323 réponses à ce sujet

[ericjdev]

They are not stopped in all endings, in control the cycle would continue, just Shep would be controlling the next extinction cycle.

[dreman9999]

Lord Goose wrote...

Control solves neither problem. It delays Shepard's problem but it is implied the reapers will come back to reap of StarShep's own accord when synthetics rebel. Likewise, it doesn't solve the Catalyst's problem because it simply keeps the status quo of the Reapers doing their reaping.

IWhere it is implied?

What guarrentees that Shepard will think the same way after uploading into the system?

[xsdob]

jijeebo wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Since when did the trend of attacking everyone elses ending choices become a thing here?

Since IT presented the idea of some of the choices meaning you "fail" some sort of test, and that the catalyst was trolling.

It has since been established by a lot of people that anything other than destroy is somehow playing into the reapers hands and generally failing at ending the threat... Even though the game distinctly says the opposite.


This means that I am not allowed to headcanon all my hilarious schenanigans involving my reaper ****es.

Yeah but I don't remember it being THIS bad until monday, now people seem more interested in bashing people who choose synthesis rather than the choice itself.

The rage is just so much more volitile now.

Modifié par xsdob, 11 mai 2012 - 06:09 .

[The Protheans]

ericjdev wrote...

They are not stopped in all endings, in control the cycle would continue, just Shep would be controlling the next extinction cycle.

You serious?

[jijeebo]

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

The main objective is neither to stop the Reapers nor destroy them. The main objective is to preserve galactic civilization.

Stopping the Reapers is a task that must be accomplished to do that. And only in Destroy are the Reapers permanently and completely, utterly, stopped.

In Synthesis or Control, the Reapers may choose to start up again. It's a possibility.

But the thing is, even in Destroy, the reapers may be reactivated. It is also a possibility that can't be overlooked.

No, If there is not reaper will left. That can't happen

All it takes is for one reaper to be alive, somewhere, and it could happen. Plus it's possible that destroy doesn't even destroy them... And it just put them into some sort of statis.

[Lord Goose]

dreman9999 wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Hadeedak wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Hadeedak wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Hadeedak wrote...

Destroy always struck me as admitting he's right and that synthetics and organics must fight, since you do wipe out the synthetics.

Control is also say he was also right because heis also saying someone need to control the galexy to keep it going.

He is? Where?

The entire reaper invation...Or....."This is my salution......Chaos."

Yeah, but unless your Control Shep thinks that Reapers are a really nifty idea... That's not what's going to happen, since Shepard apperantly does something else with them. Something that ends the Reaper threat. So maybe control is one final "Talk the bad guy into changing his evil ways", now with 90% more machine uploading and disintergration.

Again...What does"You will die, you will control them but lose everything you have," mean?

What means, what Shepard would die. Shepard woldn't be able to walk around the Earth, and see Galaxy rise from it's ashes. Shepard woldn't be able to communicate with his friends anymore. He wouldn't be united with LI. He would be completely alone.

You got part of it right....What of memeory or will?

Well, as it seen in the ending, he still manages to make Reapers fly away. So, his goals probably were not changed.

[dreman9999]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

The main objective is neither to stop the Reapers nor destroy them. The main objective is to preserve galactic civilization.

Stopping the Reapers is a task that must be accomplished to do that. And only in Destroy are the Reapers permanently and completely, utterly, stopped.

In Synthesis or Control, the Reapers may choose to start up again. It's a possibility.

But the thing is, even in Destroy, the reapers may be reactivated. It is also a possibility that can't be overlooked.

No, If there is not reaper will left. That can't happen

All it takes is for one reaper to be alive, somewhere, and it could happen. Plus it's possible that destroy doesn't even destroy them... And it just put them into some sort of statis.

But there's no reapers left. Destroy does kill every reaper. That like say control doesn't control every reaper.

Modifié par dreman9999, 11 mai 2012 - 06:15 .

