467 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

1- I know it is, and by using that weapon, I have the bigger advantage and all the reason to believe I'm going to win this war, so is it so unlogical to think my enemy will decieve me?

When you approach it with an atitude of 'all my enemy says is lies', yes. That is incredibly illogical. It isn't supported by history (the Reapers aren't big on lying when the communicate), and it isn't supported by what the Catalyst actually says (two of the three options giving the organics victory over the Reapers).

2-Standing there bleeding out, Shepard has no reason to believe anything that his enemy tells him, the same enemy which lead Saren and TIM, two people who wanted the best for the galaxy, and turn them into indoctrinated puppet. That's the problem with anything that the Catalyst says, is inconvenient because hes your enemy.

The Catalyst and Reapers didn't lead on TIM or Saren. Saren believed subjugation was the means to survival for his own reasons: it was based on a mistaken logic (that the Reapers would keep tools), but Saren was working for the Reapers before he was indoctrinated. TIM believed in Control likewise for his own reasons, and was only indoctrinated well after he started down that path.

3-Actually no, If you honestly believe that the Catalyst is lying to you at the moment, it does make the refusal more desirable, because you already believe that the catalyst is trying to trick you, so you cross out using the crucible in your mind and then refusal becomes the best chance for survival.

Except Refusal already has a zero percent chance for success, as everyone within the game has been telling you since the start. By the end of the game all but one of the major homeworlds has fallen, the Reapers are on the advance on all fronts, and the fleet for Earth is a last-ditch effort to use the Crucible.

If the Crucible doesn't work, regardless of the Catalyst lying or not, you are dead because the Crucible was the only path to survival. Refusing to attempt it has no better chance for survival than it being a trap by the Reapers.

[flanny]

iamweaver wrote...

v TricKy v wrote...

First for all people claiming that is impossible to defeat the Reapers conventionally I will quote this Codex entry
"Although clearly technologically superior to the Citadel forces, the Reapers have experienced casualties in the battles across the galaxy. This indicates that, theoretically, with the right intelligence, weapons, and strategy, the Reapers could be defeated."
So stop painting them as "invincible and impossible to defeat".

Also I fail to see how refusing is equal with taking the risk using it. If we keep fighting we take a lot of them with us. If the Crucible is actually a giant EMP Shepard just disabled every Ship and weapon we have and the only thing we can do is drop dead. I dont see how that is equal

This is the only type of argument that makes sense in support of the "refuse" option.   You have to come up with a scenario where "refuse" is superior enough to the offered options that it's worth taking.

On every world with an advanced civ but Krogan, the Reapers have either won, or (on Palevan) are winning.  So whatever you do, it's going to be with the ships that you have, as the industrial base that was used to create the Crucible is now gone.

Hackett has told us that his two fleets should be enough to punch through the enemy lines and protect the Crucible for a short time.  That's not the same thing as being even vaguely equal in terms of firepower.  On a side note, this part of the story has one of the standard, huge plot holes of Sci-Fi space opera.  You can't really "protect" an object in space unless you shield it somehow.  Your enemies can just shoot past you and hit the object.  But I digress.

Trying to count coup in a cutscene isn't helpful.  Trying to count ship battles close to the protected Crucible isn't helpful, as that only shows you the temporary local space dominance expected by Hackett.  And unfortunately for the current galactic civilizations, you handily brought all of your ships with you, so that the Reapers will be able to clean you up in one sweep, instead of breaking into tactically useful but small guerilla groups to maximize your damage before you all die.

But you can say, "Well, all of my civilization will die, but at least I might make it easier the next go around".  And the ending supports this as a possibility (though just using canon, we don't actually know if the next cycle succeeds, only that they have the same chance that we did).

The endings also support the other options - but that's metagaming.

