406 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

Warbuckaz wrote...

Shepard has no clue how to use the crucible and the Catalyst brings him to “trigger area” sort of speak and it activates the Crucible. So we a presented with four choices. If we go with the 4th – Refusal; that leaves the catalyst to perform one of three options on his own.

1) Destroy which the will never happen because why would the catalyst destroy itself? It also is the choice it explicitly disagrees with it due to the nature of non-synthetics nature to create synthetics an eventually war with them. It programming tells him no matter how much peace you create, the cycle will eventually repeat. So that nixed.

2) Control, which is an irrelevant choice because the catalyst already has control...

3) Synthesis which is also an irrelevant choice because the catalyst is unable to add itself to the stream. “And” it requires someone such as Shepard to make it work successfully.

The Catalyst is tasked with insuring younger species have a chance to thrive. They only way it know (whether it works or not) is to continue the cycle. So, that’s what it does.



So the ultimate determination comes down (I think) to whether or not you feel the catalyst is lying or not and/or if you think Reapers lie.

Since I’ve never had a Reaper lie to me I assumed those are my only options or...The cycle continues

Since the Catalyust is already in control and the Catalyst knows his solution doesn't work any more, he has the power to call off the attack.  The fact he doesn't reflects badly only on the Catalyst and no one else.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...


[quote]Facts not in evidence.  I agree the Catalyst WANTS Shepard to use the crucible, but that's not the same thing as saying the Catalyst can't use it.  We only have it's word on that, and it's word is completely unreliable.[/quote]

Again, if we're going by what Shepard knows at the time, he has no idea whether or not the Catalyst is reliable.  If we're meta-gaming, we know for a fact that the Catalyst is reliable.
[/quote]

Actually we don't even know that.  We aren't given enough information.  In fact we do know that the Catalyst at least strongly implies that Shepard will die in destroy yet we know that this is the only possible ending where Shepard lives.

The bottom line is that Reaper and Reaper forces have been known to lie and deceive when it suited them.  There is no reason to think when it's all on the line that the REAPER Catalyst will be truthful...and every reason to think it probably won't be.

[quote]

[quote]You don't know that the Catalyst is unable to use the crucible.  Please stop confusing opinion and speculation for fact.[/quote]

"I can't make them happen."  I am confusing nothing.
[/quote]

You are assuming the Catalyst is telling the truth.  That's facts not in evidence.

[quote]

[quote]As for 'trusting' the catalyst in this point, I don't have to.  Either the AI is telling the truth or it's not.  If it is telling the truth, everything I said before applies.  If it's not, then it can't be trusted in any capacity anyway (and you shouldn't be doing what it says).[/quote]

By picking destroy, you're not doing what it says, you're doing what you promised to do, what everyone fought and died so that you could do. 
[/quote]

You are doing what it says.  You are doing the Catalyst's job for him by wiping out all synthetic life preventing conflict (at least for a while).  This is EXACTLY what (one of three) things the Catalyst wants you to do.  The only thing he doesn't want is refusal.  Ask yourself WHY the Catalyst doesn't want refusal.  Is it perhaps because he knows that his little demented paradise is going to come crashing down around it's ears if not in this cycles than soon (prob next cycle...which is indeed what happens, or if not then another 2-3 cycles tops).  One thing Reapers can do is think in the long term.

[quote]

[quote]No you don't have the Alliance's word or anyone elses.  The Alliance or anyone else doesn't have the critical information That means they they can't be included in this discussion..[/quote]  

The Alliance knows that A) A convention victory is impossible, and That using the Crucible carries great risk, but is still worth it.  That's more than enough for them to be included in the discussion.  So yes, you have the Alliance's words and the words of their allies, the potential dangers of the Crucible are actually far less than the Alliance thought they'd be when decided it was worth the risk, and yes, they absolutely can be included in the discussion.
[/quote]

Actually it is unclear that "conventional victory" is impossible.  Yes, Hackett may have said so, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest that at least in principle a conventional victory against the Reapers could have been had.  It also doesn't matter.  Hackett and the rest don't know that the AI that controls all reapers IS the Catalyst and that he is controlling the Crucible.  That means your orders have just gone out the airlock.

[quote]

[quote]As far as anyone else knows, the Crucible is a big "off weapon" for the Reapers somehow.  You now know differently.  YOU have to act or not act with the enw information.[/quote]

The Destroy ending has negative side-effects, the Alliance assumed it very well could when decided it needed to be used.  Nothing fundamental changes there.  Shepard refusing to use the Crucible is dereliction of duty, plain and simple.
[/quote]

The Alliance assumed there MAY be negative side effects but did NOT know it would be controlled by the Reapers.  This is new information and you have no way to phone Adm Hackett and advise him.  Knowing that the Reapers are controlling the Crucible AND that the head AI of all the Reapers is standing 10 meters away from you might change a few things doncha think?

[quote]

[quote]As for the Reaper examples you mention, they have no reason to lie to you in either scene.  Catalyst boy has plenty of reason to lie and we are shown over and over again, that when the Reapers have reason to, they will lie like rugs.[/quote]

The Catalyst has a reason to lie about Destroy being an option but he doesn't.  That's a point right off the bat in favor of believing him.
[/quote]

Actually in the original destroy ending, Catalyst boy DOES lie to you or at least severely misrepresents the truth, and he's not much better in the EC.

[quote]

[quote]Does "Yo Dog, I hear you need to be protected from synethetics, so we will destroy you so you don't get defeated by Synthetics" seem rational too you?  It's not and it's deliberately not.  Bioware is specifically presenting a deranged AI (similiar to DAVE in 2001 Space Odessey).  Treat it as irrational.  Do not trust it.[/quote]

The "Yo dawg" joke is a complete misrepresentation of what happened, probably a deliberate one, for the purpose of structuring a joke.  It would not be as funny if they went with a more honest "Yo dawg, I heard you don't wanna be killed by Synthetics, so I put a system in place where roughly every 50,000 years advanced races will be harvested and converted into techno-organic hybrids, minds preserved, before they create technology beyond their own control and eliminate not only themselves, but cause collateral damage to more primitive races.", which is what the situation actually is.  You can't even argue that Bioware specifically presented it as irrational because you're demonstrating a clear misunderstanding of what the Reapers are even doing, even what they actually are, by summing it up as "synthetics kill you before you're killed by synthetics".  You don't even need to go by the Catalyst's words in the end to know that, and even though it's 100% confirmed in the Synthesis ending, you don't even need to meta-game to know it before then.  You see how they're made in the end of Mass Effect 2 , and dialogue with Legion tells you that the Geth percieved that the billions of organics minds form the conciousness of each Reaper when they touched the conciousness of Sovereign (though that is a semi-hidden peice of dialogue only accesible by doing certain mission out of order, I didn't hear it on my first few playthroughs of ME2 myself, so I'll give you some credit here).
[/quote]

Please.  I know a deranged logical loop when I hear one, and the Starkid is in a logic loop. He IS being irrational.  He has the power to stop a solution he admits won't work anymore and doesn't.  Doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result (starkid's approach) is classic irrationality.

