225 réponses à ce sujet

[The Twilight God]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Though I doubt you will accept what I have to say, since you asked me for my opinion, I will share it.  Basically control and synthesis are not options that only an indoctrinated Shepard would take.  For one thing, each player's Shepard is different, and that extends to his or her motives, which the the games give us ample opportunity to choose and express (an example of this being when Liara asks you in LotSB what you're fighting for), so the appeal of destroy over the other two options, right off the bat, largely hinges on what the player's motivations were. 

I have to respectfuly disagree. 

The fact remains that the Catalyst is the "Reaper King". In essense it is the reapers. It is responsible for all of the cycles. Everything that is playing out across the galaxy is its doing. The Catalyst is Hitler and the Reapers are the **** army. We are the jews.

So now that I have the chance to destory the **** army Hitler gives me some spiel about how jews will sow chaos and the merits of his final solution. I don't argue against this. I just nod while he rattles off 2 more options.
 
2. Take control of the **** army.
3. Force Interbreeding with the "aryans" so that we're all mixed and nobody can hate anybody.

Seem alittle absurd?

Now let's go back to ME examples. I have no reason to believe that 2 is feasibly possible. Nothing in any other ME game is present to give any Shepard, regardless of how you play them (i've played all types), the idea that a single man can control all the reapers. In fact you argue against this with TIM moments beforehand. Literaly minutes beforehand. And now, after 3 years of fighting all it takes to change shepard's mind - right theire on the spot - is the Reaper King's say so?

Same for synthesis. He renounces Saren's claims calling it enslavement and a abrogation of our right to self determinate. But when the Reaper King brings it up, now it's a great idea. How synthetics will understand organics isn't even explained. Granted, why they would always fight each other isn't actually explained either. This doesn't add up.

Could you please ellaborate on what cirsumstances throughout the ME series would allow for Shepard's trust in this Space Hitler? What exactly are you referring to?
 
Me, I'd have had a VI like vigil come with the Crucible. The reapers could make suggestions, but whatever the outcome the VI is the one that confirms the validity and that function would have to have been a known function of the Crucible. Not something the Reaper Kings just conveniently cooked up now that I have him by the balls. Trusting a prothean VI is more acceptable IMO.

My Shepard rejected destroy simply because, regardless of the fact that the Reapers deserve to die for what they've done, they don't deserve it at the cost of his synthetic allies, for whom he cares.

So let's say the Catalyst lied. Now you have doomed the galaxy because you place the geth over every other race in the galaxy. You gambled everyone's lives and ended up damning all of them when you had the means to ensure the Reapers died and save everyone other race. This is not a valid choice for a non-indoctrinated. Not just because of Saren or TIM or whoever, but because it's an unnecessary and stupid risk. Not to insult you as a person. I understand you are just a guy playing a video game. There are no real consequencies for you so you can make whatever choice sounds nicest to you. But you're treating the ending options like red or blue conversation choices. You, as a player, know they will bring a "good" outcome because it's just a game. But Shepard doesn't.

The problem I see here is people are looking at it from their perspective as a player playing a video game. I'm looking at it from the perspective of a guy in that situation. I guy who can't just exit the game and start over when things get ugly. A guy who can't just assume he can have it all because his enemy gives him a nicer sounding option that may or may not be genuine. A guy who holds in his hands the fate of everyone in the galaxy. I'm looking at it from Shepard's perspective.

Synthesis may very well be the final stage of evolution, but if that's the case then organics should reach it on their own, in their own time, so for my Shepard, who's goal was to protect as many people as possible, the only choice before him was to take control, become the warden of the Reapers, and keep them out of the galaxy's way from that point on.

Again, shepard doesn't know that will be the outcome. Shepard is not psychic. If his trust in the Catalyst proves wrong he has just doomed everyone he knows and loves. And this is in the face of the fact that the means to do what he came to do, without commiting suicide, is right there. I can see if Anderson was there with you and someone else was around to finish the job if the Catalyst is lying, but that is not the case. Shepard is it. Shepard cannot afford to take such a risk. It's foolhardy given what's at stake.

