587 réponses à ce sujet

[balance5050]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Wait.

Did you just change it to the non-existent cycle of Synthetics rebelling against organics?

And then back to harvesting?

One and the same, take your pick.

I'm asking Dreman.

This has been our conversation, he should be able to answer and clarify his mess.

Yes, I am saying it'sone in the same...And you still did not awnser why the star child guaranteed the cycle will come back with destroy , end with sysnthesis and is unclear with control.

Because he doesn't like destroy.

Because of Bioware's amazing art, Reapers think synthetics are bad and will rebel always and forever, based on nothing.

So, he doesn't want you destroy the Reapers and risk synthetics rebelling against organics. Even though they probably won't. Ever.

ARR! Ye be correct in that thar statement! Especially the non existent threat of singularity.

Modifié par balance5050, 19 mai 2012 - 04:58 .

[jijeebo]

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

First we talk about the cycle of harvesting and the harvesting ending, when apparently it doesn't end even though Star Brat said it ends, then it changes to the cycle of civilization ending and not ending. At the same time.

http://www.youtube.c...ZuSHpWwo#t=286s

Notice how he only talks about the cycle ending when he's purly talks abour synthesis...

"Releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle."

Yeah, right enough... Only for Synthesis.

Yet he goes on and tells me the the cycle will start agian if I pick destroy.....I wonder why?

My point is that the star child only gives a guarantee that the cycle will end with Synthesis. He guarentees that it will start again with destroy and he is never clear on that with control....Did you miss this?

Sorry, I didn't get what you were trying to say from your post.


I get ya now, thanks for clarifying. 

[dreman9999]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Wait.

Did you just change it to the non-existent cycle of Synthetics rebelling against organics?

And then back to harvesting?

No. I pointed out that the star child only guarantee's the cycle ends is sysnthesis and the h guarantess it will comeback with destory....And it unclear with  control. Also,that it still refered asmultiple any way via Javik and Liara.

You said harvesting wouldn't end, then you started talking about civilization ending. Or not ending. It was really, really confusing.

I mean all of it  except for harvesting...Havestion is just a means to how the reapers getwhat they want. It''s not the cycle. What the reapers want is to impose their ideals on organics, their ideals of evolution perfection. Turning them in to reaper is a means as well. The idea is to evolve organic life to a ploint they no linger are controlby their nature. The trap they set with the mass relaysis just a means to find organics being that it's near impossible to comb the galexy and find them. The mass relay is wa way to control where they goand makeit easier for organics to find.  The focus on advance organic likeisbecause they can never find and contol all organic life. If we are to say synthesis is true....the crucibleis anew and better way to control and find all organics.

But this is just about understanding the reapers.

My point in my last commets is that the star child only guaran tee systhesis ends the cycle to the point that it never comes back. He says destroy guarantees it will come back and he is never clear on this with control... You have to consider this is you are going to say what ends what.

[Applepie_Svk]

HagarIshay wrote...
But what if I don't agree with the destroy ending? I't not just about having a bittersweet or tragic ending. It's about IT prevents me from making a choice in a RPG game. What is the point of role playing if you can't play the role of your character as you see fit? 

 

  

Than you will pick your decision and live in land full of miracles, only one thing left the same - destroy was the only option since ME1 to survive. Look at Saren - he thought that Reapers will be pleased and let us survive after what Saren sacrifice weak species to Reaper´s pleasure. Yet lol his implant spoke otherwise ....

HagarIshay wrote... 
 
Well, if someone like Xen can screw things with synthetis or control, then someone like Xen can also recreate reapers. Different reasons, but will have the same outcome.

   

It was already said that Reaper technology is the most advanced, if someone like a Xen screw things and won´t find a solution in time than we all are lost. Yes rebuilding of Reapers is possibile but lol where do you get few - well, countless bilions of souls for rebuilding of Reapers.

HagarIshay wrote... 
 You also forget fans asked for your choices to have meaning in the end. How will the IT give us that, if there is only one option to win in?

    

The only meaning of IT is that the ending was a brainwash, as happened to Saren and Tim - they believed they can solve problem with their solutions but they were already lost due to indoctrination.
 

HagarIshay wrote... 
 
Everything can be changed. Even if it will be only clarifacation, it can still put the other choices in a bad way and destroy option as the fairytale end.  

