1238 réponses à ce sujet

[The Twilight God]

ajb314 wrote...

 There was one last thing I wanted to check before I posted again. I thought your explanation of the destroy ending was perfect and I needed to know if anyone else, at any point tried to explain how shooting a tube would trigger the crucible. There were a few threads that discussed this question, mostly from before the EC was released, and no one had an answer. One guy chalked it up to bad writing and said something to the effect of 'it's like turning on a tv by hitting it with a hammer.' I don't think even an inept writer would try to make that fly (and if he did, he would not be a writer for very long).

The Star child engages Shepard immediately so no opportunity is ever given for Shepard to figure it out without the Star Child pointing it out. And, of course, no one would know anything about the CSD. It was never known that the Reapers ahd eyes on the Crucible in the past or that they had prepared for the possibility of it ever docking successfully. However, it is plausible that he would have figured it out.

This LINK is to an alternate ending in which the Star Child does not approach Shepard immediately. It is in response to my detractors' impressions that Shepard is an unresourceful ****** who can't figure his way out of a wet paper bag without the Star Child's interference.

 

ajb314 wrote...

Personally, I think your analogy of a padlock on a door to be much more apt. In the end, this was extremely well done. But while I am very happy that you posted this (and frankly a little shocked at the level of detail you achieved) part of me wishes that it had not been necessary. As much ad I enjoyed reading and discussing your ideas, i sort of wish that bioware had simply crafted a different ending. I suppose I just like my video games with a little less complexity and a little more fun.

Agreed. They need to release an expansion that caters to everyone. I could easily write better and more consistent endings in my sleep. There could be a live or die outcome for every ending and each could be legitimized instead of all boiling down to indoctrinated or not indoctrinated. It's $39.99 in their pockets and would sell pretty well in addtion to patching up old wounds.

ajb314 wrote...

Last thing..it seems strange that there is almost no discussion (on the BSN, that is) about the fact that using your pistol activates the Crucible. This is a pretty important plot point and few people seem to even have a guess as to why it would work. Curious. 

Or people who think they are inside the Crucible even though everything shown around and above you dictates that you are still on the Citadel. I cannot imagine the writters could be THIS careless without have massive plotholes. If it is not intentional why does it all fit together so perfectly? There desire to make twist endings, imo, lowered the overall enjoyment of the ending and limited how much they could show without ruining it. The result is a great game that didn't get a proper send off because they'd rather maintain indoctrination. A poor decision.

[The Twilight God]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

It was never explicated. We only know the results. This has been a problem with the EC. It would frequently show us "what," but almost never give us "how" or "why." Your interpretation of the power conduit as a part of some CSD is no more valid than any other interpretation.

No, it was never explicated in words. However, it was logically inferred and sensibly confirmed. Granted, the entire contraption could have been what was preventing the Crucible from firing and that particular junction was just providing power to it. However, the destruction of that part is explicitely linked to the cessation of any Crucible hampering conditions.

But since you disagree share with us these "other interpretations"? Enlighten us.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 09 août 2012 - 03:44 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

The Twilight God wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

It was never explicated. We only know the results. This has been a problem with the EC. It would frequently show us "what," but almost never give us "how" or "why." Your interpretation of the power conduit as a part of some CSD is no more valid than any other interpretation.

No, it was never explicated in words. However, it was logically inferred and sensibly confirmed. Granted, the entire contraption could have been what was preventing the Crucible from firing and that particular junction was just providing power to it. However, the destruction of that part is explicitely linked to the cessation of any Crucible hampering conditions.

But since you disagree share with us these "other interpretations"? Enlighten us.

No. It has never been confirmed. You can release the energy of the Crucible by grabbing two electrified rods or jumping into the Crucible beam. That will also, for some stupid reason not explicated in the game, set off the energy. Shooting a pipe to release the energy of the Crucible can mean many things, from disabling some suppression device to simply a causing a breach in the energy containment system. Oh, and the Citadel must be engineered by morons if a suppression device fails by shooting the pipe. I personally find the lack of some failsafe (even mechanical ones) to prevent a catastrophic failure by simply shooting some pipe to be rather unbelievable and stupid.

In fact, the whole act of being able to release the energy of the Crucible by shooting a pipe is downright retarded. It doesn't matter if it's a suppression device or a pipe that contains som of the Crucible's energy. Allowing it to be set off like that is a failure of engineering.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 09 août 2012 - 04:27 .

