467 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Oh cripe.  Really?  I said I (as in me and not Shepard) can't play it now without meta-gaming it so I won't play the ending ever and if I did I wouldn't make a choice because they are equally evil.

You're doing that deontology thing again. Not every Shepard believes that consequences are morally irrelevant. It's easy to believe this in a video game where the consequences aren't real and a destroyed universe can just be reloaded. ITRW, not so much.

But the real Shepard would choose refuse and want to try and fight.  He wouldn't choose this crap and wouldn't make people live out any fate created by the choices.  The real Shepard wouldn't make a choice offered by the enemy to solve the enemy's problem.  The real Shepard would try for a fight and a possible win on his and the galaxy's terms, not the enemy's.  A renegade would never get past the kid saying, "I control the reapers."  Shepard would shoot the kid at that point.  A paragon would listen and refuse to make one of those choices.

And this is, as usual, where we part company on Shep. For me, Shep is the woman who will face the unpleasant truths that others can't or won't face , and will do the things that need to be done.

[incinerator950]

AlanC9 wrote...

Batnat wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Not using the only weapon that can put down the reapers for good is stupid. Don't need to metagame to know that refuse is just plain idiotic

Putting all resources into building a weapon that no previous cycle ever even got to finish, a weapon that no one has any idea what it does and using it because my enemy tells me to is just as idiotic. Just saying...

A plan that might work is better than no plan at all.

What, you consider Hacket your enemy?  Or the AI literally explaining that its giving you the option of killing it, taking its position, or enacting a super plan that it already failed but you now have?

On a better note, lets not go to the Council.  Lets not seek treaties to fight the Blight.  Lets not go to the Jedi Temple and instead lets go be Space Pirates or mecenaries.

[Batnat]

Urgh...Twitter...how I love thee...

Sorry, when I play a game, I focus on the story in the game! What doesn´t happen in the game, DOESN´T happen!
If there are holes in the plot I either ignore them or I plug them with my imagination, which seems to be what the creators want me to do.

I don´t care for any story elements being revealed on Twitter/Facebook/Apps/...!!!
As far as I´m concerned those are all personal interpretations of the people posting the stuff, doesn´t matter if that happens to be a writer, dev or moderator.

Take Refuse for example...in the EC nothing suggests the next cycle uses the damn crucible...it´s not explained at all how they manage to prevent war...it could be with or without the thing...I happen to believe they do it without it. I´ve heard Mr. Gamble thinks otherwise. That has no bearing on my take on things.

Want me to acknowledge something new story-wise...put it in a damn DLC! <_<

Or next time just provide the whole game in textform on Twitter so I don´t have to deal with conveniently appearing superweapons and spacebrats (I hate Kids!), plot holes, metagaming, space magic, head canon, speculations and all that funk, because...you guessed it...I don´t use Twitter!!!

[3DandBeyond]

iamweaver wrote...

The initial plan was that you would somehow activate the Crucible (you, personally), destroying the Earth and the Reaper fleet.  And you were OK with that.  But once you find out that other options exist, they are worse, somehow?

Well, hopefully you have at least learned from this that war sucks.  Unless the thought of everyone that Shepherd has even known and loved getting shoved into a tube and turned into liquid makes you go, "meh.  They asked for it.".

What initial plan?  The crucible was to destroy reapers (supposedly).  Where in ME3 does anyone say if they make the crucible it will destroy Earth too.?  In fact, when they started making it and thought it was a weapon they had no idea it would join with the Citadel and be near Earth.

Also, you are presuming I like the Crucible at all as it is.  I don't.  I don't think it's logical that no one would question what it does and yet everyone wants to make it.

Oh really war sucks.  I thought it was all fun and stuff.  I say that it makes sense to decide to try and fight the reapers and not use choices offered by the reapers to end it all-which are totally horrid in what they do.  I am answering the OP's question and I do think it makes more sense without meta-gaming to do that.  Once Shepard finds out that the crucible/citadel is very possibly a tool of the catalyst's, then the choices are suspect.  For a renegade Shepard the kid would never get so far as to even explain them.  Shepard would not know that shooting the kid would mean s/he couldn't fire the crucible.  Shepard also wouldn't know that refusing to do what the kid wants would lead to annihilation.

