247 réponses à ce sujet

[The Night Mammoth]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

You've proven nothing.

And, believing him is your choice. There's no reason to, and no reason not to.

See, I can agree that you certainly don't have to agree or disagree, but from what I saw in the ending you were supposed to make an informed choice based on what it tells you, based on its problem. 

That's what irked me. You could ignore everything it says about synthetics versus organics and you would lose nothing important to the plot. You were supposed to care, but I simply can't. 

[incinerator950]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Missile ****** and laser eyes are hard to pass up. Ah Headcanon, I can see why people like it.

Stop stealing my ideas!

Actually, that was The Angry Ones idea. 

Or was it? I must find the originator to converse with them. 

It was her I believe.  I was the one who would rather have a Reaper Scorpion instead of a Cuttlefish.  

Also, Angry's mating call is now the Reaper Horn.  You are now manually imagining this.

[The Angry One]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Irrelevant. The Catalyst is an omnicidal maniac. Anything he says is automatically untrustworthy.

Oh come on girl, try to be objective.

Omnicidal maniac? Drop the hyperbole, explain yourself and we can discuss this.

How is it hyperbole? The Catalyst has murdered trillions. This is a fact.
It tries to sugar-coat it by calling it "ascension" (nevermind the ones it outright blows up, kills, suffocates and tortures).
It's assertions are based entirely on an appeal to it's own authority and the idea that in ifinite time, the possible becomes inevitable.
By that logic, given enough time, the Reapers themselves will blow up the universe.

Modifié par The Angry One, 09 mai 2012 - 03:50 .

[The Night Mammoth]

The Angry One wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Missile ****** and laser eyes are hard to pass up. Ah Headcanon, I can see why people like it.

Stop stealing my ideas!

Actually, that was The Angry Ones idea. 

Or was it? I must find the originator to converse with them. 

Missile breasts were mine, laser eyes were porclain doll's I believe.

I claim super strength, and retractible rocket breasts. 

And invisibility! 

Oh, and inspector gadget arms!

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 09 mai 2012 - 03:51 .

[wantedman dan]

Fibonacci wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

httinks2006 wrote...

Why on this insane ravaged F@#$%^&  planet would anyone choose to believe the Starbrat , Starchild , Godchild ,or  Being of light words as law ?
This is the commander , creator of the enemy we have been trying to stop for three games and when it saids you have these choices we do it ?
illiogical , idiotic , stupid , moronic .... etc ... really ?

I absolutely knowmy Shepard would never have giving in to this , damn I've proving quite the opposite for the past two games and five years....

Then reject his "solutions" and blow up the red tube, and live

But why would we actually believe taking the red pill will actually do what he says?

We don't. That's why no rational person can subject themselves to that ending without a generous helping of cognitive dissonance.

[The Angry One]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Missile ****** and laser eyes are hard to pass up. Ah Headcanon, I can see why people like it.

Stop stealing my ideas!

Actually, that was The Angry Ones idea. 

Or was it? I must find the originator to converse with them. 

Missile breasts were mine, laser eyes were porclain doll's I believe.

I claim super strength, and retractible rocket breasts. 

And invisibility! 

Oh, and inspector gadget arms!

This summer, Commander Shepard is Reaper Girl, fighting crime with sidekick Harbinger Boy and tech expert Garrus.

Harbinger: "WHY MUST I BE CALLED BOY. THIS HURTS ME."

Shepard: "Would you prefer 'Cuttlefish Lad?"

Harbinger: "SHEPARD. I AM NOT ENJOYING YOUR COMPANY AS MUCH AS I THOUGHT I WOULD."

Garrus: "Shepard I think your missile launchers require calibrations again.."

Shepard: "That's 4 times today Garrus. You sure?"

Garrus: "..... ..... ..... yes."

Harbinger: "THIS IS REVOLTING."

Shepard: "Then stop watching."

Harbinger: "I AM REQUIRED TO. FOR SCIENCE."

[TSA_383]

Fibonacci wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

httinks2006 wrote...

Why on this insane ravaged F@#$%^&  planet would anyone choose to believe the Starbrat , Starchild , Godchild ,or  Being of light words as law ?
This is the commander , creator of the enemy we have been trying to stop for three games and when it saids you have these choices we do it ?
illiogical , idiotic , stupid , moronic .... etc ... really ?

I absolutely knowmy Shepard would never have giving in to this , damn I've proving quite the opposite for the past two games and five years....

Then reject his "solutions" and blow up the red tube, and live

But why would we actually believe taking the red pill will actually do what he says?

Exactly.
You shoot the red tube, which the catalyst implies will kill you, and you live.
You choose either of his preferred "solutions" and you get all huskified.

ALSO
The child is referred to in the game's original script and in all the game files as "guardian"
http://i48.tinypic.com/2ebam87.png

And the sound of you shooting the tube at the end is reffered to as "guardianend"
http://i45.tinypic.com/2uf7zhi.jpg

Which isn't even remotely conclusive but I find it very interesting.

