1027 réponses à ce sujet

[LiarasShield]

IscrewTali wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

wh00ley 06 wrote...

If only Mike Gamble and Jessica Merizan had kept their big mouths shut about this ending.

Agreed. That hurr durr next cycle used the Crucible anyway idiocy was just plain unnecessary.

Except it's not idiocy.  As for arguing that "It doesn't make any sense for the next cycle to use it!", well, not everything has to make sense.  And there's still a number of reasons for them to use it, even taking into account Liara's message.

The only people are mad over it is because the game doesn't conform to the headcanon of "conventional victory should be possible."

Yes it is. The next cycle is told the Crucible doesn't work. The next cycle has clear to understand warnings (unlike the gibberish Shep's cycle gets) and has time to preopare.

The Reapers are not gods.

There is no reason for them to use the Crucible instead of defeating the Reapers conventionally. So yes idiocy.

Wrong. I have no issue with Shepard losing. His cycle squandered any chances of defeating the Reapers conventionally time and time again. The next cycle having to use the Crucible is where I get irritated. So stop assuming.

I say this again, knowing about it and being able to prepare for it doesnt matter. The Reapers are constantly watching over the technological evolution of the galaxy, and when it reaches the stage they desire, they invade. It's simply not possible to overcome the Reapers with technological prowess and clever tactics. They dont allow it.

That is for you to believe they don't have secret cameras everywhere they may be watching some from the citadel or the relays but they could still come together and find a different way you just want the crucible to be the only option so once again that works for you

[RiouHotaru]

humes spork wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

This.  The options are "pick a choice and possibly fail" or "do nothing and fail for certain."

It's not meta-gaming to conclude:  "I'll pick the choice I think will work the best.  I don't have anything to lose otherwise."

They're headcanoning there is something greater to lose by not refusing despite all arguments and evidence to the contrary, and passing off headcanon as fact. Hell, a few pages ago I posted not one but two payoff matrices for the final choice to make the point refusal is irrational and actually got flamed for it. Even more tellingly is they're using the Catalyst's perceived irrationality as justification for their own irrational behavior.

I have to wonder what there is to gain here, by engaging people like this.

Well, the problem is that TAO's entire argument for Reject revolves around one assertion, which is debateable:

The Catalyst has malicious intent and/or is untrustworthy/lying through it's virtual teeth

Her argument stands that he (the Catalyst) MUST be dishonest, because of the Reapers.  Her argument only stands because of that assertion.  If you question that assertion, the logic of the argument doesn't hold.

[Gorkan86]

LiarasShield wrote...
 become a powerful dictator with unlimited power

ROFL

[Ryzaki]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
So when your told that something didn't work, you jus throw it out of the window? Are you really that stupid? I hope the next cycle is smarter than you are.

Usually when something that should work doesn't work, it means it's either incomplete, or it's broken. When something is broken, normal people usually try to fix it first before they throw it away.

The logical assumption here is that the next cycle will examine the Crucible and figure out why it didn't work and how they can make sure it does work this time. When they fix and upgraded the Crucible, they'll use it and beat the Reapers with it.

You throw it out the window yes when there's other avenues that'll work. Cute insult though. Also the Reapers knows about the Crucible now and they know that it was used against them. Chances are they now have measures against it. (Like how EDI tells you not to use that gun too early on Rannoch because if you do the Geth will find some way to make it worthless).

Liara didn't say they didn't build it right. She gave the plans (the same plans that have been passed cycle to cycle and hadn't ever been completed until Liara's cycle and when it WAS finally completed the damn thing didn't work) and said it didn't work.

The logical assumption is with knowlege of reaper weakenesses and what kind of tech they're weak too and the fact that they have a 50k year hibernation cycle they'd build anti Reaper weapons of their own and use it on the still hibernating Reapers. (or make a super weapon of their own unrelated to the Crucible).

Modifié par Ryzaki, 02 juillet 2012 - 06:04 .

[Femlob]

RiouHotaru wrote...

humes spork wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

This.  The options are "pick a choice and possibly fail" or "do nothing and fail for certain."

It's not meta-gaming to conclude:  "I'll pick the choice I think will work the best.  I don't have anything to lose otherwise."

They're headcanoning there is something greater to lose by not refusing despite all arguments and evidence to the contrary, and passing off headcanon as fact. Hell, a few pages ago I posted not one but two payoff matrices for the final choice to make the point refusal is irrational and actually got flamed for it. Even more tellingly is they're using the Catalyst's perceived irrationality as justification for their own irrational behavior.

