264 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Organic obsolescence.

Speculation at best

bleetman wrote...

"In the darkest hour, there is always a way out." -Urdnot Bakara.

Sacrificing others when you don't have to is murder.

And Reapers dominating the galaxy or forced uplifting of the entire galaxy against their will is any better?  Is submission really preferable to extinction?

ME3's endings proved Bakara's claim untrue, as there is no way out. 

For the record (again)  I hate all the endings.  None of them are worth persuing to me.  Not even Destroy.

[SpamBot2000]

I for one feel the OP is correct.

[Wayning_Star]

iakus wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

Organic obsolescence.

Speculation at best

bleetman wrote...

"In the darkest hour, there is always a way out." -Urdnot Bakara.

Sacrificing others when you don't have to is murder.

And Reapers dominating the galaxy or forced uplifting of the entire galaxy against their will is any better?  Is submission really preferable to extinction?

ME3's endings proved Bakara's claim untrue, as there is no way out. 

For the record (again)  I hate all the endings.  None of them are worth persuing to me.  Not even Destroy.

I took synthesis as the ultimate in tool making. Something the apex Leviathan seems to require. They even warn Shepard they don't care one hoot about what Shep thinks, as long as being useful to them in destruction of the reaperships. Even then, they weren't all that thrilled about it. Was even willing to permit the catalyst it's programming perimeters were within functional specifications. Telling bit of info.

There can only be one.. as the movie troupe goes..

[PsyrenY]

AresKeith wrote...

So like I said, the problem is based on an assumption

And a logical one, given the Geth's progress in a mere 300 years since creation.

AresKeith wrote...
Its not typical destroy picker BS, its stating the fact that you have a narrow-minded view

I'm narrow-minded? I'm not the one willing to commit genocide out of fear - Destroyers are. Laughable.

iakus wrote...

And Reapers dominating the galaxy or forced uplifting of the entire galaxy against their will is any better?  Is submission really preferable to extinction?

Reapers don't dominate the galaxy under Control or Synthesis.

Forced uplift is indeed preferable when the alternatives are genocide and extinction, yes.

None of those are "submission."

[Astartes Marine]

Optimystic_X wrote...
I'm narrow-minded? I'm not the one willing to commit genocide out of fear - Destroyers are. Laughable.

Watch it there, you're close to Auld Wulf territory. 


And no, not all Destroyers do it out of fear.  To make such a broad generalization, THAT is laughable.

[AresKeith]

Optimystic_X wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

So like I said, the problem is based on an assumption

And a logical one, given the Geth's progress in a mere 300 years since creation.

AresKeith wrote...
Its not typical destroy picker BS, its stating the fact that you have a narrow-minded view

I'm narrow-minded? I'm not the one willing to commit genocide out of fear - Destroyers are. Laughable.

1. And the fact that the Geth could have wiped out all the Quarians then but choose not too means it's still an assumption

2. You claiming people picked Destroy out of fear is still you being narrow-minded and laughable

For the record, I'm not a destroyer because I dislike all the ending choices

[robertthebard]

That's a lot of text to say, you should choose Refuse. I submit that there is one fatal flaw with your logic: You have 4 choices, all presented by your enemy.
1. Destroy
2. Synthesis
3. Control
4. Refuse, although this is implied, rather than suggested. In fact, if you spend a lot of time with the mental masturbation required to come up with ideas like this, the Reapers will choose it for you.

This, of course, discounts the other flaw with your logic: The Reapers did not build the Crucible. Nobody knew what it did, only that it would release massive amounts of energy. The choices, while offered by the Kid, are how the Crucible works, a device built by the species of our cycle, with the hope that it would end the Reaper threat.

[Argolas]

I didn't choose refuse. And I don't see how the Reapers not having built the Crucible contradicts my point. Although, in fact, the Catalyst is presented as a critical part of the Crucible, and the Catalyst is the Reapers.

[robertthebard]

Argolas wrote...

I didn't choose refuse. And I don't see how the Reapers not having built the Crucible contradicts my point. Although, in fact, the Catalyst is presented as a critical part of the Crucible, and the Catalyst is the Reapers.

