711 réponses à ce sujet

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Steelcan wrote...

Why people get so worked up over the geth eludes my understanding

I'll agree with that. The geth are the least of what's lost in Destroy.

The Reapers' power and Shepard's limbs are far bigger losses.

[Steelcan]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Why people get so worked up over the geth eludes my understanding

I'll agree with that. The geth are the least of what's lost in Destroy.

The Reapers' power and Shepard's limbs are far bigger losses.

.  Finally someone understands

[The Twilight God]

rekn2 wrote...

scroll back to my previous posts. theres nothing unique about reapers to target. they are made of the matter like everything else. whats the beam targeting? what singles out "reaper stuff"? how does it differentiate from other materials of the same composite?

arguing about the beam is like arguing about santa

The game says the Crucible can. That's just something you have to accept. Someone posted about a Crucible component that helps it single out reapers across the galaxy. Again, it just is. 

You can have a weapon that targets a specific thing. Say you have 3 tech types: Water powered, electrical and hamster on a wheel powered. If I unleashed an airborne poison it would stop the hamster powered machine. Certain sound frequencies devices could cause the water to turn to steam and blow up that tech. EMP would hit the electrical, but not the hamster powered. So a weapon that fires indiscriminately can target specific types of things. If the red magic cancelled out the power of the reaper nanites this could break the bonds between organic and synthetic molecules and cause the disintegration we see in the husks. Just an idea.

As reapers/husks are made of a specific stuff (a particular nanite tech) it could be targeted specifically.

[Ieldra]

The Twilight God wrote...

rekn2 wrote...

scroll back to my previous posts. theres nothing unique about reapers to target. they are made of the matter like everything else. whats the beam targeting? what singles out "reaper stuff"? how does it differentiate from other materials of the same composite?

arguing about the beam is like arguing about santa

The game says the Crucible can. That's just something you have to accept.

Then the same applies to Synthesis.

[Ieldra]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Why people get so worked up over the geth eludes my understanding

I'll agree with that. The geth are the least of what's lost in Destroy.

The Reapers' power and Shepard's limbs are far bigger losses.

I do value the geth, but I agree, especially since the geth have been changed into having organic-like individuality and are no longer unique in their perspective. 

[KaiserShep]

Meh, who needs reaper power anyway.

[ImaginaryMatter]

The Twilight God wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

The slideshow shows the Geth alive and ticking in both other endings, that coupled with what the kid says and the thematic/symbollic/whatever importance of the Destroy choice all adds up to dead Geth.

If we're talking about evidence as in the technical aspects there is none, most of what the kid says on this front is either nonsensensical or ambiguous (it can't even keep its definition of 'Synthetic' straight). And since next to nothing is actually known about the Crucible and even less about the actual mechanisms of the ending, any 'evidence' is conjecture or headcanon.

What's in what slide does not matter unless it shows lifeless Geth. The Kid never says anything about AI's in particular dying. He generalizes all technology and all technology was not noticeably affected. You have no basis to assume the died while all other non-reapertech remained intact. I believe they want to preserve the idea that the Geth died because this was definitely stated to be a result in the original dialog before the EC. Then they retconned it. Why? I think the whole point is to get people to chose something other than Destroy because the other two choices can't stand on their own. We'll just have to see when ME4 comes out.

I understand you want them to be dead for whatever reason, but there is simply no evidence. Of course, you're free to believe they did. Just like you're free to believe the Volus all died when their suits all failed because that would constitute "technology you rely on" like the Kid said. No cherry picking

The biggest mistake you are making is forgetting that the ending sequence is not a crime scene, it is a story. So when the desolate Rannoch slide shows up that means nothing is alive because the Geth and the Quarians are both dead, it's story symbolism 101. Additionally, Destroy represents solving the Catalyst solution by destroying all Synthetics.

What you're missing is that the Catalyst conversation hardly an exercise in technical writing. The Catalyst keeps it's defintions loose and contradictory, definitions you are putting too much weight into.

[The Twilight God]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 I missed this re: me...

The Twilight God wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

But it is just your belief. Just like my views are my beliefs. However, I can back my belief with evidence.

The absense of evidence is not evidence.

Correct.

But people are missing the point. There is no rationale to presume the Geth are destroyed. They would have me prove that the Geth are alive when I have no basis to think they aren't. No different than me demanding you prove the Volus or Drell are still alive when you have no reason to think they are dead. It would be like assuming a character died every time they were off camera and calling my assertion that they are probably safe and sound head canon. Pure absurdity. The burden of proof is on those claiming the Geth, Drell or Volus are dead.

