374 réponses à ce sujet

[LiarasShield]

Pitznik wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

But you're speculating peaceful measures none were taking as we have seen banshees have killed many other asaris brutes have killed many other krogan marauders have killed many other turians

We've seen reapers fire their lasers all through the course of me3


Even indoctrinated illusive man didn't use any peaceful measures he killed anderson and sure as **** was going to kill us

no pitznik stop headcannoing what the reapers have been doing lol

There are plenty of mentions of Reapers' concentration camps. Why would they keep them alive instead of shooting their lasers? Answer is easy.

Reapers are harvesting when they can, killing when they can't. They will have their human Reaper for the next cycle.

Its the same reason I don't consider twitter as canon if it isn't shown in the game then it is most like very non plausible that it happended since no forces were ever being captured in the game only indoctrinated to kill other forces or for the indoctrinated to kill others which the illusive man does

It shows no proof of the reapers wanting to keep anybody alive for harvesting or vice versa their intent seems to be to kill us all and if they do I die free not picking the being who controls the reapers in the first place to burn our galaxy and if we all do die we all doe die free because you can't make a reaper ship without the advance races being alive so yes I will die free fighting for what I believe in and not believeing in the reapers

Sorry you don't share my sentiment

But it is your ending to choose for your own shepard

ME3. Concentration camps. Proof. *facepalm*

Why would they suddenly want to kill everyone, if their goal is to harvest? Honestly, I'm not even sure anymore, if you're just trolling me, or you really that naive.

When was any reaper concentration camps shown ingame like actually happening that the reapers were keep civilians or slaves for harvest show me that video and then that will be proof but for you're also headcannoning for something that wasn't shown in the game

Modifié par LiarasShield, 22 août 2012 - 04:03 .

[Conniving_Eagle]

Newsflash: There isn't a right choice, none of the endings are good. That's why people hate them.

[Pitznik]

Hannah Montana wrote...

When they say they fought a terrible that is probably just apart of the indoctrination dream.
For refusal we didn't give in, we refused. and as such there is 0% of anything being a dream. 

If you are willing to interpret everything that way, refusal just as well may be indoctrinated choice.... seriously, stop that idiocy. It is you adding to what is shown, Occam's razor tells you are wrong, burden of proof is on you.

[LiarasShield]

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

When they say they fought a terrible that is probably just apart of the indoctrination dream.
For refusal we didn't give in, we refused. and as such there is 0% of anything being a dream. 

If you are willing to interpret everything that way, refusal just as well may be indoctrinated choice.... seriously, stop that idiocy. It is you adding to what is shown, Occam's razor tells you are wrong, burden of proof is on you.

Come pitznik show us the reaper concentration camps and the reapers keeping civilian slaves for harvest I'm waiting you can't do it can you I thought so blowing smoke on out of your ass without any ingame proof that happend during the course of the game..

[Hannah Montana]

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

When they say they fought a terrible that is probably just apart of the indoctrination dream.
For refusal we didn't give in, we refused. and as such there is 0% of anything being a dream. 

If you are willing to interpret everything that way, refusal just as well may be indoctrinated choice.... seriously, stop that idiocy. It is you adding to what is shown, Occam's razor tells you are wrong, burden of proof is on you.

Refusal isn't a choice, it is a stance. 

[Jassu1979]

robertthebard wrote...
If you choose destroy, it says they fought a terrible battle so their cycle wouldn't have to.  The Reapers are defeated in our cycle, and the video is basically the same.  So how is Refusal superior again?

You are meta-gaming, employing hindsight.

The godchild clearly identifies itself as the personification of an enemy that's been consistently known to manipulate people and warp their minds. It then proceeds to tell you how you are TOTALLY capable of controlling them (unlike that loser TIM, whom they indoctrinated), and that shooting that piece of machinery over there will DEFINITELY activate the kill-switch that'll take out the whole Reaper fleet. But if you do not like either option, you could also jump into that disintegrating ray back there, which will magically transform everybody and make them live in peace and prosperity.

Now, I dare you to take a strict in-game perspective, without any prophetic knowledge of what's going down if you actually follow through with any of these instructions.

And then tell me that you'd just go along with any of these options, based on who the godchild is and how your enemies have operated throughout the series.
Seriously, if the writers responsible for that scene had any sense at all, the Catalyst would indeed have been lying through its holographic teeth, urging you to sabotage the machine ("Destroy"), become indoctrinated ("Control"), or just commit a rather spectacular suicide ("Synthesis").

[Pitznik]

LiarasShield wrote...

