935 réponses à ce sujet

[The Twilight God]

remydat wrote...

When does shooting something activate it?  I can't shoot my computer and it turns on.  If he shoots the power conduit and the **** breaks then the galaxy burns.  Sorry, Shep has no damn clue.  This dude was sitting with Anderson reminiscing and sh*t before Hackett tells him the sh*t aint firing.  He has no clue how any of this stuff works.

You never shoot the Crucible. Scroll down to where the picture is and read from there.

To summarize: As I've already stated, Hackett expected the Crucible to fire automatically. When in the Decision Chamber there is some device set up at the docking point. Removing power to the device, via shooting the power conduit, allows the Crucible to arm. I must reiterate that the power conduit is NOT a part of the Crucible. Neither is the Control interface nor the synthesis beam as can be proven via in-game content.

remydat wrote...

The scene is fine to me.  You have three choices and you choose based on your own ideals.  I don't see a problem.  There is nothing wrong with control or synthesis to me.  Life is not so simplistic that oh because TIM advocated control that must mean it is bad.  People of things in life depend on the individual.  A gun in the hand of a criminal a bad.  A gun in the hand of a good cop is good.

My issue with Synthesis and Control has nothing to do with what TIM (or Saren) thinks. It's about what Shepard thinks right up to a few minutes before the Kid. There is a consistency issue. Also, it's a plain matter of trusting synthesis to not effectively turn organics and synthetics into a diffused Reaper or pretty husks. Or for Control not to reprogram Shepard into the Reaper mindset like every other current reaper was repurposed from a former organic/synthetic who opposed them. This sudden trust in the enemy without any reason to develop such a trust is absurd and makes no sense outside of indoctrination. It's fine only under the notion that it is an indoctrination attempt. Otherwise, it's nonsense.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

fizzypop wrote...

PirateMouse wrote...

Zazzerka wrote...

It would be kind of redundant if it killed all organics.

Here's a question for those who picked Control ...

Would you still pick Control if it required you to enslave all quarians?

All asari?

All turians?

etc.

Of course not ... but "enslaving" all Reapers is hardly equivalent as it only acts against an enemy force (the most terrible enemy force in the history of the galaxy, in fact).  By contrast, killing all synthetics means murdering friendlies and allies.  Your question and attempted analogy would make sense in this context if the Control ending already required you to "enslave" all synthetics.

That said, if you still want to pursue that, make your own thread about it.

You do realize there are many times in the series where you have to kill someone for a greater good? I mean shep had to murder 300k batarians in arrival and kill indoctrinated people....it's war people die sometimes even innocent people die. As far as killing all organics? No because it doesn't make any damn sense. We both know that.

No one is at war. Is fire at war when it burns? Is it in conflict? Or is it simply doing what it was created to do?

There is only the harvest. The Intelligence still serves its purpose. However it now sees the galaxy as an experiment.

The reapers were created to harvest.

[remydat]

Aaleel wrote...

Shepard hasn't seen anything to support this is the game just from a role playing standpoint.  The Catalyst solution is illogical and stupid so why would you just accept the reasoning that brought it about?  There is absolutely no reason too, none at all.

There's a thread going around about where you would like to insert dialogue, and I would right here.  I would have told the Catalyst that organics and synthetics are working together as we speak to stop you because there is no synthetics vs organics problem there is only a reapers vs the galaxy problem from where I stand, stopping which has been my goal has been from day one.  Now i'm going to do it by shooting this tube and making sure a reaper never kills anyone ever again.

Also show me where I said the Catalyst Shepard going bad was inevitable.  I said they're no guarantees it won't, which is something completely different, don't put words in my mouth. 

But my post sums up why I chose destroy.  In my Shepard's eyes the problem is reapers vs the galaxy, and that stopping the reapers from ever killing anyone again was the goal from the start.  Only one of the options does that definitively, and for certain, the others involve far too much crossing fingers and hoping for the best.

But whether he say it or not the logic is still the same.  I accept the threat was real because it has been killing us for billions of years to prevent it.  Am I suppose to believe he was doing that for sh*ts and giggles?  Am I suppose to believe Leviathan is a liar when it told us why the Catalyst was doing this?  Look if you want to pretend the problem did not exist to make your choice easier then go ahead.  I think the problem was real but the solution was terrible.

