748 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

erezike wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


The common feature of all versions of IT is that at least some of the ending material is lies.  Since the Crucible is, in the end, shown to work exactly as described, how is your theory not IT?

Granted, you're pushing a fairly odd version of IT, but you're fundamentally in the same business The Twilight God was when he was pushing IT-Con.

Easy, because right now. we arent discussing if the crucible is really a trap or what happens in the cutscenes.
We are discussing if shooting the tube or shepard electrifying himself makes any sense.

From My shepard viewpoint it would make no sense for the catalyst to offer him the reapers kill or control switch.
My shepard was asking himselves these questions.

1) how come we suddenly found a reaper off switch that the reapers knew of.  Why is the crucible different in our circle.
This is two questions, not one. Therefore it is cheating. I will answer #1. "Clearly, organics are more resourceful than we realized." -- The Catalyst.

2) why didnt the reapers take control of the citadel until now.
Because if they took control of the Citadel earlier they would have had to make Thessia a hub world, and that would have shot to hell the image that most people had of 99% of Asari as dancers and strippers. They would have had to do something with Asari culture. Then when Thessia was taken it would have given purpose to taking back Omega. One cannot have purpose or real Asari culture in the Mass Effect Universe.

3) how am i alive?
This is an interesting point. See I recently played the EC ending. Shepard took a stroll down to the beam. I wasn't trying to dodge anything. Shepard got hit 4 times by Harbinger. That's 4 direct hits, and nothing happened to Shepard. Then one magical hit on the mako sent it flying in the air and the next thing I know Shepard calls the Normandy to pick up her waifu. Then the magic miss that burns Shepard's armor to a cinder. Huh?

4) why isnt harbinger shooting the Normandy
http://social.biowar...55/blog/233327/

5) why was the beam still open
Starbrat was inviting you for tea, but Marauder Shields was saying "No."

6) why is harbinger leaving.
Harbinger was reading Hackett's mind that the Crucible was about to be deployed and was getting ready to intercept it. OR Harbinger thought Shepard was dead. OR Starbrat said, "Stop, don't kill her!"

7) where is the rest of the reaper ressitance: 3 husks and one huskified turian, seriously?
Seriously? You wanted a boss fight. Marauder Shields is the final boss. Try him on insanity. Seriously.

8) how come its so easy for me to reach the citadel control panel.
Because it was supposed to be easy for you to reach it.

9) if the beam was still open where are the rest of the forces, surely someone heard anderson or me over the radio
Major Coates ordered them to fallback and regroup even though the danger had passed. You were already up there bleeding to death so it didn't matter anymore.

10) why did the catalyst elevate me up and didnt leave me to bleed on the floor
Seriously. Did you look around you. Do you really have that kind of reverb in space or in open air? No. You only have that kind of reverb on acid trips or when you're dreaming. You're unconscious in front of the panel. You never left there. Elevator shmelevator.

11) why is the catalsty pressuring on me to choose one of his three chocies
Because otherwise you can't end the game properly. It was created by stupid cuttlefish. It is flawed.

12) why cant the catalyst just send the reapers into the sun
Because it is not the catalyst. It is just a very naughty boy. Remember that it cannot make things happen but YOU can. Hence YOU are the catalyst. But if you choose control you are bound by its programming, but have added your moral values sort of.

13) why doesnt the catalyst stop killing my friends while we negotiate
It is having too much fun killing your friends, that's why. It is enjoying itself. It has waited 50,000 years to do this.

14) why cant i blow the tube in a different way, why doesnt the catalyst do it himself or try to stop me.
Seriously? It can't make things happen but you can. It is smug in that you will create synthetics and you will wipe out organic life, and that in the end it will be right. That is why it won't stop you.

15) since when does shooting a tube activate a machine instead of destroying it.
If it is one of those fail close circuits or whatever kind of switches when the flowing of an organic goopy crap they're making the reaper out of stops causes the circuit to close that fires the crucible that causes the destroy beam to fire you know what I'm saying? They actually make these kind of things.


if you can answer all of these questions i will say you are right and i am wrong.(which is a precious thing on the internet and you know it) If you continue to go in a circular debate talking about the cutscenes then we will reach no where. and just repeat our statements.
So please educate me on these 15 questions

Dang. I miss out on contest!