But ultimately, what finding logical reasons to support "refuse" shows is that Bioware made a really, really stupid mistake by having an untrusted source offer choices.

disagree with that point depending on your options, if your fleet is big enough i'd ecpect to have done massive damage to the reaper fleet to make it a pyrrhic victory, while most ships joined the sword and shield groups many didn't to fight the reapers and would likely start a guriella campaign. Also with the quarians ability to collect resources quickly and the speed at which the geth and rachni can build their fleets i expect at least one more throw of the dice 

[wright1978]

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 primary goal of the game is activation of the Crucible and we're repeatedly told conventional victory is impossible. Therefore choosing the activate the crucible as intended(destroy) is the logical course of action.

[v TricKy v]

iamweaver wrote...

v TricKy v wrote...

First for all people claiming that is impossible to defeat the Reapers conventionally I will quote this Codex entry
"Although clearly technologically superior to the Citadel forces, the Reapers have experienced casualties in the battles across the galaxy. This indicates that, theoretically, with the right intelligence, weapons, and strategy, the Reapers could be defeated."
So stop painting them as "invincible and impossible to defeat".

Also I fail to see how refusing is equal with taking the risk using it. If we keep fighting we take a lot of them with us. If the Crucible is actually a giant EMP Shepard just disabled every Ship and weapon we have and the only thing we can do is drop dead. I dont see how that is equal

This is the only type of argument that makes sense in support of the "refuse" option.   You have to come up with a scenario where "refuse" is superior enough to the offered options that it's worth taking.

On every world with an advanced civ but Krogan, the Reapers have either won, or (on Palevan) are winning.  So whatever you do, it's going to be with the ships that you have, as the industrial base that was used to create the Crucible is now gone.

Hackett has told us that his two fleets should be enough to punch through the enemy lines and protect the Crucible for a short time.  That's not the same thing as being even vaguely equal in terms of firepower.  On a side note, this part of the story has one of the standard, huge plot holes of Sci-Fi space opera.  You can't really "protect" an object in space unless you shield it somehow.  Your enemies can just shoot past you and hit the object.  But I digress.

Trying to count coup in a cutscene isn't helpful.  Trying to count ship battles close to the protected Crucible isn't helpful, as that only shows you the temporary local space dominance expected by Hackett.  And unfortunately for the current galactic civilizations, you handily brought all of your ships with you, so that the Reapers will be able to clean you up in one sweep, instead of breaking into tactically useful but small guerilla groups to maximize your damage before you all die.

But you can say, "Well, all of my civilization will die, but at least I might make it easier the next go around".  And the ending supports this as a possibility (though just using canon, we don't actually know if the next cycle succeeds, only that they have the same chance that we did).

The endings also support the other options - but that's metagaming.

But ultimately, what finding logical reasons to support "refuse" shows is that Bioware made a really, really stupid mistake by having an untrusted source offer choices.

Finally someone who understands the point im trying to make.:happy:

I also agree about Biowares mistake. If a trustworthy character or even a random scientist would have explained the possibilies everything would have been fine. But instead the boss of the Reapers explains everything to you. I dont have Bioware could overlook such a big mistake.

[Dean_the_Young]

flanny wrote...

your still obeying the reaper overlord, they are 'it's' options given to you by it, you have no role here. think about return of the jedi, luke wanted to defeat vader but when he realises this is part of the emperors plans, he knows it is the wrong thing to do. Even if you wanting to do one of the three options you know you are only doing it becasue the catalyst wants you to.

That's not how obedience works. If I tell you to do something you were already intending to do for your own reasons, my desire for it to happen doesn't magically override your rational. If I tell you to breath, you aren't breathing because I commanded you: if I tell you to not commit suicide, you probably aren't making that decision based on my directive.

The Catalyst's preferences and reasons only inherently apply to one person: the Catalyst. Besides that the Catalyst isn't ordering you to take any option in particular, or even any action at all, using the Crucible in whatever measure you choose is, at the end, your choice. The Catalyst might like it if you chose Synthesis: it might think it a flawed decision if you chose Destroy. The Catalyst's preferences are irrelevant unless you adopt them yourself.