[quote]

[quote]I am going by what the Catalyst is saying.  It is clearly (see above) clearly irrational and turned on it's own creators as a symptom of it.[/quote]

No.  The Catalyst acted with cold, emotionless logic, not irrationality.

[/quote]

No.  It's caught in an irrational loop and won't change no matter what.  That is also irrational.  There is nothing logical about the Catalyst.  Not any more.

[quote]

[quote]You can not take anything the Crucible says as fact.  End of story.[/quote]

Assuming you meant to say "Catalyst".  No worries, I made the same mistake myself a while back.  And you don't have to take it as fact to recognize that without the Crucible, you lose, while using it presents at least a glimmer of hope for victory.  As I've been saying from the start, even if you don't trust the Catalyst, using the Crucible means nothing to lose, everything to gain.
[/quote]

No you don't.  Even if this cycle loses, you know that Liara can insure that the next cycle has the information.  If you don't want to "pick your own warcrime" and surrender the "soul of your species" to the Reapers, you refuse.  That may not matter to you, but it matters to me, trillions of silent dead notwithstanding.

[quote]

[quote]And the Reapers (and by extension the Catalyst) are a bunch of liars.  You can not use anything he says as a basis to do anything.[/quote]

So even though the Reapers are brutally honest with Shepard whenever they talk to him, and the Catalyst is not confirmed even post game to have told you a single lie, they're still liars because.. basically because you say so.  Not good enough for me.
[/quote]

When Shepard talks with them, they have no reason to lie.  We are known and shown that Reaper forces are very capable of deceit when it suits them.

[quote]

[quote]That is what the Catalyst would like you to think.  Fact is, without the Catalyst's own actions the entire scene doesn't happen and the Catalyst determines what choices are and are not available.  That's not 'cooperating', it's running the whole damn show.[/quote]

Your EMS determines what choices are and are not available, and that's based on the efficiency with which your fleet gets the Crucible into place as well as the quality of the engineering crew that builds the thing.  The Catalyst is not involved in either of those processes.  The fact (and by that I mean actual fact, not your opinion-fact) is that the Catalyst acknowleges the Crucible's superior solutions and cooperates with Shepard in activating it, even if Shepard chooses to use it to destroy it and the Reapers.  Meta-gaming, yes, but since we're talking about what is and is not a fact within this story, we kinda need to.
[/quote]

So having Arlakh company on standby somehow magically convinces the Starkid to open up the synthesis option?  Not buying it.  It's sloppy writing at best and FULL me metagame reasoning at worst.  Given the PoV of Shepard and Shepard only, the Catalyst decides what options are available or if the Crucible is turned on at all.  That means the kid has total control.  There is no EMS from Shep's PoV.

[quote]

[quote]We KNOW at least one case where the Catalyst superceded it's programming.[/quote]
No we don't.  It's programming was to determine and carry out the best possible solution that it can find.  That's exactly what it does.  As I said, it was most likely user-error.
[/quote]

It changed it's programming to Reapify it's creators against their wishes.  I'd say it most definately changed it's programming.


[quote]

[quote]The Catalyst is not objective.  It is in fact flawed and irrational.[/quote]

That's not what a fact is.  Again, we're going to go into meta-gaming mode here:  the endings we get from activating the Crucible prove to us that the Catalyst was being honest with you whenever we're confirmed of it one way or another.  It would not help Shepard destroy the Reapers if its programming wasn't being manipulated by the superiority of the Crucible.  It helps Shepard take an action that not only directly kills it, but also causes it to fail its previous mission.  That is the Catalyst being objective.
[/quote]

The Catalyst does lie about Destroy (not as much as prior to the EC, but it does).  It also lies by appearing to be a kid (openly manipulative).  At the very least by using the image that it knows is bothering Shepard, it is shown to be manipulative and thus inherently dishonest.


[quote]
[quote]Nope.  The Catalyst's.  It is the Catalyst that is control, not Shepard and even if Shepard won't cooperate, the Catalyst CAN choose to stop Reaping.  It doesn't.  Who's responsible?  The Catalyst.

You are NOT responsible for the decisions of another.[/quote]

And again, there is nothing to suggest that the Catalyst can stop the Reapers suddenly, and everything (including the words of Sovereign, corroborated by Legion) to suggest that he can't.  The Catalyst is responsible for the creation of the Reapers and their cycle, and the ensuing death and destruction.  Shepard is still completely responsible for his concious decision to refuse to use the Crucible and fail his mission.  
[/quote]

The Catalyst is in control of the Reapers.  It could stop the cycle at any time. It CHOOSES not to.  Thus the Catalyst and only the Catalyst is to blame.

[quote]


[quote]If you don't trust the catalyst then you have no idea how to activate the crucible anyway and have no idea what it does.  Therefore you don't use it.[/quote]

I missed the dialogue where the Catalyst says "Shoot the tube".  All I see is a vision of Anderson shooting the reactor thing, and we don't even know whether it's a vision shown to the player or to Shepard himself.  Either way, we have no proof that the Catalyst is responsible for this vision.  
[/quote]

I am assuming that the visions are being given by the Catalyst probably in the same way the Reapers can give messages in Dreams (see codex).  Certainly there is no one else that can give Shepard this information.

[quote]

[quote]Yes, but if you refuse, then a future cycle will end the cycle forever without surrendering to the Reapers.[/quote]

Yep, probably by using the Crucible.  I'll have to go back and rewatch the Stargazer scene to remind myself whether it's just heavily implied that they used the Crucible or outright confirmed.
[/quote]

I disregard Gamble's reality and substitute my own which is BETTER supported by the actual writing. 

[quote]

[quote]And Starbrat's solution 'pick a warcrime" doesn't?  At least by Refusing you are REFUSING to get your hands dirty.  If the Reapers/Catalyst CHOOSE to continue to do genocide that's their moral failing, not yours.[/quote]

'Fraid not, homeslice, you're dirtying your hands by picking Refuse as well, seeing as how in this case, inaction is just as bad as action.  Disobeying direct orders, deliberately failing a mission, pissing away the sacrifices of many to get you to that point, yes, that absolutely dirties Shepard's hands.
[/qutoe]

Wrong ":homeslice".  You are NOT responsible for not picking an option.  Only the Catalyst is responsible.  I utterly reject the notion of negative responsibility.

[quote]

[quote]Reapers and Reaper agents are known to be liars when it suits them.  The reason Reapers haven't lied to Shepard before is because there was literally no point in it.  That's not true for the Catalyst.[/quote]

And again, the Catalyst tells you how to kill it and the Reapers.
[/quote]

You think.  You have no way to know if it's telling the truth ahead of time without metaknowledge.

