4520 réponses à ce sujet

[ghost9191]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Seival wrote...

I'm sure you just want to justify Shepard's survival as a human being and reuniting with love interest... Believe me, your Shepard will no longer be a Paragon at the moment you choose the Destroy.

Gee, that's quite an assumption considering I already said in a post that I thought Shepard died in every ending when I first picked destroy.....

Secondly, destroy is NOT the most renegade thing you can do if it is the most thematically correct one.
This is the kind of belief I was talking about in another post...

none of the choices there are paragon. All are made for survival. Destroy is the most likely ending. "either we destroy them or they destroy us" with control you are taking a big risk on the chance you can control and have a power you were not meant to have. If control isn't renegade then i don't know what is.

 and by destroy being the most likely, i mean  you fight the geth for 3 games, and if you are going to believe the catalyst about control then you should believe it about the created will always rebel against the creator. I mean legion is the one that made me want to help the geth, but that is only one of them, anyways destroy ends it today, where as control can fail. but my opinion

destroy is the most logical or whatever, ends the threat. the others just delay , no real gurantee. I don't make the choices just because it's paragon or renegade, i choose what i think  is best or the right one. Which made the ending hard because i don't like the destroy option but i feel it needs to be done

Modifié par ghost9191, 29 mai 2012 - 12:57 .

[MerchantGOL]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MerchantGOL wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Oh, it can be explained, but I don't think it will.

You'll have to speculate about it.

Someone had a thread on it. Ieldra, he proposed nanites.

I know very little about such things but it made far more sense than what Bioware gave me.

Its not speculation, it spaying attention to the codex and the god damn evolution comic.

Disingenious assertions like that only give credence to the fact that you are attempting to validate within your own head claims that no evidence.

outside of the Codex and the Evolution comic you mean <_<

[Jamie9]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Oh, it can be explained, but I don't think it will.

You'll have to speculate about it.

Someone had a thread on it. Ieldra, he proposed nanites.

I know very little about such things but it made far more sense than what Bioware gave me.

Nanites are a prominent emerging technology having a variety of possible uses. Some of which are similar to gene therapy, which is good news for the human race if it succeeds.

Sanctuary (and Retribution, the novel) confirmed that indoctrination and husks are brought on by nanites. Adrenaline quickens the process too.

[Taboo]

MerchantGOL wrote...
outside of the Codex and the Evolution comic you mean <_<

What comic? You assume that I'm going to buy Mass Effect comics? If this is the case then Bioware is in even deeper **** than they were before. I need to buy a random comic to understand it?

The codex mentioned this to a great degree? I recall nothing of nanites and bodily rewrites in a positive manner.

Or are you as bad as the others with with Arthur C. Clarke comments?

I don't dislike the endings, I simply don't believe that a hapax legomena is EVER a good thing.

[MerchantGOL]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MerchantGOL wrote...
outside of the Codex and the Evolution comic you mean <_<

What comic?

 Evolution.

You assume that I'm going to buy Mass Effect comics?

if you are going to debate some thing it helps to have all the information 

The codex mentioned this to a great degree? I recall nothing of nanites and bodily rewrites in a positive manner.

its stated in the codex that indoctrination amongst other things is achived through an elctomagnetic feild

[Taboo]

Yes, well, the fault is not mine. Such things should be provided in the narrative. Such information is crucial. I work for a living you know. I'm gone for months at a time for film jobs. I don't have time to fiddle around with everything Mass Effect related.

It doesn't matter though, because the Singularity isn't going to happen in any of the endings and Bioware has already provided us with the information we need to disprove that.

But I won't spoil the fun for you.

The Extended Cut can only make things better.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 29 mai 2012 - 01:05 .

[Shallyah]

Even the topic of this thread is a sacrilege itself.

Burn, infidels. And stay away from the Crucible, cowards.

[Taboo]

The thought that the singularity isn't going to happen makes me chuckle though.

It's disproved by one small thing.

And the Geth are already dead in my playthrough.

