4520 réponses à ce sujet

[DirtyPhoenix]

Saying emotionless machines can't tell right from wrong is straying too close to catalyst-logic I'm afraid. The AIs of MEU have repeatedly demonstrated you don't need emotions to know what is right and wrong.

[Seival]

It's time for some more Control ending fan art. Just finished this picture:

[CrutchCricket]

Seival wrote...

Oh look it's that one Reaper the Leviathans sucker-punched.

"What'd I miss guys? And who's Shepard and why is it in my head?"

[Some Gamer Guy]

Seival wrote...

It's time for some more Control ending fan art. Just finished this picture:

That's awesome. Thanks for sharing.

The Reapers could use a vacation after their existence consisted so much of war and floating out in deep space.

(or is Catalyst-Shepard mourning Ashley/Kaiden? I can't tell)

Modifié par Some Gamer Guy, 10 février 2013 - 11:42 .

[Hadeedak]

Reaper fieldtrip.

[Obadiah]

Just had a disturbing thought. What if the Catalyst we meet is just the last guy that managed to get up to the control room 100 cycles ago and take control of the Reapers? What if everyone that takes control eventually accepts the Reaper's logic and starts the cycles again.

Oooooooo...

Modifié par Obadiah, 11 février 2013 - 06:04 .

[CynicalShep]

Obadiah wrote...

Just had a disturbing thought. What if the Catalyst we meet is just the last guy that managed to get up to the control room 100 cycles ago and take control of the Reapers? What if everyone that takes control eventually accepts the Reaper's logic and starts the cycles again.

Oooooooo...

Only possible if we assume GlowJob is lying to us. If that is indeed the case then my whole ME experience is a lie.

Modifié par CynicalShep, 11 février 2013 - 06:11 .

[Obadiah]

The Catalyst wouldn't be lying if it came to view itself as an extension of the same AI that existed before.

Hmm, it does say that Shep is the first organic to set foot in the room. What if the last being to set foot in the room and assume control was a Synthetic?

Modifié par Obadiah, 11 février 2013 - 07:19 .

[Linkforlife]

Seival wrote...

It's time for some more Control ending fan art. Just finished this picture:

Hey, leave Harbinger alone. He wants to go skinny dipping in peace.

[Seival]

Obadiah wrote...

Just had a disturbing thought. What if the Catalyst we meet is just the last guy that managed to get up to the control room 100 cycles ago and take control of the Reapers? What if everyone that takes control eventually accepts the Reaper's logic and starts the cycles again.

Oooooooo...

100 minds accepted someone's logic as an exact guide to action doesn't guarantee that 101st one will also do so. Unlike other endings, Control provides several possible outcomes.

Modifié par Seival, 19 février 2013 - 08:07 .

[TheCrazyHobo]

Seival wrote...

Obadiah wrote...

Just had a disturbing thought. What if the Catalyst we meet is just the last guy that managed to get up to the control room 100 cycles ago and take control of the Reapers? What if everyone that takes control eventually accepts the Reaper's logic and starts the cycles again.

Oooooooo...

100 minds accepted someone's logic doesn't guarantee that 101st one will also accept it.

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination! 

[Seival]

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination!

It was not the Catalyst who invented it. All Reapers partially based on Leviathan's DNA. Catalyst just uses Leviathans' natural abilities.

If Catalyst talks to you, it doesn't mean it wants to mind-control you. The same goes for the Leviathans. You can convince someone without using any "magic". Convincing may also be called influence, yes. But unlike mind-control or intimidating, convincing is friendly influence.

Modifié par Seival, 19 février 2013 - 08:21 .

[Commander Wookie]

Seival wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination!

It was not the Catalyst who invented it. All Reapers partially based on Leviathan's DNA. Catalyst just uses Leviathans' natural abilities.

If Catalyst talks to you, it doesn't mean it wants to mind-control you. The same goes for the Leviathans. You can convince someone without using any "magic". Convincing may also be called influence, yes. But unlike mind-control or intimidating, convincing is friendly influence.

Just a question, at what point can you tell the difference from friendly influence and subjugated mind control?<_<

[Red Panda]

Commander Wookie wrote...

Seival wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination!

It was not the Catalyst who invented it. All Reapers partially based on Leviathan's DNA. Catalyst just uses Leviathans' natural abilities.

If Catalyst talks to you, it doesn't mean it wants to mind-control you. The same goes for the Leviathans. You can convince someone without using any "magic". Convincing may also be called influence, yes. But unlike mind-control or intimidating, convincing is friendly influence.

Just a question, at what point can you tell the difference from friendly influence and subjugated mind control?<_<

Reduction of higher functions like the ability to reason.

[Seival]

Commander Wookie wrote...

Seival wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination!

