1357 réponses à ce sujet

[KingZayd]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

So essentially the catalyst is the program that the reapers follow, and the crucible changed that program. Is this acceptable?

If the Catalyst is "controlling the Reapers", then it is not stopping them from fighting during his discussion with Shepard, even if he knows at that moment that there are other solutions.

This is further backed up with the fact that the crucible can be destroyed if you wait to long.

So just because it can control the Reapers it must stop the fighting during their conversation? Please elaborate.

If it genuinely believes the Shepard's presence proves that the solution won't work any more,  then why keep at it? Every moment the fighting continues would be wasted lives on both sides.

Because it can't programmatically stop until Shepard chooses a new solution based on the change(s) the Crucible made to it?

it's a hardware change. why does that force it to let the Shepard choose?

A change in, hijacking or intercepting of logical gates to alter its computational outcomes?

so either the crucible was able to reprogram an AI that nobody knew was there, or it makes the Catalyst stupid by hogging resources... kinda like firefox?

[balance5050]

KingZayd wrote...

so either the crucible was able to reprogram an AI that nobody knew was there, or it makes the Catalyst stupid by hogging resources... kinda like firefox?

Modifié par balance5050, 06 mai 2012 - 03:01 .

[dreman9999]

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

 As much as we all have fought over this theory, their are a few ironies here that much of the Anti-IT seem to miss.
I just want to point it out.
1.The question of sold proof...

 It's been stated in the lore that there is no solid proof of it till it's too late. 

Their are syntoms but they are often spratic and divide in a way that makes it hard to link.....It's subtle. There 2 cases when somone who already knew about indoctrination via contact with reaper and reaper tech how knew and about indoctrination..... Saren, who tried to reduce it with short visits to the test onSovergin over the years, and Dr. Kenson, who may have been too late to try and avoid it.

2."Ah, yes. Reapers......"
No one remeber that time Shepard tried to prove something without solid proof, just proof to support his theory? It's ironic that it 's the same case with IT....Plenty of things to connect the dots with nothing to flatout shows it's true.
Some ever go as far as to say their is nothing to support the theory and ignore solid facts... http://social.biowar...75/blog/212630/ 



It is really twisted how people don't see thisat all.

1) The problem with saying it is "subtle" is that it is often used as an excuse for lack of evidence.
2) The problem here is that from a storytelling perspective you can't lose your audience, which is what IT effectively does and did for millions of people who played the game if it is true

1. But that is what stated in the lore..It's nature...How do you show proof of something before it happens when it naturally shows the solid proof afteR?

2.........Are you serious? Do you even read this board? You think IT will lose fans but keeping the ending as is would not? Did you not see all the angry fans threating to never buy another BW game over this ending? And IT is going to make that worse whne most ofthe people like the theory any away? I think you need to check you're glasses.

1) I realise, but absence of evidence is most usually evidence of absence. And there is no "proof" after anyway
2) Yes I do, and I realise that there is a small, but vocal contingent who support IT. Others don't. Basic 101 of Storytelling states that you need to inform your readers properly, if you don't, then you have created a crappy story, which is what has happened here. Hence why people had to turn internet forums and videos to find the "truth"; a good story should not do that. You say it yourself, people were angry, and that is why BW failed

1. But watching the nature of something  is the one of way to predict  how it develops.This one of the oldest ways to predict develpment This is the case of study valcanos, earth quakes, stars and storms.  You can't ignore it's nature if signs point  to it. Shep has been near reaper tech on and off for 3 years and there simptoms that link to it.
http://social.biowar...75/blog/212630/ 

And it's been stated, form ME1, it is hard to detect early....Really, you can't say no solid evidence means no proof being that it never shows it and it to dangerous to ignore.

2.They you have not been paying attention then.....That's all of ME1, ME2 and Arrival. bw spent 2 game explaining indoctrination.....With codex there to reexplain it. It's not the fault of BW that you forgot.

