439 réponses à ce sujet

[PirateMouse]

KingZayd wrote...

PirateMouse wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Phatose wrote...

Actually, even refusal has good reason to be suspect if you think you might be indoctrinated. After all, it's possible in that situation that ANY action you take would have any result. If the crucible were only capable of destroying the reapers, presenting the choice becomes a way of taking advantage of your indoctrination. You take no action, when any one could've saved you. The Reapers have effectively stopped you.

The whole time thinking it's your idea, because as we've seen, indoctrination tends to distort what you already believe, not force new beliefs on you.

So, yeah. You're kind of screwed.

Actually, if you bring indoctrination into it, you can't destroy the Crucible as this is happening in your head. None of the options would actually destroy the Reapers. All that would matter would be the intent to destroy them. Start to see them as potential allies/tools (synthesis/control) and that's where you'd go wrong.

Maybe that's just what they want you to think.

There is no "they". The scenario's created by Shepard's infected brain.

I'm sure you believe that ...

[GreyLycanTrope]

I didn't like the existing options so I tried Zoidberg.

[Phatose]

I'm surprised that no one who thinks Shepard is indoctrinated has considered the possibility that in fact, the catalyst can do absolutely nothing.

After all, it was an idea brought forth by Liara and Shepard - both heavily involved with the Reapers and Reaper tech. The races of the Galaxy rerouted all available resources - resources that could have been resisting the Reapers - to build it, on Shepard and Liara's word - despite not knowing what it actually *does*, or for that matter if it does anything at all.

It's completely possible the ending choices are a simple experiment by the Reapers, get some additional insight into the mind of an exception organic. It's all in Shepard's head, and he's already served his purpose by uniting the galaxy in a singular quest to build a giant, useless device.

Oh, and even better, you then lead the unified forces of the galaxy all into one place where they faced overwhelming Reaper forces to use your giant useless device.

You've not only lessened the amount of resistance the Reapers had to face by convincing everyone to build the thing, you've also lead all major resisitance forces into a deathtrap. 

Really, if you think you're indoctrinated, you should probably be considering that possibility.

Modifié par Phatose, 12 avril 2013 - 04:03 .

[PirateMouse]

Phatose wrote...

I'm surprised that no one who thinks Shepard is indoctrinated has considered the possibility that in fact, the catalyst can do absolutely nothing.

After all, it was an idea brought forth by Liara and Shepard - both heavily involved with the Reapers and Reaper tech. The races of the Galaxy rerouted all available resources - resources that could have been resisting the Reapers - to build it, on Shepard and Liara's word - despite not knowing what it actually *does*, or for that matter if it does anything at all.

It's completely possible the ending choices are a simple experiment by the Reapers, get some additional insight into the mind of an exception organic. It's all in Shepard's head, and he's already served his purpose by uniting the galaxy in a singular quest to build a giant, useless device.

Really, if you think you're indoctrinated, you should probably be considering that possibility.

Oh, now this I like. 

[KingZayd]

Phatose wrote...

I'm surprised that no one who thinks Shepard is indoctrinated has considered the possibility that in fact, the catalyst can do absolutely nothing.

After all, it was an idea brought forth by Liara and Shepard - both heavily involved with the Reapers and Reaper tech. The races of the Galaxy rerouted all available resources - resources that could have been resisting the Reapers - to build it, on Shepard and Liara's word - despite not knowing what it actually *does*, or for that matter if it does anything at all.

It's completely possible the ending choices are a simple experiment by the Reapers, get some additional insight into the mind of an exception organic. It's all in Shepard's head, and he's already served his purpose by uniting the galaxy in a singular quest to build a giant, useless device.

Oh, and even better, you then lead the unified forces of the galaxy all into one place where they faced overwhelming Reaper forces to use your giant useless device.

You've not only lessened the amount of resistance the Reapers had to face by convincing everyone to build the thing, you've also lead all major resisitance forces into a deathtrap. 

Really, if you think you're indoctrinated, you should probably be considering that possibility.

Not worth considering for very long. If that was the case, everyone was doomed anyway. So no harm done.

