692 réponses à ce sujet

[Indy_S]

I don't think it's hard to believe there's an inconsistency in Cerberus' origins so I'm going to say you're both right.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Xilizhra wrote...

But in the case of research to fight an utterly desperate war where you have to do the terrible ends to ensure the galaxy will live on, can it be justifiable?

I actually don't recall terrible things having ever been necessary; the worst beneficial action I can think of was telling a bunch of refugees to leave.

I believe they can be necessary if met under certain circumstances, situations, and contexts.

I believe the Reaper war is such an event.

You are lying: this is contradicted by the sources I already provided. You are outright denying and ignoring established canon. Please read the sources I provide.

The statements in ME1 have been retconned by the sources I proved.

Do you know the what the definition of a retcon is?

It's not a retcon; the war room guards in ME3 mention that origin of Cerberus in one conversation. So one of two things: both they and Kahoku were mistaken, or TIM took over a preexisting Alliance black ops group. But it's not a retcon.

One line.

One line. That's it. One line. 

Versus 1 game, 2 books, and 2 comics. 

1 line of dialogue (from a questionable source; it's second-hand)

vs.

1 game, 2 books, and 2 comics.

That doesn't really add up very well.

Against the Reapers?

Nothing is unforgivable.

No cost is too great.

Because there is nothing more unforgivable than the Reapers.

There is no cost to great when it comes to destroying them.

And the alliance and the Council refuse to accept this. 

They allowed this to happen. They refused to act against the Reapers.

In my opinion, they are the trash.

Time to take out the trash.

Eh. There's no more reason to hate the Reapers than to hate the bomb dropped on you; they're just tools. And I believe they're too powerful to simply throw away like that, not to mention they carry the potential of renewed sapience within them.

You're making a contradiction. If they're just tools, I can shut them down and use them the technology to rebuild the galaxy later. This is what I'm going to do.

Yet you're saying their also sentient. And that they were mandated by an intelligence that is I believe is fundamentally flawed with its premise based on what I believe to be flawed programming on flawed hardware.

That may affect me if I try to control it. I may end up coming to the same conclusion as it. It's too much of an unknown. And everything I'm hearing is coming from this flawed construct. It is irrelevant as the information is flawed. It is to be ignored. Therefore, I resort to destroying them.

That's my perspective. Agree to disagree.

Also, they didn't refuse to act against the Reapers, they just didn't acknowledge that the Reapers were a threat until it was too late. It's not the same thing as knowing there's a threat and neglecting it; they didn't consider it to be one.

They did refuse to act until it was too late. That's pretty neglectful. That's pretty infuriating. That's pretty bad.

If they didn't consider it to be a threat, that just shows that they're monumentally stupid and incompetent.

That is also infuriating and bad.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 11 août 2013 - 04:10 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

shingara wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

You are lying: this is contradicted in the Evolutions comic. You are outright denying and ignoring established canon. Please read the Evolutions comic.

Yes, I know what black operations are.


You are lying: this is contradicted by the sources I already provided. You are outright denying and ignoring established canon. Please read the sources I provide.

The statements in ME1 have been retconned by the sources I proved.

Do you know the what the definition of a retcon is?

A black operation or black op is a covert operation by a government, a government agency, or a military organization. This can include activities by private companies or groups. A black operation typically involves activities that are highly clandestine and often outside of standard military/intelligence protocol, sometimes against the law. Key features of a black operation are that it is clandestine, it has negative overtones, and it is not attributable to the organization carrying it out.[1]

The main difference between a black operation and one that is merely clandestine is that a black operation involves a significant degree of deception, to conceal who is behind it or to make it appear that some other entity is responsible ("false flag" operations).[2][3]

Good job quoting wikipedia there boss. You made a rookie mistake: you forgot to delete the links and shortcuts.

Anywho, why did you do this? It's absolutely irrelevant to this discussion.

God, how I wish I could say stuff and not get banned...

So sorry to burst your bubble, but its a fact, i know you think you are the master race as you have a reacuring statement of hitler that you love to copy and paste and your rhetoric and beliefs on the values of life but you are wrong. I know for sure your gonna come back with your headcannon that you think is always correct but alas you are wrong.

And you have only provided sources after shanxi, not before, and this is the time they were a black ops, so good night viena, enjoy your head cannon.

You're trolling now.

I provided you with 5 sources, including one of the games themselves...

And you dismiss all of it as 'headcanon'...