[megamacka]

It's a video game. Why do people need to try and come up with scientific evidence for everything lol? The entire Turians/quarians can't eat human food has already been proved to be bullcrap even though Bioware tries to make it look / sound scientific, there is a thread around here exlpaining everything. Don't have time to find it atm but I'll look it up later. People still accept it as a fact.

So yeah, trying to prove each other wrong by using logics/ science obviously isn't the best idea xD. It's an imaginary world after all...

[Ranger Jack Walker]

I think shooting the pipe (along with grabbing 2 rods and jumping into the beam) were supposed to be symbolic.

Shooting the Pipe was supposed to be representative of aggression and revenge (which is not-so-coincidently, the most common reason people choose Destroy)

Grabbing the rods was supposed to be representative of taking over the reapers. If I try and read too much into it, I could even say that Shepard first collapsing and then standing up again is symbolic of being overwhelmed with raw power but then using heroic resovle to overcome it.

Jumping into the beam was supposed to be representative of jumping into the unknown.

Ofcourse, the key words here are 'supposed to be'. If it was supposed to be symbolic, they did sloppy job.

[clennon8]

The 'shooting pipes/grabbing the rods/jumping into the beam' as symbolism lends itself pretty well to the "It was all just a hallucination" version of IT, actually. That version used to have some appeal to me, but I prefer how OP's version ties together without relying on hackneyed tropes.

Btw, I'm glad you renamed the thread, TTG.

[megamacka]

Lal. Some people seem to believe that Destroy is renegade and control is paragon....
'' The geth and EDI dies ''.... Yes? Everyone knew that there would have to be sacrifices. And the Geth can be rebuilt, not with the reaper codes perhaps but still. I always play full paragon and I love the whole geth storyline but I think it's wrong for some people to claim that destroy = renegade <.<.

There is no Renegade / Paragon option for the ending....
I just came to think about it when I read your comment Ranger Jack. You seem to want to make it sound like that? Destroy is aggressive and control is heroic blah blah. I read about it in another forum whereas '' anti Indoctrination theory '' people claimed that Destroy is renegade and that we whom choose destroy is trying to make ourselves feel better....

   The reapers are kinda aggressive too , better put an end to it 

Modifié par megamacka, 09 août 2012 - 07:21 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

I wasn't implying that. I said Heroic Resolve because it is a trope

http://tvtropes.org/...n/HeroicResolve

Even a Renegade Shepard choosing Control would be using Heroic Resolve to recover. Basically, any time you see a knocked down protagonist get back up again, it's classified under heroic resolve as long as the character isn't flat out evil.

And revenge is the most common reason people choose destroy. There's no denying that.

[clennon8]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

And revenge is the most common reason people choose destroy. There's no denying that.

Hmm.   I think there is some denying that.

[megamacka]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

I wasn't implying that. I said Heroic Resolve because it is a trope

http://tvtropes.org/...n/HeroicResolve

Even a Renegade Shepard choosing Control would be using Heroic Resolve to recover. Basically, any time you see a knocked down protagonist get back up again, it's classified under heroic resolve as long as the character isn't flat out evil.

And revenge is the most common reason people choose destroy. There's no denying that.

I only ment that what you wrote reminded me of what I had read in another thread. And I doubt that the most common reason people pick destroy is because of revenge... You have kinda been set to destroy the reapers since ME1 and I doubt most people will let some random reaper kiddo change your mind. Where is your proof that this is the most common reason? 

   To say that the most common reason that people pick destroy is because of revenge is kinda implying that destroy is an act of a renegade, not wanting to see reason or whatever because of their emotions ( anger, revenge etc ). Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to say that '' OMG YOU ARE WRONG DUDE LOLO '', that is how you see it. I just see it differently 

Modifié par megamacka, 09 août 2012 - 07:46 .

[clennon8]

If you want to take a pot-shot at Destroy-choosers that has a chance of being true, say "The most common reason people choose Destroy is because Shepard lives." Some people will argue with that, too, but in my estimation it *might* actually be true.

Modifié par clennon8, 09 août 2012 - 07:53 .

[megamacka]

clennon8 wrote...

If you want to take a pot-shot at Destroy-choosers that has a chance of being true, say "The most common reason people choose Destroy is because Shepard lives." Some people will argue with that, too, but in my estimation it *might* actually be true.

