80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

Andromidius wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Misinterpreted. Vendetta's line on Cronos Station is "You are attempting to rescue me from indoctrinated forces?" This would meaningless if Shepard was indoctrinated. And Prothean VIs, like Vigil, can always sense indoctrination.

*slowclap*

Well done.  Well done for yet again missing the point entirely.

Well done for being really dishonest.  Well done for ignoring every single ****ing time we explain things to you.

Well done for wasting everyone's time.

SHEPARD IS NOT INDOCTRINATED AT THAT STAGE!  HOW MANY TIMES DOES THAT NEED TO BE STATED?

Oh wait, you don't actually care do you?  Because you're dishonest.

Your little diatribe might even have made sense if I wasn't directly responding to someone who did outright say that Shepard had been indoctrinated on Cronos Station. Anyway, even if Shepard was left alive for some reason on the beam run, she's completely doomed if IT is true.

What is your response to
indoctrinated Prothean faction wanting to control the Reapers Xil?That
is in the codex

I'll say that that incident happened before indoctrination-detection technology was developed.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 20 octobre 2012 - 04:30 .

[shepskisaac]

spotlessvoid wrote...

What is your response to indoctrinated Prothean faction wanting to control the Reapers Xil?That is in the codex

That they may not have been indoctrinated by Reapers but controlled by Leviathans to add Control option to Crucible design. Levis sure would like to control the Reapers.

[BansheeOwnage]

Xilizhra wrote...

1. Just like no one had ever returned from the Omega-4 relay. No one stopped the reaper vanguard before. No one united a galaxy before. The list goes on.

Ah, yes, more hypocrisy from the one who can't accept Control being possible because NPCs disagreed with it. Or Synthesis, for that matter.

If Harbinger wanted Shepard dead, why didn't he kill him/her while Shepard was unconscious for two days and thus completely at his mercy?

Because Kenson is an idiot.

So you just admitted Kenson is indoctrinated by Harby (follows his orders) but Kenson is the idiot? Sureokaywhateveryousay.

Well, actually I never talked about control, but it doesn't even matter if it's possible. It's too big a risk. That's exactly how Shepard convinces the Illusive Man to kill himself!

Are you willing to bet humanity's (and everyone else's) existence on it?

Synthesis is just stupid on so many levels I'm not even going to start.

[demersel]

Xilizhra wrote...

If Harbinger wanted Shepard dead, why didn't he kill him/her while Shepard was unconscious for two days and thus completely at his mercy?

Because Kenson is an idiot.

Ohrly?  Bad Writing. 

[Domanese]

plfranke wrote...
The problem I've never seen addressed by ITers is one that you just posed, motive. The Reapers already have this battle won so it doesn't really matter whether they indoctrinate Shepard or not, (assuming it's not a full Reaper trap). Even if it was a Reaper trap though I don't see why it matters considering the Reapers just completely outgun everyone. However, for every problem there is with IT there are 2 for the literal interperetation.

For instance, I notice you seem to have a problem with Shepard being functional after he's taken a shot from Harbinger's beam, yet it doesn't bother you at all that he's able to survive in a literal interperetation which would make even less sense considering Harbinger would be shooting to kill.

Edit: When I say "it" in the places there is nothing specified of what I'm talking about, I'm talking about the Crucible.

Harbinger has shown himself to be very thorough when it comes to making sure everything is accounted for. When Shepard shows that he is a legitimate threat he instantly tries to have him killed, succeeds and then tries to secure the body just to make certain of that. It didn't work and Shepard gets revived. Okay then the next thing he does is set up traps in order to make sure he gets rid of Shepard though he wants his body all the same. Most likely because he figures Shepard to be the Paragon of their next Sovereign-class Reaper.

He has been using the Collectors to get the cycle underway as quietly as possible by preparing a new Reaper in secret. That fails as well despite his direct interventions with his ability to "assume direct control" and all his harvesting is scrapped. Alright no more screwing around he says, we're going to the Alpha Relay to start the cycle now. Shepard interferes yet again yet now he has a much better route to attack him so there is a silver lining in all of this for Harbinger despite the setback.

Despite all this now he has a better attack stragety to deal with Shepard since it's been made clear the direct approach simply does not work and Shepard has an annoying habit of interfering. So he decides that the best way to deal with Shepard is via slow indoctination. It's better this way because Shepard has been put into a position where he is spearheading the entire resistance against the Reapers. Killing him would keep that resistance going for a longer time then he wants and they would still have to get rid of the cruible either by brute force or get a sleeper agent in to sabotage it.

This explains why he is taking so much effort to make sure he does not kill Shepard during the beam run because Harbinger has him so close to being fully indoctrinated. All he needs is to give him a few more pushes and nudges into what he wants and he wins. Anyone else that makes it there will potentially ruin that and he isn't going to have that happen. He weakens Shepard enough physically and mentally and then gets Shepard Indoctrinated and he takes out this cycles final hope of defeating them which is the Crucible ending it all in one swift stroke.

