935 réponses à ce sujet

[fizzypop]

remydat wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

Shep can change her/his mind, but is it right that shep alone gets to decide the fate of all humanity and the galaxy? The entire galaxy depended on shep to kill/destroy the reapers that's what the majority wanted. I doubt many of them are going to be happy to find themselves either half machine or reapers are now serving a new master. So the idea that either of those endings is going to be all peachy is well unrealistic. Of course this all comes down to how poorly thought out the endings actually were.

That is irrelevant.  Shep is the only one that made it there and he has to decide no matter what.  Is it right he gets to decide the fate of all synthetics? No but you still choose destroy don't you?  All you are telling me is you don't like him deciding for organics but are perfectly happy with him deciding for synthetics.

And the fact is post synthesis, they do in fact look quite happy half machine and organic.  I see plenty of people smilling. 

Aaleel wrote...

So basically you're saying that just because someone is doing something, anything, even if it's the dumbest thing you've ever seen, it must have been a problem just because they decided it needed done?  OK, if that's all it takes to convince you then more power to you.  I need a little bit more though.

It's not even like the Catalyst said there was a time when organcis almost went extinct, and were saved from synthetics and to ensure that never happened again they started this.  I may have bought that, but it didn't even give Shepard this much.  It is basically saying this problem exists because I say it does.

So if this threat was not real, why was it harvesting for billions of year?  Why did Leviathan create it?  Is Leviathan in on this grand life.  If I decide to prevent AIDs by killing humans before they can catch it, that's pretty f**king dumb.  That does not mean AIDs did not exist.

Levithan said this time existed.  It said Synthetics destroyed their thralls and Tribute does not come from a dead race.

It's not irrelevent we don't make decisions in a bubble. So yes what everyone wants is relevent. Shep could've decided to stick with what everyone wanted regardless of their opinion. It's a tough job, but this is exactly what shep signed up to do. We even expect this IRL out of our own governments. As far as is it right for shep to kill all machines? Can't say. It could be a problem for some and not for others. What I can say is that the majority agreed they need to die at all costs even if that cost is themselves. They were all willing to die for it. Changing at the last minute? Not sure if that's a great idea especially when the evidence for the other options is very limited. Um no what I'm saying is that shep is deciding for the majority and should stick to the agreed upon plan. As far as the ending goes as I've said before the endings were poorly thought out. I doubt many people would be happy to find out they became part machine without their consent. It's ignores the consequences. Part oragnics will still have the same problems organics face; dieases and viruses attack living tissue this will still be an issue. Living tissue needs fuel so they'd still have to eat or inject to keep the tissue functioning. Cells have a limit on their lifespan they will eventually die and when they do the options will be limited...this could easily lead to replacing these organic parts with mech parts leading to more mech and less organic. Collectors afterall did exactly that when their own parts began to wear.

Destroy has it's consequences it's hard choice was to kill the geth and EDI. It seems the other endings lack that kind of depth which is IMO great for a story. A story without consequences isn't a good story it's simply to appease.

Modifié par fizzypop, 16 avril 2013 - 02:12 .

[Xilizhra]

. They dedicated their lives to the cause and were willing to risk death before they understood the context. There's no reason to assume they'd chicken out at the last minute.

Even so, my mandate is to protect life.

And yes those countries did want revenge. France wanted to completely destroy Germany's industrial capabilities, so did Belgium, the newly created Poland, and the British.

Ah, I misread your statement. Fair enough. They might be angry for a time, but they'll get over it.

Tyranny? I'm starting to think you take this way too seriously. You seriously can't even think of ONE reason people would be against control really? I don't believe you lack that much of an imagination. I'm sure many people wouldn't give a flip about their reparations or how useful they'd be. Humans and I'm guessing many of the other species aren't logical computers...they are emotional beings. It's the same reason people are STILL pissed off at Germany for the **** they did even though it's been YEARS since they tried to take over the world. People don't forgive or forget easily. The only way I can see a 100% peaceful ending with control is if shep orders them to kill themselves, but keeping around the very thing that threatened their entire existence? That they couldn't defeat using conventional means? Yeah I doubt most people would be "lol COOL SLAVES!". Acting as if they would is simply unrealistic. As I said it'd have made for a great story even if they wanted to paint it positive they could've without giving us such a cop out.

