If I may point out that "brave new world" is also a generic expression and a quote from Shakespeare's "The Tempest", and if I may nitpick: the fact that in the notes it's not capitalized may mean it's meant in the generic way and doesn't refer to Huxley's novel.CosmicGnosis wrote...
Yep, and I still can't decipher all of Walters' scribbles.Bill Casey wrote...
Well, they did cite "Brave New World" in the notes...
Modifié par Ieldra2, 08 novembre 2012 - 09:15 .
I can't do it justice in a short paragraph or two, and I don't have the patience for more than that. Here's a link to the thread: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/13419372Eckswhyzed wrote...
clennon8 wrote...
Catalyst Deception Theory in a nutshell: The ending choices that are available to you at the end are dependent on how damaged the Crucible is, and whether or not you saved the Collector Base at the end of ME2.Eckswhyzed wrote...
Applepie_Svk wrote...
That´s why there is so much symbolism, when you are playing LOW EMS Catalyst have no reason - he has no reason to help you at all even in HIGH... but still that whole sequence simply doesn´t make a sense till you are looking thru different view
So....with Low EMS the Catalyst has reason to help you at all, so he allows you to break indoctrination and then blow up all of the Reapers?
I really don't understand what you're trying to say here. Can you please explain?
Low EMS, destroyed the Collector Base: Destroy is the only option available, because the Crucible is too damaged for Synthesis, and because the Reaper "heart" was salvaged from Cronos Station and used in building the Crucible. Destroy requires more raw energy output than Control.
Low EMS, saved the Collector Base: Control is the only option available, because the Crucible is too damaged for Synthesis, and because the Reaper "brain" was salvaged from Cronos Station and used in building the Crucible. Control requires more computing power than Destroy.
Mid EMS: Both Destroy and Control are both available, but the Crucible is too damaged for Synthesis.
High EMS: Synthesis, by far the most complex and energy-consumptive of the choices, becomes availabepossible because the Crucible is undamaged.
OK, so how is indoctrination supposed to fit into this? The state of the Crucible shouldn't affect how much the Reapers can mind control you, should it? So if IT theory is true, what does that mean for Low EMS destroyed base? The Catalyst suddenly gives up and says, "nah not gonna indoc who cares"? Wouldn't the IT theory predict Shep gets indoctrinated and gives up so the cycle continues?
Modifié par clennon8, 08 novembre 2012 - 09:17 .
xsdob wrote...
I lol'd at how everyone saying how I was wrong about people headcanoning the endings to justify their own immediately used headcanoning of both destroy and the other endings to justify their points.
It is delicious obliviousness.
Guest_A Bethesda Fan_*
Guest_Arcian_*
Yes, but all endings suck equally much because they were written by Super MAC.xsdob wrote...
Destroy ending headcanons.
1. people are okay with no longer having synthetics.
2. all of your squadmates approve of it, joker fine with losing edi, quarians fine with losing geth.
3. catalyst is lying, this is not provable with any in game content.
4. that it's the only solution
5. that the other endings are traps
6. that the other endings are bad
7. that the other endings are somehow playing into the reapers hands and doom the galaxy.
So the op is wrong and not wrong at the same time. Rather that destroy being headcanoned, it's that people who pick destroy headcanon negative consequences onto the other endings and treat it as actual lore.
CosmicGnosis wrote...
xsdob wrote...
I lol'd at how everyone saying how I was wrong about people headcanoning the endings to justify their own immediately used headcanoning of both destroy and the other endings to justify their points.
It is delicious obliviousness.
What do you suggest we do, then?
Modifié par xsdob, 08 novembre 2012 - 09:28 .
If you're talking about Synthesis: *you're* headcanoning the outcome as bad because what we're shown and told isn't bad at all. And whether's it's so "wrong" that it's not justifiable is a matter of opinion.A Bethesda Fan wrote...
You were already headcanoning it as not being bad and wrong.
It will take even more brain power to headcanon it as good.
Guest_A Bethesda Fan_*
Ieldra2 wrote...
If you're talking about Synthesis: *you're* headcanoning the outcome as bad because what we're shown and told isn't bad at all. And whether's it's so "wrong" that it's not justifiable is a matter of opinion.A Bethesda Fan wrote...
You were already headcanoning it as not being bad and wrong.
It will take even more brain power to headcanon it as good.
I understand portraying your preferred choice in a good light. What I could do without is the persistent attempt by some people to ruin my game by insisting against all logic that it absolutely must be bad and the insulting insistence that I'm not thinking straight if I think otherwise. That's a fundamentalist's attitude to take and I have neither patience nor tolerance for it.xsdob wrote...
