222 réponses à ce sujet

[numark]

Velocithon wrote...

I think all devs should be banned from Twitter frankly. I'm tired of them insinuating what happens in certain situations because, given their status, people will assume it's "what really happened" even if there is no true outcome (speculation). We bought the game. We played the game. If it isn't in it, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. No more "well it's possible this happened" or "this is what happened" bull**** on Twitter.

edit: Perfect example is the entire Emily Wong situation.

THIS.

Not everyone goes to Twitter, not everyone comes to discussion boards, it NEEDS to be in game.

[IanPolaris]

wh00ley 06 wrote...

I guess the person who dies gets to headcanon. He doesn't go on Twitter post-death to see that his sacrifice delayed was for naught.

Very true, but the person who played him does, and it's that person that is actually paying for the game.


-Polaris

[wh00ley 06]

Optimystic_X wrote...

JA Shepard wrote...

I think it's when it is really out of spite. The crucible is Shepard's and this cycle's weapon. We may not like the catalyst but he is not the one who makes the crucible do what it does. Your own construction does. His line about control when he asks Shepard something lie "do you think I want to be replaced by you?" tells me that. If you want to blame someone, blame the previous cycles for their design.

The catalyst is basically just allowing you to use your own weapon even if it will destroy the reapers, because in his logic driven mind, events that have taken place in this cycle may have rendered his solution obsolete. He's open to new ideas. Refusing to choose is just spiting yourself. It also happens to validate the catalyst's logic because it proves that organics are still so irrational that even the best of them can't see past his own hatred to do what he came to do and save everyone. It's just as an f-you to an enemy that is conceding victory to you when he can still kill you. That's where dying for a cause becomes pointless. 

Brilliant post, thank you.

And Refusal is every bit as unethical and selfish as people claim Synthesis to be. Did you ask the Galaxy what they thought before unilaterally deciding everyone should go down swinging?

The Catalyst says 'The Crucible is little more than an energy source...'. He's the one that directs that energy into the choices.

[Allan Schumacher]

JA Shepard wrote...

I think it's when it is really out of spite. The crucible is Shepard's and this cycle's weapon. We may not like the catalyst but he is not the one who makes the crucible do what it does. Your own construction does. His line about control when he asks Shepard something lie "do you think I want to be replaced by you?" tells me that. If you want to blame someone, blame the previous cycles for their design.

The catalyst is basically just allowing you to use your own weapon even if it will destroy the reapers, because in his logic driven mind, events that have taken place in this cycle may have rendered his solution obsolete. He's open to new ideas. Refusing to choose is just spiting yourself. It also happens to validate the catalyst's logic because it proves that organics are still so irrational that even the best of them can't see past his own hatred to do what he came to do and save everyone. It's just as an f-you to an enemy that is conceding victory to you when he can still kill you. That's where dying for a cause becomes pointless. 

I like this response a lot.  Thanks for taking the time to write it

Do you think it's fair for someone to choose the refuse end for a non-spiteful reason?  Such as not trusting the Catalyst, or feeling that the costs associated with firing the Crucible are too much and not a decision that one man can make on behalf of others?

[Seta Souji]

LKx wrote...

I'm totally ok with a defeat in the refuse option, however Shepard should have reacted in some way like:

- Shepard reject the catalyst's options
- Shepard tell Hackett about the catalyst's nature (at least it would be knowledge for future cycles), and call in a nuke to the Citadel core
- The Citadel, and the Catalyst with it, gets destroyed, the reapers lose their controller. Cofused they keep their prime directive, but they are less coordinated. Some reapers go rogue and just try to destroy everything on their path, some other acquire the self-knowledge of their races and either allow the alliance to destroy them or flee away.
- Reapers suffer heavy casualties, due the confusion, but, eventually, they manage to win this cicle (but with some survivors around), and most of them follow their prime directive to go back to sleep for another 50 thousands years.
- Next cycle, are aware of the threat due the Liara's probes (and maybe some other survivors' data around), and manage to destroy conventionally the new reaper's less coordinated assault

Dude i really like your way of thinking, I never thought about destroying the catalist, leaving the Reapers without Direction, but unfortunatelly I really think that would not happen.