[Phatose]

Well, actually "Harm already done".

In that case though, it's proper to wonder what effect, if any, your response will have on the long term goals.

[KingZayd]

Phatose wrote...

Well, actually "Harm already done".

In that case though, it's proper to wonder what effect, if any, your response will have on the long term goals.

None whatsoever. Reapers would be killing all the non-primitives anyway.

[remydat]

KingZayd wrote...

And where do the Leviathan get their info on the purpose of the cycle from? It's not as if they were able to have a chat with the Starchild is it? It's merely speculation. The cycles are the solution, not an experiment.

Statement 1 occurs in response to Shepard saying we'd rather be left alone. The Starchild says "No. You can't. Without us to stop it, synthetics would destroy all organics." This is the current standing. If it wasn't we could just be left alone.

As for statement 2, it is only in our power because the Starchild lets us. We didn't change the variables. The Starchild did. It brought us upstairs. And once we've used the crucible, we don't have the power to use it again. It is a very temporary state, and one that is given to us by the Starchild.

If we have used the Crucible, and there aren't any Reapers to stop us, according to the Starchild we will be destroyed.

This isn't an experiment. The Starchild isn't doing it to collect data. This is its solution, not research.

If it had been deemed that we were strong enough to protect ourselves, then why do we need another solution? Because we haven't.

And what exactly are you doing?  Are we suppose to believe your claims that directly contradict the entities that created the Catalyst, gave it purpose, and has watched it harvest for countless cycles from the shadows? 

The cycles are the imperfect solution as well as an experiment.  Those two things are not mutually exclusive. 

Statement 1 is the catalyst providing Shep with background.  Shepard does not know why the Catalyst does what it does.  He is being told. And the Catalyst simply answers your questions and leaves you alone to make your decision.  You are left to alone to decide your own future.  The galaxy is still outside being attacked but you have met the conditions the Catalyst established and after it explains the options, it leaves you alone FOREVER.

The Star Child says organics changed the variables.  He said it.  I did not.  So you ignore Leviathan and now you want to ignore Star Child.  . 

And no according to the Star Child there will still be chaos.  You are ignoring statement 3.  He never says we will be destroyed after he makes statement 2.  Never.  If you have evidence he says this then provide it. 

All you seem to have is one statement made at the begining of the conversation when the Catalyst is trying to explain why they Reapers have been killing people for billions of years.  Then pretty much you ignore every statement by it's creators and the only first person observer to the harvests as well as Star Child that explictly tell you the variables have changed.  Ok then.

[KingZayd]

remydat wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

And where do the Leviathan get their info on the purpose of the cycle from? It's not as if they were able to have a chat with the Starchild is it? It's merely speculation. The cycles are the solution, not an experiment.

Statement 1 occurs in response to Shepard saying we'd rather be left alone. The Starchild says "No. You can't. Without us to stop it, synthetics would destroy all organics." This is the current standing. If it wasn't we could just be left alone.

As for statement 2, it is only in our power because the Starchild lets us. We didn't change the variables. The Starchild did. It brought us upstairs. And once we've used the crucible, we don't have the power to use it again. It is a very temporary state, and one that is given to us by the Starchild.

If we have used the Crucible, and there aren't any Reapers to stop us, according to the Starchild we will be destroyed.

This isn't an experiment. The Starchild isn't doing it to collect data. This is its solution, not research.

If it had been deemed that we were strong enough to protect ourselves, then why do we need another solution? Because we haven't.

And what exactly are you doing?  Are we suppose to believe your claims that directly contradict the entities that created the Catalyst, gave it purpose, and has watched it harvest for countless cycles from the shadows? 

The cycles are the imperfect solution as well as an experiment.  Those two things are not mutually exclusive. 

Statement 1 is the catalyst providing Shep with background.  Shepard does not know why the Catalyst does what it does.  He is being told. And the Catalyst simply answers your questions and leaves you alone to make your decision.  You are left to alone to decide your own future.  The galaxy is still outside being attacked but you have met the conditions the Catalyst established and after it explains the options, it leaves you alone FOREVER.