1) Yes knowing its nature can be helpful. I have two things to say to that. First, as someone has already noted, we have not played as an indoctrinated player therefore we don't know exactly how it would affect us. There is a great difference between knowing some facts about indoc' and experiencing it in its full force. And secondly, about Shep's exposure to Reaper artifacts, the people we know, Saren and TIM have been under Reaper control for a much longer time than Shep

2) ME1: Only Sovereign at the end
ME2: Admittedly some events with Reaper tech, however lack of effect from those events
Arrival: DLC and therefore discounted (is said to be unimportant in ME3)

1. We talked to and seen many indoctrinated people and they clearly tell and show you the simptoms of indoctrination. We even are giventhe perspective of someone indoctrinated in the book ME:retribution....We know all of how it works via game and book medium. Really, you don't need to have Aids to know it's simtoms.

2. No, You been in contact with reaper tech and indoctrination feilds since the moment you dropped on eden prime. Dragon's teeth, husk and indoctrinated agent giveoff indoctrination feilds...Also,  Virmire and the sub quest with reaper tech. In ME2 , it's also every time you face a collector, all the reaper tech in the sub quest, the collector ship, and the collector base with the bayby reaper..And Arrival.....That is a lot of off and on contact.

[ThinkIntegral]

KingZayd wrote...

so either the crucible was able to reprogram an AI that nobody knew was there, or it makes the Catalyst stupid by hogging resources... kinda like firefox?

Apparently someone knew it was there because the plans for the Crucible at some point in time included the Catalyst.  Second, I have no idea how you get the hogging resources idea from some change in logical gates.  In any case the details of how it does it have kind of a low relevancy.  Based on what we know the Crucible does something to the Catalyst because it explicitly says so, it gives you three choices, and you're talking to it.

[dreman9999]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Point being he shouldn't have been able to control Shepard the way he did.

Yet, you are clearly wrong.

Or am I? Indoctrination is control of the mind not the body.

It controls both the body and manipulates the mind...It's both. Benzeia and Paul grayson would tell you it's both.

[balance5050]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

so either the crucible was able to reprogram an AI that nobody knew was there, or it makes the Catalyst stupid by hogging resources... kinda like firefox?

Apparently someone knew it was there because the plans for the Crucible at some point in time included the Catalyst.  Second, I have no idea how you get the hogging resources idea from some change in logical gates.  In any case the details of how it does it have kind of a low relevancy.  Based on what we know the Crucible does something to the Catalyst because it explicitly says so, it gives you three choices, and you're talking to it.

According to the codex, it is speculated that the catalyst/crucible is used simply as an energy source. We don't know anything about starbrat except what he tells us, which may not all be true.

[balance5050]

dreman9999 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Point being he shouldn't have been able to control Shepard the way he did.

Yet, you are clearly wrong.

Or am I? Indoctrination is control of the mind not the body.

It controls both the body and manipulates the mind...It's both. Benzeia and Paul grayson would tell you it's both.

It control the body THROUGH the mind.

[dreman9999]

balance5050 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Point being he shouldn't have been able to control Shepard the way he did.

Yet, you are clearly wrong.

Or am I? Indoctrination is control of the mind not the body.

It controls both the body and manipulates the mind...It's both. Benzeia and Paul grayson would tell you it's both.

It control the body THROUGH the mind.

Not in the way you are implying. Indoctrination is one part a slow divide for  apersons formind from their hind mindthat controls your body movements. It still is both. You have to show that mind is not part of the body, which it is.

[ThinkIntegral]

balance5050 wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

so either the crucible was able to reprogram an AI that nobody knew was there, or it makes the Catalyst stupid by hogging resources... kinda like firefox?

Apparently someone knew it was there because the plans for the Crucible at some point in time included the Catalyst.  Second, I have no idea how you get the hogging resources idea from some change in logical gates.  In any case the details of how it does it have kind of a low relevancy.  Based on what we know the Crucible does something to the Catalyst because it explicitly says so, it gives you three choices, and you're talking to it.

According to the codex, it is speculated that the catalyst/crucible is used simply as an energy source. We don't know anything about starbrat except what he tells us, which may not all be true.

Well we know what is given to us in the game and outside of the game we know its the end of the story arc.

[balance5050]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

so either the crucible was able to reprogram an AI that nobody knew was there, or it makes the Catalyst stupid by hogging resources... kinda like firefox?

