55528 réponses à ce sujet

[burritosythe]

Hm strange, There seem to be bits of brain leaking out of my ears. It seems my mind has been blown.

[paxxton]

TJBartlemus wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Dwailing wrote....

MaximizedAction wrote....

Dwailing wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

You do realize that Bioware can just say no that is wrong and all they have to do is change there plan A to plan B.

Uh, they didn't change their plans after the other leak (The Rebellion leak.).  I doubt they'll do it now, not with so much at stake.

Yeah, too much steak.

I ****ing love steak!  (To quote Shep. )

Liara: I don't know how you do it.
Shep: Steak, Liara. I think about when there's so much steak.
Liara: ....ok?
Shep: I f***ing love steak.
Liara: I know. I wish I had your confidence.

You forgot the most hilarious line: 'Shepard, I'm the Reaper Doomsday Device."

Shep: Come on, Liara.
Liara: Sorry.
Shep: Something wrong?
Liara: Oh, you know....this and that.   Shepard I'm a REAPER DOOMSDAY DEVICE.
Shep: Oh, S***

Best line ever. Here is another.

Shep: The council put me in lockdown to keep the women off me. Didn't want problems but the situation changed.
James: What?
Shep: I'm Commander Shepard. Alliance Drag Queen.
James: Commander? What the f......

But the hallmark line of the whole Gamer Poop series is this:
Shepard: "I don't know how but... we'll bang, ok?"

[masster blaster]

BleedingUranium wrote...

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

*sigh* You didn't prove the Starchild's logic doesn't make sense.

If you honestly think godchild's 'logic' makes sense, I dont know how to talk to you.

Its like talking to someone that tells me I cant prove.....   I cant even come up with a good analogy because his logic is so god damned flawed its ridiculous.

He's literally so wrong I cant comprehend it.

Yknow what?

Prove to me his logic is correct.

And dont do it by redefining the meaning of rebel to mean 'doing what it was designed to do' like you did earlier.

Twas my point. If the assumption that the created will always rebel is true, his logic is sound (more or less). If that assumption is wrong, he's full of ****.

Same goes for BW haters. If the assumption that Bioware sucks is true, their logic is sound (more or less). If that assumption is wrong, they're full of ****.

I guess the Child was right about one thing when it says " the created will always rebel againts the creators" Shepard was rebuilt to stop the Collectors but he, or she rebeld agains Cerbures.

Modifié par masster blaster, 10 juin 2012 - 12:12 .

[D.Sharrah]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Reeeepost

BleedingUranium wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Snip...

Except it is no longer a positive thing if your forces are gonna turn upon you sooner or later, even worse that they are doing it allready. If you dont have complete control over something like that it is safer to wipe it out.

And you ignore that Collector forces are still fighting alongside the Reapers as as I quoted and that the Reapers put what you have claimed is untrustworthy servants to build their newest Reaper.

The problem with this theory are massive.

As a response to someone I posted that maybe the rebellion isn't a foregone conclusion...but because the Reapers believe in ReaperBieber the Starbinger's (or Habinger's, if you prefer) circular logic (particularily pertaining to the created always rebelling against the creators) - its the mere perception that it exists as a possibility that drives them to quell the "rebellion" by perfroming another "cycle" and creating their newest tool.

And I never claimed that the theory was infallible...quite the opposite actually, I suggested that I might need to be sent to a rubber room.

After having an amusing, and really, really long "debate" with an Anti-ITer, I came an interesting conclusion, that also, I just realized, applies here.

There aren't actually Pro and Anti-ITers, what they really are are BW Is Good At Writing and BW Is Bad At Writing... ers.

Before we even get to IT, we have to ask if the person your talking with or about either thinks BW devs are good writers, or bad ones. If they have decided that BW sucks, no matter what you do, not matter what logic and evidence you can show them, they either won't believe IT, or believe they would that, in the unlikely event that IT is true, it would either be barely better than, or even worse then, the current literal ending.