But if you are willing to eradicate a species because of this risk you might as well say it is inevitable.  That is basically what the Catalyst decided. 

[remydat]

robertthebard wrote...

Yeah, and here's a shocker for you, if you kill them, they can never do it again.  The clear and present danger has been removed, and they can't be a threat again.  It's simple, really.  Something I noticed in that vid I linked last night:

Shepard:  ...and there will be peace?

Catalyst:  The harvest will stop.  There's more to it, but the rest is about how the Reapers will be one with everyone else.  Nowhere does it say there will be peace, just that the harvest will stop.

And it comes with a cost (synthetics) and a risk (future synthetic race being pissed and killing you).  So it is simply a matter of what you think is the bigger risk and the bigger cost.

[remydat]

The Twilight God wrote...

You never shoot the Crucible. Scroll down to where the picture is and read from there.

To summarize: As I've already stated, Hackett expected the Crucible to fire automatically. When in the Decision Chamber there is some device set up at the docking point. Removing power to the device, via shooting the power conduit, allows the Crucible to arm. I must reiterate that the power conduit is NOT a part of the Crucible. Neither is the Control interface nor the synthesis beam as can be proven via in-game content.

My issue with Synthesis and Control has nothing to do with what TIM (or Saren) thinks. It's about what Shepard thinks right up to a few minutes before the Kid. There is a consistency issue. Also, it's a plain matter of trusting synthesis to not effectively turn organics and synthetics into a diffused Reaper or pretty husks. Or for Control not to reprogram Shepard into the Reaper mindset like every other current reaper was repurposed from a former organic/synthetic who opposed them. This sudden trust in the enemy without any reason to develop such a trust is absurd and makes no sense outside of indoctrination. It's fine only under the notion that it is an indoctrination attempt. Otherwise, it's nonsense.

But you know this how?  Explain to me how Shep as he is bleeding and half dying is suppose to understand all of this?

Shepard doesn't know why the harvest is occuring.  Changing his mind when he finds out is entirely logicial.  People change their minds when they find out more information.  That is called being sensible.  You are free not to change you mind but acting like everyone should not change their mind is where you lose me.  You don't want to change you mind.  Good, you have destroy.  I upon learning that has been going on for the past billion years or so decide I don't want to sacrifice another race now that I know what the problem is.

[fizzypop]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

PirateMouse wrote...

Zazzerka wrote...

It would be kind of redundant if it killed all organics.

Here's a question for those who picked Control ...

Would you still pick Control if it required you to enslave all quarians?

All asari?

All turians?

etc.

Of course not ... but "enslaving" all Reapers is hardly equivalent as it only acts against an enemy force (the most terrible enemy force in the history of the galaxy, in fact).  By contrast, killing all synthetics means murdering friendlies and allies.  Your question and attempted analogy would make sense in this context if the Control ending already required you to "enslave" all synthetics.

That said, if you still want to pursue that, make your own thread about it.

You do realize there are many times in the series where you have to kill someone for a greater good? I mean shep had to murder 300k batarians in arrival and kill indoctrinated people....it's war people die sometimes even innocent people die. As far as killing all organics? No because it doesn't make any damn sense. We both know that.

No one is at war. Is fire at war when it burns? Is it in conflict? Or is it simply doing what it was created to do?

There is only the harvest. The Intelligence still serves its purpose. However it now sees the galaxy as an experiment.

The reapers were created to harvest.

Seriously, don't play word games it does nothing to further your argument. You completely missed my point. My point was shep has killed innocent people in order to further her/his goal of destroying the reapers. So even if you pick blue or green options you have still done those acts. How is that ANY better than choosing to destroy the geth or EDI? They aren't much different IMO. I'm not arguing which ending is better or other such nonsense. I'm saying that you can't act all hoiler than thou because everyone's shep has had to make some difficult choices (allowing a squad member to die, killing 300k people, rewriting or killing a whole **** ton of geth, killing indoctrinated people, and the list goes on).

[fizzypop]

remydat wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

You never shoot the Crucible. Scroll down to where the picture is and read from there.

