1127 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

You'd call anything morally ambiguous where anybody stubs their toe a failure, SWM. All Cerberus "failures" resulted in success to the original goal of the project, you just don't accept that Overlord showed Geth could be controlled or the Subject Zero research empowered human biotics throughout the galaxy because then you wouldn't have a point.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 23 décembre 2011 - 08:41 .

[Stardusk78]

At the end of the day if you are consistent in how you play Shepard it shouldn't matter and people should be willing to live with the consequences of their chosen Shepard and get the job done to the best of their ability.

[Someone With Mass]

Dave of Canada wrote...

You'd call anything morally ambiguous where anybody stubs their toe a failure, SWM. All Cerberus "failures" resulted in success to the original goal of the project, you just don't accept that Overlord showed Geth could be controlled or the Subject Zero research empowered human biotics throughout the galaxy because then you wouldn't have a point.

No, I don't accept Overlord because it has no f**king idea of how autism actually works and I find it incredibly offensive in that regard.

Free hint: It doesn't give you super human abilities.

Also, the Subject Zero project produced two super biotics who either Cerberus or the Alliance have any kind of control over.

What good will a weapon do if you can't control it? Are you just going to keep trying until you stumble upon something that doesn't backfire and kill the whole staff?

Here's a better idea.

Instead of treating the biotics like weapons, how about treating them like human beings so they or other people won't feel motivated to escape/rescue them?

But wait, that would require Timmy to stop seeing every single person around him as expendable assets. We can't have that.

[Dave of Canada]

Simply because you don't like Overlord doesn't stop it from existing.

Subject Zero's research was applied to the Ascension program, all Alliance Biotics benefit from it.

[Someone With Mass]

I just told you the whole reason why it shouldn't exist from the start.

AUTISM DOES NOT WORK LIKE THAT. YOU'RE BASING YOUR WHOLE OPERATION ON BULL****.

Oh, wait. I forgot that I'm talking with the head of the Cerberus Defense Force. As long as it in your favor, it doesn't matter how stupid or unrealistic it is. Let's rip the rules a new one.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 23 décembre 2011 - 09:59 .

[Dave of Canada]

You seem to have mistaken me for somebody who cares about your delusions, it's in the game and you need to accept it or you're unreasonable. I'm assuming from past experience you'll go with the latter.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 23 décembre 2011 - 10:05 .

[PnXMarcin1PL]

uuhh... shall i drop the leak bomb to make you both stop arguing ?

Modifié par PnXMarcin1PL, 23 décembre 2011 - 10:06 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

You'd call anything morally ambiguous where anybody stubs their toe a failure, SWM. All Cerberus "failures" resulted in success to the original goal of the project, you just don't accept that Overlord showed Geth could be controlled or the Subject Zero research empowered human biotics throughout the galaxy because then you wouldn't have a point.

No, I don't accept Overlord because it has no f**king idea of how autism actually works and I find it incredibly offensive in that regard.

If you use "writers such and have no clue what they are writing about" as an exuse to disregard things, the nI'll jsut sidregard the whole ME2. It never happened.


Yes, autism and Geth have little incomon. It's a garbage explanation. Jsut like TIM's reasons for brinign Sheppard back. Just like Morodins expanations of hte genophage and human genetic diversity. JSut like plenty of other things.

But if the game tells you "the Get hcan be controlled with this redicolous method" then they can.

Also, the Subject Zero project produced two super biotics who either Cerberus or the Alliance have any kind of control over.

But it can be done. Control is a matter of enough brainwashing/control chips or just finding the right person.
Can you produce a super-biotic - YES/NO?
Yes? Great, we can refine our methods later.

[Dave of Canada]

PnXMarcin1PL wrote...

uuhh... shall i drop the leak bomb to make you both stop arguing ?

No, as it doesn't matter. I'm arguing from an ingame perspective which Shepard experiences Overlord and sees it in action and does the choice from that. Shepard sees Overlord works, therefore he keeps David there. If I was metagaming, I'd simply reason that controlling the Geth is meaningless after doing Legion's loyalty mission.

Though, as I do the decision before that point, I always do the Renegade decision because it's what my Shepard would do and I argue from his perspective. To argue that something is stupid and doesn't work by ignoring the game is being unreasonable, how is that a Cerberus failure? How is that supposed to make me hate Cerberus when my Shepard has clearly seen it work?

I'm not arguing the experiments which Cerberus has done outside of my Shepard's perspective here (and even then I'd argue they were a success (either minor or major), as the ones outside of Shepard's eyes result in their goals. Be it to study indoctrination or determinating if a species can be used as a super soldier. ).