They already do. They claim that it's a selfish act and that sacrificing yourself is paragon. Even though the starkiddo hints that you will die too 

Modifié par megamacka, 09 août 2012 - 08:15 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Take a look at any thread about Destroy and see how many people chose destroy because it means we kill the reapers and get revenge. I'm not taking a pot shot at all. It is a legitimate reason to pick Destroy and most of them do it for that reason and I won't begrudge them for picking it for that reason at all.. Shepard lving is another reason.

[megamacka]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Take a look at any thread about Destroy and see how many people chose destroy because it means we kill the reapers and get revenge. I'm not taking a pot shot at all. It is a legitimate reason to pick Destroy and most of them do it for that reason and I won't begrudge them for picking it for that reason at all.. Shepard lving is another reason.

http://social.biowar...ndex/13364419/1 

Common reason seems to be. It was the right thing to do or '' that is what we've been set to do since ME1 '' and '' I don't believe in / trust Synthesis or control.

  There is a difference between '' I believe that this is the right thing to do '' and maximus killing the emperor in gladiator because he murdered his family.
If you could go back in time and kill hitler, would you do it? Yes... Not because of revenge but because it would have been the right thing to do.

Modifié par megamacka, 09 août 2012 - 08:44 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

I don't even where clennon8 got the idea that I'm taking a pot shot at destroyers. Taking Revenge is a perfectly viable reason to choose destroy.

[The Twilight God]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

No. It has never been confirmed. You can release the energy of the Crucible by grabbing two electrified rods or jumping into the Crucible beam.

Yes, by directly interacting with the contraption within the intended range of use. The pad lock example comes back to mind. I try to open a door, but there is a pad lock on it. I take some bolt cutters (or a pistol) to the pad lock and break it. The door opens. I conclude that the pad lock was preventing the door from opening.

You say, "No, that doesn't prove the pad lock was keeping the door from opening, I can use a key on the pad lock and it opens as well or I can put in the right combo to open it." This would be shoddy logic on your part to disprove that the lock is preventing the door from opening.

It's all one device. The circle of beveled cantilevers around the beam, the chasm, the control console and the "breaker box" (CSD). I named it the CSD because it is the part you shoot and it's how I denoted that particular part based on how it is used in the story.  I can understand your objection to me designating it as a suppression device as that does imply that the "break box" is the thing doing the suppression in and of itself. On that we agree and I may amend that. But that part of the device is still the most representative of the premise. Hence I chose to designate it as such. However, you're still nitpicking on small irrelevent details, but you are unable to counter the premise: that shooting that "break box" ends the suppression affect and allows the Crucible to fire.  

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

That will also, for some stupid reason not explicated in the game, set off the energy. Shooting a pipe to release the energy of the Crucible can mean many things, from disabling some suppression device to simply a causing a breach in the energy containment system.

Both of which fit my conclusion. Destroy can essentially be summed up as "cut the power". In doing so you aren't hiting a designated switch or interacting with the device in any intended fashion. The conduit itself doesn't have to be the source of the suppression. But it is, obviously, critical to its continued supporessing effect.

Destroy that conduit = Crucible arms
Crucible arms; however, you do not interact with the Crucible itself
Conclusion: Whatever was preventing the Crucble for arming ceased to be when conduit ceased to be.
Hypothesis: The Crucible would have fired automatically if the conduit was never present to begin with.

Is this invented in my head or an accounting on in-game events?
If my conclusion and hypothesis therefore inferred or pulled out of my ass?

Bonus info:

1. Beam is shut down by Catalyst in refusal.
2. Conclusion: Catalyst controls beam

Does this follow? If not, what is wrong with my reasoning?

1. Beam shuts down when conduit is destroyed
2. Conclusion 1: Beam is associated with whatever is suppressing Crucible.
3. Since beam can be shut down without setting off Crucible, it is no suppressing it.
4. Conclusion 2: Conduit is powering beam.
5. Hypothesis: The association is that the beam and suppression device are both powered by conduit.

Does this follow? If not, what is wrong with my reasoning? 

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Oh, and the Citadel must be engineered by morons if a suppression device fails by shooting the pipe. I personally find the lack of some failsafe (even mechanical ones) to prevent a catastrophic failure by simply shooting some pipe to be rather unbelievable and stupid.

Well, you remove power to any device and it will fail. I'm not aware of anything that runs without energy. 

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

In fact, the whole act of being able to release the energy of the Crucible by shooting a pipe is downright retarded. It doesn't matter if it's a suppression device or a pipe that contains som of the Crucible's energy. Allowing it to be set off like that is a failure of engineering.

