221 réponses à ce sujet

[IMNOTCRAZYiminsane]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Where's the roll on the floor laughing smiley when you need one???http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/lol.png I killed EDI, that's one person, so now, one person is a mass slaughter? I think your perspective is off. Of course, it could just be that you're off in general, wanna share whatever it is?

If you committed genocide against the geth beforehand, that's no point in Destroy's favor. It just makes you even worse.

There is no genocide against the geth. If they were an organic species I'd have an ethical problem. Geth are not like organics. Do not apply our morality to them. No two species are identical. All must be judged on their own merits. Treating every species like ones own is racist. I've said that before.

The minds of both forms of life can be shaped. With organics this takes a lot of time. With synthetics, replacement of a data file is the only requirement.

You have basically mobile platform, an operating system, and a datafile. There are backups on the Geth's central server. This is how alien synthetic life is.

Strange I was reading in Legion's Voice 

Modifié par IMNOTCRAZYiminsane, 30 avril 2013 - 10:58 .

[AresKeith]

Xilizhra wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Xilizhra, not every play style is gonna lead to players having a choice to make peace

Trying to cry "genocide" when the person doesn't even have the option to make peace makes your claim fall

In-universe, it's an utter failure of Shepard to not attempt to make peace. Trying to make peace and failing would be acceptable, but Shepard does not do that. Shepard allows the quarians to die or forces the geth to die.

Shepard technically does, he/she tries to tell the Quarians to stand down before making the big choice between them

And then gives up immediately? No, that is incompetence. Making a continued effort to try to win peace until one side just crushed the other would be sad, but not as bad as what we actually got, and not as poor a reflection on Shepard.

Then take it up with Bioware who made the requirements to have the option to make peace 

[Yestare7]

Eterna5 wrote...
 At the end of ME3 you are given two options that spare everyone, you chose to kill your allies to complete the mission when you didn;t have to. That is not paragon. 

"spare everyone"  is ofcourse supremely subjective. 

- Either the Reapers live and Shep controls them  (follow timmie's dream)
- Or the Reapers live, you screw mother nature, transform the entire galaxy against their will, and banshees will cuddle with their Asari cousins.

Reapers live=unacceptable.


Necessary sacrifices my friend, and they were just some bots to boot!!:lol:

Modifié par Yestare7, 30 avril 2013 - 11:02 .

[Xilizhra]

robertthebard wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

RoberttheBard's dictionary of BSN terms defines utter incompetence as: Stating that failing to make peace on Rannoch is genocide, and then waffling to "oh, well, if you can't make it, you were just imcompetent, even if you didn't know that something might be important later". Sound familiar?

In what area did you fail to make peace? What did you miss?

Also, strictly speaking, as Shepard takes a direct action that Shepard knows will be the doom of all geth, it still is genocide. So you're right, I shouldn't have waffled.

What does it matter?  The paragon/renegade shouts at the Quarians were not available, so, in your eyes, I'm guilty of genocide.  I realize you are waffling all over the place now, since people not me are also calling foul, but really, your lack of knowledge about what went on in that playthrough of Rannoch gives you no right to be judgemental, or accusatory about what I intended to do, or about my competence on doing it.  However, you went straight to 'you committed genocide on Rannoch instead", which tells me that no matter what, that's what you think.  The fact that Shepard never fires a shot at that point, or that Shepard, when choosing who to save might be romancing Tali, and perhaps base his decision on that doesn't matter to you, does it?  So why ask?  In the long run, you'll just say "see, you killed them systematically and intentionally".  Which is, btw what genocide means, since it's fairly obvious you don't know.  I'm not sure how I wiped out all those ships in orbit w/out firing a shot, with my Widow, but hey, whatever makes your boat float.

Did you keep up with the thread? Obviously, you personally didn't commit genocide; it's an action taken by your Shepard. And, IC, having those options grayed-out means nothing. If your Shepard tried them and failed, that'd be one thing, but not doing them at all is what I said it is.

[Aaleel]

It all depends on what consider paragon or renegade. If loss of life is all you take into account I can see how you would say destroy is renegade.