[SNIP]


[quote]If shepard is fighting for freedom from the galaxy and really means "We will not sacrifice the soul of our species to do it (defeat the reapers), then Reject really is the only option."  Any other choice involves a hideous Warcrime and cooperation with the Reapers at some level.[/quote]

Everyone literally becomes Reapers in Refusal,. so this is assbackwards right out of the gate.  My Shepard was fighting for the freedom of the innocent, the sanctity of life, and the value of each individual person, so he chose control, becoming the warden of the Reapers and leaving the innocent to continue their lives on their own terms, offering the services of the Reapers only when requested to do so.
[/quote]

Everyone does not become Reapers.  That is clearly an Asari stargazer in refusal.  The next cycle wins the war without sacrificing their soul.  Shepard's refusal and Liara's foresight made this possible.  I think that's enough. {snip}

-Polaris

[Geneaux486]

[quote]Actually we don't even know that.  We aren't given enough information.  In fact we do know that the Catalyst at least strongly implies that Shepard will die in destroy yet we know that this is the only possible ending where Shepard lives.[/quote]

The Catalyst says that destroy will kill the Reapers and other synthetics.  That winds up happening.  He says control will give Shepard dominion over the Reapers.  That winds up happening.  He says Synthesis will strengthen organic DNA and grant everyone a deeper understanding of one another, that winds up happening.  Everything he tells you about the Crucible's effects is shown to us to come true, so yes, we do have more than enough information to know that the Catalyst is honest.  Furthermore, the Catalyst only says in regards to Shepard's fate "Even you are partly synthetic."  Implying that he has a chance to die, which, again, is completely true, as Shepard can die from destroy, or live.



[quote]The bottom line is that Reaper and Reaper forces have been known to lie and deceive when it suited them.  There is no reason to think when it's all on the line that the REAPER Catalyst will be truthful...and every reason to think it probably won't be.[/quote]

The fact that it tells you about the destroy option disproves this.  If the Catalyst were intending to mislead Shepard, it would not mention this option.  If it were in control of the Crucible's potential functions, it would not present this option. 



[quote]You are doing the Catalyst's job for him by wiping out all synthetic life preventing conflict (at least for a while).  This is EXACTLY what (one of three) things the Catalyst wants you to do.[/quote]

This is contradicted by pretty much everything we're told at the end.  From the Catalyst's perspective, destruction of the Reapers means no more safety net for the galaxy, a total failure of the Reaper objective.  You are absolutely not doing the Catalyst's job.



[quote]The only thing he doesn't want is refusal.[/quote]

How in the hell can you come to this conclusion when Refusal results in the Reaper cycle succeeding?  Total lack of situational awareness there.



[quote]Actually it is unclear that "conventional victory" is impossible.  Yes, Hackett may have said so, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest that at least in principle a conventional victory against the Reapers could have been had.[/quote]

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence to prove beyond a doubt that conventional victory is not possible.  It wasn't possible in the early stages of the war, and as the war progressed, the galaxy only got weaker, even in its united state, supplies were being lost, homeworlds were burning, people were dying.  It is clear that conventional victory is impossible as of Mass Effect 3 because nobody prepared.



[quote]It also doesn't matter.  Hackett and the rest don't know that the AI that controls all reapers IS the Catalyst and that he is controlling the Crucible.  That means your orders have just gone out the airlock.[/quote]

No it doesn't.  It means using the Crucible is a calculated risk, which we already knew.  Nothing to lose, everything to gain.


[quote]The Alliance assumed there MAY be negative side effects but did NOT know it would be controlled by the Reapers.[/quote]

It isn't controlled by the Reapers, it's controlled by Shepard, and powered by the Citadel.



[quote]This is new information and you have no way to phone Adm Hackett and advise him.  Knowing that the Reapers are controlling the Crucible AND that the head AI of all the Reapers is standing 10 meters away from you might change a few things doncha think?[/quote]

Only if one misunderstands the entire situation.



[quote]Actually in the original destroy ending, Catalyst boy DOES lie to you or at least severely misrepresents the truth, and he's not much better in the EC.[/quote]

An entirely false statement.  The Catalyst tells you exactly what Destroy will do in the original ending, just as he does in the EC.



[quote]Please.  I know a deranged logical loop when I hear one,[/quote]
 
Clearly you do not.



[quote]and the Starkid is in a logic loop. He IS being irrational.[/quote]

I've more than proven this to be false by citing in-game dialogue and in-game observations proving that the Reapers are exactly what the Catalyst says they are.  Nothing more to say on this subject, you're wrong about this aspect.



[quote]He has the power to stop a solution he admits won't work anymore and doesn't.[/quote]

And again, you have no idea whether or not this is true.



[quote]Doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result (starkid's approach) is classic irrationality.[/quote]

Except he isn't expecting a different result, he expects the same result each time, hence why it's a repeating cycle.



[quote]No.  It's caught in an irrational loop and won't change no matter what.  That is also irrational.  There is nothing logical about the Catalyst.  Not any more.[/quote]

See my earlier points about why this is untrue.



[quote]No you don't.  Even if this cycle loses, you know that Liara can insure that the next cycle has the information.  If you don't want to "pick your own warcrime" and surrender the "soul of your species" to the Reapers, you refuse.  That may not matter to you, but it matters to me, trillions of silent dead notwithstanding.[/quote]

Refuse is the only solution that "surrenders the soul of the species" to the Reapers, as it results in Reaperfication of most and death for the rest.  Once again you demonstrate the same devaluing of the individual that the Catalyst is guilty of. 



[quote]When Shepard talks with them, they have no reason to lie.  We are known and shown that Reaper forces are very capable of deceit when it suits them.[/quote]

So again, even though they are honest when they talk to Shepard, we know they're dishonest because you say so.



[quote]So having Arlakh company on standby somehow magically convinces the Starkid to open up the synthesis option?  Not buying it.[/quote]

Good, because that's not what's happening.  Your EMS determines the efficiency of the fleet getting the Crucible safely into position, as well as the quality of its construction beforehand.  That is what opens up the Synthesis option, the condition of the device and how closely to specifications it was built.  The Catalyst has nothing to do with the avaiablility of the option, and the fact that your EMS determines it proves this.



[quote]It changed it's programming to Reapify it's creators against their wishes.  I'd say it most definately changed it's programming.[/quote]

It's programming was to find and carry out the best solution it could find, and it did just that.  Again, most likely user error.



[quote]The Catalyst does lie about Destroy (not as much as prior to the EC, but it does).[/quote]

It didn't lie in either.



[quote]It also lies by appearing to be a kid (openly manipulative).  At the very least by using the image that it knows is bothering Shepard, it is shown to be manipulative and thus inherently dishonest.[/quote]

And yet it freely admits to Shepard exactly what it is with little prompting, so your dishonest argument is disproven by that.



[quote]I am assuming that the visions are being given by the Catalyst probably in the same way the Reapers can give messages in Dreams (see codex).  Certainly there is no one else that can give Shepard this information.[/quote]

Correct, you're assuming.  You've done a lot of that.



