540 réponses à ce sujet

[Galbrant]

Well I gotten to thinking why Hitler's more dastardly holographic evil brother raise his elevator to hell for Shepard. Maybe he knew that if this war continues this cycle would do so much damage to the Reapers that it would allow the second cycle to crush the remnants of the Reapers. After all in the Refusal ending the next cycle hardly had to do anything thing and the Crucible from Liara's time Capsule warned of the Reaper threat said the Crucible was a waste of time.

The Catalyst tries to fool Shepard to choose one of the more beneficial options for his case. Synthesis he gets what he wants and wins... and control he extracts the knowledge from Shepard and use his knowledge to crush the Victory Fleet with little casualties as possible and slowly turns Shepard's questionable deeds against the galaxy or use Shepard's mind to find Liara's time capsules by capturing the Normandy, Or hunt down Kasumi Goto for that greybox you didn't destroy that puts a strain on the Council races and the Alliance relations. Or the Krogans found out that Shepard jewed Wrex and sabotage the cure for the Genophage.

And Destroy is the catalyst gamble. Sure he didn't have to mention it, But he had to make it look bad by claiming it wouldn't solve anything in the long run and by pointing out that it will kill the Geth and EDI too to cause the player to hesitate. If he didn't mention it we would all probably go investigate it first since he hasn't talk about it and we are ignorant of the consequences and choose it. I mean after all if Shepard refuse to do anything, in the long run the Catalyst still loses finally for the first and last time in the next Cycle anyway. So if you're going to lose everything later why not bet all your chips now and get the Galaxies best hope to submit to your will with Control and Synthesis?

So... this is my thoughts on Mac Walters mediocre story telling.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

silverexile17s wrote...
Wrong. The beam couldn't BE shut off. If it could, it would have been turned off already, instead of having Harbinger guard it. It;s the Citadel's anchor to Earth -- there is no shut-off for it, because it keeps the Citadel teathered over Earth. Without it, the Citadel would just drift around the Earth, unable to stay aligned with any set location because of orbital rotation.

Wrong.  The beam can be shut off and there is a shut off for it.  Additionally, the beam is the only chance organics have at making the Crucible work.  Easy prevention is to shut the beam off, period.

Wrong. Harbinger doesn't see the Normandy as a threat. It's an insect to him. He doesn't kill it because he simply doesn't feel the pressing need. It's like saying "your so weak that I 'm not even going to bother killing you."

Justifying Harbinger with hypothetical thought processes doesn't make it wrong.  Good try though.

Heck let me try one:  Wrong.  Harbinger doesn't want Shepard's squadmates to die (and doesn't want Shepard to die either, that's why Shepard's wound wasn't fatal).  Harbinger wanted to do just enough to have Shepard stand alone (except for Anderson who was spared so TIM could demonstrate Reaper power more effectively).

See how neither "Wrong" passage really gets us anywhere?

[/b]Wrong[/i]. That's what Harbinger was -- reinforcements to Stop Shepard. And after everything around the beam was decimated, Shepard was assumed dead by everyone - even Major Coats says it over the radio. No one sends reinforcements when you are considered dead.

lol, not when Shepard is already through the beam. 

Btw, you may be trying too hard.  Harbinger was the reinforcements to stop the entire ground team.  Shepard was one of the last people to get shot by him.

Wrong. That's not even a flaw -- TIM's own self-delusion is making him do that. He's trying to convince himself that what he's doing is right. If he can get Shepard to believe, he'll believe it himself. It a psychosis brought on from self-delsuion that he's not indoctrinated.

The correct statement is that you[/b] try to counter [b]in-game cannon. And fail:pinched:l:D

Catalyst:  "-we already controlled him (TIM)."  Secondly, I never said it was a flaw (it's only a flaw when you pick a side).

I can tell that you'd really like to prove me wrong, but the facts are what they are...   I'll try to walk you through any additional points you bring up.

Glad to see that we're at least making some progress, lol.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 09 août 2013 - 09:01 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

silverexile17s wrote...
-1>  Because he would have used it already to stop the Crucible from being attacked by the Reapers. The Catalyst's hopes of fixing the Solution rest on the Crucible - yet the Reapers will destroy it if you are idle too long. If he could control the Reapers on that level, the Crucible would never come under threat to begin with. LOL, did you even play the game? Because you seem have to missed that bit. The difference is that you are using the wrong definition of "Control" to describe the Reapers.
And the Illusive Man uses "Control" to define his leadership of Cerberus. And Anderson uses "Control" to define his leadership of the Ressistance. Same wording, different meanings. Your flaw was that you are taking the wording of "control" far too literally and directly. It means he "controls" what they want, not what they do. There are multiple definitions for a single word, you know.

"Let's look at the game, not what you like." Because in the game, he never once displays that level of in-depth mastership over the Reapers, even when it threatens his own salvation. Take a guess what that means for your headcannoned responce?

No he wouldn't.  The Catalyst isn't affected by the Crucible until it's docked, and even then it won't think twice about destroying it (instead of finding someone else to use it).

You say "Control" has a different meaning.  What's "Direct" mean then? 

-2> Wrong. If he doesn't want to do this, then he has no reason to want to risk himself to achieve it, henceforth, he would have no negitive opinion about Destroy killing him. Meaning that he has no reason to minipulate Shepard into a spicific choice.
Again, wrong. If it were anyone else but Shepard, the Catalyst wouldn't differ to their judgement. He would argue on what's better, instead of submitting. Shepard, being the one that made all this possible single-handedly, is the only one the Catalyst would differ to in making the choice. It would argue against anyone else.