   
It´s not true and yet it is - 
Not - they said that they give us clossure and clarification not full rebuild than there is not much space to manuevers
Yes - BioWare already prove that ME3 ending dissproved everything which was said to us in previous 2 games.

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 19 mai 2012 - 05:05 .

[dreman9999]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

First we talk about the cycle of harvesting and the harvesting ending, when apparently it doesn't end even though Star Brat said it ends, then it changes to the cycle of civilization ending and not ending. At the same time.

http://www.youtube.c...ZuSHpWwo#t=286s

Notice how he only talks about the cycle ending when he's purly talks abour synthesis...

"Releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle."

Yeah, right enough... Only for Synthesis.

Yet he goes on and tells me the the cycle will start agian if I pick destroy.....I wonder why?

My point is that the star child only gives a guarantee that the cycle will end with Synthesis. He guarentees that it will start again with destroy and he is never clear on that with control....Did you miss this?

Sorry, I didn't get what you were trying to say from your post.


I get ya now, thanks for clarifying. 

The star child said in the end "Relasing the energy of h crucible will end the cycle.." But when he talks about destroy early he says....
"Soon your children with creat synthetics and the cycle will come back"

This means he is making guarentees...And he just guarantees it will come back after you end it.....But with sysnthisis...

http://www.youtube.c...ZuSHpWwo#t=286s 

He guarantees it won't come back...

But where is this guarantee with control?

Modifié par dreman9999, 19 mai 2012 - 05:09 .

[Qutayba]

I tend to see IT as a set of theories, not just one "orthodox" theory. Some people, for example, think that this was BioWare's plan all along. Others see it as a possible interpretation that doesn't invalidate other interpretations. At this point, if it wasn't planned, which I suspect is the case, they should probably keep things vague enough that IT is still a possible, but not the only possible, interpretation. We don't need a canon.

[Ageless Face]

dreman9999 wrote...

I mean all of it  except for harvesting...Havestion is just a means to how the reapers getwhat they want. It''s not the cycle. What the reapers want is to impose their ideals on organics, their ideals of evolution perfection. Turning them in to reaper is a means as well. The idea is to evolve organic life to a ploint they no linger are controlby their nature. The trap they set with the mass relaysis just a means to find organics being that it's near impossible to comb the galexy and find them. The mass relay is wa way to control where they goand makeit easier for organics to find.  The focus on advance organic likeisbecause they can never find and contol all organic life. If we are to say synthesis is true....the crucibleis anew and better way to control and find all organics.

But this is just about understanding the reapers.

My point in my last commets is that the star child only guaran tee systhesis ends the cycle to the point that it never comes back. He says destroy guarantees it will come back and he is never clear on this with control... You have to consider this is you are going to say what ends what.

If synthesis is harvesting the organics, then why does the only change we see of Joker is green eyes and some sort of... green... tech on his skin? Why isn't he a husk?

Synthesis is working for both ways. Synthetics will also be modified. Why would the catalyst want to modify the synthetics if he can control them as he did for the heretics?

So maybe he doesn't want to control anyone? Just to find another solution to the problem?

[OH-UP-THIS!]

nlag wrote...

HagarIshay wrote...
  Do you remember, pro-IT, why you thought about the indoctrnation theory in the first place? you were angry/sad/confused/lost becacuse of the ending. Don't get me wrong, I think the IT is quite brilliant. The problem is, If BioWare is going to make the IT, or take ideas from it to the EC, it's going to leave fans who didn't choose the destroy option at the same place you were, even worse if they don't like the ending as it is now.

Let's be hypothetical here and lets say that Bioware planned IT from the beginning.

What people don't understand imho is that all 3 choices will play a part even if the IT is correct. The fact that you got Indoctrinated by choosing Control ending.

I will make a really poor and brief example... i apologize but i will make it as simple as i can.

what if IT is correct:

Bioware will release a DLC which will continue after your last choice.
Shepard wakes up and he is either Indoctrinated or not, depending on your initial choice right?

So the character is playable but you wont be able to choose some dialogue options.
Some of those options will be for indoctrinated Shepards and some not.
Imagine it like a Paragon/Renegade option which one of the two will be grayed out.

