1768 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

AlexXIV wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So yeah..you wont' see me admiting  I'm wrong ...well, not against you at least. There's nothing to admit in this case.

I have no doubt you believe that. It's smilies now? Hmm ..no, don't make you more creditable. I am out of this discussion for this thread's and Stan's sake. I can at least admit a mistake. It was a mistake to try reason with you. I'll be around here in half a year to see you weasel out after ME3 is released. I am just saying this, the only person you ever convinced of anything is you yourself. Which I wouldn't consider a real accomplishment tbh.

And whom have you convinced? Your mom?

Really, if the only thing you can comment on is my use of smileys (as something bad I might add), then why should I worry? You were out of arguments before this descussion really started. It was a mistake from you to even try to argue without proper arguments.

As for ME3...It changes nothing, since it doesnt' change ME2. If you still are looking for validation in ME2, then you completley missed the enitre point of this thread.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Omega4RelayResident wrote...
Being sent on risky missions is not the problem. The Alliance and The Council were up front with most intel they could divulge. Some things they hid from me and I can understand that. However they never used me as bait on multiple occasions WITHOUT telling me the plan first. Yes TIM explained that the Collectors might have been listening in to transmissions. Errr.... I call bull**** on that one. The Quantum Entanglement based Communications Array is state of the art. www.youtube.com/watch (To spare you some time just jump to 6:00 minutes in) The communication is point to point which strongly suggests that this method of communication CAN NOT be intercepted or hacked. 100 worlds would need 100 pairs of these just to communicate with each other because of the unique state of the subatomic particles that are connected.

Its those little details that make me notice and see through his lies.

"They could be tipped off in any number of ways"

Also, reaper tech is magic (more or less). How do you know they can't intercept quantum transmissions?

Forgiven?!?!?! That just implys that you are a fanatic and not a follower that concludes his assertions based on logical deduction. Mr. Spock is quite dissapointed in you. Oh and "tough decisions" you say?

TIM: Shepard I brought you back so you can stop the abductions of the human collonies.

Shep: Okay so whats the plan.

TIM: Well we will feed them some more colonies by using you as bait... more people will be abducted and probably die but we will kick their bug eyed arses when the right moment arises.

Shep: So you want to sacrifice MORE collonists?

TIM: Yup.

Shep:  /facepalm

Tough decions my fanny... TIM never cared about those collonists. All he cared about was killing the Collectors and using their technology for his own gains.

You mean the same colonies the Collectors would have hit REGARDLESS?

So insted of trying to draw out the Collectors to a specific target so you can try and stop them you'd do..what exactly? Fly around from colony to colony hoping they'll hit exactly the one you are flying close to?
How many more colonies would be lost before you managed to intercept them?

Insted of risking 1 colony, let's risk ALL OF THEM.
Brilliant man! BRILLIANT!

And this is why TIM is the brains and not you. Thank the heavens for that!

[Lotion Soronarr]

DiebytheSword wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

I'd still like to know "how" the Collectors found the original Normandy.

Maybe TIM did that for Shepard's "own good" too?

You mean kill him to bring him back two years later by using a ton of Cerberus's resources?

Keep in mind this all goes on the assumption that anything in the space jesus/lazarus plot makes any sense in the first place.

Which makes even less sens for you trying to find sense and going the whole "TIM is evil" as explanation...

[InvincibleHero]

DiebytheSword wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Why would the coordinates for the Normandy have to be leaked when they've already gone into the trap that is the area in which those ships went missing?

That is an excellent point.  However, the Collectors would still have to be very lucky to be in the right spot to see the FTL jump happen.

How do we know they can't track ships through the relays as the reapers claim to have built them after all. Each one leads to a specific location within maybe 1000 km.

It could also be invisible to the known galaxy tech which is less than reaper tech. So they could be able to track the Normandy in ways scientists would not think of. Even the heat signatures of when they have to bleed off might be predictable.

[Ieldra]

InvincibleHero wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...
Why would the coordinates for the Normandy have to be leaked when they've already gone into the trap that is the area in which those ships went missing?

That is an excellent point.  However, the Collectors would still have to be very lucky to be in the right spot to see the FTL jump happen.

How do we know they can't track ships through the relays as the reapers claim to have built them after all. Each one leads to a specific location within maybe 1000 km.

It could also be invisible to the known galaxy tech which is less than reaper tech. So they could be able to track the Normandy in ways scientists would not think of. Even the heat signatures of when they have to bleed off might be predictable.

