4520 réponses à ce sujet

[mango smoothie]

Seival wrote...

This is not a "space magic", this is "Deus Ex Machina" concept: "God From the Machine" is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object.

BioWare implemented DEM concept in ME3 just [b]perfectly.

Wow wait I have to say something here, there is no way you can implement a Deus Ex Machina perfectly into a story. Why, because it's just bad writing it shows that the writers where to lazy to try and come up with something better to do. Which is kind of crazy because it would have been so easy to present the endings to the player without having to use the AI God Child/Starchild/Catalyst/Deus Ex Machina.

[TMA LIVE]

http://social.biowar.../index/11842598

I actually wrote a Control Plus ending for those who want to beat the Reapers without killing the Geth.

[Ageless Face]

TMA LIVE wrote...

http://social.biowar.../index/11842598

I actually wrote a Control Plus ending for those who want to beat the Reapers without killing the Geth.

Very nice! I myself will not destroy the reapers if I can, but many other will. So, if you will be able to destroy the reapers on control, the only downside of control is that Shepard is dead. Even then Shepard will become the catalyst so it's not a complete death. In fact, It's too good to be true. So I guess we will not be able to destroy the reapers in control, just because it willbe unfair.

[Seival]

Uncle Jo wrote...

Seival wrote...




(1) Nazara's purpose was to override the "signal-block-surprise" left by Protheans. The Catalist was not "on the Citadel"... The Citadel is a part of the Catalist.
(2) Protheans didn't "hack the Reapers". They jummed the some sort of signal that allowed the vanguard (in our case the Nazara) to use the Citadel's mass relay capabilities to open the way for invasion.
(3) Look at answer #2.
(4) Look at answer #2.
(5) Can you translate this question please?

... It looks like you didn't understand ME1 story. Or just forgotten it completely.

1) "Confidence borns of ignorance". Sovereign's role as vanguard was to assess the progress of the organic life and then send a signal to the keepers to activate the Citadel thus launching the Reaper's invasion, if it was about time to harvest. Because something went wrong (the Protheans modifying the Keepers signal to only respond to the Citadel's) he had to activate the Relay himself, thus searching for allies (Geth heretics and Saren) to successfully achieve his goal. And failed.
So what was doing the Brat the whole time? Taking a nap? Watching "Transformers" on the TV? Doing his homework for the school?
You're fuelling my own argumentation. If the Citadel is a part of the Space Troll, I can reasonably suppose that he controls it, so how come he couldn't activate it?

2) You misread my question. I said the Protheans hacked the Keepers not the Reapers. Try again later.

3) Look at answer 2)

4) Look at answer2)

5) Mythomania: behavior of habitual or compulsive lying.
 Schizophrenia: breakdown of thought process with hallucinations, paranoid and bizarre delusions, disorganized speech and thinking .

- "You are bacterias"
- "You're nothing"
- "I'm the Harbinger of your ascension"
- "Synthetics will always wipe out organics"

I would also add dissociative identity disorder : 

- "We are each a nation, independent, free of all weaknesses" (Sovereign)
- "I am Sovereign. And this station (the Citadel) is mine!"
- "We are the pinnacle of the evolution"
- "The forces of the Universe bend to me" (Harbinger)

EDIT: It looks like your logic is not only flawed but you also sound incredibly arrogant. All your posts prove it. A real pleasure to debate with you.

(1) You still didn't understand? If Catalist could trigger the event, it could do it each time, instead of leaving one of its "hands" behind to do it.
(2) Ok, you meant the Keepers. But keepers are just a type of hasks, so they are weak enough to be destroyed or influenced. The only defence the keepers have - is that noone knows their true purpose. Again - if the Catalist could prevent the signal from jamming or keepers from not responding - then it would did it. But it couldn't.
(3) Look answer #1 and #2.
(4) Look answer #1 and #2.
(5) Reapers are just "Catalist's Hands" they have no independent minds. All phrases you mentioned are just a part of psycological attack attempts. There is no any meaning behind these words, it's just an attempt to reduce enemy's moral, nothing more.

EDIT: My logic is fine.

Modifié par Seival, 02 juin 2012 - 05:13 .

[Uncle Jo]

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...



As you can see,
Illusive Man is outright that he is doing it for the sake of human race.
He compares Reapers to the Mass Relay Network, says that it is the way
of evolution etc.[/quote]There is a little difference between using the mass relays and trying to control a genocidal Race which has proven to be unmatched all along the Galaxy's history and a master at mental manipulation. Furthermore the Relays are Reaper tech and by using them you already evolve the way they want...

TIM was always obsessed by the idea of power, of controlling the Reapers and I perfectly remember the Horizon mission. What he did to the refugees and his own men. Whatever he wanted to achieve, it wasn't worth the price. He became totally insane and didn't give damn anymore about humanity...
The end justifies the means was never the philosophy of ME. Because then I would also have to give credit to the pile of crap the brat is spitting out.

