585 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Well it's different kinds of screwed. That's what the choice is about. 

A hard choice would be one where I could see legitimate benefit to making the choice.  

 

This is the Ghostbusters' "Choose the form of the Destructor!"  

[Obadiah]

A hard choice would be one where I could see legitimate benefit to making the choice.  
...

The "benefit" is that the Reaper invasion is ended.

[Farangbaa]

The "benefit" is that the Reaper invasion is ended.

 

That's not good enough for him. He needs to save everybody and ride out of the citadel on a My Little Pony and wants to kill the Reapers with a beam made out of friendship and love.

[Iakus]

The "benefit" is that the Reaper invasion is ended.

Simple survival is not enough.

 

By that measure, the Railoi had an equally viable plan.

 

Or the quarians flying off in their fleet and hiding between the stars.

 

Throw everyone else to the wolves, and emerge when the Reapers return to dark space.  Isn't that worth it to save yourselves?

[FOX216BC]

Refuse: Pointless

Control: Become the very thing you were meant to destroy.

Destroy: Kill the enemy, but also kill EDI, the Geth if they are still arround.

Don't see the ending of your Shepard. 

And set back all galactic civilizations by destroying the Mass relays, as if the Reapers didn't cause enough damage.

Synthesis: Even in a sfi world this is total BS.

The strengths of both the weakness of neither...?   Let me correct that. All the SAME strenght and all the same WEAKNESS.

 

 

The endings are irrelevant at best.

 

Why... because they were forced upon the player.

Apart from destroy, that one was disadvised.

 

 

I blame the whole thing on "non conventional warfare solution, we must gamble on the we not know what it does crucible thingy, because the Reapers are invincible, WHY? cause the catalyst says so" scenario.

[DrBlingzle]

Simple survival is not enough.

 

By that measure, the Railoi had an equally viable plan.

 

Or the quarians flying off in their fleet and hiding between the stars.

 

Throw everyone else to the wolves, and emerge when the Reapers return to dark space.  Isn't that worth it to save yourselves?

First of all I doubt either of those methods mentioned would work, the reapers  are nothing if not methodical. And secondly it's not the same is it? Even in destroy, while you are sacrificing all synthetics, you are stopping the reapers permanently. They will not return to perform more harvests. whereas the other methods where purely temporary, destroy will ensure that no more species will be killed by the reapers. The cost, though high, is worth it.

 

Edit: And, wow, I just realized I'm defending the destroy ending.

Well this is weird.

[Iakus]

First of all I doubt either of those methods mentioned would work, the reapers  are nothing if not methodical. And secondly it's not the same is it? Even in destroy, while you are sacrificing all synthetics, you are stopping the reapers permanently. They will not return to perform more harvests, whereas the other methods where purely temporary destroy will ensure that no more species will be killed by the reapers. The cost, though high, is worth it.

 

But "the chaos will come back"  New synthetics will be created and it will start all over again

 

Bioware the Catalyst says so

[DrBlingzle]

But "the chaos will come back"  New synthetics will be created and it will start all over again

 

Bioware the Catalyst says so

That is not certain, the possibility of a peace between the geth and quarians proves that . And even if it did happen I doubt those wars would cause the level of destruction caused by the reapers.

[Iakus]

That is not certain, the possibility of a peace between the geth and quarians proves that . And even if it did happen I doubt those wars would cause the level of destruction caused by the reapers.

Wait, I thought the geth/quarian peace didn't count?

 

I mean, the Catalyst is so certain, "The chaos will come back"!  ALl life would be extinsuished if organics and synthetics were *gasp* allowed to coexist!

 

Gee, does this mean "Synthesis is the final evolution of life" is bunk too?

[Farangbaa]

That is not certain, the possibility of a peace between the geth and quarians proves that . And even if it did happen I doubt those wars would cause the level of destruction caused by the reapers.

 

The possibility of peace changes nothing. That's just one species of AI making peace with one species of Organics.

That's like showing a picture of a Israeli - Palestinian couple holding hands and saying there's no problems in Israel/Palestine.

[DrBlingzle]

Wait, I thought the geth/quarian peace didn't count?

 

I mean, the Catalyst is so certain, "The chaos will come back"!  ALl life would be extinsuished if organics and synthetics were *gasp* allowed to coexist!

 

Gee, does this mean "Synthesis is the final evolution of life" is bunk too?

First of all: I don't see what you mean by the geth/quarian peace didn't count.