I'm not murdering multiple synthetic races to salve peoples' desire for vengeance. In fact, I've never done and would never sanction anything of that nature.

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

. They dedicated their lives to the cause and were willing to risk death before they understood the context. There's no reason to assume they'd chicken out at the last minute.

Even so, my mandate is to protect life.

. Which I'm doing by blowing the Reapers into whatever hell they crawled out of.  EDI's death is unfortunate ill admit, but not anything to change my mind.

[Xilizhra]

Steelcan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

. They dedicated their lives to the cause and were willing to risk death before they understood the context. There's no reason to assume they'd chicken out at the last minute.

Even so, my mandate is to protect life.

. Which I'm doing by blowing the Reapers into whatever hell they crawled out of.  EDI's death is unfortunate ill admit, but not anything to change my mind.

And I will do so with no death at all.

[remydat]

fizzypop wrote...

It's not irrelevent we don't make decisions in a bubble. So yes what everyone wants is relevent. Shep could've decided to stick with what everyone wanted regardless of their opinion. It's a tough job, but this is exactly what shep signed up to do. We even expect this IRL out of our own governments. As far as is it right for shep to kill all machines? Can't say. It could be a problem for some and not for others. What I can say is that the majority agreed they need to die at all costs even if that cost is themselves. They were all willing to die for it. Changing at the last minute? Not sure if that's a great idea especially when the evidence for the other options is very limited. Um no what I'm saying is that shep is deciding for the majority and should stick to the agreed upon plan. As far as the ending goes as I've said before the endings were poorly thought out. I doubt many people would be happy to find out they became part machine without their consent. It's ignores the consequences. Part oragnics will still have the same problems organics face; dieases and viruses attack living tissue this will still be an issue. Living tissue needs fuel so they'd still have to eat or inject to keep the tissue functioning. Cells have a limit on their lifespan they will eventually die and when they do the options will be limited...this could easily lead to replacing these organic parts with mech parts leading to more mech and less organic. Collectors afterall did exactly that when their own parts began to wear.

Destroy has it's consequences it's hard choice was to kill the geth and EDI. It seems the other endings lack that kind of depth which is IMO great for a story. A story without consequences isn't a good story it's simply to appease.

No actually our governments are suppose to protect the minority from the majority.  Otherwise it is mob rule.  Exterminating the folks you don't like because the majority is ok with it is not moral.  Need I remind you of all the tragedies in human history precisely because the majority was allowed to oppress the minority?

Sorry not going to let that happen if I have a choice period.  If I had to sacrifice Jews, or Blacks or (insert minority group) just so EVERYONE did not have to look green,  I would not do it period.  I don't care what the consequences because those consequences will be shared by EVERYONE EQUALLY.  I am not damning an entire group just so the majority can be happy especially when some of them will be happy that said minority group no longer exists.

[fizzypop]

blaaaaaaaaaarg wrote...

Seems odd to me that some would happily sacrifice all synthetics, but are against sacrificing all organics.

They're pretty much the same when it comes down to it: both are forms of life, and both are going to be harvested by the Reapers to bring order to the chaos.

So what's the difference?

My answer to the OP: I would sacrifice a single race. That's it. The reason I didn't pick Destroy is because you are sacrificing all synthetic races, which, IMO, is the same as sacrificing all organic races.

The reason for me is simple. Machines aren't natural. They have actual creators. Humans (and the others species) evolved naturally we have no real creators. You can't really stop organic life...even when they have such horrible ideas like creating the geth, but ya it is what it is.

[Aaleel]

remydat wrote...

So if this threat was not real, why was it harvesting for billions of year?  Why did Leviathan create it?  Is Leviathan in on this grand life.  If I decide to prevent AIDs by killing humans before they can catch it, that's pretty f**king dumb.  That does not mean AIDs did not exist.

Levithan said this time existed.  It said Synthetics destroyed their thralls and Tribute does not come from a dead race.

But yet it was enough thralls/organics left to decimate the Levithans the apex race in the galaxy, force them into hiding and build the first reaper.  This was organic and organic violence, same as we have now, except this was the result of mind control. 

They speculated that synthetics would one day kill all organics, and were scared that no more tribute would come.  But all organcis actually being destroyed or close to destroyed was not the case. 

So then the Catalyst increased the speed of organic evolution to try and bring things to a scale to justify its premise during it's use of the galaxy as an experiment.  Like I said it's a premise, a hypothesis, not a fact.  Once again, the reapers and the Catalyst are the real problems.

