543 réponses à ce sujet

[Maxster_]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Perfectly and stupidly stated.  Everyone joined up with you in the final assault to use the crucible.  They did not know what it did exactly, only that it would stop the Reapers, and they all were fine with that plan.  Pre-space flight species did not have a vote but they were outnumbered anyway.  The vast majority of galaxy was prepared to use the crucible and live with the consequences, including synthesis. 
...

Great totalitarian attitude. I like that
Keep it up, that reminds me of putin's bootlickers so much

Hmm, someone who doesn't know the meaning of democracy.  Now guess how much I value your opinion.

LOL.
That authoritharian decision by shepard, there was no referendum. Shepard was never elected to be a president of th galaxy. So don't tell me that crap(=synthesis) was approved by majority.
Also, minorities have rights, you know. If minority must completely obey majority decision, than we get bolsheviks(democratic centralism).
So much for "democracy expert"

Let me educate you since you seem to have failed any civics or government class you have taken.  In a Democratic Republic like the United States, all of the electorate vote on someone to lead, like the President, or in ME3 case, Shepard.  Everyone willingly joined under your command and was willing to live with your plans and decisions.  That is democracy in action.  If you don't agree with President Obama, it doesn't matter because the majority voted him in the lead so he is the leader.  It is not totalitarianism because you do not like what he did.  

Please specify where there was elections for a Shepard as a galaxy president.

Point 2.  In North Carolina they had a Constitution Amendment vote defining Marriage as between a man and a woman to ban gays from being able to get married.  The majority passed that amendment which cut off rights for a minority.  It was completely democratic and it completely effed over the minority but you still have to live with the decision as a minority.  

This is the reality of how government works not your insane idealism that means everyone must agree for it to be right.  You also a flagrantly ignoring that everyone joined under Shepard to use the Crucible when the game explicitly says it so you can make a completely erroneous argument.  Please take some classes on Government or just simply look at the news because your ignorance is staggering.

You do know, that USA is not the only country in the world, right? Russia, for example, have a direct presidential election, which is obviously more democratic than USA system? Well, it's implemented badly, and there is story about dependant courts and all that. But, there is also France with alike system.

Do you know about universal declaration of the human rights imposed by UN?
I'll cite that for you

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this
Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex,
language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction
shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or
international status of the country or territory to which a person
belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under
any other limitation of sovereignty.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.


 All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Link

How many of that forced cyborgizations breaks?

As for idealism...
Comrade, you clearly have no idea about world history in context of human rights. abolitionism, revolitions, trade unions - they are all idealistic.

As for a "majority" claim...
Do you know, that galaxy have 200-400 billions of stars? How do you know, that the current cycle galactic civilization is majority? You don't

Modifié par Maxster_, 04 octobre 2012 - 04:25 .

[SneakyDuc]

There is some type of huge misconception of systhesis. Firstly the notion that systhesis is inherently evil or good makes no sense it is an event of change and there is no indication that somehow people are no longer capable of individual thought or making choices. There is no reason to think that somehow everyone was indocternated. Secondly that some people think that making the choice to enhance the DNA of every being is a evil idea also makes no sense. If someone said hey I found this switch and it can make us all healthier stronger better and allow all of us to reach our fulliest potential. You wouldn't want that? Now its that or the death of millions how is that a difficult choice at all.

[AlanC9]

grey_wind wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

He shuts the Crucible down if you refuse his options.

So you refuse to use the Crucible and he.... doesn't let you use the Crucible?

No, I'm refuting your point that he cannot control the Crucible. If he has the ability to turn the damn thing off, it stands to reason that he may be able to control it in other ways as well.

And my point was that he's only able to shut down the Crucible at Shepard's command. That the Catalyst would be connected to the Crucible isn't exactly a surprise. He doesn't control anything in the endings; only Shepard does.

Of course, you can believe that he's got a much higher level of independence and agency than that. But then you're going down poor Getorex's route; headcanon something that isn't actually in the game, and then find that the stuff you're headcanoning makes the game worse. (Were you around here when Getorex was doing his Planet Incestus threads? Same thing, but at least the EC bailed him out of that one)

[What a Succulent Ass]

Festae9 wrote...

gag flex.  i feel goonow tho... 

