315 réponses à ce sujet

[SmartRetard]

Here is my .02 cents, I've listen to each side about choosing which ending and why it was the best choice. I still choose the control ending and it will always be the ending I choose until I see the DLC coming out in the summer.
When my Shepard first started out in Mass Effect, yea my only thought was to stop the Reapers anyway I could. If i could destroy them then yes I would go that option after seeing the evils they committed but we all know it wouldn't be so simple. Atleast I did anyway.
So in Mass Effect 2, I continued on hoping to find someway to beat the Reapers and stop the cycle. Now in Mass Effect 3 I thought maybe it could be accomplished with the Crucible and that the Reapers could be destroyed until those last 10 minutes. I opposed trying to control the reapers, sure because it wasn't really something my Shepard would have done unless it was the better option and in those last 10 minutes it was to me the better option. I felt as if I would betray the sacrifice legion made and the chance to prove the Catalyst wrong. To show that synthetics and organics can get along and forge a better future. I wasn't going to destroy a whole species unless I was given no choice in the matter. I felt that by choosing destroy I would just prove that the Catalyst was right and both species couldn't get along. Who's to say in the future WHEN a new synthetic race is made that they wouldn't see what happened to the Geth and rebel refusing to end up like them.
My paragon Shepard was always going to make the ultimate sacrifice for the greater good of everyone and he did. I would like to believe that they (Bioware) left what happens afterwords to the players so they can find their own happy little ending if need be. I felt that my Shepard would have his conscience sent to each Reaper telling them fix the Mass Relays and head to the nearest star/black hole and destroy themselves. Still this is in my opinion what they wanted, for me to make up my own ending after the Reapers leave.

[Geneaux486]

Unless you are hit by a reaper indoctrination device... You get hit by this you get indoctrinated, he was fighting the effects, reapers can speed this up at any time, but they obviously use people like him in cycles to prevent them from making the crucible or at the very minimum try and force them to use the control option. Once you are indoctrinated you are indoctrinated. There has been no known way to break free of it, maybe after the reapers die, but other then that... it is a guessing game.

 
If he was indoctrinated already, why was he able to execute such a massive plan to disrupt and halt the Collectors' operations.  Why was he able to steal Shepard's body away from them when they were about to obtain it from the Shadow Broker?  Even if he did show signs in Mass Effect 2 that he was indoctrinated (which he didn't), it obviously wasn't strong enough to have any real hold over him.  It's still more likely that what really got him was the Reaper tech he put into his body.  Furthermore, Shiala broke free of Indoctrination.  Apparenlty there were still some risidual traces of it in her head, but not enough to make her a risk to the rest of Zhu's Hope.

All I see with this is you want him to say, "You will destroy all synthetics, even the reapers and geth will really die, and even you will really die"... Seems more like trying to do everything possible to hold up the starchild as NOTHING but an infodump

I was pretty clear about my stance on it.  For it to be taken as absolute fact, it needs to be outright said.  He didn't outright say it.  What you're saying is possible, but not definite.  Disagreeing with it is not a hangup on my end, because your position is not proven accurate.

If you take the final ten minutes as fact then you are speculating that everything Star child said was correct. The game doesn't tell you to believe everything he said. It also doesn't tell you to not believe what he said.

Taking the information in the game at face value is not speculative.  It doesn't matter whether or not the Catalyst is being honest with you (and there's enough evidence that he is, and no evidence that he's not), the fact remains that all he is doing is telling you how to activate your own weapon, and the effects of each choice are shown to be exactly what he claims they are.  Maybe something goes wrong in the long run, maybe it doesn't, there's no statement either way, but no, taking the Catalyst at face value is not speculating.  Taking the Crucible at face value is not speculating. 

because indoctrination isn't just a discrete On/Off, 1/0 thing. At that point, TIM still had a bit of free will, and he was getting dangerously interesting results in those labs.

Yeah, that's a pretty big plothole.  No matter what the Illusive Man's results turned up, he still up and got himself indoctrinated by his own experiements.  Maybe the Reapers just wanted his husks and resources?  Maybe they just wanted to make sure he hadn't found anything that could stop them?  I dunno, all we can do at that point is speculate.

The hardware changes the options. His philosophies haven't changed. He says the old solution won't work any more because Shepard was standing there, although he's only standing there because of the lift. Why bring him upstairs?

Because the Crucible changed the Catalyst, presented it with new options, but it couldn't activate the device itself.  His philosophy as it was when he started the Reaper extinction cycle would not have coincided with synthesis or control.  Mostly because those options did not exist to him before the Crucible was hooked up, and also because the Catalyst didn't think that organics could possibly change things on their own.  The Catalyst doesn't outright state that he was proven wrong by the existence of the Geth, but obviously we all know he was.

he seems to know the new possibilities just fine. I imagine he'd have a better understanding of the tech than you too.

