1127 réponses à ce sujet

[goofyomnivore]

Disputing a certain truth =/= making it false or lower it's credibility. I can ****** and moan all I want that my mathbook is full of **** and 5x5 is not 25 that it is in fact 10. However that doesn't make it false it makes me an idiot.

Modifié par strive, 21 décembre 2011 - 10:05 .

[AlexXIV]

strive wrote...

Disputing a certain truth =/= making it false or lower it's credibility. I can ****** and moan all I want that my mathbook is full of **** and 5x5 is not 25 that it is in fact 10. However that doesn't make it false it makes me an idiot.

If you accept mathematic rules as a base of logic then you also accept it's conclusions.

However just accepting words as a means of converstation doesn't mean that everything said and written must be true. If you use codex entries to back up your Shepard's decisions then I would like to know where your Shepard knows it from other than reading codex entries. Did someone tell your Shepard, was it in a class in reaper science at college? Did a scientist tell you, maybe a cerberus scientist? Give me an ingame reason to believe what is written in the codex.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 21 décembre 2011 - 10:10 .

[goofyomnivore]

Most of the Mass Effect codexs are common knowledge(Asari lifespan) or knowledge Shepard would of known by doing the task to the specific codex(Arrival Codex). Or lore about how a shotgun works from the manufacturer. It isn't Dragon Age where the codex is presented in the form of Brother whatever's writings you found in the corner of a cave.

They're intended/presented to be taken factual they aren't presented as rumors or speculation(individual's personal thoughts).

Modifié par strive, 21 décembre 2011 - 10:20 .

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

Okay, sorry, this thread is going to be Godwin'd now, but I have no other choice:

AlexXIV wrote...

Because the base is a tool to turn living beings into murderous machines. Not sure why you left this part in your quoting me, but I guess you had your reasons ...

So, according to your logic, we shouldn't keep the German execution camps around because they're tools to mass-murder living beings? According to your logic, we shouldn't study those execution camps to find out what kind of experiments they conducted on the prisoners within those camps?

It doesn't make any sense. Why shouldn't we keep those German execution camps and learn from them, so the horrors that happened in WW2 can never happen again? Why shouldn't we keep the Collector base and learn from it, so the horrors that happened in ME2 can never happen again?

AlexXIV wrote...

Even giving it to the Alliance would be wrong,

No, it's not wrong. Why would it be wrong?

AlexXIV wrote...

My problem is that I don't want my Shep to be the person who gives the this genocidal machinery to the most untrustworthy person in the galaxy. Because I don't want anything bad comming from it being tracked back to my Shep. If that's insane then oh well ... I must be it.

Yes, it's insane. TIM is not the most untrustworthy person in the galaxy. Sure, I don't like him either and I'm halla sure this guy has a hidden agenda, but at the same time TIM is the only person who knows more about indoctrination than Shepard does (well, perhaps Kahlee Sanders knows more about indoctrination than Shepard, but I doubt she knows more than TIM). TIM is also the only person in the galaxy who knows quite a bit about reaper techology. TIM made it possible to ressurect Shepard in the first place.

Even when TIM wouldn't be your first choice, you still have to understand that giving the base to TIM likely will accomplish more than blowing the base up.

If intelligence would equal loyality, reliability or even sanity then I would agree. Sadly the worst atrocities in human history have been commited by some of the most intelligent people. So I can't accept TIM's intelligence or knowledge as a base of trust.

Also as far as I know the USA didn't keep the concentration camps to use it as a weapon in the cold war against russia so I don't see the context to the CB. We don't give the base to Cerberus to serve as an example how to avoid things like this in the future. We give it to Cerberus to use it as a weapon. And the record of Cerberus sacrificing lifes in the past for the 'greater good' makes me unsure if they are really above turning millions of people into reaper soup. Especially if these people are not humans.

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't the Codex something that's actually part of the Mass Effect universe? As in: every piece of Codex that we as the players can read, is also readable by Shepard, isn't it? I always saw the Codex as Mass Effect's version of the encyclopedia and every codex entry we as the players read, is also accessible by the in-game Shepard.

So even if I DID use the Codex information to back up my Shepard's reasoning (again, I'm not), it still wouldn't be meta-gaming.

