395 réponses à ce sujet

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Ryzaki wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

SMichelle wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

 I respect what your saying but this is what bugs me, people see the worst in refusal. They automatically assume that everyone is dead, that they didn't put up a fight and diminished the Reapers numbers by a lot, that some didn't survive till the next cycle. I know in a way it headcannoing, but it's naive to think none of those things happen, and we allowed the next cycle to win.

OMG!  Can we finally have come to an understanding?  I think Reject is bad, I think Control is bad, I think Synthesis is bad and I think Destroy is bad.  For my Shepard it was simply choosing what she thought was the least bad choice.

*GROUP HUG for everyone that believed all choices presented sucked* 

Sure we can.

*GROUP HUG* 

But everytime time someone bashes another ending, especially the one I choose, I have to argue back. I know it just keeps the cycle going, but it's just who I am, and I doubt this fighting will end anytime soon 

But I do agree every ending has some bad in them and can be justified depending on how the player sees it, and what Bioware has succesfully done is manage to split the fanbase in half instead of providing a decent ending.

Speculations!

*gags*

*gets in on hugs*

Welcome in

Anyway I think I'm done arguing for today, I'm gonna go play some Skyrim, Probaly will buy Dawnguard in a few days.

[silentassassin264]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

It's like telling Leonidas "You killed everyone. You should've accepted one of Xerxes terms and saved them, instead of this stupid last stand which achieved nothing, except feeding your stupid moral high grounds". You think survival comes first. I think survival is pointless if we lose something important in the process.

Except Leonidas didn't kill everyone.  If he had, I would question his actions.  As it was, he helped win the war.

According to the logic of destroyers he did, because he didn't surrender. Therefore kept fighting and died.

That is different.  A combined Hellenic army could defeat the Persians and his sacrifice united the Hellenes and they defeated the Persians.  A combined your cycle cannot defeat the Reapers.  You are just forcing your entire cycle to commit suicide if you pick reject.

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
Actually. 

They aren't winning. You're on the crucible standing in the control room of a machine with the power to wipe out the entire reaper fleet. Dismantle the plan of the Catalyst entirely, perhaps even destroy the very galaxy if used improperly.

The Starchild has every single reason to get you to choose the option that retains his solution, and every single reason to lie. But tell me then, what possible reason given these circumstances would the catalyst, even supposing he was winning, have to tell the truth? 

You see, as unlikely most scenarios where we should default to truth unless proven otherwise, the burden of proof with regards to the credibility of a being who has lied not just to the Illusive Man and Saren, who let us remember both began their quest by attempting to stop the Reapers as well but also the entire galaxy thousands of times over, a being that is telling you something that appears to contravene logic, a being that not moments ago you said no one could trust. Tells you that by keeping the Reapers alive but killing yourself, you will bring about the survival of your cycle.

That is absurd.

Taken.

 
They are winning.  All he has to do is shut off the Crucible, which he can do, and you can do absolutely nothing but bleed out and die.  The battle outside if laughably onesided.  Hardly any Reapers die comparable to all the Allied forces getting blown up.  He does hold all the cards.  The Crucible must interact with the catalyst and he is the catalyst.  If he doesn't interact with the Crucible, which he does so willingly if you pick a real ending, you have absolutely nothing. 

[GreyLycanTrope]

SMichelle wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

 I respect what your saying but this is what bugs me, people see the worst in refusal. They automatically assume that everyone is dead, that they didn't put up a fight and diminished the Reapers numbers by a lot, that some didn't survive till the next cycle. I know in a way it headcannoing, but it's naive to think none of those things happen, and we allowed the next cycle to win.

OMG!  Can we finally have come to an understanding?  I think Reject is bad, I think Control is bad, I think Synthesis is bad and I think Destroy is bad.  For my Shepard it was simply choosing what she thought was the least bad choice.

*GROUP HUG for everyone that believed all choices presented sucked* 

*group hug*

[Khajiit Jzargo]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

It's like telling Leonidas "You killed everyone. You should've accepted one of Xerxes terms and saved them, instead of this stupid last stand which achieved nothing, except feeding your stupid moral high grounds". You think survival comes first. I think survival is pointless if we lose something important in the process.

Except Leonidas didn't kill everyone.  If he had, I would question his actions.  As it was, he helped win the war.

According to the logic of destroyers he did, because he didn't surrender. Therefore kept fighting and died.