I suppose that just leaves EDI.

Destroy.

[Jamie9]

Shallyah wrote...

Even the topic of this thread is a sacrilege itself.

Burn, infidels. And stay away from the Crucible, cowards.

Glad to see you're a reasonable human being who is open to debate.

[PSjoh]

ghost9191 wrote...


 and by destroy being the most likely, i mean  you fight the geth for 3 games, and if you are going to believe the catalyst about control then you should believe it about the created will always rebel against the creator. I mean legion is the one that made me want to help the geth, but that is only one of them, anyways destroy ends it today, where as control can fail. but my opinion

destroy is the most logical or whatever, ends the threat. the others just delay , no real gurantee. I don't make the choices just because it's paragon or renegade, i choose what i think  is best or the right one. Which made the ending hard because i don't like the destroy option but i feel it needs to be done

The thing is , if you beleive the catalyst, destroy is the worst choice, he tells you himself and its logical.
The created will rebel against the creator, So yes you destroy the synthetics, 2 birds 1 stone. But if the synthetics were the problem, the solution wouldn't be cycle, it would be to kill the synthetics.
The real problem is the organics, they keep building synthetics, stronger and stronger until **** goes off and they get wiped out.
So the solution is not to kill the synthetics who will come again and again from organics, but to kill those able to (advanced civilisations).
So if you kill the reapers, your destroying that thing that kept civilisations in check, prevented them from getting too advanced. (reapers don't care about young species)
The destroy is the one that delays most.

control also delays, but at least the reapers are still there if you ever realise the cycle was unfortunaltely the thing to do.

Synthetisis doesn't delay, it avoids the problem instead of solving it, but it brings to the same result, organics no longer get wiped out, because they no longer exist.

[Jamie9]

Taboo: The nanites existence and role in indoctrination and husk-ifying is revealed in the logs in Sancturary. It was first revealed in the comics and novels but it's in-game too.

The first Shepard discovers of it is in Sanctuary.

[Taboo]

Jamie9 wrote...

Taboo: The nanites existence and role in indoctrination and husk-ifying is revealed in the logs in Sancturary. It was first revealed in the comics and novels but it's in-game too.

The first Shepard discovers of it is in Sanctuary.

I wasn't paying attention to such things.

I was more concerned about reaching Miranda at the time.

It makes sense, it should have been more clear though.

I'm no longer worried about the singularity in any of the endings, so I'm not choosing Synthesis or Control.

With the Geth already dead I don't feel bad about Destroy.....

[Shallyah]

Jamie9 wrote...

Shallyah wrote...

Even the topic of this thread is a sacrilege itself.

Burn, infidels. And stay away from the Crucible, cowards.

Glad to see you're a reasonable human being who is open to debate.

Well... debate is a little pointless at least till we see the EC DLC. We all have our own formed opinions and nobody's gonna change our mind, basically because there is no proof or evidence of any ending being better than another in the long run, and you simply can't change what people want to believe.

You won't ever convince me that Control is the best ending, and probably I won't ever convince you that Destroy is. People who defend one ending speculate with the best possible outcome for the ending of their choice and the worst possible outcome for the other endings so it looks like they made the right choice.

And since this thread is basically 20 pages of circular arguments where nobody really listens to what the others are saying, I thought it didn't really matter much what I said. I'm glad it caught your attention though!

Modifié par Shallyah, 29 mai 2012 - 01:24 .

[Jamie9]

Shallyah wrote...

Well... debate is a little pointless at least till we see the EC DLC. We all have our own formed opinions and nobody's gonna change our mind, basically because there is no proof or evidence of any ending being better than another in the long run, and you simply can't change what people want to believe.

You won't ever convince me that Control is the best ending, and probably I won't ever convince you that Destroy is. People who defend one ending speculate with the best possible outcome for the ending of their choice and the worst possible outcome for the other endings so it looks like they made the right choice.

And since this thread is basically 20 pages of circular arguments where nobody really listens to what the others are saying, I thought it didn't really matter much what I said. I'm glad it caught your attention though!

