925 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

You asked where the Reapers claimed that they tried to do that before. Your claim was answered.

But considering their "success" so far in preventing every subsequent civilization in discovering the Crucible plans, Mars, and the Prothean beacons/Ilos in general, as well as the Catalyst praising our capabilities, no, I really don't think so.

Wrong.

He says he believes the concept was eridacated as it wasn't passed down, he never imples they tried to destroy it, then he says Organics are more resourceful than he thinks. You saying they tried to destroy it is speculations.

And let's just pretend your right, and they tried to destroy it. They now know how resourceful organics are and they will go  to even more measures to destroy it, it's common sense.

They aren't incapable of destroying plans, that's absurd.

If they didn't try to destroy it, why would they believe it had been eradicated?

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Wrong.

He says he believes the concept was eridacated as it wasn't passed down, he never imples they tried to destroy it, then he says Organics are more resourceful than he thinks. You saying they tried to destroy it is speculations.

Because you know, I'm sure all the Organics decided to up and destroy their own doomsday device. 

Same end result: miscalculation on the part of the Reapers, if they were confident in the device's destruction.

And let's just pretend your right, and they tried to destroy it. They now know how resourceful organics are and they will go  to even more measures to destroy it, it's common sense.

They aren't incapable of destroying plans, that's absurd.

You might want to think about every past cycle that's occurred so far. Because if the Reapers were so capable, we wouldn't have Prothean beacons flying all over the place or Crucible plans passing down to each successive cycle or Ilos having managed to go undiscovered.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 18 août 2012 - 06:16 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

You asked where the Reapers claimed that they tried to do that before. Your claim was answered.

But considering their "success" so far in preventing every subsequent civilization in discovering the Crucible plans, Mars, and the Prothean beacons/Ilos in general, as well as the Catalyst praising our capabilities, no, I really don't think so.

Wrong.

He says he believes the concept was eridacated as it wasn't passed down, he never imples they tried to destroy it, then he says Organics are more resourceful than he thinks. You saying they tried to destroy it is speculations.

And let's just pretend your right, and they tried to destroy it. They now know how resourceful organics are and they will go  to even more measures to destroy it, it's common sense.

They aren't incapable of destroying plans, that's absurd.

If they didn't try to destroy it, why would they believe it had been eradicated?

Because they believed organics died out to quick and weren't resourceful enough to pass it down....

[Khajiit Jzargo]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Wrong.

He says he believes the concept was eridacated as it wasn't passed down, he never imples they tried to destroy it, then he says Organics are more resourceful than he thinks. You saying they tried to destroy it is speculations.

Because you know, I'm sure all the Organics decided to up and destroy their own doomsday device. 

Same end result: miscalculation on the part of the Reapers, if they were confident in the device's destruction.

And let's just pretend your right, and they tried to destroy it. They now know how resourceful organics are and they will go  to even more measures to destroy it, it's common sense.

They aren't incapable of destroying plans, that's absurd.

You might want to think about every past cycle that's occurred so far. Because if the Reapers were so capable, we wouldn't have Prothean beacons flying all over the place or Crucible plans passing down to each successive cycle or Ilos having managed to go undiscovered.

Like I said before, maybe he believed it wasn't passed down because of a lack of time, nothing implies it was by destroying it, so you can't use that against me it's what I'm trying to say.

Like I said, it could be something as simple as overconfindence from the Reapers thinking that organics weren't resourceful, until you can point to me where the Reapers said "We tried to destroy it" it's not a fact, and really doesn't have much to back it up, hence cannot be used against me.

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Wrong.

He says he believes the concept was eridacated as it wasn't passed down, he never imples they tried to destroy it, then he says Organics are more resourceful than he thinks. You saying they tried to destroy it is speculations.

Because you know, I'm sure all the Organics decided to up and destroy their own doomsday device. 

Same end result: miscalculation on the part of the Reapers, if they were confident in the device's destruction.

And let's just pretend your right, and they tried to destroy it. They now know how resourceful organics are and they will go  to even more measures to destroy it, it's common sense.

They aren't incapable of destroying plans, that's absurd.

You might want to think about every past cycle that's occurred so far. Because if the Reapers were so capable, we wouldn't have Prothean beacons flying all over the place or Crucible plans passing down to each successive cycle or Ilos having managed to go undiscovered.

Like I said before, maybe he believed it wasn't passed down because of a lack of time, nothing implies it was by destroying it, so you can't use that against me it's what I'm trying to say.

Like I said, it could be something as simple as overconfindence from the Reapers thinking that organics weren't resourceful, until you can point to me where the Reapers said "We tried to destroy it" it's not a fact, and really doesn't have much to back it up, hence cannot be used against me.

