465 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

Eterna5 wrote...

Destroy isn't an option you filthy genocidal luddites.

I didn't know we all turned into space Amish post-destroy. 

I see it more as necessary collateral damage, given the options. Keep the evil machines that are responsible for trillions of deaths and are actually made of billions more, or eradicate them once and for all, albeit with some [arbitrary] cost. Luddites oppose all forms of industrialization. Technically, reapers can be just as useful in death. New resources for everyone.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 16 juin 2013 - 01:02 .

[SeptimusMagistos]

knightnblu wrote...

In my opinion, Destroy is the Paragon ending. The problems with Synthesis are numerous and Control does not permanently incapacitate the Reapers because it relies upon Shepard maintaining his sanity for Eon while trapped with an insane AI. Also, both Synthesis and Control allows war criminals to escape the penalties for their crimes. Therefore, Destroy is the only solution that saves lives, punishes the guilty, and guarantees a permanent resolution to the conflict.

Destroy may be painted red, but that sounds like Paragon to me. The colors at the end of the game are irrelevant. You have to analyze the choices to determine the morality.

Paragon Shepard is well established as the kind of person to be willing to take on a long-term risk if it saves more lives right now and to let guilty escape punishment if punishing them requires others to be hurt. Seriously, how do people keep missing that?

Paragons don't care about punishment. Paragons don't care about long-term risks. Paragons care about preserving lives right this minute.

[Eterna]

KaiserShep wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Destroy isn't an option you filthy genocidal luddites.

I didn't know we all turned into space Amish post-destroy. 

I see it more as necessary collateral damage, given the options. Keep the evil machines that are responsible for trillions of deaths and are actually made of billions more, or eradicate them once and for all, albeit with some [arbitrary] cost. Luddites oppose all forms of industrialization. Technically, reapers can be just as useful in death. New resources for everyone.

That's exactly the type of thing I'd expect a no good luddite to say!

[KaiserShep]

I rebuke you, sir. REBUKE.

[KaiserShep]

Luddite would not be a correct word to use, since Luddites oppose new technology in general, which is not the case here. Choosing to be rid of the reapers, rather than keep them operational is in no way parallel to Luddism, since new technologies can still be derived from their remains, and the other technologies they themselves produced would be rebuilt and exploited.

[Nole]

If you ignore your default "Synthesis is evil" headcanon, then Synthesis should be the paragon ending. At least I think writers of the ending thought about Synthesis as the perfect super happy paragon ending.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

So what I'm seeing here is that the best way to do this is to:

* forgive (the ultimate good) the reapers for all their wrong doing and choose control
* gather up all the dead and sort them according to their races.
* throw them into the smoothie machines and make reapers out of them. They're dead, so they won't mind.
* then we instruct our minions to make another crucible and another chosen one chooses synthesis, thus reversing all of the genocide and death done in the past. Even the husks become alive. Would you deny them life?

It all makes sense now. It's a two step process. Controlled Synthesis. So The Seival was right after all for the True Paragon Ending.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

StreetMagic wrote...

Luddite sounds find to me, if that's it what it took. All I want is for people to generally be left alone. A guy should be able to be simple, maybe kick back and drink a beer in his backyard without some apocalyptic b.s. looming over his existence, like the Reapers do. As Diana Allers says in her email.. "Normal is the best revenge." Destroy is the only way to get back to normal.

Allers has it wrong. It's really: "The best revenge is to live well."

So, really, Destroy is doing it wrong -- nothing but getting even, no improvements are made (you actually go backwards).

[KaiserShep]

I dunno. I consider lack of reapers and husks, brutes, banshees, ravagers et al a significant improvement

As for going backwards, I guess this depends on whether or not you feel the catalyst is correct in its assertion about inevitability (I obviously do not, and the epilogue does not address it). Other than that, the infrastructure is rebuilt. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 16 juin 2013 - 05:36 .

[Seboist]

wiggles89 wrote...

Refuse. It's the stupid option, so it fits Paragon perfectly.

Yeah, it's the same rationale as destroying the collector base(another stupid Paragon choice).

[TheBlackBaron]

Well, it depends. Are you the pants-on-head retarded kind of Paragon, or simply the kind with goodness in their heart and a recognition that their extraordinary luck has a limit?

Refuse for the former, Control for the latter, Destroy if you happen to be of the pragmatic variety.

[Reorte]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Allers has it wrong. It's really: "The best revenge is to live well."

So, really, Destroy is doing it wrong -- nothing but getting even, no improvements are made (you actually go backwards).