It was not the Catalyst who invented it. All Reapers partially based on Leviathan's DNA. Catalyst just uses Leviathans' natural abilities.

If Catalyst talks to you, it doesn't mean it wants to mind-control you. The same goes for the Leviathans. You can convince someone without using any "magic". Convincing may also be called influence, yes. But unlike mind-control or intimidating, convincing is friendly influence.

Just a question, at what point can you tell the difference from friendly influence and subjugated mind control?<_<

At any point.

[Red Panda]

Seival wrote...

Commander Wookie wrote...

Seival wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination!

It was not the Catalyst who invented it. All Reapers partially based on Leviathan's DNA. Catalyst just uses Leviathans' natural abilities.

If Catalyst talks to you, it doesn't mean it wants to mind-control you. The same goes for the Leviathans. You can convince someone without using any "magic". Convincing may also be called influence, yes. But unlike mind-control or intimidating, convincing is friendly influence.

Just a question, at what point can you tell the difference from friendly influence and subjugated mind control?<_<

At any point.

Pretty much.

[Commander Wookie]

OperatingWookie wrote...

Commander Wookie wrote...

Seival wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination!

It was not the Catalyst who invented it. All Reapers partially based on Leviathan's DNA. Catalyst just uses Leviathans' natural abilities.

If Catalyst talks to you, it doesn't mean it wants to mind-control you. The same goes for the Leviathans. You can convince someone without using any "magic". Convincing may also be called influence, yes. But unlike mind-control or intimidating, convincing is friendly influence.

Just a question, at what point can you tell the difference from friendly influence and subjugated mind control?<_<

Reduction of higher functions like the ability to reason.

So like an example in the game would be like when unwillingly Shepard shot Anderson.

[Red Panda]

Commander Wookie wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Commander Wookie wrote...

Seival wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination!

It was not the Catalyst who invented it. All Reapers partially based on Leviathan's DNA. Catalyst just uses Leviathans' natural abilities.

If Catalyst talks to you, it doesn't mean it wants to mind-control you. The same goes for the Leviathans. You can convince someone without using any "magic". Convincing may also be called influence, yes. But unlike mind-control or intimidating, convincing is friendly influence.

Just a question, at what point can you tell the difference from friendly influence and subjugated mind control?<_<

Reduction of higher functions like the ability to reason.

So like an example in the game would be like when unwillingly Shepard shot Anderson.

Not exactly. Direct domination is not the same.

[Seival]

Commander Wookie wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Commander Wookie wrote...

Seival wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination!

It was not the Catalyst who invented it. All Reapers partially based on Leviathan's DNA. Catalyst just uses Leviathans' natural abilities.

If Catalyst talks to you, it doesn't mean it wants to mind-control you. The same goes for the Leviathans. You can convince someone without using any "magic". Convincing may also be called influence, yes. But unlike mind-control or intimidating, convincing is friendly influence.

Just a question, at what point can you tell the difference from friendly influence and subjugated mind control?<_<

Reduction of higher functions like the ability to reason.

So like an example in the game would be like when unwillingly Shepard shot Anderson.

It would be like a mental "kick in the pants". You would never consider that as an example of friendly action.

Tell someone lies to force him to do something stupid? That could be done without any "magic". Remember how Shepard tricked Saren in the end of ME1, and TIM in the end of ME3?

How to determine if a person lies to you or not? Analize the clues. If the Catalyst really wanted to get rid of Shepard in the end, then it just could let Shepard die. If the Catalyst wanted to bind Shepard to its will, then it could use Husks to capture wounded and unconscious Shepard, heal her, and left near some indoctrination device for a couple of monthes... The only conclusion - the Catalyst has no intentions to tell lies or mind-control Shepard in the end.

[Commander Wookie]

Seival wrote...

Commander Wookie wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Commander Wookie wrote...

Seival wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Thank God the Catalyst invented indoctrination!

It was not the Catalyst who invented it. All Reapers partially based on Leviathan's DNA. Catalyst just uses Leviathans' natural abilities.

If Catalyst talks to you, it doesn't mean it wants to mind-control you. The same goes for the Leviathans. You can convince someone without using any "magic". Convincing may also be called influence, yes. But unlike mind-control or intimidating, convincing is friendly influence.

Just a question, at what point can you tell the difference from friendly influence and subjugated mind control?<_<

Reduction of higher functions like the ability to reason.

So like an example in the game would be like when unwillingly Shepard shot Anderson.

It would be like a mental "kick in the pants". You would never consider that as an example of friendly action.

Tell someone lies to force him to do something stupid? That could be done without any "magic". Remember how Shepard tricked Saren in the end of ME1, and TIM in the end of ME3?

