208 réponses à ce sujet

[mr.brightside4u]

Why do I have to kill my friends if I want to kill the Reapers, but not if I want to control them or do synthesis. Wouldn't the question of what ending is the right one and the moral dilemma be the same even if the geth and EDI would survive. I'd say everybody who picked Control or Synthesis would have picked Control or Synthesis even if EDI and the geth would have survived Destroy, so why do only "Destroyers" have to kill their friends, or at least their allies.

Edit: OK, I may have worded it wrong... there are "catches" in the other endings as well. But we first of all don't know if Shepard survives Destroy, so we're just gonna assume he dies in every ending. Secondly, I was just referring to what the Catalyst told Shepard: Control: Shepard gets control over the Reapers...
                                               Synthesis: Organic and Synthetic strenghts united (with the Reapers still around) ..
                                               Destroy: The Reapers die, BUT you have to kill your friends...
Of course you can think further ahead and create your own problems with Control and Synthesis as well. I, for example, think Control is wrong, since no human mind can have so much power without abusing it in some way, and Synthesis is wrong, since if organics and synthetics are one there's no evolving and everything will stand still, which will doom all live. But that's just what I think of. As far as the Catalyst tells me, they will live happily ever after in either ending. So if I don't come up with my own "catches" for Control and Synthesis, Destroy is the only option which has a "catch", since I am told I have to kill my friends....

Modifié par mr.brightside4u, 25 avril 2013 - 03:42 .

[CDR David Shepard]

Right...because there is no "catch" to Control, Synthesis, and Refuse...

[ElSuperGecko]

It's not. Quite the opposite in fact.

[SpamBot2000]

Because they wanted 3 equal factions to fight each other, in order to make ME3 impossible to follow. And they decided they needed to hold EDI & the Geth at gunpoint to make anyone pick one of the other options. These options being kinda nutty and all.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 24 avril 2013 - 03:55 .

[kalasaurus]

If you let the Geth die over Rannoch, the only catch is EDI dies.

[Killdren88]

Because they want to punish you for not being a Martyr. Total BS in my opinion.

[robertthebard]

Because it's not, but choosers of the other two will deny any possible negatives because head canon. Destroy and Refuse get their consequences out of the gate, the other two are "but that's not what the slide show says".

[Mangalores]

They were probably worried that Destroy would be too popular because since it is what Shepard came for to the Crucible and the player just limped through hallways and saw Anderson die for, you need to throw a monkey wrench in there so they won't just do it without listening to the Catalyst's other endings.

Would have been nice to cut the chatter short.
Starchild: "But all synthetics will die!"
Shep: "That's a pity..."
Starchild: "There are other solutions!"
Shep: "Don't care, punch it!"
Starchild: "But you don't have to sacrifice..."
Shep: "Don't care, they all signed up on you getting toasted! Punch it!"
Starchild: "But you don't have to sacrifice..."
Shep: "Is this thing broken? I want something getting blown up! Now!"
*Harbinger voice*
Starchild: "So be it, the cycle will continue!"
Shep: "Wait, what? I knew you were lying you cheeky little bastard!"

[Enhanced]

mr.brightside4u wrote...

Why do I have to kill my friends if I want to kill the Reapers, but not if I want to control them or do synthesis. Wouldn't the question of what ending is the right one and the moral dilemma be the same even if the geth and EDI would survive. I'd say everybody who picked Control or Synthesis would have picked Control or Synthesis even if EDI and the geth would have survived Destroy, so why do only "Destroyers" have to kill their friends, or at least their allies.

In game reason is because the Crucible isn't completely intact, it's slightly damaged during transport. 

Modifié par Enhanced, 24 avril 2013 - 04:02 .

[Xilizhra]

The negative is that Shepard dies.

[Phatose]

Destroy is also the other ending in which Shepard has any chance of ever seeing his friends and LI ever again.

Why should I have to sacrifice Shepards future if I pick Control or Synthesis?

Destroyers are received the exact same treatment as everybody else. Bittersweet.

[Bizinha]

For me, control creates a new one menace and synthesis destroys organic life...

[Cainhurst Crow]

Control, you are separated from your friends forever, in order to ensure the reapers do not stray from their better path.

Synthesis, you are atomized so that you can help to better the galaxy.

Refuse, the entire cycle and everyone in it dies so that the next cycle can have a change of victory.

But yeah, I can see how the ending where shepard lives and can be with his firends and loved ones is the one with the biggest catch.

[themikefest]

For me it doesn't matter about the robots since I don't give a flying crap about them.

Destroy--reapers dead--good
Control--reapers alive--not good
Synthesis--reapers alive--not good
Refuse--reapers continue cycle(that sucks)--next cycle reapers gone

[NeroonWilliams]

The point of the choices as they are presented is that finally you HAVE to make a difficult choice that no amount of reputation or persuasion of any kind will allow you to come out without sacrificing something. All of the choices (with the possible exception of Refuse) is a resolution of the conflict with the Reapers. The question becomes what are you prepared to sacrifice in order to get that resolution?

It's not like you haven't had NPCs telling you all throughout the Trilogy that sometimes the right choice isn't the easy one. Hell, unless you refused to have anything to do with James, SHEPARD tells him the exact same thing.