That is different.  A combined Hellenic army could defeat the Persians and his sacrifice united the Hellenes and they defeated the Persians.  A combined your cycle cannot defeat the Reapers.  You are just forcing your entire cycle to commit suicide if you pick reject.

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
Actually. 

They aren't winning. You're on the crucible standing in the control room of a machine with the power to wipe out the entire reaper fleet. Dismantle the plan of the Catalyst entirely, perhaps even destroy the very galaxy if used improperly.

The Starchild has every single reason to get you to choose the option that retains his solution, and every single reason to lie. But tell me then, what possible reason given these circumstances would the catalyst, even supposing he was winning, have to tell the truth? 

You see, as unlikely most scenarios where we should default to truth unless proven otherwise, the burden of proof with regards to the credibility of a being who has lied not just to the Illusive Man and Saren, who let us remember both began their quest by attempting to stop the Reapers as well but also the entire galaxy thousands of times over, a being that is telling you something that appears to contravene logic, a being that not moments ago you said no one could trust. Tells you that by keeping the Reapers alive but killing yourself, you will bring about the survival of your cycle.

That is absurd.

Taken.

 
They are winning.  All he has to do is shut off the Crucible, which he can do, and you can do absolutely nothing but bleed out and die.  The battle outside if laughably onesided.  Hardly any Reapers die comparable to all the Allied forces getting blown up.  He does hold all the cards.  The Crucible must interact with the catalyst and he is the catalyst.  If he doesn't interact with the Crucible, which he does so willingly if you pick a real ending, you have absolutely nothing. 

ughh I didn't want to argue anymore. This is my last post about arguing and that's it.

1-No your incorrect, the Spartans went down fighting and had absolutely no chance of winning, that analogy is incorrect, and I really don't feel like arguing obvious history.

2-Again, your arguement consist of metagaming, when you first meet him you don't know he can shut off the crucible and anything else you state it.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

silentassassin264 wrote...
That is different.  A combined Hellenic army could defeat the Persians and his sacrifice united the Hellenes and they defeated the Persians.  A combined your cycle cannot defeat the Reapers.  You are just forcing your entire cycle to commit suicide if you pick reject.

Sorry but
a) I don't know that we can't defeat the Reapers. Suspecting and knowing 100% is different things, also "there is always another way".
I didn't see if everybody died. For all I know even Shepard could've died of old age.
c) All stargazer says "they fought a terrible war". 
d) The only implied "fail" is from Liara's speech. Still, the exact extent of a "fail" is not described in detail
e) Stargazer is Asari, child is human - this just clearly means that not everybody died. Previously Reapers wiped out advanced civilizations completely and thoroughly, why didn't that time? Did they survived in statis like protheans tried to?
Speculations afoot.

Also, Leonidas didn't know that their sacrifice will unite Hellenes. Like Shepard didn't know for sure that they will lose no matter what.

silentassassin264 wrote...
All he has to do is shut off the Crucible, which he can do, and you can do absolutely nothing but bleed out and die. 

 
a) Nothing established that starkid could shut off the Crucible at will
Nothing established that Shepard would've just bled out if he didn't ride on the glowlevator. Again, he survives through Destroy, and that was pretty harsh.

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:23 .

[RiouHotaru]

I like that people think the Catalyst has a choice in stopping in cycle on his own and that his continuance of the cycle is a threat. Stop applying human thought processes and morality to him, because it doesn't apply.

It's not a threat. He can't end the cycle unless YOU do it for him. Otherwise he has to continue using his imperfect solution. If you choose not to act, so does he. It's a two way street. He's not stopping you from taking action, but if you DON'T take action, he'll just continue the Cycle.

Since the Catalyst has NO moral agency, he's not responsible for perpetuating the cycle he explictly gave you the option to stop.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

Sion1138 wrote...

Dude, when I play a damn RPG, it's about my avatar and by extension his environment and the events unfolding therein.

If the player character dies, that's a loss right there. If both the player character and everybody he ever interacted with dies, that's a catastrophic loss.

Did you play L.A. Noire or Mafia?
I guess you can't win these games, eh?

[SMichelle]

Fandango9641 wrote...



Ok, so you role-played a genocidal Shep, a megalomaniacal Shep and a despot Shep. Assuming you play the game again, why not try to role-play a morally virtous one?

Dammit!  There's a fifth ending with a morally virtous Shepard?  How come no one told me!?

Just tell me, does it involve shooting Harby with a  cain?  That dick totally deserves it for destroying my favorite armor! 

[Ryzaki]

RiouHotaru wrote...

