1238 réponses à ce sujet

[MajorKellyRisner]

Ah yes. "Indoctrination". We have dismissed this theory and moved on to find Leviathan.

[ev76]

I hope leviathan expands on reaper indoctrination, that is one of the biggest things throughout mass effect. Also on the collective mind of a reaper.

[Reever]

dorktainian wrote...

Nice to see IT is still alive and kicking.

Why would that be nice? This theory exists only because of fan disappointment. They should get over it and see things how they have been portrayed in the EC endings...this would be the dumbest game if Bioware would let my Shep be indoctrinated but wouldn´t say at the end: "You failed" or something, but gives me sliders of that particular ending...

I know not everything´s smooth and consistent, but still...

Then again, everybody has their own head-canon. Do what you want, but don´t try to induce the theory on everybody (especially since with those sliders, "proof" or whatever is on the non-IT side, at least IMHO!)

[TheCruxDefender]

BlueDemonX-I was skeptical at first, but the evidence for IT is too strong to ignore. At the very least, it is clear Bioware was heading for an IT ending, but maybe changed its mind at the last minute.

I disagree that it would be "the dumbest thing ever" if Bioware intentionally hides the IT theory verification until sometime in the future. If IT theory is true, and Bioware springs it later, an epic moment in gaming history will occur.

[Volc19]

SubAstris wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Quote me where I stated anyone was stupid and ignorant for daring to disagree with me. I want to see where you're coming from.

It wasn't a quote, just an observation of the implied meaning of some of your posts, and it seems a lot of people on this thread would back me up on that

It doesn't help that he has basically come out and said "Destroy is the only option. I'm right, you're wrong. If you picked anything else, you are an Indoctrinated plebian, and you are doing it wrong."

If that isn't a superiority complex, then I don't know what is.

EDIT: Quote-ception

Modifié par Volc19, 04 août 2012 - 01:06 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

[quote]The Twilight God wrote...

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

No, I'm not saying Shepard is just a ******. Kinda hard to be one when you're an RPG PC.

What I am saying is that in Refuse he is being one. [/quote]
 
Right, he's just dumb as a bag of bricks there. Nice theory. Again. Not interested is discussing the Stupid Shepard Theory. "Hehe, he just had a brain fart and mistakenly forgot to hit the Destroy button" Well, that explains it. Case closed. *facepalm*[/quote]

That's not what I'm saying.


He didn't forget the Destroy button, he's deliberately choosing not to use it.

Don't act like you don't know that, for MANY people who play, the eradication of synthetic life in Destroy is a severely immoral action that results from choosing it. For some, it's reason enough to disqualify it even if it destroys the Reapers.

That rationale has nothing to do with indoctrination. If anything, it's the opposite - like ad-hominem based logic.




 
[quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...


The same way he is being stupid when he releases Grunt from the tank in tight quarters whilst taking no precautions, aside from apparently having brought the whimpiest gun in the armory. There are times when the player makes him do things which are intelligent. And others, not so much.[/quote]
 
Shepard's a terminator by that point. That Krogan shotgun and that widow aren't ripping his arms off. I'm pretty sure you can arm wrestle grunt and give him a run for his money. He lifts steel beams by himself like they are made of foam. That krogan on Korlus didn't have to move that metal sheet. Shepard could have done it himself. Risky? Maybe, but everything Shepard does is risky. Tthe idea that he was helpless against Grunt is a gross exaggeration. He could have broke that hold at any time.[/quote]

... right. 



[quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...


Like, you know, when TIM was trying to indoctrinate him and there were audible voices inside his head. What ever happened to that? What about him seeing visions that he were actively receiving through some piece of Reaper tech like in Arrival DLC?

See, that would be evidence.[/quote]
 
TIMs "control" was not in and of itself indoctrination. He was physically controlling their bodies by a means that even the reapers have never demonstrated. What he does seems more like the biotic ability Dominate and there is even a biotic effect over his hand when he makes Shepard shoot Anderson. Assuming it's something other than dominate, what TIM does is a completely new phenomenon in the ME universe. The indoctrination, the reaper's trying to get in his head, is something different. Both can be happening simultaneously. At least at the beginning. After the first part you stop hearing the whispers (same whispers as his dreams) and then it is this electonic vibratory sounds triggered whenever TIM exerts his power.[/quote]

What he was doing was undeniably a form of control. There's no question about it. OTOH, the case for the Catalyst being the player's indoctrination is a shoddy claim at best.