Does this make sense to you?

Yes, perfect sense: you are being pedantic.

Let's ignore RGB to look at other ME3 choices and their EC slides. With Jack, you can send her kids to battle on the frontlines, or put them in support. Jack has three EC slides. One is romance related, ignore that. The other two are change dependent on what decision you make a Grissom Academy. If you put the kids in support, you see them all back at the 'Academy. If you send them to the frontlines, you see Jack standing at a graveyard.

There's nothing specifically telling us that those graves are her students' and so, if we're to use the same logic you're invoking with the geth in Destroy, we can theoretically believe they don't die if you send them into the frontlines.

However, the author-intent with that slide is fairly obvious to anyone using an iota of common-sense.

You're assuming to know the nature of authors intent. If the authors intent is for you to THINK they died it doesn't dictate that they DID die. You feel strongly that the Geth died. Don't confuse your feelings with what you know. The Jack comparison fails in that with Jack and friends there are two opposing slides that can be verifiably traced to that decision. With the Geth there is no opposing slide. There is no slide regarding the Geth in Destroy. There is no opposing slide to put side by side with its opposite. a more apt comparison is Red/Green Citadel vs. Blue Citadel. The Citadel was a complete mess in green and red. In blue it was fine. Ipso-facto they all died in green and red. Even though we don't see dead bodies floating in space or have any direct confirmation. Just a dead station. In a similar fashion, we just see a deserted Rannoch. Even then, we know the Qurians perished so it's still an imperfect comparison.

Your basis for dead Geth is the lack of a slide with Geth. Nothing in-game. Just the lack of a slide. So by your logic any race without a slide is dead. At least with Jack's students there is in-game dialog to at least support the idea that they were the students with or without seeing the opposing slide. But you're right in that you can believe what you want about them. You could argue that the graves are some random people if you'd like, seeing as it was a mass cemetery instead of 11 graves. If someone said those weren't her students I couldn't state, as a matter of fact, that the graves include them. I feel that they include her students, but I can't prove it. This is something people seem unable to grasp. You guys have an almost religious attitude about "knowing" things you can't know. Could the Geth have magically died for no reason? Sure. So could the Drell, Batarians, Volus, Yahg, Hanar and Elcor. They have no slide after all. And the citadel folks. You saw the Citadel, right? Surely they are all dead.

If Quarian AND Geth are around in Control the Geth are somewhere separate from the Quarians.
Only in Synthesis are they together due to having no differences and being mind linked and stuff.
So is the abandoned Rannoch in dead Quarian destroy about dead Geth or dead Quarians? Well, the Quarians ARE dead... sooooo, it's about Dead Quarians.

There is simply nothing stated about the Geth in Destroy. There is no Geth related slide whatsoever. It is left a mystery. I don't know what it is about this that is so hard to understand.

[The Twilight God]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Actually there is.

If the Intelligence could not police the galaxy during the Leviathan times, how is the same thing with a Shepard paint job going to fair any differently? You've already accepted the Reaper logic; otherwise, you would pick Destroy.

What is "the Reaper logic" [sic]?

Remember, that thing is NOT Shepard. It's just another Reaper with his memories and voice. Shepard is dead. The machine has no more a sense of humanistic morality than it did prior to uploading Shepard's memories. It just has a job to do. And it will do it.

I've seen people on both sides of this position try to argue their point, and it gets nowhere, because it comes down to what you believe constitutes being you (and that's subjective). Some people believe that "you" are the sum of your memories, and it wouldn't matter what physical body you inhabit, that body is you if it has all the same thoughts and memories as your old self. As a matter of fact, there's a Russian millionaire (or billionaire, I forget exactly) trying to pursue immortality through this means: creating synthetic "avatars" which preserve the subject's memories.

He hopes to get it done by around ~2045. Some dispute whether or not this is truly immortality, but that's the point here. Some believe just the thoughts and memories are "you." Some think the (organic) body counts too. It's all hypothesis.

Reaper logic: The belief that organics will inevitably create organics who will turn on their organic creators and annihilate them. Shepard takes his own life because (if you chose blue or green) he believes that deeply that the conflict is unavoidable. He adopts reaper logic. In essence, Shepard accepts that the Reaper's past actions are justified due to this "truth".

