435 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Depends on what you think about Word of God and Death of the Author. As far as I am concerned, it's not canon if it's not in the actual game.

Too bad ME revilation and the other books prove you wrong.

Mass Effect: Deception (a novel okayed by the game's directors and producers, and sold as an official contribution to the overarching narrative) was so filled with lore and canon faults that it was recalled for revision.

I'm not sure how that fits into your argument.  Indeed, it rather wholly undermines it.

Deception retcons itself. Just read it...It does.

[dreman9999]

m2iCodeJockey wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
...Here is the "nubbin"....
* snip *

Thanks. I see that in the bik. Now, "Han shot first..."

It breaks two more things:
1) If the engineers had both the "source emitter" and the "modulator" and animated CAD models on top of schematics, it doesn't make sense that it would take more than an hour for someone to say "This is uses the Citadel as focused emitter. It's the only thing in the known galaxy that's has something that fits those feet and is dark energy process capable..." (if anyone bothered to listen to Shepard's Ilos suit data after she's proven to be correct about an invasion.)

2) There are large cables, at least eight on Control and two on destroy that go right from the modulator into the Citadel Tower. They are not in the cut scene and make no visual sense if the modulator was not already on the tower.

1. The creators of the crucible can always be one of the thrall races of th leviathens. The question Lies inwhen the citadel was built.  During leviathen age or post. And whenthe crucible started being planned.

2. How can you see the wire on something so zoomed out?

[m2iCodeJockey]

dreman9999 wrote...
1. The creators of the crucible can always be one of the thrall races of th leviathens. The question Lies inwhen the citadel was built. During leviathen age or post. And whenthe crucible started being planned.
2. How can you see the wire on something so zoomed out?

1) In Levi conversation, Citadel and relays came after the Levi to speed up the harvest.
2) One can walk around the area and look at them. The bound cable from the bottom of the Destroy tube, itself, goes right into the Citadel. It gave me the impression of "permanence."

Modifié par m2iCodeJockey, 19 octobre 2012 - 01:12 .

[drayfish]

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Depends on what you think about Word of God and Death of the Author. As far as I am concerned, it's not canon if it's not in the actual game.

Too bad ME revilation and the other books prove you wrong.

Mass Effect: Deception (a novel okayed by the game's directors and producers, and sold as an official contribution to the overarching narrative) was so filled with lore and canon faults that it was recalled for revision.

I'm not sure how that fits into your argument.  Indeed, it rather wholly undermines it.

Deception retcons itself. Just read it...It does.

That makes no sense at all.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Sauruz wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Because I don't believe what you do.

I hope this quote will be enough to kill this thread.

People here just love taking words out of context to serve themselves, don't they?

Sorry, but me not believing how the Crucible works does not apply to a what I'm talking about in the OP. No, you can't simply say answer the topic with "because I don't believe what you do" as that does not sufficiently answer my inquiry.

So, no. Thread stays 'til the rest of us decide we're done talking.

m2iCodeJockey wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...
RGB was all Crucible.

OK. Here are a couple big-assed pics...


*snip*
*snip*

 See the end of the Crucible in each pic? The RGB machine is part of the Citadel and it's the only reason to bring the Crucible to it.
It is already there when Shep wakes up.

I was about to tell you to rewind from the first screenshot and notice that the circled area is not, in fact, empty. It contains that nubbin I mentioned earlier, which unfolds and takes the shape of the Destroy/Control chambers we later see.

Believe me, I thought the same as you did before about Destroy/Control coming from the Citadel. Then I saw the pic and it actually makes a lot more sense to me that the options would come from the Crucible after thinking about it.

But I get the idea we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

[HTTP 404]

Wow! this thread totally changed my mind on how I see the game!!!!!!!!!!!

[Isichar]

Seems like the only person in the entire series who thought control was a good idea was the person been controlled to think that.

One moment my Shepard is saying "We can destroy them now, but if you cant control them..." and then no more then 5 minutes later you can die trying to do that exact same thing.

I dont think OP understands why people choose refuse, the same way others can't understand why someone could choose synthesis. Better to just agree to disagree.

Modifié par Isichar, 19 octobre 2012 - 02:34 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

HTTP 404 wrote...

Wow! this thread totally changed my mind on how I see the game!!!!!!!!!!!

Okay. Well, my intent wasn't changing any minds, but what can I say? I guess I'm a ~ WIZARRRRD!  like that.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Isichar wrote...