When was any reaper concentration camps shown ingame like actually happening that the reapers were keep civilians or slaves for harvest show me that video and then that will be proof but for you're also headcannoning for something that wasn't shown in the game

Lol. Just play ME3 and you'll see for yourself. Or you can pretend it wasn't mentioned, I don't care. I'm not going to prove the obvious, my patience is not limitless. If you feel like staying in denial, be my guest. Go fo conventional victory, or destroy the Citadel with Elcor mounted Thanix cannon, or pretend Reapers are killing everyone, hell, even take Leela and Bender as squadmates for your Priority: Earth mission, I can't stop you.

[LiarasShield]

Pitznik wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

When was any reaper concentration camps shown ingame like actually happening that the reapers were keep civilians or slaves for harvest show me that video and then that will be proof but for you're also headcannoning for something that wasn't shown in the game

Lol. Just play ME3 and you'll see for yourself. Or you can pretend it wasn't mentioned, I don't care. I'm not going to prove the obvious, my patience is not limitless. If you feel like staying in denial, be my guest. Go fo conventional victory, or destroy the Citadel with Elcor mounted Thanix cannon, or pretend Reapers are killing everyone, hell, even take Leela and Bender as squadmates for your Priority: Earth mission, I can't stop you.

Yeah you can no longer prove your point so you give up well it is about time lol but have a nice day and remember it is a ending for under your own interpretation

[Pitznik]

Hannah Montana wrote...

Refusal isn't a choice, it is a stance.

Whatever you say darling, it is your headcanon, my logic has no place there.

[Hannah Montana]

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

Refusal isn't a choice, it is a stance.

Whatever you say darling, it is your headcanon, my logic has no place there.

Refusal is not headcanon. 
You have no logic after saying that.

Modifié par Hannah Montana, 22 août 2012 - 04:12 .

[D24O]

Hannah Montana wrote...

Refusal is not headcanon. 
You have no logic after saying that.

Every ending involves a lot of ones own interpertation.

[Pitznik]

Hannah Montana wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

Refusal isn't a choice, it is a stance.

Whatever you say darling, it is your headcanon, my logic has no place there.

Refusal is not headcanon. 
You have no logic after saying that.

Your interpretation of non refusal endings is headcanon.

[Hannah Montana]

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

Refusal isn't a choice, it is a stance.

Whatever you say darling, it is your headcanon, my logic has no place there.

Refusal is not headcanon. 
You have no logic after saying that.

Your interpretation of non refusal endings is headcanon.

And everyone else's interpretation of them is headcanon too.
The only constant is refusal because the Reapers are defeated with 100% certainty and the others aren't.

Modifié par Hannah Montana, 22 août 2012 - 04:18 .

[H4nniba11]

LiarasShield wrote...
Yeah you can no longer prove your point so you give up well it is about time lol but have a nice day and remember it is a ending for under your own interpretation

This is a bit of jumping in in the middle of the conversation but I remember EDI telling that Reapers are herding people into camps.

IMO All of the endings suck in some way so I headcanoned my own.

[Pitznik]

Hannah Montana wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

Refusal isn't a choice, it is a stance.

Whatever you say darling, it is your headcanon, my logic has no place there.

Refusal is not headcanon. 
You have no logic after saying that.

Your interpretation of non refusal endings is headcanon.

And everyone else's interpretation of them is headcanon too.
The only constant is refusal because the Reapers are defeated with 100% certainty and the others aren't.

If you are willing to interpret what is explicitly shown as indoctrination, this also applies to Refusal epilogue.

The simplest interpretation of all the ending tells they are real. Occam's Razor, not headcanon. Disagree? Prove your interpretation.

[Jamesui]

saracen16 wrote...

It's this close-mindedness that drives all conflict: when you establish one force as an enemy and never a potential ally, tool, or friend, you are bound to have problems.

... You've gotta be kidding me. I'm pretty sure their killing of millions of our own firmly establishes them as enemies. Not much wiggle room there.  

saracen16 wrote...

A rogue AI's primary program by definition is self-preservation, and in the light of what the Citadel has to say about AI emplacements, I doubt it would go down quietly.

You can't state that off hand. An AI doesn't even need a self-preservation instinct. Then again, even if it were true, why would it offer the control and destroy endings? Both involve its destruction.

saracen16 wrote...

"All war is deception." Sun Tzu knows that misinformation is a tool used to win a war. Doesn't make you evil.

I know. My Shep's lied plenty. But dishonesty and deceit does mean we can't trust the Catalyst AI's exposition of our options or its motivations in doing so. 

saracen16 wrote...

I disagree. The entire game stressed that the Crucible is the only way to stop it, but what is uncertain is how it will stop the Reapers. Even Hackett says so in the beginning... "the only way to stop them".

