55528 réponses à ce sujet

[demersel]

Simon_Says wrote...

demersel wrote...

There is no catalyst. )))  
By the way - let's think why is it called the catalyst. )))

here's the article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalyst

I think I came up with a possible explanation for why it's called the 'Catalyst'. Oh, and the followup in case you're interested.

Yes, seems legit. And i mean it in a good way. Even during Mass effect 1 i always thought that in the end it will turn out that reapers in fact a really small - like nano particles, that a bind everything in a pattern which is reaper way of thought and logic. The are really the reasult of evolution of the most primitive organism, not even a cell but something less, which is only sentient in large quntities - like giant spaceships. And it only has only one purpose - consume. If you build a civilization around that idea - reapers is what you get, doing their cycle. thus the indoctrination. It is not some method or tactic they use - it is their core essense. The soul of their species, if you will. 

[BansheeOwnage]

DrTsoni wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...
Maybe that is why she has so much plot armor? And the most colorfull introduction? (the whole story mission) - is that in the third game she falls, partly at least, to indoctrination?

She would have plot armour regardless. She's required to find the Crucible. Without her, we'd have no direction in ME3. Regardless of whether it's the literal interpretation or not, we still need her. It's just a matter of whether you believe the Crucible is a trap or not. If it is, and she knew, it'd be a great plot twist. Same goes for Glyph merely using her to convey the information to Shepard, and by extension, the Alliance, Council, etc.

No, she of course doesn't  know that the crucible is a trap. And by the way she did not find the plans for the crucible. It was glyph. And only glyph. 

And without her, we'd never know what Glyph found. As for her not knowing it was a trap, it would depend if she was indoctrinated in the way we believe Shepard to be, without knowing it, or actually speaking to the Reapers, as Saren did. As I said, there's the idea that she's been indoctrinated from the start. If that's the case, it's not out of the question that she'd be speaking with them. The only outward sign we had that Saren was indoctrinated was the implants (other than being crazy, but I'll overlook that for this explanaition). If the Reapers wanted a good sleeper agent of sorts (ie, Liara) obviously they wouldn't do that.

It's a lot to assume, though.

I seriously doubt Liara is indoc. I mean if you romance her, wouldn't you be able to tell?

Not if Shepard is indoctrinated too.

Maybe.

[Turbo_J]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Turbo_J wrote...

Auralius Carolus wrote...

@ Turbo_J: Rebuttal, bottom of page 1570. Read over it and see what you think.

Good counters. We do have the disadvantage of building upon Reaper tech - being lead around by the nose. Makes it more difficult to identify the real 'rats'.

Still doesn't explain why every Asari every born doesn't have an inherent understanding of Prothean language and data structures if this is where they were getting their 'tech' from. Little inconsistent.

I'll look it over again later and see if there is anything to counter. Most looks solid beyond the Asai 'stupidness'.

Why would they have an understanding of protheans if only high-level officials know about the tech? (I might have missed something here).

Melding, their reproduction process, genetic memory and the fact that the melding portion may have been 'enhanced' by the Protheans medeling in their development; The cosmic imperative.

[Nightingale]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Priss Blackburne wrote...

Synthesis is what the reapers used to control and make Saren obedient and do what they wanted.

Control is what they used to make Illusive Man do what they wanted.

Destroy is what they would use to trick Shepard with, which makes me wonder can we really trust the destroy option. Is it going to do what it's supposed to. Ie break free of indoctrination or destroy the reapers.

Well it's the only one with the breath scene. Refuse is now generally viewed as doing nothing/giving up.
Edit: Okay top of page again? Seriously?

I didn't view it that way, I had the most hope for that one, even moreso than Destroy. Until Megumi (I believe it was her, correct me if I'm wrong) found the files that said everyone was dead after that ending

[BansheeOwnage]

demersel wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

demersel wrote...

There is no catalyst. )))  
By the way - let's think why is it called the catalyst. )))

here's the article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalyst

I think I came up with a possible explanation for why it's called the 'Catalyst'. Oh, and the followup in case you're interested.

