711 réponses à ce sujet

[Reorte]

wright1978 wrote...

Reorte wrote...

How can it make things worse?

Maybe the crucible takes time to build up to fire or a simple switch needs to be flicked & any action the catalyst proposes is a means of  sabotaging its activation.

Unless there's something to suggest that that's more likely than not you're at best in an informationless area, in which case your odds aren't any worse by taking things at face value.

[Daemul]

DinoSteve wrote...

Daemul wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...
Would any of this matter if the geth and EDI survived it?

Humans want to save everyone.  In this war, that's not going to happen.

Luckily for us Humans, we get given options to save everyone, we dodged a bullet there.:innocent:

Lets be clear you are given 1 option to save everyone (if subjugation can be called saving), synthesis saves no one.

How does Synthesis not save everyone? Is there an extra scene in the EC which I missed where everyone drops dead or something?

[Reorte]

JasonShepard wrote...

Yeah... Except that the visions are the only reason Shepard has for shooting the tube or grabbing the pylons. If the visions didn't happen to Shepard, then all Shepard has is the Catalyst's descriptions of what the various options do, with no information on how to activate them.

Then again, there's no vision for Synthesis. So I do wonder how Shepard knows that jumping into the beam is the way to activate Synthesis...

They're part of what makes me grind my teeth at the endings (and other things in Mass Effect to be honest). Another case of "we're just supposed to accept it" I fear to justify "not thought through."

[wright1978]

Reorte wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Reorte wrote...

How can it make things worse?

Maybe the crucible takes time to build up to fire or a simple switch needs to be flicked & any action the catalyst proposes is a means of  sabotaging its activation.

Unless there's something to suggest that that's more likely than not you're at best in an informationless area, in which case your odds aren't any worse by taking things at face value.

In an informationless situation taking any action or no action are equally valid.

[Daemul]

Reorte wrote...

iakus wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Refuse? You sanctimonious ........ Shepard, you let everyone die.

You'll never be a pure paragon until you refuse

I refuse to play any of Bioware's endings, I'm more paragon than paragon

That's a refuse stance I can respect

You have the be the most Paragon of the Paragon to choose Refuse, no one else is worthy enough.

[Reorte]

Daemul wrote...

How does Synthesis not save everyone? Is there an extra scene in the EC which I missed where everyone drops dead or something?

There have been plenty of threads on the subject of Synthesis, can I suggest you look through those instead of derailing this one, because if a Synthesis debate gets started derail it will.

[JasonShepard]

wright1978 wrote...

Reorte wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Which is why refuse is a perfectly acceptable choice as when faced with a clearly hostile untrustworthy entity where every action it proposes can be seen as suspect and potentially detrimental. I just about rationalise shooting the tube in the hope even if it doesn't destroy the reapers it might damage the catalyst.

How can it make things worse?

Maybe the crucible takes time to build up to fire or a simple switch needs to be flicked & any action the catalyst proposes is a means of  sabotaging its activation.

I can accept that theory. From Shepard's position, there's no way of knowing that the Crucible isn't just taking its sweet time in activating itself.

However, there is the dialogue from Hackett saying that "Nothing's happening. It's got to be something at your end." Whilst that isn't conclusive (maybe the techs simply haven't detected any energy build up?) it's enough to swing it for me.

So from my Shepard's perspective, the Crucible won't fire if he does nothing. Therefore he has nothing to lose by trusting the Catalyst. But I accept that it won't be the same for everyone.

I can't see this as an argument for Destroy, however. Just Refuse.

[Reorte]

wright1978 wrote...

In an informationless situation taking any action or no action are equally valid.

Exactly, so you may as well go along with taking things at face value. However this situation isn't entirely informationless. There's information, just possibly biased or inaccurate information. With nothing to indicate that reliability though I think it's better to act upon it. Mind you I wouldn't be surprised if whole academic works and philosophies have been written on that subject.

[Reorte]

JasonShepard wrote...

I can't see this as an argument for Destroy, however. Just Refuse.

Only if there's any reason whatsoever to suggest that the Crucible will work and you're stopping it. IMO that's unlikely - even if there was a delayed action there probably would've been some sign in response to pressing the buttons before the elevator, unless the Catalyst could interfere. But if he could do that then he could stop it from happening even if you refuse him, so nothing gained.

[Daemul]

Reorte wrote...

Daemul wrote...

How does Synthesis not save everyone? Is there an extra scene in the EC which I missed where everyone drops dead or something?

There have been plenty of threads on the subject of Synthesis, can I suggest you look through those instead of derailing this one, because if a Synthesis debate gets started derail it will.

My bad, I wasn't trying to derail the topic, I was just confused at the post I replied to. Let's go back on topic.

[Reorte]

Daemul wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Daemul wrote...

How does Synthesis not save everyone? Is there an extra scene in the EC which I missed where everyone drops dead or something?

There have been plenty of threads on the subject of Synthesis, can I suggest you look through those instead of derailing this one, because if a Synthesis debate gets started derail it will.