He knew enough to tell you the three basic functions.  He still may not have known how non-lethal the destroy option could actually be.

The contradictions with the major plot points of the original game, mean that it doesn't make sense. The entire Saren and Sovereign story becomes nonsense. The endings are salvageable, correct. With Indoctrination theory, or something else of that nature.

The Saren and Sovereign story is not nonsense at all, taking the ending of ME3 into account.  It does not contradict the major plotpoints in the original game.  The closest thing to that I would have agreed with was that the Catalyst, the Citadel being part of him, could have just made the Keepers open up the Mass Relay itself.  Then I got to Vigil yesterday during my latest ME1 playthrough, and I was reminded of a peice of dialogue I had forgotten about.  The Prothean scientists who went onto the Citadel through the Conduit had found out that the Keepers had evolved on their own to recognize signals from the Citadel itself, not the Reapers.  What the Prothean scientists did, and this is according to Vigil himself, was modify the Citadel signal so that the Keepers would no longer respond to it.  Whatever those scientists learned about the Citadel in their research top stop the cycle from beginning again, they were able to alter the Citadel in such a way that it could no longer compel the Keepers to open the relay, thus explaining why the Catalyst simply couldn't do so itself.

And while we agree that the endings are salvageable, we disagree in that Indoctrination theory or something similar is necesarry or even wise.  I think that clarification, explaining some of the unexplained things, will be more than enough to put everything into place.

[Cobra's_back]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Unless you are hit by a reaper indoctrination device... You get hit by this you get indoctrinated, he was fighting the effects, reapers can speed this up at any time, but they obviously use people like him in cycles to prevent them from making the crucible or at the very minimum try and force them to use the control option. Once you are indoctrinated you are indoctrinated. There has been no known way to break free of it, maybe after the reapers die, but other then that... it is a guessing game.

 
If he was indoctrinated already, why was he able to execute such a massive plan to disrupt and halt the Collectors' operations.  Why was he able to steal Shepard's body away from them when they were about to obtain it from the Shadow Broker?  Even if he did show signs in Mass Effect 2 that he was indoctrinated (which he didn't), it obviously wasn't strong enough to have any real hold over him.  It's still more likely that what really got him was the Reaper tech he put into his body.  Furthermore, Shiala broke free of Indoctrination.  Apparenlty there were still some risidual traces of it in her head, but not enough to make her a risk to the rest of Zhu's Hope.

All I see with this is you want him to say, "You will destroy all synthetics, even the reapers and geth will really die, and even you will really die"... Seems more like trying to do everything possible to hold up the starchild as NOTHING but an infodump

I was pretty clear about my stance on it.  For it to be taken as absolute fact, it needs to be outright said.  He didn't outright say it.  What you're saying is possible, but not definite.  Disagreeing with it is not a hangup on my end, because your position is not proven accurate.

If you take the final ten minutes as fact then you are speculating that everything Star child said was correct. The game doesn't tell you to believe everything he said. It also doesn't tell you to not believe what he said.

Taking the information in the game at face value is not speculative.  It doesn't matter whether or not the Catalyst is being honest with you (and there's enough evidence that he is, and no evidence that he's not), the fact remains that all he is doing is telling you how to activate your own weapon, and the effects of each choice are shown to be exactly what he claims they are.  Maybe something goes wrong in the long run, maybe it doesn't, there's no statement either way, but no, taking the Catalyst at face value is not speculating.  Taking the Crucible at face value is not speculating. 

because indoctrination isn't just a discrete On/Off, 1/0 thing. At that point, TIM still had a bit of free will, and he was getting dangerously interesting results in those labs.

Yeah, that's a pretty big plothole.  No matter what the Illusive Man's results turned up, he still up and got himself indoctrinated by his own experiements.  Maybe the Reapers just wanted his husks and resources?  Maybe they just wanted to make sure he hadn't found anything that could stop them?  I dunno, all we can do at that point is speculate.

The hardware changes the options. His philosophies haven't changed. He says the old solution won't work any more because Shepard was standing there, although he's only standing there because of the lift. Why bring him upstairs?

Because the Crucible changed the Catalyst, presented it with new options, but it couldn't activate the device itself.  His philosophy as it was when he started the Reaper extinction cycle would not have coincided with synthesis or control.  Mostly because those options did not exist to him before the Crucible was hooked up, and also because the Catalyst didn't think that organics could possibly change things on their own.  The Catalyst doesn't outright state that he was proven wrong by the existence of the Geth, but obviously we all know he was.

he seems to know the new possibilities just fine. I imagine he'd have a better understanding of the tech than you too.