Now who sais that even in Indoctrinated Shepard case, Shepard wont be able to release himself or overcome the Indoctrination?

Think about it... thank you for reading.

I'm actually OK with this, if it's implemented PROPERLY of course.

and i'm a huge fan of IT, most versions of it, anyways.

Some of the IT variants are a bit out there, however there are several iterations that do follow canon.

[jijeebo]

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

First we talk about the cycle of harvesting and the harvesting ending, when apparently it doesn't end even though Star Brat said it ends, then it changes to the cycle of civilization ending and not ending. At the same time.

http://www.youtube.c...ZuSHpWwo#t=286s

Notice how he only talks about the cycle ending when he's purly talks abour synthesis...

"Releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle."

Yeah, right enough... Only for Synthesis.

Yet he goes on and tells me the the cycle will start agian if I pick destroy.....I wonder why?

My point is that the star child only gives a guarantee that the cycle will end with Synthesis. He guarentees that it will start again with destroy and he is never clear on that with control....Did you miss this?

Sorry, I didn't get what you were trying to say from your post.


I get ya now, thanks for clarifying. 

The star child said in the end "Relasing the energy of h crucible will end the cycle.." But when he talks about destroy early he says....
"Soon your children with creat synthetics and the cycle will come back"

This means he is making guarentees...And he just guarantees it will come back after you end it.....But with sysnthisis...

http://www.youtube.c...ZuSHpWwo#t=286s 

He guarantees it won't come back...

But where is this guarantee with control?

I literally just told you that I understand what you were saying... 

[dreman9999]

HagarIshay wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

I mean all of it  except for harvesting...Havestion is just a means to how the reapers getwhat they want. It''s not the cycle. What the reapers want is to impose their ideals on organics, their ideals of evolution perfection. Turning them in to reaper is a means as well. The idea is to evolve organic life to a ploint they no linger are controlby their nature. The trap they set with the mass relaysis just a means to find organics being that it's near impossible to comb the galexy and find them. The mass relay is wa way to control where they goand makeit easier for organics to find.  The focus on advance organic likeisbecause they can never find and contol all organic life. If we are to say synthesis is true....the crucibleis anew and better way to control and find all organics.

But this is just about understanding the reapers.

My point in my last commets is that the star child only guaran tee systhesis ends the cycle to the point that it never comes back. He says destroy guarantees it will come back and he is never clear on this with control... You have to consider this is you are going to say what ends what.

If synthesis is harvesting the organics, then why does the only change we see of Joker is green eyes and some sort of... green... tech on his skin? Why isn't he a husk?

Synthesis is working for both ways. Synthetics will also be modified. Why would the catalyst want to modify the synthetics if he can control them as he did for the heretics?

So maybe he doesn't want to control anyone? Just to find another solution to the problem?

1.I did not say synthesis is havesting...Quoting my self I said.."
If we are to say synthesis is true....the crucibleis a new and better way to control and find all organics."

This does not mean harvating. This is just finding organics...They don't need to havest any more becuae they have something better to use.

2.You don't uderstand the fact the organics don't need to be modified. The fact the reapersareimosing this on us iswrong and the fact that the reaperscan contol us with it makes it even more wrong.

[Leonardo the Magnificent]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

First we talk about the cycle of harvesting and the harvesting ending, when apparently it doesn't end even though Star Brat said it ends, then it changes to the cycle of civilization ending and not ending. At the same time.

http://www.youtube.c...ZuSHpWwo#t=286s

Notice how he only talks about the cycle ending when he's purly talks abour synthesis...

"Releasing the energy of the Crucible will end the cycle."

Yeah, right enough... Only for Synthesis.

Yet he goes on and tells me the the cycle will start agian if I pick destroy.....I wonder why?

My point is that the star child only gives a guarantee that the cycle will end with Synthesis. He guarentees that it will start again with destroy and he is never clear on that with control....Did you miss this?

Sorry, I didn't get what you were trying to say from your post.


I get ya now, thanks for clarifying. 

The star child said in the end "Relasing the energy of h crucible will end the cycle.." But when he talks about destroy early he says....
"Soon your children with creat synthetics and the cycle will come back"

This means he is making guarentees...And he just guarantees it will come back after you end it.....But with sysnthisis...

http://www.youtube.c...ZuSHpWwo#t=286s 

He guarantees it won't come back...