No, reading Codex entries and assuming Shepard read them isn't metagaming. But assuming Shepard knows that Bioware wrote them and therefore they can't be wrong is. That's why I say any information is disputable unless an allknowing allmighty god wrote them.

[Lotion Soronarr]

BellaStrega wrote...

I have posted facts. You insist, against all logic and reason, that they are not facts. Therefore, it's clearly a waste of effort to discuss this with you.

You have posted weak stipulations.
If you truly have posted facts, I must have missed them.

Care to re-post them again?

I have no trouble re-posting facts  and numbers I used. You ppl seem to have a lot of trouble with that (since you know just how week your "facts" are).

Because pure numbers and codex data are irrelevant when they dont' aagree with you, right?

On the contrary, I said I agreed that your logic is valid, and I have used the same logic in game. But it is not the only valid logic available, just the only valid logic you're willing to acknowledge.

If it based on the numbers, then it IS the only valid conclusion.

Of course, you can debate what "valid" means, and that - from a certain point of view - X is a "logical" conclusion, but is pretty much just a smokescreen.

If you cannot prove that we can take on the reapers without the base, then every oher argument you make is null and void.

[goofyomnivore]

But assuming Shepard knows that Bioware wrote them and therefore they can't be wrong is.

The only codex argument I made was about beam technology. And the benefits of it are presented in game. The idea of reverse engineering it is supported in game. I'm not saying it is true because of the codex. I'm saying the codex is true because of the information told to Shepard in game. I don't even need the say it is in the codex to make it a viable argument. However it is easier to say read the codex rather than recall x event  y event z event, etc. Since the codex is just a summary of common knowledge and events Shepard has experienced.


I would agree with you 100% though on Dragon Age's codex.

Modifié par strive, 21 décembre 2011 - 10:33 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

AlexXIV wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
How is it a strawman if it adresses exactly what you said.

Becasue it doesn't.
He claim that 10 out of 10 tims X happen, so it's highly likely it will happen again.

You on the other had argue that because 10 out of 10 times X happen, the 11th time Y is more likely. Which is a whole load of BS.

Re-visit statistics 101 please.

Maybe TIM thinks becoming a Reaper is preferable, maybe he thinks the Reapers are our unavoidable genetic destiny. TIM is nothing but a big unknown in this scenario and everyone who claims otherwise is just being delusive. 'Logic dictates' blah blah. It's not logic, you believe in him because you chose to, you want to. It is a purely emotional choice. The little bit of logic in it is merely the excuse for you because you can't deal with the fact that you give it to him because you like him.

Except he doesn't think so. Except he spent 20 years fighting the reapers.
It's funny how you have to ignore TIM's whole history and characterization in an attempt to justify your insane position,
Really, if you're so hell bent on that "we know nothing" route, then let me ask you thins - would you give the CB to Hackeet? Would you trust Haackett? After all, what do we know about him? He has less dialogue than TIM.
Maby he thinks we should all become reapers?

So stop being a raging hypocrite.

I explain it like that. You play russian roulette. You have 5 empty chambers and one with a bullet. So does everytime you pull the trigger make it more likely or less likely that the next time you shoot yourself? 10 out of 10 is not enough for maths. You only need one fail to disprove a theory but you need to prove that it will work everytime if you want to establish that it works everytime. You may have positive statistics. But anything based on statistics alone will fail. That's why we don't let computers make decissions. Common sense is more imporant than statistics.

BS example is BS. With the gun, you know hte bullet is there and the equation used is different - and it's an entirely different situation.
I dont' need to prove it will work every time.
What I have to show is that it's FAR MORE LIKEY to work than not.
That it's FAR MORE LIKELY that we'll have an advantage than not.

So you might want to try and use your common sense, instead of inventing strawman examples.

He can spend 50000 years fighting reapers, what does it proof? That he can't cheat? That he can't come to the conclusion that we have no chance? That he can't think that serving the reapers is preferable to being wiped out? Yes I would give it to Hackett. Because I trust him. Hell I am not the hypocrite here who claims to be all logical. I like Hackett, I dislike TIM. I make an emotional choice. If you ever get to the point where you admit that it is the same for you, that you like TIM and trust him because of that, then we can talk about who's a hypocrite again.