On top of those two points, a third point should also be made: defining yourself in opposition to your enemy is really, really stupid because it lets your enemy dictate your concerns and thus gives them power over you. Besides the counterproductivity in closing off your options simply  because of what other people think you should do and you not wanting to seem to agree with them, anti-opinions are incredibly open to abuse by the other party. Let's take the example of a Catalyst who lies.

If you accept that the Catalyst is trying to deceive you, then the first level argument is that the Crucible options must be false. The Catalyst says they work, the Catalyst lies, ergo the must not work.

This relies on a fallacy, however, the idea that the relationship between the Catalyst claims and anything are opposite. That whatever the Catalyst says, the other must be true: if the Catalyst says they work, they must not, and if the Catalyst says they wouldn't they would.

That isn't the case, however. The Crucible will work, or will not work, regardless of what the Catalyst says. The Catalyst does not determine the Crucible effects at will.. The Catalyst also knows this, even if the player doesn't. If the Catalyst can not determine the Crucible effects at will, and it doesn't want the player to trigger the Crucible, what can it do? If it says the Crucible wouldn't work, people will just not believe it.

Double-bluff. Use the reputation of dishonesty to its advantage by telling the truth.

People who would use the Crucible regardless of the Catalyst won't be deterred one way or the other. People who react in opposition, however, can be tricked into not choosing at all simply by having the truth given to them. By insisting to themselves that the Catalyst only lies or by refusing to accept anything it offers, they will lock themselves out of the solutions of their own volition, something the Catalyst can't.

[Doctoglethorpe]

You died.

/thread

[flanny]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

flanny wrote...

your still obeying the reaper overlord, they are 'it's' options given to you by it, you have no role here. think about return of the jedi, luke wanted to defeat vader but when he realises this is part of the emperors plans, he knows it is the wrong thing to do. Even if you wanting to do one of the three options you know you are only doing it becasue the catalyst wants you to.

That's not how obedience works. If I tell you to do something you were already intending to do for your own reasons, my desire for it to happen doesn't magically override your rational. If I tell you to breath, you aren't breathing because I commanded you: if I tell you to not commit suicide, you probably aren't making that decision based on my directive.

The Catalyst's preferences and reasons only inherently apply to one person: the Catalyst. Besides that the Catalyst isn't ordering you to take any option in particular, or even any action at all, using the Crucible in whatever measure you choose is, at the end, your choice. The Catalyst might like it if you chose Synthesis: it might think it a flawed decision if you chose Destroy. The Catalyst's preferences are irrelevant unless you adopt them yourself.


On top of those two points, a third point should also be made: defining yourself in opposition to your enemy is really, really stupid because it lets your enemy dictate your concerns and thus gives them power over you. Besides the counterproductivity in closing off your options simply  because of what other people think you should do and you not wanting to seem to agree with them, anti-opinions are incredibly open to abuse by the other party. Let's take the example of a Catalyst who lies.

If you accept that the Catalyst is trying to deceive you, then the first level argument is that the Crucible options must be false. The Catalyst says they work, the Catalyst lies, ergo the must not work.

This relies on a fallacy, however, the idea that the relationship between the Catalyst claims and anything are opposite. That whatever the Catalyst says, the other must be true: if the Catalyst says they work, they must not, and if the Catalyst says they wouldn't they would.

That isn't the case, however. The Crucible will work, or will not work, regardless of what the Catalyst says. The Catalyst does not determine the Crucible effects at will.. The Catalyst also knows this, even if the player doesn't. If the Catalyst can not determine the Crucible effects at will, and it doesn't want the player to trigger the Crucible, what can it do? If it says the Crucible wouldn't work, people will just not believe it.

Double-bluff. Use the reputation of dishonesty to its advantage by telling the truth.