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 23 décembre 2011 - 10:12 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

See, I'm saying that beacuse realisticly Cerberus can't be a threat as big as reapers. Ya know..tiny organization without a real navy and with only a handfull of soldiers VS a race of sentient-machines that have been harvesting and killing entire galactic civilizations for millions of years.

It's not hard to see why your opinnion in this case is total nonsense. Becasue you can't back it up by anything resembling reason.

I have backed it up with reason. Like how Cerberus can be a threat to Shepard, which in its turn can be a threat to the war effort against the Reapers.

You just refuse to see it for the sake of your argument's convenience.

That's redicolous reaasoning. For one, Shep doesn't know he's the one true hero who will save the galaxy. No one does. It is inevitable that Shep will save the galaxy since it's a game. But that isn't sound reasoning within the game itself. Opposing one man = greatest threat ever. Yeah right.

And that still doesn't make Cerberus a great threat than the reapers, so your faliure in the "rebuttal" is double.

Oh, and let's use your logic. Shep can be a threat to Cerberus (or insert random person here), which in turn cna be a htreat to the war effot. Ergo, Sheppard is jsut as bad as reapers!

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Also, if he's not really loosing anytihg that's setting Cerberus back, then you can't really call any of his proejcts a faliue, now can you?

Yes, I can.

When their goal is not met or the project can't even reach half of the potential and expected results or can't be recreated because the original staff was killed, then I'd call a failure.

Sweeping up the remains of a project that could have been so much more is hardly what I'd call a stunning success either.

You are contradicting yourself.

If he's not loosing anything or not having any real setbacks (your words), then there is no real faliure.

Youre arguing against yourself. This is comedy gold.

Also, you're wrong on the "project cna't be recreated" and "not reached expected results" bits.

[Dave of Canada]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

That's redicolous reaasoning. For one, Shep doesn't know he's the one true hero who will save the galaxy. No one does.

Some people will say their Shepard is "unnaturally genre savvy" to justify this.

To give credit to SWM, he has yet to do this.

[Someone With Mass]

Dave of Canada wrote...

You seem to have mistaken me for somebody who cares about your delusions, it's in the game and you need to accept it or you're unreasonable. I'm assuming from past experience you'll go with the latter.

Okay, then don't come and whine about what ME3 is doing with TIM and about how it's unreasonable.

Fair request.

[Dave of Canada]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Okay, then don't come and whine about what ME3 is doing with TIM and about how it's unreasonable.

Fair request.

The difference being that I'm not using "it's stupid" to support my arguments.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

That's redicolous reaasoning. For one, Shep doesn't know he's the one true hero who will save the galaxy. No one does. It is inevitable that Shep will save the galaxy since it's a game. But that isn't sound reasoning within the game itself. Opposing one man = greatest threat ever. Yeah right.

And that still doesn't make Cerberus a great threat than the reapers, so your faliure in the "rebuttal" is double.

Oh, and let's use your logic. Shep can be a threat to Cerberus (or insert random person here), which in turn cna be a htreat to the war effot. Ergo, Sheppard is jsut as bad as reapers!

Eh, no. Now you're just unreasonable.

Also, they're against what Shepard is doing, not what he is.

Shepard is trying to rally the forces of the galaxy and to construct a weapon to fight the Reapers with and Cerberus is trying to stop that, since it's going against what they have planned for the Reapers.

Not to mention that they have seen what Shepard can accomplish and they aren't underestimating him.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

That's redicolous reaasoning. For one, Shep doesn't know he's the one true hero who will save the galaxy. No one does. It is inevitable that Shep will save the galaxy since it's a game. But that isn't sound reasoning within the game itself. Opposing one man = greatest threat ever. Yeah right.

And that still doesn't make Cerberus a great threat than the reapers, so your faliure in the "rebuttal" is double.

Oh, and let's use your logic. Shep can be a threat to Cerberus (or insert random person here), which in turn cna be a htreat to the war effot. Ergo, Sheppard is jsut as bad as reapers!

Eh, no. Now you're just unreasonable.

I'm using your reasoning there..

And now you know how I feel after reading every sinsgle post you make.

Adn nice that you never bother to properly explain how it makes sense.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Shepard can be a threat to galaxy [to quarians, volus, citadel etc.] like Cerberus.

[Someone With Mass]

Dave of Canada wrote...
The difference being that I'm not using "it's stupid" to support my arguments.

And I'm not using it either. I'm basing it on the pretty well known fact that autism doesn't work like that.

