1667 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr. Gogeta34]

AlexXIV wrote...
Sith are sort of an evil religion in a world in which good and evil really exists, represented by the force as a sort of supernatural ... well, force ... I think of the 'dark side' as a force that works like a drug, so you could say that people who use it are manipulated by the force to keep walking towards the dark side. That's not someting that exists in the ME universe in this fashion I think. I personally pity the Sith because even if they win they lose. Because whatever they are looking for, they won't get it, in victory or defeat. It is only a matter of time until a stronger Sith comes along an takes everything from you.

Their religion is power... that's what they serve and constantly strive for.  I'd never be a Sith... but everyone has a religion... something they devote themselves to (whether they know it or not).  The Paragon and Renegade paths are paths you get stronger in the more you do them (like the Dark Side).

I'd never be one.. as I also don't share their darwinistic viewpoint about lives and power.




I do wonder whether Shepard or the Reapers would ever come to acknowledge the existence of Bioware though...

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 03 décembre 2011 - 09:10 .

[AlexXIV]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Sith are sort of an evil religion in a world in which good and evil really exists, represented by the force as a sort of supernatural ... well, force ... I think of the 'dark side' as a force that works like a drug, so you could say that people who use it are manipulated by the force to keep walking towards the dark side. That's not someting that exists in the ME universe in this fashion I think. I personally pity the Sith because even if they win they lose. Because whatever they are looking for, they won't get it, in victory or defeat. It is only a matter of time until a stronger Sith comes along an takes everything from you.

Their religion is power... that's what they serve and constantly strive for.  I'd never be a Sith... but everyone has a religion... something they devote themselves to (whether they know it or not).  The Paragon and Renegade paths are paths you get stronger in the more you do them (like the Dark Side).

I'd never be a Sith.. as I also don't share their darwinistic viewpoint about lives and power.




I do wonder whether Shepard or the Reapers would ever come to acknowledge the existence of Bioware though...

No I think they would have to sell at least 100 million copies of one of their game cross the whole galaxy to get recognition from either. Even though I can imagine Shepard say something along 'This is my favorite game developer in the solar system.'

[Mr. Gogeta34]

AlexXIV wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Sith are sort of an evil religion in a world in which good and evil really exists, represented by the force as a sort of supernatural ... well, force ... I think of the 'dark side' as a force that works like a drug, so you could say that people who use it are manipulated by the force to keep walking towards the dark side. That's not someting that exists in the ME universe in this fashion I think. I personally pity the Sith because even if they win they lose. Because whatever they are looking for, they won't get it, in victory or defeat. It is only a matter of time until a stronger Sith comes along an takes everything from you.

Their religion is power... that's what they serve and constantly strive for.  I'd never be a Sith... but everyone has a religion... something they devote themselves to (whether they know it or not).  The Paragon and Renegade paths are paths you get stronger in the more you do them (like the Dark Side).

I'd never be a Sith.. as I also don't share their darwinistic viewpoint about lives and power.




I do wonder whether Shepard or the Reapers would ever come to acknowledge the existence of Bioware though...

No I think they would have to sell at least 100 million copies of one of their game cross the whole galaxy to get recognition from either. Even though I can imagine Shepard say something along 'This is my favorite game developer in the solar system.'

lol, probably.  Shepard and co. were made in the likeness of human beings afterall.

[InvincibleHero]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Can't satisfy everyone... but they can at least not favor blue choices over all of the others... given that their stated goal is to not have "easy" choices to make.

And they have some. Like Legion's loyalty mission or BDtS.

Most of them are based around characters, which obviously varies from person to person.

Given that BDtS didn't result in any known casualties by letting Balak go... I'd say things are still in the Paragon's favor there.

Rogue Geth seem present regardless (as well)... so I don't see any negative to the Paragon choice here either.

What I wonder is why people think renegade punishing is new in ME2? I mena BW made you feel like total dung for killing Shiala or letting the Terra Nova people die as the price for killing Balak. Even socking the psycho scientist made you feel like a monster.They were easier on renegades in ME2 because they didn't make it seem like you did the wrong thing here even if paragons ultimately got the cake and got to eat every slice while renegades got to get a moldy piece out of the trash(only figuratively speaking).  I think ME was far more judgemental on renegade behavior from music and tone and how the scenes played out. IN ME even executing Joram Talid seemed way out there, but not having a tsk tsk finger wag thrown your way by the game. Even Bailey seems to approve in fact and covers for Shepard.  

