708 réponses à ce sujet

[Warlocomotf]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Warlocomotf wrote...

Also, I don't doom the galaxy. As I said I have good, rational explanations for all my in-game decisions.

No, if that were the case you'd be a Renegade and you'd be on board with Cerberus. I'm sure you think you're being rational, but you aren't.

See, here's the difference between you and me. When I respond to someone's argument, I make an argument why I think I am right, and why I think the other is wrong. When you respond to someone's argument, roughly half the time you respond with "Well, you oculdn't be right because I'm already right, and you disagree- therefor you're wrong".

In short; you would do better if you debunked an argument as opposed to covering your ears, waving your narcissistic flag and screaming "I'm right because I am"

[marshalleck]

Logical Escape wrote...

Unfortunately, you have a rudimentary grasp of logic, and like the adage goes, a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.  Asking people to prove a negative isn't a logical fallacy.  Asking them to prove a metaphysical or abstract negative is.  If I want to prove that I'm not wearing any purple, I simply need to point to every article of clothing and demonstrate how none of it is purple.

Where is the "data" demonstrating that there is only one cruiser?  The only time "data" is represented in the game was that the same cruiser attacked Normandy v1, abducted colonists from Horizon, and was the derelict cruiser "trap."  Beyond that, there is no evidence that there is only one collector cruiser.  And none of the evidence is proof-positive.

Furthermore, the collectors are so mysterious that most of the galaxy believes that they're a myth.  Cerberus discovers the location of one collector base/homeworld, and that means it's safe to assume that if they take that one base out, there will be no other collectors out there?  Even if it turns out to be true, that's a huge logical leap.

How do I prove there are no other Collectors in the galaxy? How do I prove Russell's teapot isn't out there orbiting the sun? Get the point? Pointing to an article of clothing (or lack thereof) on your body is hardly analogous to demostrating that the entire Milky Way is devoid of Collectors and errant teapots.

Finally, there's a human-reaper embryo and tons of reaper tech in the collector base.  Nearly every attempt to research reaper technology has led to people being indoctrinated.  The last thing you need is to fight through a horde of husks and slaves to get to the mission objective.

You seem to be laboring under the idea that I once said there is no risk at all in any Renegade decisions. It's about minimizing risk, not eliminating it. While keeping the base is a risk, destroying and potentially losing your single greatest opportunity to learn all we could ever want to know about the Reapers is worse. 

We're going to have to learn to deal with Reaper tech eventually, be it as a result of keeping the base or cleaning up slag-heaps left over from the war. Cerberus has the experience and the dedication for these tasks. It may not always be a pretty sight, but it's necessary.

Modifié par marshalleck, 17 août 2011 - 06:11 .

[JGDD]

Saphra Deden wrote...

No, if that were the case you'd be a Renegade and you'd be on board with Cerberus. I'm sure you think you're being rational, but you aren't.

Blowing the base to smithereens is clearly a renegade move. Any loyal Cerberus fan knows that handing the base over to TIM is as high a paragon move as you can get.

[Logical Escape]

marshalleck wrote...

How do I prove there are no other Collectors in the galaxy? How do I prove Russell's teapot isn't out there orbiting the sun? Get the point? Pointing to an article of clothing (or lack thereof) on your body is hardly analogous to demostrating that the entire Milky Way is devoid of Collectors and errant teapots.

Exactly.  You CAN'T prove it.  Shepard has no way of knowing.  Thus, there is risk.  The concept is pretty simple, no?  Uncertainty = risk.

marshalleck wrote...

You seem to be laboring under the idea that I once said there is no risk at all in any Renegade decisions. It's about minimizing risk, not eliminating it. While keeping the base is a risk, destroying and potentially losing your single greatest opportunity to learn all we could ever want to know about the Reapers is worse.

I seem to recall that attempts to study reaper technology ends up in indoctrination (negative) more often than it ends up in progress (positive).  if that trend holds up, I'd rather take my chances than lose a coin flip with a weighted coin.

Expected value and all that, you know...

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Warlocomotf wrote...

See, here's the difference between you and me. When I respond to someone's argument, I make an argument why I think I am right, and why I think the other is wrong. When you respond to someone's argument, roughly half the time you respond with "Well, you oculdn't be right because I'm already right, and you disagree- therefor you're wrong".

I've explained my reasons in other posts in this very thread.

Yes,and your reasons are always " I'm right,because I'm right."

[Arppis]

Because Paragon looks out for everyone, understanding that what race you are doesn't matter and there is always a better sollution for sittulations.

[ObserverStatus]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Warlocomotf wrote...