People who would use the Crucible regardless of the Catalyst won't be deterred one way or the other. People who react in opposition, however, can be tricked into not choosing at all simply by having the truth given to them. By insisting to themselves that the Catalyst only lies or by refusing to accept anything it offers, they will lock themselves out of the solutions of their own volition, something the Catalyst can't.

the fact remains that the choices come from the catalyst and are therefore part of his masterplan, knowing that I can't see Shepard being apart of those plans. the fact it actually brings you to the room supports this, if the catalyst didn't want to use you he would have left you there.

also you may want to look back at your 'logic' becauce it doesn't work very well, you made it up simply to support your own argument and doesn't work objectively to people who don't agree with you

[Pitznik]

flanny wrote...


the fact remains that the choices come from the catalyst and are therefore part of his masterplan, knowing that I can't see Shepard being apart of those plans. the fact it actually brings you to the room supports this, if the catalyst didn't want to use you he would have left you there.

also you may want to look back at your 'logic' becauce it doesn't work very well, you made it up simply to support your own argument and doesn't work objectively to people who don't agree with you

Catalyst not necessarily wanted you to be there, he could be forced to by the Crucible. By creating the Crucible you forced him to play by your rules, he tries to bargain with you to convince you to pick synthesis, but you are not bound to do that.

And how does exactly letting Reapers destroy all advanted organic life, just like they used to do since the beginning, is not playing by their rules? I don't like the fact that he, my adversary, is willingly (or not?) cooperating, I would prefer to force him to obey, but still sort of compromise is better than not forcing anything and just letting him do his work, no? Sadly it either our rules/his rules or his rules alone. I know what I prefer.

[Seival]

It's very sad to see how some people are trying to justify ultimate mission failure as a "valuable ending". Those people are not ready to make really tough decisions even in the imaginary game's world.

...My suggestion to "uncompromising refusers": Start new game, die in the very first combat encounter, and consider this as your best playthrough. This will not be any different than choosing Refusal.

[RDSFirebane]

Refusal letting everyone die on their own terms. letting everyone say goodbye their own way.

Sorry Refusal was the best ending for me as i didn't approve of playing god by deciding what was best for a entire galaxy of different individuals who continued to show how much they loved their free will and who they were.

Modifié par RDSFirebane, 30 juillet 2012 - 01:34 .

[saracen16]

Refusal is a war crime. You disobey the orders of your superiors to use the Crucible, you consign trillions of souls to their doom, and you give up the only way to stop the Reapers just for a short-lived moment of pride and haughtiness, in effect letting the cycle continue and doing exactly what the Reapers wanted you to do... No, no, no... the Catalyst wants you to stop the Cycle because the Crucible has changed it.

Any of the Crucible's choices would suffice over refusal. Even Destroy.

[RDSFirebane]

saracen16 wrote...

Any of the Crucible's choices would suffice over refusal. Even Destroy.

opnion kinda like everything you just said.

[Seival]

RDSFirebane wrote...

Refusal letting everyone die on their own terms. letting everyone say goodbye their own way.

Sorry Refusal was the best ending for me as i didn't approve of playing god by deciding what was best for a entire galaxy of different individuals who continued to show how much they loved their free will and who they were.

Typical delusion.

You should understand that in case of Refusal everyone will die on the Reapers' terms. Cycle will continue, and everyone will be turned into new Reaper Ships and Hasks. Moreover, the Catalist will be Very disappointed and make sure noone will be able to make and use Crucible or anything similar.

Refusal is not just a critical mission failure for current Cycle. It's the Ultimate Mission Failure FOREVER. Cycles will never be stopped. You literally kill everyone and all hope by choosing Refusal. And for what? Just to feed the Indecisive Shepard's pride.

Modifié par Seival, 30 juillet 2012 - 01:54 .

[RDSFirebane]

Seival wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

Refusal letting everyone die on their own terms. letting everyone say goodbye their own way.

Sorry Refusal was the best ending for me as i didn't approve of playing god by deciding what was best for a entire galaxy of different individuals who continued to show how much they loved their free will and who they were.

Typical delusion.

You should understand that in case of Refusal everyone will die on the Reapers' terms. Cycle will continue, and everyone will be turned into new Reaper Ships and Hasks. Moreover, the Catalist will be Very disappointed and make sure noone will be able to make and use Crucible or anything similar.

