1357 réponses à ce sujet

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...
If you have two sandwiches and i say "this one is rotten, it will make you sick." I am both telling you the outcome and dissuading you from eating it. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

You're implying the Catalyst is doing so by deceit. It isn't. It outright states why it doesn't think the Destroy option is the workable.

It gives you three options, and states the outcomes of each. It is not leading you on.

No, at face value, according to him, the Galaxy will be worse off in the long run. Is he not implying that the Galaxy will return to chaos in the absence of his solution? Does this not make the destroy ending the worst one from a logistical point of view? 

Modifié par balance5050, 05 mai 2012 - 10:15 .

[dreamgazer]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...


No it doesn't.

It's implied.

No, it's not.

Unfortunately, you can't tell someone to interpret a conversation differently, or correctly. If you don't get that the catalyst suggests Shepard will die because he/she is partly synthetic, however, then you're missing something or purposely trying to avoid logical implication.

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...


No it doesn't.

It's implied.

No, it's not.

So what was the point of saying "even you are partially synthetic"?

You're making a leap that anything that is "synthetic" will be destroyed and not just synthetic life.  Shep's implants are not synthetic life.

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

My point is that he colors destroy as the worst option, maybe because he doesn't want to die.

The Catalyst doesn't think destroy will stop the cycle of destruction. It says so. It doesn't color it, he says that your "children" will create synthetics that will start the chaos again.

It is explicitly said.

Not even the Geth willingly wanted to shut down, I'm sure its more then his precious cycle that he's worrying about.

You are now saying it is lying or withholding stuff.. why is your theory so dependant on what can't actually be proven?

[OH-UP-THIS!]

[quote]SubAstris wrote...

[quote]balance5050 wrote...


[/quote]

You just said -

"definitely gives reason for potential problems with control, ""if you think you can control us" 

What's the potential problem beside NOT BEING ABLE TO CONTROL THE REAPERS?
[/quote]

Sorry, I'm not with you

[/quote]


Woops, go back and read that again slowly. g'head, we'll wait.

[secretagentbw]

balance5050 wrote...

secretagentbw wrote...

My main question about the IT (back to the original post) is that if it is true, doesn't that mean the game is incomplete? If everything from the Citadel to the end is a hallucination, doesn't that mean none of it actually happened and the battle is still happening? Eg. TIM is still alive, Citadel was never opened, Reapers were not destroyed (or whatever the solution is).

The only reason I ask this is because if you choose the 'destroy' option you get the clip of Shepard breathing under a pile or rubble, presumably waking up back in London? Does that mean he/she was somehow transported back to Earth or does that mean he/she never left? I've read most people say you never actually leave and the whole thing is happening inside your head (Citadel, star-kid, red blue green) since its an indoctrination attempt so wouldn't that mean you or someone still needs to get to the Citadel and open it etc to defeat the reapers?

Hence the "Extended Cut".... it will be extended;)

Exactly! Which is why I'd been wondering if they had intended all along to create ending DLC, but probably not for free. It just doesn't make sense to me that this could be the actual ending with or without the IT...

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...


No it doesn't.

It's implied.

No, it's not.

So what was the point of saying "even you are partially synthetic"?

You're making a leap that anything that is "synthetic" will be destroyed and not just synthetic life.  Shep's implants are not synthetic life.

K, he's talking to Shepard, and he says "Even YOU are partly synthetic."
Are you saying that Shepard is part AI?

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...
If you have two sandwiches and i say "this one is rotten, it will make you sick." I am both telling you the outcome and dissuading you from eating it. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

You're implying the Catalyst is doing so by deceit. It isn't. It outright states why it doesn't think the Destroy option is the workable.

It gives you three options, and states the outcomes of each. It is not leading you on.

No, at face value, according to him, the Galaxy will be worse off in the long run. Is he not implying that the Galaxy will return to chaos in the absence of his solution? Does this not make the destroy ending the worst one from a logistical point of view? 

From it's point of view, it is a worse ending. But it still offers it. 

