208 réponses à ce sujet

[MegaSovereign]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

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.

That's true. However many critics would argue that Control is out of place because of all the negative foreshadowing. Adding one more ending that is out of place wouldn't really improve the narrative quality of the ending.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Auld Wulf wrote...

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.

So let me guess you used harsh language against the reapers the entire game?

[robertthebard]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

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.

So let me guess you used harsh language against the reapers the entire game?

I know I did, every time I saw one, I was cussing.  When I make myself get to the beam and do the actual ending, I shoot at every Reaper I can on the way to shoot the tube.  Note that shooting them with a handgun might as well be using harsh language against them.

[SyK18]

 Did you just imply that there is no catch to Sythesis?! Really?!

[S.A.K]

Er, what catch? Loosing EDI? One person to stop the Reapers is hardly a catch and even she can probably be fixed. As for Geth, they asked for it with Reaper code and I don't give a damn about Geth. So Destroy has the least catch for me.
Getting rid of the Geth was like bonus...

P.s : I saved Geth on Rannoch because more fleets are better and they can improve Quarian lives. Never fully trusted them.

[JamieCOTC]

To make it more video gamey.

[Aaleel]

They had to drop a poison pill in Destroy so gamers would chose something other than destroy. If EDI and the Geth didn't die probably 50-60% of people who chose one of the other three options would have chosen Destroy. I'm probably low balling that number too.

[AxeloftheKey]

Well, Destroy is the only non-compromising option. If you could just press a win button, that would be Destroy without sacrificing anyone. The whole point is that the Reapers can't just be destroyed, even if you want them to.

Control is morally ambiguous, because it involves you doing exactly what the Reapers do to them, only theoretically better because your Shepard *might* be good and not a bad guy. Synthesis is ambiguous because making choices for the whole universe is a little iffy. If Destroy didn't have ambiguity, it would be the boring default choice. Having an end where you were just able to put together a device that destroys the Reapers automatically would be a little too easy.

Instead, Destroy is red and meant to be a simple Renegade choice. If you want to choose to always fight and never accept alternatives, being a hardass like Renegade Shepard is, then you have to be willing to sacrifice other people. It makes that decision Renegade and on par with the other two decisions emotionally.

[PsyrenY]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

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.

[Aaleel]

AxeloftheKey wrote...

Well, Destroy is the only non-compromising option. If you could just press a win button, that would be Destroy without sacrificing anyone. The whole point is that the Reapers can't just be destroyed, even if you want them to.

Control is morally ambiguous, because it involves you doing exactly what the Reapers do to them, only theoretically better because your Shepard *might* be good and not a bad guy. Synthesis is ambiguous because making choices for the whole universe is a little iffy. If Destroy didn't have ambiguity, it would be the boring default choice. Having an end where you were just able to put together a device that destroys the Reapers automatically would be a little too easy.

Instead, Destroy is red and meant to be a simple Renegade choice. If you want to choose to always fight and never accept alternatives, being a hardass like Renegade Shepard is, then you have to be willing to sacrifice other people. It makes that decision Renegade and on par with the other two decisions emotionally.

Honestly I don't see any of the choices being Paragon or Renegade.  Destroying the collector base is a paragon choice, and that connects to the Destory option in ME3, whereas keeping the collector base to harness the power is renegade and connects to the Control option.

So it would go that way if anything, but like I said I don't think the endings have alignments.

Modifié par Aaleel, 25 avril 2013 - 04:03 .

[Arisugawa]

Maybe it's just me, but I'm honestly baffled by the number of players who seem to think Shepard survives the Control ending.

Shepard dies in Control, and the thought patterns of what was Shepard is used to construct a new Catalyst entity. Whatever makes up Shepard isn't uploaded into a Reaper consciousness, it is merely copied. Whatever Shepard was is lost as assuredly as death came in any number of other fashions.

The new entity speaks with Shepard's voice and with the experience of Shepard's memories, but it is not Shepard. To put it another way...if you copy Shepard's thoughts and memories and use it as the basis for an AI, but leave Shepard alive, there are not two Shepards existing simultaneously. There is the real Shepard, and a construct based off of Shepard.

