543 réponses à ce sujet

[silentassassin264]

Estelindis wrote...

Getorex wrote...

 If you are at war with X and you get together to discuss terms for ending the war and X sets ALL the terms and conditions and you set none. You lost.  Simple as that. The kid is completely and fully capable of stopping the Reapers, but wont. You have no say so it is all on his terms. That makes you the LOSER.

Consider: this kid thing obviously has control over the Reapers.  The little tike could make them do whatever he wants.  He is offering to let YOU choose an action on HIS terms, provided you kill yourself in all cases.  If you tell the tike you want to control the Reapers and send them on their way...there is no reason the tike couldn't do that.  The result is the same whether the tike does it or Shepard does it, except the tike takes his pound of flesh and sees you dead in making doing so.  OR the tike could accept your wish and do it himself without anyone dying to do so.  Exact same effect either way but the kid demands a pointless victor-determined human sacrifice to do it.  

This was extremely well said.

Well said?  That is stupid as heck.  Consider WW2.  At the end, Japan had no allies left and had Russia preparing to invade from the north and the United States bombing.  After two nukes it is very apparent the Japan is facing a superweapon the likes the world has never seen and has no chance to win even without factoring in that Russia is about to invade as well.  

Imagine at this point when all hope is lost for Japan, the United States offers to end the war, keep Imperial Japan completely intact, no war crimes tribunals or any retribution at all as long as the offer General Tojo as a sacrifice to America.  Do you think Hirohito would have thought about that for more than three seconds?  That would be without a doubt flawless victory since he was facing imminent destruction and got a reprieve when he did not deserve it.  Sure he has to accept the conditions of the United States who could have accepted an unconditional victory and just ended all hostilities but the conditions are basically nothing and he can walk out of hell without much of a singe.  

[Maxster_]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...


Prothean technology is also more advanced and uses their sensory ability for data transfer. Hence why Shepard received visions when the beacon on Eden Prime zapped him.

The Prothean Cipher also attuned Shepard's mind to be able to clearly understand Prothean data. Hence why he could see the videos on From Ashes, why he could sense and activate the beacon on Thessia,

The Cipher is a Rosetta Stone fanbase-approved space magic. Simple as that.

THERE we go! 

I was trying to avoid it, but that's the crux of it.

Space Magic is only a bad thing when aesexual space babes aren't involved.

Don't touch blue girls!
They have almost nothing to do with Cipher.

You get the cypher during a scene of mysticism mind-sex with a submissive woman in a bondage suit.

That is why i said almost

[drayfish]

Xilizhra wrote...

drayfish wrote...

At no point - in any of my statements anywhere - have I ever declared that the only way to play this game is with Miffy the Space Coward. I have never said that the only valid Shepard is a beacon of goodness and friendship, who never fires a weapon and offers the enemy cookies, and I'm not sure why you are trying to reduce my position to some fantastical bastion of Disney Princess goodness - it seems needlessly reductive.

An enemy wants to genocide all life; clearly it needs to be stopped. In any build of the character Shepard is a soldier and a realist; clearly she is going to do what needs to be done.

But I am talking about basic, defining human morality. Sure, it's lovely that the universe comes together to build a big mystery machine, but all of that symbolic inclusivity and faith gets utterly annihilated when the machine gets switched on.

The game asks you to commit genocide on a friendly race of allies. It asks you to wipe out an entire form of life who do not wish you harm, who are fighting beside you, with you, for you. It asks you to believe that the extermination of one race is acceptable for the preservation of another, tasking you with the arrogance of weighing the value of two forms of life. Just like a Reaper.

The game asks you to take away everyone's right to autonomy - to violate the sanctity of their bodies against their will in order to eradicate racism and intolerance by mutating distinction away. It compels you to breach the most basic freedoms that a human being can have because you think you know better than every living creature how they should live their life, and because you have a painfully narrow vision of their capacity to live in peace. Just like a Reaper.

Or, the game asks you to use mind-control, enslaving a race in order to ascend to the status of a god, thereby ruling the galaxy (no matter how nice you might be), because, as an as an unstoppable force of will, your rule will be law. The game asks you if your Shepard is egotistical enough to believe that he/she can succeed where every other character who pursued such power failed, and whether he/she is willing to embrace such enormity of power in oder to dictate how the universe will function. Just like a Reaper.

My position is that pretending you can use the tactics and methodology of evil while still thinking yourself virtuous, that you are fighting for anything more than base survival, is delusion. My issue continues to be that it is a lie to believe that one can perform evil, and think that just because you performed it and not the other guy, that somehow it isn't evil anymore.

So what you're saying is that no Shepard who makes it to the end of the game and finishes it can possibly be a good person? There's no action whatsoever there that a good person could possibly undertake?

I'm saying that in my opinion every one of those ending is specifically designed to compromise the player's morals totally, yes.  The game is knowingly engineered to make Shepard a hypocrite to some fundamental human ethic - I presume because the writers mistook this as philosophicallly deep rather than an infantile war crime pick-a-box.

The fact that they paper over such attrocity with cheery slides that commend the player for making their choice reveals how little interest they had in a genuine exploration of such moral complexity. 

[Maxster_]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Estelindis wrote...

Getorex wrote...

 If you are at war with X and you get together to discuss terms for ending the war and X sets ALL the terms and conditions and you set none. You lost.  Simple as that. The kid is completely and fully capable of stopping the Reapers, but wont. You have no say so it is all on his terms. That makes you the LOSER.

Consider: this kid thing obviously has control over the Reapers.  The little tike could make them do whatever he wants.  He is offering to let YOU choose an action on HIS terms, provided you kill yourself in all cases.  If you tell the tike you want to control the Reapers and send them on their way...there is no reason the tike couldn't do that.  The result is the same whether the tike does it or Shepard does it, except the tike takes his pound of flesh and sees you dead in making doing so.  OR the tike could accept your wish and do it himself without anyone dying to do so.  Exact same effect either way but the kid demands a pointless victor-determined human sacrifice to do it.

This was extremely well said.

