265 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

You're getting emotionally distressed at a moral dilemma that doesn't let you upper-left blue trigger your way out of everything.

 

There are valid reasons to hate the ending. I myself hate the ending. But emotional distress and personal tastes is not an argument to making it bad. It's dismissed, and rightfully so.

Are you kidding, Blue is even worse!

 

I'd say something that's branded as entertainment that causes your audience distress is something to be taken seriously rather than dismissed.  Otherwise, it's not "entertainment"

 

The trick is finding out where it went wrong.  I submit Bioware made no more than a token effort to discover why their "art" wasn't "entertainment"

 

And I've posted many times before the more mechanical reasons why the endings suck.  They seem to get regarded as trivial compared to the potential feel-good aspects of the breath scene.  Or ruling the galaxy as a techno-god, or whatever. 

 

So I guess I really can't win.

[AlanC9]

I'm pretty sure "blue" there referred to Paragon dialogue options, not Control.

[Iakus]

I'm pretty sure "blue" there referred to Paragon dialogue options, not Control.

I know.  But the decision chamber is also shaped like a giant dialogue wheel with Control (Blue) in the paragon spot and Destroy (Red) in the renegade spot 

 

Added a   to indicate being facetious

[KaiserShep]

So synthesis is neutral? This is indeed a disturbing universe.

[ImaginaryMatter]

So synthesis is neutral? This is indeed a disturbing universe.

 

It is the natural evolution of life.

[KaiserShep]

Humbug. Poppycock even.

[SwobyJ]

Why would Synthesis be neutral?

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Why would Synthesis be neutral?

 

Say what you will about the Green ending, but I think -- ignoring the questionable logic between start-point and end-point, and ignoring the continued presence of the Reapers -- the state of the galaxy created through that particular ending choice is something that I think both Paragon- and Renegade( and every combination in between)-minded players can admire and wish to strive towards!

[SwobyJ]

I don't think its neutral, because it deliberately acts against the wishes of others.

 

A synthesis in decision making in general isn't neutral. It is still an exercise in agency and will.

 

You said it yourself HYR, 'ignoring X, ignoring Y'. You have to ignore things in order to view Synthesis as a neutral agreement that works for all. As it stands, during this war - the Reapers are unaware of it before it happens (their collective intelligence knows, but they don't - at least as far as we know), and our Alliance and co. allies on the ground and in space and across the galaxy are utterly unaware.

 

That's not neutral - it goes further into a disregard of their wishes and position in a choice being made.

[Ieldra]

I don't think its neutral, because it deliberately acts against the wishes of others.

No. It acts regardless of others' wishes, not necessarily against them. It also works the other way round. Suppose you chose something else, and the public became aware of the alternatives later: what about all those who'd say "Why the hell didn't you choose Synthesis. It's what I'd have wanted."

 

In general, I find the argument "You're acting against others' wishes" hypocritical and flawed. You are where you are, you can't ask others, and you alone are called to make the decision about the future of civilization. This is not a democraftic process. You may wish it was, but that doesn't change anything. You can't make it into one. You may believe your choice is what the majority would've wanted, but you can't ever know. You will make the decision - any decision - regardless of others' wishes.

 

.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

I don't think its neutral, because it deliberately acts against the wishes of others.

 

A synthesis in decision making in general isn't neutral. It is still an exercise in agency and will.

 

You said it yourself HYR, 'ignoring X, ignoring Y'. You have to ignore things in order to view Synthesis as a neutral agreement that works for all. As it stands, during this war - the Reapers are unaware of it before it happens (their collective intelligence knows, but they don't - at least as far as we know), and our Alliance and co. allies on the ground and in space and across the galaxy are utterly unaware.

 

That's not neutral - it goes further into a disregard of their wishes and position in a choice being made.

 

What I mean to say is that the ultimate result of this ending -- a galaxy that has achieved this great breakthrough, which promises fast-tracked advancement and where conflict is a thing of the past -- is something I think all Shepards can admire and aspire to, that's all. Obviously if that were all it was, it would not be so unpopular with so many people, but then I don't think the writers realized the negative implications of the endings when they wrote it the first time around, but that's another thing.

[Iakus]

What I mean to say is that the ultimate result of this ending -- a galaxy that has achieved this great breakthrough, which promises fast-tracked advancement and where conflict is a thing of the past -- is something I think all Shepards can admire and aspire to, that's all. Obviously if that were all it was, it would not be so unpopular with so many people, but then I don't think the writers realized the negative implications of the endings when they wrote it the first time around, but that's another thing.

Not my Shepard.

 

The galaxy didn't "earn" this.  They don't even know what "this" is.

 

Fast tracking has proven time and again to be a recipe for disaster.  Rushing in without understanding the potential consequences of your actions.  Especially bad when ysaud actions are both universal and irrevocable.

 

The galaxy will "earn" this when they as a people know what Synthesis is (both the good and the bad), are willing to accept it on their own rather than at the behest of another, and can build such a device on their own without cribbing off the plans of another people.  Or at the very least be able to comprehend what it is they're building.

[Anacronian Stryx]

It is the natural evolution of life.

Only if you have a creationists understanding of what evolution is..which is no understanding at all.

[Obadiah]

No. It acts regardless of others' wishes, not necessarily against them. It also works the other way round. Suppose you chose something else, and the public became aware of the alternatives later: what about all those who'd say "Why the hell didn't you choose Synthesis. It's what I'd have wanted."
 
In general, I find the argument "You're acting against others' wishes" hypocritical and flawed. You are where you are, you can't ask others, and you alone are called to make the decision about the future of civilization. This is not a democraftic process. You may wish it was, but that doesn't change anything. You can't make it into one. You may believe your choice is what the majority would've wanted, but you can't ever know. You will make the decision - any decision - regardless of others' wishes.

This is the part of the ending that I think is very much a Jesus metaphor. Beyond the sacrifice imagery, if there is a "sin" here in making a choice with the Catalyst, then Shepard is the one who becomes responsible for it, who suffers for it, and absolves the rest of the galaxy of its responsibility by making the choice himself.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Only if you have a creationists understanding of what evolution is..which is no understanding at all.

 

Um... okay?

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Not my Shepard.

 

The galaxy didn't "earn" this.  They don't even know what "this" is.

 

Fast tracking has proven time and again to be a recipe for disaster.  Rushing in without understanding the potential consequences of your actions.  Especially bad when ysaud actions are both universal and irrevocable.

 

The galaxy will "earn" this when they as a people know what Synthesis is (both the good and the bad), are willing to accept it on their own rather than at the behest of another, and can build such a device on their own without cribbing off the plans of another people.  Or at the very least be able to comprehend what it is they're building.

 

So, like I said, it's an end-result that anyone's Shepard can admire or aspire to (so long as the means by which it's achieved are okay by them).