505 réponses à ce sujet

[Funkdrspot]

v TricKy v wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

You can say that, selfishly, because you don't represent anything but yourself. Have a family and real friends and then say that you would watch your family die before your eyes just to stay principled, then i'll believe you.

You're throwing an awful lot of blind trust that those buttons do exactly what the thing responsible for the reapers says they'll do. Reminds me of some well known psychological studies involving button pushing.

Rejecting the options presented and trying to make a new one isn't the slightest bit selfish. Doesn't mean it will be any more successful though.

Exactly this
The problem is everyone who talks about how silly refuse is, is actually acting on outside knowledge.
You, as player, know that shooting the tube will destroy the reapers but Shepard doesnt. For all he know shooting the tube would destroy everything EXCEPT the Reapers. Or the Control and Synthesis choices could just be cool looking ways to suicide.
Refusal is actually the most viable option if you see it from that point of view. Every other choices is only viable if you trust the star child and you use your player knowledge. I mean Shepard didnt trust Saren, he didnt trust the Illusive Man, so why he should trust the star child? The Child did NOTHING to earn your trust, he is actually responsible for all the killing. If he halted the Reapers while you talk to him, than you could justify it somehow but the way it is currently in-game, no way.

Ok. I'll bite.

You can refuse and KNOW you're going to die.

Or you can make a choice. Worst comes to worst, the reapers win.

The catalyst doesn't make these choices available to you, YOU DO through building the crucible. The catalyst simply tells you what's what.

[Bomma72]

OK one more post. Synthesis looks like a totalitarian state to me, like living in North Korea (everyone happy happy fake smile for the camera). Plus you have to take away the whole galaxy's free will without there consent ,disgusting.

Control turns Shepard into a Reaper, and his speech at the end sounds like he is basically going to micro-manage them to the point of Slavery, and destroy is basically the Munich Agreement you sell out your allies for peace, except you kill them so it is even worse.

Therefor I pick refuse and then win or lose we are not slaves\\Evil ore whatever you want to call it. When I picked it by the way I didn't know what would happen thought we would still fight even if it is to the death. By the way I was right too, because (if you believe what the star brat says and he didn't lie to you before) both control and destroy the cycle just continues in the future. And if you can deal with synthesis then more power to you because to me it is the worst of them all. Only with refuse does the cycle end for good and you are not a corrupted.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

Ryzaki wrote...

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

but shepard didnt have a radio.

there was a radio at the console that opened the arms though.


too bad shepard went up that elevator.  now she cant give a pointless speech to dieing people  (Thats Hackett's job)

What.

That doesn't even MAKE any sense. Why would Hackett use the Radio in the middle of the Citadel (an area of the Citadel no one even KNOWS?) Shep clearly has a radio on that he communicates with Hackett and Anderson on. Stop grasping at straws. Hackett clearly contacts Shepard (I believe the first word out of his mouth is Commander then Shepard) the only way he could know it was Shepard is if he was contacting...drumroll Shep's comm system!

(Hell one of the most WTF parts of that seqence is that he/she has a communicator working.)

Hackett or Anderson probably opened up a communication from/to the console.  We got that scene of hackett reacting to shepard making it to the beam.  It works and makes sense.

also you're being petty.  we cant beat a fleet of hundreds of thousands of ships the size of an entire state.  mass effect 2 just got abunch of "dummies" into the series who dont understand what the story was about.  me2 kinda sucked narratively and it set up some poor expectations for the following game by making people think it was a game about kicking the reapers butts as hard as possible.


If you played ME1 you'd know that that game set up the idea of the crucible and the reapers being unbeatable.  throughout the game anderson is constantly talking about how they might find a prothean weapon capable of devastating power or that saren would find it.  this was setup for the crucible.  ME2 should have been the story of cerberus and the search for the crucible rather than being the weird "make this game as appealing as possible" thing that it became.

Mass Effect isnt about becoming the most powerful badass in the galaxy.  Its about finding any chance you can to defeat the reapers.  thats what the crucible is, a last ditch effort.  The end of ME1 was shepard leaving on the normandy to find some way to send the reapers back into dark space.  It was setting up the crucible plot.  ME2's problem was that after the EA buyout they were pressured into making a super appealing game to the masses where you make a big badass team to do a mission where you kill the baddest badguys who dont actually matter to the ultimate story in any way at all.  ME2 was much more rushed than 3 was.  ME3 was just the initial ME2 (prothean weapon) concept fused with the initial ME3 concept (reaper war).

[wantedman dan]

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

but shepard didnt have a radio.

there was a radio at the console that opened the arms though.


too bad shepard went up that elevator.  now she cant give a pointless speech to dieing people  (Thats Hackett's job)

What.