The Catalyst already makes a case for what it feels is better.  It says "peace won't last" and ~"the cycles will begin again" when it has no idea if that'll happen.  Again, if it's the Crucible forcing the Catalyst to do this, then who Shepard is is irrelevant.  If the Catalyst is making its own choice in this, then Shepard can be important... but you already said the Catalyst has no free will in this right?

-3> Let me point out the flaws in that.
**SNIP** (Still with me?)

The fact that Destroy and Control (BOTH of which, he disaproves of using personally) are the baseline options supports your belief, how?. Because I'm pretty sure that if he could ommit options that he didn't think benifical, neither of those two would be up. Rendering your entire headcannon theroy completely invalid by the fact that those two exist and are presented in the first place. (if you Still have trouble understanding this, let me know. Otheriwse, Game over on this point)

I was with you up to the last paragraph (the part I didn't SNIP).

So again, you're saying the Crucible has bound the Catalyst to consider its options.  'Destroy' does not end the conflict, but the Catalyst must consider it due to the Crucible's affect on him.  And, as you have stated, the Catalyst cannot hide Crucible options.  Therefore, it is obligated to entertain the Crucible's options and even will go along with its use if they are chosen... (but only because of the Crucible's affect on the Catalyst).  This makes who Shepard is of no particular importance.  Game over?  Game over.

-4> LOL, didn't you just say in the above point that the Catalyst ommits any options he doesn't consider benifical? Isn't that the definition of editing the choices?
Dude, you are countering yourself - stay consistant!! First the Catalyst "only entertains 3 options out of many, many more out there," and now you are saying "he doens't hide any of the options?" LOL, make up your mind! If there were other options avalible, he'd present them. The only options avalible are the ones we see. (and for the Record, I knew what you were talking about - it was just flawed. The Crucible is the last shot -- there are no remaining resources left in the galaxy for anything else, AKA no non-based Crucible options EXIST to be considered. Making you wrong twice over on locgial backing, and plasuibility.)

lol, Why do you think the Crucible is the only possible way to end the conflict with the Reapers?  I can tell you won't understand what I'm saying until you understand that the Crucible's choices aren't the only possibilities that could have been considered.  No one else is confused by this except for you, lol.

-5> Wrong. I knew what you ment from the beginning

Apparently not, lol

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Galbrant wrote...

Well I gotten to thinking why Hitler's more dastardly holographic evil brother raise his elevator to hell for Shepard. Maybe he knew that if this war continues this cycle would do so much damage to the Reapers that it would allow the second cycle to crush the remnants of the Reapers. After all in the Refusal ending the next cycle hardly had to do anything thing and the Crucible from Liara's time Capsule warned of the Reaper threat said the Crucible was a waste of time.

The Catalyst tries to fool Shepard to choose one of the more beneficial options for his case. Synthesis he gets what he wants and wins... and control he extracts the knowledge from Shepard and use his knowledge to crush the Victory Fleet with little casualties as possible and slowly turns Shepard's questionable deeds against the galaxy or use Shepard's mind to find Liara's time capsules by capturing the Normandy, Or hunt down Kasumi Goto for that greybox you didn't destroy that puts a strain on the Council races and the Alliance relations. Or the Krogans found out that Shepard jewed Wrex and sabotage the cure for the Genophage.

And Destroy is the catalyst gamble. Sure he didn't have to mention it, But he had to make it look bad by claiming it wouldn't solve anything in the long run and by pointing out that it will kill the Geth and EDI too to cause the player to hesitate. If he didn't mention it we would all probably go investigate it first since he hasn't talk about it and we are ignorant of the consequences and choose it. I mean after all if Shepard refuse to do anything, in the long run the Catalyst still loses finally for the first and last time in the next Cycle anyway. So if you're going to lose everything later why not bet all your chips now and get the Galaxies best hope to submit to your will with Control and Synthesis?

So... this is my thoughts on Mac Walters mediocre story telling.

That is quite interesting, though the Catalyst could have just... killed Shepard and/or had some other organic use the Crucible for what it wants.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 09 août 2013 - 09:30 .

[shingara]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

That is quite interesting, though the Catalyst could have just... killed Shepard and/or had some other organic use the Crucible for what it wants.

 It did, it used TIM, wierd how everyone keeps forgetting that fact, the main defence it has against anyone that gets there is to try and corrupt them with power. TIM fell for it, looked exactly like he had done synthesis, managed to survive may i remind you and then promptly went down the lift, did a bit of voodoo and blew his brains out. shep then goes up the lift, the cataylst tells shep he is the first organic to stand there even though tim just stood there, feeds them the same old BS line and half the playerbase fell for it. The ones that didnt wake up on earth in the exact spot they were knocked out.

 And tada FUBAR.

Modifié par shingara, 09 août 2013 - 12:23 .

[AlanC9]

Galbrant wrote...

Well I gotten to thinking why Hitler's more dastardly holographic evil brother raise his elevator to hell for Shepard. Maybe he knew that if this war continues this cycle would do so much damage to the Reapers that it would allow the second cycle to crush the remnants of the Reapers. .

This doesn't make any sense. The timing of the next cycle is wholly at the Reapers' discretion. If they've taken too many casualties they can just start the harvest as soon as anyone activates a relay.