Yes, seems legit. And i mean it in a good way. Even during Mass effect 1 i always thought that in the end it will turn out that reapers in fact a really small - like nano particles, that a bind everything in a pattern which is reaper way of thought and logic. The are really the reasult of evolution of the most primitive organism, not even a cell but something less, which is only sentient in large quntities - like giant spaceships. And it only has only one purpose - consume. If you build a civilization around that idea - reapers is what you get, doing their cycle. thus the indoctrination. It is not some method or tactic they use - it is their core essense. The soul of their species, if you will. 

Like geth.

[kenudigit]

Let it go it did not happen. I know you all want it to be an indoc but it did not happen live with it.

[demersel]

DrTsoni wrote...

And without her, we'd never know what Glyph found. 

Oh, we'd know. GLYPH would still be around, as would a shadow broker. When the time would come, he would just leak the plans for the crucible for someone to find. Or even sell them. They would turn up one way or another. 

The real importance of LATSB and liara is that we know her, and know what happenned and how, and what is shadow broker - thus we can understand what is glyph. 

[BansheeOwnage]

DrTsoni wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Priss Blackburne wrote...

Synthesis is what the reapers used to control and make Saren obedient and do what they wanted.

Control is what they used to make Illusive Man do what they wanted.

Destroy is what they would use to trick Shepard with, which makes me wonder can we really trust the destroy option. Is it going to do what it's supposed to. Ie break free of indoctrination or destroy the reapers.

Well it's the only one with the breath scene. Refuse is now generally viewed as doing nothing/giving up.
Edit: Okay top of page again? Seriously?

I didn't view it that way, I had the most hope for that one, even moreso than Destroy. Until Megumi (I believe it was her, correct me if I'm wrong) found the files that said everyone was dead after that ending

To add to what I said: You "win" if you pick destroy because you stick to your beliefs and do what you set out to do in ME1.
To add to what you said: Yeah I like refuse a lot too but it makes no sense to be the "worst" ending. I mean seriously Bioware? If IT is wrong then the moral of the story is "If you stand up for what you believe in you will utterly lose everything. But if you compromise your morals you get utopia."


WHAT???

It even goes against the themes of ME and even ME3 itself.

[BleedingUranium]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...
Maybe that is why she has so much plot armor? And the most colorfull introduction? (the whole story mission) - is that in the third game she falls, partly at least, to indoctrination?

She would have plot armour regardless. She's required to find the Crucible. Without her, we'd have no direction in ME3. Regardless of whether it's the literal interpretation or not, we still need her. It's just a matter of whether you believe the Crucible is a trap or not. If it is, and she knew, it'd be a great plot twist. Same goes for Glyph merely using her to convey the information to Shepard, and by extension, the Alliance, Council, etc.

No, she of course doesn't  know that the crucible is a trap. And by the way she did not find the plans for the crucible. It was glyph. And only glyph. 

And without her, we'd never know what Glyph found. As for her not knowing it was a trap, it would depend if she was indoctrinated in the way we believe Shepard to be, without knowing it, or actually speaking to the Reapers, as Saren did. As I said, there's the idea that she's been indoctrinated from the start. If that's the case, it's not out of the question that she'd be speaking with them. The only outward sign we had that Saren was indoctrinated was the implants (other than being crazy, but I'll overlook that for this explanaition). If the Reapers wanted a good sleeper agent of sorts (ie, Liara) obviously they wouldn't do that.

It's a lot to assume, though.

I seriously doubt Liara is indoc. I mean if you romance her, wouldn't you be able to tell?

This. I'm pretty sure we don't know exactly how Asari bonding works, but I remember stuff like two minds becoming one, and such. I seriously doubt Liara could be indoctrinated without a romanced Shep knowing about it. To the point where I'm going to say it's not possible.

[Turbo_J]

Iconoclaste wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Turbo_J wrote...

Auralius Carolus wrote...

@ Turbo_J: Rebuttal, bottom of page 1570. Read over it and see what you think.