I have to wonder what there is to gain here, by engaging people like this.

Well, the problem is that TAO's entire argument for Reject revolves around one assertion, which is debateable:

The Catalyst has malicious intent and/or is untrustworthy/lying through it's virtual teeth

Her argument stands that he (the Catalyst) MUST be dishonest, because of the Reapers.  Her argument only stands because of that assertion.  If you question that assertion, the logic of the argument doesn't hold.

Except there's nothing anyone can offer that will disprove it.

[Ryzaki]

IscrewTali wrote...
I say this again, knowing about it and being able to prepare for it doesnt matter. The Reapers are constantly watching over the technological evolution of the galaxy, and when it reaches the stage they desire, they invade. It's simply not possible to overcome the Reapers with technological prowess and clever tactics. They dont allow it.

OUR cycle was able to prepare for the Reapers (to a very limited extent) they were also able to take out Reapers (SOVEREIGN class REAPERS) with less advanced tech. As for how much the Reapers watch they clearly didn't realize the Crucible was still being passed cycle to cycle so they clearly have flaws.

Not to mention they'll be aware that the Reapers watch the cycles so they'll take precautions against that. You could use the same "the Reapers are watching!" logic against them rebuilding the Crucible.

[savionen]

IscrewTali wrote...
I say this again, knowing about it and being able to prepare for it doesnt matter. The Reapers are constantly watching over the technological evolution of the galaxy, and when it reaches the stage they desire, they invade. It's simply not possible to overcome the Reapers with technological prowess and clever tactics. They dont allow it.

Then how does the Crucible exist? How has the Crucible data survived without them knowing? How does the Crucible get built without them seeing it? How do they not stop the Crucible? Seriously.

If they knew it existed but did nothing then they're stupid.
If they didn't know it existed they're not omnipotent.

Pick one.

Modifié par savionen, 02 juillet 2012 - 06:04 .

[IscrewTali]

LiarasShield wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

wh00ley 06 wrote...

If only Mike Gamble and Jessica Merizan had kept their big mouths shut about this ending.

Agreed. That hurr durr next cycle used the Crucible anyway idiocy was just plain unnecessary.

Except it's not idiocy.  As for arguing that "It doesn't make any sense for the next cycle to use it!", well, not everything has to make sense.  And there's still a number of reasons for them to use it, even taking into account Liara's message.

The only people are mad over it is because the game doesn't conform to the headcanon of "conventional victory should be possible."

Yes it is. The next cycle is told the Crucible doesn't work. The next cycle has clear to understand warnings (unlike the gibberish Shep's cycle gets) and has time to preopare.

The Reapers are not gods.

There is no reason for them to use the Crucible instead of defeating the Reapers conventionally. So yes idiocy.

Wrong. I have no issue with Shepard losing. His cycle squandered any chances of defeating the Reapers conventionally time and time again. The next cycle having to use the Crucible is where I get irritated. So stop assuming.

I say this again, knowing about it and being able to prepare for it doesnt matter. The Reapers are constantly watching over the technological evolution of the galaxy, and when it reaches the stage they desire, they invade. It's simply not possible to overcome the Reapers with technological prowess and clever tactics. They dont allow it.

That is for you to believe they don't have secret cameras everywhere they may be watching some from the citadel or the relays but they could still come together and find a different way you just want the crucible to be the only option so once again that works for you

The citadel and relays arent the only things observing the evolution. It is clearly stated in lore that Sovereign woke up from time to time to check the technologies, and if needed, implanting agents inside secret projects. There is no evidence to support otherwise.

[LiarasShield]

savionen wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...
I say this again, knowing about it and being able to prepare for it doesnt matter. The Reapers are constantly watching over the technological evolution of the galaxy, and when it reaches the stage they desire, they invade. It's simply not possible to overcome the Reapers with technological prowess and clever tactics. They dont allow it.

Then how does the Crucible exist? How has the Crucible data survived without them knowing? How does the Crucible get built without them seeing it? How do they not stop the Crucible? Seriously.

Thats the big question of the day how can you say they don't allow races to get the point of advancement and the crucible is so damn big how the hell could they not have noticed that are you kidding me

[humes spork]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Well, the problem is that TAO's entire argument for Reject revolves around one assertion, which is debateable:

The Catalyst has malicious intent and/or is untrustworthy/lying through it's virtual teeth

Her argument stands that he (the Catalyst) MUST be dishonest, because of the Reapers.  Her argument only stands because of that assertion.  If you question that assertion, the logic of the argument doesn't hold.

