467 réponses à ce sujet

[Teneroth]

Zardoc wrote...

This doesn't work, since the Reapers are systematically wiping out all of our forces. Nobody else is coming.

Anderson might be alive, there should be dozens, if not hundreds of survivors on the citidel still, I doubt the reapers managed to wipe everyone out in the few hours they've had control of the citidel. I'm not going to give up hope. I refuse to.

Edit: not to mention the fleet, they have been holding the reapers off, now that the arms are open why couldn't they land a few divisions of marines on board? 

Modifié par Teneroth, 30 juillet 2012 - 07:49 .

[Zardoc]

Teneroth wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

This doesn't work, since the Reapers are systematically wiping out all of our forces. Nobody else is coming.

Anderson might be alive, there should be dozens, if not hundreds of survivors on the citidel still, I doubt the reapers managed to wipe everyone out in the few hours they've had control of the citidel. I'm not going to give up hope. I refuse to.

Anderson bled out right next to you. And even if there are capable survivors on the Citadel, none of them are anywhere near your position to activate the Crucible in time. It's in fact most likely they don't even know about it, or what it does.

 
Edit: not to mention the fleet, they have been holding the reapers off, now that the arms are open why couldn't they land a few divisions of marines on board? 

The fleet was merely buying you time. And any groundforces have already landed. You might remember "Hammer"? If so, you might also remember that they've been virtually wiped out.

Modifié par Zardoc, 30 juillet 2012 - 07:52 .

[incinerator950]

Zardoc wrote...

Teneroth wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

This doesn't work, since the Reapers are systematically wiping out all of our forces. Nobody else is coming.

Anderson might be alive, there should be dozens, if not hundreds of survivors on the citidel still, I doubt the reapers managed to wipe everyone out in the few hours they've had control of the citidel. I'm not going to give up hope. I refuse to.

Anderson bled out right next to you. And even if there are capable survivors on the Citadel, none of them are anywhere near your position to activate the Crucible in time. It's in fact most likely they don't even know about it, or what it does.

Do you still get Gameover for waiting and not making a decision?  Its obvious the Reapers will destroy the Crucible if you don't make a choice.

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

And so what anyway? Does it matter if you think that the Catalyst is offering you its destruction on a plate or not? It and the Reapers are gone, that's what matters. Ignoring a sensible course of action merely because it's suggested by your opponent is rather childish IMO (and something that politicians seem to love doing).

I make my own decisions thank you. A fallacious AI is not going to do that for me.

I choose Destroy because I believe it offers the best future for ALL life.

As do I, so I'm not sure what your point is. I was criticising those people who'll refuse to even consider a decision simply because their enemy has mentioned it. I arrived on the Citadel intending to destroy the Reapers and I'm not going to avoid doing that simply because their boss turns up and says I can destroy them. If it wants to die then that's fine by me.

[Mr Waffles]

Nope, refusal is awful and moronic. When you put all your hopes of defeating the Reapers with the Crucible, I would rather pick any other choice than Refuse. I don't think it's a smart move to condemn every advanced civilisation in the galaxy to death. Even if my Shepard was suspicious of the Catalyst kid and thought he was leading us to a trap, I would rather pick any choice rather than refusing, letting everyone down and guaranteeing the death of all advanced civilisations. I chose Destroy as my first choice.

Modifié par Mr Waffles, 30 juillet 2012 - 07:54 .

[Taboo]

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

And so what anyway? Does it matter if you think that the Catalyst is offering you its destruction on a plate or not? It and the Reapers are gone, that's what matters. Ignoring a sensible course of action merely because it's suggested by your opponent is rather childish IMO (and something that politicians seem to love doing).

I make my own decisions thank you. A fallacious AI is not going to do that for me.

I choose Destroy because I believe it offers the best future for ALL life.