Are you for real?  Yes, of course I think it's just great that people get turned into people goo on reapers-that's one reason I think Contorl is so stupid.  I don't want reapers that may have the goo of my family in them to still be alive.  I don't care if I die trying, but I want reapers dead, that's it.  And I won't agree to help my enemy if the survival he offers is garbage.

[Wayning_Star]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Not using the only weapon that can put down the reapers for good is stupid. Don't need to metagame to know that refuse is just plain idiotic

Absolute tosh. I'm a bright enough lad and had no idea choosing Refuse would result in Mac and Casey giving me the virtual bird! Lets be absolutely clear: Refuse leads to the annihilation of everything in the galaxy only because the aforementioned 'artists' were waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more invested in defending their original endings than appeasing those who refused to roleplay a war criminal.

Unfortunately, a machine cannot be a 'war criminal' no matter how bad it's programming error is, maybe their creators and those utilizing reaper technology could be busted on a conspiracy charge, but who'd try them?

I was talking about Shep.

Oh, sorry, I didn't catch that till you pointed it out. But Shepard has diplomatic immunity, its a  substantial job perk. But I get you're point, but don't blame the devs/Bioware for attempting to mollify. It is entertainment, that ends up being like hard work for so many fans.. In that they did goof up, imo and it'll probably cost'em money..maybe?

[3DandBeyond]

Wayning_Star wrote...

OP's hint is in the title: ""Why (No Metagaming) Refuse is the Best Choice."" mind those handy ()'s..

I digress, you are 'self' determined..

Yes the OP meant no meta-gaming.  And that's what I was talking about. 

I specifically talked about not metagaming and explained that refuse does make sense when you aren't metagaming, then said that as it is I cannot help metagaming so I can't make any choice including refuse. 

And yes you have digressed a lot. 
You are insulting.

[DirtyPhoenix]

3DandBeyond wrote...
But the real Shepard would choose refuse and want to try and fight.  He wouldn't choose this crap and wouldn't make people live out any fate created by the choices.  The real Shepard wouldn't make a choice offered by the enemy to solve the enemy's problem.  The real Shepard would try for a fight and a possible win on his and the galaxy's terms, not the enemy's.  A renegade would never get past the kid saying, "I control the reapers."  Shepard would shoot the kid at that point.  A paragon would listen and refuse to make one of those choices.

There is no "real" Shepard. There are just my Shepard, your Shepard and other's Shepards.. Here you seem to be talking about your Shepard. This doesn't represent my Shepard.

[3DandBeyond]

Batnat wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

Agreed. I'd try to have a refusal ending conversation with you but we seem to up to our eyes in " This ending sucks" people lol

^This...

Kinda strange, seeing as how many people wished to be able to have the option for Refuse pre-EC. And now it´s suddenly all wrong because..."OMG, total annihilation!" ...can´t have that...so, RGB it is...  

NOW all I hear is victory beeing impossible...what did those who wanted to refuse expect to get...it couldn´t be win, ´cause that´s just not possible...couldn´t be a loss either obviously...I´m confused...

Most the pro-Refusal people probably gave up on ME after they got the kick to the quads seeing the outcome.

Naturally I would enjoy Refuse quite a bit more, if the outcome depended on EMS, and I´m not getting into the argument why or how it COULD be possible. I´m not in the mood to talk against a brick wall. I just agree to disagree with those who think a win-situation in that scenario isn´t possible.  

Having said that...I also like Refuse the way it is...better that than to be forced to bow down to the enemy with every single one of my Sheps...without metagaming the outcome of that option is as much open to speculations than every other one!!!

It is because the writers only listened to the idea of refuse as they saw it.  Every post on refuse that I ever saw or took part in discussing was for Shepard to regain a backbone and tell the kid to F off.  And then the real fight to Take Earth Back could begin which could end in many variations of loss or win or sacrifice.  You know, a variety like what we were promised and some actual fight to take Earth back and not a conversation with the reaper king.

