55528 réponses à ce sujet

[masster blaster]

OdanUrr wrote...

FellishBeast wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

I'll admit, I don't oppose transhumanism.  However, I completely disagree with Synthesis.  Like one guy put it, it's raping the entire galaxy.

I don't think any man should make such a choice on behalf of the entire galaxy.

I'm guessing you play FemShep?

I played both though I'm not entirely certain what prompted you to ask such a question.

Nobody should but if it came down to it then both man and woman should havev a chocies about the galaxys fate.

[thisisme8]

Domanese wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

The inaudible sound is actually a really interesting point and an intelligent addition by BioWare. Theoretical? Yes. Proof of indoctrination? No. Then again, gravity is only a theory, so take what I just said how you will.

Rifneno: Even as you jest, just by using the word "us," you imply that you do.

Okay and now back to you and I apperciate the time given to answer me back. Basically gravity and for my own example music is invisible but you can still experience it/ hear it.  Infrasonic noise you can of course not hear but you can still of course detect it with the right equipment. You have however acknowledged it of course and I applaude that.

To me it does stand out as incredibly needless work if Indoctrination was not what they were going for and probably one of the cruelest red herrings possible if that was what put into the game. Which to me is outside the realm of possibility.

I will however yield to something here and now, it's true that the IT is just a theory at the moment since until theres flat out confirmation or denial by the Word of God its up in the air but the amount of evidence to support it is more vast then what I have seen from the literalist point of view and makes more sense to me.

As for the whole "only clairfying and adding on to the current endings", the IT does not change the ending but works alongside it giving clairification and adding onto the current endings at its core. We also have seen some people actually write out scenarios in how the IT would work without extra gameplay.

I realize that  I will not change your mind and such and thats not my intention since its not possible. What i can do is provide you with why we think the way we do.

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it.  Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard?  Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time?  The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not.  Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard.  But still, the cycle is over.

[OdanUrr]

llbountyhunter wrote...

Lol yeah..... but was talking about deus ex... you know... the left hallway.

Ah, there I did something different at first. I felt people should know the truth about what happened and decide for themselves. Ultimately, by hiding the truth you are also making a choice.

[thisisme8]

Vaya wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Where does it state that the Catalyst created himself or the cycle?  <---Entirely non-rhetorical.  If someone created him, then yes, he would be like a reaper.  But that would mean that there was someone (or even a group of beings), at some point, that created the Catalyst and the reapers to fulfill a role that became obsolete once the cycle was over.

the star child flat out states

"we created the cycle so that never happens"

about a minute into the conversation

I get that, but does that mean that a random, ancient AI just suddenly decided to create the cycle, or was he created to create the cycle?

[Dwailing]

llbountyhunter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

I'll admit, I don't oppose transhumanism.  However, I completely disagree with Synthesis.  Like one guy put it, it's raping the entire galaxy.

I don't think any man should make such a choice on behalf of the entire galaxy.

I'm guessing you chose the left corridor as well?

I chose all three. Ironically, my first choice was Synthesis, but that was because I couldn't find that ending on YouTube and I wanted to see if there was any difference between it and the other two. Imagine my surprise.<_<

Lol yeah..... but was talking about deus ex... you know... the left hallway.

I can honestly say that I have a devil of a time decide which ending in Deus Ex: Human Revolution is best.  The Taggart ending is out, for obvious reasons, but I'm not sure I like lying to the whole world ala Sarif.  The Darrow ending has sucky consequences, which would seem to leave Self-Destruct, but I really don't like the idea of killing everyone on Panchaea.  Honestly, to me, the Sarif ending has the best outcome, but the methods which are used to achieve that outcome are, frankly, a little disturbing (As I said, lying to the whole world.).

[llbountyhunter]

thisisme8 wrote...

Domanese wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

The inaudible sound is actually a really interesting point and an intelligent addition by BioWare. Theoretical? Yes. Proof of indoctrination? No. Then again, gravity is only a theory, so take what I just said how you will.

Rifneno: Even as you jest, just by using the word "us," you imply that you do.

Okay and now back to you and I apperciate the time given to answer me back. Basically gravity and for my own example music is invisible but you can still experience it/ hear it.  Infrasonic noise you can of course not hear but you can still of course detect it with the right equipment. You have however acknowledged it of course and I applaude that.

To me it does stand out as incredibly needless work if Indoctrination was not what they were going for and probably one of the cruelest red herrings possible if that was what put into the game. Which to me is outside the realm of possibility.

I will however yield to something here and now, it's true that the IT is just a theory at the moment since until theres flat out confirmation or denial by the Word of God its up in the air but the amount of evidence to support it is more vast then what I have seen from the literalist point of view and makes more sense to me.