[SilentWolfie]

Quite a few had referred to my age, and I merely put it that I play games to avoid real life just for a bit. Real life, that has your superiors and bosses raining piles of work on your desk, telling you what you had screwed up a few months back and telling you what's your next deadline for the next project. How your customers spit on your face for minor faults. How you found out your car breaks down. Real life has very few ideal situations, and I desire for an ideal ending for imperfect situations in a game.

High EMS (or if you want, make it perfect EMS) + refusal should be victory, that's surely to be considered an ideal ending, and I want it. It's my version of what an ideal victory should be. Oh wait, didn't this happen before ? (Hint: ME2 ending, Shepard's leadership won the day)

Lower EMS + refusal makes sense that it fails, but I think I recall ME2's perfect ending where nobody died didn't ruffle too many feathers.

Anyway, I made my point. Bioware is done with the series ending, and so am I.

[shurikenmanta]

The level of EMS required to beat the Reapers in a straight fight would be virtually impossible to reach.

[PsyrenY]

numark wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

I think all devs should be banned from Twitter frankly. I'm tired of them insinuating what happens in certain situations because, given their status, people will assume it's "what really happened" even if there is no true outcome (speculation). We bought the game. We played the game. If it isn't in it, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. No more "well it's possible this happened" or "this is what happened" bull**** on Twitter.

edit: Perfect example is the entire Emily Wong situation.

THIS.

Not everyone goes to Twitter, not everyone comes to discussion boards, it NEEDS to be in game.

You know they don't just randomly post PSAs on Twitter, do you?

A fan asked them. If you have a problem with it, tell everyone to STOP TWEETING BIOWARE.

wh00ley 06 wrote...

The Catalyst says 'The Crucible is little more than an energy source...'. He's the one that directs that energy into the choices.

Right, but he can only think of three ways to channel that energy. And he presents them all to you, even if it is capable of the only one he wants, i.e. Synthesis. So it's not his fault. He's being perfectly honest.

[IanPolaris]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I like this response a lot.  Thanks for taking the time to write it

Do you think it's fair for someone to choose the refuse end for a non-spiteful reason?  Such as not trusting the Catalyst, or feeling that the costs associated with firing the Crucible are too much and not a decision that one man can make on behalf of others?

I do.  It's a matter of trust.  Given that we know that the Catalyst is a Reaper and given that the Catalyst now controls the crucible, we have no reason to believe anything it says.  At all.  In fact, we have no reason to think that the actual options will even do what he says or that he's being honest with us about the consequences.

He is an unreliable narrator.  That being so, a Shepard can reasonable assume that this cycle has been tricked and the battle is lost for this cycle but maybe, just maybe they can do enough, tear a big enough hole in the Reaper forces, and give enough warning that the next cycle or the one after that can win completely and on their own terms.  In fact if you think about it, it's inevitable.  It won't be many more cycles before the Reapers are completely defeated.

Good article in Forbes about it that's worth reading.

http://www.forbes.co...of-mass-effect/

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

shurikenmanta wrote...

The level of EMS required to beat the Reapers in a straight fight would be virtually impossible to reach.

I would be just fine with that.....as long as "virtually" was left in there.

-Polaris

[PsyrenY]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

JA Shepard wrote...

I think it's when it is really out of spite. The crucible is Shepard's and this cycle's weapon. We may not like the catalyst but he is not the one who makes the crucible do what it does. Your own construction does. His line about control when he asks Shepard something lie "do you think I want to be replaced by you?" tells me that. If you want to blame someone, blame the previous cycles for their design.

