233 réponses à ce sujet

[N7Gold]

WarGriffin wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

estebanus wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

You can't fight a battle with fear compromising your resolve either.

And by fear, I hope you mean falling for the Catalyst's obvious appeals to probability and such, thus choosing one of the fatally flawed original options.

By fear, I mean wavering in front of the hard choices.

reject is the hardest choice of them all. You sacrifice your entire cycle so that the reapers will be defeated.

Reject lets the Reapers win, in case you didn't notice. I didn't rally everybody in the galaxy just to throw in the towel and let everyone get preserved in a Reaper, trapping them in a synthetic made hell.

Since we're being blunt

I didn't Rally the galaxy just that when the fight turned tough

I take the hand of my enemy and take whatever scraps he gives

Cause you can Semantic it all you want.... The three Color endings are you COMPROMISING with the enemy

Destory The Reapers take as much with them as they can
Control you betray everything you stood for but hey... everybody lives right?
Synthesis to complete the Reapers perfect veiw of the Galaxy Congradu****INGlations hey so what if i played god and made everybody what the Reapers wanted... I stopped the killing right! Right?

I had Mordin die... so i could fall on my knees and suck Star Satan's ****?

I watched Legion give his all... just to bow to my enemy's whim?

Me and Garrus left billions to die... just so I can say hey Reaper god could you let me win?

I may not like Refuse cause again most of the endings make the war assets moot... but Refuse atleast lets me go down fighting as I am and I didn't show the enemy mercy, I didn't give them a quater. and You know what

I win in the end... cause the NEXT Cycle sends these Reaper Sobs back to hell from which they came and then all those poor souls trapped in side are freed cause you fullfilled there one wish... To kill the monster they were turned into too... cause synthesis doesn't do that... Those poor races you talked about are still trapped in their big clunky shell while your firend get to be the more pratical version of the reaper's dream.

You think the endings compromise with the Reapers because the Catalyst presents and explains the endings to you as if he prepared them for you as you're coming. But think this over, don't overlook the details. What do the Reapers gain if you destroy them? You win, they're dead, your cycle and the next cycles are saved, simple as that. What do they gain if you control them? They bow to your commands, not to the Catalyst anymore-- you're the good guy, the Catalyst is the bad guy, you want to stop the cycle, the Catalyst doesn't want you to replace him as a Reaper controller, how is that wrong? i don't have much good to say about Synthesis...

Modifié par N7Gold, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:06 .

[wantedman dan]

OblivionDawn wrote...

Lol. I'm surprised you didn't abandon the Al Qaeda comparison right then and there. Al Qaeda can threaten all they like, but without the actions to prove it, the words are empty. The Reapers, however, have more than proven their capability to destroy all advanced organics, as they have done it thousands of times. I believe we can drop this silly comparison now, because it is completely unfitting and opens the door for off-topic political arguments.

My, how the jimmies have become rustled. Simply declaring an issue over by your decree--despite how empty it may be--is rather childish. Al Qaeda has successfully enacted numerous plots over the past 20 years. If you call that "all talk," I'd say you are a revisionist.

The Reapers not only believe they are justified, they were created for their purpose, and they are not going to be convinced, through incredible displays of honor or otherwise, that what they are doing is wrong.

As for the last bit. Choosing to sacrifice trillions of men, women, and children to the Reapers just to keep your reputation intact is pretty selfish.

I disagree. /argument on that one.

[wantedman dan]

RaenImrahl wrote...

My only real bias is my profound disdain for undergraduate speech team jargon substituted for genuine discussion about the game; I find threads where people criticize others' skills at argumentation, instead of discussing the game itself, an anathema. 

As to the intersection of politics and war, these two sections of the forum's rules will have to serve as the final word on the topic:

1. These forums are for BioWare, video game and related topic discussion and are to be engaged in a pleasant and fun manner.
These forums are run by BioWare and Electronic Arts for the promotion
of our games and communicating to our customers and Community members.
The topics and subjects discussed here should focus around BioWare and
our games, video games in general and other related topics. These forums
are not for discussing other topics such as politics, sex or adult
topics, religion, etc. Topics or discussions may be closed at the
discretion of staff and volunteer moderators.