As far as the Reaper mind with Shep's voice it says it isn't Shepard in the ending and refers to dead Shepard in the third person. There is nothing to argue really. If we go down that line then the Reapers ARE the previous races they killed. With that in mind, say we lost (Refuse), is the human reaper who will no doubt take part in the next Cycle the people whose memories it holds? Would those people do to others what was done to them? If the answer is no, then we can't say memories make the person as I find it highly unlikely that humanity is mostly heartless sociopaths. If yes, then Control is looking bad no matter if it was really Shepard or not.

[The Twilight God]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Why people get so worked up over the geth eludes my understanding

I'll agree with that. The geth are the least of what's lost in Destroy.

The Reapers' power and Shepard's limbs are far bigger losses.

The lack of relays and collapse of galactic civilization as we know it are pretty bad. Everyone is pretty much stranded which is why I consider the slides to be the narrator's hopes. It is spoken of as a what if as opposed to being spoken as things that happened (past tense). None of it actually occurs. Some things are possible in the distant future, but Grunt getting to Tuchanka while still being an adolescent or Samara ever seeing her daughter again? Nah. And Tali and Garrus are as good as dead with the whole food issue. That or everyone else on the Normandy is going to starve. Destroy sucks balls.

[SporkFu]

EDITS: oops, forgot the quote. apologies.

The Twilight God wrote...
Reaper logic: The belief that organics will inevitably create organics who will turn on their organic creators and annihilate them. Shepard takes his own life because (if you chose blue or green) he believes that deeply that the conflict is unavoidable. He adopts reaper logic. In essence, Shepard accepts that the Reaper's past actions are justified due to this "truth".

As far as the Reaper mind with Shep's voice it says it isn't Shepard in the ending and refers to dead Shepard in the third person. There is nothing to argue really. If we go down that line then the Reapers ARE the previous races they killed. With that in mind, say we lost (Refuse), is the human reaper who will no doubt take part in the next Cycle the people whose memories it holds? Would those people do to others what was done to them? If the answer is no, then we can't say memories make the person as I find it highly unlikely that humanity is mostly heartless sociopaths. If yes, then Control is looking bad no matter if it was really Shepard or not.

The reapers are harvesting us at our most basic level, like DNA, to build a new reaper with. That's why all the people the collectors abducted were turned into goo. Humanity's memories and personalities don't enter into it.

Good point about Shepard adopting reaper logic. I never really thought about that.

Modifié par SporkFu, 21 décembre 2013 - 08:36 .

[The Twilight God]

Ieldra2 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

rekn2 wrote...

scroll back to my previous posts. theres nothing unique about reapers to target. they are made of the matter like everything else. whats the beam targeting? what singles out "reaper stuff"? how does it differentiate from other materials of the same composite?

arguing about the beam is like arguing about santa

The game says the Crucible can. That's just something you have to accept.

Then the same applies to Synthesis.

Synthesis can work, yes. Synthesis is the same as making husks. Same concept. Just a different way the nanites are distributed and effect the host. There is nothing odd about it in concept like people make it out to be. The only problem with it is the sheer amount of nanites being produced. The energy requirement would be too great. As it spread out from the epicenter the contents would be more and more spread out. When you get to light years out in every direction there would be like 1 nanite per 20 light years.  It would be better if it just effected those on earth and over the centuries it spread naturally to the next generations as the people affected when back to their home worlds.

[KaiserShep]

The Twilight God wrote...
The lack of relays and collapse of galactic civilization as we know it are pretty bad. Everyone is pretty much stranded which is why I consider the slides to be the narrator's hopes. It is spoken of as a what if as opposed to being spoken as things that happened (past tense). None of it actually occurs. Some things are possible in the distant future, but Grunt getting to Tuchanka while still being an adolescent or Samara ever seeing her daughter again? Nah. And Tali and Garrus are as good as dead with the whole food issue. That or everyone else on the Normandy is going to starve. Destroy sucks balls.

If you want to believe that the slides are simply hopes and dreams on the part of the author and not something that actually happens, that's your prerogative, but you're going to have to accept that this is merely your headcanon, not fact. Nothing you insist here is actually the case. That would be like me saying that nothing that happens in the Synthesis slides actually happen, and instead all life in the galaxy is now the thralls of the liberated reapers, and in Control, the Shepard-derived catalyst decides to kill everything in sight because it finally sees eye to eye with the reapers.