Good counters. We do have the disadvantage of building upon Reaper tech - being lead around by the nose. Makes it more difficult to identify the real 'rats'.

Still doesn't explain why every Asari every born doesn't have an inherent understanding of Prothean language and data structures if this is where they were getting their 'tech' from. Little inconsistent.

I'll look it over again later and see if there is anything to counter. Most looks solid beyond the Asai 'stupidness'.

Why would they have an understanding of protheans if only high-level officials know about the tech? (I might have missed something here).

A "secret" known by an entire species would not remain a "secret" for very long.

How could it be a secret if the entire species was being 'uplifted' at one point. How does a species that lives a thousand years have such a short memory. Depending on when the Protheans actually involved themselves, we are talking 50 generations. That's a theoretical bridge of 50 to 60 Asari.

[demersel]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

demersel wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

demersel wrote...

There is no catalyst. )))  
By the way - let's think why is it called the catalyst. )))

here's the article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalyst

I think I came up with a possible explanation for why it's called the 'Catalyst'. Oh, and the followup in case you're interested.

Yes, seems legit. And i mean it in a good way. Even during Mass effect 1 i always thought that in the end it will turn out that reapers in fact a really small - like nano particles, that a bind everything in a pattern which is reaper way of thought and logic. The are really the reasult of evolution of the most primitive organism, not even a cell but something less, which is only sentient in large quntities - like giant spaceships. And it only has only one purpose - consume. If you build a civilization around that idea - reapers is what you get, doing their cycle. thus the indoctrination. It is not some method or tactic they use - it is their core essense. The soul of their species, if you will. 

Like geth.

no. Not like geth. 
The geth have no needs. The geth don't turn everything around them into geth. 
This thing just consumes. like a fungus. 

[Priss Blackburne]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Priss Blackburne wrote...

Synthesis is what the reapers used to control and make Saren obedient and do what they wanted.

Control is what they used to make Illusive Man do what they wanted.

Destroy is what they would use to trick Shepard with, which makes me wonder can we really trust the destroy option. Is it going to do what it's supposed to. Ie break free of indoctrination or destroy the reapers.

Well it's the only one with the breath scene. Refuse is now generally viewed as doing nothing/giving up.
Edit: Okay top of page again? Seriously?

I didn't view it that way, I had the most hope for that one, even moreso than Destroy. Until Megumi (I believe it was her, correct me if I'm wrong) found the files that said everyone was dead after that ending

To add to what I said: You "win" if you pick destroy because you stick to your beliefs and do what you set out to do in ME1.
To add to what you said: Yeah I like refuse a lot too but it makes no sense to be the "worst" ending. I mean seriously Bioware? If IT is wrong then the moral of the story is "If you stand up for what you believe in you will utterly lose everything. But if you compromise your morals you get utopia."


WHAT???

It even goes against the themes of ME and even ME3 itself.

oh yeah I pick Destroy everytime, It's what I set out to do in ME1. It's what everyone is telling me to do. "It's either destroy them or they destroy us" The Control and Synthesis options are tricks to get you to submit to the Reapers.

Just had a random oh crud thought as in what if when I posted that heh

Modifié par Priss Blackburne, 05 juillet 2012 - 04:47 .

[BansheeOwnage]

demersel wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

demersel wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

demersel wrote...

There is no catalyst. )))  
By the way - let's think why is it called the catalyst. )))

here's the article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalyst

I think I came up with a possible explanation for why it's called the 'Catalyst'. Oh, and the followup in case you're interested.

Yes, seems legit. And i mean it in a good way. Even during Mass effect 1 i always thought that in the end it will turn out that reapers in fact a really small - like nano particles, that a bind everything in a pattern which is reaper way of thought and logic. The are really the reasult of evolution of the most primitive organism, not even a cell but something less, which is only sentient in large quntities - like giant spaceships. And it only has only one purpose - consume. If you build a civilization around that idea - reapers is what you get, doing their cycle. thus the indoctrination. It is not some method or tactic they use - it is their core essense. The soul of their species, if you will. 

