184 réponses à ce sujet

[MattFini]

^ Right. This thread, and about 500 others, prove you wrong.

People are still baffled by it, five months later.

Confusing your audience is never a good note to end a story on.

[AresKeith]

MegaSovereign wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

I disagree.

The Citadel was incorporated to the Crucible's design in previous cycles. The triggers being on the Citadel doesn't prove that the Crucible was designed by the Reapers.

No actually, it sounds like a crackpot conspiracy theory.

the Catalyst could've easily said who came up with the design, but quickly avoided it and said something stupid,

<_< First off he could have easily lied. And according you guys he's pretty good at lying so I don't see why he would hesitate here.

Second, he's absolutely right. There are no historical records on the race that first designed it. Shepard would not know them and should not care. The information is competely irrelevant and this is just one case where Shepard has a derp auto-dialogue moment.

how did he hesitate when he said that right after Shepard asked? And Shepard wouldn't ask that question if s/he didn't care to know the answer, and it wouldn't be irrelevant to people who actually wanted to know

[The Angry One]

David7204 wrote...

How it works is completely irrelevant. Modern land mines have self destruct functions that use the mine's own explosives and circuits to destroy itself. That doesn't mean the mines aren't working as intended. They're working precisely as intended.

Land mines are designed to explode. Was the Crucible designed to explode? Clearly it wasn't, since it doesn't explode 2 times out of 3.
The Crucible is not a bomb.

[David7204]

If people are 'baffled' by this supposed 'problem,' it's because they're stupid. The idea that Destroy is 'confusing' because it physically works the same way a landmine and plenty of other technology works is not a problem.

[The Angry One]

David7204 wrote...

If people are 'baffled' by this supposed 'problem,' it's because they're stupid. The idea that Destroy is 'confusing' because it physically works the same way a landmine and plenty of other technology works is not a problem.

Land mines shoot out waves of red light that destroy technology now, do they?

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

If people are 'baffled' by this supposed 'problem,' it's because they're stupid. The idea that Destroy is 'confusing' because it physically works the same way a landmine and plenty of other technology works is not a problem.

Destroy is not like a landmine because its not really a function like control or synthesis, the fact that its a power conduit kinda proves that

[David7204]

The Angry One wrote...

David7204 wrote...

How it works is completely irrelevant. Modern land mines have self destruct functions that use the mine's own explosives and circuits to destroy itself. That doesn't mean the mines aren't working as intended. They're working precisely as intended.

Land mines are designed to explode. Was the Crucible designed to explode? Clearly it wasn't, since it doesn't explode 2 times out of 3.
The Crucible is not a bomb.

That is completely ridiculous. The fact that the Crucible doesn't always explode is meaningless. Landmines can explode. Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. if a landmine doesn't explode, does that mean it's malfunctioning? Does that mean it's not doing what it's designed to do? No. It probably just means it was deactivated.

[David7204]

AresKeith wrote...

David7204 wrote...

If people are 'baffled' by this supposed 'problem,' it's because they're stupid. The idea that Destroy is 'confusing' because it physically works the same way a landmine and plenty of other technology works is not a problem.

Destroy is not like a landmine because its not really a function like control or synthesis, the fact that its a power conduit kinda proves that

How does that 'prove' a single thing?

[The Angry One]

David7204 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

David7204 wrote...

How it works is completely irrelevant. Modern land mines have self destruct functions that use the mine's own explosives and circuits to destroy itself. That doesn't mean the mines aren't working as intended. They're working precisely as intended.

Land mines are designed to explode. Was the Crucible designed to explode? Clearly it wasn't, since it doesn't explode 2 times out of 3.
The Crucible is not a bomb.

That is completely ridiculous. The fact that the Crucible doesn't always explode is meaningless. Landmines can explode. Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. if a landmine doesn't explode, does that mean it's malfunctioning? Does that mean it's not doing what it's designed to do? No. It probably just means it was deactivated.

What the hell does a land mine being deactivated have to do with the fact that it's designed to explode?
If it's working properly and active, it will explode. That's what it does. That's the sole reason for it's existence.

The Crucible is a device meant to be a power source. Power sources do not explode unless they're malfunctioning.
If your laptop or cellphone battery explodes, it's not working as intended.

Modifié par The Angry One, 16 août 2012 - 02:43 .

[David7204]

The Angry One wrote...

David7204 wrote...

If people are 'baffled' by this supposed 'problem,' it's because they're stupid. The idea that Destroy is 'confusing' because it physically works the same way a landmine and plenty of other technology works is not a problem.