[Sisterofshane]

xsdob wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Since when did the trend of attacking everyone elses ending choices become a thing here?

Since IT presented the idea of some of the choices meaning you "fail" some sort of test, and that the catalyst was trolling.

It has since been established by a lot of people that anything other than destroy is somehow playing into the reapers hands and generally failing at ending the threat... Even though the game distinctly says the opposite.


This means that I am not allowed to headcanon all my hilarious schenanigans involving my reaper ****es.

Yeah but I don't remember it being THIS bad until monday, now people seem more interested in bashing people who choose synthesis rather than the choice itself.

The rage is just so much more volitile now.

Agreed, and although I hate the Synthesis ending I would never condone this.

It all comes down to personal interpretations of the ending (thank you speculation!), and the best we can all do is offer up our own viewpoints.  It doesn't really make anybody else's opinoins wrong.

[Lord Goose]

dreman9999 wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

Control solves neither problem. It delays Shepard's problem but it is implied the reapers will come back to reap of StarShep's own accord when synthetics rebel. Likewise, it doesn't solve the Catalyst's problem because it simply keeps the status quo of the Reapers doing their reaping.

IWhere it is implied?

What guarrentees that Shepard will think the same way after uploading into the system?

You're asking me to prove negative. 
And I'm asking, where it is implied, that the cycle would continue?

[jijeebo]

xsdob wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Since when did the trend of attacking everyone elses ending choices become a thing here?

Since IT presented the idea of some of the choices meaning you "fail" some sort of test, and that the catalyst was trolling.

It has since been established by a lot of people that anything other than destroy is somehow playing into the reapers hands and generally failing at ending the threat... Even though the game distinctly says the opposite.


This means that I am not allowed to headcanon all my hilarious schenanigans involving my reaper ****es.

Yeah but I don't remember it being THIS bad until monday, now people seem more interested in bashing people who choose synthesis rather than the choice itself.

The rage is just so much more volitile now.

I guess people got fed up of raging at Bioware because they've gone quiet... So they're finding reasons to rage and insult each other?


I miss the days when everyone was united under the "God, those endings sucked didn't they?" banner.

[dreman9999]

Lord Goose wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

Control solves neither problem. It delays Shepard's problem but it is implied the reapers will come back to reap of StarShep's own accord when synthetics rebel. Likewise, it doesn't solve the Catalyst's problem because it simply keeps the status quo of the Reapers doing their reaping.

IWhere it is implied?

What guarrentees that Shepard will think the same way after uploading into the system?

You're asking me to prove negative. 
And I'm asking, where it is implied, that the cycle would continue?

Because the system is still in place in control as well as need to apply it.
Synthesis ends the cycle because the reapers did everything they wanted.
Destroy the cycle is over because the system is gone.

[justafan]

dreman9999 wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

Control solves neither problem. It delays Shepard's problem but it is implied the reapers will come back to reap of StarShep's own accord when synthetics rebel. Likewise, it doesn't solve the Catalyst's problem because it simply keeps the status quo of the Reapers doing their reaping.

IWhere it is implied?

What guarrentees that Shepard will think the same way after uploading into the system?

The simple fact that the catalyst is more open to this solution than destroy implies this.  If we view Shepard and the Catalyst as having separate goals, then the Catalyst should be equally negative to destroy and control if he assumes shepard will fly the reapers into the nearest sun, if not more in favor of Destroy as it will kill the potential threat of the geth.  However, he is far more positive to control because we can assume he believes Shepard will continue with his solution after Shepard ascends to Catalysthood and is able to comprehend the data.

Sure this cycle may be delayed, but the catalyst likely believes once the synthetics rebel, Shepard will fall in line with the reapers way of thinking of his own free will.

Modifié par justafan, 11 mai 2012 - 06:21 .

[jijeebo]

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

The main objective is neither to stop the Reapers nor destroy them. The main objective is to preserve galactic civilization.

