467 réponses à ce sujet

[DocGriffin]

iamweaver wrote...

DocGriffin wrote...

Yeah this is what always surprised me. And the metaphor I always present is this:


You're on a game show, where the game is to choose one of three doors with the possibility of earning one million dollars. You need the money to pay for an emergency surgery for your mother. The game show host, who has a propensity for lying and, you deem, is untrustworthy, tells you that there is 1 million dollars behind all three doors. You tell the game show host you don't trust him, and that you'd rather try and make the money on your own. Guess what? You don't have the time, and your mother dies without the surgery. And guess what again? All 3 doors had 1 million dollars.

You had nothing to lose by giving the host the benefit of the doubt and simply choosing a door, whereas leaving the game show was the only choice with a guarantee of not earning the money. Why would that ever be the logical choice?

But you prove you're FREE by not taking one of three choices thrust upon you.  Even though you knew, when you signed up to be on the game show, that it was likely that you would have to make some kind of a decision or do something on the show.  And you promised your mother that you would do whatever it took to pay for the surgery.

I don't understand, how are you not free by picking a choice? That just seems like combatativeness with authority, or refusing to accept given options as the only options, rather than assessing the validity of the options themselves. It's sort of like saying "I'd rather have my own option, even if the options you give me are better." It just seems silly to me.

[Apple Lantern]

Have fun wiping out everyone that trusted you.

If the choices didn't work, then you were going to die anyway. Might as well pick one.

[Wayning_Star]

meta gaming is the essence of any sci fi adventure, there is NO WAY to enjoy sci fi without it. Mainly because there isn't a substancial way that the devs can put 'every nuaunce' of probablilty in the game,with graphics and immersion, the user have to put up some 'extra' energies to visualize the enviornment fully. IN this particulare game the undertow regards the original builders of the entire MEU as the antagonistic protagonist. Using Shepard for their own purposes, the catalyst is too stupid, being only an AI, eventhough advanced, cannot make such decisions of synthetic and organic 'life'. They were the ones who created the cycle, not the catalyst. It only claims this as it thinks 'like' an original creator, cause they 'made' him/it that way. It emmulated a human child ONLY because that is the way it communicates with any corpreal subject within it's broadcast range. Shepard never was there, he was still on the ground, terribly wounded by the reaper beam, maybe not intended to kill him, maybe it just missed. Shepard was within the range of the catalyst to be communcating with it, BECAUSE he was one of the ONLY ones who could besided the Illusive man who was indoctrinated. Anderson was there because he was the strongest memory in Sheps mind that insisted on the absolute distruction of the reapers as a whole. Shepard represents the middle road. Synthesis. Like it or not, that is the crux of it, and the fact that the original creators of the MEU designed the whole thing, eons ago. They're the ones who directly or indirectly resuscitated Shepard for this purpose, mainly because they were the only ones whit the technology to 'recreate' life in an organic on that scale. The illusive man didn't do it, he merely utilized the technology, he..found..somewhere,eventhough..indoctrinated by the reapers. The collectors are who killed Shepard,eventhough, indoctrinated..The catalyst admitted Shepard into the citadel, eventhough he was its worst enemy, sworn to destroy the reapers.. The choices came from the crucible, designed by the catalyst creators, built by the organics/synthetics of the MEU to 'settle' the Reaper threat, eventhough they didn't even know 'what' it would do. They "Hoped". In game the only choice the Shepard has is synthesis, the other two were tried before... end of line.

[Necrotron]

We had this thread. And people will outright disagree with you. Others will agree. People will call people from the other group names. Flames will ensue.

I agree that considering every single person who dealt with the Reapers before ended up indoctrinated it is complete foolishness to believe anything the Reaper god says. We should determine how to activate the catalyst without killing ourselves and/or trusting in the Reapers for our salvation, but...others will disagree, and say somehow the starchild is trustworthy because of such and such. It doesn't matter.

You 'can' pick refuse, but that simply means you lose, game over, that is not the ending as intended by the developers, merely an olive branch created for the extended cut. You are supposed to simply believe the starchild is being truthful and pick a 'less than ideal' ending from there, since obviously there was never another option before.

[ediskrad327]

even without meta gaming you should know you have no chance against the Reapers

Modifié par ediskrad327, 30 juillet 2012 - 06:58 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

AlanC9 wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

AlanC9, you got me thinking. In retrospect, considering that the Catalyst can turn off the Crucible at will, why does he even give those choices to Shepard?

That isn't established by anything in-game. It looks to me more like the Crucible always did require an operator on the Citadel side. Though TIM was the only guy with the manual for the thing, and he didn't bring a copy for Shepard to loot from his corpse.

Yes, it does seem like the Crucible requires an operator on the Citadel side. But it seems like preventing its use is solely in the hands of the Catalyst. Otherwise, why would the Crucible beam simply turn off when the Catalyst decided that the cycle must continue? I really don't understand the Catalyst's motives. It seems like he's okay with being fried as long as Shepard is cool with it.

