1238 réponses à ce sujet

[clennon8]

When I look at your post, I see some letters arranged into words, but no reasoning or logic.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

clennon8 wrote...

When I look at your post, I see some letters arranged into words, but no reasoning or logic.

Funny because when I look at yours, all I see is insecure poster in denial, screaming "I'm the only one who's right. Respect me! "

I could do this all day. It's amusing. Even Youtube comments are less funny in their ignorance.

[clennon8]

It seems like you guys have been reduced to nitpicking the quality of the Reapers' ruse, in between all the arm flailing.

Look, as I've mentioned before, the decision chamber is laid out the way it is because the level designers wanted to be cute and make it look like a dialogue wheel. As for the the CSD being "crappy" or "flawed," um, okay. I guess they should have made it perfect and unassailable, so that it was either impossible for the player to destroy the Reapers, or so convoluted as to make it obvious that it was the one the player was supposed to choose?

Again, this is nitpicking. When I ask these sorts of questions about the "literal" interpretations, it is almost invariably answered with "BAD WRITING."

Modifié par clennon8, 14 août 2012 - 08:37 .

[Grub Killer8016]

Two words for you OP, Indoctrination Theory. Check it out, because I think it fits your topic excellently.

Modifié par Grub Killer8016, 14 août 2012 - 08:42 .

[clennon8]

*facepalm*

Modifié par clennon8, 14 août 2012 - 08:44 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

When it's questions you can't answer in a satisfactory manner, it's nitpicking amirite?

The fact that it's so easy to 'win' using this theory is enough to question it's viability.

[clennon8]

Well, I mean, I could go over to the Synthesis thread and ask them stupid, inane, repetitive questions all day long, too. But I'm not a troglodyte.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

You should ask questions. Those guys welcome questions. They are glad to answer them. Even the hard hitting ones. Unlike you guys who resort to petty name calling when they are unable to answer satisfactorily.

[clennon8]

You know that saying about how there's no such thing as a stupid question? It's wrong. Just sayin.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Again with the petty insults. Not that expected much more from you...

It's only a stupid question if you can't answer it right? 

Modifié par Ranger Jack Walker, 14 août 2012 - 09:15 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

You know, the difference is that some people don't assert that their interpretations and opinions are fact. Feel free to disagree, and if you ask questions, they'll provide an answer that fits their interpretation. Hell, I have my own interpretation of synthesis (free of the brainwashing/indoctrination speculations), even though I don't like that ending at all. Asking questions is a good way to broaden your horizon and look at things from a different angle. OP brings up an interesting perspective in his OP. It's not necessarily wrong, but it's not something I agree with, hence the questioning. What you shouldn't do is write off dissenting opinions as inferior.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 14 août 2012 - 09:16 .

[The Twilight God]

Fedi.St wrote...

No, I'm no talking about words bro. I'm talking about them releasing a dlc expansion or whatever justifying the atrocity of synthesis and control as the best THROUGH the game itself, because we didn't get it. Through the game! Just like that. With space magic, put things in the game that completely dismiss all the previous lore! This is what I am afraid of.

But as the game stands now your explanation is the most complete I've ever read here on BSN and I'm making it my basic scenario for the ending.

I personally won't be playing any ME games for awhile. I'm gonna play DA:O and finally get Skyrim. Maybe even some Guild Wars 2. I have Fallout 3 I still haven't played. It'll be months before I play ME3 again. By that time all the DLC should be released and I'll see what comes of it. But I think I'm done with Bioware so the game as is is probably it for me. I wouldn't allow them to change my experience to something worse if I heard they completely screwed it up trying to appease people who are disgruntled that there is only one victory ending (two if you think an indoctrinated utopia is still a utopia).

Modifié par The Twilight God, 14 août 2012 - 09:28 .

[The Twilight God]

Eterna5 wrote...

No, just because you choose and think Destroy is the best option doesn't mean that everyone who didn't pick it is indoctrinated. Sheesh.

No, the game itself makes it quite clear that if you pick anything other than to destroy the Reapers Shepard is indoctrinated. There is no other explanation (besides the Stupid Shepard Theory). Not one.

But you already know that.
 


Enjoy the sunshine and butterflies in your Reaper utopia. I bet it's everything Dr. Kenson imagined and more.
 

Eterna5 wrote...

Well honestly, if they want to believe that anyone who didn't pick destroy is indoctrinated I say let them. They're just trying to find justification for the genocide they commited.

" Oh god, I stabbed the Geth in the back and killed EDI! oh god!....but wait it's okay the other endings must be bad somehow right!?!?! Right!? They must be indoctrinated to choose those options ! So I was right! I'M THE GOOD GUY LOVE MEEE"

Yeah, we're all losing sleep because a fictional race of synthetics is implied to have been wiped out in a video game. I'm in counseling right now because of all the nightmares. I attempted suicide 3 times. I've just been taking it one day at a time.

My therapist tells me that the justification for using the Crucible as intended is that all organic space-faring civilizations were saved and no future civilization, synthetic or organic, will have to deal with another Reaper harvest. She says that because you couldn't handle sacrifice and wanted to have your cake and eat it you doomed everyone to reaperfication or enslaved the minds of everyone to the Reapers.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 14 août 2012 - 09:56 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

The game makes it quite clear that all 3 choices are 'good' choices. But of course, the game itself is lying right? Anything that contradicts your theory is just lies right?

