422 réponses à ce sujet

[wantedman dan]

Davik Kang wrote...

[Subtext: Not here for any actual discussion; has no desire to back up even his own interpretation.
GGs

You'll see that your interpretation of events is far from accurate if you scroll back to even page 15.

Modifié par wantedman dan, 16 octobre 2012 - 01:28 .

[Davik Kang]

Yate wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

At least with Refusal, you're not actually sentencing anyone to death.  Metagame-wise, sure, but in-game, you could full well believe that it would work.

I sentenced the Quarians to death when I helped the geth.

I sentenced some Krogan to death when I rescued the Rachni Queen.

I sentenced Ashley to death when I chose to save Kaidan.

I sentenced my entire squad to death simply by attacking the Collectors.

But they still trusted me to get the job done.

Mass Effect is about making the hard decisions, about how far you are willing to go to get the job done.

The endings reflect this.

Refusal is a copout. Shepard can make all the speeches he wants, doesn`t change the fact that millions of lives depend on him firing the Crucible.

No Shepard would choose Refusal, not after all the sacrifices made, all the lives pledged to the cause.

Yate here seems to understand consequences.  You can't just put your fingers in your ears and hope that Ash and Kaidan might live.  You need to choose.  Unless some of you would actually prefer to let them both die than make the choice.

[MegaSovereign]

The choices would have been a lot more interesting if humanity was the causality in the Destroy ending. Especially when you just got done arguing with TIM about what's best for humanity.

EDIT:

Maybe not full on genocide. But have it to where it cripples humanity's numbers to Quarian-levels.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 16 octobre 2012 - 01:33 .

[Davik Kang]

wantedman dan wrote...
You'll see that your interpretation of events is far from accurate if you scroll back to even page 15.

In other words...
"Question I can answer?  No problem.  Question I can't answer? OH NO!!"  *dan runs away*

Circles.  Ah, circles.  Round and round and round and round.

[wantedman dan]

Davik Kang wrote...

In other words...
"Question I can answer?  No problem.  Question I can't answer? OH NO!!"  *dan runs away*

Circles.  Ah, circles.  Round and round and round and round.

Paranoid delusions sometimes seem like they're reality. 

[Davik Kang]

MegaSovereign wrote...
The choices would have been a lot more interesting if humanity was the causality in the Destroy ending. Especially when you just got done arguing with TIM about what's best for humanity.

Indeed, I've said this before, though I think even if Bioware considered it they would most likely have scapped it.

It would have avoided the whole syn v org point that gets brought up repreatedly though.

[Davik Kang]

wantedman dan wrote...
Paranoid delusions sometimes seem like they're reality. 

GGs troll.  You win.  Arguing without logic must be exhiliarating.  Rest easy now, I won't respond to you again

[wantedman dan]

Davik Kang wrote...

GGs troll.  You win.  Arguing without logic must be exhiliarating.  Rest easy now, I won't respond to you again

Toying with people provides more entertainment when you're not the one with whom the other is toying.

Modifié par wantedman dan, 16 octobre 2012 - 01:38 .

[wantedman dan]

MegaSovereign wrote...

@ bolded part...I don't exactly follow? Destroy still seems to fit that honestly. It's the only choice that doesn't gaurantee my Shepard's death. Not saying that's what drove me to make that decision.

It's not a black and white decision-making process. It's a combination of mathematical and philosphical reasoning that got me to make my choice. And IMO that is the most effective way to make that type of decision.

How? You're making a decision for literally billions of individuals.

I'm just asking you to consider whether or not you truly considered the worth of the lives lost before making the decision. It's easy to say, "Yeah, it sucked," while in all reality moving on with zero consideration, only to that of the "greater good of the galaxy."

[DrGunjah]

Davik Kang wrote...
Look.  I don't really see why you'd want to get involved in this.  But if you want to, I'd say calling the comparison "poor" isn't a great start.

Nonetheless, I'd say the problem with your alternative is that you are insinuating that Hero has another way to stop the meteor.  But the whole premise of the game was that the Crucible was the only thing that could stop the Reapers, and hence why the united species poured massive resources into completing the project, and even made a suicidal run at the Reaper-protected beam on Earth so that someone could get onto the Citadel to activate it.

And if you say, "no there's no other way", then what exactly can you do?  Why does it matter if you believe him or not?

