1027 réponses à ce sujet

[Sniktchtherat]

The Eruptionist wrote...

*snip*

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

So....to trust it, you have to distrust it.  If you trust it, you cannot distrust it..  If you distrust it, you must trust it.

That logic's as circular as the kid's, and he's the one who's killing organics with synthetics to prevent synthetics from killing organics.

[Joccaren]

humes spork wrote...

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.

Two points:
1. The Migrant Fleet is the largest KNOWN fleet in the galaxy prior to ME3. In ME3, had the writers wanted to, they could have believably made the Geth a military powerhouse that had the defences and weaponry levels of the Turians, and greater numbers of ships than the Quarians. Unknown factors can be used to your advantage.
Not to mention 50K ships is nothing to be nonchallant about. Arm them all with non-ME3-nerfed Thanix, and the Reapers are outnumbered and on near equal weaponry grounds.
2. Cinematic Magic. It takes 1 Cruiser to destroy 1 Reaper Destroyer with conventional weaponry. See Codex. It just looks cooler to have a massive hail of bullets rain down on the Reaper than it does to have 2 or 3 volleys hit it. Same reason the "Sword" fight doesn't use proper tactics, scale, ranges or accurately portray the power of either the Sword Fleet or the Reapers - it looks cooler the way it is.

Now, with non-nerfed Thanix weaponry [Fighter/Interceptor's firepower is upped to that of a Cruiser, bypasses shields] - The Galaxy's ships stand a fair chance at kicking Reaper ass. The question is: Do you retcon the ME3 nerf of Thanix, or do you let it retcon the ME2 power levels of Thanix?

[Joccaren]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

>.< What if we actually LIKED one of the choices offered to us?

Not what this thread is about.

Its about in game the only choice that makes sense being Reject.

Your options:

Shoot a valve on the Crucible that looks like it might explode and damage something.
Grab hold of two handles that you can see are bristling with energy.
Jump into a giant laser beam.

Who offers you these options?

Your arch nemisis.

Do you listen to him, or do you take the obvious route of "Wait a minute - you're just trying to get me to kill myself aren't you?". Meta-gaming we know that Destroy, Control and Synthesis work that way. Shepard has no reason to believe they will.

[Xilizhra]

Do you listen to him, or do you take the obvious route of "Wait a minute - you're just trying to get me to kill myself aren't you?". Meta-gaming we know that Destroy, Control and Synthesis work that way. Shepard has no reason to believe they will.

If the Catalyst wanted you dead, it'd just leave you there, unconscious and probably bleeding out.

[memorysquid]

Xilizhra wrote...

Do you listen to him, or do you take the obvious route of "Wait a minute - you're just trying to get me to kill myself aren't you?". Meta-gaming we know that Destroy, Control and Synthesis work that way. Shepard has no reason to believe they will.

If the Catalyst wanted you dead, it'd just leave you there, unconscious and probably bleeding out.

How many times does that need to be pointed out?  If he wasn't offering you real solutions, he could just send a husk swarm at you, evacuate the air in the Citadel, etc.  In game there remains no reason to doubt his offer, on any level.

[Sniktchtherat]

Xilizhra wrote...

Do you listen to him, or do you take the obvious route of "Wait a minute - you're just trying to get me to kill myself aren't you?". Meta-gaming we know that Destroy, Control and Synthesis work that way. Shepard has no reason to believe they will.

If the Catalyst wanted you dead, it'd just leave you there, unconscious and probably bleeding out.

Honestly, that's part of WHY I distrust it.  What stronger weapon is there than a foe turned to an ally?  It's not a fear of dying that makes most folks who pick reject pick it.  It's being rightly worried about being turned into a tool for the reapers because you accepted their gif.  Remember, every other Reaper "gift" has had a fishhook in it.  Ask TIM and Saren.  Or choose to rescue the Rachni Breeder - NOT the Queen, mind.  Or don't kill the Asari scientist on Virmire and in ME2, let her go at Okeer's lab.  Direct force is their OBVIOUS weapon.  Not their best one.  The kid has an angle.  I'm not arrogant enough to say I know WHAT his game is.  But he has a REASON he says "kill me, but ONLY in this way.  Or replace me.  But ONLY in this way.  Or do just exactly what I want."  Just like how the Joker only freaks out if someone other than Batman is trying to kill him...but taunts, eggs Bats on, and offers no resistance if it looks like Bats is gonna snap and kill him.  There's a REASON.  We can;t know it, because the kid is an author-avatar for two guys who shouldn't have the word author associated with them.  But it's there.