But making yourself God with the most powerful army in the galaxy to enforce your will, or telling everyone in the galaxy you're not good enough the way you are so I'm going to make you better can be looked at in the same light.

[robertthebard]

IMNOTCRAZYiminsane wrote...

Sanctuary was in ME3 and i already explained that i didn't like Cerberus so no im not going to say "it wasn't his Idea" I do like Cerberus in ME2 yes doesn't mean I Liked them in ME3

And yes it was funded by Cerberus but they Cut ties with TIM going rouge and doing what they want TIM order for it to be shut down where in game did it say TIM caused what happened to Jack? From what happened in game TIM funded it, they went rouge, Jack happened 

Besides the fact you don't like Cerberus show me where in game TIM was behind it all 

@Yestare7 I got scared and thought it was Blue 

Who controls Cerberus' money?  Who makes all decisions about what projects go forward and which ones don't?  Didn't you just link me a video trying to prove that TIM's in charge of the facility, but apparently blind to what they're doing?  Did they opt to kidnap all those kids on their own?  Why does Miranda tell Jack that "clearly you were a mistake"?  in their little fight?  Is it because she knows something that you don't about Cerberus?  I'll give you a hint, she does, she knows lots of things you didn't know.  Mainly because if she'd shared them, some people would have been on here, myself included, posting about how bad it was to force us to work for terrorists.  Some people were, I have no doubt.

You drank the Kool-Aid, I didn't.  I saw them for what they were in ME 1, and frankly, sanctioning the Sole Survivor incident tells me that Pragia would have been logical for Cerberus.  The follow up with Corporal Toombs just further verifies that what happened on Pragia was sanctioned by TIM.  The only problem is, you got too much intel after you got Jack, and now TIM has to make himself look innocent.  What's the best way?  Hey, I was shutting that facility down.  So, my question is, was he shutting it down because they were doing unethical research, or because they weren't getting any noticeable results?  I find it hilarious that "When our team got there to shut it down, everyone was dead", means that he didn't sanction the experiments.  I'm pretty sure that if they were hiding something from TIM, it was the pit fights.  Not that TIM has any problem killing humans to advance Cerberus, er, humanity...

[Xilizhra]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Where's the roll on the floor laughing smiley when you need one???http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/lol.png I killed EDI, that's one person, so now, one person is a mass slaughter? I think your perspective is off. Of course, it could just be that you're off in general, wanna share whatever it is?

If you committed genocide against the geth beforehand, that's no point in Destroy's favor. It just makes you even worse.

There is no genocide against the geth. If they were an organic species I'd have an ethical problem. Geth are not like organics. Do not apply our morality to them. No two species are identical. All must be judged on their own merits. Treating every species like ones own is racist. I've said that before.

The minds of both forms of life can be shaped. With organics this takes a lot of time. With synthetics, replacement of a data file is the only requirement.

You have basically mobile platform, an operating system, and a datafile. There are backups on the Geth's central server. This is how alien synthetic life is.

This might even have been relevant, but Destroy also wipes out all of the backups. The quarians themselves were able to do so by attacking the Dyson sphere, permanently killing millions of geth.

[robertthebard]

Xilizhra wrote...

Did you keep up with the thread? Obviously, you personally didn't commit genocide; it's an action taken by your Shepard. And, IC, having those options grayed-out means nothing. If your Shepard tried them and failed, that'd be one thing, but not doing them at all is what I said it is.

Again, who are you to judge what happens in somebody else's playthrough when you have nothing to go on but what you think?  I'll be honest, what you think doesn't matter to me, because your opinion is completely biased against anything that doesn't fit into your neat little box.  The very first thing you type when I told you that I killed EDI was what?  "so you committed genocide on Rannoch instead".  No, I'm really not following your replies.  This tells me everything I need to know, and I'm only addressing you because you quoted me.  This post, however, only goes to support what I said about your waffling.

[Hurbster]

Destroy is the only choice for Paragons as well.

IMO, of course.

[Xilizhra]

robertthebard wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Did you keep up with the thread? Obviously, you personally didn't commit genocide; it's an action taken by your Shepard. And, IC, having those options grayed-out means nothing. If your Shepard tried them and failed, that'd be one thing, but not doing them at all is what I said it is.