See, here's the difference between you and me. When I respond to someone's argument, I make an argument why I think I am right, and why I think the other is wrong. When you respond to someone's argument, roughly half the time you respond with "Well, you oculdn't be right because I'm already right, and you disagree- therefor you're wrong".

I've explained my reasons in other posts in this very thread.

I think Warlocomotf was saying that you don't read other people's arguments before disagreeing with them.

[ObserverStatus]

Saphra Deden wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

I think Warlocomotf was saying that you don't read other people's arguments before disagreeing with them.

You're right. I pick names at random and just start pouring out rebuttals.

Ah ha! a confession!

[Saaziel]

marshalleck wrote...

You seem to be laboring under the idea that I once said there is no risk at all in any Renegade decisions. It's about minimizing risk, not eliminating it.

If the options are : Renegade with Risk and Paragon Without. Then those working under the doctrine or Minimising risk ought to choose the Paragon option (Even if it were morally correct: The horror!)

Again , i think the issue is what is perceived as a risk.

[Warlocomotf]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Warlocomotf wrote...

See, here's the difference between you and me. When I respond to someone's argument, I make an argument why I think I am right, and why I think the other is wrong. When you respond to someone's argument, roughly half the time you respond with "Well, you oculdn't be right because I'm already right, and you disagree- therefor you're wrong".

I've explained my reasons in other posts in this very thread.

Yes, however you entirely disregard many points made- presumably because you have no counter argument.

Also unless you can substantiate your value assessment- it is not magically better than any other value assessment.

For example; it is a fact that there is some risk involved with keeping the collector base. There's a high probability that it will yield no viable results before the reapers return- investigating (even disabled) reaper technology has almost exclusively led to indoctrination.

Thus; there is a chance that keeping the base will be beneficial- there is a chance that it will be harmfull.
Unless you can somehow accurately provide a risk/reward analysis, your argument does not magically become correct.

Neither does mine, however mine is rational. So is yours.

[ObserverStatus]

Saaziel wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

You seem to be laboring under the idea that I once said there is no risk at all in any Renegade decisions. It's about minimizing risk, not eliminating it.

If the options are : Renegade with Risk and Paragon Without. Then those working under the doctrine or Minimising risk ought to choose the Paragon option (Even if it were morally correct: The horror!)

Again , i think the issue is what is perceived as a risk.

Maybe you're right.  I thought it was too risky too let the colonists on Ferros live, fearing that the spores in their bodies might grow into a new Thorian, but i'm sure not everyone saw it that way.  It's just a matter of perspective.

[Logical Escape]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Council decision. Rachni decision. Collector base decision. Arrival decision. Bring Down the Sky decision.

Council decision:  Neutral > Renegade.

Rachni decision: yet to come to a resolution.  If you did save the rachni, they promise support against Shepard's next battle.

Collector Base decision: I've already explained the risks.  You refuse to listen.

Arrival decision: Both aim to do the same thing: destroy the mass relay.

Saphra Deden wrote...

Stopping the Collectors is a lot more important than the welfare of some feeble minded quarian.

What a straw man.  You aren't assuring the welfare of one quarian.  You're ensuring that you don't ****** off the entire quarian fleet.

Again, as I have already demonstrated to you, the odds of securing any information from Veetor was miniscule.  You already had full security footage that he gave up willingly.  As I asked, do you think Veetor had a lunch date with Harbinger?

Saphra Deden wrote...

What the hell are you talking about?

LOL.  You go on and on about how knowledge is power.  And then in the case of keeping or destroying knowledge (genophage cure), you suddenly change your tune.  What?  Is the cure to the genophage not knowledge?  Again, you can't even keep your arguments straight, and when they criss-cross over and over, and you're exposed as an illogical hypocrite, you lash out.  Good going.

Saphra Deden wrote...

Nope, I gave you sound reasons and you offered no counter argument towards any of them.

No you didn't.  Here's your explanation.

Miranda: "Miranda explains why..." 

Uhhh... every flipipn' decision in the game "explains" why.  That's why they're decisions and not common sense tests.  Doesn't change the fact that it's simply more logical to let Oriana know that she's in danger and that Miranda is out to help.

Jack: "Moral dlemma."

Taylor: "Moral dilemma."

Yes, they're moral dilemmas where the renegade option was NOT the most practical, or NOT the most logical, or NOT the ones which minimized risk.  Again, your point is debunked.

Tali: "the quarians need information."

The quarians in this situation would most likely wage war with the geth, weakening both sides.  And moreover, it would result in Tali being disloyal and hurting your odds on the suicide mission.  Again, ADDING risk, not removing it.

Saphra Deden wrote...

Yes, they do. They do if I want to approach this mission responsibly.

No they don't.  You already have the Reaper IFF.  You already have a fully functional AI.  Your squadmates are all ready.

