422 réponses à ce sujet

[Cainne Chapel]

Ya'll two should just agree both were bad and horrible and awful and showcasing the worse aspects of the humanity.

no need to argue which one was worse, they were both horrible

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

Ya'll two should just agree both were bad and horrible and awful and showcasing the worse aspects of the humanity.

no need to argue which one was worse, they were both horrible

I'm trying, but Maxter won't listen.

[Cainne Chapel]

DirtyMouthSally wrote...

inversevideo wrote...
*snip not meta gaming*

From a non-meta pov you may have a point.  That's some really bad luck for Shepard and the galaxy for refusing.

Shepard:  Wait a second, there's got to be another way, what about...
Catalyst:  SO BE IT!
Shepard: 


If you think about it, these choices are laughable, especially synthesis and control.  The extended cut just makes it worse.  You've got Shepard becoming an overlord, supposedly benelovent.  You could say that Shepard becomes what was fought against throughout the series, the new catalyst! 

Or you have hybrids walking around with glowing eyes.  These choices don't deserve to be debated.  They should be laughed at by everyone here!

Not to mention BW has a way of doing that in a lot of games that a 2nd 3rd or 4th option becomes available right at or near the end.

Happened in Dragon Age with the whole staying alive despite the bit that the warden usually dies with the final blow thing that usually happens, morrigan gave you that "out" twisted girl that she was....  god i love her

Or in KoToR where youc ould suddenly go darkside if i recall.

Its at least a great way to play with the options even if it doesnt make much thematic sense in the game.

Personally as much as I like Destroy, Control was fun too (I am your overlord! mwahahaha) and even synthesis has its merits I reckon...everybody gets a little bit of shepard in them

[Village_Idiot]

Cainne Chapel wrote...
...everybody gets a little bit of shepard in them

[inversevideo]

T-Raks wrote...

inversevideo wrote...

...
Those who chose refuse do so for very valid reasons, and not to eff the galaxy.
If you are not meta-gaming then refuse is a valid call.

No, it's not, because how can Shepard be so full of himself (not meant personal) that he is that delusional that he thinks he can leave a clear shot to destroy the Reapers on the table when the harvesting already has gone on for millions of years as far as we know? How can anyone think, that we have that luxury? If you have one shot, you take it! Anything else is an epic fail.

I mean, I'm with you if we had searched for a back-up plan during the game - a plan we might be convinced of before we go on with the crucible - to build that refuse ending up. Then you would've a case. But we didn't, so there is no valid refuse option. The whole point of the crucicble is that anything else that any cycle before came up with didn't succeed. In that situation with the shot right in front of you to say "Nah, let's get back in the huddle - Garrrus, you alive, you have any idea? Liara? Anyone?" is dumb.

If you fear that finishing your job - using the crucible - will fail, you still try it. YOU have that shot in that situation. No one else. If it really fails, they don't need you in the huddle. This was the plan you were the spike of, if that plan fails, because your fear that the little starbrat is lying to you proves right, there are others left, that have to come up with a new plan. But you cannot justify not taking this ultra-rare possibiity at defeating the Reapers with one shot.

And the added refuse ending is no middle-finger, it's not even a new ending, it just showed what was implied before: that our cycle is doomed if we don't use the crucible. That should have been clear to anyone, that's why I guess it wasn't included from the beginning. So I see it the other way around: when people choose refuse, they want to give the crucible/catalyst the middle finger though they should know that they are doing wrong for "our" cycle.

I hear you. I do. But I wonder, if Shepard's attempt had been successful, and her reasoning accepted by Starkid, and it left or self terminated, would you feel the same way?

The only reason you feel that refuse is wrong, is because it failed.
Had refuse succeeded you would be wondering why anyone would make another choice.

Essentially, it is not possible to condemn refuse, as a choice, unless you know where that choice will lead.
If you do not use foreknowledge then refuse is valid. You cannot know that reasoning with it will have disastrous results.

You have been fighting Reapers, in one form or another, for three years.
Suddenly, you are introduced to an AI that tells you it controls the Reapers and it pwns you.
Period. All your fussing, with the Crucible did was present it with new possibilities, but pwns the Crucible as well. About these new possibilities, you can choose to destroy Reapers, but genocide the Geth, you can Infect organic life with Reaper nanites, or you can die, but you knowledge will be passed to a new AI, a new Catalyst that will lead the Reapers. But you have more hope than you know.