As for why my Shepard believed it would work in the first place, the simple fact is that even if you pick destroy, you're taking a leap of faith.  A necesarry leap, mind you, as not using the Crucible results in a loss.  Nothing to lose, everything to gain.

 

Not entirely. Let's say I shoot the conduits and the Crucible doesn't fire. I'm still alive to call the Catalyst out and figure out something else. With control and synthesis your dead. You don't get to try again.

As I've mentioned before the catalyst chamber is a contradiction. The fact that there are Control, Synthesis and Destroy stations with specially made walkways to each infers that the Catalyst was expecting it. But it says it sn't. Which makes it a liar off the bat. I actually refused my first time because I thought there was something else to this. It didn't seem right. I expected to at least get a, "Are you sure? there is no other options" if that was truly all there was to the ending so that I could still pick something. Outright refusing didn't even make sense as a possibility. But when I heard Liara's voice I exited the game. Reloaded and picked destroy. It was done very poorly. The refuse ending itself contradicts the catalyst catching him in 2 more lies after dropping all pretenses and reverting the the familiar reaper voice: 1. The current solution is no longer doable and 2. that synthesis is inevitable. If any of this is true Refusal cannot be an option. (granted, it's just an F.U. ending so...)

When i saw how the options were laid out expected something similar to the Matrix 2 ending where the Crucible was a reaper deception. But we are the first to make it there and prove our cycle was worthy of.. something. Oh, well.

Saren's vision of techno-organic hybrids was a lie told to him by a species that did not have the capabilities nor desire to make it a reality.  What Saren wanted was impossible. 

Care to ellaborate. What species?

[The Twilight God]

MegaSovereign wrote...

In the Control/Synthesis ending, how can Shepard be indoctrinated if he dies almost immediately after picking it? Assuming that the entire sequence wasn't a hallucination?

One of two things.

1. He doesn't die immediately. The entire ending sequence is a delusion within his mind as he is dying. It all plays out over the course of his final seconds of life. The endings also serve to keep the player indoctrinated. By this I mean if control or synthesis produced a Critiacal Failure message or played out like the refusal ending the everyone would just reload and pick the "right" ending. However, even though control and synthesis represent an indoctrinated Shepard they are still just as valid as an non-indoctrinated ending. Both indoctrinated and non-indoctrinated outcomes are valid endings this way.

2. They play out, but the way they play out are from an indoctrinated perspective of the narrator. For instance, EDI's feelings on the aftermath of synthesis may be how the reapers want her to feel about it. In the same way the Dr Kenson felt about the reaper's return was what they wanted her to feel about it: that it would be a utopia. That's one ending where I believe an organic voiceover would make more sense or have both her and Joker speak different parts. In the case of Control we are looking though the perspective of a broken shepard consciousness within the greater reaper consciousness. His perception of evens are a self imposed delusion while in reality the reapers are still reaping. But in his mind they are "helping" and "looking out for everyone". again this keeps the player oblivious to the actual reality of what is taking place (i.e indoctrinated)

These are my views. You are welcome toy yours. Just sharing my take on things.

[AlanC9]

The Twilight God wrote...

My Shepard rejected destroy simply because, regardless of the fact that the Reapers deserve to die for what they've done, they don't deserve it at the cost of his synthetic allies, for whom he cares.

So let's say the Catalyst lied. Now you have doomed the galaxy because you place the geth over every other race in the galaxy. You gambled everyone's lives and ended up damning all of them when you had the means to ensure the Reapers died and save everyone other race. This is not a valid choice for a non-indoctrinated.

But what should Shepard think the lie consists of? That the geth won't be exterminated and the Catalyst is mostly telling the truth but made that little bit up so Shepard might not pick Red after all? Wouldn't a lying Catalyst make up much bigger lies like switching the colors?

And the whole theory relies on the Catalyst preferring Destroy to Refuse. But in that case the Catalyst is asking for trouble by making Destroy sound worse than it is. It increases the chance of Shepard making a choice the Catalyst likes better than Destroy, but also increases the chance of Shepard making the worst choice. Your alternate version of the Catalyst would be running quite the risk there. There's also an implicit assumption that the Catalyst doesn't actually control the Reapers or he could implement Destroy himself, but that's a useful assumption for the standard version too.

