270 réponses à ce sujet

[Aradace]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

I don't know, it seems to me that having a character that is established to be extremely rational do something that is totally illogical is quite random.

-NSB

Not necessarily.  You severely understimate the power of greed.  Much like love, it can drive people to do some pretty damn irrational things.

[NoSoyBueno]

You severely understimate the power of greed.

I should think I am estimating it quite well. Warden Kuril understands what his gains are likely to be, and apparently does not operate with emotion, given the way he runs the prison. He would not try to take Shepard as a prisoner because there is no reasonable way that he could acquire him.  His irrationality is simply a way to make the mission violent.

-NSB

Modifié par NoSoyBueno, 16 avril 2011 - 11:17 .

[Aradace]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

You severely understimate the power of greed.

I should think I am estimating it quite well. Warden Kuril understands what his gains are likely to be, and apparently does not operate with emotion, given the way he runs the prison. He would not try to take Shepard as a prisoner because there is no reasonable way that he could acquire him.  His irrationality is simply a way to make the mission violent.

-NSB

And again, I reiterate, you understimate the power of greed.  Sure, he could have made a wad of creds by trying to extort more than the agreed upon amount for Jack.  For all we know, Kuril might have the same "Ah yes, Reapers" mentality that the council does.  And therefore, any stories he's heard of Shepards prowess, he might think are overly exaggerated.  To that end, with that in mind, his actions werent necessarily random or irrational.

[NoSoyBueno]

If that were the case, then why are we not given the option to negotiate with Kuril?

I might be able to see Kuril using the threat of violence to extort more money from Shepard, but no options are given to Shepard when confronted with this situation - such an ultimatum might have given a meaningful reason for the shootout (intimidate or charm defuses situation, regular paragon/neutral is to pay up, and regular renegade is to have shootout).

More importantly, he would have to accept that the rumors of Shepard's abilities are at least accurate enough to make Shepard valuable. If they were not, then Shepard must not be valuable and it is a moot point. Greedy or not, I could not see him risking his little empire on the chance that he could subdue a less worthwhile Shepard by force.

His dominant strategy is to let Shepard just pick up Jack and leave.

-NSB

Modifié par NoSoyBueno, 16 avril 2011 - 11:32 .

[Aradace]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

If that were the case, then why are we not given the option to negotiate with Kuril?

I might be able to see Kuril using the threat of violence to extort more money from Shepard, but no options are given to Shepard when confronted with this situation - such an ultimatum might have given a meaningful reason for the shootout.

More importantly, he would have to accept that the rumors of Shepard's abilities are at least accurate enough to make Shepard valuable. If they were not, then Shepard must not be valuable and it is a moot point. Greedy or not, I could not see him risking his little empire on the chance that he could subdue a less worthwhile Shepard by force.

-NSB

Im not disagreeing that there shouldnt have been an option there.  What Im disagreeing with is your claim that because there wasnt, it somehow makes the reason any less important.  If it's unimportant, it's unimportant to you and that, believe it or not, is an opinion.  Not a fact.  It is NOT a fact that because there was not option to resolve the situation "peacefully" that it makes it any less important for fighting them.  Just like my stance on the matter isnt fact, it's soley opinion, much like your stance.  Important, not important, it's subjective and it's value will vary from person to person.

[NoSoyBueno]

It is unimportant because it is nonsensical. The mission is designed to just give an excuse for a shootout. This tactic of just giving an excuse for a shootout is precisely what we object to.  Please reread the third paragraph to see why it is nonsensical.

-NSB

Modifié par NoSoyBueno, 16 avril 2011 - 11:35 .

[Aradace]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

It is unimportant because it is nonsensical. The mission is designed to just give an excuse for a shootout. Please reread the third paragraph to see why it is nonsensical.

-NSB

I did, regardless, that still does not make your stance fact.  Please reread MY post in its entirety if you were somehow confused on that.

[NoSoyBueno]

I did read your post, and it says nothing of the illogical decisions of Kuril that ultimately devalue the mission. What is at issue is that many missions are just excuses to have shootouts, and that these reasons are thus random. This is what you objected to in previous posts, and my statements are meant to illustrate how this example is random.

-NSB

[Aradace]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

I did read your post, and it says nothing of the illogical decisions of Kuril that ultimately devalue the mission. What is at issue is that many missions are just excuses to have shootouts, and that these reasons are thus random. This is what you objected to in previous posts, and my statements are meant to illustrate how this example is random.

