80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Rifneno]

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

[BansheeOwnage]

byne wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

And for the record, I'm against the death penalty.

I go back and forth on the death penalty.  Some people just deserve a stay in prison.  A very long stay.  However, I think there are some people who do things that are so truly horrible that they don't deserve continued existence.

I'm against it because it actually costs more money than just keeping them locked up for life.

That's a pretty bad argument. Besides, I think it's wrong anyway.

[Dwailing]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

I go back and forth on the death penalty.  Some people just deserve a stay in prison.  A very long stay.  However, I think there are some people who do things that are so truly horrible that they don't deserve continued existence.

Part of my view on the death penalty entails not what the offender deserves - as that is secondary - but what society deserves. Does society deserve for the offender to have continued existence? Try to think about it both ways the next time you think about the death penalty. It's interesting.

That's an interesting way to look at it.  I'll think about it.

[byne]

Rifneno wrote...

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

The Reaper on Rannoch even speaks against control.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Rifneno wrote...

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

Just like the Prothean splinter group and Cerberus were in control of the Reapers

[Dwailing]

paxxton wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

We have to keep in mind that Shepard presented by the game is pretty specific. We do make choices yes. But in the case of morality, we chose either ruthless or thoughtful and Shepard will stay that way. Both, as they are characterized by the story, will destroy the reapers IMO. No compromise in the last 5 minutes from some THING shooting nonsense at you at minigun speed.

If I interpreted Shepard wrong and had brain dead moments through key moments in the trilogy, please stop me right now.

It's true that in ME3 Shepard is squarely supporting Destroying the Reapers and despises Control. That does mean Control might be viewed as suspicious (IT). But it's not an evil, bad option. It's the story that makes it look so.

But if the story portrays it as a bad idea, that means it's a bad idea in the context of that universe.  It may be a good idea in real life (Not saying it is), but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea in the universe of the game.

[Steelcan]

Rifneno wrote...

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

Only because Shepard stepped in.  Had he not, the geth would have been under Control.  And had the reapers not interfered the quarians would have won easily.

[Natabre]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Natabre wrote...

Wow, I just read one of the links, Parabolee's Blog. I know I'm way behind on this, just finally got into ME and I gotta say that my mind's really BLOWN! Now I realize why this is extremely popular topic to debate and that people want answers for the ending, I don't even know what to think about ending anymore, lol. Impressive job with IT! Hope Bioware will clarify on the ending...if it ever comes.

(Sorry to butt in!)

Welcome to The Thread™!  Always nice to see new people here, especially ones who are open-minded enough to even read the stuff on the first page. Trust me, you have no idea how many try to judge the theory without the proper research, so for that I thank you, and I too hope our questions will eventually be answered. Hear about the new DLC?

Yes, I have and how it has "high potential for tears." I really hope that's a hint at fixing the ending, even though they've stated that they won't do the endings anymore. Would be amazing if it comes as a surprise from them, a way of apologizing to us!

IT is making me feel better thinking that Shepard's just in a stasis (dream) on Earth while conversing with Catalyst that is letting Shepard decide the fate of Reapers. It would be too cruel to think that Shepard's screwed in all endings anyways, including the Destroy with high EMS where he breathes. That the Catalyst is letting Shepard decide because of how he's tried so hard to save everyone in the galaxy, harder than anyone ever and that got Catalyst's attention.

Edit: I see that you guys are talking about Death Penalty, I do not support it because the people who've done horrible crimes such as murder should suffer a long life in prison. Death is just an easy way out for murderers, but for Reapers - it's impossible to contain them...so death to them is appopriate. 

Modifié par Natabre, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:19 .

[byne]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

byne wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

And for the record, I'm against the death penalty.

I go back and forth on the death penalty.  Some people just deserve a stay in prison.  A very long stay.  However, I think there are some people who do things that are so truly horrible that they don't deserve continued existence.

I'm against it because it actually costs more money than just keeping them locked up for life.

That's a pretty bad argument. Besides, I think it's wrong anyway.

Well I'm also against it because there are cases where its been proven after the fact that innocent people have been executed.

Though talking about the death penalty is dangerously close to talking about politics, so we should probably drop it.

[paxxton]

Dwailing wrote...

paxxton wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

We have to keep in mind that Shepard presented by the game is pretty specific. We do make choices yes. But in the case of morality, we chose either ruthless or thoughtful and Shepard will stay that way. Both, as they are characterized by the story, will destroy the reapers IMO. No compromise in the last 5 minutes from some THING shooting nonsense at you at minigun speed.