Modifié par AlanC9, 22 juillet 2012 - 07:51 .

[Geneaux486]

The Catalyst is Hitler and the Reapers are the **** army. We are the jews.

I reject this comparison. The Catalyst is the Catalyst and the Reapers are the Reapers. Not everything has to be an allegory.

[AlanC9]

Hey, if The Twilight God wants to have this silly interpretation, it can't be disproven. Nor should it -- it's the best version of IT yet, since at least he gets an ending and with standard IT you don't.

Modifié par AlanC9, 22 juillet 2012 - 08:10 .

[I_eat_unicorns]

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

Though I doubt you will accept what I have to say, since you asked me for my opinion, I will share it.  Basically control and synthesis are not options that only an indoctrinated Shepard would take.  For one thing, each player's Shepard is different, and that extends to his or her motives, which the the games give us ample opportunity to choose and express (an example of this being when Liara asks you in LotSB what you're fighting for), so the appeal of destroy over the other two options, right off the bat, largely hinges on what the player's motivations were. 

I have to respectfuly disagree. 

The fact remains that the Catalyst is the "Reaper King". In essense it is the reapers. It is responsible for all of the cycles. Everything that is playing out across the galaxy is its doing. The Catalyst is Hitler and the Reapers are the **** army. We are the jews.

So now that I have the chance to destory the **** army Hitler gives me some spiel about how jews will sow chaos and the merits of his final solution. I don't argue against this. I just nod while he rattles off 2 more options.
 
2. Take control of the **** army.
3. Force Interbreeding with the "aryans" so that we're all mixed and nobody can hate anybody.

Seem alittle absurd?

Now let's go back to ME examples. I have no reason to believe that 2 is feasibly possible. Nothing in any other ME game is present to give any Shepard, regardless of how you play them (i've played all types), the idea that a single man can control all the reapers. In fact you argue against this with TIM moments beforehand. Literaly minutes beforehand. And now, after 3 years of fighting all it takes to change shepard's mind - right theire on the spot - is the Reaper King's say so?

Same for synthesis. He renounces Saren's claims calling it enslavement and a abrogation of our right to self determinate. But when the Reaper King brings it up, now it's a great idea. How synthetics will understand organics isn't even explained. Granted, why they would always fight each other isn't actually explained either. This doesn't add up.

Could you please ellaborate on what cirsumstances throughout the ME series would allow for Shepard's trust in this Space Hitler? What exactly are you referring to?
 
Me, I'd have had a VI like vigil come with the Crucible. The reapers could make suggestions, but whatever the outcome the VI is the one that confirms the validity and that function would have to have been a known function of the Crucible. Not something the Reaper Kings just conveniently cooked up now that I have him by the balls. Trusting a prothean VI is more acceptable IMO.

My Shepard rejected destroy simply because, regardless of the fact that the Reapers deserve to die for what they've done, they don't deserve it at the cost of his synthetic allies, for whom he cares.

So let's say the Catalyst lied. Now you have doomed the galaxy because you place the geth over every other race in the galaxy. You gambled everyone's lives and ended up damning all of them when you had the means to ensure the Reapers died and save everyone other race. This is not a valid choice for a non-indoctrinated. Not just because of Saren or TIM or whoever, but because it's an unnecessary and stupid risk. Not to insult you as a person. I understand you are just a guy playing a video game. There are no real consequencies for you so you can make whatever choice sounds nicest to you. But you're treating the ending options like red or blue conversation choices. You, as a player, know they will bring a "good" outcome because it's just a game. But Shepard doesn't.

The problem I see here is people are looking at it from their perspective as a player playing a video game. I'm looking at it from the perspective of a guy in that situation. I guy who can't just exit the game and start over when things get ugly. A guy who can't just assume he can have it all because his enemy gives him a nicer sounding option that may or may not be genuine. A guy who holds in his hands the fate of everyone in the galaxy. I'm looking at it from Shepard's perspective.

Synthesis may very well be the final stage of evolution, but if that's the case then organics should reach it on their own, in their own time, so for my Shepard, who's goal was to protect as many people as possible, the only choice before him was to take control, become the warden of the Reapers, and keep them out of the galaxy's way from that point on.

