689 réponses à ce sujet

[RebelReya]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Hey, I think control is a legitimate choice, it just has renegade consequences. Shepard dies. But it's not necessarily the right thing to do. Does the cycle end for good? Or is the galaxy going to face the reapers again in another 50,000 years? Control doesn't have that guarantee, destroy does.

Depends how you imagine the outcome of your choice.

If you choose to see control as an unknown then fine, or even choose to have negative consequences, fine, I can see why, control comes completely out of the blue and I don't even like it either. 

I choose to see it almost the opposite. Destroy is the sure choice, you pick it, stuff happens, end of. But there's nothing you can do about it. Dead Shepard? Dead Geth? Dead EDI? Destroyed Relays? Apart from the first one, they're all things that happen unavoidably. At least with the blue door I can imagine round the problems BioWare sought to put in my way. Control allows more freedom.

Only if you believe star child, and take what he's saying at face vaule. Which I don't. Anything that calls Sythesis the best choice is not a good choice to listen too.

Control is more unknown, but I don't know that it has more freedom. Shepard is dead then they leave. What is to stop them from starting the cycle all over again? 

[The Night Mammoth]

RebelReya wrote...

Only if you believe star child, and take what he's saying at face vaule. Which I don't. Anything that calls Sythesis the best choice is not a good choice to listen too.

But you're quick to choose destroy on its word. 

Why doesn't anyone see the contradiction?

Control is more unknown, but I don't know that it has more freedom. Shepard is dead then they leave. What is to stop them from starting the cycle all over again? 

I don't know, Shepard not being dead? Use a bit of common sense.

Shepard chooses control. Shepard dies.

Citadel closes up with Crucible intact. Oh, Shepard's obviously not dead. 

[Vigilant111]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Only if you believe star child, and take what he's saying at face vaule. Which I don't. Anything that calls Sythesis the best choice is not a good choice to listen too.

But you're quick to choose destroy on its word. 

Why doesn't anyone see the contradiction?

Control is more unknown, but I don't know that it has more freedom. Shepard is dead then they leave. What is to stop them from starting the cycle all over again? 

I don't know, Shepard not being dead? Use a bit of common sense.

Shepard chooses control. Shepard dies.

Citadel closes up with Crucible intact. Oh, Shepard's obviously not dead. 

but didn't Catalyst tell u that Shepard will die? what u gonna say it is a metaphor?

[The Night Mammoth]

Vigilant111 wrote...

but didn't Catalyst tell u that Shepard will die? what u gonna say it is a metaphor?

Nope. 

I'm going to say that the Catalyst was telling the truth. 

Shepard does die, you see her organic form disintegrate, but she's obviously not completely gone, else the Reapers wouldn't fly away.

Answer the question though. Do you see the contradiction? Don't take what the Catalyst says at face-value when it suits you, but do when it doesn't.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 04 juin 2012 - 11:36 .

[RebelReya]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Only if you believe star child, and take what he's saying at face vaule. Which I don't. Anything that calls Sythesis the best choice is not a good choice to listen too.

But you're quick to choose destroy on its word. 

Why doesn't anyone see the contradiction?

No, I'm taking the misson from game ME1 to it's complete follow through. The goal has always been to destroy the reapers, and star-child *cough*Harbinger?*cough* isn't going change my mind.

I don't know, Shepard not being dead? Use a bit of common sense.

Shepard chooses control. Shepard dies.

Citadel closes up with Crucible intact. Oh, Shepard's obviously not dead. 

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

[The Night Mammoth]

RebelReya wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Only if you believe star child, and take what he's saying at face vaule. Which I don't. Anything that calls Sythesis the best choice is not a good choice to listen too.

But you're quick to choose destroy on its word. 

Why doesn't anyone see the contradiction?

No, I'm taking the misson from game ME1 to it's complete follow through. The goal has always been to destroy the reapers, and star-child *cough*Harbinger?*cough* isn't going change my mind.

You obviously missed the point.

I'm not disputing that destroying the Reapers was the goal (although it was from ME3 onwards, you had no intentions of destroying them in the two games before), only that there's a contradiction when people don't choose control or synthesis because they don't believe the Catalyst but are perfectly happy to believe destroy does what it tells you it does. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 04 juin 2012 - 11:40 .

[Vigilant111]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

but didn't Catalyst tell u that Shepard will die? what u gonna say it is a metaphor?

Nope. 

I'm going to say that the Catalyst was telling the truth. 

Shepard does die, you see her organic form disintegrate, but she's obviously not completely gone, else the Reapers wouldn't fly away.

Answer the question though. Do you see the contradiction? Don't take what the Catalyst says at face-value when it suits you, but do when it doesn't.

WTF are u talking about??? u just told me to believe it!!! who cares about face value and what not, nothing it says suits me...

A person's consiousness can only be preserved as memory, it cannot be alive without a body

[RebelReya]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Only if you believe star child, and take what he's saying at face vaule. Which I don't. Anything that calls Sythesis the best choice is not a good choice to listen too.