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Nah, I'd rather you not try to force your views on others as the OP has done several times in several other threads.

Ah, yes, participating in a thread is forcing my views on people. Considering all the forcing I do why are you still an opponent to my views?

[Ranger Jack Walker]

The game outright tells you at the end that no matter what choice you picked, the Reaper threat is over. But I guess the game itself is lying right?

[RadicalDisconnect]

Ah, yes, I love the single-minded interpretations. <_<

What if the husks in synthesis are only projections of a nearby reaper? It is silly, but when I watched that scene again, the husk wasn't looking at the soldier, it was looking at the reapers in the distance. Perhaps the reaper is looking back at itself through the husk's eyes? It's no less valid than your "living husks" slogans that you are constantly posting. On another note, the husks are never seen in the synthesis EC slides again.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 14 août 2012 - 10:08 .

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

The game makes it quite clear that all 3 choices are 'good' choices. But of course, the game itself is lying right? Anything that contradicts your theory is just lies right?

The story, events an dialog make it clear that Shepard is indoctrinated in 3 out of 4 endings and it's no surpirse that the indoctrinated perspective continues into the endings. Endings that are mostly what the narrator hopes will happen in the future from their current perspective; be that the perspective of a Reaper AI, indoctrinated AI or Alliance Admiral.

[Lokiwithrope]

Uh-uh. If Control, Synthesis and Refusal are all indoctrinated endings, what tells you Destroy isn't an indoctrinated ending? Sure the Reapers blow up with red explosions; but what the hell tells you that you weren't brainwashed in Destroy? You can't call out some endings. Just because it doesn't result in the destruction of the Reapers, doesn't make it an indoctrinated ending.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Picking Destroy is also trusting the Catalyst.

Destroying the Reapers is doing what you came to do.

Shooting the power junction is destroying something on the Citadel that is connected to all the other contraptions pre-built onto the Citadel. It's not commiting suicide because the Reapers told you to.

But you already know this. I've told you this at least 5 times already and I expect to have to tell you a sixth.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

It's very similar and it's the exact same in function: To make Destroy seem like the only good option.

And I'm laughing at one of the OP's previous posts where he states that refusing is an indoctrinated choice because Shepard loses the will to fight. That would be the exact opposite of what refuse is.

How is that?

Shepard knows that the Reapers cannot be beaten conventionally. If that was possible the Protheans would have won. Therefore the idea that he can be expecting anything other than to have all fleets obliterated is absurd. It's a clear indoctrinated choice. Oh, I forget you adhere to the Stupid Shepard Theory. The totally (in)valid theory that Shep just has a really bad brain fart at that moment (and every moment after that as he's still in the room and could snap out of it and go shoot the power junction) and dooms everyone to reaper goo status. 

[The Twilight God]

clennon8 wrote...

I have reason to believe that the Crucible was built to destroy the Reapers. I mean, maybe that's a really wacky assumption, but it somehow seems sound to me. So, yeah, I'm going to give shooting the tube a try. Seems like a better idea than committing suicide by grabbing live plasma conduits or throwing myself off a ledge.

It seems sound because Admiral Hackett explicitely states the the Crucible scientista are certain it will destroy the Reapers. And, you know, the Crucible killng the reapers automatically when you blow something on the Citadel up.

[clennon8]

.

Modifié par clennon8, 14 août 2012 - 10:49 .

[clennon8]

The Twilight God wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I have reason to believe that the Crucible was built to destroy the Reapers. I mean, maybe that's a really wacky assumption, but it somehow seems sound to me. So, yeah, I'm going to give shooting the tube a try. Seems like a better idea than committing suicide by grabbing live plasma conduits or throwing myself off a ledge.

It seems sound because Admiral Hackett explicitely states the the Crucible scientista are certain it will destroy the Reapers. And, you know, the Crucible killng the reapers automatically when you blow something on the Citadel up.

Yep.  Liara says something to that effect as well.  The Crucible is "capable of unquantifiable levels of destruction."

Modifié par clennon8, 14 août 2012 - 10:54 .

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

When it's questions you can't answer in a satisfactory manner, it's nitpicking amirite?

Yes, especially when they are unanswerable questions like, "Why didn't the Reapers make it invisible?" or "Why didn't the reapers fill the chasm with cement?" How should I know? All I know is they didn't. What next? Why didn't they paint it reaper purple? Why didn't they put a sign above all three and switch the destroy sign with syntheisis sign?

Yeah, those are all valid questions that have everything to do with the premise of my thesis.

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

The fact that it's so easy to 'win' using this theory is enough to question it's viability.

Ah, yes, it's viability is not questioned because it lacks merit or evidence... no, it is questionable because it brings to light something you don't like. At least you admit that your only qualm with my thesis is that you don't like the implications. It's not that anything in my thesis doesn't make sense; It's just that you don't like the idea that you "lost" by picking anything other than Destroy. I already knew this because you nor anyone else can come up with any kind of solid rebuttal, but it's nice to see you openly admit it.