It's a small step backwards in order to clear the field so that you can make improvements and develop without the Evil Overlords stepping in and killing you just because they don't like what you're doing. Certainly better than stagnation.

[AlexMBrennan]

The following uses real-world references in an attempt to get through to to deluded terrorist apologists.

Yeah, it's the same rationale as destroying the collector base(another stupid Paragon choice).

Right, handing nukes to space!Al-Qaeda is the smart option... Given that the space!Al-Qaeda AI piloting the ship has already demonstrated the ability to kill anyone on board, destroying the base immediately is the only way to prevent space!Bin Laden from using it.

[CptData]

WittingEight65 wrote...

If you ignore your default "Synthesis is evil" headcanon, then Synthesis should be the paragon ending. At least I think writers of the ending thought about Synthesis as the perfect super happy paragon ending.

Lets ignore "synthesis is evil" for a while - since I usually do it.

For me, synthesis isn't evil - it's just no valid option. Can you force your decision on the entire galaxy, ready or not? Not everyone is welcoming transhumanism. Salarians are looking forward to it, mankind is divided, Asari struck me as the absolute anti-transhumanists. Turians - no idea, Krogans are tradionalists and spiritual people as well, which means they're pretty much like Asari in that field. Quarians might lean towards transhumanism.

See, I'm a transhumanist through and through. But that's my decision and I don't want to decide for everyone to go down that path as well. It's a private decision, and that's a good thing.

That's why I won't pick synthesis. It removes the option of free decision to become a transhumanist being or not.

[jsadalia]

With hindsight, Destroy is most paragon. The existence of Reapers, whether synthsized or under Shep's eternal control (what was that saying about absolute power?) will always carry the threat of a return to harvesting, or at the least an eternal dictatorship. Refuse is awful, consigning trillions to terrible deaths on a fairly shaky point of principle. About as far from paragon as you can get.
Destroy is a tough choice, but it's the only one that keeps (most of) the peoples of the galaxy free, alive, and able to create a new future themselves. This to me is the paragon choice.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

jsadalia wrote...

With hindsight, Destroy is most paragon. The existence of Reapers, whether synthsized or under Shep's eternal control (what was that saying about absolute power?) will always carry the threat of a return to harvesting, or at the least an eternal dictatorship. Refuse is awful, consigning trillions to terrible deaths on a fairly shaky point of principle. About as far from paragon as you can get.
Destroy is a tough choice, but it's the only one that keeps (most of) the peoples of the galaxy free, alive, and able to create a new future themselves. This to me is the paragon choice.

But if Shepard makes the right choices and uses control for the purpose of cleaning up things and repairing things, makes more reapers out of the dead, then instructs the minions to make another crucible for the purpose of synthesis all of the death and genocide get reversed. Don't you see? It's the most paragon way of all. Shepard is the Catalyst, and after synthesis you can communicate with Shepard again.

[SeptimusMagistos]

jsadalia wrote...

With hindsight, Destroy is most paragon. The existence of Reapers, whether synthsized or under Shep's eternal control (what was that saying about absolute power?) will always carry the threat of a return to harvesting, or at the least an eternal dictatorship.

Paragon is not about avoiding threats. Paragon has never been about avoiding threats. Renegades avoid threats. Paragons accept threats.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Reorte wrote...

It's a small step backwards in order to clear the field so that you can make improvements and develop without the Evil Overlords stepping in and killing you just because they don't like what you're doing.

AI aren't controlling-dicks like organics are. They only terrorized us because they had to carry out the harvest, at all costs ("at all costs" has a way of manifesting in the worst). Irrelevant now, though. Without that mandate, they really have nothing -- zilch, nihl, nada -- to gain from terrorizing us. Anything people imagine about "Evil Overlords" is just their projection of their own human evil onto non-human entities. And yes, Reapers are synthetics. Holding larva does not make them less AI.

Destroy is not even free of Reaper influence -- the mass-relays and Citadel are shown being put back together. It's half-assed, if you ask me. Like, "we'll take these gifts they gave us, but other than that... NOOOOO!!!!" Go big or go home, IMO!

Certainly better than stagnation.

Sync =/= Stagnation. Watch the epilogue again -- advancement is off-the-charts. It's not up for debate.

Maybe at some point way, wayyy into the future, sure, there might be stagnation. That's not avoidable though, nor is it really a major problem, not if it comes after you've improved the quality of life markedly and thoroughly. Destroy will face it too.