Like geth.

no. Not like geth. 
The geth have no needs. The geth don't turn everything around them into geth. 
This thing just consumes. like a fungus. 

No I just meant they are only sentient in large numbers.

[Auralius Carolus]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Auralius Carolus wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Why would they have an understanding of protheans if only high-level officials know about the tech? (I might have missed something here).

Who is "they"? And to what phrase are you referencing?

The Asari. Something about them understanding protheans.

Riiiiiight.

[Nightingale]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Priss Blackburne wrote...

Synthesis is what the reapers used to control and make Saren obedient and do what they wanted.

Control is what they used to make Illusive Man do what they wanted.

Destroy is what they would use to trick Shepard with, which makes me wonder can we really trust the destroy option. Is it going to do what it's supposed to. Ie break free of indoctrination or destroy the reapers.

Well it's the only one with the breath scene. Refuse is now generally viewed as doing nothing/giving up.
Edit: Okay top of page again? Seriously?

I didn't view it that way, I had the most hope for that one, even moreso than Destroy. Until Megumi (I believe it was her, correct me if I'm wrong) found the files that said everyone was dead after that ending

To add to what I said: You "win" if you pick destroy because you stick to your beliefs and do what you set out to do in ME1.
To add to what you said: Yeah I like refuse a lot too but it makes no sense to be the "worst" ending. I mean seriously Bioware? If IT is wrong then the moral of the story is "If you stand up for what you believe in you will utterly lose everything. But if you compromise your morals you get utopia."


WHAT???

It even goes against the themes of ME and even ME3 itself.

I liked Reject because it was like what Legion said in ME2 (and I've said this several times, but I'm too lazy to find a quote) - they may come to the same conclusion as what the Reapers offered them, but they'd rather reach it on their own. As for making it the worst ending...yeah, you're right, and yeah, it's stupid. It should've at least been based off EMS...But I guess they didn't want to go into that great detail for an ending that wasn't even originally available.

[BleedingUranium]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Priss Blackburne wrote...

Synthesis is what the reapers used to control and make Saren obedient and do what they wanted.

Control is what they used to make Illusive Man do what they wanted.

Destroy is what they would use to trick Shepard with, which makes me wonder can we really trust the destroy option. Is it going to do what it's supposed to. Ie break free of indoctrination or destroy the reapers.

Well it's the only one with the breath scene. Refuse is now generally viewed as doing nothing/giving up.
Edit: Okay top of page again? Seriously?

I didn't view it that way, I had the most hope for that one, even moreso than Destroy. Until Megumi (I believe it was her, correct me if I'm wrong) found the files that said everyone was dead after that ending

To add to what I said: You "win" if you pick destroy because you stick to your beliefs and do what you set out to do in ME1.
To add to what you said: Yeah I like refuse a lot too but it makes no sense to be the "worst" ending. I mean seriously Bioware? If IT is wrong then the moral of the story is "If you stand up for what you believe in you will utterly lose everything. But if you compromise your morals you get utopia."


WHAT???

It even goes against the themes of ME and even ME3 itself.

No, if you compromise yourself, you get indoctrinated, and if you don't do anything, you die.

[Nightingale]

BleedingUranium wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...
Maybe that is why she has so much plot armor? And the most colorfull introduction? (the whole story mission) - is that in the third game she falls, partly at least, to indoctrination?

She would have plot armour regardless. She's required to find the Crucible. Without her, we'd have no direction in ME3. Regardless of whether it's the literal interpretation or not, we still need her. It's just a matter of whether you believe the Crucible is a trap or not. If it is, and she knew, it'd be a great plot twist. Same goes for Glyph merely using her to convey the information to Shepard, and by extension, the Alliance, Council, etc.

No, she of course doesn't  know that the crucible is a trap. And by the way she did not find the plans for the crucible. It was glyph. And only glyph. 