You mean like statements like "the Catalyst is lying"?  Or implications that a hologram can indoctrinate you in a few minutes?  Or the one from much earlier in the thread, where you point blank said that Refusal had been tried before and failed?

edit:  How about this logic:  They obviously knew of the plans for the Crucible, and they had thought they eradicated them.  Now, I realize that at my age, the mind is the first thing to go, but when I read a statement like this, I take it to mean that they had thought they eradicated the plans.  Now, when I look up eradicated in the dictionary to see if maybe it has a new modern meaning that I don't know about, I find that it means pretty much what I thought it did: http://www.merriam-w...nary/eradicated

Modifié par robertthebard, 18 août 2012 - 06:31 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Like I said before, maybe he believed it wasn't passed down because of a lack of time, nothing implies it was by destroying it, so you can't use that against me it's what I'm trying to say.

"We believed the concept had been eradicated". This by necessity indicates destruction. Unless you're going for some pretty insane assumptions regarding how the Crucible concept was eliminated. Either way, it indicates their limitations.

Like I said, it could be something as simple as overconfindence from the Reapers thinking that organics weren't resourceful, until you can point to me where the Reapers said "We tried to destroy it" it's not a fact, and really doesn't have much to back it up, hence cannot be used against me.

You mean like the refuse ending, where we actually see Liara's beacon survive and that subsequent cycles used it to stop the Reapers? So much for it being mere overconfidence. So post-Shepard cycle, either the Reapers were dumb enough to let organics keep doing what they do, or they actually aren't capable of stopping the dissemination of information. It's the same end result, either way.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 18 août 2012 - 06:28 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

No I'm not railing on Control and Synthesis, I'm railing on every single one because your accepting the Catalyst ultimantum, and agreeing with him. And any time that has done it has lead to failure. Just ask Saren.

Can you point me to where Saren met the Catalyst?  I'd like to see that.  In fact, can you document any time that anyone has accepted or rejected the Catalyst before Shepard talks to it?  Did TIM even get to talk to it?  Based on his lingering obssession with controling the Reapers, I'd say no, but hey, if you can point me to some official source that says otherwise, I'd gladly peruse it to update what I know.

Well by saying I meant to say Reapers. Anyone who has come in a lot of contact with Reapers has become indoctrinated (, Amanda Kenson, The batarians of Levianthan of Dis) any one who has wanted the Reapers in their future (TIM, Saren,The Prothean VI, Vendetta, tells you that there was a splinter Prothean group who split apart and wanted to control the Reapers, but they failed. He also tells you countless cycles have tried the same, but they failed.) and anyone who tries to reason with the Reapers has met a horrible faith. So now your standing on the Crucible, and they're telling you all you have to do is jump into a beam, hold two handles, or shoot a tube and all would make you die but then he says  you would save your cycle by dying, and you believe him?

I'd believe that before I believe that Saren spoke to the Catalyst, or that anyone really tried to "reason" with them.  I spoke to a couple of Reapers holograms, and I didn't try to reason with them, although I did try in ME 1 to figure them out.  I would believe SC before I'd believe that anyone else built the Crucible and it failed.  Especially since we have it on pretty good authority that the Protheans never finished it.  Saren lived on Sovereign for we have no idea how long, Benezia was turned after a few weeks, but I'm supposed to believe that a hologram indoctrinates me in a few minutes?  I think what I do believe is that you have talked yourself into a corner, and have forced yourself to scratch and claw for a way out.  To the point of altering things presented over the course of three games to try to suit what you want us to believe.

Here's the kicker.  I don't want you to believe anything.  I would like to understand your position, but it's so fluid that I can't tie it down.  Every time I think I'm getting close to it, it changes, or I have to change things presented in the story to make them fit what you're telling me, until I ask specifically about that.  Can you, for example, show me any dialog with Saren where he tried to reason with Sovereign?  He surrendered to it, but I don't recall any dialog where he tried to reason with it, he does try to reason with you, to make you come around to his way of thinking, but I don't recall anything where he's trying to reason with Sovereign.

Saren surrendered to the Reapers believing that it would save humanity, he tried to played the devils game by reasoning with them, when he believed that anything that had to do with the Reapers brings good, he's reasoning with them, because the Reapers also believe they are doing good. When he believes the Reapers will bring good and it's the right path, he's reasoning with the Reapers.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Like I said before, maybe he believed it wasn't passed down because of a lack of time, nothing implies it was by destroying it, so you can't use that against me it's what I'm trying to say.

"We believed the concept had been eradicated". This by necessity indicates destruction. Unless you're going for some pretty insane assumptions regarding how the Crucible concept was eliminated. Either way, it indicates their limitations.