The catalyst is basically just allowing you to use your own weapon even if it will destroy the reapers, because in his logic driven mind, events that have taken place in this cycle may have rendered his solution obsolete. He's open to new ideas. Refusing to choose is just spiting yourself. It also happens to validate the catalyst's logic because it proves that organics are still so irrational that even the best of them can't see past his own hatred to do what he came to do and save everyone. It's just as an f-you to an enemy that is conceding victory to you when he can still kill you. That's where dying for a cause becomes pointless. 

I like this response a lot.  Thanks for taking the time to write it

Do you think it's fair for someone to choose the refuse end for a non-spiteful reason?  Such as not trusting the Catalyst, or feeling that the costs associated with firing the Crucible are too much and not a decision that one man can make on behalf of others?

But Refusal itself is "a decision that one man makes on behalf of others." All the endings are. And it is very spiteful of Shepard to do so when he is repeatedly told that we cannot win conventionally by people who are in a position to know that.

The only non-spiteful reason I can think of is Shepard really shooting the hologram out of frustration and accidentally triggering it. (I just had a funny thought of Shep in the afterlife, surrounded by everyone's ghost from the ME-verse. Hackett walks up and says "what the hell happened, Shepard? The Crucible went dark and the Reapers killed all of us!!!" and Shepard replies "Man, I couldn't help myself, I had to shoot that smug hologram right in the head...")

[IanPolaris]

Optimystic_X wrote...

You know they don't just randomly post PSAs on Twitter, do you?

A fan asked them. If you have a problem with it, tell everyone to STOP TWEETING BIOWARE.

Really.  It doesn't matter whether a fan asked or not.  Has no one heard of "No Comment".  I'm told it works wonders.

-Polaris

[bboynexus]

There is absolutely nothing about the Refusal ending that completely closes the door on the possibility that our cycle DIDN'T win without using the Crucible. That interpretation is entirely up to the player. In this case, 'speculation' works. The fact that the Stargazer is any different at all in the Refusal ending is an extremely interesting variation (not to mention the fact she looks like an Asari).

[wh00ley 06]

Optimystic_X wrote...

numark wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

I think all devs should be banned from Twitter frankly. I'm tired of them insinuating what happens in certain situations because, given their status, people will assume it's "what really happened" even if there is no true outcome (speculation). We bought the game. We played the game. If it isn't in it, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. No more "well it's possible this happened" or "this is what happened" bull**** on Twitter.

edit: Perfect example is the entire Emily Wong situation.

THIS.

Not everyone goes to Twitter, not everyone comes to discussion boards, it NEEDS to be in game.

You know they don't just randomly post PSAs on Twitter, do you?

A fan asked them. If you have a problem with it, tell everyone to STOP TWEETING BIOWARE.

wh00ley 06 wrote...

The Catalyst says 'The Crucible is little more than an energy source...'. He's the one that directs that energy into the choices.

Right, but he can only think of three ways to channel that energy. And he presents them all to you, even if it is capable of the only one he wants, i.e. Synthesis. So it's not his fault. He's being perfectly honest.

His honesty is an assumption. You say he must be telling the truth if he wants Synthesis but gives us other options. He tells us he doesn't want us to control the Reapers but he's letting you anyway. Why should you believe the collective consciousness of all Reapers? The same Reapers that told Earth leaders they wanted peace and to stroll into their hulls to achieve it.

[Kandon Arc]

JA Shepard wrote...

I think it's when it is really out of spite. The crucible is Shepard's and this cycle's weapon. We may not like the catalyst but he is not the one who makes the crucible do what it does. Your own construction does. His line about control when he asks Shepard something lie "do you think I want to be replaced by you?" tells me that. If you want to blame someone, blame the previous cycles for their design.

The catalyst is basically just allowing you to use your own weapon even if it will destroy the reapers, because in his logic driven mind, events that have taken place in this cycle may have rendered his solution obsolete. He's open to new ideas. Refusing to choose is just spiting yourself. It also happens to validate the catalyst's logic because it proves that organics are still so irrational that even the best of them can't see past his own hatred to do what he came to do and save everyone. It's just as an f-you to an enemy that is conceding victory to you when he can still kill you. That's where dying for a cause becomes pointless. 