[silverexile17s]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...
Wrong. The beam couldn't BE shut off. If it could, it would have been turned off already, instead of having Harbinger guard it. It;s the Citadel's anchor to Earth -- there is no shut-off for it, because it keeps the Citadel teathered over Earth. Without it, the Citadel would just drift around the Earth, unable to stay aligned with any set location because of orbital rotation.

Wrong.  The beam can be shut off and there is a shut off for it.  Additionally, the beam is the only chance organics have at making the Crucible work.  Easy prevention is to shut the beam off, period.

Wrong. Harbinger doesn't see the Normandy as a threat. It's an insect to him. He doesn't kill it because he simply doesn't feel the pressing need. It's like saying "your so weak that I 'm not even going to bother killing you."

Justifying Harbinger with hypothetical thought processes doesn't make it wrong.  Good try though.

Heck let me try one:  Wrong.  Harbinger doesn't want Shepard's squadmates to die (and doesn't want Shepard to die either, that's why Shepard's wound wasn't fatal).  Harbinger wanted to do just enough to have Shepard stand alone (except for Anderson who was spared so TIM could demonstrate Reaper power more effectively).

See how neither "Wrong" passage really gets us anywhere?

[/b]Wrong[/i]. That's what Harbinger was -- reinforcements to Stop Shepard. And after everything around the beam was decimated, Shepard was assumed dead by everyone - even Major Coats says it over the radio. No one sends reinforcements when you are considered dead.

lol, not when Shepard is already through the beam. 

Btw, you may be trying too hard.  Harbinger was the reinforcements to stop the entire ground team.  Shepard was one of the last people to get shot by him.

Wrong. That's not even a flaw -- TIM's own self-delusion is making him do that. He's trying to convince himself that what he's doing is right. If he can get Shepard to believe, he'll believe it himself. It a psychosis brought on from self-delsuion that he's not indoctrinated.

The correct statement is that you[/b] try to counter in-game cannon. And fail:pinched:l:D

Catalyst:  "-we already controlled him (TIM)."  Secondly, I never said it was a flaw (it's only a flaw when you pick a side).

I can tell that you'd really like to prove me wrong, but the facts are what they are...   I'll try to walk you through any additional points you bring up.

Glad to see that we're at least making some progress, lol.

1- Wrong. If it could be shut off, Harbinger would never have gone to defend it. They would have just turned it off then and there, period. It teathers the Citadel to London -- having an easy shut-off would be counterproductive to the harvest since London is their centerpoint, and being able to disconnect like that would cause the Citadel to just drift in Earth's orbit aimlessly.

2 - Wrong.
As far back as ME2, Harbinger never saw Shepard as an actual threat. Just an "interesting" organic. I mean, after all the numerous quotes about "pathetic attempts" and "dust on cosmic wind,' you say " he never saw Shepard as insignifigant..... even though he repeatedly said so."?:D The only "hypocritical thought process" is again, yours.
Harbinger sees no reason to attack the Normandy -- because in his eyes, they will die no matter what, so it doesn't matter what they do, it's all in vain.
LOL, you really are deluding yourself if you think Harbinger wanted Shepard alive. I mean, sure, THAT'S why Maraduer Shields kills you dead if you don't shoot first.<_< I mean really, that's what you're going with? In ME2, Harbinger repeatedly says to kill Shepard first in squad vs squad battles. The difference now that that Shepard is physically standing in front of him and is an insect he can just crush now -- and for all intents and purposes, he does.

All I see is you continuing to delude yourself with headcannon. Nothing different then what I've seen from you so far.

3 - What reason was there to think anyone survived to get that far? And TIM is there anyway. Plus, the Citadel's layout is shifting on the go, making conventonally navigating the station a task in itself.

4 - Which TIM wasn't aware of yet. His fall into insanaty was caused by him refusing to belive, or even acknowledge the possibility that he was indoctrinated. His entire attempt to convince Shepard to agree was partly to convince himself that he was the one in control.
"I'm in control! No one is telling me what to do!"
Did you miss that line? Because that's a pretty clear indicator of self-delusion.

The only one that keeps misinterperting the facts is [b]You. All the "facts" have done is prove you wrong over and over, yet you refuse to accept it.

[silverexile17s]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...
-1>  Because he would have used it already to stop the Crucible from being attacked by the Reapers. The Catalyst's hopes of fixing the Solution rest on the Crucible - yet the Reapers will destroy it if you are idle too long. If he could control the Reapers on that level, the Crucible would never come under threat to begin with. LOL, did you even play the game? Because you seem have to missed that bit. The difference is that you are using the wrong definition of "Control" to describe the Reapers.
And the Illusive Man uses "Control" to define his leadership of Cerberus. And Anderson uses "Control" to define his leadership of the Ressistance. Same wording, different meanings. Your flaw was that you are taking the wording of "control" far too literally and directly. It means he "controls" what they want, not what they do. There are multiple definitions for a single word, you know.

"Let's look at the game, not what you like." Because in the game, he never once displays that level of in-depth mastership over the Reapers, even when it threatens his own salvation. Take a guess what that means for your headcannoned responce?

No he wouldn't.  The Catalyst isn't affected by the Crucible until it's docked, and even then it won't think twice about destroying it (instead of finding someone else to use it).

You say "Control" has a different meaning.  What's "Direct" mean then? 

