80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

[quote]demersel wrote...

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...

So the thing that controls all reapers is located on the citadel? Wow. never knew that... Does it control the citadel, or is it just like some stowaway thingy, that just happens to be there? 

[/quote]
I think the Citadel was built around it.
[/quote]

Ok, but is it connected to a catalist, or is it just like some huge whale shark, with the catalyst being some kind of remora, just riding it?  

[/quote]
The Catalyst is a computer system distributed throughout the Citadel. Fully integrated.

[paxxton]

demersel wrote...

paxxton wrote...

What's TOS?

Oh. The old Republic.  TOR. sorry. Got a typho. 

So you mean SWTOR.

[spotlessvoid]

BatmanTurian wrote...

I'm so, so tired of the "Genocide" argument, as if the other two choices aren't " Passive-Aggressive Dictator for Eternity" and "Galactic Rape and Homogenisation"

This is their newest "argument". They can't win the argument with logic or facts so they resort to what is essentially name-calling and passing judgement on the player for the collateral deaths of pixels. We're supposed to feel guilty for killing fictional characters as a byproduct of stopping omnicidal walking graveyards.

I just want to talk about IT. Why wont that thing leave BT? Its like thread cancer

[Dwailing]

Xilizhra wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

" But it's not literal. You'd still get to get past the Catalyst and battle Harbinger at the end."

You just can't let go of this idea that it's impossible to make the wrong choice can you? If all choices are valid and lead to the exact same boss battle, wtf is the point?

The point is that you, the Destroy pickers, would get the exact same story that you would in your current theory. You'd break out of indoctrination via your own means and fight Harbinger. What happened to Shepard in the other choices would have nothing to do with you. You have no reason to care about the fate of non-Destroy Shepards and no reason to oppose them getting a decent ending too.

I know this will be flamed, but frankly, if you ask me, non-Destroy Shepard's don't DESERVE a good ending.  Those guys compormised.  They gave up on the goal of the ENTIRE SERIES just because some Reaper thing that took the appearance of a dead kid said that destroying the Reapers wasn't the right thing.  

Edit: I should point out that I don't oppose the idea of there being a way for you to still win if you chose Control, Synthesis, or Rejection, I just think that it wouldn't be right for there to be no consequences.  I think, if you chose one of the afformentioned endings, that Shepard should die, and there should be significant casualties.  Not defeat, just a VERY hard won victory.

Modifié par Dwailing, 11 octobre 2012 - 05:15 .

[BatmanTurian]

spotlessvoid wrote...

" But it's not literal. You'd still get to get past the Catalyst and battle Harbinger at the end."

You just can't let go of this idea that it's impossible to make the wrong choice can you? If all choices are valid and lead to the exact same boss battle, wtf is the point?

Exactly, what is the point of having a built-up big choice moment if all the choices are happy endings except one. Making all the choices valid removes choice from Mass Effect, which has always been about player choice, for good or for bad.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 11 octobre 2012 - 05:13 .

[spotlessvoid]

Xilizhra wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

" But it's not literal. You'd still get to get past the Catalyst and battle Harbinger at the end."

You just can't let go of this idea that it's impossible to make the wrong choice can you? If all choices are valid and lead to the exact same boss battle, wtf is the point?

The point is that you, the Destroy pickers, would get the exact same story that you would in your current theory. You'd break out of indoctrination via your own means and fight Harbinger. What happened to Shepard in the other choices would have nothing to do with you. You have no reason to care about the fate of non-Destroy Shepards and no reason to oppose them getting a decent ending too.

No, wtf is the point of the indoc attempt if you cant go wrong? Thats retarded

[demersel]

Xilizhra wrote...

The Catalyst is a computer system distributed throughout the Citadel. Fully integrated.

Ok...So it can control some functions of the citadel, like orbit, Open/Close arms thing, maybe even transport it throght space, right? 

[Xilizhra]

I know this will be flamed, but frankly, if you ask me, non-Destroy Shepard's don't DESERVE a good ending. Those guys compormised. They gave up on the goal of the ENTIRE SERIES just because some Reaper thing that took the appearance of a dead kid said that destroying the Reapers wasn't the right thing.

Your opinion has been noted and will be duly disregarded.

Exactly, what is the point of having a built-up big choice moment if all the choices are happy endings except one. Making all the choices valid removes choice from Mass Effect, which has always been about player choice, for good or for bad.

This is why literalism is just better. But the ultimate effects on the galaxy could still be different depending on your choice, although I'm not entirely sure how it'd be implemented yet.

[masster blaster]

Also " they built the Citadel around it. Really the network of Reapers is in the Citadel, and the new coming dlc after Omega is a Citadel dlc, where we go into the heart of the Citadel, and in that heart. Should be the Reaper network because it has to be a huge *** program computer to store the Reapers data in the Citadel. So if we Destroy it the Reaper die and the war is over. Simply as that.

[Xilizhra]

No, wtf is the point of the indoc attempt if you cant go wrong? Thats retarded

The point is that the Reapers are wrong and can't control Shepard. How is that particularly bad? I find it impressive.

