467 réponses à ce sujet

[incinerator950]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

who IS that guy Taboo?? It would help me 'get it' if I only knew..

Here.

Zardoc sucks. 

I like you too, Taboo 

<3

[GarethJShep]

@AtreiyaN7

i agree, these threads are some enoying.

[3DandBeyond]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Pardon me while I laugh at your reasoning there. *rolls on the floor with laughter* Refusing equates to the condemnation of all intelligent organic life to death. Do explain to me how that's a good thing - oh, and then there's my firm belief that anyone who places their principles above the lives of others is being a selfish twit. The goals don't line up with your morals, they do line up with MY morals (to preserve intelligent life in all its forms and to advance our collective knowledge if possible). I don't start threads trying to force my beliefs on others, so how about you people quit trying to force your beliefs on the rest of us? *rolleyes*

I think I'm going to start using that quote from Queen Lili'uokalani soon from Unfamiliar Fishes soon if I have to keep reading this crap. See, after the queen's unlawful imprisonment, some of her supporters were arrested. The usurpers whole stole her kingdom (Hawaii) threatened to execute them if she didn't do what they wanted. The queen basically said that if they had threatened her with death, she would have continued to resist even if it cost her her life. But she wouldn't throw away the lives of her people just because of her own principles. She put others before herself - maybe you people should take a lesson from that.

You missed the part about not metagaming.  If you don't understand that it means from Shepard's point of view.  As Shepard (as if you only know what Shepard knows when Shep knows it), you have no idea that refuse condemns everyone.

And explain to me what makes life worth living (what kind of life is acceptable) and just who in your life would you allow to make decisions for you if you are consciously able to make those decisions for yourself. 

In control, the problem still exists and there's no way it's believable this is a good thing.  Is life really worth living if the things that "ate" your family are now your overseers?
In synthesis we have no idea what has been done to people really.  Shepard doesn't ask enough questions about it to understand how lives are changed.  But no one ever said that was ok to do to them, so Shepard alone is deciding their fate.  Shepard could try and discuss it even with Hackett, but doesn't.
Destroy is quite literally genocide.  Those killed aren't casualties of war.  They are targeted for extermination.  And putting a higher value on one life over another is wrong.

So, Shepard can opt out.  Shepard is not forced to make an awful choice as in your example.  People can still fight.  They may not win, but they will stand up defiant against the enemy and not crawl and bow down and do what the enemy wants.

[AlanC9]

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

I look back at the only non-metagaming I could do.  That's when I first played the endings.  I couldn't believe this was what I'd been working towards.  And then I couldn't believe this is what I was expected to do.  And back then there was a lot less crap being said.  He was "crazy" but not crazy with all those words and the slides of happiness that came after the crazy.  I instantly saw him as my enemy.  He was a wolf in sheep's clothing.  A totally insane one, but one nonetheless.

Even without the EC slides, of course, it was obvious that he kid had been telling the truth, and he wasn't your enemy anymore.

It's regrettable that an explicit (rather than implicit) Refuse wasn't in from the beginning. You've got the makings of a nice tragic ending there.

How was that obvious.  If it was so obvious everyone would universally agree on it.  He is the enemy as Shepard is speaking to him.  And he has lied.  Indoctrination is a form of lying. 

Obvious afterward, I meant. What happens in the endings is exactly what SC said would happen, both before and after the EC.

And sure, before the ending a Shep can choose to not trust what the Catalyst is saying. Which leads to the tragic ending, like I said, since by steadfastly opposing his enemies Shepard inadvertently refuses the victory that's in his hands and dooms the galaxy to utter destruction.

[incinerator950]

3DandBeyond wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Pardon me while I laugh at your reasoning there. *rolls on the floor with laughter* Refusing equates to the condemnation of all intelligent organic life to death. Do explain to me how that's a good thing - oh, and then there's my firm belief that anyone who places their principles above the lives of others is being a selfish twit. The goals don't line up with your morals, they do line up with MY morals (to preserve intelligent life in all its forms and to advance our collective knowledge if possible). I don't start threads trying to force my beliefs on others, so how about you people quit trying to force your beliefs on the rest of us? *rolleyes*

I think I'm going to start using that quote from Queen Lili'uokalani soon from Unfamiliar Fishes soon if I have to keep reading this crap. See, after the queen's unlawful imprisonment, some of her supporters were arrested. The usurpers whole stole her kingdom (Hawaii) threatened to execute them if she didn't do what they wanted. The queen basically said that if they had threatened her with death, she would have continued to resist even if it cost her her life. But she wouldn't throw away the lives of her people just because of her own principles. She put others before herself - maybe you people should take a lesson from that.