As for the whole "only clairfying and adding on to the current endings", the IT does not change the ending but works alongside it giving clairification and adding onto the current endings at its core. We also have seen some people actually write out scenarios in how the IT would work without extra gameplay.

I realize that  I will not change your mind and such and thats not my intention since its not possible. What i can do is provide you with why we think the way we do.

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it.  Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard?  Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time?  The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not.  Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard.  But still, the cycle is over.

Before you post again, can you look at the links in my sig and inform yourself on the theory?

[TJBartlemus]

Iconoclaste wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Where does it state that the Catalyst created himself or the cycle? <---Entirely non-rhetorical. If someone created him, then yes, he would be like a reaper. But that would mean that there was someone (or even a group of beings), at some point, that created the Catalyst and the reapers to fulfill a role that became obsolete once the cycle was over.

I've got a question for YOU. Or maybe questions... (Not anyone else, just thisisme8) Do you believe the star child as real? And if you do, can you explain to me on the fact that if the Citadel is his home, why did Sovereign need to access the Citadel to open the relay? The only reason the relay wouldn't activate was because the Protheans disabled the device that signals from outside to the keepers for them to activate it. If the star child was always there, why can't he do it himself? It makes me wonder what his real purpose is there for if he can't do anything...

The answer to your question is in your question : the Protheans disabled the signaling capability of the "device". If Starkid had the capacity to "enable" this device back, he could have done so. Seems like he couldn"t, hinting to the possibility that the Protheans did more than just a "software" modification.

Did you miss the part where I said for him to awnser?? Also this explaination may be but I believe that Sovereign has always been left behind to activate the relay. (It is also in his name)  So even without the device disabled why was Sovereign needed?

[Iconoclaste]

Vaya wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Where does it state that the Catalyst created himself or the cycle?  <---Entirely non-rhetorical.  If someone created him, then yes, he would be like a reaper.  But that would mean that there was someone (or even a group of beings), at some point, that created the Catalyst and the reapers to fulfill a role that became obsolete once the cycle was over.

the star child flat out states

"we created the cycle so that never happens"

about a minute into the conversation

"We" refers to the Catalyst"s "group", not to himself, just like I could say "we have nuclear weapons" to an alien. That doesn't make me the inventor of the technology.

[BatmanTurian]

thisisme8 wrote...

Domanese wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

The inaudible sound is actually a really interesting point and an intelligent addition by BioWare. Theoretical? Yes. Proof of indoctrination? No. Then again, gravity is only a theory, so take what I just said how you will.

Rifneno: Even as you jest, just by using the word "us," you imply that you do.

Okay and now back to you and I apperciate the time given to answer me back. Basically gravity and for my own example music is invisible but you can still experience it/ hear it.  Infrasonic noise you can of course not hear but you can still of course detect it with the right equipment. You have however acknowledged it of course and I applaude that.

To me it does stand out as incredibly needless work if Indoctrination was not what they were going for and probably one of the cruelest red herrings possible if that was what put into the game. Which to me is outside the realm of possibility.

I will however yield to something here and now, it's true that the IT is just a theory at the moment since until theres flat out confirmation or denial by the Word of God its up in the air but the amount of evidence to support it is more vast then what I have seen from the literalist point of view and makes more sense to me.

As for the whole "only clairfying and adding on to the current endings", the IT does not change the ending but works alongside it giving clairification and adding onto the current endings at its core. We also have seen some people actually write out scenarios in how the IT would work without extra gameplay.

I realize that  I will not change your mind and such and thats not my intention since its not possible. What i can do is provide you with why we think the way we do.

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it.  Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard?  Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time?  The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not.  Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard.  But still, the cycle is over.

I just... where do I begin? I don't even know where to start.

[llbountyhunter]

Dwailing wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

I'll admit, I don't oppose transhumanism.  However, I completely disagree with Synthesis.  Like one guy put it, it's raping the entire galaxy.

I don't think any man should make such a choice on behalf of the entire galaxy.

I'm guessing you chose the left corridor as well?

I chose all three. Ironically, my first choice was Synthesis, but that was because I couldn't find that ending on YouTube and I wanted to see if there was any difference between it and the other two. Imagine my surprise.<_<

Lol yeah..... but was talking about deus ex... you know... the left hallway.

I can honestly say that I have a devil of a time decide which ending in Deus Ex: Human Revolution is best.  The Taggart ending is out, for obvious reasons, but I'm not sure I like lying to the whole world ala Sarif.  The Darrow ending has sucky consequences, which would seem to leave Self-Destruct, but I really don't like the idea of killing everyone on Panchaea.  Honestly, to me, the Sarif ending has the best outcome, but the methods which are used to achieve that outcome are, frankly, a little disturbing (As I said, lying to the whole world.).