[quote]As I just mentioned, and you purposely ignored, the Star Child is a voice in his head. Also, when he speaks there is an overlay of shepard's voice. At least two voices are speaking. The "voice echoes" are louder and more numerous when you have low EMS. There is no other voice speaking when TIM is doing whatever it is he is doing beyond the first moments.[/quote]

His voice has all kinds of effects done to it. He's more than an ordinary AI with feminine/masculine programming, he's the collective intelligence of Reaper gestalt minds. He sounds different, because he IS different.


[quote]The Illusive Man INSTANTLY controls Shepard's body.  INSTANTLY. He didn't have to go through a "slow process" so you just put your own foot in your own mouth there. That physical control was NOT indoctrination. The indoctrination is something subtle; in the background. Not some blunt instrument like TIMs control power (dominate?).[/quote]

It IS indoctrination. That's why Shepard is hearing voices. Indoctrination can control your body too by compelling you to do things, only Shepard was not completely indoctrinated so he could fight it a little bit - physically and mentally. 


[quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

This while he holds all the power. If you believe refusal is an indoctrinated path, it begs the question why the decision isn't Synthesis-or-die. Literally, he can force him to choose either the change he wants or uphold the status quo where the Reapers reign supreme, and Shepard could do nothing about it.[/quote]
 
Of course he can. He can shoot the tubes. He has a gun. There isn't a damn thing the Catalyst can do to stop Shepard from doing that. The only possibility where the Reapers are 100% safe is low ems and you keep the base. In that scenario it doesn't matter what you do. Control or Refusal: the reapers live either way. The Crucible is fubar'd in a way where the Reapers live no matter what. If Bioware has it act complete different in this scenario it would be the same as announcing "Hey, look!! See, the Catalyst isn't what he seems". They can't do that without overtly stating that Control and Synthesis are indoctrinated endings.[/quote]

No he can't. The catalyst is the one who raises the platform to Destroy and/or Control. Even if he does, you're assuming that Shepard can/will know that shooting the tube will Desroy the Reapers without the Catalyst prompting it to him.

Another hole in your argument is that the Crucible is fubar'd in Low EMS + Base. You're wrong, because the Base improves the Crucible. It's worth more EMS. And in Control, Earth doesn't suffer like Low EMS Destroy.


Low EMS Control > Low EMS Destroy.

Bioware portraying him differently (I assume you mean the fact he does not approve of Control) doesn't matter. You know why? Because people are still going to be utterly convinced by his actions and words, whatever they may be, being clearly signs that he's manipulating Shepard. If he acted differently, you'd cite it as proof. Since he's not, you cite it as proof because it's actually proving that it's Bioware behind it, trying to trick the player whilst also not being "obvious" about it and giving it away. See how that works?

 
[quote]Obviously the Catalyst convinced YOU that he has all the power. But then again, you're indoctrinated so.....[/quote]

Nice try.

This is clearly the unanswerable question for your IT.



[quote]You rape it with or without thanix cannons. [/quote]

Normandy narrowly pulls it off without the Thanix, and one squadmate dies. Hardly a "raping."


[quote]And thanix are based on reaper weapons tech. Not collector weapons tech.[/quote]

The Collectors are augmented by Reaper tech. For all intents and purproses, they are Reaper tech in themselves.



[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

They are not Prothean. They are Reaper-upgraded Protheans. That alone makes them entirely different.

Studying Collectors = studying Reapers/Reaper tech.[/quote]

No, it doesn't. Now who is speculating.[/quote]

See above.


[quote]The only thing "reaper tech" is the fetus itself. And it doesn't seem to offer much cutting edge tech. It's most powerful attack can't even instant kill a guy in armor. It wasn't anywhere near completed.[/quote]

And yet, when Cerberus salvaged everything they could get out of it, they were outgunning Alliance marines.

The Collector Base tech was extremely potent.


[quote]Collectors don't have tech, per say. They have no culture. They simply have what the protheans had and "painted it insect". The collector tech is prothean tech.[/quote]

Mordin's lecture about the Collectors has no relevance to this. They DO have tech. It came from their bosses, the Reapers. That's why you're essentially getting Reaper tech when you take from the Collectors.

They were all made to serve them, to the point where they were building a Reaper for them. They couldn't possibly have done that on their own - not without the help of the Reaper's technology.

[quote]It's the same beam stuff as Javik's weapon.[/quote]

They are similar. They are not the same.

Javik's gun qualified as an assault-rifle. The Collectors' beam was a heavy weapon, which stood apart from the conventional assault-rifles they were also using.


[quote]You're confusing apples with oranges. Whoever came up with the Crucible... their tech helped stop the reapers. Tech passed down by several races (not just the Protheans); tech that has nothing to do with the collector base or derelict reaper.[/quote]

Yet the collector base remnants still proved useful in helping complete the Crucible. Game canon, too.