It proves what he does. You don't spend 20 years fighting reapers if that's not your goal. You don't spend 20 years creating a shadow organization to do it if you don't truly belive in that cause. And TIM also knows what happens to those that serve the reapers (they get wiped out in the end). If you truly think TIM wants humanity to end up like Collectors, you are dellusional.

I'm glad that you admit that your decision here is illogical.

For one I never said liked TIM. I don't really. I do have some respect, but that's about it. I am convinced of his dedication to humanity.
You can call me biased all you want, but you cannot prove I like TIM and that is clouding my judgment.
You however, have clearly admitted that you hate TIM and love Hackett, by which you provided clear proof of your bias.

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

Listen to what you're saying. Cerberus, the biggest PRO-HUMANITY group ever, using the Collector base to turn millions of HUMANS into a reaper? That's not really pro-human now is it?

Besides, even if Cerberus did want to do that, they wouldn't have stopped the Collectors. They would have waited until the human reaper is (nearly) finished and THEN send Shepard in to take over the base AND reaper.

So really, you're not making any sense now.

That Cerberus is pro-human you learn from Cerberus themselves. Conveniently. I said it before, TIM is as pro-human as Hitler was pro-German. In the end the germans had to pay the price for trusting him. I learn from history. You simply accept things as fact and truths even though you have no reason to. Other than trusting someone who doesn't trust anyone and who nobody really trusts either. TIM's trust in Shepard doesn't even go as far as telling Shepard of the traps he/she is running into. Why would Shepard suddenly think that TIM can be trusted?

Modifié par AlexXIV, 21 décembre 2011 - 10:37 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

BellaStrega wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The "technological evolution" is BS.
The only "path" the reapers want us to follow is to use the mass relays as the main means of travel. That's it. Nothing more.

The Collector base is not comparable PRECISELY because the reapers don't want us to have it. Which makes it all the more valubale.

Which is why the Collector Base will simply result in an indoctrinated Cerberus. It's not intended for galactic use, and will have traps, like other Reaper technology (such as dragon's teeth, Object Rho, etc).

You completely missed my point, which was that the use of mass relays doesn't include indoctrination because the Reapers want the mass relay network to be used, or at least so Sovereign claims.

And you completely miss my point.
The never intended for us to have the base - beacause it holds tech they don't want us to have. Which means it's valubale to us. If it's trapped, thet means it even mofe valubale. Anything the enemy goes to great length to keep away from you, is something that you want to have. That's common sense.

You say that base will result in indoctrinated cerberus as a fact. That's BS.
And, assuming it does, if it yeald some results before it happens, it's still worth it.

Let me ask you - how do you intend to fight indoctrination? How? Do you have some plan? Some idea how to stop our own defense force from killign eachother?
Of course you don't. The only way to find out how to defend agaisnt that is to study it. Something you apparently want to avoid. I'm beining to think you want the reapers to win.

[BellaStrega]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You have posted weak stipulations.
If you truly have posted facts, I must have missed them.

Care to re-post them again?

I have no trouble re-posting facts  and numbers I used. You ppl seem to have a lot of trouble with that (since you know just how week your "facts" are).

This terrible attempt to establish some kind of "emotional rapport" between us in which we share a false common knowledge about the strength of my facts is really not necessary. I do not in fact know that my facts are "weak." I know they are actually pretty sturdy. You have yet to deliver any actual argument against them, but you have repeatedly asserted without any argument at all that they are wrong, or weak, or otherwise insufficient to counter your ideological stance that The Illusive Man is the galaxy's only hope.

Since we haven't had a discussion, why should I repost the same argument every single time you fail to refute it? Do you think I like riding on other people's passive-aggressive carousels?

If it based on the numbers, then it IS the only valid conclusion.

Of course, you can debate what "valid" means, and that - from a certain point of view - X is a "logical" conclusion, but is pretty much just a smokescreen.

If you cannot prove that we can take on the reapers without the base, then every oher argument you make is null and void.

I can prove it, and have. You simply don't accept the proof as valid because, honestly, you're too emotionally (not logically) invested in your favored outcome to consider that other outcomes are valid as well.