That was the basis of my first few posts, and my first payoff matrix, as a point of fact. Namely, that were the Catalyst simply malevolent of intention it could simply have ignored Shepard and won anyways, and that it had nothing to gain in particular by engaging Shepard.

It's a contradiction that renders the entire point moot from the onset, and any argument stemming from that contradiction unsound.

[Ryzaki]

savionen wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...
I say this again, knowing about it and being able to prepare for it doesnt matter. The Reapers are constantly watching over the technological evolution of the galaxy, and when it reaches the stage they desire, they invade. It's simply not possible to overcome the Reapers with technological prowess and clever tactics. They dont allow it.

Then how does the Crucible exist? How has the Crucible data survived without them knowing? How does the Crucible get built without them seeing it? How do they not stop the Crucible? Seriously.

If they knew it existed but did nothing then they're stupid.
If they didn't know it existed they're not omnipotent.

Pick one.

Also this. It's like people think the Reapers are all knowing Gods. They're not. They have flaws. They don't know everything they aren't undefeatable conventionally it's just that no one so far has had the resources or the tech to meet them toe to toe and win.

[Aquilas]

magnetite wrote...

Forbes has written a nice article on this ending

Apparently, it's not as silly as it sounds.

This.  I argued adamantly for a Reject ending, and I share Griffiths' headcanon for the ME3 finale.  My Shepards want to win in this Cycle, or course, but not on the Catalyst's terms.  Even if the Catalyst is bound by some power compelling it to offer RGB and RGB only, my Shepards aren't going to betray every principle they've stood for and impose their will on the entire galaxy in this manner.  And My Sheps accept fully that the Reapers will win.  It sucks that Shep and friends didn't win this time, but it is a Cycle, after all.  Maybe next time. 

And I’m one of those who believe the next (or future) cycle(s) heeded Liara’s warning and would not use the Crucible, despite Mike Gamble’s retcon Tweet to the contrary.  She says plainly it didn’t work and warns future Cycles not to make the same mistakes her Cycle did.  She’d include info on all the time, energy, and resources her Cycle poured into the Crucible—and it didn’t work.  Is it reasonable to assume a subsequent Cycle would build another Crucible?  C’mon now.  The only way they’d build another Crucible is if they found more data that explained explicitly how it worked, or enabled them to reverse engineer a weapon that would work another way.  Whether or not they’d build it and use it if it performed as advertised did for Shepard is a whole nother debate.

Modifié par Aquilas, 02 juillet 2012 - 06:07 .

[humes spork]

Femlob wrote...

Except there's nothing anyone can offer that will disprove it.

Why did the Catalyst talk to Shepard in the first place?

[Grimwick]

Femlob wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

humes spork wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

This.  The options are "pick a choice and possibly fail" or "do nothing and fail for certain."

It's not meta-gaming to conclude:  "I'll pick the choice I think will work the best.  I don't have anything to lose otherwise."

They're headcanoning there is something greater to lose by not refusing despite all arguments and evidence to the contrary, and passing off headcanon as fact. Hell, a few pages ago I posted not one but two payoff matrices for the final choice to make the point refusal is irrational and actually got flamed for it. Even more tellingly is they're using the Catalyst's perceived irrationality as justification for their own irrational behavior.

I have to wonder what there is to gain here, by engaging people like this.

Well, the problem is that TAO's entire argument for Reject revolves around one assertion, which is debateable:

The Catalyst has malicious intent and/or is untrustworthy/lying through it's virtual teeth

Her argument stands that he (the Catalyst) MUST be dishonest, because of the Reapers.  Her argument only stands because of that assertion.  If you question that assertion, the logic of the argument doesn't hold.

Except there's nothing anyone can offer that will disprove it.

The assertion isn't solely based on trust...

It's more or less based on the fact that the Catalyst is logically fallacious. You don't agree with logic which is wrong and then do what they tell you to do based on that wrong logic.

An appeal to probability undermines the entire SC argument and as a result any of his suggested solutions are automatically invalid and unnecessary ones. 

[The Heretic of Time]

Ryzaki wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
So when your told that something didn't work, you jus throw it out of the window? Are you really that stupid? I hope the next cycle is smarter than you are.

Usually when something that should work doesn't work, it means it's either incomplete, or it's broken. When something is broken, normal people usually try to fix it first before they throw it away.