Yo, regularly consuming nasty ass images will make anyone sick, dogg.

[movieguyabw]

AlanC9 wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

He shuts the Crucible down if you refuse his options.

So you refuse to use the Crucible and he.... doesn't let you use the Crucible?

No, I'm refuting your point that he cannot control the Crucible. If he has the ability to turn the damn thing off, it stands to reason that he may be able to control it in other ways as well.

And my point was that he's only able to shut down the Crucible at Shepard's command. That the Catalyst would be connected to the Crucible isn't exactly a surprise. He doesn't control anything in the endings; only Shepard does.

Of course, you can believe that he's got a much higher level of independence and agency than that. But then you're going down poor Getorex's route; headcanon something that isn't actually in the game, and then find that the stuff you're headcanoning makes the game worse. (Were you around here when Getorex was doing his Planet Incestus threads? Same thing, but at least the EC bailed him out of that one)

Well, for starters, everyone headcanons parts of the story that aren't actually mentioned in the game.  It's part of the roleplaying experience.  You headcanon a bit about Shepard's past, and personality (things change as you discover more about the character) and in the interim of the stories, you have an idea of what Shepard and their crew would be doing.  You may not go so far as to say "Shepard and Garrus stockpile weapons on Thessia, waiting for the Reapers to show" but you have a general idea of  "oh, after ME2, Shepard is preparing for the Reaper invasion.  Probably still trying to convince people, of the threat.  Most people still probably don't believe him" that sort of thing.

I'm pretty sure what you meant by those threads was that many believed (before the extended cut) that the galactic civilization would be cut off from each other.  Most species would be located on Earth; Turians and Quarians would die off, from lack of food, and the other races would basically fight it out for survival.  Alternately, on the random planet the Normandy crashed on; either Tali and Garrus will die - or they'll be the only survivors.  This was a widespread belief - because originally the evidence pointed to the Mass Relays not being repairable; so galactic travel would not be possible, in any of the endings (provided the destruction of the Relays did not wipe everyone out)

Until the Extended Cut was released and *changed* the ends (it's made apparent that the Relays can be fixed) this was the only real logical outcome for what we were presented initially.

Now back to my point - there's nothing wrong with headcanon.  Especially in an RPG.  Heck, you need to headcanon in an RPG, a bit.


As for the Catalyst being in control of the Crucible - he also opens the pathways to you, in order for you to make your choice.

But the important thing is when asked, I'm fairly certain he says he "controls" the Reapers.  Meaning he can tell them to stop at any time.  Instead, he tells Shepard to make a choice between 3 possible solutions - *not* to the Galaxy vs. Reaper conflict;  but to the Organic vs Synthetic conflict.  Understand?

The choices at the end are primarily designed to fix *his* problem.  Not ours.

An outcome primarily designed to fix *our* problem would be to convince the Catalyst to shut down the Reapers (which he says he controls - not outside his power).

Edit:  *that* is why every choice can be looked at as a failure for Shepard.

Modifié par movieguyabw, 04 octobre 2012 - 05:04 .

[Hey]

Random Jerkface wrote...

Festae9 wrote...

gag flex.  i feel goonow tho... 

Yo, regularly consuming nasty ass images will make anyone sick, dogg.

hold up...  so that Daave Chapelle gif 'blowin A you posted back in time was sick tho so that makes you like me - a cik mo fuka?! right!  RIGHT!?   

or a hyp -O-crite, yo - but I now u arent a beetch like that/  Hey J face chekc this out - www.youtube.com/watch

"when i hear yo **** I push eject.."

[Maxster_]

SneakyDuc wrote...

There is some type of huge misconception of systhesis. Firstly the notion that systhesis is inherently evil or good makes no sense it is an event of change and there is no indication that somehow people are no longer capable of individual thought or making choices. There is no reason to think that somehow everyone was indocternated. Secondly that some people think that making the choice to enhance the DNA of every being is a evil idea also makes no sense. If someone said hey I found this switch and it can make us all healthier stronger better and allow all of us to reach our fulliest potential. You wouldn't want that? Now its that or the death of millions how is that a difficult choice at all.