I dont think OP understands why people choose refuse, the same way others can't understand why someone could choose synthesis.

I don't think so. I've heard out many people. Grant it, I can't know everybody's reasons, but I have a basic idea.

For that matter, the feedback is about what I expected to hear.

Better to just agree to disagree.

No, it's really not. Not without taking the time to understand other people's POVs. That's all I seek here. Figure out what others think, see how my own opinions hold up against cross-examination. I'd rather be proven wrong about what I think than hold a flawed opinion and have people tell me it's just as valid as their own. Know what I mean?

So I'll reiterate this question, minus the Steve Brule parody:

With Destroy/Synthesis, a Refuser could say that the victory is not "worth it" for the big-scale irreversible consequences at hand. This is no problem for Control, however, as it basically upholds the status-quo in just about every way. From there, what consequences could Control rationally pose to make the Refuser believe it's not worth at least attempting, as a means to stop the war?

[drayfish]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

So I'll reiterate this question, minus the Steve Brule parody:

With Destroy/Synthesis, a Refuser could say that the victory is not "worth it" for the big-scale irreversible consequences at hand. This is no problem for Control, however, as it basically upholds the status-quo in just about every way. From there, what consequences could Control rationally pose to make the Refuser believe it's not worth at least attempting, as a means to stop the war?

Frodo: [holding out the Ring] Take it Gandalf!

[Gandalf backs away]

Frodo: Take it!

Gandalf: No, Frodo.

Frodo: You must take it!

Gandalf: You cannot offer me this ring!

Frodo: I'm giving it to you!

Gandalf: Don't... tempt me Frodo! I dare not take it. Not even to keep it safe. Understand, Frodo. I would use this ring from a desire to do good... But through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine.

Modifié par drayfish, 19 octobre 2012 - 03:19 .

[Isichar]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Isichar wrote...

I dont think OP understands why people choose refuse, the same way others can't understand why someone could choose synthesis.

I don't think so. I've heard out many people. Grant it, I can't know everybody's reasons, but I have a basic idea.

For that matter, the feedback is about what I expected to hear.

Better to just agree to disagree.

No, it's really not. Not without taking the time to understand other people's POVs. That's all I seek here. Figure out what others think, see how my own opinions hold up against cross-examination. I'd rather be proven wrong about what I think than hold a flawed opinion and have people tell me it's just as valid as their own. Know what I mean?

So I'll reiterate this question, minus the Steve Brule parody:

With Destroy/Synthesis, a Refuser could say that the victory is not "worth it" for the big-scale irreversible consequences at hand. This is no problem for Control, however, as it basically upholds the status-quo in just about every way. From there, what consequences could Control rationally pose to make the Refuser believe it's not worth at least attempting, as a means to stop the war?

Ive also heard the same argument made towards Synthesis and Destroy, destroy moreso then any other ending compared to refuse. Heres my PoV: The Crucible, the Catalyst and the Reapers are not a solution. Never was, never will be. Its the same reason throwing a virgin in a volcano to try and make it rain is not a viable solution to me. Sure it COULD work, but thats not an entirely convincing argument on its own as towards why it should be attempted.

Now you already said you have read other threads on the topic, you have already taken the time to understand, as I have done the same, we have just come to different conclusions. I respect your views on the subject but there is nothing more I can explain to you that you have not heard by someone else that could probably word it much better then myself.

Arguing why refuse is a viable option is pretty much the exact same as trying to argue why Synthesis is. It does not matter what your reasoning is, people will bash you and call the option an abomination because of 1 aspect of it that counters your beliefs on the situation. And if you want to truly understand the other persons views you got to realize your beliefs and views of a choice is not strictly 100% true, and that is something unfortunately that will just not happen with most people on these forums in terms of how they view the ME3 ending.

Modifié par Isichar, 19 octobre 2012 - 04:46 .

[dreman9999]

drayfish wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

So I'll reiterate this question, minus the Steve Brule parody:

With Destroy/Synthesis, a Refuser could say that the victory is not "worth it" for the big-scale irreversible consequences at hand. This is no problem for Control, however, as it basically upholds the status-quo in just about every way. From there, what consequences could Control rationally pose to make the Refuser believe it's not worth at least attempting, as a means to stop the war?

Frodo: [holding out the Ring] Take it Gandalf!

