Sniktchtherat wrote...
humes spork wrote...
the Reapers cannot be defeated.
That is the essence of the endings. They won the first time we usded a relay. They won the first time we used biotics. They won when we shaped FTL by their rules. They won before Shepard was born. The only option we have in the end is do we die in body, or die in soul?
Either way....they win, we lose.
jsadalia wrote...
I don't assume he's telling the truth: like I said, it's irrelevant. Shepard does nothing, reapers win, everyone dies or is ingested into a reaper as goo.elitehunter34 wrote...
jsadalia wrote...
The choices are activating the Crucible or not activating the Crucible. Shepard knows the consequences of the latter. There is nothing worse.
Knowing this, for Shepard to not consider what "GlowBoy" says would be psychotic. Whether Shepard thinks the Catalyst is legitimate is irrelevant. Choosing inaction is to condemn the galaxy to horror and death. It's insane.
Yes what Shepard thinks is revelant because the Catalyst can be lying. Why do so many people think this is an impossiblilty? Shepard could be choosing not to use the Crucible because he does not know that the Crucible will work the way it is intended because of the Catalyst. I've already covered this several pages ago, and you seem to just gloss it over. He does not know that activating the Crucible is a good idea because of the Catalyst. His existance changes everything. If the Catalyst was just an AI, then you're damn right I'd probably trust him, but he's THE CREATOR OF THE REAPERS. You can't assume that he's telling the truth.
What could the Catalyst's offered choices do that is worse? Really, what?
Torrible wrote...
Hackett decided that the war cannot be won conventionally. One, he isn't a coward. Second, if anyone had the best idea about the Galactic Alliance forces' strength in relation to the Reaper forces, it would be him. My Shepard simply opted to trust in his widsom and military expertise. Shepard was mentally exhausted and seeing how his forces are being decimated by the Reapers made him desperate.
Modifié par Ryzaki, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:18 .
Heretic_Hanar wrote...
Sniktchtherat wrote...
humes spork wrote...
the Reapers cannot be defeated.
That is the essence of the endings. They won the first time we usded a relay. They won the first time we used biotics. They won when we shaped FTL by their rules. They won before Shepard was born. The only option we have in the end is do we die in body, or die in soul?
Either way....they win, we lose.
The ending I chose certainly did not look like a lost war to me. Everyone seemed to be quite happy and quite alright.
Ryzaki wrote...
Torrible wrote...
Hackett decided that the war cannot be won conventionally. One, he isn't a coward. Second, if anyone had the best idea about the Galactic Alliance forces' strength in relation to the Reaper forces, it would be him. My Shepard simply opted to trust in his widsom and military expertise. Shepard was mentally exhausted and seeing how his forces are being decimated by the Reapers made him desperate.
That has crap to do with what I just said. I said Shep's cycle squandered their chances. That doesn't equal the Reapers being undefeatable conventionally.
People are saying because x can't be y it can't be z which is nonsense.
The Reapers can't be defeated conventionally by Shep's cycle or the Previous cycle.
That doesn't equal the Reapers can't be defeated conventionally.
Why people don't comprehend this I don't understand.
It's like using the logic that if Sweden can't defeat England in a war that England can't be defeated in a war. It's...wut? No! It doesn't work that way!
Modifié par Jeb231, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:21 .
You'd also have to add that trillions of lives would be lost before anyone gets another chance to go to war with England, so maybe take a chance with this unpredictable superweapon you have right now?Ryzaki wrote...
Torrible wrote...
Hackett decided that the war cannot be won conventionally. One, he isn't a coward. Second, if anyone had the best idea about the Galactic Alliance forces' strength in relation to the Reaper forces, it would be him. My Shepard simply opted to trust in his widsom and military expertise. Shepard was mentally exhausted and seeing how his forces are being decimated by the Reapers made him desperate.
That has crap to do with what I just said. I said Shep's cycle squandered their chances. That doesn't equal the Reapers being undefeatable conventionally.
People are saying because x can't be y it can't be z which is nonsense.
The Reapers can't be defeated conventionally by Shep's cycle or the Previous cycle.
That doesn't equal the Reapers can't be defeated conventionally.
Why people don't comprehend this I don't understand.
It's like using the lgoic that if Sweden can't defeat England in a war that England can't be defeated in a war. It's...wut?
Ryzaki wrote...
You have a picture? From what I recall it was the opposite.
And yeah that makes no sense since we're told that other cycles desired those choices and were working on the Crucible.
Modifié par Dusen, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:24 .
Ryzaki wrote...
