286 réponses à ce sujet

[LTKerr]

AlanC9 wrote...

LTKerr wrote...

Hahaha no In short tems we are evaluating if TIM can be right even if he's a bad person (Repaers can be controlled because he says so), and I'm saying TIM's judgement is affected by Reaper's indoctrination so his opinion is untrustworthy.

Gotcha... but isn't that the same thing?  We don't have any better evidence for "Reapers can be controlled by the Crucible" than for "Reapers can be destroyed by the Crucible." 

Well, at first we were talking about how an option is a viable option even if it's proposed by a bad person (some people believe Control is wrong only because it's suggested by TIM since the begining). As I said, I personally don't trust the whole Catalyst concept itself so I don't care who says what: TIM is indoctrinated so whatever option he suggests is going to be good for the Reapers and bad for Shepard; then the Catalyst shows Destroy and Synthesis and we can see Anderson shooting the tube. If you can roleplay this (which I can't) then you don't know if he's telling the truth about each option or not. Too much symbolism here.

[DeinonSlayer]

AlanC9 wrote...

LTKerr wrote...
Second, this whole situation is too much unbelievable, too much out of place, too much symbolic. I feel disconnected from the story and from the game, I'm no longer making a decision thinking "what Shepard would do?" but thinking "what is this game about?".

I get the feeling that the design intent was for Shepard to experience being outside of the cycles and outside of history itself. Hero's journey, enlightenment, blah, blah, blah. So it sounds like they almost got you to the right head-space there.

Given all that noise about Shepard's "organic energy" et al, yeah. Unfortunately for them, that's not where people's minds are in that scene. I tend to rush through the dialogue in that scene - "transcendent" atmosphere and music or not, ships are dying every second Shepard delays.

The EC took steps to explain the Crucible, toning down fantasy in favor of the sci-fi people were looking for. The ending would have been better without the pseudo-mystical claptrap altogether. This would have been a nice change.

[78stonewobble]

I think I might have said something as bad as "Well Destroy is the only 'TRUE' ending"...

And forgotten to follow it up with "in my oppinion.".

What I think of as the right ending for me really doesn't have anything to do with what other people think is the right endings for them.

[AlanC9]

DeinonSlayer wrote...
Given all that noise about Shepard's "organic energy" et al, yeah. Unfortunately for them, that's not where people's minds are in that scene. I tend to rush through the dialogue in that scene - "transcendent" atmosphere and music or not, ships are dying every second Shepard delays.

Yep. Shep's not exactly outside of history there since he can see ships blowing up all around him.

I'm not certain the concept was sound even if the execution had been better. A story-driven CRPG is fundamentally a goal-driven system -- we take our characters through the game to experience whatever "win" is in the box. You can call goals into question in other game genres, but maybe not this one.

[CptBomBom00]

Well I like the colour red.

[AlexMBrennan]

Simply put, because most arguments for synthesis or control are based on meta-gaming (that is to say, Shepard makes a choice based on information not available to him at the time). That's silly, and makes any discussion meaningless.

Whilst I do believe that Destroy is the best ending, the other choices are also viable solutions because they all stop the Reaper Threat

But that's the crux of the matter - they are only viable solutions in hindsight. Destroying the Reapers will definitively end the Reaper war, but they might just keep killing us if Synthesis is chosen and Shepard makes it quite clear in auto dialogue that they don't consider Control viable (thus, their change of heart must be cause by the player's knowledge of the epilogue)

The problem is, most fundamentally, that Bioware gave all the crucial exposition to the least trustworthy dude imaginable. Charname learns about their choices from the proven trustworthy Solar, whereas Shepard gets the same information... From the head villain...

[Sundance31us]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Who cares either way? It's your game and your choice at the end of the day.

QFT

[AlanC9]

AlexMBrennan wrote...
But that's the crux of the matter - they are only viable solutions in hindsight. Destroying the Reapers will definitively end the Reaper war, but they might just keep killing us if Synthesis is chosen and Shepard makes it quite clear in auto dialogue that they don't consider Control viable (thus, their change of heart must be cause by the player's knowledge of the epilogue)

Note that anyone who's a Control fan considers that autodialogue a bug and ignores it. Just as people ignore other autodialogue when their Sheps are forced to say something they don't agree with. That's not a very convincing argument. (I also ignore the part where Shepard wants to stay on Earth in the prologue -- that's just stupid, and I don't usually play stupid Sheps.)

Why would the Reapers keep killing people after Synthesis? To what end?

