933 réponses à ce sujet

[Father_Jerusalem]

Miezul_Carpatin wrote...

After reading the arguments about destroy and refusal my conclusion is that both endings are sheet.

*shrugs* And that's why I like Control the best. I'm ****ing Space-Batman. Only immortal and with an army of pet Reapers.

[wantedman dan]

Reorte wrote...

If you don't find it logical then there's no hope for you whatsoever.

When you must excuse yourself for using logical fallacies to maintain your argument, one has to wonder.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

I should also note that if anyone that is arguing against destroy because they think it is murder is a hypocrite if they played the arrival dlc.

I wouldn't necessarily go THAT far. In Arrival you are literally presented with no choice. In ME3, you are presented with three other choices, one of which simply happens to be unbearably stupid.

And one that goes against everything about the Mass Effect series.

Mass effect series: "we must destroy Sovereign no matter the cost" "We must stop the collectors no matter the cost" "i refuse to destroy the Reapers because there is a cost" which of the following does not belong?

If your going to use that logic why not choose control or synthesis, their basically destroyed, their not attacking you and in matter of fact their helping you rebuild. And when hackett said that he meant give it your best not commit genocide of a species.

Control and synthesis are valid options though they also have their unique problems but they are at least valid unlike refusal.

dont change the subject, i explained what i had to say.

[Reorte]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Destroy IS genocide. I think that we can all agree with that. We are killing the Geth (though I maintain they have their data backed up. Maybe they use Carbonite.) though unintentionally.

Sorry, I can't. Genocide has to require the deliberate persecution of a group and that requires the intent to persecute them. There's a trial going on The Hague right now that makes that clear. It's the difference between ordering someone to hold a position knowing they'll die to let everyone else escape and pointing a gun at them and pulling the trigger.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Posting it again, I'm tired of explaining myself.

TO EVERYONE WHO THINKS REFUSAL IS GENOCIDE

This is honestly the last time im going to explain it because it doesn't go in your brain. I took my chances, chances meaning that there was a possibility, and tried to defeat them conventionally because I didn't want to commit genocide or choose the Catalyst absurd options. I ended up failing, but it wasn't genocide, the odds were extremely against us, but they weren't completely against us, so that means we failed, not that I commited genocide. You willingly destroyed a whole Species, you commited genocide, i didn't do it willingly because their was even a small chance to live, you knew the geth were going to die no matter what, you commited genocide, accept it, and deal with it, last time im explaining it.

Modifié par Khajiit Jzargo, 01 juillet 2012 - 09:07 .

[Reorte]

wantedman dan wrote...

Reorte wrote...

If you don't find it logical then there's no hope for you whatsoever.

When you must excuse yourself for using logical fallacies to maintain your argument, one has to wonder.

What logical fallacies? I don't think you know what logic is. You don't like the geth dying and you twist everything else to justify it.

[Miezul_Carpatin]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Miezul_Carpatin wrote...

After reading the arguments about destroy and refusal my conclusion is that both endings are sheet.

*shrugs* And that's why I like Control the best. I'm ****ing Space-Batman. Only immortal and with an army of pet Reapers.

I am also a fan of control but you have to admit that it is the most uncertain of all endings and subject to a lot of headcanon.

[Father_Jerusalem]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...


TO EVERYONE WHO THINKS REFUSAL IS GENOCIDE

This is honestly the last time im going to explain it because it doesn't go in your brain. I took my chances, chances meaning that there was a possibility, and tried to defeat them conventionally because I didn't want to commit genocide or choose the Catalyst absurd options. I ended up failing, but it wasn't genocide, the odds were extremely against us, but they weren't completely against us, so that means we failed, not that I commited genocide. You willingly destroyed a whole Species, you commited genocide, i didn't do it willingly because their was even a small chance to live, you knew the geth were going to die no matter what, you commited genocide, accept it, and deal with it, last time im explaining it.

I'm sorry, do the Reapers NOT systematically destroy racial, cultural, or political groups when they harvest every member of every advanced civilization in the galaxy? No? That's precisely what they do?