Ha ha. It was likely sarcasm - again hard to read over the nets.

Though I agree. It's impossible to make a case without speculating which means that the debates do end up going around in circles.

However, I am much more open to destroy than I was initially due to people's points of view on the BSN. I still prefer control but I can very much see the reasons why someone would pick destroy. But I go into debates wanting to see the other person's point of view. There's no point of me going into a debate with the sole purpose of persuading the other party. I get much more use out of it if I see it from their side too.

Synthesis, however, I still find stupid. Because it is poorly executed. And I believe in science.

But, yeah. We can all debate properly once the EC releases, and likely laugh at all this "dead time" we spent debating about nothing.

[MerchantGOL]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The thought that the singularity isn't going to happen makes me chuckle though.

It's disproved by one small thing.

And the Geth are already dead in my playthrough.

I suppose that just leaves EDI.

Destroy.

The catalyst says that their will be new synthetics and that they will rebell, and have good reason too.

Modifié par MerchantGOL, 29 mai 2012 - 01:48 .

[Shallyah]

Jamie9 wrote...

Shallyah wrote...

Well... debate is a little pointless at least till we see the EC DLC. We all have our own formed opinions and nobody's gonna change our mind, basically because there is no proof or evidence of any ending being better than another in the long run, and you simply can't change what people want to believe.

You won't ever convince me that Control is the best ending, and probably I won't ever convince you that Destroy is. People who defend one ending speculate with the best possible outcome for the ending of their choice and the worst possible outcome for the other endings so it looks like they made the right choice.

And since this thread is basically 20 pages of circular arguments where nobody really listens to what the others are saying, I thought it didn't really matter much what I said. I'm glad it caught your attention though!

Ha ha. It was likely sarcasm - again hard to read over the nets.

Though I agree. It's impossible to make a case without speculating which means that the debates do end up going around in circles.

However, I am much more open to destroy than I was initially due to people's points of view on the BSN. I still prefer control but I can very much see the reasons why someone would pick destroy. But I go into debates wanting to see the other person's point of view. There's no point of me going into a debate with the sole purpose of persuading the other party. I get much more use out of it if I see it from their side too.

Synthesis, however, I still find stupid. Because it is poorly executed. And I believe in science.

But, yeah. We can all debate properly once the EC releases, and likely laugh at all this "dead time" we spent debating about nothing.

I think what EC DLC will do is just confirm that all endings follow nearly the best possible outcome and things will look brighter than what is being speculated. The Galaxy is saved in all of the endings too, but then it comes down to preference. Are you willing to risk allowing the Reapers to still live and slumber in Dark Space (at least for now), or you'd rather they were gone for good to make sure they can really never return, but at the cost of also losing the Geth? That kind of thing.

In the end, the epilogue of ME3 already shows how the Galaxy survives at least a few hundred years more, and Shepard is referred to as a savior, regardless of what ending you chose.

Modifié par Shallyah, 29 mai 2012 - 01:50 .

[Taboo]

MerchantGOL wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The thought that the singularity isn't going to happen makes me chuckle though.

It's disproved by one small thing.

And the Geth are already dead in my playthrough.

I suppose that just leaves EDI.

Destroy.

The catalyst says that their will be new synthetics and that they will rebell, and have good reason too.

You missed it!

You missed it!

Keep going!

The Catalyst isn't right this time, or at least in the capacity he believes!

You're almost there!

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 29 mai 2012 - 01:51 .

[C-Sec Officer]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The thought that the singularity isn't going to happen makes me chuckle though.

It's disproved by one small thing.

And the Geth are already dead in my playthrough.

I suppose that just leaves EDI.

So what you're saying is the Catalyst still mentions the Geth/Synthetics even though they're dead, or did I mis-interpret what you said?

Modifié par C-Sec Officer, 29 mai 2012 - 01:58 .

[Taboo]

C-Sec Officer wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The thought that the singularity isn't going to happen makes me chuckle though.