As do I, so I'm not sure what your point is. I was criticising those people who'll refuse to even consider a decision simply because their enemy has mentioned it. I arrived on the Citadel intending to destroy the Reapers and I'm not going to avoid doing that simply because their boss turns up and says I can destroy them. If it wants to die then that's fine by me.

I wasn't critiquing anything.

The Catalyst essentially surrenders. But you have to choose to use the Crucible or you can't win. He can't stop the Reapers at this point.

[Wayning_Star]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I take into account the Catalyst's logical fallacies. He even states that he's taken in new variables and that this cycle is different.

I can preserve that for the most part in Destroy, at an awful price.

I know my Shepard would choose Destroy before Refusing.

In a way, Destroy IS a way of saying **** your logic, we decide what happens next.

not without the catalysts permission you don't 'do anything.. no freedom of thought there, even if you jump off the roof, you're still at the mercy of the catalyst program... otherwise, you'd never of shown up at the citadel in the first place...

He's a proxy dude. He has no bearing on your choice.

He offers his advice on his best solution but leaves the rest up to you.

Choosing Destroy says I don't care about your programming.

you are there because if it, not because you'd rather be out fishing..

[3DandBeyond]

Without metagaming you play as Shepard. One type of Shepard is the idealistic hero that has always seen the foe clearly and wants nothing more than to eradicate that foe. This type of Shepard does not believe anything is impossible and would not say it is. That's the Shepard I played in ME1 and 2. This Shepard also needs to have explanation for things and needs some things proven-has a real sense of right and wrong, being paragon. That is what all my choices in ME1 and 2 tell me. The decisions my Shepard can make in the game.

Of course Shepard goes full idiot in ME3 right from the start. Shepard says they should have prepared. Prepared to do what if it's impossible? Maybe they all should have left the galaxy because as I see it that's the only preparations you can make if you can't fight them.

Then, Shepard says the fight isn't about strategy or tactics. Well, alright what's the plan-to stand together or survive at all costs-well a paragon says we stand together. And then we fight or we die. Well, how the hell do we do that without strategy or tactics. We stand together. Great.

At the end (not metagaming) Shepard faces Harby, jr. and is just expected to automatically believe him? A lot of people here don't trust or believe other people here and I am to think Shepard would believe the guy who's been killing people especially when he's a warped AI that needs de-bugging. Never mind lying-how about deluded or mis-informed or just plain psychotic. Again, not metagaming, why would Shepard trust all this? It could make things worse. The crucible plans could have been like all the other seeded reaper tech, the choices are a part of the citadel which is a part of the kid. The choices are like a tatoo on your arm. Saying he doesn't control them is like saying your tatoo was not your decision. Yeah maybe both of you could have woken up from a hangover and found them there. But then the kid knows all about the choices and they were put into his locked room. They could be some new way to harvest all life in the galaxy faster. Shepard does not know what they will do.

Refuse may be annihilation. Some see this as the only logical conclusion. Ok say it's so for the sake of argument.

Shepard has in front of him/her an irrational AI offering choices he says will help him(the kid). The explanation for them is confusing, contradictory, and the reason for their need is illogical. That's what the kid has to offer.

Or, there's refusal. Harvesting takes a long time. And while it may be a losing battle, possibilities could arise. No one knows. Shepard didn't believe in the inevitable. Even in ME3.

But one choice is completely unknown and offered by the adversary and one means there might be at some point some slim chance of maybe not victory but survival. Even some Protheans had survived after the reapers, and one did long after them. It's not a great hope but it's one slim one.

I can see choosing refuse because of what you don't know about the kid's choices.

In metagaming, no choice, not even refuse would work for me. I think the whole set up is ridiculous.

And please, have more respect for yourself than to feel you need to show me just what an idiot I am. When you insult someone and their opinion you are saying far more about yourself than you are about them. We all have opinions. We aren't all synthesized or being told what to think by overlords.

[3DandBeyond]

incinerator950 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Maybe you should play the game again. Miranda says, "We all knew this was likely a one-way trip."

