The endings (again)

I think the new elitist destroy ending "emotional support for like-minded individuals" thread clearly proves you're right on that one.

I read the OP's post... and decided to respect her wish to only discuss the destroy ending with "like-minded individuals."  So, I've been staying clear of it since I'm clearly not one of those.

I've been playing Pathfinder: Kingmaker lately. I just started the final act.

Also getting ready for another XCom 2 run. GOt a bunch of Mass Effect reskin mods so Advent is now dressed as Cerberus and I can have asari, turians, krogan, etc on my squads. I figure this will be a better ME3 than ME3.

See... you mod them anyways... no point in staying upset about what Bioware did.  I think we'll maybe hit a point where devs will just give up on developing games and work on developing dev kits for everyone to make their own games.

There is a difference between understanding what common words mean, and what someone's opinion is. A world of difference.

You just can't make an honest argument to save your life. That's not on us, that's on you.

I'll give you a simple example. The existence of the Catalyst on the Citadel. Some have complained it is stupid and ruins the point of ME1 as the Catalyst would have control of the Citadel and simply operate the relay it self. That is a negative perspective.



However during the talk with the Catalyst it sets itself up as something akin to a scientists observing the galaxy and only acting indirectly thought the Reapers. Combine that with the fact the entire point of the Citadel is to be a massive trap that races can live for thousands of years on without figuring out it's true nature. There is no reason for the Catalyst to control anything because that is what the Keepers and the Reapers are for. And since it acts as an observer of the galaxy the aberration of the Prothean scientists disabling the Keeper signal is something it would obverse without interfering with. Because that is what scientists do they obverse and accept all aberrations and alternating to their experiments. They don't stop the experiment and alter it until it comes out exactly the way they want it to. Those people are called frauds and are a factor in why we have people that think vaccines cause autism and other just migraine inducing stupidity.


That is a more positive perspective.



One takes the lack of direct explanation as bad and the other fills in the blanks we are not directly told with logic and supporting reason that fits. It fits with the events of ME1, it fits with the behavior and motivation the Catalyst gives during our chat with it in ME3. And since ME1 the big suspension of belief is that the Citadel is basically a massive mouse trap that has been working for countless races for countless cycles. The idea the Catalyst doesn't actually have any control of the Citadel nor does it need any control with the existence of the Keepers doesn't need even a fraction of the suspension of belief as the massive floating mouse trap in space.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!  Been trying to explain that for years!  It's an Ai that thinks and observes like a scientist.  That's it!  If anyone played Leviathan it makes even more perfect sense.  The whole galaxy is an experiment to test it's hypothesis.    

CAN I LIKE THIS TWICE??!!!???

Oh don't give us your martyr act again - its painful to witness. My conclusions are targeting the direct decisions you have stated you made - everything I have said references a decision you made. Your decision to broker peace, between Quarians and Geth then kill them because their death is acceptable casualties despite what you told them. Your words, not mine. And as for that mealy mouthed 'oh all morality is nuanced and grey' claptrap,... So its a Paragon decision to commit genocide on an entire allied people is it? To betray and kill them behind false promises? Where in the rest of the series do Paragon choices work like that, hm? Where do they constitute mass murder of innocent people? And its not dishonorable to betray your allies and kill them? So that Renegade interrupt to shoot Mordin in the back was a glitch was it? Should it have been a Paragon interrupt? You don't know what you're talking about.

Some moral situations are grey - this is not one of them.  If Destroy or Refuse were the only choices it would demand a regrettable but necessary Renegade decision to all but the most foolish player. But that isn't the case for most players unless they rush through the game. You had 2 other options and choose the only one that broke your word and killed your allies. Because it was safest to organics and you deemed that certainty more important than your word to the Geth and worth more than their lives - again your words, not mine. Its Renegade thinking - perfectly valid but your vapid 'if its for the greater good then its automatically a more nuanced decision, Paragon even' is as ignorant as it is inaccurate.  You are a Renegade player - accept it or don't, its not my problem. Nor is there reason to run from it - its in the game. Its a valid stance even if most balk at being so heartless and lacking in basic humanity.

As for nuance, I khow there are many paths to justice and wisdom is not always best served by being too dogmatic. I try to keep things on the level but there are times when hard choices lead to better overall outcomes than just 'Be Good all the time because momma said so!' I take Pitne For's bribe to have a friendly smuggler in an unfriendly part of space, I let the Javelin missiles destroy the colony cityto save the spaceport and keep the region from being overrun with pirates, I shoot Dr Wayne and Dr Saleon to set an example that such cruelty won't be tolerated by me, I ally with Balak to get the Batarians - I'm well used to making Renegade decisions if they are genuinely the smarter option and serve what I deem to be the greatest good. And sometimes like with the Javelins, there's no truly good choice to make, just the one you think will do the most good in the long run.

But genocide of a whole allied people, who you tricked into helping you get this far? In an act that proves the legitimacy of the villain's motives and confirms what they say about organics? Its like Anderson says about Saren's refinery bombing - sometimes harsh action is justified but you have to at least look for alternatives and realize that some costs are too high even if done in a good cause. So save your mealy mouthed grad student ethics classes 'oh, all moral decisions are grey' claptrap  - if lying to your allies to get them to help you and repaying them by killing them *all* isn't dishonorable and cowardly to you when you had 2 other viable options, then I can only assume you're writing this from prison having being arrested for stabbing your neighbour this morning because his car is faster than yours and you had a job interview to get to. I mean couldn't he see you had tp do it...?

I'd send you a rasp in a birthday cake for the bars but I'm worried you might file somebody's face off with it for a packet of smokes.
 

Yeah, it's not like they spent the last billion years or so genociding every advanced sapient race they could find, right?