4520 réponses à ce sujet

[DirtyPhoenix]

Seival wrote...

Well, Some Destroyers actually wanna The Reapers to be punished at any cost. It's just their way of thinking. But, yes most people are still fear to choose Control, because "something might go wrong". They just don't understand that outcome depends on their own Shepards. While they believe their Shepards are not ready, they will always fear Control...

...So basically, one of the first steps towards Control is to believe that your Shepard is ready for this. Without that belief you will fail no matter what were your reasons to choose Control.

They are blinded by vengeance Reapers were controlled by the catalyst, to punish the reapers for it is like punishing Shepard for Anderson's death. Seems legit. Also. different people have different ideas of a perfect victory. For some it is the utter and total anihilation of the enemy. For me, it is making your enemy realise the follies of his action and letting him come around to your point of view. Which is why I chose synthesis. I can't let blind revenge destroy millions of years worth of civilizations, their memories and knowledge. Sorry In synthesis they are free now.

Modifié par pirate1802, 04 août 2012 - 04:08 .

[Seival]

pirate1802 wrote...

Can you point me to a tutorial or something that I might follow?

Well, one of my friends (who is an artist) told me that the only good way to learn how to draw, is to get some reference pictures, and try to repeat something from them on the blank canvas. Just watch the reference and repeat. Again, again, and again. The more you repeat, the easier for you to understand object's proportions and physics of lighting.

Also, programs like GIMP 2 have a lot of tools which help to automate some drawing processes. For example, I used Grid and Spread filters to create skyscrapper's windows in minutes. The more tools of a picture-creating program you know, the faster you can create pictures.

...There are many GIMP 2 tutorials in the internet. Example:
http://www.webdesign...teps.17155.html

Modifié par Seival, 04 août 2012 - 04:09 .

[Seival]

pirate1802 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Well, Some Destroyers actually wanna The Reapers to be punished at any cost. It's just their way of thinking. But, yes most people are still fear to choose Control, because "something might go wrong". They just don't understand that outcome depends on their own Shepards. While they believe their Shepards are not ready, they will always fear Control...

...So basically, one of the first steps towards Control is to believe that your Shepard is ready for this. Without that belief you will fail no matter what were your reasons to choose Control.

They are blinded by vengeance Reapers were controlled by the catalyst, to punish the reapers for it is like punishing Shepard for Anderson's death. Seems legit. Also. different people have different ideas of a perfect victory. For some it is the utter and total anihilation of the enemy. For me, it is making your enemy realise the follies of his action and letting him come around to your point of view. Which is why I chose synthesis. I can't let blind revenge destroy millions of years worth of civilizations, their memories and knowledge. Sorry In synthesis they are free now.

And in Control they still have a collective mind, but this mind has Commander Shepard's way of thinking and memories. "The Reapers" become the wisest creature ever existed... 

...Destroying your enemies can't fix any mistakes they made. It only can satisfy some angry people, nothing more. And refusing to make any choice will only force your enemy to repeat their mistakes, and also to make sure noone will be able to rebel ever again.

[Seival]

By the way. I think I've just found one more new name for Catalyst-Shepard...

...Commander Reapard

[CrutchCricket]

Comsky159 wrote...

So from what I see the only real argument people have against control is that 'something might go wrong'?

Pretty vapid honestly, especially given those substantive detriments lying in the destroy and synthesis options.

Don't let the triviality of it fool you. That's enough for haters to latch on to and for true zealots "might" becomes "will".

Then there's those aweful smug one-liner "refutes". I think I dislike them most of all because they're the most numerous by far.

[UKillMeLongTime]

Destroy or even refusal for me.

Control is too 'God like" and synthesis is just creepy as hell and determining everythings fate based on your one decision.

[DirtyPhoenix]

UKillMeLongTime wrote...

Destroy or even refusal for me.

Control is too 'God like" and synthesis is just creepy as hell and determining everythings fate based on your one decision.