[quote]And as far as that ingenuity is concerned I don't see a way to weaponize Keeper modifications to bring down a reaper ship.

You confuse the idea of prothean tech defeating the enemy vs protheans giving warning of an enemy or passing down non-prothean tech. There is a difference. Because the Inansuson left it for the Protheans, as those before left it for them, and the Protheans lost. Prothean tech could not defeat the reapers.[/quote]

Bringing down Reaper ships is not the only way to fight them. Especially not when we lack the conventional means to do that as it is. One has to find other ways.

- Rewriting the keepers is fighting them.
- Destroying the alpha-relay is fighting them.
- Preserving/using the Collector Base to develop tech is fighting them.


[quote]Not from the Derelict Reaper. They lost contact because the team was indoctrinated and TIM abandoned the project. If you read the books or even watched the recording on Cronos station you'd know TIM had been researching that tech from recovered husk and Dragon's teeth. It's based on the Paul Grayson experiment. The Collector base's survival or destruction changed nothing.[/quote]

The Base changed nothing because they were able to salvage it even if you destroyed it. Otherwise, it is clear that they "got some upgrades" as one squadmate says on Sur'Kesh. If it came from the same Reaper tech they had all along, why weren't they that strong from before?

It's not stated for fact but heavily implied, that the leftover 'base tech was pivotal to their sudden growth in power/influence.

ME: Invasion also indicates they've set up their own labs for study beyond the O4 relay.


[quote]Sanctuary was more Paul Grayson experiments. Based on husk body nanites. It had nothing to do with the Collector base or the Derelict Reaper.[/quote]

See above two lines.

[quote]Furthermore, if Sanctuary was such a success, why didn't they just control the reaper forces that attacked? The Reapers, in the end, simply took back control and indoctrinated TIM who hooked himself in. Foolish pride.[/quote]

The Reapers attacked Sanctuary before they got far enough to make that kind of breakthrough. 


[quote]Who would have guessed that putting reaper tech in people's bodies wouldn't work out... *facepalm*[/quote]

It largely was working for them. Their operatives could outgun Alliance marines.

And consider this. The Reapers were on Tuchanka and Rannoch. They were aware of Shepard's efforts to unite galactic forces to go fight the Reapers, but Shepard was never actively being sought after by the Reapers. OTOH, Sanctuary warranted direct action from the Reapers to stop it, because it was that threatening to them.

They were more worried about what a small rogue organization was doing to stop them than whatever Shepard was up to.



[quote]Yeah and so did a titanium steel beam. So did fuel tanks. So did paint. So what?

Nice try there rookie, but it's a miss.[/quote]

Not the same thing and you know it. You're deliberately trying to downplay it.


[quote]Control and Synthesis, taken literally are getting your cake and eating it. Compared to Destroy you lose nothing and peace is assured forever. Hooray!!! [/quote]

-- Control and Synthesis require the player's sacrifice.
-- Destroy Shepard can live. And don't give me the "oh it's just a lousy breath scene" because a lot of people do admit that Shepard surviving destroy IS a plus for them.
-- Control and Synthesis are not morally clean. People choosing those paths have to confront that.
-- Choosing Control/Synthesis doesn't mean the player likes and/or is happy with that decision.


[quote]That's why people don't want to acknowledge the endings imply indoctrination. Accepting the endings as the indoctrinated reality of the situation is too hard to handle, because it's turns out so nice if you ignore all evidence to the contrary. Fans are only used to ever making decisions on their terms and getting to have their cake and eat it. Not anymore. And that's created anger and confused responses, such as indoctrination denialist.[/quote]

Except you never see stuff like IT being done anywhere else. Why? Because the premise of "it's all just a front" is ridiculous until and unless one can soundly prove it. Failing that, everything you see is to be taken at face value.

Let's try it: Your life isn't real. You will actually wake up when you die and see that it was all just a dream. The fact it feels real and not like the dreams you're used to is just proof that you're being fooled.

It's a claim that can't really be proven wrong, but it's still nonsense. And it will be nonsense for as long as it is proven without fallacies and wild speculation.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 04 août 2012 - 03:05 .

[clennon8]

@TTG: I read your new section regarding the low-EMS scenario where the Collector base was destroyed.  The explanation is kind of muddled to me. First of all, I'm pretty sure there's a boolean/grammar area somewhere in this part:

In this scenario the only option the Star Child presents Shepard with is Destroy. The Catalyst’s attitude is noticeably more distraught in this situation. A question that has come up is “Why does the Catalyst bother to inform Shepard of how to get the Crucible armed if it does not want him to arm it?”

My reply to this inquiry: Because the Catalyst does not want Shepard to arm the Crucible.

How can it NOT want him to not arm it in this scenario?