Like I said, it could be something as simple as overconfindence from the Reapers thinking that organics weren't resourceful, until you can point to me where the Reapers said "We tried to destroy it" it's not a fact, and really doesn't have much to back it up, hence cannot be used against me.

You mean like the refuse ending, where we actually see Liara's beacon survive and that subsequent cycles used it to stop the Reapers? So much for it being mere overconfidence.

No eradicated doesn't mean it was destroyed, it means they believed it was gone, whether it was because they though the organics didn't pass them down or whatever, it never implies destroy, that cannot be used.

2- That's metagaming, and this argument is just going on circles. I'm just simply going to say they'll get it eventually and destroy everything. And if you want to bring the Liara argument, Liara said the crucible failed, so if anything that helps the Reapers.

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

No I'm not railing on Control and Synthesis, I'm railing on every single one because your accepting the Catalyst ultimantum, and agreeing with him. And any time that has done it has lead to failure. Just ask Saren.

Can you point me to where Saren met the Catalyst?  I'd like to see that.  In fact, can you document any time that anyone has accepted or rejected the Catalyst before Shepard talks to it?  Did TIM even get to talk to it?  Based on his lingering obssession with controling the Reapers, I'd say no, but hey, if you can point me to some official source that says otherwise, I'd gladly peruse it to update what I know.

Well by saying I meant to say Reapers. Anyone who has come in a lot of contact with Reapers has become indoctrinated (, Amanda Kenson, The batarians of Levianthan of Dis) any one who has wanted the Reapers in their future (TIM, Saren,The Prothean VI, Vendetta, tells you that there was a splinter Prothean group who split apart and wanted to control the Reapers, but they failed. He also tells you countless cycles have tried the same, but they failed.) and anyone who tries to reason with the Reapers has met a horrible faith. So now your standing on the Crucible, and they're telling you all you have to do is jump into a beam, hold two handles, or shoot a tube and all would make you die but then he says  you would save your cycle by dying, and you believe him?

I'd believe that before I believe that Saren spoke to the Catalyst, or that anyone really tried to "reason" with them.  I spoke to a couple of Reapers holograms, and I didn't try to reason with them, although I did try in ME 1 to figure them out.  I would believe SC before I'd believe that anyone else built the Crucible and it failed.  Especially since we have it on pretty good authority that the Protheans never finished it.  Saren lived on Sovereign for we have no idea how long, Benezia was turned after a few weeks, but I'm supposed to believe that a hologram indoctrinates me in a few minutes?  I think what I do believe is that you have talked yourself into a corner, and have forced yourself to scratch and claw for a way out.  To the point of altering things presented over the course of three games to try to suit what you want us to believe.

Here's the kicker.  I don't want you to believe anything.  I would like to understand your position, but it's so fluid that I can't tie it down.  Every time I think I'm getting close to it, it changes, or I have to change things presented in the story to make them fit what you're telling me, until I ask specifically about that.  Can you, for example, show me any dialog with Saren where he tried to reason with Sovereign?  He surrendered to it, but I don't recall any dialog where he tried to reason with it, he does try to reason with you, to make you come around to his way of thinking, but I don't recall anything where he's trying to reason with Sovereign.

Saren surrendered to the Reapers believing that it would save humanity, he tried to played the devils game by reasoning with them, when he believed that anything that had to do with the Reapers brings good, he's reasoning with them, because the Reapers also believe they are doing good. When he believes the Reapers will bring good and it's the right path, he's reasoning with the Reapers.

No, he's indoctrinated, and yet again, you are asking me to disregard things presented in game to support your position.

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Like I said before, maybe he believed it wasn't passed down because of a lack of time, nothing implies it was by destroying it, so you can't use that against me it's what I'm trying to say.

"We believed the concept had been eradicated". This by necessity indicates destruction. Unless you're going for some pretty insane assumptions regarding how the Crucible concept was eliminated. Either way, it indicates their limitations.

Like I said, it could be something as simple as overconfindence from the Reapers thinking that organics weren't resourceful, until you can point to me where the Reapers said "We tried to destroy it" it's not a fact, and really doesn't have much to back it up, hence cannot be used against me.

You mean like the refuse ending, where we actually see Liara's beacon survive and that subsequent cycles used it to stop the Reapers? So much for it being mere overconfidence.

No eradicated doesn't mean it was destroyed, it means they believed it was gone, whether it was because they though the organics didn't pass them down or whatever, it never implies destroy, that cannot be used.