That is much different than saying "We never had a chance." And you are proving my point with Joker. Other people disagree that they will all die, like Garrus. In ME3, there is no opposing voice. Everyone knows you need to use the Crucible to win.

It's called a suicide mission.  It's not called a pretty tough mission.

Again, you're missing the purpose.  Its a suicide mission because they all are almost a 100% Casualty run, or will result in capture.  Suicide missions are not impossible for achieving mission perimeters.  If anything, you have a higher chance of your goal then surviving it.  Even the worst ending in ME2 accomplished destroying or capturing the base.  

I didn't specify they said all missions were impossible.  In the suicide mission it's set up as them coming out alive and back from beyond the omega IV relay is impossible.  But they came back and everyone survived, so it was not impossible.

You are purposely putting yourselves inside a box and the game is making you do it.

Don't you see how negatively it has you all thinking.  These are not great concepts.  It's impossible, inevitable.  You need magic or don't even try it.  The ending solitdifies it.  The way forward is not based upon what people want or do, it's still prescribed by the kid and the reapers.  The choices are and the aftermath is.  Get out of the box.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 30 juillet 2012 - 08:10 .

[Wayning_Star]

another reason I chose synthesis, cause that way you are not being influenced by your hatred for the catalyst, it doesn't matter to you and you'll be there to 'get into it's programming' once and for all. Destroy just lets me bath in my own emotions, getting even, paying back. But it takes more than we recieve, as the geth are gone, poor EDI, our coolest creation(besides babies of course:) is gone and the reaper threat may be gone for a time, but if the synthetics do decide to revolt and one gets the bright idea that was given the catalyst, then what? Sure it's a big if, but all those memories, data and possibilities lost from those that suffered the reapers. Seems to me like too much to lose for them,and the MEU..just say'n

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Without metagaming you play as Shepard. One type of Shepard is the idealistic hero that has always seen the foe clearly and wants nothing more than to eradicate that foe. This type of Shepard does not believe anything is impossible and would not say it is. That's the Shepard I played in ME1 and 2. This Shepard also needs to have explanation for things and needs some things proven-has a real sense of right and wrong, being paragon. That is what all my choices in ME1 and 2 tell me. The decisions my Shepard can make in the game.

Of course Shepard goes full idiot in ME3 right from the start. Shepard says they should have prepared. Prepared to do what if it's impossible? Maybe they all should have left the galaxy because as I see it that's the only preparations you can make if you can't fight them.

Then, Shepard says the fight isn't about strategy or tactics. Well, alright what's the plan-to stand together or survive at all costs-well a paragon says we stand together. And then we fight or we die. Well, how the hell do we do that without strategy or tactics. We stand together. Great.

At the end (not metagaming) Shepard faces Harby, jr. and is just expected to automatically believe him? A lot of people here don't trust or believe other people here and I am to think Shepard would believe the guy who's been killing people especially when he's a warped AI that needs de-bugging. Never mind lying-how about deluded or mis-informed or just plain psychotic. Again, not metagaming, why would Shepard trust all this? It could make things worse. The crucible plans could have been like all the other seeded reaper tech, the choices are a part of the citadel which is a part of the kid. The choices are like a tatoo on your arm. Saying he doesn't control them is like saying your tatoo was not your decision. Yeah maybe both of you could have woken up from a hangover and found them there. But then the kid knows all about the choices and they were put into his locked room. They could be some new way to harvest all life in the galaxy faster. Shepard does not know what they will do.

Refuse may be annihilation. Some see this as the only logical conclusion. Ok say it's so for the sake of argument.

Shepard has in front of him/her an irrational AI offering choices he says will help him(the kid). The explanation for them is confusing, contradictory, and the reason for their need is illogical. That's what the kid has to offer.

Or, there's refusal. Harvesting takes a long time. And while it may be a losing battle, possibilities could arise. No one knows. Shepard didn't believe in the inevitable. Even in ME3.

