Geth/Quarian Morality Choices

I understand everyone on the internet seems to be incandescent with rage at the ending to Mass Effect 3 but personally i'm more upset at the suggestion of paragon/renegade that comes with your decision to ally with either the Geth or the Quarians.
I was playing through ME3 on my second playthrough taking all the Renegade options possible when I was faced with the Geth/Quarian allegiance choice and as a renegade I had no other option but to save the Quarians. As far as i'm aware there was no renegade option to renounce the Quarians and doom them all,and i'm sure it would have made for a very fitting renegade choice too.

Maybe i'm missing something here but why is one decision good and one is inherently bad? From what I can tell this is Bioware once again shoe-horning a pre-determined morality on to the player (I believe there was a similar instance in ME2 where you had to choose between destroying the Geth or reprogramming them) Neither of these choices are a clear cut good or bad,but Bioware removes that destinction and simply says "Yep,this choice means you're a good guy and the other means you're evil!"

Sorry for being so long winded but I wanted to get it off my chest/explain myself clearly and I'd like to know what other people make of these situations

[Capthcha - Falling Pianos?.. maybe I won't go out today]

For that case the only "good" choice is being able to prevent the war altogether. I don't really think there's a paragon or renegade choice, it's just whether you did enough right to ensure a chance at peace and gain two fleets for the price of one.

In short, choosing which to wipe out wasn't a paragon or rengade choice, it was the decision you have to make between two undesirable choices if you fucked up any chance at peace.

Edit: And correct me if I'm wrong but it sounds like you wanted a choice to have them both killed? I wouldn't call that renegade, I'd just call that incredibly stupid. You need another army to fight the Reapers, wiping both out would be completely pointless. Renegade isn't meant to be chaotic evil, it's meant to be "at any cost".

I'm more iffy about the choice itself.

OKAY GUISE HERES TEH MROAL DILEMA. GENOCIDE GROUP A, GENOCIDE GROUP B, OR SOLVE CENTURIES OF BLOODSHED WITH A FEW INSPIRING WORDS. QLATILY BIOWEAR STORYTELING!1!!

My understanding is that so long as your reputation as paragon/renegade is high enough you can succeed.

Oh,did it sound like I wanted to take both sides out?I certainly didn't mean for it to come across like that,I simply meant that the decision to destroy the Geth should not have been definitively bad. I'd have liked it if there was a paragon and a renegade response to whichever side you choose

Edit: I might be wrong but I thought to make peace between both side you had to have uploaded a save from ME2? If that is the case then I was screwed from the start as I lost all my ME1 and ME2 data many xboxes ago..

The option to make peace between both sides is a calculation of several previous choices you made such as exiling Tali in ME2, defusing the argument between Tali and Legion in ME2, saving the admiral in ME3, re-writing/destroying the Heretics in ME2, deactivating the Geth fighter squadron in ME3 etc.

Kahunaburger:
OKAY GUISE HERES TEH MROAL DILEMA. GENOCIDE GROUP A, GENOCIDE GROUP B, OR SOLVE CENTURIES OF BLOODSHED WITH A FEW INSPIRING WORDS. QLATILY BIOWEAR STORYTELING!1!!

Therefore, I don't see it as a question of just spouting some inspiring words but rather doing so after having aided both sides and proven that the centuries long war between both sides need not continue.

Goofguy:
The option to make peace between both sides is a calculation of several previous choices you made such as exiling Tali in ME2, defusing the argument between Tali and Legion in ME2, saving the admiral in ME3, re-writing/destroying the Heretics in ME2, deactivating the Geth fighter squadron in ME3 etc.

Kahunaburger:
OKAY GUISE HERES TEH MROAL DILEMA. GENOCIDE GROUP A, GENOCIDE GROUP B, OR SOLVE CENTURIES OF BLOODSHED WITH A FEW INSPIRING WORDS. QLATILY BIOWEAR STORYTELING!1!!