Synthesis is the goal of the reapers.
Forced cyborgization is very evil. This choice alone disregards everything humanity fought for in a context of human rights and freedom.

[What a Succulent Ass]

Festae9 wrote...

hold up...  so that Daave Chapelle gif 'blowin A you posted back in time was sick tho so that makes you like me - a cik mo fuka?! right!  RIGHT!?   

or a hyp -O-crite, yo - but I now u arent a beetch like that/ 

...Wat?

[Hey]

Random Jerkface wrote...

Festae9 wrote...

hold up...  so that Daave Chapelle gif 'blowin A you posted back in time was sick tho so that makes you like me - a cik mo fuka?! right!  RIGHT!?   

or a hyp -O-crite, yo - but I now u arent a beetch like that/ 

...Wat?

u couldnt relate?!... "stretch out yo legs.."

www.youtube.com/watch
....
mezamarized...  

Modifié par Festae9, 04 octobre 2012 - 05:28 .

[SneakyDuc]

Maxster_ wrote...

SneakyDuc wrote...

There is some type of huge misconception of systhesis. Firstly the notion that systhesis is inherently evil or good makes no sense it is an event of change and there is no indication that somehow people are no longer capable of individual thought or making choices. There is no reason to think that somehow everyone was indocternated. Secondly that some people think that making the choice to enhance the DNA of every being is a evil idea also makes no sense. If someone said hey I found this switch and it can make us all healthier stronger better and allow all of us to reach our fulliest potential. You wouldn't want that? Now its that or the death of millions how is that a difficult choice at all.

Synthesis is the goal of the reapers.
Forced cyborgization is very evil. This choice alone disregards everything humanity fought for in a context of human rights and freedom.

Assimilation is the goal of the reapers the destruction of the individual and the identity. Humanity fought for survival and freedom. There is no loss of freedom with synthesis. No loss of humanity you are still you. You're not changing the person so much as you are changing the enviroment that is around the person.

[Maxster_]

SneakyDuc wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

SneakyDuc wrote...

There is some type of huge misconception of systhesis. Firstly the notion that systhesis is inherently evil or good makes no sense it is an event of change and there is no indication that somehow people are no longer capable of individual thought or making choices. There is no reason to think that somehow everyone was indocternated. Secondly that some people think that making the choice to enhance the DNA of every being is a evil idea also makes no sense. If someone said hey I found this switch and it can make us all healthier stronger better and allow all of us to reach our fulliest potential. You wouldn't want that? Now its that or the death of millions how is that a difficult choice at all.

Synthesis is the goal of the reapers.
Forced cyborgization is very evil. This choice alone disregards everything humanity fought for in a context of human rights and freedom.

Assimilation is the goal of the reapers the destruction of the individual and the identity. Humanity fought for survival and freedom. There is no loss of freedom with synthesis. No loss of humanity you are still you. You're not changing the person so much as you are changing the enviroment that is around the person.

And that is where you wrong.
Telling about how "good" and and "beneficial" forced cyborgization was, doesn't change the fact that it was forced. Such level of intrusion completely disregards everything humanity fought for throughout it's history in context of freedom and human rights.

[inversevideo]

David7204 wrote...

I think that's a bit of an oversimplification of...Renegade-ness...

[Omega2079]

If it were easy to be paragon, it would be easy for everyone regardless of alignment.

[drayfish]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Let me educate you since you seem to have failed any civics or government class you have taken.  In a Democratic Republic like the United States, all of the electorate vote on someone to lead, like the President, or in ME3 case, Shepard.  Everyone willingly joined under your command and was willing to live with your plans and decisions.  That is democracy in action.  If you don't agree with President Obama, it doesn't matter because the majority voted him in the lead so he is the leader.  It is not totalitarianism because you do not like what he did.  

Point 2.  In North Carolina they had a Constitution Amendment vote defining Marriage as between a man and a woman to ban gays from being able to get married.  The majority passed that amendment which cut off rights for a minority.  It was completely democratic and it completely effed over the minority but you still have to live with the decision as a minority.  

