138 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

favoritehookeronthecitadel wrote...

Uh, yeah, except that Shepard doesn't know they're going to survive. So...

It's the only one where the catalyst didn't say "you will die" or "add your energy to the crucible" = "you will die" = you lose all your energy; "even you are partly synthetic" =/= "you will die"   Not from my elementary school reading comprehension. The last one is a maybe you will survive. I made a promise to return.

[David7204]

Yuck.

[LinksOcarina]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Yes it was the easiest of the three choices. I'd already destroyed the Geth on Rannoch. I doubt having EDI die would have blackened my soul any more. I wasn't a fan of the dialogues we'd had. They were a choice of full naïve ****** Shepard or practical but psycho Shepard. I hate the auto dialogue. I wished there was a break so I could have made other choices. But you know how it is. So basically Shepard's idea ended up: EDI's a piece of equipment ... so no problem. Replace it with a new model.

So much for the other choices becoming "more appealing" than Destroy.

As Jack said: "Death is easy. F***in' on/off-switch."

Same with Destroy. Nothing ballsy about it. Just hit the switch: quick, clean, easy. That's why it's the runaway favorite. 

But it is also the most cynial of the choices, primaily because you aren't banking on the cycle not repeating itself again, which the eventual conflict between the synthetic/organic dichotomy will eventually see presuming the way the galaxy has been cultivated up to this point. Valid as a choice, but I always felt it was the weakest choice. 

I always looked at the series always more about hope against fate. Fate is being resigned to it, letting the reapers win and fight the long defeat in a vain attempt at survival for as long as possible. The refusal ending gives off a sense of hope,  but it is hope for the next cycle, moreso than the current one, which Shepard gambles and loses on by leaving it to fate in that respect. 

For me a core theme for the series has always been hope against hopelessness, on top of the other layers of the narrative. Shepard is the only one who is giving people hope in a situation where everyone is in their darkest hour. He is not taking a chance on fate at all really, and the choices in the endgame refect this because they all offer the hope of salvation. 

If this was merely an exercise in fate, then Shepard would have no choice at all, and it would be the Catalyst choosing their destiny and Shepard doing nothing to influence that. That would make only one ending, one conclusion, vs the options given, and the free-will to make that decision. This is also in part why the fan mods I feel are just that, fan interpretations of what happened, because they do what is expected of us too see.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 03 juillet 2013 - 08:32 .

[CronoDragoon]

LinksOcarina wrote...
But it is also the most cynial of the choices, primaily because you are banking on the cycle not repeating itself again, which the eventual conflict between the synthetic/organic dichotomy will eventually see presuming the way the galaxy has been cultivated up to this point. Valid as a choice, but I always felt it was the weakest choice.

Doesn't that make Destroy the least cynical choice from Shepard's perspective?

[LinksOcarina]

CronoDragoon wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...
But it is also the most cynial of the choices, primaily because you are banking on the cycle not repeating itself again, which the eventual conflict between the synthetic/organic dichotomy will eventually see presuming the way the galaxy has been cultivated up to this point. Valid as a choice, but I always felt it was the weakest choice.

Doesn't that make Destroy the least cynical choice from Shepard's perspective?

No, because machines can be built and it starts all over. 

I don't mean the reapers, I mean the next Geth  basically, the next A.I that decides to not be peaceful. Got to remember that the A.I's were the start of this to begin with and the "natural" evolution of synthetic life will come into conflict with organic life in the Mass Effect universe. That is the argument that is made and while the Geth have shown that this may not always be the case, the Geth are just one example to the contrary opinion. 

Of course the trouble is we have little evidence of the other side outside of  people saying as such. We spent so much time with the Geth its hard to see past that and the success story they have, in a sense. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 03 juillet 2013 - 08:14 .

[KaiserShep]

Banking on something not occurring exactly as it has in the past is not cynical.

[CronoDragoon]

LinksOcarina wrote...
No, because machines can be built and it starts all over.

But

  you are banking on the cycle not repeating itself again

So by picking Destroy, you are saying that it won't start all over and that conflict is not inevitable. Which makes it pretty much the opposite of cynical.

[LinksOcarina]

CronoDragoon wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...
No, because machines can be built and it starts all over.

But

  you are banking on the cycle not repeating itself again

So by picking Destroy, you are saying that it won't start all over and that conflict is not inevitable. Which makes it pretty much the opposite of cynical.

oh my bad. Thats a typo.

Should be aren't. Sorry for the confusion there, that makes me look stupid 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 03 juillet 2013 - 08:34 .

[CronoDragoon]

Okay sorry, I'm still confused. If someone picks Destroy, you say that they aren't banking on things being different? Or that they are but they are wrong about it?

[Striker93175]

Shoot the catalyst, cycle continues. Best ending... Sequel guaranteed, new hero though.

[LinksOcarina]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Okay sorry, I'm still confused. If someone picks Destroy, you say that they aren't banking on things being different? Or that they are but they are wrong about it?

They aren't banking on things being different, because all of the evidence (unless you unite the Geth and Quarians peacefully) is to the contrary, including what is said to you by several characters.

Sorry for the confusion that was my bad there. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 03 juillet 2013 - 08:45 .

[CronoDragoon]

LinksOcarina wrote...

They aren't banking on things being different, because all of the evidence (unless you unite the Geth and Quarians peacefully) is to the contrary, including what is said to you by several characters.