Therefore, I don't see it as a question of just spouting some inspiring words but rather doing so after having aided both sides and proven that the centuries long war between both sides need not continue.

The point is more that portraying the situation as either resulting in peace (based on the actions of one person, because that's totally how ethnic conflicts are resolved IRL) or complete/near-complete genocide is a little... I don't know. Immature? Contrived? Stupid? All of the above?

I would love to see a good SF game where you play as Space Gandhi, but ME3 is not that game, and Bioware doesn't have the right writers to make that game.

I think its mostly because the Geth have actually been more or less peaceful and may have aided the galaxy in fighting the Reapers if the Quarians hadn't started a war when the galaxy needed to be united.

Kahunaburger:

Goofguy:
The option to make peace between both sides is a calculation of several previous choices you made such as exiling Tali in ME2, defusing the argument between Tali and Legion in ME2, saving the admiral in ME3, re-writing/destroying the Heretics in ME2, deactivating the Geth fighter squadron in ME3 etc.

Kahunaburger:
OKAY GUISE HERES TEH MROAL DILEMA. GENOCIDE GROUP A, GENOCIDE GROUP B, OR SOLVE CENTURIES OF BLOODSHED WITH A FEW INSPIRING WORDS. QLATILY BIOWEAR STORYTELING!1!!

Therefore, I don't see it as a question of just spouting some inspiring words but rather doing so after having aided both sides and proven that the centuries long war between both sides need not continue.

The point is more that portraying the situation as either resulting in peace (based on the actions of one person, because that's totally how ethnic conflicts are resolved IRL) or complete/near-complete genocide is a little... I don't know. Immature? Contrived? Stupid? All of the above?

I would love to see a good SF game where you play as Space Gandhi, but ME3 is not that game, and Bioware doesn't have the right writers to make that game.

The only reason the Quarians were attacking is because Han'Garrel is a douchebag. Don't think of it as sweet-talking the entire Quarian race, think of it as putting a verbal boot up the ass of an overexcited moron.

ravenshrike:

Kahunaburger:

Goofguy:
The option to make peace between both sides is a calculation of several previous choices you made such as exiling Tali in ME2, defusing the argument between Tali and Legion in ME2, saving the admiral in ME3, re-writing/destroying the Heretics in ME2, deactivating the Geth fighter squadron in ME3 etc.

Therefore, I don't see it as a question of just spouting some inspiring words but rather doing so after having aided both sides and proven that the centuries long war between both sides need not continue.

The point is more that portraying the situation as either resulting in peace (based on the actions of one person, because that's totally how ethnic conflicts are resolved IRL) or complete/near-complete genocide is a little... I don't know. Immature? Contrived? Stupid? All of the above?

I would love to see a good SF game where you play as Space Gandhi, but ME3 is not that game, and Bioware doesn't have the right writers to make that game.

The only reason the Quarians were attacking is because Han'Garrel is a douchebag. Don't think of it as sweet-talking the entire Quarian race, think of it as putting a verbal boot up the ass of an overexcited moron.

Haha that's even worse. A treatment of an ethnic conflict where the only possible outcomes of it are:

A) Ethnic group A gets completely genocided,
B) Ethnic group B gets almost completely genocided,
C) One douchebag gets a talking-to, problem solved.

Yeah, totally a fictional take on a type of real-world problem that treats it with the care and respect it deserves.

I think the mistake you're making is seeing Paragon/Renegade as good/bad - it doesn't necessarily work that way because pretty much everything that Shepard does is "good".

Take the other example you mentioned, reprogramming or killing the geth heretics: both options are presented with good and bad sides to them. Same goes for the geth v quarians in ME3, except in that case there really is a "good" option (saving them both).

Kahunaburger:
I'm more iffy about the choice itself.

OKAY GUISE HERES TEH MROAL DILEMA. GENOCIDE GROUP A, GENOCIDE GROUP B, OR SOLVE CENTURIES OF BLOODSHED WITH A FEW INSPIRING WORDS. QLATILY BIOWEAR STORYTELING!1!!

