925 réponses à ce sujet

[LiarasShield]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

No he doesn't but he does say that the reapers are synthetics and that he turned his creators into the first reaper because their was no other choice

"Technology you rely on will be affected, but those who survive should have little difficulty reparing the damage". - 9:51

But that could mean any number of things from synthetic implants to synthetic machines it doesn't falt out say hey you can rebuild the relays and the galaxy hasn't mastered reaper technology so with them gone and without their knowledge you make fixing the relays nearly impossiable or extremely hard to be done


That is why fixing the relays is so easy in control but their is major potential issues with becoming the new catalyst

[LiarasShield]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...


Cause I didn't kill my own forces to beat the reapers i allowed both synthetics and organics to make their own choices and fight for freedom and individuality for all the races

You still fail in destroy because with the reapers dead you can't receive their knowledge on how they created or repaired relays and with the relays mostly damaged beyond use you have still effectively trapt all your forces around a nearly dead solar system go you I guess


Controling the reapers after they caused the near destruction of the galaxy plus a chance to become a rogue ai in the future that may cause even more chaos or destruction every 50 thousand years

Or merging everyone to be the same do I honestly really have go into high def why any of your others choices aren't effectively good or better then refuse

Yes. You did, You know going in that beam that ALL your hope, all the GALAXY'S hope, rests on you using the Crucible to do whatever it does in an attempt to stop the Reapers.

You choose not to do so. By doing so, you, and you alone, condemn everyone in the galaxy to death.

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NiceJobBreakingItHero

So... don't pick Destroy, then. Pick Synthe.. oh no, somehow that's losing too. Pick Contro... nope, that's a loser in your mind as well. Hmm. I mean, even though all three of those options stop the Reapers (you know, the entire goal of the series), somehow you've twisted them all into being losses. 

Again, just because you, apparently, don't know the endings in the EC doesn't mean that blowing up all the Reapers is a loss. It just means that you have no idea what you're talking about.

LOL I do know the endings from extended darling how the hell did you think i chose refuse from extended my magical wand that I keep in my bra?

Then why do you INSIST that, despite being explicitly told AND shown to the contrary, that everything is all ruined and everyone's doomed to die and all the relays are forever destroyed and blah blah blah when you pick Destroy?

Hackett EXPLICITLY says that we can rebuild EVERYTHING that was damaged by the red beam. 

Why, WHY, do you continue to ignore this in order to present the galaxy as some complete and utter wasteland?

Hackett believes the relays can rebuild we never saw the relays being rebuilt in destroy so you have nothing to backs that up besides him talking about it never in the slides for destroy during hacketts monlogue did it show the relays were rebuilt

Modifié par LiarasShield, 16 août 2012 - 02:49 .

[Goneaviking]

LiarasShield wrote...

Goneaviking wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Yes better to die free then to become like the reapers and the catalyst

What gives you the right to decide this for the whole galaxy?

That is also why I chose refuse so that everyone can make their own choice wether they want to fight with shepard till the end use the 3 twisted crucible choices or leave it up to the next generation to find a way


Again pitznik also by choosing one of the three choices you're altering organics or synthetics you're taking away their freedom or their choices in my eyes you're far more evil then I could ever hope to be

No.

They aren't free to make their own choice as whether to fight to the death with Shepard, use the crucible or just give up and die.

This was a oneshot deal, you decided not to use the Crucible and so no one gets to use the Crucible until the next cycle. The choice between fighting to the death or surrendering is a false choice because there is no effective difference between continuing the fight or putting on the striped pyjamas and rolling up your sleeve for the numbered tattoo.

It's not a surprise that you think people who don't agree are "far more evil" than you could ever hope to be. Only a lunatic decides to do something for the sake of evil, it's far more likely that they do something evil with the conviction that they're doing the right thing or that morality isn't real anyway.

Basically, your claim to be unwilling to take away the freedom of the people you're fighting for by making the decision they've authorised you to make for them, appears very much to be just another refusal to accept responsibility for the consequences of your decision.