[quote]They think only of their self-preservation and you think that Catalyst
(their avatar, right?) just going to let you to finish them all?

As I said, ANY ending would work only if the Catalyst is not lying.[/quote]
 [/quote]My point exactly. Did you believe the Brat (yes their avatar, it's the only way for me to justify its nonsensical presence) or not? I didn't. But you still have to choose or you get the critical mission failure...

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 02 juin 2012 - 05:14 .

[jtav]

Typed up for another thread, my rationale for choosing Control:


*I don't believe the Catalyst. That is, the notion of a technological singularity leading to extinction was so poorly set up that I don't regard it as a threat.
*No option leaves Shepard with clean hands. Pretending humility is hypocritical at best.
*Within the context of the universe, synthetics are clearly people.
*Genocide is evil always and everywhere, regardless of the consequences. I cannot morally choose Destroy.
*Synthesis is problematic. If you don't believe the Catalyst regarding the Singularity, then the justification becomes the possible benefits. Which aren't clearly stated.
*I'm a Paragon. I like playing characters that do the right thing regardless of the consequences. If all my lecturing about second chances and mercy are to mean anything, I better be willing to extend that mercy even to people I hate. Even at the cost of my life/
*Related, I have an obligation to save as many lives as I can and to minimize suffering. Control at least leaves the Citadel intact, and the relays may be reparable.

So Control isn't perfect, but it troubles my conscience the least.

[TMA LIVE]

HagarIshay wrote...

TMA LIVE wrote...

http://social.biowar.../index/11842598

I actually wrote a Control Plus ending for those who want to beat the Reapers without killing the Geth.

Very nice! I myself will not destroy the reapers if I can, but many other will. So, if you will be able to destroy the reapers on control, the only downside of control is that Shepard is dead. Even then Shepard will become the catalyst so it's not a complete death. In fact, It's too good to be true. So I guess we will not be able to destroy the reapers in control, just because it willbe unfair.

Well, Shepard becomes a VI or AI. Or dies after briefly controlling the Reapers. It's still a sacrifice ending, which I think is the point of the endings in general. That you're willing to make a final sacrifice just to stop the Reapers. Whether it's yourself, the galaxy, or the Geth. Which is why I think such an ending still balances everything out. That there is no ending without a final sacrifice.

But again, I wanted it to be a choice. Some want to Control the Reapers because they think they can forever. So it should be a choice.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 02 juin 2012 - 05:16 .

[Ageless Face]

Got a question: If Shepard will live as the catalyst, do you believe the LI will run into the citadel, and then in some dark alley Shepard will meet him/her and have the final conversation with the LI before dissapearing forever? Seeing this will so break by heart if it will be in the EC.

I want it there so much!!!

And what do you see happening in ME4 if Shepard will actually become the catalyst?

The way I see it, the next protagonist of the Mass Effect universe will meet Shepard as the catalyst and beg from him/her to lend the reapers against a war with _____, and then Shepard will freak out because s/he is afraid to bring the reapers to anyone because they might do what the catalyst did, and then s/he will attack the protagonist. Then... That's all I've got.

[Seival]

mango smoothie wrote...

Seival wrote...

This is not a "space magic", this is "Deus Ex Machina" concept: "God From the Machine" is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object.

BioWare implemented DEM concept in ME3 just [b]perfectly.

Wow wait I have to say something here, there is no way you can implement a Deus Ex Machina perfectly into a story. Why, because it's just bad writing it shows that the writers where to lazy to try and come up with something better to do. Which is kind of crazy because it would have been so easy to present the endings to the player without having to use the AI God Child/Starchild/Catalyst/Deus Ex Machina.

Disagree. Deus Ex Machina concept is not for "lazy writers". It's for the writers, who wanna make a completely unpredictible and shocking ending. ME3 writing is fine.

[TMA LIVE]

HagarIshay wrote...

Got a question: If Shepard will live as the catalyst, do you believe the LI will run into the citadel, and then in some dark alley Shepard will meet him/her and have the final conversation with the LI before dissapearing forever? Seeing this will so break by heart if it will be in the EC.

I want it there so much!!!

And what do you see happening in ME4 if Shepard will actually become the catalyst?

The way I see it, the next protagonist of the Mass Effect universe will meet Shepard as the catalyst and beg from him/her to lend the reapers against a war with _____, and then Shepard will freak out because s/he is afraid to bring the reapers to anyone because they might do what the catalyst did, and then s/he will attack the protagonist. Then... That's all I've got.

Well, I guess it depends on if Shepard really is the Catalyst, Ghost in the Shell style, or just a program created to be like Shepard, like Vendetta.

Either way, I think they'll probably borrow from 2010, where Dave contacts his wife.