But you're quick to choose destroy on its word. 

Why doesn't anyone see the contradiction?

No, I'm taking the misson from game ME1 to it's complete follow through. The goal has always been to destroy the reapers, and star-child *cough*Harbinger?*cough* isn't going change my mind.

You obviously missed the point.

I'm not disputing that destroying the Reapers was the goal (although it was from ME3 onwards, you had no intentions of destroying them in the two games before), only that there's a contradiction when people don't choose control or synthesis because they don't believe the Catalyst but are perfectly happy to believe destroy does what it tells you it does. 

Well as much as I'd love to create my own ending, we had to choose SOMETHING, and their was only one which made star-child disapear, and that was destory.

[The Night Mammoth]

Vigilant111 wrote...

WTF are u talking about???

I didn't think it was that difficult to understand. You either take it at face-value and go from there, or you don't, and come to a different conclusion. Some people who pick destroy are awfully pick-and-choosey but are quite happy to point out ambiguity in control, synthesis, and the Catalyst's words in general, whilst assuming everything will be fine if they go red. 

u just told me to believe it!!!

No I didn't. 

who cares about face value and what not, nothing it says suits me...

I don't, but I'm just wondering if anyone notices the contradiction. 

A person's consiousness can only be preserved as memory, it cannot be alive without a body

The Citadel becomes the body. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 04 juin 2012 - 11:59 .

[The Night Mammoth]

RebelReya wrote...

Well as much as I'd love to create my own ending, we had to choose SOMETHING,

I did create my own ending, two actually. One is a massive headcanon rewrite of what increasingly seems to be the entire game's plot, and the other involves control. 

and their was only one which made star-child disapear, and that was destory.

Yeah, because it tells you. 

So I'll ask again: do you see the contradiciton?

[RebelReya]

So what your saying is that it's not trying to reason with us, it's just trying to trick us? And we should pick the bad choice because he says it's good. So we'll have tricked him with his own trick?
I think your logic is somewhat circular?

Okay, well if head-cannon is fair game, then so is my theory. Destroy is still the best choice.

[Vigilant111]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

WTF are u talking about???

I didn't think it was that difficult to understand. You either take it at face-value and go from there, or you don't, and come to a different conclusion. Some people who pick destroy are awfully pick-and-choosey but are quite happy to point out ambiguity in control whilst assuming everything will be fine if they go red. 

u just told me to believe it!!!

No I didn't. 

who cares about face value and what not, nothing it says suits me...

I don't, but I'm just wondering if anyone notices the contradiction. 

A person's consiousness can only be preserved as memory, it cannot be alive without a body

The Citadel becomes the body. 

So I picked destroy on the face value that all reapers will be destroyed then...so what of it?

What exactly is this contradiction you are talking about?

The Citadel is the Catalyst's home, at best Shepard becomes the Catalyst, if that is even possible

Citadel is not the Catalyst

U said that destroy option supporters are assuming everything to be fine, and u r not?

[The Night Mammoth]

RebelReya wrote...

So what your saying is that it's not trying to reason with us, it's just trying to trick us?

Nope. 

And we should pick the bad choice because he says it's good.

Nope.

So we'll have tricked him with his own trick?

Nope.

I think your logic is somewhat circular?

Nope. 

You've got that completely wrong. Here's the point > . 

Your conclusion is dancing with a six legged goat in Jupiter's crushing atmosphere in comparison.

Simply: you either take what the Catalyst says at face-value, or you don't, and work a conclusion from there. 

Pick destroy if you want, I don't care, I don't think it's a worse or better choice than control. But when arguing why you shouldn't choose blue, because the Catalyst says things that may or may not be true, because you don't trust it and the outcome of control might be bad, realize that you're still trusting it by choosing destroy. You have no idea what will happen if you shoot that pipe. Don't pick and choose which things you take at face-value just because it suits your conclusion. 

Okay, well if head-cannon is fair game, then so is my theory. Destroy is still the best choice.

Fine by me. 

But then so is mine, even my your reasoning. 

[RebelReya]

The Night Mammoth wrote...


Pick destroy if you want, I don't care, I don't think it's a worse or better choice than control. But when arguing why you shouldn't choose blue, because the Catalyst says things that may or may not be true, because you don't trust it and the outcome of control might be bad, realize that you're still trusting it by choosing destroy. You have no idea what will happen if you shoot that pipe. Don't pick and choose which things you take at face-value just because it suits your conclusion.

This is just silly.
I very specifically said you were welcome to choose blue.
Should I assume that nothing has anything to do with the actual ending just because I don't trust it, and have determined that BW is on some level messing with our heads? That would simply be a whole new level of bad game. I'm not trusting star-kid, it's not that I'm not trusting BW *cough* or the whole build-up of the two other games. (Both of which by the way talk about destroying the Reapers, so yes, it's since game 1.)

It's that I'm drinking the red kool-aid, but your welcome to the blue kind.

Fine by me. 

But then so is mine, even my your reasoning. 

Yeah, that's why I said it.