He knew enough to tell you the three basic functions.  He still may not have known how non-lethal the destroy option could actually be.

The contradictions with the major plot points of the original game, mean that it doesn't make sense. The entire Saren and Sovereign story becomes nonsense. The endings are salvageable, correct. With Indoctrination theory, or something else of that nature.

The Saren and Sovereign story is not nonsense at all, taking the ending of ME3 into account.  It does not contradict the major plotpoints in the original game.  The closest thing to that I would have agreed with was that the Catalyst, the Citadel being part of him, could have just made the Keepers open up the Mass Relay itself.  Then I got to Vigil yesterday during my latest ME1 playthrough, and I was reminded of a peice of dialogue I had forgotten about.  The Prothean scientists who went onto the Citadel through the Conduit had found out that the Keepers had evolved on their own to recognize signals from the Citadel itself, not the Reapers.  What the Prothean scientists did, and this is according to Vigil himself, was modify the Citadel signal so that the Keepers would no longer respond to it.  Whatever those scientists learned about the Citadel in their research top stop the cycle from beginning again, they were able to alter the Citadel in such a way that it could no longer compel the Keepers to open the relay, thus explaining why the Catalyst simply couldn't do so itself.

And while we agree that the endings are salvageable, we disagree in that Indoctrination theory or something similar is necesarry or even wise.  I think that clarification, explaining some of the unexplained things, will be more than enough to put everything into place.

Totally disagree with you.

[KingZayd]

Geneaux486 wrote... 

Taking the information in the game at face value is not speculative.  It doesn't matter whether or not the Catalyst is being honest with you (and there's enough evidence that he is, and no evidence that he's not), the fact remains that all he is doing is telling you how to activate your own weapon, and the effects of each choice are shown to be exactly what he claims they are.  Maybe something goes wrong in the long run, maybe it doesn't, there's no statement either way, but no, taking the Catalyst at face value is not speculating.  Taking the Crucible at face value is not speculating. 

he doesn't simply tell you how. You see how, in your mind through Anderson/TIM animations. He's projecting this information into your mind. What else is he projecting? the results of your actions? maybe even the whole scene?

Geneaux486 wrote... 

because indoctrination isn't just a discrete On/Off, 1/0 thing. At that point, TIM still had a bit of free will, and he was getting dangerously interesting results in those labs.

Yeah, that's a pretty big plothole.  No matter what the Illusive Man's results turned up, he still up and got himself indoctrinated by his own experiements.  Maybe the Reapers just wanted his husks and resources?  Maybe they just wanted to make sure he hadn't found anything that could stop them?  I dunno, all we can do at that point is speculate.

I actually don't think it's a plothole. It makes sense, it's just a bit tricky. TIM is undergoing indoctrination, but he hasn't completely gone off the deep end yet. At this point in the game he's still on the precipice. Plus, the fact that the research facility is there at all with those interesting results is reason enough for the reapers to destroy it. That information in the hands of say, a Shepard that plans to control reaper forces (as the experiments show is possible) would not be great for the reapers.

Geneaux486 wrote... 

The hardware changes the options. His philosophies haven't changed. He says the old solution won't work any more because Shepard was standing there, although he's only standing there because of the lift. Why bring him upstairs?

Because the Crucible changed the Catalyst, presented it with new options, but it couldn't activate the device itself.  His philosophy as it was when he started the Reaper extinction cycle would not have coincided with synthesis or control.  Mostly because those options did not exist to him before the Crucible was hooked up, and also because the Catalyst didn't think that organics could possibly change things on their own.  The Catalyst doesn't outright state that he was proven wrong by the existence of the Geth, but obviously we all know he was.

So you're saying the Catalyst actually prefers the newer options? (I might believe that for synthesis). But at what point does the Catalyst change it's mind?

TIM told the reapers about the crucible. The reapers move it (screw you Shepard). The allied fleet comes to Earth. The reaper husks fight us (screw you Shepard.) as we take down the anti-air thing. We say our goodbyes to our friends, then fight towards the missile launcher thing and take down a reaper. the fighting is at it's fiercest here (screw you Shepard!) Then we get a lift to in front of the beam.. seems clear. cool. We start charging, and then the reapers including Harby come to stop us personally (SCREW YOU SHEPARD!) and blasts us. We wake up a bit later, and start shuffling towards the beam. Then 3 husks start running towards you (heh.. shepard). You kill them and keep moving. Then near the end a marauder turns up (uh.. shepard? please stop.). this is apparently the reaper's version of the citadel defence squad. don't know where they came from. 