But one choice is completely unknown and offered by the adversary and one means there might be at some point some slim chance of maybe not victory but survival. Even some Protheans had survived after the reapers, and one did long after them. It's not a great hope but it's one slim one.

I can see choosing refuse because of what you don't know about the kid's choices.

In metagaming, no choice, not even refuse would work for me. I think the whole set up is ridiculous.

And please, have more respect for yourself than to feel you need to show me just what an idiot I am. When you insult someone and their opinion you are saying far more about yourself than you are about them. We all have opinions. We aren't all synthesized or being told what to think by overlords.

personally, as shepard, I utilized to understand the situation more, even the ugly side of it.. but apparently this must be a staggering minority...I still ended up a renegade survivor with lots of paragon attributes..lol

[Teneroth]

Zardoc wrote...

Teneroth wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

This doesn't work, since the Reapers are systematically wiping out all of our forces. Nobody else is coming.

Anderson might be alive, there should be dozens, if not hundreds of survivors on the citidel still, I doubt the reapers managed to wipe everyone out in the few hours they've had control of the citidel. I'm not going to give up hope. I refuse to.

Anderson bled out right next to you. And even if there are capable survivors on the Citadel, none of them are anywhere near your position to activate the Crucible in time. It's in fact most likely they don't even know about it, or what it does.

 
Edit: not to mention the fleet, they have been holding the reapers off, now that the arms are open why couldn't they land a few divisions of marines on board? 

The fleet was merely buying you time. And any groundforces have already landed. You might remember "Hammer"? If so, you might also remember that they've been virtually wiped out.

You're making more and more assumptions without any proof. Anderson bled out, really? cause I thought I did for a while there too. I didn't check his pulse cause I thought we were done and it didn't matter anyways. And Who knows where you have to be to actually activate the crucible, for all we know we simply need to tell avina to turn it on. 

And maybe hammer was wiped out, but maybe a couple other people made the beam and got transported to other places on the citidel like Anderson was, we have no idea how this technology works because we've never seen it before (another gripe I have with the premise but I'll let it slide for now), so it is logical to assume it could of disposited them at other places and are currently dragging themselves towards the switch. 

And even if not enough people made it to the beam, the arms are still open, it is relativly simple to kick a couple dozen people out an airlock and have them land on the citidel from the fleet, and a lot safer than running for the beam again. I got the impression that Hammer was there to open the arms, so the fleet could land more troops directly on the citidel. 

And where was the crew of the crucible anyways? It didn't fly itself did it? Maybe they are running around trying to activate it as you are shooting the tube and breaking it. 

There are dozens of other ways people could activate the crucible, maybe Hackett can open a com channel to avina and tell her to punch it, or it is active and just charging and the star brat is trying to stop it since the reapers can't break through sheild fleet to stop it directly. 

I do not trust this holo kid, and see no reason to do what he says. If a character I knew and trusted told me that was how to activate the crucible, by shooting it, then I might believe them. But as it is, coming from a new character, with self admitted reaper ties, telling me to shoot it is not trust worthy enough for me to risk the galaxy on the off chance that shooting a device is the correct way to activate it. I've never seen anything like that before and have no reason to believe it. My first, and only, playthrough to the end I spent five minutes looking for a button or something that made sense before I got the critical mission failure. Then I looked online for how to activate the crucible and found out about the RBG endings. 

Accept it, the starbrat is not credible enough to convince shepard of anything, shooting a tube makes no sense as a way of activating a super weapon, and it is most logical to assume the star brat is a last chance attempt to stop the crucible from activating by convincing or indotrinating shepard into damaging so it won't actually work.

This is all assuming, of course, you don't metagame and know the starbrat is telling the truth. that you are actually roleplaying shepard, etc.

[CronoDragoon]

3DandBeyond wrote...

I can see choosing refuse because of what you don't know about the kid's choices.

