236 réponses à ce sujet

[Pitznik]

Bill Casey wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

So... your interpretation of what they fought for, as opposed to the living themselves?

Most people aren't willing to let themselves, friends, families and race die based on principle. I'm fairly sure almost everyone was fighting so that the people close to them would have a chance of seeing tomorrow; it's a fight for survival, fundamentally, and little else.

Who says Shepard was going to let everyone die?
He was going to defeat the Reapers without the Crucible...

It didn't work out, but there you go...

1. Shepard knows it is not possible.
2. Shepard himself convinced everyone to build Crucible and to organize the biggest fleet in history just to use it, it is his responibility to use it, even if he doesn't like it.
3. How is bleeding out in the Citadel trying to defeat Reapers without Crucible?

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Pitznik wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Refusing to make that choice, while knowing it is the only chance there is, is like spitting in the face of all those who died in that final assault to let Shepard enter the Citadel. How is that not against Paragon Shepard's principles? People willing to sacrifice so much for the principles are fanatics.

Also, as far as I understand Catalyst is somehow bound by Shepard's decision, he can't refuse him. So if Shepard refuses him, what happens next? Shepard's knows very well he can't leave Citadel on his own, being wounded. He just looks up, watches his allies, people who trusted him and does nothing? Or shouts to Catakiddo: "wait, I changed my mind!", or simply does one of the required actions? Or shoots himself? How in your opinion last minutes of refusing Shepard's life look like?

I don't think this ending (or rather, glorified critical failure screen) should be in the game, since it doesn't end the game, it leaves time for some action, and Shepard isn't really the one to just sit there and do nothing.

And commiting genocide and co-existing/controlling the Reapers is not spitting to the faces of the people who died?

It's not, because it is the lesser evil. It's like Garrus example - 10 billion here, 20 billion here, you have to pick your poison. 300 000 Batarians versus the galaxy? Sorry Batarians. All Geth versus the galaxy? Sorry Geth, I like you, but Earth is more important for me and I get every other organic as a bonus. Ashley and Kaidan on Virmire? Sorry Ash/Alenko, I have to pick one. You always pick what you consider lesser evil, now you just have to do it again. You don't trust Catakiddo and you don't know what will happen? Well, you DO know what will happen if you don't pick, so it's worth the risk anyway.

I love it when a person quotes a character and because that character said something it means it's right. No one agreed to be sacrificed, and commiting genocide to win a war goes against everything in ME1.

Also this is your logic, which many people have given me which I just continue to post the same thing.
Taking a chance with your allies even though it might be impossible odds=bad
Taking a chance with your enemy even though it seems fishy for them to help you=good

[MTX99]

Refusal is a not a punch to the testicles. It's one of those tiny flicks that hit's the side of your balls and it hurts so much more. Except imagine that times 1000. It would be ok if these things called..........Hold on, 'm thinking here...................................OH YEAH, the war assets meant anything. Which they don't thus ME3 is a 7 hour game

Modifié par MTX99, 08 juillet 2012 - 12:57 .

[chemiclord]

Galbrant wrote...

zambot wrote...

I don't think refuse is a massive FU. I do agree that it is a valid choice in keeping with the ideals of a paragon Shepard. You go down fighting, never compromise your principles, and thanks to your efforts during the 3 games, the next cycle is victorious. Tragic that everyone dies, but heroic since their sacrifice was not made in vain.

The fact that you can trigger the refusal ending by shooting the catalyst speaks volume on their intent. There is no logical reason add it unless you want to spite your fans. 

I dunno... would YOU wanna try and work with someone who's first action after talking to you was to shoot you in the face?

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Xilizhra wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

No, I'm fighting for what the galaxy agreed to do, kill Reapers.

Also, most people aren't willing to commit genocide to win a war, do something like control your enemy which you've been against the whole time, or do what your enemy wanted to do. so your point is?

As a matter of fact, if it was that or have everyone die, I'm certain that most people would do any of those, or at least want them to be done. True, they may be too cowardly to do so if it was their choice alone, but it's what they'd want and would be happy, or at least relieved, to see done and know that someone had made the hard decision.