Modifié par Aaleel, 16 avril 2013 - 02:24 .

[remydat]

Steelcan wrote...

Talking about WW1.  You'd be right if we were talking about WW2.

Ah ok.  Don't remember much about WWI to comment.

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

. They dedicated their lives to the cause and were willing to risk death before they understood the context. There's no reason to assume they'd chicken out at the last minute.

Even so, my mandate is to protect life.

. Which I'm doing by blowing the Reapers into whatever hell they crawled out of.  EDI's death is unfortunate ill admit, but not anything to change my mind.

And I will do so with no death at all.

. Except for all those you will kill maintaining Control.

[The Twilight God]

remydat wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

You never shoot the Crucible. Scroll down to where the picture is and read from there.

To summarize: As I've already stated, Hackett expected the Crucible to fire automatically. When in the Decision Chamber there is some device set up at the docking point. Removing power to the device, via shooting the power conduit, allows the Crucible to arm. I must reiterate that the power conduit is NOT a part of the Crucible. Neither is the Control interface nor the synthesis beam as can be proven via in-game content.

My issue with Synthesis and Control has nothing to do with what TIM (or Saren) thinks. It's about what Shepard thinks right up to a few minutes before the Kid. There is a consistency issue. Also, it's a plain matter of trusting synthesis to not effectively turn organics and synthetics into a diffused Reaper or pretty husks. Or for Control not to reprogram Shepard into the Reaper mindset like every other current reaper was repurposed from a former organic/synthetic who opposed them. This sudden trust in the enemy without any reason to develop such a trust is absurd and makes no sense outside of indoctrination. It's fine only under the notion that it is an indoctrination attempt. Otherwise, it's nonsense.

But you know this how?  Explain to me how Shep as he is bleeding and half dying is suppose to understand all of this?

Why wouldn't he? He seems relatively fine. And, of course, he has eyes even if you didn't. You might want to consider why he would even believe Synthesis, for example, would do anything save vaporize him. Because the Reapers say it's OK? You think that makes rational sense?

remydat wrote...

Shepard doesn't know why the harvest is occuring.  Changing his mind when he finds out is entirely logicial.  People change their minds when they find out more information.  That is called being sensible. 

 
There is nothing sensible about blindly believing in the entities currently attempting to destroy everything you know and love. It's completely foolish. Shepard doesn't KNOW anything about why the Reapers are harvesting people. The Reapers telling him a story doesn't make that story true.  In fact, everything prior dictates that the Kid MUST be lying. What happened to "it's not a thing you can comprehend"? If they just want to preserve, why wipe out entire species. Just get enough to make a destroyer and go back to dark space. Seeing as the destruction of organics is "inevitable" I don't see why the Reapers have to rush it. Why didn't the Reapers just play galaxy cops like Shepard thinks he's going to do in Control? Oh, wait, supposedly they did and couldn't for whatever reason. So why allow Shepard to do Control? How exactly does synthesis stop conflict outside of mass brain washing? It doesn't do anything but give people green circuits. True synthetics are still superior in every physical way. Why would people stop making pure synthetics. Have the psychological conditions that lead people to want their lives better gone? Why fight to keep the Crucible from docking if Synthesis is their plan A? They obviously knew they could use the "battery" to power synthesis or Control. That stuff was prebuilt in advance it wasn't any "new possibility". The Kid knew from the start as the Reapers had the technological know how to make the interfaces. which begs the question of why they didn't just make their own Crucible. None of it adds up. Synthesis and Control are just deterrents. A plan B in case **** hits the fan.

remydat wrote...

You are free not to change you mind but acting like everyone should not change their mind is where you lose me.  You don't want to change you mind.  Good, you have destroy.  I upon learning that has been going on for the past billion years or so decide I don't want to sacrifice another race now that I know what the problem is.

As I said, you don't KNOW what the Reapers really want out of the harvest. The Leviathans don't even know or aren't telling. Shepard was more than happy to sacrifice the reaper "race". Depending on your conversation choices he refers to their destruction as giving those dead races peace.

[Xilizhra]

Steelcan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

. They dedicated their lives to the cause and were willing to risk death before they understood the context. There's no reason to assume they'd chicken out at the last minute.

Even so, my mandate is to protect life.