My answers are in italics. Did I win? Do I get a cookie?

[Erez Kristal]

Conclusion = ending is a mess. ;-)

[BaladasDemnevanni]

erezike wrote...

Just like you werent able to realize how  craete the thanix canons, implant reaper tech, create edi, create anf AI.

Just like a team of 12 protheans never figured out how to create a mass relay into the citdadel from iillos, modifiy the reapers and close the portal to dark space.?

Oh wait they did all that:wizard:

Irrelevant. Clearly the Reapers didn't think much of our capacity to reverse engineer their technology. Hence the point that it doesn't matter what we managed to achieve. Hell, the Reapers never figured out until way after that the Protheans created a new Relay.

Case in point: they leave their best piece of technology in our hands, without worrying about our propensity of finding out what it does. Thousands of years on the Citadel- no one has a freaking clue how it operates, but we're going to magically figure out the Crucible? Sounds pretty idiotic.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

erezike wrote...

I am talking about shepard lack of information regarding the reapers, all that shepard knows is that the reapers are wiping outall galactic life. Thats a fact.
all you have is assumpions. No my friend.

If you want to debunk my resolutions by only using assumpions you heard someone else is making then we will get no where.
Unless you can produce hard facts to support your arguments then we have nothing further to disscuss.


Another note on the leviathan. i assume that a bunch of cuttle fish living underwater have unlimited knowledgge from watching the television all day right?

Well ya' know, there is the fact that they apparently had the ability to manipulate races/species all across the Entire Empire, including the different Mass Relays, to the point where they were using the species being attacked by the Reapers to erase any traces of their existence. But yeah, apparently we can't trust their knowledge that the Crucible has never been completed. Or that they would have some idea what the Catalyst was up to.

You seem to be against verifiable information contradicting what other trustworthy characters tell you, but prefer your foaming at the mouth crazy theories. Seriously, burden of proof is on you; show where the narrative demonstrates that the Catalyst has changed his job.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 25 juillet 2013 - 10:25 .

[Erez Kristal]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...
 we're going to magically figure out the Crucible? Sounds pretty idiotic.

its called scientific research. not magic.

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...
leviathans apparently had the ability to manipulate races/species all across the Entire Empire, 

until they were suprised by the catalyst. which is a proof they are not all knowing even in their prime.
how good do you think is their knowledge now?

Modifié par erezike, 25 juillet 2013 - 11:09 .

[CronoDragoon]

erezike wrote...
 How about some real evidence for a change?
coming from an honest knowable source.


All i been hearing so far was wild speculations trying to badly mask themselves as facts. 
 

I'm asking you specifically what the game would need to show. Saying "evidence" doesn't make your hypothesis falsifiable since you can construe the definition of evidence to suit your needs. Give me actual hypothetical in-game events or facts.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 25 juillet 2013 - 02:03 .

[Stigweird85]

First time I've been back here for a while, are these debates still going on? Shows either the passion or the stubborness of the audience I suppose

[KaiserShep]

CronoDragoon wrote...

erezike wrote...
 How about some real evidence for a change?
coming from an honest knowable source.


All i been hearing so far was wild speculations trying to badly mask themselves as facts. 
 

I'm asking you specifically what the game would need to show. Saying "evidence" doesn't make your hypothesis falsifiable since you can construe the definition of evidence to suit your needs. Give me actual hypothetical in-game events or facts.

This is really just a trap, because from what I've gathered, the "evidence" required is absolutely impossible for this story. It would require an immortal character that's both at odds with the catalyst, and privy to all of its details. But here's the joke: it won't make a difference. This character will just be another potential liar that's actually in cahoots with the enemy. It doesn't matter how much evidence is presented, because it will just be turned around to be a possible fabrication.