So in short Harbinger has shown himself to be Dangerously Genre Savvy.

Modifié par Domanese, 20 octobre 2012 - 04:37 .

[Andromidius]

Just ignore it. Blantant troll. Dozens of us have tried repeated to explain things in nice simple easy to digest morsels, have asked questions that have been answered - and yet those answers suddenly don't apply when applied to something else exactly the same. Opinions on who is indoctrinationed, how its magically impossible, how it works...all change depending on the needs.

Blantant. Troll.

Someone who disagrees would have left long ago, not argued and twisted their own words to avoid admitting they are wrong. And no-one honest would accuse us of creating fan fiction while also making stuff up on the fly (even when it directly goes against what is actually stated in the story).

Seriously. Stop.

[Xilizhra]

So you just admitted Kenson is indoctrinated by Harby (follows his orders) but Kenson is the idiot? Sureokaywhateveryousay.

No, Kenson literally has her intelligence damaged by indoctrination.

Well, actually I never talked about control, but it doesn't even matter if it's possible. It's too big a risk. That's exactly how Shepard convinces the Illusive Man to kill himself!

Actually, that's just a front; Shepard only convinces TIM to do so when he realizes he's indoctrinated. In fact, the whole "We're not ready" thing seemed to whiff in out of nowhere, and then leave just as quickly.

Are you willing to bet humanity's (and everyone else's) existence on it?

I'll gamble that against the certainty of the geth's extinction, and I feel I have nothing to lose by trusting the Catalyst. Hell, if you pick Destroy, you even trust the Catalyst there.

[plfranke]

Xil you are not discussing for the sake of gaining knowledge you are discussing for the sake of arguing. You're like someone in debate class who has to defend something everyone in the class knows is wrong. There's just no point in talking to you anymore. I may not believe in IT anymore but I'm not living in delusion either. If you don't believe in IT you have to acknowledge there is bad writing in this game (there's bad writing in other places excluding IT but that's another matter) you're just living in your own little world.

[spotlessvoid]

IsaacShep wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

What is your response to indoctrinated Prothean faction wanting to control the Reapers Xil?That is in the codex

That they may not have been indoctrinated by Reapers but controlled by Leviathans to add Control option to Crucible design. Levis sure would like to control the Reapers.

How the heck would sa Leviathan sneak into the decision chamber?

[Xilizhra]

plfranke wrote...

Xil you are not discussing for the sake of gaining knowledge you are discussing for the sake of arguing. You're like someone in debate class who has to defend something everyone in the class knows is wrong. There's just no point in talking to you anymore. I may not believe in IT anymore but I'm not living in delusion either. If you don't believe in IT you have to acknowledge there is bad writing in this game (there's bad writing in other places excluding IT but that's another matter) you're just living in your own little world.

Bad writing? Certainly. It's far from absent in ME3; I've hardly denied that.

[plfranke]

Androdimus is right fellas there's no use in continuing this conversation, this person is either a troll or a complete and utter idiot.

[Andromidius]

Xilizhra wrote...
Bad writing? Certainly. It's far from absent in ME3; I've hardly denied that.

Then uninstall Mass Effect, close your Bioware account and leave the forums.  Obviously if something is so badly written why would you want to be associated with it?

Oh yeah.  Because you're a troll and you like annoying people.

[plfranke]

Okay now we're getting somewhere I may have to take back my troll or idiot comment. So x, what exactly is your take on the game like a review if you will?

[CmdrShep80]

spotlessvoid wrote...

@It
Mike Gamble refuses to specifically say that. He's answered a tweet with that and no shep in me4, followed immediately by a link from Merizan tweeting no IT DLC. Not saying anything completely undermines what Jessica and Chris said. He knows that. So if it's Bioware's official stance why wont he even acknowledge the question?

you know if I said I made a game and you asked how it ended and I say I'm telling you there is no Shepard and no IT it Los to preserve the wonder and amazement of what's to come. If I told you how the game ended you'd probably not be as satisfied if you discovered the ending yourself. I think that's why BioWare does what it does

[spotlessvoid]

We are going to find out eventually. End of DLC cycle, ME4 if your the truly optimistic kind. That's just delaying it. Which is so much worse to let people get their hopes up.

[Xilizhra]

Then uninstall Mass Effect, close your Bioware account and leave the forums. Obviously if something is so badly written why would you want to be associated with it?

Just because some of the writing is bad doesn't mean I don't enjoy it.

Okay now we're getting somewhere I may have to take back my troll or idiot comment. So x, what exactly is your take on the game like a review if you will?