If I interpreted Shepard wrong and had brain dead moments through key moments in the trilogy, please stop me right now.

It's true that in ME3 Shepard is squarely supporting Destroying the Reapers and despises Control. That does mean Control might be viewed as suspicious (IT). But it's not an evil, bad option. It's the story that makes it look so.

But if the story portrays it as a bad idea, that means it's a bad idea in the context of that universe.  It may be a good idea in real life (Not saying it is), but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea in the universe of the game.

Makes sense. Hence IT.

[Rifneno]

Hey guys, you know what's better than talking about controversial political topics? NOT talking about controversial political topics.

[Dwailing]

Steelcan wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

Only because Shepard stepped in.  Had he not, the geth would have been under Control.  And had the reapers not interfered the quarians would have won easily.

But synthetics will always destroy organics.  No question about that. <_< *end sarcasm*

[BansheeOwnage]

nebulosa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

mrs.N7 wrote...

 I think synthesis just reached a new level of wrong and disturbing ... 
fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/366/8/1/synthesis_by_efleck-d5pxvyx.jpg

I'll just assume this is meant to be satire.

Either it's satire, or people have just reached a new level of sick and disturbed. 

from the artist's description 
"I was never able to properly explain in words why I found the synthesis option in mass effect 3 so repulsive..."
haha

Glad to see the artist sees sense. Too bad I saw how he showed how he saw sense. By the way, view it at your own risk. Why did you post this Mrs.N7 WHY???

Modifié par BansheeOwnage, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:31 .

[paxxton]

OK, nice chatting with y'all but I have to go.

Modifié par paxxton, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:21 .

[Wayning_Star]

Steelcan wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

Only because Shepard stepped in.  Had he not, the geth would have been under Control.  And had the reapers not interfered the quarians would have won easily.

I found it strange that the Old Machines didn't have a better grip on the Geth. Must be because they un-indoctrinatable. Of course rebel, Shep armor wearing Legion didn't buy into the OM's hype, but still...

Modifié par Wayning_Star, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:20 .

[Wayning_Star]

Dwailing wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

Only because Shepard stepped in.  Had he not, the geth would have been under Control.  And had the reapers not interfered the quarians would have won easily.

But synthetics will always destroy organics.  No question about that. <_< *end sarcasm*

harvest yes.. destroy? not so much... (see catalyst vs leviathan

[Steelcan]

Dwailing wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

Only because Shepard stepped in.  Had he not, the geth would have been under Control.  And had the reapers not interfered the quarians would have won easily.

But synthetics will always destroy organics.  No question about that. <_< *end sarcasm*

. I think that was covered pretty well yesterday.

Modifié par Steelcan, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:25 .

[lex0r11]

paxxton wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

Please, paxxton. Please give me more than two lines of an answer about control.

This is driving me crazy!

The solutions pop up only in the last few minutes of the game because they are controversial. Many people might be upset if all of them were presented as equally legitimate throughout the series.

No, I mean what we have been talking about for the last pages. How any Shepard could justify to risk everything on a hunch to maybe control them or even consider the possibility to genetically F**K up the entire galaxy without their consent. Screw evolution.

You want someone forcing a DNA modifying drug on you that might make humanity better, because someone says so right before they give it to you after they stormed into your house in the middle of the night?

Modifié par lex0r11, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:22 .

[ElSuperGecko]

draconian139 wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

draconian139 wrote...
In the literal interpretation you actually do control the Reapers though, somehow all those independent nations agree to recognize you as their new godlike controller and obey the new AI!Shep commands instead of continuing to massacre everyone.  Of course in the literal interpretation Sheperd is an idiot for believing that it would work and the galaxy is incredibly lucky that it did...well at least for now. 

No, you don't.  Literalists assume we do, because the Catalyst tells us that is what will happen.  But whatever it is that is controlling the Reapers, it is not Shepard.  It goes so far as to explicitly tell us as much.

An AI based off of him, hence "AI!Shep".

That's still not Shepard, however.  And you never control a Shepard based-AI within the confines of the game.  So, once again, you actually do NOT end up controlling the Reapers, literal interpretation or not.

[Wayning_Star]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

nebulosa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

mrs.N7 wrote...

 I think synthesis just reached a new level of wrong and disturbing ... 
fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/366/8/1/synthesis_by_efleck-d5pxvyx.jpg

I'll just assume this is meant to be satire.