2- That's metagaming, and this argument is just going on circles. I'm just simply going to say they'll get it eventually and destroy everything. And if you want to bring the Liara argument, Liara said the crucible failed, so if anything that helps the Reapers.

http://www.merriam-w...nary/eradicated no, it pretty much means destroyed.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

No eradicated doesn't mean it was destroyed, it means they believed it was gone, whether it was because they though the organics didn't pass them down or whatever, it never implies destroy, that cannot be used.

Eradicate (v.) - to remove or destroy utterly.

http://dictionary.re...e/eradicate?s=t

So not only does it mean to destroy, but to do a really good job of destroying it.

2- That's metagaming, and this argument is just going on circles. I'm just simply going to say they'll get it eventually and destroy everything. And if you want to bring the Liara argument, Liara said the crucible failed, so if anything that helps the Reapers.

Yet despite that, apparenltly she still decided to include the Crucible plans for future generations. It still pretty definitively demonstrates the Reapers' incompetence, since after how close they came to losing this cycle, they're no closer to preventing the spread of information.

Whichever way you want to portray events, here's what it comes down to: the Reapers weren't good enough, whether because they're too confident or simply incapable. It's the same error they make in dealing with Shepard, who constantly interrupts their plans, yet they continue this act as if he's a worm to be squashed. At the end of the day, you're giving the Reapers too much credit.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 18 août 2012 - 06:38 .

[Isichar]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Got ya... okay. I did read your original post. It's just that the discussion veered off in this direction so I went with it.

You ORIGINALLY said:

Trillions of deaths from the reapers, lives destroyed in the most
horrible way possible. By using the crucible you are justifying what the
reapers have done to countless organic cycles.

By using the
crucible you are justifying that all trillions of deaths were worth it
just to save your one cycle. It is selfish and ignores those who died to
actually stop the reapers, not submit to them.

Synthesis is the ultimate renegade option, you are saying the ends justify the means.

You've built a big ****ing gun, and you've got it pointed at the head of this reaper AI that is trying to negotiate with you. It wants you to join with them in Synthesis. It will accept your Control. It will resign to being Destroyed. If you Refuse to do anything it will simply continue what it has been doing because it knows no different.

So what you're saying is that it is better to become a jar of human preserves than to destroy the thing to save our cycle, because you think this somehow dishonors the trillions it has already killed? That by destroying it with this big ****ing gun, you justify what it has been doing?

Do I have it right now?

The only valid reason I can see for refusing (and I'd pick the shooting option) the Starbrat is giving the middle finger to BW for giving us this s*** f*** of an ending to Shepard's story.

First I want to say something in regards to my views on refuse and in terms of the decision we would make in real life. The context we view a story in, compared to the way we view a situation in our lives is pretty different even when you make choices ingame that represent what you want in life.  The choice I would make ingame is not the same as I would make in real life, and I can't say what I would do in real life because I thankfully have not been put in a situation where I had to make a choice between what I thought was best overall for the world or saving the lives of the people I care about. The reason is not because your beliefs change but because your viewing it from another PoV and context, and perception can change your views of what is right and wrong in that choice.

A good example of someone who made a wrong choice, which was actually right under the context would be Gerrel choosing to fire on the geth dreadnaught, it was wrong because what was happening in the galaxy and what Shepard and the geth were involved in what something greater then the war between his people and the geth, however Gerrel was technically correct to have done what he did based on what he knew.

Now when it comes to the final choice, there is a large disconnect between how I viewed my Shepard before and how I viewed him during it. I can't connect my with my Shepard or argue what was actually important to him (or me) so I find myself become less emotionally invested in the actual choice itself in terms of how it will effect my Shepard because to some extent (not completely) I dont really care, what is important to me with this choice is how it will effect the story as a whole and what I want for the galaxy afterwords. So to those who think I am insane for picking refuse I will admit that in part my disconnect from the character itself plays a part in that.

Although I would like to say that picking refuse felt natural, it felt right. And a point others have said that I will steal because I agree with it is that it was the only ending in which the dialogue actually felt like something Shepard would say (even if you say he wouldn't make that choice to begin with).

Earlier in the thread I had made a point that regardless of your actions, or even that of the reapers I believed that life would continue on, something which I find quite beautiful. And no matter how much damage the reapers do, and no matter how long they did it for there are things they could not change. If the reapers vanished tomorrow then the entire threat the reapers existed to prevent would still be there and arguably no different then it was before they existed. The reapers are a larger then life villian, but only by an organic perception, in terms of how the galaxy operated overall they really did not have very much impact even on their own cause. Even if they wiped out one cycle the next would be the exact same.