I think the left hallway is the best, followed closely be sarif.... byt i didnt like the whole idea of killing everyone either...

[masster blaster]

Iconoclaste wrote...

Vaya wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Where does it state that the Catalyst created himself or the cycle?  <---Entirely non-rhetorical.  If someone created him, then yes, he would be like a reaper.  But that would mean that there was someone (or even a group of beings), at some point, that created the Catalyst and the reapers to fulfill a role that became obsolete once the cycle was over.

the star child flat out states

"we created the cycle so that never happens"

about a minute into the conversation

"We" refers to the Catalyst"s "group", not to himself, just like I could say "we have nuclear weapons" to an alien. That doesn't make me the inventor of the technology.

But do you notice that Harby always say we and I sometimes just saying,.

[Dwailing]

thisisme8 wrote...

Domanese wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

The inaudible sound is actually a really interesting point and an intelligent addition by BioWare. Theoretical? Yes. Proof of indoctrination? No. Then again, gravity is only a theory, so take what I just said how you will.

Rifneno: Even as you jest, just by using the word "us," you imply that you do.

Okay and now back to you and I apperciate the time given to answer me back. Basically gravity and for my own example music is invisible but you can still experience it/ hear it.  Infrasonic noise you can of course not hear but you can still of course detect it with the right equipment. You have however acknowledged it of course and I applaude that.

To me it does stand out as incredibly needless work if Indoctrination was not what they were going for and probably one of the cruelest red herrings possible if that was what put into the game. Which to me is outside the realm of possibility.

I will however yield to something here and now, it's true that the IT is just a theory at the moment since until theres flat out confirmation or denial by the Word of God its up in the air but the amount of evidence to support it is more vast then what I have seen from the literalist point of view and makes more sense to me.

As for the whole "only clairfying and adding on to the current endings", the IT does not change the ending but works alongside it giving clairification and adding onto the current endings at its core. We also have seen some people actually write out scenarios in how the IT would work without extra gameplay.

I realize that  I will not change your mind and such and thats not my intention since its not possible. What i can do is provide you with why we think the way we do.

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it.  Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard?  Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time?  The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not.  Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard.  But still, the cycle is over.

I think you might be close to figuring it out.  Here's the way we see it.  Indoctrinating the player is a key part of IT.  That's why they didn't include the reveal on the disc.  If they had, it wouldn't have had the same impact.  Also, on an in-game note, the "Catalyst" is not actually the creator of the Reapers.  He's a form taken by Harbinger to try to sway Shepard towards the paths that lead to indoctrination.

[Bill Casey]

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it. Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard? Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time? The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not. Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard. But still, the cycle is over.

The Cycle isn't over...
The Citadel is the Catalyst...
The Child isn't real, and neither are the choices...

The entire purpose is to sway Shepard away from WANTING to destroy the reapers on a subconscious level, and ensuring the mission fails...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 24 juin 2012 - 02:16 .

[BatmanTurian]

Iconoclaste wrote...

Vaya wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Where does it state that the Catalyst created himself or the cycle?  <---Entirely non-rhetorical.  If someone created him, then yes, he would be like a reaper.  But that would mean that there was someone (or even a group of beings), at some point, that created the Catalyst and the reapers to fulfill a role that became obsolete once the cycle was over.

the star child flat out states

"we created the cycle so that never happens"

about a minute into the conversation

"We" refers to the Catalyst"s "group", not to himself, just like I could say "we have nuclear weapons" to an alien. That doesn't make me the inventor of the technology.

But " we" would identify you as a human just as "we" identifies the catalyst as a Reaper.

[GethPrimeMKII]

thisisme8 wrote...

Domanese wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

The inaudible sound is actually a really interesting point and an intelligent addition by BioWare. Theoretical? Yes. Proof of indoctrination? No. Then again, gravity is only a theory, so take what I just said how you will.

Rifneno: Even as you jest, just by using the word "us," you imply that you do.

Okay and now back to you and I apperciate the time given to answer me back. Basically gravity and for my own example music is invisible but you can still experience it/ hear it.  Infrasonic noise you can of course not hear but you can still of course detect it with the right equipment. You have however acknowledged it of course and I applaude that.

To me it does stand out as incredibly needless work if Indoctrination was not what they were going for and probably one of the cruelest red herrings possible if that was what put into the game. Which to me is outside the realm of possibility.