I can see refusing if you believe the kid is lying to you. I can't see it if you take what he is saying at face value. It doesn't even matter if the choices help him; you need to evaluate them as is. Refusing because the choices coincide with his beliefs instead of because of what they do is just pride.

Personally, I play an idealistic Paragon, and I will still take Destroy over Refuse. Assuming there even is a chance to win with Refuse, that chance is a single-digit chance at best. It's like 2% you eventually win and 98% you eventually all get killed. And by the way, conventional warfare while all that harvesting is going on? That's also going to lead to a lot more deaths than suffered by the geth/EDI in Destroy. Deaths you could have prevented.

[Bill Casey]

Refuse is the only ending choice other than Destroy I have any respect for...

[KevTheGamer]

Skirata129 wrote...

Simply put, from Shepard's point of view, he is being confronted with a VI that claims to have created the Reapers, and who presents a very flawed argument before presenting 3 choices to him, none of which line up with his morals or original goals. These choices are not even presented in a professional manner, such as inputting them in a terminal. Instead, for all shepard knows, the VI who admits to being a Reaper ally just told him to either shoot a fuel tank at close range, grab a live power line, or step into a giant beam of energy that will disintegrate him.


Seriously, there's no logical reason to pick anything EXCEPT refuse.

the problem with this is that Shepard is out of options. He has no choice but to listen to this AI. The crucibal was all they had and it doesn't work earth was lost. 

Modifié par KevWestBeats.com, 30 juillet 2012 - 08:16 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Wayning_Star wrote...

another reason I chose synthesis, cause that way you are not being influenced by your hatred for the catalyst, it doesn't matter to you and you'll be there to 'get into it's programming' once and for all. Destroy just lets me bath in my own emotions, getting even, paying back. But it takes more than we recieve, as the geth are gone, poor EDI, our coolest creation(besides babies of course:) is gone and the reaper threat may be gone for a time, but if the synthetics do decide to revolt and one gets the bright idea that was given the catalyst, then what? Sure it's a big if, but all those memories, data and possibilities lost from those that suffered the reapers. Seems to me like too much to lose for them,and the MEU..just say'n

Have you not considered the fact that Destroy is the only ending that allows organics to fully salvage Reaper technology, now that the galaxy is littered with dead Reapers?

The possibilities speak for themselves.

Modifié par Fiery Phoenix, 30 juillet 2012 - 08:23 .

[Batnat]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Of course Shepard goes full idiot in ME3 right from the start. Shepard says they should have prepared. Prepared to do what if it's impossible? Maybe they all should have left the galaxy because as I see it that's the only preparations you can make if you can't fight them.

Then, Shepard says the fight isn't about strategy or tactics. Well, alright what's the plan-to stand together or survive at all costs-well a paragon says we stand together. And then we fight or we die. Well, how the hell do we do that without strategy or tactics. We stand together. Great.

Hehe...I´m sorry...I should really say something smart or profound and agree to you post but all I can do right now is "head canon" Shepard & Friends standing hand in hand before the Conduit & Harbinger singing "When we stand together" (Nickelback).

[iamweaver]

3DandBeyond wrote...

[
I didn't specify they said all missions were impossible.  In the suicide mission it's set up as them coming out alive and back from beyond the omega IV relay is impossible.  But they came back and everyone survived, so it was not impossible.

Actually - this is completely incorrect.  It was called the Suicide Mission because it was called the Suicide Mission.  Completely circular logic.

Absolutely no reason is ever given why it's a suicide mission, because no-one knows anything about what's on the other side, other than it's where the Collectors come from (note for those who missed it:  the Collectors COME FROM there.  There is a way from the destination of the relay back to known space).

Even when you get there, the only reason that Miranda says what she does is that the Normandy just crash-landed, and they don't know yet that the damage is repairable.  As it turns out, not only is the damage not all that bad, but there's a workable plan to get to the base and do your thing.  There's even a way out.