That doesn't even MAKE any sense. Why would Hackett use the Radio in the middle of the Citadel (an area of the Citadel no one even KNOWS?) Shep clearly has a radio on that he communicates with Hackett and Anderson on. Stop grasping at straws. Hackett clearly contacts Shepard (I believe the first word out of his mouth is Commander then Shepard) the only way he could know it was Shepard is if he was contacting...drumroll Shep's comm system!

(Hell one of the most WTF parts of that seqence is that he/she has a communicator working.)

Hackett or Anderson probably opened up a communication from/to the console.  We got that scene of hackett reacting to shepard making it to the beam.  It works and makes sense.

also you're being petty.  we cant beat a fleet of hundreds of thousands of ships the size of an entire state.  mass effect 2 just got abunch of "dummies" into the series who dont understand what the story was about.  me2 kinda sucked narratively and it set up some poor expectations for the following game by making people think it was a game about kicking the reapers butts as hard as possible.


If you played ME1 you'd know that that game set up the idea of the crucible and the reapers being unbeatable.  throughout the game anderson is constantly talking about how they might find a prothean weapon capable of devastating power or that saren would find it.  this was setup for the crucible.  ME2 should have been the story of cerberus and the search for the crucible rather than being the weird "make this game as appealing as possible" thing that it became.

Mass Effect isnt about becoming the most powerful badass in the galaxy.  Its about finding any chance you can to defeat the reapers.  thats what the crucible is, a last ditch effort.  The end of ME1 was shepard leaving on the normandy to find some way to send the reapers back into dark space.  It was setting up the crucible plot.  ME2's problem was that after the EA buyout they were pressured into making a super appealing game to the masses where you make a big badass team to do a mission where you kill the baddest badguys who dont actually matter to the ultimate story in any way at all.  ME2 was much more rushed than 3 was.  ME3 was just the initial ME2 (prothean weapon) concept fused with the initial ME3 concept (reaper war).

So much imposition...

[Ryzaki]

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...
Hackett or Anderson probably opened up a communication from/to the console.  We got that scene of hackett reacting to shepard making it to the beam.  It works and makes sense.

also you're being petty.  we cant beat a fleet of hundreds of thousands of ships the size of an entire state.  mass effect 2 just got abunch of "dummies" into the series who dont understand what the story was about.  me2 kinda sucked narratively and it set up some poor expectations for the following game by making people think it was a game about kicking the reapers butts as hard as possible.


If you played ME1 you'd know that that game set up the idea of the crucible and the reapers being unbeatable.  throughout the game anderson is constantly talking about how they might find a prothean weapon capable of devastating power or that saren would find it.  this was setup for the crucible.  ME2 should have been the story of cerberus and the search for the crucible rather than being the weird "make this game as appealing as possible" thing that it became.

Mass Effect isnt about becoming the most powerful badass in the galaxy.  Its about finding any chance you can to defeat the reapers.  thats what the crucible is, a last ditch effort.  The end of ME1 was shepard leaving on the normandy to find some way to send the reapers back into dark space.  It was setting up the crucible plot.  ME2's problem was that after the EA buyout they were pressured into making a super appealing game to the masses where you make a big badass team to do a mission where you kill the baddest badguys who dont actually matter to the ultimate story in any way at all.  ME2 was much more rushed than 3 was.  ME3 was just the initial ME2 (prothean weapon) concept fused with the initial ME3 concept (reaper war).

*opens mouth*

*closes*

Shakes head.

I'm not even going to try. I'm not. If you can't see how utterly riduclous (the other word was a bit strong) that sounds...Anderson (who was mostly unscathed by the way) only has a short range communicator (for...some reason despite it being a damn good idea he can coordinate with Hackett). Shepard (who clearly has a communicator that works long range somehow breaks the long range communicator (but not the short range one which Anderson uses...for some reason) Hackett then calls a console that you don't see Anderson even attempt to say anything to Hackett on (heck Anderson seems pretty confused as to WTF it does). And just...wat. WAT.

Not to mention. Nice job completely missing the point of my arguement. I didn't expect Shep to win without an asspull (which was the crucible). If he had won that would've been a unrealistic but pleasant surprise (like Synthesis!) but him losing would've worked. I just wanted him to lose and the next cycle to kick the Reapers asses without RGB or using the Catalyst.

There's no reason that logic has to hold true for the next cycle.

Also wut? 

The crucible wasn't EVEN IN ME1. The HELL?!? That was the RELAY the ILOS RELAY! The "weapon" was opening up the Citadel so the Reapers could open the relay to darkspace so they could do their instant win trick. What in blazes are you talking about? 