[quote]I disregard Gamble's reality and substitute my own which is BETTER supported by the actual writing.[/quote]

Your "reality" ignores the writing.  Furthermore, since this is the case, you can no longer claim to be arguing in-game facts.  The only reason the writing doesn't fit to you is because you've already twisted everything with your own headcanon.  You seek to prove your point by changing the story on your own and expecting the rest of us to accept that.  The problem is the game isn't subjective in that way, it's a fictional story that you didn't write, therefore your headcanon is completely irrelevant to the rest of us.



[quote]Everyone does not become Reapers.  That is clearly an Asari stargazer in refusal.[/quote]

It's not clearly anything but female.  There is no Asari because we know from Liara's final message that the Reapers ultimately won. 



[quote]The next cycle wins the war without sacrificing their soul.  Shepard's refusal and Liara's foresight made this possible.  I think that's enough.[/quote]

This is your headcanon.  Going by the actual story, Refusal resulted in, as I've pointed out, Reaperfication for most and death for the rest, only to have the next cycle more than likely use the Crucible anyway.  Roads may be slippery when wet.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 04 juillet 2012 - 07:56 .

[IanPolaris]

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...



[quote]Actually we don't even know that.  We aren't given enough information.  In fact we do know that the Catalyst at least strongly implies that Shepard will die in destroy yet we know that this is the only possible ending where Shepard lives.[/quote]

The Catalyst says that destroy will kill the Reapers and other synthetics.  That winds up happening.  He says control will give Shepard dominion over the Reapers.  That winds up happening.  He says Synthesis will strengthen organic DNA and grant everyone a deeper understanding of one another, that winds up happening.  Everything he tells you about the Crucible's effects is shown to us to come true, so yes, we do have more than enough information to know that the Catalyst is honest.  Furthermore, the Catalyst only says in regards to Shepard's fate "Even you are partly synthetic."  Implying that he has a chance to die, which, again, is completely true, as Shepard can die from destroy, or live.
[/quote]

This is all metagaming.  Don't do that. 

[quote]


[quote]The bottom line is that Reaper and Reaper forces have been known to lie and deceive when it suited them.  There is no reason to think when it's all on the line that the REAPER Catalyst will be truthful...and every reason to think it probably won't be.[/quote]

The fact that it tells you about the destroy option disproves this.  If the Catalyst were intending to mislead Shepard, it would not mention this option.  If it were in control of the Crucible's potential functions, it would not present this option. 
[/quote]

You are assuming this.  The Catalyst may want Shepard to destroy all synethetic life.  It's impossible to know for certain since the Catalyst is being fundamentally irrational.  The only ending where the Catalyst gets upset is the Refuse ending, yet it's the only one what allows the Reapers to win.  Definately seems irrational.

[quote]


[quote]You are doing the Catalyst's job for him by wiping out all synthetic life preventing conflict (at least for a while).  This is EXACTLY what (one of three) things the Catalyst wants you to do.[/quote]
This is contradicted by pretty much everything we're told at the end.  From the Catalyst's perspective, destruction of the Reapers means no more safety net for the galaxy, a total failure of the Reaper objective.  You are absolutely not doing the Catalyst's job.
[/quote]

Not it's not.  Destruction of all synethics does accomplish the Reaper mission at least for now.  it is clear that it is the least favorite of the three, and the Catalyst does try to influence Shepard against it (by misleading Shepard about dying in it), but you are committing Reaper-assisted Genocide if you pick destroy.

[quote]


[quote]The only thing he doesn't want is refusal.[/quote]
How in the hell can you come to this conclusion when Refusal results in the Reaper cycle succeeding?  Total lack of situational awareness there.
[/quote]

The Catalyst doesn't have a temper tantrum with any ending BUT refuse (edit) and he urges you to pick one of his three 'choices'.  My statement is a very fair one.

[quote]


[quote]Actually it is unclear that "conventional victory" is impossible.  Yes, Hackett may have said so, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest that at least in principle a conventional victory against the Reapers could have been had.[/quote]
There is an overwhelming amount of evidence to prove beyond a doubt that conventional victory is not possible.  It wasn't possible in the early stages of the war, and as the war progressed, the galaxy only got weaker, even in its united state, supplies were being lost, homeworlds were burning, people were dying.  It is clear that conventional victory is impossible as of Mass Effect 3 because nobody prepared.
[/quote]

There are a lot of us using the Codex entries themselves that have put a LOT of doubt about a conventional victory being "impossible" and even if it were for this cycle ( a point I do not grant!) it's certainly possible for a future cycle with a milellia or more of warning.

[quote]


[quote]It also doesn't matter.  Hackett and the rest don't know that the AI that controls all reapers IS the Catalyst and that he is controlling the Crucible.  That means your orders have just gone out the airlock.[/quote]

No it doesn't.  It means using the Crucible is a calculated risk, which we already knew.  Nothing to lose, everything to gain.
[/quote]

There is no calculation about it.  Either the Catalyst is telling the truth or it's not.  Given that the Calalyst IS the enemy, there is no reason to believe it.  Better to try to destroy the Cidadel and the Catalyst (the Reaper Leader) with it.

[quote]


[quote]The Alliance assumed there MAY be negative side effects but did NOT know it would be controlled by the Reapers.[/quote]

It isn't controlled by the Reapers, it's controlled by Shepard, and powered by the Citadel.
[/quote]

The starkid can TURN THE CRUCIBLE OFF anytime he wants to.  That means the Starkid completely controls it.  Period.  End. Of. Discussion.

[quote]


[quote]This is new information and you have no way to phone Adm Hackett and advise him.  Knowing that the Reapers are controlling the Crucible AND that the head AI of all the Reapers is standing 10 meters away from you might change a few things doncha think?[/quote]

Only if one misunderstands the entire situation.
[/quote]

There is no misunderstanding here.  The self-proclaimed leader of the Reapes controls the crucible.  That changes everything.

[quote]


[quote]Actually in the original destroy ending, Catalyst boy DOES lie to you or at least severely misrepresents the truth, and he's not much better in the EC.[/quote]

An entirely false statement.  The Catalyst tells you exactly what Destroy will do in the original ending, just as he does in the EC.
[/quote]

False.  In the EC the Catalyst never says that the Destroy ending will kill EDI or the Geth.  Watch it again.  He DOES say that you are partially synethetic in the original one which is a deliberate attempt to mislead you (Shepard) into thinking you must die.  That is untrue.  In fact destroy is the only survivable option.

[quote]


[quote]Please.  I know a deranged logical loop when I hear one,[/quote]
 
Clearly you do not.
[/quote]

You are a minority of one then because it seems pretty clear to everyone else.

