208 réponses à ce sujet

[johnj1979]

robertthebard wrote...

johnj1979 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

johnj1979 wrote...

Reapers DESTROY life in the galaxy
Reapers CONTROL husks
Reapers change races into Husk which is SYNTHESIS

so doesn't the leave "Refuse" as the ONLY non-Reaper ending

Killing Reapers stops them from killing all space faring life in the galaxy, forever.
Control stops them from killing all space faring life in the galaxy until ShepAI gets bored.
Can't say I disagree over much about Synthesis.

But to DESTROY Reapers you have destroy the GETH and EDI. So why let the Geth and EDI evlove into a lifeform. Destroy life to save life is OK then?

I guess we're left with "How do you figure that Refuse isn't a Reaper ending?" since if you choose it, the Reapers win, and you don't get a Legend Save, so you can't reuse that Shepard for a future NG+ save game.  You are perfectly willing to swallow the Harbinger DeM, but balk at the Kid?  *Points to sig*

Let life decide it's own fate or commit genocide to save life?

[johnj1979]

robertthebard wrote...

johnj1979 wrote...

The problem is that Destroying ALL Synthetic life to save life that just doesn't sit well with me. It a bit much for ONE person to decide that. Shepard is not the HERO, Shepard is a WAR CRIMINAL.

So your "solution" is to be an accessory after the fact to genocide on a scale that makes Destroy look like you ran over a squirrel on the way to the grocery store?  Like I said, if you're going to refuse, then it should be Ultimate Refusal, because then, no matter what, you're already dead, and don't have to listen to the Kid.

Genocide is not victory
Let life choose it's own fate

[Suron]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

CDR David Shepard wrote...

johnj1979 wrote...

If you look at it "Refuse" ending is only ending that works, ALL the other endings are just shepard doing the Reapers job for them.

...someone didn't pay attention.

Looks like johnj1979 did, though.

so the Reaper's were only going to destroy the Geth and EDI? wow..weird they were killing everyone on Earth or turning them into goop/husks.

looks like you need to pay better attention.

Destroy "works" but the downside is the Geth and EDI are terminated...instead of..y'know...EVERYONE.

how's that doing the Reaper's job? oh right..pool of stupid.  gotcha

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Wayning_Star wrote...

running over a squirrel on the way to work, sort of fits the basis of chaos the cat was carrying on about..

HEY! 

I have a story about squirrels. 

I'm in the Army, right? One time we're out camping in the sticks. I draw fireguard and am out making sure the camp is secure. 

I hear a strange whimpering noise and investigate. I find a little baby squirrel that happened to fall out of a tree, and the mother squirrel (I'm guessing it was the mother)  was looking for it. I pick up the squirrel and put it somewhere on the tree it fell out of. 

The next morning, the squirrel is still there. After a long day of STX in the woods, we get back to camp. Coincidentally, the baby squirrel is there with it's mother. On my little plot.

Pissing away on my sleep system.

I swear I aim for those ****ers every time I see them now when I'm driving.

[robertthebard]

johnj1979 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

johnj1979 wrote...

The problem is that Destroying ALL Synthetic life to save life that just doesn't sit well with me. It a bit much for ONE person to decide that. Shepard is not the HERO, Shepard is a WAR CRIMINAL.

So your "solution" is to be an accessory after the fact to genocide on a scale that makes Destroy look like you ran over a squirrel on the way to the grocery store?  Like I said, if you're going to refuse, then it should be Ultimate Refusal, because then, no matter what, you're already dead, and don't have to listen to the Kid.

Genocide is not victory
Let life choose it's own fate

You didn't let life choose it's own fate, you let the Reapers choose it.  By refusing to act when it was within your power to do so, you are every bit as guilty of genocide as the Reapers are.  You are in a lose/lose scenario, no matter what you do, because you were too proud to accept defeat at Harbinger on the way to the beam.  You don't get a Legend Save for Refuse, so it's the same as quitting the game when Harbinger nukes you, so why allow yourself to continue from there, if you're going to do nothing?  I have died there 16 times, and it's a very satisfying end to Shepard's journey, dying trying to stop the Reapers, and I don't have to deal with the kid.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

johnj1979 wrote...
Genocide is not victory
Let life choose it's own fate

The Geth and EDI did choose their own fate.