I'm going to bed. My brain hurts.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 29 juin 2012 - 07:49 .

[wantedman dan]

Ryzaki wrote...

*opens mouth*

*closes*

Shakes head.

I'm not even going to try. I'm not. If you can't see how utterly retarded that sounds...

I think it's time for bed.

[Kyazain]

Velocithon wrote...

I want to know why the Catalyst says "So be it" in such a deep, menacing voice and then right after says "the cycle continues" in his usual voice.

I have no idea what that was.

I wondered that, too. It almost felt personal (as a gamer). I wonder if Casey and Mac recorded that line. . .

[Funkdrspot]

wantedman dan wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

LOL the only option that forces that on people is the one you're arguing FOR! REFUSE!

You do realize the point of this thread, no? Or have you not managed to stumble your way to the OP yet?

Maybe you should display competent reading comrehension and realize that you stepped into a convo between me and someone else about the DOWNSIDES to control/destroy/synth.

He was arguing FOR refuse via his principles, saying that the other options were akin to slavery. 

Then you countered about the husks, not knowing you were burying the 'refuse' option even more.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

miekojn wrote...

"So be it, Jedi."

The ending of Return of the Jedi was the stupidest thing ever in retrospect.  I recently rewatched the star wars trilogy (in their original format, yay) and while theres some elements of RotJ that were awesome, there was alot of "make the badguys stupid so that the goodguys are able to win" that really made the film feel like it was pandering in stupid ways.  The empire became dummies, storm troopers became comical idiots (they were super ****ing threatening in the first 2 movies and everything made sense.  RotJ storm troopers just swarm into a scene and dont actually do anything until han solo shoots them all.  I think they made the emperor last minute get stupid/worthless after darth vader picks him up (why wasnt he able to use the force to save himself from falling into a death pit he installed in his throne room?  Why was that death pit there in the first place?  Did he need a sub-atomic engine next to his throne?)


The only way to beat the reapers without using a superweapon is to retcon what they are so that they are beatable by regular ships and regular people with regular weapons.

The whole galaxy is **** compared to the reapers.  Anyone who thinks that the reapers should have been beatable so that they could see a scene of shepard and the army beating the reapers are total dummies that just want another ME2, a game that is insignificant and stupid in retrospect, despite being "cool"  :/

[Father_Jerusalem]

Kyazain wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

I want to know why the Catalyst says "So be it" in such a deep, menacing voice and then right after says "the cycle continues" in his usual voice.

I have no idea what that was.

I wondered that, too. It almost felt personal (as a gamer). I wonder if Casey and Mac recorded that line. . .

Because he's giving you the chance to end the cycle once and for all, because he knows that the solution is flawed but HE cannot change it, all he can do is allow YOU to change it.

Then you shoot him in the face.

I'd be a little upset if I was him, wouldn't you?

[Ryzaki]

wantedman dan wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

*opens mouth*

*closes*

Shakes head.

I'm not even going to try. I'm not. If you can't see how utterly retarded that sounds...

I think it's time for bed.

It probably is I think I just lost a few brian cells. I'm not sure if it was me being dumb or the post I was responding too.

[wantedman dan]

Funkdrspot wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

LOL the only option that forces that on people is the one you're arguing FOR! REFUSE!

You do realize the point of this thread, no? Or have you not managed to stumble your way to the OP yet?

Maybe you should display competent reading comrehension and realize that you stepped into a convo between me and someone else about the DOWNSIDES to control/destroy/synth.

He was arguing FOR refuse via his principles, saying that the other options were akin to slavery. 

Then you countered about the husks, not knowing you were burying the 'refuse' option even more.

And maybe you should understand that this thread is about the travesty that is the current Refusal option.

Are you really that fucking stupid as to believe that I inherently enjoyed the Refusal ending? No, you're not, because you also argued that I wanted a Disney ending.

So, stop the nonsense, quit acting like a petulant, hormonal adolescent trapped in his mother's basement, and get back down to Realville for a second.

Modifié par wantedman dan, 29 juin 2012 - 07:46 .

[Bomma72]

Yeah and it is almost 4 here and I have to go to work tomorrow. But someone questioned my morality, and that is the reason I picked the damn ending in the first place.

Goodnight.

[wantedman dan]

Ryzaki wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

*opens mouth*

*closes*

Shakes head.

I'm not even going to try. I'm not. If you can't see how utterly retarded that sounds...

I think it's time for bed.

It probably is I think I just lost a few brian cells. I'm not sure if it was me being dumb or the post I was responding too.