You've got the implication the wrong way. Let's say "Defeat the Reapers" is D and "Use the Crucible" is C. Then "The crucible is the only way to defeat te reapers" means D->C, not C->D. So, yes, you can't defeat te reapers outright without the Crucible (~C->~D by contraposition), but the Crucible does not guarantee victory.  

saracen16 wrote...

I don't think so: those beliefs are put to rest when the Catalyst made it clear that the Reapers had nothing to do with the plans of the Crucible.

You did just grant that the Catalyst might be lying. 

saracen16 wrote...

But its end-goal is known.

There's a difference between prescriptive and descriptive purpose. It's prescriptive goal - defeating the Reapers - is known, but the descriptive goal - its purpose now that the Catalyst AI is at its helm - is not. If this were not the case, how do we have three options? If the prescriptive goal - the one we "know" - were the descriptive goal, there would be no choice. There'd be no point in engineering a last-ditch device that provides a last-minute choice.  

saracen16 wrote...

The codices also tell us that the Reaper capabilities far exceed those of the organics, and that the tactics that we carry out against the Reapers can not be carried out indeterminately. The Reapers do not rely on supply lines and home planets, and they can obliterate us and bleed us eventually. Furthermore, their numbers stem from countless eons (billions of years divided by 50,000 years means at least 10,000 if not 100,000 Reaper capital ships and God knows how many destroyers), and to sacrifice what limited resources we have (at most only 85 dreadnoughts, and some cruisers, capital ships, home planets, supply lines, all that are dwindling by the hour etc.) while the Reapers grow stronger with more of our troops at their disposal.

If you believe that continuing the fight conventionally is useful, that's your choice, not mine.

The choice to refuse bears with it an acceptance that you will eventually fail. The goal is not to survive or defeat the reapers, but rather to destroy more of them than they can replace. The idea is to turn the massive cycle count against the reapers. We will not win, but we will weather them down a bit, and hope that the next x cycles do the same with the guidance we've left them. 

I'm sensing some hostility, and I would like to try to diffuse some of it. I am not against the EC-rejiggered normal endings (except for synthesis). My "canon" Shepard is a destroyer. I just think that the Refusal choice is justifiable if you don't trust the Catalyst, I think distrusting the Catalyst is justifiable, and I like the way it was written despite the FU undertones. I am well aware that its writing clashes considerably with my justifications of the decision, and in my headcanon my Refusal speech is more along the lines of "I'd rather die fighting for our successors than hand you the instruments of our own demise"

[Pitznik]

H4nniba11 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...
Yeah you can no longer prove your point so you give up well it is about time lol but have a nice day and remember it is a ending for under your own interpretation

This is a bit of jumping in in the middle of the conversation but I remember EDI telling that Reapers are herding people into camps.

Don't bother. LiaraShield chosen to be ignorant, you're wasting your time. She will eventually see for herself playing through ME3.

[LiarasShield]

H4nniba11 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...
Yeah you can no longer prove your point so you give up well it is about time lol but have a nice day and remember it is a ending for under your own interpretation

This is a bit of jumping in in the middle of the conversation but I remember EDI telling that Reapers are herding people into camps.

IMO All of the endings suck in some way so I headcanoned my own.

Edi may have mentioned it but their is nothing ingame that shows that the reapers took civilians in reaper concentration camps
 
Or for them to harvest captured forces pitznik is talking out of hiss ass and can't show ingame video proof of actual reaper camps or them harvesting civilians so he is blowing smoke in the air to prove how he feels to be right and he has given up because he can't show any proof.

Modifié par LiarasShield, 22 août 2012 - 04:28 .

[Pitznik]

LiarasShield wrote...

Edi may have mentioned it but their is nothing ingame that shows that the reapers took civilians in reaper concentration camps
 
Or for them to harvest captured forces pitznik is talking out of hiss ass and can't show ingame video proof of actual reaper camps or them harvesting civilians so he is blowing smoke in the air to proof how he feels to be right and he has given up because he can't show any proof.

So everything characters mention, but not shown explicitly in game isn't real? Ok. I guess I deserve that for stooping to your level, lesson learned.

[Hannah Montana]

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Hannah Montana wrote...

Refusal isn't a choice, it is a stance.

Whatever you say darling, it is your headcanon, my logic has no place there.

Refusal is not headcanon. 
You have no logic after saying that.

Your interpretation of non refusal endings is headcanon.

And everyone else's interpretation of them is headcanon too.
The only constant is refusal because the Reapers are defeated with 100% certainty and the others aren't.

If you are willing to interpret what is explicitly shown as indoctrination, this also applies to Refusal epilogue.