It may be well said but this isn't backed up in the game at all. Star Child is incapable of ending the cycle. It explicitly says that. The Crucible has provided new solutions, but it CAN'T make them happen. It's an A.I.; it's programming has been altered, but not changed completely. It is a slave to it's directive (as the Leviathans say; it does exactly as it was created to do). Therefore it cannot stop the Reapers as it would be going against its directive.

Problem is, Leviathan is not part of the game. It is a dlc made after fan outrage, in which EAWare tried to foreshadow and justify that nonsense with Catalyst.
If it would be in game, than it is would be considered as argument.

What is described is the Reapers' unconditional surrender.  Before the Crucible is activated; the galaxy has no chance. This is evidenced by Refusal; they lose if the Crucible isn't used. Once the Crucible is docked, Star Child appears and explains what the thing does. That's it. The Crucible functions as designed. Part of its functions is to use the Catalyst for its own ends. All the Catalyst does is explain what the Crucible's options are; the choice before you. It doesn't make the choices. It doesn't even agree with two of the choices. But it's bound by its programming (that the Crucible has now altered) to help you. Despite still having the advantage in which it will successfully carry out its directive for the cycle, the Catalyst stops and allows you to break the cycle. It doesn't have a say in which option you select. That's total unconditional surrender.

You are just repeating catalyst nonsence. All functionality to use giant battery is built into the Citadel from the beginning.
And no, crucible could never be designed without access to the Citadel. And access to the Citadel is the FIRST thing every cycle lost, right at the start of every harvest.
So terms of "victory" are of reapers, and "choices" are provided by the reapers.
Without Catalyst intervention, war is completely lost. He just decided to aplly his "solutions" through Shepard.

The idea that the Catalyst is the one who had these options all along and then just randomly decided to give them to Shepard at the end is not opinion, it's just wrong. It's not backed up by anything in the lore. The Crucible is what creates the choices. The Catalyst is bound by them, unless you refuse to actually use the choices. Then the Catalyst is freed to continue the cycle.

Crucible is nonsensical absurd, OR it was designed by the Reapers(still nonsence, but less).
Catalyst said that it is just a battery. Well, you can ignore part of what he said, to make your headcanon work, but well.. it is still headcanon.
Catalyst is AI? Physical AI(bluebox)?

[Maxster_]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Estelindis wrote...

Netsfn, the Catalyst letting Shepard carry out a particular option is the same choice as it carrying out that option itself. If it is programmed not to do one, it should be unable to do the other.

Not at all. The reprogramming was likely never intended to give it full autonomy. Think about it. Crucible's design incorperates the Catalyst and altered it's programming, it indicates that the designers of the Crucible at some point realized the Catalyst existed. They may have even learned its origins.

How? By losing access to the Citadel in the first hours of harvest?

Now would you want the Catalyst making the end choice? Do you want it deciding to undertake Synthesis unilaterally? Do you want it to destroy the Geth and all synthetic life without you consent? The designers likely wanted to be able to decide themselves which option they wished to take.

If the whole problem of the Reapers was caused by an A.I. taking it's programming to an unforseen extreme, it would be crazy to give the same A.I. carte blanche to solve the Reaper problem.

AI alive or not? Sentient or not?

[Maxster_]

drayfish wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

drayfish wrote...

At no point - in any of my statements anywhere - have I ever declared that the only way to play this game is with Miffy the Space Coward. I have never said that the only valid Shepard is a beacon of goodness and friendship, who never fires a weapon and offers the enemy cookies, and I'm not sure why you are trying to reduce my position to some fantastical bastion of Disney Princess goodness - it seems needlessly reductive.

An enemy wants to genocide all life; clearly it needs to be stopped. In any build of the character Shepard is a soldier and a realist; clearly she is going to do what needs to be done.

But I am talking about basic, defining human morality. Sure, it's lovely that the universe comes together to build a big mystery machine, but all of that symbolic inclusivity and faith gets utterly annihilated when the machine gets switched on.

The game asks you to commit genocide on a friendly race of allies. It asks you to wipe out an entire form of life who do not wish you harm, who are fighting beside you, with you, for you. It asks you to believe that the extermination of one race is acceptable for the preservation of another, tasking you with the arrogance of weighing the value of two forms of life. Just like a Reaper.

The game asks you to take away everyone's right to autonomy - to violate the sanctity of their bodies against their will in order to eradicate racism and intolerance by mutating distinction away. It compels you to breach the most basic freedoms that a human being can have because you think you know better than every living creature how they should live their life, and because you have a painfully narrow vision of their capacity to live in peace. Just like a Reaper.

Or, the game asks you to use mind-control, enslaving a race in order to ascend to the status of a god, thereby ruling the galaxy (no matter how nice you might be), because, as an as an unstoppable force of will, your rule will be law. The game asks you if your Shepard is egotistical enough to believe that he/she can succeed where every other character who pursued such power failed, and whether he/she is willing to embrace such enormity of power in oder to dictate how the universe will function. Just like a Reaper.

My position is that pretending you can use the tactics and methodology of evil while still thinking yourself virtuous, that you are fighting for anything more than base survival, is delusion. My issue continues to be that it is a lie to believe that one can perform evil, and think that just because you performed it and not the other guy, that somehow it isn't evil anymore.

So what you're saying is that no Shepard who makes it to the end of the game and finishes it can possibly be a good person? There's no action whatsoever there that a good person could possibly undertake?

I'm saying that in my opinion every one of those ending is specifically designed to compromise the player's morals totally, yes.  The game is knowingly engineered to make Shepard a hypocrite to some fundamental human ethic - I presume because the writers mistook this as philosophicallly deep rather than an infantile war crime pick-a-box.

The fact that they paper over such attrocity with cheery slides that commend the player for making their choice reveals how little interest they had in a genuine exploration of such moral complexity. 

It could be different if that "ME3" was standalone and nothing related to ME1 and ME2. And, well, not being nonsensical mess.
Something like Crime and Punishment(Dostoevsky).

[Netsfn1427]

Maxster_ wrote...