Then we meet TIM who is indoctrinated. If you pick the renegade option in conversation he says  he needs you to believe him. If you don't believe him (which you don't because you don't get a choice to) he plans to shoot Anderson, then you. (unless you convince him to kill himself). Maybe the reaper controlling TIM wants to control you too, or maybe that's just his personality. Regardless, the catalyst still isn't on your side. Then you press a button and let the crucible dock, and then the catalyst respects humanity all of a sudden? seems to me, like a last ditch attempt to save itself and the reapers. Whatever, I don't buy it.

Geneaux486 wrote... 

he seems to know the new possibilities just fine. I imagine he'd have a better understanding of the tech than you too.

He knew enough to tell you the three basic functions.  He still may not have known how non-lethal the destroy option could actually be.

He's able to figure out the three functions pretty easily, and the fact that you have synthetics in you (unless he's getting that from your mind or something. If he's probing your mind to get information that will affect your decision then, to me, that's yet another reason to distrust him.

Geneaux486 wrote... 

The contradictions with the major plot points of the original game, mean that it doesn't make sense. The entire Saren and Sovereign story becomes nonsense. The endings are salvageable, correct. With Indoctrination theory, or something else of that nature.

The Saren and Sovereign story is not nonsense at all, taking the ending of ME3 into account.  It does not contradict the major plotpoints in the original game.  The closest thing to that I would have agreed with was that the Catalyst, the Citadel being part of him, could have just made the Keepers open up the Mass Relay itself.  Then I got to Vigil yesterday during my latest ME1 playthrough, and I was reminded of a peice of dialogue I had forgotten about.  The Prothean scientists who went onto the Citadel through the Conduit had found out that the Keepers had evolved on their own to recognize signals from the Citadel itself, not the Reapers.  What the Prothean scientists did, and this is according to Vigil himself, was modify the Citadel signal so that the Keepers would no longer respond to it.  Whatever those scientists learned about the Citadel in their research top stop the cycle from beginning again, they were able to alter the Citadel in such a way that it could no longer compel the Keepers to open the relay, thus explaining why the Catalyst simply couldn't do so itself.

And while we agree that the endings are salvageable, we disagree in that Indoctrination theory or something similar is necesarry or even wise.  I think that clarification, explaining some of the unexplained things, will be more than enough to put everything into place.

But Sovereign spent thousands of years trying to find out what went wrong with citadel, and why it wasn't responding to his signal. Why can't the Catalyst tell Sovereign what the Protheans did if it can control the reapers? The only reason would be that it didn't know. If the Citadel is part of the Catalyst, then how did the Protheans change the Keepers without the Catalyst knowing?

Not to mention that the Catalyst controls the reapers, one of which has to wake up every so often to see if it's time for the harvest (hello Catalyst.. look at your own Citadel body), then send a signal to the keepers to open the relay that is on the Citadel. How is that not nonsenical?

[OdanUrr]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Because the Crucible changed the Catalyst, (...)

The Crucible freed the Catalyst...

[kal_reegar]

SmartRetard wrote...
My paragon Shepard was always going to make the ultimate sacrifice for the greater good of everyone and he did. I would like to believe that they (Bioware) left what happens afterwords to the players so they can find their own happy little ending if need be. I felt that my Shepard would have his conscience sent to each Reaper telling them fix the Mass Relays and head to the nearest star/black hole and destroy themselves. Still this is in my opinion what they wanted, for me to make up my own ending after the Reapers leave.

yes, restoring the galactic civilisation to former glory is easier faster with control, but think about that: "Your civilization is based[/i] on the technology of the mass relays. Our technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we desire" (Soverign).

Maybe is better to start fresh...:happy:

[Geneaux486]

Totally disagree with you.

The underlined part?  You're disagreeing with the game, not me.  Good luck with that.

he doesn't simply tell you how. You see how, in your mind through Anderson/TIM animations. He's projecting this information into your mind. What else is he projecting? the results of your actions? maybe even the whole scene?

Projecting everything:  Possible?  Yes.  Likely?  I'd say no.  I'm of the opinion that if it were the result of indoctrination, we would not have seen anything beyond Shepard's death, but once we leave his or her perspective, we see the game from a neutral cinematic viewpoint, which is not a first in this series.  We also see ambushes and other things that Shepard cannot see, and are made aware of it before he or she is, at other points in the games.  It's the same way we, as the players, are able to see events taking place outside of Consensus while Shepard is still inside.  Our perspective disconnects from Shepard at various points in the narrative, and we see things as they are, not as Shepard sees them.  I believe that the ending cinematic is another such moment.