You missed the part about not metagaming.  If you don't understand that it means from Shepard's point of view.  As Shepard (as if you only know what Shepard knows when Shep knows it), you have no idea that refuse condemns everyone.

And explain to me what makes life worth living (what kind of life is acceptable) and just who in your life would you allow to make decisions for you if you are consciously able to make those decisions for yourself. 

In control, the problem still exists and there's no way it's believable this is a good thing.  Is life really worth living if the things that "ate" your family are now your overseers?
In synthesis we have no idea what has been done to people really.  Shepard doesn't ask enough questions about it to understand how lives are changed.  But no one ever said that was ok to do to them, so Shepard alone is deciding their fate.  Shepard could try and discuss it even with Hackett, but doesn't.
Destroy is quite literally genocide.  Those killed aren't casualties of war.  They are targeted for extermination.  And putting a higher value on one life over another is wrong.

So, Shepard can opt out.  Shepard is not forced to make an awful choice as in your example.  People can still fight.  They may not win, but they will stand up defiant against the enemy and not crawl and bow down and do what the enemy wants.

[AlanC9]

3DandBeyond wrote...
You missed the part about not metagaming.  If you don't understand that it means from Shepard's point of view.  As Shepard (as if you only know what Shepard knows when Shep knows it), you have no idea that refuse condemns everyone.

No idea? Really? I know you like to indulge in wishful thinking here, but please.The Citadel races are no more capable of victory than the Axis powers were capable of victory by 1945. 

[3DandBeyond]

AlanC9 wrote...


"Shepard must die" posts are relatively rare; very few people have a problem with Shep living in a high-EMS Destroy ending. And getting to the Citadel and using the Crucible is "winning as an outcome against all odds and by making decisions."

No using it is capitulating and fulfilling your foe's purpose not yours. 

And the decisions I was referring to are those hundreds of decisions made throughout the game that don't amount to a hill of beans at the end.  Not the 3 help the enemy ones and the on "finger this" option from BW.  The fact that you can play ME3 as a standalone game without any decisions having to be factored in from ME1 and 2 means nothing other than minimal amounts of EMS earned within ME3 matter.  In fact, the only war assets that matter are those that are a part of the plot that drives the story forward (the non-optional ones).  Otherwise, if even those were optional you could just play MP, promote characters, get 3100 EMS, and do nothing in the SP game except get to the endings and listen to the kid.

[D24O]

3DandBeyond wrote...

No using it is capitulating and fulfilling your foe's purpose not yours. 

And the decisions I was referring to are those hundreds of decisions made throughout the game that don't amount to a hill of beans at the end.  Not the 3 help the enemy ones and the on "finger this" option from BW.  The fact that you can play ME3 as a standalone game without any decisions having to be factored in from ME1 and 2 means nothing other than minimal amounts of EMS earned within ME3 matter.  In fact, the only war assets that matter are those that are a part of the plot that drives the story forward (the non-optional ones).  Otherwise, if even those were optional you could just play MP, promote characters, get 3100 EMS, and do nothing in the SP game except get to the endings and listen to the kid.

I'm just going to butt in here and say that War Effective number assets are super duper important and not arbitrary, and that it is actually an ingenious game mechanic. 

[incinerator950]

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


"Shepard must die" posts are relatively rare; very few people have a problem with Shep living in a high-EMS Destroy ending. And getting to the Citadel and using the Crucible is "winning as an outcome against all odds and by making decisions."

No using it is capitulating and fulfilling your foe's purpose not yours. 

And the decisions I was referring to are those hundreds of decisions made throughout the game that don't amount to a hill of beans at the end.  Not the 3 help the enemy ones and the on "finger this" option from BW.  The fact that you can play ME3 as a standalone game without any decisions having to be factored in from ME1 and 2 means nothing other than minimal amounts of EMS earned within ME3 matter.  In fact, the only war assets that matter are those that are a part of the plot that drives the story forward (the non-optional ones).  Otherwise, if even those were optional you could just play MP, promote characters, get 3100 EMS, and do nothing in the SP game except get to the endings and listen to the kid.

Of course, neither did the choice to poison the Kolto supply on Manaan along with its creator prompt your choice to either destroy or keep the Star Forge.  Or getting the Werewolves over the elves to kill the Archdemon.  They have their own consequences, but in the end they're just stepping stones.  If you're going to war with idealism, all you're going to get is shattered thoughts or a bodybag. 

[3DandBeyond]

AlanC9 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
You missed the part about not metagaming.  If you don't understand that it means from Shepard's point of view.  As Shepard (as if you only know what Shepard knows when Shep knows it), you have no idea that refuse condemns everyone.