So yes some of my fellow rengades and paragons doth protest overmuch. I play both so have a more balanced view for the most part.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...
As far as I can tell, so has Mass Effect. It's pretty easy to do when they're the ones writing it.

If you think the franchise is so lame, then why are you even here?

Lame-ass question. People are here because they care.

For that matter, how can they screw up their own story if they're controlling and writing it? It's THEIR story and THEIR universe. They'll do whatever they damn please with it.

Just because you "own" a story doesn't mean you can't screw it up. Case in point - Twilight.

[InvincibleHero]

Saphra Deden wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

So yes some of my fellow rengades and paragons doth protest overmuch. I play both so have a more balanced view for the most part.

Clearly you don't understand any of the arguments being made.

Wow, that's a change of pace, isn't it?

Oh wait, nevermind, nobody seems to understand this simple concept.

You see-oh **** it, never mind.

Both sides bickering over their decision (about the base or p/r decision in general) is the right one. Both have perfectly valid reasons (by BW's design mind you)  yet both spew venom and throw insults onto the other for no real reason.

Get a clue there is no right decision on blowing up the base or not. BW even stated this for ME and it applies to ME2 as well. Some people act like these decisions validate their life or something. It is a nebulous choice in a videogame. Both you and SWM are frequent offenders (among others) of that. Both think their opinion is correct and cannot accept the other POV to the point of being bellicose.

I think paragons get more favoritism in outcomes and presentation within game, but I am not about to rant over and over about it. IMO it was worse in ME. I play both and experience the whole game getting a far richer experience.

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]DiebytheSword wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

It's only an eventuality in your fantasy.

[/quote]

The same can be said in reverse, it is only a possibility in your fantasy.  Since we're playing a fantasy Sci-Fi RPG, I'm going to let that comment stare into the abyss all on its own.[/quote]

Nope.
You type words, but they make no sense.

How is it only a possibility in my fantasy? Do you have anything to back that up? ...Of course not. If you did, we wouldn't be having this conversation, now would we?



[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
So you are putting your dreams about a possibel technological singulaartiy (that you have only same vague idea of and no concrete plan how to get to) over the survival of the galaxy?

The hubris and ego in trying to decide who is "worthy". Who the hell gives you (or Shep) that right? Waht makes Sheps oppinion more valid than the needs of the galaxy.

The benefits of the base are clear. They are factual. A massive technological leap.
[/quote]

Since you haven't put Ceberus forward for the cause, like Saph, I'm going to let that one slide, because it seems like you are using Ceberus for your end goal as much as I.  A technological singularity would occur once the reaper threat is gone.  The relays, and all the Reaper tech recovered after the war will change the galaxy forever.  They are not impossible to defeat, they will be destroyed.  When its over, the right people will need to be there to pick up the pieces.  I am firmly of the opinion that one base will change nothing in a positive way.[/quote]

The difference is that my goal is clear and simple - survival of life in the galaxy. This includes steps to get there.

You have much more nebolous goals, and a very fraked-up priority.
Instead of putting the suurvival FIRST (as you should, because there will be no singularity wihout it), you go about some future dreams.


[quote]
As for hubris and ego, I control Shep, Shepard is the only character in the game that will decide things with power he alone weilds.  As an agent of change, who holds power in his hands, I control everything.  You can argue that I'm a despot or have a glactic ego, but that's silly because I am ultimately right.  Truth does not change because you want to apply logic to a fantasy game.  The game saves, and what happen in them are mine.  You can literally suck eggs on that point.  I've already decided for the Krogan, the Rachni and the Geth.  Everyone else gets a turn in 3.  Surprise, surprise, I'll decide who's worthy then too, and don't even play like you somehow avoided those choices.[/quote]

Again, you constatly make arguments out-of-character. As such, those arguments have no value whatsoever, since we are discussing the decision to be made in-universe.
You are right only in the most broad sense - in that oy are the plyer and thus decide anything.