[quote]


[quote]and the Starkid is in a logic loop. He IS being irrational.[/quote]

I've more than proven this to be false by citing in-game dialogue and in-game observations proving that the Reapers are exactly what the Catalyst says they are.  Nothing more to say on this subject, you're wrong about this aspect.
[/quote]

The Starkid ADMITS that his solution doesn't work anymore but if you refuse to choose, he continues to use a solution he knows doesn't work anyway.  That is it's choice but it's clearly an irrational choice.,..and yes as an AI he has the ability to choose.  Otherwise he'd be a VI.

[quote]


[quote]He has the power to stop a solution he admits won't work anymore and doesn't.[/quote]

And again, you have no idea whether or not this is true.
[/quote]

He has changed his programming before.  He has the ability to reason.  He is an AI. Therefor he CAN choose.  HE decides not to.  That makes the catalyst the sole moral agent here and the Reaper attacks his fault no matter what Shepard does.

[quote]


[quote]Doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result (starkid's approach) is classic irrationality.[/quote]

Except he isn't expecting a different result, he expects the same result each time, hence why it's a repeating cycle.
[/quote]

After he admits that it won't work anymore.  That is clearly irrational.

[quote]


[quote]No.  It's caught in an irrational loop and won't change no matter what.  That is also irrational.  There is nothing logical about the Catalyst.  Not any more.[/quote]

See my earlier points about why this is untrue.
[/quote]

See above why you are wrong  about this.

[quote]


[quote]No you don't.  Even if this cycle loses, you know that Liara can insure that the next cycle has the information.  If you don't want to "pick your own warcrime" and surrender the "soul of your species" to the Reapers, you refuse.  That may not matter to you, but it matters to me, trillions of silent dead notwithstanding.[/quote]

Refuse is the only solution that "surrenders the soul of the species" to the Reapers, as it results in Reaperfication of most and death for the rest.  Once again you demonstrate the same devaluing of the individual that the Catalyst is guilty of. 
[/quote]

Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.  I understand that.  You apparently do not.

[quote]


[quote]When Shepard talks with them, they have no reason to lie.  We are known and shown that Reaper forces are very capable of deceit when it suits them.[/quote]

So again, even though they are honest when they talk to Shepard, we know they're dishonest because you say so.
[/quote]

They are dishonest because reaper and reaper agents have lied and otherwise decieved themselves into positions of responsibility and power to dire effect the entire series.  It's a given that indoctrinated agents (the ultimate in lying) are everywhere.  Just because the main reapers don't lie to shepard prior to the Catalyst (because there would be no point in it) doesn't make the Reapers trustworthy.  They are not.

[quote]


[quote]So having Arlakh company on standby somehow magically convinces the Starkid to open up the synthesis option?  Not buying it.[/quote]

Good, because that's not what's happening.  Your EMS determines the efficiency of the fleet getting the Crucible safely into position, as well as the quality of its construction beforehand.  That is what opens up the Synthesis option, the condition of the device and how closely to specifications it was built.  The Catalyst has nothing to do with the avaiablility of the option, and the fact that your EMS determines it proves this.
[/quote]

So Arlakh company helps get the Crucible safely into position?  I knew Grunt was good, but that's amazing! (Being fully sarcastic).  No my point holds and it's a major problem with Mass Effect Three.  There isn't a CLEAR and Irrefutable link between the Crucible and EMS.  There is for a small sub-catatory of EMS and that should be checked to see "how good" your Crucible is, but the entire EMS system is metagaming garbage.  Shepard doesn't have an EMS meter flashing about his forhead and we can not assume the Catalyst can read that number either.

[quote]


[quote]It changed it's programming to Reapify it's creators against their wishes.  I'd say it most definately changed it's programming.[/quote]
It's programming was to find and carry out the best solution it could find, and it did just that.  Again, most likely user error.
[/quote]

No it didn't.  It admitted that it changed it's directives to start the Reaper solution.  It was a programing change and his SECOND solution.


[quote]


[quote]The Catalyst does lie about Destroy (not as much as prior to the EC, but it does).[/quote]

It didn't lie in either.
[/quote]

Yes it does (or at the very least badly misleads which I consider the equivalent when determining trustworthyness).

[quote]


[quote]It also lies by appearing to be a kid (openly manipulative).  At the very least by using the image that it knows is bothering Shepard, it is shown to be manipulative and thus inherently dishonest.[/quote]

And yet it freely admits to Shepard exactly what it is with little prompting, so your dishonest argument is disproven by that.
[/quote]

Only if Shepard asks and it is STILL being manipulative.  If it was being trustworthly, show the cuttlefish image and put all the cards on the table.  The fact it won;'t makes it manipulative and thus not trustworthy.

[quote]


[quote]I am assuming that the visions are being given by the Catalyst probably in the same way the Reapers can give messages in Dreams (see codex).  Certainly there is no one else that can give Shepard this information.[/quote]

Correct, you're assuming.  You've done a lot of that.
[/quote]

"When the impossible has been eliminated, whatever left however improbable has to be the truth"--Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Who gave Shepard the instructions to use the Crucible?  Not the team (or they would have told him directly but when you talk with Kasumi she admit they don't know what the heck it will do).  Not Hackett (he doesn't know either).  Shepard pretty clearly doesn't know ahead of time either.  In fact the ONLY being that can commumicate this information to Shepard is the Catalyst.  Ergo, the Catalyst told him visually.  Simple deductive reasoning.

[quote]


[quote]I disregard Gamble's reality and substitute my own which is BETTER supported by the actual writing.[/quote]

Your "reality" ignores the writing.  Furthermore, since this is the case, you can no longer claim to be arguing in-game facts.  The only reason the writing doesn't fit to you is because you've already twisted everything with your own headcanon.  You seek to prove your point by changing the story on your own and expecting the rest of us to accept that.  The problem is the game isn't subjective in that way, it's a fictional story that you didn't write, therefore your headcanon is completely irrelevant to the rest of us.
[/quote]

My "reality" does nothing of the sort.  We are shown Liara's recording. She explicitly tells the next cycle that the crucible was built but did not work.  Why would an advanced species spend so much time working on something that they knew didn't work the last time (as opposed to all prior cycles not being finished and thus untried).  No.  They would find another way and with Liara's warning, they have the time to do that.  Furthermore in the Stargazer scene, the Gazer says that Shepard fought a great and terrible war so they wouldn't have to and that otherwise the Reapers would threaten them too.  That tells me that this next cycle DID defeat the Reapers on their terms.

The ONLY evidence to the contrary is Gamble's unofficial tweet.

[quote]


[quote]Everyone does not become Reapers.  That is clearly an Asari stargazer in refusal.[/quote]

It's not clearly anything but female.  There is no Asari because we know from Liara's final message that the Reapers ultimately won. 
[/quote]

Javik was clearly an illusion then?  Look at the silluhette.  That is clearly an Asari.