I will however yield to something here and now, it's true that the IT is just a theory at the moment since until theres flat out confirmation or denial by the Word of God its up in the air but the amount of evidence to support it is more vast then what I have seen from the literalist point of view and makes more sense to me.

As for the whole "only clairfying and adding on to the current endings", the IT does not change the ending but works alongside it giving clairification and adding onto the current endings at its core. We also have seen some people actually write out scenarios in how the IT would work without extra gameplay.

I realize that  I will not change your mind and such and thats not my intention since its not possible. What i can do is provide you with why we think the way we do.

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it.  Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard?  Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time?  The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not.  Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard.  But still, the cycle is over.

I'm sorry but where in the f**k are you pulling this crap from?

[elegolas1]

so where does the IT stand upon the announcement of the EC?

i'm scared by all this literalism talk on the forums

[MegaSovereign]

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it. Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard? Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time? The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not. Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard. But still, the cycle is over.

According to IT, everything that happens while Shepard is on the Citadel is an indoctrination attempt. The indoctrination is not final. You can choose to resist it.

[Dwailing]

BatmanTurian wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Domanese wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

The inaudible sound is actually a really interesting point and an intelligent addition by BioWare. Theoretical? Yes. Proof of indoctrination? No. Then again, gravity is only a theory, so take what I just said how you will.

Rifneno: Even as you jest, just by using the word "us," you imply that you do.

Okay and now back to you and I apperciate the time given to answer me back. Basically gravity and for my own example music is invisible but you can still experience it/ hear it.  Infrasonic noise you can of course not hear but you can still of course detect it with the right equipment. You have however acknowledged it of course and I applaude that.

To me it does stand out as incredibly needless work if Indoctrination was not what they were going for and probably one of the cruelest red herrings possible if that was what put into the game. Which to me is outside the realm of possibility.

I will however yield to something here and now, it's true that the IT is just a theory at the moment since until theres flat out confirmation or denial by the Word of God its up in the air but the amount of evidence to support it is more vast then what I have seen from the literalist point of view and makes more sense to me.

As for the whole "only clairfying and adding on to the current endings", the IT does not change the ending but works alongside it giving clairification and adding onto the current endings at its core. We also have seen some people actually write out scenarios in how the IT would work without extra gameplay.

I realize that  I will not change your mind and such and thats not my intention since its not possible. What i can do is provide you with why we think the way we do.

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it.  Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard?  Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time?  The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not.  Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard.  But still, the cycle is over.

I just... where do I begin? I don't even know where to start.

Batman, just relax, and present your opinion and the general consensus of the thread as best you can.  Whether he ends up believing or not has no effect on your life.

[BatmanTurian]

thisisme8 wrote...

Vaya wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Where does it state that the Catalyst created himself or the cycle?  <---Entirely non-rhetorical.  If someone created him, then yes, he would be like a reaper.  But that would mean that there was someone (or even a group of beings), at some point, that created the Catalyst and the reapers to fulfill a role that became obsolete once the cycle was over.

the star child flat out states

"we created the cycle so that never happens"

about a minute into the conversation

I get that, but does that mean that a random, ancient AI just suddenly decided to create the cycle, or was he created to create the cycle?

He doesn't say. He seems to imply that whatever original race the Reapers were created the cycle.

[Iconoclaste]

TJBartlemus wrote...

Did you miss the part where I said for him to awnser?? Also this explaination may be but I believe that Sovereign has always been left behind to activate the relay. (It is also in his name)  So even without the device disabled why was Sovereign needed?

You ask for an answer, you got one. Sorry if I'm not the one you wished to provide it, but, hey, it's a discussion board, isn't it?

Sovereign's purpose is well explained in the story and lore. It's just sound decision on his behalf to try to salvage the signaling procedure by taking control by himself, don't you think?

[thisisme8]

Iconoclaste wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Where does it state that the Catalyst created himself or the cycle? <---Entirely non-rhetorical. If someone created him, then yes, he would be like a reaper. But that would mean that there was someone (or even a group of beings), at some point, that created the Catalyst and the reapers to fulfill a role that became obsolete once the cycle was over.

I've got a question for YOU. Or maybe questions... (Not anyone else, just thisisme8) Do you believe the star child as real? And if you do, can you explain to me on the fact that if the Citadel is his home, why did Sovereign need to access the Citadel to open the relay? The only reason the relay wouldn't activate was because the Protheans disabled the device that signals from outside to the keepers for them to activate it. If the star child was always there, why can't he do it himself? It makes me wonder what his real purpose is there for if he can't do anything...