Then isn't it correct that to say that by following the dictionary definition of genocide to the letter, that mabye it's actually genocide? 

Using your and Danny boy's logic, intent doesn't matter - by refusing the Reapers, you are allowing them to commit genocide, even if that wasn't your intent.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Reorte wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Destroy IS genocide. I think that we can all agree with that. We are killing the Geth (though I maintain they have their data backed up. Maybe they use Carbonite.) though unintentionally.

Sorry, I can't. Genocide has to require the deliberate persecution of a group and that requires the intent to persecute them. There's a trial going on The Hague right now that makes that clear. It's the difference between ordering someone to hold a position knowing they'll die to let everyone else escape and pointing a gun at them and pulling the trigger.

Thats where your wrong, whether you want to kill them or not, if you wipe them out, its genocide. PERIOD.

[Reorte]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Posting it again, I'm tired of explaining myself.

TO EVERYONE WHO THINKS REFUSAL IS GENOCIDE

This is honestly the last time im going to explain it because it doesn't go in your brain. I took my chances, chances meaning that there was a possibility, and tried to defeat them conventionally because I didn't want to commit genocide or choose the Catalyst absurd options. I ended up failing, but it wasn't genocide, the odds were extremely against us, but they weren't completely against us, so that means we failed, not that I commited genocide. You willingly destroyed a whole Species, you commited genocide, i didn't do it willingly because their was even a small chance to live, you knew the geth were going to die no matter what, you commited genocide, accept it, and deal with it, last time im explaining it.

Fine, and now that you know it didn't work you'll admit that you made the wrong choice and you'll do something different next time?

[Facemelter91]

Whats funny about this whole argument is that its all under the assumption that the Geth did die in destroy when we are given no indication after we choose that they did. "Star Bi**h said they would die so it must be true!".

[Reorte]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Destroy IS genocide. I think that we can all agree with that. We are killing the Geth (though I maintain they have their data backed up. Maybe they use Carbonite.) though unintentionally.

Sorry, I can't. Genocide has to require the deliberate persecution of a group and that requires the intent to persecute them. There's a trial going on The Hague right now that makes that clear. It's the difference between ordering someone to hold a position knowing they'll die to let everyone else escape and pointing a gun at them and pulling the trigger.

Thats where your wrong, whether you want to kill them or not, if you wipe them out, its genocide. PERIOD.

Buy a dictionary. Intent is a necessary part of genocide. You can't ignore it to justify using a term inaccurately. Genocide does not mean "Killing lots of people."

Modifié par Reorte, 01 juillet 2012 - 09:09 .

[Father_Jerusalem]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Destroy IS genocide. I think that we can all agree with that. We are killing the Geth (though I maintain they have their data backed up. Maybe they use Carbonite.) though unintentionally.

Sorry, I can't. Genocide has to require the deliberate persecution of a group and that requires the intent to persecute them. There's a trial going on The Hague right now that makes that clear. It's the difference between ordering someone to hold a position knowing they'll die to let everyone else escape and pointing a gun at them and pulling the trigger.

Thats where your wrong, whether you want to kill them or not, if you wipe them out, its genocide. PERIOD.

Quoting to show, yet again, the irony of claiming Destroy is genocide and Refuse isn't.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...


TO EVERYONE WHO THINKS REFUSAL IS GENOCIDE

This is honestly the last time im going to explain it because it doesn't go in your brain. I took my chances, chances meaning that there was a possibility, and tried to defeat them conventionally because I didn't want to commit genocide or choose the Catalyst absurd options. I ended up failing, but it wasn't genocide, the odds were extremely against us, but they weren't completely against us, so that means we failed, not that I commited genocide. You willingly destroyed a whole Species, you commited genocide, i didn't do it willingly because their was even a small chance to live, you knew the geth were going to die no matter what, you commited genocide, accept it, and deal with it, last time im explaining it.

I'm sorry, do the Reapers NOT systematically destroy racial, cultural, or political groups when they harvest every member of every advanced civilization in the galaxy? No? That's precisely what they do?