Next, you go on to say that the Reapers are going into full-tilt indoctrination mode to try to get Shepard to do... what? Go ahead and shoot the CSD? Refuse to do anything? The former doesn't make sense, since that destroys the Reapers as well as most organic life in the galaxy. The latter makes more sense, but you know people are going to point out that Refuse wasn't available pre-EC (except via standing around long enough to get the Critical Mission Failure screen). Could you clarify?

Modifié par clennon8, 04 août 2012 - 03:03 .

[megamacka]

 This is exactly how I viewed the ending after the EC. The extra dialogue with the '' star child '' aka mr evil reaper. Really opened my eyes and called him on his BS.

[The Twilight God]

clennon8 wrote...

@TTG: I read your new section regarding the low-EMS scenario where the Collector base was destroyed.  The explanation is kind of muddled to me. First of all, I'm pretty sure there's a boolean/grammar area somewhere in this part:

In this scenario the only option the Star Child presents Shepard with is Destroy. The Catalyst’s attitude is noticeably more distraught in this situation. A question that has come up is “Why does the Catalyst bother to inform Shepard of how to get the Crucible armed if it does not want him to arm it?”

My reply to this inquiry: Because the Catalyst does not want Shepard to arm the Crucible.

How can it NOT want him to not arm it in this scenario?

Next, you go on to say that the Reapers are going into full-tilt indoctrination mode to try to get Shepard to do... what? Go ahead and shoot the CSD? Refuse to do anything? The former doesn't make sense, since that destroys the Reapers as well as most organic life in the galaxy. The latter makes more sense, but you know people are going to point out that Refuse wasn't available pre-EC (except via standing around long enough to get the Critical Mission Failure screen). Could you clarify?

No, what I was saying was that the Reapers want him to not chose Destroy. If left to his own devices, Shepard would figure it out and initiate Destroy with or whith out the StarChild's help. Look at it from Shepard's point of view. He came there to Destroy the reapers and now that he is there there is a reaper ambassador saying, "I wouldn't do that if I were you. It'll blow up the galaxy. Just roll over and give up." Would you trust such a blatant attempt to get you to give up? As I've tried to convey, Shepard does not enter the room indoctrinated. He is in the process of indoctrination. Some tact is still necessary.

That is my in story explaination. My development team explaination is that the ending has a particular framework: StarChild chat and choice. They aren't going to make a whole new drawnout screenplay for a rare situation that the vast majority of players will not experience.

I could just say the repaers auto-fail to indoctrionate pre-EC. Pre-EC the StarChild was just a glorified option menu anyway. It comes off as a rushed mess.  But pre-EC is the past; it does not exist anymore. Only post-EC matters as EC "fixes" their mistakes. The EC actually reinforces the concept of indoctrination. They added details that support my case. Details that weren't necessary to put in.

[clennon8]

Okay, thanks for clarifying.

[The Twilight God]

Volc19 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Quote me where I stated anyone was stupid and ignorant for daring to disagree with me. I want to see where you're coming from.

It wasn't a quote, just an observation of the implied meaning of some of your posts, and it seems a lot of people on this thread would back me up on that

It doesn't help that he has basically come out and said "Destroy is the only option. I'm right, you're wrong. If you picked anything else, you are an Indoctrinated plebian, and you are doing it wrong."

If that isn't a superiority complex, then I don't know what is.

EDIT: Quote-ception

Except for the fact that I have repeatedly stated that Destroy is not the only true ending nor have I said Destroy is the "right" ending. They are all equally valid endngs. Some people simply will not wrap their head around the idea that an indoctrinated ending could be a genuine ending. For alot of people it has to be total victory over the Reapers or it's an illegitmate endng. That's just how people can be.

[munnellyladt]

No!,I'm in control,no one is telling me what to do!

[The Twilight God]

munnellyladt wrote...

No!,I'm in control,no one is telling me what to do!

Then do it!! Explain how the ending makes any sense whatsoever if Shepard isn't in the throes of indoctrination!!!!

You can't.... can you?!?!

[The Twilight God]

This is getting long. I've actually been typing this reply bit by bit since yesterday as  there was no way I was going to sit here and go through all at once.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

He didn't forget the Destroy button, he's deliberately choosing not to use it.

Don't act like you don't know that, for MANY people who play, the eradication of synthetic life in Destroy is a severely immoral action that results from choosing it. For some, it's reason enough to disqualify it even if it destroys the Reapers.[/quote]

So you destroy everyone; Organics and synthetics? In order to not kill the synthetics who get killed because you stood by and did nothing. Has Shepard been taking logic lessons from the Star Child?

