435 réponses à ce sujet

[Ticonderoga117]

txgoldrush wrote...

Conrad Verner wouldn't even make it, nor less be able to dock the Crucible. Nevermind that Shep is partly synthetic that plays a role in synthesis. Nevermind the fact that Shepard influcenced the Catalyst and it caused him to think of new possibilties....guess thats not Shepard's influence in any way (sarcasm)

You can resist the Catalyst..its called the Destroy and Control endings.

Considering anyone and thier mother could, you know, walk into the beam after Harby left, yeah.. anyone could do it.
Shepard didn't influence squat, the Cruicible "allowed" new possibilities because.... bigger battery I guess.

Conniving_Eagle wrote...


Resisting the Catalyst means
not picking one of the options he gives you. But if you do resist the
Catalyst (Refuse) Dungeon Masters Casey and Walters reply "WELL THAT'S
TOO BAD THEN YOU LOSE!"

And you do lose, if you choose Refuse, you don't get the acheivement.

This too.

Modifié par Ticonderoga117, 14 juillet 2012 - 05:59 .

[MegaSovereign]

Liara does better than researchers poking through the archives for DECADES, why?
Also the Crucible is a DEM because they insist on making the device inscrutable even while building it.

If they slowly revealed it's functions through study, it would not be a DEM. Because it remains an unknown Reaper off-button for THE ENTIRE GAME, it is.

Information passed down from cycle to cycle on how to defeat the Reapers would have to be pretty well encrypted/hidden. In the LoTSB DLC, Liara mentioned that the Shadow Broker was actively searching through Prothean data in hopes of finding a way to stop the Reapers. It was hinted that he was on to something. Liara probably used whether files in the Shadow Broker base to find the location of the Crucible blueprints.

And I don't expect Admiral Hackett to know the physics of how the Crucible works. The scientists knew what they were building, it's even stated that the Crucible blue-prints were easy to decode.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 14 juillet 2012 - 05:59 .

[txgoldrush]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

At least I can use my brain and fill in the gaps, which the avergae ME3 hater is incapable of doing.

Yet more insults and evasions.
Answer the question. Replace Shepard with Conrad Verner. What changes?

Nevermind that it is very well intentional that the Catalyst has circular logic and is part of the problem he is trying to solve.

If it were intentional then we'd be able to resist it, successfully.

Conrad Verner wouldn't even make it, nor less be able to dock the Crucible. Nevermind that Shep is partly synthetic that plays a role in synthesis. Nevermind the fact that Shepard influcenced the Catalyst and it caused him to think of new possibilties....guess thats not Shepard's influence in any way (sarcasm)

You can resist the Catalyst..its called the Destroy and Control endings.

Resisting the Catalyst means not picking one of the options he gives you. But if you do resist the Catalyst (Refuse) Dungeon Masters Casey and Walters reply "WELL THAT'S TOO BAD THEN YOU LOSE!"

WRONG

Destroy ending is basically saying screw you, well take our chances. Did you miss this?

Control basically changes the entire agenda of the Reapers, clearly resisting the Starchilds logic.

[The Angry One]

txgoldrush wrote...

Conrad Verner wouldn't even make it, nor less be able to dock the Crucible.

Assumptions. Verner is an extremely determined blockhead. Regardless, I'm talking about the end scene.

Nevermind that Shep is partly synthetic that plays a role in synthesis.

Many people in the Mass Effect universe are. Shepard is not unique in that regard.

Nevermind the fact that Shepard influcenced the Catalyst and it caused him to think of new possibilties....guess thats not Shepard's influence in any way (sarcasm)

How did Shepard influence the Catalyst?
Either the Crucible did, somehow, or the Catalyst's arbitrary ruleset did. Neither has anything to do with Shepard.

You can resist the Catalyst..its called the Destroy and Control endings.

Resist it... by following it's agenda. Right.

[The Angry One]

txgoldrush wrote...

WRONG

Destroy ending is basically saying screw you, well take our chances. Did you miss this?