Problem is, Leviathan is not part of the game. It is a dlc made after fan outrage, in which EAWare tried to foreshadow and justify that nonsense with Catalyst.
If it would be in game, than it is would be considered as argument.

You have zero evidence of that it was made to counter fan outrage. The EC, absolutely. Leviathan? Not so much. And like it or not, it's in the lore. It's canon, whether you like it or not. So it is a perfectly justifiable argument. That's like someone saying that information received in Lair of the Shadow Broker isn't relevant because it was DLC. Still counts towards the storyline of the game.

You are just repeating catalyst nonsence. All functionality to use giant battery is built into the Citadel from the beginning.
And no, crucible could never be designed without access to the Citadel. And access to the Citadel is the FIRST thing every cycle lost, right at the start of every harvest.

It's the first thing the Protheans lost. We do not know how long the Citadel trap has been in existence. Mass Relays were a creation of the Reapers, so it's safe to say the specific parts of the cycle have changed over the years, with the goal of efficiency. In the beginning, there was no citadel trap.

So terms of "victory" are of reapers, and "choices" are provided by the reapers.
Without Catalyst intervention, war is completely lost. He just decided to aplly his "solutions" through Shepard.

Nothing in the game supports this. The evidence in the game says that the Crucible changed the Catalyst and forced it to present you with the options the Crucible creates. From the Catalyst saying that the Crucible changed it, to it saying that it can't make the options happen to the fact it says the Crucible has created new possibilities. It's all there. Ignore it at your own peril.

Crucible is nonsensical absurd, OR it was designed by the Reapers(still nonsence, but less).
Catalyst said that it is just a battery. Well, you can ignore part of what he said, to make your headcanon work, but well.. it is still headcanon.
Catalyst is AI? Physical AI(bluebox)?

The Catalyst says it's a massive energy source. Which it is, though it needs the Mass Relay system to distribute the energy effectively. But that doesn't preclude it from altering the Catalyst's programming, especially since the Catalyst says it has.

All you have to counter me is your own headcanon or belief how the game should have gone. I've made my arguments based on what's in the game.  

Edit: Quote boxes.

Modifié par Netsfn1427, 06 octobre 2012 - 11:24 .

[Estelindis]

Maxster_ wrote...
Problem is, Leviathan is not part of the game. It is a dlc made after fan outrage,
in which EAWare tried to foreshadow and justify that nonsense with Catalyst.
If it would be in game, than it is would be considered as argument.

Indeed. Our Shepards originally reached the endpoint knowing nothing of Leviathan and needed to be able to make their crucial, final decision without any of that information. Accordingly, I'm not likely to take that into account when dealing with the ending on its own terms... the only terms I think my Shepard will encounter.

I haven't bought Leviathan. I don't know if I ever will. I loved all DLC from the first two Mass Effect games, but after that ending I feel no desire to buy further DLC. Bioware may wish to write whatever justifications for the ending that they wish, but I don't have to pay them to air their justifications. It's kinda sad, because I always felt that the quality of ME2 DLC in particular was miles better than Dragon Age DLC and set a great standard for the gaming industry. But Stanley Woo has always said that we should vote with our wallets if we're not happy with what Bioware has on offer. As long as they remain unwilling to make a fundamental, critical reevaluation of the ending I don't see ME3 DLC as a product that will interest me. They are free to stick to their guns and I'm free to hold on to my money.

Modifié par Estelindis, 06 octobre 2012 - 11:40 .

[Netsfn1427]

Maxster_ wrote...

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Estelindis wrote...

Netsfn, the Catalyst letting Shepard carry out a particular option is the same choice as it carrying out that option itself. If it is programmed not to do one, it should be unable to do the other.

Not at all. The reprogramming was likely never intended to give it full autonomy. Think about it. Crucible's design incorperates the Catalyst and altered it's programming, it indicates that the designers of the Crucible at some point realized the Catalyst existed. They may have even learned its origins.

How? By losing access to the Citadel in the first hours of harvest?

We don't know when the Crucible plans begin. Nor do we know when the Citadel trap began. There's nothing saying the original designers were unaware of the directive of the Catalyst.

AI alive or not? Sentient or not?

I'm not sure what's the point of the question. There are different levels of A.I. in the ME universe. Heck, it's questionable whether the Geth are even true A.I. until they get the Reaper upgrade. (Tali questions it in the first game and Raan's comments also indicate that what the Geth were did not count as a full-evolved A.I.) In any case, it may be shackled and still able to follow it's orders. It may not be and never saw a need to change its directive. It doesn't change the fact that it's following its directive.

Edit: quote boxes.

Modifié par Netsfn1427, 06 octobre 2012 - 11:30 .

[V-rcingetorix]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Estelindis wrote...

Getorex wrote...

 If you are at war with X and you get together to discuss terms for ending the war and X sets ALL the terms and conditions and you set none. You lost.  Simple as that. The kid is completely and fully capable of stopping the Reapers, but wont. You have no say so it is all on his terms. That makes you the LOSER.

Consider: this kid thing obviously has control over the Reapers.  The little tike could make them do whatever he wants.  He is offering to let YOU choose an action on HIS terms, provided you kill yourself in all cases.  If you tell the tike you want to control the Reapers and send them on their way...there is no reason the tike couldn't do that.  The result is the same whether the tike does it or Shepard does it, except the tike takes his pound of flesh and sees you dead in making doing so.  OR the tike could accept your wish and do it himself without anyone dying to do so.  Exact same effect either way but the kid demands a pointless victor-determined human sacrifice to do it.  

This was extremely well said.

Well said?  That is stupid as heck.  Consider WW2.  At the end, Japan had no allies left and had Russia preparing to invade from the north and the United States bombing.  After two nukes it is very apparent the Japan is facing a superweapon the likes the world has never seen and has no chance to win even without factoring in that Russia is about to invade as well.  

Imagine at this point when all hope is lost for Japan, the United States offers to end the war, keep Imperial Japan completely intact, no war crimes tribunals or any retribution at all as long as the offer General Tojo as a sacrifice to America.  Do you think Hirohito would have thought about that for more than three seconds?  That would be without a doubt flawless victory since he was facing imminent destruction and got a reprieve when he did not deserve it.  Sure he has to accept the conditions of the United States who could have accepted an unconditional victory and just ended all hostilities but the conditions are basically nothing and he can walk out of hell without much of a singe.  