Anyone who likes BW, or like me, hadn't really heard of them before, are always going to be open to the idea of IT. Regardless of how much they are convinced, or whether the are actually behind IT, for various good reasons, they will all be open to the idea of IT.

So, people that are Anti-BW, while they may be wrong about that, they are right about the complaints they make (not all of them) if you assume BW are bad writers/lazy/greedy.

Like I said, we shouldn't divide people into Pro-IT or Anti-IT, but into Pro (or neutral)-BW and Anti-BW.


Now, apply that same logic to the Starchild. His logic is sound if you accept that he is correct when he says that the created will always rebel against their creator. If that point were true, he'd be right, but since we can prove it's not true, then all the assumptions he makes because of that belief are thrown out the window.

You make a great point. And I am not trying to suggest that we as players or Shepard should believe the logic. It doesn't matter...as long as the Reaper's believe, than they are going to act accordingly - and IMHO in doing so they create a self fulfilling prophecy.

[BleedingUranium]

Dwailing wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Reeeepost

BleedingUranium wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Snip...

Except it is no longer a positive thing if your forces are gonna turn upon you sooner or later, even worse that they are doing it allready. If you dont have complete control over something like that it is safer to wipe it out.

And you ignore that Collector forces are still fighting alongside the Reapers as as I quoted and that the Reapers put what you have claimed is untrustworthy servants to build their newest Reaper.

The problem with this theory are massive.

As a response to someone I posted that maybe the rebellion isn't a foregone conclusion...but because the Reapers believe in ReaperBieber the Starbinger's (or Habinger's, if you prefer) circular logic (particularily pertaining to the created always rebelling against the creators) - its the mere perception that it exists as a possibility that drives them to quell the "rebellion" by perfroming another "cycle" and creating their newest tool.

And I never claimed that the theory was infallible...quite the opposite actually, I suggested that I might need to be sent to a rubber room.

After having an amusing, and really, really long "debate" with an Anti-ITer, I came an interesting conclusion, that also, I just realized, applies here.

There aren't actually Pro and Anti-ITers, what they really are are BW Is Good At Writing and BW Is Bad At Writing... ers.

Before we even get to IT, we have to ask if the person your talking with or about either thinks BW devs are good writers, or bad ones. If they have decided that BW sucks, no matter what you do, not matter what logic and evidence you can show them, they either won't believe IT, or believe they would that, in the unlikely event that IT is true, it would either be barely better than, or even worse then, the current literal ending.

Anyone who likes BW, or like me, hadn't really heard of them before, are always going to be open to the idea of IT. Regardless of how much they are convinced, or whether the are actually behind IT, for various good reasons, they will all be open to the idea of IT.

So, people that are Anti-BW, while they may be wrong about that, they are right about the complaints they make (not all of them) if you assume BW are bad writers/lazy/greedy.

Like I said, we shouldn't divide people into Pro-IT or Anti-IT, but into Pro (or neutral)-BW and Anti-BW.


Now, apply that same logic to the Starchild. His logic is sound if you accept that he is correct when he says that the created will always rebel against their creator. If that point were true, he'd be right, but since we can prove it's not true, then all the assumptions he makes because of that belief are thrown out the window.

I.... would have to agree with that.  I've always thought that Bioware are the most brilliant writers of all time (Playing KOTOR before you were a teenager does that to a person, even if I didn't know it at the time. ), and that's always been THE main reason I believe in IT.  The evidence is great, but it's my refusal to accept that Bioware could frak up this badly that has kept my belief intact.  Sadly, others seem to not think that.  So, they deny IT on principle alone.  I don't want to start a flame war or anything, but I feel like I'm part of the Evolution vs. Creationism debate that has raged for the last 150 or so years.  If someone believes that the Bible is the Word of God, then no matter what evidence you show them in favor of Evolution, you will never convince them that Evolution is real.  

Not trying to offend anyone either (if you really care, my girlfriend of 3 1/2 years is religious) but I agree with that too. If they have one solid belief that underlies everything else, you can't change someone's mind without first altering that.

