80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Andromidius]

Jusseb wrote...

I mean this one ; http://social.biowar.../index/15224788

Brainwave about that subject.

It might not be about primative humans at all.  It might be designed to interact with any species, and show earlier forms of their species being studied.  Basically a customisable dream.  So Shepard uses it and sees Cro-Magnons, but anyone else would see their own ancestors.

Would potentially explain the huge time discrepencies if it was Leviathan technology.

Also, if we assume it was Leviathans...  We could also maybe assume that the second appearence that resulted in their deaths was actually a Reaper.  A primative mind might not be able to tell the difference between them so easily.

[Andromidius]

demersel wrote...
He does play the victim card. First by suggesting that the reapers are controlled by him (not their fault they kill everyone) - then he says that he was created to find a solution - (he himself is a slave to logic and how the world works - not his fault)

I don't see it myself, he doesn't seem sad in the slightest about the situation.  He is what he is, so to speak.  If he showed any form of regret about what he's done, maybe I could see the victim side.  But he's just a psychopath.

[demersel]

Andromidius wrote...

demersel wrote...
He does play the victim card. First by suggesting that the reapers are controlled by him (not their fault they kill everyone) - then he says that he was created to find a solution - (he himself is a slave to logic and how the world works - not his fault)

I don't see it myself, he doesn't seem sad in the slightest about the situation.  He is what he is, so to speak.  If he showed any form of regret about what he's done, maybe I could see the victim side.  But he's just a psychopath.

No - he just play - "it is in my nature" - he comapres himself to fire - you don't blame fire for malice, right? 

And specifically about no regret and compassion thing - he does it deliberatly - look at me - i was made without compassion and regeret - i'm flowed that way - it isn't my fault! Would you help me? 

Modifié par demersel, 10 décembre 2012 - 04:15 .

[KyreneZA]

Andromidius wrote...

Jusseb wrote...

I mean this one ; http://social.biowar.../index/15224788

Brainwave about that subject.

It might not be about primative humans at all.  It might be designed to interact with any species, and show earlier forms of their species being studied.  Basically a customisable dream.  So Shepard uses it and sees Cro-Magnons, but anyone else would see their own ancestors.

Would potentially explain the huge time discrepencies if it was Leviathan technology.

Also, if we assume it was Leviathans...  We could also maybe assume that the second appearence that resulted in their deaths was actually a Reaper.  A primative mind might not be able to tell the difference between them so easily.

I always thought it was an Occulus that killed poor Cro-Magnon in that 'vision'...

[RavenEyry]

Andromidius wrote...

Brainwave about that subject.

It might not be about primative humans at all.  It might be designed to interact with any species, and show earlier forms of their species being studied.  Basically a customisable dream.  So Shepard uses it and sees Cro-Magnons, but anyone else would see their own ancestors.

Would potentially explain the huge time discrepencies if it was Leviathan technology.

Also, if we assume it was Leviathans...  We could also maybe assume that the second appearence that resulted in their deaths was actually a Reaper.  A primative mind might not be able to tell the difference between them so easily.

So more a generic warning rather than a historical documentary.

[paxxton]

Andromidius wrote...

Jusseb wrote...

I mean this one ; http://social.biowar.../index/15224788

Brainwave about that subject.

It might not be about primative humans at all.  It might be designed to interact with any species, and show earlier forms of their species being studied.  Basically a customisable dream.  So Shepard uses it and sees Cro-Magnons, but anyone else would see their own ancestors.

Would potentially explain the huge time discrepencies if it was Leviathan technology.

Also, if we assume it was Leviathans...  We could also maybe assume that the second appearence that resulted in their deaths was actually a Reaper.  A primative mind might not be able to tell the difference between them so easily.

Yes, when I read about the second encounter my hope for the story involving Leviathans diminished. But then I thought exactly the same thing - a primitive mind wouldn't see the difference. It's like Nostradamus and his books full of cryptic nonsense. Not that I believe anything of what he writes in them, mind you.