12.  Respect staff and/or moderator warnings or instructions. If you
are instructed by BioWare or Electronic Arts staff or by forum
moderators to modify your language, behavior or actions on the Social
site, forums, or website, you must listen to the instructions. A person
or persons found or judged to be ignoring these instructions may be
banned from these forums at the discretion of the staff.

Ah, yes. Appealing to your authority to settle the issue. Beautiful.

Moving on.

[RDSFirebane]

OblivionDawn wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

As for the last bit. Choosing to sacrifice trillions of men, women, and children to the Reapers just to keep your reputation intact is pretty selfish.

Well  to be honest decideing what is best for trillions of people with out all of their opnions is pretty selfish no matter the cause.

It can be safely assumed that people don't want to die. Especially not by the Reapers. How each of the original endings solve that problem is a different argument, but all of them do it better than Refusal.

That sir is a matter of opnion and as such I respect it but no all 4 endings are equal with their own up's and down's.

[OblivionDawn]

wantedman dan wrote...

My, how the jimmies have become rustled. Simply declaring an issue over by your decree--despite how empty it may be--is rather childish.

wantedman dan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

The Reapers not only believe they are justified, they were created for their purpose, and they are not going to be convinced, through incredible displays of honor or otherwise, that what they are doing is wrong.

As for the last bit. Choosing to sacrifice trillions of men, women, and children to the Reapers just to keep your reputation intact is pretty selfish.

I disagree. /argument on that one.

Oh, how I lol'd.

Modifié par OblivionDawn, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:10 .

[WarGriffin]

N7Gold wrote...

WarGriffin wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

estebanus wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

You can't fight a battle with fear compromising your resolve either.

And by fear, I hope you mean falling for the Catalyst's obvious appeals to probability and such, thus choosing one of the fatally flawed original options.

By fear, I mean wavering in front of the hard choices.

reject is the hardest choice of them all. You sacrifice your entire cycle so that the reapers will be defeated.

Reject lets the Reapers win, in case you didn't notice. I didn't rally everybody in the galaxy just to throw in the towel and let everyone get preserved in a Reaper, trapping them in a synthetic made hell.

Since we're being blunt

I didn't Rally the galaxy just that when the fight turned tough

I take the hand of my enemy and take whatever scraps he gives

Cause you can Semantic it all you want.... The three Color endings are you COMPROMISING with the enemy

Destory The Reapers take as much with them as they can
Control you betray everything you stood for but hey... everybody lives right?
Synthesis to complete the Reapers perfect veiw of the Galaxy Congradu****INGlations hey so what if i played god and made everybody what the Reapers wanted... I stopped the killing right! Right?

I had Mordin die... so i could fall on my knees and suck Star Satan's ****?

I watched Legion give his all... just to bow to my enemy's whim?

Me and Garrus left billions to die... just so I can say hey Reaper god could you let me win?

I may not like Refuse cause again most of the endings make the war assets moot... but Refuse atleast lets me go down fighting as I am and I didn't show the enemy mercy, I didn't give them a quater. and You know what

I win in the end... cause the NEXT Cycle sends these Reaper Sobs back to hell from which they came and then all those poor souls trapped in side are freed cause you fullfilled there one wish... To kill the monster they were turned into too... cause synthesis doesn't do that... Those poor races you talked about are still trapped in their big clunky shell while your firend get to be the more pratical version of the reaper's dream.

You think the endings compromise with the Reapers because the Catalyst presents and explains the endings to you as if he prepared them for you as you're coming. But think this over, don't overlook the details. What do the Reapers gain if you destroy them? You win, they're dead, your cycle and the next cycles are saved, simple as that. What do they gain if you control them? They bow to your commands, not to the Catalyst anymore-- you're the good guy, the Catalyst is the bad guy, you want to stop the cycle, the Catalyst doesn't want you to replace him as a Reaper controller, how is that wrong? i don't have much good to say about Synthesis...

and Said bad guy is the one offering the choices... and I don't trust kids that sell out thier homeboys at the drop of a hat.