[TJBartlemus]

paxxton wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

paxxton wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Well I really can't think up anymore thought about IT because we all have pretty much thought of everything we could think of . All we can do now is wait for the EC and hope we are all right about IT.

Until Tuesday then.

Um refresh my memory but I thought it comes out in September the 9th.

Michael Gamble tweeted a few days ago that they are going to show something during Comic Con in San Diego.

Where did you get that date??

You know what makes me sad is what they posted on the official Mass Effect wiki:

Heres whats on DLC page:
Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut
Cinematics
Summer 2012
Free


And what is on the official page:
Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut[/b] is an upcoming DLC pack for Mass Effect 3. It will be released in Summer 2012 for all platforms, and be available for free download until April 12, 2014.[1][2]
Following Mass Effect 3's release, a number of players complained
that the game's original ending was confusing and lacked closure. In
response, BioWare's Dr. Ray Muzyka announced new content would be created for Mass Effect 3 to address fan concerns.[3]
Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut was revealed to be that new content. To
develop it, BioWare re-prioritized their post-release downloadable
content schedule for the game.
Content 
Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut will feature new cinematics and epilogue
scenes that will expand upon Mass Effect 3's original ending by
providing more closure to Commander Shepard's story.[1][2] The endings will vary, depending on the choices made in the trilogy by the player.[4]


So as far as we know it's just cinematics. They are also making it free until April 12, 2014. What is up with that?

Here is the link:
http://masseffect.wi...te_note-Press-0

[BleedingUranium]

D.Sharrah wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Reeeepost

BleedingUranium wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Snip...

Except it is no longer a positive thing if your forces are gonna turn upon you sooner or later, even worse that they are doing it allready. If you dont have complete control over something like that it is safer to wipe it out.

And you ignore that Collector forces are still fighting alongside the Reapers as as I quoted and that the Reapers put what you have claimed is untrustworthy servants to build their newest Reaper.

The problem with this theory are massive.

As a response to someone I posted that maybe the rebellion isn't a foregone conclusion...but because the Reapers believe in ReaperBieber the Starbinger's (or Habinger's, if you prefer) circular logic (particularily pertaining to the created always rebelling against the creators) - its the mere perception that it exists as a possibility that drives them to quell the "rebellion" by perfroming another "cycle" and creating their newest tool.

And I never claimed that the theory was infallible...quite the opposite actually, I suggested that I might need to be sent to a rubber room.

After having an amusing, and really, really long "debate" with an Anti-ITer, I came an interesting conclusion, that also, I just realized, applies here.

There aren't actually Pro and Anti-ITers, what they really are are BW Is Good At Writing and BW Is Bad At Writing... ers.

Before we even get to IT, we have to ask if the person your talking with or about either thinks BW devs are good writers, or bad ones. If they have decided that BW sucks, no matter what you do, not matter what logic and evidence you can show them, they either won't believe IT, or believe they would that, in the unlikely event that IT is true, it would either be barely better than, or even worse then, the current literal ending.

Anyone who likes BW, or like me, hadn't really heard of them before, are always going to be open to the idea of IT. Regardless of how much they are convinced, or whether the are actually behind IT, for various good reasons, they will all be open to the idea of IT.

So, people that are Anti-BW, while they may be wrong about that, they are right about the complaints they make (not all of them) if you assume BW are bad writers/lazy/greedy.

Like I said, we shouldn't divide people into Pro-IT or Anti-IT, but into Pro (or neutral)-BW and Anti-BW.


Now, apply that same logic to the Starchild. His logic is sound if you accept that he is correct when he says that the created will always rebel against their creator. If that point were true, he'd be right, but since we can prove it's not true, then all the assumptions he makes because of that belief are thrown out the window.

You make a great point. And I am not trying to suggest that we as players or Shepard should believe the logic. It doesn't matter...as long as the Reaper's believe, than they are going to act accordingly - and IMHO in doing so they create a self fulfilling prophecy.