This refuse is not that refuse.  I know many thought this would be one way that they could keep their "boy" and allow others to get some of what they wanted.  But it just comes off as finger food.  But it seems to me the logical "choice" if not metagaming.

[iamweaver]

3DandBeyond wrote...

iamweaver wrote...

The initial plan was that you would somehow activate the Crucible (you, personally), destroying the Earth and the Reaper fleet.  And you were OK with that.  But once you find out that other options exist, they are worse, somehow?

Well, hopefully you have at least learned from this that war sucks.  Unless the thought of everyone that Shepherd has even known and loved getting shoved into a tube and turned into liquid makes you go, "meh.  They asked for it.".

What initial plan?  The crucible was to destroy reapers (supposedly).  Where in ME3 does anyone say if they make the crucible it will destroy Earth too.?  In fact, when they started making it and thought it was a weapon they had no idea it would join with the Citadel and be near Earth.

Also, you are presuming I like the Crucible at all as it is.  I don't.  I don't think it's logical that no one would question what it does and yet everyone wants to make it.

Oh really war sucks.  I thought it was all fun and stuff.  I say that it makes sense to decide to try and fight the reapers and not use choices offered by the reapers to end it all-which are totally horrid in what they do.  I am answering the OP's question and I do think it makes more sense without meta-gaming to do that.  Once Shepard finds out that the crucible/citadel is very possibly a tool of the catalyst's, then the choices are suspect.  For a renegade Shepard the kid would never get so far as to even explain them.  Shepard would not know that shooting the kid would mean s/he couldn't fire the crucible.  Shepard also wouldn't know that refusing to do what the kid wants would lead to annihilation.

Are you for real?  Yes, of course I think it's just great that people get turned into people goo on reapers-that's one reason I think Contorl is so stupid.  I don't want reapers that may have the goo of my family in them to still be alive.  I don't care if I die trying, but I want reapers dead, that's it.  And I won't agree to help my enemy if the survival he offers is garbage.

As for the Crucible - Hackett tells you that it will emit enough energy to destroy any nearby planets, at some point.  Of course, it turns out that theres a super-secret EMS powered device inside the Catalyst that can direct those energies better.  But while you are there on the Citadel, the best bet is that it will incinerate Earth upon use.

Arguing that the Starkid is simply a liar is a reasonable logical path to follow, if you're going to choose "refuse".  My arguments all assume that you were making your choice, based on the face value of the options offered to you - mostly because all of your arguments seemed to take the options at face value.  IMO, thats one big issue with the writing here, not using a trusted agent to give you options.

[iamweaver]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Batnat wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

Agreed. I'd try to have a refusal ending conversation with you but we seem to up to our eyes in " This ending sucks" people lol

^This...

Kinda strange, seeing as how many people wished to be able to have the option for Refuse pre-EC. And now it´s suddenly all wrong because..."OMG, total annihilation!" ...can´t have that...so, RGB it is...  

NOW all I hear is victory beeing impossible...what did those who wanted to refuse expect to get...it couldn´t be win, ´cause that´s just not possible...couldn´t be a loss either obviously...I´m confused...

Most the pro-Refusal people probably gave up on ME after they got the kick to the quads seeing the outcome.

Naturally I would enjoy Refuse quite a bit more, if the outcome depended on EMS, and I´m not getting into the argument why or how it COULD be possible. I´m not in the mood to talk against a brick wall. I just agree to disagree with those who think a win-situation in that scenario isn´t possible.  

Having said that...I also like Refuse the way it is...better that than to be forced to bow down to the enemy with every single one of my Sheps...without metagaming the outcome of that option is as much open to speculations than every other one!!!

It is because the writers only listened to the idea of refuse as they saw it.  Every post on refuse that I ever saw or took part in discussing was for Shepard to regain a backbone and tell the kid to F off.  And then the real fight to Take Earth Back could begin which could end in many variations of loss or win or sacrifice.  You know, a variety like what we were promised and some actual fight to take Earth back and not a conversation with the reaper king.