The choice would have been so much more difficult if you couldn't talk down both groups. With that option there, it makes the other two seem like a non standard game over. Taking away the super happy resolution would make it one of the toughest decisions in the ME series ever.

Playing Renegade does not mean that you have to pick the bottom option in every conversation. For example, you can upload the Reaper code and use your Renegade speech powers to prevent Han'Gerrel from launching the attack.

AD-Stu: I agree that my interpretation of Paragon/Renegade = Good/Bad might not be clear cut but I feel Bioware make a distinction between the two ie. the disfiguration of renegade Shepard,the actions taken by renegade Shep which are very often not would people would consider typical good behaviour etc, and I don't feel everything Shepard does is good,certainly the death of either the Geth or the Quarians isin't clearly a 'good' thing but I can see how the result is (saving the galaxy is for the greater good)

I think my only dislike about that part is that Legion dies no matter what. Legion and Thane are (I think) the only squadmates you can't keep alive at the end of the series. Well, you also have to decide between Mordin and Wrex... Thane is obvious because he was dying anyway, so it was nice for him to go out like a hero...

But Legion was a total bro and they insinuate that he was the very first active Geth platform. Even Tali sticks up for him in the third game. It seemed very out of place for Tali and Legion to have to die when the other side wins, and it was very annoying that if you pick peace or geth, Legion has to "die" to help his people. In a game like that, I personally think there should always be an option to save every character that isn't logically going to have to die (like Thane). Even Mordin has a very convoluted way you can save him and I'm doing a whole new playthrough with that being my sole purpose.

Von Dean:
As far as i'm aware there was no renegade option to renounce the Quarians and doom them all,and i'm sure it would have made for a very fitting renegade choice too.

EDIT: disregard that, I read it wrongly. The more important choices aren't necessarily renegade or paragon, yeah. Don't think you get points for it either way.

RedEyesBlackGamer:

The choice would have been so much more difficult if you couldn't talk down both groups. With that option there, it makes the other two seem like a non standard game over. Taking away the super happy resolution would make it one of the toughest decisions in the ME series ever.

The part with convincing both sides was a reward for having played through Mass Effect 2 and gotten Legion and Tali's missions right. The option to charm/intimidate doesn't even appear if you start a new ME3 game from scratch, or if you screw a few things up during your playthroughs.

ilovemyLunchbox:
Even Mordin has a very convoluted way you can save him and I'm doing a whole new playthrough with that being my sole purpose.

My 2 cents: Mordin doesn't need to be 'saved', he needs redemption. I loved that guy to bits and his death, well, it sucked, but it gave him closure to something that he deeply regretted.

poiumty:

Von Dean:
As far as i'm aware there was no renegade option to renounce the Quarians and doom them all,and i'm sure it would have made for a very fitting renegade choice too.

Wait what? No, that would be stupid. You need at least one side to help you in the war. Not getting either of them would be a clear-cut mission failure.

Renegade doesn't mean evil. That's the only answer you need.

RedEyesBlackGamer:

The choice would have been so much more difficult if you couldn't talk down both groups. With that option there, it makes the other two seem like a non standard game over. Taking away the super happy resolution would make it one of the toughest decisions in the ME series ever.

The part with convincing both sides was a reward for having played through Mass Effect 2 and gotten Legion and Tali's missions right. The option to charm/intimidate doesn't even appear if you start a new ME3 game from scratch, or if you screw a few things up during your playthroughs.

Really? I just figured I got it because I had max reputation. If it is really that hard to get, I can see why it is there. Though, if you don't qualify for one of the Paragon/Renegade options, they just just not be there. Having them be visible but faded out shows a player that they aren't getting the best outcome.

Indecipherable:

ilovemyLunchbox:
Even Mordin has a very convoluted way you can save him and I'm doing a whole new playthrough with that being my sole purpose.