That's bullsh*t. Any argument starting with "How do we know they can't....." is bullsh*t, because it presupposes that you could, theoretically, know about everything the enemy cannot do. You can't. You can only know about what they *can* do. "How do we know they can't...." has zero weight as an argument unless there is evidence that they actually can do certain things. There is no evidence, direct or indirect, that the Collectors can track the Normandy with "invisible tech", so it must be assumed that they can not unless such evidence manifests.

I have no idea which goal this argument was intended to serve, but it doesn't matter. It's methodically flawed. The capabilities of unknown enemies are based on experience and observation. So it's reasonable to assume they can do everything we can unless proven otherwise, and it's reasonable they cannot do more than we can unless proven otherwise. We have such evidence for weapons and biotechnology, we don't have anything for communications and sensor technology.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 09 décembre 2011 - 11:25 .

[InvincibleHero]

Ieldra2 wrote...
That's bullsh*t. Any argument starting with "How do we know they can't....." is bullsh*t, because it presupposes that you could, theoretically, know about everything the enemy cannot do. You can't. You can only know about what they *can* do. "How do we know they can't...." has zero weight as an argument unless there is evidence that they actually can do certain things. There is no evidence, direct or indirect, that the Collectors can track the Normandy with "invisible tech", so it must be assumed that they can not unless such evidence manifests.

I have no idea which goal this argument was intended to serve, but it doesn't matter. It's methodically flawed.

Oh really. It is quite possible they have the tech. There was only the one encounter where they trashed the Normandy to go on. Exactly why would that tell you they could not track it? It was an ambush after all.

Call it poor writing if you will but you cannot prove they did not have such a theoretical capability. BW knows the answer. Yes you cannot account for it which is why it is unknown what the collectors and reapears are capable of. That makes them far more dangerous.

You cannot rule out the possibility and you know it no matter what invectives you spew. The flaw is your ruling out a possible reason which cannot be factually eliminated.

Modifié par InvincibleHero, 09 décembre 2011 - 12:46 .

[AlexXIV]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So yeah..you wont' see me admiting  I'm wrong ...well, not against you at least. There's nothing to admit in this case.

I have no doubt you believe that. It's smilies now? Hmm ..no, don't make you more creditable. I am out of this discussion for this thread's and Stan's sake. I can at least admit a mistake. It was a mistake to try reason with you. I'll be around here in half a year to see you weasel out after ME3 is released. I am just saying this, the only person you ever convinced of anything is you yourself. Which I wouldn't consider a real accomplishment tbh.

And whom have you convinced? Your mom?

Really, if the only thing you can comment on is my use of smileys (as something bad I might add), then why should I worry? You were out of arguments before this descussion really started. It was a mistake from you to even try to argue without proper arguments.

As for ME3...It changes nothing, since it doesnt' change ME2. If you still are looking for validation in ME2, then you completley missed the enitre point of this thread.

No my mistake was to think it is possible to reason with you. And you can imagine how stupid I feel to even engage in conversation with you considering all the other people you do the same thing to. I should have ignored you from start which I am going to do now. At least until you maybe learn that you are not the high jury with ultimate authority of what is an argument and what is a good point and not. As Stan said (not sure if you read it, since that's one of your problems) I merely agree to disagree. If you want to see it as a victory go ahead.

Even if you were right with anything, which you are not, it wouldn't matter anyway because I play my game just the way I want no matter if it makes sense to some random person on the BSN. So what is there to gain for me to argue with you, especially considering I can't say that I enjoyed it at any time. Waste of my time really. That said, go ahead, do what you have to do.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 09 décembre 2011 - 12:43 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Ieldra2 wrote...
I have no idea which goal this argument was intended to serve, but it doesn't matter. It's methodically flawed. The capabilities of unknown enemies are based on experience and observation. So it's reasonable to assume they can do everything we can unless proven otherwise, and it's reasonable they cannot do more than we can unless proven otherwise. We have such evidence for weapons and biotechnology, we don't have anything for communications and sensor technology.

Erm..can't fully agree with you here.

You are starting from an assumption that a race that is factually technologcly far superior is only superior in weapons technolgoy and bioengineering...

We already know they use quantum communications everywhere. They can easily communicate from Dark Sapce in real time.

It 's wrong to conclude they can only do the same as we can do, givne thay have better technology. Taht doesn't mean they can detect stealth ships, but it doesn't mean they can't either. It's simply unknown, altough the probability is more in reaper favor.

[Ieldra]

What I was saying it is methodically dishonest to say "We don't know they can't do X", put anything in for X and then make an argument based on that.

If you make such an argument, then you must provide a reasonable extrapolation of how you come to the expectation that the enemy might be able to do X. "Better technology" is not synonymous to "might be able to do anything".

