80611 réponses à ce sujet

[dorktainian]

demersel wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

demersel wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

demersel wrote...

EC did one thing. It made Destroy HARDER to pick. Both thematically and gameplaywise. If the ending is a final battle - they made it more difficult and challenging.

It's not difficult if you know what you want...which is probably the case for most players by the time the EC was released. I wonder if there is anyone who changed their mind on the choices because of the extra lines of the Guardian or the ending cinematics.

Did people pay too little attention to the trilogy or too much to the Guardian?

It is very difficult if you don't know that there is refuse - and even when you do - I had to be very cerefull as t o not to pick up any of the lines that may lead to refuse. 

Oh so Refuse is now a bad choice that has to be avoided actively? Da hell?

1 - yes it is.
2 - what i meant is when you don't even know there is such an option - it is very esily triggered - the very first uot break of discontent from you, even a slight hint of noncomplience - and it is irreversably triggered. 

refusal is YOUR only choice.  :whistle:star brat gives you 3 choices.

Modifié par dorktainian, 07 janvier 2013 - 03:02 .

[demersel]

dorktainian wrote...
refusal is YOUR only choice.  

What? What do you mean by it being MINE only choice? 

[ElSuperGecko]

BleedingUranium wrote...
What's OSDM?

[dorktainian]

demersel wrote...

dorktainian wrote...
refusal is YOUR only choice.  

What? What do you mean by it being MINE only choice? 

you are given 3 choices from starbrat.  all 3 have positives, but all 3 have drawbacks.

the only choice YOU are free to make is REFUSE.  

The other 3 solutions are his solutions.  I want to destroy the reapers, but i dont want to sacrifice synthetics.  i certainly dont want to control the reapers - other than to have them fly into the nearest star.  Synthesis is just huskification by the back door.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

dorktainian wrote...

demersel wrote...

dorktainian wrote...
refusal is YOUR only choice.  

What? What do you mean by it being MINE only choice? 

you are given 3 choices from starbrat.  all 3 have positives, but all 3 have drawbacks.

the only choice YOU are free to make is REFUSE.  

The other 3 solutions are his solutions.  I want to destroy the reapers, but i dont want to sacrifice synthetics.  i certainly dont want to control the reapers - other than to have them fly into the nearest star.  Synthesis is just huskification by the back door.

Destroy can hardly be considered his solution considering it goes directly against his programming. He knows it wont stop Synthetics from rising again so it is not a solution in relation to his programming.

[BleedingUranium]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...
What's OSDM?

LOL That's hilarious


@Dork
For the 37 millionth time: Destroy is not one of the kid's options.

[demersel]

dorktainian wrote...

demersel wrote...

dorktainian wrote...
refusal is YOUR only choice.  

What? What do you mean by it being MINE only choice? 

you are given 3 choices from starbrat.  all 3 have positives, but all 3 have drawbacks.

the only choice YOU are free to make is REFUSE.  

The other 3 solutions are his solutions.  I want to destroy the reapers, but i dont want to sacrifice synthetics.  i certainly dont want to control the reapers - other than to have them fly into the nearest star.  Synthesis is just huskification by the back door.

See, there is your mistake. I want to destroy the reapers. No BUTs, no IFs.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

MaximizedAction wrote...

demersel wrote...

EC did one thing. It made Destroy HARDER to pick. Both thematically and gameplaywise. If the ending is a final battle - they made it more difficult and challenging.

It's not difficult if you know what you want...which is probably the case for most players by the time the EC was released. I wonder if there is anyone who changed their mind on the choices because of the extra lines of the Guardian or the ending cinematics.

Did people pay too little attention to the trilogy or too much to the Guardian?

Idd say neither. I think it is more that people put to much emphasiz on what was just introduced forgetting what had come before in the process.

[dorktainian]

BleedingUranium wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...
What's OSDM?

LOL That's hilarious


@Dork
For the 37 millionth time: Destroy is not one of the kid's options.

yeah but - it kinda makes sense to include it.  ''The Decision Wheel Theory''

[BleedingUranium]

Indoctrination is aligning youself with the Reapers' goals. Destroying the Reapers is not a goal of the Reapers, therefore Shepard can't become indoctrinated like that.

[Norlond]

Found an interesting article

Summary. The psychological principles that govern the perception of decision problems and the evaluation of probabilities and outcomes produce predictable shifts of preference when the same problem is framed in different ways. Reversals of preference are demonstrated in choices regarding monetary outcomes, both hypothetical and real, and in questions pertaining to the loss of human lives. The effects of frames on preferences are compared to the effects of perspectives on perceptual appearance. The dependence of preferences on the formulation of decision problems is a significant concern for the theory of rational choice.

We use the term "decision frame" to refer to the decision-maker's conception of the acts, outcomes, and contingencies associated with a particular choice.

Similarly, rational choice requires that the preference between options should not reverse with changes of frame. Because of imperfections of human perception and decision, however, changes of perspective often reverse the relative apparent size of objects and the relative desirability of options.

(all quotes from page 2)

These are the most interesting parts I found so far, I'll see if there're some more, but the article gets a little complicated  later on

Modifié par Norlond, 07 janvier 2013 - 03:16 .

[BleedingUranium]

Casey Hudson does have a degree in psychology, but noooo bad ritings

[draconian139]

demersel wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

demersel wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

demersel wrote...

EC did one thing. It made Destroy HARDER to pick. Both thematically and gameplaywise. If the ending is a final battle - they made it more difficult and challenging.

It's not difficult if you know what you want...which is probably the case for most players by the time the EC was released. I wonder if there is anyone who changed their mind on the choices because of the extra lines of the Guardian or the ending cinematics.