[edit}  And note:  I actually don't agree with the premise.  My own premise is all the endings = loss.  The only difference is do we bow or do we die and doom the next cycle to bowing.  Either way, we're screwed, and have been since the first time we used a relay.

Modifié par Sniktchtherat, 03 juillet 2012 - 01:33 .

[memorysquid]

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.

That you would write this way, regarding this topic and for no more reason than debate on some writers' intentions is distasteful.

Further, your reasoning is simply baffling.  This is a fictional creation being discussed.  The motives of its characters, its physics, its ethics, all are created and follow the intention of the people creating it rather than anything realistic.  Them being different people, they also contradicted one another in several instances.  The entire idea underlying this thread is ludicrous, and your behavior in particular is excreable.

[The Angry One]

Xilizhra wrote...

Do you listen to him, or do you take the obvious route of "Wait a minute - you're just trying to get me to kill myself aren't you?". Meta-gaming we know that Destroy, Control and Synthesis work that way. Shepard has no reason to believe they will.

If the Catalyst wanted you dead, it'd just leave you there, unconscious and probably bleeding out.

Unless the Crucible is a genuine threat, and you're there, and it has to mislead you in some way.
How do you know the Catalyst activated the elevator? You don't. That may have been automatic.

[memorysquid]

Sniktchtherat wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Do you listen to him, or do you take the obvious route of "Wait a minute - you're just trying to get me to kill myself aren't you?". Meta-gaming we know that Destroy, Control and Synthesis work that way. Shepard has no reason to believe they will.

If the Catalyst wanted you dead, it'd just leave you there, unconscious and probably bleeding out.

Honestly, that's part of WHY I distrust it.  What stronger weapon is there than a foe turned to an ally? 

It doesn't turn Shepard to an ally, it offers him three ways to modify or destroy himself and modify or destroy the Reapers.

[edit}  And note:  I actually don't agree with the premise.  My own premise is all the endings = loss.  The only difference is do we bow or do we die and doom the next cycle to bowing.  Either way, we're screwed, and have been since the first time we used a relay.

But it isn't an ME3 premise.  Because it is a fictional universe and that isn't how they created it.  Yeah the Mass Relays shape society, but you can stop using them and then boom, they stop shaping society.  The way they shaped society was keeping all sentients in tight little easily Reaped bundles.  If Reaping goes away, the big bad reason against relays goes away, well except for the whole interstellar war thing and the whole any terrorist group can blow up a solar system with ease thing.

[Baronesa]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

>.< What if we actually LIKED one of the choices offered to us?

Then more power for you... bravo and *pats on the back* Enjoy!

See? this is a lil thing...

Why am I not satisfied by the ending? Starbrat... in my opinion it breaks the narrative... and the fan made cuts removing it show how much better then ending would be without it.

Now, I have been vocal against Control and Synthesis... but if we HAVE to keep starbrat.., those 2 endings satisfy me, i think they convey exactly what they mean and do so properly... I just can't choose them because neither of those sit well with me.

Destroy is close, but the sacrifice of Geth and EDI is a deal breaker.

Have talked about reject in many places, not going to repeat myself.


After reading arguments against and for different endings... I honestly think that EVEN if EDI and the geth survive destroy ending... the amount of people choosing Synthesis and Control would NOT vary. Because those who took those endings did so because it suited their convictions, their worldview... EVEN if the geth and EDI survived on destroy, i'm now convinced that the ones picking synthesis and control would still go with their endings.

Then the only noticeable change would be that more people from reject would go to destroy... and personally? Reject instead of being my first option, it would become my second option, still personally more palatable than Control and synthesis.

But I'm rambling now so meh.

Modifié par Baronesa, 03 juillet 2012 - 01:55 .

[memorysquid]

The Angry One wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Do you listen to him, or do you take the obvious route of "Wait a minute - you're just trying to get me to kill myself aren't you?". Meta-gaming we know that Destroy, Control and Synthesis work that way. Shepard has no reason to believe they will.

If the Catalyst wanted you dead, it'd just leave you there, unconscious and probably bleeding out.

Unless the Crucible is a genuine threat, and you're there, and it has to mislead you in some way.
How do you know the Catalyst activated the elevator? You don't. That may have been automatic.

