55528 réponses à ce sujet

[BansheeOwnage]

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

You know what? I'm not getting into this crap with you again Paxxton. You can keep your control and synthesis endings and have sweet dreams about being a god and forcing people into line, or being a god and altering their DNA, but not me. I have principles.

I also have principles. Even in RL war changes everything and the world after is much different than before. There are no status quo solutions during the war.

So basically you have principles, just not in war? That must be convenient.

I personally cant just turn off my principles when it suits my needs.

Actually what you said reminds me of something George Carlin said. "Rights aren't rights if you can take em away". Principles aren't principles if you can ignore them.

[Xavendithas]

SubAstris wrote...

On a separate point, doesn't this imply that the Crucible wasn't a Reaper device and the Catalyst was right?

The Catalyst itself states that they believed they did not know for certain what cycle had created the Crucible, and that the reapers believed they had destroyed all evidence of the Crucible....

[BatmanTurian]

byne wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Why is everyone so rude right now
Seriously, let's all calm down

here, this will help:

Am I being rude? I sure hope I'm not, because I'm not trying to be.

He might mean me. I dunno.

[EpyonX3]

@Paxxton

Here you go

[Trollgunner]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

I just trolled the community big time - hope you enjoy: 
http://imgur.com/a/Ylw9X#0

You, sir, are my hero for now. That was really awesome, I'll translate it to my native language and bring this to ITheorists from another country. I hope you don't mind.

Modifié par Trollgunner, 27 juin 2012 - 07:23 .

[paxxton]

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

You know what? I'm not getting into this crap with you again Paxxton. You can keep your control and synthesis endings and have sweet dreams about being a god and forcing people into line, or being a god and altering their DNA, but not me. I have principles.

I also have principles. Even in RL war changes everything and the world after is much different than before. There are no status quo solutions during the war.

So basically you have principles, just not in war? That must be convenient.

I personally cant just turn off my principles when it suits my needs.

LOL. This is not what I meant.
Grabbing your principles and waving them like a flag is ok but you still have to be open for new possibilities that arise, new solutions and ways of resolving conflicts, novel thinking. Especialy if they can prevent further destruction and bring added value. And especially during the war with the Reapers.

[Earthborn_Shepard]

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Why is everyone so rude right now
Seriously, let's all calm down

here, this will help:

Am I being rude? I sure hope I'm not, because I'm not trying to be.

He might mean me. I dunno.

I actually kinda ment byne. Also, I'm a she.
Not rude, but.. I dunno... we're all just pretty touchy right now, I guess

[Cyricsservant101]

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

You know what? I'm not getting into this crap with you again Paxxton. You can keep your control and synthesis endings and have sweet dreams about being a god and forcing people into line, or being a god and altering their DNA, but not me. I have principles.

I also have principles. Even in RL war changes everything and the world after is much different than before. There are no status quo solutions during the war.

So basically you have principles, just not in war? That must be convenient.

I personally cant just turn off my principles when it suits my needs.

Lets see, I can genocide my friends, force invasive, non-consensual surgery on the entire galaxy, or I can become God.

Decisions, decisions.

*Becomes God* :innocent:

Modifié par Cyricsservant101, 27 juin 2012 - 07:25 .

[MaximizedAction]

Ok, it seems a bit as if I wanted to have a decent conversation in a club...where can one actually discuss things?

[WandySilva]

anyone else think shepards monologue for the control ending makes him/her sound, thematically, alot like TIM? I still find it so hard to turn to the same solution that one of your main enemies throughout the series has been seeking. An enemy that we know to be indoctrinated...

[BatmanTurian]

SubAstris wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

OK, I know I said that I was going to take a break, but I had a thought. Remember how people were SO upset that there was only ONE way to break free of indoctrination while there were TWO ways to succumb to it? Well, maybe Rejection was added as a second way of breaking free. That way, two unindoctrinated endings, and two indoctrinated endings. Any thoughts?

Well I feel Desroy was the best one of all of them, because it gave everyone hope to choose their lives. In Synthesis or Control you impose those decisions on the rest of the galaxy. Reject I feel is counter productive. Cause Michael Gamble replied that the next cycle uses the crucible anyway, so what was the point of refusing it??

On a separate point, doesn't this imply that the Crucible wasn't a Reaper device and the Catalyst was right?

Yes, the catalyst says itself that it is not a reaper device. The catalyst is not a complete liar but can be said to be slightly manipulative.

I thought Reapers were fully evil, surely they would lie about everything...
But what bits are manipulative?

it appears as a boy. It's thrown up the peace flag but it's lobbying shepard to choose a future that includes the Reapers,  and its true voice is masked. It isn't the catalyst because the catalyst is the Reapers. A catalyst is not changed by a reaction. The citadel is not changed by the reaction so it is the true catalyst. The starkid, however, is changed by the reaction. It simply doesn't exist anymore in two of the endings. Therefore, it was a Reaper because the Reapers are changed no matter what happens.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 27 juin 2012 - 07:27 .

[v0rt3x22]

Trollgunner wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

I just trolled the community big time - hope you enjoy: 
http://imgur.com/a/Ylw9X#0

You, sir, are my hero for now. That was really awesome, I'll translate it to my native language and bring this to ITheorists from another country. I hope you don't mind.

No course not and thanks :-) Just give credit if you can <3

[SubAstris]

Xavendithas wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

On a separate point, doesn't this imply that the Crucible wasn't a Reaper device and the Catalyst was right?

The Catalyst itself states that they believed they did not know for certain what cycle had created the Crucible, and that the reapers believed they had destroyed all evidence of the Crucible....

But according to IT he is lying through his teeth, or is he just conveniently not lying at this moment?