My 2 cents: Mordin doesn't need to be 'saved', he needs redemption. I loved that guy to bits and his death, well, it sucked, but it gave him closure to something that he deeply regretted.

I call bullshit on that. In the second game, Mordin was very much for the genophage and I was with him on it. In the third game, he suddenly hates it. I can see him getting on board with fixing it for the sake of the mission (because that's logical), but he just does a 180 out of nowhere. He doesn't need redemption.

Was right decision at time. Given time travel, would do it again. But still undo later, now. *sniff* Both necessary.

ilovemyLunchbox:

Indecipherable:

ilovemyLunchbox:
Even Mordin has a very convoluted way you can save him and I'm doing a whole new playthrough with that being my sole purpose.

My 2 cents: Mordin doesn't need to be 'saved', he needs redemption. I loved that guy to bits and his death, well, it sucked, but it gave him closure to something that he deeply regretted.

I call bullshit on that. In the second game, Mordin was very much for the genophage and I was with him on it. In the third game, he suddenly hates it. I can see him getting on board with fixing it for the sake of the mission (because that's logical), but he just does a 180 out of nowhere. He doesn't need redemption.

Was right decision at time. Given time travel, would do it again. But still undo later, now. *sniff* Both necessary.

if you talk to him with paragon choices during his loyalty mission you can see he was pretty upset about it but belived it was the best of the worst

Spacewolf:

ilovemyLunchbox:

Indecipherable:

My 2 cents: Mordin doesn't need to be 'saved', he needs redemption. I loved that guy to bits and his death, well, it sucked, but it gave him closure to something that he deeply regretted.

I call bullshit on that. In the second game, Mordin was very much for the genophage and I was with him on it. In the third game, he suddenly hates it. I can see him getting on board with fixing it for the sake of the mission (because that's logical), but he just does a 180 out of nowhere. He doesn't need redemption.

Was right decision at time. Given time travel, would do it again. But still undo later, now. *sniff* Both necessary.

if you talk to him with paragon choices during his loyalty mission you can see he was pretty upset about it but belived it was the best of the worst

I guess that would fix it. My canon Shep is Renegade, and all Mordin ever talks about is how the genophage was absolutely necessary and the whole team agreed on it. I just want Mordin to be able to do experiments on the seashells, you guys...

I took the renegade option to get peace.

It went something along the lines of, "Han'Gerral, if you don't stop your attack NOW, I am going to sit here and watch as my friend enables the rest of the geth to wipe you out in 3 minutes flat."

I actually don't know what the paragon option is, but I feel like the renegade one does actually make sense; You're basically threatening Han'Gerral and his entire species if he doesn't cooperate.

I would've absolutely sided with the Geth after what the Quarians did. And I did.

Then I restarted and sided with the Quarians because Tali. Goddamnit woman, why do you make me stab my awesome friend in the back?

ilovemyLunchbox:

Spacewolf:

ilovemyLunchbox:
I call bullshit on that. In the second game, Mordin was very much for the genophage and I was with him on it. In the third game, he suddenly hates it. I can see him getting on board with fixing it for the sake of the mission (because that's logical), but he just does a 180 out of nowhere. He doesn't need redemption.

Was right decision at time. Given time travel, would do it again. But still undo later, now. *sniff* Both necessary.

if you talk to him with paragon choices during his loyalty mission you can see he was pretty upset about it but belived it was the best of the worst

I guess that would fix it. My canon Shep is Renegade, and all Mordin ever talks about is how the genophage was absolutely necessary and the whole team agreed on it. I just want Mordin to be able to do experiments on the seashells, you guys...

Mordin is one of my favorite characters, and i think his death was beautifully done. if you go renegade and only reveal the sabotage at the end, Mordin will say (actually, yell) that he made a mistake. you can see even in the second game how, while he thought the genophage was necessary at the time, he regrets that such a decision ever had to be made.
besides all that, he was about at the end of his life anyway (i mean, from what i remember he's over 40, right? and that's pretty old for a salarian).