Again, shepard doesn't know that will be the outcome. Shepard is not psychic. If his trust in the Catalyst proves wrong he has just doomed everyone he knows and loves. And this is in the face of the fact that the means to do what he came to do, without commiting suicide, is right there. I can see if Anderson was there with you and someone else was around to finish the job if the Catalyst is lying, but that is not the case. Shepard is it. Shepard cannot afford to take such a risk. It's foolhardy given what's at stake.

As for why my Shepard believed it would work in the first place, the simple fact is that even if you pick destroy, you're taking a leap of faith.  A necesarry leap, mind you, as not using the Crucible results in a loss.  Nothing to lose, everything to gain.

 

Not entirely. Let's say I shoot the conduits and the Crucible doesn't fire. I'm still alive to call the Catalyst out and figure out something else. With control and synthesis your dead. You don't get to try again.

As I've mentioned before the catalyst chamber is a contradiction. The fact that there are Control, Synthesis and Destroy stations with specially made walkways to each infers that the Catalyst was expecting it. But it says it sn't. Which makes it a liar off the bat. I actually refused my first time because I thought there was something else to this. It didn't seem right. I expected to at least get a, "Are you sure? there is no other options" if that was truly all there was to the ending so that I could still pick something. Outright refusing didn't even make sense as a possibility. But when I heard Liara's voice I exited the game. Reloaded and picked destroy. It was done very poorly. The refuse ending itself contradicts the catalyst catching him in 2 more lies after dropping all pretenses and reverting the the familiar reaper voice: 1. The current solution is no longer doable and 2. that synthesis is inevitable. If any of this is true Refusal cannot be an option. (granted, it's just an F.U. ending so...)

When i saw how the options were laid out expected something similar to the Matrix 2 ending where the Crucible was a reaper deception. But we are the first to make it there and prove our cycle was worthy of.. something. Oh, well.

Saren's vision of techno-organic hybrids was a lie told to him by a species that did not have the capabilities nor desire to make it a reality.  What Saren wanted was impossible. 

Care to ellaborate. What species?

You assume a few wrong things:
1. The reapers are not an army of massacring robots, they harvest to preserve cultures/species to prevent synthetics from winning (which is a bs motive introduced in the last 10 min). In that sense, they are the pinnacle of all cultures/races.

2. Shepard is a character from the player, not his/her own character. ME3 made this less apparant with lots of auto-dialouge, but the fact that the player can customize his/her face, background, and morality shows how the player and shepard are together, as an rpg game should be. 

3. Because shepard is his/her the player, that means the player gets to choose which ending is more appealing to him/her. Have you considered the fact that some players may actually like to choose synthesis? With the understanding of what the reapers are, the player may actually WANT to choose synthesis/control, aka shepard wants to choose synthesis/control. 

You assume shepard to be his/her own character with the whole "shepard wouldn't choose control/synthesis", but with the player variablity that a game like mass effect encourages, it's absurd to believe that there is "one canon" shepard, as that's insulting to the player since his/her choices are invalid. 

And about the "trusting reaper child", the catalyst is needed to use the crucible, which the whole game was focusing on since it's used to end the reaper threat (harvesting species every cycle). The catalyst offers three solutions which the player can choose and END the reaper threat. Refuse shows how ignoring the catalyst is ignoring the crucible, and allowing the reaper threat to continue. Also, how can you not trust the catalyst, when he gives you the option to destroy the reapers? 

There is one possiblity where the player may not have enough ems, so destroy is the only option the player can choose. By your logic of not trusting the catalyst, this means that the catalyst is tricking shepard into killing them all, aka zero sense.

[The Twilight God]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Catalyst is Hitler and the Reapers are the **** army. We are the jews.

I reject this comparison. The Catalyst is the Catalyst and the Reapers are the Reapers. Not everything has to be an allegory.

Neither here nor there. You can substitute Catalyst for Hitler, **** army for Reapers, Space faring species for jews. It doesn't change the points I made.

[Dessalines]

The Twilight God wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

In the Control/Synthesis ending, how can Shepard be indoctrinated if he dies almost immediately after picking it? Assuming that the entire sequence wasn't a hallucination?