I did see this before, but no one else commented

[paxxton]

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

*sigh* You didn't prove the Starchild's logic doesn't make sense.

If you honestly think godchild's 'logic' makes sense, I dont know how to talk to you.

Its like talking to someone that tells me I cant prove.....   I cant even come up with a good analogy because his logic is so god damned flawed its ridiculous.

He's literally so wrong I cant comprehend it.

Yknow what?

Prove to me his logic is correct.

And dont do it by redefining the meaning of rebel to mean 'doing what it was designed to do' like you did earlier.

The logic makes sense if you consider a broad meaning of "rebel".

[byne]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...


And dont do it by redefining the meaning of rebel to mean 'doing what it was designed to do' like you did earlier.

The logic makes sense if you consider a broad meaning of "rebel".

.................................................................................really?


ALSO!

One example of the created who have never once rebelled against their creator, no matter how broadly you define rebellion:

Modifié par byne, 10 juin 2012 - 12:17 .

[paxxton]

masster blaster wrote...

I guess the Child was right about one thing when it says " the created will always rebel againts the creators" Shepard was rebuilt to stop the Collectors but he, or she rebeld agains Cerbures.

Now you're talking!

[senshi420]

paxxton wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Dwailing wrote....

MaximizedAction wrote....

Dwailing wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

You do realize that Bioware can just say no that is wrong and all they have to do is change there plan A to plan B.

Uh, they didn't change their plans after the other leak (The Rebellion leak.).  I doubt they'll do it now, not with so much at stake.

Yeah, too much steak.

I ****ing love steak!  (To quote Shep. )

Liara: I don't know how you do it.
Shep: Steak, Liara. I think about when there's so much steak.
Liara: ....ok?
Shep: I f***ing love steak.
Liara: I know. I wish I had your confidence.

You forgot the most hilarious line: 'Shepard, I'm the Reaper Doomsday Device."

Shep: Come on, Liara.
Liara: Sorry.
Shep: Something wrong?
Liara: Oh, you know....this and that.   Shepard I'm a REAPER DOOMSDAY DEVICE.
Shep: Oh, S***

Best line ever. Here is another.

Shep: The council put me in lockdown to keep the women off me. Didn't want problems but the situation changed.
James: What?
Shep: I'm Commander Shepard. Alliance Drag Queen.
James: Commander? What the f......

But the hallmark line of the whole Gamer Poop series is this:
Shepard: "I don't know how but... we'll bang, ok?"

youtu.be/wCWBi_7lqp4

[BleedingUranium]

TJBartlemus wrote...

paxxton wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

paxxton wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Well I really can't think up anymore thought about IT because we all have pretty much thought of everything we could think of . All we can do now is wait for the EC and hope we are all right about IT.

Until Tuesday then.

Um refresh my memory but I thought it comes out in September the 9th.

Michael Gamble tweeted a few days ago that they are going to show something during Comic Con in San Diego.

Where did you get that date??

You know what makes me sad is what they posted on the official Mass Effect wiki:

Heres whats on DLC page:
Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut
Cinematics
Summer 2012
Free


And what is on the official page:
Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut[/b] is an upcoming DLC pack for Mass Effect 3. It will be released in Summer 2012 for all platforms, and be available for free download until April 12, 2014.[1][2]
Following Mass Effect 3's release, a number of players complained
that the game's original ending was confusing and lacked closure. In
response, BioWare's Dr. Ray Muzyka announced new content would be created for Mass Effect 3 to address fan concerns.[3]
Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut was revealed to be that new content. To
develop it, BioWare re-prioritized their post-release downloadable
content schedule for the game.
Content 
Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut will feature new cinematics and epilogue
scenes that will expand upon Mass Effect 3's original ending by
providing more closure to Commander Shepard's story.[1][2] The endings will vary, depending on the choices made in the trilogy by the player.[4]


So as far as we know it's just cinematics. They are also making it free until April 12, 2014. What is up with that?

