304 réponses à ce sujet

[Seival]

The thread was reported as IT-related.

You were asked to discuss anything IT-related in groups, remember?

Modifié par Seival, 08 janvier 2013 - 02:01 .

[Math Effect]

I'd also like to quickly explain another fatal flaw in IT that relates to my preference of Green over Red and Blue

IT falls apart at low EMS.

If you follow IT to the dot, then choosing Destroy means winning the game because you were able to reject indoctrination at the end.  Two problems I have with this.

Firstly, at low EMS you only get one option.  If you chose to destroy the Collector base in ME2, then you are for some reason 100% guaranteed to win the game.  Unless you choose to Refuse either by not making a decision, or shooting the CatalystBoy (which, in my eyes, is an action that is essentially the same as choosing Destroy).  All I have to say is, why?  Why can Shepard automatically resist indoctrination because of that one decision?  Is there an astrononical amount of Reaper Tech in that base that if Shepard is not exposed to grants him Legilimency spell?

Secondly, the very idea that one decision you made in a different game decides whether or not you can win a later game.  Save the Collector Base and all of a sudden I can't win the game anymore?  Seriously?

If anything, I see low EMS as Shepard not having the ability to resist indoctrination, so he has less ability to resist and choose differently.  Therefore, at low EMS, Shepard automatically loses.  But if that were true, Destroy and Control should both be incorrect options that the Reapers are forcing onto Shepard.

[Lokanaiya]

Seival wrote...

The thread was reported as IT-related.

You were asked to discuss anything IT-related in groups, remember?

WNT =/= IT. There are major differences between the two, which you would know if you had read the first page.

[401 Kill]

Seival wrote...

The thread was reported as IT-related.

You were asked to discuss anything IT-related in groups, remember?

We are not discussing IT, we are discussing WNT. Though similar, they are different Theories.

[Math Effect]

Seival wrote...

The thread was reported as IT-related.

You were asked to discuss anything IT-related in groups, remember?

I'm advocating synthesis so let us live! 

[Math Effect]

If a person's only reason for supporting the Literal interpretation was because he hates IT with a passion, and he writes up 5 paragraph essay about while IT fails, that would technically be IT-related and the thread would be closed, right?

[Lokanaiya]

Math Effect wrote...

If a person's only reason for supporting the Literal interpretation was because he hates IT with a passion, and he writes up 5 paragraph essay about while IT fails, that would technically be IT-related and the thread would be closed, right?

But of course! (And I'd suspect that the person might also get a temp ban, knowing the roll that CP has been on lately.) Why? Is there something we should know?

[TJBartlemus]

Math Effect wrote...

If a person's only reason for supporting the Literal interpretation was because he hates IT with a passion, and he writes up 5 paragraph essay about while IT fails, that would technically be IT-related and the thread would be closed, right?

Yep. 

[TJBartlemus]

Math Effect wrote...

Secondly, the very idea that one decision you made in a different game decides whether or not you can win a later game.  Save the Collector Base and all of a sudden I can't win the game anymore?  Seriously?

*snip*

 That was what I was actually hoping for in the game when it first came out. It would truely make all your decisions matter. Unfortunately for some reason BioWare decided to scrap that idea. 

[Math Effect]

TJBartlemus wrote...

Math Effect wrote...

Secondly, the very idea that one decision you made in a different game decides whether or not you can win a later game.  Save the Collector Base and all of a sudden I can't win the game anymore?  Seriously?

*snip*

 That was what I was actually hoping for in the game when it first came out. It would truely make all your decisions matter. Unfortunately for some reason BioWare decided to scrap that idea. 

I guess that would be kinda cool if I think about it...  <_<

[TJBartlemus]

Math Effect wrote...
I guess that would be kinda cool if I think about it...  <_<

It would be. Imagine it. Instead of having everything similar each playthrough, every playthrough it is a different experiance due to the choices you have made. More so if you have played the previous games, adding to the variables.

Ahhhh...perfection. But it was not to be... 

[masster blaster]

TJBartlemus wrote...

Math Effect wrote...
I guess that would be kinda cool if I think about it...  <_<

It would be. Imagine it. Instead of having everything similar each playthrough, every playthrough it is a different experiance due to the choices you have made. More so if you have played the previous games, adding to the variables.

Ahhhh...perfection. But it was not to be... 

I know Tj I know, at any rate I am going back to the IT thread. see you there TJ.

[TJBartlemus]

masster blaster wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Math Effect wrote...
I guess that would be kinda cool if I think about it...  <_<

It would be. Imagine it. Instead of having everything similar each playthrough, every playthrough it is a different experiance due to the choices you have made. More so if you have played the previous games, adding to the variables.