See, Shepherd goes into the Suicide Misison ready and willing to sacrifice herself - but without any knowledge of whether it will atually come to that or not.

Now, contrast that to the refuse option.  I'm not going to bore you with the previously-mentioned, in-game proof known by Shepherd that on a strategic and even tactical level, things are hopeless without a leg up.  What's more, all this data simply backs up up what all of his military sources and superiors have been claiming. 

[3DandBeyond]

CronoDragoon wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

I can see choosing refuse because of what you don't know about the kid's choices.

I can see refusing if you believe the kid is lying to you. I can't see it if you take what he is saying at face value. It doesn't even matter if the choices help him; you need to evaluate them as is. Refusing because the choices coincide with his beliefs instead of because of what they do is just pride.

Personally, I play an idealistic Paragon, and I will still take Destroy over Refuse. Assuming there even is a chance to win with Refuse, that chance is a single-digit chance at best. It's like 2% you eventually win and 98% you eventually all get killed. And by the way, conventional warfare while all that harvesting is going on? That's also going to lead to a lot more deaths than suffered by the geth/EDI in Destroy. Deaths you could have prevented.

And I said that several pages back.  That I don't think Shepard could believe all the kid says-it could mean instant death since harvesting takes too long and the kid is worried they might find a way to win.  As opposed to it, refuse means at least they go down fighting and they live for a time intact and on their own terms, with dignity.  Making a choice when you don't know what it will do and it will affect the whole galaxy is like chasing after some unknown object because you think it will be a weapon that will destroy the uh, uh oh.   And that's my point.  I don't think someone in that position seeing that the kid lives where the choices are and he knows all about them and the kid is insane would believe all this and would need to know more.  I couldn't go on trust.

In metagaming I hate all choices equally and won't make one and I won't pick refuse.  I hate that we were given arbitrary choices that have nothing to do with how we played the games or previous choices we made.  It's totally unnecessary to play ME1, 2, and parts of 3. 

I think the endings and the choices are needlessly and gratuitously cruel especially for a game that was never like this before.

[Thaa_solon]

Since the choices displayed by the catalyst are illogical then the only logical choice is to refuse, but this results in failure....everyone dies

I must question this

WHY?...........why can't we win conventionally

Because reapers are invincible, no they are apperently not

They are just an conventional enemy on a unconventional scale..........oh I guess we need an unconventional weapon to win over them, yes???

NO

The resorces put on the crusible could have been spent on other war winning "stuff"
An unconventional ammount of conventional weapons would have indeed solved this

My point in short: the crusible is a complete waste of time and effort, it's a stupid/poorly written DEM put in a unplanned story in a rush job of a now meh game.

What do you think?

[Teneroth]

Thaa_solon wrote...

Since the choices displayed by the catalyst are illogical then the only logical choice is to refuse, but this results in failure....everyone dies

I must question this

WHY?...........why can't we win conventionally

Because reapers are invincible, no they are apperently not

They are just an conventional enemy on a unconventional scale..........oh I guess we need an unconventional weapon to win over them, yes???

NO

The resorces put on the crusible could have been spent on other war winning "stuff"
An unconventional ammount of conventional weapons would have indeed solved this

My point in short: the crusible is a complete waste of time and effort, it's a stupid/poorly written DEM put in a unplanned story in a rush job of a now meh game.

What do you think?

I'd tend to agree, in 4 or 5 years since the first game the galaxy has gone from being unable to damage reapers to taking them out, if not easily, but with co-ordinated firepower. In addition, a big deal was made in the first game how the reapers had to split the galaxy up, by disabling the relays and destroying the government in order to win. 

there is no reason the final battle couldn't of been against harbinger in a massive battle over some reaper stronghold planet (hell, pick earth, they seemed to hit it first) and cluminate in a massive ground action to capture several reaper cannons and use them to shoot down Harbinger, breaking the leadership of the reapers and routing them. Hell, that's what my ending would of been if I could write the entire game, start to finish, without the limitation of the crucible.