From this view I can say the Catalyst is very much a victim of his own cycle without even knowing it. He is caught in events that can not be changed and the entire time he could only keep resetting it to a point that it could be controlled properly, however it really could not because there is no such thing as perfect cycle. Organics as a whole may end up making the same choices and eventually was may full victim to those consequences but there will always be factors that make it unique, Shepard is one of these examples because Shepard was able to do something no organic was able to do before. The Protheons passing on the crucible to the next cycle should have never been allowed and yet because one piece of information was passed down from cycles, the next cycle was changed slightly. I remember thinking how appropriate the name "mass effect" was for the first game not only because the game is based around choices, but how watching 1 choice effected another and how that effected something else and so on. The protheons surviving the cycle long enough to change the citadel, the reaper invasion not starting when it was suppose to and in result humans been pulled into a cycle they could have missed entirely had it started on time.

What I am getting at is that everything that built up to the crucible and these events in the story was not based around 1 action and was not controlled by one person, it happened as a result of multiple uncontrollable things in the story coming together, things the catalyst thought it could control, but couldn't.

This is why the reaper defeat will happen regardless, because there is too many unknown factors that they can not control, and no matter how powerful they are or how many reapers they have they can still die because 1 tiny piece of information passed from one cycle to the next can result in their defeat (as it does no matter what you choose at the end) and I 100% thinks the catalyst sees this too (even if he only realizes it the moment Shepard trys to activate the crucible). His cycle is not perfect and never was. It was never really a solution to anything,  and essentially he needed the crucible to be fired.

I stated that the catalyst was just as much a victim of the cycles as organics or the reapers were and I also feel that to some extent his existance was unavoidable or to some extent necessary (in the context of the story at least... Definitely not needed in the series itself) however he can not do anything but degrade the galaxy, he did not do anything that, after the reapers are gone, would have benefitted anything or anyone, and certainly less so for the people involved in the cycles. He sacrificed more lives to prevent something when letting nature take its course would arguably have caused less suffering and destruction then war between organics and synthetics would (letting organics survive with the intention of killing them later does not count to me as been good for anyone long term) and the chaotic progression of the galaxy actually provides more hope towards peace between organics and synthetics then anything he ever did could, and it also is what eventually defeats the reapers in a certain way.

In mass effect and its story the single most powerful force I personally can see is chaos. Or Chaos > Reapers. In 2 endings you use the crucible to try and control the progression of the galaxy, one through control of the reapers (Which is pointless to me since I dont actually see the reapers as capable of having a real positive effect on life) and synthesis which completely deny's chaos altogether, in synthesis you are trying to put the galaxy in a state that is for lack of a better way to describe it static, and it will not grow or evolve because it no longer needs to. It makes complete sense why the Catalyst finds this the ideal solution. It essentially defeats chaos.

This chaos and growth which the catalyst is a part of has done more good then the catalyst ever did in the story.

Now destroy lets the chaos continue, however it forces you to destroy the Geth and EDI. I am going to steal another point in this thread that someone else stated that what is ironic is that even though this is the only option that can be made that allows organics and synthetics to exist in peace without reaper control, it requires you to wipe out synthetics. And the ending that lets both live is the one that submits to the logic that neither can live in peace together.

I fully believe organics and synthetics can live in peace, even if you argue it would take something as big as the reaper threat to unite them, they are still capable of working together. However most my hopes for peace lie on the shoulders of the Geth and EDI, and by killing them I am effectively killing all my hopes for that peace as well. If it took a reaper threat to unite both then what is there to let me believe the new synthetics won't end up at war with organics based on the threat, its something I can certainly chance, but it is a future that looks to repeat itself (for me) because of the sacrifice required.

When I am given the choice to use the crucible I look at all 3 options and all I can see is futures that I dont care about or feel that are actually beneficial to the galaxy and its progression, and they are coming from someone who has never had any interest in what is actually best for the galaxy or anyone in it and instead whos views directly contradict what I feel is best, which is to let life continue its course naturally, chaos is NOT a bad thing. It is a choice I can only make because I feel the story forced me to or because it is the only way to not kill everyone, but thats it, otherwise I am only help the catalyst accomplish something that will only impede on real organic growth.

I care very much about the characters in the mass effect story and would say I have grown much more attached to them then any other story I have ever invested my time into. The entire nature of the crucible sticks out in the story like a sore thumb, making the choice feel much more disconnected and unnatural (almost like an entirely different story) and that in part makes it hard to even consider the characters I grew to love and weigh there lives in equation, because for this one moment in the story I am no longer Shepard, I am just a player sitting behind his monitor and asking himself what I want and what I believe is best for the galaxy in terms of using the crucible.