The logical assumption here is that the next cycle will examine the Crucible and figure out why it didn't work and how they can make sure it does work this time. When they fix and upgraded the Crucible, they'll use it and beat the Reapers with it.

You throw it out the window yes when there's other avenues that'll work. Cute insult though.

Ah, so rather continuing something that dozens of cycles have already put all their resources in and continue building onto that, which is obviously your best chance against the reapers, you rather just start all over again from scratch with a new plan?

So on the one hand you have the Crucible, that didn't work, but can be fixed.

On the other hand you have nothing.


You say you think it's more logical to start from scratch with nothing rather than trying to fix the Crucible and use that? My god, you really are stupid. 

Ryzaki wrote...

Liara didn't say they didn't build it right. She gave the plans (the same plans that have been passed cycle to cycle and hadn't ever been completed until Liara's cycle and when it WAS finally completed the damn thing didn't work) and said it didn't work.

But Liara didn't know why it didn't work. That's something for the next cycle to figure out. And oooo boy do I wonder what they'l think when they figure out the Crucible would have worked fine, if only the damn idiot named Commander Shepard would have used it. They're probably going to laugh their asses off. 

Ryzaki wrote...

The logical assumption is with knowlege of reaper weakenesses and what kind of tech they're weak too and the fact that they have a 50k year hibernation cycle they'd build anti Reaper weapons of their own and use it on the still hibernating Reapers.

The cycle is 50k because that's what it takes for species to advance to a point where they're advanced enough to be harvested. If the next cycle advances faster, the reapers will wake up earlier. Do you honestly think the reapers will just sit on their asses waiting until you have developed tech advanced enough to beat them conventionally? LOL!  You're funny.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 02 juillet 2012 - 06:11 .

[Torrible]

Femlob wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

humes spork wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

This.  The options are "pick a choice and possibly fail" or "do nothing and fail for certain."

It's not meta-gaming to conclude:  "I'll pick the choice I think will work the best.  I don't have anything to lose otherwise."

They're headcanoning there is something greater to lose by not refusing despite all arguments and evidence to the contrary, and passing off headcanon as fact. Hell, a few pages ago I posted not one but two payoff matrices for the final choice to make the point refusal is irrational and actually got flamed for it. Even more tellingly is they're using the Catalyst's perceived irrationality as justification for their own irrational behavior.

I have to wonder what there is to gain here, by engaging people like this.

Well, the problem is that TAO's entire argument for Reject revolves around one assertion, which is debateable:

The Catalyst has malicious intent and/or is untrustworthy/lying through it's virtual teeth

Her argument stands that he (the Catalyst) MUST be dishonest, because of the Reapers.  Her argument only stands because of that assertion.  If you question that assertion, the logic of the argument doesn't hold.

Except there's nothing anyone can offer that will disprove it.

Nor has anyone disproved the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[Femlob]

humes spork wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Except there's nothing anyone can offer that will disprove it.

Why did the Catalyst talk to Shepard in the first place?

Because Mac Walters.

[RiouHotaru]

Femlob wrote...

Except there's nothing anyone can offer that will disprove it.

But you haven't offered any definitive proof he's untrustworthy.  So far the ONLY evidence used to mistrust the Catalyst is a relationship to the Reapers, which is tentative at best.  The Catalyst didn't make them, his only connection is that they're a "solution" to the problem posed to him by his creators.

This constant assertion he's "deranged" has no basis in fact.

[IscrewTali]

savionen wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...
I say this again, knowing about it and being able to prepare for it doesnt matter. The Reapers are constantly watching over the technological evolution of the galaxy, and when it reaches the stage they desire, they invade. It's simply not possible to overcome the Reapers with technological prowess and clever tactics. They dont allow it.

Then how does the Crucible exist? How has the Crucible data survived without them knowing? How does the Crucible get built without them seeing it? How do they not stop the Crucible? Seriously.

If they knew it existed but did nothing then they're stupid.
If they didn't know it existed they're not omnipotent.

Pick one.

They believed the Crucible plans were destroyed, so they stopped searching for it. Now they know it exists. All of this is filled with bad movie cliches. Too many things contradicting each other to make any argument 100% valid from any of the 4 decisions. this argument could go on for an eternity if we let it.

[Grimwick]

humes spork wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Well, the problem is that TAO's entire argument for Reject revolves around one assertion, which is debateable:

The Catalyst has malicious intent and/or is untrustworthy/lying through it's virtual teeth

Her argument stands that he (the Catalyst) MUST be dishonest, because of the Reapers.  Her argument only stands because of that assertion.  If you question that assertion, the logic of the argument doesn't hold.