To summarize: As I've already stated, Hackett expected the Crucible to fire automatically. When in the Decision Chamber there is some device set up at the docking point. Removing power to the device, via shooting the power conduit, allows the Crucible to arm. I must reiterate that the power conduit is NOT a part of the Crucible. Neither is the Control interface nor the synthesis beam as can be proven via in-game content.

My issue with Synthesis and Control has nothing to do with what TIM (or Saren) thinks. It's about what Shepard thinks right up to a few minutes before the Kid. There is a consistency issue. Also, it's a plain matter of trusting synthesis to not effectively turn organics and synthetics into a diffused Reaper or pretty husks. Or for Control not to reprogram Shepard into the Reaper mindset like every other current reaper was repurposed from a former organic/synthetic who opposed them. This sudden trust in the enemy without any reason to develop such a trust is absurd and makes no sense outside of indoctrination. It's fine only under the notion that it is an indoctrination attempt. Otherwise, it's nonsense.

But you know this how?  Explain to me how Shep as he is bleeding and half dying is suppose to understand all of this?

Shepard doesn't know why the harvest is occuring.  Changing his mind when he finds out is entirely logicial.  People change their minds when they find out more information.  That is called being sensible.  You are free not to change you mind but acting like everyone should not change their mind is where you lose me.  You don't want to change you mind.  Good, you have destroy.  I upon learning that has been going on for the past billion years or so decide I don't want to sacrifice another race now that I know what the problem is.

Shep can change her/his mind, but is it right that shep alone gets to decide the fate of all humanity and the galaxy? The entire galaxy depended on shep to kill/destroy the reapers that's what the majority wanted. I doubt many of them are going to be happy to find themselves either half machine or reapers are now serving a new master. So the idea that either of those endings is going to be all peachy is well unrealistic. Of course this all comes down to how poorly thought out the endings actually were.

[Xilizhra]

Shep can change her/his mind, but is it right that shep alone gets to decide the fate of all humanity and the galaxy? The entire galaxy depended on shep to kill/destroy the reapers that's what the majority wanted. I doubt many of them are going to be happy to find themselves either half machine or reapers are now serving a new master. So the idea that either of those endings is going to be all peachy is well unrealistic. Of course this all comes down to how poorly thought out the endings actually were.

If someone would rather see the genocide of all synthetics than possibly be nervous about implications of Reaper survival even when they're no longer at war, their opinion doesn't matter to me.

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

Shep can change her/his mind, but is it right that shep alone gets to decide the fate of all humanity and the galaxy? The entire galaxy depended on shep to kill/destroy the reapers that's what the majority wanted. I doubt many of them are going to be happy to find themselves either half machine or reapers are now serving a new master. So the idea that either of those endings is going to be all peachy is well unrealistic. Of course this all comes down to how poorly thought out the endings actually were.

If someone would rather see the genocide of all synthetics than possibly be nervous about implications of Reaper survival even when they're no longer at war, their opinion doesn't matter to me.

. Does anybody's opinion really matter to your ending choice?  I don't pick Destroy because it what other people want.

[Aaleel]

remydat wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

Shepard hasn't seen anything to support this is the game just from a role playing standpoint.  The Catalyst solution is illogical and stupid so why would you just accept the reasoning that brought it about?  There is absolutely no reason too, none at all.

There's a thread going around about where you would like to insert dialogue, and I would right here.  I would have told the Catalyst that organics and synthetics are working together as we speak to stop you because there is no synthetics vs organics problem there is only a reapers vs the galaxy problem from where I stand, stopping which has been my goal has been from day one.  Now i'm going to do it by shooting this tube and making sure a reaper never kills anyone ever again.

Also show me where I said the Catalyst Shepard going bad was inevitable.  I said they're no guarantees it won't, which is something completely different, don't put words in my mouth. 

But my post sums up why I chose destroy.  In my Shepard's eyes the problem is reapers vs the galaxy, and that stopping the reapers from ever killing anyone again was the goal from the start.  Only one of the options does that definitively, and for certain, the others involve far too much crossing fingers and hoping for the best.

But whether he say it or not the logic is still the same.  I accept the threat was real because it has been killing us for billions of years to prevent it.  Am I suppose to believe he was doing that for sh*ts and giggles?  Am I suppose to believe Leviathan is a liar when it told us why the Catalyst was doing this?  Look if you want to pretend the problem did not exist to make your choice easier then go ahead.  I think the problem was real but the solution was terrible.

