80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Norlond]

I tried to warn you Skillz

agree on the husks, I'll post the pics here so the others don't have to google it and see the horror

[Skillz1986]

I don't how to link pictures...so thanks for posting them here norlond.

[CmdrShep80]

By the way someone on page 3136 said something about dead/dying reapers causing hallucinations. I just wanted to share that just before the beam run you drive next to/underneath the reaper that you had just shot at via the missile batteries. Given the reaper on rannoch took a little bit to keel over, it's possible this reaper is the same way, the difference is Shepard is not alone because he's in the transport else he might even be talking to the reaper like on Rannoch

[Norlond]

[.img]<link>[./img]
or
[.img=WxH]<link>[./img]

Without "." of course

[CmdrShep80]

Norlond wrote...

[.img]<link>[./img]
or
[.img=WxH]<link>[./img]

Without "." of course

oh so that a how you do that. I just copy and paste and poof it appears

[Andromidius]

dorktainian wrote...

is wow still going?

Yes, and is still by far the biggest MMO out there.  Honestly its better then its ever been right now (which is hard for me to say, since I'm still a bit in love with the whole Lich King era), though its also extremely frustrating at the same time.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Skillz1986 wrote...

Seriously though, people are f**king sick. Asari/Hanar porn pictures?

Um, there are several references to Asari/Hanar porn in the games themselves.

For one, there's that game salesman in ME2 on the Citadel that talks about an Asari/Hanar porn game.

So, Bioware started that. I think there was something in 'Blasto' as well.

And then of course there's Aethyta, Liara's dad, who's had children with Hanar.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 04 janvier 2013 - 03:51 .

[CoolioThane]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...


It's common when technology and biology evolves that previous concepts are scrapped.

Yes, concepts that become less useful/redundant. The illusions the Reapers can project would be more than invaluable in indoctrinating subjects...so you're still making more of a leap than us.

Not really. Reactions to hallucinations are too unpredictable. Just changing the chemical composition to make the subject fall in line is much saver. Though that's why the thralls have some sort of expiration date, the more is changed the less autonomous they get. Though the Reapers don't really care about that.

So you're completely guessing and using these guesses to try and explain how we're wrong...whilst we're using correlation? smh

Correlation? Again Reaper induced hallucinations are shown in multiple instances and were never as coherent, why are they suddenly? Your explanations are as much guesses as mine, but just look at Virmire etc, the Reapers give a frak about about it as long as they still can fulfill their purpose "Sovereign has implanted me to strengthen my resolve", and Retribution shows they are perfectly fine to make a coherent lie on their own.
I sure I will encounter quite some opposition now but:
That's also shown in TIM. He's just completely different at first compared to his last scenes. Even if he could feel where the monolith was in the comic, he was never compelled to protect it. These and other actions just make no sense at all if he were indoctrinated at that point. It's only ME3 where his actions began to become seemingly erratic. He also used quite some resources to bring Grayson down, also it's described as the Reapers use Grayson like Saren to familiarize themselves with the tech and layout of where he is, even the Cerberus base. Why would they need to do that if TIM was indeed indoctrinated? Like with the hallucinations we know of to be happening it doesn't add up.

Then why do you keep arguing? You're fighting guesses with our apparent "guesses" - Jesus. Harbinger is the first Reaper, the one made from LEviathans, the one who would have perfected indoctrination. The one who would have the power of all the Leviathans inside of it. 

The TIM thing is completely irrelevant to the debate at hand...It doesn't add up? It ****ing does add up but you're not truly listening to the posts. Go back and read through everything and you'll see.

Correlation. The Reapers have improved part a) of enthrallment, so it's more than likely they improve part of enthrallment. This is the most likely scenario. You can't disprove that.

Edit: Russell's Teapot. What I meant to say was we can't argue that as even though there are very similar things throughout the series there's nothing exactly the same, and you seem to need the exact same thing happening as proof it can happen. 

Modifié par CoolioThane, 04 janvier 2013 - 04:13 .

[ElSuperGecko]

The Synthesis is an Abomination thread gets funnier every time I read it...

[Dwailing]

CoolioThane wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...


It's common when technology and biology evolves that previous concepts are scrapped.

Yes, concepts that become less useful/redundant. The illusions the Reapers can project would be more than invaluable in indoctrinating subjects...so you're still making more of a leap than us.

Not really. Reactions to hallucinations are too unpredictable. Just changing the chemical composition to make the subject fall in line is much saver. Though that's why the thralls have some sort of expiration date, the more is changed the less autonomous they get. Though the Reapers don't really care about that.