But that it a completely broken logic that makes no sense - since as a player ANY choice "justified". Yet we're not talking about the player, we are talking about Shep and the ME universe.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
What a galatic ego.
And people say TIM is full of himself......
[/quote]

Spare me your lectures on who I may or may not be.  That is irrelevant and you don't know me from a hole in the wall.

What galactic ego that you lot condemn me, an actual human with free will, for choices in a video game.[/quote]

Not really irrelevant, as it highlights all the flaws in your logic.
And yeah..I condemn you. Problem?



[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Broken logic. Sheppard doesn't know it's game. You cna bet your card on a Deus Ex Machina you dont' know will come. The only reason you are betting on it because you know it's a game and it will be there.
Otherwise, if ME was real, and you were in Sheps shoes...would you realyl do the same? REALLY?

So no, there is no false dichotomy. Thre is no other side because there is no logical alternative to the base.

I'm not limiting my options, because a base - if not destroyed - remains there to be used or destroyed later. As a card it remains on the table, and it can still be removed.
Once it's is destroyed however, there is no going back.
[/quote]


I know its a game.  Who's using faulty logic again?  I can bet my card on options down the road, it is my game, my mouse clicks and thankfully you aren't at my keyboard guiding my experience.  If ME was real, and I were in Shepards shoes, I would not have dialogue options restricting my actions.  So spare me hypotheticals, because that is exactly the situation in which I would chose something different than option a and option b, as I stated above.  If we are applying full control, where I choose the content of Shepards message and actions and don't simply choose amongst the presented options, things would be very different indeed.  Therefore, there is very much  a false dichotomy.  I am playing a game, and this situation is not real, presenting only two choices when there would be many.[/quote]


There is no sense in talking to you, since you do not even grasp the crux of the arguments.
The decision is discussed IN-UNIVERSE. You, as the player - are IRRELEVANT.
Yes, it is a game, but the crux is to deciede the best course of action WITHIN THE UNIVERSE. By definition that cannot be achieved by applying out-of-universe knowledge.
That, in it's very core, it an anathema to logic in this case.

Hence, why the decision must be approached as if you were Sheppard, lived in the ME universe and ME was not a game. And then choose the best betwen the options that are availalbe (pretend that other options are simply not possible).


[quote]
Once its turned over to TIM, it is out of your hands.  You would have to invade it again to stop it, this time with its resources under TIMs control, or worse, Reaper control.  As I stated earlier, he only tolerates you while you are convenient.  I only tolerate things in the game while they are convenient.  The bases existence is only possibly convenient, provided it is used properly.  Something I cannot garauntee, and a risk I am not willing to take.[/quote]

So? It's a single base in a fixed location.
In repaer hands it is meaningless to the war effort. In handes of any of the sentient races, it a great tool agaisnt the reapers. Cerberus doesn't have a real navy.
The best itself can be easiyl blitzed by the Alliance/Council. Even if TIM gets a hold of it and abuses it, he will still study it. That knowledge will be gathered. Recorded. And if Shep or the Council ends up stopping him, that knowledge will land right into their hands. As long as knowledge exists, it can be used.
No matter who gets the base, eventually, the knowledge will find it's way into the galactic society.

And what about the risk of the reapers wiping out the galaxy? That a risk you're willing to take?



[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
There is only one goal - survival of the galaxy. Whoever gets the base will use it to thwart the reapers, if they care at all about theuir survival. IS it possible that the technology will be abused? Of course - such potential exists for ALL technology.
Yet it is ultimatively irrelevant. If the reapers win, there will be no one left to abuse it.
[/quote]

Wrong, there is another more explicit goal: my enjoyment of the game.  Like it or not, the galaxy and all its inhabitants are my playthings.  But lets put that aside for now.  There are other goals, War without and end game strategy is a fool's errand.  As someone who decides where the chips will fall, Shepard will be the right man, in the right place, to change the galaxy as he sees fit multiple times before the game is done.  You will decide what the galaxy looks like when you are done.  You have a different vision than I, and that's fine, its your game too.