The Star Child says organics changed the variables.  He said it.  I did not.  So you ignore Leviathan and now you want to ignore Star Child.  . 

And no according to the Star Child there will still be chaos.  You are ignoring statement 3.  He never says we will be destroyed after he makes statement 2.  Never.  If you have evidence he says this then provide it. Weh

All you seem to have is one statement made at the begining of the conversation when the Catalyst is trying to explain why they Reapers have been killing people for billions of years.  Then pretty much you ignore every statement by it's creators and the only first person observer to the harvests as well as Star Child that explictly tell you the variables have changed.  Ok then.

The "claims" are simply what the Starchild tells us.
The Reapers do not leave you alone forever once the options have been explained.

When did we change the variables? Surely not halfway through the conversation? So why does he have to repeat himself? He has already told us that we will be destroyed by Synthetics without the Reapers.

He makes the statement in response to Shepard saying we'd rather be left alone.

Modifié par KingZayd, 12 avril 2013 - 05:20 .

[remydat]

KingZayd wrote...

The "claims" are simply what the Starchild tells us.
The Reapers do not leave you alone forever once the options have been explained.

When did we change the variables? Surely not halfway through the conversation? So why does he have to repeat himself? He has already told us that we will be destroyed by Synthetics without the Reapers.

He makes the statement in response to Shepard saying we'd rather be left alone.

The variables were changed when we arrived.  That is what the Catalyst said.  Obviously Shep has questions so it has to explain to you what it has been doing for billions of years.  When Shep says we want to be left alone, it responds by first explaiining why it hasn't left you alone because previously if it did synthetics will destroy organics.  It then right after this statement says that Shep has changed the variables. 

 So it explained why it hasn't left you alone but then immediately tells you the situation has changed.  It then explains it's options and if you choose destroy it is perfectly fine with dying and leaving you alone forever.  All he says is chaos will return but he refrains from saying chaos will return and synthetics will destroy you.  The logical conclusion of him being willing to leave you alone forever is that he no longer thinks synthetics will inevitably destroy organics because he has told you your presence changed the variables.

[KingZayd]

remydat wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

The "claims" are simply what the Starchild tells us.
The Reapers do not leave you alone forever once the options have been explained.

When did we change the variables? Surely not halfway through the conversation? So why does he have to repeat himself? He has already told us that we will be destroyed by Synthetics without the Reapers.

He makes the statement in response to Shepard saying we'd rather be left alone.

The variables were changed when we arrived.  That is what the Catalyst said.  Obviously Shep has questions so it has to explain to you what it has been doing for billions of years.  When Shep says we want to be left alone, it responds by first explaiining why it hasn't left you alone because previously if it did synthetics will destroy organics.  It then right after this statement says that Shep has changed the variables. 

 So it explained why it hasn't left you alone but then immediately tells you the situation has changed.  It then explains it's options and if you choose destroy it is perfectly fine with dying and leaving you alone forever.  All he says is chaos will return but he refrains from saying chaos will return and synthetics will destroy you.  The logical conclusion of him being willing to leave you alone forever is that he no longer thinks synthetics will inevitably destroy organics because he has told you your presence changed the variables.

He uses the present tense. And that's incorrect. It takes about 3 minutes and then he says "the fact that you are standing here...". The variables he's talking about changing is due fact you added a giant battery to the Citadel.

Clearly you're the one who's confused.

[remydat]

KingZayd wrote...

He uses the present tense. And that's incorrect. It takes about 3 minutes and then he says "the fact that you are standing here...". The variables he's talking about changing is due fact you added a giant battery to the Citadel.

Clearly you're the one who's confused.

I am not sure your point here.  What does 3 minutes have to do with anything.  He is having a conversation.  What he says and does at the end of it supercedes what he said before because he is taking you through his thought process as He explain things to you. 

If I say to you right now I interfere because otherwise synthetics will destroy you then later on in the conversation say but you have more hope than you think and say the variables have changed then I am explaining real time how my thought process has changed.  I wouldn't let you get rid of me later on if I still believed you needed me.  I made a statement then later in the conversation noted how things have changed and then even later let you destroy me because you don't need me anymore.