Control basically changes the entire agenda of the Reapers, clearly resisting the Starchilds logic.

By killing all synthetics including the Geth, which also fits the Catalyst's agenda.

[txgoldrush]

The Angry One wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

WRONG

Destroy ending is basically saying screw you, well take our chances. Did you miss this?

Control basically changes the entire agenda of the Reapers, clearly resisting the Starchilds logic.

By killing all synthetics including the Geth, which also fits the Catalyst's agenda.

And when does he suggest that it fits the agenda.....the way he explains it, the Destroy option is a REJECTION of it. He is trying to DISSAUDE you from that decision.

And in lower EMS is kills everyone..so...its more about how the Crucible is built and kept than the Catalyst's master plan.

[Conniving_Eagle]

txgoldrush wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

At least I can use my brain and fill in the gaps, which the avergae ME3 hater is incapable of doing.

Yet more insults and evasions.
Answer the question. Replace Shepard with Conrad Verner. What changes?

Nevermind that it is very well intentional that the Catalyst has circular logic and is part of the problem he is trying to solve.

If it were intentional then we'd be able to resist it, successfully.

Conrad Verner wouldn't even make it, nor less be able to dock the Crucible. Nevermind that Shep is partly synthetic that plays a role in synthesis. Nevermind the fact that Shepard influcenced the Catalyst and it caused him to think of new possibilties....guess thats not Shepard's influence in any way (sarcasm)

You can resist the Catalyst..its called the Destroy and Control endings.

Resisting the Catalyst means not picking one of the options he gives you. But if you do resist the Catalyst (Refuse) Dungeon Masters Casey and Walters reply "WELL THAT'S TOO BAD THEN YOU LOSE!"

WRONG

Destroy ending is basically saying screw you, well take our chances. Did you miss this?

Control basically changes the entire agenda of the Reapers, clearly resisting the Starchilds logic.

If memory serves me correctly, the Catalyst's point was that synthetics are an inevitable threat to organic life.

By choosing Destroy, you end that threat by killing all synthetics.

By choosing Control, you end that threat by assuming control of the Reapers to keep synthetics in line. And if they do, they are destroyed.

By choosing Synthesis, you end that threat by fusing organics and synthetics into a singular existence.

Modifié par Conniving_Eagle, 14 juillet 2012 - 06:04 .

[MegaSovereign]

Many people in the Mass Effect universe are. Shepard is not unique in that regard.

I doubt many people have 4 billion credits worth of cybernetic implants. Shepard is basically a cyborg.

If everyone was like Shepard, tech singularity wouldn't be an issue because then organics can upgrade/evolve themselves as fast as synthetics. I think that's the idea behind synthesis.

[Ticonderoga117]

MegaSovereign wrote...
Information passed down from cycle to cycle on how to defeat the Reapers would have to be pretty well encrypted/hidden. In the LoTSB DLC, Liara mentioned that the Shadow Broker was actively searching through Prothean data in hopes of finding a way to stop the Reapers. It was hinted that he was on to something. Liara probably used whether files in the Shadow Broker base to find the location of the Crucible blueprints.

And I don't expect Admiral Hackett to know the physics of how the Crucible works. The scientists knew what they were building, it's even stated that the Crucible blue-prints were easy to decode.

Well hidden? Like... by the planet that has intelligent life that will one day be harvested? Well hidden would be, like Ilos difficulty. Take a relay somewhere then fly off for a good long while to a system no one else knows about difficult.

Encryption wouldn't do much good against these guys, they could probably brute force it given the context during Rannoch.

Would it be so hard to tell Hackett: "Hey, yeah, this thing kills Reapers. We got that function down. Tell Shepard we're almost done eh?"

[What a Succulent Ass]

SSPBOURNE wrote...

Hell, the game is named after a Deus Ex Machina. Mass Effect fields so everything in this series.

ITT: PEOPLE WHO DO NOT KNOW THE MEANING OF "DEUS EX MACHINA" DESPITE CLAIMING OTHERWISE.

