210 réponses à ce sujet

[fiendishchicken]

Without Meta-gaming, Refusal is my favorite option. It's a disappointment to be sure, but one that my Shepard would get behind.

My main though is High EMS Destroy.

[Red Panda]

It's the other selfless option.

[CronoDragoon]

Archonsg wrote...

Here is what I don't get, for people to be so willing to accept that Shepard can somehow survive a blast with a radius of roughly 4 kilometers (or about 3 miles for you imperials) estimated, to get a more exact radi I'll need to calculate and scale to the citadel's dimensions, with enough power to overwhelm its mass effect shield and cause substantial damage but the concept of the writers adding a conventional victory is adamantly refuted for being "impossible".

People are willing to accept it because it doesn't affect how the conflict is resolved. It's just an Easter Egg for people to feel better about Destroy. The other deals specifically with how the plot can and should be resolved.

[OdanUrr]

Archonsg wrote...

Here is what I don't get, for people to be so willing to accept that Shepard can somehow survive a blast with a radius of roughly 4 kilometers (or about 3 miles for you imperials) estimated, to get a more exact radi I'll need to calculate and scale to the citadel's dimensions, with enough power to overwhelm its mass effect shield and cause substantial damage but the concept of the writers adding a conventional victory is adamantly refuted for being "impossible".

Well, Shepard did manage to survive depressurization, sub-zero temperatures, atmospheric re-entry and the subsequent free-falling.<_<

[crimzontearz]

OdanUrr wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

Here is what I don't get, for people to be so willing to accept that Shepard can somehow survive a blast with a radius of roughly 4 kilometers (or about 3 miles for you imperials) estimated, to get a more exact radi I'll need to calculate and scale to the citadel's dimensions, with enough power to overwhelm its mass effect shield and cause substantial damage but the concept of the writers adding a conventional victory is adamantly refuted for being "impossible".

Well, Shepard did manage to survive depressurization, sub-zero temperatures, atmospheric re-entry and the subsequent free-falling.<_<

He is John 117...minus John's special power

[Monster_user]

OdanUrr wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

Here is what I don't get, for people to be so willing to accept that Shepard can somehow survive a blast with a radius of roughly 4 kilometers (or about 3 miles for you imperials) estimated, to get a more exact radi I'll need to calculate and scale to the citadel's dimensions, with enough power to overwhelm its mass effect shield and cause substantial damage but the concept of the writers adding a conventional victory is adamantly refuted for being "impossible".

Well, Shepard did manage to survive depressurization, sub-zero temperatures, atmospheric re-entry and the subsequent free-falling.<_<

If by survived, you mean having all of his bones shattered, burnt to a crisp, no pulse, no breathing, brain dead, and requiring 2 years, and countless resources spent to frankenstien him back to life, then yeah, he survived.

So if Shepard did crash back to Earth, with fragments of the Citadel, he's dead. All the kings horses, and all the kings men, will not be able to put Humpty Dumpty back together, again,...

Modifié par Monster_user, 11 janvier 2013 - 12:05 .

[Archonsg]

OdanUrr wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

Here is what I don't get, for people to be so willing to accept that Shepard can somehow survive a blast with a radius of roughly 4 kilometers (or about 3 miles for you imperials) estimated, to get a more exact radi I'll need to calculate and scale to the citadel's dimensions, with enough power to overwhelm its mass effect shield and cause substantial damage but the concept of the writers adding a conventional victory is adamantly refuted for being "impossible".

Well, Shepard did manage to survive depressurization, sub-zero temperatures, atmospheric re-entry and the subsequent free-falling.<_<

Depends on if you are referring to ME2 or ME3.

ME2, he had fully functioning armor, suffered multiple severe trauma to his skeletal structure and well, died. 
They brought him back with tech, but Shepard's injuries were very similar to what you would expect from a free fall victim.

If its ME3, his exact location is not determined, initially I thought it was London due to the presence of broken concrete / tarmac. However it can be argued that Shepard is still on the Citadel at ground zero or near it, of the blast.

In the first assumption, Shepard's survival is questioned by how he is able to do so in absolute space, breathe vacuum, re-entry and eventual planet fall.