How do I know you're grasping at straws to avoid an obvious conclusion?  That bit you wrote above.  It's an informal fallacy called "moving the goal posts".  At best, you'd only make your interpretation possible, by offering this baseless speculation, as if it were meaningful.  The Catalyst had the ability to Reap his creator race but couldn't figure out how to remove a passed out, bleeding, half dead guy?  Let's get Occam's Razor in here, or even Hume's spork.

Modifié par memorysquid, 03 juillet 2012 - 02:18 .

[humes spork]

Joccaren wrote...

1. The Migrant Fleet is the largest KNOWN fleet in the galaxy prior to ME3. In ME3, had the writers wanted to, they could have believably made the Geth a military powerhouse that had the defences and weaponry levels of the Turians, and greater numbers of ships than the Quarians. Unknown factors can be used to your advantage.
Not to mention 50K ships is nothing to be nonchallant about. Arm them all with non-ME3-nerfed Thanix, and the Reapers are outnumbered and on near equal weaponry grounds.
2. Cinematic Magic. It takes 1 Cruiser to destroy 1 Reaper Destroyer with conventional weaponry. See Codex. It just looks cooler to have a massive hail of bullets rain down on the Reaper than it does to have 2 or 3 volleys hit it. Same reason the "Sword" fight doesn't use proper tactics, scale, ranges or accurately portray the power of either the Sword Fleet or the Reapers - it looks cooler the way it is.

Now, with non-nerfed Thanix weaponry [Fighter/Interceptor's firepower is upped to that of a Cruiser, bypasses shields] - The Galaxy's ships stand a fair chance at kicking Reaper ass. The question is: Do you retcon the ME3 nerf of Thanix, or do you let it retcon the ME2 power levels of Thanix?

Well, my first, lengthier, post got eaten, so here's the slap-and-tickle version.

1. The Migrant Fleet's comparative strength has been positively stated and consistent throughout the trilogy, ME3 included. Geth were depicted as a military powerhouse, yet not as powerful in fleet strength as the quarians. Changing this exposition at the eleventh hour would be a retcon.

2. Thanix cannons' destructive capabilities were never retconned. The only retcon there was how they work. Feel free to check the thanix cannon and Reaper vulnerability entries yourself. The community grossly overestimated thanix cannons' power based upon a cutscene in ME2 (which you just mentioned was misrepresentative) and cherry-picked codex entries.

3. Where the hell do all these thanix cannons come from? People pushing the "conventional victory is possible" argument seem to think organic races have unlimited capability to produce and retrofit unlimited numbers of ships, produce and move unlimited materiel, and field and supply unlimited numbers of troops. They either paid no attention to -- or conveniently ignore -- the logistics involved. Which is why I keep going back to the logistic argument in the first place -- the Reapers destroyed the organic species' industrial base, that was the first thing they targeted for crying out loud. The codex is clear on this.

You don't just pull out your omni-tool, space magic and then thanix cannons everywhere. Omni-gel is cool stuff, but it's not space magic. You still need time, workers, raw material, transportation, and industrial fabricators; of those, the Reapers blew up the fourth, are flying around stopping the third almost dead in its tracks, captured the second and is turning them into Reaper forces, and all of those together deny the first. Shadow broker terminal entries, spectre terminal entries, newsfeeds on the Citadel, the codex, not just minor dialog but explicit dialog between major characters, all elaborate on this. The organic species were barely able to complete the Crucible for a lack of resources. The war is logistically unsustainable.

That is why it cannot be won conventionally. Conventional-victory folks seem to have some presumption of a drawn-out asymmetric war of attrition. Yes, the organic species are going to win a war of attrition on extremely finite resources and materiel and no ability to reinforce, using asymmetric strategies against which Reaper forces are highly resistant, if not flatly immune. Otherwise, notions of a Mahanian victory are right the hell out, considering that's what happens at the end of the game already, and is a decisive, unambiguous failure but for the Crucible.

That you would write this way, regarding this topic and for no more reason than debate on some writers' intentions is distasteful. 

That's pretty much what he does. When you countermand him, he just repeats himself more hyperbolically, insults you, and then claims he won the argument. He really hates it when you contradict him with his own posts.

Modifié par humes spork, 03 juillet 2012 - 03:23 .

[LiarasShield]

we could fight on forever whichever ending is the best choice we have our owns reasons for why we believe the particular choice we made is the right one to us as player or as a people

[Moirai]

Ryzaki wrote...