But where is this guarantee with control?

I literally just told you that I understand what you were saying... 

There's a reason I left the thread an hour ago. However, I still have no idea why I came back...

[Applepie_Svk]

If I should choose from Control or Synthesis and IT was false - than ofc it would be Synthesis, why ?
Morale statements:
- Control - your will become a Reaper´s will and it means that you will be dangerous power which will somewhere in dark space waiting and watching to other Species and serve as a solution to war threat OR as i said you will be Humanity´s whip which will subdue other species. None should had such a power which could bring a genocide upony his foes.

- Synthesis - will bring peace to everyone, knowlendge of Reapers will be ours and everyone will live in harmony - no disease, no disability, high inteligence and Reapers will dissapear.

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 19 mai 2012 - 05:17 .

[dreman9999]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Wait.

Did you just change it to the non-existent cycle of Synthetics rebelling against organics?

And then back to harvesting?

One and the same, take your pick.

I'm asking Dreman.

This has been our conversation, he should be able to answer and clarify his mess.

Yes, I am saying it'sone in the same...And you still did not awnser why the star child guaranteed the cycle will come back with destroy , end with sysnthesis and is unclear with control.

Because he doesn't like destroy.

Because of Bioware's amazing art, Reapers think synthetics are bad and will rebel always and forever, based on nothing.

So, he doesn't want you destroy the Reapers and risk synthetics rebelling against organics. Even though they probably won't. Ever.

*Sigh...Don't try to argue in this direction....The fact the we have limited info on past events and the reaper have near limitless info on it make the entrie argument flawed..The fact that we don't know mean we can't argue that it did not and will not happen.

Modifié par dreman9999, 19 mai 2012 - 05:20 .

[dreman9999]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

If I should choose from Control or Synthesis and IT was false - than ofc it would be Synthesis, why ?
Morale statements:
- Control - your will become a Reaper´s will and it means that you will be dangerous power which will somewhere in dark space waiting and watching to other Species and serve as a solution to war threat OR as i said you will be Humanity´s whip which will subdue other species. None should had such a power which could bring a genocide upony his foes.

- Synthesis - will bring peace to everyone, knowlendge of Reapers will be ours and everyone will live in harmony - no disease, no disability, high inteligence and Reapers will dissapear.

But the reapers are still there with the ability to control everyone via implnts...And IT can only be false if it's proven the reaper never  could attempt to influence Shepard .

[Hadeedak]

Qutayba wrote...

I tend to see IT as a set of theories, not just one "orthodox" theory. Some people, for example, think that this was BioWare's plan all along. Others see it as a possible interpretation that doesn't invalidate other interpretations. At this point, if it wasn't planned, which I suspect is the case, they should probably keep things vague enough that IT is still a possible, but not the only possible, interpretation. We don't need a canon.

That'd be fun. And probably ideal. I do wish they'd deal with it somehow... Without invalidating people who don't feel like killing their synthetic buddies. Mass Effect has had a shortage of patently wrong single choices up until now, and it'd be a shame if they felt the need to break that streak.

I mean, I think this would literally be the only time where choosing between 3 things would result in a critical mission failure, in the version of IT these guys have been arguing about. And I don't like that in my Mass Effect. It's at its best when it's not absolute and there's moral and logical reasons for each choice you could make.

[Ageless Face]

Applepie_Svk wrote...


Than you will pick your decision and live in land full of miracles, only one thing left the same - destroy was the only option since ME1 to survive. Look at Saren - he thought that Reapers will be pleased and let us survive after what Saren sacrifice weak species to Reaper´s pleasure. Yet lol his implant spoke otherwise .... 

 

First of all, that is not entirly true. You can save the collector base for future knowlage. Destroy is the only option until you are giving other solutions. 

 

It was already said that Reaper technology is the most advanced, if someone like a Xen screw things and won´t find a solution in time than we all are lost. Yes rebuilding of Reapers is possibile but lol where do you get few - well, countless bilions of souls for rebuilding of Reapers.

 

Actually after the reaper war it'll be the perfect time. You will have the leftovers of the reapers. Why do you think no one will use them? 
 