So you're completely guessing and using these guesses to try and explain how we're wrong...whilst we're using correlation? smh

Correlation? Again Reaper induced hallucinations are shown in multiple instances and were never as coherent, why are they suddenly? Your explanations are as much guesses as mine, but just look at Virmire etc, the Reapers give a frak about about it as long as they still can fulfill their purpose "Sovereign has implanted me to strengthen my resolve", and Retribution shows they are perfectly fine to make a coherent lie on their own.
I sure I will encounter quite some opposition now but:
That's also shown in TIM. He's just completely different at first compared to his last scenes. Even if he could feel where the monolith was in the comic, he was never compelled to protect it. These and other actions just make no sense at all if he were indoctrinated at that point. It's only ME3 where his actions began to become seemingly erratic. He also used quite some resources to bring Grayson down, also it's described as the Reapers use Grayson like Saren to familiarize themselves with the tech and layout of where he is, even the Cerberus base. Why would they need to do that if TIM was indeed indoctrinated? Like with the hallucinations we know of to be happening it doesn't add up.

Then why do you keep arguing? You're fighting guesses with our apparent "guesses" - Jesus. Harbinger is the first Reaper, the one made from LEviathans, the one who would have perfected indoctrination. The one who would have the power of all the Leviathans inside of it. 

The TIM thing is completely irrelevant to the debate at hand...It doesn't add up? It ****ing does add up but you're not truly listening to the posts. Go back and read through everything and you'll see.

Correlation. The Reapers have improved part a) of enthrallment, so it's more than likely they improve part of enthrallment. This is the most likely scenario. You're can't disprove that.

I this conversation really still going?  As in, it's survived TWELVE HOURS OF DEBATE?! 

Modifié par Dwailing, 04 janvier 2013 - 04:02 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

draconian139 wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

when I say 'solid in-game support' I mean in-game dialogue that would support the idea of refuse. That's all that I meant.

Honestly I count the "So be it" line as in-game dialogue supporting it.  If you mean foreshadowing dialogue I can't really think of any but I'm honestly not that into the whole dialogue as evidence thing.

Well, I don't mean necessarily mean 'dialogue as evidence'.

What I mean is... if refuse is somehow supposed to be the right choice, then there must be support for it in the themes of the game.

A 'correct choice' would be something that would align with the premise and the themes of the story, right? The way I see it, if all the choices are a trap, and only one of them is the correct one, then there must be a way for the player to know which is the correct choice. Making the right choice should be a reward for understanding the themes of the story. (Which is pretty much one of the main ideas of IT)

The way I see it, refuse goes against the game's theme of 'a good soldier does not abandon the mission', and I can't think of anything in the game that could support refuse. Destroy, on the other hand, has so much support in the themes and the dialogue, it's not even funny.

I could be wrong, but I really can't think of anything that would support refuse.

(Not to rekindle this debate again - just really wanted to clarify the 'support' thing.)

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 04 janvier 2013 - 04:05 .

[Dwailing]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

draconian139 wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

when I say 'solid in-game support' I mean in-game dialogue that would support the idea of refuse. That's all that I meant.

Honestly I count the "So be it" line as in-game dialogue supporting it.  If you mean foreshadowing dialogue I can't really think of any but I'm honestly not that into the whole dialogue as evidence thing.

Well, I don't mean necessarily mean 'dialogue as evidence'.

What I mean is... if refuse is somehow supposed to be the right choice, then there must be support for it in the themes of the game.

A 'correct choice' would be something that would align with the premise and the themes of the story, right? The way I see it, if all the choices are a trap, and only one of them is the correct one, then there must be a way for the player to know which is the correct choice. Making the right choice should be a reward for understanding the themes of the story. (Which is pretty much one of the main ideas of IT)

The way I see it, refuse goes against the game's theme of 'a good soldier does not abandon the mission', and I can't think of anything in the game that could support refuse. Destroy, on the other hand, has so much support in the themes and the dialogue, it's not even funny.

I could be wrong, but I really can't think of anything that would support refuse.

(Not to rekindle this debate again - just really wanted to clarify the 'support' thing.)

I agree with you.  I may not always think the dialogue you come up with definitely supports IT, but I'll definitely agree that you've dug up a LOT of Destroy support.

[CoolioThane]

There's been sleep Dwailing!

She's trying to argue there couldn't have been a hallucination because "we haven't seen them before" when we have...

...now she's changed it to "we haven't seen them like this before"...It's like a never-ending cycle,

[DoomsdayDevice]

Steelcan wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...
Yesterday IT's bulldog. Today, a zealot. What will it be tomorrow?

