935 réponses à ce sujet

[Fade9wayz]

Yes, yes I would, and for the record, I'd eat my cat if I had to.

Robertthebard has already explained at length my own stand on this matter. Faced with utter destruction, I have three choices. The main thing is that I don't make that choice based on how I know each of the ending will actually turn out. I make it based on the experiences Shepard has had so far in the games. I just killed TIM who thought was in control. I killed Saren in ME1 for the exact same reason.

Why should I think I'm so mighty that I can't be indoctrinated myself, or at the very least have my morals corrupted by the kind of power nobody should have? No, everything so far leads me to think Control is a big no-no. Synthesis goes so far beyond everything I believe in, and is so ridiculous, I can't even entertain it. So, only Destroy and Refuse are left to me. Actually, the only choice that makes any sense in my opinion is Refuse, because I fondamentally distrust the Catalyst and the Reapers. However, if I decide to trust the Catalyst and save whatever I can, destroy is the only way I can ensure that any lifeform has a chance to develop free from any outside influence.

It's a flimsy bet, but that's the best I can do. As for the argument of future synthetics thinking that all organic life is against them based on that choice, it doesn't really hold. The only ones who know about this choice are the Catalyst and Shepard. One is utterly wiped, the other very likely dies as well, and if not, can keep this to her/himself, which is what I would do.

(By the way, I've watched the Control ending on youtube, and it frankly chills me to the bones. It has only comforted me in my choice for Destroy. Sheplyst scares me!)

[remydat]

robertthebard wrote...

So your source of information is different from mine?  Somebody besides the Catalyst is telling you that Control will work, or Synthesis?  No?  Then why keep bringing it up, unless you Refuse?  The thing is, with Destroy, the races are all free to do whatever they want to do, freewill, without having to worry about whether or not the Reapers, or ShepAI takes offense to it.  The cause of this self fulfilling prophecy is dead and gone, along with his puppets.  It doesn't matter who the puppeteer is, if they have no puppets to control.

The rest of this is covered in my quoted post.  There are no assurances that there would be no repeat of the harvest as long as the Reapers are alive.  I've touched on the moustache twirling exposition of the Catalyst more than a few times.  That's all I see it as.  If you choose anything but Refuse, you are buying into it's spiel, so don't try to make out like the only viable options are Control and Synthesis.  You have no more reason to believe Control or Synthesis than I do to believe Destroy.  I have less reason to believe that it would kill the geth, myself and EDI than I do to believe it would kill just the Reapers.  He tells us that Shepard is mostly synthetic after all.  This is what it does, but it could kill you too might as well be what he says, and even with that possibility, I shoot the tube.  Why?  Because I am willing to die to save the galaxy, if that's what it takes, EDI is too, she told me herself.  So with no geth, it's a nonissue.  With the geth, it's regrettable, but, brutal calculus, and much safer for everyone that's left.

No my source is the same.  My point is you either trust he is telling you the truth or your don't.  I trust he is telling me the truth about all the options so there are risks in all the options.  I thought you were implying Destroy had no risks which is why I pointed out the risk the advanced synthetic he told you about comes to pass you have given it a reason to want all organics dead ie you sacrificed all previous synthetics to save organics.

If you agree there are risks in all the scenarios and were not implying the Catalyst was lying then I simply misunderstood your post.

The only other thing I would say is EDI told you she was willing to die before knowing synthesis and control were real options.  You can't really use that as a justification to eradicate her when she doesn't know she had a chance to live with Joker but you denied her that opportunity.  That's a bit disingenuos don't you think?

[remydat]

Fade9wayz wrote...

It's a flimsy bet, but that's the best I can do. As for the argument of future synthetics thinking that all organic life is against them based on that choice, it doesn't really hold. The only ones who know about this choice are the Catalyst and Shepard. One is utterly wiped, the other very likely dies as well, and if not, can keep this to her/himself, which is what I would do.

The legend of Shep is told throughout the times as the Old Man and Boy note.  It is actually worse if the story is told without people knowing there was a choice.  If people know there was a choice then it could be rationalized that the decision to kill synthetics in Destroy was simply the fault of one man Mr. Super AI.  You can't blame us for that.