So yes, Destroy has something of a downside to it. The question you must answer as Shepard is: is the downside of that resolution worse than the downside of any of the others?

[thehomeworld]

Destroy just has the most immediate and noticeable catch you destroy the geth and EDI who both volunteered for that anyway and you guarantee you save the galaxy from the reapers.

Synthesis has a catch and is less obvious to those who want to believe in rainbows and forced utopianisum that the once genocidal reapers when they combine the rest of the galaxy with their tech won't have a new galaxy of brainwashed masses to use as soldiers to conquer the next galaxy.

Control has a catch as well human brain goes insane controlling the reapers see David he didn't last long either controlling the AI now times that by trillion and it isn't going to last the year with Shep in his own monologe he's already changing. he will become the new Harbi and use the geth again to retake the galaxy.

Control and synthesis are for the gullible and naive who think my enemy is my misunderstood friend. Destroy's catch is worth the price and the futures it secures.

Modifié par thehomeworld, 24 avril 2013 - 05:38 .

[Samtheman63]

thehomeworld wrote...

Destroy just has the most immediate and noticeable catch you destroy the geth and EDI who both volunteered for that anyway and you guarantee you save the galaxy from the reapers.

Synthesis has a catch and is less obvious to those who want to believe in rainbows and forced utopianisum that the once genocidal reapers when they combine the rest of the galaxy with their tech won't have a new galaxy of brainwashed masses to use as soldiers to conquer the next galaxy.

Control has a catch as well human brain goes insane controlling the reapers see David he didn't last long either controlling the AI now times that by trillion and it isn't going to last the year with Shep in his own monologe he's already changing. he will become the new Harbi and use the geth again to retake the galaxy.

Control and synthesis are for the gullible and naive who think my enemy is my misunderstood friend. Destroy's catch is worth the price and the futures it secures.

well said

[Steelcan]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

GlassElephant wrote...

If you let the Geth die over Rannoch, the only catch is EDI dies.

And if you also don't care for EDI, there's no catch at all!

. QFT

[Suron]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

GlassElephant wrote...

If you let the Geth die over Rannoch, the only catch is EDI dies.

And if you also don't care for EDI, there's no catch at all!

or you'd realize that it's only a debacle because we're outside the situation and it's not real.

if it was real..even the Geth and EDI would tell you sacrificing that many other species to Genocide is not worth saving them..especially since you're NOT saving them once the Reaper's are done on Earth

[JasonShepard]

mr.brightside4u wrote...

I'd say everybody who picked Control or Synthesis would have picked Control or Synthesis even if EDI and the geth would have survived Destroy.

I wouldn't. If Destroy left the Geth untouched, I'd pick it in a heartbeat.
Control also loses it's self-sacrifice theme if Destroy only wipes out the Reapers, which is my favourite aspect of Control.

As for why Destroy targets all synthetics, ask the original Crucible-Designers. If they were anything like the Protheans, or the Quarians (until very recently) or, well, most people in the Mass Effect galaxy before the Geth were shown to be friendly... Then I'm really not surprised that they designed it to wipe out all synthetics.

Modifié par JasonShepard, 24 avril 2013 - 06:16 .

[tonofluck21]

thehomeworld wrote...

Control and synthesis are for the gullible and naive who think my enemy is my misunderstood friend. Destroy's catch is worth the price and the futures it secures.

I don't think the reapers are my friends, I think they are tools. I just wanted robot slaves.

[Auld Wulf]

GlassElephant wrote...

If you let the Geth die over Rannoch, the only catch is EDI dies.

Which is completely incorrect since the Alliance are now creating new life in the form of the AIUs.

[Auld Wulf]

Steelcan wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

GlassElephant wrote...

If you let the Geth die over Rannoch, the only catch is EDI dies.

And if you also don't care for EDI, there's no catch at all!

. QFT

Why do you start sentences with the punctuation that you should end them with? I mean no offence, I'm genuinely curious, since I see you do that all the time. Are you posting form a mobile device, is that the reason?

Sorry, curiosity aside...

I don't think that's cool, personally. That means that you'd happily have your finger on the button to commit murder/genocide of anyone you didn't like. All life has value, even the life you dislike. These are the values I uphold as an ethically superior person. Even if I didn't like someone, I wouldn't want to see them die.

Even the Reapers were just slaves to the Catalyst, so they don't deserve to die, either.

But again, ethically superior. I won't kill someone (or an entire species) based upon my likes or dislikes.

[Mangalores]

Auld Wulf wrote...

...

But again, ethically superior. I won't kill someone (or an entire species) based upon my likes or dislikes.

None kills them based on likes or dislikes. The Reapers are killed because they are dangerous weapons of mass destruction that can and should probably never be controlled, EDI and the Geth are simply tragic colletarl damage, but so are millions of others who could still live had the Reapers/Catalyst never started the cycle.

You are not ethical superior because you take an arrogant stance btw. Not having started the war the Allies certainly did not have to feel guilty to end the war against the Axis by winning and not offering a conditional peace (though they actually did that with Japan)

Modifié par Mangalores, 24 avril 2013 - 07:32 .