And you don't realize that no concrete sources on Cerberus exist prior to 'Evolutions', in which it is literally shown in pictures as well as words (if you can't read so well) that Cerberus was created by TIM, after Shanxi...

And you compare me to Hitler by bringing up my personal philosophy in a discussion that has nothing to do with this discussion...

.
.
.
.
.
.

10/10 would bang.

Excellent job trolling. 

You got me good. You got me real good.

[Xilizhra]

I believe they can be necessary if met under certain circumstances, situations, and contexts.

I believe the Reaper war is such an event.

When was this necessity actually demonstrated?

One line.

One line. That's it. One line.

Versus 1 game, 2 books, and 2 comics.

1 line of dialogue (from a questionable source; it's second-hand)

vs.

1 game, 2 books, and 2 comics.

That doesn't really add up very well.

One line written after all those other things, keep in mind. I also think it was a few lines, not just one.

You're making a contradiction. If they're just tools, I can shut them down and use them the technology to rebuild the galaxy later. This is what I'm going to do.

Yet you're saying their also sentient. And that they were mandated by an intelligence that is I believe is fundamentally flawed with its premise based on what I believe to be flawed programming on flawed hardware.

As of now, they're under mind control and not responsible for their own actions. They're being used as tools now... but they could be freed. Truth be told, I prefer the outcome of Synthesis, but I have a hard time roleplaying that because of bad presentation. If it had been set up better, however, I'd easily prefer it.

That may affect me if I try to control it. I may end up coming to the same conclusion as it. It's too much of an unknown. And everything I'm hearing is coming from this flawed construct. It is irrelevant as the information is flawed. It is to be ignored. Therefore, I resort to destroying them.

You presume a great deal by assuming it's flawed. You're too quick to throw away resources yourself.

They did refuse to act until it was too late. That's pretty neglectful. That's pretty infuriating. That's pretty bad.

If they didn't consider it to be a threat, that just shows that they're monumentally stupid and incompetent.

That is also infuriating and bad.

Different perspectives.

Also, how is Paragon Shepard bad again? With specific examples?

[Philosophaster]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Alien Number Six wrote...

During the war in Iraq I dug up a mass grave. Several of the bodies we discovered where children. I can tell you from personal experience that wiping out whole groups of people for research, political reasons, or you just feel superior to them is wrong on so many levels.

Brother. I'm saying this as a fellow veteran. Believe me, I know what you went through. In February 2008' 'The deadliest month of OEF' (which has now unfortunately been surpassed by August of 2011), I was attached as a HUMINT Collector with the 173rd in Northeastern Afghanistan. We were in the Korangal Valley. We came across a tribe that had been attacked by insurgents. Teenage girls were raped and killed. Men were beaten while their wives were mutilated in their genitalia for daring to not wear a hijab - the tribe wasn't even Muslim. A teacher was immolated alive and his charred corpse hung from a tree. I saw all of this. While I haven't been particularly changed as a person by this (and I acknoweldge this), it was a very unpleasant experience. 

I know this is going to sound strange, but are you sure you have the correct month? I read your account of this in the Military BSN'ers group and you stated your tour of duty was from April 2009 through December 2009, not 2008. February 2008 was actually a relatively quiet month for Coalition fatalities at a total of seven. In the group post, you were also specific about the date of the incident (September 3rd) and your arrival the next day. Then again, the 173rd was not deployed to Afghanistan until November of that year. You might need to fix your post.

[shingara]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Good job quoting wikipedia there boss. You made a rookie mistake: you forgot to delete the links and shortcuts.

Anywho, why did you do this? It's absolutely irrelevant to this discussion.

God, how I wish I could say stuff and not get banned...


You're trolling now.

I provided you with 5 sources, including one of the games themselves...

And you dismiss all of it as 'headcanon'...

And you don't realize that no concrete sources on Cerberus exist prior to 'Evolutions', in which it is literally shown in pictures as well as words (if you can't read so well) that Cerberus was created by TIM, after Shanxi...

And you compare me to Hitler by bringing up my personal philosophy in a discussion that has nothing to do with this discussion...

.
.
.
.
.
.

10/10 would bang.

Excellent job trolling. 

You got me good. You got me real good.

 I love how you think that because i got it from wiki that its somehow a rookie mistake, alas my poor poor poor whatever you are, i left it as such so you could actualy use the links to the words i thought you might have problems with.