[paxxton]

demersel wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Nice stuff, Norlond.  Though I will underline the parts I think apply as well as the bolded ones you did.

Norlond wrote...

From Psychological manipulation:

"According to Simon, successful psychological manipulation primarily involves:
- manipulator concealing aggressive intentions and behaviors"
Checked
"- manipulator knowing the psychological vulnerabilities of the victim to determine what tactics are likely to be the most effective. "
Starbrat being Starbrat: Checked
"- manipulator having a sufficient level of ruthlessness to have no qualms about causing harm to the victim if necessary."
"So be it! The cycle continues!" Checked

- Lying
- Lying by omission (lying by withholding truth)
- Denial (has done nothing wrong)
- Rationalisation (as excuse)
- Minimization (behavior is not as harmful as others think)
- Selective inattention or selective attention (ignores anything that distracts from his agenda)
- Diversion (not giving straight answer to straight question)
- Evasion (giving irrelevant, vague responses)
- Covert intimidation (throwing victim onto defensive)
- Guilt tripping (make victim feel guilty, selfish...)
- Shaming (increase self-doubt)
- Playing the victim role ("poor me")
- Vilifying the victim (putting victim onto defensive while masking aggressive behavior)
- Playing the servant role (of a noble cause)
- Seduction (charm, praise, flattery)
- Projecting the blame (just blaming others)
- Feigning innocence (any harm done was not intentional)
- Feigning confusion (playing dumb)
- Brandishing anger (acting angry)"

[/i]Starbrat does almost everything of these things, especially the bold ones

"Manipulation strategy:
1: Assessment phase: Determining the victims potential and its weak points
2: Manipulation phase: Putting on a mask and using the above techniques
3: Abandonment phase: If victim is no longer useful. It can happen quickly and without the victim knowing the manipulators intentions"

3 kind of applies to Refuse I think

Everything is paraphrased, I didn't want to just copy everything

So pretty much all of it.  The only thing Starbinger doesn't do is play the victim card.

He does everything else, to a greater or less degree.

He does play the victim card. First by suggesting that the reapers are controlled by him (not their fault they kill everyone) - then he says that he was created to find a solution - (he himself is a slave to logic and how the world works - not his fault)

He also uses rationalization when talking about fire that burns.

Modifié par paxxton, 10 décembre 2012 - 04:27 .

[Andromidius]

RavenEyry wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Brainwave about that subject.

It might not be about primative humans at all.  It might be designed to interact with any species, and show earlier forms of their species being studied.  Basically a customisable dream.  So Shepard uses it and sees Cro-Magnons, but anyone else would see their own ancestors.

Would potentially explain the huge time discrepencies if it was Leviathan technology.

Also, if we assume it was Leviathans...  We could also maybe assume that the second appearence that resulted in their deaths was actually a Reaper.  A primative mind might not be able to tell the difference between them so easily.

So more a generic warning rather than a historical documentary.

Pretty much.  Nothing to back that up, obviously.  But it reminds me of a (stupid) episode of Voyager where they accidently set off a probe that puts visions in their heads of them commiting war crimes to a people they've never met.  You're just a proxie for whoever it happened to originally.

[Andromidius]

paxxton wrote...

demersel wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Nice stuff, Norlond.  Though I will underline the parts I think apply as well as the bolded ones you did.

Norlond wrote...