[AlanC9]

Right. Like all versions of IT it's not falsifiable, because any contrary evidence would simply be called more indoctrination.

[CronoDragoon]

KaiserShep wrote...

This is really just a trap, because from what I've gathered, the "evidence" required is absolutely impossible for this story. It would require an immortal character that's both at odds with the catalyst, and privy to all of its details. But here's the joke: it won't make a difference. This character will just be another potential liar that's actually in cahoots with the enemy. It doesn't matter how much evidence is presented, because it will just be turned around to be a possible fabrication.

That's more or less the Leviathans, though, sans the immortal. They still know what happened, and they have no reason to lie to Shepard about the Catalyst's purpose. But they are decidedly anti-Catalyst, and given they created him they know exactly with what he was programmed.

If anything, the Leviathans probably should have told Shepard that the Catalyst DID go berserk and turn against them to garner sympathy. Instead they gave him a version of the story that offers no particular benefit to their position. In other words, there's no compelling evidence that they are lying to Shepard.

Here's the argument laid out in basic logical structure:

1. If the Leviathans programmed the Catalyst, then they know with what mandate he was programmed.
2. The Leviathans programmed the Catalyst.
-------------------------------------------------------
C: The Leviathans know with what mandate he was programmed .

1. The Leviathans want the Catalyst defeated.
2. If Shepard knows how the Catalyst works, he'll have a better chance defeating it.
------------------------------------------------------
C: The Leviathans want Shepard to know how the Catalyst works.

Final argument:

1. The Leviathans are either lying, misinformed, or telling the truth when they tell Shepard the Catalyst is still following his mandate.
2. If the Leviathans want Shepard to know how the Catalyst works, then they will not lie to him.
3. The Leviathans want Shepard to know how the Catalyst works.
4. The Leviathans are not lying.
5. If the Leviathans know with what mandate the Catalyst was programmed, then they aren't misinformed.
6. The Leviathans know with what mandate the Catalyst is programmed.
7. The Leviathans aren't misinformed.
------------------------------------------------
C: The Leviathans are telling the truth when they tell Shepard that the Catalyst is still following his mandate.

As far as I can tell without reviewing this argument and having written it in ten minutes, it's valid. I also believe it's sound. To show it's unsound, he's gonna have to show one of the premises to be false.

[KaiserShep]

The Leviathans were brought up a few times over these 20 something pages, and time and time again they were rejected. It makes no difference.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 25 juillet 2013 - 05:15 .

[CronoDragoon]

Yeah, but now he'll have to attack a specific premise about the Leviathans with logic or counter-evidence.

Or he won't, which is tantamount to forfeiting the debate.

[AlanC9]

I thought he forfeited around page four, myself.

[Erez Kristal]

CronoDragoon wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

This is really just a trap, because from what I've gathered, the "evidence" required is absolutely impossible for this story. It would require an immortal character that's both at odds with the catalyst, and privy to all of its details. But here's the joke: it won't make a difference. This character will just be another potential liar that's actually in cahoots with the enemy. It doesn't matter how much evidence is presented, because it will just be turned around to be a possible fabrication.

That's more or less the Leviathans, though, sans the immortal. They still know what happened, and they have no reason to lie to Shepard about the Catalyst's purpose. But they are decidedly anti-Catalyst, and given they created him they know exactly with what he was programmed.

If anything, the Leviathans probably should have told Shepard that the Catalyst DID go berserk and turn against them to garner sympathy. Instead they gave him a version of the story that offers no particular benefit to their position. In other words, there's no compelling evidence that they are lying to Shepard.

Here's the argument laid out in basic logical structure:

1. If the Leviathans programmed the Catalyst, then they know with what mandate he was programmed.
2. The Leviathans programmed the Catalyst.
-------------------------------------------------------
C: The Leviathans know with what mandate he was programmed .

1. The Leviathans want the Catalyst defeated.
2. If Shepard knows how the Catalyst works, he'll have a better chance defeating it.
------------------------------------------------------
C: The Leviathans want Shepard to know how the Catalyst works.