I could cut power to your house by blowing up the main breaker box. I guess your house or apartment is crappily engineering by morons, right ? That's an interesting stance to take if you are indeed taking it.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 10 août 2012 - 01:25 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

Protip: In nuclear power plants, control rods have springs attached such that in the event of a power failure for those rods, the rods still lower into place. Modern aircraft have triple-redundant hydraulics. See, different comparison, different analogy.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 10 août 2012 - 01:26 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

megamacka wrote...

Lal. Some people seem to believe that Destroy is renegade and control is paragon....
'' The geth and EDI dies ''.... Yes? Everyone knew that there would have to be sacrifices. And the Geth can be rebuilt, not with the reaper codes perhaps but still. I always play full paragon and I love the whole geth storyline but I think it's wrong for some people to claim that destroy = renegade <.<.

What does it matter? Your job there is to do whatever you feel is best for the galaxy, not uphold your personal morality.

Otherwise, there's always refuse.

[The Twilight God]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Protip: In nuclear power plants, control rods have springs attached such that in the event of a power failure for those rods, the rods still lower into place. Modern aircraft have triple-redundant hydraulics. See, different comparison, different analogy.

So you suggest Bioware hire less fiction writers and more nuclear engineers and defense contractors? Duly noted.



I await your rebuttal to both of these posts:

http://social.biowar...372/21#13601471

And you fogot this one:

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Which is why the Catalyst chooses to turn off the Crucible of he thinks you won't use it? What? Again, this CSD is a headcanon plot device. I feel that it's very contrived while you may feel that it's valid. Just different interpretations.

Such a possibility eliminates the ability to enact Destroy because it could just say, "No" and turn the Crucible off.

And if you think the Crucible "changed" the Star Child's personality or shackled it somehow, how do you simultaneously accept its claim that the Crucible is "just a battery"? By that logic the Crucible's "changes" to the Star Child should have ended the conflict right then and there without having to fire the Crucible. The option to force it to stand down should exist if shackled or simply ask it to stand down if it's now more compliant. It clearly isn't compliant or shackled as it blatantly states it's gonna keep killing everyone if you don't act.

It's willing to allow you to destroy all reapers and itself (when it can supposedly not allow it), but not willing to simply stand down? That isn't very logical for a supposed AI. A billion years of reaping and harvesting and you're tell me this thing just rolls over and allows Shepard to kill it "just because"?

Modifié par The Twilight God, 10 août 2012 - 01:50 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

I find it pointless to make rebuttals because then I need a headcanon plot device of my own to invalidate yours. See where I'm going? The game doesn't provide enough information to prove or disprove your assertions. You use one analogy to suit your headcanon, I'll use another. In the end, does it really go anywhere? I'm just pointing out that you can't definitively point to your IT as "logically confirmed" or canon since you needed to headcanon a plot device, the CSD, to serve as the basis for your theory.

Context is everything. Catalyst claimed that the Crucible "changed" him by altering the variables. Well, gee, thanks. Which variables are altered? How are the variables altered?

Oh, and you know what's funny? If you choose to shoot the pipe, he'll just stand there and watch you without bothering to take any action, yet if you shoot his hologram once, he'll turn off the Crucible. Again, to me, this strongly hints at the Catalyst voluntarily giving you an option to destroy him and the reapers. Why? I have no idea. To this day, I still don't understand the motivations and goals of the Catalyst. He does so many contradictory things seemingly just "because he can."

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 10 août 2012 - 02:27 .

[The Twilight God]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

I find it pointless to make rebuttals because then I need a headcanon plot device of my own to invalidate yours. See where I'm going?

 
Yes. You have no rebuttal because everything I've said is sound. You can't argue against solid logic and you, realizing this, are trying to back out of the debate with your head held high. It's the same way all of my detractors go; The way of defeat.

I haven't invented any plot device and I PROVED this point by point. And you KNOW it. If you could muster any kind rebuttal you kwould have. You are beaten and defeated. Your pride will not allow you to admit you were wrong. Like your fellows you willfully ignore all counter-arguments against your weak arguments and then continue regurgitating them as if they haven't already been blown out of the water.

I'm afraid you have lost the internets, sir. Good day.

[RadicalDisconnect]

The Twilight God wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

I find it pointless to make rebuttals because then I need a headcanon plot device of my own to invalidate yours. See where I'm going?