One of two things.

1. He doesn't die immediately. The entire ending sequence is a delusion within his mind as he is dying. It all plays out over the course of his final seconds of life. The endings also serve to keep the player indoctrinated. By this I mean if control or synthesis produced a Critiacal Failure message or played out like the refusal ending the everyone would just reload and pick the "right" ending. However, even though control and synthesis represent an indoctrinated Shepard they are still just as valid as an non-indoctrinated ending. Both indoctrinated and non-indoctrinated outcomes are valid endings this way.

2. They play out, but the way they play out are from an indoctrinated perspective of the narrator. For instance, EDI's feelings on the aftermath of synthesis may be how the reapers want her to feel about it. In the same way the Dr Kenson felt about the reaper's return was what they wanted her to feel about it: that it would be a utopia. That's one ending where I believe an organic voiceover would make more sense or have both her and Joker speak different parts. In the case of Control we are looking though the perspective of a broken shepard consciousness within the greater reaper consciousness. His perception of evens are a self imposed delusion while in reality the reapers are still reaping. But in his mind they are "helping" and "looking out for everyone". again this keeps the player oblivious to the actual reality of what is taking place (i.e indoctrinated)

These are my views. You are welcome toy yours. Just sharing my take on things.

Which is actually proven valid by previous Mass Effect Games. In Mass Effect Arrival, when Shepard dies at the base. He sees a bunch of images plays out in his mind, then he dies.  It is not like there is no precedent.

[AlanC9]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
3. Because shepard is his/her the player, that means the player gets to choose which ending is more appealing to him/her. Have you considered the fact that some players may actually like to choose synthesis? With the understanding of what the reapers are, the player may actually WANT to choose synthesis/control, aka shepard wants to choose synthesis/control. 

I believe the argument is that the player should not trust the Catalyst, and so shouldn't believe that the synthesis and control options will actually do what they're supposed to do.

Plus he's headcanoning the endings so the Catalyst actually is lying, but that's not important for the argument

[I_eat_unicorns]

AlanC9 wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
3. Because shepard is his/her the player, that means the player gets to choose which ending is more appealing to him/her. Have you considered the fact that some players may actually like to choose synthesis? With the understanding of what the reapers are, the player may actually WANT to choose synthesis/control, aka shepard wants to choose synthesis/control. 

I believe the argument is that the player should not trust the Catalyst, and so shouldn't believe that the synthesis and control options will actually do what they're supposed to do.

Plus he's headcanoning the endings so the Catalyst actually is lying, but that's not important for the argument

The player is free to choose whatever he/she wishes to believe, that's what an rpg game is. 

[Dessalines]

The kid entered a locked building, he survived inside a room from a blast that he did not know it was coming, he was inside a vent marked dangerous, and Shepard always seems to be the only one that sees him.
Extended Cut dialogue that describes the Reapers as a cleansing fire, when all of your dreams end with you or the kid being consume with a fire. They could have described the Reapers as a hurricane, tornado, lighting, or even natural disaster, but they choose fire.
The fact that the one question that you think Shepard would have asked was why do you look like the kid I saw on Earth is not answered, and if the Reapers are inside Shepard's mind, then why trust anything they say.
Did Bioware attend for IT to be end product? No, I have always believed in the bad writing and corporate greed theory.

[Geneaux486]

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Catalyst is Hitler and the Reapers are the **** army. We are the jews.

I reject this comparison. The Catalyst is the Catalyst and the Reapers are the Reapers. Not everything has to be an allegory.

Neither here nor there. You can substitute Catalyst for Hitler, **** army for Reapers, Space faring species for jews. It doesn't change the points I made.

You can substitute them, sure, that doesn't mean it's a valid comparison.  In this case it isn't.  The Catalyst and the Reapers are nothing so terrestrial and comprehendable.  That much we've known since the first game.  I reject your comparison.

[The Twilight God]

Geneaux486 wrote...

You can substitute them, sure, that doesn't mean it's a valid comparison.  In this case it isn't.  The Catalyst and the Reapers are nothing so terrestrial and comprehendable.  That much we've known since the first game.  I reject your comparison.

Reject away.