-2> Wrong. If he doesn't want to do this, then he has no reason to want to risk himself to achieve it, henceforth, he would have no negitive opinion about Destroy killing him. Meaning that he has no reason to minipulate Shepard into a spicific choice.
Again, wrong. If it were anyone else but Shepard, the Catalyst wouldn't differ to their judgement. He would argue on what's better, instead of submitting. Shepard, being the one that made all this possible single-handedly, is the only one the Catalyst would differ to in making the choice. It would argue against anyone else.

The Catalyst already makes a case for what it feels is better.  It says "peace won't last" and ~"the cycles will begin again" when it has no idea if that'll happen.  Again, if it's the Crucible forcing the Catalyst to do this, then who Shepard is is irrelevant.  If the Catalyst is making its own choice in this, then Shepard can be important... but you already said the Catalyst has no free will in this right?

-3> Let me point out the flaws in that.
**SNIP** (Still with me?)

The fact that Destroy and Control (BOTH of which, he disaproves of using personally) are the baseline options supports your belief, how?. Because I'm pretty sure that if he could ommit options that he didn't think benifical, neither of those two would be up. Rendering your entire headcannon theroy completely invalid by the fact that those two exist and are presented in the first place. (if you Still have trouble understanding this, let me know. Otheriwse, Game over on this point)

I was with you up to the last paragraph (the part I didn't SNIP).

So again, you're saying the Crucible has bound the Catalyst to consider its options.  'Destroy' does not end the conflict, but the Catalyst must consider it due to the Crucible's affect on him.  And, as you have stated, the Catalyst cannot hide Crucible options.  Therefore, it is obligated to entertain the Crucible's options and even will go along with its use if they are chosen... (but only because of the Crucible's affect on the Catalyst).  This makes who Shepard is of no particular importance.  Game over?  Game over.

-4> LOL, didn't you just say in the above point that the Catalyst ommits any options he doesn't consider benifical?[/b] Isn't that the definition of editing the choices?
Dude, you are countering yourself - stay consistant!! First the Catalyst "only entertains 3 options out of many, many more out there," and now you are saying "he doens't hide any of the options?" LOL, make up your mind! If there were other options avalible, he'd present them. The only options avalible are the ones we see. (and for the Record, I knew what you were talking about - it was just flawed. The Crucible is the last shot -- there are no remaining resources left in the galaxy for anything else, AKA no non-based Crucible options EXIST to be considered. Making you wrong twice over on locgial backing, and plasuibility.)

lol, Why do you think the Crucible is the only possible way to end the conflict with the Reapers?  I can tell you won't understand what I'm saying until you understand that the Crucible's choices aren't the only possibilities that could have been considered.  No one else is confused by this except for you, lol.

-5> Wrong. I knew what you ment from the beginning

Apparently not, lol

-1> Which it already is by the time the Reapers attack it, remember:P
I mean, you yourself brought up the Reapers destroyoing it if you wait too long in making a choice. Convient that you forget all about it when the point is used against you. The Crucible is it's only chance to fix the Solution -- no other options exist that don't use the Crucible, else they would have been presented for debate already.

"Direct" would be in-depth minipulation of every single unit, like you see in a hive-mind like the Rachni. The Reapers however, aren't a
hive-mind. They operate atonomously, with the Catalyst teling them what
the end-goal is, but letting them use their own means and methods to
achieve each step.
Also, I must note that the Catalyst never does state that his control of the Reapers is "direct," now does he? Pretty big flaw in your attempted reasoning there, pal.

-2> But doesn't force it on Shepard. Choose the bottom diolouge option when he speaks about Control, and he says that while he doesn't like the thought of being replaced, he will conceed to Shepard's judgement.. Now what does that tell you? He's not "giving permission," he's actively submitting and surrendering to Shepard's will.
Wrong. Shepard got this far and brought all this together. If it was anyone else, the Catalyst would argue more forcibly on what is right or not.
And in the case of Synthesis, it is explisitly impossible to attain without Shepard. Name me one other individual that Synthesis is possible with? It would have to be a member pf the most genetically-diverse race (human) so that it can adapt to most races easily, and have a large amount of synthetic-implantation. Shepard at this point is nearly 50% synthetic thanks to the Lazarus project. And in the case of Control, name me one person that has the same strength of will to become the new Catalyst without their mind shattering mid-way. The only option that "anyone can make" is Destroy. Control needs someone with a strong will, and Synthesis is only possible with Shepard.
So.... how does that "Shepard isn't needed for any of the endings" theroy look valid again?

-3> Dude, I already said that I knew what you ment. It just didn;t have any barring on anything I said, because non-Crucible options would be treated no differently.
Wrong. The Catalyst's pre-existing programming binds it to consider all options. That's how it always was. All the Crucible did was make it aware of possibilities it didn't know existed beforehand. It's pre-existing core directives are what force it to consider anything and everything with which to rectify the Solution. The Catalyst doesn't think Destroy will end conflict, but will acknowlidge Shepard's faith that it will. It doesn't think replaing him in Control will be for the best, but will acknowledge Shepard's faith that it will. It will submit to Shepard's judgement on what's best, because Shepard has a variable that the Catalyst is incapable of accounting for - the "gut instinct." Things like "faith, hope, trust." All concepts that are alien to him, and which Shepard used to best his Solution.
If it was anyone else, the Catalyst would argue in-depth about what is right or not. It wouldn't just say "I'll default to your judgement." And if it was anyone else, Synthesis - the Catalyst's preferred option, I remind you - would not be possible. Nor would Control without someone of incredible willpower to be absorbed by the data core without going insane before the process could be compleated.
So, since two of the three options aren't possible without Shepard, what does that say for your theroy?
That is the real "Game over," pal.