. Which I'm doing by blowing the Reapers into whatever hell they crawled out of.  EDI's death is unfortunate ill admit, but not anything to change my mind.

And I will do so with no death at all.

. Except for all those you will kill maintaining Control.

That's up to them. I'm not going to be attacking anyone, only defending people.

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

That's up to them. I'm not going to be attacking anyone, only defending people.

. Just like Al-Qaeda was just defending the Islamic way of life.  Or the Crusades were defending the Holy Land.  Or Hitler was defending Germany.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

fizzypop wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

You do realize there are many times in the series where you have to kill someone for a greater good? I mean shep had to murder 300k batarians in arrival and kill indoctrinated people....it's war people die sometimes even innocent people die. As far as killing all organics? No because it doesn't make any damn sense. We both know that.

No one is at war. Is fire at war when it burns? Is it in conflict? Or is it simply doing what it was created to do?

There is only the harvest. The Intelligence still serves its purpose. However it now sees the galaxy as an experiment.

The reapers were created to harvest.

Seriously, don't play word games it does nothing to further your argument. You completely missed my point. My point was shep has killed innocent people in order to further her/his goal of destroying the reapers. So even if you pick blue or green options you have still done those acts. How is that ANY better than choosing to destroy the geth or EDI? They aren't much different IMO. I'm not arguing which ending is better or other such nonsense. I'm saying that you can't act all hoiler than thou because everyone's shep has had to make some difficult choices (allowing a squad member to die, killing 300k people, rewriting or killing a whole **** ton of geth, killing indoctrinated people, and the list goes on).

Aww... Fizzy, I was just trolling you. I didn't miss your point at all. You just left me a perfect opportunity to use that line.

EDIT: Actually I gave you more ammo.... The reapers were created to harvest. That was their purpose. If preserving organic life was the real goal why put the "preserves" at such risk of being destroyed if what was in them was so valuable? Because it wasn't valuable. It was marmalade. ==> ApplepieSVK's Marmalade Theory.

You left out not curing the genophage when Wreav was in charge to get the Salarian dreadnoughts. I mean we knew the Krogan were going to take huge losses, but those dreadnoughts were really hard to pass up, and with Wreav in charge of the Krogan? Post war population explosion with a genophage cure? Probably not a good idea for the rest of the galaxy especially if they managed to hijack some of those advanced warships.

No matter what you choose some one will see it as bad. Someone will see it with a different set of ideals. Someone will also see it as good. Someone will see it with similar ideals.

To get to the end you have done the same things. That's what you said. So no one can act holier than thou about their choices. I guess the bottom line here is do you let 3 billion or 10 billion die to save 90 billion? You go home afterward knowing that 90 billion are alive that would have been otherwise dead. You have to frame it positively in your mind otherwise you'll go insane.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 16 avril 2013 - 02:32 .

[remydat]

Aaleel wrote...

But yet it was enough thralls/organics left to decimate the Levithans the apex race in the galaxy, force them into hiding and build the first reaper.  This was organic and organic violence, same as we have now, except this was the result of mind control. 

They speculated that synthetics would one day kill all organics, and were scared that no more tribute would come.  But all organcis actually being destroyed or close to destroyed was not the case. 

So then the Catalyst increased the speed of organic evolution to try and bring things to a scale to justify its premise.  Once again, the reapers and the Catalyst are the real problems.

I think it was stated the Catalyst created an army of pawns.  It never claims that the army was organic or synthetic.  Leviathan says it could not protect them and that organics created synthetics that destroyed them.  You have no basis to claim that synthetics were not close to wiping out all synthetics because you were not there.  

For all we know this army of pawns were shackled AI created at a time when the Unshackled AI had pretty much wiped out all the advanced thralls and was turning their attention to the cave men of the time that woud stand no chance because they were not even space faring yet.  So the Catalyst uses the shackled AI pawns to kill Leviathan and create Harbinger because he was necessary to kill these Unshackled AI.  Point is we don't know.

[robertthebard]

Xilizhra wrote...

Shep can change her/his mind, but is it right that shep alone gets to decide the fate of all humanity and the galaxy? The entire galaxy depended on shep to kill/destroy the reapers that's what the majority wanted. I doubt many of them are going to be happy to find themselves either half machine or reapers are now serving a new master. So the idea that either of those endings is going to be all peachy is well unrealistic. Of course this all comes down to how poorly thought out the endings actually were.