That was the basis of my first few posts, and my first payoff matrix, as a point of fact. Namely, that were the Catalyst simply malevolent of intention it could simply have ignored Shepard and won anyways, and that it had nothing to gain in particular by engaging Shepard.

It's a contradiction that renders the entire point moot from the onset, and any argument stemming from that contradiction unsound.

Nope. You make wild assertions here. For a start you are assuming that the Catalyst can carry out the 'solutions' without Shepard's help - whereas it appears he needs to trick Shepard into activating them.

You are also assuming that the Catalyst will think that the reapers will win when it is possible the Catalyst was in a losing position, therefore had everything to gain from tricking Shepard. Or perhaps he was worried Shepard might accidentally activate it by himself and tried to divert him?

You cannot prove something by contradiction if you make such unsubstantiated assertions.

[Ryzaki]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
Ah, so rather continuing something that dozens of cycles have already put all their resources in and continue building onto that, which is obviously your best chance against the reapers, you rather just start all over again from scratch with a new plan?

So on the one hand you have the Crucible, that didn't work, but can be fixed.

On the other hand you have nothing.


You say you think it's more logical to start from scratch with nothing rather than trying to fix the Crucible and use that? My god, you really are stupid. :')

Oh yes it clearly makes sense to keep wasting resources (on a life or death situation no less) on something that didn't work vs developing weapons and ships that are guaranteed to work if you get enough of them. Oh yes you are clearly so much more intelligent *slow clap*

But Liara didn't know why it didn't work. That's something for the next cycle to figure out. And oooo boy do I wonder what they'l think when they figure out the Crucible would have worked fine, if only the damn idiot named Commander Shepard would have used it. They're probably going to laugh their asses off.

This is assuming that the sTarbrat didn't modify the Citadel to make it so the Crucible doesn't work (hilariously enough not doing so would be far more idiotic than any decision Shep could've made). As for them LTAO we'll see how they feel about the same RGB choices.

The cycle is 50k because that's what it takes for species to advance to a point where they're advanced enough to be harvested. If the next cycle advances faster, the reapers will wake up earlier. Do you honestly think the reapers will just sit on their asses waiting until you have developed tech advanced enough to beat them conventionally? LOL!  You're funny.

You really think the Reapers will sit on their asses waiting for the Crucible to be rebuilt? LOL you funny! You also seem to have no concept of subtly or stealth but given your posts I'm not surprised. You seem the dense sort.

[Femlob]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Except there's nothing anyone can offer that will disprove it.

But you haven't offered any definitive proof he's untrustworthy.  So far the ONLY evidence used to mistrust the Catalyst is a relationship to the Reapers, which is tentative at best.  The Catalyst didn't make them, his only connection is that they're a "solution" to the problem posed to him by his creators.

This constant assertion he's "deranged" has no basis in fact.

It does; it even has basis in reality. It's a stupid f*cking plot device that shouldn't have existed in the first place. So if I'm given the opportunity to shoot it in the face so I won't have to listen to its inane ramblings, you can bet your last buck I'll do just that.

But hey, let's stay reasonable. Why the hell would Shepard listen to anything said by some glowing kid that appears out of nowhere with no prior introduction or any indication of its existence of any kind and claims it has the answers to everything?

[Ryzaki]

IscrewTali wrote...
They believed the Crucible plans were destroyed, so they stopped searching for it. Now they know it exists. All of this is filled with bad movie cliches. Too many things contradicting each other to make any argument 100% valid from any of the 4 decisions. this argument could go on for an eternity if we let it.

You could use that logic to say they'd be even more suspicious of any new Crucible building than anything else though. Since they know they didn't manage to completely wipe any traces of it before.

[Sniktchtherat]

humes spork wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Except there's nothing anyone can offer that will disprove it.

Why did the Catalyst talk to Shepard in the first place?

Because what better way to crush the spirit of your foes than to turn their symbol into an ally?

[RiouHotaru]

Femlob wrote...

humes spork wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Except there's nothing anyone can offer that will disprove it.

Why did the Catalyst talk to Shepard in the first place?

Because Mac Walters.

That's not an argument, nor is that evidence.  Are you saying it's bad writing that the Catalyst chose to interact with Shepard at all?

Because this sounds suspiciously like the arguments that the Reapers should've just waited for Shepard to die before invading back when ME2 was out.  Attributing thought processes to a character that only someone ridiculously Genre Savvy would make isn't a good argument.