In the second assumption, that is the rubble Shepard is on, is within and part of the Citadel, which then brings up the issue of how Shepard being helmet less can survive a blast that essentially tore up ferocrete.
Now, I do not know the tensile strength of "ferocrete" but I do know what it takes to cut or break concrete. 5MPa (mega pascals) or about 700 psi.

It takes 16psi to crack a human skull.

Modifié par Archonsg, 11 janvier 2013 - 12:09 .

[crimzontearz]

Ok...I do not usually do this but, Archonsg....read the kind of cybernetic modification you can purchase for your Shepard in ME2. From metal reinforced bones to nanofiber muscles to implanted medigel injectors to all sort of other augmentations. Just saying his body does not react like that of normal human

[AlanC9]

Archonsg wrote...

Here is what I don't get, for people to be so willing to accept that Shepard can somehow survive a blast with a radius of roughly 4 kilometers (or about 3 miles for you imperials) estimated, to get a more exact radi I'll need to calculate and scale to the citadel's dimensions, with enough power to overwhelm its mass effect shield and cause substantial damage but the concept of the writers adding a conventional victory is adamantly refuted for being "impossible".

One is a problem with five seconds of cutscene, the other is a problem with the entire game. Pretty much what CronoDragoon said.

Modifié par AlanC9, 11 janvier 2013 - 12:15 .

[ZeCollectorDestroya]

Would you rather die and lose?
Or
Would you rather trust a stranger and have a chance of surviving and winning?

[shepskisaac]

Monster_user wrote...

If by survived, you mean having all of his bones shattered, burnt to a crisp, no pulse, no breathing, brain dead, and requiring 2 years, and countless resources spent to frankenstien him back to life, then yeah, he survived.

Yeah hi, there shouldn't either be a single cell left after he entered the atmosphere in punctured suit or he should be a spagetti only cloning could revive after he fell on the ground on that icy plnat from about ohh, IDK, 100,000 miles?

[KotorEffect3]

Refusers get what they deserve. It shouldn't have been an option in the first place. It wasn't in the original endings.

[BeastSaver]

xsdob wrote...

You know what's good about an open ending and refuse? You can ignore twitter and that entire tweet in your playthrough.

So in one of my playthroughs, shepard picked refuse and the crucible was never constructed, and the next cycle won by being thousands of years more prepared than our current cycle.

^This^ 

I also think refuse is a valid ending on my playthroughs where I deliberately have low EMS; fighting to the end is a better choice than blasting the H*ll out of the galaxy.

Besides, if you don't like refuse, don't choose it. Just angry because you can't shoot the catalyst?

Modifié par BeastSaver, 11 janvier 2013 - 12:34 .

[Archonsg]

crimzontearz wrote...

Ok...I do not usually do this but, Archonsg....read the kind of cybernetic modification you can purchase for your Shepard in ME2. From metal reinforced bones to nanofiber muscles to implanted medigel injectors to all sort of other augmentations. Just saying his body does not react like that of normal human

I have and taken that into account.
If let's say nothing has compromised these modifications, are you trying to cliam his bones and body, especially exposed parts have more tensile strength that of concrete?

If not, consider this as well, all or most of his cybernetics implants should be compromised by Destroy's choice.
He is still human.
He isn't in the best of health and lack protective armor in key places.

Kinetic momentum force, or an explosion is a cutting force. It shears stuff off at points of weakness or where two material meet and one is much more stronger than the other, such as an exposed arm out of armor at the elbow or the human neck at the collar.

BTW, the human skull is much much stronger than your elbow joints or neck.

Mind you.
I want my Shepard to survive and I want my Shepard to be reunited with Tali / Liara / Miranda / Ashley ...
I am just pointing out just how badly thought out that scene was and why it is so hypocritical to accept one illogical scenario while refusing to accept a possible one if the writers can find a way for a conventional victory, where we don't have to deal with all the aforementioned BS.

As it is, the ending is broken.
A conventional victory would no more be as bogus as how Shepard could survive in Destroy.

[PsyrenY]

Yep, a giant, GLORIOUS middle finger.