 As for your 5 sources and your love of spewing retcon as if its your golden bullet, please please show me any referance to cerberus before they showed up on shanxi and that bold and underlined bit i did, TADA black ops, do sometimes wonder about you.

 And i think how you love to quote 'Reductio ad Hitlerum' as a defense and how you value life, as posted by you and only you as your statements throughout this entire topic how life means nothing and you would kill as many as is required to fulfill an objective, no matter how those lives are dispensed with or the anguish and turmoil to your own troops enacting your orders.

 So like i said, enjoy your head cannon no matter how sadistic it is.

 And with that adieu and Goodnight Viena.

Modifié par shingara, 11 août 2013 - 04:17 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

inconsiderate rick wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Alien Number Six wrote...

During the war in Iraq I dug up a mass grave. Several of the bodies we discovered where children. I can tell you from personal experience that wiping out whole groups of people for research, political reasons, or you just feel superior to them is wrong on so many levels.

Brother. I'm saying this as a fellow veteran. Believe me, I know what you went through. In February 2008' 'The deadliest month of OEF' (which has now unfortunately been surpassed by August of 2011), I was attached as a HUMINT Collector with the 173rd in Northeastern Afghanistan. We were in the Korangal Valley. We came across a tribe that had been attacked by insurgents. Teenage girls were raped and killed. Men were beaten while their wives were mutilated in their genitalia for daring to not wear a hijab - the tribe wasn't even Muslim. A teacher was immolated alive and his charred corpse hung from a tree. I saw all of this. While I haven't been particularly changed as a person by this (and I acknoweldge this), it was a very unpleasant experience. 

I know this is going to sound strange, but are you sure you have the correct month? I read your account of this in the Military BSN'ers group and you stated your tour of duty was from April 2009 through December 2009, not 2008. February 2008 was actually a relatively quiet month for Coalition fatalities at a total of seven. In the group post, you were also specific about the date of the incident (September 3rd) and your arrival the next day. Then again, the 173rd was not deployed to Afghanistan until November of that year. You might need to fix your post.

Thanks. I wasn't in Afghanistan in 2009. I probably put that date down for some other reason. No, that incident was on February 3rd of 2008 near the town of Konar (it might have been the province; they've redrawn the map since then since the Korangal valley is in Kandahar now). I honestly don't know why I put down for September 09'. I wasn't even attached to the 173rd at that point. As I recall, in September 09' I was at Ft. Hunter Liggett in CA, waiting for the weather to clear to head up to Ft. Wainwright for the NWTC. 

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 11 août 2013 - 04:25 .

[Philosophaster]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Thanks. I wasn't in Afghanistan in 2009. I probably put that date down for some other reason. No, that incident was in February of 2008. I honestly don't know why I put down for September 09'. I wasn't even attached to the 173rd at that point. As I recall, in September 09' I was at Ft. Hunter Liggett in CA, waiting for the weather to clear to head up to Ft. Wainwright for the NWTC.

Yeah, no problem.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

inconsiderate rick wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Thanks. I wasn't in Afghanistan in 2009. I probably put that date down for some other reason. No, that incident was in February of 2008. I honestly don't know why I put down for September 09'. I wasn't even attached to the 173rd at that point. As I recall, in September 09' I was at Ft. Hunter Liggett in CA, waiting for the weather to clear to head up to Ft. Wainwright for the NWTC.

Yeah, no problem.

As I put in my edit, it was either the town or the province of Konar (or Kunar), and it was in the Korangal Valley. Which is odd since I think the Korangal Valley extends into Kandahar.

I must be having memory issues.

[Philosophaster]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

inconsiderate rick wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Thanks. I wasn't in Afghanistan in 2009. I probably put that date down for some other reason. No, that incident was in February of 2008. I honestly don't know why I put down for September 09'. I wasn't even attached to the 173rd at that point. As I recall, in September 09' I was at Ft. Hunter Liggett in CA, waiting for the weather to clear to head up to Ft. Wainwright for the NWTC.

Yeah, no problem.

As I put in my edit, it was either the town or the province of Konar (or Kunar), and it was in the Korangal Valley. Which is odd since I think the Korangal Valley extends into Kandahar.

I must be having memory issues.

The Korangal Valley is definitely in Kunar Province. But I'm afraid this is veering off-topic; I'll let you get back on track. Just wanted to clear up the confusion.

Modifié par inconsiderate rick, 11 août 2013 - 04:36 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

[quote]shingara wrote...