-4> Wrong. That's only true of you. Because you refuse to acknowledge that no other options exist.
Everything was thrown into the Crucible. No other resources for anything else remain. If there were other options, non-Crucible or otherwise, the Catalyst would have shown them regardless. I Knew what you were saying from the get-go -- it just didn't have any effect whatsoever on what I said. The Catalyst is bound by it's own programming to solve conflcit, and thus, consider any and all presented possibilities. That includes non-Crucible. None were presented by the Catalyst because none exist. You are the only one that doesn't understand that.

-5> Re-read the above. The only one that "apparently" didn't get it was [b]you.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

shingara wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

That is quite interesting, though the Catalyst could have just... killed Shepard and/or had some other organic use the Crucible for what it wants.

 It did, it used TIM, wierd how everyone keeps forgetting that fact, the main defence it has against anyone that gets there is to try and corrupt them with power. TIM fell for it, looked exactly like he had done synthesis, managed to survive may i remind you and then promptly went down the lift, did a bit of voodoo and blew his brains out. shep then goes up the lift, the cataylst tells shep he is the first organic to stand there even though tim just stood there, feeds them the same old BS line and half the playerbase fell for it. The ones that didnt wake up on earth in the exact spot they were knocked out.

 And tada FUBAR.

Except that they didn't use TIM to kill Shepard (or at least didn't exert enough control to).  More control was exerted over Benezia.

Interesting theory for the rest of it btw.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

silverexile17s, let's try this in smaller bites. 

You said the Catalyst is code-bound to find a solution to the organic/synthetic conflict, correct? 

Is it the Catalyst's purpose to find and implement a solution that rids the universe of organic vs synthetic conflict?

Please stay on topic and answer the above questions as well as you can.


-------
[NOTE:  We'll cover every point you want to cover from our discussion thusfar, but let's start here for now.  Doing it this way should make it easier to reach an end to our points of contention.. unless you're arguing for the sake of arguing]

Fun discussion so far btw, but now let's try a serious debate.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 10 août 2013 - 10:21 .

[SuperNerd1975]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

... you need the 'permission' of the Reaper leader to do it?


Who's idea (in the ME universe) was that? lol.

"Okay the last thing we need... is the leader of the Reapers to be okay with this so we can fire off that Crucible, because we have no idea how to work this thing."


Doesn't that inadvertently suggest that the Crucible itself is a Reaper design (possibly pushed through by indoctrinated civilizations?)


Let the speculations continue

First of all, when you (aka Shepard) are talking to the "star kid" or "god child" at the end of the game that is actually "The Intelligence" that Leviathan spoke of on Despoina (provided you have the Leviathan DLC).
Second, said "intelligence" is not directing Shepard, or in any way granting Shepard permission to do anything, but rather presenting Shepard with three different ways to end the conflict between organics and synthetics (Control, Synthesis, or Destruction).  Keep in mind that throughout ME3 all of those closest to Shepard talk about killing (or destroying) the Reapers.
Third, yes the Citadel and the Mass Relays are of Reaper design since they all were created by "The Intelligence".  The Citadel forms the Catalyst for the Crucible so it is safe to assume that the Crucible was also created by "The Intelligence".
I am by no means a Mass Effect expert, I simply PAID ATTENTION while playing through the trilogy, and especially after installing all of the DLC for ME2 and ME3.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

SuperNerd1975 wrote...
First of all, when you (aka Shepard) are talking to the "star kid" or "god child" at the end of the game that is actually "The Intelligence" that Leviathan spoke of on Despoina (provided you have the Leviathan DLC).
Second, said "intelligence" is not directing Shepard, or in any way granting Shepard permission to do anything, but rather presenting Shepard with three different ways to end the conflict between organics and synthetics (Control, Synthesis, or Destruction).  Keep in mind that throughout ME3 all of those closest to Shepard talk about killing (or destroying) the Reapers.
Third, yes the Citadel and the Mass Relays are of Reaper design since they all were created by "The Intelligence".  The Citadel forms the Catalyst for the Crucible so it is safe to assume that the Crucible was also created by "The Intelligence".
I am by no means a Mass Effect expert, I simply PAID ATTENTION while playing through the trilogy, and especially after installing all of the DLC for ME2 and ME3.

Interesting, why do you think "The Intelligence" created the Crucible?

On your 2nd point, "The Intelligence" specifically says "Destroy" won't work... so it's not a way to end conflict  between organics and synthetics.

Lastly, I call the "star kid/god child/ 'The Intelligence'" the "Reaper King"

[phillip100]

The Catalyst never said that Destroy wouldn't work. When you ask it if the Reapers will be destroyed, it actually says "Yes, but the peace won't last. Soon you're children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back."

[shingara]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

shingara wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

That is quite interesting, though the Catalyst could have just... killed Shepard and/or had some other organic use the Crucible for what it wants.

 It did, it used TIM, wierd how everyone keeps forgetting that fact, the main defence it has against anyone that gets there is to try and corrupt them with power. TIM fell for it, looked exactly like he had done synthesis, managed to survive may i remind you and then promptly went down the lift, did a bit of voodoo and blew his brains out. shep then goes up the lift, the cataylst tells shep he is the first organic to stand there even though tim just stood there, feeds them the same old BS line and half the playerbase fell for it. The ones that didnt wake up on earth in the exact spot they were knocked out.

 And tada FUBAR.

Except that they didn't use TIM to kill Shepard (or at least didn't exert enough control to).  More control was exerted over Benezia.