So did you take a galactic vote before refusing?
Did you ask the Geth if they are ok with being killed before shooting the pipe? Who knows how many human's fates have you sealed, would they be ok, did you ask for their opinion?

Each decision you take is you forcing your opinion on the rest of the galaxy. Not just control or synthesis.

[Ageless Face]

pirate1802 wrote...
So did you take a galactic vote before refusing?
Did you ask the Geth if they are ok with being killed before shooting the pipe? Who knows how many human's fates have you sealed, would they be ok, did you ask for their opinion?

Each decision you take is you forcing your opinion on the rest of the galaxy. Not just control or synthesis.

Well, refuse doesn't really force anyone to do anything.

But it just seems sad. The one choice that doesn't force the galaxy into anything, is also what I think the choice the galaxy will hate the most. What does the people in the galaxy cares about a little ghost boy, a lazer just hit their home and their friends got turned into goo! I'd imagine they will like to make it out alive.

[DirtyPhoenix]

Well in a way it does. Shepard forces a death sentence of every reapable- species out there with his/her inability to make a decision. Which, to me, is more abominable than the other three choices combined.

[Ageless Face]

Lack of action =/= forcing

How can you force something on anyone if you didn't do anything?

Modifié par HagarIshay, 04 août 2012 - 05:59 .

[estebanus]

HagarIshay wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...
Something might go wrong in all the endings. Destroyers refuse to accept it, synthesizers and controllers largely accept it as part of the decision. The only ending where something might not go wrong in future is refusal... because all the wrong has already happened!

Could be worse... Could be raining. 

Hagar, I already told you this once: Refusal isn't about the consequences of that choice, it's what the choice itself represents.

[Ageless Face]

estebanus wrote...
Hagar, I already told you this once: Refusal isn't about the consequences of that choice, it's what the choice itself represents.

I know... Doesn't mean I'm not allowed to hate it.  C'mon, you say you hate synthesis. I'd imagine someone tried to explain to you the choice. Does it mean you are not allowed to hate the choice anymore?

I like what the choice represents. But the consequences (which are there, cannot deny that) are too big for me to ignore.

[Ericus]

pirate1802 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Well, Some Destroyers actually wanna The Reapers to be punished at any cost. It's just their way of thinking. But, yes most people are still fear to choose Control, because "something might go wrong". They just don't understand that outcome depends on their own Shepards. While they believe their Shepards are not ready, they will always fear Control...

...So basically, one of the first steps towards Control is to believe that your Shepard is ready for this. Without that belief you will fail no matter what were your reasons to choose Control.

They are blinded by vengeance Reapers were controlled by the catalyst, to punish the reapers for it is like punishing Shepard for Anderson's death. Seems legit. Also. different people have different ideas of a perfect victory. For some it is the utter and total anihilation of the enemy. For me, it is making your enemy realise the follies of his action and letting him come around to your point of view. Which is why I chose synthesis. I can't let blind revenge destroy millions of years worth of civilizations, their memories and knowledge. Sorry In synthesis they are free now.

I find it interesting that Destroyers often say the whole point of the game is to 'kill' the Reapers.  I always thought the point was to 'stop' the Reapers, or more specifically, to stop them from reaping all advanced civilizations.  How each player (and their Shepard) defines the goal is really important here.  If the goal is to kill, then I understand why somebody would pick Destroy.  But from my perspective that was never the real goal, and that makes the other options (except Refuse) viable.

[DirtyPhoenix]

HagarIshay wrote...

Lack of action =/= forcing

How can you force something on anyone if you didn't do anything?

If someone is dying before you, you are just standing and you have the ability to save him yet you don't.. then you are partially responsible for his death no?

[estebanus]

HagarIshay wrote...

estebanus wrote...
Hagar, I already told you this once: Refusal isn't about the consequences of that choice, it's what the choice itself represents.