They chose to fight back against the Reapers, knowing full well they may be completely annhilated.

They chose to fight for all life, no matter the cost. Everyone who was involved with the Crucible (including the Geth and EDI) believe that whatever it does has to be better than the Reapers.

So they die. If that's my sacrifice, I make it with no regrets.

[o Ventus]

johnj1979 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

johnj1979 wrote...

The problem is that Destroying ALL Synthetic life to save life that just doesn't sit well with me. It a bit much for ONE person to decide that. Shepard is not the HERO, Shepard is a WAR CRIMINAL.

So your "solution" is to be an accessory after the fact to genocide on a scale that makes Destroy look like you ran over a squirrel on the way to the grocery store?  Like I said, if you're going to refuse, then it should be Ultimate Refusal, because then, no matter what, you're already dead, and don't have to listen to the Kid.

Genocide is not victory
Let life choose it's own fate

Refuse is not letting "life" choose its fate.

Refuse is Shepard rejecting victory because of his or her moral standing, completely disregarding his or her entire motivation for every action he or she takes throughout the game. It is quite literally the dumbest thing Shepard can possibly do.

[CDR David Shepard]

The Reapers "job"...as they believe it to be...is to wipe out all the advanced civilizations every 50,000 years to prevent a hypothetical organic vs synthetic war that they believe to be inevitable.

By choosing Destroy...you completely destroy the Reapers...meaning that they can no longer do their "job" every 50,000 years.

The immediate side effect of destroying all synthetic life along with the Reapers would seem to prevent a hypothetical organic vs synthetic war, that the reapers believe to be inevitable, for the present...but it does not stop the potential for this to happen in the future.

The Catalyst states this...and it's proven by the fact that technology still exists after choosing destroy. So while the current synthetic life (EDI and the Geth) die...the technology that can create synthetic life, right after the destroy ending, still exists.

That is not doing the Reapers job for them. That's stopping the Reapers from ever doing their "job" again.

Modifié par CDR David Shepard, 24 avril 2013 - 09:45 .

[Mangalores]

CDR David Shepard wrote...

The Reapers "job"...as they believe it to be...is to wipe out all the advanced civilizations every 50,000 years to prevent a hypothetical organic vs synthetic war that they believe to be inevitable.

By choosing Destroy...you completely destroy the Reapers...meaning that they can no longer do their "job" every 50,000 years.

Which is good. I thought only Bray gets the crap details...

[Sir George Parr]

GlassElephant wrote...

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

Something that never bugged me. It was a sacrifice worth making.

[Cainhurst Crow]

robertthebard wrote...

CDR David Shepard wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

CDR David Shepard wrote...

johnj1979 wrote...

If you look at it "Refuse" ending is only ending that works, ALL the other endings are just shepard doing the Reapers job for them.

...someone didn't pay attention.

Looks like johnj1979 did, though.

I fail to see how destroy is doing the reapers job for them.

I guess I missed the part where it was their job to destroy themselves.

It's a pretty common argument:  The Reapers are really not genocidal robots, but suicidal robots, so killing them is the same as suicide by cop, or some such nonsense.

WHO THE **** CARES IF IT'S DOING WHAT THEY WANTED!?

Say you had a ****ing serial killer who just murdered your best friend, and he wanted you to kill him or turn him into the cops. Would you just let him go to kill more people because what he wants is to be killed or arrested? I hope ****ing not.

If you honestly think that letting more people suffer, just because you want to act like a juvinile ****** and stop enemies "on your own terms", than you seriously need to sit down, punch yourself in the face, and think about the psychological problems you have where you think this is a good thing to do.