No, the Catalyst is the Citadel, the Kid claims to be the Catalyst.  The only reason the Citadel is the Catalyst is that it's the "master" relay.  However, if we want to say that using Reaper tech means we're signing on with the Reapers, then the entire space faring community is guilty of it, and I refer you to Sovereign's discussion on Virmire.  Every space faring species in the galaxy is based off of Reaper tech.

[PsyrenY]

Astartes Marine wrote...

And no, not all Destroyers do it out of fear.

Then let's have a discussion - tell me why, if not fear. Because Hackett and Anderson think it's the only way? They hired you to think for yourself, not to blindly follow their directions. Hackett says as much in your reinstatement e-mail - Shepard has absolute authority to make any and all war-related decisions on humanity's behalf under emergency war powers (chapter and verse.)

AresKeith wrote...

1. And the fact that the Geth could have wiped out all the Quarians then but choose not too means it's still an assumption

"We were in our infancy. We could not calculate the repercussions of destroying an entire species."

Note however that the second time around, they have no problem wiping out the Quarians if you don't get them to stop.

AresKeith wrote...
For the record, I'm not a destroyer because I dislike all the ending choices

I never said you were.

[Wayning_Star]

Argolas wrote...

I didn't choose refuse. And I don't see how the Reapers not having built the Crucible contradicts my point. Although, in fact, the Catalyst is presented as a critical part of the Crucible, and the Catalyst is the Reapers.

I've always thought that the catalyst role in the ending is that it's in charge of the relays, via the citadel. I know it's weird but it's got to have a way of communication with the reaperships, that being through the relays. I'm thinking the harvest it's self is a reapership base program instinct. They don't make any decision unless the catalyst is aware of it, but they are separate other than that, independent nations and the like, this is because their intellect is of the harvested races/societies past. Kind of puts an 'organic' spin on them, as well as synthetic. I'm thinking this is the cats version of synthesis, for what that's worth. It does infer that it was done to 'preserve' as well as a reconnection ability if synthesis was considered viable.

So in a weird way, the reaperships who are reapers when included with the catalyst and it's solution. The catalyst is only the enabler in regard to the controlling nature of the attaching the crucible, Shepard actually takes over after that.

I'm of the opinion that Shepard actually formulated the choices. Part of that mind meld thing with the catalyst.

but then I figure that the catalyst is an organic computer..puts another spin on the organic vs. synthetic chaos theory.

[Argolas]

It's not about using reaper tech or not. It's about the choice being handed over to Shepard as opposed to Shepard achieving something.

[robertthebard]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Astartes Marine wrote...

And no, not all Destroyers do it out of fear.

Then let's have a discussion - tell me why, if not fear. Because Hackett and Anderson think it's the only way? They hired you to think for yourself, not to blindly follow their directions. Hackett says as much in your reinstatement e-mail - Shepard has absolute authority to make any and all war-related decisions on humanity's behalf under emergency war powers (chapter and verse.)

...and the Reapers spent three games trying to kill me, and even succeeded once.  Every time I spoke to one, it ran along the lines of "You are insignificant, and will die because we demand it".  So if I force myself to go past the Harbinger DeM, you can bet your ass I'm blowing them up.  They have never shown me anything that says "Hey, if you spare us, we can work together to make the galaxy a better place.

Oh, sorry, I was just thinking for myself...

[AresKeith]

Optimystic_X wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

1. And the fact that the Geth could have wiped out all the Quarians then but choose not too means it's still an assumption

"We were in our infancy. We could not calculate the repercussions of destroying an entire species."

Note however that the second time around, they have no problem wiping out the Quarians if you don't get them to stop.

You mean the Reaper controlled Geth or when you Optional side with the Geth and Quarians refuse to stop attacking

Other than that Geth themselves had no problem welcoming the Quarians back if they didn't attack them

[robertthebard]

Argolas wrote...

It's not about using reaper tech or not. It's about the choice being handed over to Shepard as opposed to Shepard achieving something.

We did achieve something, we united the galaxy, we built a weapon that nobody was sure what it did, and we deployed the weapon in the fight.  For me, it should have fired as soon as it docked and warmed up, and destroyed the Reapers.  That's what I went in hoping for.  But regardless, we aren't in that position because we're on vacation in Hawaii.  We're in that position because the Reapers are systematically wiping us out.  So because the big bad got it's moustache twirling exposition, we're supposed to believe it devalues Shepard or the crew?  It's just the moustache twirling exposition.

