Deus Ex: Human Revolution endings

These are the available endings in Deus Ex: Human Revolution. The endings are based on one of the four possible final choices of the player in Panchaea. Options offered by Hugh Darrow and Eliza Cassan will always be available; however, you need to rescue David Sarif and William Taggart to obtain their respective ending options.

Each of the four ending choices have three variations in the ending monologue depending on whether the player employed pacifist means, took violent action, or a mix of both methods (neutral) when dealing with situations throughout the game. This means that the game has twelve unique endings.

Darrow: Reveal the truth
Requirements: This option is available under all circumstances.

Hugh Darrow believes that revealing the truth behind the incident will cause mankind to abandon research into human augmentation technology forever. If this option is selected, Eliza will broadcast Darrow's recorded confession, in which nothing is held back and all information is revealed to the world.

Monologue: Jensen reflects on Albert Einstein's quote, "Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal." Jensen remarks that the dream of progress is often perverted, and that human technology have shattered the lives of millions. It is not explicitly stated whether all augmentation research is banned, but Jensen suggests that humanity will fear it.

Sarif: Blame the extremists so that technology may progress
Requirements: Rescue David Sarif and follow Sarif's request.

If this option is selected, Eliza will alter Darrow's message by concealing the creation of the biochip and inserting new content blaming the Humanity Front. By placing the blame on extremism, biotechnology corporations will be free to conduct further research on augmentation technology without hindrance from public opinion.

Monologue: Jensen states that Sarif was right about one thing, which is that it is human nature to desire to rise above our limits. Jensen reflects that using creativity and ingenuity to overcome obstacles is an inevitable cycle.

Taggart: Cover up the Illuminati's involvement
Requirements: Rescue William Taggart and follow Taggart's request.

If this option is selected, Eliza will alter Darrow's message by erasing all mention of the Illuminati and reporting that the lack of regulation resulted in Neuropozyne poisoning. As a result, harsh restrictions will be placed on all human enhancement research and the Illuminati's position will be strengthened.

Monologue: Jensen reflects that Taggart is not afraid of freedom, but is instead afraid of the chaos that occurs when individuals have nothing but morality to constrain them. Jensen remarks that absolute freedom is no better than chaos, and hopes that the men who work in the shadows to maintain order are as wise as Taggart claims they are.

Destroy Panchaea: Let humanity decide
Requirements: Do not select any of the three above messages to send, but instead deactivate Panchaea's pressure regulation control, causing the structure to collapse due to the weight of the ocean. This option is available under all circumstances.

Monologue: Jensen feels that it is not up to Darrow, Taggart, Sarif, or even himself to determine mankind's fate. He has faith that humanity will eventually do what is best, and that none should stand in humanity's way.

Canonical ending
Subsequent Deus Ex media confirm the collapse of Panchaea, but the specific cause of the collapse is not stated.

Mary DeMarle, the lead writer for Human Revolution, has explained that all endings are consistent with the progression of the story after Human Revolution. According to DeMarle, Panchaea was so damaged that it collapsed regardless of which ending option actually occurred, and that any message that was sent would have been ineffective due to the large number of rumors and competing messages in the aftermath of the incident.

DeMarle's resolution of the ending was confirmed in developer commentary in Prima Games' official strategy guide for Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. However, the commentary also notes that at one point during development, the development team felt that Jensen would have chosen to destroy Panchaea:"Mary, the narrative director, will tell you that all endings are canon because the truth is buried and nobody really knows what truly happened that day in Panchaea. But when we were developing the endings, we felt that Jensen would choose to sink the facility, thus avoiding broadcasting perverted versions of the truth to the world. At least that was the original state of mind."

- Jean-François Dugas

Darrow ending

 * Albert Einstein said, "Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal." Took me awhile, but I finally see his point. How often have we changed the dream of progress, only to see that dream perverted? More often than not, haven't the machines we built to improve life shattered the lives of millions? And now we want to turn that dream on ourselves, to fundamentally improve who we are. Experience has shown me how dangerous that can be.
 * (The next part depends on your actions)
 * Pacifist – How many times, in the call of duty, did I almost fall into the trap of taking shortcuts, abusing my abilities or the resources at hand? I resisted, barely at times, because I valued human lives and considerations. But can I truly despise others that fall? Technology offers us strength, strength enables dominance, and dominance paves the way for abuse.
 * Neutral – When faced with difficult choices, sometimes I considered human lives and suffering but other times, my own interests were paramount. Did I always do the right thing? Or did the presence of an easy answer lead me astray? Technologies are invented to make our lives easier - not our choices. The problem comes when we forget that.
 * Violent – When facing difficult choices, how often did I take the easiest path, abusing technologies and resources at hand in order to accomplish my goals? If other people needed my help or simply stood in my way, did I not callously and systematically discount them. Technology gave me the power to achieve what I wanted, but I was blind to the suffering I caused.
 * Darrow understood this. He knew that using technology to becoming something more than we are risks losing our ability to love, aspire or make moral choices - the very things that make us Human. It also risks giving some men the power to make others what they choose - regardless of the cost to human dignity. The suffering Darrow inflicted is not the end of the world. It is merely the seed for change. And change never comes without pain.