[Gandalf backs away]

Frodo: Take it!

Gandalf: No, Frodo.

Frodo: You must take it!

Gandalf: You cannot offer me this ring!

Frodo: I'm giving it to you!

Gandalf: Don't... tempt me Frodo! I dare not take it. Not even to keep it safe. Understand, Frodo. I would use this ring from a desire to do good... But through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine.

You do  know the ring has a will of it's own and the reapers don't ,right?

[dreman9999]

Isichar wrote...

Seems like the only person in the entire series who thought control was a good idea was the person been controlled to think that.

One moment my Shepard is saying "We can destroy them now, but if you cant control them..." and then no more then 5 minutes later you can die trying to do that exact same thing.

I dont think OP understands why people choose refuse, the same way others can't understand why someone could choose synthesis. Better to just agree to disagree.

What does it matter what TIM thinks? What TIM thinks does nto devalue the choice. He had completly different reason to want to control the reapers then you do.
It's not the same case.

[dreman9999]

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Depends on what you think about Word of God and Death of the Author. As far as I am concerned, it's not canon if it's not in the actual game.

Too bad ME revilation and the other books prove you wrong.

Mass Effect: Deception (a novel okayed by the game's directors and producers, and sold as an official contribution to the overarching narrative) was so filled with lore and canon faults that it was recalled for revision.

I'm not sure how that fits into your argument.  Indeed, it rather wholly undermines it.

Deception retcons itself. Just read it...It does.

That makes no sense at all.

If you read it..It does. It's that bad.

[dreman9999]

m2iCodeJockey wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
1. The creators of the crucible can always be one of the thrall races of th leviathens. The question Lies inwhen the citadel was built. During leviathen age or post. And whenthe crucible started being planned.
2. How can you see the wire on something so zoomed out?

1) In Levi conversation, Citadel and relays came after the Levi to speed up the harvest.
2) One can walk around the area and look at them. The bound cable from the bottom of the Destroy tube, itself, goes right into the Citadel. It gave me the impression of "permanence."

1.Levithrall raceS...Not Levi. I'm talking about the slaves of the levi.

2.I 'm not talking about what you see in Shepard's level.  I mean for the full size imagre of the crucible.

[Isichar]

dreman9999 wrote...

Isichar wrote...

Seems like the only person in the entire series who thought control was a good idea was the person been controlled to think that.

One moment my Shepard is saying "We can destroy them now, but if you cant control them..." and then no more then 5 minutes later you can die trying to do that exact same thing.

I dont think OP understands why people choose refuse, the same way others can't understand why someone could choose synthesis. Better to just agree to disagree.

What does it matter what TIM thinks? What TIM thinks does nto devalue the choice. He had completly different reason to want to control the reapers then you do.
It's not the same case.

Because he was the only one in the entire series that seemed to feel Control of the reapers was the best solution. Infact the only people in the series that felt the reapers could be a solution to anything are the people been controlled by the reapers.

[Hey]

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

So I'll reiterate this question, minus the Steve Brule parody:

With Destroy/Synthesis, a Refuser could say that the victory is not "worth it" for the big-scale irreversible consequences at hand. This is no problem for Control, however, as it basically upholds the status-quo in just about every way. From there, what consequences could Control rationally pose to make the Refuser believe it's not worth at least attempting, as a means to stop the war?

Frodo: [holding out the Ring] Take it Gandalf!

[Gandalf backs away]

Frodo: Take it!

Gandalf: No, Frodo.

Frodo: You must take it!

Gandalf: You cannot offer me this ring!

Frodo: I'm giving it to you!

Gandalf: Don't... tempt me Frodo! I dare not take it. Not even to keep it safe. Understand, Frodo. I would use this ring from a desire to do good... But through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine.

You do  know the ring has a will of it's own and the reapers don't ,right?

All that power... It would be .. hard to resist regardless of intention.. Unless you are Tom Bombadil.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

silentassassin264 wrote...

BS. The Aldemeri Dominion would curbstomp them. They are outnumbered and outmagicked. Ondolomar put it quite simply when he described it as a simply a calm between storms. The Thalmor never had to surrender as they were winning the entire time.

Won't happen. We'll reform the empire as it was meant to be. The old empire is but a puppet of the Aldmeri Dominion. We kicked those milk drinking boot lickers out of Skyrim.