Brian will be displeased.

[AtreiyaN7]

Galbrant wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

It's not a slap in the face. You chose to fight an unwinnable war that will get everyone in this Cycle killed because you're selfish, oops, I mean "principled."

There's no one left alive from our Cycle, so what do you expect to see? Do you want a slideshow showing that the Reapers turning Garrus into a Marauder? Maybe see Kaidan/Ashley get turned into a husk? Watch Samara's other daughter get turned into a Banshee too? What, exactly, is there supposed to be for you to look at if everyone's dead or enslaved?

While I enjoy horror movies on occasion, I'm not really sure why you'd want to see all the horrible ways in which all the characters who are ostensibly your friends die. Yeah, they did you a really huge disservice there by not showing all of that. *sarcasm* As I understand it, the next Cycle learns from the information you leave behind, so they get to win even though you got our entire race killed. There's your bright side! Take solace it in - or don't.

I respectivly disagree. For starters these choices are been given by our defacto leader of the Reapers, I have no reason to believe a word from my enemy without any valid proof. Shepard has shown time and time again he could do the impossible. Why should it be any different this time around? Because the writers were asinine  enough to use a silly Deus Ex Machina plot line? I doubt even Captain Kirk would even take up on the God Child offer.  

"I don't believe in no-win scenarios. " ~ Captain James T. Kirk 

Besides The Protheans stop the Citidel from being use as a  giant Mass Relay  and retained their ability to travel through space. They lost because they are one species one empire, and one set of strategies.  Now in this cycle we have the help of entire differen't species and cultures and mulitple different strategies. It seems we have enough tactics, and strategies to keep the reapers from forming an effective counter measure.  Who knows? With the Genious minds of the  Geth, Salarians, Asari, Quarian, Humans, and Turians we could develop a way to resist indoctrination. I'm pretty sure the Geth of a general idea of how indoctrination works from being apart of the Old Machines. If not then maybe the Leviathan of dis may provide something. 

You are welcome to continue to think my refusal is a selfish request... but at least I kept my humanity.

I love Star Trek, but the ME universe is decidedly not that same as that of Star Trek, and we're not talking about a Kobayashi Maru or one of those other impossible situations that James T. Kirk always managed to miraculously turn into a victory for the Federation. You don't get to change the rules with the Reapers, and Shepard is not James T. Kirk (much as I adore him). Shepard clearly wasn't meant to be invincible even if you wanted it to be so.

Furthermore, what happened with the Protheans is irrelevant. We had what seemed to be all the major fleets at Earth, so what ships are going to be left to fight your conventional war or to protect the worlds that aren't under Reaper control? Who's going to retake the worlds that are under Reaper control? It was an all or nothing move with all our forces (as far as I know) in the Sol system to get the Crucible in place. Based on the cutscenes, quite a few of those ships were being blown to itty-bitty bits.

I also don't particularly value your brand of humanity, as I simply can't see how one individual's ego is worth more than billions or trillions of lives. But since you brought up Star Trek, maybe you'll remember Spock sacrificing himself to save is friends at the end of the Wrath of Khan? Or how Kirk had to let Edith Keeler die in The City on the Edge of Forever? Sacrificing your life, your love, or compromising on your principles for the greater good sure as heck seems a lot more in line with the kind of humanity that I value.

Vulcan proverb: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one.

Maybe you should keep that proverb in mind if you want to draw from the well of Star Trek.

[Funkdrspot]

Bomma72 wrote...

OK one more post. Synthesis looks like a totalitarian state to me, like living in North Korea (everyone happy happy fake smile for the camera). Plus you have to take away the whole galaxy's free will without there consent ,disgusting.

Control turns Shepard into a Reaper, and his speech at the end sounds like he is basically going to micro-manage them to the point of Slavery, and destroy is basically the Munich Agreement you sell out your allies for peace, except you kill them so it is even worse.

Therefor I pick refuse and then win or lose we are not slavesEvil ore whatever you want to call it. When I picked it by the way I didn't know what would happen thought we would still fight even if it is to the death. By the way I was right too, because (if you believe what the star brat says and he didn't lie to you before) both control and destroy the cycle just continues in the future. And if you can deal with synthesis then more power to you because to me it is the worst of them all. Only with refuse does the cycle end for good and you are not a corrupted.

Wait, so in control, you're worried about the reapers being micro-managed?!?!

R O F L.