 
Yes. You have no rebuttal because everything I've said is sound. You can't argue against solid logic and you, realizing this, are trying to back out of the debate with your head held high. It's the same way all of my detractors go; The way of defeat.

I haven't invented any plot device and I PROVED this point by point. And you KNOW it. If you could muster any kind rebuttal you kwould have. You are beaten and defeated. Your pride will not allow you to admit you were wrong. Like your fellows you willfully ignore all counter-arguments against your weak arguments and then continue regurgitating them as if they haven't already been blown out of the water.

I'm afraid you have lost the internets, sir. Good day.

Oh, okay. Since you demanded it, I'll reply.

I'll offer my interpretation. The pipe is no "Crucible Suppression Device." It is simply a power conduit that serves as a routing for the Crucible's energy, and shooting it causes a containment breach whose chain reaction causes a catastrophic failure and the release of the energy contained in the Crucible and Citadel. It's like popping a balloon. For comparison, imagine ammunition inside a chambered rifle cooking off due to overheating; the rifle will discharge.

I still stand by my belief that it's a failure of engineering to allow the Citadel to release such copious amounts of energy from an external device like the Crucible just by shooting a pipe. I find it stupid that it such a suppression device exists, triggering the Crucible requires shooting something rather than simply turning off the said device. But lets suppose that a failsafe was never intended for whatever reason. Instead of a CSD, I'd just say that shooting the pipe is like taking a rifle and shooting incendiary rounds at the fuel tank of a plane. It will cause catastrophic failure. Indeed, as the energy of the Crucible is being released (at least in destroy and synthesis), the Citadel is shown to be taking heavy damage, and the Presidium ring was engulfed by fireballs.

There's another problem with your CSD that I mentioned in the previous paragraph. If a Crucible Suppression Device is required to be deactivated in order to release the energy of the Crucible, then why does it have to be disabled by shooting a pipe? Why not access a control panel? Is this super-advanced AI so damn inflexible as to not be able to bring up a holographic control panel? Wouldn't that be a much safer and quaranteed method of releasing the energy?

You also didn't answer another point in my post. The game shows that the Catalyst can turn off the Crucible, and in two ways. He will do it if you don't look convinced on using one of his solutions: destroy, control, or synthesis. On the other hand, he will sit idly while you shoot the pipe. This strongly suggests that he is voluntarily giving you the choices for the ending. Why? I don't know. The Catalyst's motivations and goals are confounded by seemingly contradictory actions. If his goal is to indoctrinate you, then why voluntarily give you the option to destroy himself and the reapers, or even the option to refuse?

No you didn't prove anything. You proved your theory by using your own headcanon plot device. Now you are using ad hominem to gloat. So who's the one with pride here? Now you can take your arrogance out of here. Feel free to express your interpretation, but don't force your headcanon on others. Plain and simple. Capiche?

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 10 août 2012 - 08:10 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

OP, you just shot yourself in the foot by agreeing that the Catalyst controls the Beam. If he can turn the beam on or off at will, why wouldn't he turn it off when he sees that Shepard is 'breaking free' of his supposed indoctrination attempt?

Shepard goes to shoot the pipe. Catalyst shuts down beam. Shepard shoots pipe. Nothing happens.

The idea that a villain trying to defeat you would voluntarily provide ou with the means to defeat him is just absurd.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

OP, you just shot yourself in the foot by agreeing that the Catalyst controls the Beam. If he can turn the beam on or off at will, why wouldn't he turn it off when he sees that Shepard is 'breaking free' of his supposed indoctrination attempt?

Shepard goes to shoot the pipe. Catalyst shuts down beam. Shepard shoots pipe. Nothing happens.

What good would turning off the synthesis beam do?

The beam is synthesis (and/or control) related. It has nothing to do with Destroy. As I've stated multiple times before. It is no surprised that you willfully ignore this fact and continue spouting off at the mouth.

What you chose to ignored this time:

The Twilight God wrote...

1. Beam is shut down by Catalyst in refusal.
2. Conclusion: Catalyst controls beam

Does this follow? If not, what is wrong with my reasoning?

1. Beam shuts down when conduit is destroyed
2. Conclusion 1: Beam is associated with whatever is suppressing Crucible.
3. Since beam can be shut down without setting off Crucible, it is no suppressing it.
4. Conclusion 2: Conduit is powering beam.
5. Hypothesis: The association is that the beam and suppression device are both powered by conduit. [i.e. not the Crucible]

Does this follow? If not, what is wrong with my reasoning?