[OmegaXI]

Nope sorry Refuse still seems like a selfish, petty, internet hipster ending.

[sUiCiDeKiNgS13]

Though refuse is noble, it would only bring more death. My Shepard took control and became Guardian of the Galaxy while keeping everyone the way they are. No more death. Life goes on under his watchful hive-mind-eye.

[jetfire118]

OmegaXI wrote...


Nope sorry Refuse still seems like a selfish, petty, internet hipster ending.

LOL QFTFT

[SSPBOURNE]

Nyxeris wrote...

Have fun wiping out everyone that trusted you.

If the choices didn't work, then you were going to die anyway. Might as well pick one.

No one trusts you. Every character is a collection of 1's and 0's that contains no sentience and I do not feel attachment to them. Neither should you.
Just kidding, I cried when Tali had to leave.

[Sajuro]

Bill Casey wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

My Shepard picks Destroy because he believes it offers the best future for ALL life. No one will have to suffer under the Reapers any longer. He alone takes responsibility for his actions, and the destruction of EDI and the Geth are his weights to carry for the rest of his life.

[Shepard tries to hang himself in the hospital]
[Joker walks in, breaks several bones saving him]

Joker: For the last time... It was the Reapers. You know, big shooty death laser monsters. Noone's blaming you. You did what you had to. You don't see me killing myself. I lost my father, my sister, my girlfriend, Anderson... god dammit... I'm not going to lose you too. So you don't get to die, do you hear me?

Shepard: ...

Joker: Besides. Think of all of the obscure things you can fetch for people once you get out of here.

Shepard:.....
Hangs Joker for getting him killed at the start of ME2 and goes off on fetch quest involving an egg clutch, broken heating units, and over use of the word "liable"

[xsdob]

How about, and this might be just crazy talk, how about the best ending for everyone...is the ending that they like the best?

Modifié par xsdob, 30 juillet 2012 - 07:39 .

[Pitznik]

xsdob wrote...

How about, and this might be just crazy talk, how about the best ending for everyone...is the ending that they like the best?

Why would I respect other people's opinion, if I can call them stupid instead?

[lillitheris]

1. You know you will lose this fight. You can wish the game was done differently, but as it is, it’s absolutely, unequivocally clear that you will lose. This is not a debateable point. You. Will. Lose.

2. You don’t know that any future cycle will even come close to where you got, let alone win. (No metagaming, remember?)

3. By Refusing, you’re condemning everyone to death. A short existence of terror and loss, fighting a useless fight with ever-dwindling numbers, until finally in the end all your friends are dead, along with the rest of the galaxy.

4. You’re a horrible monster. Yes, you. You killed everybody.

[elegolas1]

I wouldn't trust it. If I were Shep I think I would run away and cry for a very long time. I don't think I'd make a very good soldier...
No metagaming, I would probably refuse.

Two suicide options and shooting the cruciple, yep.

[elegolas1]

lillitheris wrote...

1. You know you will lose this fight. You can wish the game was done differently, but as it is, it’s absolutely, unequivocally clear that you will lose. This is not a debateable point. You. Will. Lose.

2. You don’t know that any future cycle will even come close to where you got, let alone win. (No metagaming, remember?)

3. By Refusing, you’re condemning everyone to death. A short existence of terror and loss, fighting a useless fight with ever-dwindling numbers, until finally in the end all your friends are dead, along with the rest of the galaxy.

4. You’re a horrible monster. Yes, you. You killed everybody.

As far as Shep is concerned though, the catalyst tells him/her to grab live wires, jump over a cliff or shoot a fuel line. How is refusing any better than that? I'm not saying you are wrong, but presenting another point of view.

[CINCTuchanka]

The first time I played the EC I realized, without metagaming or knowing anything in advance, that Refusing was a bad decision. Why? Because the Catalyst straight up tells you so. In the game. Only by meta-metagaming can you decide it us the best option (I think?)

[Father_Jerusalem]

elegolas1 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

1. You know you will lose this fight. You can wish the game was done differently, but as it is, it’s absolutely, unequivocally clear that you will lose. This is not a debateable point. You. Will. Lose.

2. You don’t know that any future cycle will even come close to where you got, let alone win. (No metagaming, remember?)

3. By Refusing, you’re condemning everyone to death. A short existence of terror and loss, fighting a useless fight with ever-dwindling numbers, until finally in the end all your friends are dead, along with the rest of the galaxy.

4. You’re a horrible monster. Yes, you. You killed everybody.

As far as Shep is concerned though, the catalyst tells him/her to grab live wires, jump over a cliff or shoot a fuel line. How is refusing any better than that? I'm not saying you are wrong, but presenting another point of view.

Because by grabbing live wires, jumping off a cliff, or shooting a fuel line, there is the hope that you will END this. That by taking a, in one instance absolutely literal, leap of faith that the Reapers will be stopped - FOREVER.