Refusal is not just a critical mission failure for current Cycle. It's the Ultimate Mission Failure FOREVER. Cycles will never be stopped again. You literally kill everyone and all hope by choosing Refusal. And for what? Just to feed the Indecisive Shepard's pride.

It was confimred via twitter the next cycle defeats the reapers so you just lost there and No I expected since Me 1 everyone would die and was ready for it I let them die who they are and I let them die for what they belived in.

and as far as being deluded goes I could say the same about you and what ever crappy ending you like wow see what the accomplished nothing.

[iamweaver]

RDSFirebane wrote...

Refusal letting everyone die on their own terms. letting everyone say goodbye their own way.

Sorry Refusal was the best ending for me as i didn't approve of playing god by deciding what was best for a entire galaxy of different individuals who continued to show how much they loved their free will and who they were.

But... weren't you chosen to make the decision for the galaxy by a reasonable majority of leaders?  And didn't the leaders who chose you, did so as a matter of choice, using their free will?  And didn't you say that you would stop the reapers, using any means possible?

Basically, if you assume some level of veracity from the Starchild, then refuse is only an option if you want to turn traitor and avoid the task you were chosen to do, in other words playing fickle God by ignoring the free willed choices of those who trusted you with this task.

It would be one thing if you were an independent agent, haring around the galaxy, who stumbled into this and suddenly faced a decision like this. But the whole reason that every galactic civilization, even the salarians in the end, were behind you was that you promised to stop the reapers.  So feel free to walk away from your promise, but don't hide behind some "free will" handwaving, just so that you can feel good about yourself while every person that you have ever known gets stuffed into a tube, liquified, and is used to reap the following civilizations.  Yeah, they'll really thank you for that.

[iamweaver]

RDSFirebane wrote...

Seival wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

Refusal letting everyone die on their own terms. letting everyone say goodbye their own way.

Sorry Refusal was the best ending for me as i didn't approve of playing god by deciding what was best for a entire galaxy of different individuals who continued to show how much they loved their free will and who they were.

Typical delusion.

You should understand that in case of Refusal everyone will die on the Reapers' terms. Cycle will continue, and everyone will be turned into new Reaper Ships and Hasks. Moreover, the Catalist will be Very disappointed and make sure noone will be able to make and use Crucible or anything similar.

Refusal is not just a critical mission failure for current Cycle. It's the Ultimate Mission Failure FOREVER. Cycles will never be stopped again. You literally kill everyone and all hope by choosing Refusal. And for what? Just to feed the Indecisive Shepard's pride.

It was confimred via twitter the next cycle defeats the reapers so you just lost there and No I expected since Me 1 everyone would die and was ready for it I let them die who they are and I let them die for what they belived in.

and as far as being deluded goes I could say the same about you and what ever crappy ending you like wow see what the accomplished nothing.

Read the title of the post.  WIthout Metagaming.  Is that really that hard to understand?

Because if you metagame, then refuse is completely useless, as control beats it, hands down, 100%.  Not that I chose Control, because I wasn't metagaming.

[Pitznik]

A leader who gets his soldiers killed while achieving the objective he was ordered to is doing his job, even if he has to deal with guilt after.

A leader who lets all his soldiers die for no reason other than some perceived moral high ground will face court-martial.

[Seival]

RDSFirebane wrote...

Seival wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

Refusal letting everyone die on their own terms. letting everyone say goodbye their own way.

Sorry Refusal was the best ending for me as i didn't approve of playing god by deciding what was best for a entire galaxy of different individuals who continued to show how much they loved their free will and who they were.

Typical delusion.

You should understand that in case of Refusal everyone will die on the Reapers' terms. Cycle will continue, and everyone will be turned into new Reaper Ships and Hasks. Moreover, the Catalist will be Very disappointed and make sure noone will be able to make and use Crucible or anything similar.

Refusal is not just a critical mission failure for current Cycle. It's the Ultimate Mission Failure FOREVER. Cycles will never be stopped again. You literally kill everyone and all hope by choosing Refusal. And for what? Just to feed the Indecisive Shepard's pride.