And without her, we'd never know what Glyph found. As for her not knowing it was a trap, it would depend if she was indoctrinated in the way we believe Shepard to be, without knowing it, or actually speaking to the Reapers, as Saren did. As I said, there's the idea that she's been indoctrinated from the start. If that's the case, it's not out of the question that she'd be speaking with them. The only outward sign we had that Saren was indoctrinated was the implants (other than being crazy, but I'll overlook that for this explanaition). If the Reapers wanted a good sleeper agent of sorts (ie, Liara) obviously they wouldn't do that.

It's a lot to assume, though.

I seriously doubt Liara is indoc. I mean if you romance her, wouldn't you be able to tell?

This. I'm pretty sure we don't know exactly how Asari bonding works, but I remember stuff like two minds becoming one, and such. I seriously doubt Liara could be indoctrinated without a romanced Shep knowing about it. To the point where I'm going to say it's not possible.

Like I said, it's plausible if Shepard is indoctrinated too.

[BansheeOwnage]

Turbo_J wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Turbo_J wrote...

Auralius Carolus wrote...

@ Turbo_J: Rebuttal, bottom of page 1570. Read over it and see what you think.

Good counters. We do have the disadvantage of building upon Reaper tech - being lead around by the nose. Makes it more difficult to identify the real 'rats'.

Still doesn't explain why every Asari every born doesn't have an inherent understanding of Prothean language and data structures if this is where they were getting their 'tech' from. Little inconsistent.

I'll look it over again later and see if there is anything to counter. Most looks solid beyond the Asai 'stupidness'.

Why would they have an understanding of protheans if only high-level officials know about the tech? (I might have missed something here).

A "secret" known by an entire species would not remain a "secret" for very long.

How could it be a secret if the entire species was being 'uplifted' at one point. How does a species that lives a thousand years have such a short memory. Depending on when the Protheans actually involved themselves, we are talking 50 generations. That's a theoretical bridge of 50 to 60 Asari.

It's not like the protheans were all like "Hey primitives, we uplifted you. Kind of." They would have been much more secretive. It seems somewhat unprothean to uplift anyway. I'm sure they wouldn't advertise it.

[Iconoclaste]

demersel wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

demersel wrote...

There is no catalyst. )))  
By the way - let's think why is it called the catalyst. )))

here's the article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalyst

I think I came up with a possible explanation for why it's called the 'Catalyst'. Oh, and the followup in case you're interested.

Yes, seems legit. And i mean it in a good way. Even during Mass effect 1 i always thought that in the end it will turn out that reapers in fact a really small - like nano particles, that a bind everything in a pattern which is reaper way of thought and logic. The are really the reasult of evolution of the most primitive organism, not even a cell but something less, which is only sentient in large quntities - like giant spaceships. And it only has only one purpose - consume. If you build a civilization around that idea - reapers is what you get, doing their cycle. thus the indoctrination. It is not some method or tactic they use - it is their core essense. The soul of their species, if you will.

The desire to reach consensus is a fundamental part of societies, hence the success of democracy compared to other systems. It's not perfect, but it shows a "general trend" even in other political systems. Indoctrination can be translated in our present context by "the majority wins over the minority", or as stated by Star Trek's motto : "the general wins over the particular, the needs of the many prevail over the needs of the few". In that sence, even without resorting to "induced indoctrination", the Reapers would still legitimately be justified to try to "convince" in other ways that their goals are the result of a logical, desirable "consensus". That makes their standpoint defendable with some "childish innocence" by the Catalyst, although viewed with horror by the organics.

But I don't know how simple mono-cellular things could build the first Reaper, though.

[WandySilva]

Iconoclaste wrote...

WandySilva wrote...

Just played the ending again and I have another interjection about the star child's logic, during his explaination about synthensis, he states that a similar solution had been attempted before but it had failed, to paraphrase "organics were not ready, It is not something that can be forced". This last part is particularly interesting, as choosing synthesis, you are effectively forcing synthesis on all organics (and synthetics for that matter) against their will. Why can shepard force this transformation and make it work, while the reapers cannot? I initially thought that this had something to do with the star child saying that the crucible "changed the variables" but as he stated, this solution can not be forced. If I am missing something or someone with a better understanding of the lore can explain this to me, please do. As it stands, in my mind, this is yet another key piece of evidence for the IT, or it is just another plot hole that needs to be patched.