[quote]MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Good job quoting wikipedia there boss. You made a rookie mistake: you forgot to delete the links and shortcuts.

Anywho, why did you do this? It's absolutely irrelevant to this discussion.

God, how I wish I could say stuff and not get banned...


You're trolling now.

I provided you with 5 sources, including one of the games themselves...

And you dismiss all of it as 'headcanon'...

And you don't realize that no concrete sources on Cerberus exist prior to 'Evolutions', in which it is literally shown in pictures as well as words (if you can't read so well) that Cerberus was created by TIM, after Shanxi...

And you compare me to Hitler by bringing up my personal philosophy in a discussion that has nothing to do with this discussion...

.
.
.
.
.
.

10/10 would bang.

Excellent job trolling. 

You got me good. You got me real good.


[/quote]

 I love how you think that because i got it from wiki that its somehow a rookie mistake, alas my poor poor poor whatever you are, i left it as such so you could actualy use the links to the words i thought you might have problems with.

[/quote]

Pal. 

I've given a briefing or two to SF operators. I work in Military Intelligence. 

I've never worked in anything related to Black Operations in my career, but I know full well what they are and what the definition is.

You don't have to wiki me the page.

[/quote]

[quote]
 As for your 5 sources and your love of spewing retcon as if its your golden bullet, please please show me any referance to cerberus before they showed up on shanxi and that bold and underlined bit i did, TADA black ops, do sometimes wonder about you.
[/quote]

According to the 5 sources (the game Mass Effect 2, the novel Ascension, the novel Retribution, the comic Redemption, and the comic Evolutions), which all contradict ME1 on this matter (thus retcon):

There is no reference to Cerberus before Shanxi. There is no reference to Cerberus during Shanxi. They did not exist prior to Shaxi. They did not exist during Shanxi. 

From the Mass Effect wiki:

Cerberus arose from the tumult of the First Contact War in 2157 CE, a conflict between humanity and the first alien race they had encountered after achieving spaceflight, the turians. During the turian occupation of Shanxi, a trio of human mercenaries, Jack Harper, Eva Coré, and Ben Hislop, served with the Systems Alliance forces led byGeneral Williams who were resisting the turians. After capturing a turian general, the mercenaries became embroiled in the general's conspiracy to use an ancient alien artifact to transform the turians into a race of invincible supersoldiers under his command. With the aid of the general's brother, Saren Arterius, Harper was able to foil the plot, but both Coré and Hislop were lost. In the aftermath, Harper realized that although the galaxy was abundant with knowledge and wealth, it was also a dangerous place, and a dark time was coming for humanity. It was humanity's duty to meet this challenge, and Harper resolved to do everything in his power to better humanity and ensure their place among the stars. With that, Harper published the manifesto of Cerberus and assumed the identity of the Illusive Man.



I'm starting to think your sole purpose is to try and get me to insult you so that I will be banned...

I will not stoop to ad hominems. Must. Not. Stoop. To. Ad. Hominems.

[quote]
 And i think how you love to quote 'Reductio ad Hitlerum' as a defense and how you value life, as posted by you and only you as your statements throughout this entire topic how life means nothing and you would kill as many as is required to fulfill an objective, no matter how those lives are dispensed with or the anguish and turmoil to your own troops enacting your orders.[/quote]

I called out the 'Reductio ad Hitlerum' fallacy because you compared me to Hitler. 

In argument and persuasion, that is considered an immediate forfeiture of an argument.

Regardless, you're also attacking my personal philosophy (which you have a flawed, or skewed, perception of) for the sake of genetically discrediting any argument I make based on a belief in a universal morality that I don't share, and then judging me because I don't share your opinion, and since your opinion must be right, I must be evil.

At this point, this is simply for whoever decides to read this as a testament to my defense. 

[quote]

 So like i said, enjoy your head cannon no matter how sadistic it is.

 And with that adieu and Goodnight Viena.

[/quote]

I will. It's not sadistic. I'm not a sadist. I'm a practicalist. 

[shingara]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

I will. It's not sadistic. I'm not a sadist. I'm a practicalist. 

 I dont know if you like arguments, get a rush out of arguments, saying things to get a reaction out of people. There is a trend for it. I love how you think because you are in the militery that i have never been, like thats somehow a get out of jail free card for you not understanding the basic principle of a black ops.