RedEyesBlackGamer:

i don't understand how the decisions of a few Quarians condemns the entire species to death. that strikes me as completely outrageous.

saluraropicrusa:

RedEyesBlackGamer:

i don't understand how the decisions of a few Quarians condemns the entire species to death. that strikes me as completely outrageous.

For those who are interested, you need certain decisions from ME2 to save both races, it's not just blind choices;

"Geth vs. Quarians
In order to achieve peace between the two races, you need to get 5 to 7 points. These points are based on your ME2 and ME3 decisions. If you have 4 points or below, you cannot achieve peace.

-Rewrote the Heretics (0 points)
-Destroyed the Heretics (+2 points)
-Tali is NOT exiled (+2 points)
-Tali has been exiled/You did not do the Loyalty Mission (0 points)
-Resolved Legion/Tali conflict either using the Paragon or Renegade options (+1 point)
-N7 Mission: Save the Admiral on Rannoch in ME3 (+1 point)
-N7 Mission: Destroy Geth Squadron on Rannoch in ME3 (+1 point)
-Completed Legion's Mission in ME3 (or no peace)

You will need a HIGH reputation for the peace talks. If you rewrote the heretics in ME2 BUT achieve peace, you will gain more war assets, but there'll be less quarians. Also, if you rewrote them, you will face more geth than people who destroyed them, in which they'll face less geth."

OT: Maybe it's because I didn't romance Tali but the Geth were much more worthy of living than the Quarians were to me. After about my second playthrough I realised that you can save both sides. But even so, to a lesser degree in ME2 but more so in ME3, the Quarians in general are well... dicks.

They distrust me helping Tali in ME2 with her trial thingy, they fire on a ship with me inside after I just did them a huge favour to save their collective fleet asses by stopping the Reaper signal, they are generally condescending towards me and I think it was their own damn fault that they lost their planet to the Geth in the first place. So they should either accept their fate as a space-born fleet forever and shut up about their homeworld. They make the Geth out as some kind of super evil race that hounded them from their own planet when they created them, then they tried to destroy them. If the Geth show self preservation, which they do, then they are truely living. Yet the Quarians still treated them as machines that have no emotion. Also, "Oh there's a full scale Reaper invasion of the Galaxy? Let's initiate a war with two rediculously large fleets to take back our home world that will probably be eaten by Reapers in a few weeks anyway"

Also Legion is a much better squad member than Tali and is a much more interesting character than those faceless[1] Quarians.

So yeah, the Geth live and the Quarians die. No regrets

[1] See what I did there?

Kahunaburger:
I'm more iffy about the choice itself.

OKAY GUISE HERES TEH MROAL DILEMA. GENOCIDE GROUP A, GENOCIDE GROUP B, OR SOLVE CENTURIES OF BLOODSHED WITH A FEW INSPIRING WORDS. QLATILY BIOWEAR STORYTELING!1!!

Except its not nearly that simple and all the fancy words in the world don't mean shit if you haven't taken steps to make it possible, but hey, people who hate things rarely think things through, so that's okay.

OT: I agree, honestly both groups had their ups and downs, so I just get annoyed like you how it has a set "good v. evil" thing.

RedEyesBlackGamer:

saluraropicrusa:

RedEyesBlackGamer:

i don't understand how the decisions of a few Quarians condemns the entire species to death. that strikes me as completely outrageous.

hold on, i thought Legion implied in that mission that it wasn't a majority that wanted to deactivate the Geth. or am i remembering wrong?
as for the rest of that, to be fair to the Quarians, they've been living on their ships for hundreds of years. Those that actually participated in the initial war are probably long dead. All they have to go on is the stories they've heard about the Geth, and it's not hard to imagine why many would be desperate to end the conflict in the fastest way possible. It's likely the majority of them haven't had any significant contact with any Geth, let alone one like Legion. while it's obviously wrong for them to wipe out the Geth, i fail to understand how genocide of a species is right under any circumstances. neither side deserved to be wiped out.