Wrong. The Titanic sank for a clear reason. You'll see it if you actually looked at the blueprints for the ship. (Not to mention it sank due to external reasons. The ship sank because it was hit by an iceberg and the designers didn't accomdate for that. It's kind of going to be assumed the Reapers can blow up the Crucible rather easily. It's not made to withstand direct fire. Not ot mention "The crucible was destroyed." is a far cry from "the crucible didn't work"). There are also several ships that worked successfully that WEREN'T the titanic. So you also have a clear base otherwise to work on. You can also test ships without causing the Sea to drown everything down. Your analogy fails on several accounts. You fail to take into account the real and present danger of the Reapers (you can't afford to fail. If you do you're dead. Everyone you love is dead. Everything you care about and built is destroyed. ) the knowledge that it's something that's never been created before and is based off things for the most part you barely comprehened. (Most of the building of the Crucible is spent slavishly following the schematic with little to no deviation in fear that that'd make it fail. You can't test the thing more than once! And if it doesn't work. Game over! )
So no. not a wise idea to hedge all your bets (When you don't have to.) on something without a guarantee to work. The reasons it was even necessary for the previous cycles was because it was their last resort. They had no time, resources or ability to do anything else. The next cycle however does. Using the same last resort plan in such a case is sheer idiocy. Especially when the last ones who did it tell you the damn thing doesn't work!
Ryzaki wrote...
Torrible wrote...
Hackett decided that the war cannot be won conventionally. One, he isn't a coward. Second, if anyone had the best idea about the Galactic Alliance forces' strength in relation to the Reaper forces, it would be him. My Shepard simply opted to trust in his widsom and military expertise. Shepard was mentally exhausted and seeing how his forces are being decimated by the Reapers made him desperate.
That has crap to do with what I just said. I said Shep's cycle squandered their chances. That doesn't equal the Reapers being undefeatable conventionally.
People are saying because x can't be y it can't be z which is nonsense.
The Reapers can't be defeated conventionally by Shep's cycle or the Previous cycle.
That doesn't equal the Reapers can't be defeated conventionally.
Why people don't comprehend this I don't understand.
It's like using the lgoic that if Sweden can't defeat England in a war that England can't be defeated in a war. It's...wut?
Modifié par Torrible, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:39 .
RiouHotaru wrote...
@Ryzaki: We have clear evidence that all previous attempts at conventionally defeating the Reapers AS A WHOLE have failed miserably. Yes, you can defeat a Destroyer here and there, and it's even possible to drop a Sovereign-class Reaper under extreme circumstances.
But as a whole? Conventional technology stands not a chance.
Sniktchtherat wrote...
Heretic_Hanar wrote...
Sniktchtherat wrote...
humes spork wrote...
the Reapers cannot be defeated.
That is the essence of the endings. They won the first time we usded a relay. They won the first time we used biotics. They won when we shaped FTL by their rules. They won before Shepard was born. The only option we have in the end is do we die in body, or die in soul?
Either way....they win, we lose.
The ending I chose certainly did not look like a lost war to me. Everyone seemed to be quite happy and quite alright.
Lemme guess, Control? Say hi to HAL 9000 and A.M. for me.
Heretic_Hanar wrote..
Way to go to take my analogy too litteral. It's the underlying idea of my analogy that counts. That's what I'm trying to get through your thick skull, but you're too stubborn to listen. There is a clear deadline here. As soon as you start using the Mass Relays, you know the clock is ticking. In that time you have to find a solution to the Reapers, or you're done for. The smart idea would be to take a look at those Crucible blueprints and try to figure them out before you decide whether you're going to build it or not. That's the very LEAST you can do.
But you rather arrogantly wave away the whole Crucible because your stubborn and arrogant. You believe you can design something completely new and better in merely a couple of dozen years. How arrogant and foolish of you to just wave away a concept and design that has been worked on for countless of generations, countless of cycles, countless of engineers from different species coming together to expand on this idea, to create a device that will stop the reapers.
Like I said, before you decide whether you're going to build that Crucible or not, wouldn't it be smart to first figure out WHY the damn thing didn't work in Liara's cycle?
Dusen wrote...
I'll admit that it isn't the best picture but it will do for what I need to show. From the previous cutscene showing the Crucible attaching to the Citadel we know that it (the Crucible) is closest to Earth (another odd thing if you think about having to turn it when they reached the Citadel, but that's a different matter altogether). In this picture the Crucible is above (closest to Earth) circled in red while the Citadel is circled in green below. As you can see, the three choices are located below, on the citadel. This in turn means that these choices were made available by the catalyst.