Yes, yes. The Stupid Shepard Theory. I gotcha loud and clear. 

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...


[quote]The Twilight God wrote...
 
Shepard's a terminator by that point. That Krogan shotgun and that widow aren't ripping his arms off. I'm pretty sure you can arm wrestle grunt and give him a run for his money. He lifts steel beams by himself like they are made of foam. That krogan on Korlus didn't have to move that metal sheet. Shepard could have done it himself. Risky? Maybe, but everything Shepard does is risky. Tthe idea that he was helpless against Grunt is a gross exaggeration. He could have broke that hold at any time.[/quote]

... right. [/quote]

Right

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...


What he was doing was undeniably a form of control. There's no question about it. OTOH, the case for the Catalyst being the player's indoctrination is a shoddy claim at best.[/quote]

Yeah, Shepard can use Dominate too. So I guess he should have used that on the reaper destroyer instead of Kalros, the quarian fleet or a scrap load of thanix missiles. It is a form of control afterall.

Yeah, Shepard suiciding himself because a Reaper says it will save the day iis shoddy evidence for indoctrination. Went right ahead and suicided himself to advance their agenda. Riiight I guess Dr. Kenson wasn't indoctrinated and genuinely wanted to see the reaper utopia. Because that kind of behavior is shoddy evidence at best. My mistake.

And he's going to control all the hundreds or thousands of robot reaper bodies all throughout the galaxy using that technique?  Last I cheecked Dominate only works on organics and requires line of sight.  And I presume he will never eat or sleep ever against using that technique else he lose control or simply get angry and slip up. Note he could not control the reaper force attacking Sanctuary. No, he'll use the Crucible, right?  If he's going to use the Star Kids' control console then his technique is irrelevant and a collosal waste of his time and effort and therefore has no real bearing on the issue of rather or not controlling the Reapers is possible seeing as he has no credible reason to believe the Crucible can Control the reapers other than the reapers putting the idea in his head. 

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

His voice has all kinds of effects done to it. He's more than an ordinary AI with feminine/masculine programming, he's the collective intelligence of Reaper gestalt minds. He sounds different, because he IS different.[/quote]

What he is is or isn't isn't the point. What he is isn't known. He could be an AI on the Citadel. He could be Harbinger playing mind games. But you brought up the topic of  voices being evidence of indoctrination. And I'm reminding you that there were other voices during that conversation.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

It IS indoctrination. That's why Shepard is hearing voices. Indoctrination can control your body too by compelling you to do things, only Shepard was not completely indoctrinated so he could fight it a little bit - physically and mentally. [/quote]

No, it isn't. Controlling motor functions, in and of itself, is not indoctrination. There is no precedence in the entire series for instant motor control indoctrination. You shot yourself in the foot and just refuse to admit it. What TIM does is either dominate or something completely new. If that was indoctrination then Soveriegn could have simply made Shep and company attack themselves on the Citadel at the end of ME1. The Derelict Reaper could have just forced them to stand still while the husks tore Shepard apart. Again, there is nothing whatsoever supporting this new instant super indoctrination idea you've made up.


[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

No he can't. The catalyst is the one who raises the platform to Destroy and/or Control. Even if he does, you're assuming that Shepard can/will know that shooting the tube will Desroy the Reapers without the Catalyst prompting it to him.[/quote]

He'd figure it out. He still has radio contact with EDI, HAckett and the scientist. Also, guns have more range that point blank. Not a thing the Star Kid can do about it. walking up to it is part of the chosing process and facilitates the cutscene.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

Another hole in your argument is that the Crucible is fubar'd in Low EMS + Base. You're wrong, because the Base improves the Crucible. It's worth more EMS. And in Control, Earth doesn't suffer like Low EMS Destroy.[/quote]

It's fubar'd if it can't initiate a proper Destroy. That is what it is for. That is the only thing it was desgined to do. Syhthesis and control are based in the Citadel, not the Crucible. They need the Crucible's to power them.

Yeah, Control doesn't seem to really need the alot of Crucible energy as I've mention before. The low and high ems difference are just relay explosion and normady damage. Control  doesn't seem to really need the Crucible as much and is less power dependent than synthesis which is understandable seeing as synthesis is making matter out of energy

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

Bioware portraying him differently (I assume you mean the fact he does not approve of Control) doesn't matter. You know why? Because people are still going to be utterly convinced by his actions and words, whatever they may be, being clearly signs that he's manipulating Shepard. If he acted differently, you'd cite it as proof. Since he's not, you cite it as proof because it's actually proving that it's Bioware behind it, trying to trick the player whilst also not being "obvious" about it and giving it away. See how that works?[/quote]

Yup. Nice how that works, eh?

 [quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...




