80611 réponses à ce sujet

[dorktainian]

Isn't refusal just giving up tho? Thats what I thought. Right at the beginning of the game Shepard states ''we fight or we die''. So he's just going to do nothing while the rest of the galaxy burns?

[MaximizedAction]

dorktainian wrote...

Isn't refusal just giving up tho? Thats what I thought. Right at the beginning of the game Shepard states ''we fight or we die''. So he's just going to do nothing while the rest of the galaxy burns?

Yes, but you're still working actively against the Reapers. And this is where Refuse makes many hints between the lines (at least to me):
The Reapers' offering ends up being: Work with me or give up your lives.
And the story's message: Have blind faith in someone else only because he says so, instead of your own (we've been persuing freedom throughout all 98% of the trilogy).

So maybe it means that the galaxy is burning, but choosing all other choices is still doing (and thus trusting) what a Reaper is offering you.

I know, taking Refuse literally looks horrible, but take into account that Shepard's final speech when picking Refuse contains what he has been doing and saying all the time (literally, lookup ME1, Shep's dialog with Saren on Virmire).
Moreover, as burz wrote, it somehow contains the message, that, in the end, the Reapers were defeated -- by what means, however, still remains unclear to me.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 29 novembre 2012 - 11:54 .

[BleedingUranium]

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

MaximizedAction wrote...

dorktainian wrote...

Isn't refusal just giving up tho? Thats what I thought. Right at the beginning of the game Shepard states ''we fight or we die''. So he's just going to do nothing while the rest of the galaxy burns?

Yes, but you're still working actively against the Reapers. And this is where Refuse makes many hints between the lines (at least to me):
The Reapers' offering ends up being: Work with me or give up your lives.
And the story's message: Have blind faith in someone else only because he says so, instead of your own (we've been persuing freedom throughout all 98% of the trilogy).

So maybe it means that the galaxy is burning, but choosing all other choices is still doing (and thus trusting) what a Reaper is offering you.

I know, taking Refuse literally looks horrible, but take into account that Shepard's final speech when picking Refuse contains what he has been doing and saying all the time (literally, lookup ME1, Shep's dialog with Saren on Virmire).
Moreover, as burz wrote, it somehow contains the message, that, in the end, the Reapers were defeated -- by what means, however, still remains unclear to me.

Perhaps, but i dont see how Destroy could change Shepard in a way favorable to the Reapers.

Remember Indoctrination works by altering the victims goals and beliefs to be in line with the Reapers motives. Control and Synthesis both represent a mindset favorable to the Reapers, but i dont see how a Shepard dedicated to their destruction would be favorable.

As I allready said I think the Catalyst / Harbinger lack of reaction is because he knows Shepard is not free. The Indoctrination is still there, he just needs more time to succumb.

[Fur28]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

I,m too lazy to investigate but what´s the Deception Theory?

[BleedingUranium]

Fur28 wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

I,m too lazy to investigate but what´s the Deception Theory?

IT, but everything is really happening. So Synthesucks is a trick, but actually works or something crazy like that. It makes less sense than Literal.

It's for the people that hate the kid and the endings, but won't/can't accept IT.

[MaximizedAction]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

Wow, looks like I'm very out of loop these days, but...is the Crucible being a trap not part of IT anymore?

[Fur28]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Fur28 wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

I,m too lazy to investigate but what´s the Deception Theory?

IT, but everything is really happening. So Synthesucks is a trick, but actually works or something crazy like that. It makes less sense than Literal.

It's for the people that hate the kid and the endings, but won't/can't accept IT.

yeah i think i heard that before
so that theory is that shepard is physicly in the crucible, but TIM, anderson, ahsley bobies, etc are indoctrillusions?

[Fur28]

One question
so where does IT begin? Before or after the Harbinger laser?

[DavidMW]

Fur28 wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

I,m too lazy to investigate but what´s the Deception Theory?

The thread itself is like 6 pages of wall of texts.
I think this sums it up.

http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.3480/

[Fur28]

DavidMW wrote...

Fur28 wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

I,m too lazy to investigate but what´s the Deception Theory?

The thread itself is like 6 pages of wall of texts.
I think this sums it up.

http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.3480/

Yeah that explains it better
thats actually kinda of how i see the Literal endings, but in my version the prologue slideshows are visions made by the reapers to shepard so she can´t see how she really screwd up the galaxy

[RavenEyry]

Fur28 wrote...

One question
so where does IT begin? Before or after the Harbinger laser?

It depends who you ask.

The most common opinions are after the laser knocks Shepard out and slightly earlier when the mako crashes.