And how does that justify it doing it? Your arguement is since someone else would have done it, it means therefore is the correct choice.

So your argument, at first, is that it's justified to let everyone die because everyone was fighting to beat the Reapers perfectly. Then, when I say they weren't, in fact, fighting for that, it no longer matters what they were fighting for? What does matter, then? What you alone were fighting for? What makes you more important than the whole galaxy?

No, my argument has always been that we as a galaxy agreed to fight the Reapers or die trying.

Did we agree to commit genocide of one of our allies to win-no
Did we agree to control the reapers-no
Did we agree to merge life in the galaxy-no

It is you who assumes your more important than the whole galaxy by accepting the catalyst's ultimatum, the galaxy agreed to fight reapers, by refusing we continue to fight Reapers, so how am I undermining the galaxy again?

[Ryzaki]

chemiclord wrote...

Galbrant wrote...

zambot wrote...

I don't think refuse is a massive FU. I do agree that it is a valid choice in keeping with the ideals of a paragon Shepard. You go down fighting, never compromise your principles, and thanks to your efforts during the 3 games, the next cycle is victorious. Tragic that everyone dies, but heroic since their sacrifice was not made in vain.

The fact that you can trigger the refusal ending by shooting the catalyst speaks volume on their intent. There is no logical reason add it unless you want to spite your fans. 

I dunno... would YOU wanna try and work with someone who's first action after talking to you was to shoot you in the face?

Anderson didn't seem to mind. Neither did that Keeper...nor did...quite a few people come to think of it.   My Shep shot Garrus in the ass all day every day. (mostly for stealing his kills. Kill stealing wh***!)

Modifié par Ryzaki, 08 juillet 2012 - 12:59 .

[Galbrant]

chemiclord wrote...

Galbrant wrote...

zambot wrote...

I don't think refuse is a massive FU. I do agree that it is a valid choice in keeping with the ideals of a paragon Shepard. You go down fighting, never compromise your principles, and thanks to your efforts during the 3 games, the next cycle is victorious. Tragic that everyone dies, but heroic since their sacrifice was not made in vain.

The fact that you can trigger the refusal ending by shooting the catalyst speaks volume on their intent. There is no logical reason add it unless you want to spite your fans. 

I dunno... would YOU wanna try and work with someone who's first action after talking to you was to shoot you in the face?

Its Caspers fault he took the form of the kid that Shepard saw died and claims he controls the Reapers. I wouldn't be suprise if Renegade Shepards first instinct is to kill it..

[Pitznik]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
I love it when a person quotes a character and because that character said something it means it's right. No one agreed to be sacrificed, and commiting genocide to win a war goes against everything in ME1.

Also this is your logic, which many people have given me which I just continue to post the same thing.
Taking a chance with your allies even though it might be impossible odds=bad
Taking a chance with your enemy even though it seems fishy for them to help you=good

I'm quoting a question, since he said it as a question. Question can't be right or wrong. Commiting genocide to win the war is something that always happened and always will, just scale is greater in ME, since it is galaxy we're talking about. Ever heard of Hiroshima? Or how many people died during landing in Normandy? Loss of life is inevitable during a war, you just try to minimize it whenever possible.

You're not taking your chance with your allies, you're just consciously accepting defeat and destruction of all advanced life. Shepard KNOWS he can't win without Crucible, that's why he put everything on it, even without knowledge what it can achieve. Small chance is always better than no chance.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

D24O wrote...

Oh boy, this thread just took a terrible turn.

Of course, a person makes a thread that disagreed with them, they have to come bash it.

[Bill Casey]

TIM: I'm looking at the schematics EDI uploaded. A timed radiation pulse would kill the remaining Collectors, but leave the machinery and technology intact. This is our chance, Shepard. That knowledge -- that framework -- could save us.

Paragon Shepard: They liquified people. Turned them into something horrible. We have to Destroy the base.

TIM: Don't be short-sighted. Our best chance against the Reapers is to turn their own resources against them.

Miranda: I'm not so sure. Seeing it firsthand... using anything from this base seems like a betrayal.