No idea? Really? I know you like to indulge in wishful thinking here, but please.The Citadel races are no more capable of victory than the Axis powers were capable of victory by 1945. 

Ok yes it's impossible but that's metagaming.  In the story Shepard has never believed anything is impossible. 

And I don't care what happened in 1945.  In ME we deal with extremes of characters and belief.  Shepard does not believe in the impossible.  They neutered Shepard in ME3. 

[incinerator950]

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
You missed the part about not metagaming.  If you don't understand that it means from Shepard's point of view.  As Shepard (as if you only know what Shepard knows when Shep knows it), you have no idea that refuse condemns everyone.

No idea? Really? I know you like to indulge in wishful thinking here, but please.The Citadel races are no more capable of victory than the Axis powers were capable of victory by 1945. 

Ok yes it's impossible but that's metagaming.  In the story Shepard has never believed anything is impossible. 

And I don't care what happened in 1945.  In ME we deal with extremes of characters and belief.  Shepard does not believe in the impossible.  They neutered Shepard in ME3. 

Shepard doesn't believe that the impossible is possible, they believe in getting their job done.  You're the one interpreting it as make the impossible possible. 

[3DandBeyond]

incinerator950 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


"Shepard must die" posts are relatively rare; very few people have a problem with Shep living in a high-EMS Destroy ending. And getting to the Citadel and using the Crucible is "winning as an outcome against all odds and by making decisions."

No using it is capitulating and fulfilling your foe's purpose not yours. 

And the decisions I was referring to are those hundreds of decisions made throughout the game that don't amount to a hill of beans at the end.  Not the 3 help the enemy ones and the on "finger this" option from BW.  The fact that you can play ME3 as a standalone game without any decisions having to be factored in from ME1 and 2 means nothing other than minimal amounts of EMS earned within ME3 matter.  In fact, the only war assets that matter are those that are a part of the plot that drives the story forward (the non-optional ones).  Otherwise, if even those were optional you could just play MP, promote characters, get 3100 EMS, and do nothing in the SP game except get to the endings and listen to the kid.

Of course, neither did the choice to poison the Kolto supply on Manaan along with its creator prompt your choice to either destroy or keep the Star Forge.  Or getting the Werewolves over the elves to kill the Archdemon.  They have their own consequences, but in the end they're just stepping stones.  If you're going to war with idealism, all you're going to get is shattered thoughts or a bodybag. 

However, this is a game where they did just that.  I didn't play Star Forge, but that's not ME.  I don't care what they did in that game.  This is a game about idealism or Shepard would have just told everyone to go to hell from the start.  The whole idea of someone doing what Shepard did was over the top idealism, the ultra hero.  They created that and asked us to live in his/her world.  That ultra hero does not give up.

[3DandBeyond]

incinerator950 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
You missed the part about not metagaming.  If you don't understand that it means from Shepard's point of view.  As Shepard (as if you only know what Shepard knows when Shep knows it), you have no idea that refuse condemns everyone.

No idea? Really? I know you like to indulge in wishful thinking here, but please.The Citadel races are no more capable of victory than the Axis powers were capable of victory by 1945. 

Ok yes it's impossible but that's metagaming.  In the story Shepard has never believed anything is impossible. 

And I don't care what happened in 1945.  In ME we deal with extremes of characters and belief.  Shepard does not believe in the impossible.  They neutered Shepard in ME3. 

Shepard doesn't believe that the impossible is possible, they believe in getting their job done.  You're the one interpreting it as make the impossible possible. 

No I'm not.  Getting the job done was about doing the impossible.  Everything Shepard did was that. 

[Taboo]

Yeah, uh war and idealism don't mix.

Someone is going to die and people are going to suffer.

Nothing is more of a moral failing than Refuse.

I would sooner kill one race to save them all than to kill everyone to satisfy MY beliefs.

Refuse is a colossal full retard position.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 30 juillet 2012 - 06:45 .

[Zardoc]

3DandBeyond wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


"Shepard must die" posts are relatively rare; very few people have a problem with Shep living in a high-EMS Destroy ending. And getting to the Citadel and using the Crucible is "winning as an outcome against all odds and by making decisions."

No using it is capitulating and fulfilling your foe's purpose not yours. 