Ok...So it can control some functions of the citadel, like orbit, Open/Close arms thing, maybe even transport it throght space, right?

Not... directly, I think. I don't think it can move the Citadel like a body; it needs outside help to do those things. I don't really get the design, it's sort of odd, but this is what I've extrapolated so far.

[demersel]

masster blaster wrote...

Also " they built the Citadel around it. Really the network of Reapers is in the Citadel, and the new coming dlc after Omega is a Citadel dlc, where we go into the heart of the Citadel, and in that heart. Should be the Reaper network because it has to be a huge *** program computer to store the Reapers data in the Citadel. So if we Destroy it the Reaper die and the war is over. Simply as that.

Wait, wait wait! I have a point with this - don't spoil it! 

[Dwailing]

Xilizhra wrote...

Exactly, what is the point of having a built-up big choice moment if all the choices are happy endings except one. Making all the choices valid removes choice from Mass Effect, which has always been about player choice, for good or for bad.

This is why literalism is just better. But the ultimate effects on the galaxy could still be different depending on your choice, although I'm not entirely sure how it'd be implemented yet.

So you're saying that galactic rape, synthetic genocide, all powerful Reaper overlord, and GALACTIC genocide are better than indoctrination vs. non-indoctrination? 

Modifié par Dwailing, 11 octobre 2012 - 05:18 .

[Either.Ardrey]

Xilizhra wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

You're ridiculous and pathetic. You're not in here to discuss IT. You're just here to complain.

Actually, my first post in here a while back was to give an alternate version of IT that I thought we could compromise on, one where there's an indoctrination attempt, but Shepard can break through it regardless of choice at the end. Then you were the one who started complaining about that and making the case that IT is about being exclusionary and ensuring that only your personal preference is the right choice. I have since responded.

And I personally supported that general idea as an option. I don't understand some people's problem with it. I don't remember about your version, but in mine, each choice changes how one would break free.

[BatmanTurian]

Xilizhra wrote...

I know this will be flamed, but frankly, if you ask me, non-Destroy Shepard's don't DESERVE a good ending. Those guys compormised. They gave up on the goal of the ENTIRE SERIES just because some Reaper thing that took the appearance of a dead kid said that destroying the Reapers wasn't the right thing.

Your opinion has been noted and will be duly disregarded.

can't take the heat so ignore the kitchen.

Xilizhra wrote...

Exactly, what is the point of having a built-up big choice moment if all the choices are happy endings except one. Making all the choices valid removes choice from Mass Effect, which has always been about player choice, for good or for bad.

This is why literalism is just better. But the ultimate effects on the galaxy could still be different depending on your choice, although I'm not entirely sure how it'd be implemented yet.

"This is why literalism is just better" ? Because then everyone would have a happy ending? Did you just not read what I said? Having all the choices valid invalidates the point of having a choice if all the choices result in essentially the same game-winning mechanic.

[Xilizhra]

Dwailing wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I know this will be flamed, but frankly, if you ask me, non-Destroy Shepard's don't DESERVE a good ending. Those guys compormised. They gave up on the goal of the ENTIRE SERIES just because some Reaper thing that took the appearance of a dead kid said that destroying the Reapers wasn't the right thing.

Your opinion has been noted and will be duly disregarded.

Exactly, what is the point of having a built-up big choice moment if all the choices are happy endings except one. Making all the choices valid removes choice from Mass Effect, which has always been about player choice, for good or for bad.

This is why literalism is just better. But the ultimate effects on the galaxy could still be different depending on your choice, although I'm not entirely sure how it'd be implemented yet.

So you're saying that galactic rape, synthetic genocide, all powerful Reaper overlord, and GALACTIC genocide are better than indoctrination vs. non-indoctrination? 

Better for making your choices matter, sure. Though I'm for, if IT is real, completely disregard all four choices and having the real final choice be in the DLC after Shepard wakes up.

"This is why literalism is just better" ? Because then everyone
would have a happy ending? Did you just not read what I said? Having all
the choices valid invalidates the point of having a choice if all the
choices result in essentially the same game-winning mechanic.

Then have a new choice at the end.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 11 octobre 2012 - 05:19 .

[demersel]

Xilizhra wrote...

No, wtf is the point of the indoc attempt if you cant go wrong? Thats retarded

The point is that the Reapers are wrong and can't control Shepard. How is that particularly bad? I find it impressive.

Ok...So it can control some functions of the citadel, like orbit, Open/Close arms thing, maybe even transport it throght space, right?

Not... directly, I think. I don't think it can move the Citadel like a body; it needs outside help to do those things. I don't really get the design, it's sort of odd, but this is what I've extrapolated so far.

Nah it is really simple - it either controls something or it doesn't. Which one it is? 
You can't be sort of fully integrated into somathing and control a race of infinite numbers of huge sentiant machines and not be able to control the thing you;re fully integrated into - which one is it? Is the the citadel part of the catalyst like an arm is part of your body, or is it just like same no wi-fi no bluetoth old laptop that somedody just dropped in one of the counless corridors of a huge space station? 