This is a pretty big catch, in my opinion. Shepard is asked to die with the assumption that a construct based off Shepard will then be able to control the Reapers, and that construct will in turn make the same choices Shepard would have. There's no guarantee of this. The construct isn't Shepard, and may end up coming to altogether different conclusions despite sharing similar memories.

Modifié par Arisugawa, 25 avril 2013 - 04:15 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

Arisugawa wrote...

Maybe it's just me, but I'm honestly baffled by the number of players who seem to think Shepard survives the Control ending.

Shepard dies in Control, and the thought patterns of what was Shepard is used to construct a new Catalyst entity. Whatever makes up Shepard isn't uploaded into a Reaper consciousness, it is merely copied. Whatever Shepard was is lost as assuredly as death came in any number of other fashions.

The new entity speaks with Shepard's voice and with the experience of Shepard's memories, but it is not Shepard. To put it another way...if you copy Shepard's thoughts and memories and use it as the basis for an AI, but leave Shepard alive, there are not two Shepards existing simultaneously. There is the real Shepard, and a construct based off of Shepard.

This is a pretty big catch, in my opinion. Shepard is asked to die with the assumption that a construct based off Shepard will then be able to control the Reapers, and that construct will in turn make the same choices Shepard would have. There's no guarantee of this. The construct isn't Shepard, and may end up coming to altogether different conclusions despite sharing similar memories.

Control actually reminds me of quantum physics teleportation.

In order to teleport anywhere, you need to create an exact duplicate of yourself at the point where you wish to go, right down to every hair and every thought and memory. Than the original you is destroyed, so that there are not two different copies of you running around, while the new you now exist in the spot you teleported to, all in the span of a few seconds.

I personally do not see the problem here, since if everything that made my shepard, shepard is still kept in tact, than that pretty much means that my shepard is still alive. Afterall, when a person is burned, they don't stop being the person they were and become "burned guy mcashskin" with an entire new identity. The physical form isn't nearly as important as the thoughts, memories, emotions, and mind.

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 25 avril 2013 - 05:05 .

[robertthebard]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Arisugawa wrote...

Maybe it's just me, but I'm honestly baffled by the number of players who seem to think Shepard survives the Control ending.

Shepard dies in Control, and the thought patterns of what was Shepard is used to construct a new Catalyst entity. Whatever makes up Shepard isn't uploaded into a Reaper consciousness, it is merely copied. Whatever Shepard was is lost as assuredly as death came in any number of other fashions.

The new entity speaks with Shepard's voice and with the experience of Shepard's memories, but it is not Shepard. To put it another way...if you copy Shepard's thoughts and memories and use it as the basis for an AI, but leave Shepard alive, there are not two Shepards existing simultaneously. There is the real Shepard, and a construct based off of Shepard.

This is a pretty big catch, in my opinion. Shepard is asked to die with the assumption that a construct based off Shepard will then be able to control the Reapers, and that construct will in turn make the same choices Shepard would have. There's no guarantee of this. The construct isn't Shepard, and may end up coming to altogether different conclusions despite sharing similar memories.

Control actually reminds me of quantum physics teleportation.

In order to teleport anywhere, you need to create an exact duplicate of yourself at the point where you wish to go, right down to every hair and every thought and memory. Than the original you is destroyed, so that there are not two different copies of you running around, while the new you now exist in the spot you teleported to, all in the span of a few seconds.

I personally do not see the problem here, since if everything that made my shepard, shepard is still kept in tact, than that pretty much means that my shepard is still alive. Afterall, when a person is burned, they don't stop being the person they were and become "burned guy mcashskin" with an entire new identity. The physical form isn't nearly as important as the thoughts, memories, emotions, and mind.

Except that connection is lost:  16:04 on for control ending explanation. 

[PsyrenY]

AI-Shep is indeed a different entity, but it also says that Shepard's thoughts guide it and provide it direction, so it might not matter. Also, we clearly see the Blue Reapers ceasing hostility, repairing the relays and what have you.