How to determine if a person lies to you or not? Analize the clues. If the Catalyst really wanted to get rid of Shepard in the end, then it just could let Shepard die. If the Catalyst wanted to bind Shepard to its will, then it could use Husks to capture wounded and unconscious Shepard, heal her, and left near some indoctrination device for a couple of monthes... The only conclusion - the Catalyst has no intentions to tell lies or mind-control Shepard in the end.

My badz, my example of Shepard unwillingly shooting Anderson was meant as an in game example of attempted mind control of Shepard, not friendly influence. ("Reduction of higher functions like the ability to reason" as OperatingWookie mentioned earlier)

Which if he was at least being attempted to be mind controlled at that moment, I thought only the Catalyst and Reapers possessed that type of tech. (Even though TIM researched it extensively)

So thats what kind of lead me to think that Shepard was not all there in the head, with his show down with TIM, after he shot Anderson and he was being influenced by some outside source. 

You are right that the Catalyst does have a purpose for you, his ultimate intentions for you are not so clear, whether nefarious or truly peaceful. I'm just left with a question in the back of my head was it the Catalyst in my head when I shot Anderson? If so, is the Catalyst still in my head now when I talk to it about the final solutions? Hence my thoughts of the lines being blurred between friendly influence and mind control.

[Seival]

The final DLC was awesome! And now I like Control ending even more than before

My Shepard bequeathed her new apartment to Liara before the final mission. So, I suppose Shadow Broker will live on the Citadel, where Shepard-Catalyst can watch over her, and help her if needed... Considering Shepard and Liara did it twice before the final mission, blue children were not just a kind words.

P.S. I have a feeling, that Citadel DLC was initially planned as the very first one for ME3, and EC - as the last one. But devs had to change their DLC schedule. Anyone has the same feeling, or it's just me?

P.P.S I really hope new ME game will be sequel-RPG-trilogy with ME3 save import feature. New protagonist could be Shepard's asari doughter.

P.P.P.S BioWare, please make new ME game even better than Mass Effect Trilogy. On all possible levels. I know you can do that

[byarru]

pirate1802 wrote...

Argolas wrote...

Seival wrote...

I think Renegade Control epilogues will answer that question better than me.

Watch all variants of Control edning, and compare them to each other. Then you will get the answer, given by the game itself.

That is not Shepard. At no point it is even suggested that this is Shepard. The old intelligence says outright that Shepard will die in Control. The Shepard AI talks about Shepard, but does not say "me", instead "the (wo)man I once was". Shepard's thoughts continue, but they are not Shepard's anymore: "his/her thoughts" instead of "my thoughts". Shepard lost everything, his/her life as well as thoughts and memories, although the latter don't vanish but are uploaded into the new construct's mind.

If you want to be picky about it, the AI does say the (wo)man "I" was.. Like I say the child I was 10 years ago, for example. So the construct admits he/she is no longer human/organic but the identification with Shepard is still there, and the connection continues. Maybe he sees it as we see different stages of growing up of an individual. I was a human Shepard back then, now I am the reaperqueen, for example.

I believe so. After all the Catalyst did say that she would replace him and she would no longer be an organic. And the way she describes herself is actually quite common when people refer to their past. Especially when they went through important changes to make clear that they have changed

[New Display Name]

It's Shepard in another shell.

[Seival]

HJF4 wrote...

It's Shepard in another shell.

You can say so.

Way of thinking and memories is what makes the person, not body.

[KwangtungTiger]

Seival wrote...

HJF4 wrote...

It's Shepard in another shell.

You can say so.

Way of thinking and memories is what makes the person, not body.

 I find it hard to believe that someone like you ((who believes in Nihilism) a form of anarchy) truely likes,

Control: Basicly a form of a established goverment ( shepard controling the most advanced military in the galaxy reguardless of paragon/renagade intensions).

 Synthesis: Essentially a forced mutation on all civilizations.

 Instead of Destroy which keeps the galaxy in its chaotic ( anarchy like ) state.

  ni·hil·ism [nahy-uh-liz-uhm, nee-] Show IPA noun
1. total rejection of established laws and institutions.
2. anarchy, terrorism, or other revolutionary activity.
3. total and absolute destructiveness, especially toward the world at large and including oneself: the power-mad nihilism that marked Hitler's last years.
4. Philosophy . a. an extreme form of skepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth. b. nothingness or nonexistence.
5. ( sometimes initial capital letter  ) the principles of a Russian revolutionary group, active in the latter half of the 19th century, holding that existing social and political institutions must be destroyed in order to clear the way for a new state of society and employing extreme measures, including terrorism and assassination.
6. annihilation of the self, or the individual consciousness, especially as an aspect of mystical experience.

Modifié par KwangtungTiger, 10 mars 2013 - 07:19 .