Ahhhh...perfection. But it was not to be... 

I know Tj I know, at any rate I am going back to the IT thread. see you there TJ.

What is this thread you speak of?  jk. On topic now:

How could synthesis be the solution to the Reaper problem when it is essencially what the Reapers have been promoting the entire series and how constantly we are told that it is bad. Remember Saren anyone?

[Math Effect]

TJBartlemus wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Math Effect wrote...
I guess that would be kinda cool if I think about it...  <_<

It would be. Imagine it. Instead of having everything similar each playthrough, every playthrough it is a different experiance due to the choices you have made. More so if you have played the previous games, adding to the variables.

Ahhhh...perfection. But it was not to be... 

I know Tj I know, at any rate I am going back to the IT thread. see you there TJ.

What is this thread you speak of?  jk. On topic now:

How could synthesis be the solution to the Reaper problem when it is essencially what the Reapers have been promoting the entire series and how constantly we are told that it is bad. Remember Saren anyone?

Control - TIM's goals
Synthesis - Reaper husks
Destroy - Conflict (verified by Leviathan, not just Catalyst.

Furthermore, choosing Refuse by shooting the Catalyst is identical to Destroy in the context of IT.  It's only different in the Literal interpretation because of the two different endings.

So all three can be construed as bad.  Hence why I'm arguing for another meaning, where Beam = Mission and Beam =/= Synthesis.

[demersel]

But why do you think that your mission is the beam in the first place?

[draconian139]

The beam was the mission, whether it should have ever been the mission is a legitimate question though.

[demersel]

No. The beam wasn't the mission. Getting into the citadel was the mission.

[TJBartlemus]

Math Effect wrote...

Control - TIM's goals
Synthesis - Reaper husks
Destroy - Conflict (verified by Leviathan, not just Catalyst.

Furthermore, choosing Refuse by shooting the Catalyst is identical to Destroy in the context of IT.  It's only different in the Literal interpretation because of the two different endings.

So all three can be construed as bad.  Hence why I'm arguing for another meaning, where Beam = Mission and Beam =/= Synthesis.

Conflict always makes good entertainment though.  I have yet to be convinced that Destroy is bad, literal or in any other interpretation. 

Please extrapolate and explain how the Beam is the mission. 

[TJBartlemus]

demersel wrote...

No. The beam wasn't the mission. Getting into the citadel was the mission.

Which they thought getting to the beam would be a "back door" in a sense. That plan makes no sense though. It is practically the biggest / brightest thing in London. The Reapers had to know that they would try to get to it. That's why I stand by that the beam is a trap. Imagine it as a giant electric fly swatter. 

[draconian139]

demersel wrote...

No. The beam wasn't the mission. Getting into the citadel was the mission.

By using the beam... or do you think the scene with Anderson's "plan" didn't occur?

[demersel]

TJBartlemus wrote...

demersel wrote...

No. The beam wasn't the mission. Getting into the citadel was the mission.

Which they thought getting to the beam would be a "back door" in a sense. That plan makes no sense though. It is practically the biggest / brightest thing in London. The Reapers had to know that they would try to get to it. That's why I stand by that the beam is a trap. Imagine it as a giant electric fly swatter. 

That is exaclty the way I always viewed it. OH! SHINY!

@draconian. That is the thing about me - I don't trust Anderson at the end of ME3. I have my reasons. 

Modifié par demersel, 08 janvier 2013 - 03:42 .

[draconian139]

A case could easily be made against Anderson. I always found it odd that he was leading ground forces in such an exposed location considering his position of authority.

[TJBartlemus]

draconian139 wrote...

A case could easily be made against Anderson. I always found it odd that he was leading ground forces in such an exposed location considering his position of authority.

 I know right? I can respect the want to be on the front lines with his men, but no one can predict war. You can only assume what will happen/ what your enemy will do, and anyone who says otherwise is a fool. Anderson being one of the few Admirals left after the mass loss of Alliance Command, you would think he would be in a safer location. 

[Math Effect]

You mean Old Man Anderson who was too old to join your crew in ME2 but decides to join the Beam Blitz with no helmet and minimal armor?

Yeah that's a can of worms I don't wish to open...

[TJBartlemus]

Math Effect wrote...

You mean Old Man Anderson who was too old to join your crew in ME2 but decides to join the Beam Blitz with no helmet and minimal armor?

Yeah that's a can of worms I don't wish to open...

He seemed in pretty good condition to be able to stay ahead of Shepard during the entire Vancouver mission.