-NSB

Just because YOU feel they are irrational, does NOT mean that the reason is any less "important"  That is what you are failing to see.  Yes, I see that YOU feel it is that way, and you are entitled to feel that way, it's your opinion youre allowed to have it.  But take in mind that not EVERYONE feels that way.  Your stance, no matter how much you think otherwise, is like mine, completely and solely opinion.  That is all Im trying to get you to admit to.

[NoSoyBueno]

Actually, the case I have been making for the past few posts is not opinion. I have demonstrated with logic how Kuril's decisions are irrational (as defined in Economics, in this case relating to game theory) and random. People have objected to the fact that missions have random justification, and this makes the missions feel unimportant to them. These are all statements of fact.

Opinion enters when one says that they do not mind that the justification is random. However, what you objected to in your post critiquing Nashiktal was that the missions' justifications were random.

-NSB

Modifié par NoSoyBueno, 16 avril 2011 - 11:52 .

[Aradace]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

Actually, the case I have been making for the past few posts is not opinion. I have demonstrated with logic how Kuril's decisions are irrational (as defined in Economics, in this case relating to game theory) and random. People have objected to the fact that missions have random justification, and this makes the missions feel unimportant to them. These are all statements of fact.

Opinion enters when one says that they do not mind that the justification is random. However, what you objected to in your post critiquing Nashiktal was that the missions' justifications were random.

-NSB

Not entirely, I was debating the so called "importance".  Who are you to tell me what I do and do not find "important"  Just because you cant roam the galaxy being space ghandi doesnt make the "importance" of any given encounter any less important.  That is what Im debating as opinion.  In fact, if you'd take the time to read instead of just gleaming over my posts, youd see that I have infact agreed with the part (on more than one count) that Kuril's actions did seem a bit irrational.  Again, what I was contesting is that regardless of that, it is your opinion that it makes the encounter unimportant.  

Examples of Fact and Opinion:

Shepard can be male or female: Fact
Kasumi Goto is of Japanese decent: Fact
ME2 is a great game: Opinion
ME1 is a great game: Opinion
ME2 is a ****ty game: Opinion
The reaper invasion will be happening: Fact
Encounters feel unimportant because I dont have a pacifist option to avoid them or to give them more meaning: OPINION

See where Im going here?

[NoSoyBueno]

Nyoka:

The valuation of Shepard is based on his combat abilities.

Shepard's possible combat abilities from Kuril's perspective: Good or not good.
Shepard's value is based on his combat abilities: Good combat abilities = high value; not good combat abilities = low value.
Kuril's choices are: Extort money from Shepard with force or not.

If Shepard is valued highly, then his combat abilities are good. Kuril, in this case, cannot expect a payoff from attempting to subdue Shepard. Payoff is negative, because Kuril will lose his prison and die.
If Shepard's combat abilities are not good, in which case Kuril does have a chance of subduing him, Shepard is not worth capturing because he is low value. Payoff is nonexistent because he does not sell Jack if he chooses to subdue in this case.

Regardless of Shepard's combat abilities, Kuril may choose a positive payoff outcome of transacting Jack and letting everyone go their own way.

Since the payoff for Kuril transacting Jack and letting everyone go is always greater than the alternative, regardless of Shepard's combat abilities, he will always choose this outcome if he is rational.

-NSB

Modifié par NoSoyBueno, 17 avril 2011 - 12:07 .

[Aradace]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

The valuation of Shepard is based on his combat abilities.

Shepard's possible combat abilities from Kuril's perspective: Good or not good.
Shepard's value is based on his combat abilities: Good combat abilities = high value; not good combat abilities = low value.
Kuril's choices are: Extort money from Shepard with force or not.

If Shepard is valued highly, then his combat abilities are good. Kuril, in this case, cannot expect a payoff from attempting to subdue Shepard. Payoff is negative, because Kuril will lose his prison and die.
If Shepard's combat abilities are not good, in which case Kuril does have a chance of subduing him, Shepard is not worth capturing because he is low value. Payoff is nonexistent because he does not sell Jack if he chooses to subdue in this case.

Regardless of Shepard's combat abilities, Kuril may choose a positive payoff outcome of transacting Jack and letting everyone go their own way.

Since the payoff for Kuril transacting Jack and letting everyone go is always greater than the alternative, regardless of Shepard's combat abilities, he will always choose this outcome if he is rational.