Okay, say I believe Starkid, it can see new possibilities, and I have more hope than I know.
So, why would I not believe it and try to reason with it? I've known this Starkid, for all of 5 minutes?
I would not take the opportunity to try and communicate? To reason with it? No?
Based on a 5-10 minute conversation, with the harvester, I would just close my eyes and use the force?

[Cainne Chapel]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...

Ya'll two should just agree both were bad and horrible and awful and showcasing the worse aspects of the humanity.

no need to argue which one was worse, they were both horrible

I'm trying, but Maxter won't listen.

Well we just have to all agree history is never kind, its a litany of war and atrocites against fellow man and its not going to change anytime soon until we evolve past it...which I dont see happening short of an ELE....like real reapers or something

[Hanako Ikezawa]

DirtyMouthSally wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...
Those are better than the genocides of varying degree that Destroy and Refuse are.

Maybe to you they are.

Edit:  And you missed my point entirely.

I got what you were going for, but I agree with Synthesis so didn't get the reaction you thought I would.

[Cainne Chapel]

Shadrach 88 wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...
...everybody gets a little bit of shepard in them

"Hold on folks..... Here's SHEPARD!"  Everyone hears as they are bathed in green light

[Maxster_]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...

Ya'll two should just agree both were bad and horrible and awful and showcasing the worse aspects of the humanity.

no need to argue which one was worse, they were both horrible

I'm trying, but Maxter won't listen.

Of course not. I prefer truth, not alteration of it.
"Necessity" is a horrific, terrifying word. We, russians, know that too well.

P.S. Well, I stop now, i already stated my position on topic.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...

Ya'll two should just agree both were bad and horrible and awful and showcasing the worse aspects of the humanity.

no need to argue which one was worse, they were both horrible

I'm trying, but Maxter won't listen.

Well we just have to all agree history is never kind, its a litany of war and atrocites against fellow man and its not going to change anytime soon until we evolve past it...which I dont see happening short of an ELE....like real reapers or something

Disasters, sadly, are the best(as in most efficient) way to unite people.

[munnellyladt]

Because you like getting slaped in the face?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Maxster_ wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...

Ya'll two should just agree both were bad and horrible and awful and showcasing the worse aspects of the humanity.

no need to argue which one was worse, they were both horrible

I'm trying, but Maxter won't listen.

Of course not. I prefer truth, not alteration of it.
"Necessity" is a horrific, terrifying word. We, russians, know that too well.

P.S. Well, I stop now, i already stated my position on topic.

I was right, you are Russian.

[Village_Idiot]

inversevideo wrote...

I hear you. I do. But I wonder, if Shepard's attempt had been successful, and her reasoning accepted by Starkid, and it left or self terminated, would you feel the same way?

The only reason you feel that refuse is wrong, is because it failed.
Had refuse succeeded you would be wondering why anyone would make another choice.

Essentially, it is not possible to condemn refuse, as a choice, unless you know where that choice will lead.
If you do not use foreknowledge then refuse is valid. You cannot know that reasoning with it will have disastrous results.

You have been fighting Reapers, in one form or another, for three years.
Suddenly, you are introduced to an AI that tells you it controls the Reapers and it pwns you.
Period. All your fussing, with the Crucible did was present it with new possibilities, but pwns the Crucible as well. About these new possibilities, you can choose to destroy Reapers, but genocide the Geth, you can Infect organic life with Reaper nanites, or you can die, but you knowledge will be passed to a new AI, a new Catalyst that will lead the Reapers. But you have more hope than you know.

Okay, say I believe Starkid, it can see new possibilities, and I have more hope than I know.
So, why would I not believe it and try to reason with it? I've known this Starkid, for all of 5 minutes?
I would not take the opportunity to try and communicate? To reason with it? No?
Based on a 5-10 minute conversation, with the harvester, I would just close my eyes and use the force?

See my previous post. It's an entirely valid point, but given Shepard's choice of action, it doesn't seem to be one that s/he shares.