saluraropicrusa:

RedEyesBlackGamer:

saluraropicrusa:

i don't understand how the decisions of a few Quarians condemns the entire species to death. that strikes me as completely outrageous.

hold on, i thought Legion implied in that mission that it wasn't a majority that wanted to deactivate the Geth. or am i remembering wrong?
as for the rest of that, to be fair to the Quarians, they've been living on their ships for hundreds of years. Those that actually participated in the initial war are probably long dead. All they have to go on is the stories they've heard about the Geth, and it's not hard to imagine why many would be desperate to end the conflict in the fastest way possible. It's likely the majority of them haven't had any significant contact with any Geth, let alone one like Legion. while it's obviously wrong for them to wipe out the Geth, i fail to understand how genocide of a species is right under any circumstances. neither side deserved to be wiped out.

Deserved might be a bit strong, but I wouldn't shed a tear if their antagonistic behavior lead to the destruction of their fleet.

saluraropicrusa:

RedEyesBlackGamer:

saluraropicrusa:

i don't understand how the decisions of a few Quarians condemns the entire species to death. that strikes me as completely outrageous.

hold on, i thought Legion implied in that mission that it wasn't a majority that wanted to deactivate the Geth. or am i remembering wrong?
as for the rest of that, to be fair to the Quarians, they've been living on their ships for hundreds of years. Those that actually participated in the initial war are probably long dead. All they have to go on is the stories they've heard about the Geth, and it's not hard to imagine why many would be desperate to end the conflict in the fastest way possible. It's likely the majority of them haven't had any significant contact with any Geth, let alone one like Legion. while it's obviously wrong for them to wipe out the Geth, i fail to understand how genocide of a species is right under any circumstances. neither side deserved to be wiped out.

They may not deserve extinction, but if only one of them can be saved, you'd bet your ass I'd save the Geth every time. The Quarians have shown a tendency for self-destructive behavior when the Geth are involved. What do you think will happen after the war against the Reapers with all of the Geth tech just floating there above Rannoch? Do you really think Admiral Xen would keep her greedy fingers off of all that tech? Do you really think someone as obsessed with reclaiming the Geth as Xen was would just leave things the way they are?

First time I did it, I was playing as Renegade. I decided to wipe them out, and Legion turned and Tali's replacement (she had died in ME2 with this Shepard) shot him. I felt genuinely bad after that.

However this time I managed to keep them both happy. Legion still died (sadface) but I now have the Geth and Quarian fleets.

I symphatised with the Geth, especially seeing more of their backstory. And there is one line that gets me - when you're on the Normandy, one of the Quarian commanders says something about the Geth attacking, and Legion just cries (something like) "to save themselves from you!"

Brilliant stuff.

Also, Tali aside, most Quarians are dicks.

Kahunaburger:
I'm more iffy about the choice itself.

OKAY GUISE HERES TEH MROAL DILEMA. GENOCIDE GROUP A, GENOCIDE GROUP B, OR SOLVE CENTURIES OF BLOODSHED WITH A FEW INSPIRING WORDS. QLATILY BIOWEAR STORYTELING!1!!

This times a billion. I found out that my "genocide" choice could have been averted if i had enough paragon which rendered the point of this moral dilemma to nothing and it just pissed me off.

Lemme tell you what i did:
I had enough paragon to save them both. Because you see.... my Shepard is space Jesus.

Von Dean:
*Snip*

I've never seen it give Paragon or Renegade points, so therefore each is neutral. It is one of the big problems with the Dialogue wheel and its arrangement though - it generally makes everything look either paragon or Renegade, even when they are just two equally neutral choices. Its why I prefer the list of responses as opposed to an ordered wheel of 'This is good, this is bad'.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked