323 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

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."

[Pride Demon]

dreman9999 wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...

Cerberus didn't cut it off, they coopted it! (the basis behind the "control idea")
That's why TIM implanted himself with reaper tech, so that his troops (that are made of indoctrinated civilians augmented with reaper tech) would be indoctrinated to his will (Cerberus') rather than the reapers'...
This is why he managed to obtain such an enourmous amount of fanatical troopers in such a short window of time.

He eventually probably planned to use the crucible as an amplificator to "indoctrinate" the reapers too, of course, in the end it was him that got indoctrinated through his implants, rather than him using them to indoctrinate others, which ended up making the whole point  of indoctrinating his troops to Cerberus' will moot, but this proves indoctrination can exist apart from the reapers and their will.

And there is no proof of other reapers interfering with the derelict one.
Besides, others may take control of indoctrinated agents/husks, but the fact the derelict reaper was capable of indoctrinating them in the first place demonstrates they don't need to be operational to indoctrinate...

That still means someone to control it has to be there...Which is my point...All the reapers are dead, there would be no one to take control.

Maybe, but they didn't stop being indoctrinated just because they started being controlled by someone else, and it proves, like I said, that indoctrination doesn't need a reaper sustaining it to work.
If I had to guess, I'd say it's a reflex of some sort, regardless of whether a reaper works or not it will indoctrinate those surrounding it, when it comes to direction of the slaves, maybe someone is needed to coordinate them, but I doubt someone is needed to qactually commit the indoctrination...

It is, but what use is it if know one can use it.

So you are saying it's ok for people to get turned into drooling maniacs, so long as there's a chance* their madness is undirected?

*We have no actual idea how much control a slave would retain in such a situation, just because they can't coordinate themselves doesn't make them any less dangerous.

Your not understanding how it works. It happen on it own, but it only changes thing based on the will of the controler. You only become a drooling maniac if the controler wills it and appies it. What I'm saying is the feild will go one but it will not have any effect at all. It only imposes a state if a direction is given. It will do nothing with out direction.

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...

[Lord Goose]

Putting any for of balance would be playing god. Fixing everything withthe reaper would be playing god. The us of the reaper in any way would be playing god. Understand.

Eh, Mine Shepard would take them out from the Galaxy to lay dormant in dark space for eternity. I would rather compare this situation with criminals in jail, while he acts as their warden. Don't really think that it is playing god.

We also have no guarentee Shepard would even think the same after getting control of the reapers.
What does"You will die, You can control us but lose everything you have.." MEAN?

I always interpreted in a... well, "for teh drama" way. That means, what he will not be united with his LI. He never will be able to talk with his friends again as a human they knew. He won't be able to see how the Galaxy would rise from the ashes. No one would probably even knew what happened to him.

That's pretty sad, and is in good terms with "messianic" nature of "100% paragon".

Modifié par Lord Goose, 11 mai 2012 - 05:45 .

[111987]

dreman9999 wrote...

111987 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

111987 wrote...

cyrslash1974 wrote...

Destroy the reapers and stop the reapers, what is the difference ?

No solution proposed by Starchild is good, his logic is wrong.

Control the reapers ? That means that you agree with the solution from Starchild, the reapers are useful to have the galaxy in peace. So the genocide of organics was also useful. No way.

How does Control mean you agree with the Catalyst's solution? Your Shepard gets to use the Reapers however he/she feels is best. The Reapers, used right, could be enormously helpful to the galaxy.

Using the reaper isn any way men you agree with the cataylist. The cataylist is all about controling the galexy...That's what your doing if you control the reapers.

No, it really doesn't. I'm sorry you can't see that. You only agree with the Catalyst if your perpetuate the cycle. Using them for anything else is a rejection of the Catalyst.

Yes it does. The point of the reapers was to control and impose. The point was to stop chaos. You being in control gives that job to you. The star child is basicly say order need to be inposed. You using the reaper means your doing so as well.

I''m so sorry you fail to see such an obvious difference between how the Catalys uses the Reapers and how Shepard can use then. The Reapers are just a tool; tools are not good or evil. How they are used determines that. However I know you will fail to understand this, so whatever.