Not everyone would want the reapers to live or for shepard to merge they're dna together the galaxy and the council never gave shepard that permission despite the guise you say about defeating the reapers

And without getting permission from your forces and the galaxy you're trying to save you altering everything and everyone to try to save them what you're doing is wrong

You don't defeat evil with evil

Just like you don't become satan to beat satan has the bible or any religion for that matter taught you any of these things?

Don't try beating me over the head with your self-serving religious sophistries. Religion taught me to take responsibility for my decisions, even the horrible ones. If you don't want to go with any of the catalyst's options that's fine, but don't pretend that by refusing, you're not guaranteeing death for everyone in this cycle and quite possibly for the next as well.

Here's a hypothetical for you. You're home watching television when you hear screaming from just outside you home, moving to the window you see a man struggling with a woman culminating in him stabbing her with a knife. She screams more desperately and when he realizes that several of your neighbours have noted the attack he flees into the night.

You assume that one of the other neighbours has called the emergency services but no police or paramedics arrive, and eventually her screaming and whimpering stops because she's died. In the investigation afterwards it's discovered that none of the witnesses called for the police to come and stop the attack, or for the paramedics to come and save her life after the attacker had fled..

Who bears responsibility in this situation? Obviously the killer is guilty of stabbing her, but what about the dozens of people who saw the attack and heard the calls for help and did not even call for assistance? If you had the option to make a phone call that might have saved her life, but didn't, wouldn't that be a decision that you'd made yourself that lead to an unnecessary death?

[Timusafa]

Krunjar wrote...

Yaaawn yet another person that seems to have difficulty with the existence of opinions other than their own. Wanna choose refuse choose refuse. But don't kid yourself. You killed everyone you ever loved. All for your precious principles. I love it when people try to argue certain ME endings are bad or invalid based on principle. They have clearly missed the point. You are too stupid for mass effect please go play Halo.

First of all, she is perfectly fine to choose the refuse option.  WIth respect to good and bad endings, they are dependent upon the individual and the individual's beliefs and morals.  

I don't personally think it is the advantageous or correct choice, but if they don't want to make the choice because their morals and beliefs preclude them from doing so, then they are fine to see a universe where that choice can be made.

With respect to the comment about every choice having a sacrifice, there is no way around that.  In video games we can believe that we can conquer and run the universe without sacrifice, but the truth of the matter is that most things in life don't work out the way we want them to and sacrifices have to be made.

Life is a series of sacrifices, where we must decide how much we are willing to lose in order to gain something better. Luckily, some people are able to make choices and tarnish their image in order to preserve the freedom of others.  My image is tarnished so that the umpteen quadrillion individuals in the galaxy don't have to compromise themselves or make such a decision.

[Father_Jerusalem]

LiarasShield wrote...

Hackett believes the relays can rebuild we never saw the relays being rebuilt in destroy so you have nothing to backs that up besides him talking about it never in the slides for destroy during hacketts monlogue did it show the relays were rebuilt

So your reasoning for the whole galaxy being a wasteland is nothing more than headcanon, contradicting what you're EXPLICITLY TOLD in the epilogue.

So, yeah, I'm done talking about this with you. There's simply no way you can rationally state that Destroy leaves the galaxy in a worse state than Refuse. You are simply making stuff up, and I Refuse (cwutididthar) to deal with that. 

Refuse is an abomination. If you pick it, you betray everything that Shepard stands for. You betray every civilized life form in the galaxy. You become the worst monster in the history of the galaxy. But hey, at least you have your "morals".

[Krunjar]

Timusafa wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Yaaawn yet another person that seems to have difficulty with the existence of opinions other than their own. Wanna choose refuse choose refuse. But don't kid yourself. You killed everyone you ever loved. All for your precious principles. I love it when people try to argue certain ME endings are bad or invalid based on principle. They have clearly missed the point. You are too stupid for mass effect please go play Halo.