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

The idea that a villain trying to defeat you would voluntarily provide ou with the means to defeat him is just absurd.

In his position it is the smartest thing he can do as ignoring Shepard's intended objective or claiming it couldn't be done would just breed mistrust and suspicion right  off the bat. Although this has already been addressed and you are simply being willfully ignorant and resurrecting the same weak arguments (that have already been put to rest) over again.

He presented himself as a neutral party who is not motivated by self-interest. It was enough to fool you so your claims of absurdity ring hollow. His deception has been quite effective on you and you are living proof that the Star Child was smart in addressing the Destroy option to you.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 10 août 2012 - 01:53 .

[The Twilight God]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Oh, okay. Since you demanded it, I'll reply.

I don't demand anything of you. You want to reply because your pride has been wounded. Problem is, I'm just going to keep deepening that would because I'm right, you're wrong, you know you're wrong and there isn't a thing you can do about it.

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

I'll offer my interpretation. The pipe is no "Crucible Suppression Device." It is simply a power conduit that serves as a routing for the Crucible's energy, and shooting it causes a containment breach whose chain reaction causes a catastrophic failure and the release of the energy contained in the Crucible and Citadel. It's like popping a balloon. For comparison, imagine ammunition inside a chambered rifle cooking off due to overheating; the rifle will discharge.

No, that is MY interpretation with ever so slighty modified word usage. Which I have put forth and you are now claiming as your own. This is too good to be true.

You are nitpicking on terminology in order to avoid dealing with the actual premise, which was addressed in my last post.

The Twilight God wrote...

It's all one device. The circle of beveled cantilevers around the beam, the chasm, the control console and the "breaker box" (CSD). I named it the CSD because it is the part you shoot and it's how I denoted that particular part based on how it is used in the story. I can understand your objection to me designating it as a suppression device as that does imply that the "break box" is the thing doing the suppression in and of itself. On that we agree and I may amend that. But that part of the device is still the most representative of the premise. Hence I chose to designate it as such. However, you're still nitpicking on small irrelevent details, but you are unable to counter the premise: that shooting that "break box" ends the suppression affect and allows the Crucible to fire.

This was also ellaborated on in my alternate ending post BEFORE that:

The Twilight God wrote...

EDI: I believe so. The chasm serves as a form of capacitor, absorbing the Crucible's arming pulse and preventing it from achieving the necessary link to initiate the appropriate overrides with Citadel control. This energy is then redirected into a junction located on your right where it is distributed along an energy dispersal array as well as a console to your left.
Shepard: For what purpose?
EDI: Unknown. However the energy dispersal array is responsible for generating the beam. It is siphoning power from the Crucible to power a fourth device within the bowels of the Citadel.
Shepard: How do I stop it?
EDI: Disabling the device to your right will cause the chasm dielectric to reach capacity. This will prevent the capacitance chamber from discharging. This will also cut power to the energy dispersal array and the other unknown device to your left. Warning: The chasm will discharge directly into the surrounding devices rendering them inoperative. I suggest you avoid direct contact with metallic surfaces.

"Your interpretation"... .  That's funny stuff.

I guess your motto now is "can't beat 'em, join 'em".

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

There's another problem with your CSD that I mentioned in the previous paragraph. If a Crucible Suppression Device is required to be deactivated in order to release the energy of the Crucible, then why does it have to be disabled by shooting a pipe? Why not access a control panel? Is this super-advanced AI so damn inflexible as to not be able to bring up a holographic control panel? Wouldn't that be a much safer and quaranteed method of releasing the energy?

Why would the Reapers build a switch to shut off the device that is preventing them from dying? But, hey, it may have a switch somewhere. They're morons, right? The "CSD" is essentially a break box (power junction). In the same way that I can turn off power by flipping a swtich I can accomplish the same effect more crudely by flipping the breaker off.

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

You also didn't answer another point in my post. The game shows that the Catalyst can turn off the Crucible,

 
No, the Catalyst turns off the synthesis beam. This has been addressed already. Go reread over my previous posts. I even pointed out the posts in which this was address. You know, the posts you purposely ignored because you cant come up with a rebuttal.

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Now you are using ad hominem to gloat.

1. Learn what an ad hominem is.
2. You make it so easy to gloat.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 10 août 2012 - 03:05 .