Final argument:

1. The Leviathans are either lying, misinformed, or telling the truth when they tell Shepard the Catalyst is still following his mandate.
2. If the Leviathans want Shepard to know how the Catalyst works, then they will not lie to him.
3. The Leviathans want Shepard to know how the Catalyst works.
4. The Leviathans are not lying.
5. If the Leviathans know with what mandate the Catalyst was programmed, then they aren't misinformed.
6. The Leviathans know with what mandate the Catalyst is programmed.
7. The Leviathans aren't misinformed.
------------------------------------------------
C: The Leviathans are telling the truth when they tell Shepard that the Catalyst is still following his mandate.

As far as I can tell without reviewing this argument and having written it in ten minutes, it's valid. I also believe it's sound. To show it's unsound, he's gonna have to show one of the premises to be false.

its a nice theory, which for you is valid but you jump into conclusions you cannot back up.

7) the leviathans aren't misinformed - Seeing that they were misinformed at the top of their strengh. there is no reason they are rightly informed now. 

The leviathans want shepard to know how the catalyst work - while i believe this conclusion to be truth. i cannot back it up with any facts. in times of war allies do not reveal all they know to their other allies if they have something personal to gain. the leviathans may want to return to the glory of their former empire and because of this hold on information on the catayst.

you choose to promote your two conclusions as facts. while in fact they are just assumptions since things can go different ways.

As for the point im trying to deliver here. even if both conclusions were correct that still wouldnt make the destroy or control choices any more logical.

When shepards meet the catalyst he as clueless as he can possibily be.
The only thing shepard knows for sure. is that the reapers are pounding on the alliance fleets, earth is in ruins and that he is heavly wounded.
What you do from there depends on your character and the way you choose to analyse information given to you.
Im myself am not favorite of gambling. i make decisions based on given information and reading through my opponents. going blind without planning tend to lead to defeat on the long run.

[Erez Kristal]

AlanC9 wrote...

I thought he forfeited around page four, myself.

Its all assumptions based on facts or other assumptions really.
While you three consider assumptons to be facts. i consider to assumptions to be assumptions.
And only rely on facts.

thats about it.

The rest lies on those three questions i constantly repeated 

Since you choose to take the catalyst words as truth and see no alternatives we will never reach a middle ground.


http://social.biowar...ndex/12427056/1 long catalyst truth or false debate

http://social.biowar...ndex/13338879/1 conventional victory arguments.

I think we are done here. unless someone new walks by.

[Erez Kristal]

bigstig wrote...

First time I've been back here for a while, are these debates still going on? Shows either the passion or the stubborness of the audience I suppose

I mostly use these threads in order to locate people for the me3 rewrite group.
the second reason is to hone creative and logical thinking skills.

Modifié par erezike, 25 juillet 2013 - 06:44 .

[CronoDragoon]

erezike wrote...
 its a nice theory, which for you is valid but you jump into conclusions you cannot back up.

There is no jumping to a conclusion if my argument is valid, which means that the conclusion follows from the premises. My argument is valid; your issues below deal with the soundness of it, which deal with attacking the truth or falsity of the premises.

7) the leviathans aren't misinformed - Seeing that they were misinformed at the top of their strengh. there is no reason they are rightly informed now.

Misinformed about what? To attack this premise you must demonstrate that the Leviathans were misinformed about what the programmed mandate was for something that they programmed themselves or that the Catalyst has changed his mandate but still says he's following it. Since both the Leviathan and the Catalyst agree that the Catalyst is still following his mandate, you must be the one to provide counter-evidence since the only evidence that exists - however flimsy you think it is - supports that he's following his mandate.

The leviathans want shepard to know how the catalyst work - while i believe this conclusion to be truth. i cannot back it up with any facts. in times of war allies do not reveal all they know to their other allies if they have something personal to gain. the leviathans may want to return to the glory of their former empire and because of this hold on information on the catayst.

You must demonstrate how lying about the Catalyst's true purpose gives them more of an advantage than telling Shepard the truth to challenge that premise.