Sorry for the confusion that was my bad there. 

No problem, but I do disagree. I choose Destroy because I do believe that things will be different, and that the next group of synthetics can also coexist the same way that the geth (I made peace) and EDI were on their way to doing.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 03 juillet 2013 - 08:48 .

[Mordanticus]

frostajulie wrote...

each of the endings are devoid of hope except refuse and we get to see how badly trusting to hope plays out. The tragedy is I would rather trust to hope than accept fate even when I already know the outcome.

That's why the ending sucks. It is the death of hope. The death of dreams.

This pretty much sums it up.. The heroes I have played or that I enjoy reading about never rely on luck or give in to fate.. They struggle against the odds and make their own destiny..

Mass Effect always eluded to our ultimate choices (not ultimate fate).. and this is why the sudden lack of choice was.. well.. jarring to say the least..

[Farangbaa]

frostajulie wrote...

each of the endings are devoid of hope except refuse and we get to see how badly trusting to hope plays out. The tragedy is I would rather trust to hope than accept fate even when I already know the outcome.

That's why the ending sucks. It is the death of hope. The death of dreams.

This is exactly why I like the endings.

[KaiserShep]

Well, no accounting for taste

[ShepnTali]

I wonder. If they were to go with destroy as canon, will there be a synthetic vs organic crisis, with no reapers to 'save us'?

[KaiserShep]

Doubtful it'll be addressed at all. Judging from what I've read from Chris Priestly on IGN, it may not even be a sequel, per se. Implications...unpleasant.

[Nightwriter]

Dendio1 wrote...

In Mass effect the star kid tells shepard he will die if he choses synthesis or control, but he also says that these are legit solutions to the organic vs synthetic conflict. Destroy is the only original option that allows shepard to trust hope over fate. The red ending is uncertain and leaves the problem only temporaraly solved...but shepard has a chance to survive.

So its shepards choice on whether to give into fate and die to save the universe or leave it to chance and hope for the best. Most movie heroes will do what they have to do to ensure their goal is reached...even if it means death, but the interactive nature of mass effect 3 allows us to do otherwise

But I don't agree with "the problem."

Fate vs Hope is a valid theme to play on but if I haven't even been successfully convinced there is a problem that requires a dramatic choice, I cannot be sold on the theme.

[Eryri]

Nightwriter wrote...

But I don't agree with "the problem."

Fate vs Hope is a valid theme to play on but if I haven't even been successfully convinced there is a problem that requires a dramatic choice, I cannot be sold on the theme.

Agreed.

To put the destroy ending into a smaller, more easily relatable context, it's as though you and and a group of your friends are being held at gunpoint by a gibbering, pants-on-head maniac. The said maniac is convinced that people with blue eyes are all conspiring to make the sky fall in. He therefore orders you to stab all your blue eyed friends, or he'll shoot everybody. Then, when it's all over, you're expected to feel like a hero for saving most of your buddies, instead of feeling like a craven traitor, who indulged the delusions of your captor to save your own skin.

I'm not sure how that analogy would apply to synthesis. Stitching all the blue and brown eyed people together into human centipedes perhaps...?

Modifié par Eryri, 04 juillet 2013 - 04:24 .

[Nightwriter]

We never speak of Human Centipede. NEVER.

Also yes, I dig that analogy.

[favoritehookeronthecitadel]

Nightwriter wrote...

We never speak of Human Centipede. NEVER.

Also yes, I dig that analogy.

I feel like they were a human Centipede when they wrote this game. 

[LinksOcarina]

CronoDragoon wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

They aren't banking on things being different, because all of the evidence (unless you unite the Geth and Quarians peacefully) is to the contrary, including what is said to you by several characters.

Sorry for the confusion that was my bad there. 

No problem, but I do disagree. I choose Destroy because I do believe that things will be different, and that the next group of synthetics can also coexist the same way that the geth (I made peace) and EDI were on their way to doing.

Then it seems like the issue stems from interpretation of what is seen moreso than something really factual, you know what I mean?

If we believe we can find hope through destruction of these reapers, isen't it just as valid that we can find hope in controlling them, or pushing forward with evolution like Shepard did? In a sense, that does validate everything said in the final minutes of the game because it is interpretation vs fact, because we can find hope over fate. 

In it's own way that makes the endings deeper than we may realize. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 04 juillet 2013 - 06:46 .

[CronoDragoon]

LinksOcarina wrote...
Then it seems like the issue stems from interpretation of what is seen moreso than something really factual, you know what I mean?

If we believe we can find hope through destruction of these reapers, isen't it just as valid that we can find hope in controlling them, or pushing forward with evolution like Shepard did? In a sense, that does validate everything said in the final minutes of the game because it is interpretation vs fact, because we can find hope over fate.

It is my personal belief that you can find hope in each of the endings, certainly.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Controlling the reapers? People are going to suddenly accept their new reaper masters just because they stopped shooting at them? Your new galactic order will not end well. Yeah, you'll have them start rebuilding, but then they get to watch over everyone.... forever. You become the new Leviathans. They'll build synthetics. Then what? Maybe they'll build them to challenge the Reapers again. But the synthetics will turn on them. Will you recognize that you are part of the problem?

Hope?

Destroy is hope. Too bad they tainted it. Too bad it was attached to the sucktastic ending.