935 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

PirateMouse wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

Whether you call it genocide or not, Control and Synthesis are more heinous and perverse crimes against the galaxy. That's the sad part about the endings.

Yes, stopping the Reapers without any further casualties is totally more heinous than committing genocide.

I'm still waiting for documentation of genocide:  the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group.

Source

If I have to choose between somebody bitter about a choice in a video game, and a dictionary for a definition, I'm going to choose the dictionary every time.  You can, if you choose, ignore the definition to say that the end is the same either way, but what we're actually looking at is collateral damage, since one that chooses Destroy is choosing to destroy the Reapers.  collateral damage  Again, given the choice between a somebody bitter about a choice, and a dictionary, I'm taking the dictionary every time.  If the Catalyst is not to be trusted at all, and one decides to shoot the tube anyway, they cannot know that they will indeed kill EDI and the geth, if applicable, since it's entirely possible that the geth aren't even around any more at this time.  Hence:   injury inflicted on something other than an intended target; specifically : civilian casualties of a military operation.  Source provided in the link entitled collateral damage.

[BansheeOwnage]

fr33stylez wrote...

PirateMouse wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

Whether you call it genocide or not, Control and Synthesis are more heinous and perverse crimes against the galaxy. That's the sad part about the endings.

Yes, stopping the Reapers without any further casualties is totally more heinous than committing genocide.

lol, becoming the new Catalyst while putting the galaxy under your Reaper rule for eternity

lol, jumping into a beam and transforming every living organic being into a synthetic hybrid for no reason

[BansheeOwnage]

robertthebard wrote...

PirateMouse wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

Whether you call it genocide or not, Control and Synthesis are more heinous and perverse crimes against the galaxy. That's the sad part about the endings.

Yes, stopping the Reapers without any further casualties is totally more heinous than committing genocide.

I'm still waiting for documentation of genocide:  the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group.

Source

If I have to choose between somebody bitter about a choice in a video game, and a dictionary for a definition, I'm going to choose the dictionary every time.  You can, if you choose, ignore the definition to say that the end is the same either way, but what we're actually looking at is collateral damage, since one that chooses Destroy is choosing to destroy the Reapers.  collateral damage  Again, given the choice between a somebody bitter about a choice, and a dictionary, I'm taking the dictionary every time.  If the Catalyst is not to be trusted at all, and one decides to shoot the tube anyway, they cannot know that they will indeed kill EDI and the geth, if applicable, since it's entirely possible that the geth aren't even around any more at this time.  Hence:   injury inflicted on something other than an intended target; specifically : civilian casualties of a military operation.  Source provided in the link entitled collateral damage.

Yeah, like civillians. But remember, the geth are soldiers. Every. Single. One.

[PirateMouse]

DecCylonus wrote...

It has nothing to do with motive. It has to do with the consequences of the choices the Catalyst offers. The future of the galaxy is entirely determined by Shepard's choice. The outcome of each option is radically different.

If all you really want is the Catalyst gone, the Reapers no longer a threat, and no genocide, why not pick Synthesis? You get everything you stated with that choice too.

The implications of Synthesis are too bizarre and extreme, and I also don't feel it's right to force that on the entire galaxy.  Control isn't forcing anything on anyone -- there's nothing preventing me from taking control, fixing the relays, and then just stepping back to only really intervene if something truly galaxy-cracking comes up again.

The options are basically:

1. Commit genocide (unacceptable unless no other viable option exists).

2. Turn everyone into weird synthetic/organic hybrid things.  The implications are staggering and potentially nightmare-inducing, and even in a best-case scenario this is forcing something on the rest of the galaxy in a way I'm not prepared to do.  Worst of all, it fails to solve what I believe to be the real problem: to wit, Starbrat itself.

3. Take a kind of power I never particularly wanted but in so doing stop the Reapers without further casualties and, as a side benefit, gain a force that could be used to protect the galaxy if anything truly galaxy-cracking ever came along again.

It's really not even a contest.

[Bill Casey]

remydat wrote...

So who exactly is honoring them?  No one mourns the Geth in the post destroy ending as far as I am aware.  In fact they are not even mentioned at all are they?

[Asnine112]

PirateMouse wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Zazzerka wrote...

I AM SO SICK OF THE WORD "GENOCIDE"

HOLY F*CKING HELL

Plus infinity. This is sacrifice, learn the difference.

I'm sure you like to tell yourself that.  In fact, I'm sure many such atrocities have been committed with similar thinking behind them.

You're all getting trolled.

If you can't tell by his juvenile depictions of all people who choose certain endings whilst refusing to recognize the faults with his own reasoning / his chosen ending then I don't know what to say. Let the thread die

[PirateMouse]

Asnine112 wrote...