Actually, it was a very hard decision for the Japanese people. They were, and are, a proud, intelligent race that prized honor over almost anything. Remember the Kamikaze's? The phrase: banzai (blood for the Emperor)?
 Surrendering was one of the hardest choices they ever made, and the only reason they did so was because they couldn't fight an atomic warhead.

It is probable that without the a-bomb, WW2 would have gone on another year or more.

Bringing ME3 into the mix...the ending feels very much like a surrender, I'm sorry. As someone pointed out, the Reapers hold the high ground, they have the hostages (threatening to kill them) and all the galaxy can do is add to the ending menu. Which the ghostly matre'de offers.

[V-rcingetorix]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

So terms of "victory" are of reapers, and "choices" are provided by the reapers.
Without Catalyst intervention, war is completely lost. He just decided to aplly his "solutions" through Shepard.

Nothing in the game supports this. The evidence in the game says that the Crucible changed the Catalyst and forced it to present you with the options the Crucible creates. From the Catalyst saying that the Crucible changed it, to it saying that it can't make the options happen to the fact it says the Crucible has created new possibilities. It's all there. Ignore it at your own peril.

I have a wonder, why was the Catalyst presenting Shep with the options? The Reapers have always done their best to kill any/everything, and the only thing they've been honest about is their determination and belief that they are superior and will kill everything.

Judging from a trust viewpoint, the Reapers have never been honest. Why believe them now? Further, why believe them when they have Shep over a barrel?

@Netsfn, thank you for the Leviathan data. I may have to get the dlc now, but there seems no point to it :/

As for the Catalyst being an AI...yeah. Debatable. Not wanting to stop, I suppose that is logical, it's winning everything, and according to the Leviathan it's following its programming.

But why wouldn't the Leviathan have the resources/time to make a Crucible themselves? All they need is an empty bit of space, some slaves, and a nap every 50,000 years. Might not be as fast as having a whole galaxy come together, but it is highly improbable that the Leviathan (apex race) would be incapable of coming up with a Crucible.

[Estelindis]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Imagine at this point when all hope is lost for Japan, the United States offers to end the war, keep Imperial Japan completely intact, no war crimes tribunals or any retribution at all as long as the offer General Tojo as a sacrifice to America.  Do you think Hirohito would have thought about that for more than three seconds?  That would be without a doubt flawless victory since he was facing imminent destruction and got a reprieve when he did not deserve it.  Sure he has to accept the conditions of the United States who could have accepted an unconditional victory and just ended all hostilities but the conditions are basically nothing and he can walk out of hell without much of a singe.  

I don't think that's remotely analogous to the ME3 ending.  It would only be analogous if America had declared war on various nations throughout the world at intervals of, say, fifty years, totally unprovoked, and wiped out each nation that it fought completely and utterly without mercy, before finally turning to Japan and attempting to do the same.  Another reason it's not analogous is that the scenario you present has literally no down-side for Japan apart from the loss of a single life.  There are numerous drawbacks to the three endings even if you ignore what happens to Shepard.

[Maxster_]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Problem is, Leviathan is not part of the game. It is a dlc made after fan outrage, in which EAWare tried to foreshadow and justify that nonsense with Catalyst.
If it would be in game, than it is would be considered as argument.

You have zero evidence of that it was made to counter fan outrage. The EC, absolutely. Leviathan? Not so much. And like it or not, it's in the lore. It's canon, whether you like it or not. So it is a perfectly justifiable argument. That's like someone saying that information received in Lair of the Shadow Broker isn't relevant because it was DLC. Still counts towards the storyline of the game.

Of course i have no evidence. And you have no evidence of the opposite.
Leviathan is not a part of the game, and this is a fact. Leviathan was made after fan outrage - this is a fact. EAWare never seen an outrage of this magnitude in their adress - this a fact.
I made a conjecture, and plausible one, seeing as they madly retconning ending to the point of idiocy(evacuation scene) in the EC.
Lair of shadow broker have added "foreshadowing" to the ME2? Or some plot changing information? Some plot changing reveals? No.
Also, foreshadowing - the act of providing vague advance indications; representing beforehand.
from google:
Foreshadowing is the presentation in a work of literature of hints and clues that tip the reader off as to what is to come later in the work.
Foreshadowing is an advance sign or warning of what is to come in the future. The author of a mystery novel might use foreshadowing in the early chapter of his book to give readers an inkling of an impending murder.

Adding a paid DLC to include "foreshadowing" into already finished paid fiction work - it is absurd, and contradicts definition of foreshadowing.
So no, leviathan is no argument to that nonsensical ending. They just took fans agruments about nonsensical absurd, and tried to lessen that nonsense.

You are just repeating catalyst nonsence. All functionality to use giant battery is built into the Citadel from the beginning.
And no, crucible could never be designed without access to the Citadel. And access to the Citadel is the FIRST thing every cycle lost, right at the start of every harvest.

It's the first thing the Protheans lost. We do not know how long the Citadel trap has been in existence. Mass Relays were a creation of the Reapers, so it's safe to say the specific parts of the cycle have changed over the years, with the goal of efficiency. In the beginning, there was no citadel trap.

So, you are just making things up, to justify your headcanon. Taking the Citadel and shutting down relay network was always reaper tactic. This is why they needed Citadel at all. This is what ME1 was all about.
You retconning ME1 with lore to justify crucible nonsense.

So terms of "victory" are of reapers, and "choices" are provided by the reapers.
Without Catalyst intervention, war is completely lost. He just decided to aplly his "solutions" through Shepard.

Nothing in the game supports this. The evidence in the game says that the Crucible changed the Catalyst and forced it to present you with the options the Crucible creates. From the Catalyst saying that the Crucible changed it, to it saying that it can't make the options happen to the fact it says the Crucible has created new possibilities. It's all there. Ignore it at your own peril.