Apparently someone knew it was there because the plans for the Crucible at some point in time included the Catalyst.  Second, I have no idea how you get the hogging resources idea from some change in logical gates.  In any case the details of how it does it have kind of a low relevancy.  Based on what we know the Crucible does something to the Catalyst because it explicitly says so, it gives you three choices, and you're talking to it.

According to the codex, it is speculated that the catalyst/crucible is used simply as an energy source. We don't know anything about starbrat except what he tells us, which may not all be true.

Well we know what is given to us in the game and outside of the game we know its the end of the story arc.

There's this thing called the "Extended Cut" coming out, you may have heard of it. It will *extend* the ending.

Also clarify it.

Modifié par balance5050, 06 mai 2012 - 04:11 .

[ThinkIntegral]

balance5050 wrote...
There's this thing called the "Extended Cut" coming out, you may have heard of it. It will *extend* the ending.

Also clarify it.

Yeah I know. What of it? You hoping it'll show the IT?

[dreman9999]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

balance5050 wrote...
There's this thing called the "Extended Cut" coming out, you may have heard of it. It will *extend* the ending.

Also clarify it.

Yeah I know. What of it? You hoping it'll show the IT?

Well...IT does clearify the ending.....

[SoloPala]

dreman9999 wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

balance5050 wrote...
There's this thing called the "Extended Cut" coming out, you may have heard of it. It will *extend* the ending.

Also clarify it.

Yeah I know. What of it? You hoping it'll show the IT?

Well...IT does clearify the ending.....

In that it means we never got an ending, which is why its just as bad as the crap they gave us.

[dreman9999]

SoloPala wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

balance5050 wrote...
There's this thing called the "Extended Cut" coming out, you may have heard of it. It will *extend* the ending.

Also clarify it.

Yeah I know. What of it? You hoping it'll show the IT?

Well...IT does clearify the ending.....

In that it means we never got an ending, which is why its just as bad as the crap they gave us.

The fact that we are getting EC means we never got an ending... 
And no, nothing that makes sence can be as bad waswhat we got...Nothing.

[Peytl]

We got the ending. as bad as it is. EC is an act of BW hoping to sooth angered fans that will expand current ending. It's just IT believers who don't get it.  Get over it, IT will never be proven. Something that never existed can't be proven.

[SubAstris]

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

 As much as we all have fought over this theory, their are a few ironies here that much of the Anti-IT seem to miss.
I just want to point it out.
1.The question of sold proof...

 It's been stated in the lore that there is no solid proof of it till it's too late. 

Their are syntoms but they are often spratic and divide in a way that makes it hard to link.....It's subtle. There 2 cases when somone who already knew about indoctrination via contact with reaper and reaper tech how knew and about indoctrination..... Saren, who tried to reduce it with short visits to the test onSovergin over the years, and Dr. Kenson, who may have been too late to try and avoid it.

2."Ah, yes. Reapers......"
No one remeber that time Shepard tried to prove something without solid proof, just proof to support his theory? It's ironic that it 's the same case with IT....Plenty of things to connect the dots with nothing to flatout shows it's true.
Some ever go as far as to say their is nothing to support the theory and ignore solid facts... http://social.biowar...75/blog/212630/ 



It is really twisted how people don't see thisat all.

1) The problem with saying it is "subtle" is that it is often used as an excuse for lack of evidence.
2) The problem here is that from a storytelling perspective you can't lose your audience, which is what IT effectively does and did for millions of people who played the game if it is true

1. But that is what stated in the lore..It's nature...How do you show proof of something before it happens when it naturally shows the solid proof afteR?

2.........Are you serious? Do you even read this board? You think IT will lose fans but keeping the ending as is would not? Did you not see all the angry fans threating to never buy another BW game over this ending? And IT is going to make that worse whne most ofthe people like the theory any away? I think you need to check you're glasses.