I'm not a native english speaker so I'm sorry if "poor" was too harsh.
I only wanted to point out that from shepards point of view refusal is a valid option. A holokid tells him that he must shoot a tube to destroy the reapers. Isn't that fairly suspicious? That could do anything... make the crucible explode, or the citadel...  Maybe the crucible just needs 30 minutes loading time before it fires and holoboy tries to trick shepard into destroying it before that happens... Of course as a player we now know this is not true, but for shepard there are so many things to consider in that situation.

[robertthebard]

wantedman dan wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...

In other words...
"Question I can answer?  No problem.  Question I can't answer? OH NO!!"  *dan runs away*

Circles.  Ah, circles.  Round and round and round and round.

Paranoid delusions sometimes seem like they're reality. 

You mean like:  Everything the SC says is a lie.  Because, quite frankly, that's a whopper of a delusion.  It runs along with:  All the choices are working for the Reapers, except my choice to do nothing.  Because we all know that just letting them do what they have been doing for millions of years isn't playing into their hands at all, right?

[Davik Kang]

DrGunjah wrote...
I'm not a native english speaker so I'm sorry if "poor" was too harsh.
I only wanted to point out that from shepards point of view refusal is a valid option. A holokid tells him that he must shoot a tube to destroy the reapers. Isn't that fairly suspicious? That could do anything... make the crucible explode, or the citadel...  Maybe the crucible just needs 30 minutes loading time before it fires and holoboy tries to trick shepard into destroying it before that happens... Of course as a player we now know this is not true, but for shepard there are so many things to consider in that situation.

Ok fair enough, sorry I snapped, some threads just get me so perplexed that I end up assuming that every response is an insult.

You're right about it being suspicious.  No doubt.  Anyone that interprets the end as an Indoctrination or similar scenario (like me) is drawn to that conclusion by the suspiciousness of the whole thing.  Now what conclusions you come to regarding that suspicion is up to you.

A number of posters have said that they didn't know Refuse meant giving up.  And in that case, I really have no problem with their decision, but I still don't agree with how they came to that interpretation.

E.g. I previously argued that Refuse was the moral choice, and a way to beat indoctrination, but not the right choice.  Now I know that you'll say "there is no right choice" but I think that there can be a wrong choice.  When I first played, I leaned toward refuse, for no logical reason other than I really couldn't believe what the Kid was saying.  But I thought about it and decided to go forwards, not backwards.  Different players will have different ideas about what's going on at the end, but as a choice, Refuse seems to have no logical reason behind it whatsoever.  The other three options are repulsive in their different ways, but choosing Refuse is essentially to say "no, I won't use the Crucible, it's not right".  So you basically undo all the work that you did over the entire course of the trilogy, other than having succeeded in taking down a couple of Reapers.

The choice may be confusing, but the only possible defence I can see for Refuse is if the player genuinely did not realise that Refuse meant not using the Crucible.  Why you might not realise that, well, maybe you skipped dialogue, maybe you didn't care.  It was explained pretty clearly that Refuse meant turning away.  And even if you thought that the first time, how can you still think it having finished the game?  I don't understand how someone can pick Refuse and, having seen what happens, still believe they made the right choice.

Choices shouldn't be judged on their consequences, but they should be judged on the reasoning behind them.  Hindsight does allow you to see if your reasoning was sound.  Where is there sound reasoning for Refuse?  The only reasoning is, you didn't understand the options you were presented with.

[Dance Craze]

what is refuse? A garbage can?

[AlanC9]

A Shep who thinks the Crucible just needs some warm-up time can just stand there and watch the battle. Pre-EC waiting too long gets the Crucible destroyed; I've heard that timer doesn't exist anymore, but I haven't tested it.

[Davik Kang]

AlanC9 wrote...
A Shep who thinks the Crucible just needs some warm-up time can just stand there and watch the battle. Pre-EC waiting too long gets the Crucible destroyed; I've heard that timer doesn't exist anymore, but I haven't tested it.

Apparently, if you turn away from Destroy after mounting the ramp, the same thing happens, but I haven't actually seen it - just hearsay from a couple of posts.

[DrGunjah]

I still don't see refuse as "giving up". That is in issue of the bad presentation.
Imagine after telling holoboy he should get the **** off, shepard called hackett to blow the citadel (maybe catalyst gets damaged, reapers get disoriented or something), the crucible is a lie, etc. with an epic space battle going on after this scene. We would likely loose anyway, but it wouldn't feel totally pointless. But all we get is shepard standing there like a fool that has pissed his pants and later that time capsule thing.