First of all, she is perfectly fine to choose the refuse option.  WIth respect to good and bad endings, they are dependent upon the individual and the individual's beliefs and morals.  

I don't personally think it is the advantageous or correct choice, but if they don't want to make the choice because their morals and beliefs preclude them from doing so, then they are fine to see a universe where that choice can be made.

With respect to the comment about every choice having a sacrifice, there is no way around that.  In video games we can believe that we can conquer and run the universe without sacrifice, but the truth of the matter is that most things in life don't work out the way we want them to and sacrifices have to be made.

Life is a series of sacrifices, where we must decide how much we are willing to lose in order to gain something better. Luckily, some people are able to make choices and tarnish their image in order to preserve the freedom of others.  My image is tarnished so that the umpteen quadrillion individuals in the galaxy don't have to compromise themselves or make such a decision.

Not sure wether you agree with me or not but my stance like you that there is no right or wrong choice only A choice. What narks me off is all the total ****s who have difficulty accepting the choices of others. And go round soapboxing their own personal take on the ending like anyone who disagreed is either stupid a **** or sick in the head. It's just pure naivete and im sick of it.

[AlanC9]

LiarasShield wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Doesn't the Catalyst also say (explicitly) that they can be repaired?

No he doesn't but he does say that the reapers are synthetics and that he turned his creators into the first reaper because their was no other choice

Um... Actually, he does. And with "little difficulty," though of course that's relative. On his time scale a century or two would be trivial.

Modifié par AlanC9, 16 août 2012 - 03:06 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

LiarasShield wrote...

But that could mean any number of things from synthetic implants to synthetic machines it doesn't falt out say hey you can rebuild the relays and the galaxy hasn't mastered reaper technology so with them gone and without their knowledge you make fixing the relays nearly impossiable or extremely hard to be done

That is why fixing the relays is so easy in control but their is major potential issues with becoming the new catalyst

Beyond, you know, that we've seen other civilizations master them (the Protheans) given enough time. Or that you have the Geth, or the Quarians, or potentially both, as well as the rest of the galaxy, invested in fixing the relays. Or even the Catalyst telling us that our ability to survive won't be affected in the post-destroy galaxy. Or that there are other alternatives, which aren't based around the relays to survive in space. Honestly, at this point, it sounds like you're just gunning for whatever version of the galaxy will let you believe that  acceptable casualties is somehow worse than condemning the entire galaxy to death.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 16 août 2012 - 02:57 .

[LiarasShield]

Timusafa wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Yaaawn yet another person that seems to have difficulty with the existence of opinions other than their own. Wanna choose refuse choose refuse. But don't kid yourself. You killed everyone you ever loved. All for your precious principles. I love it when people try to argue certain ME endings are bad or invalid based on principle. They have clearly missed the point. You are too stupid for mass effect please go play Halo.

First of all, she is perfectly fine to choose the refuse option.  WIth respect to good and bad endings, they are dependent upon the individual and the individual's beliefs and morals.  

I don't personally think it is the advantageous or correct choice, but if they don't want to make the choice because their morals and beliefs preclude them from doing so, then they are fine to see a universe where that choice can be made.

With respect to the comment about every choice having a sacrifice, there is no way around that.  In video games we can believe that we can conquer and run the universe without sacrifice, but the truth of the matter is that most things in life don't work out the way we want them to and sacrifices have to be made.

Life is a series of sacrifices, where we must decide how much we are willing to lose in order to gain something better. Luckily, some people are able to make choices and tarnish their image in order to preserve the freedom of others.  My image is tarnished so that the umpteen quadrillion individuals in the galaxy don't have to compromise themselves or make such a decision.

Finally someone who may understand where I'm coming from gives you a high five

[Goneaviking]

LiarasShield wrote...

and some women and men want to keep individuality and the freedom for all

Or none.

[Timusafa]

LiarasShield wrote...