As I have said above it makes more sense that they tell the truth. The Leviathans cannot win the war without Shepard and the galaxy doing most of the fighting. They want the Catalyst defeated. Therefore they want Shepard and the rest of the galaxy to be equipped to defeat the Catalyst. Providing an accurate history of the Catalyst's MO and goal supports this desire. Lying about it does not. Provide reasons for why the Leviathans would lie to Shepard. "Allies withhold info during wartime" does not qualify, because it does not explain why in THIS situation the Leviathans would withhold THIS specific morsel of information.

you choose to promote your two conclusions as facts. while in fact they are just assumptions since things can go different ways.

Conclusions are not assumptions if the argument is valid. They are logical necessities. The assumptions lie in the premises.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 25 juillet 2013 - 07:11 .

[Ymladdych]

The Reapers use psychological manipulation and the seduction of "tech" to manipulate people to their point of view...and yeah, they've used both methods to obtain "Fool's Mate" wins in the past.

And yes, I believe The Catalyst employed both tactics to persuade Shepard away from "Destroy" in the decision chamber.

Still, that's not proof that The Catalyst was lying. In fact, I don't think The Catalyst *was* lying; it just thought it was irrefutably *right* in its conclusions, and it was doing whatever necessary to make Shepard believe its "truths."

Regardless, its preferred solutions simply failed to pass objective muster with me. My mistrust of The Catalyst isn't based on its "persuasion" techniques or its "truthiness." I chose "Destroy"  based on real-world information (some of which comes directly from The Singularity Institute), as well as events I observed during the course of the trilogy. The Catalyst's shady tactics and my personal value system are just icing on the "F U, Starkid!" cake.

Now, the Leviathans, on the other hand...something about that conversation leads me to believe that they're withholding *some* piece of information. A purely speculative opinion, but, there it is. Does that mean The Catalyst is lying? No, of course not. I have to wonder about The Crucible's origins, though.

[dorktainian]

Shepard takes a breath. That is the only fact - and that happens in destroy. Anything else is just crappy storyboards and utter nonsense.

[CronoDragoon]

Ymladdych wrote...
Now, the Leviathans, on the other hand...something about that conversation leads me to believe that they're withholding *some* piece of information. A purely speculative opinion, but, there it is. Does that mean The Catalyst is lying? No, of course not. I have to wonder about The Crucible's origins, though.

It does seem that they know more about the Crucible than they're saying, I agree. But they don't really have a reason to lie about why the Catalyst is doing what he's doing.

[AlanC9]

Ymladdych wrote...

The Reapers use psychological manipulation and the seduction of "tech" to manipulate people to their point of view...and yeah, they've used both methods to obtain "Fool's Mate" wins in the past.

And yes, I believe The Catalyst employed both tactics to persuade Shepard away from "Destroy" in the decision chamber.

Note that the Catalyst is extraordinarily bad at psychological manipulation. Which is OK; he's not supposed to understand organics all that well. Having Indoctrination means that if an organic's psychology isn't working the way you need it to you just change the psychology rather than deal with it.

[Erez Kristal]

CronoDragoon wrote...



There is no jumping to a conclusion if my argument is valid, which means that the conclusion follows from the premises. My argument is valid; your issues below deal with the soundness of it, which deal with attacking the truth or falsity of the premises.

7) the leviathans aren't misinformed - Seeing that they were misinformed at the top of their strengh. there is no reason they are rightly informed now.

Misinformed about what? To attack this premise you must demonstrate that the Leviathans were misinformed about what the programmed mandate was for something that they programmed themselves or that the Catalyst has changed his mandate but still says he's following it. Since both the Leviathan and the Catalyst agree that the Catalyst is still following his mandate, you must be the one to provide counter-evidence since the only evidence that exists - however flimsy you think it is - supports that he's following his mandate.

The leviathans want shepard to know how the catalyst work - while i believe this conclusion to be truth. i cannot back it up with any facts. in times of war allies do not reveal all they know to their other allies if they have something personal to gain. the leviathans may want to return to the glory of their former empire and because of this hold on information on the catayst.