[The Angry One]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

How is it hyperbole? The Catalyst has murdered trillions. This is a fact.
It tries to sugar-coat it by calling it "ascension" (nevermind the ones it outright blows up, kills, suffocates and tortures).
It's assertions are based entirely on an appeal to it's own authority and the idea that in ifinite time, the possible becomes inevitable.
By that logic, given enough time, the Reapers themselves will blow up the universe.

The point is, you don't have to agree with someone's logic for it to be valid logic.

Many criminals are stupid,  but there are a few smart ones out there that logically came to the decision of a life of crime. That doesn't make them maniacs.

Same for the "omnicide" part. It truly believes that what it is doing saves organics. It isn't doing it for a visceral thrill.

It doesn't matter if it believes it's right. Very few actual genocidal dictators have believed they were wrong.
What matters is by it's actions and it's faulty arguments there is no reason to believe it. None.

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

The point is, you don't have to agree with someone's logic for it to be valid logic.

Many criminals are stupid,  but there are a few smart ones out there that logically came to the decision of a life of crime. That doesn't make them maniacs.

Same for the "omnicide" part. It truly believes that what it is doing saves organics. It isn't doing it for a visceral thrill.

You're countering a specific example with a generalization. It's not working out very well.

You may not have to agree with someone's logic for it to be valid, but the point is: Starchild is circular in his logic; he justifies it through itself, therefore it is null.

There is nothing rational by saying, "I must save you from destroying your civilization from technologically superior synthetics by destroying your civilization by technologically superior bio-synthetics."

[Reth Shepherd]

@EternalEmbiguity
Question. If Adolf Hitler appeared in front of you, admitted to the slaughter he had caused, BUT he had done it because Jews will inevitably destroy all other races; would you accept his solution to the problem?

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

It doesn't matter if it believes it's right. Very few actual genocidal dictators have believed they were wrong.
What matters is by it's actions and it's faulty arguments there is no reason to believe it. None.

Believed they were wrong=/=believed what they were doing was genuinely good for their people.

Those types are generally so full of themselves that they think they're always right. The Catalyst isn't like that; he's doing this purely because he believes that synthetics will one day eliminate organics.

Just like every other genocidal maniac believes that killing off a people en masse truly helps the people not being killed.

[The Angry One]

wantedman dan wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

The point is, you don't have to agree with someone's logic for it to be valid logic.

Many criminals are stupid,  but there are a few smart ones out there that logically came to the decision of a life of crime. That doesn't make them maniacs.

Same for the "omnicide" part. It truly believes that what it is doing saves organics. It isn't doing it for a visceral thrill.

You're countering a specific example with a generalization. It's not working out very well.

You may not have to agree with someone's logic for it to be valid, but the point is: Starchild is circular in his logic; he justifies it through itself, therefore it is null.

There is nothing rational by saying, "I must save you from destroying your civilization from technologically superior synthetics by destroying your civilization by technologically superior bio-synthetics."

Not to mention it's attempts at platitudes and sugar-coating.
For example, it never refers to what it's doing as "wiping out" or "killing". It's "preserving in Reaper form", "harvesting" and "ascension".
It refers to the process as it's "solution". It claims that old races go to "make way for the new".

This drips with the snake oil of an extremist politician, trying to misdirect you from the implications of what it's saying.

[The Angry One]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Believed they were wrong=/=believed what they were doing was genuinely good for their people.

Um. They do believe that in their twisted minds, that's the whole point.
They think they know better. That their people will prosper for this. That this is the right way.

Those types are generally so full of themselves that they think they're always right. The Catalyst isn't like that; he's doing this purely because he believes that synthetics will one day eliminate organics.

No, it's doing it because it's full of itself. It has no proof for it's assertions. It deliberately causes the things it claims to prevent.

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

His logic is not circular. His logic is based on things we don't know.

He literally ends up where he began: You will destroy yourselves through synthetic life, so I must destroy you through synthetic life first.

That is the very epitome of circular reasoning. If there's something more to the equation, they should have added it. Not our problem. If we're to take what the Starchild says at face-value, he is, by definition, being circular.

[wantedman dan]

The Angry One wrote...

Not to mention it's attempts at platitudes and sugar-coating.
For example, it never refers to what it's doing as "wiping out" or "killing". It's "preserving in Reaper form", "harvesting" and "ascension".
It refers to the process as it's "solution". It claims that old races go to "make way for the new".

This drips with the snake oil of an extremist politician, trying to misdirect you from the implications of what it's saying.

Precisely. Added together, there is a very unsubtle approach to his deceit.

[The Night Mammoth]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

You're countering a specific example with a generalization. It's not working out very well.

You may not have to agree with someone's logic for it to be valid, but the point is: Starchild is circular in his logic; he justifies it through itself, therefore it is null.

There is nothing rational by saying, "I must save you from destroying your civilization from technologically superior synthetics by destroying your civilization by technologically superior bio-synthetics."

His logic is not circular. His logic is based on things we don't know.

From our perspective it might as well be. 

Again, lack of exposition, as you said. 

I'll point out though that there's a severe lack of it throughout the story. They can add whatever they want in those last five minutes, a whole damn slide-shows, with gifs too, and it'll still be a stupid unsupported narrative shift.