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.

True. Unless you go with the notion that the Crucible had introduced new variables which made it a programming imperative for the Catalyst to offer you those choices.

In essence, It was given no 'choice' in the matter. It had to do so, because It was now effectively programmed to do so.

Here's my personal take on the Crucible idea.

Someone in some distance previous cycle realised that it was impossible to beat the Reapers conventionally, and that the only way to beat them was to find a way to get back door 'root' access to their control program and change it. Kind of like boarding a speeding locomotive and turning off the power to stop it, rather than just pointlessly throwing stuff in front of it to try to slow it down.

And this makes a lot of sense.

So, the came up with the idea for what became known as the Crucible.

And that is precisely the point of it. It is a massive power source and programming interface to not only reprogram the Reapers core control program, the Catalyst, with alternate functionality, but also to provide the power necessary to enable that proposed new functionality.

The Catalyst isn't giving you these options because they are of It's devising. It is being forced to give you them because you have hacked It to do so.

And you are the first organics to get that far.

It's entirely possible that the original idea may have even come from the original creators of the Catalyst AI, and something that was a last ditch desperate attempt to save future organics from the cycle of destruction that they had inadvertently begun. What we have now is the closest replication of their failsafe fix.


EDIT: I think I'm going to post the above as a new topic. I still feel it has direct relevance here, but it is potentially interesting as a topic in it's own right.

Well, maybe. Let's see...

EDIT2: Or maybe not, since I now see that there are quite a few Crucible topic in play already.

Modifié par Moirai, 03 juillet 2012 - 05:29 .

[Arisugawa]

magnetite wrote...

Forbes has written a nice article on this ending

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

Except that there is no guarantee that Liara's capsules will:

a) be found in time to help the next cycle
will be ultilized correctly by the next cycle
c) will be understood in the same way that the Prothean Beacon was, as Liara will not be capable of providing a similar cypher
d) even survive the war, as it was made plain in ME1 that the Reapers take great pains to eradicate traces of their existence and why the previous cycles ended. This isn't always successful, as the Beacon in ME1 proved, but it lessens the chances of a successful use of Liara's information dramatically.

Shepard refusing to deal with the Catalyst entirely on the hope that Liara's capsules will lead the next cycle to victory is as foolish as trusting the Catalyst outright. Rejecting the Catalyst on principle is one thing, but doing so under the illusion that victory has been otherwise assured by Liara's capsules is another.

Shepard simply has no real good choices at the end. Everything is a crapshoot.

[Sniktchtherat]

memorysquid wrote...

Sniktchtherat wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Do you listen to him, or do you take the obvious route of "Wait a minute - you're just trying to get me to kill myself aren't you?". Meta-gaming we know that Destroy, Control and Synthesis work that way. Shepard has no reason to believe they will.

If the Catalyst wanted you dead, it'd just leave you there, unconscious and probably bleeding out.

Honestly, that's part of WHY I distrust it.  What stronger weapon is there than a foe turned to an ally? 

It doesn't turn Shepard to an ally, it offers him three ways to modify or destroy himself and modify or destroy the Reapers.

[edit}  And note:  I actually don't agree with the premise.  My own premise is all the endings = loss.  The only difference is do we bow or do we die and doom the next cycle to bowing.  Either way, we're screwed, and have been since the first time we used a relay.

But it isn't an ME3 premise.  Because it is a fictional universe and that isn't how they created it.  Yeah the Mass Relays shape society, but you can stop using them and then boom, they stop shaping society.  The way they shaped society was keeping all sentients in tight little easily Reaped bundles.  If Reaping goes away, the big bad reason against relays goes away, well except for the whole interstellar war thing and the whole any terrorist group can blow up a solar system with ease thing.

By your example, the Interstate system shapes our society.  To stop having them shape our society, we just have to stop using them.  Except our society is BASED ON THEM.  And the relays are the only thing that makes system-to-system travel possible - thus the origin of the "best end possible is the Krogan eat everyone else" with the original endings.  The Reapers already have their hooks into galactic society so deep we'll never extract them.  It would take GENERATIONS, barring a "mule" discovery, to develop system-to-system methods alternate to the relays.