As for the reasoning behind refuse. There is still no consent what exactly the red, green and blue beams exactly do. There are tons of threads in this forum about this.
Imho it's totally unclear what for example destroy actually does, even from the players perspective. Shepard has much less information and holoboy doesn't want to give him detailed answers. Then, considering the three devices are part of the citadel it's obvious that the reapers or their minions created them. When they can create devices that use the crucibles power in the ways we get presented, there is also the possibility they found a way to use it's power against us.
That's why I don't trust this little mother****er and that's why refuse is a valid option to me.

Modifié par DrGunjah, 16 octobre 2012 - 03:43 .

[MegaSovereign]

wantedman dan wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

@ bolded part...I don't exactly follow? Destroy still seems to fit that honestly. It's the only choice that doesn't gaurantee my Shepard's death. Not saying that's what drove me to make that decision.

It's not a black and white decision-making process. It's a combination of mathematical and philosphical reasoning that got me to make my choice. And IMO that is the most effective way to make that type of decision.

How? You're making a decision for literally billions of individuals.

I'm just asking you to consider whether or not you truly considered the worth of the lives lost before making the decision. It's easy to say, "Yeah, it sucked," while in all reality moving on with zero consideration, only to that of the "greater good of the galaxy."

What? I DID take their lives into consideration. If I could have saved them I would. If you're a saint and you can't make that sort of decision then fine, but don't put words into my mouth to try to make me look inhumane.

Fact of the matter is using the Crucible will save more lives than inaction. No I'm not metagaming. Even if refusal victory was possible there would still be massive casualities on my side.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 16 octobre 2012 - 04:02 .

[wantedman dan]

MegaSovereign wrote...

What? I DID take their lives into consideration. If I could have saved them I would. If you're a saint and you can't make that sort of decision then fine, but don't put words into my mouth to try to make me look inhumane.

Fact of the matter is using the Crucible will save more lives than inaction. No I'm not metagaming. Even if refusal victory was possible there would still be massive casualities on my side.

You're putting words into my mouth at this point; nowhere did I label you as inhumane, merely that your considerations aren't as clearly defined as they may seem.

[Ice Cold J]

I don't know... if I were to do it all over again...
Refuse just seems like a wasted ending to me. I think I STILL would've went with Control, but refuse is very tempting if you don't know what it initially entails.

[Davik Kang]

DrGunjah wrote...
I still don't see refuse as "giving up".

Like I said, it is refusing to use the Crucible and this was never in doubt.

You were already committed to using the Crucible, that is the whole point of ME3.  You never knew what it did, only that it would do something, and that it would end the Reaper threat.

You get to the end; even if it's a trap, what else can you do?  That's why I brought up the meteor thing.  Maybe it's a trap, but if you do nothing, everybody dies.  You have to do something.

But fine.  You refuse.  Everybody dies.  If I had to choose between something bizarre and certain death for everybody, I'd go for the bizarre.  You'd prefer everyone goes down fighting.  The problem is, for me, soldiers are firing guns at the Reapers, and Shepard has the biggest gun of all, right there, ready to fire.  There are a lot of reasons not to fire it.  But there's no other choice, except to put the gun down.  I can't see how anybody would want you to put the gun down.  It means you did give up.  And it means everybody does.

But anyway, I don't think we're gonna be able to convince each other of anything any more.  I'll leave with one thing: if you pick Refuse, you don't get the game completion achievements.  Not any of them.  Not Legend.  Not Long Service Medal.  Nothing.  Read into it what you will.  You can point that at Bioware if you like.

[The Twilight God]

Davik Kang wrote...

Ah, wantedman dan, dan, dan.

You seem to want to contribute to this discussion but have still refused to answer a basic question that goes to the core of your point. 

I see I'm not the only one he avoids. He simply chooses to believe what he wills regardless of evidence to the contrary. He isn;t interested in debate or truth. He is only interested in maitaining his pre-conceived ideas.  He is the guy who still believes the world is flat and has four corners. He'll be doing a bad internet troll inpersonation and try to mask his broken ego with with smilies. soon enough. 

[wantedman dan]

The Twilight God wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...

Ah, wantedman dan, dan, dan.

You seem to want to contribute to this discussion but have still refused to answer a basic question that goes to the core of your point. 

I see I'm not the only one he avoids. He simply chooses to believe what he wills regardless of evidence to the contrary. He isn;t interested in debate or truth. He is only interested in maitaining his pre-conceived ideas.  He is the guy who still believes the world is flat and has four corners. He'll be doing a bad internet troll inpersonation and try to mask his broken ego with with smilies. soon enough. 

The butthurt flows freely.

Gooooooooood.