If all we know is this machined killed the Reapers and all synthetics ie there was no choice then the conclusion is that the organics tried to solve a threat to both synthetics and orgnanics by creating a machine that killed all synthetics.  ALL.  Not only that, this machine that killed ALL synthetics was created by organics over millions of years.  So try convincing Mr. Super AI that every single cylce and thus every single organic race over millions of years designed a weapon that was designed to eliminate all synthetic races.  You basically just prove to Mr Super AI that this was not a choice by one man but a concerted effort by orgnanics over millions if not billions of years to kill two birds with one stone ie kill Reapers and eliminate the synthetic threat.

Now explain to me how you are going to convince it you built a machine with such a scale that just magically killed all synthetics but you had no clue.  This dude will be like WTF, do you think I am some dumb AI like those Geth you eradicated?

Modifié par remydat, 13 avril 2013 - 12:13 .

[remydat]

DarthRic wrote...

Saving an entire race is a noble goal, but if the cost is changing the course of life itself forever in the galaxy its not worth the price, if the Geth are destroyed now then everything that comes after is free to proceed and evolve without a change being forced on it.  For the record I would choose destroy even if Shepard died, as for humanity itself, it would require more consideration (i'd probably just choose control and fly the reapers into the sun).

Also some people would consider synthesis equivalent to death, I think Samara said it best about rewriting the Geth heretics "If you change who I am, what I am, you have killed me, I will just be something new in the same body" (Not quoted word for word exactly but you get the picture).

Again that is your opinion.  You are entitled to have it.  The fact you admit to having a different outcome if it was humans proves that part of your willingness to accept destroy is because some other species you value less than you own is the ones slated to die.

And again, some people will like synthesis and some won't.  If synthesis allows sick, injured and dying people to live healthy for 1,000 years with the people they love then you honestly think they are going to say nah I pass.

All I am saying is it is easy to say this stuff because it is fictional.  People who act like synthesis is a death sentence is because they have the luxury to do so.  If they had Volik's syndrome like Joker or terminal cancer in real life and synthesis potentially cured them of that, they would happily accept it.

[MegaSovereign]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

If picking Destroy required me to kill off an actual race of mostly innocent people, there's a good chance I'd switch and go with Control instead.

The line is drawn if the Volus are threatened.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

MegaSovereign wrote...

The line is drawn if the Volus are threatened.

This human understands.

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 13 avril 2013 - 12:54 .

[Steelcan]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

If picking Destroy required me to kill off an actual race of mostly innocent people, there's a good chance I'd switch and go with Control instead.

.  unless its the asari:devil:

[Alien Number Six]

I chose destroy the first time I finished the game. Considering that none of these people are real I was fine with it. If they where real I would still pick destroy. In war you lose people. I fought in Iraq and we lost several people completing our objectives. The mission always comes first. In Shepard's shoes you are out to stop a invading force whose mission is to kill every race. Under these conditions the loss of one race is an exceptable loss even if it where the humans.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

It'd be no different to me if it killed human, or Turians, or Asari, or whoever.

I pick destroy because it solves the Reaper problem. They are the ones perpetuating their cycle. They are the problem.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

If picking Destroy required me to kill off an actual race of mostly innocent people, there's a good chance I'd switch and go with Control instead.

.  unless its the asari:devil:

Oh, of course; that goes without saying.

Obviously.

[conjmk]

Eradicating the Asari would make Destroy an even easier choice.

[Auld Wulf]

PinkToolTheater wrote...

I'd sacrifice the Yahg, Batarians, Vorcha, Jellyfish together with Geth

So you're willing to sacrifice those you find distasteful. That's actually fascinating to me because of human history and how it reflects upon anyone saying something like that -- as there have been a lot of figures who've gone above and beyond in order to not only remove distasteful elements, but justify it.

This is also the reason that Control and Synthesis aren't chosen -- because according to this mindset, to sacrifice the familiar one for the sake of the distasteful many is actually wrong. And that's a really troubling mindset, in ages past I'm sure it would have caused a lot of trouble for a lot of people, but thankfully we live in a much more civilised world, now. A world where most people can make the right choices, and where there are laws in place to stop those who don't know better. It's not perfect, and we have a long way to go, but it's better than it has been.