Again, who are you to judge what happens in somebody else's playthrough when you have nothing to go on but what you think?  I'll be honest, what you think doesn't matter to me, because your opinion is completely biased against anything that doesn't fit into your neat little box.  The very first thing you type when I told you that I killed EDI was what?  "so you committed genocide on Rannoch instead".  No, I'm really not following your replies.  This tells me everything I need to know, and I'm only addressing you because you quoted me.  This post, however, only goes to support what I said about your waffling.

What can I say? You took deliberate action to ensure the destruction of the geth. I don't care about your motivations, and neither will posterity or definitions.

[robertthebard]

Xilizhra wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Did you keep up with the thread? Obviously, you personally didn't commit genocide; it's an action taken by your Shepard. And, IC, having those options grayed-out means nothing. If your Shepard tried them and failed, that'd be one thing, but not doing them at all is what I said it is.

Again, who are you to judge what happens in somebody else's playthrough when you have nothing to go on but what you think?  I'll be honest, what you think doesn't matter to me, because your opinion is completely biased against anything that doesn't fit into your neat little box.  The very first thing you type when I told you that I killed EDI was what?  "so you committed genocide on Rannoch instead".  No, I'm really not following your replies.  This tells me everything I need to know, and I'm only addressing you because you quoted me.  This post, however, only goes to support what I said about your waffling.

What can I say? You took deliberate action to ensure the destruction of the geth. I don't care about your motivations, and neither will posterity or definitions.

You know what posterity is going to care about?  Dead Reapers.  Mission Accomplished.

[Xilizhra]

robertthebard wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Did you keep up with the thread? Obviously, you personally didn't commit genocide; it's an action taken by your Shepard. And, IC, having those options grayed-out means nothing. If your Shepard tried them and failed, that'd be one thing, but not doing them at all is what I said it is.

Again, who are you to judge what happens in somebody else's playthrough when you have nothing to go on but what you think?  I'll be honest, what you think doesn't matter to me, because your opinion is completely biased against anything that doesn't fit into your neat little box.  The very first thing you type when I told you that I killed EDI was what?  "so you committed genocide on Rannoch instead".  No, I'm really not following your replies.  This tells me everything I need to know, and I'm only addressing you because you quoted me.  This post, however, only goes to support what I said about your waffling.

What can I say? You took deliberate action to ensure the destruction of the geth. I don't care about your motivations, and neither will posterity or definitions.

You know what posterity is going to care about?  Dead Reapers.  Mission Accomplished.

Posterity, judging by the Stargazer scene, is totally fine with all three endings. Which I can achieve with no casualties. I will remain satisfied.

[AresKeith]

Xilizhra wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Did you keep up with the thread? Obviously, you personally didn't commit genocide; it's an action taken by your Shepard. And, IC, having those options grayed-out means nothing. If your Shepard tried them and failed, that'd be one thing, but not doing them at all is what I said it is.

Again, who are you to judge what happens in somebody else's playthrough when you have nothing to go on but what you think?  I'll be honest, what you think doesn't matter to me, because your opinion is completely biased against anything that doesn't fit into your neat little box.  The very first thing you type when I told you that I killed EDI was what?  "so you committed genocide on Rannoch instead".  No, I'm really not following your replies.  This tells me everything I need to know, and I'm only addressing you because you quoted me.  This post, however, only goes to support what I said about your waffling.

What can I say? You took deliberate action to ensure the destruction of the geth. I don't care about your motivations, and neither will posterity or definitions.

And that makes you more bias than the people you claim

[Xilizhra]

And that makes you more bias than the people you claim

How? In universe, their Shepards could still try to make peace, they just chose not to.

[AresKeith]

Xilizhra wrote...

And that makes you more bias than the people you claim

How? In universe, their Shepards could still try to make peace, they just chose not to.

In universe only applies if every players Shepard has the option to make, not everyone could

Like I said, you judging people based on that makes you the most bias about it

[Xilizhra]

AresKeith wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

And that makes you more bias than the people you claim

How? In universe, their Shepards could still try to make peace, they just chose not to.