So lets get this right. You would rather have +9 races, +100 billion people die b/c your enemy might get micromanaged too much if they lose?!?!? L O L

Now lets move to Destroy.
Again, you'd rather have +9 races, INCLUDING the Geth, +100 billion people die instead of JUST the Geth? The Geth die REGARDLESS!!!!!!! At least their death isn't in vain this way!
Just in case you cant comprehend:
Refuse=Geth die, everyone else dies           Destroy=Geth die, everyone else wins

Wow, you'd be an absolute HORRIBLE General. You'd lose a war b/c you'd be too scared to lose some infantrymen. How does the US win WWII if we don't storm the beach first? How do you storm the beach if you don't have SOME losses? The Geth are those losses in Destroy.

[Bomma72]

It has nothing to do with ego!!  It's about morals. 

Modifié par Bomma72, 29 juin 2012 - 07:49 .

[Rhiens VI]

You cannot defeat the Reapers conventionally, there's plenty of evidence throughout all three games. Thinking otherwise is to delude yourself.

More work put into that particular ending would be nice, though. I wouldn't go as far as saying it's a slap in the face, but it's fairly obvious Bioware didn't initially plan for this option, and they weren't too thrilled to flesh it out.

[Father_Jerusalem]

Bomma72 wrote...

It has nothing to do with ego!!  It's about morals. 

YOUR morals. You're willing to sacrifice ALL advanced life in the galaxy for YOUR morals.

How is that NOT ego?

[Ryzaki]

wantedman dan wrote...

Brian will be displeased.

I know she gets on me about doing that to her all the time. *sighs* Sorry brain.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

Ryzaki wrote...

Also wut? 

The crucible wasn't EVEN IN ME1. The HELL?!? That was the RELAY the ILOS RELAY! The "weapon" was opening up the Citadel so the Reapers could open the relay to darkspace so they could do their instant win trick. The ****? 

I'm going to bed.

it wasnt explicitly in it, but there are 3 points in the game where anderson introduces the concept of a prothean superweapon to the PLAYER.  he doesnt know that saren was looking for a relay to the citadel, he thought the conduit was a super weapon.  Early in ME1 Anderson TWO TIMES talks about the idea that they might uncover a prothean super weapon.  Its something that stood out in retrospect after playing ME3, not something I noticed my first time through.  ME3 is both of the sequels to ME1 that we should have gotten tied into one product that got rushed by EA.

Think about the arc of a 3 part story.  "Introduce the threat in part 1.  find out how to deal with the threat in part 2.  deal with the threat in part 3."  ME2 ruined this just to appeal to people and the actual second arc of the game had to be condensed into the third act of the story.  I dont want to have to explain narrative structure and storytelling elements to you but when I say anderson introduces the concept of the crucible I dont mean he's introducing it to the characters, its a way for an author to communicate directly to the player about the path of the story going forward, its a literary technique.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

Also the thing about the radio, its because shepard heads towards the controls as anderson contacts her. in storyboarding terms thats how you convey a direction of sound. Perhapes the console was just picking up Hackett's broadcast? It wasnt explicit, it was visual language.

[Ryzaki]

...

*slowly facepalms*

There was no superweapon. It. was. the. beacon. showing. how. to. get. to. the. Citadel. undected.

How...I just...what. Did you even play ME1?

I'm done. I'm going to bed.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 29 juin 2012 - 07:53 .

[wantedman dan]

Ryzaki wrote...

...

*slowly facepalms*

There was no superweapon.

How...I just...what. Did you even play ME1?

I'm done. I'm going to bed.

Good night. 

[Funkdrspot]

wantedman dan wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

LOL the only option that forces that on people is the one you're arguing FOR! REFUSE!

You do realize the point of this thread, no? Or have you not managed to stumble your way to the OP yet?

Maybe you should display competent reading comrehension and realize that you stepped into a convo between me and someone else about the DOWNSIDES to control/destroy/synth.

He was arguing FOR refuse via his principles, saying that the other options were akin to slavery. 

Then you countered about the husks, not knowing you were burying the 'refuse' option even more.

And maybe you should understand that this thread is about the travesty that is the current Refusal option.

Are you really that fucking stupid as to believe that I inherently enjoyed the Refusal ending? No, you're not, because you also argued that I wanted a Disney ending.

So, stop the nonsense, quit acting like a petulant, hormonal adolescent trapped in his mother's basement, and get back down to Realville for a second.

Wants the nonsense stopped
Then throws tantrum, calls names

You wanted a Disney ending. In leu of that, you wanted a conventional ending.  You got one, but it wasn't the end you wanted so you're pouting now.

You're pouting so damn hard you're not even arguing the point anymore, you're just arguing about me. It's flattering that you think i'm a teen and you call me sweat pea but i'm not a fruitcup like you. I'm a grown ass man, so save the e-tough guy routine.