465 réponses à ce sujet

[ryn_wolf]

i destroyed the geth heretics in ME2 so there arent many geth in my playthroughs so in the end i choose destroy because i refuse to listen to anything an indoctrinated TIM has to say and i'm definitely not listening to the catalyst so there are only 2 options destroy them and the reapers are gone or refuse which is shepard saying forget this let someone else handle it

[mass perfection]

The endings aren't meant to be Paragon/Renegade.There are Paragon AND Renegade versions of Control.The endings themselves aren't Paragon/Renegade.

[Tron Mega]

StreetMagic wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

jtav wrote...

@MegaSovereign

But Refuse does have the speech, which seems very principled/stupid. It's the whole, I won'r compromise aspect. I kind of want to drop an anvil on Shep's head here, so I'm not concerned with results.

Refuse reeks of Lawful stupid.

Not really. It's a small way of saying the game sucks.

Not that anyone is listening though. It's just for self-satisfaction.

indeed.

i dont pick refuse because of what happens after i pick refuse.

Modifié par Tron Mega, 15 juin 2013 - 03:31 .

[Steelcan]

I Destroy or neutral Control. There are three different speeches...

[DeinonSlayer]

Steelcan wrote...

I Destroy or neutral Control. There are three different speeches...

I thought Control only had para/ren speeches? There's a third?

[Steelcan]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

I Destroy or neutral Control. There are three different speeches...

I thought Control only had para/ren speeches? There's a third?

Pretty sure.  It does not have unique dialogue, but is parts of one and bits of another.  Or my hearing is worse than I thought.

[jtav]

Just checked on YT. Neutral has a one-line difference from Paragon; Shep wants to protect the many instead of save.

[Steelcan]

jtav wrote...

Just checked on YT. Neutral has a one-line difference from Paragon; Shep wants to protect the many instead of save.

Does paragon have that bit about an unstoppable army?

[Deathsaurer]

I do believe someone made a thread saying there were a crap ton of variations on Control. Could be remembering wrong though.

[CptData]

jtav wrote...

Destroy isn't Paragon folks. "We don't sacrifice lives for the sake of the mission." Paragon is the "damn the consequences" where Shep makes huge gambles to avoid immediate casualties. That's not Destroy. It's also not the same thing as right or ethical.

Negative.

"Control" has far more dire consequences than you might imagine. And synthesis consequences are "horrible" tbh.

"Destroy" might end EDI and the Geth. But who says it has to be like this? Who says the Geth can't come back? Maybe they shut down themselves to prevent destruction by the energy wave? And who says EDI can't be repaired? That's what I do in my headcanon: bring them back post-destruction, without stupid *sspulls. Just logic *g*

Technically, none of those endings fit the "full paragon Shepard". They all come with more or less acceptable consequences. I can't live with a dictator and the danger said dictator might get nuts one day. And 'though I'm a transhumanist, I won't ever force my decision on others who're not ready to advance. Especially not in that risky way via "Reaper supported space magic".
Refuse those three options will end our cycle with out defeat.
So it has to be "destroy" - it's the most paragon option.

[SolariUK]

Refusal with 100% EMS should have been a win by sheer numbers IMO.

My paragon Shep weighed things up and decided to "Destroy", it was what he'd been trying to do over all 3 games. Potentially sacrificing EDI and the Geth was gut-wrenching. Who knows, the Geth could have survived in some form, essentially being software. Without software, the Normandy wouldn't be functioning. Not so sure about EDI.

Anyhow, I was happy with the EC Destroy ending. I'm certainly glad I didn't buy the game until they'd released it. I wish Bioware would provide some answers on the whole Indoctrination Theory thing, I don't think it's the case anymore but there are still some niggling "hints" at it that I find annoying.

I agree with the idea that you don't have the right to impose such a fundamental change upon the galaxy's population without them having any say in it. That sounds renegade to me.

Can't believe so many people are still discussing this. I suppose from BioWare's perspective, that's a good thing. Wish they would clear up a few things though seeing as it's been a while now and pretty much everyone and their dog has completed the series.

Modifié par SolariUK, 15 juin 2013 - 12:13 .

[KaiserShep]

CptData wrote...

"Destroy" might end EDI and the Geth. But who says it has to be like this? Who says the Geth can't come back? Maybe they shut down themselves to prevent destruction by the energy wave? And who says EDI can't be repaired? That's what I do in my headcanon: bring them back post-destruction, without stupid *sspulls. Just logic *g*

EDI is a different case, because of the whole blue box thing, but this isn't really the case for the geth, since each individual geth is not really anything special, since they originally derived their higher intelligence from the neural network when they join together. Their identical design can be rebuilt, but the problem is that their collective memories may have been lost anyway. So even if you could technically rebuild the identical synthetics, they just won't be the same in that their experiences are lost. This is what's wrong with the destroy epilogue. Their deaths are so arbitrary and unceremonious (as in never even shown), that there's just no impact in their assumed demise. But another problem I have with all this is that software should not be vulnerable to this kind of thing, in any form whatsoever. If that was the case, how would the Crucible wave distinguish the memories of a synthetic from a datapad's files? This alone leaves lots of room for head-canon in itself.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 15 juin 2013 - 12:26 .

[Zazzerka]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

And everyone saying to pick Destroy; nope, Destroy's the Renegade choice. Paragon Shepard spends far too much time whining about how robots are people to pick Destroy.

I whined about how robots are people, and then proceeded to blow them up with Destroy anyway.

Where is your God now?

[Straw Nihilist]

Control is the lawful side of things, destroy is the chaotic, refuse is neutral and synthesis is err... lets just leave that one out.

[KaiserShep]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

And everyone saying to pick Destroy; nope, Destroy's the Renegade choice. Paragon Shepard spends far too much time whining about how robots are people to pick Destroy.

I actually agree that it's more renegade than paragon to pick destroy, which is why Paragrade is the way to go. 

[Zazzerka]

At least no-one will be able to use the "He's always hated robots!" tactic against my Shepard if a lawsuit is ever filed against him. Which is pretty likely, since insurance companies don't cover against damage from space magic.

Modifié par Zazzerka, 15 juin 2013 - 01:49 .

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

My Shep is a rebel.

She just sits down and plays Angry Birds until the Catalyst gets frustrated and leaves.

[KaiserShep]

Zazzerka wrote...

At least no-one will be able to use the "He's always hated robots!" tactic against my Shepard if a lawsuit is ever filed against him. Which is pretty likely, since insurance companies don't cover against damage from space magic.

If it means anything, the courts would have nothing to go with as claims would go unsubstantiated. The only party to witness the events leading up to the synthetics' destruction was deleted. It's the perfect crime! 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 15 juin 2013 - 01:54 .

[Aaleel]

I don't know why people keep trying to give these choices alignments, they don't have them.

They're pretty much all paragade or renegon, or whatever you call your mixed Shepard, but none are pure anything.

[SeptimusMagistos]

jtav wrote...

Just checked on YT. Neutral has a one-line difference from Paragon; Shep wants to protect the many instead of save.

Nope. Paragons and Renegades have a different beginning speech and then there are several lines which are altered by specific choices (such as Tuchanka). There is no "neutral" Shepard.

Pretty sure this is on the wiki.

[jtav]

No, really. I checked. There is a variation almost identical to the Paragon version except Shepard says they want to protect the many instead of save or lead.

[AlanC9]

CptData wrote...

"Control" has far more dire consequences than you might imagine. And synthesis consequences are "horrible" tbh.

Evidence would be nice.