[quote]


[quote]The next cycle wins the war without sacrificing their soul.  Shepard's refusal and Liara's foresight made this possible.  I think that's enough.[/quote]

This is your headcanon.  Going by the actual story, Refusal resulted in, as I've pointed out, Reaperfication for most and death for the rest, only to have the next cycle more than likely use the Crucible anyway.  Roads may be slippery when wet.[/quote]

I am going by the actual story.  You, sir, are not.

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 04 juillet 2012 - 09:30 .

[Geneaux486]

[quote]This is all metagaming.  Don't do that.[/quote]

You were metagaming as well.  I was responding in kind.  Our discussion has long sinced evolved into a debate regarding both the lore and the information Shepard had available when it came time to make his decision, so don't bother trying to suddenly take the anti-metagaming stance.






[quote]The Catalyst may want Shepard to destroy all synethetic life.[/quote]

Nothing implies this, therefore it isn't any more likely than any other possible scenario that isn't implied.






[quote]Destruction of all synethics does accomplish the Reaper mission at least for now.[/quote]

You just got through saying that the Reapers only see things in the long run, and you were correct about that.  There is no "for now", there's the failure of the Reaper mission, nothing more.






[quote]The Catalyst doesn't have a temper tantrum with any ending BUT destroy[/quote]

What the hell are you talking about?






[quote]There are a lot of us using the Codex entries themselves that have put a LOT of doubt about a conventional victory being "impossible"[/quote]

Is the Codex stopping the Reapers from demolishing the Turian military with sheer force?  How about stopping them from decimating the Asari homeworld even though they had time to prepare their defences better?  How'd the Codex hold up to a burning Earth?  






[quote]There is no calculation about it.  Either the Catalyst is telling the truth or it's not.  Given that the Calalyst IS the enemy, there is no reason to believe it.  Better to try to destroy the Cidadel and the Catalyst (the Reaper Leader) with it.[/quote]

Of course there's calculation.  The Alliance and other governments decided that it was better to use the Crucible and have a chance at victory than to not use it and die.  That's a calculated risk.  






[quote]The starkid can TURN THE CRUCIBLE OFF anytime he wants to.  That means the Starkid completely controls it.  Period.  End. Of. Discussion.[/quote]

If the Catalyst cannot activate the thing, cannot use its options, then no, it does not have complete control.  Unless you don't understand the defintion of the word "Complete", you should not be arguing this point.






[quote]There is no misunderstanding here.  The self-proclaimed leader of the Reapes controls the crucible.  That changes everything.[/quote]

Therein lies the misunderstanding, he does not control the Crucible.  He can't use it himself.






[quote] In the EC the Catalyst never says that the Destroy ending will kill EDI or the Geth.  Watch it again.[/quote]

He says that it will kill all synthetics, not just discriminating the Reapers.  






[quote]He DOES say that you are partially synethetic in the original one which is a deliberate attempt to mislead you (Shepard) into thinking you must die.  That is untrue.  In fact destroy is the only survivable option.[/quote]

The only thing he implies with that statement is that Shepard might die.  And that's true.






[quote]You are a minority of one then because it seems pretty clear to everyone else.[/quote]

You don't speak for everyone else.






[quote]The Starkid ADMITS that his solution doesn't work anymore but if you refuse to choose, he continues to use a solution he knows doesn't work anyway.  That is it's choice but it's clearly an irrational choice.,..and yes as an AI he has the ability to choose.  Otherwise he'd be a VI.[/quote]

A valid point, but also an easily refuted one.  The Catalyst admits that his solution will no longer work in the face of the Crucible.  It presents a better option, the Catalyst is forced to admit this, so he submits to Shepard and allows him to proceed.  If Shepard refuses to use his own weapon, what does that tell the Catalyst?  That this cycle's organics aren't as advanced as he thought, therefore, until a stronger batch comes along, the cycle has to continue as usual.  This is even more proof that the Catalyst can't use the Crucible himself.






[quote]He has changed his programming before.[/quote]

See my earlier points about his adherence to his programming.  I've explained it more than enough times.






[quote]After he admits that it won't work anymore.  That is clearly irrational.[/quote]

He admits that the Crucible signifies that his solution will no longer work.  That's the opposite of irrational.






[quote]Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.  I understand that.  You apparently do not.[/quote]

"You have it backwards.  It is better to live on your feet than to die on your knees."  






[quote]They are dishonest because reaper and reaper agents have lied and otherwise decieved themselves into positions of responsibility and power to dire effect the entire series.  It's a given that indoctrinated agents (the ultimate in lying) are everywhere.  Just because the main reapers don't lie to shepard prior to the Catalyst (because there would be no point in it) doesn't make the Reapers trustworthy.  They are not.[/quote]

Not trustworthy, brutally honest.  Indoctrinated agents are no different, they are forced to accept Reaper conclusion not through deciet, but through a forceful change in their thought processes.






[quote]So Arlakh company helps get the Crucible safely into position?[/quote]

Strawman.






[quote]No my point holds and it's a major problem with Mass Effect Three.[/quote]

Your point fails because what you consider a problem with ME3 isn't even actually happening in ME3.  Again, I've already explained how EMS works, using what's shown and stated in the game.  No point in repeating myself when you're just going to swap it with your own headcanon yet again.






[quote]There isn't a CLEAR and Irrefutable link between the Crucible and EMS.[/quote]

Did you not notice that the higher the number, the more functions it can perform?  Or did you reject that aspect of "Gamble's reality" as well?






[quote]It admitted that it changed it's directives to start the Reaper solution.  It was a programing change and his SECOND solution.[/quote]

The fact that he continued to find solutions proves the opposite, that his programming was unchanged.






[quote]Yes it does (or at the very least badly misleads which I consider the equivalent when determining trustworthyness).[/quote]

It doesn't do either.






[quote]Only if Shepard asks and it is STILL being manipulative.  If it was being trustworthly, show the cuttlefish image and put all the cards on the table.  The fact it won;'t makes it manipulative and thus not trustworthy.[/quote]

Why?  Shepard already knows what it is, by the Catalyst's own admission.  Are you suggesting that just because it tells you the truth doesn't mean it's telling you the truth?






[quote]My "reality" does nothing of the sort.[/quote]

Your "reality" has done so every step of the way.






[quote]We are shown Liara's recording. She explicitly tells the next cycle that the crucible was built but did not work.  Why would an advanced species spend so much time working on something that they knew didn't work the last time (as opposed to all prior cycles not being finished and thus untried).[/quote]

The scene ends with her going into detail regarding the war with the Reapers, so the reason the Crucible plan failed (Shepard's refusal) would be covered as well, and the races that discover the recording would know that the problem was, of course, user error.






[quote]Furthermore in the Stargazer scene, the Gazer says that Shepard fought a great and terrible war so they wouldn't have to and that otherwise the Reapers would threaten them too.  That tells me that this next cycle DID defeat the Reapers on their terms.[/quote]

The Crucible would be on their own terms, as it's not a Reaper weapon.