You're all getting trolled.

If you can't tell by his juvenile depictions of all people who choose certain endings whilst refusing to recognize the faults with his own reasoning / his chosen ending then I don't know what to say. Let the thread die

And what faults are those?

Or did you actually have anything to contribute aside from ad hominem attacks?

[Bill Casey]

Bioware thinks it's sacrifice...




I think it's deplorable...

[fr33stylez]

PirateMouse wrote...


The implications of Synthesis are too bizarre and extreme, and I also don't feel it's right to force that on the entire galaxy.  Control isn't forcing anything on anyone -- there's nothing preventing me from taking control, fixing the relays, and then just stepping back to only really intervene if something truly galaxy-cracking comes up again.

The options are basically:

1. Commit genocide (unacceptable unless no other viable option exists).

2. Turn everyone into weird synthetic/organic hybrid things.  The implications are staggering and potentially nightmare-inducing, and even in a best-case scenario this is forcing something on the rest of the galaxy in a way I'm not prepared to do.  Worst of all, it fails to solve what I believe to be the real problem: to wit, Starbrat itself.

3. Take a kind of power I never particularly wanted but in so doing stop the Reapers without further casualties and, as a side benefit, gain a force that could be used to protect the galaxy if anything truly galaxy-cracking ever came along again.

It's really not even a contest.

Except, you know, you're the new problem now. Who asked you to guide the galaxy under Reaper rule for the rest of eternity?

Why can't people simply just live their own lives and build their own future without some AI and his monsters telling them how to behave?

[DecCylonus]

remydat wrote...

DecCylonus wrote...

Wrong. How can you choose to become something you don't agree with? You become the Catalyst and keep the Reapers as a force that can impose your will. Same solution, new AI. You choose not to commit genocide, and that's good. You are still agreeing that there will always be conflict and that the Reapers are the right tool to stop it. You are just choosing to use the tool differently.

How can you choose to become something you don't agree with?  You become a Reaper by destroying/harvesting all synthetics to prevent conflict.

This works both ways.  You are choosing to resolve conflict by exterminating a species.  In fact, at least the Reapers have the decency to preserve them in Reaper form, lol.  You aren't even harvesting, you are outright exterminating them and then chastising people for being like the Catalyst, lol.  Ok Harbinger.

The difference is I wouldn't start a war to destroy the Geth because I felt it would be good for the galaxy. The Catalyst has started countless wars and wiped out countless races and individuals in the name of creating order, which it believes needs to exist for the galactic good. That's a vast difference.

[Asnine112]

PirateMouse wrote...

Asnine112 wrote...

You're all getting trolled.

If you can't tell by his juvenile depictions of all people who choose certain endings whilst refusing to recognize the faults with his own reasoning / his chosen ending then I don't know what to say. Let the thread die

And what faults are those?

Or did you actually have anything to contribute aside from ad hominem attacks?

You're the one with ad hominem attacks, accusing everyone of choose destroy of being genocidal bastards.

As I said, the endings are written in such a vague way that you can't really tell at all what's going on. NOWHERE does it explicitly state that the Geth are destroyed, it's merely alluded to. You attempting to force this as if it were a fact is just trolling.

Also, I couldn't care less about what ending you chose. But, I'll leave a little saying here: Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I'm done feeding your troll topic

[Bill Casey]

remydat wrote...

In fact, at least the Reapers have the decency to preserve them in Reaper form, lol.

Is submission not preferable to extinction?

Modifié par Bill Casey, 12 avril 2013 - 07:30 .

[PirateMouse]

fr33stylez wrote...

Except, you know, you're the new problem now. Who asked you to guide the galaxy under Reaper rule for the rest of eternity?

Why can't people simply just live their own lives and build their own future without some AI and his monsters telling them how to behave?

Who says I have to do that? I can fix the relays and then just step back and only intervene if something truly galaxy-cracking happens.  Nothing prevents me from doing this.

Meanwhile, who asked you to wipe out an entire sapient species when there were viable alternatives? Why can't people simply just live their own lives and build their own futures without being wiped out by a genocidal Shepard?

[jstme]

Well i am ready to go all the way to MEHEM .
In any case ,Synthesis in my opinion is awful horrible horrendous option while simultaneously not making any sense MEwise while control has 0 chance to work. So if there was no MEHEM destroy would be my official choice though exiting game after Anderson scene would be the real life choice.

[fr33stylez]

PirateMouse wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

Except, you know, you're the new problem now. Who asked you to guide the galaxy under Reaper rule for the rest of eternity?

Why can't people simply just live their own lives and build their own future without some AI and his monsters telling them how to behave?