[Trollgunner]

I actually kinda ment byne. Also, I'm a she.
Not rude, but.. I dunno... we're all just pretty touchy right now, I guess

More or less. Everyone hyped up after EC, just like first ppl who finished me3 and started these kind of threads)

[byne]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

You know what? I'm not getting into this crap with you again Paxxton. You can keep your control and synthesis endings and have sweet dreams about being a god and forcing people into line, or being a god and altering their DNA, but not me. I have principles.

I also have principles. Even in RL war changes everything and the world after is much different than before. There are no status quo solutions during the war.

So basically you have principles, just not in war? That must be convenient.

I personally cant just turn off my principles when it suits my needs.

LOL. This is not what I meant.
Grabbing your principles and waving them like a flag is ok but you still have to be open for new possibilities that arise, new solutions and ways of resolving conflicts, novel thinking. Especialy if they can prevent further destruction and bring added value. And especially during the war with the Reapers.

No amount of mental contortions will ever make it ok for me to either enslave the Reapers or to forcibly alter everyone in the galaxy on a molecular level.

You might be ok with abandoning your principles, but I'm not.

[BatmanTurian]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Why is everyone so rude right now
Seriously, let's all calm down

here, this will help:

Am I being rude? I sure hope I'm not, because I'm not trying to be.

He might mean me. I dunno.

I actually kinda ment byne. Also, I'm a she.
Not rude, but.. I dunno... we're all just pretty touchy right now, I guess

It's hard to tell on the internet. Sorry for calling you a he.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 27 juin 2012 - 07:28 .

[TJBartlemus]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

OK, I know I said that I was going to take a break, but I had a thought. Remember how people were SO upset that there was only ONE way to break free of indoctrination while there were TWO ways to succumb to it? Well, maybe Rejection was added as a second way of breaking free. That way, two unindoctrinated endings, and two indoctrinated endings. Any thoughts?

I have honestly given up on the idea of a full hallucination at this point and taken on a more waking nightmare approach. I think the endings are as real as they are supposed to be and indoctrination is used sparingly in the game and not to its full potential. That is just my opinion, though.

Edit: Here is a possibility on what BioWare could have done. If not then, I still will believe in IT.

Yes!! I feel that the Reapers are influencing your perceptions, in an attempt for you to make a choice that is favorable to them. Control/Synthesis impose the Reapers on the galaxy. It's too much like giving up and surrendering. Harbinger doesn't destroy the Normandy because then it would be too hard to get Shepard to trust the leader of the Reapers. Harbinger attempting on Shepard's life is to make the situation seem more real and like the Reapers are the bad guy but the leader of them is your friend. He tells you the truth about their origins, and that he didn't expect the Crucible. He then lies to you about the choices to get you to trust him. (He still lied about the fact you wouldn't survive destroy) How else would the Reapers make you choose something favorable to them in a situation they didn't (or possibly did) expect?

So BioWare could have possibly made a "melding" of the two perspectives on the ending. This way everyone was right.

Modifié par TJBartlemus, 27 juin 2012 - 07:31 .

[byne]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Why is everyone so rude right now
Seriously, let's all calm down

here, this will help:

Am I being rude? I sure hope I'm not, because I'm not trying to be.

He might mean me. I dunno.

I actually kinda ment byne. Also, I'm a she.
Not rude, but.. I dunno... we're all just pretty touchy right now, I guess

If you're referring to my argument with Paxxton, I dont think I'm being rude. This is how the conversation generally goes everytime he and I argue this point.

Paxxton, if you think I'm being rude, let me know.

If you're not referring to Paxxton, I have no idea what you mean.

[BatmanTurian]

SubAstris wrote...

Xavendithas wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

On a separate point, doesn't this imply that the Crucible wasn't a Reaper device and the Catalyst was right?

The Catalyst itself states that they believed they did not know for certain what cycle had created the Crucible, and that the reapers believed they had destroyed all evidence of the Crucible....

But according to IT he is lying through his teeth, or is he just conveniently not lying at this moment?

IT has obviously changed after the new endings, SubAstris. There's no need to go begging the question.

[Xavendithas]

SubAstris wrote...

Xavendithas wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

On a separate point, doesn't this imply that the Crucible wasn't a Reaper device and the Catalyst was right?

The Catalyst itself states that they believed they did not know for certain what cycle had created the Crucible, and that the reapers believed they had destroyed all evidence of the Crucible....

But according to IT he is lying through his teeth, or is he just conveniently not lying at this moment?

I can't tell you how to interpret that piece of dialogue. You have to do that for yourself. I personally did not take it as a lie, or even a half truth. The Catalyst seemed to be providing an answer to what it was asked.

[Earthborn_Shepard]

Ok then We're still a big family.

And I don't mind being called a he, that's only logical to assume.. just thought I'd clarify.

[byne]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Ok then We're still a big family.

And I don't mind being called a he, that's only logical to assume.. just thought I'd clarify.

Dont worry! I knew you were a she!

[Trollgunner]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

No course not and thanks :-) Just give credit if you can <3

I sure will do. You know what's a pity? When I was looking for an artistic person to do smth like that : " A picture of Shepard riding a Normandy on top, swinging his omni-blade and shouting "Joker! Drive me closer, I want to hit those reapers with my omni-blade!" and a sign under it "Badass Shepard  in DLC you demanded" " No one did that D: And i couldn't do it myself TзT Aww..

[v0rt3x22]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Ok then We're still a big family.

And I don't mind being called a he, that's only logical to assume.. just thought I'd clarify.

You're a girl who like Mass Effect? <3 Will you be my LI?

[masster blaster]

My question is why does Shepard look back when Shepard wakes up after Shepard enters the Conduit on Earth. Is he looking for Anderson, or is Shepard looking at the thing behind him/her which look's just like the relay in the Citadel? Thoughts.