Essentially, I'm calling your thinking outmoded. I find that modern thinking needs to be ethical to be contemporary. Any erudite person worth their salt will tell you that, because we've all seen the attrocities that are borne of a lack of ethics, by allowing the one to choose personal desire over the needs of the many.

Here's a hypothetical scenario: Let's say that you are one of a set of two lords who have a passive role in administering a kingdom. Something happens, and you have to make the choice between saving the life of your fellow lord (a brother or sister whom you love dearly), or the entirety of your kingdom. The life of every man, woman, and children reduced to statistics. Of course, they're just peasantry and you've never been fond of the peasantry, but still, you have to ask yourself: How do you make that call? How do you weigh it up? What worth do you put on your fellow lord versus that of the lives of an entire kingdom?

The "ruthless calculus" statement of Garrus is often abused and misused. I'll explain.

The Destroyer: Ruthless calculus means me picking Shepard over all those people, 'cause I like Shepard! I do!
Garrus Vakarian: Ruthless calculus is looking objectively at sets of statistics, of people whose faces you've never seen, whose worth you can't sum up. And then... deciding which of them gets to live. Somehow deciding that, somehow making that call.

I hope the difference here is clear. The fact of the matter is is that even in his darkest moment, Garrus would never sacrifice numerous races in order to save Shepard. He has a conscience. If he did find himself weak and wanting and he did sacrifice them to save Shepard? He'd just shoot himself in the head to restore his honour. Anyone who knows anything about turian honour knows that this is true. Plus, being that weak would likely leave him broken. All in all, he'd not make that call. He'd sacrifice Shepard for the many.

Just as Shepard would sacrifice herself for the many.

Here's the thing. If Garrus Vakarian was there with Shepard in the Catalyst chamber, he wouldn't stand between her and her duty. He wouldn't say "To hell with all those people, let them all die. Because not one of them is my beloved, familiar Shepard. And if they're not my beloved, familiar Shepard, then they have no worth." to her. If you could hear Garrus saying that then your head is wrong and you need to play the entire series again and play close attention to you. Garrus has always been the one to give Shepard a hard time about unethical acts, genocide especially.

You are there in the chamber with Shepard. You have to make the choice. This isn't ruthless calculus, this is greed and racism. This is "Well, I love my dear, familiar Shepard. And those races are just filthy serfs. Okay, I'm going to shoot the Destroy tubes and let them die! Hooray!" and that's just utterly monstrous. Do you want an abomination? That... that is an abomination. There is nothing, nothing more abominable than being willing to let entire species die just to save one person you kind of care about.

That's as bad, if not worse, than all of the greatest villains of history. Since you're making that choice. And you're not even really thinking about it. You don't care about those races, so you might as well be hitting a "gas chamber" button before you leave for tea. That's the kind of calibre of person you represent. That's you. That's anyone who doesn't realise the truth of what I'm saying, here. That's anyone who puts the value of one person above an entire peoples. How anyone could find that ethically correct I'll never know.

Shepard would hang her head in shame and tell you how truly disappointed and how utterly disgusted she was.

"Is this what you thought of me? Is this who you thought I was?"

Look back to the hypothetical and just ponder on it for a while. Don't hit me with a knee-jerk response because I'm genuinely tired of that, but use your intellectuality and your emotional maturity and reflect upon the decision and how it affects the Universe. Think on how it stains the name of Shepard, and how it sullies everything a good hero could ever stand for. Ethics is important, it's of great contemporary importance, we wouldn't be where we are without it. The world would still be rife with slavery and ethnic abuse.

I always want to think that the majority of people are better than that.

But, you know? I look at this quote and I think... maybe they're not.

A lot of who you are is reflected in the choices you make.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Aaaaaaaaand Wolfie time.

This thread's about to get entertaining.

[Auld Wulf]

Zazzerka wrote...

PirateMouse wrote...

This is a serious question.  I really want to get people to think about it and see what they say.

If you say so. These kinds of threads have a track record.

You could start by not assuming that we all get our rocks off to genocide.

This is kind of sad because the person I quoted directly before, the person whom I've quoted directly above you, clearly does enjoy killing distasteful species. And not persons, species.

Your words ring hollow. Very hollow. The evidence fits my perceptions.

[Astartes Marine]

It's not quite a complete thread without Wolfie's...interesting...opinions and total lack of ability to separate real from fiction.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Astartes Marine wrote...