[Argolas]

robertthebard wrote...

We did achieve something, we united the galaxy, we built a weapon that nobody was sure what it did, and we deployed the weapon in the fight.  

Exactly. That is why the rest is good. The ending does not have anything like that and that is one reason why it's bad.

[robertthebard]

Argolas wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

We did achieve something, we united the galaxy, we built a weapon that nobody was sure what it did, and we deployed the weapon in the fight.  

Exactly. That is why the rest is good. The ending does not have anything like that and that is one reason why it's bad.

You won't find me disagreeing that the ending is bad, hence my Ultimate Refusal Ending, where I don't have to deal with the Kid at all.  However, in context with what we have, I don't have to invent theories that disregard parts of what's presented to say why.  All I have to say is, they did not fit with what I saw coming when I got there, and I sure didn't expect to have to do the Harbinger DeM to do so.

[PsyrenY]

robertthebard wrote...

...and the Reapers spent three games trying to kill me, and even succeeded once.  Every time I spoke to one, it ran along the lines of "You are insignificant, and will die because we demand it".  So if I force myself to go past the Harbinger DeM, you can bet your ass I'm blowing them up.  They have never shown me anything that says "Hey, if you spare us, we can work together to make the galaxy a better place.

Oh, sorry, I was just thinking for myself...

So... hatred? Revenge? Those are more worthy of slaughtering innocents than fear?

Is that honestly the best Shepard can do?

Argolas wrote...

It's not about using reaper tech or not. It's about the choice being handed over to Shepard as opposed to Shepard achieving something.

The choice came from our Crucible, that we built. The kid is just a mouthpiece.

AresKeith wrote...

You mean the Reaper controlled Geth or when you Optional side with the Geth and Quarians refuse to stop attacking

The latter. After you destroy the Rannoch Reaper, the Geth are no longer under Reaper control. And they "regret the deaths of the Creators" but have no problem erasing them from existence if they keep attacking.

AresKeith wrote...
Other than that Geth themselves had no problem welcoming the Quarians back if they didn't attack them

I'm talking about ability here. In the beginning, they are unwilling to wipe out the Quarians, even if it means risking that they come back later and take on the Geth once more.

Now, they have that capability. Mere years after the Morning War ended, they've grown up completely. They advance much faster than we do and always will.

[Argolas]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Argolas wrote...

It's not about using reaper tech or not. It's about the choice being handed over to Shepard as opposed to Shepard achieving something.

The choice came from our Crucible, that we built. The kid is just a mouthpiece.

So the Crucible uplifted Shepard to the decision chamber? So the Crucible told Shepard how to choose? So the Crucible told us what will happen in each decision?

You know, even if it was only a mouthpiece: A mouthpiece has significance. If we don't know the consequences of a choice, it's not a real choice, it just superficially resembles a choice.

[David7204]

We do know the consequences. The Catalyst has no reason to lie.

I applaud your recognition of a meaningful choice, though. You understand that for choices to be meaningful, 'good' choices generally need to lead to good outcomes and vice versa? And that Paragon choices therefore generally need to be rewarded more? And that punishing the player with bad outcomes they could never have reasonably forseen is poor writing for a story about meaningful heroism?

Modifié par David7204, 29 avril 2013 - 09:47 .

[Argolas]

David7204 wrote...

We do know the consequences. The Catalyst has no reason to lie.

I applaud your recognition of a meaningful choice, though. You understand that for choices to be meaningful, 'good' choices generally need to lead to good outcomes and vice versa? And that Paragon choices therefore generally need to be rewarded more?

In the particular story we are talking about here: Yes, I agree.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Astartes Marine wrote...

And no, not all Destroyers do it out of fear.

Then let's have a discussion - tell me why, if not fear. Because Hackett and Anderson think it's the only way? They hired you to think for yourself, not to blindly follow their directions. Hackett says as much in your reinstatement e-mail - Shepard has absolute authority to make any and all war-related decisions on humanity's behalf under emergency war powers (chapter and verse.)

AresKeith wrote...

1. And the fact that the Geth could have wiped out all the Quarians then but choose not too means it's still an assumption

"We were in our infancy. We could not calculate the repercussions of destroying an entire species."

Note however that the second time around, they have no problem wiping out the Quarians if you don't get them to stop.

