234 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Then our battle map says "Allied forces are holding steady and are winning in key locations." How can we be winning in key locations if we cannot win conventionally? The map is a lie; or Hackett is indoctrinated; Shepard is indoctrinated; or something is coming in the next DLC.

[andy6915]

And my big several paragraph post on page 4 goes COMPLETELY ignored.Wonderful...

[His Name was HYR!!]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Then our battle map says "Allied forces are holding steady and are winning in key locations." How can we be winning in key locations if we cannot win conventionally? The map is a lie; or Hackett is indoctrinated; Shepard is indoctrinated; or something is coming in the next DLC.

You mean, the map of small facilities around the galaxy where a "win" constitutes merely keeping the enemy out of a facility?

The war is not a sprint, it's a marathon. And you simply cannot outlast the Reapers. They can carry out the harvests over centuries. For as long as there are any organics available, they have a steady supply of troops at their disposal.


Garrus: "But how long until the fight is kicked out of you?"

[M Hedonist]

A:
A hero.

arial wrote...

Refuse is basicly saying "You won't let me save <insert here>? fine, go kill us all then!".

Weird. My Shepard said something different to the Catalyst. Maybe that's from the low EMS dialogue?

[Quikraptor]

Refusal to commit genocide at the cost of the cycles is a nice sentiment. It's too bad nobody can live by it. The only problem is that the only thing being destroyed is synthetics. Reapers, the one thing that needs to be destroyed, along with Geth, EDI, and things like that.

Things that can be rebuilt.

There's no such thing as "pure paragon". Either you choose to control the reapers, make everyone half robot, or destroy synthetics. Or you choose to refuse, and destroy potentially the only chance the galaxy has to stop the cycles forever. "Shepard doesn't know." Correction; YOUR Shepard didn't know. As in, you, the person developing the path he/she follows.

The moment I was told "you can't win the war conventionally" I knew that by not destroying the reapers, meant that I would be weak. Just because you're not okay with something, doesn't mean it's wrong. Refusing is saying simply telling the Starchild "Yeah, I feel bad for you. So even though you explained that this choice you have more or less means we win ... You can win. Sorry."

Either you commit genocide of an artificial race, or you doom the entire galaxy and more to come forever. There will be no end. Face it. If you could gain control of the blueprints and actual product of what would be your end... Would you risk leaving it lieing around? No, you wouldn't. That is why andy69156915 had it 100% right. Refusers likely didn't pay any attention to the dialogue.

Modifié par Quikraptor, 10 décembre 2012 - 10:05 .

[Redbelle]

arial wrote...

 I often see people on these forums saying they pick refuse because "My Shepard would not commit Genocide".

which makes me want to ask.

do you really picture Shepard the kind of person that would doom everyone, just because there were ones he could not save? 



I believe Spock said it best: www.youtube.com/watch

But Kirk comes back later to say the need's of the one outweigh the needs of the many.

I had a very lengthy reply type up till I accidently hit the back button and erased it........... but it comes down to this.

Screw the Catalyst and his pocket calculator too. Life cannot be measured by the number's of individual's alive at any one time. You have to have something worth living for. Something to reach out and seize for yourself.

The Catalyst want's everything his way. For everybody. It want's to reach out and violate or control everyone and everything that falls under it's remit. And it's doing this without realising that it's doing things that fall under immoral actions because it has no concept of morality. It's an artificial contruct designed to solve a problem. You don't need morals to solve an equation.

We may not be able to stop the machine for Shep's cycle, but choosing to live without the Catalyst's will dominating that cycles live's in some way mean's that whatever life is left for the advanced race's in that cycle will be lived as free beings. And the one's who come after will inherit that choice of freedom.

Modifié par Redbelle, 10 décembre 2012 - 10:11 .

[grey_wind]

Natural selection demands that an entire galaxy that was stupid enough to pour all their resources and hopes into a machine they could not even understand without a single backup plan deserves to be wiped out.

[TheProtheans]

You bring everyone together like never seen before in this galaxy, Mammal, bird, fish, reptile, strippers, dinosaurs and AI.
And for what? To compromise?

[M Hedonist]

Quikraptor wrote...

The moment I was told "you can't win the war conventionally"

Rolled eyes, stopped reading.

[Ultranovae]

Shepard has to compromise his morals in order to save the galaxy.
He may not be the hero we deserve, he is the one we need!

What?! Too late, did somebody already make the joke/comparison?

[Linkenski]

arial wrote...