I like that people think the Catalyst has a choice in stopping in cycle on his own and that his continuance of the cycle is a threat. Stop applying human thought processes and morality to him, because it doesn't apply.

It's not a threat. He can't end the cycle unless YOU do it for him. Otherwise he has to continue using his imperfect solution. If you choose not to act, so does he. It's a two way street. He's not stopping you from taking action, but if you DON'T take action, he'll just continue the Cycle.

Since the Catalyst has NO moral agency, he's not responsible for perpetuating the cycle he explictly gave you the option to stop.

I call BS. He wasn't created to do the cycle the cycle was a solution to a problem he was created to solve. He can stop the cycle without doing anything to his programming. The little douche just doesn't want to.

[Ryzaki]

SMichelle wrote..

Dammit!  There's a fifth ending with a morally virtous Shepard?  How come no one told me!?

Just tell me, does it involve shooting Harby with a  cain?  That dick totally deserves it for destroying my favorite armor! 

...Shooting Harby with a Cain would've been damned hilarious.

And hell I wish there was a ending for a morally virtous Shepard. Sadly the only ending there is dying to Marauder Shields. <_< Dying to TIM isn't morally right since you have to let him kill Anderson to do it.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:32 .

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

If Catalyst is just a machine with no free will, then his creators are responsible. This does not shift blame on Shepard somehow.

[Ryzaki]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

If Catalyst is just a machine with no free will, then his creators are responsible. This does not shift blame on Shepard somehow.

They really weren't the sharpest knives in the rack.

So we're having problems with Synthetics...let's make more Synthetics to help making peace with Synthetics! That can't go wrong!

/facepalm

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Fandango9641 wrote...

SMichelle wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...



Ok, so you role-played a genocidal Shep, a megalomaniacal Shep and a despot Shep. Assuming you play the game again, why not try to role-play a morally virtous one?

Dammit!  There's a fifth ending with a morally virtous Shepard?  How come no one told me!?

Just tell me, does it involve shooting Harby with a  cain?  That dick totally deserves it for destroying my favorite armor! 

Nope, just the 4 endings: 3 that require you become a war criminal and one that doesnt.

No ending is virtually good, even I admit that, and I'm an incredibly stubborn person.

[silentassassin264]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...
That is different.  A combined Hellenic army could defeat the Persians and his sacrifice united the Hellenes and they defeated the Persians.  A combined your cycle cannot defeat the Reapers.  You are just forcing your entire cycle to commit suicide if you pick reject.

Sorry but
a) I don't know that we can't defeat the Reapers. Suspecting and knowing 100% is different things, also "there is always another way".
I didn't see if everybody died. For all I know even Shepard could've died of old age.
c) All stargazer says "they fought a terrible war". 
d) The only implied "fail" is from Liara's speech. Still, the exact extent of a "fail" is not described in detail
e) Stargazer is Asari, child is human - this just clearly means that not everybody died. Previously Reapers wiped out advanced civilizations completely and thoroughly, why didn't that time? Did they survived in statis like protheans tried to?
Speculations afoot.

Also, Leonidas didn't know that their sacrifice will unite Hellenes. Like Shepard didn't know for sure that they will lose no matter what.

 
a) Hackett tells you.  Anderson tells you.  Glyph updates Liara when you go in there how the resistance is going (horribly if you don't want to go find it).  The game makes it quite clear that this longshot is your only way.
Shepard is stuck on the Citadel in some inner labyrinthian cave and mortally wounded.  You can bet your sweet derriere it is not going to be old age.  And it doesn't matter what you saw, everyone died.
c) Your resistance from the Fall of Earth to firing the crucible is a terrible war with allied forces losing continuously.
d) It doesn't matter "how much you failed" the Reapers would build more forces up from the dead and indoctrinated and be completely replenished regardless of how much damage you did.  You gained nothing.
e) The stargazer is not asari.  It is said that previous cycle fought a war implying that they were not of that cycle.  

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote... 

silentassassin264 wrote...
All he has to do is shut off the Crucible, which he can do, and you can do absolutely nothing but bleed out and die. 

 
a) Nothing established that starkid could shut off the Crucible at will
Nothing established that Shepard would've just bled out if he didn't ride on the glowlevator. Again, he survives through Destroy, and that was pretty harsh.

Yes there is something implying he could.  If you listened to how the Crucible worked, it needed what adminstered the relay network (the catalysyt) to fire anything worth a [pyjack].  That would have been easy except the Catalyst that adminstered the relay network was not some object but a sentient being that could choose to interact with it.  If the Catalyst did not want to interact with the Crucible, it didn't.  