[Isichar]

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Depends on what you think about Word of God and Death of the Author. As far as I am concerned, it's not canon if it's not in the actual game.

Too bad ME revilation and the other books prove you wrong.

Mass Effect: Deception (a novel okayed by the game's directors and producers, and sold as an official contribution to the overarching narrative) was so filled with lore and canon faults that it was recalled for revision.

I'm not sure how that fits into your argument.  Indeed, it rather wholly undermines it.

Deception retcons itself. Just read it...It does.

That makes no sense at all.

If you read it..It does. It's that bad.

Yeah it really is. Too bad its not even the worse Bioware book ever written... But its pretty close.

[dreman9999]

Festae9 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

So I'll reiterate this question, minus the Steve Brule parody:

With Destroy/Synthesis, a Refuser could say that the victory is not "worth it" for the big-scale irreversible consequences at hand. This is no problem for Control, however, as it basically upholds the status-quo in just about every way. From there, what consequences could Control rationally pose to make the Refuser believe it's not worth at least attempting, as a means to stop the war?

Frodo: [holding out the Ring] Take it Gandalf!

[Gandalf backs away]

Frodo: Take it!

Gandalf: No, Frodo.

Frodo: You must take it!

Gandalf: You cannot offer me this ring!

Frodo: I'm giving it to you!

Gandalf: Don't... tempt me Frodo! I dare not take it. Not even to keep it safe. Understand, Frodo. I would use this ring from a desire to do good... But through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine.

You do  know the ring has a will of it's own and the reapers don't ,right?

All that power... It would be .. hard to resist regardless of intention.. Unless you are Tom Bombadil.

What causes the fall of a person is indifferance,not power. Power does not inheritly corrupt no matter how abolute it is.

[dreman9999]

Isichar wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Depends on what you think about Word of God and Death of the Author. As far as I am concerned, it's not canon if it's not in the actual game.

Too bad ME revilation and the other books prove you wrong.

Mass Effect: Deception (a novel okayed by the game's directors and producers, and sold as an official contribution to the overarching narrative) was so filled with lore and canon faults that it was recalled for revision.

I'm not sure how that fits into your argument.  Indeed, it rather wholly undermines it.

Deception retcons itself. Just read it...It does.

That makes no sense at all.

If you read it..It does. It's that bad.

Yeah it really is. Too bad its not even the worse Bioware book ever written... But its pretty close.

...What do you consider worse?

[dreman9999]

Isichar wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Isichar wrote...

Seems like the only person in the entire series who thought control was a good idea was the person been controlled to think that.

One moment my Shepard is saying "We can destroy them now, but if you cant control them..." and then no more then 5 minutes later you can die trying to do that exact same thing.

I dont think OP understands why people choose refuse, the same way others can't understand why someone could choose synthesis. Better to just agree to disagree.

What does it matter what TIM thinks? What TIM thinks does nto devalue the choice. He had completly different reason to want to control the reapers then you do.
It's not the same case.

Because he was the only one in the entire series that seemed to feel Control of the reapers was the best solution. Infact the only people in the series that felt the reapers could be a solution to anything are the people been controlled by the reapers.

But his reason is differnet then yours. That's the key point. And you still have free will.

[Hey]

dreman9999 wrote...

What causes the fall of a person is indifferance,not power. Power does not inheritly corrupt no matter how abolute it is.

so when Galadriel went all 'im gonna kill everyone' in the presence of the ring was that indifference? 

[dreman9999]

Festae9 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

What causes the fall of a person is indifferance,not power. Power does not inheritly corrupt no matter how abolute it is.

so when Galadriel went all 'im gonna kill everyone' in the presence of the ring was that indifference? 

We have to go back to that point that the reapers have no will of there, own are we?

Added, when he goes for the ring he does not much care what the others think does he?

[drayfish]

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Deception retcons itself. Just read it...It does.

That makes no sense at all.

If you read it..It does. It's that bad.

So Deception - official licenced addition to the Mass Effect universe - can be ignored because of plot inconsistencies and an affront to the game's lore; but Twitter - the account of one Bioware employee who was not even on the writing staff - must be esteemed as lore-sacred?

I'm honestly not trying to be rude, but you have some intensely subjective notions of what can and can not be considered valid, Dremenn.  I really hope that you realise you cannot expect people to be able to disentangle what you personally do and do not consider applicable to an argument.

Modifié par drayfish, 19 octobre 2012 - 05:37 .