[quote]Obviously the Catalyst convinced YOU that he has all the power. But then again, you're indoctrinated so.....[/quote]
Nice try.

This is clearly the unanswerable question for your IT.[/quote]

And what question would that be? I've answered everything.


[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

Normandy narrowly pulls it off without the Thanix, and one squadmate dies. Hardly a "raping."[/quote]

It's a frigate and the collector ship is a cruiser. The Normandy raped it and gave the collectors a bag of it's underwear to wash.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

The Collectors are augmented by Reaper tech. For all intents and purproses, they are Reaper tech in themselves.[/quote]

If collector tech was representative of reaper tech a conventional victory wouldn't be so crazy.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...




[quote]No, it doesn't. Now who is speculating.[/quote]

See above.[/quote]

Yup, that was definitely YOU speculating above.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

And yet, when Cerberus salvaged everything they could get out of it, they were outgunning Alliance marines.

The Collector Base tech was extremely potent.[/quote]

Reaper nanites exist in husks and dragon's teeth. There aren't any special nanites only found on the collector base. Read the books. The difference is Grayson is infected while still alive. Husks are not.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
Yet the collector base remnants still proved useful in helping complete the Crucible. Game canon, too.[/quote]

Yeah, like those merchant fleet fuel canisters I picked up. Game canon, too.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

Bringing down Reaper ships is not the only way to fight them. Especially not when we lack the conventional means to do that as it is. One has to find other ways.

- Rewriting the keepers is fighting them.
- Destroying the alpha-relay is fighting them.
- Preserving/using the Collector Base to develop tech is fighting them.[/quote]

Yeah, and none of that is the subject matter. The issue brought up is prothean tech winning us the war which is simply not true. And the fact that you are diverting the subject tells me you recognize your folly.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
The Base changed nothing because they were able to salvage it even if you destroyed it. Otherwise, it is clear that they "got some upgrades" as one squadmate says on Sur'Kesh. If it came from the same Reaper tech they had all along, why weren't they that strong from before?[/quote]

It didn't go from concept to mass prodction in the last couple months. Cerberus has been at this for awhile and they made a breakthrough after grayson. It is explicitely stated that the cerberus troop upgrades are based on what they recovered fromn grayson's body. Grayson was inhected with reaper nanites. The same as any husk. There was no super special tech gained from the collector base. Just the same old same old. 

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

The Reapers attacked Sanctuary before they got far enough to make that kind of breakthrough.[/quote] 

Um, no. Henry Lawson says they succeeded and that they can maintain control of reaper forces indefinitely as long as they are in close proximity. They couldn't control the reapers themselves however. However, it appears they could only control the ones they specially made because Henry Lawson was trapped inside because the reaper forces blocked the exit.  

So really they never really made much of a breakthrough, before or after. What they did do was make their own husks, but there is never any evidence given that they could actually take control from the reapers or their forces. In fact, the videos on Cronos station hint that the reapers were in the process of taking control of even TIM's specially made soldiers.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

It largely was working for them. Their operatives could outgun Alliance marines.[/quote]

Their combat effectiveness isn't the issue. They were indoctrinated grunts. The reaper tech makes them submissive. The issue is TIM put reaper tech in HIS head. He wasn't planning on heading to the front lines. He's not trying to become a super soldier. In every occurence of the use of reaper tech indoctrination occurs. Why would this be any different?

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

And consider this. The Reapers were on Tuchanka and Rannoch. They were aware of Shepard's efforts to unite galactic forces to go fight the Reapers, but Shepard was never actively being sought after by the Reapers. OTOH, Sanctuary warranted direct action from the Reapers to stop it, because it was that threatening to them.[/quote]

Shepard didn't exactly stand around in one fixed place for extended amounts of time for them to come after him. And he wasn't dealing with what can be considered "reaper tracking devices" which is how they knew about sanctuary? Because of the reaper tech being implanted in people. If Sanctuary was such a threat why not send a dreadnaught to obliterate it from orbit or even a destroyer? Didn't seem like it was that high on their threat list.

And they did come after Shepard. They actively sought him on the galaxy map.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

[quote]Yeah and so did a titanium steel beam. So did fuel tanks. So did paint. So what?