I know... Doesn't mean I'm not allowed to hate it.  C'mon, you say you hate synthesis. I'd imagine someone tried to explain to you the choice. Does it mean you are not allowed to hate the choice anymore?

I like what the choice represents. But the consequences (which are there, cannot deny that) are too big for me to ignore.

I understand you. Really, I do. I'm just saying that refusal is the most philosophical ending.

[DirtyPhoenix]

Ericus wrote...

I find it interesting that Destroyers often say the whole point of the game is to 'kill' the Reapers.  I always thought the point was to 'stop' the Reapers, or more specifically, to stop them from reaping all advanced civilizations.  How each player (and their Shepard) defines the goal is really important here.  If the goal is to kill, then I understand why somebody would pick Destroy.  But from my perspective that was never the real goal, and that makes the other options (except Refuse) viable.

Yes that is true. And the ONLY reason they say kill the reapers is because the other options (control, synthesis) were not foreshadowed properly. They were literally dropped on our head at the last moment. We didn't even know other options existed except for the last moment.

So, think of it like this: You are told that a man has this very dangerous form of contageous disease. And the only way to stop it from spreading is to kill the man through a deadly injection. But when you reach the man with the toxin, he tells you there are ways to cure the disease without killing him. Because we didn't know he the disease could be cured without killing him, you were ordered to kill him. But now that you know it is possible, would you explore the other alternatives? Or would you go ahead with killing the man, because you were ordered to do so based on an inaccurate assumption?

Hope I made sense

[Ageless Face]

pirate1802 wrote...
If someone is dying before you, you are just standing and you have the ability to save him yet you don't.. then you are partially responsible for his death no?

Yes, you are responsible for his death for not doing anything to save him when you could. But you weren't the person the killed him, therefore you didn't force anything. Even saving him without you asking him wether he wanted you to save him will be considered forcing (not that it's bad, don't get me wrong).

[DirtyPhoenix]

HagarIshay wrote...

Yes, you are responsible for his death for not doing anything to save him when you could. But you weren't the person the killed him, therefore you didn't force anything. Even saving him without you asking him wether he wanted you to save him will be considered forcing (not that it's bad, don't get me wrong).

So Shepard is atleast partially responsible for all the death that happens after he/she refuses, even though he himself didn't reap them. I understand what you're saying.. its just hard to see the technicality behind a galaxy worth of dead people. :/

[TheStupidJellyFish]

After viewing all the endings I can't bring myself to side with Control or Synthesis. The fact that they're made out to be the "better" choices doesn't make sense to me.

[Seival]

Ericus wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Well, Some Destroyers actually wanna The Reapers to be punished at any cost. It's just their way of thinking. But, yes most people are still fear to choose Control, because "something might go wrong". They just don't understand that outcome depends on their own Shepards. While they believe their Shepards are not ready, they will always fear Control...

...So basically, one of the first steps towards Control is to believe that your Shepard is ready for this. Without that belief you will fail no matter what were your reasons to choose Control.

They are blinded by vengeance Reapers were controlled by the catalyst, to punish the reapers for it is like punishing Shepard for Anderson's death. Seems legit. Also. different people have different ideas of a perfect victory. For some it is the utter and total anihilation of the enemy. For me, it is making your enemy realise the follies of his action and letting him come around to your point of view. Which is why I chose synthesis. I can't let blind revenge destroy millions of years worth of civilizations, their memories and knowledge. Sorry In synthesis they are free now.

I find it interesting that Destroyers often say the whole point of the game is to 'kill' the Reapers.  I always thought the point was to 'stop' the Reapers, or more specifically, to stop them from reaping all advanced civilizations.  How each player (and their Shepard) defines the goal is really important here.  If the goal is to kill, then I understand why somebody would pick Destroy.  But from my perspective that was never the real goal, and that makes the other options (except Refuse) viable.

+1

[Seival]

HagarIshay wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...
If someone is dying before you, you are just standing and you have the ability to save him yet you don't.. then you are partially responsible for his death no?