But if you are willing to eradicate a species because of this risk you might as well say it is inevitable.  That is basically what the Catalyst decided. 

So basically you're saying that just because someone is doing something, anything, even if it's the dumbest thing you've ever seen, it must have been a problem just because they decided it needed done?  OK, if that's all it takes to convince you then more power to you.  I need a little bit more though.

It's not even like the Catalyst said there was a time when organcis almost went extinct, and were saved from synthetics and to ensure that never happened again they started this.  I may have bought that, but it didn't even give Shepard this much.  It is basically saying this problem exists because I say it does.

Modifié par Aaleel, 16 avril 2013 - 01:31 .

[fizzypop]

Xilizhra wrote...

Shep can change her/his mind, but is it right that shep alone gets to decide the fate of all humanity and the galaxy? The entire galaxy depended on shep to kill/destroy the reapers that's what the majority wanted. I doubt many of them are going to be happy to find themselves either half machine or reapers are now serving a new master. So the idea that either of those endings is going to be all peachy is well unrealistic. Of course this all comes down to how poorly thought out the endings actually were.

If someone would rather see the genocide of all synthetics than possibly be nervous about implications of Reaper survival even when they're no longer at war, their opinion doesn't matter to me.

I find that very ironic considering that's the same attitude that lead the reapers to the logic of their harvests. The idea that one person's opinion matters more over the majority is exactly what that galaxy doesn't need. What would you say if the geth and EDI both agreed the reapers must be destroyed even at the cost of their lives? You seem to think that they weren't ready to lay their lives down.

My main point was simply that the endings that were portrayed for blue and green weren't realistic. No one is going to be all happy skippy with the choice shep made in either of those circumstances...they missed a great storytelling opportunity.

Modifié par fizzypop, 16 avril 2013 - 01:36 .

[Xilizhra]

fizzypop wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Shep can change her/his mind, but is it right that shep alone gets to decide the fate of all humanity and the galaxy? The entire galaxy depended on shep to kill/destroy the reapers that's what the majority wanted. I doubt many of them are going to be happy to find themselves either half machine or reapers are now serving a new master. So the idea that either of those endings is going to be all peachy is well unrealistic. Of course this all comes down to how poorly thought out the endings actually were.

If someone would rather see the genocide of all synthetics than possibly be nervous about implications of Reaper survival even when they're no longer at war, their opinion doesn't matter to me.

I find that very ironic considering that's the same attitude that lead the reapers to the logic of their harvests. The idea that one person's opinion matters more over the majority is exactly what that galaxy doesn't need. What would you say if the geth and EDI both agreed the reapers must be destroyed even at the cost of their lives? You seem to think that they weren't ready to lay their lives down.

They didn't have all necessary information and couldn't make an informed decision on the matter.

[fizzypop]

Xilizhra wrote...

fizzypop wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Shep can change her/his mind, but is it right that shep alone gets to decide the fate of all humanity and the galaxy? The entire galaxy depended on shep to kill/destroy the reapers that's what the majority wanted. I doubt many of them are going to be happy to find themselves either half machine or reapers are now serving a new master. So the idea that either of those endings is going to be all peachy is well unrealistic. Of course this all comes down to how poorly thought out the endings actually were.

If someone would rather see the genocide of all synthetics than possibly be nervous about implications of Reaper survival even when they're no longer at war, their opinion doesn't matter to me.

I find that very ironic considering that's the same attitude that lead the reapers to the logic of their harvests. The idea that one person's opinion matters more over the majority is exactly what that galaxy doesn't need. What would you say if the geth and EDI both agreed the reapers must be destroyed even at the cost of their lives? You seem to think that they weren't ready to lay their lives down.

They didn't have all necessary information and couldn't make an informed decision on the matter.

And if they did and still chose it?

Also since I edited my original post; My main point was simply that the endings that were portrayed for blue and green weren't realistic. No one is going to be all happy skippy with the choice shep made in either of thosecircumstances...they missed a great storytelling opportunity.

Modifié par fizzypop, 16 avril 2013 - 01:36 .

