Ieldra2 wrote...
robertthebard wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
@3DAndBeyond:
Your scenario is not more valid than any other. If you think *your* Shepard would act like this if you chose Control then of course you won't, but don't tell others how their post-Control scenario degenerates into an oppressive regime. It. Does. Not. Happen. Period. Not in my games anyway.
It's this insistence that "the outcome of a choice I don't agree with is bad" that makes me mad. If you can't imagine a better post-Control scenario that says more about you than about any intrinsic evil Control may or may not have.
So tell me, how did the Reapers come to be in the first place? Wasn't the Catalyst just a tool of the Leviathans to stop a situation that they deemed counterproductive? How is Shepard going to be any different? How many millennia will it take for Shepard to break? How long will it take for this Shepard to come around to the same way of thinking that the Catalyst did. I don't know, and don't care, if you played Leviathan, but I did, and frankly, while the survivors didn't want to be harvested, they didn't really think the Harvest was bad. They tell Shepard it's not broken, it's doing what it was designed to do.
On one hand, you say don't deal in absolutes, and then you state emphatically that what 3D proposes absolutely can't happen. I can see it happening. I can see an average civilian going through exactly the scenario that 3D proposes. All you have to do is look at what happens when a shark does attack a person on a beach to see the very mentality that 3D mentions. Only now, instead of taking care of the problem, they implant a chip, and say "see, he's not going to attack anyone ever again". How do we know? How is the shark going to eat, which is what it's designed to do, w/out killing something? Your absolute may hold, for a century, for a hundred centuries, but sooner or later, it can break down. It can break down, and leave a population that has grown to see the Reapers as a good thing completely unprepared for the consequences of it breaking down. You can continue on in believing that it can't happen, but, the fact is, the Catalyst was originally created to solve a problem, and the Harvests were it's ultimate solution. How can you state absolutely that your Shepard won't come to the same conclusion eventually? I can answer that question in one word: denial.
Asking for guarantees is nonsensical. There's never any guarantee for anything. I can't guarantee that the black hole at the core of the galaxy won't explode tomorrow, and I have no idea about what happens in a billion years. But tell me, please, why the hell should I consider a bad scenario as more likely than a good one?
You're speaking as if the only possible outcome is that Control!Shep will eventually become insane and restart the cycle. That's bullsh*t. This is one of countless different scenarios, one in a million or more you can imagine. Really, I cannot say how much I HATE, HATE HATE this INSANE insistence on bad outcomes. WHY THE HÉLL DON'T YOU IMAGINE GOOD ONES!!!!!!!!!
What would you say if I insisted that post-Destroy, galactic civilization collapses after a hundred years and there's a 10000000-year-dark age because galactic infrastructure is destroyed? What if I said that Destroy is invalidated because you can't guarantee that this won't happen?
I am basing my logic entirely on what has happened in the game world to the point where the "choices" are offered. To respond to your query though, I'd say that it's possible. In fact, it's likely, but there will be no Reapers, which is what I set out to do in the first place. Mission accomplished, and the galaxy's fate is it's own to decide, instead of me deciding at some undisclosed time in the future that my will is more important than free will. This means, in complete context, that some civilization, at some point may even be wiped out by synthetics that they create. Again, however, it is free will. You rally on the cry of being free to choose what you like, but balk at the fact that that choice may have consequences, and instead of accepting potential consequences, you instead lash out at what might happen in another alternate reality. When I choose to play past London, 3 games in total, I blow them up, because that's the only way I know that they are stopped. I don't have to worry about what happens later, because my mission was to stop the Reapers. If we end up in a galactic wide dark age, that's what's going to happen, but we won't have the Reapers there to make it any worse.
However, to touch on your invalidated conundrum; your choice is not invalidated by anything I said. Historically speaking, everything that I stated could happen can happen. Because, in the history of the galaxy that we are presented with, it has happened. It's not a statistical impossibility, in fact, it's likely to happen because the Reapers still exist, and they are still controlled by an AI. The question really isn't if, but when. That you're ok with it affecting your grand children's grand children's grand children, or any permutation there of ad infinitum, is ok, because it could happen sooner, or much later than I'm willing to type out grand children. However, to dismiss human nature out of hand because it's not in your head canon makes it seem more like you should be discussing Synthesis. After all, then everyone is a hybrid, and the human condition really no longer exists, does it? All that ShepAI controls is the Reapers. The rest of the galaxy is free to feel however they want about the Reapers still existing, and frankly, looking at my galaxy map prior to going to London, there's going to be some unhappy people scattered around the galaxy.
Retour en haut