First, I'd go digging through the game's codex which clearly demonstrates that no strategy or tactic attempted by organics during "this" or "the previous" (i.e. the protheans') cycle managed any result greater than a wholesale strategic loss. The single greatest 'victory' outlined in the codex is the Battle for Palaven, in which the turians managed to hold their relay against the Reapers for a very short time before being overwhelmed by sheer force of numbers. Moreover, the 'desperate measures' codex entry reinforces the notion that even tactics that cross the boundary into unconventional are still guaranteed failures, with the best hope being pyhhric victories that result in the end of galactic civilization anyways.elitehunter34 wrote...
Prove that refuse has a 100% chance of defeat.
jsadalia wrote...
You'd also have to add that trillions of lives would be lost before anyone gets another chance to go to war with England, so maybe take a chance with this unpredictable superweapon you have right now?
Unless you've made it to 1988 and are able to take advantage of something called "tabs". If you have a list of threads to read, any sensible person will open links in tabs.Disclaimer: If my opinions on the ending bother you, the back button should be to the top left of your browser.
The first statement is correct, but the conclusion is wrong. Shepard knows that the war is lost unless he picks one of the options - you are told at every turn that the Crucible is their only hope, yet at the end you still don't have the faintest idea what it does, never mind how to use it. You hear that no one else made it to the beam and that what's left of Hammer is falling back. You've lost all your tanks, and the one destroyer you managed to take out has been replaced by half a dozen capital Reapers.How is the Catalyst trustworthy? The Reaper's main tactic throughout all 3 games is corruption and deception.
[...]
This represents a fundamental flaw in the ending. Within the narrative Shepard basically can't take any of these options, they require a leap of faith far worse than the one needed to give TIM the Collector Base, for example.
Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:32 .
Ryzaki wrote...
RiouHotaru wrote...
@Ryzaki: We have clear evidence that all previous attempts at conventionally defeating the Reapers AS A WHOLE have failed miserably. Yes, you can defeat a Destroyer here and there, and it's even possible to drop a Sovereign-class Reaper under extreme circumstances.
But as a whole? Conventional technology stands not a chance.
...did you even bother listening to ME1? Not to be rude but no other cycle than the Protheans got enough time to send out beacons! The Reapers had a great plan of attack that worked up until Shep's cycle. They destroyed the heads of gov't in one fell swoop causing absolute chaos, they isolated allies from each other leading to more confusion and they swept up the remainders.
RiouHotaru wrote...
This thread is going in circles. The underlying issue is, at it's core:
"Can you believe the Catalyst?"
If YES: Then the given three options are valid choices.
If NO: Then Refusal is the more valid option.
And whether you believe the Catalyst or not is a matter of personal preference.
But for TAO to make the argument that disbelieving him is the ONLY valid conclusion, and thus Refusal the only valid option, is fallacious (a false dichotomy, to be specific)
Those of us here who aren't Pro-Refusal don't care that you prefer it, that's fine. What we care about is that you present a illogical statement as FACT.
Ryzaki wrote...
Heretic_Hanar wrote..
Way to go to take my analogy too litteral. It's the underlying idea of my analogy that counts. That's what I'm trying to get through your thick skull, but you're too stubborn to listen. There is a clear deadline here. As soon as you start using the Mass Relays, you know the clock is ticking. In that time you have to find a solution to the Reapers, or you're done for. The smart idea would be to take a look at those Crucible blueprints and try to figure them out before you decide whether you're going to build it or not. That's the very LEAST you can do.
But you rather arrogantly wave away the whole Crucible because your stubborn and arrogant. You believe you can design something completely new and better in merely a couple of dozen years. How arrogant and foolish of you to just wave away a concept and design that has been worked on for countless of generations, countless of cycles, countless of engineers from different species coming together to expand on this idea, to create a device that will stop the reapers.
Like I said, before you decide whether you're going to build that Crucible or not, wouldn't it be smart to first figure out WHY the damn thing didn't work in Liara's cycle?
Your refusal to acknowledge the difference is why your analogy utterly fails. It doesn't work! It's not the same situation. You're too stubborn to acknowledge that. But by all means keep going on about why someone would hedge their lives and families on something that has been said not to work (and the only way to prove that wrong is by using it and thus hedging the entire war on its usage) instead of something that DOES work but the previous cycles simply lacked enough of. By all means.
Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:31 .
Heretic_Hanar wrote...
Ryzaki wrote...
RiouHotaru wrote...
@Ryzaki: We have clear evidence that all previous attempts at conventionally defeating the Reapers AS A WHOLE have failed miserably. Yes, you can defeat a Destroyer here and there, and it's even possible to drop a Sovereign-class Reaper under extreme circumstances.
But as a whole? Conventional technology stands not a chance.
...did you even bother listening to ME1? Not to be rude but no other cycle than the Protheans got enough time to send out beacons! The Reapers had a great plan of attack that worked up until Shep's cycle. They destroyed the heads of gov't in one fell swoop causing absolute chaos, they isolated allies from each other leading to more confusion and they swept up the remainders.
...did you even bother listening to ME3? Not to be rude but every cycle so far managed to pass on the Crucible while adding something to it's design in the hope it will work for the next cycle. The Protheans too would have used the Crucible if they had the chance, but they didn't. Not a single cycle so far had the chance to succesfully use the Crucible, up until Shep's cycle. Shep's cycle figured out what the Catalyst is and managed to build and deploy the Crucible. Then Shepard used it (unless your Shepard is a huge troll) and defeated the Reapers with it.
Modifié par Ryzaki, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:32 .
The Angry One wrote...
Disclaimer: If my opinions on the ending bother you, the back button should be to the top left of your browser.
When talking about rejection compared to the other endings, people often bring up how the Reaper threat is still ended one way or another and how selfish people are for rejecting and so on. That's debatable, but not the point here.
One important point that I think is often missed though pointed out many times before by various people - how does Shepard know that?
Every one of the 3 options is a leap of faith based on the word - and that alone - of the creator and controller of the Reapers. Shepard will not even survive to see these options pan out. Definitely so in control and synthesis, and at least a likely possibility in destroy (especially since Shepard tries to commit suicide by explosion).
From Shepard's perspective, all she sees is the head Reaper giving her an ultimatum, the logic of which is flawed. Why would the Reapers hand you the keys to their own destruction? The Catalyst does not adequately explain the reasons for this, other than the current solution no longer being viable for arbitrary reasons.
How is the Catalyst trustworthy? The Reaper's main tactic throughout all 3 games is corruption and deception.
Yes, Sovereign and Harbinger were honest. But they didn't WANT anything from Shepard, they were simply making proclamations as to their intent.
With others they have manipulated, lied and used up through indoctrination and such. Look at the Geth. The Geth were attacked by the Quarians, so the Reapers promised to upgrade and help them. Which they did... they also took total control and made them puppets, illustrating perfectly how the Reapers cannot be trusted.
This represents a fundamental flaw in the ending. Within the narrative Shepard basically can't take any of these options, they require a leap of faith far worse than the one needed to give TIM the Collector Base, for example.
The only way you know the endings are viable is because you already know what they'll do! This is in the EC of course - a first time player with the OE must simply blindly fumble into an ending because you have no other choice.
Now that you HAVE the choice to reject, no other ending makes sense internally. You can philosophise about sacrifice and brave new eras all you want. I'm sure some will immediately react and yell "DON'T SPEAK FOR MY SHEPARD". But I'm sorry, you see the appeal of destroy/control/synthesis because you are meta-gaming. Shepard doesn't see it because Shepard CANNOT see it.
And again, I'll refer you to the post I made in which I explained how that position is either blatantly and obviously untrue, or is so unparsimonious as to not be worth entertainment.elitehunter34 wrote...
I already explained what he could do that is worse.
Modifié par humes spork, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:34 .
Heretic_Hanar wrote...
Sniktchtherat wrote...
Heretic_Hanar wrote...
Sniktchtherat wrote...
humes spork wrote...
the Reapers cannot be defeated.
That is the essence of the endings. They won the first time we usded a relay. They won the first time we used biotics. They won when we shaped FTL by their rules. They won before Shepard was born. The only option we have in the end is do we die in body, or die in soul?
Either way....they win, we lose.
The ending I chose certainly did not look like a lost war to me. Everyone seemed to be quite happy and quite alright.
Lemme guess, Control? Say hi to HAL 9000 and A.M. for me.
Except Shepard isn't HAL 9000.
Besides, if your so concerned about the posibble rampifications of Control, just pick Destroy. The Reapers are destroyed, all synthetics are destroyed, everyone seems to be happy. Certainly does not seem like a lost war to me.
Heretic_Hanar wrote...
Blablablablabla.
I've yet to hear you answer my questions on to why you wouldn't at least take a look at the Crucible and try to figure it out. The damn thing is handed to you on a silver plate! All you have to do is take a look at it and see whether it can be fixed and used or not. Any reasonable person sees this, even you, you just don't want to admit it.
Retour en haut