[Xilizhra]

And if they did and still chose it?

I would decide then.

Also since I edited my original post; My main point was simply that the endings that were protrayed for blue
and green weren't realistic. No one is going to be all happy skippy with
the choice shep made in either of those circumstances...they missed a
great storytelling opportunity.

It's a damn sight better than what had just been happening prior, and the end of the war will be pleasant enough for them.

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

They didn't have all necessary information and couldn't make an informed decision on the matter.

. What information do they need?  The Reapers are out to kill every being in the galaxy.  That's all they need to know to make a decision.  Adding context, which is what the Catalyst ultimately tries to do, only means we know why they are trying to kill us all.  The fact remains, they are still trying to kill us all.

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...
It's a damn sight better than what had just been happening prior, and the end of the war will be pleasant enough for them.

. I'm pretty sure that's what the Allies reasoning was at the end of WW1.  There's no way they could ever want revenge.........

[Xilizhra]

Steelcan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

They didn't have all necessary information and couldn't make an informed decision on the matter.

. What information do they need?  The Reapers are out to kill every being in the galaxy.  That's all they need to know to make a decision.  Adding context, which is what the Catalyst ultimately tries to do, only means we know why they are trying to kill us all.  The fact remains, they are still trying to kill us all.

What they don't know is that killing the Reapers means wiping them out, and that the Reapers can be stopped without killing them.

. I'm pretty sure that's what the Allies reasoning was at the end of WW1.  There's no way they could ever want revenge.........

Well, certainly the countries that the Allies saved didn't want revenge. But countries IRL can't be Controlled or Synthesized, so the enemy nations were understandably annoyed.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 16 avril 2013 - 01:39 .

[fizzypop]

Xilizhra wrote...

And if they did and still chose it?

I would decide then.

Also since I edited my original post; My main point was simply that the endings that were protrayed for blue
and green weren't realistic. No one is going to be all happy skippy with
the choice shep made in either of those circumstances...they missed a
great storytelling opportunity.

It's a damn sight better than what had just been happening prior, and the end of the war will be pleasant enough for them.

So it's okay to overwrite people's decisions when you don't like them? That's even MORE awesome because that's exactly what's feared in the control ending...shep ending up just like the reapers.

You think it'd be pleasant. We both don't know that. If they revolted against it would it be pleasant then? Kill the very people you swore to protect? Or would you control them? This is turning out to be an awesome villian story. I'm digging it.

Modifié par fizzypop, 16 avril 2013 - 01:41 .

[Xilizhra]

So it's okay to overwrite people's deicisons when you don't like them? That's even MORE awesome because that's exactly what's feared in the control ending...shep ending up just like the reapers.

Protecting a minority from the tyranny of the majority.

You think it'd be pleasant. We both don't know that. If they revolted against it would it be pleasant then? Kill the very people you swore to protect? Or would you control them? This is turning out to be an awesome villian story. I'm digging it.

Why would they revolt? All I'm doing is reconstructing the war damage. They're effectively getting war reparations out of the Reapers.

[remydat]

fizzypop wrote...

Shep can change her/his mind, but is it right that shep alone gets to decide the fate of all humanity and the galaxy? The entire galaxy depended on shep to kill/destroy the reapers that's what the majority wanted. I doubt many of them are going to be happy to find themselves either half machine or reapers are now serving a new master. So the idea that either of those endings is going to be all peachy is well unrealistic. Of course this all comes down to how poorly thought out the endings actually were.

That is irrelevant.  Shep is the only one that made it there and he has to decide no matter what.  Is it right he gets to decide the fate of all synthetics? No but you still choose destroy don't you?  All you are telling me is you don't like him deciding for organics but are perfectly happy with him deciding for synthetics.

And the fact is post synthesis, they do in fact look quite happy half machine and organic.  I see plenty of people smilling. 

Aaleel wrote...

So basically you're saying that just because someone is doing something, anything, even if it's the dumbest thing you've ever seen, it must have been a problem just because they decided it needed done?  OK, if that's all it takes to convince you then more power to you.  I need a little bit more though.

It's not even like the Catalyst said there was a time when organcis almost went extinct, and were saved from synthetics and to ensure that never happened again they started this.  I may have bought that, but it didn't even give Shepard this much.  It is basically saying this problem exists because I say it does.