This is the reality of how government works not your insane idealism that means everyone must agree for it to be right.  You also a flagrantly ignoring that everyone joined under Shepard to use the Crucible when the game explicitly says it so you can make a completely erroneous argument.  Please take some classes on Government or just simply look at the news because your ignorance is staggering.

I'm assuming that you are being flippant or contrarian here (your 'Let me educate you...' tone suggests as much), because otherwise this post sounds a little crazy...

But just in case you're serious (and it seems odd to have to say this): a President is not a King from the Middle Ages.

They still answer to a rule of law, and do not have permission to violate to will of the populace.  They must uphold the Constitution of their nation and its Bill of Rights, and obey the laws voted by their constituents.  They are but one part of one branch of government - not some Orwellian nightmare figurehead decreeing from on high how life is to be led.

A President must answer to his fellow elected officials, to the people, to the press.  He does not ever get to flip a switch that says 'Everyone has gills now', watch his synthesise ray shoot across the land, and demand that we swim in the sea.

You seem to be mixing up your definition of 'President' with 'Dictator' - and we do not like our Presidents to get ahead of themselves and overstep their power.

...I believe Nixon said something to that effect, no?

Shepard is a soldier thrust into a horrifying situation.  You may want to embrace that scenario and say he/she was 'doing what needed to be done', but equating Shepard's actions in their farcical moral conundrum with anything that a President does or has power over is nonsensical.

[CastledCard]

No no no no no no no no... I did destroy

[BrookerT]

The endings are neither Paragon or Renegade, they are morally ambiguous. Each has it's advantages or disadvantages
*Destroy - Reapers are gone for good, possible genocide of Geth, murder of EDI
*Control - Reapers are no longer a threat, Shepard becomes a leader, Shepard has a chance of going Catalyst
*Synthesis - Everyone is changed for the better, Reapers are given the chance to make amends, however is genetic violation on a macro scale
*Refuse - The reapers are defeated without the need for the crucible or starchilds inteference, Shepard's galactic era is harvested.

Mass Effect has never really had difficult choices, most of them have been black or white with some being grey. It is an actual Moral dilemma, your concept of Renegade is different from my concept of Renegade, your concept of a good ending is different from my concept of a good ending. The Paragon or Renegade is irrelevant, its down to how you, your Shepard wants to proceed, not some arbitrary notion of duplicit morality.

[knightnblu]

I usually play a paragon character with the occasional renegade option tossed in when it makes sense to do so. But the ending of ME3 caused me to take the renegade option as the best available option. I don't know or trust the catalyst, he had been doing his best to kill me since ME and I have no reason to trust him now. He is an insane AI and you can't reason with crazy so I took the "blow him to hell" option as the best solution presented.

As such, I don't believe that the endings favored any playing style. We didn't get what we had been told to expect and just had to deal with what they handed us. Further, renegade was toned down from what it had been before. In ME2 you could essentially channel Darth Vader, but that wasn't true with ME3.

While I can certainly understand your frustration, the truth of the matter is that very few of us got what we wanted in the ending.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

BrookerT wrote...

The endings are neither Paragon or Renegade, they are morally ambiguous. Each has it's advantages or disadvantages
*Destroy - Reapers are gone for good, possible genocide of Geth, murder of EDI
*Control - Reapers are no longer a threat, Shepard becomes a leader, Shepard has a chance of going Catalyst
*Synthesis - Everyone is changed for the better, Reapers are given the chance to make amends, however is genetic violation on a macro scale
*Refuse - The reapers are defeated without the need for the crucible or starchilds inteference, Shepard's galactic era is harvested.

Mass Effect has never really had difficult choices, most of them have been black or white with some being grey. It is an actual Moral dilemma, your concept of Renegade is different from my concept of Renegade, your concept of a good ending is different from my concept of a good ending. The Paragon or Renegade is irrelevant, its down to how you, your Shepard wants to proceed, not some arbitrary notion of duplicit morality.

That was...so beautiful.

[N7 Lisbeth]

Yes, OP, I am of the opinion that Paragons have the worst of the moral quandary with the EC endings.

I "get" that war isn't supposed to be easy, that there are hard decisions, but the endings do not present "hard decisions." They present options with artificial penalties to force the player to Bioware's golden answer -- because they knew we'd never do it. I resent their meddling, I resent the penalties, and to be honest, I resent the endings.