Interesting theory for the rest of it btw.

 I think the key is they didnt succeed in using TIM to kill shepard, they most definatly tried though didnt they. Remember there is only 2 ways out of TIM if i remember right, appeal to his humanity where he takes hold again the same way saren did or shot him in the face.

 In essence TIM became a Saren redo. So that implys was it infact a memory induced from sheps own mind. And if thats the case its a memory that harby would retain from sovy which leads to when you shoot cat in the face its harbys voice.

 

Modifié par shingara, 10 août 2013 - 06:05 .

[silverexile17s]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

silverexile17s, let's try this in smaller bites. 

You said the Catalyst is code-bound to find a solution to the organic/synthetic conflict, correct? 

Is it the Catalyst's purpose to find and implement a solution that rids the universe of organic vs synthetic conflict?

Please stay on topic and answer the above questions as well as you can.


-------
[NOTE:  We'll cover every point you want to cover from our discussion thusfar, but let's start here for now.  Doing it this way should make it easier to reach an end to our points of contention.. unless you're arguing for the sake of arguing]

Fun discussion so far btw, but now let's try a serious debate.

You AGAIN missed the points I pointed out.
While it's code-bound to take any of the three options presented, only Shepard can make all three viable. Thus, only Shepard can make a choice that (A) the Catalyst will submit to without debating to, and ( be able to make more then one choice. Syhthesis is completely impossible without Shepard - strange how you had no responce for that. Or that use of Control would be limited to strong-minded people like Shepard.
Or that you had no actual responce when I said that if non-Crucible options existed, the Catalyst would be code-bound to present those as well. Since they don't exist, that point of yours was completely and utterly redundant.

Also, you notice that you are the one that didn't refute my questions?

Fancy way of saying "you got nothing." Sorry, but I don't respond to cop-outs, pal. Either refute the actual point, or don't. Although, you never really did from the get-go.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 10 août 2013 - 06:58 .

[silverexile17s]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

SuperNerd1975 wrote...
First of all, when you (aka Shepard) are talking to the "star kid" or "god child" at the end of the game that is actually "The Intelligence" that Leviathan spoke of on Despoina (provided you have the Leviathan DLC).
Second, said "intelligence" is not directing Shepard, or in any way granting Shepard permission to do anything, but rather presenting Shepard with three different ways to end the conflict between organics and synthetics (Control, Synthesis, or Destruction).  Keep in mind that throughout ME3 all of those closest to Shepard talk about killing (or destroying) the Reapers.
Third, yes the Citadel and the Mass Relays are of Reaper design since they all were created by "The Intelligence".  The Citadel forms the Catalyst for the Crucible so it is safe to assume that the Crucible was also created by "The Intelligence".
I am by no means a Mass Effect expert, I simply PAID ATTENTION while playing through the trilogy, and especially after installing all of the DLC for ME2 and ME3.

Interesting, why do you think "The Intelligence" created the Crucible?

On your 2nd point, "The Intelligence" specifically says "Destroy" won't work... so it's not a way to end conflict  between organics and synthetics.

Lastly, I call the "star kid/god child/ 'The Intelligence'" the "Reaper King"

What are you talking about? The Leivathans themselves say the Crucible was not created by it. It's far too young a design. So that point is redundant because it's untrue -- the Leviathans say so themselves, and they want to live through this like the rest of us, so they have no reason to lie.

He says the same thing about Control and his being replaced. Yet he conceeds to that too. You know, like he has no choice in it? And if Shepard has faith that Destory will bring about the end of conflict between organics and synthetics, then the Catalyst will submit to Shepard's faith on that. It's stating it's opinion on the situation, but only cares about which option Shepard thinks will end conflict.

Lastly, that's a complete misdemeanor -- since he doesn't control every single action they take (like the Rachni do with their drones), it's a mistake to call him "Reaper King." Pretty sure we went over that before:wizard:

[shingara]

silverexile17s wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

SuperNerd1975 wrote...
First of all, when you (aka Shepard) are talking to the "star kid" or "god child" at the end of the game that is actually "The Intelligence" that Leviathan spoke of on Despoina (provided you have the Leviathan DLC).
Second, said "intelligence" is not directing Shepard, or in any way granting Shepard permission to do anything, but rather presenting Shepard with three different ways to end the conflict between organics and synthetics (Control, Synthesis, or Destruction).  Keep in mind that throughout ME3 all of those closest to Shepard talk about killing (or destroying) the Reapers.
Third, yes the Citadel and the Mass Relays are of Reaper design since they all were created by "The Intelligence".  The Citadel forms the Catalyst for the Crucible so it is safe to assume that the Crucible was also created by "The Intelligence".
I am by no means a Mass Effect expert, I simply PAID ATTENTION while playing through the trilogy, and especially after installing all of the DLC for ME2 and ME3.

Interesting, why do you think "The Intelligence" created the Crucible?

On your 2nd point, "The Intelligence" specifically says "Destroy" won't work... so it's not a way to end conflict  between organics and synthetics.

Lastly, I call the "star kid/god child/ 'The Intelligence'" the "Reaper King"

What are you talking about? The Leivathans themselves say the Crucible was not created by it. It's far too young a design. So that point is redundant because it's untrue -- the Leviathans say so themselves, and they want to live through this like the rest of us, so they have no reason to lie.