So you're saying the Catalyst actually prefers the newer options? (I might believe that for synthesis). But at what point does the Catalyst change it's mind?

The Catalyst as he is presented to us views everything from a logical standpoint.  Not only have organics created a peaceful synthetic race, but now they've not only built a machine capable of destroying or enslaving the Reapers, or enhancing DNA on a galactic scale, but they've plugged it into the Citadel itself.  At this point the Catalyst probably judged that things needed to change.

TIM told the reapers about the crucible. The reapers move it (screw you Shepard). The allied fleet comes to Earth. The reaper husks fight us (screw you Shepard.) as we take down the anti-air thing. We say our goodbyes to our friends, then fight towards the missile launcher thing and take down a reaper. the fighting is at it's fiercest here (screw you Shepard!) Then we get a lift to in front of the beam.. seems clear. cool. We start charging, and then the reapers including Harby come to stop us personally (SCREW YOU SHEPARD!) and blasts us. We wake up a bit later, and start shuffling towards the beam. Then 3 husks start running towards you (heh.. shepard). You kill them and keep moving. Then near the end a marauder turns up (uh.. shepard? please stop.). this is apparently the reaper's version of the citadel defence squad. don't know where they came from. 

Then we meet TIM who is indoctrinated. If you pick the renegade option in conversation he says  he needs you to believe him. If you don't believe him (which you don't because you don't get a choice to) he plans to shoot Anderson, then you. (unless you convince him to kill himself). Maybe the reaper controlling TIM wants to control you too, or maybe that's just his personality. Regardless, the catalyst still isn't on your side. Then you press a button and let the crucible dock, and then the catalyst respects humanity all of a sudden? seems to me, like a last ditch attempt to save itself and the reapers. Whatever, I don't buy it.

And if the Catalyst could directly issue orders to the Reapers, that would be a huge contradiction.  Clearly he cannot.  We don't know why he can't, but then, we don't know much else about him either.  He says he "controls" the Reapers, but that probably just means he was the one who programmed them to carry out the pattern.  We do know the Protheans altered the Citadel, that may very well be the reason why he no longer has direct control, but all we can do is speculate at that point.

He's able to figure out the three functions pretty easily, and the fact that you have synthetics in you (unless he's getting that from your mind or something. If he's probing your mind to get information that will affect your decision then, to me, that's yet another reason to distrust him.

He could just as easily scan Shepard's body and see that he's got some synthetic stuff in him.  Probably did the same thing for the Crucible.

But Sovereign spent thousands of years trying to find out what went wrong with citadel, and why it wasn't responding to his signal. Why can't the Catalyst tell Sovereign what the Protheans did if it can control the reapers? The only reason would be that it didn't know. If the Citadel is part of the Catalyst, then how did the Protheans change the Keepers without the Catalyst knowing?

Not to mention that the Catalyst controls the reapers, one of which has to wake up every so often to see if it's time for the harvest (hello Catalyst.. look at your own Citadel body), then send a signal to the keepers to open the relay that is on the Citadel. How is that not nonsenical?

First of all, the Protheans didn't alter the Keepers, they altered the Citadel so that it could no longer signal the Keepers to activate the relay.  I hadn't realized this myself until I replayed that part again last night.  Maybe it was the Protheans tampering that somehow rendered the Catalyst incapable of direct control, or perhaps the Catalyst has simply been dormant up until the point where the Crucible was hooked up to the Citadel.  The reason it isn't nonsensical is because while it is a question that needs answering, it is not an unanswerable question.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 15 avril 2012 - 10:54 .

[Meltemph]

If he was indoctrinated already, why was he able to execute such a massive plan to disrupt and halt the Collectors' operations. Why was he able to steal Shepard's body away from them when they were about to obtain it from the Shadow Broker? Even if he did show signs in Mass Effect 2 that he was indoctrinated (which he didn't), it obviously wasn't strong enough to have any real hold over him. It's still more likely that what really got him was the Reaper tech he put into his body. Furthermore, Shiala broke free of Indoctrination. Apparenlty there were still some risidual traces of it in her head, but not enough to make her a risk to the rest of Zhu's Hope.