Maybe the fact that Shepard is the one that will be "merged" is what makes this attempt "succesfull", since the Catalyst recognizes that Shepard is the first one to have made it "this far". It was discussed on another thread that "this far" might equally point towards a "physical" position on the Citadel as to a "state of readyness". But synthesis is, by all means, still "forced" upon everyone. Bioware tried to make it look like a "good thing", though.

Interesting insight, but this raises some more questions. Why is it that by entering a specific arbitrary position that synthesis can now work, does shepard become some kind of "chosen one" for making it this far (changed variables maybe?)? More importantly, why is this not elaborated upon?
The other part of your post that I wanted to touch on, is that it still brings me back to my original point. As you said "synthesis is, by all means, still "forced" upon everyone", when the star child directly contradicts this possibility.

*edited for clarity

Modifié par WandySilva, 05 juillet 2012 - 04:55 .

[BansheeOwnage]

BleedingUranium wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Priss Blackburne wrote...

Synthesis is what the reapers used to control and make Saren obedient and do what they wanted.

Control is what they used to make Illusive Man do what they wanted.

Destroy is what they would use to trick Shepard with, which makes me wonder can we really trust the destroy option. Is it going to do what it's supposed to. Ie break free of indoctrination or destroy the reapers.

Well it's the only one with the breath scene. Refuse is now generally viewed as doing nothing/giving up.
Edit: Okay top of page again? Seriously?

I didn't view it that way, I had the most hope for that one, even moreso than Destroy. Until Megumi (I believe it was her, correct me if I'm wrong) found the files that said everyone was dead after that ending

To add to what I said: You "win" if you pick destroy because you stick to your beliefs and do what you set out to do in ME1.
To add to what you said: Yeah I like refuse a lot too but it makes no sense to be the "worst" ending. I mean seriously Bioware? If IT is wrong then the moral of the story is "If you stand up for what you believe in you will utterly lose everything. But if you compromise your morals you get utopia."


WHAT???

It even goes against the themes of ME and even ME3 itself.

No, if you compromise yourself, you get indoctrinated, and if you don't do anything, you die.

I did say if IT is wrong

[BansheeOwnage]

DrTsoni wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...
Maybe that is why she has so much plot armor? And the most colorfull introduction? (the whole story mission) - is that in the third game she falls, partly at least, to indoctrination?

She would have plot armour regardless. She's required to find the Crucible. Without her, we'd have no direction in ME3. Regardless of whether it's the literal interpretation or not, we still need her. It's just a matter of whether you believe the Crucible is a trap or not. If it is, and she knew, it'd be a great plot twist. Same goes for Glyph merely using her to convey the information to Shepard, and by extension, the Alliance, Council, etc.

No, she of course doesn't  know that the crucible is a trap. And by the way she did not find the plans for the crucible. It was glyph. And only glyph. 

And without her, we'd never know what Glyph found. As for her not knowing it was a trap, it would depend if she was indoctrinated in the way we believe Shepard to be, without knowing it, or actually speaking to the Reapers, as Saren did. As I said, there's the idea that she's been indoctrinated from the start. If that's the case, it's not out of the question that she'd be speaking with them. The only outward sign we had that Saren was indoctrinated was the implants (other than being crazy, but I'll overlook that for this explanaition). If the Reapers wanted a good sleeper agent of sorts (ie, Liara) obviously they wouldn't do that.

It's a lot to assume, though.

I seriously doubt Liara is indoc. I mean if you romance her, wouldn't you be able to tell?

This. I'm pretty sure we don't know exactly how Asari bonding works, but I remember stuff like two minds becoming one, and such. I seriously doubt Liara could be indoctrinated without a romanced Shep knowing about it. To the point where I'm going to say it's not possible.

Like I said, it's plausible if Shepard is indoctrinated too.

We can be indoctrinated together

Modifié par BansheeOwnage, 05 juillet 2012 - 04:54 .

[BleedingUranium]

DrTsoni wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Priss Blackburne wrote...