I'm not convinced it will last either - hence my preferring Synthesis - but assuming it can/does it would be the ideal ending to me.

In any event, if the AI has all your memories and the clone has your body, there's a chance (however slim) that the two could be one day reunited and Shepard could be reborn.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Because Destroy needed a catch, and they pulled one of their asses. Seriously, why is it that Destroy targets all synthetics, while Control targets only the Reapers, and Synthesis targets every single living being in existence?

Arbitrary BS and bad writing, that's why.

[PsyrenY]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

Because Destroy needed a catch, and they pulled one of their asses. Seriously, why is it that Destroy targets all synthetics, while Control targets only the Reapers, and Synthesis targets every single living being in existence?

Arbitrary BS and bad writing, that's why.

Don't call it arbitrary simply because you lack understanding. 

Destroy - targets Reaper code, which unfortunately the Geth and EDI have.

Control - replaces the Catalyst (who already only controls Reapers) with you. It doesn't target their code, it simply changes "setMaster = Catalyst" to "setMaster = Shepard".

Synthesis - Hits everyone because it does neither of the above - it doesn't target code and doesn't replace the Catalyst with anyone. It hits all sides because it's designed to.

[shodiswe]

Samtheman63 wrote...

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

I dissagree, but that's old news, the games tells us all will be fine in Control and even synthesis. The slides given by the EC are the "Clarifications" of the endings that Bioware promised. If there had been further bad resulting from the choice then they woudl have told us that, just like they did with refuse.
Also you can't compare David, he's not mentaly well to begin with and people with his type of "mental issues" are natualy scared by everythign that's unknown. They have a need of known familiar environm,ents and having people they know around them or they get panicked.

Modifié par shodiswe, 25 avril 2013 - 06:34 .

[Giantdeathrobot]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

Because Destroy needed a catch, and they pulled one of their asses. Seriously, why is it that Destroy targets all synthetics, while Control targets only the Reapers, and Synthesis targets every single living being in existence?

Arbitrary BS and bad writing, that's why.

Don't call it arbitrary simply because you lack understanding. 

Destroy - targets Reaper code, which unfortunately the Geth and EDI have.

Control - replaces the Catalyst (who already only controls Reapers) with you. It doesn't target their code, it simply changes "setMaster = Catalyst" to "setMaster = Shepard".

Synthesis - Hits everyone because it does neither of the above - it doesn't target code and doesn't replace the Catalyst with anyone. It hits all sides because it's designed to.

EDI doesn't have Reaper code, she has modified Reaper hardware. The Geth's code was heavily modified as well, enough that it didn't make them fall under their control a second time. Also, ''code'' is not a thing you can target.

Check the other threads on the subject before claiming I lack understanding. This was covered before.

[AlanC9]

Darth Brotarian wrote...
I personally do not see the problem here, since if everything that made my shepard, shepard is still kept in tact, than that pretty much means that my shepard is still alive. Afterall, when a person is burned, they don't stop being the person they were and become "burned guy mcashskin" with an entire new identity. The physical form isn't nearly as important as the thoughts, memories, emotions, and mind.

I've seen SF stories go both ways on this topic, sometimes in the same book; in Peter Hamilton's  Pandora's Star most human keep cell samples on file and have a memorycell implant that records their thoughts (plus backups if the cell gets nuked. So if you get killed, they grow a clone body, accelerate its development so it's mature in a few months, and then download your memories and personality into the brain. So, your body, your mind... is it really you, or a copy? Different characters have different opinions on whether you're dead or not if there's a new you running around.

OTOH, does the Sheplyst think it's Shepard?

[PsyrenY]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

EDI doesn't have Reaper code, she has modified Reaper hardware.

Incorrect - her entire cyberwarfare suite is Reaper code. She says so herself.
(Not to mention the IFF.)

Giantdeathrobot wrote...
The Geth's code was heavily modified as well, enough that it didn't make them fall under their control a second time.

They retained control, but it was still - per Legion - "the old machine code."
The lack of control was because that particular variant was keyed to the Rannoch reaper, who Shepard destroyed.