My point still stands: There is no valid reason to trust the Catalyst. Fact.

[I_eat_unicorns]

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

You can substitute them, sure, that doesn't mean it's a valid comparison.  In this case it isn't.  The Catalyst and the Reapers are nothing so terrestrial and comprehendable.  That much we've known since the first game.  I reject your comparison.

Reject away.

My point still stands: There is no valid reason to trust the Catalyst. Fact.

opinion

[Geneaux486]

The Twilight God wrote...
There is no valid reason to trust the Catalyst. Fact.

That's an opinion, not a fact.  A fact would be "Without using the Crucible, everyone dies."  That's a fact, as it's clearly shown in the game.  Seeing as how using the Crucible is the only way forward, whether or not the Catalyst is trustworthy, in my opinion, becomes largely irrelevant.  You disagree, but it is still merely your opinion, not a fact.

[Bill Casey]

The Catalyst is far worse than Hitler...
Let's be honest here...

He makes Hitler look like a small time schlub...
It's like comparing a guy selling pot out of his van to Tony Montana...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 22 juillet 2012 - 10:25 .

[AlanC9]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
3. Because shepard is his/her the player, that means the player gets to choose which ending is more appealing to him/her. Have you considered the fact that some players may actually like to choose synthesis? With the understanding of what the reapers are, the player may actually WANT to choose synthesis/control, aka shepard wants to choose synthesis/control. 

I believe the argument is that the player should not trust the Catalyst, and so shouldn't believe that the synthesis and control options will actually do what they're supposed to do.

Plus he's headcanoning the endings so the Catalyst actually is lying, but that's not important for the argument

The player is free to choose whatever he/she wishes to believe, that's what an rpg game is. 

Right, and I don't have to believe it. My point was that this part argument doesn't depend on you believing it. If it did there'd be nothing to talk about.

[The Twilight God]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

You can substitute them, sure, that doesn't mean it's a valid comparison.  In this case it isn't.  The Catalyst and the Reapers are nothing so terrestrial and comprehendable.  That much we've known since the first game.  I reject your comparison.

Reject away.

My point still stands: There is no valid reason to trust the Catalyst. Fact.

opinion

Fact.

Disagree? Tell me why.

And "I like Synthesis/Control so I just want it to make sense just because" isn't a valid reason. So far that's the best anyone can do. Thing is, I'm not talking about you the player. From your perspective you just pick the one that sounds best for you. The galaxy doesn't actual hang in the balance.

I'm talking about from Shepard's perspective.

[The Twilight God]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...
There is no valid reason to trust the Catalyst. Fact.

That's an opinion, not a fact.  A fact would be "Without using the Crucible, everyone dies."  That's a fact, as it's clearly shown in the game.  Seeing as how using the Crucible is the only way forward, whether or not the Catalyst is trustworthy, in my opinion, becomes largely irrelevant.  You disagree, but it is still merely your opinion, not a fact.

So in otherwords, you have no valid reason to trust him? Gotcha. Read you loud and clear.

Like I said. Fact.

[The Twilight God]

Bill Casey wrote...

The Catalyst is far worse than Hitler...
Let's be honest here...

He makes Hitler look like a small time schlub...
It's like comparing a guy selling pot out of his van to Tony Montana...

Hehe, yeah, I guess so.

[Tefnacht]

The indoctrination theory was never a “valid” form of the ending as it doesn't provide an actual end to the story. If you make the right choice Shepard supposedly breaks free of indoctrination (something completely unprecedented in the lore) and should now continue the fight, just that she doesn't because the credits roll and the game is over.

We've seen quite a few indoctrinated folks break out of it for a few moments, just long enough to say they were sorry and then kill themselves. Nobody ever recovered from being indoctrinated, it is a one way road as far as the lore goes.
While I agree that Shepard might be the first person to actually do that, shouldn't the game reveal this twist, make a big deal out of it and ... continue? Why would the writers put down their pens and leave it at that? There is at least one chapter missing because the Reapers would still be going full tilt as Shepard snaps out of it.

I had a hard time buying IT before the extended cut, now its just dead. You don't spend months to polish up dream sequences that supposedly provide closure like the fans wanted, just to go back on it later.