And the decisions I was referring to are those hundreds of decisions made throughout the game that don't amount to a hill of beans at the end.  Not the 3 help the enemy ones and the on "finger this" option from BW.  The fact that you can play ME3 as a standalone game without any decisions having to be factored in from ME1 and 2 means nothing other than minimal amounts of EMS earned within ME3 matter.  In fact, the only war assets that matter are those that are a part of the plot that drives the story forward (the non-optional ones).  Otherwise, if even those were optional you could just play MP, promote characters, get 3100 EMS, and do nothing in the SP game except get to the endings and listen to the kid.

Of course, neither did the choice to poison the Kolto supply on Manaan along with its creator prompt your choice to either destroy or keep the Star Forge.  Or getting the Werewolves over the elves to kill the Archdemon.  They have their own consequences, but in the end they're just stepping stones.  If you're going to war with idealism, all you're going to get is shattered thoughts or a bodybag. 

However, this is a game where they did just that.  I didn't play Star Forge, but that's not ME.  I don't care what they did in that game.  This is a game about idealism or Shepard would have just told everyone to go to hell from the start.  The whole idea of someone doing what Shepard did was over the top idealism, the ultra hero.  They created that and asked us to live in his/her world.  That ultra hero does not give up.

Wait, aren't you pro-Refuse?

[incinerator950]

Zardoc wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


"Shepard must die" posts are relatively rare; very few people have a problem with Shep living in a high-EMS Destroy ending. And getting to the Citadel and using the Crucible is "winning as an outcome against all odds and by making decisions."

No using it is capitulating and fulfilling your foe's purpose not yours. 

And the decisions I was referring to are those hundreds of decisions made throughout the game that don't amount to a hill of beans at the end.  Not the 3 help the enemy ones and the on "finger this" option from BW.  The fact that you can play ME3 as a standalone game without any decisions having to be factored in from ME1 and 2 means nothing other than minimal amounts of EMS earned within ME3 matter.  In fact, the only war assets that matter are those that are a part of the plot that drives the story forward (the non-optional ones).  Otherwise, if even those were optional you could just play MP, promote characters, get 3100 EMS, and do nothing in the SP game except get to the endings and listen to the kid.

Of course, neither did the choice to poison the Kolto supply on Manaan along with its creator prompt your choice to either destroy or keep the Star Forge.  Or getting the Werewolves over the elves to kill the Archdemon.  They have their own consequences, but in the end they're just stepping stones.  If you're going to war with idealism, all you're going to get is shattered thoughts or a bodybag. 

However, this is a game where they did just that.  I didn't play Star Forge, but that's not ME.  I don't care what they did in that game.  This is a game about idealism or Shepard would have just told everyone to go to hell from the start.  The whole idea of someone doing what Shepard did was over the top idealism, the ultra hero.  They created that and asked us to live in his/her world.  That ultra hero does not give up.

Wait, aren't you pro-Refuse?

[3DandBeyond]

D24O wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

No using it is capitulating and fulfilling your foe's purpose not yours. 

And the decisions I was referring to are those hundreds of decisions made throughout the game that don't amount to a hill of beans at the end.  Not the 3 help the enemy ones and the on "finger this" option from BW.  The fact that you can play ME3 as a standalone game without any decisions having to be factored in from ME1 and 2 means nothing other than minimal amounts of EMS earned within ME3 matter.  In fact, the only war assets that matter are those that are a part of the plot that drives the story forward (the non-optional ones).  Otherwise, if even those were optional you could just play MP, promote characters, get 3100 EMS, and do nothing in the SP game except get to the endings and listen to the kid.

I'm just going to butt in here and say that War Effective number assets are super duper important and not arbitrary, and that it is actually an ingenious game mechanic. 

Well they are rather arbitrary if you look at how they are applied, but I
don't even care about nor was I talking about that.  I was saying you
don't need to play all the quests to get a high enough EMS to get these
vastly different endings based on all your decisions in 3 games.

You only need to play ME3 and do the minimum to drive the plot forward and your EMS will be high enough.  You can get all the EMS you need from MP alone.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 30 juillet 2012 - 06:47 .

[incinerator950]

3DandBeyond wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


"Shepard must die" posts are relatively rare; very few people have a problem with Shep living in a high-EMS Destroy ending. And getting to the Citadel and using the Crucible is "winning as an outcome against all odds and by making decisions."

No using it is capitulating and fulfilling your foe's purpose not yours. 

And the decisions I was referring to are those hundreds of decisions made throughout the game that don't amount to a hill of beans at the end.  Not the 3 help the enemy ones and the on "finger this" option from BW.  The fact that you can play ME3 as a standalone game without any decisions having to be factored in from ME1 and 2 means nothing other than minimal amounts of EMS earned within ME3 matter.  In fact, the only war assets that matter are those that are a part of the plot that drives the story forward (the non-optional ones).  Otherwise, if even those were optional you could just play MP, promote characters, get 3100 EMS, and do nothing in the SP game except get to the endings and listen to the kid.