AresKeith wrote...
For the record, I'm not a destroyer because I dislike all the ending choices

I never said you were.

No. Not out of fear. I destroy them because I want to. I need to hurt them. I need to crush the reapers for the billions they killed in my cycle, and for the quadrillions they killed in previous cycles. I need to pulverize the Intelligence into nothing for the crimes it has committed. If the cost is the geth and one of my crew, so be it. I've already "sacrificed" (or murdered in your terms) 300,000 Batarians on Aratoht. What's another 3 billion synthetics? I'm already going to Hell, so who the f**k cares?

The loss of the Geth is only specific in the Original Ending. In the EC, it isn't exactly made clear that the Geth and EDI will die, anyway. It's kept pretty vague. "But be warned, the beam will not discriminate. All synthetics will be targeted. Even you are partly synthetic...." or something like that..... Then if you ask for details. He says. "There will be losses, but no more than you have already lost."

Look out there. What have you been shooting? Those husks were once people! The were men, women, and I'm guessing they simply killed the children because we don't see any child husks. Now that would have been something. How would you have felt then? Did they ask to become husks? No. They were murdered by the reapers.

The Intelligence is a mass murderer. Its reapers are mass murderers. The Intelligence had a choice. It made its choice. Its choice was to farm the galaxy.

The deader the reapers and the Intelligence are the better it is for the galactic community. After it's over, when Shepard is found alive, Shepard will be honored as a frakking HERO. They'll pin a goddamned medal on her and have a goddamned parade in London and she'll visit every world, and they'll welcome her as a goddamned HERO. The Reapers are dead. The war is over.

You sacrificed US organics is what you did in synthesis.  You sacrificed organic life. You reaperized the entire galaxy. You're indoctrinated.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 29 avril 2013 - 09:53 .

[Mr.House]

I like how non destroyers keep throwing the term slaughtering, genocide ect. The term is called sacerfice. Soldiers do it all the time in war. It's not my fault you can't handle the hard choice and decide to take the easy way out and leave the Reapers alive and risk the galaxy because you don't want to sacrifice your robots, WHO WHERE READY TO DIE TO STOP THE REAPERS IN THE FIRST PLACE. I hope in the next ME game, if you can import a synth ending the game starts with the Reapers killing everyone in the cycle and Shepard watches on from the afterlife and everyone points and laughs at them for screwing the galaxy.

War criminals deserve death, the peopel they have killed and harvested deserve justice. The Reapers are nothing but a mistake that needs to be unmade. The cost is not that high to get rid of them.

Modifié par Mr.House, 29 avril 2013 - 09:53 .

[AresKeith]

Optimystic_X wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

You mean the Reaper controlled Geth or when you Optional side with the Geth and Quarians refuse to stop attacking

The latter. After you destroy the Rannoch Reaper, the Geth are no longer under Reaper control. And they "regret the deaths of the Creators" but have no problem erasing them from existence if they keep attacking.

And what would you have done in that same situation?

Optimystic_X wrote...

AresKeith wrote...
Other than that Geth themselves had no problem welcoming the Quarians back if they didn't attack them

I'm talking about ability here. In the beginning, they are unwilling to wipe out the Quarians, even if it means risking that they come back later and take on the Geth once more.

Now, they have that capability. Mere years after the Morning War ended, they've grown up completely. They advance much faster than we do and always will.

Just because they have the ability to do so, doesn't mean they will

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I don't trust or believe in the Reapers. Everything I have heard from them from the Catalyst is logically, scientifically, and biologically

The Reapers aren't interested in War? Perhaps, but that doesn't convince me of their motives. I've had several Reapers that told me what would happen to my civilization, and what they've done to other civilizations. I don't believe a word the Catalyst says in that regard.

I have no interest in the Catalyst. He wants me to solve his problem, which is not one that I conceive as being all encompassing. I'm not interested in finding a solution for organics and synthetics. We'll do it later. Right now my problem is the Reapers.

Synthesis is utterly unbelievable from my perspective. It violates science and logic. Moreover, it requires my death to work. I'm not going to trust it to die for it. And I'm not going to die in the belief that things might be better for my friends. I honor what they believe in and fight for, even if it means sacrificing them and letting them die.

There is nothing redeemable about the Reapers existence from my perspective. They're gone and the galaxy will be a better place for it.