Then isn't it correct that to say that by following the dictionary definition of genocide to the letter, that mabye it's actually genocide? 

Using your and Danny boy's logic, intent doesn't matter - by refusing the Reapers, you are allowing them to commit genocide, even if that wasn't your intent.

So your saying that if we never knew about the crucible and we died holding out, its genocide? OK, I understand you are incompetent and still can't understand what I wrote.

[wantedman dan]

Reorte wrote...

What logical fallacies? I don't think you know what logic is. You don't like the geth dying and you twist everything else to justify it.

Of course you wouldn't; anything to justify your tirades.

I've already pointed out the problem in your argument--you obviously didn't take the time to read it, hence your "Whutchu talkin' bout?"

When the metaarguing begins, the original argument has officially ceased. Time for some GTA 4.

[Father_Jerusalem]

Miezul_Carpatin wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Miezul_Carpatin wrote...

After reading the arguments about destroy and refusal my conclusion is that both endings are sheet.

*shrugs* And that's why I like Control the best. I'm ****ing Space-Batman. Only immortal and with an army of pet Reapers.

I am also a fan of control but you have to admit that it is the most uncertain of all endings and subject to a lot of headcanon.

They're all uncertain and subject to headcanon, and that's why I love them. BioWare gave us endings that we can discuss and debate and argue about forever rather than giving us one clearly better ending. 

It all depends on your point of view.

[wantedman dan]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Using your and Danny boy's logic, intent doesn't matter - by refusing the Reapers, you are allowing them to commit genocide, even if that wasn't your intent.

One more thing.

If you're incompetent enough to, after all this time, misconstrue my logic--despite having argued contrary to what you've claimed--your responses throughout the thread refusing to argue because "I SAID SO LAWL" are completely justified.

[mauro2222]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Miezul_Carpatin wrote...

After reading the arguments about destroy and refusal my conclusion is that both endings are sheet.

*shrugs* And that's why I like Control the best. I'm ****ing Space-Batman. Only immortal and with an army of pet Reapers.

Funny, that's not how Control works. It makes me doubt that you understood the original endings.

[Reorte]

Concise Oxford English Dictionary:
genocide The deliberate killing of a very large number of people from a particular ethnic group or nation.

deliberate Done conciously and intentionally.

[Father_Jerusalem]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...


TO EVERYONE WHO THINKS REFUSAL IS GENOCIDE

This is honestly the last time im going to explain it because it doesn't go in your brain. I took my chances, chances meaning that there was a possibility, and tried to defeat them conventionally because I didn't want to commit genocide or choose the Catalyst absurd options. I ended up failing, but it wasn't genocide, the odds were extremely against us, but they weren't completely against us, so that means we failed, not that I commited genocide. You willingly destroyed a whole Species, you commited genocide, i didn't do it willingly because their was even a small chance to live, you knew the geth were going to die no matter what, you commited genocide, accept it, and deal with it, last time im explaining it.

I'm sorry, do the Reapers NOT systematically destroy racial, cultural, or political groups when they harvest every member of every advanced civilization in the galaxy? No? That's precisely what they do?

Then isn't it correct that to say that by following the dictionary definition of genocide to the letter, that mabye it's actually genocide? 

Using your and Danny boy's logic, intent doesn't matter - by refusing the Reapers, you are allowing them to commit genocide, even if that wasn't your intent.

So your saying that if we never knew about the crucible and we died holding out, its genocide? OK, I understand you are incompetent and still can't understand what I wrote.

Yup. In that case, the Reapers are absolutely committing genocide against the species of the galaxy. Absolutely.

In THIS case, you are given specific options to STOP that. You choose NOT to. You are a willing participant of that genocide. 

In the first case there, you are NOT given specific options to stop it. You have NO choice. You are NOT a willing participant of that genocide.

See the difference yet? In either instance, the Reapers are ABSOLUTELY committing genocide - it is only a question of whether or not Shepard is a willing participant, and thus deserves blame for, allowing it.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Reorte wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Posting it again, I'm tired of explaining myself.