Of course, neither did the choice to poison the Kolto supply on Manaan along with its creator prompt your choice to either destroy or keep the Star Forge.  Or getting the Werewolves over the elves to kill the Archdemon.  They have their own consequences, but in the end they're just stepping stones.  If you're going to war with idealism, all you're going to get is shattered thoughts or a bodybag. 

However, this is a game where they did just that.  I didn't play Star Forge, but that's not ME.  I don't care what they did in that game.  This is a game about idealism or Shepard would have just told everyone to go to hell from the start.  The whole idea of someone doing what Shepard did was over the top idealism, the ultra hero.  They created that and asked us to live in his/her world.  That ultra hero does not give up.

If you seriously believe all you said, I feel a marginal sense of pity for you.

[Wayning_Star]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

who IS that guy Taboo?? It would help me 'get it' if I only knew..

Here.

Zardoc sucks. 

I like you too, Taboo 

<3

oh, I never ever watch the Oh'really Fracture, it's against my religously believed conceptuality. Fiction in the wrong hands CAN be dangerous.

[CronoDragoon]

3DandBeyond wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

I personally think that anyone who picks Refuse is either a coward or Kant, but to each their own.

How does opting to fight an enemy rather than set off a magical space non-gun that may or may not do what the kid says make one a coward?

The space fantasy machine may kill Shepard but it may also make harvesting either.  No one except the kid knows what it will do and he could be lying.  If Shepard uses it it could turn everyone into marshmallows for all Shepard knows. 

So deciding to actually try and fight a very tough (some would say impossible) fight is cowardice?

It's not "some would say impossible." Nobody believes you can win conventionally, and you have NO reason to believe you can. This isn't like the Suicide Mission.  I am not going to get into the conventional victory thing much, except to say reiterate my sentence:

If you choose Refuse knowing that the entire galaxy will be annihilated as a result, then it means you are unwilling to sacrifice what one of the three endings requires as an alternative to total annihilation. That makes you either a coward or someone who believes that doing harm to others must be prevented at all costs, even the extermination of many more lives.

If you choose Refuse thinking you can win, then that makes you delusional in the opinion of the characters in the game and the very writers of the universe. Word of God is that you can't win without the Crucible. Claiming otherwise is just throwing a hissy fit.

[Zardoc]

incinerator950 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...


Wait, aren't you pro-Refuse?

...wat.

Modifié par Zardoc, 30 juillet 2012 - 06:48 .

[xsdob]

This is turning into more of a religious war than anything else.

I plan to make 4 playthroughs where I pick all 4 endings, because I liked them all for different reasons, even synthesis. I like destroy because it is a alright end to a war with the reapers and shepard lives. I like control because the trope of the hero using evil or dark powers for good is one of my favorites. I like synthesis becasue of the prospect of bringing about a new age of life and peace interest me and none of the people seem to be mentally lobotomized. And I like refuse because it is a nice defiance act and allows our cycle to help the next one just like the protheans did for us, seems like a nice way to tie things together and stick to lore to defeat them.

So, what's the problem of letting people just like the ending that they like again, other than an ego trip?

Modifié par xsdob, 30 juillet 2012 - 06:51 .

[ThaDPG]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Yeah, uh war and idealism don't mix.

Someone is going to die and people are going to suffer.

Nothing is more of a moral failing than Refuse.

I would sooner kill one race to save them all than to kill everyone to satisfy MY beliefs.

Refuse is a colossal full retard position.

Just like in Arrival, Shepard would see that the few (in this case the Geth, and EDI) had to die so that the many (the rest of the galaxy) would survive.  He'd deal with the consequences later, if there is a later for him.  This applies to Shepard whether he's paragon or renegade.  Control and synthesis just dont fit, and refuse is basically condemning everyone to die no matter what

[3DandBeyond]

incinerator950 wrote...

If you seriously believe all you said, I feel a marginal sense of pity for you.

Why because I was playing a game or 3 games that featured a hero that did the impossible and didn't buy that things were inevitable and then was turned into an idiot at the end?  You pity me for actually thinking that this game would be in the same "universe" as ME1 and 2 and wouldn't veer off into the silly and some sadistic fantasy land.  Yes, I'm sure when you were playing ME1 and 2 and then 3, you hoped at the end the game would end with a conversation with a crazy AI who would ask you to help him fulfill his purpose, and that you would do that.  Sure you did.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 30 juillet 2012 - 06:52 .