1027 réponses à ce sujet

[MegaSovereign]

Heeden wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Why is refusal the yellow ending?

Is it because that's what processed organics look like? You know like in the Collector base.

Red is the colour of Wrath, Green is the colour of Will, Blue is the colour of Hope and Yellow is the colour of Fear.

It's also the color of ******.

People call it the "FU" to the fans, but they pick it anyway. 

Is refusal the hipster ending or something? 

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 03 juillet 2012 - 03:01 .

[Ryzaki]

wantedman dan wrote...
BUT IT WAS ARTLAWL

I wish they'd told me that before hand so I wouldn't have wasted money on their "art". But instead they deceived me with their blatant exaggerations pre-release. *hisses*

But yes them and their artistic intergrity (even when it results in straight up retcons in the EC).

[wantedman dan]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

The sheer amount of butthurt in this thread is quite amusing.

And make that four.

[wantedman dan]

Ryzaki wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...
BUT IT WAS ARTLAWL

I wish they'd told me that before hand so I wouldn't have wasted money on their "art". But instead they deceived me with their blatant exaggerations pre-release. *hisses*

But yes them and their artistic intergrity (even when it results in straight up retcons in the EC).

But... it was artlawl

Reminds me of my flippant thread questioning that second statement. Maybe I should give it a bump.

[The Heretic of Time]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Is refusal the hipster ending or something? 

Hipster ending? More like the emo ending.  All that's missing in the refusal ending is this song.

[Heeden]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Is refusal the hipster ending or something? 

Hipster ending? More like the emo ending.  All that's missing in the refusal ending is this song.

I was gonna say the same :-)

With the EC allowing more people to warm to the green ending, I can see eventually someone stating "I liked Synthesis before it was cool".

[The Heretic of Time]

Heeden wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Is refusal the hipster ending or something? 

Hipster ending? More like the emo ending.  All that's missing in the refusal ending is this song.

I was gonna say the same :-)

With the EC allowing more people to warm to the green ending, I can see eventually someone stating "I liked Synthesis before it was cool".

Synthesis would have been nice if it actually made sense. For me, synthesis does not contain enough science and too much fiction. I'd like a little more science (better explanation on how it works) and a little less fiction (space-magic).

I chose destroy in the original endings, but the EC made me fall in love the the control ending. Shepard's epilogue speech and the amazing music in the control ending is just too awesome.

[Ryzaki]

wantedman dan wrote...
But... it was artlawl

Reminds me of my flippant thread questioning that second statement. Maybe I should give it a bump.

Yeah well if they were so proud of their art they should've told us their "art" was what we were buying. Instead of whatever game they were telling us about pre-release. That sure in hell wasn't what I got! I wish I had gotten that game it would've been epic.

LOL I wanna read! Linky!

Modifié par Ryzaki, 03 juillet 2012 - 03:12 .

[wantedman dan]

Ryzaki wrote...
Linky! 

[chidingewe8036]

hey hey the refusal ending is the best ending you know why? because shepard basically tells star boy to go blank himself and thats why I looooooove it. Everyone keeps saying that it is Bioware's way of screwing the fans no no if more fans choose refusal as the best ending it should go down as fans basically telling bioware go blank off we did not like those 3 stupid a** choices the first time around.

[Ryzaki]

wantedman dan wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...
Linky! 

LOL gotta love it. "Artistic intergrity." 

[wantedman dan]

Ryzaki wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...
Linky! 

LOL gotta love it. "Artistic intergrity." 

I was flippantly making a very serious point.

[Ryzaki]

wantedman dan wrote...

I was flippantly making a very serious point.

I know. The backpeddaling was amusing.

[wantedman dan]

Ryzaki wrote...

I know. The backpeddaling was amusing.

It was.

"Oh, we're not changing the ending. Only expanding."

"Well, what about this?"

"..."

[Ryzaki]

wantedman dan wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

I know. The backpeddaling was amusing.

It was.

"Oh, we're not changing the ending. Only expanding."

"Well, what about this?"

"..."

Silence is golden? 

Really though all I wanted was to be able to shoot the Catalyst before picking Destroy again.

[wantedman dan]

Ryzaki wrote...

Silence is golden? 

Really though all I wanted was to be able to shoot the Catalyst before picking Destroy again.

"...Dance, holoboy!"

pew pew pew

[humes spork]

elitehunter34 wrote...

 I don't remember Garrus saying that, I have provided you links with my proof, it's only fair that you do the same.

I do, having four complete playthroughs under my belt, and I play on 360 and haven't a video capture card otherwise I would gladly video cap and upload these videos. Otherwise, I have cited my source and that should be enough in the name of a charitable argument.

Ok, let me clarify, because I was a little vague the first time around.  I meant to say that do you have any concrete proof that the Reapers as a whole outnumber the military forces of the different races.  It is been said in game that there are billions to the low trillions of different people in the galaxy.  They may have only a hundred dreadnoughts, but they might have tens of thousands to the low millions of cruisers, frigates, carriers, and fighters.  None of us know for sure.  You don't need dreadnoughts to defeat the Reapers.

The Migrant Fleet is the single largest fleet in the galaxy, comprised of 50,000 starships that are all, at least partly, militarized. The Migrant Fleet also includes three liveships that incorporate dreadnought-scale weaponry, but no defenses to speak of. The quarians also have extraordinarily disproportionately high fleet strength due to the nature of their existence. Best case scenario, the organic races might have a slight numerical advantage, including Reaper destroyers, against an enemy that requires focused and sustained fire even from the mightiest fighting ships organic races can bring to bear to destroy one ship while they can one-shot anything you have in the meantime.

After all, you saw what it took the single largest fleet in the galaxy to destroy one Reaper destroyer (i.e. the little, weak ones) while it was on the surface of a planet and at its most vulnerable according to the codex.

Also, why are you basically completely glossing over my most important fact?

And with the use of the mass relays, maintaing a massive army becomes that much easier.  And logistics is just as important as courage, as Eisenhower said.

The first and second point go hand-in-hand, here.

"The most important strategic advantage the galaxy has ever had" amounted in this case to being able to build and deploy the Crucible. Otherwise, the galaxy was still in ruins in a matter of months, its major worlds and most importantly its industrial centers burned, occupied and their populations captured, and the Citadel taken. From where would the troops, supplies and materiel necessary to wage a protracted asymmetric war come? Maintaining and supplying a military is not even possible, let alone on the scale necessary to wage a long-term galactic asymmetric war, given the fact the Reapers wiped out the organic races' industrial base, control their primary food supplies, and hold their populations prisoner (for harvesting, or even more detrimental to any possible war effort, indoctrination).

The Reapers are not even vulnerable to asymmetric warfare as such, for crying out loud -- they have no morale to speak of, they have no consideration towards cost or popularity of war, and their only logistic consideration is your own population. What asymmetric strategy do organic races have to fall back upon once attrition without resupply sets in, nuking their own populations to deprive the Reapers troops and ships?

Conventional victory is not possible. Period.

[Ryzaki]

wantedman dan wrote...

"...Dance, holoboy!"

pew pew pew

LOL

I still don't get the hissy fit over being shot at when you're giving the dude the means to kill you. It's just...wut? 

[Nragedreaper]

Conventional victory is not possible. Period.

Can't we just use space magic?

[wantedman dan]

Ryzaki wrote...

LOL

I still don't get the hissy fit over being shot at when you're giving the dude the means to kill you. It's just...wut? 

And then shutting down the Crucible and running away.

Which it could have done in the first place.

[The Eruptionist]

Let me have a go at this. Important sections are italicised. TL;DR at bottom.

To begin with the Catalyst is essentially just another sentient being. The first time you talk to it you have neither trust nor distrust for it (just like Vigil on Illos). Maybe caution is necessary since it has taken the form of the boy but there is still no reason not to trust it at this point. It is not until it states that it created and controls the Reapers that you have a reason to mistrust it. And that is the single most important point in the entire Catalyst discussion. The Catalyst states without provocation but of its own free will that it is the Reaper King.


Now, if I were going to try and trick or persuade someone into committing suicide or inadvertently activating a Reaper doomsday device I would not start by admitting I am your enemy. By admitting that it is the Reaper King the Catalyst has immediately forced us to mistrust it. What possible reason could there be to do so? There is literally no advantage to wanting someone to mistrust you. At one point Shepard is uncertain about the Catalyst and it is free to make up any story it wished but then thanks to its confession Shepard now completely mistrusts it and has no reason to believe what it says. Yet this is admission was done so by the Catalyst and it would appear for absolutely no reason whatsoever. 

If the Catalyst were really trying to manipulate you then why wouldn’t it lie about whom it is straight off the bat? If it was going to lie to you in order to trick you then that would be something worth lying about. Why begin with a truth “I created the Reapers” and then proceed to lie about everything else in an attempt to claim back that trust you gave up in order to trick someone into killing themselves?. If the Catalyst did this then it is deliberately putting itself at a major disadvantage by making you think it’s untrustworthy.In fact the only reason you think that the Catalyst is lying is because it told you the truth (that it controls the Reapers).

This is the key to being able to trust the Catalyst. Because it has openly admitted its true nature it becomes apparent that it doesn’t care if you know or not. You asked and so you received the answer. So why has the Catalyst deliberately made you mistrust it? There is absolutely no positive gains achieved by this action for the Catalyst; there are only negative outcomes for it conveying this information. If you were trying to get someone to trust you then you would not give them possibly the best reason in the galaxy not to trust you. If it actually cared about whether or not you trust it then it would have lied about who it was in order to prevent you from not trusting it – but it didn’t. If it did care then it would not have given you such a reason to mistrust it. It is indifferent to your trust – it does not care what you think of it. This is literally the only possible answer for its actions.

If it doesn’t care whether you trust it or not then what does it care about? We can deduce that if the Catalyst is answering your questions and is not intending to manipulate you then it must be concerned with one thing and one thing only – the facts (as it knows them). The only reason to assume that the Catalyst told you its true nature is because it is indifferent to how you feel about it.
It is telling you it is the Reaper King knowing full well that stating this will mean you won’t trust it. If you want to successfully lie to someone then you need to have their trust (which the Catalyst deliberately surrendered to Shepard) but if all you want is to tell someone the truth then their trust is irrelevant. A fact is a fact irrespective of whether or not the person hearing it believes you. The Catalyst itself alludes to this when it says that it doesn’t require your belief in it.

So if you followed that then we reach the logical conclusion that the Catalyst is actually trustworthy. It is telling the truth as it knows it. No need for blind faith, wishful thinking or capitulation. The Catalysts behaviour and logic is all we need.

TL;DR:

1. The Catalyst begins as neither trust worthy nor untrustworthy (think Vigil from ME1).

2. The Catalyst deliberately tells you it is the Reaper King which means you have no choice but to mistrust it.

3. The fact that the Catalyst willingly tells you that it is the Reaper King and thus unworthy of your trust tells us that it doesn’t care what you think about it or not. If it did want to trick you into doing something inadvertently then it would not begin by giving you the biggest reason in the world not to trust it.

4. If the Catalyst is not concerned with whether or not you believe it and is thus not trying to trick you then its only concern can be the conveyance of the facts and information that it has.

5. If all the Catalyst cares about is facts and not manipulation then you can trust it.

Essentially: The same reason you can trust the Catalyst is the same reason you doubt it.

Modifié par The Eruptionist, 03 juillet 2012 - 06:02 .

[Zine2]

humes spork wrote...

Why? It gains absolutely nothing. It holds all the cards, has the position of absolute dominance, and the final choice is completely on its terms.

Oh, how cute. Humes Spork proves that he is nothing more than an apologist for bad writers and an utter liar.