Once you start pushing this idea that somehow the ending is some sort of deception, it becomes hard to take any of this seriously. Insisting that the geth survived based solely on the lack of a slide explicitly showing their inert remains is already pushing it.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 21 décembre 2013 - 08:45 .

[The Twilight God]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

The slideshow shows the Geth alive and ticking in both other endings, that coupled with what the kid says and the thematic/symbollic/whatever importance of the Destroy choice all adds up to dead Geth.

If we're talking about evidence as in the technical aspects there is none, most of what the kid says on this front is either nonsensensical or ambiguous (it can't even keep its definition of 'Synthetic' straight). And since next to nothing is actually known about the Crucible and even less about the actual mechanisms of the ending, any 'evidence' is conjecture or headcanon.

What's in what slide does not matter unless it shows lifeless Geth. The Kid never says anything about AI's in particular dying. He generalizes all technology and all technology was not noticeably affected. You have no basis to assume the died while all other non-reapertech remained intact. I believe they want to preserve the idea that the Geth died because this was definitely stated to be a result in the original dialog before the EC. Then they retconned it. Why? I think the whole point is to get people to chose something other than Destroy because the other two choices can't stand on their own. We'll just have to see when ME4 comes out.

I understand you want them to be dead for whatever reason, but there is simply no evidence. Of course, you're free to believe they did. Just like you're free to believe the Volus all died when their suits all failed because that would constitute "technology you rely on" like the Kid said. No cherry picking

The biggest mistake you are making is forgetting that the ending sequence is not a crime scene, it is a story. So when the desolate Rannoch slide shows up that means nothing is alive because the Geth and the Quarians are both dead, it's story symbolism 101. Additionally, Destroy represents solving the Catalyst solution by destroying all Synthetics.

What you're missing is that the Catalyst conversation hardly an exercise in technical writing. The Catalyst keeps it's defintions loose and contradictory, definitions you are putting too much weight into.

It just means the Quarians are dead. Hence, the dead Qurian as opposed to any dead Geth. The Geth have no slide whatsoever in Destroy. The Geth are left a mystery in Destroy.

In Control the Geth are not with the Qurians if both alive. I don't know where they are in Control, but it isn't necessarily Rannoch. Considering they say they stayed in space instead of on planets I'd guess they were on some space station of sorts. And without the Qurians around they have no reason to take care of Rannoch anymore.

You feel the Geth died. That Pre-EC mindset is dug in deep. And that's cool. I understand where you're coming from. But you don't know they died. Don't pretend you do. You believe they died. Again, that's cool.

Destroy actually runs counter to the Kid's so-called solution. The Kid says so itself.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 21 décembre 2013 - 08:52 .

[KaiserShep]

They are both dead and alive at the same time.

[The Twilight God]

SporkFu wrote...

EDITS: oops, forgot the quote. apologies.

The Twilight God wrote...
Reaper logic: The belief that organics will inevitably create organics who will turn on their organic creators and annihilate them. Shepard takes his own life because (if you chose blue or green) he believes that deeply that the conflict is unavoidable. He adopts reaper logic. In essence, Shepard accepts that the Reaper's past actions are justified due to this "truth".

As far as the Reaper mind with Shep's voice it says it isn't Shepard in the ending and refers to dead Shepard in the third person. There is nothing to argue really. If we go down that line then the Reapers ARE the previous races they killed. With that in mind, say we lost (Refuse), is the human reaper who will no doubt take part in the next Cycle the people whose memories it holds? Would those people do to others what was done to them? If the answer is no, then we can't say memories make the person as I find it highly unlikely that humanity is mostly heartless sociopaths. If yes, then Control is looking bad no matter if it was really Shepard or not.

The reapers are harvesting us at our most basic level, like DNA, to build a new reaper with. That's why all the people the collectors abducted were turned into goo. Humanity's memories and personalities don't enter into it.

Good point about Shepard adopting reaper logic. I never really thought about that.

Actually, it was said that they did harvest their memories. The Goo was just to absorb the races "essence". I really thought the Reapers were going to take a metaphysical turn, but Walters let me down

The whole "essence" is nonsense without a metaphysical slant. It's one thing to harvest it as data samples, but to make synthesized alloys out of it? What's the point? It's just body fluid. It wouldn't make the Human Reaper any more or less human as a non-metaphysical agent. *shrug*

[ImaginaryMatter]

The Twilight God wrote...