TIM: If we ignore this opportunity, that would be a betrayal. They were working directly with the Collectors. Who knows what information is buried there? This base is a gift. We can't just destroy it.

Paragon Shepard: No matter what kind of technology we might find, it's not worth it.

TIM: Shepard, you died fighting for what you believed. I brought you back so you could keep fighting. Some would say what we did to you was going too far. But look at what you've accomplished. I didn't discard you because I knew your value. Don't be so quick to discard this facility. Think of the potential.

Shepard: "We'll fight and win without it. I won't let fear compromise who I am."

Modifié par Bill Casey, 08 juillet 2012 - 01:12 .

[Xilizhra]

No, my argument has always been that we as a galaxy agreed to fight the Reapers or die trying.

Did we agree to commit genocide of one of our allies to win-no
Did we agree to control the reapers-no
Did we agree to merge life in the galaxy-no

It is you who assumes your more important than the whole galaxy by accepting the catalyst's ultimatum, the galaxy agreed to fight reapers, by refusing we continue to fight Reapers, so how am I undermining the galaxy again?

You agreed to fight the Reapers by building up and using the Crucible. There were no provisions for specifically avoiding any of the costs incurred by the use of the Crucible, but it was made very clear that the Crucible was your only conceivable hope. And what everyone wanted most was for their loved ones, etc, to survive, not stick to some principle or other that would lead to everyone dying.

TIM: I'm looking at the schematics EDI uploaded. A timed radiation pulse would kill the remaining Collectors, but leave the machinery and technology intact. This is our chance, Shepard. That knowledge -- that framework -- could save us.

Paragon Shepard: They liquified people. Turned them into something horrible. We have to Destroy the base.

TIM: Don't be short-sighted. Our best chance against the Reapers is to turn their own resources against them.

Miranda: I'm not so sure. Seeing it firsthand... using anything from this base seems like a betrayal.

TIM: If we ignore this opportunity, that would be a betrayal. They were working directly with the Collectors. Who knows what information is buried there? This base is a gift. We can't just destroy it.

Paragon Shepard: No matter what kind of technology we might find, it's not worth it.

TIM: Shepard, you died fighting for what you believed. I brought you back so you could keep fighting. Some would say what we did to you was going too far. But look at what you've accomplished. I didn't discard you because I knew your value. Don't be so quick to discard this facility. Think of the potential.

Shepard: We'll fight and win without it. I won't let fear compromise who I am.

And guess what? That's the wrong decision. Not that wrong, technically, but you get fewer war assets out of it and no gain from it. People in the final battle probably died from it.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 08 juillet 2012 - 01:07 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Pitznik wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
I love it when a person quotes a character and because that character said something it means it's right. No one agreed to be sacrificed, and commiting genocide to win a war goes against everything in ME1.

Also this is your logic, which many people have given me which I just continue to post the same thing.
Taking a chance with your allies even though it might be impossible odds=bad
Taking a chance with your enemy even though it seems fishy for them to help you=good

I'm quoting a question, since he said it as a question. Question can't be right or wrong. Commiting genocide to win the war is something that always happened and always will, just scale is greater in ME, since it is galaxy we're talking about. Ever heard of Hiroshima? Or how many people died during landing in Normandy? Loss of life is inevitable during a war, you just try to minimize it whenever possible.

You're not taking your chance with your allies, you're just consciously accepting defeat and destruction of all advanced life. Shepard KNOWS he can't win without Crucible, that's why he put everything on it, even without knowledge what it can achieve. Small chance is always better than no chance.

Hiroshima and D-Day were not genocide of 1.5 billion people, please make a correct analogy. And your consciously accepting to commit genocide, I'm not accepting defeat because I continue to fight, you don't know what happens after refusal so don't headcannon.

[chemiclord]

Galbrant wrote...

Its Caspers fault he took the form of the kid that Shepard saw died and claims he controls the Reapers. I wouldn't be suprise if Renegade Shepards first instinct is to kill it..

Hey, not blaming your response... just saying that if someone shot YOU in between the eyes, you'd probably be pretty peeved about it, even if it couldn't hurt you.