Shepard KNOWS that this is what the entire point has been leading up to: Use the Crucibe, have a chance of winning. Don't use the Crucible, lose. EVERYTHING.

So... do you take a leap and hope? Or do you refuse and doom galactic civilization to gruesome deaths or existence as Reaper bits?

[elegolas1]

SSPBOURNE wrote...

I still prefer control. It is the means to survival.

If you were told you could save everyone in the galaxy by taking hold of live wires, would you still think that?

[elegolas1]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

elegolas1 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

1. You know you will lose this fight. You can wish the game was done differently, but as it is, it’s absolutely, unequivocally clear that you will lose. This is not a debateable point. You. Will. Lose.

2. You don’t know that any future cycle will even come close to where you got, let alone win. (No metagaming, remember?)

3. By Refusing, you’re condemning everyone to death. A short existence of terror and loss, fighting a useless fight with ever-dwindling numbers, until finally in the end all your friends are dead, along with the rest of the galaxy.

4. You’re a horrible monster. Yes, you. You killed everybody.

As far as Shep is concerned though, the catalyst tells him/her to grab live wires, jump over a cliff or shoot a fuel line. How is refusing any better than that? I'm not saying you are wrong, but presenting another point of view.

Because by grabbing live wires, jumping off a cliff, or shooting a fuel line, there is the hope that you will END this. That by taking a, in one instance absolutely literal, leap of faith that the Reapers will be stopped - FOREVER.

Shepard KNOWS that this is what the entire point has been leading up to: Use the Crucibe, have a chance of winning. Don't use the Crucible, lose. EVERYTHING.

So... do you take a leap and hope? Or do you refuse and doom galactic civilization to gruesome deaths or existence as Reaper bits?

I guess so. It's like a saw movie

Shepard wakes up with a chainsaw in hand and a note saying "cut off your leg and the reapers will go away"
I hate saw movies.

[Lord Goose]

As far as Shep is concerned though, the catalyst tells him/her
to grab live wires, jump over a cliff or shoot a fuel line.

He actually doesn't tell you to do it. Shepard comes to this conclusion by him/herself.

[v TricKy v]

AlanC9 wrote...

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.

So let's see... Shepard is supposed to refuse because the options might be traps. Or is it because the options don't line up with his morals and original goals? If it's a trap, the Catalyst sure isn't very good at baiting it.

But let's say Shepard thinks it's probably a trap. What of it? If it is a trap, all that means is that the galaxy is doomed anyway, and whatever Shepard does just doesn't matter.

Exactly
So why should I take the chance to possibily help the Reapers?
It could trigger an EMP which disables all our ships. Why should I risk that? You can say that everyone dies anyway so why dont risk it. All that can happen is that you die.
But what is better way to die? Going down fighting and taking as many as you can with them(remember they have no way to replace their capital ships) or die like hopeless in your disabled ship unable to do anything?

The argument about not taking chances can work both ways

[elegolas1]

Lord Goose wrote...

As far as Shep is concerned though, the catalyst tells him/her
to grab live wires, jump over a cliff or shoot a fuel line.

He actually doesn't tell you to do it. Shepard comes to this conclusion by him/herself.

Shepard is such a ****** in me3 hahaha
Just as Shep jumps into the beam the catalyst shouts out "wait, the console's right there!"

[Pitznik]

v TricKy v wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

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.

So let's see... Shepard is supposed to refuse because the options might be traps. Or is it because the options don't line up with his morals and original goals? If it's a trap, the Catalyst sure isn't very good at baiting it.

But let's say Shepard thinks it's probably a trap. What of it? If it is a trap, all that means is that the galaxy is doomed anyway, and whatever Shepard does just doesn't matter.

Exactly
So why should I take the chance to possibily help the Reapers?
It could trigger an EMP which disables all our ships. Why should I risk that? You can say that everyone dies anyway so why dont risk it. All that can happen is that you die.
But what is better way to die? Going down fighting and taking as many as you can with them(remember they have no way to replace their capital ships) or die like hopeless in your disabled ship unable to do anything?

The argument about not taking chances can work both ways

Because they are clearly winning and they don't need to try any tricks. They are safe. It is you who loses, so it is your turn to move. Plus, you knew that this whole Crucible thing was supposed to work for you, and not for the Reapers.

[Myria]

Bill Casey wrote...

[Shepard tries to hang himself in the hospital]
[Joker walks in, breaks several bones saving him]

Joker: For the last time... It was the Reapers. You know, big shooty death laser monsters. Noone's blaming you. You did what you had to. You don't see me killing myself. I lost my father, my sister, my girlfriend, Anderson... god dammit... I'm not going to lose you too. So you don't get to die, do you hear me?

Shepard: ...

Joker: Besides. Think of all of the obscure things you can fetch for people once you get out of here.

In all the discussion I've read about the ending, this combined with Taboo-XX's argument are the best.  Had the Destroy choice included this scene, it would have been the ending many were looking for.  Even though that's not what is shown in the game, it's definitely my interpretation of the ending now.  Thanks!