Who says I have to do that? I can fix the relays and then just step back and only intervene if something truly galaxy-cracking happens.  Nothing prevents me from doing this.

Meanwhile, who asked you to wipe out an entire sapient species when there were viable alternatives? Why can't people simply just live their own lives and build their own futures without being wiped out by a genocidal Shepard?

Sorry, you can't headcanon that Shepalyst walks away in Control - the epilogue clearly shows his plans for the galaxy. He's not going anywhere, just a new Catalyst doing what it thinks is best for organics. Since you know they, organics can't take care of themselves and are not worthy of self-determination.

You added the qualifier 'viable alternatives'. Too bad they aren't any - being the new Catalyst isn't viable to me.

Modifié par fr33stylez, 12 avril 2013 - 07:32 .

[PirateMouse]

Asnine112 wrote...

You're the one with ad hominem attacks, accusing everyone of choose destroy of being genocidal bastards.

I never called them genocidal bastards.  I did, however, call their act what it is.

I'm done feeding your troll topic

Good.  Go troll elsewhere, then.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

remydat wrote...

oblique9 wrote...

I see it more as a quest to save whatever you don't kill.

I'm not trying to kill a Reaper because 'why not'. I'm doing it because if I don't, everybody else WILL die.

Even not looking at it as a mathematical equation, I can't see a moral argument being made for choosing to allow a 3rd party to kill everything when you knew that killing something would save everything else.

Except you are then presented with evidence that everyone else WILL NOT die.  All you are doing is saying you believe the Catalyst that destroy is in fact destroy but then will ignore everything else he says or choose to believe it is a lie.  So he just happens to be telling you the truth about the option you instinctively want to pick but then he must be lying on confused about the other options that he clearly states WILL NOT result in everyone'e else death.

This is just confirmation bias.  You heard destroy and liked what you heard so everything else that contradicts your pre-ordained conclusion will be disregarded.

Remy, do we really have to go through this AGAIN? If you take a human and you throw the human in a giant blender and turn it on say "grind", what do you have? A dead human shake. This is getting disgusting. If you take say 6 million humans and throw them into a giant blender and grind them up what do you have? A mess of ground up dead humans. Then they take that and add a bunch of their favorite blend of special nanites and herbs and spices to it and pump it through these pipes into this superstructure, which is pretty huge and shaped like a metal human for some reason. Then these nanites go to work and form a webbing inside the slushie along with the herbs and spices. Then their core program gets uploaded into it that gives it purpose*. Legion saw the reaper mind and explains it like this "one ship, many minds, one will." Nazara told you this on Virmire. "We are each a nation, independent, free of all weakness." Legion explains that this means that the reapers have achieved unity.

They are fully aware of what they do, and they do it with purpose. That one will is the harvest. They are not innocent.

So it takes 6 million humans to make a capital reaper, and say they make a few more destroyers out of the rest of the species. What happens to the rest of the people? They die. They all die. All of your friends, your family, everyone you love, they all die. That's what happens. Across the galaxy it ends up to be billions of people who die at the hands of the reapers.

You are being delusional about the reapers.


* I cannot think of any other way the thing gets activated other than . It is controlled by Starbrat. Starbrat controls the reapers. They are its solution.

[Bill Casey]

PirateMouse wrote...

Meanwhile, who asked you to wipe out an entire sapient species when there were viable alternatives? Why can't people simply just live their own lives and build their own futures without being wiped out by a genocidal Shepard?

Because the writers didn't want an ending like that...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 12 avril 2013 - 07:33 .

[Asnine112]

PirateMouse wrote...

Asnine112 wrote...

You're the one with ad hominem attacks, accusing everyone of choose destroy of being genocidal bastards.

I never called them genocidal bastards.  I did, however, call their act what it is.

I'm done feeding your troll topic

Good.  Go troll elsewhere, then.

1) Just like everyone who picks control is a tyrannical despot who wants to make everyone conform to their view of how things should be (oh how well this fits)?

2) Like the troll I called you out on being, you ignored the actual point I made. You can head-canon in your head all you want, in the end what you're doing is no different than what people who pick synthesis or destroy are doing (i.e. destroy only killing EDI, synthesis....whatever the hell you want to make it)

Thanks for proving my point.

Modifié par Asnine112, 12 avril 2013 - 07:38 .

[PirateMouse]

fr33stylez wrote...

Sorry, you can't headcanon that Shepalyst walks away in Control - the epilogue clearly shows his plans for the galaxy. He's not going anywhere, just a new Catalyst doing what it thinks is best for organics. since you, know they can't take care of themselves and are not capable of self-determination.

"To give the many hope for a future; to ensure that all have a voice in their future."