They did a lot of things that didnt make a ton of sense tactically, so I'm no the best person to answer this, but the fact that after they destroyed the normandy, that they didnt go and get sheps body is strange. The fact that the child told you he was controling TIM, yet apparently had to the power to kill himself is a bit odd. The fact that he called himself "we" when he said can you control us, is odd. The fact taht EDI can live in the destroy ending if you take her on the final run, and that this idea was backed-up buy the devs, by defending that EDI isnt made from reaper tech, is odd. The fact that Shep can live after every synthetic is destroyed, is odd. There are plenty of pieces that don't add up.

As for Shiala, apparently the Thorium thing is a pretty powerful creature. And again, the premise of what the beams can do, have every reason to be rejected by the player, because the things the crucible does is so fanciful that it is dumb.

[Cobra's_back]

Geneaux wrote:

“The underlined part? You're disagreeing with the game, not me. Good luck with that.”



No, I disagree with your logic. I agree with others on this post. I also agree with the following, that I already have posted :


Allan Schumacher of BioWare wrote:

“The Catalyst doesn't even give any indication for what would motivate synthetics to do this, so any suppositions that the Catalyst is saying that the Geth want to destroy the Quarians is just an assumption.


What the Geth-Quarian conflict shows is that, at least right now, the Catalyst's assertion may not actually be correct. Shepard even acknowledges this doubt when he says "maybe" in response to the Catalyst stating that the peace won't last. As a game player, I was certainly skeptical as well. Especially given the Rannoch storyline. It's why I ended up choosing destroy, because I wanted the galaxy to determine their own fate rather than have Reaper intervention come in and muck it all up every fifty thousand years.”

The point here is that the gentlemen’s reasoning for his decision makes sense. There are other arguments that support the other two options. The best decision is the one you pick for your own reasoning. You don't have to take everything that Star Child said as Law.

[Geneaux486]

ghostbusters101 wrote...
The best decision is the one you pick for your own reasoning. You don't have to take everything that Star Child said as Law.

I agree.  However, the Catalyst being honest is not the same as the Catalyst being right.  I believe the Catalyst is genuine in the things it tells you, that it truly believes them.  I also believe that its conclusion that the Reapers are necesarry to preserve a delicate balance is incorrect.  It is, however, quite clearly correct in what the stated effects of the Crucible will be, as we see them happening after Shepard has either died or been knocked out.  This is part of the reason why I do not think the Catalyst lies to Shepard, and I certainly have enough in-game evidence to back up my positions, and have done so throughout this thread.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 15 avril 2012 - 11:32 .

[Dragoni89]

Geneaux486 wrote...

ghostbusters101 wrote...
The best decision is the one you pick for your own reasoning. You don't have to take everything that Star Child said as Law.

I agree.  However, the Catalyst being honest is not the same as the Catalyst being right.  I believe the Catalyst is genuine in the things it tells you, that it truly believes them.  I also believe that its conclusion that the Reapers are necesarry to preserve a delicate balance is incorrect.  It is, however, quite clearly correct in what the stated effects of the Crucible will be, as we see them happening after Shepard has either died or been knocked out.  This is part of the reason why I do not think the Catalyst lies to Shepard, and I certainly have enough in-game evidence to back up my positions, and have done so throughout this thread.

Please stop contridicting yourself. Pretty sure you said something along the lines reapers are manuplitive and we should not trust them in one of your topics. All I see from you is contridictions.
Stop digging the hole that you can't crawl out of. The endings were illogical and terrible. Because Shepard apparently just accepts what the catalyst says. <--- This is already the spark for everything wrong about the ending.

Modifié par Dragoni89, 15 avril 2012 - 11:55 .

[Geneaux486]

Dragoni89 wrote...
Please stop contridicting yourself. Pretty sure you said something along the lines reapers are manuplitive and we should not trust them in one of your topics. All I see from you is contridictions.
Stop digging the hole that you can't crawl out of. The endings were illogical and terrible. Because Shepard apparently just accepts what the catalyst says. <--- This is already the spark for everything wrong about the ending.

What the the **** are you talking about?  One of my topics?  I've started a grand total of one topic on this forum, and it was about how it would be cool to revist Feros in DLC.  So now you're claiming I'm contradicting myself based on things you're "pretty sure" I said in topics that don't exist.  What, did you just start assuming that everyone with the Joker avatar was me?  You're clearly not actually bothering to read my arguments, and until you start doing so, you and I have nothing more to say to one another. 

Modifié par Geneaux486, 16 avril 2012 - 12:01 .

[Dragoni89]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...
Please stop contridicting yourself. Pretty sure you said something along the lines reapers are manuplitive and we should not trust them in one of your topics. All I see from you is contridictions.
Stop digging the hole that you can't crawl out of. The endings were illogical and terrible. Because Shepard apparently just accepts what the catalyst says. <--- This is already the spark for everything wrong about the ending.