As Shep says, without hope, what's the point?

[CavScout]

dreamgazer wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...


No it doesn't.

It's implied.

No, it's not.

Unfortunately, you can't tell someone to interpret a conversation differently, or correctly. If you don't get that the catalyst suggests Shepard will die because he/she is partly synthetic, however, then you're missing something or purposely trying to avoid logical implication.

Ahh, the "either you agree with me or you're dumb" retort.

Modifié par CavScout, 05 mai 2012 - 10:19 .

[OH-UP-THIS!]

Leafs43 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ev76 wrote...

Cavscout did you choose control?or Synthesis?

I selected destroy. Why?

Really? i remember you passionately defending synthesis as the superior option a couple of weeks ago? Why the change? (from destroy --> synthesis, or from synthesis --> destroy)

He has to make his argument seem credible by choosing the one option that hasn't been completely obliterated by logic.

ROTFLMFAO

[ev76]

Cavscout it's a matter of interpretation, you end the cycle and destroy the reapers. That is what Shepard was fighting for all along. Please grace me with no the best ending is him living, cuz I wuv happy endings.

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...


No it doesn't.

It's implied.

No, it's not.

So what was the point of saying "even you are partially synthetic"?

You're making a leap that anything that is "synthetic" will be destroyed and not just synthetic life.  Shep's implants are not synthetic life.

K, he's talking to Shepard, and he says "Even YOU are partly synthetic."
Are you saying that Shepard is part AI?

[balance5050]

secretagentbw wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

secretagentbw wrote...

My main question about the IT (back to the original post) is that if it is true, doesn't that mean the game is incomplete? If everything from the Citadel to the end is a hallucination, doesn't that mean none of it actually happened and the battle is still happening? Eg. TIM is still alive, Citadel was never opened, Reapers were not destroyed (or whatever the solution is).

The only reason I ask this is because if you choose the 'destroy' option you get the clip of Shepard breathing under a pile or rubble, presumably waking up back in London? Does that mean he/she was somehow transported back to Earth or does that mean he/she never left? I've read most people say you never actually leave and the whole thing is happening inside your head (Citadel, star-kid, red blue green) since its an indoctrination attempt so wouldn't that mean you or someone still needs to get to the Citadel and open it etc to defeat the reapers?

Hence the "Extended Cut".... it will be extended;)

Exactly! Which is why I'd been wondering if they had intended all along to create ending DLC, but probably not for free. It just doesn't make sense to me that this could be the actual ending with or without the IT...

Yep! Prince of Persia (2008) sold ending epilogue DLC, Final Fantasy 13-2 is selling ending DLC with their "Paradox" endings, and Asuras Wrath left its ending vague to later sell "True" ending DLC as well. I doubt Fallout 3's "Broken Steel" was entirley a response. This concept of ending DLC is hardly new. The industry has been shifting closer to a "micro transaction" model of a while now

[OH-UP-THIS!]

CavScout wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You must really being feeling as if you're in a untenable position. What else explains your expansive use of ad hominems?

Fact is, Anderson and Shep have lost control of the bodies but not their minds. Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary... or just keep attacking me if it makes you feel better.

Ok I'll ask you AGAIN, what controls the BODY?? think slowly now, it might evade you.

Are you claiming that the entire scene with Shep, Anderson and TIM was controled by the Reapers/TIM because Anderson and Shep weren't in control of their minds?

Actually no, that part was all an illusion, but the premise of that is completely true.

And yes Shep, Anderson and TIM were All being Controlled by indoctrination, IN THEIR MINDS!

[CavScout]

ev76 wrote...

Cavscout it's a matter of interpretation, you end the cycle and destroy the reapers. That is what Shepard was fighting for all along. Please grace me with no the best ending is him living, cuz I wuv happy endings.

You can stop the Reapers, practicaly destroy earth and all those around it...

or

You can stop the Reapers, and do little to no damage to Earth and leave everyone on her alive....

Is there any reall reason to suggest the first is better than the second?