This refuse is not that refuse.  I know many thought this would be one way that they could keep their "boy" and allow others to get some of what they wanted.  But it just comes off as finger food.  But it seems to me the logical "choice" if not metagaming.

The writers can retcon whatever they like, of course.  But I outlined in a succinct way above, excatly why conventional success is not an option, given exactly what Shep knows as she stands there on the platform.

EDIT:  Note that this doesn't mean that our forces won't supply the Reapers with the worst disaster that they have yet faced, and it will assist later cycles, if the Reapers don't rebuild.

Modifié par iamweaver, 30 juillet 2012 - 04:32 .

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

OP's hint is in the title: ""Why (No Metagaming) Refuse is the Best Choice."" mind those handy ()'s..

I digress, you are 'self' determined..

Yes the OP meant no meta-gaming.  And that's what I was talking about. 

I specifically talked about not metagaming and explained that refuse does make sense when you aren't metagaming, then said that as it is I cannot help metagaming so I can't make any choice including refuse. 

And yes you have digressed a lot. 
You are insulting.

no, you didn't but thats ok.. and no I'm not insulting, you're just saying that because..you can. lol

Try'n stop finding things and points that detract from an entertainment medium and live a little. There is NO point in 'wanting reapers dead' as they're not alive in the first place and 'your family' isn't goo inside a reaper and their enities are but memories of their existence, a recording. Like family pictures, only more 'interactive'. Like the little thief girl who found her true love, still imagined in a reality other than here at home, or on twitter..well,maybe on facebook,but..that's meta gaming.

[Pitznik]

iamweaver wrote...
IMO, thats one big issue with the writing here, not using a trusted agent to give you options.

It would fix so many issues. But instead we have one huge gamble with building the Crucible, and then another huge gamble with actually making it work. So much depending on luck, gut feeling, trust towards someone untrustworthy. Bad idea. I don't mind it being it a difficult choice, but it should be conscious choice.

[incinerator950]

iamweaver wrote...

DocGriffin wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

No.

Without metagaming, Refusal is still mindnumbingly stupid.

At best - AT BEST (and this is so very much beyond any reasonable best that actually exists, and assumes you have in the neighborhood of a billion war assets, mind) - Shepard is willfully gambling the lives of EVERY MEMBER OF EVERY ADVANCED SPECIES IN THE GALAXY on a 50% chance. Do nothing and he KNOWS the galaxy is doomed.

Yes, the choices may be traps... but how, in any sane way, does that make things worse off than they are at the moment that the Catalyst is presented to Shepard?

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 a random game show, that it was likely that you would have to make some kind of a decision or do something on some show, though you didn't know which one or exactly what that decision woudl be.  And you promised your mother that you would do whatever it took to pay for the surgery.

Dying free is not the same as living free with denial or guilt.  If anything, its about living with yourself when you have to make a difficult decision.  

[3DandBeyond]

pirate1802 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
But the real Shepard would choose refuse and want to try and fight.  He wouldn't choose this crap and wouldn't make people live out any fate created by the choices.  The real Shepard wouldn't make a choice offered by the enemy to solve the enemy's problem.  The real Shepard would try for a fight and a possible win on his and the galaxy's terms, not the enemy's.  A renegade would never get past the kid saying, "I control the reapers."  Shepard would shoot the kid at that point.  A paragon would listen and refuse to make one of those choices.

There is no "real" Shepard. There are just my Shepard, your Shepard and other's Shepards.. Here you seem to be talking about your Shepard. This doesn't represent my Shepard.

With all due respect, contrary to what everyone believes Shepard works within certain boundaries in the games.  You are doing a bit of metagaming.  The choices Shepard gets within the game are not limitless.  A renegade acts before thinking and punches reporter that say things that are nowhere as bad as what the kid says.  The game allows a paragon to choose certain things within boundaries too.  A paragon Shepard also has said so many things in the game that would make all of these choices invalid ones.

For instance, the kid sees conflict as inevitable and says Shepard must make a choice based on that.  Destroy dooms the geth to extinction.  A paragon Shepard has said "you don't doom a whole race to extincition base on what may happen."  A paragon also says, you don't kill some over here to save others over there.  Just a couple examples.