[Uncle Jo]

Seival wrote...


(1) You still didn't understand? If Catalist could trigger the event, it could do it each time, instead of leaving one of its "hands" behind to do it.
(2) Ok, you meant the Keepers. But keepers are just a type of hasks, so they are weak enough to be destroyed or influenced. The only defence the keepers have - is that noone knows their true purpose. Again - if the Catalist could prevent the signal from jamming or keepers from not responding - then it would did it. But it couldn't.
(3) Look answer #1 and #2.
(4) Look answer #1 and #2.
(5) Reapers are just "Catalist's Hands" they have no independent minds. All phrases you mentioned are just a part of psycological attack attempts. There is no any meaning behind these words, it's just an attempt to reduce enemy's moral, nothing more.

EDIT: My logic is fine.

1) Thanks o enlightened one. So it could do it, but... didn't. It sure likes suspense. Your answers always make sense. Pleasure to read you.
2) So he could do anything like control the reapers, but neither could prevent the keepers, these mindless husks, being overriden nor regaining control over them in 50,000 years. Beautifuly contradicting yourself (see your 1st answer).
5) I confess, I'm beaten. I've never read so much nonsense in one post.


EDIT: Absolutely. Keep up the good work.

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 03 juin 2012 - 01:11 .

[jtav]

What I would like is for the LI to be able to join Shep somehow. They disappear and something happens to indicate the Catalyst is no longer alone.

[Ageless Face]

TMA LIVE wrote...


Well, Shepard becomes a VI or AI. Or dies after briefly controlling the Reapers. It's still a sacrifice ending, which I think is the point of the endings in general. That you're willing to make a final sacrifice just to stop the Reapers. Whether it's yourself, the galaxy, or the Geth. Which is why I think such an ending still balances everything out. That there is no ending without a final sacrifice.

But again, I wanted it to be a choice. Some want to Control the Reapers because they think they can forever. So it should be a choice.

I also believe it should be a choice. However, if BioWare will do that, then they should also make the synthetics live in destroy. Meaning, there would be no difference between the choices. I will support it if it will be possible, but I don't think it's likely. Unless BioWare will let us headconon everything.

[Lord Goose]

mass relays and trying to control a genocidal Race which has proven to be unmatched all along the Galaxy's history and a master at mental manipulation. Furthermore the Relays are Reaper tech and by using them you already evolve the way they want...

The point I was trying to make, is that unlike you have said, Shepards objects not idea about controlling the Reapers in general, but doing it as Illusive Man wishes (for the sake of humanity). I don't see her claiming that it is totally impossible and beyound any human's abilities. Her arguments are personal.

I perfectly remember the Horizon mission. What he did to the refugees and his own men. Whatever he wanted to achieve, it wasn't worth the price. He became totally insane and didn't give damn anymore about humanity...

The point I was trying to make, that they did found something on the Sanctuary, what made Reapers attack it. That means that something like control is possible, because discovery made Reapers launch preemptive strike.

My point exactly. Did you believe the Brat (yes their avatar, it's the only way for me to justify its nonsensical presence) or not? I didn't.

Yes, I believe him. And he is supposed to be being of light. Read this article and twit.

http://masseffect.wi...m/wiki/Klencory
https://twitter.com/...420195968847873

If I didn't believed him, I would rather have critical mission failure.

Also, destroy (if you spared the geth) is exactly "the end justify means" in comparison to other solutions.

[Leafs43]

Anyone who believes they can control the reapers are as egotistical as TIM.

[Lord Goose]

Anyone who believes they can control the reapers are as egotistical as TIM.

TIM's motives were pure as raindrops.
He was doing it for the sake of humanity.
His methods in turn were ranging from questionable to unacceptable.

[Seival]

HagarIshay wrote...

Got a question: If Shepard will live as the catalyst, do you believe the LI will run into the citadel, and then in some dark alley Shepard will meet him/her and have the final conversation with the LI before dissapearing forever? Seeing this will so break by heart if it will be in the EC.

I want it there so much!!!

And what do you see happening in ME4 if Shepard will actually become the catalyst?

The way I see it, the next protagonist of the Mass Effect universe will meet Shepard as the catalyst and beg from him/her to lend the reapers against a war with _____, and then Shepard will freak out because s/he is afraid to bring the reapers to anyone because they might do what the catalyst did, and then s/he will attack the protagonist. Then... That's all I've got.

Catalist-Shepard might speak not just with Liara, but also with Council and the Alliance leaders. Why? To explain them what happend (to avoid panic in goverments), and ask to keep it secret.

...I don't think there will be ME4. But I hope to see new RPG Trilogy in Mass Effect universe. Moreover, I want it to take place hundreds of years after ME3, and I want that the choices we made in ME Trilogy will affect the new Trilogy's story.