It was confimred via twitter the next cycle defeats the reapers so you just lost there and No I expected since Me 1 everyone would die and was ready for it I let them die who they are and I let them die for what they belived in.

and as far as being deluded goes I could say the same about you and what ever crappy ending you like wow see what the accomplished nothing.

What you were "confirmed via the twitter" doesn't really matter. How many Cycles were required to make even a little possibility to stop the Reapers? Thousands? Millions? What hope will future Cycles have with Catalist's readiness to the Crucible and anything similar?

The conclusion is simple: In case of Refusal Cycles will become unstoppable.

...Suggestion: Don't look for answers in the twitter. Look for them in the game.

[Galbrant]

saracen16 wrote...

Refusal is a war crime. You disobey the orders of your superiors to use the Crucible, you consign trillions of souls to their doom, and you give up the only way to stop the Reapers just for a short-lived moment of pride and haughtiness, in effect letting the cycle continue and doing exactly what the Reapers wanted you to do... No, no, no... the Catalyst wants you to stop the Cycle because the Crucible has changed it.

Any of the Crucible's choices would suffice over refusal. Even Destroy.

No its not, Shepard is a Spectre s/he answers only to the Council and last I check Hackett isn't apart of the council, also there was a Paragon option with EDI in a conversation about not following orders sometimes, and you can completely ignore Hackett side quests in ME1 and ignore Arrival in ME2 .And Refusal doesn't mean Shepard isn't going to use the Crucible, you just reject how the Catalyst wants to use the Crucible. For all we know they're could be other functions of the Crucible we don't know about. I rather not rely on oversized garbage can though.

If I must use it I rather learn what the Crucible functions are from a more reliable source and not in the last ten minutes with all our forces committed to use something we had no idea on how it operates. It isn't about pride or haughtiness, It's about not making a deal with the  Devil who's responsible for wiping out Galactic Civilizations for eons through deciet, suprise attacks, and his bright plan for you to save everyone  is to kill yourself.  

[RDSFirebane]

iamweaver wrote...

But... weren't you chosen to make the decision for the galaxy by a reasonable majority of leaders?  And didn't the leaders who chose you, did so as a matter of choice, using their free will?  And didn't you say that you would stop the reapers, using any means possible?

1. cut it down for space not avoiding your statment.



"Basically, if you assume some level of veracity from the Starchild,
then refuse is only an option if you want to turn traitor and avoid the
task you were chosen to do, in other words playing fickle God by
ignoring the free willed choices of those who trusted you with this
task."

My issue with this is I see the other 3 options also in many ways are betraying one or more groups you've sworn to save. Choseing Refuse is makeing a choice and is no way ignoreing the task I decided to roll the dice sadly the game only allows me to roll snake eyes with my ending.

also Refuse is by far the hardest decsion to chose because of what happens but have a great time paveing your own road to hell with all thouse good intetions you just tried to throw in my face denouceing my free will hand waveing as u call it.

[flanny]

Pitznik wrote...

flanny wrote...


the fact remains that the choices come from the catalyst and are therefore part of his masterplan, knowing that I can't see Shepard being apart of those plans. the fact it actually brings you to the room supports this, if the catalyst didn't want to use you he would have left you there.

also you may want to look back at your 'logic' becauce it doesn't work very well, you made it up simply to support your own argument and doesn't work objectively to people who don't agree with you

Catalyst not necessarily wanted you to be there, he could be forced to by the Crucible. By creating the Crucible you forced him to play by your rules, he tries to bargain with you to convince you to pick synthesis, but you are not bound to do that.

And how does exactly letting Reapers destroy all advanted organic life, just like they used to do since the beginning, is not playing by their rules? I don't like the fact that he, my adversary, is willingly (or not?) cooperating, I would prefer to force him to obey, but still sort of compromise is better than not forcing anything and just letting him do his work, no? Sadly it either our rules/his rules or his rules alone. I know what I prefer.

that makes no sense as no-one knows about the catalyst how can you begin to design something that alters something you don't know about. 

also, since the refuse ending is left vague I'd like to think i inflicted a pyrrhic victory, meaning they no longer have the reasources to continue the next cycle. that or headcanon.