Numbers by themselves don't give you the only valid conclusion, unless you're dealing with an abstractly pure math problem or you're dealing with something simple like comparing fuel to mass to see how far you can get and how much additional mass you can transport. You're not talking about anything like that, however. You are talking about a situation that is rife with human error and denying that human error is valid because "numbers! logic!" and you have no real argument that any approach but your favorite is wrong.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Lumikki wrote...

BellaStrega wrote...

I have posted facts. You insist, against all logic and reason, that they are not facts. Therefore, it's clearly a waste of effort to discuss this with you.

Exactly.

No point of discuss with different ways to looking informations, if the other person doesn't accept anything else than they own viewpoint. So, why waste time.

Evidence -> persons A conclusions -> Result A
Evidence -> persons B conclusions -> Result B

Person A only accept result A, while person B accept both result A and B. Reasons why person A accept only result A has nothing to do with logic, but because the result is what persons A wants (his own).

All fine and dandy - until you ignore evidence alltogether. Which is what you are doing.

And ya know - conclusion can be drawn from evidence - but one can also draw wrong conclusions.

There's also the difference between understandable decision (as in - I can understand what drives on to do it) and a smart/logical one.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 21 décembre 2011 - 10:41 .

[Someone With Mass]

BellaStrega wrote...


This terrible attempt to establish some kind of "emotional rapport" between us in which we share a false common knowledge about the strength of my facts is really not necessary. I do not in fact know that my facts are "weak." I know they are actually pretty sturdy. You have yet to deliver any actual argument against them, but you have repeatedly asserted without any argument at all that they are wrong, or weak, or otherwise insufficient to counter your ideological stance that The Illusive Man is the galaxy's only hope.

Since we haven't had a discussion, why should I repost the same argument every single time you fail to refute it? Do you think I like riding on other people's passive-aggressive carousels?

That's how he deals with all arguments. Claims that they're weak or that the people are wrong without even posting any form of rebuttal and then proceeds to claim his own arguments (what little of them there are) as facts.

It's pretty much a running gag at this point, if you ask me.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 21 décembre 2011 - 10:57 .

[BellaStrega]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Let me ask you - how do you intend to fight indoctrination? How? Do you have some plan? Some idea how to stop our own defense force from killign eachother?
Of course you don't. The only way to find out how to defend agaisnt that is to study it. Something you apparently want to avoid. I'm beining to think you want the reapers to win.

Hahaha, oh my god, did you forget we're discussing a game? Reapers win, Reapers lose, I want to play a video game where Commander Shepard kicks a lot of ass and looks good while doing it. And I know - and have no trouble with - the idea that it will be possible to save the galaxy from the Reapers via Paragon or Renegade decisions. I like having choices that enable me to define Shepard as I wish. If I want a Shepard who doesn't take bull from anyone, I can play that. If I want a Shepard who tries to build bridges and work multilaterally, I can play that. I'm not invested in having a singular path that must be the only possible successful way to win, and I seriously question the goals of anyone who wants the game to follow their own logic at the expense of sticking to the game's actual conceptual basis.

As for your question: Study the damned dragon's teeth that are all over the place to understand indoctrination. It's probably many times safer to deal with those than to deal with the base, and since it's not Cerberus, a pro-human survivalist terrorist organization, odds are good that the research will be shared among other species if such research is relevant to the game in the first place.

[Lotion Soronarr]

BellaStrega wrote...

If it based on the numbers, then it IS the only valid conclusion.

Of course, you can debate what "valid" means, and that - from a certain point of view - X is a "logical" conclusion, but is pretty much just a smokescreen.

If you cannot prove that we can take on the reapers without the base, then every oher argument you make is null and void.

I can prove it, and have. You simply don't accept the proof as valid because, honestly, you're too emotionally (not logically) invested in your favored outcome to consider that other outcomes are valid as well.

You proved nothing.

I asked, multiple times, to debunk the reaper strength.
You havn't. You didn' teven try to tackle it. You keep avpiding to tackle the issue.

I DARE you to tackle it. 

You didn't counter any of my claim there.
I countered all of your pathetic ones (that Soverign and Citadel fleet paragraph of yours  was hilarious)


Prove to me that the reapers can't take out many of our ships and retreat without us being able to do jack s*** about it. Then prove to me that in light of such hit-and-run attacks, we can win.