-NSB

And regardless of that, if you will see my previous post, your assumption that since it doesnt happen that way makes it any less important is soley an opinion.  Its fine if YOU feel that way, but to presume to tell everyone else that they feel that way is goddamn arrogant.  THAT is what makes your stance of the importance of the encounter an opinion.  Because you CANNOT presume to tell EVERYONE that they dont feel it is relevant or important in anyway.  Again, if you want to be space ghandi, that's your business.  But dont **** in my hand and tell me it's a candy bar.

[Almostfaceman]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

The valuation of Shepard is based on his combat abilities.

Shepard's possible combat abilities from Kuril's perspective: Good or not good.
Shepard's value is based on his combat abilities: Good combat abilities = high value; not good combat abilities = low value.
Kuril's choices are: Extort money from Shepard with force or not.

If Shepard is valued highly, then his combat abilities are good. Kuril, in this case, cannot expect a payoff from attempting to subdue Shepard. Payoff is negative, because Kuril will lose his prison and die.
If Shepard's combat abilities are not good, in which case Kuril does have a chance of subduing him, Shepard is not worth capturing because he is low value. Payoff is nonexistent because he does not sell Jack if he chooses to subdue in this case.

Regardless of Shepard's combat abilities, Kuril may choose a positive payoff outcome of transacting Jack and letting everyone go their own way.

Since the payoff for Kuril transacting Jack and letting everyone go is always greater than the alternative, regardless of Shepard's combat abilities, he will always choose this outcome if he is rational.

-NSB

Well, Number 1 Kuril is an arrogant dork (illustrated in the game dialogue) who doesn't consider Shep a threat no matter how good his combat abilities are.
Number 2 - Shepard is worth a lot of money even if he's a blind cripple - he's famous and a symbol.  There are a lot of people who would pay a ransom for him (take the Zu's Hope folks for just one example or Councilor Anderson as another).

So, arrogant dork Kuril thinks he'll get a double dip - he can still sell Jack and Shep later.

[NoSoyBueno]

That post was meant to explain how the game theory problem works out, since Kyoka inquired. I edited it with his name after I realized that you had posted.

I don't presume to tell everyone that they don't feel it is relevant or important. What I am saying is that his irrationality makes it random, and in our opinion this makes the mission less important to us. This is what Nashiktal was arguing, and this is what you attacked his position on.

Almostfaceman:
I had considered what you point out, but nonetheless all of those people's value for him is based on his combat abilities, without which Shepard would not have achieved fame or recognition.  If it were, for example, Ambassador Udina, who is not known for his combat abilities but does have value because of his non-combat work, it seems perfectly rational to kidnap him for extortion.

-NSB

Modifié par NoSoyBueno, 17 avril 2011 - 12:20 .

[Aradace]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

That post was meant to explain how the game theory problem works out, since Kyoka inquired. I edited it with his name after I realized that you had posted.

I don't presume to tell everyone that they don't feel it is relevant or important. What I am saying is that his irrationality makes it random, and in our opinion this makes the mission less important to us. This is what Nashiktal was arguing, and this is what you attacked his position on.

-NSB

Because, like you, he was trying to pass his theory off as fact.  All I was doing is giving counter examples to disuade that.  Irrational or not, it is still and opinion and the debate of it's randomness is also an opinion.  None of your arguements to that were fact.  You cannot supply evidence to prove without a doubt otherwise.  Which until you do, will make your stance an opinion.  I never said that neither of you SHOULDNT feel that way.  Ive merely stated that these events arent necessarily as random as you might think.  Even now, your "irrationality" theory is being debunked.

[Almostfaceman]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

That post was meant to explain how the game theory problem works out, since Kyoka inquired. I edited it with his name after I realized that you had posted.

I don't presume to tell everyone that they don't feel it is relevant or important. What I am saying is that his irrationality makes it random, and in our opinion this makes the mission less important to us. This is what Nashiktal was arguing, and this is what you attacked his position on.

Almostfaceman:
I had considered what you point out, but nonetheless all of those people's value for him is based on his combat abilities, without which Shepard would not have achieved fame or recognition.  If it were, for example, Ambassador Udina, who is not known for his combat abilities but does have value because of his non-combat work, it seems perfectly rational to kidnap him for extortion.