 I often see people on these forums saying they pick refuse because "My Shepard would not commit Genocide".

which makes me want to ask.

do you really picture Shepard the kind of person that would doom everyone, just because there were ones he could not save? 



I believe Spock said it best: www.youtube.com/watch

Why don't people realise that Shepard is our character and we define him, or at least, we did in ME1 and ME2 until all the autodialogue

[StayFrosty05]

andy69156915 wrote...

Most of you "refuse" guys think that anything but refuse is letting the Catalyst dictate the terms? No, that's not how it worked. The Crucible was forcing him to relay information whether he liked it or not, even forcing him to bring up the destroy option when it was the number 1 thing he DIDN'T want chosen... And even explain how to do it. He also hated control, but was forced to mention it too. He didn't have a say in anything. If I decide to choose destroy or control, the best he can do is whine about it because he has absolutely no recourse to stop me. He can't even try a lie of omission, because the Crucible wasn't letting him do that either.

He didn't help you by choice, he didn't want to, gave you options he despised and told you how to do it regardless of his opinions, and was even forced to bring you up on that elevator at the control panel (the fact that he acts really really ticked off when he does this a low EMS is proof of that, because why else would he bring you up if he didn't even want you up there to begin with?). He was 100% at your mercy, being forced to do what you and the Crucible demanded.

That is also why refuse shuts down the Crucible. The Crucible was linked with you, and was doing what you asked it to. From the moment you touched the control panel, it was doing what your mind told it to. When you refuse, you're pretty much telling the Crucible to shut down. It's asking you through the Catalyst "what do you wish this program to perform?", and refusing is like you clicking cancel. Think of it as a computer, you have an EXE file (a non-virus one, before someone gets cute) asking what you wish to do and refusing is you clicking to cancel the file altogether. The moment you did that, the Catalyst stopped being controlled by the Crucible and regained full control of himself, which is why he's suddenly talking like a Reaper and making it clear that he's going to keep killing everyone, you handed the choice back to the Reapers by choice because of refusing. Refusing is telling the Crucible to shut down and allowing the Catalyst to regain control... Which is why it's such a supremely stupid choice. So when the Crucible asks what function you want done, give it a real answer, don't close the program out of fear. 

Refusers, you had the control of the Crucible and the Catalyst in your hands, and politely handed it back to the Catalyst by shutting the Crucible down. Epic "derp" moment right there. You had total control, was the one dictating the terms of how this encounter was going to go down, had the full house of cards to your chest... And responded by deciding to release control, let the Catalyst dictate instead, and folded the hand of cards you had. Good job.

This is pretty much it and is why I always choose Destroy.....bring an end to the Catalyst and reapers altogether. My Paragade Shep may not like his choices and deeply regrets the loss of EDI and the Geth, but if it ends the Reaper threat once and for all...forever...then what must be done, must be done.

[Ultranovae]

Sorry to tell you guys, but in the end it does come to arithmetic.
It's not like Shepard wants to kill the geth (because control and synthesis don't exist apparently)
But they are the ones he has to leave behind I order to save the rest.
In an ideal world, there would be no compromise, but even the mass effect universe is not an ideal world (unless you ask the writers of synthesis).

I mean what kind of pedantic egomaniac would you have to be sacrifice everyone just because "oh no! Compromise!"?
I really don't see a paragon Shepard letting his ego get in the way saving the galaxy. He knows not everyone will make it, and you wish you could save them all, but you just can't.
Unless you know, you chose control or synthesis, I really can't stress that enough.

[Redbelle]

StayFrosty05 wrote...

andy69156915 wrote...

Most of you "refuse" guys think that anything but refuse is letting the Catalyst dictate the terms? No, that's not how it worked. The Crucible was forcing him to relay information whether he liked it or not, even forcing him to bring up the destroy option when it was the number 1 thing he DIDN'T want chosen... And even explain how to do it. He also hated control, but was forced to mention it too. He didn't have a say in anything. If I decide to choose destroy or control, the best he can do is whine about it because he has absolutely no recourse to stop me. He can't even try a lie of omission, because the Crucible wasn't letting him do that either.

He didn't help you by choice, he didn't want to, gave you options he despised and told you how to do it regardless of his opinions, and was even forced to bring you up on that elevator at the control panel (the fact that he acts really really ticked off when he does this a low EMS is proof of that, because why else would he bring you up if he didn't even want you up there to begin with?). He was 100% at your mercy, being forced to do what you and the Crucible demanded.