Sarif ending

 * Sarif was right about one thing, it's in our nature to want to rise above our limits. Think about it. We were cold, so we harnessed fire. We were weak, so we invented tools. 
 * (The next part depends on your actions)
 * Pacifist – Every time we met an obstacle, we used creativity and ingenuity to overcome it. The cycle is inevitable... but will the outcome always be good? I guess that will depend on how we approach it. These past few months I was challenged many times, but more often than not didn't I try to keep morality in mind, knowing that my actions didn't have to harm others? Time and time again, didn't I resist the urge to abuse power and resources simply to achieve my goals more swiftly? In the past we've had to compensate for weaknesses, finding quick solutions that only benefit a few. But what if we never need to feel weak or morally conflicted again? What if the path Sarif wants us to take enables us to hold on to higher values with more stability?
 * Neutral – Every time we've met an obstacle, we've used creativity and ingenuity to overcome it. The cycle is inevitable... but will the outcome necessarily be good? Sarif thinks so, but I know how tempting it is to put your own needs in front of others. These past few months I was often tested, and even though I managed to show concern for people on several occasions, I also caused them injury enough. Consumed with a desire to succeed, I found it easy to abuse power and resources, when I wanted to. But perhaps that's just one limit I have yet to overcome. Given time and ingenuity perhaps Man's willingness to improve will turn out to be stronger than any evil his selfishness creates.
 * Violent – Every time we met an obstacle, we used creativity and ingenuity to overcome it. The cycle is inevitable... but will the outcome always be good? Sarif believed so, but my own experience makes me wonder. These past few months I was tested many times, and too often I chose to inflict suffering when challenged even though I had alternatives. I reacted selfishly, abusing power and resources to accomplish my goals -- and I lost my humanity along the way. But perhaps selfishness is the one limit I have yet to overcome. Given time and ingenuity perhaps Man's willingness to improve will turn out to be stronger than any evil we create.
 * One thing is obvious. For the first time in history we have a chance to steal fire from the gods. To turn away from it now - to stop pursing a future in which technology and biology combine leading to the promise of a singularity - would mean to deny the very essence of who we are. No doubt the road to get there will be bumpy, hurting some people along the way. But won't achieving the dream be worth it? We can become the gods we've always been striving to be. We might as well get good at it.

Taggart ending

 * Freedom. To those that don't have, it it's more valuable than gold. But where should it start and end? We humans often think we have the right to expand, absorb, convert, or possess anything we need to reach our dreams. But time and time again, hasn't this lead to conflicts with others who essentially believe the same thing?
 * (The next part depends on your actions)
 * Pacifist – Looking back on the challenges I faced -- at the way I often resolved them -- I realize morality can become our saving grace. Most of the time, didn't I try to keep my values in mind knowing how my actions would affect others? More often than not, I resisted the urge to abuse power and resources simply to reach my goals more swiftly. I managed to hang on to my humanity -- but the temptation to ignore it was always there. It's that temptation that so worries Taggart. He's not afraid of freedom. He's afraid of the chaos that erupts when individuals have nothing but morality to constrain them.
 * Neutral – Morality is supposed to keep us in line but I can't always say it's effective. Looking back at the challenges I faced, sometimes I made an effort to spare lives, to use the tools and resources around me in ways that might benefit all. But not always. Intent on reaching my goals, how often did I waver between adhering to my morals and indulging in self-centered concerns? If I fell, was it because I didn't care, or because I lacked the strength to go the extra mile? That's what Taggart is so worried about. He's not afraid of freedom. He's afraid of the chaos that ensures when individuals have nothing but morality to constrain them.
 * Violent – How often in my desire to reach a goal, did I put my needs first, ignoring others or causing senseless pain, simply because something stood in my way? Didn't I often act coldly, becoming a destructive force that lost touch with my humanity along the way? I got what I wanted sure, but at what cost to others around me? That's what Taggart is worried about. He's not afraid of freedom; He's afraid of the chaos that erupts when individuals have nothing but a weak grasp on morality to constrain them.
 * He wants us to regulate enhancement technologies because he fears all that power without limits, without guide rails to keep us from abusing it. Absolute freedom is no better than chaos. Society needs laws and regulations to protect it. So if the men and women behind Taggart need to work in the shadows, pulling strings to enable us to head in a safe direction, will supporting them be all that bad? If they're as wise as Taggart says, how bad will their leadership be? I just hope they stand by what they say.

Destruction of Panchaea ending

 * Do I trust Mankind to save itself? That's what Eliza was asking. The truth is, I don't know. After everything I've seen, all the fighting, and the chaos around me. I only know what I want to believe: somehow, human decency will triumph. These past few months, I faced many life-threatening situations. I could have given up many times, but my need to know the truth, to uncover the secrets that others were hiding, and to survive, forced me to keep on going.
 * (The next part depends on your actions)
 * Pacifist – Most of the time, I tried to keep my values in mind, knowing my actions did not have to harm others. I held on to my humanity, resisting the urge to abuse power or resources in order to meet my goals. And in the end, I got the job done. But does this mean I have the right to choose for everyone? No. Because it isn't up to me. It isn't up to Darrow. Sarif, or Taggart, either. Ordinary men and women will have to decide together what course mankind should take. 
 * Neutral – Sometimes I considered the effect my actions would have on others, and found solutions that would benefit us all. Other times I did the opposite, abusing power and resources without care, simply to benefit myself. So what does this say about me? Perhaps that I am only human, and looking for a way to survive. Of course, so were Darrow, Sarif, and Taggart. Each of them idealistic men, so caught up in achieving their view of the future they failed to see the chaos they left behind.So now, I'm leaving the future up to ordinary men and women to decide.
 * Violent – Most of the time, I dealt with obstacles ruthlessly, abusing resources and inflicting suffering before others could do it to me. Detached from my humanity, I may not have done the best thing, but I always got the job done. Thank goodness, I'm not the only one out there. Because the truth is, deciding the future for all of mankind shouldn't be left up to one man. Ordinary men and women will have to decide together what course mankind should take.
 * The kind of people who, time and time again, have picked and chosen the future in highly practical ways - slowing change when it's negative, speeding it up when it's good. Can they do it again? I don't know. But I do know I'm not about to let anyone in this station, including myself, stand in their way.