711 réponses à ce sujet

[Dilandau3000]

For me, it has always been rather simple. Based only on the information available to Shepard at the moment of the choice, it is a matter of choosing between something that sounds like a trap (TIM couldn't control the reapers, but Shepard can? yeah right), complete nonsense (I have no idea what synthesis does or how it does it; it could be no better than Borg assimilation for all Shepard knows), and destroying the reapers.

Destroy is a bad option. I hate destroying the geth and EDI (although I think the geth could probably be restored). But the other two didn't sound like actual choices.

I still think Control is a trap. My paragon Shepard would fly the Reapers into a black hole with control (destroy but killing Shepard instead of EDI and the geth, which I would've preferred). Since this isn't what happened in the epilogue, Shepard's will has been subverted. He was tricked into letting the Reapers live.

And synthesis... explain to me what it did, how it did it, and why it's a good thing, and then I might consider it.

[LtBashkar]

My main issue with many pro-Destroy and anti-Control/Synthesis arguments (note that I emphasis it's pro-destroy AND anti-control/synthesis. There are many good pro-destroy arguments out there that don't rely on targeting the other two and presenting themselves as a least worst option) is that we know how all three endings pan out. If this was similar to Mass Effect 2's ending, in which at the time we had no idea how giving the base or destroying the base would pan out, we've have a lot more elbow room to discuss.

But we know for a fact in the epilogue we see that Shepard does not get corrupted by control, at least in the short-term. There's no indication during it that Shepard loses it or becomes tyrannical, or that it was one big trick by the Reapers. In Synthesis, it's much the same way. We don't see Saren's doomsday apocalypse show up, we aren't subjugated by the Reapers, if anything it resembles an idyllic (if green-hued) utopia in the making.

In Destroy, we see no indication the Geth or EDI come back. They are gone, Shepard is probably alive, the galaxy is devoid of Reaper tech period.

Good arguments for Destroy are that the Reapers have to pay no matter what, that Reaper tech influencing the galaxy any longer is a bad idea, that we'll persevere and come up with solutions beyond what the Reapers and Catalyst offers, or that Shepard doesn't feel right wielding the power of Control, or that Synthesis is too great a change at this time and might compromise individuality, etc.

Arguments such as Synthesis = Saren's option, or that Shepard becomes corrupt, are at best conjecture and headcanon, they are things you can speculate on but can't rely on to form an argument. That fear or that reasoning doesn't ever come up.

Control is problematic for most Shepards because most of them don't trust themselves with that level of power, and feel that it's unnatural to have a fleet of Shepard-controlled Reapers flowing about. Synthesis is problematic for some Shepards because there is no way for them to understand what it entails, and it's a huge step forward into a direction they might not know. Destroy is ideal for some because it's saving the galaxy as it is RIGHT NOW--not transmuting it into Synthesis's world, or turning Shepard into just that, a shepherd.

It's not necessary to rip down Control/Synthesis. They aren't traps, tricks, or "forced mutilation" of the galaxy. They don't corrupt, or indoctrinate. There's not even a slight indicator that Shepard false to corruption in Control's case, or that the galaxy is dominated by the Reaper's in Synthesis. Not getting into the Destroyer mindset is just that, you don't feel your Shepards would choose it. Now, saying Destroy is an insane or incorrect choice--just ludicrous. I don't think any of them are a bad choice besides Refusal.

[von uber]

It depends if you feel forcibly rewriting everyone's dna with reaper tech without consent is worth it to save the sexbot and the geth.

[AlanC9]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

But I'll pose you this question: What makes you think the Kid raised the elevator? Have you seen the Kid's low EMS introduction?

Shepard certainly didn't. If you're refering to the low EMS introduction the kid could be refering to why Shepard is on the Citadel in general, not that exact spot.

Leaving the elevator aside, why tell Shepard anything?

[AlanC9]

LtBashkar wrote...
Arguments such as Synthesis = Saren's option, or that Shepard becomes corrupt, are at best conjecture and headcanon, they are things you can speculate on but can't rely on to form an argument. That fear or that reasoning doesn't ever come up.

Right. These arguments can be good ones for RP; if my Shepard thinks she can't trust herself with Control, she doesn't pick it. There's no need to go further.

Modifié par AlanC9, 10 janvier 2014 - 04:24 .

[AlanC9]

Dilandau3000 wrote...
I still think Control is a trap. My paragon Shepard would fly the Reapers into a black hole with control (destroy but killing Shepard instead of EDI and the geth, which I would've preferred). Since this isn't what happened in the epilogue, Shepard's will has been subverted. He was tricked into letting the Reapers live.

All this proves is that Bio didn't do multiple versions of Control.

Flying the Reapers into the sun is stupid and wasteful. I'm glad Bio didn't make my  Control Shepards do that.Edit: wouldn't have minded an option to do it, though.

Modifié par AlanC9, 10 janvier 2014 - 04:44 .

[Jaulen]

My whole reason for only considering Destroy as a viable option is:

That's the whole motivation Shepard had throughout the games. Find a way to destroy the reapers and end the threat. Also if I play as Shepard, I can't play Shepard's motivations with the foreknowledge of "Shepard knows that if she picks control, she's not going to go all TIM on the world" and "Shepard knows that if she picks synthesis the space magic works, and a new merged Utpoia is born (don't get me started on the silliness of rewriting every living things DNA in the blink of an eye....)" The one time I picked control I felt I had to pick AGAINST the motivations of Shepard....

It would have been done better if in ME2 Shepard had a chance to AGREE with and HELP TIM. Then the whole picking control would have made more sense.

And for Sythesis to be a viable option they had to do a better job of showing the possibility of merging living DNA with sythetics....the only real example we have for that in game are the enemies....the reapers and the husks.

[FluffyCannibal]

Given the similarities between the three 'Win' endings, it all comes down to player choice, really. I choose Destroy mainly because to me, that has always been the aim of the game. I don't like Synthesis - I refuse to accept it as a real ending and refer to it as 'Butterflies and Rainbows' - and it's morally wrong; yes, it makes the galaxy a nicer place, but should Shepard be allowed to make that decision alone? Control could go one of two ways - either the Reapers will rebel against Shepard and we'll be back to where we started (minus one super-human Lieutenant Commander), or it's utterly pointless because Shepard will have the Reapers roaming around the galaxy until the end of time, doing absolutely nothing. In that case, wouldn't Destroy have been simpler?

But, anyway, back to my point: To be honest, it doesn't really matter which ending you choose, it's all a matter of personal preference and/or head canon.

[The Twilight God]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Why bother deceiving Shepard when all the kid had to do was just leave him alone at the bottom of the elevator?

Also what about cases where only the Control option is available?

This has already been covered in the actual DT thread. I don't expect you to go through the entire thread and I don't like getting into discussing DT proper in other people's threads. Especially with comments like, "But like IT and many other things it depends a lot on conjecture, arguments about semantics, making sense out of space magic, etc.". This really isn't the place. And you're being vague and making what I would consider false claims.  I'll discuss it with you in that thread if you like.

But I'll pose you this question: What makes you think the Kid raised the elevator? Have you seen the Kid's low EMS introduction?

Shepard certainly didn't. If you're referring to the low EMS introduction the kid could be referring to why Shepard is on the Citadel in general, not that exact spot.

"Shepard certainly didn't"? How exactly did it certainly have nothing to do with anything Shepard did?

The Kid "could be"? Yeah, and it "could be" a keeper who did it having watched events take place? It could be a part of the ward arm opening protocols as they don't finish opening until after the elevator activates. It "could be" that Shepard hit the tip of the console holo-display. Or a combination of some of the things I mentioned. It "could be" anything honestly. There is plenty of conjecture to go around. But to say that it is definitely the Kid as a matter of fact is reaching.

As others have pointed out, if Destroy is the only option in a low EMS situation why would the Kid allow Shepard up into the decision room if it can control the elevator? If we believe the Kid is telling the truth we must accept that it has absolutely no reason to let Shepard up there if total galactic destruction is assured. None. Their dedication seen so far does not dictate the Reapers were willing to commit self suicide, much less galactic suicide, but that is exactly what they must be expecting in low EMS Destroy? Why bring Shepard up there and then try to talk him out of low EMS Destroy when it could have simply left him to rot on that dais?

It makes no sense to claim the Kid operates the elevator. There is no indication that it has any power over any citadel system. The only thing it is shown to have any power over is the control prongs and the synthesis beam. As has also been mentioned, if there was an AI on the Citadel that could control Citadel functions ME1's plotline is nonsensical. I mentioned above, the ward arms completely opening is linked to the arm arms fully extending. Did the Kid do that? Nope. Can't be. If you want to chalk it up to bad writing, be my guess, but don't try to argue against me if you've consigned to "anything goes". Once you choose bad writing there is nothing to logically discuss as it "could be" a magic gnome.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 10 janvier 2014 - 04:50 .

[MattFini]

^ *Like*

[N7Gold]

FluffyCannibal wrote...

Given the similarities between the three 'Win' endings, it all comes down to player choice, really. I choose Destroy mainly because to me, that has always been the aim of the game. I don't like Synthesis - I refuse to accept it as a real ending and refer to it as 'Butterflies and Rainbows' - and it's morally wrong; yes, it makes the galaxy a nicer place, but should Shepard be allowed to make that decision alone? Control could go one of two ways - either the Reapers will rebel against Shepard and we'll be back to where we started (minus one super-human Lieutenant Commander), or it's utterly pointless because Shepard will have the Reapers roaming around the galaxy until the end of time, doing absolutely nothing. In that case, wouldn't Destroy have been simpler?

But, anyway, back to my point: To be honest, it doesn't really matter which ending you choose, it's all a matter of personal preference and/or head canon.

Honestly, I think there is only one "Win" ending, because it seems that the Catalyst and Reapers need Shepard to willingly choose a solution that favors their cause. They tried to use Saren and Illusive Man to convince Shepard that Synthesis and Control respectively are the best courses of action to stop the harvest cycle, and that destroying them causes too many unnecessary sacrifices and gives out no truly positive outcome. Why trust the puppets? Why trust the puppet masters? Follow your instincts and the advice of your allies, they won't lie to you, especially about the right choices sometimes being the ones that destroys your enemy and some, if not most of your allies with them.

Modifié par N7Gold, 10 janvier 2014 - 05:59 .

[Farangbaa]

To those who think Control and Synthesis are Reaper wins:

Explain to me how in low EMS with Collector base destroyed, the Catalyst only presents you with his loss.

In the best possible scenario for the Catalyst, with the galaxy at it's weakest, it just decides to let you win... for the lulz I suppose?