I don't see it that way. I see it as recognising that you failed in this cycle, that despite your best efforts the cost of 'victory' would be too high; you would 'sacrifice too much'. Therefore you elect to roll the dice, to pass on what you know about the crucible and hope that the next cycle can do better than you and truly defeat the enemy instead of merely bargaining for their survival.

Modifié par Kandon Arc, 29 juin 2012 - 12:25 .

[wh00ley 06]

IanPolaris wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

You know they don't just randomly post PSAs on Twitter, do you?

A fan asked them. If you have a problem with it, tell everyone to STOP TWEETING BIOWARE.

Really.  It doesn't matter whether a fan asked or not.  Has no one heard of "No Comment".  I'm told it works wonders.

-Polaris

Merizan also posted it in a thread on the BSN.

[PsyrenY]

IanPolaris wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

You know they don't just randomly post PSAs on Twitter, do you?

A fan asked them. If you have a problem with it, tell everyone to STOP TWEETING BIOWARE.

Really.  It doesn't matter whether a fan asked or not.  Has no one heard of "No Comment".  I'm told it works wonders.

-Polaris

Clearly, he had a comment. Problem?

[numark]

Optimystic_X wrote...

numark wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

I think all devs should be banned from Twitter frankly. I'm tired of them insinuating what happens in certain situations because, given their status, people will assume it's "what really happened" even if there is no true outcome (speculation). We bought the game. We played the game. If it isn't in it, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. No more "well it's possible this happened" or "this is what happened" bull**** on Twitter.

edit: Perfect example is the entire Emily Wong situation.

THIS.

Not everyone goes to Twitter, not everyone comes to discussion boards, it NEEDS to be in game.

You know they don't just randomly post PSAs on Twitter, do you?

A fan asked them. If you have a problem with it, tell everyone to STOP TWEETING BIOWARE.

wh00ley 06 wrote...

The Catalyst says 'The Crucible is little more than an energy source...'. He's the one that directs that energy into the choices.

Right, but he can only think of three ways to channel that energy. And he presents them all to you, even if it is capable of the only one he wants, i.e. Synthesis. So it's not his fault. He's being perfectly honest.

Oh I'm all for using Twitter and discussion boards as a line of communication between the fans and development. For asking questions or "clarifying" issues. I just think game content should be, well, in the game.

Like if a fan asked, "...so what happens to our LI now?" and a dev tweeted back that they die in a horrible explosion that also kills half a dozen ponies and orphans I doubt anyone would be happy with that

Modifié par numark, 29 juin 2012 - 12:54 .

[IanPolaris]

wh00ley 06 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

You know they don't just randomly post PSAs on Twitter, do you?

A fan asked them. If you have a problem with it, tell everyone to STOP TWEETING BIOWARE.

Really.  It doesn't matter whether a fan asked or not.  Has no one heard of "No Comment".  I'm told it works wonders.

-Polaris

Merizan also posted it in a thread on the BSN.

Same applies to her, except that everyone knows that she is an unreliable source when it comes to Mass Effect (or at least that's been my experience).

-Polaris

[PsyrenY]

wh00ley 06 wrote...

His honesty is an assumption. You say he must be telling the truth if he wants Synthesis but gives us other options. He tells us he doesn't want us to control the Reapers but he's letting you anyway. Why should you believe the collective consciousness of all Reapers? The same Reapers that told Earth leaders they wanted peace and to stroll into their hulls to achieve it.

They said that before the Crucible was installed, so it's irrelevant.

bboynexus wrote...

There is absolutely nothing about the Refusal ending that completely closes the door on the possibility that our cycle DIDN'T win without using the Crucible. That interpretation is entirely up to the player. In this case, 'speculation' works. The fact that the Stargazer is any different at all in the Refusal ending is an extremely interesting variation (not to mention the fact she looks like an Asari).

Asari are pretty unique though. Even if only one survived to the next cycle, she can mate with anything else (even the Yahg/Vorcha) and repopulate the entire asari race with no inbreeding.