[MrFob]

Well, the way I see it, it is easy to say "you should have chosen" after the EC shows you how great all your choices work out. However, Shepard doesn't know the outcome of the choices he is given. What dies Shepard know?
He knows that the entity to offer him three choices is the instigator of the reaper threat. He knows that the reapers themselves are unwilling forced participants in the catalyst's schemes. He knows the problem the catalyst was created to resolve and the solution it employed. He also knows what the catalyst tells him about the 3 choices. I don't know how you RP your Shepard but mine didn't trust the catalyst as far as he could throw him (and he can't even touch him). So how about the options:
Control: My Shepard immediately dismissed that option, especially in light of the encounter with TIM just a few minutes back. The chance of this being a trap is very high.
Destroy: Also a trap/ Why? Because it is ludicrous! Giving this option to Shepard makes no sense whatsoever according to everything the catalyst tells us. The variables have changes? In a way that after billions of years of genocide the catalyst suddenly abandons his mission without even a reason? No way I am going to press this button until I get an exact explanation as to why this is supposed to be an option for the catalyst (which Shepard can't get).
Synthesis: This is the one option where my Shepard could actually believe the catalyst is sincere. It sounds like a real new solution from his pov (I still think it is not but it's close enough). However, the effect's are very vague and I get the impression even the catalyst doesn't know exactly hat's going to happen. The psychological, social and ecological consequences are too great and potentially devastating that this is not a risk my Shepard would take on behalf of everyone.

The deciding point here is that if I choose synthesis, I potentially doom all life forever, fi I choose control or destroy and spring the trap, the reapers will do something unpredictable, maybe stay around in the galaxy or god knows what but they will turn me into their tool. If I refuse I give up the best hope this cycle but I still leave them the ability to fight, to try and with Liaras time capsules, even if they loose, we have given hope to the next cycle and we have proven the concept that step by step, cycle by cycle we can change things.

There, that is my Shepard's reasing and it has nothing to do with cowardice. I think no one PRed it the way you interpret it and you can only come to that interpretation by comparing outcomes, not the origin of the decision. I do wonder how these kinds of discussions would have turned out if refusal would have been an option in the original cut. I think the refusal option would have worked much better with the ambiguity we had before he EC.

[wantedman dan]

OblivionDawn wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

My, how the jimmies have become rustled. Simply declaring an issue over by your decree--despite how empty it may be--is rather childish.

wantedman dan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

The Reapers not only believe they are justified, they were created for their purpose, and they are not going to be convinced, through incredible displays of honor or otherwise, that what they are doing is wrong.

As for the last bit. Choosing to sacrifice trillions of men, women, and children to the Reapers just to keep your reputation intact is pretty selfish.

I disagree. /argument on that one.

Oh, how I lol'd.

Good. After getting so much inspiration from you on that one, I figured there would be no better way to point out the irony.

[OblivionDawn]

RDSFirebane wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

As for the last bit. Choosing to sacrifice trillions of men, women, and children to the Reapers just to keep your reputation intact is pretty selfish.

Well  to be honest decideing what is best for trillions of people with out all of their opnions is pretty selfish no matter the cause.

It can be safely assumed that people don't want to die. Especially not by the Reapers. How each of the original endings solve that problem is a different argument, but all of them do it better than Refusal.

That sir is a matter of opnion and as such I respect it but no all 4 endings are equal with their own up's and down's.

It's really not a matter of opinion. Refusal gets everyone killed. The other endings don't.

[Makrys]

TookYoCookies wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

All endings suck

Still better post than OPs.

Endings suck, Refusal only option for any one who's paid attention through out the series.

F***ing amen. Although Destroy qualifies as well, but I still can't trust starbrat. Synthesis and Control are appalling and go against the established themes and lore of the franchise. No one can control the Reapers, and combining synthetics and organics has never been shown to be a 'good' thing, not to mention it was exactly what Saren preached and he was *cough* INDOCTRINATED *cough*.

Modifié par Makrys, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:17 .

[Peranor]

I've said it before. But I look at refusal/reject this way:


...I am among those who believe the ending [to ME3] could never be salvaged. The thematic kidnapping of the Ten Minutes was too blatant, too problematic, too dissociative. The game should've ended at "best seats in the house", and no investigation options would be enough to satisfy. That it didn't prompted me to reevaluate the entirety of the game - and I found it wanting. That damage is done. But until the EC was released, I couldn't let go, not fully, not until I'd made quite sure they didn't pull some miracle from their collective posteriors.