By using their tech, we evolve down paths they desire - direct quote of Sovereign.  Eezo, biotics....why do you think lasers are so unadvanced in the ME universe?  Because the Reapers led us to kinetic barriers and mass-effect-based guns.  Things they can counter with ease, because they only let us get so far on the path before they harvest.  The choices the kid offers are just an extension of the path.  And to put it simply....if the Crucible can make the kid offer you choices between kill me, replace me, or do what I want most of all, then it would be deep enough in his programming to just flip the ****ing OFF switch.

Oncemore, the kid HAS to have a reason to offer you the chance to invalidate his existence and fail his purpose.  nobody's given a reason he would provide that yet, and no-one will - inept writing is mostly to blame here, with a fair side of lazy writing(also notable in the evac scene - the SR2 CANNOT LAND, per EDI in ME2.  That's why the SR2 has shuttles).  But he has some reason to offer himself as a sacrifice....and he AIN'T Aslan.

If we give him what he wants, he'll go away,.  If we don't, he'll kill us all.  Look up Steven King's Storm Of The Century - main antagonist is a gent named Linoge.  And that's his ultimatum to the people of a Maine island town trapped in a blizzard.

[edit] And just to note: he makes his ultimatum from the jail cell he LETS himself be thrown into after murdering an old woman for no immediately discernable reason.  Evil doesn't mean stupid.  So when evil does something that looks stupid, the wise man looks twice.

Modifié par Sniktchtherat, 03 juillet 2012 - 05:38 .

[RiouHotaru]

Once again, this thread is going is circles. It's been veritably proven that TAO's original statement is false (hopefully a statement made out of ignorance than out of any malicious intent, false dichotomies are easy traps to fall into), and that the options given to you are valid ones outside of meta-gaming. (Hell, one poster has already stated you essentially had to be meta-gaming to GET to the finale in the first place)

Again, the argument boils down to a simple true/false statement:

"Trust the Catalyst" (True/False)

Whether you trust him or not is a personal preference, but there's already significant evidence that malicious intent is entirely out of the question. He wouldn't even entertain Shepard's presence in the first place if that were so.

So, in conclusion, the validity of any given ending is entirely up to the player and Shepard, who bears full responsibility for the consequences of any given choice.

[memorysquid]

Sniktchtherat wrote...

By your example, the Interstate system shapes our society.  To stop having them shape our society, we just have to stop using them. 

Well I'd only say something like that because it happens to be literally true.

Except our society is BASED ON THEM.  And the relays are the only thing that makes system-to-system travel possible - thus the origin of the "best end possible is the Krogan eat everyone else" with the original endings.  The Reapers already have their hooks into galactic society so deep we'll never extract them.  It would take GENERATIONS, barring a "mule" discovery, to develop system-to-system methods alternate to the relays.

No, it's easy.  No colony that can't be self-supporting will continue to exist.  The end.

Oncemore, the kid HAS to have a reason to offer you the chance to invalidate his existence and fail his purpose.  nobody's given a reason he would provide that yet, and no-one will - inept writing is mostly to blame here, with a fair side of lazy writing(also notable in the evac scene - the SR2 CANNOT LAND, per EDI in ME2.  That's why the SR2 has shuttles).  But he has some reason to offer himself as a sacrifice....and he AIN'T Aslan.

He gives the reason he is providing you the choice.  Blame poor writing, as I do, but he offers a paper thin rationale, that we're supposed to accept as gospel per the writers, and it's done.

If we give him what he wants, he'll go away,.  If we don't, he'll kill us all.  Look up Steven King's Storm Of The Century - main antagonist is a gent named Linoge.  And that's his ultimatum to the people of a Maine island town trapped in a blizzard.

[edit] And just to note: he makes his ultimatum from the jail cell he LETS himself be thrown into after murdering an old woman for no immediately discernable reason.  Evil doesn't mean stupid.  So when evil does something that looks stupid, the wise man looks twice.

IT and the evil genius still?  I can unverifiably add "and you're a brain in a jar" to almost any theory you'd ever propose; what's the point?  Look up Occam's Razor, while I am looking up Stephen King's tripe.  There's no reason to assume the writers intended him to be the evil genius of the universe, and their direct statements to the contrary against.  Will you continue to push it and use a different author as evidence?

[jumpingkaede]

krukow wrote...

Starbrat has no motivation to lie. NONE.

Shep is passed out on the floor. If starbrat wanted to win, he just had to leave him there. Done. War over, let's start the next cycle. He doesn't. He brings him up to the area, wakes him up, then gives him choices.