It's disproved by one small thing.

And the Geth are already dead in my playthrough.

I suppose that just leaves EDI.

So what you're saying is the Catalyst still mentions the Geth/Synthetics even though they're dead, or did I mis-interpret what you said?

The Geth are destroyed by the Quarians.

That leaves EDI.

Shepard survives.

And there is no singularity.

And Bioware already included the scene we needed to disprove such claims.

But I won't share because it would ruin all the Synthesis fans fun.

It will stay here, in my head.

Or until someone else figures it out and shares.

[Jamie9]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Geth are destroyed by the Quarians. That leaves EDI.Shepard survives.

And there is no singularity. And Bioware already included the scene we needed to disprove such claims. But I won't share because it would ruin all the Synthesis fans fun.

It will stay here, in my head. Or until someone else figures it out and shares.

[I shortened the post. If you wish to see it's original format, please look above]

The Stargazer scene?

[MerchantGOL]

Taboo-XX wrote...

MerchantGOL wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The thought that the singularity isn't going to happen makes me chuckle though.

It's disproved by one small thing.

And the Geth are already dead in my playthrough.

I suppose that just leaves EDI.

Destroy.

The catalyst says that their will be new synthetics and that they will rebell, and have good reason too.

You missed it!

You missed it!

Keep going!

The Catalyst isn't right this time, or at least in the capacity he believes!

You're almost there!

Listen destory provves the catalyst right, any synthetic will look at the events of this war and see that organics  are not to be trusted, ether with what happend on rannoch or what happend in destroy. 

Modifié par MerchantGOL, 29 mai 2012 - 02:20 .

[Taboo]

Jamie9 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Geth are destroyed by the Quarians. That leaves EDI.Shepard survives.

And there is no singularity. And Bioware already included the scene we needed to disprove such claims. But I won't share because it would ruin all the Synthesis fans fun.

It will stay here, in my head. Or until someone else figures it out and shares.

[I shortened the post. If you wish to see it's original format, please look above]

The Stargazer scene?

Yes!

It takes place ten thousand years in the future. As an effort to canonize all the Shepard's Bioware contradicted what the Star Child says.

You can still choose Synthesis, but I feel confident with Destroy now, at least so as long as the Quarians wipe out the Geth.

[PSjoh]

how do you know, it takes place in then thousand years, from what I understood, super fast travel and space community was still not (re)achieved.
looks very soon after shepard, who would remember sheperd after tens of thousands of years anyway?

Destroy is meh, you destroy the immidiate threat and take your bets on organics not being stupid, 2 cycles known, both fought with synthetics and while the prophecy did not happen in neither (yet) All it takes is one rogue organisation, to make a super synthetic to screw everyone.

also, singularity didn't have to happen in 10k years, i could have happened 100K years ago, tommorrow, in 1M years, does it even matter when? would you sacrifice organics, for your civilisation to have a natural (if ever) death?

The way I see things, Reapers were once organics who faced singularity synthetics, Use synthesis (became hybrids) to defeat them, and took it on their shoulders to prevent others to face the same thing. Because where they succeeded (at a great cost) if anyone failed, it would be the end of organic life.
so evil synthetics happened at least once... speculation i know, but reaper creators  had to have a very good reason to do this crazy cycle.

Modifié par PSjoh, 29 mai 2012 - 03:26 .

[Taboo]

PSjoh wrote...

how do you know, it takes place in then thousand years, from what I understood, super fast travel and space community was still not (re)achieved.
looks very soon after shepard, who would remember sheperd after tens of thousands of years anyway?

Destroy is meh, you destroy the immidiate threat and take your bets on organics not being stupid, 2 cycles known, both fought with synthetics and while the prophecy did not happen in neither (yet) All it takes is one rogue organisation, to make a super synthetic to screw everyone.

Bioware has stated as much.

Who am I to refute such logic?

[2hard2findaname]

So if you control the reapers does that mean you live just not in your body. The reason I picked it though was because I wanted to control the reapers for my self.