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...


No it doesn't.

It's implied.

No, it's not.

So what was the point of saying "even you are partially synthetic"?

You're making a leap that anything that is "synthetic" will be destroyed and not just synthetic life.  Shep's implants are not synthetic life.

K, he's talking to Shepard, and he says "Even YOU are partly synthetic."
Are you saying that Shepard is part AI?

sniped

HUH? You didn't answer my question. He says 

"Even YOU are partly synthetic.", then you said  

"You're making a leap that anything that is "synthetic" will be destroyed and not just synthetic life.  Shep's implants are not synthetic life."

So are you saying that Shepard is partially synthetic life?

Modifié par balance5050, 05 mai 2012 - 10:25 .

[CavScout]

ohupthis wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You must really being feeling as if you're in a untenable position. What else explains your expansive use of ad hominems?

Fact is, Anderson and Shep have lost control of the bodies but not their minds. Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary... or just keep attacking me if it makes you feel better.

Ok I'll ask you AGAIN, what controls the BODY?? think slowly now, it might evade you.

Are you claiming that the entire scene with Shep, Anderson and TIM was controled by the Reapers/TIM because Anderson and Shep weren't in control of their minds?

Actually no, that part was all an illusion, but the premise of that is completely true.

And yes Shep, Anderson and TIM were All being Controlled by indoctrination, IN THEIR MINDS!

So you're claiming the scene didn't even take place...

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...


No it doesn't.

It's implied.

No, it's not.

So what was the point of saying "even you are partially synthetic"?

You're making a leap that anything that is "synthetic" will be destroyed and not just synthetic life.  Shep's implants are not synthetic life.

K, he's talking to Shepard, and he says "Even YOU are partly synthetic."
Are you saying that Shepard is part AI?

sniped

HUH? You didn't answer my question. He says 

"Even YOU are partly synthetic.", then you said  

"You're making a leap that anything that is "synthetic" will be destroyed and not just synthetic life.  Shep's implants are not synthetic life."

So are you saying that Shepard is partially synthetic life?

I don't defend strawmen.

[Clayless]

balance5050 wrote...

My point is that he colors destroy as the worst option, maybe because he doesn't want to die.

This:

I know you've thought about destroying us. You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want, inculding the Geth, even you are partly synthetic.
Yes but the peace wont last. Soon your children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back.

Compared to this:

Or do you think you can control us?
Yes, but he could never have taken control, because we already controled him.
You will die, you will control us, but you will lose everything you have.
Yes.

I wouldn't say he colours destroy as the worst option, control is coloured much worse than that.

[KingZayd]

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Are you lying or purposively misremembering?

neither: 
http://social.biowar...dex/11593338/10 

are you lying or purposely misremembering?

Where do I say I selected Sythesis or that I think it is the best ending? You do know I am not the OP of that topic, right?

I know you weren't the OP, but you were defending synthesis. I asked why you were defending synthesis, you then said i was lying or purposely misremembering. But you were. If you hadn't picked synthesis, and were simply defending it for some other reason, why didn't you explain rather than accuse me of lying?

I said, in the post you linked: "That is not evidence of lying.... "

That's support for Synthesis how? You claimed I defended it as the best ending. Where? Link it or stop lying.

Hell, that thread has this post from me. Even better is this one, where I state which ending I think is best!

Why are you lying?

i was linking to the thread. not a post. you were defending it from page 5 onwards.. (at least, that's when I joined the thread and saw you defending it) . I didn't say you were defending it as the best ending, i said you were defending it. While i thought you were defending it as the best ending rather than a good ending, I didn't say it.  You were defending synthesis in that thread.

I didn't lie at all.

Out of curiousity, now that I know you chose destroy, why did you?

Modifié par KingZayd, 05 mai 2012 - 10:28 .

[OH-UP-THIS!]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Ok I'll ask you AGAIN, what controls the BODY?

Well, evidently not the mind or else Shepard would not be able to resist the command to shoot Anderson (or whatever happens in that scene).