If someone would rather see the genocide of all synthetics than possibly be nervous about implications of Reaper survival even when they're no longer at war, their opinion doesn't matter to me.

Uh oh, back to genocide again.  It's pretty sad when your best argument is inaccurate.  I realize it's a justification for you to choose to either become a Reaper God, or genetically rape the entire galaxy, but I have to wonder, why do you need a justification?  My reason for choosing Destroy when I allow myself past Harbinger is quite simple, it's what I set out to do once I learned about the threat.  I don't have to rationalize it, I don't have to justify it and I don't have to try to say everyone else is a monster to make me feel better about my choice.  16 out of 20 saves in ME 3, the Reapers win because I refuse to accept the Harbinger DeM.  It's bad enough that I have to accept the Lazarus DeM.

But when I get there, I'm doing what I set out to do.  I didn't look at the galaxy map on the way to Earth and say to myself "Self, we're doing pretty good, maybe I should just flip BioWare the bird and shoot the Catalyst.  I sure never thought that I'd like to genetically alter every living thing in the galaxy for fun, and I don't want to be a Reaper.  I told EDI not to think like one, why would I want to become one?  I have been forced to sacrifice crew members and friends in an effort to end the Reapers, and I won't allow their sacrifices to be in vain.  I am ending the Reapers, and the Reaper threat.  The galaxy is now free to self determinate, no matter what it decides to do.

[remydat]

The Twilight God wrote...

Why wouldn't he? He seems relatively fine. And, of course, he has eyes even if you didn't. You might want to consider why he would even believe Synthesis, for example, would do anything save vaporize him. Because the Reapers say it's OK? You think that makes rational sense? 

There is nothing sensible about blindly believing in the entities currently attempting to destroy everything you know and love. It's completely foolish. Shepard doesn't KNOW anything about why the Reapers are harvesting people. The Reapers telling him a story doesn't make that story true.  In fact, everything prior dictates that the Kid MUST be lying. What happened to "it's not a thing you can comprehend"? If they just want to preserve, why wipe out entire species. Just get enough to make a destroyer and go back to dark space. Seeing as the destruction of organics is "inevitable" I don't see why the Reapers have to rush it. Why didn't the Reapers just play galaxy cops like Shepard thinks he's going to do in Control? Oh, wait, supposedly they did and couldn't for whatever reason. So why allow Shepard to do Control? How exactly does synthesis stop conflict outside of mass brain washing? It doesn't do anything but give people green circuits. True synthetics are still superior in every physical way. Why would people stop making pure synthetics. Have the psychological conditions that lead people to want their lives better gone? Why fight to keep the Crucible from docking if Synthesis is their plan A? They obviously knew they could use the "battery" to power synthesis or Control. That stuff was prebuilt in advance it wasn't any "new possibility". The Kid knew from the start as the Reapers had the technological know how to make the interfaces. which begs the question of why they didn't just make their own Crucible. None of it adds up. Synthesis and Control are just deterrents. A plan B in case **** hits the fan.

As I said, you don't KNOW what the Reapers really want out of the harvest. The Leviathans don't even know or aren't telling. Shepard was more than happy to sacrifice the reaper "race". Depending on your conversation choices he refers to their destruction as giving those dead races peace.

Why wouldn't he is not a response.  You are a gamer.  Shep is a player.  I saw nothing in the game that tells me pulling the plug would activate the Crucible.

Let's say the Catalyst lies to me by telling me Synthesis and Control result in my death.  HMMM.  Why would he admit that?  It makes no rational sense if he is trying to deceive me.

Except Leviathan confirms this story.  Sorry, I played the DLC. 

I choose Synthesis or Control because everyone lives not because I think they are fairy tales. 

[Xilizhra]

Uh oh, back to genocide again. It's pretty sad when your best argument is inaccurate. I realize it's a justification for you to choose to either become a Reaper God, or genetically rape the entire galaxy, but I have to wonder, why do you need a justification? My reason for choosing Destroy when I allow myself past Harbinger is quite simple, it's what I set out to do once I learned about the threat. I don't have to rationalize it, I don't have to justify it and I don't have to try to say everyone else is a monster to make me feel better about my choice. 16 out of 20 saves in ME 3, the Reapers win because I refuse to accept the Harbinger DeM. It's bad enough that I have to accept the Lazarus DeM.