But in metagaming, I can ignore all that and decide that destroy makes sense because I will ignore what Shepard has said before.  But a paragon Shepard without metagaming would live his/her previous choices.

I'm not saying you aren't free to interpret it as you would see it and you can of course choose anything you want.  I'd never tell you not to.  I'm only ever saying what I think, just as you are saying what you think.

[3DandBeyond]

Wayning_Star wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

OP's hint is in the title: ""Why (No Metagaming) Refuse is the Best Choice."" mind those handy ()'s..

I digress, you are 'self' determined..

Yes the OP meant no meta-gaming.  And that's what I was talking about. 

I specifically talked about not metagaming and explained that refuse does make sense when you aren't metagaming, then said that as it is I cannot help metagaming so I can't make any choice including refuse. 

And yes you have digressed a lot. 
You are insulting.

no, you didn't but thats ok.. and no I'm not insulting, you're just saying that because..you can. lol

Try'n stop finding things and points that detract from an entertainment medium and live a little. There is NO point in 'wanting reapers dead' as they're not alive in the first place and 'your family' isn't goo inside a reaper and their enities are but memories of their existence, a recording. Like family pictures, only more 'interactive'. Like the little thief girl who found her true love, still imagined in a reality other than here at home, or on twitter..well,maybe on facebook,but..that's meta gaming.

What game have you been playing?  I'm serious here.  Reapers turned people into organic paste and put the paste into constructs to make reapers.

[Wayning_Star]

iamweaver wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

iamweaver wrote...

The initial plan was that you would somehow activate the Crucible (you, personally), destroying the Earth and the Reaper fleet.  And you were OK with that.  But once you find out that other options exist, they are worse, somehow?

Well, hopefully you have at least learned from this that war sucks.  Unless the thought of everyone that Shepherd has even known and loved getting shoved into a tube and turned into liquid makes you go, "meh.  They asked for it.".

What initial plan?  The crucible was to destroy reapers (supposedly).  Where in ME3 does anyone say if they make the crucible it will destroy Earth too.?  In fact, when they started making it and thought it was a weapon they had no idea it would join with the Citadel and be near Earth.

Also, you are presuming I like the Crucible at all as it is.  I don't.  I don't think it's logical that no one would question what it does and yet everyone wants to make it.

Oh really war sucks.  I thought it was all fun and stuff.  I say that it makes sense to decide to try and fight the reapers and not use choices offered by the reapers to end it all-which are totally horrid in what they do.  I am answering the OP's question and I do think it makes more sense without meta-gaming to do that.  Once Shepard finds out that the crucible/citadel is very possibly a tool of the catalyst's, then the choices are suspect.  For a renegade Shepard the kid would never get so far as to even explain them.  Shepard would not know that shooting the kid would mean s/he couldn't fire the crucible.  Shepard also wouldn't know that refusing to do what the kid wants would lead to annihilation.

Are you for real?  Yes, of course I think it's just great that people get turned into people goo on reapers-that's one reason I think Contorl is so stupid.  I don't want reapers that may have the goo of my family in them to still be alive.  I don't care if I die trying, but I want reapers dead, that's it.  And I won't agree to help my enemy if the survival he offers is garbage.

As for the Crucible - Hackett tells you that it will emit enough energy to destroy any nearby planets, at some point.  Of course, it turns out that theres a super-secret EMS powered device inside the Catalyst that can direct those energies better.  But while you are there on the Citadel, the best bet is that it will incinerate Earth upon use.

Arguing that the Starkid is simply a liar is a reasonable logical path to follow, if you're going to choose "refuse".  My arguments all assume that you were making your choice, based on the face value of the options offered to you - mostly because all of your arguments seemed to take the options at face value.  IMO, thats one big issue with the writing here, not using a trusted agent to give you options.

excellent point there, but the entire MEU is based on the acts of the ' untrusted agent', ie reaper threat, and reaper tech, and the crucible, devined by the creator of the catalyst. All 'super' and mysterious. Shepard is as stuck in the cycle as anyone, but wants it to stop, completely and is self determined, more than anyone else in the MEU reality. So you have to trust his decisions. But, you are Shepard, so how do you go about realizing what is the best choice for the entire MEU, including the mysterious creators of which you have dedicated your entire existence to? Without realizing it, adrift in a sea of disaster. All the choices suck, none are actually choices, but polite demands...