It just means the Quarians are dead. Hence, the dead Qurian as opposed to any dead Geth. The Geth have no slide whatsoever in Destroy. The Geth are left a mystery in Destroy.

In Control the Geth are not with the Qurians if both alive. I don't know where they are in Control, but it isn't necessarily Rannoch. Considering they say they stayed in space instead of on planets I'd guess they were on some space station of sorts. And without the Qurians around they have no reason to take care of Rannoch anymore.

You feel the Geth died. That Pre-EC mindset is dug in deep. And that's cool. I understand where you're coming from. But you don't know they died. Don't pretend you do. You believe they died. Again, that's cool.

Destroy actually runs counter to the Kid's so-called solution. The Kid says so itself.

The 'Desolate Rannoch Slide' (DRS) requires two prerequisites: The Geth were chosen on Rannoch over the Quarians and the Destroy option was chosen. The DRS will never show in the Control or Synthesis slides if the Quarians are destroyed over Rannoch. Also in the Control and Synthesis slides the Geth are clearly seen standing on Rannoch, the architecture in the backround is Quarian as seen in the Quarian slides and they are beneath sky.

So, assuming the Quarians are destroyed and the Geth survive the Destroy ending, then how come they only settle/maintain Rannoch in Control and Synthesis but not Destroy?

Also relevent. The DRS shows damaged and decaying Quarian archetecture. Since you seem to agree that the dead Quarian represents the entirety of the extinct Quarians then it would seem reasonable to assume that the desolate architecture represents the entirety of the destroyed and not maintained buildings on all of Rannoch. This is important because the Control/Synthesis slides show the Geth maintaining Rannoch even though the Quarians are gone, while Destroy does not.

Modifié par ImaginaryMatter, 21 décembre 2013 - 09:37 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

KaiserShep wrote...

They are both dead and alive at the same time.

Schrodinger's Geth?

[Sir DeLoria]

The Twilight God wrote...

The lack of relays and collapse of galactic civilization as we know it are pretty bad. Everyone is pretty much stranded which is why I consider the slides to be the narrator's hopes. It is spoken of as a what if as opposed to being spoken as things that happened (past tense). None of it actually occurs. Some things are possible in the distant future, but Grunt getting to Tuchanka while still being an adolescent or Samara ever seeing her daughter again? Nah. And Tali and Garrus are as good as dead with the whole food issue. That or everyone else on the Normandy is going to starve. Destroy sucks balls.

Low EMS destroy sucks, high EMS destroy is fine, the relays are repaired rather quickly and Shep survives. Your hyperbole and exaggeration won't change that.

[Sir DeLoria]

Tbh, I never got the desolate Rannoch slide. About 99% of the Quarian population lived and served on the Flotilla, why didn't the spare survivors(a number still in the tens of thousands) settle on the planet?

[The Twilight God]

KaiserShep wrote...

If you want to believe that the slides are simply hopes and dreams on the part of the author and not something that actually happens, that's your prerogative, but you're going to have to accept that this is merely your headcanon, not fact. Nothing you insist here is actually the case. That would be like me saying that nothing that happens in the Synthesis slides actually happen, and instead all life in the galaxy is now the thralls of the liberated reapers, and in Control, the Shepard-derived catalyst decides to kill everything in sight because it finally sees eye to eye with the reapers.

You keep throwing around the phrase "head canon". I'm not sure you know what that means. I think you use it as a catch all label to devalue anything you don't like. I'm just taking everything at face value. In-game content. Nothing more. Nothing less. I'm stating explicitly what occurs in terms of narrator vs. narration vs. slides. That isn't to say that stuff couldn't come true (save for the few I mentioned). The last thing that occurs in real time is either the breath scene or Normandy taking off.

"All of the epilogue slides involve a narrator speaking about what they foresee will happen, want to happen, hope will happen or plan to make happen. The slides do not actually occur in real-time. Nothing in the slides actually occur in-game (CG.rendered models,etc.). The endings don't happen in the future. The endings are in the present. No time travel takes place. The EC slides are intended to placate angry fans by showing them pretty pictures. Ignore the slides and just listen to what the narrator actually says. The narrator does not describe what is on screen. The narrator cannot know if any of that stuff would happen as the narrator is speaking from the perspective of a person in the present. It is merely an individual talking about their hopes for the future in a general manner. No direct mention of krogan babies, geth-quarian peace, Jack becoming the headmaster of Grissom, Miranda becoming president of Earth, or anything else of that sort. Bioware counts on people to see what they want to see. Many players assume everything in the slides is an actual depiction of the future. There is no evidence of this being true. There cannot be as the endings take place in the present."