[crimzontearz]

Archonsg wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Ok...I do not usually do this but, Archonsg....read the kind of cybernetic modification you can purchase for your Shepard in ME2. From metal reinforced bones to nanofiber muscles to implanted medigel injectors to all sort of other augmentations. Just saying his body does not react like that of normal human

I have and taken that into account.
If let's say nothing has compromised these modifications, are you trying to cliam his bones and body, especially exposed parts have more tensile strength that of concrete?

If not, consider this as well, all or most of his cybernetics implants should be compromised by Destroy's choice.
He is still human.
He isn't in the best of health and lack protective armor in key places.

Kinetic momentum force, or an explosion is a cutting force. It shears stuff off at points of weakness or where two material meet and one is much more stronger than the other, such as an exposed arm out of armor at the elbow or the human neck at the collar.

BTW, the human skull is much much stronger than your elbow joints or neck.

Mind you.
I want my Shepard to survive and I want my Shepard to be reunited with Tali / Liara / Miranda / Ashley ...
I am just pointing out just how badly thought out that scene was and why it is so hypocritical to accept one illogical scenario while refusing to accept a possible one if the writers can find a way for a conventional victory, where we don't have to deal with all the aforementioned BS.

As it is, the ending is broken.
A conventional victory would no more be as bogus as how Shepard could survive in Destroy.

point taken....but I was already in your camp

[NightAntilli]

The whole game told you for 40+ hours, that you can not win by military might. I'm glad they added it in there.

[Archonsg]

ZeCollectorDestroya wrote...

Would you rather die and lose?
Or
Would you rather trust a stranger and have a chance of surviving and winning?

I would rather trust in the alliance I have built, trust in my friends to fight like hell. I would rather win, live, and retire with a loved one.

Oh wait, that is not an option, because it was not written in.
The enemy's strength is only as strong as the plot.

We already know that the reapers have a "kill switch" from Leviathan. Is it too much to as that with research, we get a usable "disable switch" so that Shepard need not accept a forced suicide of choice under duress, to not be the broken person depicted, to essentially not be "The Messiah" but a leader who allowed *The entire Galaxy* a victory purchased with the true sacrifice of its people?

[crimzontearz]

Archonsg wrote...

ZeCollectorDestroya wrote...

Would you rather die and lose?
Or
Would you rather trust a stranger and have a chance of surviving and winning?

I would rather trust in the alliance I have built, trust in my friends to fight like hell. I would rather win, live, and retire with a loved one.

Oh wait, that is not an option, because it was not written in.
The enemy's strength is only as strong as the plot.

We already know that the reapers have a "kill switch" from Leviathan. Is it too much to as that with research, we get a usable "disable switch" so that Shepard need not accept a forced suicide of choice under duress, to not be the broken person depicted, to essentially not be "The Messiah" but a leader who allowed *The entire Galaxy* a victory purchased with the true sacrifice of its people?

sorry but according to Bioware that is not artistic enough and neither is giving us an answer about our character

[PsyrenY]

Archonsg wrote...

The enemy's strength is only as strong as the plot.

Guess what! So is yours.

[Aaleel]

Archonsg wrote...

ZeCollectorDestroya wrote...

Would you rather die and lose?
Or
Would you rather trust a stranger and have a chance of surviving and winning?

I would rather trust in the alliance I have built, trust in my friends to fight like hell. I would rather win, live, and retire with a loved one.

Oh wait, that is not an option, because it was not written in.
The enemy's strength is only as strong as the plot.

We already know that the reapers have a "kill switch" from Leviathan. Is it too much to as that with research, we get a usable "disable switch" so that Shepard need not accept a forced suicide of choice under duress, to not be the broken person depicted, to essentially not be "The Messiah" but a leader who allowed *The entire Galaxy* a victory purchased with the true sacrifice of its people?

And it should be consistent.  We have at most a basic understanding of tech left behind by the reapers, so how in the world would we ever decipher the mysteries of reaper tech, which by common sense would be more advanced than what they left for us to study.  The plot has already nerfed the reapers and made them stupid as it is, how much further do people want it to go.

And a 'disable switch' would be no better than the crucible.