"To right the wrongs of the past; to provide a voice to those too weak to speak for themselves."

"I will rebuild what the many have lost; I will create a future with limitless possibilities; I will protect, and sustain; I will act as guardian for the many."

"I will protect, defend; I will destroy those who threaten the future of the many."

Okay, there are some quotes -- taken from both Renegade and Paragon Shepards -- that support what I suggested, as none of them require constant forceful involvement (apart from in the case of new galaxy-cracking threats) or acting as a dictator (unless you believe everyone who advocates for or protects others is a dictator).

Now, show me the part where AI Shepard reveals that he/she intends to remove self-determination and freedom?

Modifié par PirateMouse, 12 avril 2013 - 07:40 .

[AlanC9]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...
They are fully aware of what they do, and they do it with purpose. That one will is the harvest. They are not innocent.

A creature that's programmed by it's creators is guilty of.... what? Being created?

I guess in a Calvinist sensed it kind of works; sinners are guilty of the sins that God predestined them to commit, right?

[Bill Casey]

PirateMouse wrote...

"To give the many hope for a future; to ensure that all have a voice in their future." "To right the wrongs of the past; to provide a voice to those too weak to speak for themselves."

"I will rebuild what the many have lost; I will create a future with limitless possibilities; I will protect, and sustain; I will act as guardian for the many."

"I will protect, defend; I will destroy those who threaten the future of the many."

Okay, there are some quotes -- taken from both Renegade and Paragon Shepards -- that support what I suggested, as none of them require constant forceful involvement (apart from in the case of new galaxy-cracking threats).

Yes they do...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 12 avril 2013 - 07:41 .

[Argolas]

PirateMouse wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

Sorry, you can't headcanon that Shepalyst walks away in Control - the epilogue clearly shows his plans for the galaxy. He's not going anywhere, just a new Catalyst doing what it thinks is best for organics. since you, know they can't take care of themselves and are not capable of self-determination.

"To give the many hope for a future; to ensure that all have a voice in their future." "To right the wrongs of the past; to provide a voice to those too weak to speak for themselves."

"I will rebuild what the many have lost; I will create a future with limitless possibilities; I will protect, and sustain; I will act as guardian for the many."

"I will protect, defend; I will destroy those who threaten the future of the many."

Okay, there are some quotes -- taken from both Renegade and Paragon Shepards -- that support what I suggested, as none of them require constant forceful involvement (apart from in the case of new galaxy-cracking threats).

Now, show me the part where AI Shepard reveals that he/she intends to remove self-determination and freedom?

There it begins... Who are the many? Shep A.I. decides. Who threatens them? Shep A.I. decides.

The many may as well be the Reapers in that speech.

[fr33stylez]

PirateMouse wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

Sorry, you can't headcanon that Shepalyst walks away in Control - the epilogue clearly shows his plans for the galaxy. He's not going anywhere, just a new Catalyst doing what it thinks is best for organics. since you, know they can't take care of themselves and are not capable of self-determination.

"To give the many hope for a future; to ensure that all have a voice in their future." "To right the wrongs of the past; to provide a voice to those too weak to speak for themselves."

"I will rebuild what the many have lost; I will create a future with limitless possibilities; I will protect, and sustain; I will act as guardian for the many."

"I will protect, defend; I will destroy those who threaten the future of the many."

Okay, there are some quotes that support what I suggested, as none of them require constant forceful involvement (apart from in the case of new galaxy-cracking threats).

Now, show me the part where AI Shepard reveals that he/she intends to remove self-determination and freedom?

Again, you're adding qualifiers to soften your psoition.

"Constant forceful involvement" - what does this mean? So are you going to be involved in meddling in galactic affairs or not?

What do you consider 'galaxy-cracking threats'? Will you intervene in a krogan-turian war? Which side will you pick?

No matter how you rationalize it, you're interfering in the self-determination of the galaxy - and your quotes support that, no matter how nice they sound as a Paragon. Then of couse, we have these gems from control:

" I will creature a future with limitless possibilities. "
"I will lead an army that no one will dare oppose"

That sounds nice and non-interfering. Right.

Modifié par fr33stylez, 12 avril 2013 - 07:43 .

[PirateMouse]

Argolas wrote...

There it begins... Who are the many? Shep A.I. decides. Who threatens them? Shep A.I. decides.

The many may as well be the Reapers in that speech.

Really? Of all the parts to try to nitpick, you selected that?

And who decided when you picked Destroy in the first place?

Sure, you can speculate all you like that the Reapers are the "many," but that's just your made-up headcanon.  By contrast, it's actual canon that you committed genocide to kill the Reapers.  You chose to commit genocide.  Who decided? You decided.