[xsdob]

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

[Hadeedak]

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.

[jijeebo]

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.

[cyrslash1974]

Bill Casey wrote...

Commander Shepard: If we destroy them, this ends today. But if you can't control them.

Admiral Hackett: He's wrong. Dead Reapers are how we win this thing.

Admiral Anderson: Bull****. We Destroy them or they Destroy us.

The Catalyst: What you came here to do.

/thread

It seems that Shepard said something to TIM using a paragon option at the end of the game regarding the control, something like "we are not ready for that !". I'm sorry, my game is in French...



 

[Lord Goose]

 "Talk the bad guy into changing his evil ways", now with 90% more machine uploading and disintergration.

Funny thing here.
If Commander unites krogan and turians, and ends geth-qurian war, Garrus would make such a comment:
"Wow, you have united the geth and the quarins. Tell me, when you pacify krogan and turians... Oh, wait, you've already done that. So, next thing you pacify the Reapers, and we will canonize you.

FORESHADOWING.

[The Protheans]

I control them.

[Sisterofshane]

Hadeedak wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Jackumzz wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

Why do people assume the catalyst is telling the truth concerning destroy, but not control and synthesis?

The issue is not whether the Catalyst is telling the truth, but rather trusting in it's judgement about it's proposed "solutions".

If you believe that the Catalyst is correct in it's assumption of the Singularity, the only option that feels correct is the Synthesis option.

If you reject the idea of inherent synthetic/organic conflict, then destroy is the option for you.

And if you are not quite sure, you control the Reapers, giving the galaxy a chance to prove itself, but safe guarding the reapers should the need arise to use them again.

You regect the idea of inherent synthetic/organic conflict... By killing all the synthetics, including your allies, the only sapient synthetic species created this cycle and newly given full self-awareness?

Good going, Shepard.

I'm not saying destroy is bad... But it does a pretty mediocre job of rejecting that conflict, because it promptly enacts it.

Unfortunately it is the only ending that completely rejects the Catalyst's logic.  The Geth and EDI were collateral damage.

The sad thing is I believe the death of the Geth and EDI were tacked on by the writers because they could not otherwise justify/explain the ending they thought was best.  They knew that they failed at making a true sympathetic villain - one that really gives you pause when the option comes to destroy it at the end.

[StarcloudSWG]

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.

[Nimrodell]

Bill Casey wrote...

Commander Shepard: If we destroy them, this ends today. But if you can't control them.

Admiral Hackett: He's wrong. Dead Reapers are how we win this thing.

Admiral Anderson: Bull****. We Destroy them or they Destroy us.

The Catalyst: What you came here to do.

/thread

So, did admirals talk to Catalyst or in previous installations were they making a slight push in Shepard's decisions? So, this constant quoting of their beliefs is basically saying - they actually knew more than Shepard? And why didn't Shepard follow Anderson's advice on working with Cerberus if Anderson is such authority on reapers, cycles and Catalyst? So, Shepard should decide what others are telling him/her even though they never had first hand extra knowledge? I'm not being offensive or sarcastic, Bill Casey, I'm just asking simple explanations from you - since when those two are experts on what Crucible is, reapers are, Catalyst is? So far, the only npc from the game I'm believing is actually Commander Shepard, what she experienced, learned - not those two. Commander Shepard may take their advice to heart, but that doesn't mean they are correct .

Edit: typo.

Modifié par Nimrodell, 11 mai 2012 - 05:55 .

[jijeebo]

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.

[dreman9999]

Pride Demon wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...

Cerberus didn't cut it off, they coopted it! (the basis behind the "control idea")
That's why TIM implanted himself with reaper tech, so that his troops (that are made of indoctrinated civilians augmented with reaper tech) would be indoctrinated to his will (Cerberus') rather than the reapers'...
This is why he managed to obtain such an enourmous amount of fanatical troopers in such a short window of time.

He eventually probably planned to use the crucible as an amplificator to "indoctrinate" the reapers too, of course, in the end it was him that got indoctrinated through his implants, rather than him using them to indoctrinate others, which ended up making the whole point  of indoctrinating his troops to Cerberus' will moot, but this proves indoctrination can exist apart from the reapers and their will.