OK, you want me to say "the mind" but that's silly. Firstly, it's a fictional universe. Real world neuroscience is kinda irrelevant.
If you want to go down that road anyway, the answer is "electrical impulses" - unless, of course, you'd prefer to argue that pacemakers are impossible.

DON'T EVEN GO THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My better half has one installed, WATCH IT PAL!!!!!!

Electrical impulses created WHERE?

[dreamgazer]

CavScout wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...


No it doesn't.

It's implied.

No, it's not.

Unfortunately, you can't tell someone to interpret a conversation differently, or correctly. If you don't get that the catalyst suggests Shepard will die because he/she is partly synthetic, however, then you're missing something or purposely trying to avoid logical implication.

Ahh, the "either you agree with me or you're dumb" retort.

No, I never commented on your intelligence.  Is it a "you're missing something" retort, or that you might be overlooking/reframing it to better fit your argument? Yes.

[CavScout]

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Are you lying or purposively misremembering?

neither: 
http://social.biowar...dex/11593338/10 

are you lying or purposely misremembering?

Where do I say I selected Sythesis or that I think it is the best ending? You do know I am not the OP of that topic, right?

I know you weren't the OP, but you were defending synthesis. I asked why you were defending synthesis, you then said i was lying or purposely misremembering. But you were. If you hadn't picked synthesis, and were simply defending it for some other reason, why didn't you explain rather than accuse me of lying?

I said, in the post you linked: "That is not evidence of lying.... "

That's support for Synthesis how? You claimed I defended it as the best ending. Where? Link it or stop lying.

Hell, that thread has this post from me. Even better is this one, where I state which ending I think is best!

Why are you lying?

i was linking to the thread. not a post. you were defending it from page 5 onwards. I didn't say you were defending it as the best ending, i said you were defending it. While i thought you were defending it as the best ending rather than a good ending, I didn't say it.  You were defending synthesis in that thread.

I didn't lie at all.

Out of curiousity, now that I know you chose destroy, why did you?

You won't even admit you lied when it is proven... sad.

You asserted: "Really? i remember you passionately defending synthesis as the superior option a couple of weeks ago? Why the change?"

You posted that. You dont' get to change what you said simply because you can't actually support it.

Modifié par CavScout, 05 mai 2012 - 10:33 .

[KingZayd]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...


No it doesn't.

It's implied.

No, it's not.

So what was the point of saying "even you are partially synthetic"?

You're making a leap that anything that is "synthetic" will be destroyed and not just synthetic life.  Shep's implants are not synthetic life.

K, he's talking to Shepard, and he says "Even YOU are partly synthetic."
Are you saying that Shepard is part AI?

sniped

HUH? You didn't answer my question. He says 

"Even YOU are partly synthetic.", then you said  

"You're making a leap that anything that is "synthetic" will be destroyed and not just synthetic life.  Shep's implants are not synthetic life."

So are you saying that Shepard is partially synthetic life?

I don't defend strawmen.

sorry, how is that a strawman? (not referring to the picture, although i suppose technically my question still stands)

[balance5050]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

My point is that he colors destroy as the worst option, maybe because he doesn't want to die.

This:

I know you've thought about destroying us. You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want, inculding the Geth, even you are partly synthetic.
Yes but the peace wont last. Soon your children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back.

Compared to this:

Or do you think you can control us?
Yes, but he could never have taken control, because we already controled him.
You will die, you will control us, but you will lose everything you have.
Yes.

I wouldn't say he colours destroy as the worst option, control is coloured much worse than that.

You die in all the endings unless you have High EMS. You don't lose anything besides your life in control, destroy destroys an entire race and a squadmate and doesn't solve the Catalyst problem.

Also, what makes anyone beleive "you can control the reapers! All you have to do is DIE first!" - To beleive in control is to beleive that Shepards conciousness goes on into the reapers.

Or is it something like "My dying wish is that the reapers leave us alone"?

Seriously... how does control even work if you have to die first?