1) I realise, but absence of evidence is most usually evidence of absence. And there is no "proof" after anyway
2) Yes I do, and I realise that there is a small, but vocal contingent who support IT. Others don't. Basic 101 of Storytelling states that you need to inform your readers properly, if you don't, then you have created a crappy story, which is what has happened here. Hence why people had to turn internet forums and videos to find the "truth"; a good story should not do that. You say it yourself, people were angry, and that is why BW failed

1. But watching the nature of something  is the one of way to predict  how it develops.This one of the oldest ways to predict develpment This is the case of study valcanos, earth quakes, stars and storms.  You can't ignore it's nature if signs point  to it. Shep has been near reaper tech on and off for 3 years and there simptoms that link to it.
http://social.biowar...75/blog/212630/ 

And it's been stated, form ME1, it is hard to detect early....Really, you can't say no solid evidence means no proof being that it never shows it and it to dangerous to ignore.

2.They you have not been paying attention then.....That's all of ME1, ME2 and Arrival. bw spent 2 game explaining indoctrination.....With codex there to reexplain it. It's not the fault of BW that you forgot.

1) Yes knowing its nature can be helpful. I have two things to say to that. First, as someone has already noted, we have not played as an indoctrinated player therefore we don't know exactly how it would affect us. There is a great difference between knowing some facts about indoc' and experiencing it in its full force. And secondly, about Shep's exposure to Reaper artifacts, the people we know, Saren and TIM have been under Reaper control for a much longer time than Shep

2) ME1: Only Sovereign at the end
ME2: Admittedly some events with Reaper tech, however lack of effect from those events
Arrival: DLC and therefore discounted (is said to be unimportant in ME3)

1. We talked to and seen many indoctrinated people and they clearly tell and show you the simptoms of indoctrination. We even are giventhe perspective of someone indoctrinated in the book ME:retribution....We know all of how it works via game and book medium. Really, you don't need to have Aids to know it's simtoms.

2. No, You been in contact with reaper tech and indoctrination feilds since the moment you dropped on eden prime. Dragon's teeth, husk and indoctrinated agent giveoff indoctrination feilds...Also,  Virmire and the sub quest with reaper tech. In ME2 , it's also every time you face a collector, all the reaper tech in the sub quest, the collector ship, and the collector base with the bayby reaper..And Arrival.....That is a lot of off and on contact.

1) Difference is indoctrination is a personal, mental disease
2) Still amounts to a few hours. And if that is so, why aren't Joker and all the Crew also indoctrinated?

[dreman9999]

SubAstris wrote...



1) Difference is indoctrination is a personal, mental disease
2) Still amounts to a few hours. And if that is so, why aren't Joker and all the Crew also indoctrinated?

1.No...It not... Read the codex...
http://masseffect.wi...#Indoctrination 


Reaper "indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds, "reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods. The Reaper's resulting control over the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its suggestions. 

Cleary, it's a disortion of the mind via physical and subliminal means. That is what IT is stating.

2. Not a few hours...Their is no way to caluclate the time not do we have the show of intecidy of waves use. Time and intecity is a factor that causes indoctrination and it was stated in ME1, shown even more in ME:evolution. Remeber, their is fast and slow indoctrination and it can be balenced.
http://masseffect.wi...#Indoctrination 

Long-term physical effects of the manipulation are unsustainable. Higher mental functioning decays, ultimately leaving the victim a gibbering animal. Rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes this decay in days or weeks. Slow, patient indoctrination allows the thrall to last for months or years. 

......Also, you have to note that the theory states that Shepard is in the process of indoctrination meaning the reapers are still trying to indoctrinated Shepard at the end of the game. The theory stated Harbinger is over Shepard uncounsuious body  focusing indoctination wave in an attempt to finish the indoctrination.

[KingZayd]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

so either the crucible was able to reprogram an AI that nobody knew was there, or it makes the Catalyst stupid by hogging resources... kinda like firefox?

Apparently someone knew it was there because the plans for the Crucible at some point in time included the Catalyst.  Second, I have no idea how you get the hogging resources idea from some change in logical gates.  In any case the details of how it does it have kind of a low relevancy.  Based on what we know the Crucible does something to the Catalyst because it explicitly says so, it gives you three choices, and you're talking to it.

i got that from the case that nobody did program it, and there was some sort of accidental change to the personality.

The Starchild said that no organic had ever been there before. How would anyone discover it's presence and create a a device capable of reprogramming the catalyst.