[Xilizhra]

Hiroshima and D-Day were not genocide of 1.5 billion people, please make a correct analogy. And your consciously accepting to commit genocide, I'm not accepting defeat because I continue to fight, you don't know what happens after refusal so don't headcannon.

The Crucible blows up and the Reapers destroy all of the fleets that were losing the battle anyway. It's not hard, since you were told all this earlier.

[Ryzaki]

5 or is it 10 assets wasn't going to be a good help

[Xilizhra]

Ryzaki wrote...

5 or is it 10 assets wasn't going to be a good help

110.

[Pitznik]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...


No, my argument has always been that we as a galaxy agreed to fight the Reapers or die trying.

Did we agree to commit genocide of one of our allies to win-no
Did we agree to control the reapers-no
Did we agree to merge life in the galaxy-no

It is you who assumes your more important than the whole galaxy by accepting the catalyst's ultimatum, the galaxy agreed to fight reapers, by refusing we continue to fight Reapers, so how am I undermining the galaxy again?

By taking part in a war you know that your life might end. The leaders always knows he sends some people to death. Sacrificing the Geth is no different.

Controlling the Reapers is winning with Reapers. By controlling them, you can in fact make them destroy themselves. But winning is what matters, not destroying them.

About merging life I won't say anything, that ending doesn't make any sense to me.

[Galbrant]

chemiclord wrote...

Galbrant wrote...

Its Caspers fault he took the form of the kid that Shepard saw died and claims he controls the Reapers. I wouldn't be suprise if Renegade Shepards first instinct is to kill it..

Hey, not blaming your response... just saying that if someone shot YOU in between the eyes, you'd probably be pretty peeved about it, even if it couldn't hurt you.

Its cool. but like Ryzaki said, Most NPCs alive don't seem to mind it.... Hell everytime I take James in my party I make it a point to unload a clip just to show who's the alpha male.

[PoisonMushroom]

Xilizhra wrote...
And with Refusal, there'll be no more synthetics or advanced organics. No more diversity. No more free will. No more anything due to your failure to make a choice. I can't see how this makes sense.

The end of Shepard, yes. Recall how you said that it had always been your Shepard who'd found a way out. Your Shepard. Not other people. Your Shepard did not, I presume, sit on his ass and die while waiting for other people to find a solution for him  I'm not surprised in the least that this doesn't work.

All right look at it from this angle.

Assume you played the EC before the original endings. You're there for the first time and you see the option to refuse the Catalyst. Refusing the Catalyst would normally be the thing you'd do before Shepard starts sorting **** out. You'd expect that your war assets would come into play and you'd see an epic battle OR Shepard would come up with another solution. Maybe you'd win, maybe you'd lose depending on your EMS.

I would be the first to take that choice, because it's what you'd expect Shepard to do, and you'd expect him to succeed in doing so. It fits with the core themes such as unity and diversity when all other choices seem to undermine them.

It's not my fault that this leads to death. 

The other choices are a huge chunk of what I think is wrong with the ending. I can push some buttons and make my Shepard choose them, but by doing so I've just written what I view as being a nonsensical and thematically horrific ending to my story.

I might have chosen what I as the player might feel is the best choice for the Galaxy, but by doing so I've completely disconnected myself from that Galaxy anyway so as a player what's the point?

Refuse might be horrifically bleak, but it's still the most appropriate ending and the only one that seems like a natural and fitting conclusion to the story for me.

[v TricKy v]

 Oh look another one of these turned into a heated argument that will end with no conclusion because there is none<_<

[Bill Casey]

Xilizhra wrote...

And guess what? That's the wrong decision.

No it isn't...

Not that wrong, technically, but you get fewer war assets out of it and no gain from it. People in the final battle probably died from it.

Stop metagaming...
Shepard cannot see into the future...
He is not Nicolas Cage...

How is the Reaper brain going to save anyone in the final battle?

Modifié par Bill Casey, 08 juillet 2012 - 01:18 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Xilizhra wrote...

No, my argument has always been that we as a galaxy agreed to fight the Reapers or die trying.