"Choices" were created by the Reapers. They built the Citadel. All functionality and interface to use the giant battery is built into Citadel, from the beginning.
And it is all in the game. You just headcanoning everything you don't want to see out of the game.

Crucible is nonsensical absurd, OR it was designed by the Reapers(still nonsence, but less).
Catalyst said that it is just a battery. Well, you can ignore part of what he said, to make your headcanon work, but well.. it is still headcanon.
Catalyst is AI? Physical AI(bluebox)?

The Catalyst says it's a massive energy source. Which it is, though it needs the Mass Relay system to distribute the energy effectively. But that doesn't preclude it from altering the Catalyst's programming, especially since the Catalyst says it has.

All you have to counter me is your own headcanon or belief how the game should have gone. I've made my arguments based on what's in the game.  

Edit: Quote boxes.

Please show me a battery that change programming of a device in real life.
If you are disregarding scientific method, engineering and common sense, to make your headcanon work - it doesn't make that crucible idea less nonsensical.

[Netsfn1427]

V-rcingetorix wrote...

Netsfn1427 wrote...

So terms of "victory" are of reapers, and "choices" are provided by the reapers.
Without Catalyst intervention, war is completely lost. He just decided to aplly his "solutions" through Shepard.

Nothing in the game supports this. The evidence in the game says that the Crucible changed the Catalyst and forced it to present you with the options the Crucible creates. From the Catalyst saying that the Crucible changed it, to it saying that it can't make the options happen to the fact it says the Crucible has created new possibilities. It's all there. Ignore it at your own peril.

I have a wonder, why was the Catalyst presenting Shep with the options? The Reapers have always done their best to kill any/everything, and the only thing they've been honest about is their determination and belief that they are superior and will kill everything.

The Crucible is the reason. The Catalyst is an A.I.; it does only as it's programmed to do. It couldn't have presented the options to Shepard unless it was changed. Otherwise it would have no reason to divert from it's directive. The Crucible docking with it changes it forcing it to stop and accept the results of the Crucible. This is evidenced by the Catalyst presenting you with options, even if the only option is Control or Destroy. Neither is a solution the Catalyst seeks.

Judging from a trust viewpoint, the Reapers have never been honest. Why believe them now? Further, why believe them when they have Shep over a barrel?

While A.I.s can lie, I'm not sure the Reapers have. Harbinger doesn't. Sovereign's closet thing to a lie is saying it has no beginning, which it does. But other than that?

But if you're asking why someone playing blind would believe them, it's less belief and more need. You've got no chance if you don't use the Crucible, so you might as well.

@Netsfn, thank you for the Leviathan data. I may have to get the dlc now, but there seems no point to it :/

As for the Catalyst being an AI...yeah. Debatable. Not wanting to stop, I suppose that is logical, it's winning everything, and according to the Leviathan it's following its programming.

But why wouldn't the Leviathan have the resources/time to make a Crucible themselves? All they need is an empty bit of space, some slaves, and a nap every 50,000 years. Might not be as fast as having a whole galaxy come together, but it is highly improbable that the Leviathan (apex race) would be incapable of coming up with a Crucible.

It's a solid DLC, but everything I described can be found on Youtube. Just look up the end conversation if you don't want to buy it.

The Leviathans are not numerous though. And their control seems to be limited to their environment. They also state they are monitoring things, but they largely use their thralls to cover up their own existence. So they probably don't want to chance building a massive thing like the Crucible. Plus even if they built it, they'd need a huge fleet to deliver it. Really, their best hope was laying low and hoping the Reapers were defeated by someone else.

[Netsfn1427]

Maxster_ wrote...

Of course i have no evidence. And you have no evidence of the opposite.
Leviathan is not a part of the game, and this is a fact. Leviathan was made after fan outrage - this is a fact. EAWare never seen an outrage of this magnitude in their adress - this a fact.
I made a conjecture, and plausible one, seeing as they madly retconning ending to the point of idiocy(evacuation scene) in the EC.
Lair of shadow broker have added "foreshadowing" to the ME2? Or some plot changing information? Some plot changing reveals? No.
Also, foreshadowing - the act of providing vague advance indications; representing beforehand.
from google:
Foreshadowing is the presentation in a work of literature of hints and clues that tip the reader off as to what is to come later in the work.
Foreshadowing is an advance sign or warning of what is to come in the future. The author of a mystery novel might use foreshadowing in the early chapter of his book to give readers an inkling of an impending murder.

Adding a paid DLC to include "foreshadowing" into already finished paid fiction work - it is absurd, and contradicts definition of foreshadowing.
So no, leviathan is no argument to that nonsensical ending. They just took fans agruments about nonsensical absurd, and tried to lessen that nonsense.

Sorry, not my job to prove your speculation. I find it extremely likely the Leviathan DLC was planned from the jump but was merely delayed for the EC. Nothing with the Leviathan changed the ending. All it did was provide greater explanations to it's creation.

I never called it foreshadowing. It isn't, since most of the people who played the DLC did it after beating the game. It's an explanation. You may not like they included an explanation of the Catalyst's origins in DLC, but they did.  Bioware wrote the game. It's their story. If you dismiss their own explanation, then your argument loses meaning.

So, you are just making things up, to justify your headcanon. Taking the Citadel and shutting down relay network was always reaper tactic. This is why they needed Citadel at all. This is what ME1 was all about.
You retconning ME1 with lore to justify crucible nonsense.

I've played ME1 five or six times. I've retconned nothing. The Cycle has gone on for a billion years. All we're aware of is what happened in the Prothean cycle and bits and pieces of the cycle before that. The Leviathans state that the Mass Relays were created after the Reapers to make the cycle more efficient, so the process of the cycle has evolved. Or does that not count because it's Leviathan DLC?

"Choices" were created by the Reapers. They built the Citadel. All functionality and interface to use the giant battery is built into Citadel, from the beginning.
And it is all in the game. You just headcanoning everything you don't want to see out of the game.

Where's your evidence for this? The Crucible is stated to be a design that has been tinkered with over the cycles, with different cycles adding a piece. And the Catalyst states the Crucible changed it, and provided new options. If it created the choices, why not just act on them? 