You must demonstrate how lying about the Catalyst's true purpose gives them more of an advantage than telling Shepard the truth to challenge that premise.

As I have said above it makes more sense that they tell the truth. The Leviathans cannot win the war without Shepard and the galaxy doing most of the fighting. They want the Catalyst defeated. Therefore they want Shepard and the rest of the galaxy to be equipped to defeat the Catalyst. Providing an accurate history of the Catalyst's MO and goal supports this desire. Lying about it does not. Provide reasons for why the Leviathans would lie to Shepard. "Allies withhold info during wartime" does not qualify, because it does not explain why in THIS situation the Leviathans would withhold THIS specific morsel of information.

you choose to promote your two conclusions as facts. while in fact they are just assumptions since things can go different ways.

Conclusions are not assumptions if the argument is valid. They are logical necessities. The assumptions lie in the premises.

there is jumpting to conclusion since you arent backing your arguments with facts. the leviathans were suprised by the catalyst. the catalyst is an ai, able to reprogram itself. no one changes an ai did after the initial reprogramming. which is why the leviathans were so misinformed at their top of their strengths. to make things worse, there were no reapers at first. which means the catalyst needed to sway the thralls races, use synthetics or mass destruction weapons to defeat the leviathans. all of this happened due to their lack of information, lack of intel. just how good you think their intel is now?  
This is why your claims the leviathans are a know it all race are false.

In case of victory, the new galactic races could use the reapers to their advantage against the leviathans.
THis may not work well in the leviathans grand plans of retaking the galaxy.

Conclusions are assumptions if they arent backed by any facts.

Moreso you have ignored the main argument of this thread by side tracking it to the leviathans.

[Erez Kristal]

Ymladdych wrote...

The Reapers use psychological manipulation and the seduction of "tech" to manipulate people to their point of view...and yeah, they've used both methods to obtain "Fool's Mate" wins in the past.

And yes, I believe The Catalyst employed both tactics to persuade Shepard away from "Destroy" in the decision chamber.

Still, that's not proof that The Catalyst was lying. In fact, I don't think The Catalyst *was* lying; it just thought it was irrefutably *right* in its conclusions, and it was doing whatever necessary to make Shepard believe its "truths."

Regardless, its preferred solutions simply failed to pass objective muster with me. My mistrust of The Catalyst isn't based on its "persuasion" techniques or its "truthiness." I chose "Destroy"  based on real-world information (some of which comes directly from The Singularity Institute), as well as events I observed during the course of the trilogy. The Catalyst's shady tactics and my personal value system are just icing on the "F U, Starkid!" cake.

Now, the Leviathans, on the other hand...something about that conversation leads me to believe that they're withholding *some* piece of information. A purely speculative opinion, but, there it is. Does that mean The Catalyst is lying? No, of course not. I have to wonder about The Crucible's origins, though.

But how do you know that shooting the tube will turn on the reapers kill switch?

[Erez Kristal]

AlanC9 wrote...


Note that the Catalyst is extraordinarily bad at psychological manipulation. Which is OK; he's not supposed to understand organics all that well. Having Indoctrination means that if an organic's psychology isn't working the way you need it to you just change the psychology rather than deal with it.

Is it really that bad at psychological manipulation? 
Different ending cutscenes and everyone would tell themselves how they been duped.
And those different ending cutscenes would make more sense than the ones we got.

We have to analyse it from shep view point and remember all the convenient events that happened ever since shep was hit by the capital ship death ray.

[Sinnerj117]

In my opinion, Synthesis is the most flawed. You're talking about subjecting an entire galaxy to a change that they never asked for. It seems deceitful.

That said, there is no way the galaxy can shake hands with the Reapers after all that they've done. No matter how helpful they may be in the Control scenario, they are still alive. The line of trust with these new "allies" would be very thin.

Destroy is always my choice as it is what Shepard sets out to do since the first game. During the course of all three games, you seek destroy the Reapers and the threat they pose to future generations. This ensures peace from the cycle of slaughter that so many others have suffered through.