The answer to your question is in your question : the Protheans disabled the signaling capability of the "device". If Starkid had the capacity to "enable" this device back, he could have done so. Seems like he couldn"t, hinting to the possibility that the Protheans did more than just a "software" modification.

I'd also point out that at the conclusion of each cycle, the Sovereign would signal to the keepers to activate.  Having this disabled meant the Catalyst was in the dark - and didn't know when Sovereign deemed this cycle as ready.

Modifié par thisisme8, 24 juin 2012 - 02:16 .

[MegaSovereign]

elegolas1 wrote...

so where does the IT stand upon the announcement of the EC?

i'm scared by all this literalism talk on the forums

Bioware confirmed through twitter that the IT can still be left to interpretation. It's not going to be an outright confirmation or denial.

Kind of stupid, considering the EC is suppose to be provide clarity and closure. But hey I'm not a business man. What the **** do I know.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 24 juin 2012 - 02:17 .

[BatmanTurian]

Dwailing wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Domanese wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

The inaudible sound is actually a really interesting point and an intelligent addition by BioWare. Theoretical? Yes. Proof of indoctrination? No. Then again, gravity is only a theory, so take what I just said how you will.

Rifneno: Even as you jest, just by using the word "us," you imply that you do.

Okay and now back to you and I apperciate the time given to answer me back. Basically gravity and for my own example music is invisible but you can still experience it/ hear it.  Infrasonic noise you can of course not hear but you can still of course detect it with the right equipment. You have however acknowledged it of course and I applaude that.

To me it does stand out as incredibly needless work if Indoctrination was not what they were going for and probably one of the cruelest red herrings possible if that was what put into the game. Which to me is outside the realm of possibility.

I will however yield to something here and now, it's true that the IT is just a theory at the moment since until theres flat out confirmation or denial by the Word of God its up in the air but the amount of evidence to support it is more vast then what I have seen from the literalist point of view and makes more sense to me.

As for the whole "only clairfying and adding on to the current endings", the IT does not change the ending but works alongside it giving clairification and adding onto the current endings at its core. We also have seen some people actually write out scenarios in how the IT would work without extra gameplay.

I realize that  I will not change your mind and such and thats not my intention since its not possible. What i can do is provide you with why we think the way we do.

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it.  Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard?  Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time?  The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not.  Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard.  But still, the cycle is over.

I just... where do I begin? I don't even know where to start.

Batman, just relax, and present your opinion and the general consensus of the thread as best you can.  Whether he ends up believing or not has no effect on your life.

No, I was actually being honest. I didn't know where to start explaining the answers to his questions.

[masster blaster]

BatmanTurian wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Domanese wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

The inaudible sound is actually a really interesting point and an intelligent addition by BioWare. Theoretical? Yes. Proof of indoctrination? No. Then again, gravity is only a theory, so take what I just said how you will.

Rifneno: Even as you jest, just by using the word "us," you imply that you do.

Okay and now back to you and I apperciate the time given to answer me back. Basically gravity and for my own example music is invisible but you can still experience it/ hear it.  Infrasonic noise you can of course not hear but you can still of course detect it with the right equipment. You have however acknowledged it of course and I applaude that.

To me it does stand out as incredibly needless work if Indoctrination was not what they were going for and probably one of the cruelest red herrings possible if that was what put into the game. Which to me is outside the realm of possibility.

I will however yield to something here and now, it's true that the IT is just a theory at the moment since until theres flat out confirmation or denial by the Word of God its up in the air but the amount of evidence to support it is more vast then what I have seen from the literalist point of view and makes more sense to me.

As for the whole "only clairfying and adding on to the current endings", the IT does not change the ending but works alongside it giving clairification and adding onto the current endings at its core. We also have seen some people actually write out scenarios in how the IT would work without extra gameplay.

I realize that  I will not change your mind and such and thats not my intention since its not possible. What i can do is provide you with why we think the way we do.

My own problem with IT is really the reasoning behind it.  Why would the Catalyst need to lie to Shepard?  Would an AI, although capable, lie while conceding at the same time?  The cycle is over, so there is no need to tell Shepard that he is not indoctrinated, but he still goes so far as to say he is not.  Unless IT's true meaning is the indoctrination of the player, and not Shepard.  But still, the cycle is over.

I just... where do I begin? I don't even know where to start.

It's never going to end unless we kill the Reapers and if you think Shepard can control them then why does he, or she become a Reaper if you don't see him, or her in the end of control, and why in do the Reapers just leave in Synthesis Harby said evelution can not be holted."

[EpyonX3]

BatmanTurian wrote...

It does close, which is... interesting.

One must then ask the following:

How does it close with the crucible docked?