My bad, I wasn't trying to derail the topic, I was just confused at the post I replied to. Let's go back on topic.

No problem, I'm only speaking from experience knowing that I wouldn't be able to let it go

[wright1978]

JasonShepard wrote...

I can accept that theory. From Shepard's position, there's no way of knowing that the Crucible isn't just taking its sweet time in activating itself.

However, there is the dialogue from Hackett saying that "Nothing's happening. It's got to be something at your end." Whilst that isn't conclusive (maybe the techs simply haven't detected any energy build up?) it's enough to swing it for me.

So from my Shepard's perspective, the Crucible won't fire if he does nothing. Therefore he has nothing to lose by trusting the Catalyst. But I accept that it won't be the same for everyone.

I can't see this as an argument for Destroy, however. Just Refuse.

Hence why i installed MEHEM & won't ever play the default game as none of my Sheps without some altificially weighted rationalisation regarding tube shooting killing catalyst over choosing refuse & trying to find a sensible means of activating the crucible

Modifié par wright1978, 12 décembre 2013 - 07:44 .

[JasonShepard]

Reorte wrote...

JasonShepard wrote...

Yeah... Except that the visions are the only reason Shepard has for shooting the tube or grabbing the pylons. If the visions didn't happen to Shepard, then all Shepard has is the Catalyst's descriptions of what the various options do, with no information on how to activate them.

Then again, there's no vision for Synthesis. So I do wonder how Shepard knows that jumping into the beam is the way to activate Synthesis...

They're part of what makes me grind my teeth at the endings (and other things in Mass Effect to be honest). Another case of "we're just supposed to accept it" I fear to justify "not thought through."

I agree. Even if I was writing the same ending (ie keeping Catalyst, Crucible, Destroy, Control, Synthesis & Refuse,) I'd have written it differently. However, I work with what I've got, and I can at least assume that the visions are related to whatever psychic technology allowed the Catalyst to get inside Shepard's head and know what the kid looked like. Which runs scarily close to indoctrination, but we're already playing the how-much-can-I-trust-you-game, so... *shrugs*.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Reorte wrote...

Daemul wrote...

How does Synthesis not save everyone? Is there an extra scene in the EC which I missed where everyone drops dead or something?

There have been plenty of threads on the subject of Synthesis, can I suggest you look through those instead of derailing this one, because if a Synthesis debate gets started derail it will.

This

[Reorte]

JasonShepard wrote...

I agree. Even if I was writing the same ending (ie keeping Catalyst, Crucible, Destroy, Control, Synthesis & Refuse,) I'd have written it differently. However, I work with what I've got, and I can at least assume that the visions are related to whatever psychic technology allowed the Catalyst to get inside Shepard's head and know what the kid looked like. Which runs scarily close to indoctrination, but we're already playing the how-much-can-I-trust-you-game, so... *shrugs*.

I see your point. Not a lot I can say to that, although interestingly you could look at is a meta-representation of Shepard and the Catalyst...

Modifié par Reorte, 12 décembre 2013 - 07:49 .

[Vicious]

The more I think about the endings the more I realize how absolutely terrible they are.

People are inferring too much based on their own bias. You can only use what Bioware presented us because we have no idea where they will take the story from here.

I agree with many of you, what follows is largely dumb/silly/ridiculous, but it's what Bioware gave us.

The ending slides/refusal are what happen. So the Catalyst is not lying to you. despite what many claim in this thread. You cannot argue with the Catalyst's retarded circular logic or point out Geth are fighting for organics right outside the window because it is ultimately irrelevant to the endings.

With that in mind, ME3 took the 'synthetic vs organic' theme to the forefront. Based on previous cycles, synthetics vs organics is guaranteed to happen again and again. Leviathans, Even the Protheans were in the middle of their own war with synthetics when the Reapers showed up. So a war with synthetics is likely to happen again with the possibility of organics being completely wiped out


ugh. AWFUL stuff, really. I tried to justify the endings as ambiguous but since I got extended Cut I realized they went the worst way possible and ran with it.

Cue ME4 where:

Destroy didn't wipe out the Geth, just killed their hardware, but now they hate people again.
Control where Shepard takes the Reapers into dark space so they can be irrelevant to the plot and never returns again, and we go back to the way things were in ME1.
Synthesis where the Reapers go into dark space so they can be irrelevant to the plot, the green eyes fade over time, gratz we can all drink the same water but other than that everythings back to ME1.

Modifié par Vicious, 12 décembre 2013 - 07:52 .

[themikefest]

Control--everyone living in fear looking over their shoulder wondering if/when the reapers will fire their laser--that sucks

Synthesis--everyone glowing green and the reapers still exist--that sucks

Refuse--everyone dead--that really sucks

Destroy--reapers dead and I can have a future without the threat of the reapers anymore--excellent. I will pick destroy

Modifié par themikefest, 12 décembre 2013 - 07:59 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

@Vigilant111: Interesting points, sir.