Second: Yes I disagree with the catalyst on that, I don't see what you're getting at.

Thirdly: That's a matter of opinion. One which I disagree with myself, but I can see why people would choose synthesis. 

[Iakus]

First of all: I don't see what you mean by the geth/quarian peace didn't count.

Second: Yes I disagree with the catalyst on that, I don't see what you're getting at.

Thirdly: That's a matter of opinion. One which I disagree with myself, but I can see why people would choose synthesis. 

Sorry, but a lot of pro-ending folks refuse to accept that the geth-quarian peace is a valid example of organics and synthetics being able to coexist.  They think it's an anomaly at best, temporary at worst.

 

The second point is that if certain details the Catalyst tells us are innacurate, how can we trust any of its conclusions?  Why are we forced to go along with what is obviously faulty reasoning?

 

Third: a lot of people swallow what the Catalyst says hook, line and sinker:  Synthesis=peace without looking at the nonsense (as well as the really unfortunate impolications) behind it and such.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

...under the watchful eyes of the Reapers.

The Reapers cannot monitor every last Joe Schmoe in the galaxy even if they wanted to. They weren't good enough to catch the Protheans or Ilos nor the construction of the Crucible. And nothing the new Catalyst says in the epilogue suggests management on a micro-scale either (macro-, sure, but not micro-).

Look, I get you not liking the ending, but tilting at windmills and then freaking out at your own headcanon just makes you look like a lunatic (or, maybe you really are one; that's possible too).
 

Wonder what the cuttlefish will do if anyone does something they see as a "threat to the many"?

Threats like what, galaxy-wide war? Extra-galactic threats? Natural disaster?

 

Probably the same thing any normal government would do if they saw such a thing.
 

How is what I have said in any way inaccurate?

 

It is a strawman.

You claim that in choosing Synthesis, "You have told the entire galaxy that they are unworthy of existing as they are and need to be changed," but I have stated very clearly ITT that that is not my line of thinking at all. So in my case, you are wrong. You are probably also wrong for about 99% of all the instances of it being chosen by anyone.

Here's a shocking revelation for you (get ready for it, it's truly shocking): ... you can pick any Crucible choice without agreeing with the Catalyst, or any of the tragic insinuations anti-enders love to assert about the nature of them!!

[Iakus]

The Reapers cannot monitor every last Joe Schmoe in the galaxy even if they wanted to. They weren't good enough to catch the Protheans or Ilos nor the construction of the Crucible. And nothing the new Catalyst says in the epilogue suggests management on a micro-scale either (macro-, sure, but not micro-).
 

 

They didn't discover Ilos because of a fluke:  all the information on it was destroyed in the initial attack, and tehy went dark afterwards:  And most of them ended up dying anyway while hiding from the Reapers.

 

And Micro or macro, the people of the galaxy are not free.

 

 

Look, I get you not liking the ending, but tilting at windmills and then freaking out at your own headcanon just makes you look like a lunatic (or, maybe you really are one; that's possible too).

 

It's also possible that I look at the endings with a critical eye, and see very unpleasant implications in them

 

 

Threats like what, galaxy-wide war? Extra-galactic threats? Natural disaster?

Probably the same thing any normal government would do if they saw such a thing.

 

What like harvesting species and turning them into Reapers is "preserving life"?

 

 

It is a strawman.

You claim that in choosing Synthesis, "You have told the entire galaxy that they are unworthy of existing as they are and need to be changed," but I have stated very clearly ITT that that is not my line of thinking at all. So in my case, you are wrong. You are probably also wrong for about 99% of all the instances of it being chosen by anyone.

Here's a shocking revelation for you (get ready for it, it's truly shocking): ... you can pick any Crucible choice without agreeing with the Catalyst, or any of the tragic insinuations anti-enders love to assert about the nature of them!!

 

Well the Catalyst sure took that tack:

 

"I think we'd rather keep our own form"

"You can't"

 

Plus he places all the blame for the situation on organics for daring to try and improve their lives with synthetics.

 

And when you look at all three endings together, there's a common theme:  Organics and synthetics cannot coexist peacefully.  You have to either remove one of them (Destroy)  Allow one to dominate the other (Control)  or change them all into some third faction (Synthesis), changing them into something else.  My words were harsh.  But they were not innacurate.

 

There is no "leave us in peace to find our own solution" which, ironically is exactly what my Shepard told the Rannoch Reaper.

 

Whether or not I agree or disagree with the Catalyst, in choosing an ending, I am going along with its conclusion.  I am tacitly endorsing it.