For instance:

(1) the Collectors can detect stealth ships at normal electromagnetic sensor range as evidenced by the intro of ME2, and they have their technology from the Reapers. So it's a reasonable expectation that the Reapers can do that, too. But...

(2) As far as we know, FTL detection is physically impossible. We have seen no evidence of anyone doing it, and we have seen nothing that even remotely suggests that anyone can do it, *and* the known laws of physics say it can't be done. So it is an unreasonable expectation that the Reapers can do that. Unless you can provide evidence, the assumption that they might be able to do it has zero weight as an argument.

And

(1) The Reapers built the mass relays and the mass relay network is built as a trap for organic civilizations. We already know the Reapers could control the relays from the Citadel, and at the time of ME3 we can reasonably assume that they cannot control them without the Citadel, for if they could, they would've shut them down for everyone but themselves. But...

(2) The expectation that the Reapers have stealth technology surpassing that of Citadel space is unreasonable. There is nothing that remotely suggests that, nothing we could infer that from except the blanket claim "they have better technology", which means that making an argument based on that will not convince - should not convince - unless you can demonstrate why your expectation is reasonable.

"They have better technology" is not a blanket justification for assuming "they might be able to do X", with X being more or less anything.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 09 décembre 2011 - 04:17 .

[ubermensch007]

[quote]Saphra Deden wrote: Getting back to ME2, yes I think Jacob could have
probably pulled off what Shepard did.[/quote]

Jacob? You think Mr. The glass is half empty, negativity is the air I breath Taylor, could have sat in Commander Shepard's chair?!

SD: Many other people in the universe probably could have too.

Like who? Kai Leng...

SD: Perhaps not quite as well in some cases,

I agree with you there.

SD: but also better in some cases. Take Overlord for instance, or Jack's RM. Those would have gone smoother if not for Shepard.[/quote]

Hang on... So now your blaming Shepard, for what Warden Kuril tried to do. "Shepard, your a Icon and Celebrity.You brought this on yourself."

[quote]Saphra Deden: Nothing about Shepard is actually ever NEEDED in ME2. All the plot ever uses him for is to shoot things. Shepard isn't actually important to the plot and that is a big problem.

It would have been better if there was something unique about Shepard that made him as indespensible as EDI. Like I don't know, the cipher, or his Spectre status, or connection to certain people/factions, anything.[/quote]

What makes Shepard 'special' is the choices that he makes.Like Alexander the Great solved the puzzle of the 'Gordian Knot' As TIM says of Commander Shepard in 'The Story so Far' Trailer:

The Illusive Man: "Before the Protheans were wiped out.They left a message.That the Reapers 'cycle of destruction' would repeat... One man, chose to heed their warning.Commander Shepard uncovered the truth. (Not Cerberus)

Now Cerberus may have uncovered the truth, about what happened to all the missing human colonist (Actually the quarian, Veetor did.) But really... What is a greater mystery. Who really built the Mass Relays.Or what are those f*cked up bug things? Like Jack put it. What's a greater threat? That the galaxy needs to know about: The Collectors or Reapers?

You say that Shepard wasn't NEEDED for the 'plot' of Mass Effect 2.Saphra, there aren't many people who could have pulled off what Shepard did.Which is convince a bunch of the galaxies finest to go with him through the Omega 4 Relay.Everyone knows about it, and knows that no ship has ever returned after going through that Relay.Save the
Collectors.If you recall the Recruitment Missions.Most of the people that Commander Shepard recruits.Wasn't in it for the money.And if you want to see and hear what Miranda was talking about when she says that Shepard has something that she doesn't have.A fire and passion, a force of personality that makes others willing to follow him into hell
and back.Watch the Mass Effect 2: Launch Trailer.Listen to what Commander Shepard and the Illusive Man say there.I still get goose bumps when I watch that trailer; and we hear Shepard's speech (or sound bite.) It makes me want to sign up and enlist myself.Military Proporganda at its finest.Say what you will: BioWare knows how to write and direct.

EDI, was indespensible. Dr.Mordin Solus was irreplacable.Commander Shepard was as well. You ever heard that old saying about movies.A film lives or dies by its casting.In ME2, Shepard was the Casting Director.TIM may have gave Shepard his 'Fantasy Football Team' - Dossiers.But Shepard is the one who had to turn that Dream Team into a
reality.Anyone can compile a list and say, "Ooh, wouldn't it be great if I could get so and so to work together." Not everyone can make it happen.Shepard makes it happen.Not TIM.

But if you still don't think that Commander Shepard is indespensible in ME2. There is no doubt that he is irreplacable in ME3.