Here is the link:
http://masseffect.wi...te_note-Press-0

Do not ever trust the wiki. They will not tolerate speculation of any kind whatsoever. They won't, for example, mention that the Argus is a variant of the Mattock because we aren't specifically told that anywhere, and looking at them is a visual comparison, which is "subjective". They also don't allow evidence for anything from Twitter, or BSN PMs, because they're "unconfirmed accounts".

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 10 juin 2012 - 12:19 .

[paxxton]

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...


And dont do it by redefining the meaning of rebel to mean 'doing what it was designed to do' like you did earlier.

The logic makes sense if you consider a broad meaning of "rebel".

.................................................................................really?

Rebel as any form of disagreement.

The Reapers weren't created by the Starchild. He never admits that, merely stating that the Reapers are his.

Modifié par paxxton, 10 juin 2012 - 12:19 .

[Dwailing]

MaximizedAction wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

Fun fact:
The train sounds in the Control ending start EXACTLY once Shepard drops her weapon.
Fits perfectly to the dream symbol "trains" which, as a reminder, can stand for losing control or being guided in a particular direction.
Take that with Dwailing's post of the gun representing our control of Shepard/Shepard's control of herself.
Perfect.

Huh, I don't think that's EXACTLY what my original idea was, but it IS easy to go from my idea to that.  I'd say it's something of a natural evolution of my idea.

Edit: This might be a matter of symantics more than anything else.  My theory originally was that the gun is Shepard's willpower, the Shepard we see and control is actually the litteral avatar of the player, and it ends up being our decision what we do with Shep's willpower (Throw it away or hold on tightly.).

Oh, sorry about misquoting then.

My point was just to tell what I heard from rewatching the Control ending.

Well, you could VERY easily say that the gun DOES represent Shepard's control over HIMself .  Willpower, control, either one is a possibility.  Besides, I could tie that into my idea easily.  When we see Anderson (The symbol of the unindoctrinated part of Shep's mind.) right after the crash, he's holding the gun.  This could represent that Shep's unindoctrinated side is in control (And like I said, able to fight back, hence, the gun being the form Shep's self control takes.).  Later, the gun is in the hands of "Shepard" (Who represents... the player?  That's what I originally thought, but it could be something else.), and we eventually have to decide what to do with it.  Do we surrender Shepard's self control?  Or do we ASSUME DIRECT CONTROL?

[BleedingUranium]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

*sigh* You didn't prove the Starchild's logic doesn't make sense.

If you honestly think godchild's 'logic' makes sense, I dont know how to talk to you.

Its like talking to someone that tells me I cant prove.....   I cant even come up with a good analogy because his logic is so god damned flawed its ridiculous.

He's literally so wrong I cant comprehend it.

Yknow what?

Prove to me his logic is correct.

And dont do it by redefining the meaning of rebel to mean 'doing what it was designed to do' like you did earlier.

The logic makes sense if you consider a broad meaning of "rebel".

But that's irrelevant, because the word we're supposed to be looking at is "always"

[masster blaster]

i can't believe that Bioware did not add a choices at the end of the game were you can pick either para, or rene when the two button come up, but I wish that could have happened with the god child.

Renegade: Shepard says **** your plans and **** your reapers. then puts to bullets in it's head.

Paragon Shepard talks the God child  to commit suicide, because that's what paragon Shepard makes people kill themselves. Tim and Saren.

Modifié par masster blaster, 10 juin 2012 - 12:24 .

[Salient Archer]

Electra77 wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

...
The reason I never chose to keep the collector base in ME2  is the same as why I originally chose Destroy in ME3, because ‘it was MY choice’. What I mean to say is that it was the decision I made in the first Mass Effect and I was going to stick to it, because it’s what I’ve always felt to be right.

I might not have been able to chose to have EDI on the SR-2, to use the Mass Relays or even to be resurrected by cerberus, but “I” (the player and Shepard) could chose to not wither my resolve from ME1 about destroying the Reapers, their perverse tech and everything they represent.