It's not quite a complete thread without Wolfie's...interesting...opinions and total lack of ability to separate real from fiction.

He's the kind of fellow who would take a Daemon's words at face value.

After all Chaos are people too!

[dreamgazer]

You're clearly smarter than that wall of misrepresentation and straw-manning, Auld Wulf. It's a shame.

[spirosz]

dreamgazer wrote...

You're clearly smarter than that wall of misrepresentation and straw-manning, Auld Wulf. It's a shame.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

dreamgazer wrote...

You're clearly smarter than that wall of misrepresentation and straw-manning, Auld Wulf. It's a shame.

No! You must love the Wulf! He is our chosen mouth piece! All you us organics must bow before his superior sense of superiority!!!

[mass perfection]

Control seems like the same exact galaxy as the one with Leviathans controlling everything.

[Steelcan]

Auld Wolf can you forgive our sinful ways?

[robertthebard]

remydat wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

So your source of information is different from mine?  Somebody besides the Catalyst is telling you that Control will work, or Synthesis?  No?  Then why keep bringing it up, unless you Refuse?  The thing is, with Destroy, the races are all free to do whatever they want to do, freewill, without having to worry about whether or not the Reapers, or ShepAI takes offense to it.  The cause of this self fulfilling prophecy is dead and gone, along with his puppets.  It doesn't matter who the puppeteer is, if they have no puppets to control.

The rest of this is covered in my quoted post.  There are no assurances that there would be no repeat of the harvest as long as the Reapers are alive.  I've touched on the moustache twirling exposition of the Catalyst more than a few times.  That's all I see it as.  If you choose anything but Refuse, you are buying into it's spiel, so don't try to make out like the only viable options are Control and Synthesis.  You have no more reason to believe Control or Synthesis than I do to believe Destroy.  I have less reason to believe that it would kill the geth, myself and EDI than I do to believe it would kill just the Reapers.  He tells us that Shepard is mostly synthetic after all.  This is what it does, but it could kill you too might as well be what he says, and even with that possibility, I shoot the tube.  Why?  Because I am willing to die to save the galaxy, if that's what it takes, EDI is too, she told me herself.  So with no geth, it's a nonissue.  With the geth, it's regrettable, but, brutal calculus, and much safer for everyone that's left.

No my source is the same.  My point is you either trust he is telling you the truth or your don't.  I trust he is telling me the truth about all the options so there are risks in all the options.  I thought you were implying Destroy had no risks which is why I pointed out the risk the advanced synthetic he told you about comes to pass you have given it a reason to want all organics dead ie you sacrificed all previous synthetics to save organics.

If you agree there are risks in all the scenarios and were not implying the Catalyst was lying then I simply misunderstood your post.

The only other thing I would say is EDI told you she was willing to die before knowing synthesis and control were real options.  You can't really use that as a justification to eradicate her when she doesn't know she had a chance to live with Joker but you denied her that opportunity.  That's a bit disingenuos don't you think?

Nobody knew what the Catalyst was, and nobody knows what it does.  The choices are known only to Shepard.  They have no way to know that this or that could happen.  Note that I wouldn't try to hide behind this, assuming I lived.  When EDI talks about it, however, she's as safe as anyone else is on the Normandy.  What they may or may not choose does not come into the equation.  You are locked into making this decision based entirely on Shepard's morals, as decided by you.  When I let myself get that far, I destroy them, I spent too much time trying to find a way to stop them, and destroying them makes sure they are never a threat again.  While I would like to think that the crew that's been with me from the start would choose the same, and that the crew that joined me in the middle would understand the need to end this threat, once and for all.  Neither of the other options accomplish this with 100% certainty, Destroy does.

[Zazzerka]

Auld Wulf wrote...

This is kind of sad because the person I quoted directly before, the person whom I've quoted directly above you, clearly does enjoy killing distasteful species. And not persons, species.

Your words ring hollow. Very hollow. The evidence fits my perceptions.

My words are hollow? One guy with an off-colour comment (and he was likely being sarcastic) has ruined all of the "destroyers" in your eyes?

I recently found out that a guy whom picked synthesis once pushed his mother down the stairs. Needless to say, I was turned off that ending forever.