And once my personal feelings towards my cycle vanished, refuse became the only option that made sense, the only one that had the possibility to grow without the need to control it or make it static or force a logic on organics simply for the sake of continuing to exist.


Its something that is not easy to explain. And not to people that are so set in their own PoV on the story. Next time someone asks me why I chose refuse I will tell them because it was the most natural choice I could make. But it is not one made out of spite, even if my dislike for the ending factors into it... Anyways to anyone crazy enough to actually read this... ty, you have every bit of right to bash away at whatever you disagree with now

Edit: I kind of want overboard on this post moreso my own reasons then to make any actual point if anyone is curious. I did not feel I explained my beliefs well at all earlier in the thread and was hoping to try again, although I still probably did not do that well.

Modifié par Isichar, 18 août 2012 - 06:46 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

No eradicated doesn't mean it was destroyed, it means they believed it was gone, whether it was because they though the organics didn't pass them down or whatever, it never implies destroy, that cannot be used.

Eradicate (v.) - to remove or destroy utterly.

http://dictionary.re...e/eradicate?s=t

So not only does it mean to destroy, but to do a really good job of destroying it.

2- That's metagaming, and this argument is just going on circles. I'm just simply going to say they'll get it eventually and destroy everything. And if you want to bring the Liara argument, Liara said the crucible failed, so if anything that helps the Reapers.

Yet despite that, apparenltly she still decided to include the Crucible plans for future generations. It still pretty definitively demonstrates the Reapers' incompetence, since after how close they came to losing this cycle, they're no closer to preventing the spread of information.

Whichever way you want to portray events, here's what it comes down to: the Reapers weren't good enough, whether because they're too confident or simply incapable. It's the same error they make in dealing with Shepard, who constantly interrupts their plans, yet they continue this act as if he's a worm to be squashed. At the end of the day, you're giving the Reapers too much credit.

I give you that, the eradicated part your correct.

I still believe that Reapers can destroy plans, even if they have fail, eventually I believe they can destroy the Crucible and it's plans

[Khajiit Jzargo]

robertthebard wrote...

No, he's indoctrinated, and yet again, you are asking me to disregard things presented in game to support your position.

And how did he come Indoctrinated again?

Let me find that for you.

"During this time, Saren made his final preparations to discover Dr Shu Qian's artifact, and encountered Sovereign. Through the ancient Reaper, he learned the fate of the many civilizations of eons past. Instead of using Sovereign as a weapon, as he had intended, Saren made it his goal to save the races of the galaxy by aiding the Reapers, proving the worth of organics to the Reapers so that they might be spared. He believed that servitude was the logical answer, instead of instinctively fighting to the finish."

"However, Sovereign had other plans. The more time Saren spent in service to Sovereign, the more indoctrinated he became"

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

No eradicated doesn't mean it was destroyed, it means they believed it was gone, whether it was because they though the organics didn't pass them down or whatever, it never implies destroy, that cannot be used.

Eradicate (v.) - to remove or destroy utterly.

http://dictionary.re...e/eradicate?s=t

So not only does it mean to destroy, but to do a really good job of destroying it.

2- That's metagaming, and this argument is just going on circles. I'm just simply going to say they'll get it eventually and destroy everything. And if you want to bring the Liara argument, Liara said the crucible failed, so if anything that helps the Reapers.

Yet despite that, apparenltly she still decided to include the Crucible plans for future generations. It still pretty definitively demonstrates the Reapers' incompetence, since after how close they came to losing this cycle, they're no closer to preventing the spread of information.

Whichever way you want to portray events, here's what it comes down to: the Reapers weren't good enough, whether because they're too confident or simply incapable. It's the same error they make in dealing with Shepard, who constantly interrupts their plans, yet they continue this act as if he's a worm to be squashed. At the end of the day, you're giving the Reapers too much credit.

I give you that, the eradicated part your correct.

I still believe that Reapers can destroy plans, even if they have fail, eventually I believe they can destroy the Crucible and it's plans

Once you choose Refusal, they can most assuredly destroy the Crucible, since it's right there unprotected.  The plans, however, are seeded all over the galaxy by Liara's teams.  It can be built again, and, unfortunately for those of us who hate twitter almost as much as Facebook, it is announced that they not only can, but do, and use it to destroy the Reapers.  I hate that too.<grumpy alien>

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Not it's not different. Your critizing me for choosing something that has failed before, when the whole plan was doing something that has failed before. That's hypocrosy.

I give up. You keep moving the goal line. You keep changing the rules of the discussion. You are impossible. You are the Council!!!

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 18 août 2012 - 06:55 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

No eradicated doesn't mean it was destroyed, it means they believed it was gone, whether it was because they though the organics didn't pass them down or whatever, it never implies destroy, that cannot be used.