In universe only applies if every players Shepard has the option to make, not everyone could

Like I said, you judging people based on that makes you the most bias about it

That's something the player was unable to do, not the character.

[KENNY4753]

Destroy- Kill Reapers, Side Effect Geth/EDI may die
Control- Enslave Reapers, just like the AI. Side Effect- Geth logically should be effected as well
Synthesis- Play God, Side Effect- Reapers/Catalyst still alive

So which is worse...playing God, become a Slaver, or supposedly commit genocide

[IMNOTCRAZYiminsane]

robertthebard wrote...

IMNOTCRAZYiminsane wrote...

Sanctuary was in ME3 and i already explained that i didn't like Cerberus so no im not going to say "it wasn't his Idea" I do like Cerberus in ME2 yes doesn't mean I Liked them in ME3

And yes it was funded by Cerberus but they Cut ties with TIM going rouge and doing what they want TIM order for it to be shut down where in game did it say TIM caused what happened to Jack? From what happened in game TIM funded it, they went rouge, Jack happened 

Besides the fact you don't like Cerberus show me where in game TIM was behind it all 

@Yestare7 I got scared and thought it was Blue 

Who controls Cerberus' money?  Who makes all decisions about what projects go forward and which ones don't?  Didn't you just link me a video trying to prove that TIM's in charge of the facility, but apparently blind to what they're doing?  Did they opt to kidnap all those kids on their own?  Why does Miranda tell Jack that "clearly you were a mistake"?  in their little fight?  Is it because she knows something that you don't about Cerberus?  I'll give you a hint, she does, she knows lots of things you didn't know.  Mainly because if she'd shared them, some people would have been on here, myself included, posting about how bad it was to force us to work for terrorists.  Some people were, I have no doubt.

You drank the Kool-Aid, I didn't.  I saw them for what they were in ME 1, and frankly, sanctioning the Sole Survivor incident tells me that Pragia would have been logical for Cerberus.  The follow up with Corporal Toombs just further verifies that what happened on Pragia was sanctioned by TIM.  The only problem is, you got too much intel after you got Jack, and now TIM has to make himself look innocent.  What's the best way?  Hey, I was shutting that facility down.  So, my question is, was he shutting it down because they were doing unethical research, or because they weren't getting any noticeable results?  I find it hilarious that "When our team got there to shut it down, everyone was dead", means that he didn't sanction the experiments.  I'm pretty sure that if they were hiding something from TIM, it was the pit fights.  Not that TIM has any problem killing humans to advance Cerberus, er, humanity...

investers Control Cerberus Money 

TIM

No I linked you to prove that the place went Rouge and did things by their means and disobeyed TIM actions resulting in Jack

Maybe, but again I said "They are Hursh" they want to better humanity in hursh ways said this multiple times so yes maybe they did

"Clearly you are a mistake" can be anything it can be what you see it as TIM behind the whole thing or it can be a Horrible insult to Jack do not forget Miranda HATES Jacks its almost like someone saying "Your a mistake" to a sibling because they Hate them unitl you give me edvidence it's an insult to me and something TIM is hiding for you

Miranda knows alot about Cerberus but it was for Humanity this is why in ME3 she didn't want to work with them anymore because it changed from Humanity to ControlTIM 

And I Love kool-aid  "YEHHHHH"

The link i showed you clearly state they went rouge I am Sorry that i couldn't find a better one, it was stupid when they cut it off,  I was Lazy to look for a better one but i can if you want me to 

The Log says "The Illusive Man is requesting operation logs again. He's Getting Suspiscious"
"When he get's results he wont care what we did, But if he knew..."
"He wont find out"

Then we finish the mission and we get this 

From: Cerberus Intel

Commander Shepard,

Contacting you per Illusive Man's instructions. He believed you would want to know that he had ordered Subject Zero's project shut down before the riot broke out. Cerberus personnel arrived to find all guards dead, along with most of the subjects. Any surviving children were treated for injuries, given mild amnesic treatments, and delivered to Alliance facilities as survivors of slaver attacks. A few surviving doctors were forcibly retired for their role in the project.

Per your report, the facility on Pragia has been destroyed.