[dreamgazer]

There is no "leave us in peace to find our own solution" which, ironically is exactly what my Shepard told the Rannoch Reaper.

As there shouldn't be.

[dreamgazer]

1) It isn't.  Always got a pang leaving someone behind,  Kinda wish Bioware had left in being able to rescue both.  Yeah I'm one of the very few who liked both Kaidan and Ashley.

Yikes. Not sure we should even continue this conversation if you think one of the most iconic and defining moments of the first game, of the franchise, isn't fun and should have been done differently. Sacrifice was, is, and always will be a (the) crucial theme in this series.
 

2) I choose not to kill them.  Never had a problem with it.  Though honestly, not being able to contact the Council was rather silly.  Heck Garrus even suggests it!

Even my rachni-saving Shepard, a paragade, has a problem with this. It's a naive decision based on hopeful (partly-strategic) idealism and moral skittishness, and you (can) get berated for it both before and after making the decision. You should have a problem with it.
 

3) "Sacrifice" there is a grayer area.  You're not sending them in defenseless.  It's not like you're about to shoot them unawares with a red wave of space magic that'll fry their brains.  You're sending ships in to shoot other ships.

You're sending ships in to die, at your command, which is made clear. Surely you've taken Ashley with you to the Citadel, who bluntly advises you of this. There's very little gray area: it's either almost ten-thousand aliens and a dead council, or almost ten-thousand humans and a preserved council.
 

Think Firefly:
 
Simon: I'm trying to put this as delicately as I can.  How do I know you won't kill me in my sleep?
Mal: You don't know me, son, so let me explain this to you once:  If I ever kill you, you'll be awake. You'll be facing me, and you'll be armed.

Shepard wasn't even among the fleet, though. The call was made from a distance, and thousands of lives were extinguished as projected.

And you've yet to explain how any of that was "fun".

[Farangbaa]

As there shouldn't be.

 

The Catalyst couldn't allow such a thing anyway. It has to solve the problem, it has no other option.

[dreamgazer]

The possibility of peace changes nothing. That's just one species of AI making peace with one species of Organics.

In a cycle with a turn of events that justifies its warped programming.

Tentative peace in one debatable counter-example means little. Proof that the problem persists means quite a bit more.

You're gonna have to dethrone the Reaper overlord by force.

[Obadiah]

...
And Micro or macro, the people of the galaxy are not free.
...

They're as free as they would be living under any other system of laws where certain behavior is illegal.

...
It's also possible that I look at the endings with a critical eye, and see very unpleasant implications in them
...

There is, but you are simply repeating arguments which we as a forum have had before. You have not said anything new - your arguments are the same, and the response is the same. Its not that you (or anyone) should not present your perspective on the ending - but by ignoring the repeated responses, not building upon what has come before, the original argument no longer has any integrity.

...
What like harvesting species and turning them into Reapers is "preserving life"?
...

Its a different perspective. One that evaluates the essence of life differentlt, and looks at organics not as individuals, but as a species. Elevating the value of the collective many over the few is not a brand new perspective by any means - hopefully it is not something any of us have to actually do in real life.

...
Well the Catalyst sure took that tack:

"I think we'd rather keep our own form"
"You can't"

Plus he places all the blame for the situation on organics for daring to try and improve their lives with synthetics.

And when you look at all three endings together, there's a common theme: Organics and synthetics cannot coexist peacefully. You have to either remove one of them (Destroy) Allow one to dominate the other (Control) or change them all into some third faction (Synthesis), changing them into something else. My words were harsh. But they were not innacurate.

There is no "leave us in peace to find our own solution" which, ironically is exactly what my Shepard told the Rannoch Reaper.
...

That was literally the first thing that was tried a billion years ago before the Catalyst was created, and it repeatedly failed.

...
Whether or not I agree or disagree with the Catalyst, in choosing an ending, I am going along with its conclusion. I am tacitly endorsing it.

No you're not necessarily doing anything of the sort. If you don't accept the Catalyst's conclusion, then you stopped the Reaper invasion, sacrifices had to be made, Synthetics will be built and emerge eventually, and any problems that occur afterwards will be dealt with by others.

[Iakus]

 
You're sending ships in to die, at your command, which is made clear. Surely you've taken Ashley with you to the Citadel, who bluntly advises you of this. There's very little gray area: it's either almost ten-thousand aliens and a dead council, or almost ten-thousand humans and a preserved council.
 