That they chose to retain that horrid divergence was expected. That I would still be less than satisfied with both the ending and the narrative as a whole was also expected. What that fourth option did - that ability to refuse not only on a textual level but a metatextual one - was to allow me to reject the game itself, within the game itself. It was an admission by the creators that, for some, their vision was unacceptable. It was a subtle form of humility, masked though it might be by the distorted, petulant exclamation by the Catalyst at my decision, and it allowed me to act with the finality I desired. I no longer wished to be a part of this story, so twisted and unrecognizable.



I was allowed to draw a line. I took them up on their offer.

                                                                                   -->Source<--

Modifié par anorling, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:15 .

[wantedman dan]

Makrys wrote...

TookYoCookies wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

All endings suck

Still better post than OPs.

Endings suck, Refusal only option for any one who's paid attention through out the series.

F***ing amen. Although Destroy qualifies as well, but I still can't trust starbrat. Synthesis and Control are appalling and go against the established themes and lore of the franchise. No one can control the Reapers, and combining synthetics and organics has never been shown to be a 'good' thing, not to mention it was exactly what Saren preached and he was *cough* hello INDOCTRINATED *cough*.

Oh, no... You said indoctrinated. Here come the rush of IT'ers and Anti-IT'ers--RUN!

[His Name was HYR!!]

wantedman dan wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

If you can't fight a battle with your honor intact, how are you any better than the enemy you're fighting?

The obvious answer is, you aren't.

If you kill a murderer who's going to kill you and someone else, are you as bad as he is for comitting murder??

Oh, the strawman. I see.

Funny, your question is completely divorced from the context of Mass Effect 3. If you care to make it relevant, I'd be happy to answer it. Otherwise, still a strawman, still a logical fallacy.

If it were a "strawman" then you'd have no difficulty answering and proving it wrong. But you haven't done either, it's also quite obvious why. And, well, repeating a lie doesn't make it true either.

Meanwhile, I'll keep a running count of how many times you continue to dodge the argument. We're now at three.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:17 .

[OblivionDawn]

wantedman dan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

My, how the jimmies have become rustled. Simply declaring an issue over by your decree--despite how empty it may be--is rather childish.

wantedman dan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

The Reapers not only believe they are justified, they were created for their purpose, and they are not going to be convinced, through incredible displays of honor or otherwise, that what they are doing is wrong.

As for the last bit. Choosing to sacrifice trillions of men, women, and children to the Reapers just to keep your reputation intact is pretty selfish.

I disagree. /argument on that one.

Oh, how I lol'd.

Good. After getting so much inspiration from you on that one, I figured there would be no better way to point out the irony.

Look, I'm sorry that your analogy was terrible, and everyone but you can see it, but that's no reason to throw away the rest of your argument. Please explain to me how keeping your reputation intact and shunting off responsibility to the next cycle is better than actually solving the problem when you have the chance.

[Makrys]

OblivionDawn wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

My, how the jimmies have become rustled. Simply declaring an issue over by your decree--despite how empty it may be--is rather childish.

wantedman dan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

The Reapers not only believe they are justified, they were created for their purpose, and they are not going to be convinced, through incredible displays of honor or otherwise, that what they are doing is wrong.

As for the last bit. Choosing to sacrifice trillions of men, women, and children to the Reapers just to keep your reputation intact is pretty selfish.

I disagree. /argument on that one.

Oh, how I lol'd.

Good. After getting so much inspiration from you on that one, I figured there would be no better way to point out the irony.

Look, I'm sorry that your analogy was terrible, and everyone but you can see it, but that's no reason to throw away the rest of your argument. Please explain to me how keeping your reputation intact and shunting off responsibility to the next cycle is better than actually solving the problem when you have the chance.

Assuming one of the three options is actually a solution...

The whole concept of what choice to choose at the end depends entirely on the fact of whether you trust the starbrat or not.

I do not.

Modifié par Makrys, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:19 .