Timusafa wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Yaaawn yet another person that seems to have difficulty with the existence of opinions other than their own. Wanna choose refuse choose refuse. But don't kid yourself. You killed everyone you ever loved. All for your precious principles. I love it when people try to argue certain ME endings are bad or invalid based on principle. They have clearly missed the point. You are too stupid for mass effect please go play Halo.

First of all, she is perfectly fine to choose the refuse option.  WIth respect to good and bad endings, they are dependent upon the individual and the individual's beliefs and morals.  

I don't personally think it is the advantageous or correct choice, but if they don't want to make the choice because their morals and beliefs preclude them from doing so, then they are fine to see a universe where that choice can be made.

With respect to the comment about every choice having a sacrifice, there is no way around that.  In video games we can believe that we can conquer and run the universe without sacrifice, but the truth of the matter is that most things in life don't work out the way we want them to and sacrifices have to be made.

Life is a series of sacrifices, where we must decide how much we are willing to lose in order to gain something better. Luckily, some people are able to make choices and tarnish their image in order to preserve the freedom of others.  My image is tarnished so that the umpteen quadrillion individuals in the galaxy don't have to compromise themselves or make such a decision.

Finally someone who may understand where I'm coming from gives you a high five

I completely see where you are coming from, and I respect the fact that you are attempting to justify your position with some good logic and argument.  Your willingness to stick it out on a forum where it's you against the masses is commendable.

I don't agree with you, as I've stated, but that's because my morals and beliefs allow for a tarnished figure that takes the blame/pain/burden of a tarnished rep, ala Batman in a way, so that other's don't have to be burdened with it.

But yes, I know exactly what you are trying to say.

[LiarasShield]

Timusafa wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Timusafa wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Yaaawn yet another person that seems to have difficulty with the existence of opinions other than their own. Wanna choose refuse choose refuse. But don't kid yourself. You killed everyone you ever loved. All for your precious principles. I love it when people try to argue certain ME endings are bad or invalid based on principle. They have clearly missed the point. You are too stupid for mass effect please go play Halo.

First of all, she is perfectly fine to choose the refuse option.  WIth respect to good and bad endings, they are dependent upon the individual and the individual's beliefs and morals.  

I don't personally think it is the advantageous or correct choice, but if they don't want to make the choice because their morals and beliefs preclude them from doing so, then they are fine to see a universe where that choice can be made.

With respect to the comment about every choice having a sacrifice, there is no way around that.  In video games we can believe that we can conquer and run the universe without sacrifice, but the truth of the matter is that most things in life don't work out the way we want them to and sacrifices have to be made.

Life is a series of sacrifices, where we must decide how much we are willing to lose in order to gain something better. Luckily, some people are able to make choices and tarnish their image in order to preserve the freedom of others.  My image is tarnished so that the umpteen quadrillion individuals in the galaxy don't have to compromise themselves or make such a decision.

Finally someone who may understand where I'm coming from gives you a high five

I completely see where you are coming from, and I respect the fact that you are attempting to justify your position with some good logic and argument.  Your willingness to stick it out on a forum where it's you against the masses is commendable.

I don't agree with you, as I've stated, but that's because my morals and beliefs allow for a tarnished figure that takes the blame/pain/burden of a tarnished rep, ala Batman in a way, so that other's don't have to be burdened with it.

But yes, I know exactly what you are trying to say.

Still even though you don't quite agree with me I'm glad you can at least see where I am coming from

[AlanC9]

The problem as I see it, Timusafa, is that it's moral stances like yours that make positions like LiarasShield's possible. She's indulging in high-minded irresponsibility that only works because other people are making the hard choices she won't make herself..

[Timusafa]

Here's a question. Say you got to the end and Anderson was still with you. You look at the starchild and say, "F--- this, I'm doing it my way."

Anderson says, "Shepard, I'm going to destroy the reapers," and he hobbles off to choose the destroy ending.

Do you let him, or do you shoot him/stop him from choosing?

[Goneaviking]

LiarasShield wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...
But the difference here is that no one is being altered or change you have to make a quick decision on the fly on who you can or want to save very different situations dear

So you're more sensible when you have less time to think?