[iamweaver]

3DandBeyond wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
But the real Shepard would choose refuse and want to try and fight.  He wouldn't choose this crap and wouldn't make people live out any fate created by the choices.  The real Shepard wouldn't make a choice offered by the enemy to solve the enemy's problem.  The real Shepard would try for a fight and a possible win on his and the galaxy's terms, not the enemy's.  A renegade would never get past the kid saying, "I control the reapers."  Shepard would shoot the kid at that point.  A paragon would listen and refuse to make one of those choices.

There is no "real" Shepard. There are just my Shepard, your Shepard and other's Shepards.. Here you seem to be talking about your Shepard. This doesn't represent my Shepard.

With all due respect, contrary to what everyone believes Shepard works within certain boundaries in the games.  You are doing a bit of metagaming.  The choices Shepard gets within the game are not limitless.  A renegade acts before thinking and punches reporter that say things that are nowhere as bad as what the kid says.  The game allows a paragon to choose certain things within boundaries too.  A paragon Shepard also has said so many things in the game that would make all of these choices invalid ones.

For instance, the kid sees conflict as inevitable and says Shepard must make a choice based on that.  Destroy dooms the geth to extinction.  A paragon Shepard has said "you don't doom a whole race to extincition base on what may happen."  A paragon also says, you don't kill some over here to save others over there.  Just a couple examples.

But in metagaming, I can ignore all that and decide that destroy makes sense because I will ignore what Shepard has said before.  But a paragon Shepard without metagaming would live his/her previous choices.

I'm not saying you aren't free to interpret it as you would see it and you can of course choose anything you want.  I'd never tell you not to.  I'm only ever saying what I think, just as you are saying what you think.

Actually, this was part of the ending that I really enjoyed (I decided to ignore the "untrusted agent argument - but that's off topic here).  I certainly chose the "math is bad" and "genocide is bad" options during the game play, when the entire galaxy didn't hinge on that decision, and there were either no negative consequences, or I was just using armchair moralization.

In some ways, I got a lot of nice mental exercise as I sat in my PC chair, knowing full well that, unlike previous silly in-game claims about "Shepherd does the impossible", that there really was no way for the Reapers to lose conventionally here, and that I was either going to stand on my armchair morals and watch the entire galaxy die screaming, or I was going to have to make a terrible choice to allow some or all of its advanced civilizations live.

Modifié par iamweaver, 30 juillet 2012 - 04:47 .

[3DandBeyond]

iamweaver wrote...

As for the Crucible - Hackett tells you that it will emit enough energy to destroy any nearby planets, at some point.  Of course, it turns out that theres a super-secret EMS powered device inside the Catalyst that can direct those energies better.  But while you are there on the Citadel, the best bet is that it will incinerate Earth upon use.

Arguing that the Starkid is simply a liar is a reasonable logical path to follow, if you're going to choose "refuse".  My arguments all assume that you were making your choice, based on the face value of the options offered to you - mostly because all of your arguments seemed to take the options at face value.  IMO, thats one big issue with the writing here, not using a trusted agent to give you options.

Exactly my problem as well.  The kid is so contradictory and the options have enough ambiguity built in as to make a person living as Shepard consider them false at face value. 

It's almost like you are forced to keep going back from playing as Shepard and then metagaming.

I don't remember Hackett saying that but don't doubt you at all and if it did destroy Earth well that's one thing, but I actually am saying I reject the Crucible as it is. 

Part of my problem is the given the proximity of the citadel and crucible to the Earth, there still should be signficant damage to Earth as well if Destroy is picked.  But what we see if we make a choice is actually the opposite of what we should see.  Everything seems to be "happy".  I think if everyone is so determined that the choices be "hard" choices then the consequences should be real.  But they aren't.  There only sadness is over Shepard's fate (and I'd like one ending where Shepard lives).  Everyone else is happy or dead. 


