883 réponses à ce sujet

[The Night Mammoth]

So the argument here is that Destroy is too risky to choose because what's left of the Reapers will indoctrinate people, because it's a natural part of them.

Well, maybe, but I'd rather risk some people maybe being indoctrinated, than have everyone die.

I don't really understand this though. If the Reapers are still indoctrinating people if they're dead, how are they doing it and what are the results? People who have been indoctrinated come to serve the Reapers, and are under their control, but if the Reapers are dead, how are people being affected?

[Steelcan]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

So the argument here is that Destroy is too risky to choose because what's left of the Reapers will indoctrinate people, because it's a natural part of them.

Well, maybe, but I'd rather risk some people maybe being indoctrinated, than have everyone die.

I don't really understand this though. If the Reapers are still indoctrinating people if they're dead, how are they doing it and what are the results? People who have been indoctrinated come to serve the Reapers, and are under their control, but if the Reapers are dead, how are people being affected?

. Well the indoctrinated Protheans just kind of wasted away without the Reapers there.

[Wynterdust]

There is a difference between a derelict reaper and a dead one. Sovereign is very much dead.
The only thing messing with minds in Leviathan are the Leviathans orbs that are being used to enthrall, not indoctrinate.
The crucible was designed to target the reapers and so it would logically destroy anything reaper related. It may be making assumptions but it is only the same as assuming everythings rainbows and butterflies in synthesis.
Destroying the reapers ends the suffering of billions... since they are no longer being hunted down and mercilessly murdered anymore. Besides, they all seem cheery and happy in the epilogue and the slides afterwards so not sure where you are getting "centuries of suffering for the survivors" from.

[Seival]

robertthebard wrote...

Seival wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Seival wrote...

So many emotions and zero constructivity. I give you strong evidence, but you only bark in reply... as any hater who hates the ones who actually like the story and the ending concept.

I suppose the only ending you can accept is Destroy. But this thread make you doubt about that choice. After realizing that Destroy is much more complicated than you thought, you panicked. And your hate here is some kind of twisted defence reaction.

Stop panicking, please. Panic will never help you to understand something.

You mean like calling people stupid for insisting on proof of something you claim, despite your not providing the proof?  I asked for one thing, something which you swear should be simple to understand, and yet, other than the aforementioned assault on my intelligence, you have yet to provide it.  In case it's not clear, since you decided to make it personal, I'm not going to stop insisting that you support your claims with proof, instead of "because I believe that's what's going to happen".

So, where's my video of Sovereign indoctrinating anyone in Leviathan?

 - We both know that derelict Reaper can indoctrinate.
 - I gave you a prof that even small piece of a Reaper is too dangerous to be left unshielded.
 - If you really played Leviathan DLC, then you should know that indoctrination is property of organic part of a Reaper.
 - ME2 shows you that mass effect core only held derelict Reaper on orbit, and had nothing to do with indoctrination itself.
 - Arrival and Sanctuary show that it's just a matter of time when any Reaper device will influence you, if left unshielded.

You just refuse to see the facts. And you can't prove that I'm wrong. All you said is that "Reaper tech can't indoctrinate without power source", and "Destroy eliminates Reaper tech completely", said without any evidence to prove that. You don't wanna realize that Destroy is much more complicated than you initially thought.

You clearly want to win in the end. But you can't. You can only accept the enemy's rules and keep galactic civilization in game... or refuse which is also the act of accepting enemy's rules, because Cycles will continue. The ultimate winners are only Leviathans. In any ending... Destroy doesn't make you a winner. It only makes you the one who want revenge at any cost, even if the cost is millions of deaths and centuries of suffering for the survivors.

Can you link the video where ME 2 shows that the Reaper doesn't need power to indoctrinate?  Since it's not a natural ability, Reapers being synthetic, they can't have "natural abilities" by definition, and other entries involved in indoctrination indicate that it works on some kind of signal, see the discussion with Rana on Virmire in ME 1, in order to broadcast that signal, it would need power.  So, w/out power, how is it going to work?  The thing about the device in Arrival is, it's active, meaning, it has the power to broadcast the indoctrination signal, and the same applies to any Reaper tech at Sanctuary.  It's hard to use a machine, if you don't turn it on.  If you doubt me on that, shut down your computer and try to respond to this post.

I already provided you with everything to make the right conclusion. Video from ME3 about small Reaper part (without any power sources) that had to be shielded to avoid indoctrination, reference from ME2 about the derelict Reaper, and so on. But the facts somehow harm your personal opinion on Destroy ending. So, you are just trying to defend it, fighting for the lost cause. Forget about the win. You can't win in Mass Effect Trilogy, and this is one of the things that make the story really good.