And on the topic of trusting the space child ... if you don't “trust” him at all your only valid option is to refuse the choice and get everybody killed. If you don't believe what sparkle kid tells you about the control and synthesis options, there is no valid reason to believe in his talk about the destroy option either.
Shooting a machine to make it work is not really the most reasonable thing to do. According to the Thessia VI Shepard knows the Crucible and Citadel have to work together somehow to defeat the Reapers. Shooting that tube might very well sever the connection between the two and render the whole apparatus inoperable.
All three options could very reasonably lead to a Reaper victory if the vent brat is deceiving you.

[I_eat_unicorns]

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...
There is no valid reason to trust the Catalyst. Fact.

That's an opinion, not a fact.  A fact would be "Without using the Crucible, everyone dies."  That's a fact, as it's clearly shown in the game.  Seeing as how using the Crucible is the only way forward, whether or not the Catalyst is trustworthy, in my opinion, becomes largely irrelevant.  You disagree, but it is still merely your opinion, not a fact.

So in otherwords, you have no valid reason to trust him? Gotcha. Read you loud and clear.

Like I said. Fact.

For "trusting reaper child", the catalyst is needed to use the crucible, which the whole game was focusing on since it's used to end the reaper threat (harvesting species every cycle). The catalyst offers three solutions which the player can choose and END the reaper threat. Refuse shows how ignoring the catalyst is ignoring the crucible, and allowing the reaper threat to continue. Also, how can you not trust the catalyst, when he gives you the option to destroy the reapers? 

There is one possiblity where the player may not have enough ems, so destroy is the only option the player can choose. By your logic of not trusting the catalyst, this means that the catalyst is tricking shepard into killing them all, aka zero sense. 

[I_eat_unicorns]

Tefnacht wrote...

The indoctrination theory was never a “valid” form of the ending as it doesn't provide an actual end to the story. If you make the right choice Shepard supposedly breaks free of indoctrination (something completely unprecedented in the lore) and should now continue the fight, just that she doesn't because the credits roll and the game is over.

We've seen quite a few indoctrinated folks break out of it for a few moments, just long enough to say they were sorry and then kill themselves. Nobody ever recovered from being indoctrinated, it is a one way road as far as the lore goes.
While I agree that Shepard might be the first person to actually do that, shouldn't the game reveal this twist, make a big deal out of it and ... continue? Why would the writers put down their pens and leave it at that? There is at least one chapter missing because the Reapers would still be going full tilt as Shepard snaps out of it.

I had a hard time buying IT before the extended cut, now its just dead. You don't spend months to polish up dream sequences that supposedly provide closure like the fans wanted, just to go back on it later.

And on the topic of trusting the space child ... if you don't “trust” him at all your only valid option is to refuse the choice and get everybody killed. If you don't believe what sparkle kid tells you about the control and synthesis options, there is no valid reason to believe in his talk about the destroy option either.
Shooting a machine to make it work is not really the most reasonable thing to do. According to the Thessia VI Shepard knows the Crucible and Citadel have to work together somehow to defeat the Reapers. Shooting that tube might very well sever the connection between the two and render the whole apparatus inoperable.
All three options could very reasonably lead to a Reaper victory if the vent brat is deceiving you.

But from your previous posts such as anderson reaching the control before shepard and trusting the catalyst, you are an IT supporter since you follow their versions of the endings and their "evidence" You think no differently than an IT supporter, as they don't believe the star child either. 

[Tefnacht]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
But from your previous posts such as anderson reaching the control before shepard and trusting the catalyst, you are an IT supporter since you follow their versions of the endings and their "evidence" You think no differently than an IT supporter, as they don't believe the star child either. 

Excuse me ... what? You sure you quoted the right post?

[I_eat_unicorns]

Tefnacht wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
But from your previous posts such as anderson reaching the control before shepard and trusting the catalyst, you are an IT supporter since you follow their versions of the endings and their "evidence" You think no differently than an IT supporter, as they don't believe the star child either. 

Excuse me ... what? You sure you quoted the right post?

Yes, that's what you said, you believed that anderson reaching the control panel first is part of a hallucination. Same thing IT supporters believe.