And there is no proof of other reapers interfering with the derelict one.
Besides, others may take control of indoctrinated agents/husks, but the fact the derelict reaper was capable of indoctrinating them in the first place demonstrates they don't need to be operational to indoctrinate...

That still means someone to control it has to be there...Which is my point...All the reapers are dead, there would be no one to take control.

Maybe, but they didn't stop being indoctrinated just because they started being controlled by someone else, and it proves, like I said, that indoctrination doesn't need a reaper sustaining it to work.
If I had to guess, I'd say it's a reflex of some sort, regardless of whether a reaper works or not it will indoctrinate those surrounding it, when it comes to direction of the slaves, maybe someone is needed to coordinate them, but I doubt someone is needed to qactually commit the indoctrination...

It is, but what use is it if know one can use it.

So you are saying it's ok for people to get turned into drooling maniacs, so long as there's a chance* their madness is undirected?

*We have no actual idea how much control a slave would retain in such a situation, just because they can't coordinate themselves doesn't make them any less dangerous.

Your not understanding how it works. It happen on it own, but it only changes thing based on the will of the controler. You only become a drooling maniac if the controler wills it and appies it. What I'm saying is the feild will go one but it will not have any effect at all. It only imposes a state if a direction is given. It will do nothing with out direction.

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.

Modifié par dreman9999, 11 mai 2012 - 06:02 .

[Lord Goose]

It seems that Shepard said something to TIM using a paragon option at the end of the game regarding the control, something like "we are not ready for that !". I'm sorry, my game is in French...
 

Illusive Man wants to use the Reapers to ensure humanity's dominance over the galaxy. He goes into massive rant comparing Reapers with Mass Relays, saying that humanity would progress thousand-fold. When, Shepards counters that humanity is not perfect and not ready.

 

Modifié par Lord Goose, 11 mai 2012 - 06:01 .

[Nimrodell]

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.

Also in destroy, if Catalyst actually lied - if it's capable of lying in these two options, why would it say truth in destroy? Shepard stays alive, so who's to say that all reapers are actually in Sol system - maybe there are some left as back guard, in dark space. You don't know that . Just like you actually don't know the nature of control or synthesis - we don't know what happened at the end, whatever we choose .

[dreman9999]

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?

[dreman9999]

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.

No, the main goal is to stop the reapers. If it was to perseve galactic civilzation, we would be doing a cryo lock atthe end of the game.

[justafan]

Here is how I see it. There are two objectives The Catalyst's objective of stopping synthetics from killing organics, and Shepard's objective of preventing the Reapers from destroying organics (+geth post Rannoch).

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.

Synthesis solves the Catalyst's problem. There are no longer Synthetics to wipe out organics, and there are no more organics to be wiped out by synthetics. The Catalyst is therefor content, and will order away the Reapers for eternity. Shepard's problem is not solved. He is out to preserve the current species so that they might have a future to build themselves, and through synthesis, he fails.

In Destroy, the Catalyst flat out loses. His solution is destroyed and by his logic, synthetics will now eventually wipe out organics. Shepard also loses, but less so than the others. The Geth are an unfortunate casualty, but all organic races survive. Furthermore, there is no chance that the reapers will ever come back like in Control. Preventing the Synthetic vs. Organic war was never Shepard's mission, it was to stop the reapers from killing organics forever, and even then, there is no guarantee such a conflict will ever happen, as the now deceased Geth and EDI proved coexistence was possible. Therefore, to me destroy is the best ending because it best accomplishes Shepard's objective.

As for the issue of indoctrination and reaper corpses, I think this is a special case like how the relays don't supernova this time like arrival. The red wave destroys all the reapers, destroys their drive cores, and destroys their indoctrination ability. There is nothing "alive" about them after destroy (unlike the Reaper corpse in ME2 and Dis) and they are totally non-functional.

[Lord Goose]

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.

[dreman9999]

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

[dreman9999]

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?

[Lord Goose]

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?