352 réponses à ce sujet

[M Hedonist]

The Angry One wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

That doesn't make any sense. If he really wanted to stop Shepard from taking the 'destruction' option he could have done a number of things to stop him that are way more effective. Such as:
- Not lifting him up on the elevator
- Not telling him about 'destruction'
- Telling him jumping into the 'synthesis' beam would destroy all the reapers
- Telling him reapers can't be destroyed
- Ordering one of the reapers to destroy the Crucible
- Ordering one fo the reapers to kill Shepard
- Ordering one of the reapers to launch one of their flaming rocks carrying husks onto the Crucible
- Not talking to Shepard at all
And that was just from the top of my head.

Doing any of those things risks a conventional victory by the fleet.
Even if the fleet doesn't win, the Reapers could come out of the fight so crippled that the next cycle will finish them off.
So starbaby dupes Shepard into using the Crucible to further it's agenda and destroy the galaxy.

Well, that's one of the 'abstract theories' I talked about a few posts ago. Less abstract than IT, but still doesn't seem viable to me. I just can't see Bioware doing an ending like that where the player loses against the reapers no matter what he does.

[dreman9999]

Sauruz wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Also, if the reapers could kill Shepard at the cayalyst,that same reaper could destroy the caytylist which would benifite them more. Truth is....theythey would of destory the cataylyst if they could kill Shepard with a reaper then.

Are you saying that the Catalyst may actually be an enemy of the reapers? Now that's fanfiction territory.

Sorry...I meant crucible. 

[lillitheris]

dreman9999 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

The developers obviously intended that the Catalyst's options are the real genuine thing (otherwise there'd have been a way to decline them, ‘see his bluff’).

That said, there needs to be some in-game reason for Shepard to believe it. It must be addressed in the EC.

We've been going over it in my EC/ending/clarification thread (or signature), without that much success. I'm quoting myself from there on the most plausible explanation I have thus far:

lillitheris wrote in a thread far, far away…

Yeah, I think the question of the Catalyst is an important one. We've only dealt with it cursorily, because it's pretty tricky to solve. Being able to get an external comm would be the best, although of course you'd only get a plausible explanation out of that (could they really do some kind of a scan to verify that?) That also creates the problem that, well, you have external comms. There's all kinds of stuff that you could do with that, and I don't think they want you to.

So, maybe the most plausible thing would be that you go for the [new, added -l] Investigate option, “why should I believe you?”, and the Catalyst says that it's going to upload some schematic data to the fleet; a moment later, it opens some communication shield (which has been preventing you from getting comms earlier), and among the cacophony of the fleet in battle, you hear Hackett, EDI, Dr. Lok or someone try to hail: “Commander Shepard? Commander? We received schematics and analysis, are you transmitting this? They show that the Crucible plans were correct, but there's something preventing it from firing. You can release the destructive ray by disabling the thingamajic somewhere nearby place, it looks like; EDI also says that there's some kind of a code repository there with Reaper command structure modifications that could be used if they could be beamed to the Reapers, but she can't get access to it. There's also some really weird schematics for nanotech that seem something like the ones in the husks but not quite. Commander, we can only hold off for a few minutes before the Reapers get to the Crucible, what is going on?! What's the situ-” with the Catalyst then closing the comms shield, the fleet  chatter dies off etc.

How does that sound? Obvious faults? It's not great, but it works mostly in the given framework. It gives you reasonable assurance without getting some magic confirmation, as well as an impetus to figure it out quick because of a reason that you know is accurate.

Feedback here or in the clarification thread would be great!

That really doesn't prove what the star childsays in the game is true. Just in theory more thing can be added tothe conversation. What you put in your statement is not guanteed to be what bw is going to put in EC. It's a speculation.

It doesn't prove it, no. I think, though, that it's a reasonable assurance, and moreover, I think it's one of the few ways that even that can be achieved. Like I said, it's imperative that we get some explanation for why Shepard believes the Catalyst, and this is one way to do it.

Is there something that you think could be improved about it?

And, no, we don't know what's going into the EC. I'm trying to collect ideas that can be used in the EC, illustrating what the playerbase thinks is feasible and what isn't, hopefully actually making its way to the developers.

But it still is speculation. What you stated doesn't show that the starkid is tellike the truth.

This is my point! Tell me what WOULD be sufficient? The best that I can come up with is that you get some indication that it is true – and if I had that in the EC, it'd be fantastic, much better than not having any explanation at all.