The change is merely this addition of a crucible that allows 3 options. This is why he says "the crucible changed me" not when he's explaining that the old solution won't work anymore, but before he tells you what the new possibilities are.

The device was designed to work with the Citadel. Not an AI nobody knew about. Otherwise surely the Starchild would be able to activate the Crucible itself?

[KingZayd]

dreman9999 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Point being he shouldn't have been able to control Shepard the way he did.

Yet, you are clearly wrong.

Or am I? Indoctrination is control of the mind not the body.

It controls both the body and manipulates the mind...It's both. Benzeia and Paul grayson would tell you it's both.

It controls the body BY controlling the mind. It's not either or. Unless they're implanted/huskified like saren.

[KingZayd]

SoloPala wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

balance5050 wrote...
There's this thing called the "Extended Cut" coming out, you may have heard of it. It will *extend* the ending.

Also clarify it.

Yeah I know. What of it? You hoping it'll show the IT?

Well...IT does clearify the ending.....

In that it means we never got an ending, which is why its just as bad as the crap they gave us.

except it predicted there would be an ending DLC. which is why it's so much better than "the crap they gave us"

[KingZayd]

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

 As much as we all have fought over this theory, their are a few ironies here that much of the Anti-IT seem to miss.
I just want to point it out.
1.The question of sold proof...

 It's been stated in the lore that there is no solid proof of it till it's too late. 

Their are syntoms but they are often spratic and divide in a way that makes it hard to link.....It's subtle. There 2 cases when somone who already knew about indoctrination via contact with reaper and reaper tech how knew and about indoctrination..... Saren, who tried to reduce it with short visits to the test onSovergin over the years, and Dr. Kenson, who may have been too late to try and avoid it.

2."Ah, yes. Reapers......"
No one remeber that time Shepard tried to prove something without solid proof, just proof to support his theory? It's ironic that it 's the same case with IT....Plenty of things to connect the dots with nothing to flatout shows it's true.
Some ever go as far as to say their is nothing to support the theory and ignore solid facts... http://social.biowar...75/blog/212630/ 



It is really twisted how people don't see thisat all.

1) The problem with saying it is "subtle" is that it is often used as an excuse for lack of evidence.
2) The problem here is that from a storytelling perspective you can't lose your audience, which is what IT effectively does and did for millions of people who played the game if it is true

1. But that is what stated in the lore..It's nature...How do you show proof of something before it happens when it naturally shows the solid proof afteR?

2.........Are you serious? Do you even read this board? You think IT will lose fans but keeping the ending as is would not? Did you not see all the angry fans threating to never buy another BW game over this ending? And IT is going to make that worse whne most ofthe people like the theory any away? I think you need to check you're glasses.

1) I realise, but absence of evidence is most usually evidence of absence. And there is no "proof" after anyway
2) Yes I do, and I realise that there is a small, but vocal contingent who support IT. Others don't. Basic 101 of Storytelling states that you need to inform your readers properly, if you don't, then you have created a crappy story, which is what has happened here. Hence why people had to turn internet forums and videos to find the "truth"; a good story should not do that. You say it yourself, people were angry, and that is why BW failed

1. But watching the nature of something  is the one of way to predict  how it develops.This one of the oldest ways to predict develpment This is the case of study valcanos, earth quakes, stars and storms.  You can't ignore it's nature if signs point  to it. Shep has been near reaper tech on and off for 3 years and there simptoms that link to it.
http://social.biowar...75/blog/212630/ 

And it's been stated, form ME1, it is hard to detect early....Really, you can't say no solid evidence means no proof being that it never shows it and it to dangerous to ignore.

2.They you have not been paying attention then.....That's all of ME1, ME2 and Arrival. bw spent 2 game explaining indoctrination.....With codex there to reexplain it. It's not the fault of BW that you forgot.