Less common are the shuttle crash at the beginning of Earth and as early as Cronus station.

[Fur28]

RavenEyry wrote...

Fur28 wrote...

One question
so where does IT begin? Before or after the Harbinger laser?

It depends who you ask.

The most common opinions are after the laser knocks Shepard out and slightly earlier when the mako crashes.

Less common are the shuttle crash at the beginning of Earth and as early as Cronus station.

well i hope that if IT is before the laser, BW uses the chance to include a revamped Earth or atleast War assets cinematics to the IT DLC

[BleedingUranium]

MaximizedAction wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

Wow, looks like I'm very out of loop these days, but...is the Crucible being a trap not part of IT anymore?

It is, but remember, that's not the real Crucible, just something in your head. We still don't know what the real Crucible does.

Refuse is more up for debate than the others, a number of ITers are Refuse supporters, and most of us (this is just what I see from everyone) think Refuse could still break from the illusion, just not as well as Destroy would.

[masster blaster]

Most people follow refuse because what Shepard says in Refuse. Now if Shepard were to give a speech in Destroy ending before he shoots, then ya people would like Destroy more. And that's why people also like Control because of what Shepard says in Control, even though Shepard of any kind never used the first words he/she said.

Modifié par masster blaster, 29 novembre 2012 - 01:59 .

[MegumiAzusa]

BleedingUranium wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

Wow, looks like I'm very out of loop these days, but...is the Crucible being a trap not part of IT anymore?

It is, but remember, that's not the real Crucible, just something in your head. We still don't know what the real Crucible does.

Refuse is more up for debate than the others, a number of ITers are Refuse supporters, and most of us (this is just what I see from everyone) think Refuse could still break from the illusion, just not as well as Destroy would.

Too bad Refuse is called Opt Out and by choosing it all your squadmates die. That plus the epilog can only conclude in you just dooming this cycle.

[RavenEyry]

I'm never sure what to think about refuse in IT, but it sure is suspicious in literal. Mr. Sparkle seems to prefer destroy to refuse even though destroy doesn't 'solve' his 'problem', while refuse let's the cycle continue. It reinforces the idea that he's playing a game with Shepard if refusing to play upsets him more than the option that goes against what it supposedly wants.

[BleedingUranium]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Refuse isn't a good option in the Literal Theory or Indoctrination Theory. In IT the kid's not the one giving you the Destroy choice, so "ima reject your choices" doesn't apply. Refuse only works with the Deception Theory, but DT sucks and makes no sense.

Wow, looks like I'm very out of loop these days, but...is the Crucible being a trap not part of IT anymore?

It is, but remember, that's not the real Crucible, just something in your head. We still don't know what the real Crucible does.

Refuse is more up for debate than the others, a number of ITers are Refuse supporters, and most of us (this is just what I see from everyone) think Refuse could still break from the illusion, just not as well as Destroy would.

Too bad Refuse is called Opt Out and by choosing it all your squadmates die. That plus the epilog can only conclude in you just dooming this cycle.

I'm with you 100% on that Megumi, but Refuse is something debated around here, so I was making sure Maximized knew that.

RavenEyry wrote...

I'm never sure what to think about refuse in IT, but it sure is suspicious in literal. Mr. Sparkle seems to prefer destroy to refuse even though destroy doesn't 'solve' his 'problem', while refuse let's the cycle continue. It reinforces the idea that he's playing a game with Shepard if refusing to play upsets him more than the option that goes against what it supposedly wants.

Because Shepard resists in Destroy, he stays Shepard, a man of action who does whatever it takes. Shepard is even like this in Control and Synthesis, even if he's siding with the enemy. In Refuse Shepard is broken and unwilling to act. It's the most out of character for him.

Harbinger's okay with Destroy because it means Shepard's still the awesome Commander Shepard he's been after, while he's mad in Refuse because Shepard didn't turn out to be as awesome as Harbinger thought he was, and is now broken.

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 29 novembre 2012 - 02:16 .

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

RavenEyry wrote...

I'm never sure what to think about refuse in IT, but it sure is suspicious in literal. Mr. Sparkle seems to prefer destroy to refuse even though destroy doesn't 'solve' his 'problem', while refuse let's the cycle continue. It reinforces the idea that he's playing a game with Shepard if refusing to play upsets him more than the option that goes against what it supposedly wants.

Not just want, what he is goddamn programmed to do!

This really bugs me in any kind of litteral belief. This is not some organic vilian where you can simply say he is stupid for sabotaging his own plans, no this is an AI, an AI which was programmed with the purpose of preventing Synthetics from killing Organics.