* It is Commander Shepard and no other, that the Racchni Queen has an alliance with.

* It is Shepard Commander, that the geth sent Legion to converse with and form an alliance.

* It is the first human Spectre, the greatest warrior in this era of the galactic community; that has the respect and admiration of the krogan on Tuchanka.(Urdnot Wrex is still an ally and friend.) His kleos has reached even their world, and if you recall.Shepard even got a breeding request from a krogan female.At least I hope that it was
from a female krogan.

* It is Shepard vas Normandy, who has a growing friendship and the respect of the Migrant Fleet.

* It is this same former Systems Alliance N7 Marine, who is in very good standing with the salarian STG.He is their brother arms, and a comrade of Captain Kirhae.

* It is Shepard and Shepard alone who has a 'direct line' to The Shadow Brokers Network.

It is Commander Shepard (and no one else) who brings all these diverse factions to the table.This is his GREAT contribuition to the war effort in Mass Effect 3.

What the hell does Cerberus have to offer? Or the Alliance or Council for that matter?

Ah yes...Commander Shepard "is just a foot soldier." (Saphra Deden's words on page 28) We have dismissed that claim.

Modifié par ubermensch007, 20 décembre 2011 - 01:02 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Why is this thread being necro'd?

Again?

And by someone who can't even be bothered to use the quote function?

[Dean_the_Young]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Why are you making this post, are you a mod?

Disbelief at a lack of style, and no.

You should know better.

I do.

It's not the first time the thread has been necro'd and if someone wants to continue the debate I say let them.

Sure... but I'd appreciate if they at least had style.

Anything you care to say? Do you agree with me that Shepard was not integral to ME2 or do you feel otherwise?

You know I do.

[Medhia Nox]

Personally - I would have accepted the idea that his personality alone was enough to keep this disparate group of super specialists together and functioning as a collective whole.

But - aside from TIM's homoerotic fawning over Shepard (I jest) - there's really nothing that suggests that it was Shepard's "larger than life" persona that achieved the end goal.

====

Was Shepard hunting Geth on Council orders at the beginning of ME 2? I don't remember the reasoning - I was too irate at the railroading.

[SnakeStrike8]

StrawberryViking wrote...


The only renegade decision that I find that was truly "victory" for renegades was on Samara's recruitment with Elnora. You are specifically told before you start that every eclipse sister has to earn her uniform by killing. When you encounter her, Renegades, while not immediatly shooting her upon seeing her uniform, does kill her after a presumed act of hostility. The paragon lets her go, and finds out afterwards she was infact a ruthless killer and murdered the volus. 

This scene in particular galled me when I first played the game. When I saw the Renegade interrupt upon seeing Elnora draw, I mashed it instantly, because to me it seems like a perfectly valid reaction: a trained soldier sees a uniformed enemy pull out a gun and aim it at him, so he shoots her on instinct. That ought to have been the primary response for a paragon Shepard as well.
Instead, we end up with a Judge Dredd moment.
This was only a single moment, but it points to an underlying trend in the series: Doing what a soldier ought to do is almost always the renegade option. Shooting to kill is the renegade path. Refusing to negotiate with terrorists is the rengade path. Allowing enemy soldiers to flee is the renegade path.
I don't know what this says about the ME writers, but I tried to play ME 1 and 2 once according to everything I remembered about army rules of conduct and engagement. The result was a thoroughly Renegade outcome... 

[SnakeStrike8]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Was Shepard hunting Geth on Council orders at the beginning of ME 2? I don't remember the reasoning - I was too irate at the railroading.

They did say in the beginning that the Council had sent Shepard to fight the geth to 'quell the rumours' or something. Still, the game begins with Joker claiming that 'three ships went missing here in the past month'. That leads me to think that Shepard-Commander got his orders, but then he promptly ignored them and went off to look into anything that might relate to the Reapers- such as vanishing ships.
Later on, when he meets Anderson on the Citadel, he says 'we were still fighting holdouts'. That makes me think Shepard-Commander was atleast peripherally related to the geth cleanup.

[Troika0]

@SnakeStrike8

Bioware has always been real wonky when it comes to constructing morality systems. What constitutes Paragon and Renegade almost seems arbitrary in most cases with no discernible philosophical underpinnings.

I suspect part of the problem is the binary nature of all their systems, which force decisions to be lumped into two broad categories.

Case in point being a particular instance I encountered in SWtoR during the beta:

During the Trooper tutorial, one of the side quests involves tracking down refugees who are stealing medical supplies from your base. In true Bioware fashion, confiscating the stolen supplies is the dark side choice.

Modifié par Troika0, 20 décembre 2011 - 03:47 .