565 réponses à ce sujet

[Baramon]

Some good discussin' going on in here! I'm just curious: has anyone else read this article?
Editorial - The Reaper's Advocate

It's lengthy, but you can skip over the parts that don't interest you. I found a lot of the explanations helpful, and the theory on why certain events happen, the function of the crucible, etc. to be informative. It certainly helped solidify some of my thoughts on why the Catalyst acts the way it does and the purpose of the Reapers. Definitely worth a read if you have some time.

Modifié par Baramon, 30 juin 2012 - 11:44 .

[Joe Del Toro]

maxulic wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

nicocap24 wrote...

Oh, for the love of God. Yes, the catalyst is the criminal. You have the chance to stop him, and you decide not to. Instead, you let everyone die because you suppose that they wouldn't have agreed to using the crucible, even though they spend the whole freaking game building it.

Without knowing what it does.

It does save them. Period.

Shepard refusing to use the Crucible after all it took to get there is just slapping trillions of people in the face.

Doesn't save the Geth. Two of the options save the Reapers. And let's not get into if Synthesis is even 'saving' anyone.

[CavScout]

Angry One is angry. Shocking,

[CavScout]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

maxulic wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

nicocap24 wrote...

Oh, for the love of God. Yes, the catalyst is the criminal. You have the chance to stop him, and you decide not to. Instead, you let everyone die because you suppose that they wouldn't have agreed to using the crucible, even though they spend the whole freaking game building it.

Without knowing what it does.

It does save them. Period.

Shepard refusing to use the Crucible after all it took to get there is just slapping trillions of people in the face.

Doesn't save the Geth. Two of the options save the Reapers. And let's not get into if Synthesis is even 'saving' anyone.

Choosing to save no one because you cant save everyone is ignorant.

[LilyasAvalon]

Not really, no. I've always kinda known the Starchild was a lieing and now I'm just too tired about this controversy to give a damn.

As for the EDI and Geth thing, I just theorise that they can be repaired.

Modifié par LilyasAvalon, 30 juin 2012 - 11:50 .

[ImperatorMortis]

No. I really don't care.

Also the refusal ending is just all kinds of idiotic. If this was actually a thing, and I knew someone was just gonna do nothing when he/she got there. I would do everything in my power to try, and stop/kill that person. 

AlduinTheWorldNommer wrote...

Really TAO, you've been on this fairly mediocre game's case for nearly a quarter of a year.

Let it go...move on. It's over.

Wow really? That's incredibly sad. Must have nothing better to do.

Modifié par ImperatorMortis, 30 juin 2012 - 11:54 .

[Joe Del Toro]

CavScout wrote...

Choosing to save no one because you cant save everyone is ignorant.

Yeah I get that, but here's what people don't seem to get.

You are punished. Even though you spent the whole game doing everything right. You take issue with me saying no to the Catalyst, but none with the fact that the other three choices exist at all? For God's sake, why are we submitting to the use of a deus ex machina? Why can't I fight like I was supposed to? Why are we accepting that we have an arbitrary variety of nihilistic options?

I say no on principle. If Bioware felt like that principle is wrong because it gets everyone killed, that's their problem.

[CavScout]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Choosing to save no one because you cant save everyone is ignorant.

Yeah I get that, but here's what people don't seem to get.

You are punished. Even though you spent the whole game doing everything right. You take issue with me saying no to the Catalyst, but none with the fact that the other three choices exist at all? For God's sake, why are we submitting to the use of a deus ex machina? Why can't I fight like I was supposed to? Why are we accepting that we have an arbitrary variety of nihilistic options?

I say no on principle. If Bioware felt like that principle is wrong because it gets everyone killed, that's their problem.

Being stubborn and letting people die is even more ignorant.

[ImperatorMortis]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Choosing to save no one because you cant save everyone is ignorant.

Yeah I get that, but here's what people don't seem to get.

You are punished. Even though you spent the whole game doing everything right. You take issue with me saying no to the Catalyst, but none with the fact that the other three choices exist at all? For God's sake, why are we submitting to the use of a deus ex machina? Why can't I fight like I was supposed to? Why are we accepting that we have an arbitrary variety of nihilistic options?

I say no on principle. If Bioware felt like that principle is wrong because it gets everyone killed, that's their problem.

So "Principles" > Greater Good in your opinion? You should never be in charge of anything, ever.

You're officially on "exependible lackey" duty from now on. 

Modifié par ImperatorMortis, 30 juin 2012 - 11:57 .

[Joe Del Toro]

*facepalm*

So's ignoring the entire point of my post.

[ThatDancingTurian]

maxulic wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

nicocap24 wrote...