So if this threat was not real, why was it harvesting for billions of year?  Why did Leviathan create it?  Is Leviathan in on this grand life.  If I decide to prevent AIDs by killing humans before they can catch it, that's pretty f**king dumb.  That does not mean AIDs did not exist.

Levithan said this time existed.  It said Synthetics destroyed their thralls and Tribute does not come from a dead race.

Modifié par remydat, 16 avril 2013 - 01:42 .

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

What they don't know is that killing the Reapers means wiping them out, and that the Reapers can be stopped without killing them.

. I'm pretty sure that's what the Allies reasoning was at the end of WW1.  There's no way they could ever want revenge.........

Well, certainly the countries that the Allies saved didn't want revenge. But countries IRL can't be Controlled or Synthesized, so the enemy nations were understandably annoyed.

. They dedicated their lives to the cause and were willing to risk death before they understood the context.  There's no reason to assume they'd chicken out at the last minute.

And yes those countries did want revenge.  France wanted to completely destroy Germany's industrial capabilities, so did Belgium, the newly created Poland, and the British.

Modifié par Steelcan, 16 avril 2013 - 01:45 .

[fizzypop]

Xilizhra wrote...

So it's okay to overwrite people's deicisons when you don't like them? That's even MORE awesome because that's exactly what's feared in the control ending...shep ending up just like the reapers.

Protecting a minority from the tyranny of the majority.

You think it'd be pleasant. We both don't know that. If they revolted against it would it be pleasant then? Kill the very people you swore to protect? Or would you control them? This is turning out to be an awesome villian story. I'm digging it.

Why would they revolt? All I'm doing is reconstructing the war damage. They're effectively getting war reparations out of the Reapers.

Tyranny? I'm starting to think you take this way too seriously. You seriously can't even think of ONE reason people would be against control really? I don't believe you lack that much of an imagination. I'm sure many people wouldn't give a flip about their reparations or how useful they'd be. Humans and I'm guessing many of the other species aren't logical computers...they are emotional beings. It's the same reason people are STILL pissed off at Germany for the **** they did even though it's been YEARS since they tried to take over the world. People don't forgive or forget easily. The only way I can see a 100% peaceful ending with control is if shep orders them to kill themselves, but keeping around the very thing that threatened their entire existence? That they couldn't defeat using conventional means? Yeah I doubt most people would be "lol COOL SLAVES!". Acting as if they would is simply unrealistic. As I said it'd have made for a great story even if they wanted to paint it positive they could've without giving us such a cop out.

Have you ever heard the phase; absolute power corrupts absolutely? Something to consider.

[remydat]

Steelcan wrote...

And yes those countries did want revenge.  France wanted to completely destroy Germany's industrial capabilities, so did Belgium, the newly created Poland, and the British.

I thought it was Russia that wanted to turn Germany into potatoes fields.  I thought that was the reason for the Cold War essentially.  Russia wanted to send Germany back to the Dark Ages while the West (mostly the US) decided Europe could not be rebuilt without German industry.  France may have been pissed because hey they kept getting their a** kicked by the Germans but I thought Britain was on board with the US plan.  Could be wrong though.

[Steelcan]

remydat wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

And yes those countries did want revenge.  France wanted to completely destroy Germany's industrial capabilities, so did Belgium, the newly created Poland, and the British.

I thought it was Russia that wanted to turn Germany into potatoes fields.  I thought that was the reason for the Cold War essentially.  Russia wanted to send Germany back to the Dark Ages while the West (mostly the US) decided Europe could not be rebuilt without German industry.  France may have been pissed because hey they kept getting their a** kicked by the Germans but I thought Britain was on board with the US plan.  Could be wrong though.

. Talking about WW1.  You'd be right if we were talking about WW2.

[Blarg]

Seems odd to me that some would happily sacrifice all synthetics, but are against sacrificing all organics.

They're pretty much the same when it comes down to it: both are forms of life, and both are going to be harvested by the Reapers to bring order to the chaos.

So what's the difference?

My answer to the OP: I would sacrifice a single race. That's it. The reason I didn't pick Destroy is because you are sacrificing all synthetic races, which, IMO, is the same as sacrificing all organic races.