Now I could be wrong. Maybe the writers were just careless with the slides and narrator script. But I could be right and they are more talented than they are given credit. We don't KNOW the nature of the writers' intent. Your disdain for writer deception does not remove the possibility of deception.

Once you start pushing this idea that somehow the ending is some sort of deception, it becomes hard to take any of this seriously. Insisting that the geth survived based solely on the lack of a slide explicitly showing their inert remains is already pushing it.

This backs up my previous point. When you don't like something you ridicule and call it head canon despite nothing I say being made up at all. There isn't any crucial point I've made that is not taken from game data. I never see anyone actually debunking anything I say. I see no one able to actually pull apart my arguments. You just call me a crazy and dismiss me. Why is that? If I'm such a nutjob and my ideas are so outlandish and insane how hard should it be to actually refute me?

Say the writers did pull off what I suspect and entered ME4 from that perspective. How would you debunk them? How would you explain how their deception makes no sense and how everything depicted in the slides must have come to pass without a doubt? This should be interesting.

I can easily say that you believing the Geth died based on LITERALLY nothing is pushing it. You're asserting that I should just blindly believe that they died just because there is nothing showing them alive. While at the same time not questioning all the other races mortality who are without slides. You don't see the hypocrisy in this? You do realize the burden of proof is yours, right?

That wasn't rhetorical. Do you realize that the burden of proof is on you? Yes or No?

You don't have to share my views, but please stop pretending like you know something. You KNOW nothing. You believe the Geth died. And you believe this based on the lack of a Geth slide (i.e. based on nothing). But I'm the one who isn't to be taken seriously?

[Sir DeLoria]

 Even if it were ambiguos wether the Geth survived Destroy or not, I wouldn't care all too much, since I never even let them get that far:lol:

[ImaginaryMatter]

The Twilight God wrote...

"All of the epilogue slides involve a narrator speaking about what they foresee will happen, want to happen, hope will happen or plan to make happen. The slides do not actually occur in real-time. Nothing in the slides actually occur in-game (CG.rendered models,etc.). [i]The endings don't happen in the future. The endings are in the present. No time travel takes place. The EC slides are intended to placate angry fans by showing them pretty pictures. Ignore the slides and just listen to what the narrator actually says. The narrator does not describe what is on screen. The narrator cannot know if any of that stuff would happen as the narrator is speaking from the perspective of a person in the present. It is merely an individual talking about their hopes for the future in a general manner. No direct mention of krogan babies, geth-quarian peace, Jack becoming the headmaster of Grissom, Miranda becoming president of Earth, or anything else of that sort. Bioware counts on people to see what they want to see. Many players assume everything in the slides is an actual depiction of the future. There is no evidence of this being true. There cannot be as the endings take place in the present."

Are you not familiar with how montages generally work?

Also, here is a thought exercise to explain why what you are doing is head canon:

Describe the mechanics of the Destroy ending, citing evidence from the game and your own assumptions when appropriate.

Are you saying the Geth are definately alive or you believe they are alive? Or are you saying they're fate is purposely left a mystery or that you believe it's supposed to be a mystery?

Modifié par ImaginaryMatter, 21 décembre 2013 - 10:21 .

[The Twilight God]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

It just means the Quarians are dead. Hence, the dead Qurian as opposed to any dead Geth. The Geth have no slide whatsoever in Destroy. The Geth are left a mystery in Destroy.

In Control the Geth are not with the Qurians if both alive. I don't know where they are in Control, but it isn't necessarily Rannoch. Considering they say they stayed in space instead of on planets I'd guess they were on some space station of sorts. And without the Qurians around they have no reason to take care of Rannoch anymore.

You feel the Geth died. That Pre-EC mindset is dug in deep. And that's cool. I understand where you're coming from. But you don't know they died. Don't pretend you do. You believe they died. Again, that's cool.

Destroy actually runs counter to the Kid's so-called solution. The Kid says so itself.