TO EVERYONE WHO THINKS REFUSAL IS GENOCIDE

This is honestly the last time im going to explain it because it doesn't go in your brain. I took my chances, chances meaning that there was a possibility, and tried to defeat them conventionally because I didn't want to commit genocide or choose the Catalyst absurd options. I ended up failing, but it wasn't genocide, the odds were extremely against us, but they weren't completely against us, so that means we failed, not that I commited genocide. You willingly destroyed a whole Species, you commited genocide, i didn't do it willingly because their was even a small chance to live, you knew the geth were going to die no matter what, you commited genocide, accept it, and deal with it, last time im explaining it.

Fine, and now that you know it didn't work you'll admit that you made the wrong choice and you'll do something different next time?

No, because I refuse to commit willingful genocide.

[Father_Jerusalem]

mauro2222 wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Miezul_Carpatin wrote...

After reading the arguments about destroy and refusal my conclusion is that both endings are sheet.

*shrugs* And that's why I like Control the best. I'm ****ing Space-Batman. Only immortal and with an army of pet Reapers.

Funny, that's not how Control works. It makes me doubt that you understood the original endings.

Funny, that's exactly how Renegade Control works. It makes me doubt that you understand anything other than PARAGON IS TEH BEST.

[Reorte]

wantedman dan wrote...

Of course you wouldn't; anything to justify your tirades.

I've already pointed out the problem in your argument--you obviously didn't take the time to read it, hence your "Whutchu talkin' bout?"

When the metaarguing begins, the original argument has officially ceased. Time for some GTA 4.

If I didn't read it it's because it never appeared because nothing you said pointed out any problems in my argument.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...


TO EVERYONE WHO THINKS REFUSAL IS GENOCIDE

This is honestly the last time im going to explain it because it doesn't go in your brain. I took my chances, chances meaning that there was a possibility, and tried to defeat them conventionally because I didn't want to commit genocide or choose the Catalyst absurd options. I ended up failing, but it wasn't genocide, the odds were extremely against us, but they weren't completely against us, so that means we failed, not that I commited genocide. You willingly destroyed a whole Species, you commited genocide, i didn't do it willingly because their was even a small chance to live, you knew the geth were going to die no matter what, you commited genocide, accept it, and deal with it, last time im explaining it.

I'm sorry, do the Reapers NOT systematically destroy racial, cultural, or political groups when they harvest every member of every advanced civilization in the galaxy? No? That's precisely what they do?

Then isn't it correct that to say that by following the dictionary definition of genocide to the letter, that mabye it's actually genocide? 

Using your and Danny boy's logic, intent doesn't matter - by refusing the Reapers, you are allowing them to commit genocide, even if that wasn't your intent.

So your saying that if we never knew about the crucible and we died holding out, its genocide? OK, I understand you are incompetent and still can't understand what I wrote.

Yup. In that case, the Reapers are absolutely committing genocide against the species of the galaxy. Absolutely.

In THIS case, you are given specific options to STOP that. You choose NOT to. You are a willing participant of that genocide. 

In the first case there, you are NOT given specific options to stop it. You have NO choice. You are NOT a willing participant of that genocide.

See the difference yet? In either instance, the Reapers are ABSOLUTELY committing genocide - it is only a question of whether or not Shepard is a willing participant, and thus deserves blame for, allowing it.

So you want me to stop Genocide from someone else, by commiting Genocide myself. If I choose not to try to fight the reapers and fail, thats not genocide.

[Reorte]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Fine, and now that you know it didn't work you'll admit that you made the wrong choice and you'll do something different next time?

No, because I refuse to commit willingful genocide.

Then trillions of deaths happened that you could've prevented without giving the enemy anything they wanted, all because you're too stubborn to do something hard. You've compromised on your morals and arguably given in to the enemy but almost everyone else has not. You've won, everyone's dead or you and the geth have lost but everyone else is alive and not under any threat at all.

Modifié par Reorte, 01 juillet 2012 - 09:19 .