Modifié par Shadrach 88, 13 octobre 2012 - 08:29 .

[Eterna]

You chose it because you're a petty spiteful person who's unwilling to sacrifice a part of themselves to save everyone they love.

[T-Raks]

inversevideo wrote...

T-Raks wrote...

inversevideo wrote...

...
Those who chose refuse do so for very valid reasons, and not to eff the galaxy.
If you are not meta-gaming then refuse is a valid call.

No, it's not, because how can Shepard be so full of himself (not meant personal) that he is that delusional that he thinks he can leave a clear shot to destroy the Reapers on the table when the harvesting already has gone on for millions of years as far as we know? How can anyone think, that we have that luxury? If you have one shot, you take it! Anything else is an epic fail.

I mean, I'm with you if we had searched for a back-up plan during the game - a plan we might be convinced of before we go on with the crucible - to build that refuse ending up. Then you would've a case. But we didn't, so there is no valid refuse option. The whole point of the crucicble is that anything else that any cycle before came up with didn't succeed. In that situation with the shot right in front of you to say "Nah, let's get back in the huddle - Garrrus, you alive, you have any idea? Liara? Anyone?" is dumb.

If you fear that finishing your job - using the crucible - will fail, you still try it. YOU have that shot in that situation. No one else. If it really fails, they don't need you in the huddle. This was the plan you were the spike of, if that plan fails, because your fear that the little starbrat is lying to you proves right, there are others left, that have to come up with a new plan. But you cannot justify not taking this ultra-rare possibiity at defeating the Reapers with one shot.

And the added refuse ending is no middle-finger, it's not even a new ending, it just showed what was implied before: that our cycle is doomed if we don't use the crucible. That should have been clear to anyone, that's why I guess it wasn't included from the beginning. So I see it the other way around: when people choose refuse, they want to give the crucible/catalyst the middle finger though they should know that they are doing wrong for "our" cycle.

I hear you. I do. But I wonder, if Shepard's attempt had been successful, and her reasoning accepted by Starkid, and it left or self terminated, would you feel the same way?

The only reason you feel that refuse is wrong, is because it failed.
Had refuse succeeded you would be wondering why anyone would make another choice.

Essentially, it is not possible to condemn refuse, as a choice, unless you know where that choice will lead.
If you do not use foreknowledge then refuse is valid. You cannot know that reasoning with it will have disastrous results.

You have been fighting Reapers, in one form or another, for three years.
Suddenly, you are introduced to an AI that tells you it controls the Reapers and it pwns you.
Period. All your fussing, with the Crucible did was present it with new possibilities, but pwns the Crucible as well. About these new possibilities, you can choose to destroy Reapers, but genocide the Geth, you can Infect organic life with Reaper nanites, or you can die, but you knowledge will be passed to a new AI, a new Catalyst that will lead the Reapers. But you have more hope than you know.

Okay, say I believe Starkid, it can see new possibilities, and I have more hope than I know.
So, why would I not believe it and try to reason with it? I've known this Starkid, for all of 5 minutes?
I would not take the opportunity to try and communicate? To reason with it? No?
Based on a 5-10 minute conversation, with the harvester, I would just close my eyes and use the force?

Nah, I'm not meta-gaming. I take that shot at destroying them, because when I got there first (and ever since) I didn't think that we get another shot. This is our one and only opportunity. That's what I thought and still think and with the history of the mass effect universe in mind - not knowing the future (i.e. what really happens after I take that shot or after refuse or...) - I can't understand how anyone could think we could get another shot at destroying them. That's why I wrote that wall before.  So I didn't even think about arguing with it. The crucible is in that situation supposedly doing what we build it for, so I can't hesitate and let that opportunity possibly slip.

Modifié par T-Raks, 13 octobre 2012 - 08:40 .

[fiendishchicken]

I would've chosen refuse if Bioware didn't troll us.

Destroy it is, because it's the only option where the Reapers are killed.

Refuse is wrong. The reason it's wrong? Because SuperMac and Casey the kid won't let me be right.

I sincerely want to pick refuse, but I won't because the story tells me I can't win, which is retarded in my own personal opinion. I CAN win, I just need to level the playing field.

Casey Hudson, pre game release: "Oh there won't be a Reaper off switch."