Please show me a battery that change programming of a device in real life.
If you are disregarding scientific method, engineering and common sense, to make your headcanon work - it doesn't make that crucible idea less nonsensical.

Show me a Mass Relay in real life. And how the hell did the scientific method get brought into this?

I've presented my arguments. It's what's stated in the game. You may not like that the Crucible changed the Catalyst, but it is stated in the game that it does. Not headcanon. Explicitly stated.

It's one thing to debate the merits of the lore. It's another to just dismiss it if you don't like the way its presented. If you want to dismiss what's stated in the game itself, then what's the point of even being here? Just so you can go into different threads and call the game and all its elements stupid?

[Maxster_]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Estelindis wrote...

Netsfn, the Catalyst letting Shepard carry out a particular option is the same choice as it carrying out that option itself. If it is programmed not to do one, it should be unable to do the other.

Not at all. The reprogramming was likely never intended to give it full autonomy. Think about it. Crucible's design incorperates the Catalyst and altered it's programming, it indicates that the designers of the Crucible at some point realized the Catalyst existed. They may have even learned its origins.

How? By losing access to the Citadel in the first hours of harvest?

We don't know when the Crucible plans begin. Nor do we know when the Citadel trap began. There's nothing saying the original designers were unaware of the directive of the Catalyst.

LOL.
Sovereign
Vigil
So, now to make your headcanon work, you ignoring the Sovereign and Vigil conversations.
Vigil directly says, that Citadel trap worked for every civilization before Protheans.
So no, everything i said about Citadel trap is in the lore, you just CHOOSE to ignore that.

AI alive or not? Sentient or not?

I'm not sure what's the point of the question. There are different levels of A.I. in the ME universe. Heck, it's questionable whether the Geth are even true A.I. until they get the Reaper upgrade. (Tali questions it in the first game and Raan's comments also indicate that what the Geth were did not count as a full-evolved A.I.) In any case, it may be shackled and still able to follow it's orders. It may not be and never saw a need to change its directive. It doesn't change the fact that it's following its directive.

Edit: quote boxes.

It changes everything. If AI is sentient - it is responsible for it's actions.

[Maxster_]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Of course i have no evidence. And you have no evidence of the opposite.
Leviathan is not a part of the game, and this is a fact. Leviathan was made after fan outrage - this is a fact. EAWare never seen an outrage of this magnitude in their adress - this a fact.
I made a conjecture, and plausible one, seeing as they madly retconning ending to the point of idiocy(evacuation scene) in the EC.
Lair of shadow broker have added "foreshadowing" to the ME2? Or some plot changing information? Some plot changing reveals? No.
Also, foreshadowing - the act of providing vague advance indications; representing beforehand.
from google:
Foreshadowing is the presentation in a work of literature of hints and clues that tip the reader off as to what is to come later in the work.
Foreshadowing is an advance sign or warning of what is to come in the future. The author of a mystery novel might use foreshadowing in the early chapter of his book to give readers an inkling of an impending murder.

Adding a paid DLC to include "foreshadowing" into already finished paid fiction work - it is absurd, and contradicts definition of foreshadowing.
So no, leviathan is no argument to that nonsensical ending. They just took fans agruments about nonsensical absurd, and tried to lessen that nonsense.

Sorry, not my job to prove your speculation. I find it extremely likely the Leviathan DLC was planned from the jump but was merely delayed for the EC. Nothing with the Leviathan changed the ending. All it did was provide greater explanations to it's creation.

I never called it foreshadowing. It isn't, since most of the people who played the DLC did it after beating the game. It's an explanation. You may not like they included an explanation of the Catalyst's origins in DLC, but they did.  Bioware wrote the game. It's their story. If you dismiss their own explanation, then your argument loses meaning.

Nah, it has just made leviathans retarded.

- Let's make an AI to solve problem of AI rebelling against their creators? What could possibly go wrong?
- Sure, i'll start the preparations.
...Some time later...
- Damn! The AI we created, to solve problem of AI rebelling against it's creators, SUDDENLY rebelled against us, it's creators!
- How could that even happen?!

And EAWare tried to put into it some justifications to catalyst nonsense. And, of course, failed again, because ME3 is in irrepairable state.

So, you are just making things up, to justify your headcanon. Taking the Citadel and shutting down relay network was always reaper tactic. This is why they needed Citadel at all. This is what ME1 was all about.
You retconning ME1 with lore to justify crucible nonsense.

I've played ME1 five or six times. I've retconned nothing. The Cycle has gone on for a billion years. All we're aware of is what happened in the Prothean cycle and bits and pieces of the cycle before that. The Leviathans state that the Mass Relays were created after the Reapers to make the cycle more efficient, so the process of the cycle has evolved. Or does that not count because it's Leviathan DLC?

Vigil directly states that trap worked for every civilization.

"Choices" were created by the Reapers. They built the Citadel. All functionality and interface to use the giant battery is built into Citadel, from the beginning.
And it is all in the game. You just headcanoning everything you don't want to see out of the game.

Where's your evidence for this? The Crucible is stated to be a design that has been tinkered with over the cycles, with different cycles adding a piece. And the Catalyst states the Crucible changed it, and provided new options. If it created the choices, why not just act on them? 

Vigil conversation.

The Crucible is stated to be a design that has been tinkered with over the cycles, with different cycles adding a piece.

And this is nonsence. Everyone who knows something about scientific method and engineering will say you the same.
And to sci-fi pretender(ME3) to completely ignore scientific method - well, that just declassifies it into fairytale.

Please show me a battery that change programming of a device in real life.
If you are disregarding scientific method, engineering and common sense, to make your headcanon work - it doesn't make that crucible idea less nonsensical.

Show me a Mass Relay in real life. And how the hell did the scientific method get brought into this?

I've presented my arguments. It's what's stated in the game. You may not like that the Crucible changed the Catalyst, but it is stated in the game that it does. Not headcanon. Explicitly stated.