I was determined to do it on the collector base more so then ever because to do otherwise would mean that I am no better than Cerberus or even the Reapers themselves. To use your enemies methods doesn’t make you a clever tactician, it doesn’t give you the upper hand, it makes you no better than they are.



Back in ME2 I was convinced that the collector base could be the very thing to turn the tide, but we had hard proof that trying to unlock the secrets of Reaper tech corrupts and always leads to a fall and even with the ethical dilemma of what it represented aside it was a dangerous risk, it was an opportunity for mankind's grasp to extend past it’s reach. Shepard knows the dangers of Reaper tech, he’s seen what it did to Saren, he’s seen it on Virmire, he’s seen it on the derelict reaper and object rho and we the player have even more sources to prove that Reaper tech always leads to a fall and this doesn’t even cover the ethics in choosing to keep it. 

Regardless, I ask you this: Is mankind worth saving if we have to loose our humanity to do so?

We are confusing methods and tools.  Rounding everyone up to turn them in genetic ooze for a new reaper is their method.  Their technology is a tool, and in some cases that tool helps facilitate their actions.  Taking their technology does not require you to adopt, accept, or appove of their methods.  If you are a stone age civilization and found yourself fighting an industrial age civilization, you would not attempt to capture their guns and use those guns against your industrial age aggressors?

To your question, I reject that this is the binary choice I am offered.  Humanity requires a lot of defining as well before I could answer the question.  Right now I don't know what the price I'm being asked to pay, making the huge assumption that I have to fall into this binary trap.

If I was discussing the fact that it was used as a tool to grind people up and turn them into a proto-reaper goo than I’d understand your point, but I’m not discussing if it’s just morally right or wrong to keep it because of what it did or what it stand for. What I’m trying to say is that Shepard has hard evidence that the study of Reaper technology leads to indoctrination and that the technology eventually turns on those who try to wield it (see: Virmire or the Derelict Reaper) could you honestly hand a piece of technology like that over knowing that those who are subjected to it (much like the Leviathan) will become mindless slaves to the Reapers, who then in turn could eventually be planted in key areas of society to destroy entire civilizations? Or could you hand it over to a man who later proves that he has a deep interest in abducting people to huskify them for his own needs?

We as a player have even more proof of why it’s a poor decision to research Reaper tech such as The Arch Monolith in evolution or those affected by the research of Sovereign in Revelation or even Object Rho in Arrival. This is not to mention the other times brought up in ME2, Ascension, Invasion, Retribution or the countless reports in ME3 about those affected by Reaper indoctrination such as the Baterian Leviathan.

This is the point I’m argueing: a logical Shepard Renegade or Paragon would know that the Technology would cause incalculable harm for very little to no gain.

To summarize: it’d be like handing all your troops the guns of your enemies but forgeting to mention to them that after they fire their first round it’s rigid to blow both their hands off.

P.S. About binary choice, that a very fair call. It was wrong of me to force you into such a black and white choice, but sometimes they’re the only choices we are offered in life. Anyway, You say you don’t like being offered only two choices, but yet you played Mass Effect 3? You must have been stoked when the ending offered you three choices.

Modifié par Salient Archer, 10 juin 2012 - 12:26 .

[byne]

BleedingUranium wrote...


Do not ever trust the wiki. They will not tolerate speculation of any kind whatsoever. They won't, for example, mention that the Argus is a variant of the Mattock because it we aren't specificall told that anywhere, and looking at them is a visual comparison, which is "subjective". They also don't allow evidence for anything from Twitter, or BSN PMs, because they're "unconfirmed".

Wait, so does that mean their section on the Zha'til is correct, and that they never once rebelled until the Reapers forced them to do so?

[BleedingUranium]

byne wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...


Do not ever trust the wiki. They will not tolerate speculation of any kind whatsoever. They won't, for example, mention that the Argus is a variant of the Mattock because it we aren't specificall told that anywhere, and looking at them is a visual comparison, which is "subjective". They also don't allow evidence for anything from Twitter, or BSN PMs, because they're "unconfirmed".