[Steelcan]

No Seival, that's what makes it really bad. ME as a whole does not buck convention on anything really. Their attempt at an artsy ending fell on its face because it is narratively inconsistent with the story that preceded it.

And PS, there's no evidence that the piece of Sovereign in Leviathan HAD to be shielded. They were just being careful. It could have been completely inert.

[robertthebard]

Seival wrote...

I already provided you with everything to make the right conclusion. Video from ME3 about small Reaper part (without any power sources) that had to be shielded to avoid indoctrination, reference from ME2 about the derelict Reaper, and so on. But the facts somehow harm your personal opinion on Destroy ending. So, you are just trying to defend it, fighting for the lost cause. Forget about the win. You can't win in Mass Effect Trilogy, and this is one of the things that make the story really good.

You have provided nothing to prove your assertion.  You have simply provided a video that says "see, a piece of a Reaper in our lab, but we took precautions, just in case".  But you provided no proof that anyone had been indoctrinated by that piece of Sovereign.  Yet again, you ignore things that won't fit into your neat little box, and point to head canon to use as proof.  So show me the video of Reapers indoctrinating w/out a power source.  You don't need to go on a 3 page rampage of "it's that way because I said so", all you have to do is provide evidence that contradicts what we've been told about indoctrination since ME 1, since everything you're basing your latest fantasy epic on is hinged on people not knowing anything about it.

[Seival]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

So the argument here is that Destroy is too risky to choose because what's left of the Reapers will indoctrinate people, because it's a natural part of them.

Well, maybe, but I'd rather risk some people maybe being indoctrinated, than have everyone die.

I don't really understand this though. If the Reapers are still indoctrinating people if they're dead, how are they doing it and what are the results? People who have been indoctrinated come to serve the Reapers, and are under their control, but if the Reapers are dead, how are people being affected?

You missed the point. Completely.

The argument here is that Destroy is not too dire, but only because of the Leviathans.

Also, if someone was indoctrinated without guidance, he becomes just insane. The proof of that is in ME2. Influenced Cerberus personnel started to worship derelict Reaper, and eventually most of them became husks, the rest - died. Without any purpose behind it, because dead Reaper was no longer under the Catalyst's control obviously.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Seival wrote...
What you did is just delayed Synthesis.

And millions of derelict Reapers so close to galactic civilization was a very... hmm... specific gift to survivors.

Yes, I did delay synthesis. 

I delayed so that when it is finally induced (be decades, centuries, or millenia), it will be for good cause, it won't have some stupid made up effect such as making organics "perfect" or giving "understanding" to synthetics, it will be scientifically plausible, it will be biologically plausible, it will be logically plausible, it won't be involuntary, and it won't be called the "final evolution of all life".

The thousands of derelict Reapers are going to be useful once we've dissassembled, studied, and integrated the technology. And no indoctrination is necessary either. Since there will be no indoctrination. Dead Reapers prevent that.

Leviathan is little more than a crab/cuttlefish thing stewing about on its world. It has no influence on the galaxy whatsoever. None.

I love Destroy! 

(Or at least tolerate it among the current filth called an ending...<_<)

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 03 mai 2013 - 04:20 .

[Steelcan]

Seival wrote...

The argument here is that Destroy is not too dire, but only because of the Leviathans.
.

. You can keep saying that until you are blue in the face, but that doesn't make it true in the slightest.  We already have the underpinning knowledge of how Relays work, and the Citadel is just a big station.  Neither of those will be too difficult to repair.

[Seival]

robertthebard wrote...

Seival wrote...

I already provided you with everything to make the right conclusion. Video from ME3 about small Reaper part (without any power sources) that had to be shielded to avoid indoctrination, reference from ME2 about the derelict Reaper, and so on. But the facts somehow harm your personal opinion on Destroy ending. So, you are just trying to defend it, fighting for the lost cause. Forget about the win. You can't win in Mass Effect Trilogy, and this is one of the things that make the story really good.

You have provided nothing to prove your assertion.  You have simply provided a video that says "see, a piece of a Reaper in our lab, but we took precautions, just in case".  But you provided no proof that anyone had been indoctrinated by that piece of Sovereign.  Yet again, you ignore things that won't fit into your neat little box, and point to head canon to use as proof.  So show me the video of Reapers indoctrinating w/out a power source.  You don't need to go on a 3 page rampage of "it's that way because I said so", all you have to do is provide evidence that contradicts what we've been told about indoctrination since ME 1, since everything you're basing your latest fantasy epic on is hinged on people not knowing anything about it.

This exchange is over.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Destroy destroys Reapers.