Oh, for the love of God. Yes, the catalyst is the criminal. You have the chance to stop him, and you decide not to. Instead, you let everyone die because you suppose that they wouldn't have agreed to using the crucible, even though they spend the whole freaking game building it.

Without knowing what it does.

It does save them. Period.

Shepard refusing to use the Crucible after all it took to get there is just slapping trillions of people in the face.

Shepard doesn't know that. Shepard doesn't know if it will work, how to use it or what it will do if it does work. The only thing Shepard 'knows' about it is what s/he's told by the evil leader of all Reapers who is posing as a child in a transparent ploy to gain his/her trust. For all Shepard knows, this Reaper AI is unable to use the device itself and is trying to force Shepard to do something that will ultimately sabotage it. Breaking its pipes, interfering with its circuits or jumping into its beam all seem like excellent ways to break the thing from an outsider's perspective. Just saying.

It just makes no sense why Shepard would trust this thing in the first place, which makes the entire ending kind of a fail.

Not to mention the fact that they sent a soldier up there instead of a scientist who might have figured out how to work the thing assuming there wasn't some deus ex machina waiting to explain it to him/her.

Modifié par Aris Ravenstar, 30 juin 2012 - 11:59 .

[Arcadian Legend]

Baramon wrote...

Some good discussin' going on in here! I'm just curious: has anyone else read this article?
Editorial - The Reaper's Advocate

It's lengthy, but you can skip over the parts that don't interest you. I found a lot of the explanations helpful, and the theory on why certain events happen, the function of the crucible, etc. to be informative. It certainly helped solidify some of my thoughts on why the Catalyst acts the way it does and the purpose of the Reapers. Definitely worth a read if you have some time.

Thanks! I'll check this out later.

[ImperatorMortis]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

*facepalm*

So's ignoring the entire point of my post.

You're punished because doing nothing is asinine. Yeah.. Just gonna satisfy my ego, and let everyone die for nothing. Yep.. I'm definetly the right person for this job. 

A person with even a hint of common sense would get over themselves, and make a bloody decision(preferably if that decision was "Destroy"). 

[davishepard]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

Yeah I get that, but here's what people don't seem to get.

You are punished. Even though you spent the whole game doing everything right. You take issue with me saying no to the Catalyst, but none with the fact that the other three choices exist at all? For God's sake, why are we submitting to the use of a deus ex machina? Why can't I fight like I was supposed to? Why are we accepting that we have an arbitrary variety of nihilistic options?

I say no on principle. If Bioware felt like that principle is wrong because it gets everyone killed, that's their problem.

Because you can't win the war without the Crucible. Pay attention to the dialogues in the game, for Gods sake. Garrus provides specially interesting insights about the war and decisions. "All converge to the Crucible". And don't tell me they manage to take down Reapers during ME3, because they weren't Capital Ships, only Destroyer, and posed a hell of a job to take down (entire Auarian flotila firing at one, the mother of the thresher maws, that missile with limited fire).

[Joe Del Toro]

ImperatorMortis wrote...

So "Principles" > Greater Good in your opinion? You should never be in charge of anything, ever. 

You're officially on "exependible lackey" duty from now on. 

Read my post. I'm not talking about in-game consequences. I'm talking about how Bioware can kiss my god damn ass with their idiotic set-up of an ending to begin with.

[The Angry One]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

No, your logic with Reject is that "because it's morally messy to use the Crucible, I'm going to kill them so they can be saved from the Reapers". 

No. My logic is that using the Crucible enslaves the galaxy to the Catalyst's whim.
We'll fight and win without it. I won't sacrifice the soul of my species.

-You- are given the ability to save trillions of lives.

-You- choose to not use this ability.

-You- are responsible for their deaths, if not totally then it part.

-You- are at the very least an accomplice to a war criminal, and if I understand how the Hague handles such things, that makes -you- one yourself.

-You- apparently cannot accept that. So you wrap yourself in emotion, stick your head in the sand, and cry that anybody that says otherwise is "angsty".

I will damn well yell at you for that.

The Catalyst chooses to continue the cycle.

The Catalyst chooses to hold the galaxy hostage and present an ultimatum.

The Catalyst chooses to throw a tantrum and murder everyone.

The Catalyst is the villain here, not Shepard. You want to give into evil because you think it's the easiest way to save lives. I refuse. A galaxy built on evil is nothing.

Neither do you.

So again, little more than speculation and invented details supports the idea that the Reapers would stop fighting and make a conventional victory possible.

It's a very real possibility. My Shepard would try.

*facepalm*

Those tactics only worked because of a unique set of circumstances that have not been duplicated.

Do try and actually read what I say.

The circumstances were not unique, try again.

[ImperatorMortis]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

ImperatorMortis wrote...