It was a comparison between you and Thomas Huxley.  I meant no insult.

I had to look that up. Wasn't aware they called him that. It's pretty funny, actually.

BleedingUranium wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...
Yesterday IT's bulldog. Today, a zealot.  What will it be tomorrow?

Awesome! As always!

lol thanks

I guess I come on a bit strong with my opinion sometimes.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 04 janvier 2013 - 04:11 .

[MaximizedAction]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...
Well, I don't mean necessarily mean 'dialogue as evidence'.

What I mean is... if refuse is somehow supposed to be the right choice, then there must be support for it in the themes of the game.

A 'correct choice' would be something that would align with the premise and the themes of the story, right? The way I see it, if all the choices are a trap, and only one of them is the correct one there must be a way for the player to know which is the correct one. Also, making the right choice should be a reward for understanding the themes of the story.

The way I see it, refuse goes against the game's theme of 'a good soldier does not abandon the mission', and I can't think of anything in the game that could support refuse. Destroy, on the other hand, has so much support in the themes and the dialogue, it's not even funny.

I could be wrong, but I really can't think of anything that would support refuse.

(Not to rekindle this debate again - just really wanted to clarify the 'support' thing.

It's true, the idea of Destroy is something we've been striving for since ME1. In fact, if you confront the ME1 Shepard (somewhere between beginning and mid-story) the Geth thing would even make ya choose quicker, because back then they've been the villians, too.

The problem though is, the circumstances and surrounding under which Shepard is supposed to make the choice are so strange and anything but common, so I wouldn't rush in and judge Destroy by what we imagined it to be before the whole situation after London.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, what makes Refuse so attractive to me is how Shepard says almost exactly what he said during the first confrontation with Saren on Virmire. Though the situation is clearly different this time, Shepard seems very familiar here and gives a speech which, to me, is similar in its sincereness to the ME2 motivational speech on the Collector Base.
But of course, there's this immediate loss thing...

Anyhow, non of the choices seems perfect, but the breath scene definitely hints that Destroy is 'better' or, more along the line of Shepard-typical: Rising from the dead once again.

CoolioThane wrote...

There's been sleep Dwailing!

She's trying to argue there couldn't have been a hallucination because "we haven't seen them before" when we have...

...now she's changed it to "we haven't seen them like this before"...It's like a never-ending cycle,

But you...urgh...you can end it! *cough* [/drama]

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 04 janvier 2013 - 04:16 .

[Andromidius]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

The way I see it, refuse goes against the game's theme of 'a good soldier does not abandon the mission', and I can't think of anything in the game that could support refuse.

Doctor Kenson supports Refuse.

[Dwailing]

CoolioThane wrote...

There's been sleep Dwailing!

She's trying to argue there couldn't have been a hallucination because "we haven't seen them before" when we have...

...now she's changed it to "we haven't seen them like this before"...It's like a never-ending cycle,

But it's true, we HAVEN'T seen hallucinations just like the one at the ending.  I don't think that means it's impossible, but she is right about that.

[Skillz1986]

@doomsday
There's a great difference between humorous references in game an actual depoctions of asari hanar porn

[CoolioThane]

It's nothing Doomsday, some people just don't like others having a view they strongly believe is right if it differs from theirs and call people zealots for it. You're awesome

[Dwailing]

Skillz1986 wrote...

@doomsday
There's a great difference between humorous references in game an actual depoctions of asari hanar porn

True, but Rule 34 is in full effect with, well, EVERYTHING.  People have sick minds, what can I say?

[Skillz1986]

I'm a little bit out of the loop these days...rule 34?

[garrusfan1]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

The Synthesis is an Abomination thread gets funnier every time I read it...

It is an abomination though. Destroy is the only way to go

[Dwailing]

Skillz1986 wrote...

I'm a little bit out of the loop these days...rule 34?

If you can think of it, there's porn of it somewhere on the internet.  No exceptions.

And when they say "no exceptions" they MEAN "no exceptions."

[MaximizedAction]

Skillz1986 wrote...

I'm a little bit out of the loop these days...rule 34?

"If it exists, there's pr0n of it"

edit: Really BSN, THIS post gets top?

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 04 janvier 2013 - 04:26 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

Dwailing wrote...

I agree with you.  I may not always think the dialogue you come up with definitely supports IT, but I'll definitely agree that you've dug up a LOT of Destroy support.

Thing is, I haven't even collected all of it. I know there's more. In the conversations with TIM, for example. The list is still growing.