The crucible will alter everything and everyone in the galaxy at once a line I can't cross


If I have to save one life over another that is a line I can cross cause fundamentally I'm not altering the person or taking his or her choices a way I just have to make a decision on who I can get to in time in order to save them

No you can't. You've just spent the last few pages telling us you can't.

There is no fundamental difference between choosing to sacrifice EDI and the Geth to save the rest of the universe and choosing Kaidan over Ashley (or vice versa). The only difference is scale.

In either case anyone who dies because of your decisions has permanently been stripped of the ability to make any kind of choice ever again. It's a bigger scale, but if you let the Reaper purge continue the number of individuals who lose their free will is infinitely larger than sacrificing the geth and EDI. Or assuming control of the reapers.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

AlanC9 wrote...

The problem as I see it, Timusafa, is that it's moral stances like yours that make positions like LiarasShield's possible. She's indulging in high-minded irresponsibility that only works because other people are making the hard choices she won't make herself..

Which is fine. But then there's no point of being in a position of power yourself if you're not going to engage in cost/benefit analysis.

[Timusafa]

AlanC9 wrote...

The problem as I see it, Timusafa, is that it's moral stances like yours that make positions like LiarasShield's possible. She's indulging in high-minded irresponsibility that only works because other people are making the hard choices she won't make herself..

Hopefully in the real world I'll be able to make that tough choice or decision so she doesn't have to, and I'd gladly do it. Our American public is already at the point where we are dependent on others to make choices for us (i'm American, BTW).

I agree with you, but we've been indulged for so long that we've lost a lot of meaning from sacrifice and personal responsibility (i'm not talking about you, necessarily, LiarasShield, just the populace in general).

If my inaction causes many people to die so that one person can learn to make tough decisions, then I'd step in to make the choice and disregard that one who can't choose.

Again, a triage system.  But this is an entirely separate discussion.

[LiarasShield]

Goneaviking wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...
But the difference here is that no one is being altered or change you have to make a quick decision on the fly on who you can or want to save very different situations dear

So you're more sensible when you have less time to think?

The crucible will alter everything and everyone in the galaxy at once a line I can't cross


If I have to save one life over another that is a line I can cross cause fundamentally I'm not altering the person or taking his or her choices a way I just have to make a decision on who I can get to in time in order to save them

No you can't. You've just spent the last few pages telling us you can't.

There is no fundamental difference between choosing to sacrifice EDI and the Geth to save the rest of the universe and choosing Kaidan over Ashley (or vice versa). The only difference is scale.

In either case anyone who dies because of your decisions has permanently been stripped of the ability to make any kind of choice ever again. It's a bigger scale, but if you let the Reaper purge continue the number of individuals who lose their free will is infinitely larger than sacrificing the geth and EDI. Or assuming control of the reapers.

very false if you become a rogue ai in control because you could constantly destroy all the races every 50 thousand years still more darker and chaotic then refuse

[Timusafa]

Timusafa wrote...

Here's a question. Say you got to the end and Anderson was still with you. You look at the starchild and say, "F--- this, I'm doing it my way."

Anderson says, "Shepard, I'm going to destroy the reapers," and he hobbles off to choose the destroy ending.

Do you let him, or do you shoot him/stop him from choosing?

What I'm getting at is would you stop someone else from making that choice if you could?

Edit: And with that I'm out for this evening.  It's been a very pleasing, philosophical discussion with you all.  Have a good night.  I'm excited to see where this discussion heads in the next few hours.

PM's are always appreciated for a private discussion or trash talk that requires a more closed forum!

Modifié par Timusafa, 16 août 2012 - 03:20 .

[SeptimusMagistos]

LiarasShield wrote...
very false if you become a rogue ai in control because you could constantly destroy all the races every 50 thousand years still more darker and chaotic then refuse

As a Paragon I choose to undertake the task of keeping everyone safe and whatever risks that entails if that means people don't die.