You will have to answer for letting the genie out of the bottle at some point, I decided that no one deserved the genie.  Come of that what may, it is my choice when I'm playing, not yours.[/quote]

*FACEPALM*

No words...no words.....



[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
A single reaper base in the midst of a reaper invasion is a non-factor. Why worry about a factory that will take months/years to pump out a repaer of a few troops, when you have a thousent sentient super-warship indoctrinating people and reaping.
[/quote]

Oh, but I thought it was oh so important?!  Pray tell, how is it that the Collector base is of worth to only one side?  I thought I was the illogical one here.  An asset is an asset, no matter who weilds it.  If I were to find a cache of nuclear weapons in the desert, it would be destroyed to assure it couldn't be used against me in the future.    Scorched earth games are what the reapers are doing with us, the favor must be returned in kind, as it has been demonstrated that their weapons and equipment are dangerous by their very presence alone.  Anything I might learn from a servitor species is not worth the risk.[/quote]

Dear lord....I can't belive this. There aren't enough facepalm images on the internet for this...

How..can you be so ...blind?

The Reapers already have all the tech in the base. There is nothing new in it for them. No big advantage. An asset does not have the same value to everyone. To the reapers the base is of little value - to the other races it is of great value.

It would be like you facing an attack by the US, you don't have any nukes or the technological know-how to build them, and you conquer a US missile base.
Do you study those nukes, take them for yourself - so you have technological parity with the US? Or do you blow it up and count on a Deus Ex Machina to stop a US ICBM attakc on you?



[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
A far greater boon - a necessary boon - and a comparatively insignificant libaility.
[/quote]

In your opinion.  It is both a boon and a liability, you cannot argue that it is one or the other.  If it has worth, it has worth, freind and foe alike (not all foes being reapers), what it is worth to one side or the other in comparison is irrelevant.[/quote]

No, not oppinion. Fact.
See above.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 05 décembre 2011 - 12:25 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Well, it makes sense for Cerberus to have a small fleet, considering that one of their most successful front companies IS A DAMN STARSHIP MANUFACTURER.

And the CO's of Northop-Grumman, Boeing and sprivate shipyards all have their own military fleets?...

Oh wait - no they don't!

[Troika0]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Be that as it may, the point still stands.  They aren't all adaptive.  Compassion is not something necessary for personal survival... but something commonly attributed to moral decency and civility.  Adaptation in evolution just raises the chances of survival... but in the end it's still the "strong" and/or cunning that continue to persist and pass on their genetic successors into the future.

I suggest you take another look at current evolutionary and game theory. Cooparative behaviors are genetically beneficial, that's why they are conserved and exist at all. Sure, you could argue it's not beneficial in all circumstances--particularly when resources are scarce--but that's no contradiction.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Evolution - it's not the survival of the strongest/fittest. It's just survival. By those who fornicate the most.
It doens't care why your genes get passed on. Strength, ressilience, massive libido or jsut plain old good luck (or bad luck for your rival) - everything goes.

[Lotion Soronarr]

jreezy wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

I think paragons get more favoritism in outcomes and presentation within game, but I am not about to rant over and over about it.

Why not?

What could repeated ranting solve?

What COULDN'T it solve?

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And the CO's of Northop-Grumman, Boeing and sprivate shipyards all have their own military fleets?...

Oh wait - no they don't!

Are they fronts to paramilitary extremist groups as well? I didn't know that.

The point is to keep it a secret.

They could easily have some of their own agents act as buyers and send the ships to different locations, so there's no gathering of this fleet either, but so it can easily be mobilized when needed.

[mango smoothie]

     I really need to do that video series I wanted to do that where I talk about the choices of Mass Effect and why people choose one choice or another. Where I go into great depth and talk about multiple reasons why people would make that certain choice, and try to have people understand why people make that choice. I have always found a pro and con in every choice in Mass Effect, and can understand why people would choose one choice over the other.
    Even if I did that though I'm sure people would still not understand why people choose certain choices.

Modifié par mango smoothie, 05 décembre 2011 - 01:27 .

[Medhia Nox]

@jreezy: Have you ever worked in retail? Whining endlessly (or repeated ranting as you put it) is the key to a successful shopping experience.