From Psychological manipulation:

"According to Simon, successful psychological manipulation primarily involves:
- manipulator concealing aggressive intentions and behaviors"
Checked
"- manipulator knowing the psychological vulnerabilities of the victim to determine what tactics are likely to be the most effective. "
Starbrat being Starbrat: Checked
"- manipulator having a sufficient level of ruthlessness to have no qualms about causing harm to the victim if necessary."
"So be it! The cycle continues!" Checked

- Lying
- Lying by omission (lying by withholding truth)
- Denial (has done nothing wrong)
- Rationalisation (as excuse)
- Minimization (behavior is not as harmful as others think)
- Selective inattention or selective attention (ignores anything that distracts from his agenda)
- Diversion (not giving straight answer to straight question)
- Evasion (giving irrelevant, vague responses)
- Covert intimidation (throwing victim onto defensive)
- Guilt tripping (make victim feel guilty, selfish...)
- Shaming (increase self-doubt)
- Playing the victim role ("poor me")
- Vilifying the victim (putting victim onto defensive while masking aggressive behavior)
- Playing the servant role (of a noble cause)
- Seduction (charm, praise, flattery)
- Projecting the blame (just blaming others)
- Feigning innocence (any harm done was not intentional)
- Feigning confusion (playing dumb)
- Brandishing anger (acting angry)"

[/i]Starbrat does almost everything of these things, especially the bold ones

"Manipulation strategy:
1: Assessment phase: Determining the victims potential and its weak points
2: Manipulation phase: Putting on a mask and using the above techniques
3: Abandonment phase: If victim is no longer useful. It can happen quickly and without the victim knowing the manipulators intentions"

3 kind of applies to Refuse I think

Everything is paraphrased, I didn't want to just copy everything

So pretty much all of it.  The only thing Starbinger doesn't do is play the victim card.

He does everything else, to a greater or less degree.

He does play the victim card. First by suggesting that the reapers are controlled by him (not their fault they kill everyone) - then he says that he was created to find a solution - (he himself is a slave to logic and how the world works - not his fault)

He also uses rationalization when talking about fire that burns.

It again seems more like a 'I am what I am' form of justification rather then any pity-mongering.

Probably because that wouldn'y fly even with a confused and weak Shepard.

Though the child at the start certain does the pity card - "You can't help me."

Modifié par Andromidius, 10 décembre 2012 - 04:31 .

[Restrider]

In the end, does it matter if the Guardian used the "victim card"?
The rest of the list clearly indicates its deceptive nature.
As I have stated in a few posts of mine throughout the course of this thread:
You may question if the endings are a hallucination, but it is really far fetched to believe that the Guardian - the self-proclaimed leader of the Reapers - is honest in his assertions about the endings.
Since - at least for me - it is established that the Guardian is a deceptive liar, the conclusion for the slides for Control/Synthesis is that they are not what they seem or they are also a hallucination. This would then extend to the differing variations of IT that I've listed under "IT Flavour" in my signature.

TL;DR
Trusting the Guardian is for fools.

Modifié par Restrider, 10 décembre 2012 - 04:35 .

[GethPrimeMKII]

I think the dialogue wheel like appearance of the decision chamber, coupled with the color coded ending choices deserve alot more attention from critics and theorists alike.

Thats way too 4th wall breaking to be literally happening.

[paxxton]

Andromidius wrote...

paxxton wrote...

demersel wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Nice stuff, Norlond.  Though I will underline the parts I think apply as well as the bolded ones you did.

Norlond wrote...

From Psychological manipulation:

"According to Simon, successful psychological manipulation primarily involves:
- manipulator concealing aggressive intentions and behaviors"
Checked
"- manipulator knowing the psychological vulnerabilities of the victim to determine what tactics are likely to be the most effective. "
Starbrat being Starbrat: Checked
"- manipulator having a sufficient level of ruthlessness to have no qualms about causing harm to the victim if necessary."
"So be it! The cycle continues!" Checked