Did we agree to commit genocide of one of our allies to win-no
Did we agree to control the reapers-no
Did we agree to merge life in the galaxy-no

It is you who assumes your more important than the whole galaxy by accepting the catalyst's ultimatum, the galaxy agreed to fight reapers, by refusing we continue to fight Reapers, so how am I undermining the galaxy again?

You agreed to fight the Reapers by building up and using the Crucible. There were no provisions for specifically avoiding any of the costs incurred by the use of the Crucible, but it was made very clear that the Crucible was your only conceivable hope. And what everyone wanted most was for their loved ones, etc, to survive, not stick to some principle or other that would lead to everyone dying.

TIM: I'm looking at the schematics EDI uploaded. A timed radiation pulse would kill the remaining Collectors, but leave the machinery and technology intact. This is our chance, Shepard. That knowledge -- that framework -- could save us.

Paragon Shepard: They liquified people. Turned them into something horrible. We have to Destroy the base.

TIM: Don't be short-sighted. Our best chance against the Reapers is to turn their own resources against them.

Miranda: I'm not so sure. Seeing it firsthand... using anything from this base seems like a betrayal.

TIM: If we ignore this opportunity, that would be a betrayal. They were working directly with the Collectors. Who knows what information is buried there? This base is a gift. We can't just destroy it.

Paragon Shepard: No matter what kind of technology we might find, it's not worth it.

TIM: Shepard, you died fighting for what you believed. I brought you back so you could keep fighting. Some would say what we did to you was going too far. But look at what you've accomplished. I didn't discard you because I knew your value. Don't be so quick to discard this facility. Think of the potential.

Shepard: We'll fight and win without it. I won't let fear compromise who I am.

And guess what? That's the wrong decision. Not that wrong, technically, but you get fewer war assets out of it and no gain from it. People in the final battle probably died from it.

The difference is you know what the Crucible does.
And that principle is only everything that the ME series has been about, overcoming impossible odds on your terms, why should it be any different at the end? Because you rather submit than to face extinction, because you rather accept to live under the Catalyst tyranny by doing something as atrocious as commiting genocide.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Pitznik wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...


No, my argument has always been that we as a galaxy agreed to fight the Reapers or die trying.

Did we agree to commit genocide of one of our allies to win-no
Did we agree to control the reapers-no
Did we agree to merge life in the galaxy-no

It is you who assumes your more important than the whole galaxy by accepting the catalyst's ultimatum, the galaxy agreed to fight reapers, by refusing we continue to fight Reapers, so how am I undermining the galaxy again?

By taking part in a war you know that your life might end. The leaders always knows he sends some people to death. Sacrificing the Geth is no different.

Controlling the Reapers is winning with Reapers. By controlling them, you can in fact make them destroy themselves. But winning is what matters, not destroying them.

About merging life I won't say anything, that ending doesn't make any sense to me.

It's not sacrifice, it's genocide. Your deliberately and systematically killing the Geth, and control is wrong because it completely contradicts ME3.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Xilizhra wrote...

Hiroshima and D-Day were not genocide of 1.5 billion people, please make a correct analogy. And your consciously accepting to commit genocide, I'm not accepting defeat because I continue to fight, you don't know what happens after refusal so don't headcannon.

The Crucible blows up and the Reapers destroy all of the fleets that were losing the battle anyway. It's not hard, since you were told all this earlier.

Am I systematically or deliberatelly killing someone, no.

[Pitznik]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...


Hiroshima and D-Day were not genocide of 1.5 billion people, please make a correct analogy. And your consciously accepting to commit genocide, I'm not accepting defeat because I continue to fight, you don't know what happens after refusal so don't headcannon.

Analogy is correct - both of those were a conscious decision to sacrifice human life in great number to stop even greater loss of human life. In ME just the scale (both of lives lost and lives saved) is greater. No difference whatsoever, principle remains exactly the same.

Like I said - Shepard knows what happens after refusal. If conventional victory would be possible, he wouldn't risk majority of galactic forces just to create diversion to use a device, which he doesn't even exactly know how is working. That, or Shepard and every other military leader who agreed to go with the plan is a moron.