And yet from a litteral perspective he offers up two choices which go against his programming, Control and Destroy. Control can be stricken from the list if it turns out the new AI Shepard Reaper Commander in time reaches the same conclusion as the Catalyst and that the Catalyst knows this. 

But no matter how you look at it that is not the case with Destroy. If Shepard chooses Destroy he is going directly against the AI's core programming and everything it said was a problem with the universe.

It should be forced to try and stop him and it is fully capable of doing so as we see in the Refuse ending where it deactivates the Crucible. It is not a question of want, it is a question of the Catalyst allowing something to happen which goes against the programming the Leviathan stated it had.

In short either the AI and the Catalyst are two different entities entirely and thus not subject to the same restrictions or the Catalyst from a litteral perspective shot itself in the foot in a way which it should be utterly incapable of.

[Restrider]

burz wrote...

In the refusal ending we get a different conversation between a woman and a child rather than the Buzz Aldrin one. In this refusal ending Liara's messages recounting the war with the Reapers are left and found by future generations. This time the child specifically says "And thats why we have peace." The Lady responds "Otherwise we too would have been threatened."

The main difference really seems to be that in the refusal, the people blatantly mention that there is peace and it is because of the "Archives". It would seem that here we have been successful, not in our own cycle, but successful in warding off the Reapers for future generations.

In the other endings the boy and Buzz talk about how there could be many stars, and many worlds that could have life. It seems odd that he wouldn't mention any specific species to the boy like Asari or Krogan. Buzz only tells of stories, not archives or hard facts like in the refusal's. Neither of them directly mention that there is peace. They seem to just be sharing a story, like they don't take the Reapers seriously, much like the Council did in ME1. Maybe this is the beginning of a new cycle rather than the beginning of peace.

This is my first post here and I have only read so many of these 2000+ pages so Im sure this has been discussed. I sought these forums out after seeing the IT documentaries on youtube. I am a fan of IT and think it makes a lot of sense, but then again I feel Bioware has sought to ignore it so who knows whats supposed to be real. It seems hard to believe the star child is a dream anymore when Leviathan legitimized him.

Before the EC dlc came, I was a firm Destroy guy, but now I kind of think Refusal is the only one that shows some ounce of success, at least for the future. Either way, I hope to join in on your guys' sometimes friendly discussions!

This is really an interesting point that should be discussed more throughly.
Personally, I am also inclined to not just dismiss the Refuse ending as a more refined Game Over screen. However, we still have not enough information on this ending and the lack of any form of "Breath Scene" isn't really helping to make the Refuse ending a serious ending to most players.
However, if there was no "Breath Scene" in any ending, I'd be convinced by Ithurael's take on the IT, that Refuse is the only way to break free, unfortunately you still die - but you die free.

And last but not least:
Welcome to the thread and do not hesitate to ask questions. I encourage you to watch Acavyos "There is only one choice" video (linked in the OP) as well as the IT Top Ten in my signature.

BTW: Leviathan may have validated the existence of an intelligence, but it is never stated that this is the self-proclaimd Catalyst. Many here think that the AI merged with the first Reaper and became Harbinger. Who wouldn't use the most powerful platform available?
Furthermore Leviathan showed us that Shepard can be trapped/deceived by hallucinated images. And this skill has been perfected by the Reapers even more over the course of the milennia.

[Fur28]

masster blaster wrote...

Most people follow refuse because what Shepard says in Refuse. Now if Shepard were to give a speech in Destroy ending before he shoots, then ya people would like Destroy more. And that's why people also like Control because of what Shepard says in Control, even though Shepard of any kind never used the first words he/she said.

You got to admit shepard´s speeches makes everything better, except in 3 there they feel meh
Refuse i just don´t know if to liked it or hate it, on a literal standpoint it feels like saying "screw you and you´re senseless logic" to the glowing crapkid, on the other side it feels like bioware is telling me "you dont like mai art, well you die"

[BleedingUranium]

Fur28 wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Most people follow refuse because what Shepard says in Refuse. Now if Shepard were to give a speech in Destroy ending before he shoots, then ya people would like Destroy more. And that's why people also like Control because of what Shepard says in Control, even though Shepard of any kind never used the first words he/she said.

You got to admit shepard´s speeches makes everything better, except in 3 there they feel meh
Refuse i just don´t know if to liked it or hate it, on a literal standpoint it feels like saying "screw you and you´re senseless logic" to the glowing crapkid, on the other side it feels like bioware is telling me "you dont like mai art, well you die"

That's basically it.

Everyone's all like "Waaaaah I didn't get the endings they sucked as so did the kid, why can't we say 'screw you' and not pick the choices?"