What does landing on Omega and chatting up Aria have to do with approaching this mission responsibly?

[marshalleck]

Logical Escape wrote...

I seem to recall that attempts to study reaper technology ends up in indoctrination (negative) more often than it ends up in progress (positive).  if that trend holds up, I'd rather take my chances than lose a coin flip with a weighted coin.

Expected value and all that, you know...

Thanix cannons are pretty useful. EDI is pretty useful. The IFF is pretty useful. Mass relays are pretty useful. Mass effect technology in general is pretty useful. Hell, Shepards implants of undoubtedly Reaper-origin are pretty useful. The IFF is the only one of these we know about going poorly. Well, there was Saren's lab on Virmire, but he was intentionally indoctrinating people.

Given a calculated, methodical approach to research, risk of indoctrination should be minimized. Simply rotating science teams on a regular basis rather than leaving them isolated for weeks or months should do wonders. And leave us in a much better position over all than just blowing up everything on sight and assuming everything will turn out okay because we're secure in our moral self-righteousness.

Modifié par marshalleck, 17 août 2011 - 06:26 .

[Warlocomotf]

Logical Escape wrote...

I seem to recall that attempts to study reaper technology ends up in indoctrination (negative) more often than it ends up in progress (positive).  if that trend holds up, I'd rather take my chances than lose a coin flip with a weighted coin.

Expected value and all that, you know...

In fact, it stands to argue that some of the most succesfull research into reaper technology came from a destroyed sovereign (IE: EDI based on reaper technology).

[marshalleck]

Saaziel wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

You seem to be laboring under the idea that I once said there is no risk at all in any Renegade decisions. It's about minimizing risk, not eliminating it.

If the options are : Renegade with Risk and Paragon Without. Then those working under the doctrine or Minimising risk ought to choose the Paragon option (Even if it were morally correct: The horror!)

Again , i think the issue is what is perceived as a risk.

Paragon is hardly without risk. 

So you've blown up the base. What's your plan now?

[Logical Escape]

Saphra Deden wrote...

You don't know what you're talking about.

Studying the derelict Reaper granted us the IFF, without which we could not have stopped the Collectors.

Studying Object Rho revealed the Alpha Relay and the immiment arrival of the Reapers, which we were able to stop/delay.

The study of Sovereign's remains granted us the Thanix and EDI. EDI of-course was invaluable in stopping the Collectors and the Thanix was a nice boon as well.

So far I'm not seeing any real negatives.

Studying the derelict Reaper also indoctrinated the whole crew, which Shepard had to fight through.  If not for Legion being there, Shepard probably would've died (as mentioned in the dialogue).  So yes, I'm sure Cerberus planned the whole thing by putting Legion there to save Shepard's ass.

Studying Object Rho also indoctrinated Dr. Kenson who was hellbent on keeping the Alpha Relay.  It was only through the intervention of the battarians capturing her that her plot was foiled.  I'm sure the researchers simply gave Dr. Kenson to the battarians so Shepard can rescue them.

Both of these situations were where hugely fortuitous things went in Shepard's favor.  Otherwise, attempting to research them would have done more harm than good.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Warlocomotf wrote...

Yes, however you entirely disregard many points made- presumably because you have no counter argument.

No. If I disregard something someone says its precisely because I have  no actual counter argument and  no point. That means I can't respond.

[Logical Escape]

marshalleck wrote...

Thanix cannons are pretty useful. EDI is pretty useful. The IFF is pretty useful. Mass relays are pretty useful. Mass effect technology in general is pretty useful. Hell, Shepards implants of undoubtedly Reaper-origin are pretty useful. The IFF is the only one of these we know about going poorly. Well, there was Saren's lab on Virmire, but he was intentionally indoctrinating people.

Only the first two can be credited to studying reaper tech.  The last two happened because the reapers wanted spacefaring life to find it.  Playing into reaper hands isn't "useful."

marshalleck wrote...

Given a calculated, methodical approach to research, risk of indoctrination should be minimized. Simply rotating science teams on a regular basis rather than leaving them isolated for weeks or months should do wonders. And leave us in a much better position over all than just blowing up everything on sight and assuming everything will turn out okay because we're secure in our moral self-righteousness.

And yet, despite people being indoctrinated on every reaper tech they've worked on for the last few years, people still manage to get indoctrinated.  Maybe avoiding indoctrination isn't as simple as you make it out to be.

marshalleck wrote...

Paragon is hardly without risk. 

So you've blown up the base. What's your plan now?

So you study the collector base.  What's your guarantee that you'll find anything useful?

Furthermore, what's your guarantee that you can trust the illusive man?  Shepard himself asks, how do you know he's not going to build a reaper of his own?