[quote]Look at the silluhette.  That is clearly an Asari.[/quote]

Asari are not the only bipedal aliens with head fringes.  Nor are they still alive at that point in time.






[quote]I am going by the actual story.  You, sir, are not.[/quote]

Good.  Gravy.  You're going by your own headcanon.  This was proven when you demonstrated a lack of understanding of what the Reapers were earlier on (or perhaps it was simply a rejection of the explanation), and confirmed when you admitted that you swapped out "Gamble's reality" with your own.  Again, I don't care whether or not you have your own headcanon, that's your business, but it has no place in a debate about the objective story when you didn't write the story. 

Modifié par Geneaux486, 04 juillet 2012 - 09:44 .

[IanPolaris]

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...



[quote]This is all metagaming.  Don't do that.[/quote]

You were metagaming as well.  I was responding in kind.  Our discussion has long sinced evolved into a debate regarding both the lore and the information Shepard had available when it came time to make his decision, so don't bother trying to suddenly take the anti-metagaming stance.
[/quote]

Actually I am keeping my metagaming to a bare minimum.  Your entire argument depends on it. That's a big difference.


[quote]


[quote]The Catalyst may want Shepard to destroy all synethetic life.[/quote]
Nothing implies this, therefore it isn't any more likely than any other possible scenario that isn't implied.
[/quote]

It's own mission statement implies this.  If one side or the other is destroyed, the conflict is resolved which is apparently one of the catalyst's goals.  The only flaw if we are to believe the Catalyst here is that it isn't resolved permanently.  Control has that problem too fwiw.

[quote]



[quote]Destruction of all synethics does accomplish the Reaper mission at least for now.[/quote]
You just got through saying that the Reapers only see things in the long run, and you were correct about that.  There is no "for now", there's the failure of the Reaper mission, nothing more.
[/quote]

False.  The Reapers want you to destroy all synethetic life to resolve the conflict.  They don't like (and starkid clearly doesn' tlike) the temporary nature, but that's not the same thing as failure.  By using Destroy you are engaging in Reaper demanded genocide.

[quote]



[quote]The Catalyst doesn't have a temper tantrum with any ending BUT destroy[/quote]
What the hell are you talking about?
[/quote]

Why the hell aren't you quoting my EDITED post which i posted long before you posted your reply.  I meant to say "refuse" ending here which was clearly edited and labeled as such.

[quote]



[quote]There are a lot of us using the Codex entries themselves that have put a LOT of doubt about a conventional victory being "impossible"[/quote]

Is the Codex stopping the Reapers from demolishing the Turian military with sheer force?  How about stopping them from decimating the Asari homeworld even though they had time to prepare their defences better?  How'd the Codex hold up to a burning Earth?  
[/quote]

How about the entries where it describes how four dreadnaughts can (with minimal risk) take out a Soveriegn class.  How about the Miracle of Palavan.  How about the unconventional tactics used by the Turians and proposed by others that actually might work.  There is a LOT of evidence (esp in ME1 and ME2) that the Reapers while immensely powerful are NOT invincible without the Crucible.  That only changed at the start of ME3.

[quote]



[quote]There is no calculation about it.  Either the Catalyst is telling the truth or it's not.  Given that the Calalyst IS the enemy, there is no reason to believe it.  Better to try to destroy the Cidadel and the Catalyst (the Reaper Leader) with it.[/quote]

Of course there's calculation.  The Alliance and other governments decided that it was better to use the Crucible and have a chance at victory than to not use it and die.  That's a calculated risk.  
[/quote]

They made that calculation with incomplete data.  They didn't KNOW the crucible was a Reaper Trap and that you would have to choose a "reaper solution".  That's not a calculated risk.  It's surrender.

[quote]



[quote]The starkid can TURN THE CRUCIBLE OFF anytime he wants to.  That means the Starkid completely controls it.  Period.  End. Of. Discussion.[/quote]

If the Catalyst cannot activate the thing, cannot use its options, then no, it does not have complete control.  Unless you don't understand the defintion of the word "Complete", you should not be arguing this point.
[/quote]

You don't know that the Catalyst can't activate it.  The fact he CAN turn it off implies strongly that he can.  You don't know if the Catalyst can't use the options.  In fact he is already using one of them (Control).  There is no reason to think the Catalyst can't simply destroy the Reapers if he wanted to.  He says otherwise, but you can't use his words to justify anything.

[quote]



[quote]There is no misunderstanding here.  The self-proclaimed leader of the Reapes controls the crucible.  That changes everything.[/quote]

Therein lies the misunderstanding, he does not control the Crucible.  He can't use it himself.
[/quote]

He who can destroy something controls it.  The Catalyst most definately controls the Crucible.  Moving on.


[quote]



[quote] In the EC the Catalyst never says that the Destroy ending will kill EDI or the Geth.  Watch it again.[/quote]
He says that it will kill all synthetics, not just discriminating the Reapers.  
[/quote]

He doesn't SAY it though (not like the first version).


[quote]


[quote]He DOES say that you are partially synethetic in the original one which is a deliberate attempt to mislead you (Shepard) into thinking you must die.  That is untrue.  In fact destroy is the only survivable option.[/quote]

The only thing he implies with that statement is that Shepard might die.  And that's true.
[/quote]

The way he is saying it is manipulative and deceptive.  Read: Untrustworthy.


[quote]



[quote]You are a minority of one then because it seems pretty clear to everyone else.[/quote]
You don't speak for everyone else.
[/quote]

I don't have to.  I can read pretty much every other commentary on the Starkid's (lack of) logic.


[quote]



[quote]The Starkid ADMITS that his solution doesn't work anymore but if you refuse to choose, he continues to use a solution he knows doesn't work anyway.  That is it's choice but it's clearly an irrational choice.,..and yes as an AI he has the ability to choose.  Otherwise he'd be a VI.[/quote]

A valid point, but also an easily refuted one.  The Catalyst admits that his solution will no longer work in the face of the Crucible.  It presents a better option, the Catalyst is forced to admit this, so he submits to Shepard and allows him to proceed.  If Shepard refuses to use his own weapon, what does that tell the Catalyst?  That this cycle's organics aren't as advanced as he thought, therefore, until a stronger batch comes along, the cycle has to continue as usual.  This is even more proof that the Catalyst can't use the Crucible himself.
[/quote]

It doesn't tell the Catalyst anything of the sort.  The Catalyst is an AI.  An AI is capable of choice and emotion (and the Starkid demonstrates both).  The Starkid has a temper tantrum.  Period.  He acts very irrationally and insists on a solution he has admitted no longer works.  No getting around this.  This IS being irratational (and so is the temper tantrum).  For that matter so is shutting everything down and losing your temper just for having your hologram shot at (which can not possibly hurt anything least of all the Starkid).  That is also irrational.


[quote]



[quote]He has changed his programming before.[/quote]
See my earlier points about his adherence to his programming.  I've explained it more than enough times.
[/quote]

And you again fail to see that the Starkid has by it's own admission changed it's programming before.  It's an AI.  AI's in Mass Effect can do that.