[IanPolaris]

Optimystic_X wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

You know they don't just randomly post PSAs on Twitter, do you?

A fan asked them. If you have a problem with it, tell everyone to STOP TWEETING BIOWARE.

Really.  It doesn't matter whether a fan asked or not.  Has no one heard of "No Comment".  I'm told it works wonders.

-Polaris

Clearly, he had a comment. Problem?

Frankly yes.  He is a member of the Bioware team.  That means he doesn't have the same lattitude as Joe Poster because of what his posts represent or are taken to represent.  You do realize (for example) that in the US it is ILLEGAL for an active duty commissioned officer to criticize the president even privately?  Same idea.

-Polaris

[wh00ley 06]

Optimystic_X wrote...

wh00ley 06 wrote...

His honesty is an assumption. You say he must be telling the truth if he wants Synthesis but gives us other options. He tells us he doesn't want us to control the Reapers but he's letting you anyway. Why should you believe the collective consciousness of all Reapers? The same Reapers that told Earth leaders they wanted peace and to stroll into their hulls to achieve it.

They said that before the Crucible was installed, so it's irrelevant.

bboynexus wrote...

There is absolutely nothing about the Refusal ending that completely closes the door on the possibility that our cycle DIDN'T win without using the Crucible. That interpretation is entirely up to the player. In this case, 'speculation' works. The fact that the Stargazer is any different at all in the Refusal ending is an extremely interesting variation (not to mention the fact she looks like an Asari).

Asari are pretty unique though. Even if only one survived to the next cycle, she can mate with anything else (even the Yahg/Vorcha) and repopulate the entire asari race with no inbreeding.

The Crucible isn't a truth serum. If the foundation of the logic is built on a lie, it's all lies.

Modifié par wh00ley 06, 29 juin 2012 - 12:34 .

[bboynexus]

IanPolaris wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

You know they don't just randomly post PSAs on Twitter, do you?

A fan asked them. If you have a problem with it, tell everyone to STOP TWEETING BIOWARE.

Really.  It doesn't matter whether a fan asked or not.  Has no one heard of "No Comment".  I'm told it works wonders.

-Polaris

Clearly, he had a comment. Problem?

You do realize (for example) that in the US it is ILLEGAL for an active duty commissioned officer to criticize the president even privately?  Same idea.

-Polaris

Oh, yeah, because that is ENTIRELY acceptable...

[Micah3sixty]

To the OP: I think it's cool they added a new option to refuse the Catalyst at all. Totally unexpected but welcome. The outcome of the current cycle ending shouldn't be any big surprise, as the whole trilogy has been drilling the fact that the Reapers cannot be won conventionally, as they by far out class and overpower the combined forces of the Galaxy. At least Liara provided enough warning and foresight to allow a future cycle to end the Reaper threat. Credit to Liara for that happening, not Shepard.

[bboynexus]

wh00ley 06 wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

wh00ley 06 wrote...

His honesty is an assumption. You say he must be telling the truth if he wants Synthesis but gives us other options. He tells us he doesn't want us to control the Reapers but he's letting you anyway. Why should you believe the collective consciousness of all Reapers? The same Reapers that told Earth leaders they wanted peace and to stroll into their hulls to achieve it.

They said that before the Crucible was installed, so it's irrelevant.

bboynexus wrote...

There is absolutely nothing about the Refusal ending that completely closes the door on the possibility that our cycle DIDN'T win without using the Crucible. That interpretation is entirely up to the player. In this case, 'speculation' works. The fact that the Stargazer is any different at all in the Refusal ending is an extremely interesting variation (not to mention the fact she looks like an Asari).

The Crucible isn't a truth serum. If the foundation of his logic is built on a lie, it's all lies.

Asari are pretty unique though. Even if only one survived to the next cycle, she can mate with anything else (even the Yahg/Vorcha) and repopulate the entire asari race with no inbreeding.

Sorry!! I meant to say 'DID win'.