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 24 avril 2013 - 10:04 .

[SpamBot2000]

That's enough juvenile pricking, thanks. What some people are obviously neglecting to take into account is that for us to view refusal to carry out King Reaper's orders as refusing to act at all requires us to metagame, using the knowledge we have of what will happen if we choose that option.

My Shepard would certainly refuse to follow the orders of the Reapers. That being said, he would be ****ing **** up in Space Ghost's room, looking for the Off switch. Possibly even shoot some tubes. But not just meekly sitting there.

BioWare are responsible for the paralysis that comes over Shep when refusing to play "Reaper Boss Says". And you only know that happens because you know the game.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 24 avril 2013 - 10:22 .

[cerberus1701]

It's a forced catch.

Put in there for no real reason other than to keep Destroy from being the universal ending instead of the majority ending that it is.

[robertthebard]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

That's enough juvenile pricking, thanks. What some people are obviously neglecting to take into account is that for us to view refusal to carry out King Reaper's orders as refusing to act at all requires us to metagame, using the knowledge we have of what will happen if we choose that option.

My Shepard would certainly refuse to follow the orders of the Reapers. That being said, he would be ****ing **** up in Space Ghost's room, looking for the Off switch. Possibly even shoot some tubes. But not just meekly sitting there.

BioWare are responsible for the paralysis that comes over Shep when refusing to play "Reaper Boss Says". And you only know that happens because you know the game.

Actually, the first time I was there, I knew Refusing would be bad.  I knew it because the entire galaxy map was controlled by the Reapers.  It requires no metagame knowledge at all to extrapolate the result of refusing at that point.  Shooting the kid, of course, only confirms what I already knew.

[Cainhurst Crow]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

That's enough juvenile pricking, thanks. What some people are obviously neglecting to take into account is that for us to view refusal to carry out King Reaper's orders as refusing to act at all requires us to metagame, using the knowledge we have of what will happen if we choose that option.

My Shepard would certainly refuse to follow the orders of the Reapers. That being said, he would be ****ing **** up in Space Ghost's room, looking for the Off switch. Possibly even shoot some tubes. But not just meekly sitting there.

BioWare are responsible for the paralysis that comes over Shep when refusing to play "Reaper Boss Says". And you only know that happens because you know the game.

So your shepard would throw a temper tantrum, shoot up the now deactivated citadel room, assumingly find nothing that stops the reapers based on liaras message and the stargazer scene, and than....something or other that still results in everyone being slaughtered wondering what went wrong, and why the crucible didn't work.

I'm not bashing it of course, refuse I think is a poetic ending in which we essentially become the next protheans and leave aids to help the next cycle fight and win against the reapers. It's a pretty good ending, imo.

But the fact remains that many peoples reasons for picking refuse strike me as utterly moronic and immature. Essentially falling for a bugs bunny and daffy duck "Duck season, Rabbit season" skit of going against what your rival says in the heat of the moment, even if by doing so you tell elmur fudd to shoot you in the face.

[SpamBot2000]

robertthebard wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

That's enough juvenile pricking, thanks. What some people are obviously neglecting to take into account is that for us to view refusal to carry out King Reaper's orders as refusing to act at all requires us to metagame, using the knowledge we have of what will happen if we choose that option.

My Shepard would certainly refuse to follow the orders of the Reapers. That being said, he would be ****ing **** up in Space Ghost's room, looking for the Off switch. Possibly even shoot some tubes. But not just meekly sitting there.

BioWare are responsible for the paralysis that comes over Shep when refusing to play "Reaper Boss Says". And you only know that happens because you know the game.

Actually, the first time I was there, I knew Refusing would be bad.  I knew it because the entire galaxy map was controlled by the Reapers.  It requires no metagame knowledge at all to extrapolate the result of refusing at that point.  Shooting the kid, of course, only confirms what I already knew.