Modifié par AlanC9, 21 janvier 2013 - 11:10 .

[Auintus]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Simply put, because most arguments for synthesis or control are based on meta-gaming (that is to say, Shepard makes a choice based on information not available to him at the time). That's silly, and makes any discussion meaningless.

The catalyst explains every ending. If you believe it, there's no metagaming involved.

[jstme]

AlanC9 wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...
But that's the crux of the matter - they are only viable solutions in hindsight. Destroying the Reapers will definitively end the Reaper war, but they might just keep killing us if Synthesis is chosen and Shepard makes it quite clear in auto dialogue that they don't consider Control viable (thus, their change of heart must be cause by the player's knowledge of the epilogue)

Note that anyone who's a Control fan considers that autodialogue a bug and ignores it. Just as people ignore other autodialogue when their Sheps are forced to say something they don't agree with. That's not a very convincing argument. (I also ignore the part where Shepard wants to stay on Earth in the prologue -- that's just stupid, and I don't usually play stupid Sheps.)

Why would the Reapers keep killing people after Synthesis? To what end?

Because advanced organo-synthetics would create ,say, ethereals and rebelling etherials then would wipe out all organo-synthetic life. Makes as much sense as the reason for original reaping solution. 

[JasonShepard]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Simply put, because most arguments for synthesis or control are based on meta-gaming (that is to say, Shepard makes a choice based on information not available to him at the time). That's silly, and makes any discussion meaningless.

Some of them are (ie. "It works in the EC slides!"). Not all of them.

For example, I would argue that there is no reason not to trust the Catalyst - or at least, not to trust what it says about one option any less than what it says about another. If it suggests Destroy and I'm willing to trust it about Destroy, then I should be willing to trust it about any of the choices. If anything, Destroy is the one most likely to be a trick, since it's the one most tailored to what Shepard wants.

Thing is, if the Catalyst wanted Shepard dead, it would have left him below to bleed out with Anderson. Possibly send some troops off to kill him (although it might have to wait until the Crucible is destroyed if you subscribe to the theory that the Crucible is blocking the Catalyst from controlling the Reapers). If it wanted Shepard indoctrinated, send some troops through the beam to capture him and drag him off to sit inside a Reaper for a week.

The only explanation that I can see for the Catalyst helping Shepard is that it is actually being genuine. Otherwise there are far easier ways to achieve what it wants, ways that don't involve the 'risk' of Shepard picking Destroy. For whatever reason - and there are some theories out there - the Catalyst prefers the solutions provided by the Crucible to its own method.

EDIT:

AlexMBrennan wrote...
But that's the crux of the matter - they are only viable solutions in hindsight. Destroying the Reapers will definitively end the Reaper war, but they might just keep killing us if Synthesis is chosen and Shepard makes it quite clear in auto dialogue that they don't consider Control viable (thus, their change of heart must be cause by the player's knowledge of the epilogue)

Which autodialogue are we referring to here? Because during the TIM/Anderson confrontation, I'd say it's possible to avoid having Shepard dismiss Control out of hand.

Modifié par JasonShepard, 21 janvier 2013 - 11:20 .

[Auintus]

jstme wrote...

Because advanced organo-synthetics would create ,say, ethereals and rebelling etherials then would wipe out all organo-synthetic life. Makes as much sense as the reason for original reaping solution. 

Creating synthetics served a purpose. Creating something else after Synthesis would not.

Modifié par Auintus, 21 janvier 2013 - 11:28 .

[xAmilli0n]

JasonShepard wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...
But that's the crux of the matter - they are only viable solutions in hindsight. Destroying the Reapers will definitively end the Reaper war, but they might just keep killing us if Synthesis is chosen and Shepard makes it quite clear in auto dialogue that they don't consider Control viable (thus, their change of heart must be cause by the player's knowledge of the epilogue)

Which autodialogue are we referring to here? Because during the TIM/Anderson confrontation, I'd say it's possible to avoid having Shepard dismiss Control out of hand.

Here is a link to a Shepard who is not dismissing Control outright, while still realizing that TIM was indoctrinated, and that his judgment is likely clouded.  Typically how my playthroughs go, much more exciting and less self rightous than the other option.

www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par xAmilli0n, 21 janvier 2013 - 11:35 .

[ZLurps]

Zack56 wrote...

Still surprised that nobody sees the reapers as victims too...

Not what you meant but Reapers deserved better ending.

[JasonShepard]

xAmilli0n wrote...