That is also why refuse shuts down the Crucible. The Crucible was linked with you, and was doing what you asked it to. From the moment you touched the control panel, it was doing what your mind told it to. When you refuse, you're pretty much telling the Crucible to shut down. It's asking you through the Catalyst "what do you wish this program to perform?", and refusing is like you clicking cancel. Think of it as a computer, you have an EXE file (a non-virus one, before someone gets cute) asking what you wish to do and refusing is you clicking to cancel the file altogether. The moment you did that, the Catalyst stopped being controlled by the Crucible and regained full control of himself, which is why he's suddenly talking like a Reaper and making it clear that he's going to keep killing everyone, you handed the choice back to the Reapers by choice because of refusing. Refusing is telling the Crucible to shut down and allowing the Catalyst to regain control... Which is why it's such a supremely stupid choice. So when the Crucible asks what function you want done, give it a real answer, don't close the program out of fear. 

Refusers, you had the control of the Crucible and the Catalyst in your hands, and politely handed it back to the Catalyst by shutting the Crucible down. Epic "derp" moment right there. You had total control, was the one dictating the terms of how this encounter was going to go down, had the full house of cards to your chest... And responded by deciding to release control, let the Catalyst dictate instead, and folded the hand of cards you had. Good job.

This is pretty much it and is why I always choose Destroy.....bring an end to the Catalyst and reapers altogether. My Paragade Shep may not like his choices and deeply regrets the loss of EDI and the Geth, but if it ends the Reaper threat once and for all...forever...then what must be done, must be done.

If it makes you feel any better, Edi will alter her program given the appropriate stimulas, to reflect her desire to protect Jeff to the death. She understands that it is unlikely they will win but resolves to fight on regardless as she has no wish to become like the Reapers.

The Geth on the other hand, they are the one's I can't figure out. If they would say yes, it mean's no more Reapers. Or no, we only just started living these news lives.

[StayFrosty05]

Redbelle wrote...

StayFrosty05 wrote...

This is pretty much it and is why I always choose Destroy.....bring an end to the Catalyst and reapers altogether. My Paragade Shep may not like his choices and deeply regrets the loss of EDI and the Geth, but if it ends the Reaper threat once and for all...forever...then what must be done, must be done.

If it makes you feel any better, Edi will alter her program given the appropriate stimulas, to reflect her desire to protect Jeff to the death. She understands that it is unlikely they will win but resolves to fight on regardless as she has no wish to become like the Reapers.

The Geth on the other hand, they are the one's I can't figure out. If they would say yes, it mean's no more Reapers. Or no, we only just started living these news lives.

Yes, I do believe EDI would concur and understand and even support Sheps decision...there are things worth dying for.

As for the Geth, their situation really does bite....Shep successfully brokered peace for Rannoch and it turns out he has to wipe the Geth out anyway....not that he know's that's coming when his on Rannoch....Destroy wasn't a complete success due to the extermination of an entire species to achieve it and Shep can only hope to god it was quick and painless (if they can feel pain) for the Geth and EDI...going by the Reapers it looks quick and painless....But for the survivng Species and all the Species still to come Destroy remains the only way to absolutely ensure the Reapers are no more....no matter the cost.

[M Hedonist]

Ultranovae wrote...

Sorry to tell you guys, but in the end it does come to arithmetic.
It's not like Shepard wants to kill the geth (because control and synthesis don't exist apparently)
But they are the ones he has to leave behind I order to save the rest.
In an ideal world, there would be no compromise, but even the mass effect universe is not an ideal world (unless you ask the writers of synthesis).

I mean what kind of pedantic egomaniac would you have to be sacrifice everyone just because "oh no! Compromise!"?
I really don't see a paragon Shepard letting his ego get in the way saving the galaxy. He knows not everyone will make it, and you wish you could save them all, but you just can't.
Unless you know, you chose control or synthesis, I really can't stress that enough.

Oh, I haven't "sacrificed" anyone. And I'm certain the entire galaxy wasn't wiped out, either. I'm just gonna drop this part of a FAQ I wrote on Refusal here.

Q: But doesn't Refusal kill everyone?
A: Not necessarily. Refusal isn't as grim as many like to make it look. In fact, it is almost entirely up to interpretation. The notion that the entire Galaxy was wiped out is, simply put, bogus. The Protheans managed to get a living Prothean into the next cycle and they were completely disorganized when the Reapers hit them - Javik himself admits that this cycle has a clear advantage over the Protheans. So who's to say we didn't manage to save thousands, or even millions of each race? Especially since scientists must've been studying the Protheans' life sustainment systems ever since the end of ME1. Or people found a way to escape to another galaxy.
Realistically, I would say the Refusal ending is a Population Bottleneck event of epic proportions. It's up to you whether you prefer this over genocide or one of the other morally dubious endings.