- Lying
- Lying by omission (lying by withholding truth)
- Denial (has done nothing wrong)
- Rationalisation (as excuse)
- Minimization (behavior is not as harmful as others think)
- Selective inattention or selective attention (ignores anything that distracts from his agenda)
- Diversion (not giving straight answer to straight question)
- Evasion (giving irrelevant, vague responses)
- Covert intimidation (throwing victim onto defensive)
- Guilt tripping (make victim feel guilty, selfish...)
- Shaming (increase self-doubt)
- Playing the victim role ("poor me")
- Vilifying the victim (putting victim onto defensive while masking aggressive behavior)
- Playing the servant role (of a noble cause)
- Seduction (charm, praise, flattery)
- Projecting the blame (just blaming others)
- Feigning innocence (any harm done was not intentional)
- Feigning confusion (playing dumb)
- Brandishing anger (acting angry)"

[/i]Starbrat does almost everything of these things, especially the bold ones

"Manipulation strategy:
1: Assessment phase: Determining the victims potential and its weak points
2: Manipulation phase: Putting on a mask and using the above techniques
3: Abandonment phase: If victim is no longer useful. It can happen quickly and without the victim knowing the manipulators intentions"

3 kind of applies to Refuse I think

Everything is paraphrased, I didn't want to just copy everything

So pretty much all of it.  The only thing Starbinger doesn't do is play the victim card.

He does everything else, to a greater or less degree.

He does play the victim card. First by suggesting that the reapers are controlled by him (not their fault they kill everyone) - then he says that he was created to find a solution - (he himself is a slave to logic and how the world works - not his fault)

He also uses rationalization when talking about fire that burns.

It again seems more like a 'I am what I am' form of justification rather then any pity-mongering.

Probably because that wouldn'y fly even with a confused and weak Shepard.

Though the child at the start certain does the pity card - "You can't help me."

Yes, but he says it with confidence. It is a rationale that he presents to weakened and wounded Shepard who probably wishes he was already dead.

Modifié par paxxton, 10 décembre 2012 - 04:45 .

[Andromidius]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

I think the dialogue wheel like appearance of the decision chamber, coupled with the color coded ending choices deserve alot more attention from critics and theorists alike.

Thats way too 4th wall breaking to be literally happening.

Apperently we're grasping straws, don't you know?

But yeah.  Its a very deliberate design to that location.

[MaximizedAction]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

I think the dialogue wheel like appearance of the decision chamber, coupled with the color coded ending choices deserve alot more attention from critics and theorists alike.

Thats way too 4th wall breaking to be literally happening.

Fun fact:
The coloring of the choices is that in which Shepard would see our dialog wheel from his side, red would be on the upper right and blue on the upper left.
I mean red would be lower right and blue on the upper right, if you look at the dialog wheel, but the striked version would be how the respective choices would if you would stand in the middle of the dialog wheel and look to the right if you were Shepard.
It's difficult to explain in words. A drawing would be better. But I think you know what I mean.


And you used to be a cute geth.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 10 décembre 2012 - 04:52 .

[Andromidius]

MaximizedAction wrote...

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

I think the dialogue wheel like appearance of the decision chamber, coupled with the color coded ending choices deserve alot more attention from critics and theorists alike.

Thats way too 4th wall breaking to be literally happening.

Fun fact:
The coloring of the choices is that in which Shepard would see our dialog wheel from his side, red would be on the upper right and blue on the upper left.


And you used to be a cute geth.

The good old colour reversal.  Awesome.

[GethPrimeMKII]

Andromidius wrote...

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

I think the dialogue wheel like appearance of the decision chamber, coupled with the color coded ending choices deserve alot more attention from critics and theorists alike.

Thats way too 4th wall breaking to be literally happening.

Apperently we're grasping straws, don't you know?

But yeah.  Its a very deliberate design to that location.

Ive yet to get anything remotely close to a good explanation for that one. No character in Mass Effect associates red and blue with moral decisions. Its a game mechanic that has snuck its way into the story in the most clever way possible. 

You the player are trained to shy away from major renegade decisions. ME3's Renegade Shep is a genocidal, racist, evil, psychopath. Its no wonder players have no problem allowing colors to guide the fate of the galaxy.

[RavenEyry]

Refuse is 'I should go' on the choice-o-matic dialogue wheel.