All Reapers are destroyed.

All that is left is a dead husk.

The mind or minds of a Reaper are all dead.

There is no indoctrination. There are no Reaper minds left to cause indoctrination.

Even if the technology causes it, what can the indoctrinated person do? The Reapers are dead.

[AresKeith]

Seival wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Seival wrote...

I already provided you with everything to make the right conclusion. Video from ME3 about small Reaper part (without any power sources) that had to be shielded to avoid indoctrination, reference from ME2 about the derelict Reaper, and so on. But the facts somehow harm your personal opinion on Destroy ending. So, you are just trying to defend it, fighting for the lost cause. Forget about the win. You can't win in Mass Effect Trilogy, and this is one of the things that make the story really good.

You have provided nothing to prove your assertion.  You have simply provided a video that says "see, a piece of a Reaper in our lab, but we took precautions, just in case".  But you provided no proof that anyone had been indoctrinated by that piece of Sovereign.  Yet again, you ignore things that won't fit into your neat little box, and point to head canon to use as proof.  So show me the video of Reapers indoctrinating w/out a power source.  You don't need to go on a 3 page rampage of "it's that way because I said so", all you have to do is provide evidence that contradicts what we've been told about indoctrination since ME 1, since everything you're basing your latest fantasy epic on is hinged on people not knowing anything about it.

This exchange is over.

What's wrong Seival can't find any proof to back up your claims

[GreyLycanTrope]

Seival wrote...
This exchange is over.

SO BE IT!

[Seival]

Steelcan wrote...

No Seival, that's what makes it really bad. ME as a whole does not buck convention on anything really. Their attempt at an artsy ending fell on its face because it is narratively inconsistent with the story that preceded it.

And PS, there's no evidence that the piece of Sovereign in Leviathan HAD to be shielded. They were just being careful. It could have been completely inert.

I think that the ending concept fits the story just perfectly. And we couldn't expect anything but bittersweet and completely unpredictable ending, where you can't win... but can take part in great, and unimaginable galactic-scale changes.

"Could have been completely inert" can't prove anything. But fact of shielding can. Also, let's not forget about Arrival and Sanctuary. This is what happens when Reaper tech left unshielded and/or used for some experiments.

[Steelcan]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Seival wrote...
This exchange is over.

SO BE IT!

http://m.youtube.com...h?v=RTh3RaFFIpk

Dat Reaper benevolence.  They are just so willing to help us.

[AresKeith]

Seival wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

No Seival, that's what makes it really bad. ME as a whole does not buck convention on anything really. Their attempt at an artsy ending fell on its face because it is narratively inconsistent with the story that preceded it.

And PS, there's no evidence that the piece of Sovereign in Leviathan HAD to be shielded. They were just being careful. It could have been completely inert.

I think that the ending concept fits the story just perfectly. And we couldn't expect anything but bittersweet and completely unpredictable ending, where you can't win... but can take part in great, and unimaginable galactic-scale changes.

"Could have been completely inert" can't prove anything. But fact of shielding can. Also, let's not forget about Arrival and Sanctuary. This is what happens when Reaper tech left unshielded and/or used for some experiments.

Project Rho isn't a severed limb of a dead Reaper

[Seival]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Seival wrote...
This exchange is over.

SO BE IT!

That was told not for you.

...But if you insist

[Steelcan]

Seival wrote...

I think that the ending concept fits the story just perfectly. And we couldn't expect anything but bittersweet and completely unpredictable ending, where you can't win... but can take part in great, and unimaginable galactic-scale changes.

"Could have been completely inert" can't prove anything. But fact of shielding can. Also, let's not forget about Arrival and Sanctuary. This is what happens when Reaper tech left unshielded and/or used for some experiments.

. ME has always been a fairly typical, shooter action story.  The other two endings (except Shepard dies in ME2) are pretty optimistic and hopeful.  The whole series has always been about defying the odds.  It was foolish to go against Saren, Sovereign was supposed to be invincible, the Collector Base attack was a suicide run etc... Shepard has always defied the odds.  The ending takes this away so the writers can have their Deus Ex rip off.

Once again, that shielding may have been unnecessary.  Object Rho and the Human Reaper still had functioning power sources.  That little bit did not.  The shielding might just have been an unnecessary precaution.

[Seival]

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

No Seival, that's what makes it really bad. ME as a whole does not buck convention on anything really. Their attempt at an artsy ending fell on its face because it is narratively inconsistent with the story that preceded it.

And PS, there's no evidence that the piece of Sovereign in Leviathan HAD to be shielded. They were just being careful. It could have been completely inert.