My argument is that a sane Catalyst that is truly looking for a way to find an alternative to the cycle would arrange something called a "cease fire" if it was actually looking to demonstrate its good faith to Shepard.

It has absolutely everything to gain by doing this - giving Shepard (and the players) a reason to believe it and erase doubts of its ill intent. It gives Shep a time to clear his / her head and consult with allies. It will make sure that any decisions made by Shep will at least be formed out of concensus, instead of some rushed BS like how it OMNOMed its original creators.

And if all your claims are true - which is that it is GOD and PUNY HUMANS CAN NEVER HAVE THE POWER TO DEFY IT (in reality, Mac Walters, Casey Hudson, and idiot fanboys being a bunch of idiots being unwilling to admit the original ending was terribly written) - then it has nothing to lose. Okay, puny humans didn't listen to Star Kid. They stll kept firing. We lost a few Reapers. No problem, we have INFINITE POWER thanks to the power of writer fiat hence we can still crush the puny humans despite losing a few Reaper Dreadnoughts.

Bringing Shep up to talk to him / her is NOT an act of good faith. An act of good faith would be to stop the killing, and then let the galaxy decide.

And yet somehow you twist this into "Zine is a paranoid person who should show more trust". This isn't my problem. The problem is you asking everyone to trust a lunatic who is still in the middle of the act of committing mass genocide. Again, it'd be like the police treating a madman who is shooting people as having committed an act of good faith merely because the madman said "Hi". It's utterly retarded thinking.

I'll show trust if the Star Kid actually shows sign of being an actual intelligent life form instead of a crazy OMNOM machine, and not before.

Modifié par Zine2, 03 juillet 2012 - 08:15 .

[v TricKy v]

Zine2 wrote...

humes spork wrote...

Why? It gains absolutely nothing. It holds all the cards, has the position of absolute dominance, and the final choice is completely on its terms.

Oh, how cute. Humes Spork proves that he is nothing more than an apologist for bad writers and an utter liar.

My argument is that a sane Catalyst that is truly looking for a way to find an alternative to the cycle would arrange something called a "cease fire" if it was actually looking to demonstrate its good faith to Shepard.

It has absolutely everything to gain by doing this - giving Shepard (and the players) a reason to believe it and erase doubts of its ill intent. It gives Shep a time to clear his / her head and consult with allies. It will make sure that any decisions made by Shep will at least be formed out of concensus, instead of some rushed BS like how it OMNOMed its original creators.

And if all your claims are true - which is that it is GOD and PUNY HUMANS CAN NEVER HAVE THE POWER TO DEFY IT (in reality, Mac Walters, Casey Hudson, and idiot fanboys being a bunch of idiots being unwilling to admit the original ending was terribly written) - then it has nothing to lose. Okay, puny humans didn't listen to Star Kid. They stll kept firing. We lost a few Reapers. No problem, we have INFINITE POWER thanks to the power of writer fiat hence we can still crush the puny humans despite losing a few Reaper Dreadnoughts.

Bringing Shep up to talk to him / her is NOT an act of good faith. An act of good faith would be to stop the killing, and then let the galaxy decide.

And yet somehow you twist this into "Zine is a paranoid person who should show more trust". This isn't my problem. The problem is you asking everyone to trust a lunatic who is still in the middle of the act of committing mass genocide. Again, it'd be like the police treating a madman who is shooting people as having committed an act of good faith merely because the madman said "Hi". It's utterly retarded thinking.

I'll show trust if the Star Kid actually shows sign of being an actual intelligent life form instead of a crazy OMNOM machine, and not before.

Exactly what I was saying in another thread.
But I have the feeling he isnt interessted in understandig but more in discussing and "proving" other peoples views wrong.

[Ryzaki]

wantedman dan wrote...
And then shutting down the Crucible and running away.

Which it could have done in the first place.

Honestly him managing to be able to shut the damn thing off makes Control and Destroy being possible utterly ridculous. The brat...LETS you destroy/one up him when he doesn't have to? I just...wat? 

Seriously. Lifting Shepard to begin with was counterproductive.