Nice try there rookie, but it's a miss.[/quote]

Not the same thing and you know it. You're deliberately trying to downplay it.[/quote]

It is exactly the same thing. Irrelevent stuff that doesn'tt really matter in the end. It can have the core or brain. Both interchangeable which makes both ultimately unimportant. It works fine without or without the core. It works fine with or without the brain. Only if the Crucible is jacked up do they come into play and at that point it's a lose-lose situation anyway. It'll either allow the Crucible to destory all life or leave the crucible incapable of defeating the reapers.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
-- Control and Synthesis require the player's sacrifice.
-- Destroy Shepard can live. And don't give me the "oh it's just a lousy breath scene" because a lot of people do admit that Shepard surviving destroy IS a plus for them.
-- Control and Synthesis are not morally clean. People choosing those paths have to confront that.
-- Choosing Control/Synthesis doesn't mean the player likes and/or is happy with that decision.[/quote]

-- All endings require the players sacrifice.
-- Shepard living on is headcannon. I get no payoff whatsoever from a breathe scene. For all intents and purposes Shepard ends at the docking chamber for all endings.There is no reunion, no nothing. The End. I can say Shepard made a cylon body and reurned to his friends with control or hatched out of a ctbernetic pof in syntheis. Control, if take at face value, presents a more believable reunion than Destroy. 
-- Control and Synthesis are rainbows and butterflies. There are no downsides other than the ones you make up.
-- Still raindows and butterflies with no downside compared to Destroy. No sacrifice other than the one all endings share.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

Except you never see stuff like IT being done anywhere else. Why? Because the premise of "it's all just a front" is ridiculous until and unless one can soundly prove it. Failing that, everything you see is to be taken at face value.[/quote]

At face value it is nothing. It's a narrator talking about what if's. Nothing in those epiliques actually plays out. Not even Destroy.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

Let's try it: Your life isn't real. You will actually wake up when you die and see that it was all just a dream. The fact it feels real and not like the dreams you're used to is just proof that you're being fooled.

It's a claim that can't really be proven wrong, but it's still nonsense. And it will be nonsense for as long as it is proven without fallacies and wild speculation.
[/quote]

You claiming solid evidence is fallacy and wild speculation doesn't make it so. The evidence is there. You do not have to accept it. Your belief is not required. It is what it is regardless.

Shepard is either indoctrinated or TIM infected him with retardation. Take your pick.

There is not a single reason for any person in their right mind to trust the Reapers. Nothing you say will ever change that. You cannot rationalize the irrational.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 05 août 2012 - 05:40 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Only the indoctrinated will deny being indoctrinated.

[Applepie_Svk]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Only the indoctrinated will deny being indoctrinated.

I know I can control them, Shepard !

[Ranger Jack Walker]

The Twilight God wrote...

You claiming solid evidence is fallacy and wild speculation doesn't make it so. The evidence is there. You do not have to accept it. Your belief is not required. It is what it is regardless.

Shepard is either indoctrinated or TIM infected him with retardation. Take your pick.

There is not a single reason for any person in their right mind to trust the Reapers. Nothing you say will ever change that. You cannot rationalize the irrational.

There is no solid evidence. Ofcourse we won't accept what you say. It is the human brain seeing patterns where there might not be any. You are freeto believe what ever you want but it doesn't change that it will always be your own interpretation. Making a thread whose sole purpose is to force it on others only proves that you are a troll.

If there is no reason to trust the catalyst, there is no reason to pick destroy either. Only refuse. Yeah, that turned out great.

[Wayning_Star]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

You claiming solid evidence is fallacy and wild speculation doesn't make it so. The evidence is there. You do not have to accept it. Your belief is not required. It is what it is regardless.

Shepard is either indoctrinated or TIM infected him with retardation. Take your pick.

There is not a single reason for any person in their right mind to trust the Reapers. Nothing you say will ever change that. You cannot rationalize the irrational.

There is no solid evidence. Ofcourse we won't accept what you say. It is the human brain seeing patterns where there might not be any. You are freeto believe what ever you want but it doesn't change that it will always be your own interpretation. Making a thread whose sole purpose is to force it on others only proves that you are a troll.

If there is no reason to trust the catalyst, there is no reason to pick destroy either. Only refuse. Yeah, that turned out great.

I'm not sure, but I have a feeling that the Laviathan DLC will throw the IT folks into another spin off of 'idoctrination vs ultra-tech communication". You're concept of them being 'trollish' invigorates their belief that if they say something long enough, with enough 'stuff' that the idea will be accepted. A current form of indoctrination/feeding the trolls. The funny part is, they're correct in a way, but just not in the 'right' way.lol Shep IS indoctrinated, but not in the form or function that the IT'ers insist, it's much stranger than their thoeory portends. The new DLC should provide everyone with information about all that. imo only.

I don't buy into the IT, as it's just too 'off the wall' for me..

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

There is no solid evidence. Ofcourse we won't accept what you say. It is the human brain seeing patterns where there might not be any. You are freeto believe what ever you want but it doesn't change that it will always be your own interpretation. Making a thread whose sole purpose is to force it on others only proves that you are a troll.