CosmicGnosis wrote...
xsdob wrote...
I lol'd at how everyone saying how I was wrong about people headcanoning the endings to justify their own immediately used headcanoning of both destroy and the other endings to justify their points.
It is delicious obliviousness.
What do you suggest we do, then?
Admit you do it and continue as usual. Being aware that it's something you do is a lot better than being oblivious to it, even if there isn't anything to change about it.
Personally, I find it simply human nature to attribute positive traits to the things we like and negative traits to the things we don't, helps amplify and fortify our choices and is a basic human logic response. But it's a lot better to know you do something and do it, than to do something and be like "I don't do that, your making stuff up" when someone points it out.
Just my two cents in the matter.
Modifié par Ieldra2, 08 novembre 2012 - 09:40 .
Modifié par Lizardviking, 08 novembre 2012 - 09:44 .
Guest_DirtyMouthSally_*
Sure, why not? I assume that you're saying this because you believe that some are embellishing destroy, while doing the opposite and picking apart the other two?CosmicGnosis wrote...
If you can headcanon good things about Destroy, then I can headcanon good things about Control and Synthesis. Especially Synthesis because its short-term and long-term consequences are the most ambiguous.
Guest_DirtyMouthSally_*
I don't know about low EMS, but destroy is sugar coated post extended cut. In the original it says that all synthetics will die, I think (edit: I think it says "you can destroy all synthetic life if you want to"). In the ec it says that all will be targeted, implying it, but not stating it as before.Lizardviking wrote...
I am the only one who thinks the catalyst sugar coats low EMS destroy? He says that only organics that are dependent on cybernetics will die. Yet the energy wave seems to kill nearly everyone save a few lucky.
"EDIT"
And let us not forget that he withholds most of the information about LOW EMS destroy, aside from the synthethics being destroyed, you have to fish it out of him.
Modifié par DirtyMouthSally, 08 novembre 2012 - 10:11 .
xsdob wrote...
Destroy ending headcanons.
1. people are okay with no longer having synthetics.
2. all of your squadmates approve of it, joker fine with losing edi, quarians fine with losing geth.
3. catalyst is lying, this is not provable with any in game content.
4. that it's the only solution
5. that the other endings are traps
6. that the other endings are bad
7. that the other endings are somehow playing into the reapers hands and doom the galaxy.
So the op is wrong and not wrong at the same time. Rather that destroy being headcanoned, it's that people who pick destroy headcanon negative consequences onto the other endings and treat it as actual lore.
Modifié par KingZayd, 08 novembre 2012 - 10:05 .
Modifié par Ieldra2, 08 novembre 2012 - 10:08 .
Ieldra2 wrote...
@clennon8:
If it requires you to treat the EC epilogue as a delusion, yes, then it's unreasonable. Also, I won't even start counting the unfounded assumptions in your post.
DirtyMouthSally wrote...
I don't know about low EMS, but destroy is sugar coated post extended cut. In the original it says that all synthetics will die, I think (edit: I think it says "you can destroy all synthetic life if you want to"). In the ec it says that all will be targeted, implying it, but not stating it as before.Lizardviking wrote...
I am the only one who thinks the catalyst sugar coats low EMS destroy? He says that only organics that are dependent on cybernetics will die. Yet the energy wave seems to kill nearly everyone save a few lucky.
"EDIT"
And let us not forget that he withholds most of the information about LOW EMS destroy, aside from the synthethics being destroyed, you have to fish it out of him.
I had copied the quotes, but I can't find them.
Edit: Here's the quote: "But be warned: others will be destroyed as well. The Crucible will not discriminate. All synthetics will be targeted. Even you are partly synthetic..."
http://social.biowar...9059/7#14495294
Assuming ^that is accurate, anyone claiming that destroy is genocide post ec cannot back it up with the facts.
Easy doesn't mean it's reasonable.clennon8 wrote...
EC epilogue is very easily dismissed as delusion.
That's Ironic coming from someone who was locked into "LALALALA IT DIDN'T REALLY HAPPEN IT DIDN'T REALLY HAPPEN LALALA" ever since ME3 came out.And don't act like EC mattered anyway. You were locked into this LALALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALALA attitude regarding indoctrination long before EC came out. You had slightly different rationalizations back then is all.
clennon8 wrote...
I can't do it justice in a short paragraph or two, and I don't have the patience for more than that. Here's a link to the thread: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/13419372
Modifié par AxStapleton, 08 novembre 2012 - 11:11 .
Retour en haut