[RDSFirebane]

Seival wrote...

What you were "confirmed via the twitter" doesn't really matter. How many Cycles were required to make even a little possibility to stop the Reapers? Thousands? Millions? What hope will future Cycles have with Catalist's readiness to the Crucible and anything similar?

The conclusion is simple: In case of Refusal Cycles will become unstoppable.

...Suggestion: Don't look for answers in the twitter. Look for them in the game.

Sorry the fact the lead writter states that Refusal still leads to a win completey throws what you think out the window and no they adapted to stop the cycles once would only be a matter of time till some race did so again matter a fact they do so the next cycle its amazeing really.

[Pitznik]

RDSFirebane wrote...


My issue with this is I see the other 3 options also in many ways are betraying one or more groups you've sworn to save. Choseing Refuse is makeing a choice and is no way ignoreing the task I decided to roll the dice sadly the game only allows me to roll snake eyes with my ending.

also Refuse is by far the hardest decsion to chose because of what happens but have a great time paveing your own road to hell with all thouse good intetions you just tried to throw in my face denouceing my free will hand waveing as u call it.

To sacrifice some of the people who put their trust in you to achieve your common goal is reality of war, not betrayal. To suddenly abort your goal despite having everyone else to believe in it and invest in it and give their life for it is betrayal. Refusal is betrayal.

[iamweaver]

RDSFirebane wrote...

iamweaver wrote...

But... weren't you chosen to make the decision for the galaxy by a reasonable majority of leaders?  And didn't the leaders who chose you, did so as a matter of choice, using their free will?  And didn't you say that you would stop the reapers, using any means possible?

1. cut it down for space not avoiding your statment.



"Basically, if you assume some level of veracity from the Starchild,
then refuse is only an option if you want to turn traitor and avoid the
task you were chosen to do, in other words playing fickle God by
ignoring the free willed choices of those who trusted you with this
task."

My issue with this is I see the other 3 options also in many ways are betraying one or more groups you've sworn to save. Choseing Refuse is makeing a choice and is no way ignoreing the task I decided to roll the dice sadly the game only allows me to roll snake eyes with my ending.

also Refuse is by far the hardest decsion to chose because of what happens but have a great time paveing your own road to hell with all thouse good intetions you just tried to throw in my face denouceing my free will hand waveing as u call it.

Yeah, sometimes you roll snake eyes.  But hopefully you don't welsh on your bet because of it.

The whole "hell is paved" argument only works if it's just you facing the consequences of your decisions. And you're still missing the point.  When you are chosen as leader, that means that its you who makes the decisions.  You.,  All by your lonesome, without sppending time personally asking everyone who chose you if decision X is right.


What's more - you're actually wrong.  The entire Geth collective chose you to make decisions for you, and volunteered to fight against the reapers, regardless of consequenses - and this is only if you didn't let them get wiped out.  And EDI, the other AI affected by Destroy, personally told you that she was willing to die to stop the reapers.

You have yet to explain how the Control option goes against the free will of folk in the Galaxy.

[iamweaver]

RDSFirebane wrote...

Seival wrote...

What you were "confirmed via the twitter" doesn't really matter. How many Cycles were required to make even a little possibility to stop the Reapers? Thousands? Millions? What hope will future Cycles have with Catalist's readiness to the Crucible and anything similar?

The conclusion is simple: In case of Refusal Cycles will become unstoppable.

...Suggestion: Don't look for answers in the twitter. Look for them in the game.

Sorry the fact the lead writter states that Refusal still leads to a win completey throws what you think out the window and no they adapted to stop the cycles once would only be a matter of time till some race did so again matter a fact they do so the next cycle its amazeing really.

The question in the thread is, "without using metagaming".  Second, if you use all available sources, Control is best.