What the the **** are you talking about?  One of my topics?  I've started a grand total of one topic on this forum, and it was about how it would be cool to revist Feros in DLC.  So now you're claiming I'm contradicting myself based on things you're "pretty sure" I said in topics that don't exist.  What, did you just start assuming that everyone with the Joker avatar was me?  You're clearly not actually bothering to read my arguments, and until you start doing so, you and I have nothing more to say to one another. 

one of your dumb replies. You said saren should not belieave the reapers because they are manulitive and untrustworthy. . Stfu you ****ing ******.

Modifié par Dragoni89, 16 avril 2012 - 12:07 .

[Cobra's_back]

Geneaux486 wrote...

ghostbusters101 wrote...
The best decision is the one you pick for your own reasoning. You don't have to take everything that Star Child said as Law.

I agree.  However, the Catalyst being honest is not the same as the Catalyst being right.  I believe the Catalyst is genuine in the things it tells you, that it truly believes them.  I also believe that its conclusion that the Reapers are necesarry to preserve a delicate balance is incorrect.  It is, however, quite clearly correct in what the stated effects of the Crucible will be, as we see them happening after Shepard has either died or been knocked out.  This is part of the reason why I do not think the Catalyst lies to Shepard, and I certainly have enough in-game evidence to back up my positions, and have done so throughout this thread.

Then you misunderstood me. What I said before was:
My comments:
If you take the final ten minutes as fact then you are speculating that everything Star child said was correct. The game doesn't tell you to believe everything he said. It also doesn't tell you to not believe what he said.
 
 
Your Comments:
Taking the information in the game at face value is not speculative. It doesn't matter whether or not the Catalyst is being honest with you (and there's enough evidence that he is, and no evidence that he's not), the fact remains that all he is doing is telling you how to activate your own weapon, and the effects of each choice are shown to be exactly what he claims they are. Maybe something goes wrong in the long run, maybe it doesn't, there's no statement either way, but no, taking the Catalyst at face value is not speculating. Taking the Crucible at face value is not speculating. 


My point: The Star Child can be honest but incorrect. Therefore, there was a misunderstanding.
 
 

[Geneaux486]

Dragoni89 wrote...

one of your dumb replies. You said saren should not belieave the reapers because they are manulitive and untrustworthy. . Stfu you ****ing ******.

Thanks for confirming what I already suspected about you. 

[Dragoni89]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...

one of your dumb replies. You said saren should not belieave the reapers because they are manulitive and untrustworthy. . Stfu you ****ing ******.

Thanks for confirming what I already suspected about you. 

Thank for not denying you said that. Which makes your " trust the catalyst "( reaper controller) contridicting. Again.

Talking to you has been talking to a wall.

Modifié par Dragoni89, 16 avril 2012 - 12:11 .

[Geneaux486]

Dragoni89 wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...

one of your dumb replies. You said saren should not belieave the reapers because they are manulitive and untrustworthy. . Stfu you ****ing ******.

Thanks for confirming what I already suspected about you. 

Sorry for not deining you did not say. Which makes you trust the catalyst ( reaper controller) contridicting. Again.

Talking to you has been talking to a wall.

Feeling is mutual.  You still clearly have no idea what points I've been making.  You don't have to acknowlege me on these forums, I really don't care whether you do or you don't, but if you're going to respond to me, at least know what I'm saying XD

Modifié par Geneaux486, 16 avril 2012 - 12:13 .

[Dragoni89]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...

one of your dumb replies. You said saren should not belieave the reapers because they are manulitive and untrustworthy. . Stfu you ****ing ******.

Thanks for confirming what I already suspected about you. 

Sorry for not deining you did not say. Which makes you trust the catalyst ( reaper controller) contridicting. Again.

Talking to you has been talking to a wall.

Feeling is mutual.  You still clearly have no idea what points I've been making.  You don't have to acknowlege me on these forums, I really don't care whether you do or you don't, but if you're going to respond to me, at least know what I'm saying XD

Beacuse your not contridicting yourself half the time. I know what your saying "trust the catalyst". Do you not find anything wrong with this statement?

Modifié par Dragoni89, 16 avril 2012 - 12:15 .

[Geneaux486]

Dragoni89 wrote...
Beacuse your not contridicting yourself half the time.

What is that even supposed to mean?  You just kinda saying things just to say them now?

I know what your saying "trust the catalyst". Do you not find anything wrong with this statement?