Too much thematic matter (unity, diversity, etc) that is well-established throughout the Mass Effect series (games, books, and comics) is broken by the endings. That ending was the worst in sci-fi history, is definitively "bad storytelling", and it was all on purpose to keep us "speculating" or talking about the game long after it was done.

That's right. This entire mess is a PR stunt. Hooray, marketing! Way to ruin a franchise for publicity. This is a direct quote from Casey Hudson (speaking to Digital Trends): ""I didn't want the game to be forgettable, and even right down to the sort of polarizing reaction that the ends have had with people-debating what the endings mean and what's going to happen next, and what situation are the characters left in." Full article here.

Modifié par N7 Lisbeth, 04 octobre 2012 - 06:54 .

[Maxster_]

drayfish wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Let me educate you since you seem to have failed any civics or government class you have taken.  In a Democratic Republic like the United States, all of the electorate vote on someone to lead, like the President, or in ME3 case, Shepard.  Everyone willingly joined under your command and was willing to live with your plans and decisions.  That is democracy in action.  If you don't agree with President Obama, it doesn't matter because the majority voted him in the lead so he is the leader.  It is not totalitarianism because you do not like what he did.  

Point 2.  In North Carolina they had a Constitution Amendment vote defining Marriage as between a man and a woman to ban gays from being able to get married.  The majority passed that amendment which cut off rights for a minority.  It was completely democratic and it completely effed over the minority but you still have to live with the decision as a minority.  

This is the reality of how government works not your insane idealism that means everyone must agree for it to be right.  You also a flagrantly ignoring that everyone joined under Shepard to use the Crucible when the game explicitly says it so you can make a completely erroneous argument.  Please take some classes on Government or just simply look at the news because your ignorance is staggering.

I'm assuming that you are being flippant or contrarian here (your 'Let me educate you...' tone suggests as much), because otherwise this post sounds a little crazy...

But just in case you're serious (and it seems odd to have to say this): a President is not a King from the Middle Ages.

They still answer to a rule of law, and do not have permission to violate to will of the populace.  They must uphold the Constitution of their nation and its Bill of Rights, and obey the laws voted by their constituents.  They are but one part of one branch of government - not some Orwellian nightmare figurehead decreeing from on high how life is to be led.

A President must answer to his fellow elected officials, to the people, to the press.  He does not ever get to flip a switch that says 'Everyone has gills now', watch his synthesise ray shoot across the land, and demand that we swim in the sea.

You seem to be mixing up your definition of 'President' with 'Dictator' - and we do not like our Presidents to get ahead of themselves and overstep their power.

...I believe Nixon said something to that effect, no?

Shepard is a soldier thrust into a horrifying situation.  You may want to embrace that scenario and say he/she was 'doing what needed to be done', but equating Shepard's actions in their farcical moral conundrum with anything that a President does or has power over is nonsensical.

Well, as i said, such a nice totalitarian attitude Reminds me of Putin's demagogy.

[Maxster_]

BrookerT wrote...

The endings are neither Paragon or Renegade, they are morally ambiguous. Each has it's advantages or disadvantages
*Destroy - Reapers are gone for good, possible genocide of Geth, murder of EDI
*Control - Reapers are no longer a threat, Shepard becomes a leader, Shepard has a chance of going Catalyst
*Synthesis - Everyone is changed for the better, Reapers are given the chance to make amends, however is genetic violation on a macro scale
*Refuse - The reapers are defeated without the need for the crucible or starchilds inteference, Shepard's galactic era is harvested.

Mass Effect has never really had difficult choices, most of them have been black or white with some being grey. It is an actual Moral dilemma, your concept of Renegade is different from my concept of Renegade, your concept of a good ending is different from my concept of a good ending. The Paragon or Renegade is irrelevant, its down to how you, your Shepard wants to proceed, not some arbitrary notion of duplicit morality.

Real choice of ME3 is to surrendering unconditionally to an enemy's whim, or not.
And both well.. fails.

[SneakyDuc]

Maxster_ wrote...

SneakyDuc wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

SneakyDuc wrote...