Goes along the same lines of having your choice "matter".

Modifié par fiendishchicken, 13 octobre 2012 - 08:38 .

[Hanako Ikezawa]

fiendishchicken wrote...

I would've chosen refuse if Bioware didn't troll us.

Destroy it is, because it's the only option where the Reapers are killed.

Refuse is wrong. The reason it's wrong? Because SuperMac and Casey the kid won't let me be right.

I sincerely want to pick refuse, but I won't because the story tells me I can't win, which is retarded in my own personal opinion. I CAN win, I just need to level the playing field.

Casey Hudson, pre game release: "Oh there won't be a Reaper off switch."

Goes along the same lines of having your choice "matter".

He technically wasn't lying since there is no actual switch.

[fiendishchicken]

Taboo-XX wrote...

You were given a stick to beat the Reapers to death. Why not use it? Surely you'll save more lives in Destroy than Refuse?

Sounds more like people don't want to accept the consequences. Choosing Refuse over Destroy makes ZERO sense.

I've decided now Taboo after thinking about it from our past skype discussions, that I was wrong.

I would pick the billion over the trillion, if it meant not compromising with the Reaper.

Destroy is a form of compromise, one that I believe makes you submit to the catalysts logic and flaw, even as you destroy it and the Reapers.

You know my opinion on space grandpa.

I would refuse, if SuperMac and Casey Hudson didn't troll me. 

Plus I can think of a very cool twist for the Crucible

[fiendishchicken]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

fiendishchicken wrote...

I would've chosen refuse if Bioware didn't troll us.

Destroy it is, because it's the only option where the Reapers are killed.

Refuse is wrong. The reason it's wrong? Because SuperMac and Casey the kid won't let me be right.

I sincerely want to pick refuse, but I won't because the story tells me I can't win, which is retarded in my own personal opinion. I CAN win, I just need to level the playing field.

Casey Hudson, pre game release: "Oh there won't be a Reaper off switch."

Goes along the same lines of having your choice "matter".

He technically wasn't lying since there is no actual switch.

It was a pipe, is that better?

[Village_Idiot]

fiendishchicken wrote...

It was a pipe, is that better?

I prefer to think of it as a "Smash glass in case of Reaper Invasion" box.

Modifié par Shadrach 88, 13 octobre 2012 - 08:57 .

[Hanako Ikezawa]

fiendishchicken wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

fiendishchicken wrote...

I would've chosen refuse if Bioware didn't troll us.

Destroy it is, because it's the only option where the Reapers are killed.

Refuse is wrong. The reason it's wrong? Because SuperMac and Casey the kid won't let me be right.

I sincerely want to pick refuse, but I won't because the story tells me I can't win, which is retarded in my own personal opinion. I CAN win, I just need to level the playing field.

Casey Hudson, pre game release: "Oh there won't be a Reaper off switch."

Goes along the same lines of having your choice "matter".

He technically wasn't lying since there is no actual switch.

It was a pipe, is that better?

I'm just saying he never lied is all. I never shoot the pipe and instead jump into the 'make the galaxy better" beam.

[Cainne Chapel]

DirtyMouthSally wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...
Not to mention BW has a way of doing that in a lot of games that a 2nd 3rd or 4th option becomes available right at or near the end.

Happened in Dragon Age with the whole staying alive despite the bit that the warden usually dies with the final blow thing that usually happens, morrigan gave you that "out" twisted girl that she was....  god i love her

Or in KoToR where youc ould suddenly go darkside if i recall.

Its at least a great way to play with the options even if it doesnt make much thematic sense in the game.

Personally as much as I like Destroy, Control was fun too (I am your overlord! mwahahaha) and even synthesis has its merits I reckon...everybody gets a little bit of shepard in them

I got a good chuckle after talking Loghain into sleeping with Morrigan and watching that scene. 

I think that the control ending is more appealing without the extended cut.  With the original it looked to be a viable choice for a power hungry Shepard, but the ec dampens that a bit with it's commentary.

Loghain and Morrigan *shudder* How dare he touch my wardens woman!   you Dirty dirty sally you

Modifié par Cainne Chapel, 13 octobre 2012 - 08:57 .