No, I'm sending ships to fight, at my command (or rather, Hackett's command).  It's ten thousand aliens and the Council will die, or thousands of humans may die.  But the humans do not die helpless.

 

 

Shepard wasn't even among the fleet, though. The call was made from a distance, and thousands of lives were extinguished as projected.

And you've yet to explain how any of that was "fun".

 

 

The "fun" was a didn't fire a space-magicky death ray at the human fleet to get to Sovereign. 

[dreamgazer]

No, I'm sending ships to fight, at my command (or rather, Hackett's command).  It's ten thousand aliens and the Council will die, or thousands of humans may die.  But the humans do not die helpless.

Nope, they will die in exchange for the Ascension, which is made very clear.
 

The "fun" was a didn't fire a space-magicky death ray at the human fleet to get to Sovereign.

Let's try one last time: how was any of what I listed considered "fun"?

[Iakus]

They're as free as they would be living under any other system of laws where certain behavior is illegal.

 

I think you meant to add "if that government was run by an immortal unaccountable  god-king who has the power to destroy the galaxy at any time"

 

 

There is, but you are simply repeating arguments which we as a forum have had before. You have not said anything new - your arguments are the same, and the response is the same. Its not that you (or anyone) should not present your perspective on the ending - but by ignoring the repeated responses, not building upon what has come before, the original argument no longer has any integrity.

 

So since your arguments haven't changed either, does that mean your argument no longer has any integrity?  Because I haven't heard much beyond "you so pessimistic!"

 

 

Its a different perspective. One that evaluates the essence of life differentlt, and looks at organics not as individuals, but as a species. Elevating the value of the collective many over the few is not a brand new perspective by any means - hopefully it is not something any of us have to actually do in real life.

 

 So the Shepalyst will glass over Tuchanka "for the good of the many" if it's calculations indicate that's a good idea "for the many".  Gotcha.

 

 

That was literally the first thing that was tried a billion years ago before the Catalyst was created, and it repeatedly failed.

 

Hearsay. 

 

 

No you're not necessarily doing anything of the sort. If you don't accept the Catalyst's conclusion, then you stopped the Reaper invasion, sacrifices had to be made, Synthetics will be built and emerge eventually, and any problems that occur afterwards will be dealt with by others.

 

Defeating the Reapers by becoming Reaper-Lite is not, imo, a satisfying conclusion.

 

They're only as good as the world allows them to be.  I'll show you, when the chips are down, these... these civilized people?  They'll eat each other.  See, I'm not a monster, I'm just ahead of the curve.

[Iakus]

Nope, they will die in exchange for the Ascension, which is made very clear.
 

No, it's may.  Hacket says they may not have enough firepower to stop Sovereign.

 

Yes losses are likely, as happens in combat in general.  But a given number of losses are not a guarantee.  Yes, people are likely to die to the geth, but as Shepard had shown throughout the game, they are not invincible, they can be faced and beaten.

 

 

Let's try one last time: how was any of what I listed considered "fun"?

 

And I already told you:  I am sending people to fight, not to die.  These are ships, not suicide bombers.  If they do die, it's to the suckage that is combat.  They do not die helplessly at the hands of a supposed ally, but to enemy fire, while they are shooting back.

[dreamgazer]

No, it's may.  Hacket says they may not have enough firepower to stop Sovereign.
 
Yes losses are likely, as happens in combat in general.  But a given number of losses are not a guarantee.  Yes, people are likely to die to the geth, but as Shepard had shown throughout the game, they are not invincible, they can be faced and beaten.

http://youtu.be/bNnd6oUEQ2I?t=3m7s
 
Sorry, but it's will. Unless you're ignoring Ashley and the crew now. You're kidding yourself if you think the casualties weren't going to be comparable.

 

"We need to save the Ascension, no matter what the cost!"  SACRIFICE. 
 

And I already told you:  I am sending people to fight, not to die.  These are ships, not suicide bombers.  If they do die, it's to the suckage that is combat.  They do not die helplessly at the hands of a supposed ally, but to enemy fire, while they are shooting back.

They die on the orders of Commander Shepard, instead of preserving precious numbers to focus on the direct threat. "If they do die" is a idealistic way of avoiding the truth.  There's a reason the neutral option is to "Concentrate on Sovereign".

 

So, it's "fun" to sacrifice troops for an optional rescue mission that's going to kill nearly ten-thousand of their numbers?

 

How about the rachni? 

[Farangbaa]

Is it time?

 

I think it's time.