[wantedman dan]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

If it were a "strawman" then you'd have no difficulty answering and proving it wrong. But you haven't done either, it's also quite obvious why. And, well, repeating a lie doesn't make it true either.

Meanwhile, I'll keep a running count of how many times you continue to dodge the argument. We're now at three.

I love it when people use my own former arguments against me.

To which, I respond, as I would have the first time around if I were the one receiving such, "It's a logical fallacy. Keep counting." If you can't debate without resorting to fallacious appeal, I'm going to keep dragging this along in amusement.

[wantedman dan]

OblivionDawn wrote...

Look, I'm sorry that your analogy was terrible, and everyone but you can see it, but that's no reason to throw away the rest of your argument. Please explain to me how keeping your reputation intact and shunting off responsibility to the next cycle is better than actually solving the problem when you have the chance.

LOL, and by your decree, it is done.

I'd be happy to have a debate if, first, you'd offer your argument. You believe it is selfish. I disagree. We're at an impasse.

[OblivionDawn]

Makrys wrote...


Assuming one of the three options is actually a solution...

The whole concept of what choice to choose at the end depends entirely on the fact of whether you trust the starbrat or not.

I do not.

Why not? He says what the Crucible does, and you see it happen after you pick your option. Why not trust him?

[Makrys]

OblivionDawn wrote...

Makrys wrote...


Assuming one of the three options is actually a solution...

The whole concept of what choice to choose at the end depends entirely on the fact of whether you trust the starbrat or not.

I do not.

Why not? He says what the Crucible does, and you see it happen after you pick your option. Why not trust him?

Because he contradicts himself. Practically every word from his mouth is a logical fallacy. That's only one reason why.

Modifié par Makrys, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:24 .

[wantedman dan]

OblivionDawn wrote...

Makrys wrote...


Assuming one of the three options is actually a solution...

The whole concept of what choice to choose at the end depends entirely on the fact of whether you trust the starbrat or not.

I do not.

Why not? He says what the Crucible does, and you see it happen after you pick your option. Why not trust him?

Why should we trust the Reaper collective intelligence?

[RDSFirebane]

OblivionDawn wrote...

Why not? He says what the Crucible does, and you see it happen after you pick your option. Why not trust him?

Wait so if someone walked up to you handed you some car keys and said it was yours free and wasent stolen you would take it?

[OblivionDawn]

wantedman dan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

Look, I'm sorry that your analogy was terrible, and everyone but you can see it, but that's no reason to throw away the rest of your argument. Please explain to me how keeping your reputation intact and shunting off responsibility to the next cycle is better than actually solving the problem when you have the chance.

LOL, and by your decree, it is done.

I'd be happy to have a debate if, first, you'd offer your argument. You believe it is selfish. I disagree. We're at an impasse.

I asked you to explain your reasoning, but ok.

It's selfish because all the people getting killed and tortured by Reapers don't care about whether the man/women who stopped them was honorable, they just want to stop getting killed and tortured.

But, because you don't want your image marred by the consequences of your decision, you decide to not make a decision at all. So people keep dying and getting tortured until there are none of them left, but at least they're doing it honorably, right?

[MrFob]

OblivionDawn wrote...

Makrys wrote...


Assuming one of the three options is actually a solution...

The whole concept of what choice to choose at the end depends entirely on the fact of whether you trust the starbrat or not.

I do not.

Why not? He says what the Crucible does, and you see it happen after you pick your option. Why not trust him?

The question of trust however presents itself before you pick an option.

[Ticonderoga117]

RDSFirebane wrote...
Wait so if someone walked up to you handed you some car keys and said it was yours free and wasent stolen you would take it?

Well, if he looked like a terrorist, gang member, or a little kid... no!

[His Name was HYR!!]

wantedman dan wrote...

I love it when people use my own former arguments against me.

To which, I respond, as I would have the first time around if I were the one receiving such, "It's a logical fallacy. Keep counting." If you can't debate without resorting to fallacious appeal, I'm going to keep dragging this along in amusement.

Don't flatter yourself. I'm not using your arguments whatsoever.

Again, you can repeat that LIE about how there's some logic fallacy in my argument all you want. But it's still not going to become true. Not until you can prove how it is.

And we're now at four.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:30 .