[TheProtheans]

Norlond wrote...

- Denial 
- Minimization (behavior is not as harmful as others think)
- Selective inattention or selective attention (ignores anything that distracts from his agenda)
- Diversion (not giving straight answer to straight question)
- Evasion (giving irrelevant, vague responses)
- Covert intimidation (throwing victim onto defensive)
- Guilt tripping (make victim feel guilty, selfish...)
- Shaming (increase self-doubt)
- Playing the victim role ("poor me")
- Vilifying the victim (putting victim onto defensive while masking aggressive behavior)
- Projecting the blame (just blaming others)
- Feigning confusion (playing dumb)
- Brandishing anger (acting angry)"

Sounds familiar

Modifié par TheProtheans, 10 décembre 2012 - 05:18 .

[byne]

TheProtheans wrote...

Norlond wrote...

- Denial 
- Minimization (behavior is not as harmful as others think)
- Selective inattention or selective attention (ignores anything that distracts from his agenda)
- Diversion (not giving straight answer to straight question)
- Evasion (giving irrelevant, vague responses)
- Covert intimidation (throwing victim onto defensive)
- Guilt tripping (make victim feel guilty, selfish...)
- Shaming (increase self-doubt)
- Playing the victim role ("poor me")
- Vilifying the victim (putting victim onto defensive while masking aggressive behavior)
- Projecting the blame (just blaming others)
- Feigning confusion (playing dumb)
- Brandishing anger (acting angry)"

Sounds familiar

Right, you do it all the time.

[GethPrimeMKII]

Protheans. The trick to successful trolling is subtlety.

[masster blaster]

Refuse is Shepard refuseing to kill the Reapers. Yes Shepard says that they are going to fight you till the end, yet this is what through me off.

Shepard: And if I die I die knowing that I did everything I could to stop you..

That some ******* bull ****. Hello Destroy is right there, and the only reason people pick refuse is that they hate the endings, hate the brat, and want to say **** you, and they can't kill EDI and the Geth. That is if you believe the brat that they die.

Honest I see refuse as not fighting, but more like refuseing to kill the Reapers. We have 1 chance to kill the Reapers right here, yet Shepard ( The player) can't kill the Geth, and EDI.

I see refuse as a Shepard gives up. Shepard is only all talk, and no action. At least in Destroy Shepard is taking action, and the player is saying " **** you star brat." In my opinion that is the refuse the brat.

Shepard: I won't let fear comprimise who I am.

You can only hear Shepard say this if you choose to Destroy the base.

Also refuse is like saying if Shepard refuses to stop arrival what happence if you don't.

The player: I can't kill 300,000 Batarians to save the galaxy from the Reapers.

Honest yes I get it they are Batarians, but what if they were the Geth, and EDI in the Baha system. Honest could you kill them if you have a chance to stop the Reapers for at least 6 months, and bying time for the galaxy to prepare even more? Hell yes I could.

[TheProtheans]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Protheans. The trick to successful trolling is subtlety.

- Shaming (increase self-doubt)
- Playing the victim role ("poor me")
- Vilifying the victim (putting victim onto defensive while masking aggressive behavior)
- Projecting the blame (just blaming others)
- Feigning confusion (playing dumb)
- Brandishing anger (acting angry)"

I see how you operate.

[paxxton]

TheProtheans, you are repeating yourself.

[byne]

TheProtheans wrote...

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Protheans. The trick to successful trolling is subtlety.

- Shaming (increase self-doubt)
-Playing the victim role ("poor me")
-Vilifying the victim (putting victim onto defensive while masking aggressive behavior)

I see how you operate.

And I see how you operate.

Modifié par byne, 10 décembre 2012 - 05:28 .

[demersel]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Protheans. The trick to successful trolling is subtlety.

Yeah, he should reaslly take some ques from me- i've been successfully trolling the IT thread for more than six months now.