The 'Desolate Rannoch Slide' (DRS) requires two prerequisites: The Geth were chosen on Rannoch over the Quarians and the Destroy option was chosen. The DRS will never show in the Control or Synthesis slides if the Quarians are destroyed over Rannoch. Also in the Control and Synthesis slides the Geth are clearly seen standing on Rannoch, the architecture in the backround is Quarian as seen in the Quarian slides and they are beneath sky.

So, assuming the Quarians are destroyed and the Geth survive the Destroy ending, then how come they only settle/maintain Rannoch in Control and Synthesis but not Destroy?

Also relevent. The DRS shows damaged and decaying Quarian archetecture. Since you seem to agree that the dead Quarian represents the entirety of the extinct Quarians then it would seem reasonable to assume that the desolate architecture represents the entirety of the destroyed and not maintained buildings on all of Rannoch. This is important because the Control/Synthesis slides show the Geth maintaining Rannoch even though the Quarians are gone, while Destroy does not.

What is your point?

That slide shows a desolate Rannoch with a dead Quarian. It has NOTHING obvious to do with Geth .Notice how on Tuchanka slides they actually have dead Krogran? You know, to show it's a slide about dead krogan...  

Why would Geth be on Rannoch? They live in space? Only the synthesized geth live on the planet with the Qurians. You're trying to compare the lack of a slide in one ending to the existence of a slide in another. That's where you've gone wrong. Again, Destroy has no Geth slides. The Geth are a mystery in Destroy just like some other races are in all endings. No matter how much you want to label something with no trace of Geth as a Geth slide you would be wrong. Fact: There is no slide with anything Geth related in Destroy. Deal with it.

That architecture does not mean it's on Rannoch. That is their shared architecture. It's nothing like the stuff on Tali's recruit mission which is the only Qurian specific architecture we see. At the end of ME3 the Qurians have no such architecture. Rannoch is wild land with no cities. If the Qurians are dead that same architecture exists in the Control slide for Geth. So the idea that it is "Quarian architecture" is incorrect. 

Do the Geth maintain Rannoch in Control or Synthesis without the Qurians being there? I don't know where they are in blue or green if the Qurians die (or are there in the case of blue). The "sky" makes me think it's a station in space with no atmosphere in conjunction with the fact that they state the live in stations. I don't know. But there is nothing to make me think it's definitively Rannoch. You're taking a baseless assumption and asserting it as matter of fact.

You keep comparing a slide to the lack of a slide. You seem to be operating under the assumption that I believe you, the player, are intended to definitively know the fate of the Geth in Destroy. This is a mistake on your part. I believe the writers left the Geth a mystery so that people could continue pre-EC mentality and assume their demise. You're approaching this as if I'm just saying that Bioware definitively wanted to portray them as alive a well without a doubt. They reconned the Kid's AI comments for a reason. It could be to mantain blue and green's viability vs red. It could also be to keep their options open for future games. As they left it they can say the Geth lived or died. Who really knows? But regardless of their ultimate intent the fact remains that there is no evidence of the Geth's demise. The fact remains that in Destroy there is no Geth slide. In Destroy the Geth are a mystery.

[The Twilight God]

Necanor wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

The lack of relays and collapse of galactic civilization as we know it are pretty bad. Everyone is pretty much stranded which is why I consider the slides to be the narrator's hopes. It is spoken of as a what if as opposed to being spoken as things that happened (past tense). None of it actually occurs. Some things are possible in the distant future, but Grunt getting to Tuchanka while still being an adolescent or Samara ever seeing her daughter again? Nah. And Tali and Garrus are as good as dead with the whole food issue. That or everyone else on the Normandy is going to starve. Destroy sucks balls.

Low EMS destroy sucks, high EMS destroy is fine, the relays are repaired rather quickly and Shep survives. Your hyperbole and exaggeration won't change that.

How are they repaired quickly? Nobody knows how they work. Does everyone from every corner of the galaxy magical figure it out at the same time all of the sudden when they couldn't figure it out for the past thousands of years? Even if they fix one they still have to FTL to the next one to repair it. And on and on. Destroy cannot end well overnight. Things will be rough for the immediate future. They have no infrastructure and ruined worlds. Of course, you can ignore established lore and pretend it can all work out overnight. But you're not going to win any argument concerning the logistics of repairing the relay network even if they did know how to fix them, much less considering the fact that they don't know how. Destroy is just the lesser of 3 evils. But it still sucks.

If the Reapers could be trusted Synthesis or Control are objectively better than Destroy.