Modifié par remydat, 12 avril 2013 - 07:02 .

[KingZayd]

remydat wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

He uses the present tense. And that's incorrect. It takes about 3 minutes and then he says "the fact that you are standing here...". The variables he's talking about changing is due fact you added a giant battery to the Citadel.

Clearly you're the one who's confused.

I am not sure your point here.  What does 3 minutes have to do with anything.  He is having a conversation.  What he says and does at the end of it supercedes what he said before because he is taking you through his thought process as He explain things to you. 

If I say to you right now I interfere because otherwise synthetics will destroy you then later on in the conversation say but you have more hope than you think and say the variables have changed then I am explaining real time how my thought process has changed.  I wouldn't let you get rid of me later on if I still believed you needed me.  I made a statement then later in the conversation noted how things have changed and then even later let you destroy me because you don't need me anymore.

I was describing the conversation since you've clearly misremembered/misunderstood. What you said happened, didn't,

That's not what the Starchild said. He said in the present tense "Without us to stop it, Synthetics would..."
The variables he is talking about are nothing to do with organics being able to deal with synthetics now. He says that the variables have changed, as now with the Crucible there are more options. Not that we don't need him anymore.

[TheRealJayDee]

Eterna5 wrote...

I pick Synthesis to infuriate people on the BSN.

By far the most sensible reason for Synthesis I've ever seen someone post...

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

I pick Control to establish a new race to the galactic community. I seriously think having the Reapers as some sort of new council race would be a great addition to....

What am I talking about. Space stalinism all the way!

[remydat]

KingZayd wrote...

I was describing the conversation since you've clearly misremembered/misunderstood. What you said happened, didn't,

That's not what the Starchild said. He said in the present tense "Without us to stop it, Synthetics would..."
The variables he is talking about are nothing to do with organics being able to deal with synthetics now. He says that the variables have changed, as now with the Crucible there are more options. Not that we don't need him anymore.

I never said he explicitly said we don't need him anymore.  If I say you need me to surive and then later in the conversation I say things have changed and then allow you to kill me then the logical conclusion is I don't think you need me anymore.  If I did, I would not have let you kill me. 

I said some stuff to you last night.  At the time, I used present tense.  Time has passed.  We are still having a conversation.  If I same something now or do something now that seemingly contradicts what I said last night then a logical conclusion is what I said last night is no longer what I believe.  So you telling me statement 1 was made in the presented is irrelevant.  At the time he said it, it was.  Then he said Statement 2 and State 3 in which he never claims again that the chaos will destroy organics and then in the ultimate show that he opinion has likely changed is willing to accept you killing him despite being able to kill you and despite being able to lie to you if he really thought you were considering picking destroy.   Shep has no f**king clue how the Crucible works.  He is completely dependent on the Catalyst telling him the options.

[KingZayd]

remydat wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

I was describing the conversation since you've clearly misremembered/misunderstood. What you said happened, didn't,

That's not what the Starchild said. He said in the present tense "Without us to stop it, Synthetics would..."
The variables he is talking about are nothing to do with organics being able to deal with synthetics now. He says that the variables have changed, as now with the Crucible there are more options. Not that we don't need him anymore.

I never said he explicitly said we don't need him anymore.  If I say you need me to surive and then later in the conversation I say things have changed and then allow you to kill me then the logical conclusion is I don't think you need me anymore.  If I did, I would not have let you kill me. 

I said some stuff to you last night.  At the time, I used present tense.  Time has passed.  We are still having a conversation.  If I same something now or do something now that seemingly contradicts what I said last night then a logical conclusion is what I said last night is no longer what I believe.  So you telling me statement 1 was made in the presented is irrelevant.  At the time he said it, it was.  Then he said Statement 2 and State 3 in which he never claims again that the chaos will destroy organics and then in the ultimate show that he opinion has likely changed is willing to accept you killing him despite being able to kill you and despite being able to lie to you if he really thought you were considering picking destroy.   Shep has no f**king clue how the Crucible works.  He is completely dependent on the Catalyst telling him the options.

