1010 réponses à ce sujet

[jtav]

This is something I've noticed since the EC's release. Those who choose Destroy and Refuse tend to speak of their ending as the best of a bad lot. Those who choose Control and Synthesis tend to be more enthusiastic about their ending choice and be more accepting of the ending scenario overall. Why is that? Is it a case of the minority opinion having to be able to defend itself more ably? Or do Synth/Control people want something different from the ending than Destroy/Refuse?

[Forst1999]

I guess control and synthesis supporters just like the concepts the ending introduces. Whereas many destroyers hate the very idea of synthesis and think the ending would be better if it didn't exist at all.

[Steelcan]

People who like Control and Synthesis aren't going to be ones who disagree with the Catalyst. In order to accept those endings some degree of acceptance of the Catalyst is necessary.

People who reject the Catalyst or on a meta level reject BioWare's bad writing are more inclined to pick the option that does not mesh with what is viewed as the manifestation with everything wrong in the ending.


Just my $.02

[spirosz]

Closure?

[Br3admax]

That and a certain level of insanity comes with even wanting to think those ending are a good idea.

[AsheraII]

Dunno, I picked Destroy, and I'm okay with the ending. It's not the ending I would've written, but you haven't heard me call it bad either.

[ruggly]

I have a friend that doesn't like synthesis, but it's the only ending he will ever choose. You see those people around from time to time.  There's another friend who loves heroic sacrifice endings, so synthesis was made for him.  So it's kind of interesting.

Modifié par ruggly, 19 octobre 2013 - 05:21 .

[Br3admax]

scyphozoa wrote...

I don't have a problem with Synthesis or Control, as both are pretty great outcomes, IMO. Getting to evolve all organic life or getting to become space-god are both pretty appealing to me.

Well I don't like to be super dogmatic in everything. I'm not god, no matter how many species let me deside their fates. I don't want to rewrite history, DNA, or Reaper controls. I just want to get the mission accomplished and go home. Shepard is a soldier. I want him to at least pretend to be that instead of Space Jeebus. 

Modifié par Br3ad, 19 octobre 2013 - 05:26 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

*picked Sync.

I think there are a bunch of reasons for this...

1.) Closure, as was said above. We "get" Shepard's fate and can make peace with it. We're not led on and it's not overly cruel either like it is with Destroy, where Shepard is *hinted* at living and without his arms of legs intact.

2.) Effort justification. Control/Sync are harder choices to make because they require almost a mental 180 you're not prepared for. Destroy is just an on/off switch, and the idea of allies making a sacrifice is not foreign to us, especially not by this point in the game. People have a tendency to be happier without outcomes they put more effort into, to justify doing it in the first place. Human nature.

3.) There is more upside to Control/Sync, they offer unique/interesting new gains. Destroy gains nothing but peace-of-mind. Kinda lame.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 19 octobre 2013 - 05:44 .

[KaiserShep]

There's a lot more ambition involved with both of those endings, particularly synthesis. It goes so far as to promote this idea that somehow the galaxy is going to transcend this and that, and pushes this idea of a super idyllic galaxy, though Control can go either way, since there's a renegade and paragon option. As others have said, there's also a stronger sense of closure, rather than a cliffhanger. I guess there's also the space Jesus thing, which both control and synthesis offer. After all, for Shepard so loved the galaxy, he took one for the team and ascended into reaperhood. After the credits roll, EDI probably scooped up Joker, whose Vrolik syndrome was no doubt magically healed, and slid down a rainbow together.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 19 octobre 2013 - 05:52 .

[Obadiah]

Control and Synthesis aren't as much of a sacrifice as Destroy.

Plus, in Destroy you end up in a peer group of players who hated the Geth and wanted them destroyed, which is not a fun group to end up with.

[KaiserShep]

I wonder how many people who pick control also destroyed the geth.

[Obadiah]

KaiserShep wrote...

I wonder how many people who pick control also destroyed the geth.

Good point. I only mentioned the Geth thing because when the support threads were still getting created and commented upon, the Destroy threads seemed to have the "yeah we won!" and  "**** the Geth" comments. It also had comments from people who thought Destroy was necessary and killing the Geth was heart-wrenching, but pretty damn soon they stopped commenting.

Modifié par Obadiah, 19 octobre 2013 - 06:00 .

[Ribosome]

<-Picked control on my canon MaleShep.

Why? So I could assume direct control of Harbinger

Modifié par ViaNegativia, 19 octobre 2013 - 06:02 .