1) Yes knowing its nature can be helpful. I have two things to say to that. First, as someone has already noted, we have not played as an indoctrinated player therefore we don't know exactly how it would affect us. There is a great difference between knowing some facts about indoc' and experiencing it in its full force. And secondly, about Shep's exposure to Reaper artifacts, the people we know, Saren and TIM have been under Reaper control for a much longer time than Shep

2) ME1: Only Sovereign at the end
ME2: Admittedly some events with Reaper tech, however lack of effect from those events
Arrival: DLC and therefore discounted (is said to be unimportant in ME3)

1. We talked to and seen many indoctrinated people and they clearly tell and show you the simptoms of indoctrination. We even are giventhe perspective of someone indoctrinated in the book ME:retribution....We know all of how it works via game and book medium. Really, you don't need to have Aids to know it's simtoms.

2. No, You been in contact with reaper tech and indoctrination feilds since the moment you dropped on eden prime. Dragon's teeth, husk and indoctrinated agent giveoff indoctrination feilds...Also,  Virmire and the sub quest with reaper tech. In ME2 , it's also every time you face a collector, all the reaper tech in the sub quest, the collector ship, and the collector base with the bayby reaper..And Arrival.....That is a lot of off and on contact.

1) Difference is indoctrination is a personal, mental disease
2) Still amounts to a few hours. And if that is so, why aren't Joker and all the Crew also indoctrinated?

Why was Ben indoctrinated? Mass effect Evolution.

[SoloPala]

KingZayd wrote...

SoloPala wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

balance5050 wrote...
There's this thing called the "Extended Cut" coming out, you may have heard of it. It will *extend* the ending.

Also clarify it.

Yeah I know. What of it? You hoping it'll show the IT?

Well...IT does clearify the ending.....

In that it means we never got an ending, which is why its just as bad as the crap they gave us.

except it predicted there would be an ending DLC. which is why it's so much better than "the crap they gave us"

No, its just people grasping at straws hoping to make sense of the madness, Bioware was going to move straight into paid DLC if it wasn't for the outrage over the retarded ending.

[KingZayd]

SoloPala wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

SoloPala wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

balance5050 wrote...
There's this thing called the "Extended Cut" coming out, you may have heard of it. It will *extend* the ending.

Also clarify it.

Yeah I know. What of it? You hoping it'll show the IT?

Well...IT does clearify the ending.....

In that it means we never got an ending, which is why its just as bad as the crap they gave us.

except it predicted there would be an ending DLC. which is why it's so much better than "the crap they gave us"

No, its just people grasping at straws hoping to make sense of the madness, Bioware was going to move straight into paid DLC if it wasn't for the outrage over the retarded ending.

Proof?

I actually had my doubts about indoctrination theory until I looked at the lore in the comics, Arrival and then back at the plotline in ME3. There is definitely a huge emphasis put on indoctrination in the storyline. Shepard was hit by a reaper artifcat that causes indoctrination. TIM had indoctrination tech, and believed it was the answer to controlling the reapers. TIM was able to control Shepard on the Citadel. It's not a straw, even if that's what YOU see.

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

davishepard wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

When life becomes sentient, it realises that it doesn't want to die. This si expressed when the Geth no longer wanted to shut down.

A. are you suggesting that the Reapers aren't sentient, that they have no desire to endure? Are you suggesting that the OLDEST AI isn't sentient?

B. The kid actually does react, he immediatly dissapears, fades away. In control and synthesis, however, it zooms in on his (catalyst) face and he smirks.

I am telling that neither the Reapers or the Catalyst show a particular will to "live". They seem to only have a "program", and follow it over anything else.

I didn't found a cutscene that shows the Catalyst after the Synthesis option is chosen, but I saw the Control ending, and he fades in that ending, after the zoom, no smirks though.

If they have no will to live then they aren't sentient.

Were Kamikaze pilots sentient?

[CavScout]

ev76 wrote...

Cavscout I'm not lying I'm just pointing out that you feel that destroying the reapers with low ems is obtuse, you said it yourself. You are the sensitive type that in order to break the cycle everyone must (other than the reapers) live. Yet low ems gives you the best outcome, you win. You might not like how you won but you won. Which is the best ending of the three options, everything else after the last choice is made is window dressing.

No, saying that the low EMS destroy optioin is the same as the high EMS destroy option is obtuse. They are not equal, one has a much more favorable out-come.

Keep trying... I guess. You must think you are clever.