I'm saying it's acceptable to take the Catalyst at face value, and I've explained my reasoning for that quite clearly in this thread.  All you've done is accuse me of contradicting myself when I haven't, based partly on "my topics" that don't exist, and then flip your **** when I call you on it.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 16 avril 2012 - 12:18 .

[Bigdoser]

This is what went through my ren femshep mind when making the choice:Mission objective destroy reapers. Everyone fought to destory the reapers and thats what I am going to do.  Plus destory is the only closest thing i could do to show that I disagree with the starchild. 

*Walks over to red*

Modifié par Bigdoser, 16 avril 2012 - 12:19 .

[Dragoni89]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...
Beacuse your not contridicting yourself half the time.

What is that even supposed to mean?  You just kinda saying things just to say them now?

That is sarcasm if you did not get. "Trusting the Reapers to be honest"?

[Dragoni89]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...
Beacuse your not contridicting yourself half the time.

What is that even supposed to mean?  You just kinda saying things just to say them now?

I know what your saying "trust the catalyst". Do you not find anything wrong with this statement?

I'm saying it's acceptable to take the Catalyst at face value, and I've explained my reasoning for that quite clearly in this thread.  All you've done is accuse me of contradicting myself when I haven't, based partly on "my topics" that don't exist, and then flip your **** when I call you on it.

When has become acceptable agree with the reapers? Clearly Catalyst states All Synthetics Kill All Organics. And this is proven wrong by the Geth and Quarain. You defense would be we are specualting. Yeah but so is catalyst cause obviously never seen All Syntheitcs Kill All Organics.

Oh when I said topics, I meant ot type replies obviously I corrected myself by saying the context of the reply.

Modifié par Dragoni89, 16 avril 2012 - 12:23 .

[Geneaux486]

Dragoni89 wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...
Beacuse your not contridicting yourself half the time.

What is that even supposed to mean?  You just kinda saying things just to say them now?

That is sarcasm if you did not get. "Trusting the Reapers to be honest"?

Just so we're on the same page, did you actually see me say "trusting the Reapers to be honest" or was it just a member with a Joker avatar.  I feel the need to ask you that at this point.

When has become acceptable agree with the reapers? Clearly Catalyst states All Synthetics Kill All Organics. And this is proven wrong by the Geth and Quarain. You defense would be we are specualting. Yeah but so is catalyst cause obviously never seen All Syntheitcs Kill All Organics.

Taking the Catalyst at face value has nothing to do with agreeing with the Reapers.  Taking the Catalyst at face value means believing that it's telling you the truth about the functions of the crucible.  And big surprise, it turns out that it was.  Yes, the existence of the Geth proves the Catalyst wrong, I've said this myself several times.  That doesn't somehow mean the Catalyst is lying about the Crucible.

Oh when I said topics, I meant ot type replies obviously I corrected myself by saying the context of the reply.

 
And you were still wrong.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 16 avril 2012 - 12:29 .

[troyk2027]

If control actually works, then it's the best ending. Even if you want to destroy the reapers,just fly them into the sun or something. Destroy would just be killing the geth for no reason if control works.

However, the argument could be made that it's not work the risk, but if you don't trust the starchild at all, then any of the choices could do anything.

Also, I'm pretending synthesis doesn't exist, because come on.

[Dragoni89]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

Dragoni89 wrote...
Beacuse your not contridicting yourself half the time.

What is that even supposed to mean?  You just kinda saying things just to say them now?

That is sarcasm if you did not get. "Trusting the Reapers to be honest"?

Just so we're on the same page, did you actually see me say "trusting the Reapers to be honest" or was it just a member with a Joker avatar.  I feel the need to ask you that at this point.

When has become acceptable agree with the reapers? Clearly Catalyst states All Synthetics Kill All Organics. And this is proven wrong by the Geth and Quarain. You defense would be we are specualting. Yeah but so is catalyst cause obviously never seen All Syntheitcs Kill All Organics.

First of all, taking the Catalyst at face value is not agreeing with the Reapers.  It's believing that what the Catalyst tells you about the Crucible's effects are true.  And big surprise, they are.  Yes, the Catalyst's hypothesis is proven wrong by the existence of the Geth.  I've said that myself multiple times.  How exactly can you conclude that the Catalyst is lying to you about the Crucible from that?

Because the Catalyst is a reaper...
Why would you even start trusting the thing you been fighting with this entire time?
Because if the Reaper logic is wrong, than everything the Catalyst belieaves comes in to question.
When he tell you the three solutions to the alll synthetics kill organics. He is wrong about that statement. Why would you need those 3 solutions? If there is no probelm why would there be need of soultions.

Modifié par Dragoni89, 16 avril 2012 - 12:29 .