Wait, so does that mean their section on the Zha'til is correct, and that they never once rebelled until the Reapers forced them to do so?

Was it explicitly stated in game? I honestly don't remember, but if it was, then yes. I doubt they have time to clean up every article all the time, so it could be wrong.

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 10 juin 2012 - 12:23 .

[byne]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...


And dont do it by redefining the meaning of rebel to mean 'doing what it was designed to do' like you did earlier.

The logic makes sense if you consider a broad meaning of "rebel".

.................................................................................really?

Rebel as any form of disagreement.

The Reapers weren't created by the Starchild. He never admits that, merely stating that the Reapers are his.

Paxxton, since I like you, I'm going to stop talking about this with you.

The more you defend godchild's ridiculous logic and jump through mental hoops to justify what he says, the more annoyed I get, and eventually if this continues I'll probably yell at you or something, since I'm kind of in a bad mood already, unrelated to this discussion.

[BleedingUranium]

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...


And dont do it by redefining the meaning of rebel to mean 'doing what it was designed to do' like you did earlier.

The logic makes sense if you consider a broad meaning of "rebel".

.................................................................................really?

Rebel as any form of disagreement.

The Reapers weren't created by the Starchild. He never admits that, merely stating that the Reapers are his.

Paxxton, since I like you, I'm going to stop talking about this with you.

The more you defend godchild's ridiculous logic and jump through mental hoops to justify what he says, the more annoyed I get, and eventually if this continues I'll probably yell at you or something, since I'm kind of in a bad mood already, unrelated to this discussion.

*hugs*

Also, that whole debate is pointless because we should be debating the word "always"

[paxxton]

senshi420 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Dwailing wrote....

MaximizedAction wrote....

Dwailing wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

You do realize that Bioware can just say no that is wrong and all they have to do is change there plan A to plan B.

Uh, they didn't change their plans after the other leak (The Rebellion leak.).  I doubt they'll do it now, not with so much at stake.

Yeah, too much steak.

I ****ing love steak!  (To quote Shep. )

Liara: I don't know how you do it.
Shep: Steak, Liara. I think about when there's so much steak.
Liara: ....ok?
Shep: I f***ing love steak.
Liara: I know. I wish I had your confidence.

You forgot the most hilarious line: 'Shepard, I'm the Reaper Doomsday Device."

Shep: Come on, Liara.
Liara: Sorry.
Shep: Something wrong?
Liara: Oh, you know....this and that.   Shepard I'm a REAPER DOOMSDAY DEVICE.
Shep: Oh, S***

Best line ever. Here is another.

Shep: The council put me in lockdown to keep the women off me. Didn't want problems but the situation changed.
James: What?
Shep: I'm Commander Shepard. Alliance Drag Queen.
James: Commander? What the f......

But the hallmark line of the whole Gamer Poop series is this:
Shepard: "I don't know how but... we'll bang, ok?"

youtu.be/wCWBi_7lqp4

[masster blaster]

byne is it because I am here since I do tend to start up a lot of talking with my poor misspelled grammar.

Sorry I ment you offf mood.

and please don't take it the wrong way just trying to bust morale up.

Modifié par masster blaster, 10 juin 2012 - 12:29 .

[Rifneno]

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

*sigh* You didn't prove the Starchild's logic doesn't make sense.

If you honestly think godchild's 'logic' makes sense, I dont know how to talk to you.

Its like talking to someone that tells me I cant prove.....   I cant even come up with a good analogy because his logic is so god damned flawed its ridiculous.

He's literally so wrong I cant comprehend it.

Yknow what?

Prove to me his logic is correct.

And dont do it by redefining the meaning of rebel to mean 'doing what it was designed to do' like you did earlier.

I'm still waiting for that clay ashtray I made in first grade to try to kill me.  It's a crafty little bastard, biding its time...

[byne]

masster blaster wrote...

byne is it because I am here since I do tend to start up a lot of talking with my poor misspelled grammar.

Nah, I like you too.

I'm just generally in a bad mood today. Dont know why.