So, you don't actually think very much about the pros and cons of individual choices, just coast along with Destroy because it was your original objective and mission parameters never ever change?

[remydat]

robertthebard wrote...

Uh oh, back to genocide again.  It's pretty sad when your best argument is inaccurate.  I realize it's a justification for you to choose to either become a Reaper God, or genetically rape the entire galaxy, but I have to wonder, why do you need a justification?  My reason for choosing Destroy when I allow myself past Harbinger is quite simple, it's what I set out to do once I learned about the threat.  I don't have to rationalize it, I don't have to justify it and I don't have to try to say everyone else is a monster to make me feel better about my choice.  16 out of 20 saves in ME 3, the Reapers win because I refuse to accept the Harbinger DeM.  It's bad enough that I have to accept the Lazarus DeM.

But when I get there, I'm doing what I set out to do.  I didn't look at the galaxy map on the way to Earth and say to myself "Self, we're doing pretty good, maybe I should just flip BioWare the bird and shoot the Catalyst.  I sure never thought that I'd like to genetically alter every living thing in the galaxy for fun, and I don't want to be a Reaper.  I told EDI not to think like one, why would I want to become one?  I have been forced to sacrifice crew members and friends in an effort to end the Reapers, and I won't allow their sacrifices to be in vain.  I am ending the Reapers, and the Reaper threat.  The galaxy is now free to self determinate, no matter what it decides to do.

The Galaxy minus synthetics which is the point.  You allow certain people to self determinate by eliminating others.  That is your choice but that is exactly why others choose Synthesis or Control.  It lets everyone live to forge a future.  EVERYONE. 

[robertthebard]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...


To get to the end you have done the same things. That's what you said. So no one can act holier than thou about their choices. I guess the bottom line here is do you let 3 billion or 10 billion die to save 90 billion? You go home afterward knowing that 90 billion are alive that would have been otherwise dead. You have to frame it positively in your mind otherwise you'll go insane.

Shepard:  We're not responsible the ones that die.  We're responsible for the ones left standing when this is all over.

[fizzypop]

remydat wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

It's not irrelevent we don't make decisions in a bubble. So yes what everyone wants is relevent. Shep could've decided to stick with what everyone wanted regardless of their opinion. It's a tough job, but this is exactly what shep signed up to do. We even expect this IRL out of our own governments. As far as is it right for shep to kill all machines? Can't say. It could be a problem for some and not for others. What I can say is that the majority agreed they need to die at all costs even if that cost is themselves. They were all willing to die for it. Changing at the last minute? Not sure if that's a great idea especially when the evidence for the other options is very limited. Um no what I'm saying is that shep is deciding for the majority and should stick to the agreed upon plan. As far as the ending goes as I've said before the endings were poorly thought out. I doubt many people would be happy to find out they became part machine without their consent. It's ignores the consequences. Part oragnics will still have the same problems organics face; dieases and viruses attack living tissue this will still be an issue. Living tissue needs fuel so they'd still have to eat or inject to keep the tissue functioning. Cells have a limit on their lifespan they will eventually die and when they do the options will be limited...this could easily lead to replacing these organic parts with mech parts leading to more mech and less organic. Collectors afterall did exactly that when their own parts began to wear.

Destroy has it's consequences it's hard choice was to kill the geth and EDI. It seems the other endings lack that kind of depth which is IMO great for a story. A story without consequences isn't a good story it's simply to appease.

No actually our governments are suppose to protect the minority from the majority.  Otherwise it is mob rule.  Exterminating the folks you don't like because the majority is ok with it is not moral.  Need I remind you of all the tragedies in human history precisely because the majority was allowed to oppress the minority?

Sorry not going to let that happen if I have a choice period.  If I had to sacrifice Jews, or Blacks or (insert minority group) just so EVERYONE did not have to look green,  I would not do it period.  I don't care what the consequences because those consequences will be shared by EVERYONE EQUALLY.  I am not damning an entire group just so the majority can be happy especially when some of them will be happy that said minority group no longer exists.

Everyone get's an opinion and a vote, but the majority is who votes them in and has control over policies. It wouldn't be mob rule it'd mean just what I said the majority votes in their elected reps and those reps vote in policies. Those policies should be about benefitting the most people because let's face it, it's unrealistic we will help everyone. Sometimes you do have to make hard choices in order to make sure everything runs smoothly. Not that I don't disagree there are problems with the system and we've seen them, but I still think that system is better than the alternative. As far as protecting the minorities that's a laugh and I am a minority.