Modifié par Seival, 02 juin 2012 - 05:45 .

[Ageless Face]

Leafs43 wrote...

Anyone who believes they can control the reapers are as egotistical as TIM.

Does a man who lights a fire to light a candle is as bad as the man who lights a fire to burn a house?

Modifié par HagarIshay, 02 juin 2012 - 05:47 .

[Leafs43]

HagarIshay wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...

Anyone who believes they can control the reapers are as egotistical as TIM.

Does a man who lights a fire to light a candle is bad a the man who lights a fire to burn a house?

TIM wanted to control the reapers.

Shepard, if choosing control, would want to control the reapers.


Ergo, they are both lighting the house on fire.  You're just too hard headed to see it.  Your ego is in the way.

Modifié par Leafs43, 02 juin 2012 - 05:50 .

[Ageless Face]

Seival wrote...

Catalist-Shepard might speak not just with Liara, but also with Council and the Alliance leaders. Why? To explain them what happend (to avoid panic in goverments), and ask to keep it secret.

...I don't think there will be ME4. But I hope to see new RPG Trilogy in Mass Effect universe. Moreover, I want it to take place hundreds of years after ME3, and I want that the choices we made in ME Trilogy will affect the new Trilogy's story.

Oh, I forgot about the council and Hackett. How could I?! It will certentily care the hell out of them, but whatever.

Well, I didn't actually meant ME4. I'll just call it that until we are giving a name for the new game.

The problem is, we will not really get to choose exactly what happened in ME. We are not giving a save after the ending. So I guess we will only be able to choose the ending choice and Shepard's gender.

[Jamie9]

Leafs43 wrote...

TIM wanted to control the reapers.

Shepard, if choosing control, would want to control the reapers.


Ergo, they are both lighting the house on fire.  You're just too hard headed to see it.  Your ego is in the way.

I'm not explaining it again, there are 30 pages of solid reasoning on why control isn't "that thing that TIM wanted".

Besides, because TIM wanted it, you'll never ever consider it? Even if the situation changes? That seems rather stubborn and close-minded. Your ego is in the way?

[Lord Goose]

TIM wanted to control the reapers.

Shepard, if choosing control, would want to control the reapers.


Ergo, they are both lighting the house on fire

Association fallacy - arguing that because two things share a property they are the same.

[Leafs43]

Lord Goose wrote...

TIM wanted to control the reapers.

Shepard, if choosing control, would want to control the reapers.


Ergo, they are both lighting the house on fire

Association fallacy - arguing that because two things share a property they are the same.

It''s not an association when the result is the same.

[Ageless Face]

Leafs43 wrote...



TIM wanted to control the reapers.

Shepard, if choosing control, would want to control the reapers.


Ergo, they are both lighting the house on fire.  You're just too hard headed to see it.  Your ego is in the way.

No. They are both lighting a fire. That is a fact. The reasons for that, hoever, are different. Shepard is controling the reapers for good- lighting a candle. TIM wants to dominate the galaxy- buring a house.

Does that means lighting a fire is wrong? No. All that matters is what you are doing with the match. Does controling the repaers is bad? No. all that matters is what you are doing with your control.

[Seival]

Uncle Jo wrote...

Seival wrote...


(1) You still didn't understand? If Catalist could trigger the event, it could do it each time, instead of leaving one of its "hands" behind to do it.
(2) Ok, you meant the Keepers. But keepers are just a type of hasks, so they are weak enough to be destroyed or influenced. The only defence the keepers have - is that noone knows their true purpose. Again - if the Catalist could prevent the signal from jamming or keepers from not responding - then it would did it. But it couldn't.
(3) Look answer #1 and #2.
(4) Look answer #1 and #2.
(5) Reapers are just "Catalist's Hands" they have no independent minds. All phrases you mentioned are just a part of psycological attack attempts. There is no any meaning behind these words, it's just an attempt to reduce enemy's moral, nothing more.

EDIT: My logic is fine.

1) Thanks o enlightened one. So it could do it, but... didn't. It sure likes suspense. Your answers make always sense. Pleasure to read you.
2) So he could do anything like control the reapers, but neither could prevent the keepers, this mindless husks being overriden nor regaining control over them in 50,000 years. Beautifuly contradicting yourself (see your 1st answer).
5) I confess, I'm beaten. I've never read so much nonsense in one post.


EDIT: Absolutely. Keep up the good work.

I really don't know why don't you want to understand... The Trilogy show you facts of its story, but you prefer to take some of these facts as a hallucinations or lies.

...I'm sure you read Lord of the Rings. Did you ever think it was written not good enough? Why the Ring didn't manage to show its exact location on some kind of "Magic Mirror", so the Sauron will be able to find and take it back much easier?

Modifié par Seival, 02 juin 2012 - 06:03 .