  
It´s not true and yet it is - 
Not - they said that they give us clossure and clarification not full rebuild than there is not much space to manuevers
Yes - BioWare already prove that ME3 ending dissproved everything which was said to us in previous 2 games.

Well, I didn't wanted to say it like that... But that is sadly my point. A change of the ending is very likely.

[Leonardo the Magnificent]

dreman9999 wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

If I should choose from Control or Synthesis and IT was false - than ofc it would be Synthesis, why ?
Morale statements:
- Control - your will become a Reaper´s will and it means that you will be dangerous power which will somewhere in dark space waiting and watching to other Species and serve as a solution to war threat OR as i said you will be Humanity´s whip which will subdue other species. None should had such a power which could bring a genocide upony his foes.

- Synthesis - will bring peace to everyone, knowlendge of Reapers will be ours and everyone will live in harmony - no disease, no disability, high inteligence and Reapers will dissapear.

But the reapers are still there with the ability to control everyone via implnts...And IT can only be false if it's proven the reaper never  could attempt to influence Shepard .

IT could also be proven false via the EC not using IT. As it stands, it's just one of the several interpretations of the current endings. However, it also commands the most zeal.

[jijeebo]

Leonardo the Magnificent wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


Sorry, I didn't get what you were trying to say from your post.


I get ya now, thanks for clarifying. 

The star child said in the end "Relasing the energy of h crucible will end the cycle.." But when he talks about destroy early he says....
"Soon your children with creat synthetics and the cycle will come back"

This means he is making guarentees...And he just guarantees it will come back after you end it.....But with sysnthisis...

http://www.youtube.c...ZuSHpWwo#t=286s 

He guarantees it won't come back...

But where is this guarantee with control?

I literally just told you that I understand what you were saying... 

There's a reason I left the thread an hour ago. However, I still have no idea why I came back...

You're obviously indoctrinated. 

[dreman9999]

Leonardo the Magnificent wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

If I should choose from Control or Synthesis and IT was false - than ofc it would be Synthesis, why ?
Morale statements:
- Control - your will become a Reaper´s will and it means that you will be dangerous power which will somewhere in dark space waiting and watching to other Species and serve as a solution to war threat OR as i said you will be Humanity´s whip which will subdue other species. None should had such a power which could bring a genocide upony his foes.

- Synthesis - will bring peace to everyone, knowlendge of Reapers will be ours and everyone will live in harmony - no disease, no disability, high inteligence and Reapers will dissapear.

But the reapers are still there with the ability to control everyone via implnts...And IT can only be false if it's proven the reaper never  could attempt to influence Shepard .

IT could also be proven false via the EC not using IT. As it stands, it's just one of the several interpretations of the current endings. However, it also commands the most zeal.

The onlyway IT can't be used is if EC show that the reaper were never able to influce shepard.....
They are 3 versions of IT.
1. Dream theory. This is the most popular one that everyone know. It the one that stated everything is an indoctriantion dream...This one stands ou by having Shepard still on earth.

2. Hallucination Theory. This is the second more know theory. It's one where Shepard is awake but is theoried that every thing he sees before him is an illusion or soon end up being in his head only. This one can have Shepard on the citadel but has the entire converstion with TIM and Anderson an illusion of indoctrination as well as the Star child.

3. Inflence theory. This is the one that has everything as real but it one that the reaper are trying to subminally influence Shepards choices with indoctrination and warping his perpective. This is inflence by the idea how reaper are more convincing with indoctrination. This also can murge with Hallucination theory as well with the star child or have the scene that happen be real in away.(Meaning the star child can be an illusion but Shepard is at that place.) 
.....
Any one of them can be used for EC.  The only way IT dies is if it's shown that the reaper are not trying to influence Shepard.

[Leonardo the Magnificent]

jijeebo wrote...

Leonardo the Magnificent wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


Sorry, I didn't get what you were trying to say from your post.


I get ya now, thanks for clarifying. 

The star child said in the end "Relasing the energy of h crucible will end the cycle.." But when he talks about destroy early he says....
"Soon your children with creat synthetics and the cycle will come back"

This means he is making guarentees...And he just guarantees it will come back after you end it.....But with sysnthisis...

http://www.youtube.c...ZuSHpWwo#t=286s 

He guarantees it won't come back...

But where is this guarantee with control?

I literally just told you that I understand what you were saying... 