Either it's satire, or people have just reached a new level of sick and disturbed. 

from the artist's description 
"I was never able to properly explain in words why I found the synthesis option in mass effect 3 so repulsive..."
haha

Glad to see the artist sees sense. Too bad I saw how see showed how he saw sense. By the way, view it at your own risk. Why did you post this Mrs.N7 WHY???

Don't worry, it's just artistic space magic...

[Steelcan]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

Only because Shepard stepped in.  Had he not, the geth would have been under Control.  And had the reapers not interfered the quarians would have won easily.

I found it strange that the Old Machines didn't have a better grip on the Geth. Must be because they un-indoctrinatable. Of course rebel, Shep armor wearing Legion didn't buy into the OM's hype, but still...

. That wasn't legion.  It is a geth coincidentally named Legion.

[Dwailing]

Rifneno wrote...

Hey guys, you know what's better than talking about controversial political topics? NOT talking about controversial political topics.

Actually, I don't think it's a bad thing.  To discuss a story where there are parallels with controversial topics without addressing those topics would be wrong.  Either discuss the story and the controversial topics that it may address, or don't discuss it at all.  To say that it's bad to discuss the death penalty when discussing whether it's right to kill a race that has commited genocide and countless other crimes would be wrong, IMHO.  It's like saying that discussing opinions on socialism or free speech while discussing 1984 is bad.  At least, that's how I see it. 

[byne]

Steelcan wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

The Reapers tried to control the geth and it backfired. But I'm sure Shepard could control the Reapers. </sarcasm>

Only because Shepard stepped in.  Had he not, the geth would have been under Control.  And had the reapers not interfered the quarians would have won easily.

I found it strange that the Old Machines didn't have a better grip on the Geth. Must be because they un-indoctrinatable. Of course rebel, Shep armor wearing Legion didn't buy into the OM's hype, but still...

. That wasn't legion.  It is a geth coincidentally named Legion.

Maybe you screwed up and it wasnt Legion in your game, but it was in mine.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Eryri wrote...

dorktainian wrote...

Also Eryri, think about SH's quote about sad music et al. How sad would it be to actually play as one of sheps comrades and have to watch as he literally goes to pieces and (potentially) hands over the galaxy to the reapers?

you might even have to stop him....  

While that would be far more fitting and appropriate, and could even be cathartic in its way, I think Bioware would be wary of ratcheting up the sadness factor even higher. I think I'd prefer to finish the game without getting depressed.

For a change.

If they want to pull IT through to its complete possibility, sadness is almost unavoidable.

However I agree that ME3 has seen enough death and gloom already. I think that if you pull of everything perfectly you should be able to get through with a bare minimum of losses among the the known characters (Anderson is pretty much the only one I consider a certain goner almost no matter how this pans out). Obviusly the fleet will take a beating almost no matter what we do, but that is only faceless mooks (as harsh as that sounds).

A common thing I find in stories is that it is easy to give the reader / watcher a number on how many died, but without a face or a comparision it remains numbers, the ruthless calculus of war.

To give an example I have been to Pointe du Hoc in the Normandy, the cliff several soldiers scaled to take out a german gun emplacement on D-Day. The place has been preserved like it looked after the soldiers left it and you can see every crater and hole where bombs or shells fell. The power of a bomb is hard to truly comprehend until you stand in the crater unable to see over the edge cause it is so deep.

Also in the Normandy I stood at the graveyard for the American soldiers who fell. Seemingly endless rows of crosses as far as the eye went.

Or the nuke dropped on Hiroshima. The blast radius was just a number until i walked through the city and could see how much was once gone from a single blast.

It is those real life comparisions which gives the numbers form to me.

But a introduced and established character will always have form and value and thus hit harder than any number.

[draconian139]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

draconian139 wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

draconian139 wrote...
In the literal interpretation you actually do control the Reapers though, somehow all those independent nations agree to recognize you as their new godlike controller and obey the new AI!Shep commands instead of continuing to massacre everyone.  Of course in the literal interpretation Sheperd is an idiot for believing that it would work and the galaxy is incredibly lucky that it did...well at least for now. 

No, you don't.  Literalists assume we do, because the Catalyst tells us that is what will happen.  But whatever it is that is controlling the Reapers, it is not Shepard.  It goes so far as to explicitly tell us as much.

An AI based off of him, hence "AI!Shep".

That's still not Shepard, however.  And you never control a Shepard based-AI within the confines of the game.  So, once again, you actually do NOT end up controlling the Reapers, literal interpretation or not.

Would this make you feel better?  "In the literal interpretation an AI based off of your Sheperd actually does control the Reapers though."  Its what I meant and I really feel that the AI!Shep line made that obvious, perhaps not.