By the way, do you honestly believe that destroying some of your own forces to wipe out all of the Reapers is morally superior to letting the Reapers destroy your entire force? Could you elaborate as to why you believe this?

[robertthebard]

Timusafa wrote...

Timusafa wrote...

Here's a question. Say you got to the end and Anderson was still with you. You look at the starchild and say, "F--- this, I'm doing it my way."

Anderson says, "Shepard, I'm going to destroy the reapers," and he hobbles off to choose the destroy ending.

Do you let him, or do you shoot him/stop him from choosing?

What I'm getting at is would you stop someone else from making that choice if you could?

Edit: And with that I'm out for this evening.  It's been a very pleasing, philosophical discussion with you all.  Have a good night.  I'm excited to see where this discussion heads in the next few hours.

PM's are always appreciated for a private discussion or trash talk that requires a more closed forum!

If my mind had been made up to choose another option, then I'd shoot him.  Per the little sidebar about making the hard choices, I'm one that can make them.

I just want to put this out there again:  I don't care what ending people choose, as far as I'm concerned there are no good choices, mainly because I see getting to them in the first place as being contrived.  I've discussed this previously.  My "beef", if we want to call it that, is assuming that killing everybody is better than killing a few, even if that few is a few million.  This comes back to the hard choices though, and as I said, I'm more than capable, and more than willing to do so.

[Bowie Hawkins]

LiarasShield wrote...

At least I didn't kill my own forces to kill the enemy

If you chose the Refuse ending, you let the Reapers survive to kill your forces in the vague hope that somebody might manage to find another way to stop them thousands (or possibly millions) of years later.

You know that the people of the next cycle will ultimately triumph because of what Shepard and Liara did, but that's because you saw the ending play out either during your playthrough or on YouTube. Shepard has no way of knowing that.

[Goneaviking]

LiarasShield wrote...

Goneaviking wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...
But the difference here is that no one is being altered or change you have to make a quick decision on the fly on who you can or want to save very different situations dear

So you're more sensible when you have less time to think?

The crucible will alter everything and everyone in the galaxy at once a line I can't cross


If I have to save one life over another that is a line I can cross cause fundamentally I'm not altering the person or taking his or her choices a way I just have to make a decision on who I can get to in time in order to save them

No you can't. You've just spent the last few pages telling us you can't.

There is no fundamental difference between choosing to sacrifice EDI and the Geth to save the rest of the universe and choosing Kaidan over Ashley (or vice versa). The only difference is scale.

In either case anyone who dies because of your decisions has permanently been stripped of the ability to make any kind of choice ever again. It's a bigger scale, but if you let the Reaper purge continue the number of individuals who lose their free will is infinitely larger than sacrificing the geth and EDI. Or assuming control of the reapers.

very false if you become a rogue ai in control because you could constantly destroy all the races every 50 thousand years still more darker and chaotic then refuse

Which has exactly nothing to do with the response you quoted.

You claim you're able to deal with the Virmire choice because "I'm not altering the person or taking his or her choices a way" - but that is exactly what you're doing to whoever you leave behind. If Ash survives, then your decision has irrevocably taken Kaidan's choices away.

If you pick destroy then yes, you've taken away the geth's ability make choices because they're dead; but if you don't you've facilitated the Reapers in doing the same to everyone else, including them. Except the humans who will be turned into one or more reapers and compelled to serve the catalyst until it is eventually destroyed.

Even if you assume control of the reapers, and even if that somehow does affect the geth, that's still taking away the choice of fewer individuals than allowing the reapers to keep doing their thing.

You can be as ostensibly pious as you choose, and take whatever option you prefer. I have zero problem with that. I do take exception however when people deny responsibility for their choices.

[PanzerGr3nadier]

Choosing refusal is a selfish act. Period.

[Isichar]

PanzerGr3nadier wrote...


Choosing refusal is a selfish act. Period.

So is using the crucible.

And if you think this is just a troll thread, then why feed it? If you don't believe its even possible for someone to like refuse other then just to ****** others off then your wrong.