Synthesis is what the reapers used to control and make Saren obedient and do what they wanted.

Control is what they used to make Illusive Man do what they wanted.

Destroy is what they would use to trick Shepard with, which makes me wonder can we really trust the destroy option. Is it going to do what it's supposed to. Ie break free of indoctrination or destroy the reapers.

Well it's the only one with the breath scene. Refuse is now generally viewed as doing nothing/giving up.
Edit: Okay top of page again? Seriously?

I didn't view it that way, I had the most hope for that one, even moreso than Destroy. Until Megumi (I believe it was her, correct me if I'm wrong) found the files that said everyone was dead after that ending

To add to what I said: You "win" if you pick destroy because you stick to your beliefs and do what you set out to do in ME1.
To add to what you said: Yeah I like refuse a lot too but it makes no sense to be the "worst" ending. I mean seriously Bioware? If IT is wrong then the moral of the story is "If you stand up for what you believe in you will utterly lose everything. But if you compromise your morals you get utopia."


WHAT???

It even goes against the themes of ME and even ME3 itself.

I liked Reject because it was like what Legion said in ME2 (and I've said this several times, but I'm too lazy to find a quote) - they may come to the same conclusion as what the Reapers offered them, but they'd rather reach it on their own. As for making it the worst ending...yeah, you're right, and yeah, it's stupid. It should've at least been based off EMS...But I guess they didn't want to go into that great detail for an ending that wasn't even originally available.

The Legion comparison doesn't quite work, because you're only using things the Reapers gave you in a literal ending. In IT, you're simply choosing to ignore their bull and fight them out of your head.

I see Reject as taking the Paragon option instead of the Charm option. You're going to make the same point, but less awesomely or forcefully, and you won't get what you want.

[Nightingale]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

demersel wrote...
Maybe that is why she has so much plot armor? And the most colorfull introduction? (the whole story mission) - is that in the third game she falls, partly at least, to indoctrination?

She would have plot armour regardless. She's required to find the Crucible. Without her, we'd have no direction in ME3. Regardless of whether it's the literal interpretation or not, we still need her. It's just a matter of whether you believe the Crucible is a trap or not. If it is, and she knew, it'd be a great plot twist. Same goes for Glyph merely using her to convey the information to Shepard, and by extension, the Alliance, Council, etc.

No, she of course doesn't  know that the crucible is a trap. And by the way she did not find the plans for the crucible. It was glyph. And only glyph. 

And without her, we'd never know what Glyph found. As for her not knowing it was a trap, it would depend if she was indoctrinated in the way we believe Shepard to be, without knowing it, or actually speaking to the Reapers, as Saren did. As I said, there's the idea that she's been indoctrinated from the start. If that's the case, it's not out of the question that she'd be speaking with them. The only outward sign we had that Saren was indoctrinated was the implants (other than being crazy, but I'll overlook that for this explanaition). If the Reapers wanted a good sleeper agent of sorts (ie, Liara) obviously they wouldn't do that.

It's a lot to assume, though.

I seriously doubt Liara is indoc. I mean if you romance her, wouldn't you be able to tell?

This. I'm pretty sure we don't know exactly how Asari bonding works, but I remember stuff like two minds becoming one, and such. I seriously doubt Liara could be indoctrinated without a romanced Shep knowing about it. To the point where I'm going to say it's not possible.

Like I said, it's plausible if Shepard is indoctrinated too.

We can be indoctrinated together

Okay, I admit that made me chuckle. It probably shouldn't have, since I've been a Liaramancer from the start

[Iconoclaste]

Turbo_J wrote...

How could it be a secret if the entire species was being 'uplifted' at one point. How does a species that lives a thousand years have such a short memory. Depending on when the Protheans actually involved themselves, we are talking 50 generations. That's a theoretical bridge of 50 to 60 Asari.

There is space too. If the Asari had evolved on the same planets as the Protheans, then maybe. But the Asari, like most other species, must have evolved from "scratch" all the way to a space-faring species in these few generations, and at that time only would they then discover of the Protheans legacy.