-NSB

It doesn't matter WHY he's famous at this point - he's worth money because he's famous.  So it's completely rational for arrogant Kuril to take a risk to try and capture him.  That's the point.  If Shep gets hurt during the process - no problem - still worth big bucks.  If Shep gets killed, oh well.  Jack is still his and worth big bucks.

So Kuril is arrogant but he's not irrational - which is what I believe your argument was.

[Aradace]

Almostfaceman wrote...

NoSoyBueno wrote...

That post was meant to explain how the game theory problem works out, since Kyoka inquired. I edited it with his name after I realized that you had posted.

I don't presume to tell everyone that they don't feel it is relevant or important. What I am saying is that his irrationality makes it random, and in our opinion this makes the mission less important to us. This is what Nashiktal was arguing, and this is what you attacked his position on.

Almostfaceman:
I had considered what you point out, but nonetheless all of those people's value for him is based on his combat abilities, without which Shepard would not have achieved fame or recognition.  If it were, for example, Ambassador Udina, who is not known for his combat abilities but does have value because of his non-combat work, it seems perfectly rational to kidnap him for extortion.

-NSB

It doesn't matter WHY he's famous at this point - he's worth money because he's famous.  So it's completely rational for arrogant Kuril to take a risk to try and capture him.  That's the point.  If Shep gets hurt during the process - no problem - still worth big bucks.  If Shep gets killed, oh well.  Jack is still his and worth big bucks.

So Kuril is arrogant but he's not irrational - which is what I believe your argument was.

May as well give it up at this point, Im starting to think ol' NSB lives in the same bizarro fantasy world that Zulu does.  Where nobody but him is right.  And where words mean what they want them to mean regardless of what they actually do mean lol

[NoSoyBueno]

I've tried engaging in debate that involved presentation of fact. didymos1120 was able to proceed in such a fashion, and has pointed out errors on things that I have conceded. However, Aradace, [redacted], and [redacted] have decided that personal attacks and assaults on credibility are better.

If you had a counter-point you would like to make regarding my arguments, then I am open to that, as I have proceeded with debate about Almostfaceman's points about Kuril's motivation and rationality in previous posts. Don't expect that I will not try to rebut. However, lacing your arguments with criticism of me is not logic or argumentation.

It does, nevertheless, suggest to me that you had already decided what your viewpoint was before you looked at these things.

-NSB

Modifié par NoSoyBueno, 17 avril 2011 - 12:43 .

[Aradace]

Nyoka wrote...

- I run a maximum security prison filled with the meanest bastards in the galaxy.
- Among them, the most powerful biotic human ever. And I subdued her.
- I have been doing this for years.
- There has been no escapes.
- Every cell is an independent module.
- We have technologically advanced equipment that isolates prisoners in handy blue energy fields if they start a fight.
- We have a lot people with guns guarding this place.
- Therefore, we can handle 3 armed guests.
- Because they are three, after all.

He underestimated Shepard. That's all. Your argument is: "If Shepard is good at fighting, then it is impossible to take her down. Therefore, nobody can rationally expect to take her down in a fight." But she's not a God, she's just good. And Kuril thought he, given his fortress and his experience and his personnel, was better.

It's pretty simple, really.

I dont think it can get anymore clearer than this Nosoy.  If you can some how contest this, then you DO infact live in the same tripped out drug induced fantasy world that Zulu lives in.  To which, I'll henceforth have the krogan mentality with you and inflict the greatest insult upon you that an enemy can suffer lol

[Almostfaceman]

NoSoyBueno wrote...

I've tried engaging in debate that involved presentation of fact. didymos1120 was able to proceed in such a fashion, and has pointed out errors on things which I have conceded. However, Aradace, Almostfaceman, and [redacted] have decided that personal attacks and assaults on credibility are better.

If you had a counter-point you would like to make regarding my arguments, then I am open to that, as I have proceeded with debate about Almostfaceman's points about Kuril's motivation and rationality in previous posts. Don't expect that I will not try to rebut. However, lacing your arguments with criticism of me is not logic or argumentation.

It does, nevertheless, suggest to me that you had already decided what your viewpoint was before you looked at these things.

-NSB

I've already offered a counter-point, and I've not once attacked anyone's credibility or attacked anyone personally.  Feel free to call a mod in if you feel I have. 

[NoSoyBueno]

So Kuril is arrogant but he's not irrational - which is what I believe your argument was.

Sorry, I misinterpreted this quote.  I will redact your name.

-NSB

Modifié par NoSoyBueno, 17 avril 2011 - 12:43 .