Eradicate (v.) - to remove or destroy utterly.

http://dictionary.re...e/eradicate?s=t

So not only does it mean to destroy, but to do a really good job of destroying it.

2- That's metagaming, and this argument is just going on circles. I'm just simply going to say they'll get it eventually and destroy everything. And if you want to bring the Liara argument, Liara said the crucible failed, so if anything that helps the Reapers.

Yet despite that, apparenltly she still decided to include the Crucible plans for future generations. It still pretty definitively demonstrates the Reapers' incompetence, since after how close they came to losing this cycle, they're no closer to preventing the spread of information.

Whichever way you want to portray events, here's what it comes down to: the Reapers weren't good enough, whether because they're too confident or simply incapable. It's the same error they make in dealing with Shepard, who constantly interrupts their plans, yet they continue this act as if he's a worm to be squashed. At the end of the day, you're giving the Reapers too much credit.

I give you that, the eradicated part your correct.

I still believe that Reapers can destroy plans, even if they have fail, eventually I believe they can destroy the Crucible and it's plans

Once you choose Refusal, they can most assuredly destroy the Crucible, since it's right there unprotected.  The plans, however, are seeded all over the galaxy by Liara's teams.  It can be built again, and, unfortunately for those of us who hate twitter almost as much as Facebook, it is announced that they not only can, but do, and use it to destroy the Reapers.  I hate that too.<grumpy alien>

I wouldn't be so sure since Liara said it failed. And I agree, Twitter is not cannon.

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

No, he's indoctrinated, and yet again, you are asking me to disregard things presented in game to support your position.

And how did he come Indoctrinated again?

Let me find that for you.

"During this time, Saren made his final preparations to discover Dr Shu Qian's artifact, and encountered Sovereign. Through the ancient Reaper, he learned the fate of the many civilizations of eons past. Instead of using Sovereign as a weapon, as he had intended, Saren made it his goal to save the races of the galaxy by aiding the Reapers, proving the worth of organics to the Reapers so that they might be spared. He believed that servitude was the logical answer, instead of instinctively fighting to the finish."

"However, Sovereign had other plans. The more time Saren spent in service to Sovereign, the more indoctrinated he became"

So he surrendered to the Reapers, or spent enough time on Sovereign that he became indoctrinated?  The last line certainly bears that out, doesn't it?  After he becomes indoctrinated, he, like TIM, is a puppet.  Just as Benezia, and Shiara were.  It doesn't matter what Sovereign allowed Saren to believe, as we see in ME 2, the Reapers have a definite use for organics, and it's not a "we can all live happily ever after" situation.  It's a "some of us will be converted to paste and turned into a human Reaper, and some will be left to starve to death after the indoctrination becomes so strong that we can no longer think for ourselves, and die".  We may actually learn that last part from Vigil, in ME 1.  Hey, maybe they were going to use us as replacement Collectors, since we destroyed the last batch?

[Khajiit Jzargo]

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

No, he's indoctrinated, and yet again, you are asking me to disregard things presented in game to support your position.

And how did he come Indoctrinated again?

Let me find that for you.

"During this time, Saren made his final preparations to discover Dr Shu Qian's artifact, and encountered Sovereign. Through the ancient Reaper, he learned the fate of the many civilizations of eons past. Instead of using Sovereign as a weapon, as he had intended, Saren made it his goal to save the races of the galaxy by aiding the Reapers, proving the worth of organics to the Reapers so that they might be spared. He believed that servitude was the logical answer, instead of instinctively fighting to the finish."

"However, Sovereign had other plans. The more time Saren spent in service to Sovereign, the more indoctrinated he became"

So he surrendered to the Reapers, or spent enough time on Sovereign that he became indoctrinated?  The last line certainly bears that out, doesn't it?  After he becomes indoctrinated, he, like TIM, is a puppet.  Just as Benezia, and Shiara were.  It doesn't matter what Sovereign allowed Saren to believe, as we see in ME 2, the Reapers have a definite use for organics, and it's not a "we can all live happily ever after" situation.  It's a "some of us will be converted to paste and turned into a human Reaper, and some will be left to starve to death after the indoctrination becomes so strong that we can no longer think for ourselves, and die".  We may actually learn that last part from Vigil, in ME 1.  Hey, maybe they were going to use us as replacement Collectors, since we destroyed the last batch?

Bingo!

He reasoned with the Reapers which led to his downfall. 

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

No eradicated doesn't mean it was destroyed, it means they believed it was gone, whether it was because they though the organics didn't pass them down or whatever, it never implies destroy, that cannot be used.