The Citadel was the home of the Intelligence and created by it. So, the idea that a third party built the landing platform without the Intelligence knowing about it seems rather unlikely. It also seems very knowledgeable during Shepard's tour their. It's the perfect guide. If the Intelligence didn't want the Crucible's functionality then it would have ordered to remove it. And yes, it seems to favor the synthesis option. The Intelligence even thinks it is inevitable. If so then synthesis will happen, no matter what other option Shepard chooses.

To me the destruction of the Intelligence and the reapers makes more sense than to keep them alive. The reapers, which use genocide as a means to reproduce themselves, could do so again at any point. If synthesis, according to its fans, does not destroy free will, and synthetics get thinking capabilities of organics then chances are, given the galaxy's history (or even our own), that some of the reapers sooner or later will go rogue. Evil synthetics will be created sooner or later anyway. If not in this galaxy then in another. And if these smell organics or their descendants then, oh, my dear, they will find them. Ghehe. Alternatively, leaving Shepard in control of the reapers doesn't seem to be a good idea either, because, as Shepard puts in the first part of the trilogy, "machines can be destroyed". And thus the controlling Shepard can be destroyed - with all related consequences.

[Shuidizi]

Because Destroy effectively destroys everything that makes this cycle unnatural, from the discovery of technology that we cannot develop on our own, to retarded machines who wants to play god, get rid of all those garbage and let all organics come up a cycle that's truly our own. I'm 100% certain we can do better than those retarded Leviathans. 

Control is potentially a viable option IMO too, my Shepard would use Reapers to repair some damage, wipe out all Leviathans, then ask the Reapers to all self destruct, provided she's still sane by that time. But in my book, the legitimate ending either kills all Reapers or give me the power to kill them all. The ability to wipe out Leviathans is a bonus in the control ending, but my Shepard dies, so I don't choose this one.

Bottom line is this: no race, organic or synthetic, should play god, not in this universe, not in any universe. 

Modifié par Shuidizi, 13 décembre 2013 - 01:53 .

[ShadowLordXII]

Destroy is the only option where the galaxy is left to chart their own future free from reaper influence or domination. It has a lot of problems itself, but it's honestly the best when compared to the other three endings.

Control and Synthesis more or less maintains the status quo with superficial differences and the reapers become karma houdini's for billions of years of genocide.

Reject is the equivalent of a DM getting pissed off and yelling, "Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies!"

[Reorte]

Shuidizi wrote...

Control is potentially a viable option IMO too, my Shepard would use Reapers to repair some damage, wipe out all Leviathans, then ask the Reapers to all self destruct, provided she's still sane by that time. But in my book, the legitimate ending either kills all Reapers or give me the power to kill them all. The ability to wipe out Leviathans is a bonus in the control ending, but my Shepard dies, so I don't choose this one.

Since so many would use it to order the Reapers to destroy themselves (with or without patching things up first) the lack of any sign of that in the EC is disturbing. Either the Shepalyst is unable or unwilling to do that.

[dreamgazer]

ShadowLordXII wrote...

Reject is the equivalent of a DM getting pissed off and yelling, "Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies!"

Eh, the game had been telling us that the rocks were above the galaxy's head from the very beginning.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Reorte wrote...

Since so many would use it to order the Reapers to destroy themselves (with or without patching things up first) the lack of any sign of that in the EC is disturbing. Either the Shepalyst is unable or unwilling to do that.

To be fair, if that ending existed, no one would bother picking Destroy (except folks that really hate EDI).

[Hazegurl]

Who cares if you can't destroy the Reapers. Just pick an ending that best suits you.

Reasons my Shepards pick destroy:

He doesn't give a damn about the Starbrat or what he wants.

He doesn't give a damn about preserving the Reapers.

He isn't afraid to sacrifice anyone or anything in the pursuit of his goals.

When he has a goal he usually sticks to it unless given a beneficial reason to change his mind.

Controlling the Reapers sound nice, becoming a disembodied immortal entity is not. (only one of my Sheps took this path)

Synthesis sounds nice....too nice to be trusted. Besides, my Shepard is about organics and synthetics having the freedom to determine their own path, that will lead to conflicts. You can't choke up and take our natural paths of evolution away out of fear of the future. You face it and deal with it and do the best you can with what you have.

Dealing with tough issues and not running away has been my Shepard's primary opinion. He's not going to give in to the Reapers just to create some sort of preemptive strike against a possible problem. Especially one he had resolved in less time than the starkid.

Besides, if a device like the Crucible can be built to destroy all those with Reaper tech then what is stopping some non-synthesis galactic community from firing their own Crucible at us and taking us all out one day?

[Steelcan]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Since so many would use it to order the Reapers to destroy themselves (with or without patching things up first) the lack of any sign of that in the EC is disturbing. Either the Shepalyst is unable or unwilling to do that.

To be fair, if that ending existed, no one would bother picking Destroy (except folks that really hate EDI).

Or those who wanted to make it back in one(ish) piece