[Xilizhra]

Nah it is really simple - it either controls something or it doesn't. Which one it is?
You can't be sort of fully integrated into somathing and control a race of infinite numbers of huge sentiant machines and not be able to control the thing you;re fully integrated into - which one is it? Is the the citadel part of the catalyst like an arm is part of your body, or is it just like same no wi-fi no bluetoth old laptop that somedody just dropped in one of the counless corridors of a huge space station?

The Catalyst is like a stock trading/managing computer: it can run and control many important things on its own, but can't physically affect itself or its hardware.

[masster blaster]

Xil you do realize the Citadel IS a TRAP. Hell in ME1 you find out it's a trap to trap the galactic leader inone spot, and take them out/ get all the info on the current cycle. Ya the Reapers taking the Citadel, and TIM letting Shepard talk to the Prothean VI, ( which TIM could have Destroyed it, oh wait Reapers want to have Shepard, so they set a trap up) and it all doesn't add up if you think literaly.

[BatmanTurian]

Either.Ardrey wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

You're ridiculous and pathetic. You're not in here to discuss IT. You're just here to complain.

Actually, my first post in here a while back was to give an alternate version of IT that I thought we could compromise on, one where there's an indoctrination attempt, but Shepard can break through it regardless of choice at the end. Then you were the one who started complaining about that and making the case that IT is about being exclusionary and ensuring that only your personal preference is the right choice. I have since responded.

And I personally supported that general idea as an option. I don't understand some people's problem with it. I don't remember about your version, but in mine, each choice changes how one would break free.

That is the original IT and it still stands. Destroy is the only way not to be indoctrinated. The other two make you indoctrinated but you might have a backdoor out like Liara's mind-touch creating something like Benezia's locked room for her mind.

So obviously one would pick the choice that makes you not have to go through the indoctrinated nonsense and go right back to fighting and destroying Reapers, whether in a final DLC or in ME4.

[demersel]

Xilizhra wrote...
The Catalyst is like a stock trading/managing computer: it can run and control many important things on its own, but can't physically affect itself or its hardware.

It seems to be perfectly able to turn off the beam, turn on the elevator, close the arms in control etc... So it does have control over citadel functions. 

[spotlessvoid]

" The point is that the Reapers are wrong and can't control Shepard. How is that particularly bad? Ifind it impressive."

I find it trite and childish. Invincible Shepard...pointless and stupid. So Shepard can fail spectacularly in the suicide mission, but not the end?

[Ithurael]

demersel wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

The Catalyst is a computer system distributed throughout the Citadel. Fully integrated.

Ok...So it can control some functions of the citadel, like orbit, Open/Close arms thing, maybe even transport it throght space, right? 

That is what I keep saying to some pro-enders!!

Assuming it can - it can - that invalidates all of ME1 and 2

demersel wrote...
It seems to be perfectly able to turn off the beam, turn on the
elevator, close the arms in control etc... So it does have control over
citadel functions. 

THANK YOU!! God I thought I was the only one!

Bad writing is bad.

Modifié par Ithurael, 11 octobre 2012 - 05:24 .

[Rifneno]

demersel wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

No, wtf is the point of the indoc attempt if you cant go wrong? Thats retarded

The point is that the Reapers are wrong and can't control Shepard. How is that particularly bad? I find it impressive.

Ok...So it can control some functions of the citadel, like orbit, Open/Close arms thing, maybe even transport it throght space, right?

Not... directly, I think. I don't think it can move the Citadel like a body; it needs outside help to do those things. I don't really get the design, it's sort of odd, but this is what I've extrapolated so far.

Nah it is really simple - it either controls something or it doesn't. Which one it is? 
You can't be sort of fully integrated into somathing and control a race of infinite numbers of huge sentiant machines and not be able to control the thing you;re fully integrated into - which one is it? Is the the citadel part of the catalyst like an arm is part of your body, or is it just like same no wi-fi no bluetoth old laptop that somedody just dropped in one of the counless corridors of a huge space station? 

She's just making up bull**** because she's been posed with the question "if the catalyst is real, then why didn't it just open the relay instead of Sovereign having to get destroyed trying to open it manually?" and there's no intelligent answer for that.  It requires bull****ting.  Hence all the bull**** you're seeing.

[Dwailing]

Xilizhra wrote...

Nah it is really simple - it either controls something or it doesn't. Which one it is?
You can't be sort of fully integrated into somathing and control a race of infinite numbers of huge sentiant machines and not be able to control the thing you;re fully integrated into - which one is it? Is the the citadel part of the catalyst like an arm is part of your body, or is it just like same no wi-fi no bluetoth old laptop that somedody just dropped in one of the counless corridors of a huge space station?

The Catalyst is like a stock trading/managing computer: it can run and control many important things on its own, but can't physically affect itself or its hardware.

Then how is it able to disable the choices if you choose Rejection?  In fact, how is it even able to choose how many choices to give you?  Because that requires the ability to physically affect its hardware (The walkways to the choices).

[spotlessvoid]

" The Catalyst is like astock trading/managing computer: it can run and control many important things on its own, but can't physically affect itself or its hardware."

Then how did such a pathetic thing manage to harvest the Leviathan into the first reaper? Lol