The simplest interpretation of all the ending tells they are real. Occam's Razor, not headcanon. Disagree? Prove your interpretation.

Not really, indoctrination would be accepting the King of the Reapers choices.
Much like if Sauron offered 3 choices to Frodo on the walk up to mount doom, Frodo could not trust him in any of the 3 choices.
Frodo would have to refuse and carry on up the mountain to destroy the ring. 
Shepard has to do the same.

[LiarasShield]

Pitznik wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Edi may have mentioned it but their is nothing ingame that shows that the reapers took civilians in reaper concentration camps
 
Or for them to harvest captured forces pitznik is talking out of hiss ass and can't show ingame video proof of actual reaper camps or them harvesting civilians so he is blowing smoke in the air to proof how he feels to be right and he has given up because he can't show any proof.

So everything characters mention, but not shown explicitly in game isn't real? Ok. I guess I deserve that for stooping to your level, lesson learned.

Yes your using twitter tactis to say something is cannon when it didn't happen or that it wasn't shown in game your blowing smoke everywhere no where in me3 did we see reaper camps or civilians getting indoctrinated so you might as well be making up or doing fanfics off the top of your head and headcannoning like you have accused many others of doing.

[H4nniba11]

LiarasShield wrote...

H4nniba11 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...
Yeah you can no longer prove your point so you give up well it is about time lol but have a nice day and remember it is a ending for under your own interpretation

This is a bit of jumping in in the middle of the conversation but I remember EDI telling that Reapers are herding people into camps.

IMO All of the endings suck in some way so I headcanoned my own.

Edi may have mentioned it but their is nothing ingame that shows that the reapers took civilians in reaper concentration camps
 
Or for them to harvest captured forces pitznik is talking out of hiss ass and can't show ingame video proof of actual reaper camps or them harvesting civilians so he is blowing smoke in the air to prove how he feels to be right and he has given up because he can't show any proof.

EDI does tell that Reapers are killing those people in camps but it is true that she does not mention them being turned into a reaper. Or maybe she did. I'm not sure did she use the word ''Reaper processing plant''. We however never actually see even a single camp through Shepards eyes.

[LiarasShield]

H4nniba11 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

H4nniba11 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...
Yeah you can no longer prove your point so you give up well it is about time lol but have a nice day and remember it is a ending for under your own interpretation

This is a bit of jumping in in the middle of the conversation but I remember EDI telling that Reapers are herding people into camps.

IMO All of the endings suck in some way so I headcanoned my own.

Edi may have mentioned it but their is nothing ingame that shows that the reapers took civilians in reaper concentration camps
 
Or for them to harvest captured forces pitznik is talking out of hiss ass and can't show ingame video proof of actual reaper camps or them harvesting civilians so he is blowing smoke in the air to prove how he feels to be right and he has given up because he can't show any proof.

EDI does tell that Reapers are killing those people in camps but it is true that she does not mention them being turned into a reaper. Or maybe she did. I'm not sure did she use the word ''Reaper processing plant''. We however never actually see even a single camp through Shepards eyes.

Cause it wasn't shown ingame I'm less likely to believe it they never shown reaper camps or civilians getting turned into reapers during me3 just them trying to kill us

Also they can't harvest us if they kill us because they need the species alive in order to try make their reaper capital ships which I can back up because they needed live humans to process them in order to create the human reaper

[Pitznik]

LiarasShield wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Edi may have mentioned it but their is nothing ingame that shows that the reapers took civilians in reaper concentration camps
 
Or for them to harvest captured forces pitznik is talking out of hiss ass and can't show ingame video proof of actual reaper camps or them harvesting civilians so he is blowing smoke in the air to proof how he feels to be right and he has given up because he can't show any proof.

So everything characters mention, but not shown explicitly in game isn't real? Ok. I guess I deserve that for stooping to your level, lesson learned.

Yes your using twitter tactis to say something is cannon when it didn't happen or that it wasn't shown in game your blowing smoke everywhere no where in me3 did we see reaper camps or civilians getting indoctrinated so you might as well be making up or doing fanfics off the top of your head and headcannoning like you have accused many others of doing.

Ok, it is EDI's headcanon then. But why she would do it? Can you even take yourself seriously? I know I can't.

[Jamesui]

H4nniba11 wrote...

EDI does tell that Reapers are killing those people in camps but it is true that she does not mention them being turned into a reaper. Or maybe she did. I'm not sure did she use the word ''Reaper processing plant''. We however never actually see even a single camp through Shepards eyes.

I think it's safe to assume that Reapers wouldn't round up people in camps just to kill them, unless the method or execution is liqueification followed by absorption into a new reaper.