If you can give me or help me get to a scenario that makes it even more plausible that the Catalyst is truthful, the better!

Everyone's so interested in digging their respective plotholes that no-one actually wants to try help come up with a solution

Modifié par lillitheris, 19 avril 2012 - 03:03 .

[PsyrenY]

The Angry One wrote...

Doing any of those things risks a conventional victory by the fleet.

Conventional victory isn't possible.

The Angry One wrote...
Even if the fleet doesn't win, the Reapers could come out of the fight so crippled that the next cycle will finish them off.

Very easy solution: show up a couple thousand years early for a trivial harvest with no resistance from the aliens with 20th-century tech (or lower.)

The Angry One wrote...
So starbaby dupes Shepard into using the Crucible to further it's agenda and destroy the galaxy.

Galaxy isn't destroyed, Catalyst has no "agenda" post-Crucible.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 19 avril 2012 - 03:05 .

[cachx]

What if the Catalyst was actually created in or as a result of the singularity?

Would dropping that in a few lines of dialogue be enough to fix this particular problem?

(this is a honest question, no intent of trolling behind it).

[The Angry One]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Conventional victory isn't possible.

I disagree.

Unless they decide to show up a couple thousand years early for a much easier harvest, anyway.

Showing up a few thousand years early won't change the fact that they won't replace their losses for a very, very long time, if ever.

Galaxy isn't destroyed, Catalyst has no "agenda" post-Crucible.

It's agenda is preserved, especially in synthesis. The galaxy is destroyed. Without the mass relays, galactic society dies and the Catalyst wins.

[lillitheris]

cachx wrote...

What if the Catalyst was actually created in or as a result of the singularity?

Would dropping that in a few lines of dialogue be enough to fix this particular problem?

(this is a honest question, no intent of trolling behind it).

No, I don't see how that would improve its credibility in any way. I don't really even know how you could trust it that it was truthful about that

[M Hedonist]

cachx wrote...

What if the Catalyst was actually created in or as a result of the singularity?

Some say he may actually be the technological singularity he claims he wants to stop.

[The Angry One]

cachx wrote...

What if the Catalyst was actually created in or as a result of the singularity?

Would dropping that in a few lines of dialogue be enough to fix this particular problem?

(this is a honest question, no intent of trolling behind it).

Unlikely, the idea of a technological singularity is that we don't know just how far an AI will advance.
The Catalyst and the Reapers... don't advance. They're static and rigid. They have stayed the same for billions of years without innovation.

[dreman9999]

lillitheris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

The developers obviously intended that the Catalyst's options are the real genuine thing (otherwise there'd have been a way to decline them, ‘see his bluff’).

That said, there needs to be some in-game reason for Shepard to believe it. It must be addressed in the EC.

We've been going over it in my EC/ending/clarification thread (or signature), without that much success. I'm quoting myself from there on the most plausible explanation I have thus far:

lillitheris wrote in a thread far, far away…

Yeah, I think the question of the Catalyst is an important one. We've only dealt with it cursorily, because it's pretty tricky to solve. Being able to get an external comm would be the best, although of course you'd only get a plausible explanation out of that (could they really do some kind of a scan to verify that?) That also creates the problem that, well, you have external comms. There's all kinds of stuff that you could do with that, and I don't think they want you to.

So, maybe the most plausible thing would be that you go for the [new, added -l] Investigate option, “why should I believe you?”, and the Catalyst says that it's going to upload some schematic data to the fleet; a moment later, it opens some communication shield (which has been preventing you from getting comms earlier), and among the cacophony of the fleet in battle, you hear Hackett, EDI, Dr. Lok or someone try to hail: “Commander Shepard? Commander? We received schematics and analysis, are you transmitting this? They show that the Crucible plans were correct, but there's something preventing it from firing. You can release the destructive ray by disabling the thingamajic somewhere nearby place, it looks like; EDI also says that there's some kind of a code repository there with Reaper command structure modifications that could be used if they could be beamed to the Reapers, but she can't get access to it. There's also some really weird schematics for nanotech that seem something like the ones in the husks but not quite. Commander, we can only hold off for a few minutes before the Reapers get to the Crucible, what is going on?! What's the situ-” with the Catalyst then closing the comms shield, the fleet  chatter dies off etc.

How does that sound? Obvious faults? It's not great, but it works mostly in the given framework. It gives you reasonable assurance without getting some magic confirmation, as well as an impetus to figure it out quick because of a reason that you know is accurate.