 I mean do you not understand that the basic principle of a black ops is to not be known about. But wait i think you do, you obviously do if your militery yourself, which can only mean that you are arguing to extend an argument for the sake of it, no matter the facts given to you, your just willing on an argument for the sake of it.

 As for the part of your quote i left, i think anyone and everyone including you should go over every single post you have made within this topic and see which of those within the quote left you fall under. And again i say adieu, good night viena, now lets see if you get the picture ?

Modifié par shingara, 11 août 2013 - 04:53 .

[dreamgazer]

I'm not entirely sure what you two are even discussing anymore.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...

[quote]I believe they can be necessary if met under certain circumstances, situations, and contexts.

I believe the Reaper war is such an event.[/quote]
When was this necessity actually demonstrated?

[/quote]

When the Reapers invaded.

[quote]
[quote]One line.

One line. That's it. One line.

Versus 1 game, 2 books, and 2 comics.

1 line of dialogue (from a questionable source; it's second-hand)

vs.

1 game, 2 books, and 2 comics.

That doesn't really add up very well.[/quote]
One line written after all those other things, keep in mind. I also think it was a few lines, not just one.
[/quote]

Ok.

A few lines. A few lines from a Private who was not involved, who heard from her Sergeant (who was likely not involved either). Thus making it second-hand evidence (and possibly third-hand evidence).

vs.

1 Game, 2 Books, and 2 Comics.

It still doesn't add up.

[quote]
[quote]
You're making a contradiction. If they're just tools, I can shut them down and use them the technology to rebuild the galaxy later. This is what I'm going to do.

Yet you're saying their also sentient. And that they were mandated by an intelligence that is I believe is fundamentally flawed with its premise based on what I believe to be flawed programming on flawed hardware.[/quote]
As of now, they're under mind control and not responsible for their own actions. They're being used as tools now... but they could be freed. Truth be told, I prefer the outcome of Synthesis, but I have a hard time roleplaying that because of bad presentation. If it had been set up better, however, I'd easily prefer it.
[/quote]

I don't support Synthesis or Control for a variety of reasons, namely:

-Because it is narratively and thematically inconsistent with the rest of the trilogy (along with the entire overarching ending)
Because it scientifically, biologically, and logically doesn't make sense.

-Going along with the Reapers, I'm not about to believe this entity I just met on faith about what the Reapers really are when its own logic and perfect solutions don't make any sense based on what I believe is a programming and/or hardware error, and when every single past experience with the Reapers showed me the opposite of what this little dude is telling me.

-That he might be manipulating me based on the knowledge that that is what they do and have always done (indoctrination or no).

-The very history that this guy is contradicting because his very own creations (that he controls as you say) have actually instigated the very conflict he is supposedly trying to prevent.

-How he fails to consecutively define the term 'synthetic'.

-Because the whole premise on why this entire problem exists is flawed due to the arrogant belief of a bunch of giant crabs (that look really tasty) are destined to rule the universe and that they cannot be worshipped if the people they enthrall keep building machines that kill them because the giant crabs have enslaved the people that worship them make them perform difficult tasks that require the assistance of intelligent machines to assist with said tasks.

It's not something I just take on faith. I'm not wired that way to accept claims like that, especially when so much evidence contradicts it.

[quote]
[quote]That may affect me if I try to control it. I may end up coming to the same conclusion as it. It's too much of an unknown. And everything I'm hearing is coming from this flawed construct. It is irrelevant as the information is flawed. It is to be ignored. Therefore, I resort to destroying them.[/quote]
You presume a great deal by assuming it's flawed. You're too quick to throw away resources yourself.

[/quote]

I just explained why I believe it was flawed right above me.

I'm not throwing away any resources. I'm destroying the Reapers and using their tech as resources later. It's going to be pretty tight when we use it to advance the galaxy.

[quote]
[quote]They did refuse to act until it was too late. That's pretty neglectful. That's pretty infuriating. That's pretty bad.

If they didn't consider it to be a threat, that just shows that they're monumentally stupid and incompetent.

That is also infuriating and bad.[/quote]
Different perspectives.
[/quote]

Fair enough. 

My point stands.

[quote]
Also, how is Paragon Shepard bad again? With specific examples?[/quote]

I really can't use a specific example; This is based on a philosophy. I don't like or agree with Paragon Shepard.

You're asking me to prove why I don't like something. The very nature of this query is unprovable and designed no less to discredit me.

You're improperly asking for evidence where there is none or it is not needed. Asking again will result in a forfeiture of the argument on your part.

