's the only way.

I know everyone has their own reasons for their choice, and they're entitled to them.  But I honestly don't understand how people can do this.  To each his/her own though.

Of course he has guilt but that guilt is over people still alive no matter how people may want to pretend it isn't life.  That is entirely different than the guilt that comes with condemning a race to be exterminated.

Yeah it's a different type of guilt.  Which is worse is a matter of opinion though.  I just have a problem with someone saying it's a matter of conscience as if one choice means you have one and one doesn't, which is what I got from the post. 

You've altered the lives of so many more people in Synthesis than Destroy or control.  The scale of Synthesis is so large, it's everything, all levels of organic and synthetic life.  No one or no thing is what/who they once were.

[remydat]

Aaleel wrote...


Yeah it's a different type of guilt.  Which is worse is a matter of opinion though.  I just have a problem with someone saying it's a matter of conscience as if one choice means you have one and one doesn't, which is what I got from the post. 

You've altered the lives of so many more people in Synthesis than Destroy or control.  The scale of Synthesis is so large, it's everything, all levels of organic and synthetic life.  No one or no thing is what/who they once were.

Yes it is a matter of opinion so fair enough.  When he said a matter of conscience I think he said it knowing they are both morally tough calls but he went with the one more in line with conscience.  I don't think he meant it as if there are no moral implications associated with synthesis.  Synthesis sucks but again everyone lives and realistically there are some who will like that choice.   People who are sick, dying, or like Joker can break bones quite easily.

The people most affected by Destroy die.  That's it.  It is the end for them.

[JG The Gamer]

See my sig for my reason.

Funny thing was, I sided with the geth in the Rannoch arc (lost Tali in ME2). But when it came time to choose, my hand was forced. If we do not destroy the Reapers, they will destroy us. Whether they're under the control of a new Catalyst, or co-exist in Synthesis, they are still there and can still pose a threat. Destroy removes that threat permanently to eliminate any chance of them coming back and wiping out all galactic for the (insert number of cycles here) time. And those people from countless cycles back can finally rest in peace after being turned into those 2km tall abominations.

The galaxy can continue on, on its own terms and the galactic community can decide how it wants to set the course into the future. Maybe they will achieve synthesis one day. But they can decide that themselves.

By some dumb luck, I survived shooting the tube and I'll actually get to witness the future I've enabled the galaxy to achieve.

[OdanUrr]

Reorte wrote...

MEHEM is doing to Mass Effect what Kirk did to the Kobyashi Maru scenario.

Spot on.

[remydat]

JG The Gamer wrote...

See my sig for my reason.

Funny thing was, I sided with the geth in the Rannoch arc (lost Tali in ME2). But when it came time to choose, my hand was forced. If we do not destroy the Reapers, they will destroy us. Whether they're under the control of a new Catalyst, or co-exist in Synthesis, they are still there and can still pose a threat. Destroy removes that threat permanently to eliminate any chance of them coming back and wiping out all galactic for the (insert number of cycles here) time. And those people from countless cycles back can finally rest in peace after being turned into those 2km tall abominations.

The galaxy can continue on, on its own terms and the galactic community can decide how it wants to set the course into the future. Maybe they will achieve synthesis one day. But they can decide that themselves.

By some dumb luck, I survived shooting the tube and I'll actually get to witness the future I've enabled the galaxy to achieve.

Sounds like you just want to live you selfish bastard, lol.  Ok sorry I couldn't resist that.

And what happens when another synthetic race comes along learns all the history of this galaxy and decides to avenge the Geth and all the synthetics who have died so the organics who created them can feel a little safer?  The Crucible tells us this is distinct possibility.  Only this time these guys are the threat the Reapers had envisioned ie the real synthetic bad asses that come about in a Reaperless world and they wipe out organics without any restraint ie advanced and primitives alike.

Point is every decision comes with risk.  There is no real evidence to suggest control or synthesis is any more risker unless you head canon yourself in to thinking it is.  The game actually tells us the bigger risk is with destroy as it is only a temporay solution since technically you never resolved the synthetic vs organic conflict, you just eliminated one side temporily until they are inevitably created again.

[JG The Gamer]

remydat wrote...

Sounds like you just want to live you selfish bastard, lol.  Ok sorry I couldn't resist that.

And what happens when another synthetic race comes along learns all the history of this galaxy and decides to avenge the Geth and all the synthetics who have died so the organics who created them can feel a little safer?  The Crucible tells us this is distinct possibility.  Only this time these guys are the threat the Reapers had envisioned ie the real synthetic bad asses that come about in a Reaperless world and they wipe out organics without any restraint ie advanced and primitives alike.

Point is every decision comes with risk.  There is no real evidence to suggest control or synthesis is any more risker unless you head canon yourself in to thinking it is.  The game actually tells us the bigger risk is with destroy as it is only a temporay solution since technically you never resolved the synthetic vs organic conflict, you just eliminated one side temporily until they are inevitably created again.

LOL. I assumed an unintended safe zone existed where Shepard shot the tube. He/she may be injured in the explosion, but managed to avoid the Crucible pulse.

My guess is that when the Citadel Council is re-organized in a Destroy ending, there'll be an even more severe clampdown on the creation of AI.  What effect that'll have is unknown. It may work, considering it was only the quarians who created a synthetic race and had it blow up in their face. There was another AI race according to the Citadel Archives but that was dealt with. In endings where the quarians survive, I doubt they even want to think about re-creating the geth as they would not want to risk another Morning War at a time when they're rebuilding their relationship with the rest of the galaxy buoyed by the support they offered during the Reaper War.

As for Control and Synthesis, I do respect those choices as they end the present cycles even if I wouldn't pick them.

[remydat]

JG The Gamer wrote...

LOL. I assumed an unintended safe zone existed where Shepard shot the tube. He/she may be injured in the explosion, but managed to avoid the Crucible pulse.

My guess is that when the Citadel Council is re-organized in a Destroy ending, there'll be an even more severe clampdown on the creation of AI.  What effect that'll have is unknown. It may work, considering it was only the quarians who created a synthetic race and had it blow up in their face. There was another AI race according to the Citadel Archives but that was dealt with. In endings where the quarians survive, I doubt they even want to think about re-creating the geth as they would not want to risk another Morning War at a time when they're rebuilding their relationship with the rest of the galaxy buoyed by the support they offered during the Reaper War.

As for Control and Synthesis, I do respect those choices as they end the present cycles even if I wouldn't pick them.

So your solution is to further continue the policy of prejudice?  You still can't guarantee a mistake like what happened with the Quarians.  The real synthetic risk isn't machines in isolated bodies that can be destroyed.  The real threat is of the skynet variety where some machine becomes alive and then infiltrates defense systems, electricity ie it's consciously is everywhere like the extranet.  And it sees the history of organics killing synthetics, sees the policy banning it's existence and so doesn't reveal to organics it is alive until it has sufficently permeated all their electronic devices of any significnce that when it does attack you are screwed. 

And at that point, what are you going to tell it that will make it stop?  Dude will look at you and be like, "You should have listend to the Reapers when they said in the end organics will end up creating their own gravediggers."

But yes, I understand you point and we can agree to disagree.  Just saying there are pitfalls with every option.

Modifié par remydat, 24 mars 2013 - 12:13 .