Numbers by themselves don't give you the only valid conclusion, unless you're dealing with an abstractly pure math problem or you're dealing with something simple like comparing fuel to mass to see how far you can get and how much additional mass you can transport. You're not talking about anything like that, however. You are talking about a situation that is rife with human error and denying that human error is valid because "numbers! logic!" and you have no real argument that any approach but your favorite is wrong.

What human error? Provide and example in the context of the reaper war.

[BellaStrega]

Someone With Mass wrote...

That's how he deals with all arguments. Claims that they're weak or they the people are wrong without even posting any form of rebuttal and then proceeds to claim his own arguments (what little of them there are) as facts.

It's pretty much a running gag at this point, if you ask me.

Oh, I've noticed. It is almost entertaining.

[AlexXIV]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Yes I can think and believe you are biased whether you admit it or not. The jails are full of innocent people, you know. Your own opinion on your own bias does not mean a thing. My examples are as BS as yours. Your claims to know something or have some sort calculation going when making this decision are also void. I have never seen these calculations you made and I have asked for them several times. You just assume that if you would calculate the pro and cons that the pros would outweigh the cons. But you have nothing that comes close to a proof or actual calculation. I am just thinking you believe yourself to be much smarter than you are, smarter than we are. You think we don't understand the 'points' you are making. I can speak only for myself. I understand your points pretty good. They are mostly opinions on what you believe to be facts. You believe in Cerberus and in TIM. Or you wouldn't give him the base. No logical conclusion in the world can make up for the question whether you trust TIM or not. Because if he uses the base differently than you assume all your calculations go to hell. Because then you have no base, no knowledge, no nothing. And TIM has everything he ever wanted.

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't the Codex something that's actually part of the Mass Effect universe? As in: every piece of Codex that we as the players can read, is also readable by Shepard, isn't it? I always saw the Codex as Mass Effect's version of the encyclopedia and every codex entry we as the players read, is also accessible by the in-game Shepard.

So even if I DID use the Codex information to back up my Shepard's reasoning (again, I'm not), it still wouldn't be meta-gaming.

No, reading Codex entries and assuming Shepard read them isn't metagaming. But assuming Shepard knows that Bioware wrote them and therefore they can't be wrong is. That's why I say any information is disputable unless an allknowing allmighty god wrote them.

Yes but like the encyclopedia in real-life, we can assume that whatever is written in the Codex, is a fact, until proven otherwise.

It's how science works in real-life and bet it's how science works in Mass Effect too. Those codex entries are based on known facts and/or scientific theories. It's reasonable to assume the codex entries are accurate and correct, even when you approach them from an in-universe point of view.

But we are not talking about historic events or research data. We are talking about the future, about chances and risks of using reaper data. Did people know of the chances and risks of nuclear power BEFORE they used it? No. Sure there were different opinions, written down in assays and books. But we are still learning new things every day. That's why codex are not automatically evidence for anything. Some things in the codex are 100% true, some things are less. And information regarding tech we have not researched yet is most likely not 100% relieable.

[BellaStrega]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You proved nothing.

I asked, multiple times, to debunk the reaper strength.
You havn't. You didn' teven try to tackle it. You keep avpiding to tackle the issue.

I DARE you to tackle it. 

You didn't counter any of my claim there.
I countered all of your pathetic ones (that Soverign and Citadel fleet paragraph of yours  was hilarious)

Prove to me that the reapers can't take out many of our ships and retreat without us being able to do jack s*** about it. Then prove to me that in light of such hit-and-run attacks, we can win.

You didn't counter anything I said. You just told me I was wrong and moved on, which you are doing again. You don't argue; all you do is contradict. I'm convinced at this point that you either did not read or did not understand anything I did write, as you seem incapable of actually addressing it.

What human error? Provide and example in the context of the reaper war.

The human error of giving a giant robot smoothie machine to Cerberus. You might as well add a ribbon and a card to make it clear that you're handing a giftwrapped Cerberus over to the Reapers for their own personal use during the invasion.

Modifié par BellaStrega, 21 décembre 2011 - 11:01 .