It's one thing to debate the merits of the lore. It's another to just dismiss it if you don't like the way its presented. If you want to dismiss what's stated in the game itself, then what's the point of even being here? Just so you can go into different threads and call the game and all its elements stupid?

You completely retconning ME1 to make your headcanon work.
Scientific method is brought into this, because ME1 was sci-fi. You are now telling me, that scifi genre have no relation to scientific method?
Dafuq?

[Netsfn1427]

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...


[/quote]
How? By losing access to the Citadel in the first hours of harvest?[/quote]

We don't know when the Crucible plans begin. Nor do we know when the Citadel trap began. There's nothing saying the original designers were unaware of the directive of the Catalyst.
[/quote]
LOL.
Sovereign
Vigil
So, now to make your headcanon work, you ignoring the Sovereign and Vigil conversations.
Vigil directly says, that Citadel trap worked for every civilization before Protheans.
So no, everything i said about Citadel trap is in the lore, you just CHOOSE to ignore that.
[/quote]

ME3 says otherwise. And since this is contradicted by the civilization that created the Catalyst, their opinion means more in game:
.
Leviathan

About 9:30 in. Directly states that the cycle has evolved. The citadel trap could not have existed in the beginning as it relies on species growing to need the Mass Relays. They couldn't need them if they didn't exist.

[quote]

AI alive or not? Sentient or not?

[/quote]

I'm not sure what's the point of the question. There are different levels of A.I. in the ME universe. Heck, it's questionable whether the Geth are even true A.I. until they get the Reaper upgrade. (Tali questions it in the first game and Raan's comments also indicate that what the Geth were did not count as a full-evolved A.I.) In any case, it may be shackled and still able to follow it's orders. It may not be and never saw a need to change its directive. It doesn't change the fact that it's following its directive.

Edit: quote boxes.

[/quote]
It changes everything. If AI is sentient - it is responsible for it's actions.
[/quote]

Why do I care if the Catalyst is responsible for it's actions? I'm not there to put the thing on trial. I'm there to decide what to do with the galaxy. 

Edit: Link

Modifié par Netsfn1427, 07 octobre 2012 - 12:26 .

[Maxster_]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...


How? By losing access to the Citadel in the first hours of harvest?

We don't know when the Crucible plans begin. Nor do we know when the Citadel trap began. There's nothing saying the original designers were unaware of the directive of the Catalyst.

LOL.
Sovereign
Vigil
So, now to make your headcanon work, you ignoring the Sovereign and Vigil conversations.
Vigil directly says, that Citadel trap worked for every civilization before Protheans.
So no, everything i said about Citadel trap is in the lore, you just CHOOSE to ignore that.

ME3 says otherwise. And since this is contradicted by the civilization that created the Catalyst, their opinion means more in game:
.
Leviathan

About 9:30 in. Directly states that the cycle has evolved. The citadel trap could not have existed in the beginning as it relies on species growing to need the Mass Relays. They couldn't need them if they didn't exist.

You do know, what retcon is?
You've just said, that ME3 completely retcons ME1 into oblivion.
And that's, comrade, is precisely the problem.
Why are you saying that one fictional character is more legit than the other?

AI alive or not? Sentient or not?

I'm not sure what's the point of the question. There are different levels of A.I. in the ME universe. Heck, it's questionable whether the Geth are even true A.I. until they get the Reaper upgrade. (Tali questions it in the first game and Raan's comments also indicate that what the Geth were did not count as a full-evolved A.I.) In any case, it may be shackled and still able to follow it's orders. It may not be and never saw a need to change its directive. It doesn't change the fact that it's following its directive.

Edit: quote boxes.

It changes everything. If AI is sentient - it is responsible for it's actions.

Why do I care if the Catalyst is responsible for it's actions? I'm not there to put the thing on trial. I'm there to decide what to do with the galaxy. 

Edit: Link

There was a discussion about catalyst excuse, that reapers are force of nature, and thus irresponsible for their actions, as also catalyst himself.

Modifié par Maxster_, 07 octobre 2012 - 12:36 .

[Netsfn1427]

Maxster_ wrote...

Nah, it has just made leviathans retarded.

- Let's make an AI to solve problem of AI rebelling against their creators? What could possibly go wrong?
- Sure, i'll start the preparations.
...Some time later...
- Damn! The AI we created, to solve problem of AI rebelling against it's creators, SUDDENLY rebelled against us, it's creators!
- How could that even happen?!

And EAWare tried to put into it some justifications to catalyst nonsense. And, of course, failed again, because ME3 is in irrepairable state.

The Leviathans thought they were beyond the reaches of their creations. They were brought down by their own arrogance. This is a common theme in literature. You may not like it, but it's there.

And whether you like the explanation doesn't change the explanation exists.

Vigil directly states that trap worked for every civilization.

Vigil believes this is the case. ME3 shows this is not the case. And Protheans were as arrogant as the Leviathans. It hardly suprises me that they may have been wrong about something that has been taken place over a billion years. We can't even say with complete certainty what happened 65 million years ago.

Vigil conversation.

The Crucible is stated to be a design that has been tinkered with over the cycles, with different cycles adding a piece.

And this is nonsence. Everyone who knows something about scientific method and engineering will say you the same.
And to sci-fi pretender(ME3) to completely ignore scientific method - well, that just declassifies it into fairytale.

I showed in my prior response that Vigil isn't totally accurate. I don't even know what to say if you're bashing a video game for not following the scientific method. 

You completely retconning ME1 to make your headcanon work.
Scientific method is brought into this, because ME1 was sci-fi. You are now telling me, that scifi genre have no relation to scientific method?
Dafuq?

ME1 was pop sci-fi. So was ME2. ME3 is the same as its predecessors in that regard. And to be honest I still don't understand HOW the scientific method relates to a video game. Can you explain how ME1 followed  and ME2 followed it and ME3 didn't?

[Netsfn1427]

Maxster_ wrote...

You do know, what retcon is?
You've just said, that ME3 completely retcons ME1 into oblivion.
And that's, comrade, is precisely the problem.
Why are you saying that one fictional character is more legit than the other?