Eradicate (v.) - to remove or destroy utterly.

http://dictionary.re...e/eradicate?s=t

So not only does it mean to destroy, but to do a really good job of destroying it.

2- That's metagaming, and this argument is just going on circles. I'm just simply going to say they'll get it eventually and destroy everything. And if you want to bring the Liara argument, Liara said the crucible failed, so if anything that helps the Reapers.

Yet despite that, apparenltly she still decided to include the Crucible plans for future generations. It still pretty definitively demonstrates the Reapers' incompetence, since after how close they came to losing this cycle, they're no closer to preventing the spread of information.

Whichever way you want to portray events, here's what it comes down to: the Reapers weren't good enough, whether because they're too confident or simply incapable. It's the same error they make in dealing with Shepard, who constantly interrupts their plans, yet they continue this act as if he's a worm to be squashed. At the end of the day, you're giving the Reapers too much credit.

I give you that, the eradicated part your correct.

I still believe that Reapers can destroy plans, even if they have fail, eventually I believe they can destroy the Crucible and it's plans

Once you choose Refusal, they can most assuredly destroy the Crucible, since it's right there unprotected.  The plans, however, are seeded all over the galaxy by Liara's teams.  It can be built again, and, unfortunately for those of us who hate twitter almost as much as Facebook, it is announced that they not only can, but do, and use it to destroy the Reapers.  I hate that too.<grumpy alien>

I wouldn't be so sure since Liara said it failed. And I agree, Twitter is not cannon.

Unfortunately for us, as much as we may wish to deny it, it is.  Their house, their rules kinda thing.  We don't have to acknowledge it, but we can't deny it either.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

LIARA SAID THE CRUCIBLE FAILED BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T USE IT!!!!!

She wasn't there to know that you didn't use it. She thought you used it and that it didn't work.

:headdesk: :headdesk: :headdesk:

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 18 août 2012 - 07:00 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Not it's not different. Your critizing me for choosing something that has failed before, when the whole plan was doing something that has failed before. That's hypocrosy.

I give up. You keep moving the goal line. You keep changing the rules of the discussion. You are impossible. You are the Council!!!

How so? If anything your doing that. I went back to the roots of the conversation.

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

No, he's indoctrinated, and yet again, you are asking me to disregard things presented in game to support your position.

And how did he come Indoctrinated again?

Let me find that for you.

"During this time, Saren made his final preparations to discover Dr Shu Qian's artifact, and encountered Sovereign. Through the ancient Reaper, he learned the fate of the many civilizations of eons past. Instead of using Sovereign as a weapon, as he had intended, Saren made it his goal to save the races of the galaxy by aiding the Reapers, proving the worth of organics to the Reapers so that they might be spared. He believed that servitude was the logical answer, instead of instinctively fighting to the finish."

"However, Sovereign had other plans. The more time Saren spent in service to Sovereign, the more indoctrinated he became"

So he surrendered to the Reapers, or spent enough time on Sovereign that he became indoctrinated?  The last line certainly bears that out, doesn't it?  After he becomes indoctrinated, he, like TIM, is a puppet.  Just as Benezia, and Shiara were.  It doesn't matter what Sovereign allowed Saren to believe, as we see in ME 2, the Reapers have a definite use for organics, and it's not a "we can all live happily ever after" situation.  It's a "some of us will be converted to paste and turned into a human Reaper, and some will be left to starve to death after the indoctrination becomes so strong that we can no longer think for ourselves, and die".  We may actually learn that last part from Vigil, in ME 1.  Hey, maybe they were going to use us as replacement Collectors, since we destroyed the last batch?

Bingo!

He reasoned with the Reapers which led to his downfall. 

Actually, that doesn't say anything about reasoning with them, it does say he believed that serving them was the answer.  Servants don't reason, they serve, and in the case of Saren, he was little more than a slave that couldn't see his collar.  You even underlined believed.  Surrender does not imply reasoning with.  A surrender can be unconditional, meaning whatever the winner says goes.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

LIARA SAID THE CRUCIBLE FAILED BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T USE IT!!!!!

She wasn't there to know that you didn't use it. She thought you used it and that it didn't work.

:headdesk: :headdesk: :headdesk:

No she said it didn't work.



2:16
*Facepalm*

Modifié par Khajiit Jzargo, 18 août 2012 - 07:04 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Not it's not different. Your critizing me for choosing something that has failed before, when the whole plan was doing something that has failed before. That's hypocrosy.

I give up. You keep moving the goal line. You keep changing the rules of the discussion. You are impossible. You are the Council!!!

How so? If anything your doing that. I went back to the roots of the conversation.

We not talks to you. We know all Gavorn's tricks. Go away.