Feedback here or in the clarification thread would be great!

That really doesn't prove what the star childsays in the game is true. Just in theory more thing can be added tothe conversation. What you put in your statement is not guanteed to be what bw is going to put in EC. It's a speculation.

It doesn't prove it, no. I think, though, that it's a reasonable assurance, and moreover, I think it's one of the few ways that even that can be achieved. Like I said, it's imperative that we get some explanation for why Shepard believes the Catalyst, and this is one way to do it.

Is there something that you think could be improved about it?

And, no, we don't know what's going into the EC. I'm trying to collect ideas that can be used in the EC, illustrating what the playerbase thinks is feasible and what isn't, hopefully actually making its way to the developers.

But it still is speculation. What you stated doesn't show that the starkid is tellike the truth.

This is my point! Tell me what WOULD be sufficient? The best that I can come up with is that you get some indication that it is true – and if I had that in the EC, it'd be fantastic, much better than not having any explanation at all.

If you can give me or help me get to a scenario that makes it even more plausible that the Catalyst is truthful, the better!

Everyone's so interested in digging their respective plotholes that no-one actually wants to try help come up with a solution

I really can't say what I want EC to have...Not in this topic....It would derail it. It's based on the fact that the reapers have a history of deception.....I just want to focus on illustationthe fact that the star child maybe lieing not what I beleive is really happening in the end. I just want to stur some thought not push want I really think is happening.

[dreman9999]

Sauruz wrote...

cachx wrote...

What if the Catalyst was actually created in or as a result of the singularity?

Some say he may actually be the technological singularity he claims he wants to stop.

Did the star child and the reapers say they were trying to stop a technological singularity?

[lillitheris]

dreman9999 wrote...

I really can't say what I want EC to have...Not in this topic....It would derail it. It's based on the fact that the reapers have a history of deception.....I just want to focus on illustationthe fact that the star child maybe lieing not what I beleive is really happening in the end. I just want to stur some thought not push want I really think is happening.

If you can, please hop over to the thread (see signature) and expand over there.

…

I don't really know what this ‘debate’ is achieving here, it's just a bunch of “n-uh”, “too”, “your mom!”

It's blatantly obvious that there's no reason why Shepard could or should believe the Catalyst without some confirmation – or, maybe I'll soften that up: there's no reason that many or most Shepard characters would, even if some minority would.

So, the only way I see out of this is to establish that fact, and then look for the additional info (content) that would allow Shepard to believe it.

Modifié par lillitheris, 19 avril 2012 - 03:14 .

[M Hedonist]

dreman9999 wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

cachx wrote...

What if the Catalyst was actually created in or as a result of the singularity?

Some say he may actually be the technological singularity he claims he wants to stop.

Did the star child and the reapers say they were trying to stop a technological singularity?

'Created will rebel against their creators' and synthetics wiping out all organics is basically the idea of technological singularity.

[dreman9999]

The Angry One wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

Conventional victory isn't possible.

I disagree.

No it's  not possible...Not when they have.. Oculuses....http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Oculus
These fighters can barrow in to ships and destory them from the inside out.....The reapers have  swarms of them.

[lillitheris]

Sauruz wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

cachx wrote...

What if the Catalyst was actually created in or as a result of the singularity?

Some say he may actually be the technological singularity he claims he wants to stop.

Did the star child and the reapers say they were trying to stop a technological singularity?

'Created will rebel against their creators' and synthetics wiping out all organics is basically the idea of technological singularity.

No, it isn't.

[M Hedonist]

lillitheris wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

cachx wrote...

What if the Catalyst was actually created in or as a result of the singularity?

Some say he may actually be the technological singularity he claims he wants to stop.

Did the star child and the reapers say they were trying to stop a technological singularity?

'Created will rebel against their creators' and synthetics wiping out all organics is basically the idea of technological singularity.

No, it isn't.

The idea that synthetics may evolve to a point where they wipe out all organics is based on technological singularity. Otherwise, it doesn't make any sense.

[Orumon]

The Angry One wrote...

You can't, because his assertions are unprovable. He uses logical fallacies, assumptions and circular logic to justify it's psychopathic insanity.

The mere fact that organic life was never totally exterminated before the Reapers existed disproves everything it claims.

Amen on this comment.

[dreman9999]

Sauruz wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

cachx wrote...