That makes no sense. He stopped believing it halfway through the conversation then? Why? The variables we changed (he explicitly tells us what they are: He has the Crucible (a giant battery, he tells us) attached to him and now there are more options available) were changed before the conversation began.

Also, the Starchild never told Shepard how to activate the Crucible.

Modifié par KingZayd, 13 avril 2013 - 01:53 .

[remydat]

KingZayd wrote...

That makes no sense. He stopped believing it halfway through the conversation then? Why? The variables we changed (he explicitly tells us what they are: He has the Crucible (a giant battery, he tells us) attached to him and now there are more options available) were changed before the conversation began.

Also, the Starchild never told Shepard how to activate the Crucible.

This is their first meeting Zayd.  He is explaining to him what he has been doing for billions of years.  Why he has been slaughtering organics for all those years and why what is currently (ie present tense) happening outside the window is currently happening ie if left alone synthetics would destroy organics.

He then goes on and expains why that thing currently happening right now outside the window doesn't have to happen anymore because things have changed.  They changed from the moment Shep got there but before telling Shep things changed he simply explained why what is currently  happening right outside that window and why it is currently happening

If he honestly thought synthetics would still destroy organics then he wouldn't leave it up to Shep to decide especially when he has to know Shep is likely to choose destroy.  So he uses present tense because the thing he is trying to explain is still currently happening.  However, he makes it clear it doesn't have to happeny anymore.

[rrtda]

Synthesis is the most logical choice for me.

[KingZayd]

remydat wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

That makes no sense. He stopped believing it halfway through the conversation then? Why? The variables we changed (he explicitly tells us what they are: He has the Crucible (a giant battery, he tells us) attached to him and now there are more options available) were changed before the conversation began.

Also, the Starchild never told Shepard how to activate the Crucible.

This is their first meeting Zayd.  He is explaining to him what he has been doing for billions of years.  Why he has been slaughtering organics for all those years and why what is currently (ie present tense) happening outside the window is currently happening ie if left alone synthetics would destroy organics.

He then goes on and expains why that thing currently happening right now outside the window doesn't have to happen anymore because things have changed.  They changed from the moment Shep got there but before telling Shep things changed he simply explained why what is currently  happening right outside that window and why it is currently happening

If he honestly thought synthetics would still destroy organics then he wouldn't leave it up to Shep to decide especially when he has to know Shep is likely to choose destroy.  So he uses present tense because the thing he is trying to explain is still currently happening.  However, he makes it clear it doesn't have to happeny anymore.

He says they don't have to happen now because the Crucible can provide new solutions. THAT is what he says.
The only solution that could possibly solve the problem he talks about is synthesis.

He tells you that without the Reapers, synthetics would still destroy organics. Why would he say this if he didn't believe it? He makes this perfectly clear.

[Galbrant]

Greylycantrope wrote...

I didn't like the existing options so I tried Zoidberg.

I made out with him once... but I think it's because I just had a anchovies pizza and now I no longer have a tongue. 

[GreyLycanTrope]

Galbrant wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

I didn't like the existing options so I tried Zoidberg.

I made out with him once... but I think it's because I just had a anchovies pizza and now I no longer have a tongue. 

Note to self, never make out with Zoidberg.

[N7 Drone]

I choose Synthesis every snigle time. There no downside to perfection.

[cljqnsnyc]

The only ending for me is MEHEM+Citadel

Why?

Well, for me, ANY ending that validates the unbelievably ridiculous logic of the catalyst is a no go.

The MEHEM + Citadel fits my Shep. He started this journey way back in late 2007 on a different platform, and worked his way to ME3 on a pc. He has always been under MY control, and thanks to this mod and the dlc, he remains MY Shep, just as it should be.

Modifié par cljqnsnyc, 17 avril 2013 - 06:56 .

[Dunabar]

I cannot approve of the Reaper's reasoning for doing what they do, I do not trust the star child, and I will not force a change on the whole galaxy.

"Dead Reapers are how we win this war"