Well, I can't force anything on anyone. Perhaps you mean by proving something you find distasteful, I have saddened you. And because it has had a negative effect on you emotionally I must be trolling? Because if you didn't take anything I've posted to heart and it was all easily dismissable we wouldn't be having this conversation. You wouldn't be resorting to ad-hominems.

The Star Child lies to Shepard from the start. Fact.
Shepard has no reason to trust the Reapers. Fact.
Shepard either does what he came to do, rolls over and lets the Reapers win or commits suicide because the Reapers said it was a good idea. Fact.

You keep asserting that there is no evidence yet you nor anyone else can come up with any counter to my clear and obvious evidence. You simply ignore and choose to remain willfully ignorant. The entire opposition can be summed up as "I want to believe my sunshine and butterflies ending so I have to disagree". You simply handwave anything you don't like as bad writting. Essentially, going outside of what is written to dismiss what is written in favor what you claim the writters intended to write (but didn't). And of course the writters supposed intent equates to whatever you want that intent to be. 

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

If there is no reason to trust the catalyst, there is no reason to pick destroy either. Only refuse. Yeah, that turned out great.

Destroy does not equal instantaneous death if the Star Child is lying. Destroy does not fullfill the agenda of the Reapers pointed out in 2 games. Destroy exists independently of the Star Child. Destory is the only option that requires no direct interface on Shepard's part because it is the Crucible sole objective and automatically enacts upon the destruction of the reaper device suppresing it. Shepard has every reason to believe that Destroy is possible and will work out in his favor. The entire game is predicated on this.

Comparing Destroy to Control and Synthesis is grapsing at straws. It requires you to willfully ignore the evidence against this association and the very plot of the game itself. It's like saying if I decide to go to the grocery store and there is a kid outside who offers to let me take my own car, a new truck or a new SUV; that the choice to drive my own car, that I was going to drive anyway, comes into play only because this kid includes it in his list of vehicle choices. That's absurd logic. Rather or not I drive my own car is not up to him. The kid in this example has himself provided me addtional 2 options. Not three new options.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

The Twilight God wrote...

Perhaps you mean by proving something you find distasteful, I have saddened you.

Not really. Things on the internet are not worth getting upset over.
Besides you haven't proved anything. Your responses come down to "I'm right because I think I'm right" which is fine as far as you are concerned but for everyone else? Not so much.

The Catalyst doesn't need to indoctrinate Shepard or anything. It is the one who brings Shepard up to the Pick and Ending platform in the first place. If his agenda was to assure the Reapers victory, he could have just left Shepard there. If you want to believe it is lying go ahead. Your belief is not required.

And Car comparison is absurd beyond belief. You're really grasping at straws here aren't yor?  

Modifié par Ranger Jack Walker, 05 août 2012 - 05:38 .

[megamacka]

Just a thought. Shepy fell all the way down from space onto a planet and Cerby was able to resurrect him again. Now we get a breathing scene and his current situation seems a lot '' better '' than the whole die in space then trololo fall all the way down onto a random planet.

So lazarus project number two? God I hated the lazarus project... Lol you are dead but we haz super science and can bring you back again lolololol. But if it gets me my blue children and my house on rannoch then fine ....

[megamacka]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Perhaps you mean by proving something you find distasteful, I have saddened you.

Not really. Things on the internet are not worth getting upset over.
Besides you haven't proved anything. Your responses come down to "I'm right because I think I'm right" which is fine as far as you are concerned but for everyone else? Not so much.

The Catalyst doesn't need to indoctrinate Shepard or anything. It is the one who brings Shepard up to the Pick and Ending platform in the first place. If his agenda was to assure the Reapers victory, he could have just left Shepard there. If you want to believe it is lying go ahead. Your belief is not required.

And Car comparison is absurd beyond belief. You're really grasping at straws here aren't yor?  

Maybe the entire platform thing was the indoctrination in his head?
I mean Shepy fell unconscious did he not? Why would he magiclly awaken just because some platform appeared. And the entire thing takes place with the console? Control / synthesis lolo we got you now shep ! Or I am a super hero and click the console and kill all the reapers like I was suppoused to do from the very start . Bioware don't want a '' canon '' ending. They want us to believe what we want to believe. And I don't trust in a random reaper kid who just appears out of nowhere and claims all of these random stuff. Especially not considering how it went for Tim and Saren .

Modifié par megamacka, 05 août 2012 - 06:18 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Again, believe what you want but Bioware clearly intended all of the endings to be final and 'good' or 'happy' endings. Whether they executed it well is a different matter.

[JohnP]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...
And Car comparison is absurd beyond belief.

How so?

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Because he took the basic premise of being offered 3 choices and ran with it.