What if the Catalyst was actually created in or as a result of the singularity?

Some say he may actually be the technological singularity he claims he wants to stop.

Did the star child and the reapers say they were trying to stop a technological singularity?

'Created will rebel against their creators' and synthetics wiping out all organics is basically the idea of technological singularity.

Oh, they are ways for synthetics to wipe out organics without technological singularity...Ever heard of a Pyrrhic victory.

[dreman9999]

Orumon wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

You can't, because his assertions are unprovable. He uses logical fallacies, assumptions and circular logic to justify it's psychopathic insanity.

The mere fact that organic life was never totally exterminated before the Reapers existed disproves everything it claims.

Amen on this comment.

Again, the reapers are not here to debate there reasons, theyare here to impose them.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

dreman9999 wrote...

Orumon wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

You can't, because his assertions are unprovable. He uses logical fallacies, assumptions and circular logic to justify it's psychopathic insanity.

The mere fact that organic life was never totally exterminated before the Reapers existed disproves everything it claims.

Amen on this comment.

Again, the reapers are not here to debate there reasons

Sorry, is this in the game manual or EULA? "Clause 3.22 You are not allowed to debate Reapers" ?

[Orumon]

dreman9999 wrote...

Jagri wrote...

Of course he isn't lying! He generally and honestly wants to stop the cycle *Snicker*

Now go choice one of the fellowing methods to die!

1) Becoming a grounding point.
2) Fall to your death.
3) Walk into a explosion.

Ignore that voice in your head suggesting it would be more logical to find a control panel with buttons.

*rotfl
*then stand up claping with tears in eys.

This too.

[dreman9999]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Orumon wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

You can't, because his assertions are unprovable. He uses logical fallacies, assumptions and circular logic to justify it's psychopathic insanity.

The mere fact that organic life was never totally exterminated before the Reapers existed disproves everything it claims.

Amen on this comment.

Again, the reapers are not here to debate there reasons

Sorry, is this in the game manual or EULA? "Clause 3.22 You are not allowed to debate Reapers" ?

Clearly by the fact thay are invading and not giving a clear reason why illustates they are not here to debate with us on their beleifs. I'mnot saying they can't, I'm say they won't and don't want to. Really, if they did want to debate it....They would be trying to debate it with us.

[PsyrenY]

The Angry One wrote...

I disagree.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I think Hackett and Victus know more about the situation than you do.

The Angry One wrote...
Showing up a few thousand years early won't change the fact that they won't replace their losses for a very, very long time, if ever.

So they show up early for the next, what, 5 cycles? 10? Should be easy to replenish their numbers in that case.

The Angry One wrote...
It's agenda is preserved, especially in synthesis. The galaxy is destroyed. Without the mass relays, galactic society dies and the Catalyst wins.

No, please read the myriad debunks to the notion that no relays = doom. ("Aftermath" section.)

The Angry One wrote...

Unlikely, the idea of a technological singularity is that we don't know just how far an AI will advance.
The Catalyst and the Reapers... don't advance. They're static and rigid. They have stayed the same for billions of years without innovation.

Kardashev Type II is as far as they need to advance to fulfill their stated mission, especially if they forcibly keep everyone else at T0 and T1.

A Gray Goo or other hostile synthetic would have no reason not to keep going, however.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 19 avril 2012 - 03:32 .

[M Hedonist]

dreman9999 wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Orumon wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

You can't, because his assertions are unprovable. He uses logical fallacies, assumptions and circular logic to justify it's psychopathic insanity.

The mere fact that organic life was never totally exterminated before the Reapers existed disproves everything it claims.

Amen on this comment.

Again, the reapers are not here to debate there reasons

Sorry, is this in the game manual or EULA? "Clause 3.22 You are not allowed to debate Reapers" ?

Clearly by the fact thay are invading and not giving a clear reason why illustates they are not here to debate with us on their beleifs. I'mnot saying they can't, I'm say they won't and don't want to. Really, if they did want to debate it....They would be trying to debate it with us.

The point is that the game doesn't present you any way to argue against the Catalyst's 'solutions'. A downer ending just doesn't work if it has to be explained outside the game.

[Laurencio]

Theres no way to prove or disprove a statement as vague as "eventually this will happen", as that would require knowledge of all possibly outcomes and results through all of time. So no, there isn't anyone who can prove that starchild is being truthful or not, aside from possibly Mac Walters and whatever other writers who made him, he/they basically have the role of God in the universe.