Land mines shoot out waves of red light that destroy technology now, do they?

I don't like the endings at all. But I'm smart enough not to like them for the right reasons.

You got to do better than this.

[MattFini]

What an amazingly terrible analogy.

What the hell kind of ray is activated by destroying a piece of it?

Is destroy the intended function? Or a result of destroying a piece of it.

[zambot]

After reading your OP again, I think you might be on to something, but I think the intended use of the citadel is actually control. This would explain why the spacecadet is there in the first place: he uses the citadel to exert control over the reapers. It would not be that difficult (with the right tech) to build a device that alters the mechanism by which the reapers are controlled. Or perhaps one that alters the signal to do something more.

It could help explain why Control is the only option available in Low EMS + collector base endings.  

As an aside:
I do think it can be fun to come up with explanations that work in game, but how the endings "happen" is Bioware's overuse of symbolism. You destroy things (destroy the pipe), control things (grab the controls), or redeem the galaxy (take a crucifiction dive into the beam).

Modifié par zambot, 16 août 2012 - 02:50 .

[David7204]

The Angry One wrote...

David7204 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

David7204 wrote...

How it works is completely irrelevant. Modern land mines have self destruct functions that use the mine's own explosives and circuits to destroy itself. That doesn't mean the mines aren't working as intended. They're working precisely as intended.

Land mines are designed to explode. Was the Crucible designed to explode? Clearly it wasn't, since it doesn't explode 2 times out of 3.
The Crucible is not a bomb.

That is completely ridiculous. The fact that the Crucible doesn't always explode is meaningless. Landmines can explode. Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. if a landmine doesn't explode, does that mean it's malfunctioning? Does that mean it's not doing what it's designed to do? No. It probably just means it was deactivated.

How the hell does a land mine being deactivated have to do with the fact that it's designed to explode?
If it's working properly and active, it will explode. That's what it does. That's the sole reason for it's existence.

The Crucible is a device meant to be a power source. Power sources do not explode unless they're malfunctioning.
If your laptop or cellphone battery explodes, it's not working as intended.

What if your laptop had sensitive data, and you hooked up a magnet inside the casing to wipe the hard drive? The magnet would destroy the hard drive once you activated it. The hard drive would be lost. But everything would be working exactly as designed. As intended.

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

David7204 wrote...

If people are 'baffled' by this supposed 'problem,' it's because they're stupid. The idea that Destroy is 'confusing' because it physically works the same way a landmine and plenty of other technology works is not a problem.

Destroy is not like a landmine because its not really a function like control or synthesis, the fact that its a power conduit kinda proves that

How does that 'prove' a single thing?

the Power Conduit in destroy option gives the power to cause synthesis, thats what it was intended to do, when you shoot it you caused it to malfunction and overload. Instead of doing what Synthesis does in the ending, the red energy wave kills all synthetics

[David7204]

You're trying to argue that if a piece of technology has two or more functions, and one of those functions renders the technology unusable, it's not working as intended. That's what it boils down to. And you're wrong.

[The Angry One]

David7204 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

David7204 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

David7204 wrote...

How it works is completely irrelevant. Modern land mines have self destruct functions that use the mine's own explosives and circuits to destroy itself. That doesn't mean the mines aren't working as intended. They're working precisely as intended.

Land mines are designed to explode. Was the Crucible designed to explode? Clearly it wasn't, since it doesn't explode 2 times out of 3.
The Crucible is not a bomb.

That is completely ridiculous. The fact that the Crucible doesn't always explode is meaningless. Landmines can explode. Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. if a landmine doesn't explode, does that mean it's malfunctioning? Does that mean it's not doing what it's designed to do? No. It probably just means it was deactivated.

How the hell does a land mine being deactivated have to do with the fact that it's designed to explode?
If it's working properly and active, it will explode. That's what it does. That's the sole reason for it's existence.

The Crucible is a device meant to be a power source. Power sources do not explode unless they're malfunctioning.
If your laptop or cellphone battery explodes, it's not working as intended.

What if your laptop had sensitive data, and you hooked up a magnet inside the casing to wipe the hard drive? The magnet would destroy the hard drive once you activated it. The hard drive would be lost. But everything would be working exactly as designed. As intended.

No. You're breaking a component to prevent it's use. You may have intended to do it, but you still broke it.

David7204 wrote...

You're trying to argue that if a piece
of technology has two or more functions, and one of those functions
renders the technology unusable, it's not working as intended. That's
what it boils down to. And you're wrong.