Did people pay too little attention to the trilogy or too much to the Guardian?

It is very difficult if you don't know that there is refuse - and even when you do - I had to be very cerefull as t o not to pick up any of the lines that may lead to refuse. 

Oh so Refuse is now a bad choice that has to be avoided actively? Da hell?

1 - yes it is.
2 - what i meant is when you don't even know there is such an option - it is very esily triggered - the very first uot break of discontent from you, even a slight hint of noncomplience - and it is irreversably triggered. 

I can sort of see your point but by the time that the EC came out everyone thought that shooting starbrat wouldn't trigger anything.  My first time playing the ending sequence postEC I just marched right towards destroy immediately after he finished.  

[dorktainian]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Indoctrination is aligning youself with the Reapers' goals. Destroying the Reapers is not a goal of the Reapers, therefore Shepard can't become indoctrinated like that.

and if you're indoctrinated (i'm assuming you are following this train of thought) is destroy............destroy?  If your mind is 'lost' then how can you be 100% sure that anything this spawn of reaper hell says is legit?

[demersel]

dorktainian wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Indoctrination is aligning youself with the Reapers' goals. Destroying the Reapers is not a goal of the Reapers, therefore Shepard can't become indoctrinated like that.

and if you're indoctrinated (i'm assuming you are following this train of thought) is destroy............destroy?  If your mind is 'lost' then how can you be 100% sure that anything this spawn of reaper hell says is legit?

Well that isn't a reason not to do anything, right? 

[Eryri]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Casey Hudson does have a degree in psychology, but noooo bad ritings

I thought that was Mac Walters? Or does Casey have a psychology degree too?

[BleedingUranium]

dorktainian wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Indoctrination is aligning youself with the Reapers' goals. Destroying the Reapers is not a goal of the Reapers, therefore Shepard can't become indoctrinated like that.

and if you're indoctrinated (i'm assuming you are following this train of thought) is destroy............destroy?  If your mind is 'lost' then how can you be 100% sure that anything this spawn of reaper hell says is legit?

Because Shepard is not indoctrinated before making a choice.

[BleedingUranium]

Eryri wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Casey Hudson does have a degree in psychology, but noooo bad ritings

I thought that was Mac Walters? Or does Casey have a psychology degree too?

Or him, I knew it was one of them.

[Lokanaiya]

I'd just like to point out that in Destroy, you are swallowing your pride and accepting a solution presented by the Catalyst because you want to destroy the Reapers, no matter what. You're saying that you're willing to accept a solution presented by you by the leader of the Reapers if it means that your goals, however noble, are ultimately achieved. Sound familiar?

In Refuse, you are saying that no matter what happens, no matter who dies, you're not going to have anything to do with the Reapers, period. That is extremely bullheaded and stubborn, but it is the only one of the options that means you are not doing anything that the Reapers have presented to you, period. It is also the only option that makes the Catalyst furious at you. It ultimately dooms everyone and everything (or at least it does in the dream...) but it's the only option where you stay true to your ideals and the themes throughout the series of self-determination and doing the impossible. Just some food for thought.

P.S. I'm going to school now, so I won't be able to answer this.

[dorktainian]

demersel wrote...

dorktainian wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Indoctrination is aligning youself with the Reapers' goals. Destroying the Reapers is not a goal of the Reapers, therefore Shepard can't become indoctrinated like that.

and if you're indoctrinated (i'm assuming you are following this train of thought) is destroy............destroy?  If your mind is 'lost' then how can you be 100% sure that anything this spawn of reaper hell says is legit?

Well that isn't a reason not to do anything, right? 

who says we're doing nothing?  maybe to refuse is the correct answer to the reaper question?  who knows?  

[dorktainian]

Lokanaiya wrote...

I'd just like to point out that in Destroy, you are swallowing your pride and accepting a solution presented by the Catalyst because you want to destroy the Reapers, no matter what. You're saying that you're willing to accept a solution presented by you by the leader of the Reapers if it means that your goals, however noble, are ultimately achieved. Sound familiar?

In Refuse, you are saying that no matter what happens, no matter who dies, you're not going to have anything to do with the Reapers, period. That is extremely bullheaded and stubborn, but it is the only one of the options that means you are not doing anything that the Reapers have presented to you, period. It is also the only option that makes the Catalyst furious at you. It ultimately dooms everyone and everything (or at least it does in the dream...) but it's the only option where you stay true to your ideals and the themes throughout the series of self-determination and doing the impossible. Just some food for thought.

P.S. I'm going to school now, so I won't be able to answer this.

but there may be a way to win.  what if the 3 main choices weaken us somehow so we can never defeat the reapers...by....oh i don't know......disabling the relays?  (called it) 

Modifié par dorktainian, 07 janvier 2013 - 03:34 .

[demersel]

Isn't it a genius move by the reaper leader to present an option to destroy them (as you insist he does) as one of HIS options? Knowing that you might not trust anything he says at all and veiw everything he proposes as a trap? )))

[Lokanaiya]

One last thing: Destroy is the "practical" correct choice, but Refuse is the "thematic" correct choice. Personally, I think thematic stuff would be more important when facing down the Reapers in a battle in the mind.

[demersel]

dorktainian wrote...
]who says we're doing nothing?  maybe to refuse is the correct answer to the reaper question?  who knows?  

As of this moment - the game says so. And there is no breath scene after refuse, while we know it is possible for one to be there.

[draconian139]

demersel wrote...

Isn't it a genius move by the reaper leader to present an option to destroy them (as you insist he does) as one of HIS options? Knowing that you might not trust anything he says at all and veiw everything he proposes as a trap? )))

Yes, if an option to destroy them is actually there.