I think the game could of worked still even with the crucible, but the options should of been logical, made sense, and NOT be presented by a character we've never met and had no reason to trust. (read my ending, link in siggy, for an example of 'logical' endings)

[AlanC9]

Thaa_solon wrote...

The resorces put on the crusible could have been spent on other war winning "stuff"
An unconventional ammount of conventional weapons would have indeed solved this

My point in short: the crusible is a complete waste of time and effort, it's a stupid/poorly written DEM put in a unplanned story in a rush job of a now meh game.

What do you think?

I think you're being silly.

The Crucible was relatively cheap and quick, compared to the number of ships that would have been necessary for conventional victory.

Unless you're just saying that Bio could have made the Reaprs weaker and so permitted a conventional victory. If that's all you're saying, then sure. Bio could have done that.

But this has nothing to do with Refuse working in the game world ythat we actually have.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 juillet 2012 - 08:52 .

[3DandBeyond]

iamweaver wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

[
I didn't specify they said all missions were impossible.  In the suicide mission it's set up as them coming out alive and back from beyond the omega IV relay is impossible.  But they came back and everyone survived, so it was not impossible.

Actually - this is completely incorrect.  It was called the Suicide Mission because it was called the Suicide Mission.  Completely circular logic.

Absolutely no reason is ever given why it's a suicide mission, because no-one knows anything about what's on the other side, other than it's where the Collectors come from (note for those who missed it:  the Collectors COME FROM there.  There is a way from the destination of the relay back to known space).

Even when you get there, the only reason that Miranda says what she does is that the Normandy just crash-landed, and they don't know yet that the damage is repairable.  As it turns out, not only is the damage not all that bad, but there's a workable plan to get to the base and do your thing.  There's even a way out.

See, Shepherd goes into the Suicide Misison ready and willing to sacrifice herself - but without any knowledge of whether it will atually come to that or not.

Now, contrast that to the refuse option.  I'm not going to bore you with the previously-mentioned, in-game proof known by Shepherd that on a strategic and even tactical level, things are hopeless without a leg up.  What's more, all this data simply backs up up what all of his military sources and superiors have been claiming. 

It's called the suicide mission because no one ever has returned from beyond the Omega IV relay.  Over the last thousand years people have gone through it and never returned.  That's why you need the reaper IFF, but they don't even know if that will work.  The Collectors come through it because it recognizes them.

Miranda says that because they all thought there was a good chance they wouldn't return even before they crashed.

Yes Shepard goes into it ready to sacrifice but where others think it's impossible to come back s/he doesn't.  And I agree Shepard has no way of knowing if s/he he will have to die, just as s/he has no way of knowing if s/he will be successful.  Believing you will live and will succeed are a part of the battle.  If you've already given up, then you will do neither without someone swooping in and saving you.

And while we're at it--even if faced with only one impossible choice, no military commander worth anything is going to say, "we're all gonna die!!!!" which is basically what Hackett says, except before Cronos.  If they can't get the catalyst then they go to plan b.  If it's all impossible what exactly is plan b?

[AlanC9]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Without metagaming you play as Shepard. One type of Shepard is the idealistic hero that has always seen the foe clearly and wants nothing more than to eradicate that foe. This type of Shepard does not believe anything is impossible and would not say it is. That's the Shepard I played in ME1 and 2.

You really played a Shepard who can't tell when a situation is hopeless? Who thinks he's living in some sort of fantasy world where if he just tries really hard he can do anything he wants to do? How did he explain his failure on Virmire? Did he just not want to rescue both squadmates enough?

Some things are impossible. No matter how much Hitler thought he could turn things around in late 1944, he couldn't.

(Sorry for Godwinning there, but it's a perfect example of someone being unable to understand that a war really is lost.)

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 juillet 2012 - 08:49 .

[Thaa_solon]

If indeed so, then I would choose refuse to prove the catalyst wrong......

"So be it"