I'm arguing that a process that begins by breaking a component and is essentially similar to another process, and it ends up destroying the device is very likely one that was not an intended function, or at least not a primary one, being possibly a failsafe.

Modifié par The Angry One, 16 août 2012 - 02:52 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

The Angry One wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Actually, there appears to be 8 instead of 6. The members you labelled as 6 and 3 are actually two members that look like singles due to the viewing angle. In such a case, it's possible that the each leg of the four prongs split into two.

The problem with that idea is that the side prongs look far too thin, hence why I count them as one. If the other prongs split then they'd be too thick.



Maybe this pic illustrates it better. If you look close at "6", you see there's another prong, but it's quite thin and very close to the other one and why am I scientifically analysing dimwittery of the highest order? Beats boring old sleep I guess.

No, your number 1 prong is obscuring your number 6 prong. Perhaps someone with map editor can grab a top-down view.

[David7204]

Okay. Let's use a much simpler example then. Let's say an automated sawblade. Tungsten carbide teeth. A blade like that in a factory could cut through wood or paper for a damn long time. But let's say one day we use the factory and the saw to cut through steel or some other material that would wear it down.

We certainly don't want the blade to be rendered unusable. it would be nice if it lasted forever. Everything is working exactly as designed and intended. But the blade would still be ruined.

Modifié par David7204, 16 août 2012 - 03:01 .

[MattFini]

David7204 wrote...

You're trying to argue that if a piece of technology has two or more functions, and one of those functions renders the technology unusable, it's not working as intended. That's what it boils down to. And you're wrong.

No, the argument is whether or not destroy is an intended function, or a consequence of shooting the tubing.

Which, according to you, nobody should care about. Because it "just works".

[David7204]

You're basing your conclusion that Destroy is unintended upon this issue.

[MattFini]

Yes I am. Because that is a point that the OP made.

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

Okay. Let's use a much simpler example then. Let's say an automated sawblade. Tungsten carbide teeth. A blade like that in a factory could cut through wood or paper for a damn long time. But let's say one day we use the factory and the saw to cut through steel or some other material that would wear it down.

We certainly don't want the blade to be rendered unusable. it would be nice if it lasted forever. Everything is working exactly as designed and intended. But the blade would still be ruined.

thats still not a good analogy

[David7204]

Why not? You're arguing Destroy is unintended because the Crucible is destroyed in some scenarios and not others when it would be preferable for it not to be destroyed. I provided an example of a technology we all understand that is destroyed in some scenarios and not others when it would be preferable for it not to be destroyed. Yet it's clearly working exactly as designed and intended.

Modifié par David7204, 16 août 2012 - 03:11 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

The question I have is that while it may be true that the Citadel and Crucible are meant to do synthesis, is that really what the Catalyst wants? As shown in low-EMS endings, reapers are shown making passes and attacking the Crucible, and even the Catalyst said that the Crucible is damaged. If he truly wants synthesis and only wants to pretend that the reapers don't want the Crucible to dock, then why not just fire non-lethal projectiles? Even with a damaged Crucible, the Catalyst will still present to you the only option of Destroy instead of saving his skin and hoping the next cycle can protect the Crucible better. And he will get mad at you if you refuse. In short, what the hell does the Catalyst exactly want?

Also, if you wait too long, the Crucible is destroyed. What does that mean?

[JeffZero]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

The question I have is that while it may be true that the Citadel and Crucible are meant to do synthesis, is that really what the Catalyst wants? As shown in low-EMS endings, reapers are shown making passes and attacking the Crucible, and even the Catalyst said that the Crucible is damaged. If he truly wants synthesis and only wants to pretend that the reapers don't want the Crucible to dock, then why not just fire non-lethal projectiles? Even with a damaged Crucible, the Catalyst will still present to you the only option of Destroy instead of saving his skin and hoping the next cycle can protect the Crucible better. And he will get mad at you if you refuse. In short, what the hell does the Catalyst exactly want?

Also, if you wait too long, the Crucible is destroyed. What does that mean?

The Catalyst only alters its framework to something of "astonished recognition" (or whatever) with the right EMS score. It criticizes you more and more heavily the less EMS you have. It doesn't believe Synthesis -- its goal, however warped those ambitions have become and whatever monsters [Leviathan, allegedly] those attempts created -- is yet possible unless Shepard walks in with enough galactic unity outside its door.

It actually makes sense, really.