He says the same thing about Control and his being replaced. Yet he conceeds to that too. You know, like he has no choice [/i]in it? And if Shepard has faith that Destory will bring about the end of conflict between organics and synthetics, then the Catalyst will submit to Shepard's faith on that. It's stating it's opinion on the situation, but only cares about which option [i]Shepard thinks will end conflict.

Lastly, that's a complete misdemeanor -- since he doesn't control every single action they take (like the Rachni do with their drones), it's a mistake to call him "Reaper King." Pretty sure we went over that before:wizard:

  Just a few points, You assume that the inteligence isnt the reaper king WHY? it created the reapers who it inturn commanded to create all the mass relays, that includes the citidel which produces a plot hole ( ME3 staff really should have used mass effect Wiki).

 On the point of it not having choice on what shepard does, why does the 'intelegence' have harbys voice ?,  What its stating is infact what it stated to TIM, Tim for all intensive purposes was under the influence of the reapers thus the inteligence. TIM right up until the point that he had interacted with the station to gain control of the reapers and then confronted shepard thought that he had control of the reapers. It was only upon being challanged that he came to the realisation that he had been lied to and was infact controlled and not the controller.

Modifié par shingara, 10 août 2013 - 07:14 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

phillip100 wrote...

The Catalyst never said that Destroy wouldn't work. When you ask it if the Reapers will be destroyed, it actually says "Yes, but the peace won't last. Soon you're children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back."

That means it won't work.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

@silverexile17s

Stay focused, I already told you we'll get to every point that you have.  You get too far off track with multi-point posts though.  So we'll address them one at a time...

Starting with:

Is it the Catalyst's purpose to find and implement a solution that rids the universe of organic vs synthetic conflict?

You said the Catalyst is code-bound to find a solution to the organic/synthetic conflict, correct?


If you're not just arguing for the sake of arguing, then now's the time to have a serious debate and get to the bottom of this.  Answer the questions when you're ready.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 11 août 2013 - 10:37 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

silverexile17s wrote...
it's a mistake to call him "Reaper King." Pretty sure we went over that before:wizard:

What kind of control do you think a King has? lol

Harbinger can 'control' and 'direct' the Collectors as he sees fit (just a little tidbit thar).

[Mr. Gogeta34]

silverexile17s wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

SuperNerd1975 wrote...
First of all, when you (aka Shepard) are talking to the "star kid" or "god child" at the end of the game that is actually "The Intelligence" that Leviathan spoke of on Despoina (provided you have the Leviathan DLC).
Second, said "intelligence" is not directing Shepard, or in any way granting Shepard permission to do anything, but rather presenting Shepard with three different ways to end the conflict between organics and synthetics (Control, Synthesis, or Destruction).  Keep in mind that throughout ME3 all of those closest to Shepard talk about killing (or destroying) the Reapers.
Third, yes the Citadel and the Mass Relays are of Reaper design since they all were created by "The Intelligence".  The Citadel forms the Catalyst for the Crucible so it is safe to assume that the Crucible was also created by "The Intelligence".
I am by no means a Mass Effect expert, I simply PAID ATTENTION while playing through the trilogy, and especially after installing all of the DLC for ME2 and ME3.

Interesting, why do you think "The Intelligence" created the Crucible?

On your 2nd point, "The Intelligence" specifically says "Destroy" won't work... so it's not a way to end conflict  between organics and synthetics.

Lastly, I call the "star kid/god child/ 'The Intelligence'" the "Reaper King"

What are you talking about? The Leivathans themselves say the Crucible was not created by it. It's far too young a design. So that point is redundant because it's untrue -- the Leviathans say so themselves, and they want to live through this like the rest of us, so they have no reason to lie.

LOL, dude... I'm talking about the post made by SuperNerd1975.  It's his assertion that the Crucible was made by the Catalyst, not mine.

I didn't think you wanted to try and prove me wrong that badly...  What's your goal here?

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 11 août 2013 - 10:49 .

[phillip100]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

phillip100 wrote...

The Catalyst never said that Destroy wouldn't work. When you ask it if the Reapers will be destroyed, it actually says "Yes, but the peace won't last. Soon you're children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back."

That means it won't work.

Then why is destoy an option? If it doesn't work, then the destroy solution shouldn't be given in the first place.

Modifié par phillip100, 12 août 2013 - 06:38 .

[silverexile17s]

shingara wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

SuperNerd1975 wrote...
First of all, when you (aka Shepard) are talking to the "star kid" or "god child" at the end of the game that is actually "The Intelligence" that Leviathan spoke of on Despoina (provided you have the Leviathan DLC).
Second, said "intelligence" is not directing Shepard, or in any way granting Shepard permission to do anything, but rather presenting Shepard with three different ways to end the conflict between organics and synthetics (Control, Synthesis, or Destruction).  Keep in mind that throughout ME3 all of those closest to Shepard talk about killing (or destroying) the Reapers.
Third, yes the Citadel and the Mass Relays are of Reaper design since they all were created by "The Intelligence".  The Citadel forms the Catalyst for the Crucible so it is safe to assume that the Crucible was also created by "The Intelligence".
I am by no means a Mass Effect expert, I simply PAID ATTENTION while playing through the trilogy, and especially after installing all of the DLC for ME2 and ME3.

Interesting, why do you think "The Intelligence" created the Crucible?

On your 2nd point, "The Intelligence" specifically says "Destroy" won't work... so it's not a way to end conflict  between organics and synthetics.