It's questionable as a retcon at best. It's unrealistic to think the Protheans would have learned the precise development of the cycles over a billion year stretch. It far more likely there are parts they've gotten wrong.

And Vigil is speculating based on what it has learned. It gets a lot right, but gets some things wrong. The Leviathans are more reliable since they actually saw the the start of the cycle.

You may not like the explanation, but it exists. I'm not here to argue what we knew at the end of ME1. I'm discussing what we know at the end of ME3.

There was a discussion about catalyst excuse, that reapers are force of nature, and thus irresponsible for their actions, as also catalyst himself.

Oh okay, but was that in this thread or over anything I said? Because while I think it can be fun to debate whether the Catalyst was a shackled A.I. or not, it doesn't seem relevant to this conversation.

Edit: stupid quote boxes.

Modifié par Netsfn1427, 07 octobre 2012 - 12:42 .

[Maxster_]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Nah, it has just made leviathans retarded.

- Let's make an AI to solve problem of AI rebelling against their creators? What could possibly go wrong?
- Sure, i'll start the preparations.
...Some time later...
- Damn! The AI we created, to solve problem of AI rebelling against it's creators, SUDDENLY rebelled against us, it's creators!
- How could that even happen?!

And EAWare tried to put into it some justifications to catalyst nonsense. And, of course, failed again, because ME3 is in irrepairable state.

The Leviathans thought they were beyond the reaches of their creations. They were brought down by their own arrogance. This is a common theme in literature. You may not like it, but it's there.

And whether you like the explanation doesn't change the explanation exists.

Vigil directly states that trap worked for every civilization.

Vigil believes this is the case. ME3 shows this is not the case. And Protheans were as arrogant as the Leviathans. It hardly suprises me that they may have been wrong about something that has been taken place over a billion years. We can't even say with complete certainty what happened 65 million years ago.

Vigil conversation.

The Crucible is stated to be a design that has been tinkered with over the cycles, with different cycles adding a piece.

And this is nonsence. Everyone who knows something about scientific method and engineering will say you the same.
And to sci-fi pretender(ME3) to completely ignore scientific method - well, that just declassifies it into fairytale.

I showed in my prior response that Vigil isn't totally accurate. I don't even know what to say if you're bashing a video game for not following the scientific method. 

You completely retconning ME1 to make your headcanon work.
Scientific method is brought into this, because ME1 was sci-fi. You are now telling me, that scifi genre have no relation to scientific method?
Dafuq?

ME1 was pop sci-fi. So was ME2. ME3 is the same as its predecessors in that regard. And to be honest I still don't understand HOW the scientific method relates to a video game. Can you explain how ME1 followed  and ME2 followed it and ME3 didn't?

Oh, now it is getting fun.
Why are you think, that one fictional character Leviathan(one that talked) is more legit than the other fictional character Vigil?
Because you WANT it to be that way. Thus you are ignoring parts of the prequel game, that doesn't fit in your headcanon.

As for your last question - synthesis. It is space magic, which directly contradicts human sum of knowledge. In comparison, to say, kinetic weapons, or space suits, or even biotics(they are based on fantasy element).

[Maxster_]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

You do know, what retcon is?
You've just said, that ME3 completely retcons ME1 into oblivion.
And that's, comrade, is precisely the problem.
Why are you saying that one fictional character is more legit than the other?

It's questionable as a retcon at best. It's unrealistic to think the Protheans would have learned the precise development of the cycles over a billion year stretch. It far more likely there are parts they've gotten wrong.

And Vigil is speculating based on what it has learned. It gets a lot right, but gets some things wrong. The Leviathans are more reliable since they actually saw the the start of the cycle.

You may not like the explanation, but it exists. I'm not here to argue what we knew at the end of ME1. I'm discussing what we know at the end of ME3.

This is called headcanon. You just removing everything from prequels that doesn't fit your headcanon.
And at the same time, you accusing me of doing less, like building assumptions and conjectures on everything that in game, not removing anything.

You are removing evidence from the game, and then making some funny statemens like

Nothing in the game supports this. The evidence in the game says that
the Crucible changed the Catalyst and forced it to present you with the
options the Crucible creates. From the Catalyst saying that the Crucible
changed it, to it saying that it can't make the options happen to the
fact it says the Crucible has created new possibilities. It's all
there. Ignore it at your own peril.

Hypocrisy ftw

There was a discussion about catalyst excuse, that reapers are force of nature, and thus irresponsible for their actions, as also catalyst himself.

Oh okay, but was that in this thread or over anything I said? Because while I think it can be fun to debate whether the Catalyst was a shackled A.I. or not, it doesn't seem relevant to this conversation.

Edit: stupid quote boxes.

Well, it is relevant to this conversation. It is about ethics.

Modifié par Maxster_, 07 octobre 2012 - 12:54 .

[Netsfn1427]

Maxster_ wrote...

Oh, now it is getting fun.
Why are you think, that one fictional character Leviathan(one that talked) is more legit than the other fictional character Vigil?
Because you WANT it to be that way. Thus you are ignoring parts of the prequel game, that doesn't fit in your headcanon.

As for your last question - synthesis. It is space magic, which directly contradicts human sum of knowledge. In comparison, to say, kinetic weapons, or space suits, or even biotics(they are based on fantasy element).

I just won't do a pyramid of quote boxes.

Why is the Leviathan's word more valid or Vigil?  Because they were there at the beginnings of the Reapers. They were made into the first Reaper. Vigil was NOT there because the Protheans were not there.

If the Leviathans, who were there, say there were no relays when the cycles began, then there were no relays. Therefore there was no Citadel trap. It's not a matter of wanting it. It's a matter of what's shown in the game. What you say has been contradicted by later testimony, which because of its source, outweighs it.

Now that I've shown why the Leviathans get more say over Vigil, why should Vigil's word be put over the Leviathans? And "Bioware retconned it" isn't an acceptable answer.

I don't like Synthesis as an ending. But it's no more insane than people being melted into goo some how being able to become a sentinent being with the knowledge of the civilizations stored in DNA. That makes zero sense but I accept it, because it's how the lore works.