Let it be known.

[Steelcan]

This is still going on?

[Sir DeLoria]

Steelcan wrote...

This is still going on?

Apparently:?

[Xilizhra]

When the Reapers invaded.

And they never required terrible things done to defeat them.

Ok.

A few lines. A few lines from a Private who was not involved, who heard from her Sergeant (who was likely not involved either). Thus making it second-hand evidence (and possibly third-hand evidence).

vs.

1 Game, 2 Books, and 2 Comics.

It still doesn't add up.

I didn't say she was necessarily right, just that it's not a retcon; the opinion that it was an Alliance black op still exists in-universe, even if it's wrong.

I don't support Synthesis or Control for a variety of reasons, namely:

-Because it is narratively and thematically inconsistent with the rest of the trilogy (along with the entire overarching ending)
Because it scientifically, biologically, and logically doesn't make sense.

-Going along with the Reapers, I'm not about to believe this entity I just met on faith about what the Reapers really are when its own logic and perfect solutions don't make any sense based on what I believe is a programming and/or hardware error, and when every single past experience with the Reapers showed me the opposite of what this little dude is telling me.

-That he might be manipulating me based on the knowledge that that is what they do and have always done (indoctrination or no).

-The very history that this guy is contradicting because his very own creations (that he controls as you say) have actually instigated the very conflict he is supposedly trying to prevent.

-How he fails to consecutively define the term 'synthetic'.

-Because the whole premise on why this entire problem exists is flawed due to the arrogant belief of a bunch of giant crabs (that look really tasty) are destined to rule the universe and that they cannot be worshipped if the people they enthrall keep building machines that kill them because the giant crabs have enslaved the people that worship them make them perform difficult tasks that require the assistance of intelligent machines to assist with said tasks.

It's not something I just take on faith. I'm not wired that way to accept claims like that, especially when so much evidence contradicts it.

This'd be reasonable, except that all of this also makes Destroy suspect; if the Catalyst is lying to you and trying to harm you in some manner, it probably has all of the options rigged to kill/indoctrinate you. At that point, it's shooting in the dark.
As for the rest, that's just down to differences of opinion, either between you and the Catalyst or between you and the creators. I personally don't consider them to conflict with the overarching narrative. I do consider Renegade Shepard's actions and supporting Cerberus to do so, when you don't. Neither of us has an advantage of objective truth here.

I'm not throwing away any resources. I'm destroying the Reapers and using their tech as resources later. It's going to be pretty tight when we use it to advance the galaxy.

My galaxy comes pre-advanced for the user's convenience.

Fair enough.

My point stands.

To you.

I really can't use a specific example; This is based on a philosophy. I don't like or agree with Paragon Shepard.

You're asking me to prove why I don't like something. The very nature of this query is unprovable and designed no less to discredit me.

You're improperly asking for evidence where there is none or it is not needed. Asking again will result in a forfeiture of the argument on your part.

Let it be known.

All right, fine. What are Paragon actions taken that you don't like?

[KaiserShep]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
I'm not throwing away any resources. I'm destroying the Reapers and using their tech as resources later. It's going to be pretty tight when we use it to advance the galaxy.

Yeah one thing I never got was how destroying them was tossing away something useful. Living or dead, the reapers are certainly useful. Imagine what you could do with all that building material with indoctrination completely neutralized.

[Steelcan]

Just let the naysayers believe what they will. Their belief in no way belittles yours. In my view what Cerberus did was justifiable, others don't see it that way.

[Sir DeLoria]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

This is still going on?

I've told you before man.

I literally cannot stop myself. 

Evidently:whistle:

[KaiserShep]

Indoctrination turned them into mindless pranksters in the end. Sabotaging the medigel dispensers? Real funny, guys. It's even funnier if Conrad Verner is their distraction.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 11 août 2013 - 05:28 .

[shingara]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

shingara wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

I will. It's not sadistic. I'm not a sadist. I'm a practicalist. 

 I dont know if you like arguments, get a rush out of arguments, saying things to get a reaction out of people. There is a trend for it. I love how you think because you are in the militery that i have never been, like thats somehow a get out of jail free card for you not understanding the basic principle of a black ops.

I do like arguments. I do get a rush out of arguments. I can be provocative with people: it makes them think (though it's obviously failed here).

I understand black ops. Completely understand the definition. It's not hard to understand. You yourself posted the damn definition. Yet you're claiming I don't understand it. I don't know why you think that. I don't know why you feel the need to insult my intelligence like this.