Stopping the Reapers is a task that must be accomplished to do that. And only in Destroy are the Reapers permanently and completely, utterly, stopped.

In Synthesis or Control, the Reapers may choose to start up again. It's a possibility.

But the thing is, even in Destroy, the reapers may be reactivated. It is also a possibility that can't be overlooked.

No, If there is not reaper will left. That can't happen

All it takes is for one reaper to be alive, somewhere, and it could happen. Plus it's possible that destroy doesn't even destroy them... And it just put them into some sort of statis.

But there's no reapers left. Destroy does kill every reaper. That like say control doesn't control every reaper.

There is no more evidence to point to Destroy destroying all the reapers than there is to point to Control being able to control all the reapers.

Anything is possible... In the world of SPECULATION!!1!:wizard:

[Nimrodell]

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

The main objective is neither to stop the Reapers nor destroy them. The main objective is to preserve galactic civilization.

Stopping the Reapers is a task that must be accomplished to do that. And only in Destroy are the Reapers permanently and completely, utterly, stopped.

In Synthesis or Control, the Reapers may choose to start up again. It's a possibility.

But the thing is, even in Destroy, the reapers may be reactivated. It is also a possibility that can't be overlooked.

No, If there is not reaper will left. That can't happen

All it takes is for one reaper to be alive, somewhere, and it could happen. Plus it's possible that destroy doesn't even destroy them... And it just put them into some sort of statis.

But there's no reapers left. Destroy does kill every reaper. That like say control doesn't control every reaper.

Where's your proof to this claim if you're one of those who claim that Catalyst lies in other options? To be honest, it's either you believe Catalyst or not and if you don't - there's no proof, in-game one, that in destroy Catalyst chose to tell the truth. I do believe that Catalyst was sincere in all three options (there are many reasons why I do, but that's not the topic here) and I do believe that all reapers were destroyed, and I'll support that if there's no Catalyst is lying premise.

[Pride Demon]

dreman9999 wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...

So you are saying that without someone controlling it everyone will suddently be "cured" (as in not having any symptoms anymore) in spite of the fact indoctrination is always defined in game as causing permanent effects and neural degeneration?

From what we see it's actually the opposite, the controller has to actively avoid going to far in order to slow indoctrination down, otherwise every slave would be burned out in a matter of days...

No, with out someone in control, there would be nothing to tell what ever is rewrite the brain what to do. It will sit Idle.

I fail to see how having thousands, hundreds of thousands or whatever end up as brain dead  "idle" creatures that will soon die of exposure is so much better, but whatever, let's end it here, I have no desire to continue this discussion forever, and that's probably where it will end if one of us doesn't stop... Peace...

BTW, you should really try and reduce the quote piramids from time to time, you can't simply hope the other guy/gal you are talking too will finally tire of having his/her post be twenty stories long and decide to cut it down...

[Lord Goose]

Because the system is still in place in control as well as need to apply it.

The cycle was Catalyst solution for the problem of chaos. If Shepard's assumes his role, it must be HIS solution to the cycle for continue.

Again.
I've asked, where it is implied that the cycle would continue? Meaning what maybe there is some hidden cut-scene in the game which shows Reapers returning. Or something.

[dreman9999]

justafan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

Control solves neither problem. It delays Shepard's problem but it is implied the reapers will come back to reap of StarShep's own accord when synthetics rebel. Likewise, it doesn't solve the Catalyst's problem because it simply keeps the status quo of the Reapers doing their reaping.

IWhere it is implied?

What guarrentees that Shepard will think the same way after uploading into the system?

The simple fact that the catalyst is more open to this solution than destroy implies this.  If we view Shepard and the Catalyst as having separate goals, then the Catalyst should be equally negative to destroy and control if he assumes shepard will fly the reapers into the nearest sun, if not more in favor of Destroy as it will kill the potential threat of the geth.  However, he is far more positive to control because we can assume he believes Shepard will continue with his solution after Shepard ascends to Catalysthood and is able to comprehend the data.