I think that the ending concept fits the story just perfectly. And we couldn't expect anything but bittersweet and completely unpredictable ending, where you can't win... but can take part in great, and unimaginable galactic-scale changes.

"Could have been completely inert" can't prove anything. But fact of shielding can. Also, let's not forget about Arrival and Sanctuary. This is what happens when Reaper tech left unshielded and/or used for some experiments.

Project Rho isn't a severed limb of a dead Reaper

But it is what any Reaper ship is full of. You thought Reaper ships are empty? No tons of different devices on board at all? Don't kid yourself.

[AresKeith]

Seival wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

No Seival, that's what makes it really bad. ME as a whole does not buck convention on anything really. Their attempt at an artsy ending fell on its face because it is narratively inconsistent with the story that preceded it.

And PS, there's no evidence that the piece of Sovereign in Leviathan HAD to be shielded. They were just being careful. It could have been completely inert.

I think that the ending concept fits the story just perfectly. And we couldn't expect anything but bittersweet and completely unpredictable ending, where you can't win... but can take part in great, and unimaginable galactic-scale changes.

"Could have been completely inert" can't prove anything. But fact of shielding can. Also, let's not forget about Arrival and Sanctuary. This is what happens when Reaper tech left unshielded and/or used for some experiments.

Project Rho isn't a severed limb of a dead Reaper

But it is what any Reaper ship is full of. You thought Reaper ships are empty? No tons of different devices on board at all? Don't kid yourself.

And where have I said any of this?

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

So the argument here is that Destroy is too risky to choose because what's left of the Reapers will indoctrinate people, because it's a natural part of them.

Well, maybe, but I'd rather risk some people maybe being indoctrinated, than have everyone die.

I don't really understand this though. If the Reapers are still indoctrinating people if they're dead, how are they doing it and what are the results? People who have been indoctrinated come to serve the Reapers, and are under their control, but if the Reapers are dead, how are people being affected?

You missed the point. Completely.

The argument here is that Destroy is not too dire, but only because of the Leviathans.

So scrap what I was saying then. Why are the Leviathans so dangerous? Seems to me like they're easily neutralised if they try anything by using the shield technology Aurora developed if they start anything. 

Also, if someone was indoctrinated without guidance, he becomes just insane. The proof of that is in ME2. Influenced Cerberus personnel started to worship derelict Reaper, and eventually most of them became husks, the rest - died. Without any purpose behind it, because dead Reaper was no longer under the Catalyst's control obviously.

They obviously threw themselves on Dragon's Teeth, so they must have had some direction. Are the completely dead Reapers from the Destroy ending capable of doing that? How? Why wouldn't that be a risk in Control and Synthesis? 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 30 avril 2013 - 12:13 .

[Wynterdust]

It is dead. Deactivated. Broken. Not working anymore.
Project Rho is still active.
The derelict reaper is.... derelict, not dead hence the mass effect core still working.

[Seival]

Steelcan wrote...

Seival wrote...

I think that the ending concept fits the story just perfectly. And we couldn't expect anything but bittersweet and completely unpredictable ending, where you can't win... but can take part in great, and unimaginable galactic-scale changes.

"Could have been completely inert" can't prove anything. But fact of shielding can. Also, let's not forget about Arrival and Sanctuary. This is what happens when Reaper tech left unshielded and/or used for some experiments.

. ME has always been a fairly typical, shooter action story.  The other two endings (except Shepard dies in ME2) are pretty optimistic and hopeful.  The whole series has always been about defying the odds.  It was foolish to go against Saren, Sovereign was supposed to be invincible, the Collector Base attack was a suicide run etc... Shepard has always defied the odds.  The ending takes this away so the writers can have their Deus Ex rip off.

Once again, that shielding may have been unnecessary.  Object Rho and the Human Reaper still had functioning power sources.  That little bit did not.  The shielding might just have been an unnecessary precaution.

Disagree. For me Mass Effect Trilogy looked philosophical from the very beginning. Ghost in the Shell, Appleseed, Deus Ex... Those names are in the same line with ME Trilogy. The whole series was always about moral choices, and philosophical questions. Mass Effect was never "Star Wars 2.0".

The shielding is necessary, unless proved otherwise. There are several proves of necessary shielding, and no proves of unnecessary shielding.

[AresKeith]

Seival wrote...

The shielding is necessary, unless proved otherwise. There are several proves of necessary shielding, and no proves of unnecessary shielding.

The shielding is only a precaution nothing more

[Seival]

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

The shielding is necessary, unless proved otherwise. There are several proves of necessary shielding, and no proves of unnecessary shielding.

The shielding is only a precaution nothing more

Without that "nothing more" something like Sanctuary always happens.