[quote]


[quote]After he admits that it won't work anymore.  That is clearly irrational.[/quote]

He admits that the Crucible signifies that his solution will no longer work.  That's the opposite of irrational.
[/quote]

...and then proceeds to do it anyway.  Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is the very epitome of irrational.




[quote]


[quote]Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.  I understand that.  You apparently do not.[/quote]

"You have it backwards.  It is better to live on your feet than to die on your knees."  
[/quote]

No I had it right.  Doing anything the Catalyst says means surrendering to the will of the Reapers and sacrifcing the soul of your species.  It's dead set against everything Mass Effect has ever stood for.  Better to die on your feet and sacrifice who you are.


[quote]



[quote]They are dishonest because reaper and reaper agents have lied and otherwise decieved themselves into positions of responsibility and power to dire effect the entire series.  It's a given that indoctrinated agents (the ultimate in lying) are everywhere.  Just because the main reapers don't lie to shepard prior to the Catalyst (because there would be no point in it) doesn't make the Reapers trustworthy.  They are not.[/quote]

Not trustworthy, brutally honest.  Indoctrinated agents are no different, they are forced to accept Reaper conclusion not through deciet, but through a forceful change in their thought processes.
[/quote]

The very act of not only indoctrinating people but placing them in roles of spies IS an act of blatent dishonestly and lying....and yes almost all espionage falls under that.  The fact the Reapers use indoctrinated agents so well proves they are capable and experienced liars.  We KNOW that Sovereign outright lied to Saren not once but multiple times.  Sovereign doesn't bother with Shepard, but we know that Reapers are liars and do not have our best interests at heart.



[quote]



[quote]So Arlakh company helps get the Crucible safely into position?[/quote]

Strawman.
[/quote]

Not at all.  It's a good illustration of why the EMS system fails to work in Mass Effect 3.
Pro-Tip:  Look up strawman sometime.



[quote]


[quote]No my point holds and it's a major problem with Mass Effect Three.[/quote]

Your point fails because what you consider a problem with ME3 isn't even actually happening in ME3.  Again, I've already explained how EMS works, using what's shown and stated in the game.  No point in repeating myself when you're just going to swap it with your own headcanon yet again.
[/quote]

You can "explain" it until you are blue in the fact but it doesn't make the system work.  The fact is that there is NO WAY the Catalyst can know what your "EMS" is, and many of your assets should have no effect at all on the state of your crucible (and many should have a strong effect).  Instead the game throws it all into a pot in a metagaming mess where only the raw score matters.  Neither Shepard nor the catalyst knows the "EMS" of the game.  That's a pure meta-game construction....and it fails.  Now if the precise assets were shown and shown to matter, that would be different, but they aren't.


[quote]



[quote]There isn't a CLEAR and Irrefutable link between the Crucible and EMS.[/quote]

Did you not notice that the higher the number, the more functions it can perform?  Or did you reject that aspect of "Gamble's reality" as well?
[/quote]

It isn't clear and irrefutable, and after a certain number the crucible somehow doesn't improve but is always damaged?  No, it's metagaming claptrap (see above)


[quote]


[quote]It admitted that it changed it's directives to start the Reaper solution.  It was a programing change and his SECOND solution.[/quote]

The fact that he continued to find solutions proves the opposite, that his programming was unchanged.
[/quote]

He changed his programming to allow him to attack his creators.  He is an AI.  AI's can have emotions and CAN change their programming.  Starkid is no exception.



[SNIP]


[quote]



[quote]Only if Shepard asks and it is STILL being manipulative.  If it was being trustworthly, show the cuttlefish image and put all the cards on the table.  The fact it won;'t makes it manipulative and thus not trustworthy.[/quote]

Why?  Shepard already knows what it is, by the Catalyst's own admission.  Are you suggesting that just because it tells you the truth doesn't mean it's telling you the truth?
[/quote]

Absolutely.  The best way to lie ever invented is to tell (part of) the truth.  The way the Catalyst chooses to do it is absolutely dishonest and manipulative....egregiously so.



[quote]


[quote]My "reality" does nothing of the sort.[/quote]

Your "reality" has done so every step of the way.
[/quote]

As I explained, I am basing it off of the information directly in the game.


[quote]



[quote]We are shown Liara's recording. She explicitly tells the next cycle that the crucible was built but did not work.  Why would an advanced species spend so much time working on something that they knew didn't work the last time (as opposed to all prior cycles not being finished and thus untried).[/quote]

The scene ends with her going into detail regarding the war with the Reapers, so the reason the Crucible plan failed (Shepard's refusal) would be covered as well, and the races that discover the recording would know that the problem was, of course, user error.
[/quote]

No one knows that Shepard refused.  All anyone knows is that the Crucible didn't work.  You are metagaming (again).



[quote]


[quote]Furthermore in the Stargazer scene, the Gazer says that Shepard fought a great and terrible war so they wouldn't have to and that otherwise the Reapers would threaten them too.  That tells me that this next cycle DID defeat the Reapers on their terms.[/quote]

The Crucible would be on their own terms, as it's not a Reaper weapon.
[/quote]

The Crucible is always about "pick your own warcrime" courtesy Reapers no matter how "well built" it is.  No reason to assume it would be any different in the next cycle...and we have every reason to think if we disregard Gambles unofficial and non-game tweet that the next cycle won't bother with the crucible at all.

[quote]


[quote]Look at the silluhette.  That is clearly an Asari.
[/quote]

[quote]I am going by the actual story.  You, sir, are not.[/quote]

Good.  Gravy.  You're going by your own headcanon.  This was proven when you demonstrated a lack of understanding of what the Reapers were earlier on (or perhaps it was simply a rejection of the explanation), and confirmed when you admitted that you swapped out "Gamble's reality" with your own.  Again, I don't care whether or not you have your own headcanon, that's your business, but it has no place in a debate about the objective story when you didn't write the story.  [/quote]

1.  Blow up the Silhuette.  It is clearly asari.  We also know that some small number of species can survive the Reapers.  They aren't perfect (see Javik or the scientists on Illos).  This is not some female with just a fringe.  It is clearly asari and humanoid.

2.  We are FORCED to go by our own headcanon in Refusal, but we are given enough information to at least make a reasonable guess that the Reapers were defeated for good AND it was done on that cycle's own terms (i.e. the crucible wasn't used).  The only evidence to the contrary is an unofficial non-canon tweet by Gamble.

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 04 juillet 2012 - 03:54 .

[Geneaux486]

As I was making a reply to this, I realized that I was just restating things I've already said multiple times in this thread, as have you.  We've long since been arguing in circles, so I'm not going to waste anymore space in this thread retyping what I've already typed.  If anyone else wants me to clarify my points, I'll happily do it, but our personal discussion has come to an end.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 05 juillet 2012 - 09:22 .