Sure this cycle may be delayed, but the catalyst likely believes once the synthetics rebel, Shepard will fall in line with the reapers way of thinking of his own free will.

Nothing implies that he's open to anything. If he was he would stop the reapers right then  and there. If you look around he lets the reapers keep going. 
If you understand that he reallyy is not open to other salutions...Ask yourself this....How dose control and synthesis solve the problems he presents in any way?

[dreman9999]

Lord Goose wrote...

Because the system is still in place in control as well as need to apply it.

The cycle was Catalyst solution for the problem of chaos. If Shepard's assumes his role, it must be HIS solution to the cycle for continue.

Again.
I've asked, where it is implied that the cycle would continue? Meaning what maybe there is some hidden cut-scene in the game which shows Reapers returning. Or something.

And becuas e thesystem is in place...Do you know how I konw that...Ask yourself how control and sysnthesis solves any of the problem the star child brings up.

You find out that it doesn't....That  means it not over.

[antares_sublight]

Lord Goose wrote...

Because the system is still in place in control as well as need to apply it.

The cycle was Catalyst solution for the problem of chaos. If Shepard's assumes his role, it must be HIS solution to the cycle for continue.

Again.
I've asked, where it is implied that the cycle would continue? Meaning what maybe there is some hidden cut-scene in the game which shows Reapers returning. Or something.

In the leaked script it goes like this:

Shepard: What would happen to me?
Catalyst: You will become the catalyst. You will continue the cycle as you see fit.

Shepard might very well come to be convinced over thousands of years that the original cycle was a good idea.

Modifié par antares_sublight, 11 mai 2012 - 06:30 .

[AwesomeDudex64]

"Dead reapers is how we win this."

[dreman9999]

Pride Demon wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...

So you are saying that without someone controlling it everyone will suddently be "cured" (as in not having any symptoms anymore) in spite of the fact indoctrination is always defined in game as causing permanent effects and neural degeneration?

From what we see it's actually the opposite, the controller has to actively avoid going to far in order to slow indoctrination down, otherwise every slave would be burned out in a matter of days...

No, with out someone in control, there would be nothing to tell what ever is rewrite the brain what to do. It will sit Idle.

I fail to see how having thousands, hundreds of thousands or whatever end up as brain dead  "idle" creatures that will soon die of exposure is so much better, but whatever, let's end it here, I have no desire to continue this discussion forever, and that's probably where it will end if one of us doesn't stop... Peace...

BTW, you should really try and reduce the quote piramids from time to time, you can't simply hope the other guy/gal you are talking too will finally tire of having his/her post be twenty stories long and decide to cut it down...

You not getting it still. Indoctrination work by first setting up a conect to a reaper. Then after that, the reaper manipulates the function of the mind. The mind is is soon cut off when the reaper has full control of the body via indoctrinaton. It basicly allows the reaper to close the door on your will in your mind.
You not understand that.
1. Once the coccect is set, there is no one to tell it how to contiue the next stage. It mean is sit in idled as the person has a free mind and body
2. No one is there to give the command to cut off the mind from the body, still meaning the person has a free mind and body.

This is shown in ME:RETRIBUTION. indoctrination comes to a state that it has to be directed...If not directed it does notcut off the free will of the person...It does nothing.

[dreman9999]

antares_sublight wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

Because the system is still in place in control as well as need to apply it.

The cycle was Catalyst solution for the problem of chaos. If Shepard's assumes his role, it must be HIS solution to the cycle for continue.

Again.
I've asked, where it is implied that the cycle would continue? Meaning what maybe there is some hidden cut-scene in the game which shows Reapers returning. Or something.

In the leaked script it goes like this:

Shepard: What would happen to me?
Catalyst: You will become the catalyst. You will continue the cycle as you see fit.