I don't really see how that translates into believing there would be any more benefits to doing what the enemy leader, under no duress, is telling you to do.

[Kunari801]

Mangalores wrote...

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!"

LOL... "curse your inevitable but sudden betrayal"

[SpamBot2000]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

So your shepard would throw a temper tantrum, shoot up the now deactivated citadel room, assumingly find nothing that stops the reapers based on liaras message and the stargazer scene, and than....something or other that still results in everyone being slaughtered wondering what went wrong, and why the crucible didn't work.

Indeed. You assume based on subsequent events.

[ThinkSharp]

The "catch" for the other two is the risk of not knowing what the consequences are going to be. At least that's how I take it. Besides, there had to be some balance. If there was not consequence for Destroy, the others would never be considered.

If you think Destroy is the right way to go, then you may not mind that. But the aim was that "no choice is clearly better than all the rest". Considering the debates around here, seems that was achieved for better or for worse.

[Cainhurst Crow]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

So your shepard would throw a temper tantrum, shoot up the now deactivated citadel room, assumingly find nothing that stops the reapers based on liaras message and the stargazer scene, and than....something or other that still results in everyone being slaughtered wondering what went wrong, and why the crucible didn't work.

Indeed. You assume based on subsequent events.

So what exactly is your point? Those scenes happened, they are what occurs in the ending when you pick it. You can say that how the races won is up to you to decide, but the fact remains that you must base the consequences of the option you picked on the consequences that are clearly shown to you.

I know it may be a bit to ask, but may you please elaborate a bit on what you mean to prove by discounting events from cutscenes in your ending choice. Because what it sounds like is you denying that what has literally been shown right in front of your face actually happened.

[SpamBot2000]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

So your shepard would throw a temper tantrum, shoot up the now deactivated citadel room, assumingly find nothing that stops the reapers based on liaras message and the stargazer scene, and than....something or other that still results in everyone being slaughtered wondering what went wrong, and why the crucible didn't work.

Indeed. You assume based on subsequent events.

So what exactly is your point? Those scenes happened, they are what occurs in the ending when you pick it. You can say that how the races won is up to you to decide, but the fact remains that you must base the consequences of the option you picked on the consequences that are clearly shown to you.

I know it may be a bit to ask, but may you please elaborate a bit on what you mean to prove by discounting events from cutscenes in your ending choice. Because what it sounds like is you denying that what has literally been shown right in front of your face actually happened.

This is not complicated. The player knows what happens. Shepard doesn't. If you play the role of Shepard, "role play" that is, you can't take into account the fact that you know refusing the Catalyst means "Game Over, everyone died hahahahhaaa!" And you probably shouldn't be calling someone a "juvenile ******" for role playing a role playing game. 

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 24 avril 2013 - 10:57 .

[MegaSovereign]

@SpamBot.

Refusal's outcome isn't out of nowhere...You've been told by a variety of characters that conventional victory wouldn't work, and even if there was a slim chance of it, you've already committed all your resources to the Crucible....There is no plan B.

Shepard finding an alternative non-Conventional victory at the last second would have been pretty contrived, and the game's plot is already full of contrivances.

[SpamBot2000]

MegaSovereign wrote...

@SpamBot.

Refusal's outcome isn't out of nowhere...You've been told by a variety of characters that conventional victory wouldn't work, and even if there was a slim chance of it, you've already committed all your resources to the Crucible....There is no plan B.

Shepard finding an alternative non-Conventional victory at the last second would have been pretty contrived, and the game's plot is already full of contrivances.

No more contrived than the green magic beam. And as for stuff that you've been told, you've been told something about controlling the Reapers as well, I believe.

[fizzypop]

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!

ugh I seriously dislike EDI. I love legion, but EDI is so ****ing annoying.

[Reorte]

Refuse is standing there with a lifebelt in your hands, watching someone flailing around in the water whilst you do nothing. That makes you as responsible for his death when he drowns as if you'd pushed him in in my eyes.