I think refuse is the only thing that makes the consequences real.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 30 juillet 2012 - 04:49 .

[CronoDragoon]

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

[AlanC9]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...
Absolute tosh. I'm a bright enough lad and had no idea choosing Refuse would result in Mac and Casey giving me the virtual bird! Lets be absolutely clear: Refuse leads to the annihilation of everything in the galaxy only because the aforementioned 'artists' were waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more invested in defending their original endings than appeasing those who refused to roleplay a war criminal.

Unfortunately, a machine cannot be a 'war criminal' no matter how bad it's programming error is, maybe their creators and those utilizing reaper technology could be busted on a conspiracy charge, but who'd try them?

I was talking about Shep.

Hey, maybe Bio can do a Reunion DLC and add a trial too. IIRC some folks were upset that we didn't get one to start the game.

[3DandBeyond]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Not using the only weapon that can put down the reapers for good is stupid. Don't need to metagame to know that refuse is just plain idiotic

Absolute tosh. I'm a bright enough lad and had no idea choosing Refuse would result in Mac and Casey giving me the virtual bird! Lets be absolutely clear: Refuse leads to the annihilation of everything in the galaxy only because the aforementioned 'artists' were waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more invested in defending their original endings than appeasing those who refused to roleplay a war criminal.

Unfortunately, a machine cannot be a 'war criminal' no matter how bad it's programming error is, maybe their creators and those utilizing reaper technology could be busted on a conspiracy charge, but who'd try them?

The roleplay a war criminal quote was referring to Shepard not the kid.

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

OP's hint is in the title: ""Why (No Metagaming) Refuse is the Best Choice."" mind those handy ()'s..

I digress, you are 'self' determined..

Yes the OP meant no meta-gaming.  And that's what I was talking about. 

I specifically talked about not metagaming and explained that refuse does make sense when you aren't metagaming, then said that as it is I cannot help metagaming so I can't make any choice including refuse. 

And yes you have digressed a lot. 
You are insulting.

no, you didn't but thats ok.. and no I'm not insulting, you're just saying that because..you can. lol

Try'n stop finding things and points that detract from an entertainment medium and live a little. There is NO point in 'wanting reapers dead' as they're not alive in the first place and 'your family' isn't goo inside a reaper and their enities are but memories of their existence, a recording. Like family pictures, only more 'interactive'. Like the little thief girl who found her true love, still imagined in a reality other than here at home, or on twitter..well,maybe on facebook,but..that's meta gaming.

What game have you been playing?  I'm serious here.  Reapers turned people into organic paste and put the paste into constructs to make reapers.

please don't patronize me with faux density, I know you're waaaay brighter than that, and stop fooling yourself into believing that I could possibly make a mistake.

The goo isn't there inside reapers, storing family members, their memories are and their DNA is stored as well, as far as I can tell from codex entries. The reapers didn't do it, the original builders of the catalyst did it when they created the catalyst to prevent some sort of friction(unexplained in the game) between organics and synthetics at some point in the past. Thats the reason they cannot be 'killed' as they are already dead/pure machine/not alive/sapient. Even their leader/head program is only a minor AI, so the catalyst isn't alive either, so it cannot be killed. So you cannot attain revenge on them, they're emotionless.
 
Even the false bravado emmitted from some reapers is just playback from what they contrived from programming as to what would  'intimidate' organics. Rember these machines are programmed from "organic LIFE forms" so they carry inovative programming, but not emotions/intuition/hopes/dreams/imagination/fear/greif/guilt or guile. The only reason to 'kill' them is to stop them, but that won't do it, according to the game and codex. Revenge is wasted on them and we can't "get back at' their creators, so we're stuck in a cycle with them. So, we stop the cycle.. how we do that is in contention though.

[3DandBeyond]

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?

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 30 juillet 2012 - 04:57 .

[AlanC9]

3DandBeyond wrote... 

Part of my problem is the given the proximity of the citadel and crucible to the Earth, there still should be signficant damage to Earth as well if Destroy is picked.  

Why only Destroy? Also, this would make Shep surviving really inexplicable.