So Bioware's all like "Okay, since you clearly understand the ending so well, go say 'screw you' to the kid, see how well that goes over for you."

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 29 novembre 2012 - 02:21 .

[masster blaster]

You know what's funny. When Shepard says this little sentence after Destroy was shown to you. " We'll Destroy you without using the crucible."

The brat says " IMPOSSIBLE. You are vastly out numbered."

So basically we have to use the crucible, but not for Destroy. He writes Destroy right off as " You don't want to pick that." But I think it get's mad that Shepard is already considering on not using the crucible ( fake VI Crucible) before the brat can explain Control, and Synthesis.

You see the way I see it.

Destroy seems evil, but in reality it's not. I mean story wise. Control has been proven yes you can control it, but how long until your are corrupted, or it over throughs you. Synthesis has always been shown as " Do not pass and go. Don't do this." Option. Don't get me wrong if over time it happence, then okay, but at the end your forceing the whole galaxy to become Synthesis.

Refuse although it may seem like " No Shepard is not giving up" he/she kind of is." Even though apart from his/her speech, Shepard is just using word, instead of action. Shepard says " .....That I did everything I could to stop you." BS because your rejecting the choice to Destroy the Reaper by not using the crucible because EDI, and the Geth will die/ your Shepard/ the cycle will start over.


Now what's funny is that how does the brat know that in Destroy all Synthetics will be targeted, yet in Control only the Reaper, and there forces are under Shepard's Control. Then in Synthesis everyone is targeted. Um correct me if I am wrong, but if the past cycles were trying to build this crucible, then it should only have Control, and Destroy avaliable.

For Indoctrinated agents in Javiks cycle knew about the crucible/ sabatoge it. Yet in Shepard's cycle TIM does not. Why is that?

But back to what I was saying. It makes no sense for Synthesis to be part of the crucible desgin because only Indoctrinated agents that wanted to control the Reapers, and the non Indoctrinated people that wanted to Destroy the Reapers.

So in reality the crucible should only Destroy or Control the Reapers right. Yet both make no sense.

Destroy. You kill all Synthetics.

Control: Control ONLY the Reapers/ their forces.

I find it hard to believe that if in Destroy we kill All Synthetics, then shouldn't we not Control all Synthetics in Control. Then again we are trusting a brat that everything will be bad in Destroy, but Control, and Synthesis everything will be fine.

[RavenEyry]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Because Shepard resists in Destroy, he stays Shepard, a man of action who does whatever it takes. Shepard is even like this in Control and Synthesis, even if he's siding with the enemy. In Refuse Shepard is broken and unwilling to act. It's the most out of character for him.

Harbinger's okay with Destroy because it means Shepard's still the awesome Commander Shepard he's been after, while he's mad in Refuse because Shepard didn't turn out to be as awesome as Harbinger thought he was, and is now broken.

Yeah Arian said something similar in more words and I generally agree, it's just refuse always seems like a wild card when I think about it.

My main point is how refuse just doesn't make sense in a literal view, even moreso than the others. The stunned pause and 'so be it' seems like Mr. Sparkle was less comfortable about refuse than destroy, despite destroy going against all it stands for. I've no problem with it offering destroy because it's part of the device and it can't not offer, just dissuade. But considering it more of a valid solution than continuing the cycle? That's rather fishy.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

RavenEyry wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Because Shepard resists in Destroy, he stays Shepard, a man of action who does whatever it takes. Shepard is even like this in Control and Synthesis, even if he's siding with the enemy. In Refuse Shepard is broken and unwilling to act. It's the most out of character for him.

Harbinger's okay with Destroy because it means Shepard's still the awesome Commander Shepard he's been after, while he's mad in Refuse because Shepard didn't turn out to be as awesome as Harbinger thought he was, and is now broken.

Yeah Arian said something similar in more words and I generally agree, it's just refuse always seems like a wild card when I think about it.

My main point is how refuse just doesn't make sense in a literal view, even moreso than the others. The stunned pause and 'so be it' seems like Mr. Sparkle was less comfortable about refuse than destroy, despite destroy going against all it stands for. I've no problem with it offering destroy because it's part of the device and it can't not offer, just dissuade. But considering it more of a valid solution than continuing the cycle? That's rather fishy.

It is perfectly capable of not offering Destroy, just deactivate the Crucible if Shepard tries to mess with it as I said.

It could explain Control / Synthesis to Shepard and Shepard could go, "what about that over there?"

"That is for destroying us, but try to touch it and I will shut down the Crucible. It dosent end the cycle and thus my programming cannot allow you to pick it" - Catalyst

It is that simple...yet dosent happen.