Sure he does.  Let's say the Reapers were being beaten badly by the combined Galactic Fleet and the Crucible was a bomb of some sort.

Starkid realizes his Reapers are going to lose, he talks Shepard into blowing up the Crucible: "Shoot this glass tube and blowup the Crucible... and you'll beat the Reapers.  Yeah..."

If Starkid doesn't "trick" Shepard, then the Crucible bomb works and the Reapers lose.  Assuming the Starkid can't actively disable the Crucible himself.

[Remember, this is all without the benefit of hindsight post-ending].

[memorysquid]

jumpingkaede wrote...

krukow wrote...

Starbrat has no motivation to lie. NONE.

Shep is passed out on the floor. If starbrat wanted to win, he just had to leave him there. Done. War over, let's start the next cycle. He doesn't. He brings him up to the area, wakes him up, then gives him choices.

Sure he does.  Let's say the Reapers were being beaten badly by the combined Galactic Fleet and the Crucible was a bomb of some sort.

You mean let's say we were playing a different game altogether?  Because in this game, they're winning.

[Xilizhra]

memorysquid wrote...

jumpingkaede wrote...

krukow wrote...

Starbrat has no motivation to lie. NONE.

Shep is passed out on the floor. If starbrat wanted to win, he just had to leave him there. Done. War over, let's start the next cycle. He doesn't. He brings him up to the area, wakes him up, then gives him choices.

Sure he does.  Let's say the Reapers were being beaten badly by the combined Galactic Fleet and the Crucible was a bomb of some sort.

You mean let's say we were playing a different game altogether?  Because in this game, they're winning.

Moreover, it was never supposed to be anything except a delaying action, and everyone knew they'd be losing.

[jumpingkaede]

memorysquid wrote...

jumpingkaede wrote...

krukow wrote...

Starbrat has no motivation to lie. NONE.

Shep is passed out on the floor. If starbrat wanted to win, he just had to leave him there. Done. War over, let's start the next cycle. He doesn't. He brings him up to the area, wakes him up, then gives him choices.

Sure he does.  Let's say the Reapers were being beaten badly by the combined Galactic Fleet and the Crucible was a bomb of some sort.

You mean let's say we were playing a different game altogether?  Because in this game, they're winning.

Are they?  Isn't it assumed beforehand that the Crucible means YOU win?

Separate what you know of the endings now from what you knew at the moment just before you met the Starkid.

Are the Reapers winning?  Weren't you going to connect the Crucible and win?

[jumpingkaede]

Xilizhra wrote...

Moreover, it was never supposed to be anything except a delaying action, and everyone knew they'd be losing.

No.

Everyone (the Galactic Fleet and the Reapers) knew the Reapers would be losing... if the Crucible made it to the Citadel successfully.

That's why the Reapers hijacked the Citadel.

That's why there's the delaying action.

And that's why you can't blindly trust the Starkid.  Now, I'm not saying you should distrust the Starkid.  But there's a fairly plausible rationale for doing so and a reason for the Starkid to be lying to you.

Namely that he is the Reapers.  Read that again.  The Starkid IS your enemy.  

Would you trust Harbinger if he appeared and told you to shoot and blow up the Crucible tube?  Would you trust Harbinger if he told you to electrocute yourself?  Would you trust Harbinger if he told you to jump into the beam of light?

Of  course not.

Now, as it turns out the Starkid is not lying to you and he's actually telling the truth.  

But at the moment you have no way of knowing that and IF the Crucible had turned out to be a Reaper  insta-kill and the Starkid (reasonably) did not want his Reapers insta-killed; him telling you to kill yourself instead of activating the Crucible or telling you to BLOW UP the Crucible would be a pretty smart way of getting around that.

[Xilizhra]

But at the moment you have no way of knowing that and IF the Crucible had turned out to be a Reaper insta-kill and the Starkid (reasonably) did not want his Reapers insta-killed; him telling you to kill yourself instead of activating the Crucible or telling you to BLOW UP the Crucible would be a pretty smart way of getting around that.

I can't quite respond in an intelligent way to this because I haven't made it to the endings yet, but it seems like, if this was the be-all and end-all, there should have been an option for Shepard to just wait around until the Crucible was actually activated, or try to find the "real" way to activate it, instead of just refusing to use it at all. In fact, Refusal only makes sense if Shepard believes that the Catalyst is the only way to use the Crucible, and is telling the truth.