There's a reason I left the thread an hour ago. However, I still have no idea why I came back...

You're obviously indoctrinated. 

That's just stupid enough that it might be the only possible answer.

[estebanus]

HagarIshay wrote...

estebanus wrote...

I still don't see how "your choices matter" is the same as "every goddamn choice you made is the damn right one."

Look,
you say you want Shepard to have an heroic death, right? Well, if that
is the case, then control is not for you, even if taken at face-value.

You want to know why?

Because you're dead. And you died for nothing.

Shepard cannot control the reapers, because s/he is dead. Get it?

If Shepard can control the reapers, then s/he is not dead, s/he has been doomed to eternal existence. Doesn't this also screw over Shepard's storyline?

In the case of the script, Shepard can still save the galaxy at the cost of his/her own life. But only if you made the right choices. If you din't then you die. And you know what? You deserve it.

You fell under the reapers' spell. At least you can still save the galaxy, although be it at the cost of your own life.

How is this not a heroic death? Because it's one of your friends that kills you? Well, if that's the case, I don't think that you understand the premise of what a heroic death actually is. It is when you sacrifice yourself to save someone else. If your sacrifice makes the difference between life and death everywhere.

THAT is what a heroic death is.

The catalyst is, again, a ghost. Means he is dead. If he is dead, and can control the reaper, why not Shepard?

Your point about Shepard's life being screwed anyway is true, I admit. I'd rather Shepard to die while saving everyone else, but it does seem to good to be true.

But the script is adding an insult to injury. Not only you're not controlling the reapers and save everyone, you are also indoctrinated , and on top of that, one of Shepard's best friends is killing her/him, when the end choice in the script could have ended with the rachni queen saving Shepard (or not). Adding the indoctrination to it was relevant...Why?

Wait... Who said that the catalyst was a ghost?! Also, ghosts don't exist, and Shepard is dead, NOT a ghost.

What is the problem with one of Shepard's best firends killing him? Would you rather it'd be a random enemy grunt?

So first you're saying that if you picked control you're screwed either way, but now that a viable option out of indoctrination exists, you don't want it BECAUSE Shepard is not indoctrinated? I don't get it.

Also, I think you may have read the script the wrong way, because it doesn't seem like you even understood what the hell was written down.

[dreman9999]

Hadeedak wrote...

Qutayba wrote...

I tend to see IT as a set of theories, not just one "orthodox" theory. Some people, for example, think that this was BioWare's plan all along. Others see it as a possible interpretation that doesn't invalidate other interpretations. At this point, if it wasn't planned, which I suspect is the case, they should probably keep things vague enough that IT is still a possible, but not the only possible, interpretation. We don't need a canon.

That'd be fun. And probably ideal. I do wish they'd deal with it somehow... Without invalidating people who don't feel like killing their synthetic buddies. Mass Effect has had a shortage of patently wrong single choices up until now, and it'd be a shame if they felt the need to break that streak.

I mean, I think this would literally be the only time where choosing between 3 things would result in a critical mission failure, in the version of IT these guys have been arguing about. And I don't like that in my Mass Effect. It's at its best when it's not absolute and there's moral and logical reasons for each choice you could make.

But those choice can be argued as wrong even without IT...

[Leonardo the Magnificent]

dreman9999 wrote...

Leonardo the Magnificent wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

If I should choose from Control or Synthesis and IT was false - than ofc it would be Synthesis, why ?
Morale statements:
- Control - your will become a Reaper´s will and it means that you will be dangerous power which will somewhere in dark space waiting and watching to other Species and serve as a solution to war threat OR as i said you will be Humanity´s whip which will subdue other species. None should had such a power which could bring a genocide upony his foes.

- Synthesis - will bring peace to everyone, knowlendge of Reapers will be ours and everyone will live in harmony - no disease, no disability, high inteligence and Reapers will dissapear.

But the reapers are still there with the ability to control everyone via implnts...And IT can only be false if it's proven the reaper never  could attempt to influence Shepard .

IT could also be proven false via the EC not using IT. As it stands, it's just one of the several interpretations of the current endings. However, it also commands the most zeal.

The onlyway IT can't be used is if EC show that the reaper were never able to influce shepard.....
They are 3 versions of IT.
1. Dream theory. This is the most popular one that everyone know. It the one that stated everything is an indoctriantion dream...This one stands ou by having Shepard still on earth.