That's how I see it, at least. I don't expect you to agree, only that you understand my point and don't try to force your view upon me.

Modifié par Sauruz, 10 décembre 2012 - 11:53 .

[Pedrak]

[quote]
[quote]Sauruz wrote...
Realistically, I would say the Refusal ending is a Population Bottleneck event of epic proportions. It's up to you whether you prefer this over genocide or one of the other morally dubious endings.[/quote]
That's how I see it, at least. I don't expect you to agree, only that you understand my point and don't try to force your view upon me.
[/quote]
[/quote]

I really have no problem with people choosing any ending they might like, of course. I fail to understand one thing, though. Why causing the death of people in Refusal through inaction is determining a "Population Bottleneck" and going for Destroy "Genocide"? So if I push a button and let, say,  1 person die to save 9, I'm a murderer, but if I refuse to push that button and 9 people die while one survives I'm highly moral?

Modifié par Pedrak, 11 décembre 2012 - 12:05 .

[M Hedonist]

Pedrak wrote...

I really have no problem with people choosing any ending they might like, of course. I fail to understand one thing, though. Why causing the death of people in Refusal through inaction is determining a "Population Bottleneck" and going for Destroy "Genocide"? So if I push a button and let, say,  1 person die to save 9, I'm a murderer, but if I refuse to push that button and 9 people die while one survives I'm highly moral?

Do I need to explain "Genocide" at this point? Because I've seen others on this forum who didn't quite understand the ramifications of that term...
By ending the Geth you are taking away the potential of an entire species. Everything that could have been, everything they could have evolved to. And they're at a point where they're still actively evolving. You're not just killing a group of individuals, you are killing every individual of that group in the present and every individual of that group that may be born/created in the future. Sure, maybe you can rebuild them... but they just wouldn't be the same. Especially because whoever would rebuild them will probably 'meddle the mixture' in some way - put in more security locks to prevent them from ever turning against their creators, for example.

Modifié par Sauruz, 11 décembre 2012 - 12:18 .

[thearbiter1337]

Gotta love the people who say that the only reasons Refusers refuse is to save the Geth

Gotta love them

[Steelcan]

thearbiter1337 wrote...

Gotta love the people who say that the only reasons Refusers refuse is to save the Geth

Gotta love them

Hey who doesn't want to screw over the entire galaxy so the genocidal robots don't die instantly?

[Femlob]

how do the refusers honestly picture Shepard?

Sane.

[Pedrak]

Sauruz wrote...
Do I need to explain "Genocide" at this point? Because I've seen others on this forum who didn't quite understand the ramifications of that term...

My point is that the term "genocide" carries certain implications of hate and deliberate desire to hurt a certain group which don't really describe Shep's dilemma and intent here. By using the word "genocide" for Destroy you're colouring it in a specific  way... and doing it while softening all the deaths by Refuse with the pretty "Population Bottleneck" term reeks of a pretty obvious double standard.

Shepard in Destroy is no more genocidal than a general choosing to sacrifice 50 men instead of 500 is a mass murderer.

Modifié par Pedrak, 11 décembre 2012 - 12:39 .

[Aiyie]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

I'm sure the soldier being mauled to death on Earth by husks after his wife was turned into one, and his daughter was rendered into gray paste, will die happy in the knowledge that The Shepard kept his hands clean when total victory was thirty paces and half a thermal clip away.

bear in mind that nobody really knows what Shepard does or does not do... the only other being to witness Shepard's actions firsthand, is the starbrat, and something tells me the little punk isn't going around talking to anyone but Shep.

it really is a case of http://tvtropes.org/...YouAreInTheDark

Modifié par Aiyie, 11 décembre 2012 - 01:56 .

[Kuari999]

andy69156915 wrote...

And my big several paragraph post on page 4 goes COMPLETELY ignored.Wonderful...

Because your paragraph is pointless and doesn't change that the whole thing was non-sensical and defied all logic and knowledge up to that point.  I seriously considered going back and playing the song "Everything you know is wrong" by Weird Al over the scene because of how ridiculously absurd it is.  Plus nothing in what was stated showed that the catalyst was being forced to do anything.  He CHOSE to say those things because essentially "things changed".  Your headcanon != the way things were presented in either case.