[The Angry One]

txgoldrush wrote...

And when does he suggest that it fits the agenda.....the way he explains it, the Destroy option is a REJECTION of it. He is trying to DISSAUDE you from that decision.

Yes, because it's not the one it desires.
But it still continues it's agenda. You're still submitting to it's will one way or another.

True resistance would be finding a way to save the Geth while still ridding the galaxy of the Reapers.

And in lower EMS is kills everyone..so...its more about how the Crucible is built and kept than the Catalyst's master plan.

In the EC it turns out it's that the Crucible is damaged with low EMS and hence the wave is borked. It has nothing to do with how it's built or it's intended function.

Modifié par The Angry One, 14 juillet 2012 - 06:06 .

[What a Succulent Ass]

By the way, OP, an expository spot is not a DEM.

[txgoldrush]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

At least I can use my brain and fill in the gaps, which the avergae ME3 hater is incapable of doing.

Yet more insults and evasions.
Answer the question. Replace Shepard with Conrad Verner. What changes?

Nevermind that it is very well intentional that the Catalyst has circular logic and is part of the problem he is trying to solve.

If it were intentional then we'd be able to resist it, successfully.

Conrad Verner wouldn't even make it, nor less be able to dock the Crucible. Nevermind that Shep is partly synthetic that plays a role in synthesis. Nevermind the fact that Shepard influcenced the Catalyst and it caused him to think of new possibilties....guess thats not Shepard's influence in any way (sarcasm)

You can resist the Catalyst..its called the Destroy and Control endings.

Resisting the Catalyst means not picking one of the options he gives you. But if you do resist the Catalyst (Refuse) Dungeon Masters Casey and Walters reply "WELL THAT'S TOO BAD THEN YOU LOSE!"

WRONG

Destroy ending is basically saying screw you, well take our chances. Did you miss this?

Control basically changes the entire agenda of the Reapers, clearly resisting the Starchilds logic.

If memory serves me correctly, the Catalyst's point was that synthetics are an inevitable threat to organic life.

By choosing Destroy, you end that threat by killing all synthetics.

By choosing Control, you end that threat by assuming control of the Reapers to keep synthetics in line. And if they do, they are destroyed.

By choosing Synthesis, you end that threat by fusing organics and synthetics into a singular existence.

By choosing Destroy...you are gambling that in the future, the Catalyst is wrong. Plain and freaking simple. Notice how the catalyst explains by choosing this..."then your children will create synthetics and teh choas will come back"...which you ar eobviously ignoring.

The death of EDI and the geth is collaterial damage, the ruthless calculus of war, nothing more.

[Conniving_Eagle]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Many people in the Mass Effect universe are. Shepard is not unique in that regard.

I doubt many people have 4 billion credits worth of cybernetic implants. Shepard is basically a cyborg.

If everyone was like Shepard, tech singularity wouldn't be an issue because then organics can upgrade/evolve themselves as fast as synthetics. I think that's the idea behind synthesis.

In technicality, they are. Shepard is influenced by cybernetics, just like Biotics, most Alliance soldiers and many other people.

In Synthesis, not everyone is a giant cuttlefish dreadnought, but they are all the fruition of combining organics and synthetics.

[txgoldrush]

Random Jerkface wrote...

By the way, OP, an expository spot is not a DEM.

Vigil was more than just expository.

[The Angry One]

MegaSovereign wrote...

I doubt many people have 4 billion credits worth of cybernetic implants. Shepard is basically a cyborg.

I'm sorry since when did the expense of the implants come into it?

If everyone was like Shepard, tech singularity wouldn't be an issue
because then organics can upgrade/evolve themselves as fast as
synthetics. I think that's the idea behind synthesis.

Yeah except for the part where Shepard's brain was completely untouched other than being restored.
You realise the idea of a technological singularity is an AI's capacity for thought? Yeah.

[The Angry One]

txgoldrush wrote...