[Sc2mashimaro]

Mendelevosa wrote...

Regardless of how Bioware intended Refusal to be interpreted, I think it was uncalled for to add galactic suicide as a non-colorful ending option.

Or, because a lot of people said "I want to be able to tell the Catalyst NO!", Bioware writers sat down and said, "Well, maybe some Shepards would say, "No, I'll do it my way". Then they asked why some people felt that way and decided that most thought it was because they viewed the Catalyst interaction as a Reaper trick. Then they decided the Crucible was not a Reaper trick, regardless of the role of the Catalyst, and made an ending that fit those parameters.

The ending is a little humorous, but, honestly, it makes sense. If you think Shepard was indoctrinated and those choices were invalid, then the important thing he did to end the cycle was what happened with Liara. If you think the choices were offensive for rhetorical reasons (I didn't, but I understand the rationale of those who did), then you have the ability to reject those solutions - the consequences might suck, but from the point of ignorance (not knowing what will happen when you make the choice) it would be justifiable.

I really like that the refuse choice was added. It was a little easy to accidentally trigger, I thought, but I thought it was in good humor and made perfect sense within the universe we were operating in (and given the constraints of the story told before it).

[Archonsg]

Aaleel wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

ZeCollectorDestroya wrote...

Would you rather die and lose?
Or
Would you rather trust a stranger and have a chance of surviving and winning?

I would rather trust in the alliance I have built, trust in my friends to fight like hell. I would rather win, live, and retire with a loved one.

Oh wait, that is not an option, because it was not written in.
The enemy's strength is only as strong as the plot.

We already know that the reapers have a "kill switch" from Leviathan. Is it too much to as that with research, we get a usable "disable switch" so that Shepard need not accept a forced suicide of choice under duress, to not be the broken person depicted, to essentially not be "The Messiah" but a leader who allowed *The entire Galaxy* a victory purchased with the true sacrifice of its people?

And it should be consistent.  We have at most a basic understanding of tech left behind by the reapers, so how in the world would we ever decipher the mysteries of reaper tech, which by common sense would be more advanced than what they left for us to study.  The plot has already nerfed the reapers and made them stupid as it is, how much further do people want it to go.

And a 'disable switch' would be no better than the crucible.

No argument there.
ME3's plot was shot to hell right from the start when they ignored the major ending decision of ME2 and introduced the Crucible.

Personally, I would prefer that ME3 didn't happen and we get a reboot.
As that is definitely not going to happen, I just worked with what lore and resources both in game and in real world, that is available.

I could type out my idea of how ME3 should have played out, using your ending decision in ME2 whether or not to side with Cerberus, use war assets that you collect, have and use you companions, every single surving one, both as squad members and in out of gameplay tactical missions and win, but that's neither here or there.


ps: Yes, every squad member, Thane is alive and will survive *if* you so choose to quest for it.
Isn't that what role playing games do, give you options and choices that can be polar opposites?

Modifié par Archonsg, 11 janvier 2013 - 01:35 .

[Kileyan]

The middle finger wasn't that refusing means the Reapers annihilate every advanced civilization in the galaxy.

I have to admit it did seem a little vindictive to play the mystery card, the leave it to players imagination card on so many subjects.

Yet in this one choice, Bioware breaks that rule, the only time they ever give us a peek 50,000 years into the future, and spell out in no uncertain terms what happened, is when they want to say "LOL LOL refusing didn't matter, the next guys just built the Crucible and chose a door anyway!" That was a bit of a middle finger, not sure it was intended.

I wouldn't say it was purposely spiteful, but it was an odd thing.

Modifié par Kileyan, 11 janvier 2013 - 01:53 .

[marcustheMezz]

Personally, I would have liked self-destruction or something. Think about it, pretty much all the reapers were at Earth to safeguard the citadel, so it would've been cool if you told everyone to get the hell out of there, and could turn the crucible into a giant bomb or something, if the damn thing has enough energy to do what happened in those 3 ****ty choices, I think blowing it up would have made a nice explosion, like blowing up that relay in Arrival, you'd be sacricifing Earth to save the rest of the universe.
Would've been interesting.