Autism won't grant you the ability to speak a different language if you're already a mentally restricted mathmatical genius.

It's a technical blunder.

Say what you will about the alien technology. I know it's an excuse to pull off something silly, but don't expect me to believe that something that's already known and based on something real suddenly has developed into something completely different for the sake of plot convenience.

If I say that a lemon can power a car's battery or that a diabetic's blood can cure cancer, that doesn't make it true.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I'm using your reasoning there..

And now you know how I feel after reading every sinsgle post you make.

Adn nice that you never bother to properly explain how it makes sense.

Oh, and you do?

I'm sure you're explaining so much with such epic rebuttals as "Which is utter BS because it's so STUPID and INEFFECTIVE. It makes as much sense as Cerberus building warships out of matchsticks."

[Dave of Canada]

But if you show a lemon powering a car's battery and a diabetic's blood cure cancer, it does work. You can say it doesn't how many times you like, doing so doesn't stop it from being shown as working. No matter how ridiculous it is.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 23 décembre 2011 - 10:35 .

[Someone With Mass]

Oh, okay.

Then you can never say that anything about ME3 is inconsistent, complain about how the choices don't matter or how it's written in a poorly explained way, because then you're contradicting yourself.

As long as it works (which it always does in some capacity, according to yourself), any bullsh*t reason is okay.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I'm using your reasoning there..

And now you know how I feel after reading every sinsgle post you make.

Adn nice that you never bother to properly explain how it makes sense.

Oh, and you do?

I'm sure you're explaining so much with such epic rebuttals as "Which is utter BS because it's so STUPID and INEFFECTIVE. It makes as much sense as Cerberus building warships out of matchsticks."

I do.
Plenty of times. Of course, I know your memory is such that any arguments agaisnt your claims are quickly forgotten.

It's pretty damn obvious why it's ineffective and stupid, but some things obviously have to be spelled out (for hte n'th time) to some people.
I'ts ineffective because making a reaper is slow, and requires millions of humans (which is a logistical nightmare and brings with itself a whole lot of other problems) and in the end, you come to the problem of controling said reaper.
If you however, make a regular ship with reaper tech, you end up with a vessel that's roughly just as powerfull, but doesn't have any of the problem . And you can make more of them and faster. And the millions of people you killed to make the reaper ship are still available to add to the war effor in other ways.

In other words- Cerberus building a reaper is inefficent, self-defeating and downright stupid.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Oh, okay.

Then you can never say that anything about ME3 is inconsistent, complain about how the choices don't matter or how it's written in a poorly explained way, because then you're contradicting yourself.

As long as it works (which it always does in some capacity, according to yourself), any bullsh*t reason is okay.

There's is a difference between complaning that some expalantion in-game is horribly written and makes little sense, but accepting it as a fact, and outright denying it....whihc is what you are doing.

So yes, we can complain that X is incosistent, that it makes little sense or that it's poorly written.
What we can't do is refuse to acknowledge X as an argument.

Autism doesn't work that way. Neither does brinigng people back to life. But it's in the game.
I can't deny Sheppard was brought back to life, even tough it makes no medical sense whatsoever. It happend. Period.
In the ME universe, such thing just work. Hence, whey in the ME univers autism DOES work that way.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 23 décembre 2011 - 10:59 .

[Exia001]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Oh, okay.

Then you can never say that anything about ME3 is inconsistent, complain about how the choices don't matter or how it's written in a poorly explained way, because then you're contradicting yourself.

As long as it works (which it always does in some capacity, according to yourself), any bullsh*t reason is okay.

There's is a difference between complaning that some expalantion in-game is horribly written and makes little sense, but accepting it as a fact, and outright denying it....whihc is what you are doing.

So yes, we can complain that X is incosistent, that it makes little sense or that it's poorly written.
What we can't do is refuse to acknowledge X as an argument.

Autism doesn't work that way. Neither does brinigng people back to life. But it's in the game.
I can't deny Sheppard was brought back to life, even tough it makes no medical sense whatsoever. It happend. Period.
In the ME universe, such thing just work. Hence, whey in the ME univers autism DOES work that way.

Just because its a game, it doesn't mean whatever it says goes. Autism is a stated disability, thus it can only work one way. if the grass was blue and the sky green on earth, you'd complain but I could say 'Thats just how earth is in ME, No? Thought not

[Dave of Canada]

But it still occured.

If The Illusive Man suddenly exploded into candy, I'd say it was stupid. I'd say it doesn't make sense and I'd argue about it, though the fact is... The Illusive Man exploded into candy. I can't pretend it didn't happen despite how stupid it is.