Shepard might very well come to be convinced over thousands of years that the original cycle was a good idea.

If he said that, Shepard would not choose it.
Understand this, if it does not solve the problem presented by the star child, the cycle contioues.

[dreman9999]

Nimrodell wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

The main objective is neither to stop the Reapers nor destroy them. The main objective is to preserve galactic civilization.

Stopping the Reapers is a task that must be accomplished to do that. And only in Destroy are the Reapers permanently and completely, utterly, stopped.

In Synthesis or Control, the Reapers may choose to start up again. It's a possibility.

But the thing is, even in Destroy, the reapers may be reactivated. It is also a possibility that can't be overlooked.

No, If there is not reaper will left. That can't happen

All it takes is for one reaper to be alive, somewhere, and it could happen. Plus it's possible that destroy doesn't even destroy them... And it just put them into some sort of statis.

But there's no reapers left. Destroy does kill every reaper. That like say control doesn't control every reaper.

Where's your proof to this claim if you're one of those who claim that Catalyst lies in other options? To be honest, it's either you believe Catalyst or not and if you don't - there's no proof, in-game one, that in destroy Catalyst chose to tell the truth. I do believe that Catalyst was sincere in all three options (there are many reasons why I do, but that's not the topic here) and I do believe that all reapers were destroyed, and I'll support that if there's no Catalyst is lying premise.

Well , if we are saying the star child is telling the truth....The star child says they all die...

[justafan]

dreman9999 wrote...

justafan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

Control solves neither problem. It delays Shepard's problem but it is implied the reapers will come back to reap of StarShep's own accord when synthetics rebel. Likewise, it doesn't solve the Catalyst's problem because it simply keeps the status quo of the Reapers doing their reaping.

IWhere it is implied?

What guarrentees that Shepard will think the same way after uploading into the system?

The simple fact that the catalyst is more open to this solution than destroy implies this.  If we view Shepard and the Catalyst as having separate goals, then the Catalyst should be equally negative to destroy and control if he assumes shepard will fly the reapers into the nearest sun, if not more in favor of Destroy as it will kill the potential threat of the geth.  However, he is far more positive to control because we can assume he believes Shepard will continue with his solution after Shepard ascends to Catalysthood and is able to comprehend the data.

Sure this cycle may be delayed, but the catalyst likely believes once the synthetics rebel, Shepard will fall in line with the reapers way of thinking of his own free will.

Nothing implies that he's open to anything. If he was he would stop the reapers right then  and there. If you look around he lets the reapers keep going. 
If you understand that he reallyy is not open to other salutions...Ask yourself this....How dose control and synthesis solve the problems he presents in any way?

Well, my original quote was snipped for length but on the previous page I outlined why the other two options achieve the Catalyst's objective.

Also, I'm pretty sure the Catalyst's level of control is severely limited in general or at least by the crucible.  If we take everything at face value, he says that the crucible has "changed" him, which might limit his ability to tell the repers to stop right there.  Or who knows, maybe he just isn't isn't ready to give in just yet and lets his squids keep killing until Shepard makes his choice.

As for the Catalyst being open.  He makes it quite clear the peace will not last in destroy, and that only you will die in Control.  Synthesis is quite clearly his favorite though.

Modifié par justafan, 11 mai 2012 - 06:37 .

[Lord Goose]

And becuas e thesystem is in place...Do you know how I konw that...Ask yourself how control and sysnthesis solves any of the problem the star child brings up.

You find out that it doesn't....That  means it not over.

That the problem? The synthetics will rebel and kill all organic life? Even if they do, it wouldn't be continuation of the cycle. Even if Shepard will have brought the Reapers to wipe out rebellious synthetics, the cycle still won't be continued. The cycle would be restored only if Shepard would believe that the only way to save organig life is to wipe out civilazitions systematically.

Modifié par Lord Goose, 11 mai 2012 - 06:40 .