Giantdeathrobot wrote...
Also, ''code'' is not a thing you can target.

It has to be, otherwise Destroy would have wiped out everyone with any cybernetics or synthetic parts e.g. the whole Quarian race. How do you know what the Crucible targets, then?

Giantdeathrobot wrote...
Check the other threads on the subject before claiming I lack understanding. This was covered before.

Clearly these threads you're referring to were simply wrong/lacking imagination.

[George Costanza]

Because then there's no reason to pick Control or Synthesis. That's why they spend so much time humanising the Geth and shoving EDI's Pinnochio routine at you. So when it comes to the crunch it's more difficult to pick Destroy.

Modifié par George Costanza, 25 avril 2013 - 08:23 .

[CaIIisto]

George Costanza wrote...

Because then there's no reason to pick Control or Synthesis. That's why they spend so much time humanising the Geth and shoving EDI's Pinnochio routine at you. So when it comes to the crunch it's more difficult to pick Destroy.

Through your efforts in the game you give EDI and the Geth free will. Both make the determination that they want to fight the Reapers for the greater good, even if it means them dying. They place their trust and confidence in Shepard to make the right decision, at the right time, for the good of all. Shepard does that, she/he picks destroy and ends the the Reapers. EDI and the Geth die, which was always a possibility, and an outcome that both were prepared to chance and accept. 

It's not a catch for me. EDI and the Geth died to ensure that the Reapers were stopped, for good. They are. 

[CSunkyst]

Killdren88 wrote...

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

[ThinkSharp]

George Costanza wrote...

Because then there's no reason to pick Control or Synthesis. That's why they spend so much time humanising the Geth and shoving EDI's Pinnochio routine at you. So when it comes to the crunch it's more difficult to pick Destroy.

You really believe that the main reason EDI and the Geth are humanized is so that it's harder to choose Destroy?

I know many people feel betrayed by the endings, but it's not as if BW designed every plot point in the game around the last 5 minutes in order to promote some agenda.

Both EDI and Legion are portrayed in a positive and "more human" light from the moment they are introduced in ME2. Both act as counterweights to prejudice: EDI against evil AIs, Legion against evil Geth. That they continue to do so with more emphasis in ME3 should not be a surprise. Of course the point is to make the choices involving them harder. But it's no different than having to face Wrex when considering the Genophage cure. It's the same thing.

Showing EDI and the Geth to be more complex adds something to the story overall. (And I'd argue that the Geth aren't exactly shown to be innocent. Even as you see they are "innocent" in the Morning War, they continue to side with the Reapers and try to kill organics.)There's nothing wrong with depth. Besides, there are plenty of shallow mooks to mow down, cue Cereberus and Reaper troops.

But anyway,  does it mean that you can't or shouldn't destroy the Geth or the Reapers for the sake of the greater galaxy? No, it just means that there are ramifications. This is realistic. (Not talking about science here; I'm talking about war and life.) Life is not cut and dry, black and white. Not facing that is naive.

(I apologize if I read too much into your statement, GC.)

Modifié par ThinkSharp, 25 avril 2013 - 09:54 .

[George Costanza]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

Because Destroy needed a catch, and they pulled one of their asses. Seriously, why is it that Destroy targets all synthetics, while Control targets only the Reapers, and Synthesis targets every single living being in existence?

Arbitrary BS and bad writing, that's why.

Don't call it arbitrary simply because you lack understanding. 

Destroy - targets Reaper code, which unfortunately the Geth and EDI have.

Control - replaces the Catalyst (who already only controls Reapers) with you. It doesn't target their code, it simply changes "setMaster = Catalyst" to "setMaster = Shepard".

Synthesis - Hits everyone because it does neither of the above - it doesn't target code and doesn't replace the Catalyst with anyone. It hits all sides because it's designed to.

It's not a lack of understanding. There is no understanding. The Crucible doesn't make any sense on practically any level you look at it.

Modifié par George Costanza, 25 avril 2013 - 11:25 .