[The Night Mammoth]

Vigilant111 wrote...

So I picked destroy on the face value that all reapers will be destroyed then...so what of it?

I have no problem with that. 

What exactly is this contradiction you are talking about?

Taking what the Catalyst says about destroy at face value, but not doing the same for control, or vice-versa. 

The Citadel is the Catalyst's home, at best Shepard becomes the Catalyst, if that is even possible

Citadel is not the Catalyst

The Citadel is part of the Catalyst, apparently. It lives there. If Shepard becomes the Catalyst, she lives on the Citadel. Not that difficult to believe. 

U said that destroy option supporters are assuming everything to be fine, and u r not?

I said some people who choose destroy are assuming everything is fine with destroy just because the Catalyst says so, despite using the reverse logic to argue against control. They're picking and choosing what they take at face-value to suit their argument. 

[ReXspec]

A support thread for common sense? Really? Well, synthesis and control have one, I suppose we had to follow suit at one point.

I personally think ALL the choices that were given were awful, but Destroy was the lesser of three evils.

[RavenEyry]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

U said that destroy option supporters are assuming everything to be fine, and u r not?

I said some people who choose destroy are assuming everything is fine with destroy just because the Catalyst says so, despite using the reverse logic to argue against control. They're picking and choosing what they take at face-value to suit their argument. 

Yeah everyone needs to compare the best possible outcomes to each or the worst possible. Taking the best interpretation for your favourite and the worst for the others is ridiculous.

[The Night Mammoth]

RebelReya wrote...
I'm not trusting star-kid, it's not that I'm not trusting BW *cough* or the whole build-up of the two other games. (Both of which by the way talk about destroying the Reapers, so yes, it's since game 1.)

You are, but I don't mind that at all. 

All I'm saying is that some people, you maybe, maybe not though, have double standards. 

[RebelReya]

ReXspec wrote...

A support thread for common sense? Really? Well, synthesis and control have one, I suppose we had to follow suit at one point.

I personally think ALL the choices that were given were awful, but Destroy was the lesser of three evils.

Deffinately!
But you'd be surprized how rare common sense can be these days. I think it's an endangered speices.

[Vigilant111]

@Mammoth: that's fine, so I believe the Catalyst on the face value, actually I believe it on all options, but I am concerned with the repercussions of all choices... and the repercussions of destroy is the most remote...and now u will say:"I am not concerned about repercussions, I am only concerned with face value meaning" -  that's okay, fine by me

What astounds me is that when u said that if u believe u must believe the entire thing... that is just simply not true, because if u did u would have picked synthesis since that is the most optimistic right? I am not even sure if words like trust/believe apply here, when I picked I was just numb, I don't know s**t about the Catalyst, but I wanted to get to the ending, so I just did what I did according to the information given, u don't need to believe the Catalyst, it is irrelevant

Modifié par Vigilant111, 04 juin 2012 - 12:37 .

[RebelReya]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

RebelReya wrote...
I'm not trusting star-kid, it's not that I'm not trusting BW *cough* or the whole build-up of the two other games. (Both of which by the way talk about destroying the Reapers, so yes, it's since game 1.)

You are, but I don't mind that at all. 

All I'm saying is that some people, you maybe, maybe not though, have double standards. 

....really? thats all you've got? I even made a kool-aid joke that wasn't completely terrible. And so I might maybe, maybe not have double standards?

I think this might be a testimony to what I just stated about common sense.

[lDonutsl]

Destroy is the only option that doesn't require Shepard to die to activate. So if starchild is lying, Shepard still has the ability to continue the fight.

[Vigilant111]

lDonutsl wrote...

Destroy is the only option that doesn't require Shepard to die to activate. So if starchild is lying, Shepard still has the ability to continue the fight.

A perfect notion, but still need solid proof that was indeed Shepard, and questions about how he / she survived the blast must be answered

[The Night Mammoth]

RebelReya wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

RebelReya wrote...
I'm not trusting star-kid, it's not that I'm not trusting BW *cough* or the whole build-up of the two other games. (Both of which by the way talk about destroying the Reapers, so yes, it's since game 1.)

You are, but I don't mind that at all. 

All I'm saying is that some people, you maybe, maybe not though, have double standards. 

....really? thats all you've got? I even made a kool-aid joke that wasn't completely terrible. And so I might maybe, maybe not have double standards?

I think this might be a testimony to what I just stated about common sense.

That's all I've got.

Anything else? 

[The Night Mammoth]

Vigilant111 wrote...

What astounds me is that when u said that if u believe u must believe the entire thing... that is just simply not true, because if u did u would have picked synthesis since that is the most optimistic right?

Optimism is a state of mind. Believing what the Catalyst says is not prerequisite to you liking it. 

I am not even sure if words like trust/believe apply here, when I picked I was just numb, I don't know s**t about the Catalyst, but I wanted to get to the ending, so I just did what I did according to the information given, u don't need to believe the Catalyst, it is irrelevant

If you're trying to make a case for one being more desirable than the others, you really do.