JasonShepard wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...
But that's the crux of the matter - they are only viable solutions in hindsight. Destroying the Reapers will definitively end the Reaper war, but they might just keep killing us if Synthesis is chosen and Shepard makes it quite clear in auto dialogue that they don't consider Control viable (thus, their change of heart must be cause by the player's knowledge of the epilogue)

Which autodialogue are we referring to here? Because during the TIM/Anderson confrontation, I'd say it's possible to avoid having Shepard dismiss Control out of hand.

Here is a link to a Shepard who is not dismissing Control outright, while still realizing that TIM was indoctrinated, and that his judgment is likely clouded.  Typically how my playthroughs go, much more exciting and less self rightous than the other option.

www.youtube.com/watch

Yeah - during that conversation I tend to pick both Charm and Intimidate options, in order to roleplay my Shepard as someone who is open to Control but fully aware TIM is indoctrinated and is trying to make TIM realise this.

[Auld Wulf]

@OP

Xenophobia, simple as. People want things to be black and white. You know, the Lars mindset, FIRE BAD and all that. Something has to be evil, something has to be good, good must destroy evil. Naturally, the player is the one-dimensional good guy, and the reapers are a one-dimensional evil (not that I see them that way, but this is how it is to the minds of some). And that's that.

It's just plain old xenophobia, and the short-sightedness and binary thinking that usually accompanies it.

Modifié par Auld Wulf, 22 janvier 2013 - 12:11 .

[KBomb]

I'd say creating a thread with the purpose of inciting inflammatory replies is a bit arrogant. Pot, kettle and all that.

[TheRealJayDee]

You know, the thing about Destroy as opposed to the other choices is...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Let's be fair, Seival is one of the most rational people on the forums.

Seival is one of the most rational people on the forums

...I should go...

Modifié par TheRealJayDee, 22 janvier 2013 - 12:30 .

[AlanC9]

JasonShepard wrote...
 If anything, Destroy is the one most likely to be a trick, since it's the one most tailored to what Shepard wants.

Imagine if shooting the tube actually caused Synthesis. Or disabled the Crucible altogether.

[xAmilli0n]

AlanC9 wrote...

JasonShepard wrote...
 If anything, Destroy is the one most likely to be a trick, since it's the one most tailored to what Shepard wants.

Imagine if shooting the tube actually caused Synthesis. Or disabled the Crucible altogether.

A possibility I seldom hear brought up.

[Meltemph]

xAmilli0n wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

JasonShepard wrote...
 If anything, Destroy is the one most likely to be a trick, since it's the one most tailored to what Shepard wants.

Imagine if shooting the tube actually caused Synthesis. Or disabled the Crucible altogether.

A possibility I seldom hear brought up.

Meh, if the kid is lying or being decitful, then IT is just as if not more viable then any of these explinations and/or refusing makes a lot more sense then anything else.   Outside of not listening to what the kid says and just randomly picking something, I'm not sure what would be the point, but since the other 2 have you die, well...


If the kid is telling the truth, then he is telling the truth and the only thing you can really question is his vagueness when explaining how certain options work.

[Eterna]

A lot of people pick Destroy out of bitterness and seek validation by trying to make anyone else who is happy with their ending as miserable as they are.

[Meltemph]

Eterna5 wrote...

A lot of people pick Destroy out of bitterness and seek validation by trying to make anyone else who is happy with their ending as miserable as they are.

I'm assuming you see yourself as their antithesis?

[xAmilli0n]

Meltemph wrote...

xAmilli0n wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

JasonShepard wrote...
 If anything, Destroy is the one most likely to be a trick, since it's the one most tailored to what Shepard wants.

Imagine if shooting the tube actually caused Synthesis. Or disabled the Crucible altogether.

A possibility I seldom hear brought up.

Meh, if the kid is lying or being decitful, then IT is just as if not more viable then any of these explinations and/or refusing makes a lot more sense then anything else.   Outside of not listening to what the kid says and just randomly picking something, I'm not sure what would be the point, but since the other 2 have you die, well...


If the kid is telling the truth, then he is telling the truth and the only thing you can really question is his vagueness when explaining how certain options work.

Oh, I have no problem believeing the Catalyst (if he wanted Shep dead or to fail, he wouldn't have brought her up the elevator).  I was just commenting a something that is, in fact, seldom brought up.

[Eterna]

Meltemph wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

A lot of people pick Destroy out of bitterness and seek validation by trying to make anyone else who is happy with their ending as miserable as they are.

I'm assuming you see yourself as their antithesis?

I'm sorry English isn;t my first language I don't really know what that means.