The modern age is ruled by chronic complainers.

I blame the fact that we no longer beat weak people with morning stars.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And the CO's of Northop-Grumman, Boeing and sprivate shipyards all have their own military fleets?...

Oh wait - no they don't!

Are they fronts to paramilitary extremist groups as well? I didn't know that.

The point is to keep it a secret.

They could easily have some of their own agents act as buyers and send the ships to different locations, so there's no gathering of this fleet either, but so it can easily be mobilized when needed.

Yes, because government allows shipyards to sell armed warships to anyone.

I'm sure Bill Gates has his own aircraft carrier with nukes...


Whatever Cerberus can legaly get from shipyards will be civilian stuff or simple military stuff (like Hum-Vees).
And Illegaly getting anything would be a b**** too, since any sensible government watches military shipyards like a hawk.

Frankly, the ease one can aquire weapons and military hardware (especialyl ships) in most sci-fi settings is laughable.
There's a reason pirates drive around in dingies with AK-47's, and not in their own destroyers.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 05 décembre 2011 - 02:08 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

mango smoothie wrote...

     I really need to do that video series I wanted to do that where I talk about the choices of Mass Effect and why people choose one choice or another. Where I go into great depth and talk about multiple reasons why people would make that certain choice, and try to have people understand why people make that choice. I have always found a pro and con in every choice in Mass Effect, and can understand why people would choose one choice over the other.
    Even if I did that though I'm sure people would still not understand why people choose certain choices.

I can't speak for everyone but "why" is not an issue in itself.
I fully understand why poeple blow the CB for example (they start with wrong premises or have messed-up priorities).

The bigger issue is if the "why" makes proper sense.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Medhia Nox wrote...
The modern age is ruled by chronic complainers.

I blame the fact that we no longer beat weak people with morning stars.

Yes, morningstars are seriously underrated. W need mroe morningstars. And greatswords. And cowbell.

[AlexXIV]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

mango smoothie wrote...

     I really need to do that video series I wanted to do that where I talk about the choices of Mass Effect and why people choose one choice or another. Where I go into great depth and talk about multiple reasons why people would make that certain choice, and try to have people understand why people make that choice. I have always found a pro and con in every choice in Mass Effect, and can understand why people would choose one choice over the other.
    Even if I did that though I'm sure people would still not understand why people choose certain choices.

I can't speak for everyone but "why" is not an issue in itself.
I fully understand why poeple blow the CB for example (they start with wrong premises or have messed-up priorities).

The bigger issue is if the "why" makes proper sense.

It does because TIM would get his hands on it. If the Alliance or Council grapped it I would have been ok with it. Even though I think it is a mistake. But my Shep is still Alliance/Council soldier. Sry but anyone who kisses TIM's butt is just a turncoat. And I don't think it is a good idea to start a war Cerberus vs the rest of the world just when the Reaper invasion is close.

It's not really about making proper sense as you claim. It is about what you accept being a proper sense. You can't disprove my opinion as little as I can disprove yours. However, we have a choice and we will see what we get for it in ME3.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Yes, because government allows shipyards to sell armed warships to anyone.

I'm sure Bill Gates has his own aircraft carrier with nukes...


Whatever Cerberus can legaly get from shipyards will be civilian stuff or simple military stuff (like Hum-Vees).
And Illegaly getting anything would be a b**** too, since any sensible government watches military shipyards like a hawk.

Frankly, the ease one can aquire weapons and military hardware (especialyl ships) in most sci-fi settings is laughable.
There's a reason pirates drive around in dingies with AK-47's, and not in their own destroyers.

Okay, then how did they get the latest disruptor torpedo launching system for the SR2?

Maybe they added it later? Maybe they built the weapons themselves?

Or maybe they got their parts out in the Terminus systems, where there is no military government.

Or, hell, actually used their connections in the Alliance ranks to authorize their companies to build the components needed to construct the ships they wanted later. Not everything has a stamp on it that says "WEAPON/SHIP PARTS" on it, you know.

And if they can get their hands on the blueprints of a top secret stealth frigate like the Normandy, I think they can get their hands on blueprints of something like a fighter or a cruiser.