Of course that part is off topic let's go back to the game. Where did I say you should kill those you don't like? Choosing destroy means you kill the geth not because you don't like them, but because you need to kill the reapers who refuse to stop harvesting. You make a choice it has a consequence. Does that consequence suck? Sure, but that's life. Your balancing the needs of the many races over the needs of one race.

That's okay if you wouldn't do it. I don't really care what you decide in your game, but what I am saying is it should have consequences that are realistic. We both know that everyone being all peachy with it isn't realistic. That's my problem. It makes the choice hollow. It's just another "let's all be friends ending" which is a cop out.

I have the same problem with the control ending. It's simply a cop out. Ignoring any real depth and making it again another hollow choice.

I'm not even arguing one choice is more vaild than another, but I do think you need to open up your mind to the possible consequences of said actions. Acting as if they are perfect in every single way cannot possibly have ramifcations that are negative is short-sighted and boring. All of the endings could've been better, but destroy felt real because it had consequences. Heck I might have even chosen control if there were consequences that felt real.

Modifié par fizzypop, 16 avril 2013 - 02:45 .

[fizzypop]

remydat wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Uh oh, back to genocide again.  It's pretty sad when your best argument is inaccurate.  I realize it's a justification for you to choose to either become a Reaper God, or genetically rape the entire galaxy, but I have to wonder, why do you need a justification?  My reason for choosing Destroy when I allow myself past Harbinger is quite simple, it's what I set out to do once I learned about the threat.  I don't have to rationalize it, I don't have to justify it and I don't have to try to say everyone else is a monster to make me feel better about my choice.  16 out of 20 saves in ME 3, the Reapers win because I refuse to accept the Harbinger DeM.  It's bad enough that I have to accept the Lazarus DeM.

But when I get there, I'm doing what I set out to do.  I didn't look at the galaxy map on the way to Earth and say to myself "Self, we're doing pretty good, maybe I should just flip BioWare the bird and shoot the Catalyst.  I sure never thought that I'd like to genetically alter every living thing in the galaxy for fun, and I don't want to be a Reaper.  I told EDI not to think like one, why would I want to become one?  I have been forced to sacrifice crew members and friends in an effort to end the Reapers, and I won't allow their sacrifices to be in vain.  I am ending the Reapers, and the Reaper threat.  The galaxy is now free to self determinate, no matter what it decides to do.

The Galaxy minus synthetics which is the point.  You allow certain people to self determinate by eliminating others.  That is your choice but that is exactly why others choose Synthesis or Control.  It lets everyone live to forge a future.  EVERYONE. 

Only if they want or agree with that future.

[fizzypop]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

You do realize there are many times in the series where you have to kill someone for a greater good? I mean shep had to murder 300k batarians in arrival and kill indoctrinated people....it's war people die sometimes even innocent people die. As far as killing all organics? No because it doesn't make any damn sense. We both know that.

No one is at war. Is fire at war when it burns? Is it in conflict? Or is it simply doing what it was created to do?

There is only the harvest. The Intelligence still serves its purpose. However it now sees the galaxy as an experiment.

The reapers were created to harvest.

Seriously, don't play word games it does nothing to further your argument. You completely missed my point. My point was shep has killed innocent people in order to further her/his goal of destroying the reapers. So even if you pick blue or green options you have still done those acts. How is that ANY better than choosing to destroy the geth or EDI? They aren't much different IMO. I'm not arguing which ending is better or other such nonsense. I'm saying that you can't act all hoiler than thou because everyone's shep has had to make some difficult choices (allowing a squad member to die, killing 300k people, rewriting or killing a whole **** ton of geth, killing indoctrinated people, and the list goes on).

Aww... Fizzy, I was just trolling you. I didn't miss your point at all. You just left me a perfect opportunity to use that line.

EDIT: Actually I gave you more ammo.... The reapers were created to harvest. That was their purpose. If preserving organic life was the real goal why put the "preserves" at such risk of being destroyed if what was in them was so valuable? Because it wasn't valuable. It was marmalade. ==> ApplepieSVK's Marmalade Theory.