It's not like TIM said "By the Way before you go on the mission we didn't do it"

He or w/e told us after the mission was complete and there was edvidence He didn't know about it!

Seriously Yes maybe he was shuting it down because they were not getting results or maybe Yes he saw unethtical research going on.....The main problem was he did NOT know about what was going on with the kids and Jack until he finally sent someone there 

By that message do you really think they were hiding pit fights from TIM i mean REALLY!? 

And yes Maybe your right about TIM not caring if he killed a FEW to better Humanity but it's not like he's batcrap crazy like he was in ME3

and again 

Besides the fact you don't like Cerberus show me where in game TIM was behind everything that went on with Jack 

Modifié par IMNOTCRAZYiminsane, 01 mai 2013 - 12:01 .

[Jukaga]

Rogue not rouge.

Rouge is french for the color red.

The only one that bothers me more is 'Emporer' and you see that everywhere.

For christ's sakes... read a book internet people.

[remydat]

KENNY4753 wrote...

Destroy- Kill Reapers, Side Effect Geth/EDI may die
Control- Enslave Reapers, just like the AI. Side Effect- Geth logically should be effected as well
Synthesis- Play God, Side Effect- Reapers/Catalyst still alive

So which is worse...playing God, become a Slaver, or supposedly commit genocide

From the moment the Catalyst let's you decide to for the galaxy, you are playing god.  The only distinction is what kind of god you want to be.

Destroy - A god who kills an entire race in order to punish the Reapers.
Control - A god who mind controls the Reapers to ensure the rest of the Galaxy stays in line.
Synthesis - A god who alters the DNA of every living species in order to spare having to exterminate a particular group.

[TheRealJayDee]

My main Shepard was Paragon, and he chose Destroy with a heavy heart.

My complete Renegade Shepard would have actually had a hard time choosing between Control and Destroy, and might've even considered Synthesis.
Ruling the universe for all eternity? Nice!
Blowing up the Reapers with the Geth and EDI as a bonus? Nice!
Changing every being in the galaxy via superior Shepard essence? Weird... but, why the **** not?!

[KENNY4753]

@remydat there is no 100% proof that you kill an entire race.

1. Shep could live, thus making the Catalyst word less credible
2. "We can rebuild what was lost" the Geth were lost and can be rebuilt
3. EDI on the memorial means nothing as that happens right after the crash. There was not yet time to rebuild what was lost.
4. If you could make peace and the Quarians won then they wont be afftected by destroy

[KENNY4753]

i meant if you couldnt make peace in number 4 btw

[Aaleel]

No matter what alignment my Shepard is or how I role played it they all picked Destroy. They all wanted to best and most definitive way to stop the reapers and make sure they never had to revisit this again, and Destroying them is the best way to do this.

You hear people say I would have chosen Destroy but...I didn't want to kill EDI, I didn't want to kill the Geth. But you rarely heard that it was the best way to deal with the reapers, especially right after the game came out.  Now that people have dug in they've come up with stuff like oh the reapers were just poor slaves not in control of their actions and other stuff, but not in the beginning.  I'll be conservative and say that if EDI and the Geth didn't die 75% (As this is a low ball estimate) of people who chose something else would have chosen destroy.

Because on their face given the choice between destroying them, merging DNA with them, or changing the person in control of them and leaving them be, Destroying them is the best way to definitively end the threat so you never have to revisit it again in the future.

Modifié par Aaleel, 01 mai 2013 - 12:40 .

[remydat]

KENNY4753 wrote...

@remydat there is no 100% proof that you kill an entire race.

1. Shep could live, thus making the Catalyst word less credible
2. "We can rebuild what was lost" the Geth were lost and can be rebuilt
3. EDI on the memorial means nothing as that happens right after the crash. There was not yet time to rebuild what was lost.
4. If you could make peace and the Quarians won then they wont be afftected by destroy

By this logic, there is no 100% proof that what you think happens in control or synthesis is what actually happens.  All you are doing is trying to justify playing god with the decision you prefer.  Again, the Catalyst allows you and you alone to decide the fate of the entire galaxy.  You are playing god no matter what you decide.

Modifié par remydat, 01 mai 2013 - 12:45 .