By choosing Destroy...you are gambling that in the future, the Catalyst is wrong. Plain and freaking simple. Notice how the catalyst explains by choosing this..."then your children will create synthetics and teh choas will come back"...which you ar eobviously ignoring.

The death of EDI and the geth is collaterial damage, the ruthless calculus of war, nothing more.

Yeah, and do you even get to tell it that it's wrong? Nope.
Hell, Shep's attitude is basically tacit acceptance that the Catalyst is correct and we are "buying time".

I do not accept "collateral damage" in this manner. If the Geth and EDI died while fighting the Reapers, that's one thing. That they die as sacrificial lambs to the Reapers is quite another.

[Ticonderoga117]

The Angry One wrote...
Yeah except for the part where Shepard's brain was completely untouched other than being restored.
You realise the idea of a technological singularity is an AI's capacity for thought? Yeah.

Actually it's any being's capacity for thought, whether it be organic, synthetic, or a mix of both.

[Mr.House]

Vigil didn't solve the problem of Sovie.

[MegaSovereign]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...
Information passed down from cycle to cycle on how to defeat the Reapers would have to be pretty well encrypted/hidden. In the LoTSB DLC, Liara mentioned that the Shadow Broker was actively searching through Prothean data in hopes of finding a way to stop the Reapers. It was hinted that he was on to something. Liara probably used whether files in the Shadow Broker base to find the location of the Crucible blueprints.

And I don't expect Admiral Hackett to know the physics of how the Crucible works. The scientists knew what they were building, it's even stated that the Crucible blue-prints were easy to decode.

Well hidden? Like... by the planet that has intelligent life that will one day be harvested? Well hidden would be, like Ilos difficulty. Take a relay somewhere then fly off for a good long while to a system no one else knows about difficult.

Encryption wouldn't do much good against these guys, they could probably brute force it given the context during Rannoch.

Would it be so hard to tell Hackett: "Hey, yeah, this thing kills Reapers. We got that function down. Tell Shepard we're almost done eh?"

You have to consider it from the Reapers' perspective. Mars can't sustain life, so their searches there aren't as thorough as well...Earth. It makes sense.

And we knew it could kill Reapers. Liara knew that much even before she gother hands on the blueprints. She just wasn't sure whether it would backfire and cause collateral damage (like in the low EMS destroy ending).

[What a Succulent Ass]

txgoldrush wrote...

Vigil was more than just expository--

"--He is a textbook case of a Deus ex machina", yes I read that part.

Cool story.

[Conniving_Eagle]

If you're right txgoldrush, then you have made my opinion of the ending drop even further.

Modifié par Conniving_Eagle, 14 juillet 2012 - 06:12 .

[RenegonSQ]

Vigil? Yes

Lazarus? No

[txgoldrush]

The Angry One wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

And when does he suggest that it fits the agenda.....the way he explains it, the Destroy option is a REJECTION of it. He is trying to DISSAUDE you from that decision.

Yes, because it's not the one it desires.
But it still continues it's agenda. You're still submitting to it's will one way or another.

True resistance would be finding a way to save the Geth while still ridding the galaxy of the Reapers.

And in lower EMS is kills everyone..so...its more about how the Crucible is built and kept than the Catalyst's master plan.

In the EC it turns out it's that the Crucible is damaged with low EMS and hence the wave is borked. It has nothing to do with how it's built or it's intended function.

It only "continues its agenda" by circumstance alone.

The thought of a future where synthetics are created and that he is not in the picture is NOT in his agenda.

Nevermind the Control ending where he doesn't wish to be replaced but must accept his fate.

ONLY synthesis is going with his agenda.

[The Angry One]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Yeah except for the part where Shepard's brain was completely untouched other than being restored.
You realise the idea of a technological singularity is an AI's capacity for thought? Yeah.

Actually it's any being's capacity for thought, whether it be organic, synthetic, or a mix of both.

And the assumption that an AI's will always be greater. Which by the way wouldn't actually change in synthesis.
All you've done is make organics more... compatible for their glorious AI overlords. Well done.