Lastly, I call the "star kid/god child/ 'The Intelligence'" the "Reaper King"

What are you talking about? The Leivathans themselves say the Crucible was not created by it. It's far too young a design. So that point is redundant because it's untrue -- the Leviathans say so themselves, and they want to live through this like the rest of us, so they have no reason to lie.

He says the same thing about Control and his being replaced. Yet he conceeds to that too. You know, like he has no choice [/i]in it? And if Shepard has faith that Destory will bring about the end of conflict between organics and synthetics, then the Catalyst will submit to Shepard's faith on that. It's stating it's opinion on the situation, but only cares about which option Shepard thinks will end conflict.

Lastly, that's a complete misdemeanor -- since he doesn't control every single action they take (like the Rachni do with their drones), it's a mistake to call him "Reaper King." Pretty sure we went over that before:wizard:

  Just a few points, You assume that the inteligence isnt the reaper king WHY? it created the reapers who it inturn commanded to create all the mass relays, that includes the citidel which produces a plot hole ( ME3 staff really should have used mass effect Wiki).

 On the point of it not having choice on what shepard does, why does the 'intelegence' have harbys voice ?,  What its stating is infact what it stated to TIM, Tim for all intensive purposes was under the influence of the reapers thus the inteligence. TIM right up until the point that he had interacted with the station to gain control of the reapers and then confronted shepard thought that he had control of the reapers. It was only upon being challanged that he came to the realisation that he had been lied to and was infact controlled and not the controller.

Because it doesn't have that level of Control over them. He only ever says he embodys their collective intelligence. He never says that he "rules" them. He controls their objectives, their long term goals. He doesn't control their individual actions. He says it himself -  they give hm a purpose while he gives them direction. That's all he does - point them in the direction to go. He doesn't control how or what methods they use to do that, or what stratagies to use in combat. Since he doesn't have that level of control, and openly admits that he gives them nothing but "direction," he's not a "king."
He "directed" them to make the Relays, but didn't control things like placement, timeframe of construction, design, and so-forth. For all we know, the Relays were leftover tech from the Leviathans that was simply repurposed.

What the hell are you talking about? The Catalyst doesn't speak with Harbinger's voice -- check the wiki yourself. It's voiced by a kid, with echos of Shepard's voice actors in the background.
That's actually not true. TIM was under the control of the Reapers, not the Catalyst. The Reapers indoctrination trait is a passive trait - one that exists even after the Reaper has long died, like with the Human-Reaper, The Reaper Corpse in ME2, or the "Leviathan of Dis" Reaper Corpse that indoctrinated the batarian officials on Kar'shan. This is obvious since the Catalyst says "we" controlled him, not "I" controlled him. If you had been right, the Catalyst would have said "I," not "We."
And TIM kept telling himself that he could control them anytime he wished, without actually touching any of the controls. He [i]never actually interfaced with the station -- he kept telling himself that it wasn't necessary because he could win whenever he wanted. That was actually the indoctrination speaking though. Point being, he never actually was working the controls on the station.

[silverexile17s]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

phillip100 wrote...

The Catalyst never said that Destroy wouldn't work. When you ask it if the Reapers will be destroyed, it actually says "Yes, but the peace won't last. Soon you're children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back."

That means it won't work.

Wrong. That means he thinks it won't work, but will accept that Shepard thinks it will. There is a chance that the peace will last and that they will learn from their mistakes. The Catalyst personally doesn't believe this is the case, but if Shepard does, then the Catalyst will acknowledge and submit to his judgement.

[silverexile17s]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

SuperNerd1975 wrote...
First of all, when you (aka Shepard) are talking to the "star kid" or "god child" at the end of the game that is actually "The Intelligence" that Leviathan spoke of on Despoina (provided you have the Leviathan DLC).
Second, said "intelligence" is not directing Shepard, or in any way granting Shepard permission to do anything, but rather presenting Shepard with three different ways to end the conflict between organics and synthetics (Control, Synthesis, or Destruction).  Keep in mind that throughout ME3 all of those closest to Shepard talk about killing (or destroying) the Reapers.
Third, yes the Citadel and the Mass Relays are of Reaper design since they all were created by "The Intelligence".  The Citadel forms the Catalyst for the Crucible so it is safe to assume that the Crucible was also created by "The Intelligence".
I am by no means a Mass Effect expert, I simply PAID ATTENTION while playing through the trilogy, and especially after installing all of the DLC for ME2 and ME3.

Interesting, why do you think "The Intelligence" created the Crucible?

On your 2nd point, "The Intelligence" specifically says "Destroy" won't work... so it's not a way to end conflict  between organics and synthetics.

Lastly, I call the "star kid/god child/ 'The Intelligence'" the "Reaper King"

What are you talking about? The Leivathans themselves say the Crucible was not created by it. It's far too young a design. So that point is redundant because it's untrue -- the Leviathans say so themselves, and they want to live through this like the rest of us, so they have no reason to lie.

LOL, dude... I'm talking about the post made by SuperNerd1975.  It's his assertion that the Crucible was made by the Catalyst, not mine.

I didn't think you wanted to try and prove me wrong that badly...  What's your goal here?

First off, I was pointing out the flaw in that point. Otherwise, he was fine.
Second, The fact that you are spouting compete and utter headcannon, despite three seperate people telling you otherwise, and giving definate proof that your views aren't true:pinched:.
Third, this is a public form -- that means any post can be commented on by anyone else. If you don't want it commented on, use PM. Don't get so upset because your public post was commented on.
I'm just here to debate. However, you constantly ignoring fact and replacing it with IT headcannon doesn't help that.