I have to ask one thing:

Is English your native language? You have atrocious grammar and terrible spelling.

I'm not using this as an argument. I legit think you don't speak or write or understand English very well.

 I mean do you not understand that the basic principle of a black ops is to not be known about. But wait i think you do, you obviously do if your militery yourself, which can only mean that you are arguing to extend an argument for the sake of it, no matter the facts given to you, your just willing on an argument for the sake of it.

You haven't given me any facts beyond ones that have been completely irrelevant to the discussion and ones that I never questioned or challenged.

I think you're actually the one arguing every point.

You've already long before resorted to ignoring evidence, fabricating evidence, called my personal character into question, comparing me to Hitler, and now made insults against my intelligence.

Should I contact a mod now? This is quite bannable you know.

 As for the part of your quote i left, i think anyone and everyone including you should go over every single post you have made within this topic and see which of those within the quote left you fall under. And again i say adieu, good night viena, now lets see if you get the picture ?

...

Do you speak English?

Parlez-vous anglais?

Sprichst du Englisch?

Habla usted ingles?

Voce fala Ingles?

 Really, your admiting that you activly provoke people into emotional responses for your jollys and then continue in your post to elicit a response and expect us to take you seriously ?. Reafirming exactly what i thought. When you are losing an argument one of your basic responses as seen throughout this topic is to state what others say as not an argument and if they cannot argue that you have by default won.

 This shows a great weakness within you, as when you cannot win a debate you debase yourself to denile. denile of what has been placed before you. A good example is the Cerberus originally being an alliance black ops as stated within game by multiple sources, the bulk of which as a direct conversation with shepard. But to you this is an affront as it would link them to alliance.

 But lets face facts here, you arnt debating the facts, your eliciting responses. On that basis everything you have said within this topic may not even be your view.  If i were to say something is white you would say it is black.

 So where as i have provided my actual thoughts on cerberus and there actions in sanctuary you have been purposly goading people upon the forums upon there feelings upon the value of human life.

 But feel free and report, because what you are doing is refered to as trolling.

Modifié par shingara, 11 août 2013 - 05:49 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...

[quote]When the Reapers invaded.[/quote]
And they never required terrible things done to defeat them.

[/quote]

Are you sure? A lot of terrible things were done to defeat them. I think the situation we're in kind of calls for a renewed philosophy against the Reapers.

[quote]
[quote]Ok.

A few lines. A few lines from a Private who was not involved, who heard from her Sergeant (who was likely not involved either). Thus making it second-hand evidence (and possibly third-hand evidence).

vs.

1 Game, 2 Books, and 2 Comics.

It still doesn't add up.[/quote]
I didn't say she was necessarily right, just that it's not a retcon; the opinion that it was an Alliance black op still exists in-universe, even if it's wrong.
[/quote]

It does. My mistake. The opinion exists in universe still. In the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I think it's a mistaken opinion. 

[quote]
[quote]I don't support Synthesis or Control for a variety of reasons, namely:

-Because it is narratively and thematically inconsistent with the rest of the trilogy (along with the entire overarching ending)
Because it scientifically, biologically, and logically doesn't make sense.

-Going along with the Reapers, I'm not about to believe this entity I just met on faith about what the Reapers really are when its own logic and perfect solutions don't make any sense based on what I believe is a programming and/or hardware error, and when every single past experience with the Reapers showed me the opposite of what this little dude is telling me.

-That he might be manipulating me based on the knowledge that that is what they do and have always done (indoctrination or no).

-The very history that this guy is contradicting because his very own creations (that he controls as you say) have actually instigated the very conflict he is supposedly trying to prevent.

-How he fails to consecutively define the term 'synthetic'.

-Because the whole premise on why this entire problem exists is flawed due to the arrogant belief of a bunch of giant crabs (that look really tasty) are destined to rule the universe and that they cannot be worshipped if the people they enthrall keep building machines that kill them because the giant crabs have enslaved the people that worship them make them perform difficult tasks that require the assistance of intelligent machines to assist with said tasks.

It's not something I just take on faith. I'm not wired that way to accept claims like that, especially when so much evidence contradicts it.[/quote]

This'd be reasonable, except that all of this also makes Destroy suspect; if the Catalyst is lying to you and trying to harm you in some manner, it probably has all of the options rigged to kill/indoctrinate you. At that point, it's shooting in the dark.