2. Hallucination Theory. This is the second more know theory. It's one where Shepard is awake but is theoried that every thing he sees before him is an illusion or soon end up being in his head only. This one can have Shepard on the citadel but has the entire converstion with TIM and Anderson an illusion of indoctrination as well as the Star child.

3. Inflence theory. This is the one that has everything as real but it one that the reaper are trying to subminally influence Shepards choices with indoctrination and warping his perpective. This is inflence by the idea how reaper are more convincing with indoctrination. This also can murge with Hallucination theory as well with the star child or have the scene that happen be real in away.(Meaning the star child can be an illusion but Shepard is at that place.) 
.....
Any one of them can be used for EC.  The only way IT dies is if it's shown that the reaper are not trying to influence Shepard.

That did absolutely nothing to advance the discussion. We're still at the point where if they don't use IT, then IT isn't true. Now you're just trying to make the scroll bar smaller.

[dreman9999]

estebanus wrote...

HagarIshay wrote...

estebanus wrote...

I still don't see how "your choices matter" is the same as "every goddamn choice you made is the damn right one."

Look,
you say you want Shepard to have an heroic death, right? Well, if that
is the case, then control is not for you, even if taken at face-value.

You want to know why?

Because you're dead. And you died for nothing.

Shepard cannot control the reapers, because s/he is dead. Get it?

If Shepard can control the reapers, then s/he is not dead, s/he has been doomed to eternal existence. Doesn't this also screw over Shepard's storyline?

In the case of the script, Shepard can still save the galaxy at the cost of his/her own life. But only if you made the right choices. If you din't then you die. And you know what? You deserve it.

You fell under the reapers' spell. At least you can still save the galaxy, although be it at the cost of your own life.

How is this not a heroic death? Because it's one of your friends that kills you? Well, if that's the case, I don't think that you understand the premise of what a heroic death actually is. It is when you sacrifice yourself to save someone else. If your sacrifice makes the difference between life and death everywhere.

THAT is what a heroic death is.

The catalyst is, again, a ghost. Means he is dead. If he is dead, and can control the reaper, why not Shepard?

Your point about Shepard's life being screwed anyway is true, I admit. I'd rather Shepard to die while saving everyone else, but it does seem to good to be true.

But the script is adding an insult to injury. Not only you're not controlling the reapers and save everyone, you are also indoctrinated , and on top of that, one of Shepard's best friends is killing her/him, when the end choice in the script could have ended with the rachni queen saving Shepard (or not). Adding the indoctrination to it was relevant...Why?

Wait... Who said that the catalyst was a ghost?! Also, ghosts don't exist, and Shepard is dead, NOT a ghost.

What is the problem with one of Shepard's best firends killing him? Would you rather it'd be a random enemy grunt?

So first you're saying that if you picked control you're screwed either way, but now that a viable option out of indoctrination exists, you don't want it BECAUSE Shepard is not indoctrinated? I don't get it.

Also, I think you may have read the script the wrong way, because it doesn't seem like you even understood what the hell was written down.

Welcome to my arguement that he is in denial.

[Leonardo the Magnificent]

dreman9999 wrote...

Hadeedak wrote...

Qutayba wrote...

I tend to see IT as a set of theories, not just one "orthodox" theory. Some people, for example, think that this was BioWare's plan all along. Others see it as a possible interpretation that doesn't invalidate other interpretations. At this point, if it wasn't planned, which I suspect is the case, they should probably keep things vague enough that IT is still a possible, but not the only possible, interpretation. We don't need a canon.

That'd be fun. And probably ideal. I do wish they'd deal with it somehow... Without invalidating people who don't feel like killing their synthetic buddies. Mass Effect has had a shortage of patently wrong single choices up until now, and it'd be a shame if they felt the need to break that streak.

I mean, I think this would literally be the only time where choosing between 3 things would result in a critical mission failure, in the version of IT these guys have been arguing about. And I don't like that in my Mass Effect. It's at its best when it's not absolute and there's moral and logical reasons for each choice you could make.

But those choice can be argued as wrong even without IT...

And they can just as easily be argued as right. You're not really a fan of alternate interpretations, are you?