You left out not curing the genophage when Wreav was in charge to get the Salarian dreadnoughts. I mean we knew the Krogan were going to take huge losses, but those dreadnoughts were really hard to pass up, and with Wreav in charge of the Krogan? Post war population explosion with a genophage cure? Probably not a good idea for the rest of the galaxy especially if they managed to hijack some of those advanced warships.

No matter what you choose some one will see it as bad. Someone will see it with a different set of ideals. Someone will also see it as good. Someone will see it with similar ideals.

To get to the end you have done the same things. That's what you said. So no one can act holier than thou about their choices. I guess the bottom line here is do you let 3 billion or 10 billion die to save 90 billion? You go home afterward knowing that 90 billion are alive that would have been otherwise dead. You have to frame it positively in your mind otherwise you'll go insane.

Ugh I cannot believe I didn't notice that. I kind of was thinking that with your last line, but I was like eh IDK. I hate calling troll. Heck I left out one of the biggest ones that supported my point...saving the council. Most people use the argument when saving the council that saving DA is important because there are more lives onboard than what you sacrifice.  I chose to save them, but for other reasons mainly I thought the second time around the council may trust you more giving you a better chance at convicing them of the reaper threat lol how wrong was I?

[fizzypop]

Xilizhra wrote...

. They dedicated their lives to the cause and were willing to risk death before they understood the context. There's no reason to assume they'd chicken out at the last minute.

Even so, my mandate is to protect life.

And yes those countries did want revenge. France wanted to completely destroy Germany's industrial capabilities, so did Belgium, the newly created Poland, and the British.

Ah, I misread your statement. Fair enough. They might be angry for a time, but they'll get over it.

Tyranny? I'm starting to think you take this way too seriously. You seriously can't even think of ONE reason people would be against control really? I don't believe you lack that much of an imagination. I'm sure many people wouldn't give a flip about their reparations or how useful they'd be. Humans and I'm guessing many of the other species aren't logical computers...they are emotional beings. It's the same reason people are STILL pissed off at Germany for the **** they did even though it's been YEARS since they tried to take over the world. People don't forgive or forget easily. The only way I can see a 100% peaceful ending with control is if shep orders them to kill themselves, but keeping around the very thing that threatened their entire existence? That they couldn't defeat using conventional means? Yeah I doubt most people would be "lol COOL SLAVES!". Acting as if they would is simply unrealistic. As I said it'd have made for a great story even if they wanted to paint it positive they could've without giving us such a cop out.

I'm not murdering multiple synthetic races to salve peoples' desire for vengeance. In fact, I've never done and would never sanction anything of that nature.

Okay, but you still have to accept that there can be possible negative consequences to that action. Perfect options don't exist if they did everyone would choose them we'd have no war, no crime, no conflicts, no cheating, no stealing, etc etc. Life isn't perfect...it's choatic at best and everything has it's consequences. All I'm doing is simply trying to open your mind to other possiblities.

Modifié par fizzypop, 16 avril 2013 - 03:03 .

[Xilizhra]

Okay, but you still have to accept that there can be possible negative consequences to that action. Perfect options don't exist if they did everyone would choose them we'd have no war, no crime, no conflicts, no cheating, no stealing, etc etc. Life isn't perfect...it's choatic at best and everything has it's consequences. All I'm doing is simply trying to open your mind to other possiblities.

There are possible negative consequences to everything, but with my current information, I judge that the risk isn't sufficient to kill all synthetics instead.

[fizzypop]

Xilizhra wrote...

Okay, but you still have to accept that there can be possible negative consequences to that action. Perfect options don't exist if they did everyone would choose them we'd have no war, no crime, no conflicts, no cheating, no stealing, etc etc. Life isn't perfect...it's choatic at best and everything has it's consequences. All I'm doing is simply trying to open your mind to other possiblities.

There are possible negative consequences to everything, but with my current information, I judge that the risk isn't sufficient to kill all synthetics instead.

I don't disparage that. I just wish all of the choices would've been a bit better about showing the pros and cons. I think it'd have been much more interesting. The choices should've been hard because we got that feeling all through out mass effect that the ending wasn't going to be peachy. Mass effect 3 hammered that in with scripted deaths, but then failed to deliver. Those hard choices is what makes a story great. I really hated playing arrival because I felt awful about what I was doing, but I also didn't have a choice. Regardless of how awful I felt I still enjoyed it as part of the story it forced me to look at things from another perspective. It took me out of my comfort zone and that's IMO good storytelling.