So "Principles" > Greater Good in your opinion? You should never be in charge of anything, ever. 

You're officially on "exependible lackey" duty from now on. 

Read my post. I'm not talking about in-game consequences. I'm talking about how Bioware can kiss my god damn ass with their idiotic set-up of an ending to begin with.

OK, I seriously doubt Bioware cares about your ass either way. Atleast they did something to try, and rectify their mistake(nobodies perfect), and alot of people seem to like the change so they did what they set out to do. 

But if you want to keep being miserable thats your perogative I suppose. 

The Angry One wrote...
No. My logic is that using the Crucible enslaves the galaxy to the Catalyst's whim.
We'll fight and win without it. I won't sacrifice the soul of my species.

You're logic is faulty. If you don't give in to their "whims" everyone will die, and the cycle starts over again, then some other species has to make the decision for you. All you're doing is putting it off until tomorrow, and being a useless bastard in the meantime. 

The refusing is lazy, useless, pointless, and all kinds of idiotic. The crucible was their last ditch effort, and by not using it you're condemning everyone to death. There was no other way to defeat the reapers, and if you didn't want to be a slave to them anymore you should have just chosen destroy. 

That way the reapers are GONE FOREVER, and nobody has to ever deal with them again.

Ever. 

Modifié par ImperatorMortis, 30 juin 2012 - 12:08 .

[ImperatorMortis]

Double post. 

Modifié par ImperatorMortis, 30 juin 2012 - 12:08 .

[Joe Del Toro]

ImperatorMortis wrote...

OK, I seriously doubt Bioware cares about your ass either way. Atleast they did something to try, and rectify their mistake(nobodies perfect), and alot of people seem to like the change so they did what they set out to do. 

But if you want to keep being miserable thats your perogative I suppose. 

Auuuuugh you hurt my feelings now auuuugh

Yes I want to be miserable. I don't want to love my favourite game series anymore, I'm just deciding to hate something that I adored for 5 years.

Get out of my face and go bother someone else.

[ImperatorMortis]

Joe Del Toro wrote...
Auuuuugh you hurt my feelings now auuuugh

 

Oh. I'm sorry. 

Joe Del Toro wrote...
Yes I want to be miserable. I don't want to love my favourite game series anymore, I'm just deciding to hate something that I adored for 5 years.

 

OK thats fine, don't love it then. There are other series ya know? There is such a thing as "moving on", and at this point it just seems kind of obsessive. The creepy kind of obsessive. 

Joe Del Toro wrote...
Get out of my face and go bother someone else.

Because of course I'm gonna listen to you right? 

Modifié par ImperatorMortis, 30 juin 2012 - 12:12 .

[Lord Goose]

The Catalyst is the villain here, not Shepard. You want to give
into evil because you think it's the easiest way to save lives. I
refuse. A galaxy built on evil is nothing.

Catalyst is a villain, but Shepard done nothing to stop it, when given a chance. Though it may have been logical answer for your character, it is not necessary the correct answer.

[translationninja]

It's becoming a bit absurd now really, so basically any and all solution(s) is/are a loss if the catalyst has suggested it because that would mean the galaxy is enslaved to the catalyst's whim.

That just really makes no sense anymore.

[wh00ley 06]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

ImperatorMortis wrote...

OK, I seriously doubt Bioware cares about your ass either way. Atleast they did something to try, and rectify their mistake(nobodies perfect), and alot of people seem to like the change so they did what they set out to do. 

But if you want to keep being miserable thats your perogative I suppose. 

Auuuuugh you hurt my feelings now auuuugh

Yes I want to be miserable. I don't want to love my favourite game series anymore, I'm just deciding to hate something that I adored for 5 years.

Get out of my face and go bother someone else.

QFT

[Joe Del Toro]

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Oh. I'm sorry.

You don't get sarcasm then. Terrific.

OK thats fine, don't love it then. There are other series ya know? There is such a thing as "moving on", and at this point it just seems kind of obsessive. The creepy kind of obsessive.

If that's creepy and obsessive...

Joe Del Toro wrote...
Get out of my face and go bother someone else.

Because of course I'm gonna listen to you right? 

Why do you then go on to imply you're gonna carry on bothering me?

Seriously. Go away.

Modifié par Joe Del Toro, 30 juin 2012 - 12:20 .

[Gorkan86]

Why spend huge amounts of money and effort to build the Crucible? Instead, you can spend them on ships to win conventionally. But even before the construction of Crucible, it was determined that we can not win by conventional methods. Admiral Hackett knows it. But are you sure that you know better than Admiral. Ok, no problem.
Admiral Hackett should be tried as a war criminal for what he supports this opinion, or just shoot him under the laws of war as a traitor?