It... didn't live up to the potential it had, but didn't completely crash and burn. There's a decided lack of polish in much of the game, mixed with some shining gems of plot, especially the Rannoch arc. The endings have fascinating implications but weren't set up in anything close to the proper way, or implemented or explained well. ME2 squadmates were mostly the victims of their own potential deaths. Cerberus' implementation was silly. The Reapers were interesting. The characterization was better than ME1, the story was better than ME2, the mechanics were the best of them all.

It wasn't the game most of us wanted, but it could have been worse.

[Ithurael]

spotlessvoid wrote...

@It
Mike Gamble refuses to specifically say that. He's answered a tweet with that and no shep in me4, followed immediately by a link from Merizan tweeting no IT DLC. Not saying anything completely undermines what Jessica and Chris said. He knows that. So if it's Bioware's official stance why wont he even acknowledge the question?

Well, I am no bioware official - because if I were we would have better endings that would be awesome and harbinger would be a pile of smoking ruin near the beam - however, to your post.

You stated earlier that you - or another - reached out to him about merizans tweet. (I h@te twitter btw). Looking at Gambles tweet history I think I found his response:
"@thespotlessvoid we've said countless times that me3 is the end of commander shepards story. Im not going to comment further."

He - in stunning corporate fashion - neither confirms/denys that IT is/is not going to happen. However, he does state one main thing - something reiterated as of late. Shepard's story is over. If ME4 is a sequel it will have a new protagonist (IT or no IT). What this means for variants of IT - I don't know. I usually assume the worst.

Bill Casey's view on IT is amazing. It doesn't require any content. He is what I would call an "IT Purist" as he does not need/want anything else for his interpretation. Other ITers (like clevernoob) want to use IT to enable the hope for a new ending. As of the current, that seems highly unlikely. As a new ending with IT would require shepard wakeing up (continuing his story) and shepard's story has been confirmed over.

I would still wait and Youtube Omege personally (15 dollars for a DLC is a hefty price IMO) but we can only wait and see.:wizard:

Modifié par Ithurael, 20 octobre 2012 - 04:49 .

[spotlessvoid]

" I feel I have nothing to lose by trusting the Catalyst"
- Xilizhra

What could go wrong right?

[Xilizhra]

spotlessvoid wrote...

" I feel I have nothing to lose by trusting the Catalyst"
- Xilizhra

What could go wrong right?

The exact same thing that happens if I don't, i.e. we all die. If the Catalyst wants me dead, nothing of what it says is trustworthy and it all might kill me, so it doesn't matter what I pick. If I do nothing, the Crucible is lost and everyone will die. I may as well pick something, and that which I believe to be the best option.

[plfranke]

I think x is like all of us, trying to make sense of something that went horribly wrong. Only we are looking for a way to do this through elements that hold true to the core we knew and loved but not what we finished with. x is trying to make sense of things by using the elements we finished with instead of the foundation that built the series.

[shepskisaac]

spotlessvoid wrote...

How the heck would sa Leviathan sneak into the decision chamber?

Incognito Seriously though, maybe it would be possible for them to control the Reapers through controlled organic that would become the new Catalyst?  Or through orbs? Lots of possibilities here, I hope Leviathans' obviously hinted involvement with the Crucible gets explained in upcoming Omega or Citadel DLCs

[Xilizhra]

plfranke wrote...

I think x is like all of us, trying to make sense of something that went horribly wrong. Only we are looking for a way to do this through elements that hold true to the core we knew and loved but not what we finished with. x is trying to make sense of things by using the elements we finished with instead of the foundation that built the series.

What I knew and loved was the universe itself, not all of the themes. Some of the themes I considered annoyingly organic-purist and in some cases anti-intellectual. The ending, badly implemented though it was, gave me more interesting possibilities, as well as the opportunity to preserve the universe.

[spotlessvoid]

The starchild would know the organic is compromised

[CmdrShep80]

Is there a place that has all the mp announcements and releases in order. i.e. the title what the op is about And the outcome for each op they've done since mp launched?

[plfranke]

Xilizhra wrote...

plfranke wrote...

I think x is like all of us, trying to make sense of something that went horribly wrong. Only we are looking for a way to do this through elements that hold true to the core we knew and loved but not what we finished with. x is trying to make sense of things by using the elements we finished with instead of the foundation that built the series.

What I knew and loved was the universe itself, not all of the themes. Some of the themes I considered annoyingly organic-purist and in some cases anti-intellectual. The ending, badly implemented though it was, gave me more interesting possibilities, as well as the opportunity to preserve the universe.

The problem those of us who hate the ending have with your philosophy is that the ending is more of just asking a hypothetical question than something that was built upon by an actual plot. I can create interesting possibilities if I just make up something where possibilities are limitless, and that's exactly what the crucible is. It may make for interesting discussion and be a thought provoking decision, but it doesn't make it make any sense from a story perspective.