As for the rest, that's just down to differences of opinion, either between you and the Catalyst or between you and the creators. I personally don't consider them to conflict with the overarching narrative. I do consider Renegade Shepard's actions and supporting Cerberus to do so, when you don't. Neither of us has an advantage of objective truth here.
[/quote]

Firstly, I don't think the Catalyst is capable of withholding information. That's why it mentions destroy. But I do think it is capable of using deceit. I do think it is overtly trying to portray destroy in a negative light to entice Shepard to choose a solution more on its own preference. An example of this is when it uses multiple definitions for the term 'synthetic'.

First, it implies that all synthetic creations, from the Geth, EDI, to things like synthetic flesh, organs, VI's, etc, will be affected. It implies this when it says "even you are partly synthetic"

Going by the definition that I used of synthetic flesh and organs, this is true. I am partly synthetic.

Going by the definition of synthetic as in synthetic sapient intelligence, or synthetic life, this is not true. I am not synthetic in this manner. There is no AI in me at all. I am a human being, with a few synthetic organs, yes, but I am not synthetic life.

Then when it defines synthesis and who will be affected, it mentions that synthetics will be merged with organics... which we already can do. I'm an example. I'm standing right in front of the Catalyst.

Yet the Catalyst uses the definition of synthetic as in synthetic sapient intelligence. It makes it clear that it is talking about things like EDI and the Geth. 

And it says how necessary and vital they, so much so that I supposedly can't imagine my life without them.

Except I can. EDI is one synthetic. One. And she's only a year or two old. The Geth meanwhile have existed for over 300 years.... the majority of which they have been isolated from the rest of the galaxy. In fact, it was only just recently that I talked them into joining the war effort. Also, the council expressly forbids the creation of AI's and imposes very harsh penalties for doing so. These laws are effective enough that synthetic, sapient intelligences are

But the point is, yes I can envision my life without synthetic intelligence. I've literally been doing it for almost all of my life. As has most of the galaxy for centuries. 

This assertion is false.... unless my prosthetic gall bladder is going to go on a crusade against my pancreas.

It's this little... contradiction that makes me think he's trying to downplay destroy. He doesn't want me to pick it. He's hoping he can convince or manipulate me into following the path he desires. He may not be able to hide the fact that destroy exists, but he can try to deceive me on the nature of it, and him.

As for the rest, I guess I'll agree to that, if for no other reason than I'm rather weary from arguing now, and really don't want to bring in an ending debate.

[quote]

[quote]I'm not throwing away any resources. I'm destroying the Reapers and using their tech as resources later. It's going to be pretty tight when we use it to advance the galaxy.[/quote]
My galaxy comes pre-advanced for the user's convenience.

[/quote]

And mine comes with the tech and info that we can use to expand upon the original. I'm fine with that, especially since I'm opposed to the conditions that would lead to a pre-advancement such as yours.

[quote]
[quote]Fair enough.

My point stands.[/quote]
To you.
[/quote]

Yes, to me. That's really all I care about, especially considering that I forgot what this point is about.

[quote]
[quote]I really can't use a specific example; This is based on a philosophy. I don't like or agree with Paragon Shepard.

You're asking me to prove why I don't like something. The very nature of this query is unprovable and designed no less to discredit me.

You're improperly asking for evidence where there is none or it is not needed. Asking again will result in a forfeiture of the argument on your part.

Let it be known.[/quote]
All right, fine. What are Paragon actions taken that you don't like?[/quote]
[/quote]

Now you're asking me to objectively state my perspective on actions, which you don't share. I can't objectively state a perspective on an given action. A perspective is subjective. There is no way to prove that it is right or wrong or correct or incorrect, unless it is factually based.

You broke our agreement that you just acquiesced to. This point is no longer relevant and will no longer be argued.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 11 août 2013 - 05:53 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

shingara wrote...
snip

Lets hold a poll. You are not allowed to answer.

Our peers will decide:

As far as reasonable posts go, who has been the more reasonable and respectful poster who has given the best presentation for his points? 

Myself, MassivelyEffective0730?

Or shingara?

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 11 août 2013 - 06:04 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Shingara's been a bit difficult to understand, and I'm never fond of the "You picked a play-style that I disagree with in a vidya game MILLION YEARS IN DUNGEON you're literally worse than Hitler!"

So Shin-y loses I guess...?

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 11 août 2013 - 06:12 .