Modifié par silentassassin264, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:37 .

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

Ryzaki wrote...
They really weren't the sharpest knives in the rack. 

So we're having problems with Synthetics...let's make more Synthetics to help making peace with Synthetics! That can't go wrong!

I'd assume they were desperate. Sometimes people do very dangerous things in desperate times.
They thought it was a probability that atomic bomb will ignite whole Earth atmosphere - but they tried it anyway. For Catalyst creators it did ignite it.

[RiouHotaru]

Ryzaki wrote...

I call BS. He wasn't created to do the cycle the cycle was a solution to a problem he was created to solve. He can stop the cycle without doing anything to his programming. The little douche just doesn't want to.

The cycle was, at the time, the ONLY means of solving the dilemma that was the conflict of organics versus synthetics.  He's even aware his solution isn't perfect.  He'd rather go synthesis and remove the elements that start the problem in the first place.  Problem is he can't, and while his solution isn't the best idea, it's the only one that works, therefore he has to do it.

Remember, he's a machine.

[Ryzaki]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

I'd assume they were desperate. Sometimes people do very dangerous things in desperate times.
They thought it was a probability that atomic bomb will ignite whole Earth atmosphere - but they tried it anyway. For Catalyst creators it did ignite it.

But they could've just killed the synthetics!

They had technology capable of making goddamn REAPERS! It shouldn't have been much of a problem.

Sadly it looks like their attempts to be peaceful instead of just kill em all is what resulted in their demise.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:38 .

[ghost9191]

SMichelle wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...



Ok, so you role-played a genocidal Shep, a megalomaniacal Shep and a despot Shep. Assuming you play the game again, why not try to role-play a morally virtous one?

Dammit!  There's a fifth ending with a morally virtous Shepard?  How come no one told me!?

Just tell me, does it involve shooting Harby with a  cain?  That dick totally deserves it for destroying my favorite armor! 

+1:wub:

Modifié par ghost9191, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:38 .

[SMichelle]

Fandango9641 wrote...


Nope, just the 4 endings: 3 that require you become a war criminal and one that doesnt.

*swoosh*


Joke

--------------------------------




Your head







Now who want's in on that group hug! 

[Ryzaki]

RiouHotaru wrote...
The cycle was, at the time, the ONLY means of solving the dilemma that was the conflict of organics versus synthetics.  He's even aware his solution isn't perfect.  He'd rather go synthesis and remove the elements that start the problem in the first place.  Problem is he can't, and while his solution isn't the best idea, it's the only one that works, therefore he has to do it.

Remember, he's a machine.

No it's not. He could've just as easily killed all synthetics and left organics alone. He chose that solution. He can unchoose it.

Machine or not.

On the note of Harby burning armor I love how my Shep's icy white armor turned completely black after being hit by Harby.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:40 .

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

silentassassin264 wrote...

a) Hackett tells you.  Anderson tells you.  Glyph updates Liara when you go in there how the resistance is going (horribly if you don't want to go find it).  The game makes it quite clear that this longshot is your only way.

During all ME trilogy a lot of people/aliens told Shep a lot of things that are impossible. He proven them wrong. 

Shepard is stuck on the Citadel in some inner labyrinthian cave and mortally wounded.  You can bet your sweet derriere it is not going to be old age.  And it doesn't matter what you saw, everyone died.
c) Your resistance from the Fall of Earth to firing the crucible is a terrible war with allied forces losing continuously.
d) It doesn't matter "how much you failed" the Reapers would build more forces up from the dead and indoctrinated and be completely replenished regardless of how much damage you did.  You gained nothing.
e) The stargazer is not asari.  It is said that previous cycle fought a war implying that they were not of that cycle.  

Now you just making things up. Sorry, but if its not confirmed in game, it didn't happen. It could've happen, but no way to pick one headcanon over another. I pick mine.

silentassassin264 wrote...
Yes there is something implying he could.  If you listened to how the Crucible worked, it needed what adminstered the relay network (the catalysyt) to fire anything worth a [pyjack].  That would have been easy except the Catalyst that adminstered the relay network was not some object but a sentient being that could choose to interact with it.  If the Catalyst did not want to interact with the Crucible, it didn't.  

You making things up again. Even if it was implied, unless it was explicitly stated, it's just your interpretation/headcanon/fanfiction.

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:41 .