[KaiserShep]

Obadiah wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

I wonder how many people who pick control also destroyed the geth.

Good point. I only mentioned the Geth thing because when the support threads were still getting created and commented upon, the Destroy threads seemed to have the "yeah we won!" and  "**** the Geth" comments. It also had comments from people who thought Destroy was necessary and killing the Geth was heart-wrenching, but pretty damn soon they stopped commenting.

And I imagine guys like Auld Wulf didn't make it any easier with all of them being horrible Luddites committing crimes against the galaxy.

[Undead Han]

I picked Destroy and am okay with that ending, or at least I am post-EC.

I liked the narration for the Control and Synthesis endings post-EC, but wouldn't roll with either one as my canon ending. Neither one is a victorious conclusion to the Reaper War, since the Reaper fleet remains undefeated in battle, continues to exist and as such poses a threat to the survival of galactic civilization, and some form of a Catalyst remains firmly in control of said fleet. Control gets Catalyst 2.0 a.k.a. the Sheplyst and Synthesis gets to keep the original Catalyst.

I like my Reapers and my Catalyst dead, thank you.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 19 octobre 2013 - 06:11 .

[Wulfram]

I picked Control as the least bad of a bad lot. Destroy kills the geth, Synthesis is gibberish, so Control is what I'm stuck with.

Though my problem with it is more from a narrative point of view than a logical one.

[KaiserShep]

If I had to go with a second best option, it would be renegade control. Screw everyone, the reapers are under new management, and you will all bow down until dark energy consumes the universe.

[Br3admax]

I never liked the geth and never saw a point to them. Thirty minutes of "Quarians are satanic bullies!" did not change that fact, nor did it make me sympathize with them. If that was enough for you, all the power in the world to you. Me, I see them for what they are. Robots who think violence is the answer to almost any problem who jumped ship at the first second and shot as many people as they could on the way down. So yeah, Destroy was a really easy choice for me.

Modifié par Br3ad, 19 octobre 2013 - 06:30 .

[Deathsaurer]

Steelcan wrote...

People who like Control and Synthesis aren't going to be ones who disagree with the Catalyst.

I don't agree with this. I'll go as far as saying there is probably a reoccuring conflict that is the result of bigotry. I won't agree with it that its conclusions on how to address it are in any way valid or that it is an unsolvable problem. Its reasoning is simply absurd. I will pick Control on a Shepard that opposed ruthless calculus.

[KaiserShep]

When did the geth "jump ship"?

[AlexMBrennan]

Anyone who wants a vaguely logical and coherent ending would object to the ME3 ending* and won't pick Control **or Synthesis ***

* we win mostly because the Reapers hold back - e.g. not using their main guns, not turning off their space elevator - and actively help Shepard - Catalyst taking a mortally wounded Shepard to the control room

** e.g. Shepard is happy to trust a Reaper when told that he'd be able to control the Reapers moments after shooting TIM who had been tricked into believing that he'd be able to control the Reapers by a Reapers... right... if you are happy with that then I have a bridge to sell

*** which is an alleged and nonsensical solution to a an alleged problem which we have to take the head Reaper's word for

Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 19 octobre 2013 - 07:03 .

[Jukaga]

I'm not that fond of sync, but I really like both flavours of control. While I instinctively lean towards destroy, control is by far the most responsible thing you could do in that situation. I think even a Shepard is recoverable. shep is dead in control but the catalyst makes a quantum map of Shep's brain and neurons. No reason you couldn't upload Shepard 3.0 into a new clone body. I think post Lazarus Shepard is a new being with all of Shep 1.0s memory intact, why not do it again at some point.

It's like in Star Trek, every time they step into the transporter they die and a new quantum copy is produced on the other end. The quantum clones are perfect copies in every way and have no idea that they are not the 'original'. It's a question of religion and philosophy if that really matters.

[RatThing]

Maybe it's because if you agree with the ideas of control ("my hero Shepard is the guardian of the Galaxy") or synthesis ("finally organics and synthetics understand each other and can live in peace") there's no reason not to be happy about them (other than the fact that Shepard dies). If you think that the Reapers need to be destroyed and the Galaxy needs to make free choises (but care for the Geth and EDI plus the initial dark age thing) there's a downside.

edit: personally I like both destroy and control as they give me different roleplay options for different Shepard characters. (And the voiceover for control is excellent). It's just synthesis that I don't like.

Modifié par RatThing, 19 octobre 2013 - 07:22 .