There is some type of huge misconception of systhesis. Firstly the notion that systhesis is inherently evil or good makes no sense it is an event of change and there is no indication that somehow people are no longer capable of individual thought or making choices. There is no reason to think that somehow everyone was indocternated. Secondly that some people think that making the choice to enhance the DNA of every being is a evil idea also makes no sense. If someone said hey I found this switch and it can make us all healthier stronger better and allow all of us to reach our fulliest potential. You wouldn't want that? Now its that or the death of millions how is that a difficult choice at all.

Synthesis is the goal of the reapers.
Forced cyborgization is very evil. This choice alone disregards everything humanity fought for in a context of human rights and freedom.

Assimilation is the goal of the reapers the destruction of the individual and the identity. Humanity fought for survival and freedom. There is no loss of freedom with synthesis. No loss of humanity you are still you. You're not changing the person so much as you are changing the enviroment that is around the person.

And that is where you wrong.
Telling about how "good" and and "beneficial" forced cyborgization was, doesn't change the fact that it was forced. Such level of intrusion completely disregards everything humanity fought for throughout it's history in context of freedom and human rights.

I never said that it was good or beneficial that depends on the individual. Synthesis does not take away freedom or rights. Freedom is self determined and rights are determined by society. Only refuse has the ending in which the self and society are ultimately destoryed. The rest are simply altered there is nothing to suggest that synthesis destories the individual that because of synthesis that humans are suddenly less human or that they are incapable of making their own decisions. At the end of synthesis people still have rights and they are still free. All the endings are massive intrusions to the enviroment and no ending returns the enviroment back to the originial state.

[Maxster_]

SneakyDuc wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

SneakyDuc wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

SneakyDuc wrote...

There is some type of huge misconception of systhesis. Firstly the notion that systhesis is inherently evil or good makes no sense it is an event of change and there is no indication that somehow people are no longer capable of individual thought or making choices. There is no reason to think that somehow everyone was indocternated. Secondly that some people think that making the choice to enhance the DNA of every being is a evil idea also makes no sense. If someone said hey I found this switch and it can make us all healthier stronger better and allow all of us to reach our fulliest potential. You wouldn't want that? Now its that or the death of millions how is that a difficult choice at all.

Synthesis is the goal of the reapers.
Forced cyborgization is very evil. This choice alone disregards everything humanity fought for in a context of human rights and freedom.

Assimilation is the goal of the reapers the destruction of the individual and the identity. Humanity fought for survival and freedom. There is no loss of freedom with synthesis. No loss of humanity you are still you. You're not changing the person so much as you are changing the enviroment that is around the person.

And that is where you wrong.
Telling about how "good" and and "beneficial" forced cyborgization was, doesn't change the fact that it was forced. Such level of intrusion completely disregards everything humanity fought for throughout it's history in context of freedom and human rights.

I never said that it was good or beneficial that depends on the individual. Synthesis does not take away freedom or rights. Freedom is self determined and rights are determined by society. Only refuse has the ending in which the self and society are ultimately destoryed. The rest are simply altered there is nothing to suggest that synthesis destories the individual that because of synthesis that humans are suddenly less human or that they are incapable of making their own decisions. At the end of synthesis people still have rights and they are still free. All the endings are massive intrusions to the enviroment and no ending returns the enviroment back to the originial state.

You seem to not understand my point at all.
Read the universal declaration of the human rights for starters.
The fact that synthesis is forced, alone, is enough.

Freedom is self determined and rights are determined by society. Only
refuse has the ending in which the self and society
are ultimately destoryed. The rest are simply altered there is nothing
to suggest that synthesis destories the individual that because of
synthesis that humans are suddenly less human or that they are incapable
of making their own decisions

*facepalm*
You do realise that it is same argumentation, with which worst crimes against humanity were committed?

P.S. You do realize, that sentient beings are not environment?
Damn, that is not even funny anymore, you are a real monster.

Modifié par Maxster_, 04 octobre 2012 - 07:17 .

[Applepie_Svk]

Paragon Shep gets refusal ending/not mentioned that there is one of the best speech since first ME/, as a fu to your ideals dude .!..

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 04 octobre 2012 - 07:25 .