Yes, you are responsible for his death for not doing anything to save him when you could. But you weren't the person the killed him, therefore you didn't force anything. Even saving him without you asking him wether he wanted you to save him will be considered forcing (not that it's bad, don't get me wrong).

I think we have the other case here. Galactic Civilization asked Shepard for help, and made her responsible for that help. Refusing to help after what happened, and after you gained the real ability to help, is the most dirty and disgusting murder history ever knew.

[Ageless Face]

Seival wrote...
I think we have the other case here. Galactic Civilization asked Shepard for help, and made her responsible for that help. Refusing to help after what happened, and after you gained the real ability to help, is the most dirty and disgusting murder history ever knew.

What you feel about the ending itself is irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact Shepard didn't force the choice on anyone. S/he just let things happen on their own.

Responsible for the death- yes. The cause of the death- no.

[Seival]

HagarIshay wrote...

Seival wrote...
I think we have the other case here. Galactic Civilization asked Shepard for help, and made her responsible for that help. Refusing to help after what happened, and after you gained the real ability to help, is the most dirty and disgusting murder history ever knew.

What you feel about the ending itself is irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact Shepard didn't force the choice on anyone. S/he just let things happen on their own.

Responsible for the death- yes. The cause of the death- no.

Yes, but I think in case of Refusal to be "responsible" is even worse than to be the one, who caused the death. Anyone responsible for someone's death is also the murderer. And in case of Refusal the "responsible" commits the worse crime, than the one, who caused the death.

[Ageless Face]

Seival wrote...
Yes, but I think in case of Refusal to be "responsible" is even worse than to be the one, who caused the death. Anyone responsible for someone's death is also the murderer. And in case of Refusal the "responsible" commits the worse crime, than the one, who caused the death.

No, people who chose refuse are definitely not worse than the Reapers or the catalyst, in my opinion. However much I hate this ending and don't agree with choosing it, refusers didn't refuse for people to get killed. They simply refused the catalyst and his choices, logic, didn't trust him... They refused to kill the synthetics themselves, and they refused to pick an option where the reapers aren't dead.

Refusers may responsible for the death, but they weren't the murderers, and they had no intention for this to happen. And from what I understand, refusers see the RBG endings like Submission to the Reapers in some way. They would rather die free than submit to them or accept them. As much as I disagree with that thinking (since the choices are coming from the Crucible, has nothing to do with the Reapers), people's intentions are far from bad.

[Seival]

HagarIshay wrote...

Seival wrote...
Yes, but I think in case of Refusal to be "responsible" is even worse than to be the one, who caused the death. Anyone responsible for someone's death is also the murderer. And in case of Refusal the "responsible" commits the worse crime, than the one, who caused the death.

No, people who chose refuse are definitely not worse than the Reapers or the catalyst, in my opinion. However much I hate this ending and don't agree with choosing it, refusers didn't refuse for people to get killed. They simply refused the catalyst and his choices, logic, didn't trust him... They refused to kill the synthetics themselves, and they refused to pick an option where the reapers aren't dead.

Refusers may responsible for the death, but they weren't the murderers, and they had no intention for this to happen. And from what I understand, refusers see the RBG endings like Submission to the Reapers in some way. They would rather die free than submit to them or accept them. As much as I disagree with that thinking (since the choices are coming from the Crucible, has nothing to do with the Reapers), people's intentions are far from bad.

Well, I think Refusers should understand that by Refusal they allow Galactic Civilization to be submitted to the Reapers literally, not in "some hypothetical way". And only Shepard will probably die free in this case - already critically wounded, and have a pistol to "finish the job". Everyone else will be harvested by the Reapers in regular way. My opinion is that Refusal is commiting the genocide of the entire Galactic Civilization.

...Moreover, I think Refusal is the logical reason for the original Catalist to make sure noone will be able to use Crucible or anything similar again.