937 réponses à ce sujet

[von uber]

And me1. And me2.

[ElSuperGecko]

So that's why they try to kill him/her all the time during ME3.

 

And me1. And me2.

 

Irrelevant.  We're talking about the END SEQUENCE to Mass Effect 3, not what came before.  it's precisely Shepard's prior actions, resistance and determination to survive against all odds which LED us to this very point.

 

The Reapers interest stroke obsession with Shepard is exactly why they DON'T try to kill him/her at the end of Mass Effect 3.  Harbinger is bristling with weapons that can take down capital ships.  So why does Shepard merely get dazed and disorientated by Harbinger's attack?  Harbinger bullseyes the other members of Hammer team with almost contemptuous ease.  Why isn't Shepard literally disintegrated?  And please don't fall back to the tired old excuse of "BaD wRiTiNgZ", we have dismissed that claim.

 

Shepard's injured, disorientated, alone, practically helpless... so why not just finish him/her off?  Why instead actually provide Shepard with 5 minutes of exposition which actively attempts to nudge him/her into following in the Illusive Man and Saren's footsteps?

 

Sorry kids, your argument (for want of a better word) holds no weight.

[Farangbaa]

Irrelevant.  We're talking about the END SEQUENCE to Mass Effect 3, not what came before.  it's precisely Shepard's prior actions, resistance and determination to survive against all odds which LED us to this very point.

 

The Reapers interest stroke obsession with Shepard is exactly why they DON'T try to kill him/her at the end of Mass Effect 3.  Harbinger is bristling with weapons that can take down capital ships.  So why does Shepard merely get dazed and disorientated by Harbinger's attack?  Harbinger bullseyes the other members of Hammer team with almost contemptuous ease.  Why isn't Shepard literally disintegrated?  And please don't fall back to the tired old excuse of "BaD wRiTiNgZ", we have dismissed that claim.

 

Shepard's injured, disorientated, alone, practically helpless... so why not just finish him/her off?  Why instead actually provide Shepard with 5 minutes of exposition which actively attempts to nudge him/her into following in the Illusive Man and Saren's footsteps?

 

Sorry kids, your argument (for want of a better word) holds no weight.

 

http://en.wikipedia....il_Marksmanship

 

and I'm pretty damn certain those Husks and Marauders try to kill me after being hit by the beam.

[masster blaster]

Don't you dare accuse BioWare of using cinematic effects.

 

It's all on purpose, everything is a clue.

 

You're indoctrinated!

sigh. this is what I am talking about. Sarcastic comments. I didn't say " It's all true or all on purpose" I said " It's not ideals" Mean I don't know if it's true or not.

[KaiserShep]

http://en.wikipedia....il_Marksmanship

 

and I'm pretty damn certain those Husks and Marauders try to kill me after being hit by the beam.

 

Wrong, bucko. They were trying to escort Shepard up to the beam! They just...lack the gentle touch.

[masster blaster]

The reapers have no need for shepard. They kill her, they win and the cycle continues.
Any other outcome where she doesn't activate the crucible is a reaper win (and you can argue that only destroy is a reaper loss).
Therfore why bother with a convoluted indoctrination attempt? They don't need her.

Note true. Since ME2 the Reapers have wanted Shepard, Dead or alive. In ME3 Shepard is the symbol of " Hope". Shepard and his/her squadmates have rallied the galaxy to form a counter offensive force to take back Earth, and recapture the Citadel. Wouldn't the Reapers want Shepard on their side? I know I would.

 

Having Shepard as a pawn for the Reapers is a major blow for the galaxy. Morale wise, is shot to hell. Organic and synthetic races would see their greatest hero work with the Reapers and that would put a huge strain on the war effort. Not to mention our squadmates. Many of them will be devastated with the lose of Shepard, especially our LI if you have romanced anyone. It would be a huge insult for the Reapers to just merely show Shepard to them and to the galaxy that in the end Shepard was converted to the Reapers side, so that means nobody can resist the Reapers.

 

Now it is true it would be simply to just kill Shepard, which they do of course through out the trilogy, yet it works both ways. If Shepard is not fit to become an Indoctrinated agent for the Reapers, then they simply kill him/er, however Shepard would become a BEACON of hope if Shepard is killed in combat. If Shepard works for the Reapers, then that symbol of hope dies for the galaxy lost it's leader in the fight, a hero, and a friend. It is a risky move on the Reapers both ways because if the Reapers force Shepard to go under rapid Indoctrination, then Shepard would become a mindless husk. They need Shepard for all he/she is and worth, much like how TIM wanted Shepard, exactly like him/her self.

 

So in a way it's a win win for the Reapers, yet if Shepard picks Destroy and wakes up from either the Normandy attacking Harbinger, Hammar, or some Sword fleet distracting Harbinger from finishing off Shepard, then our Shepard wakes up, and resisted Indoctrination for with for now or forever. My theory on the " forever" is that Liara( However Liara will die because her mind will take on the Reaper's Indoctrination towards Shepard, causing Liara to become a husk like creature, not like the husk we see, but just her body would be all that is left), the rachni queen ( She might live or die, her linking her mind towards Shepard would save Liara, but the there is a possibility that she may die or be driven insane) from ME1, or the Leviathans link their minds with Shepard, causing Shepard to not be taken in by Reaper Indoctrination again, since the more minds you have linked with one another like Zhu's hope. The better your odds are of not becoming Indoctrinated. IT is why when ever Shepard is alone, Shepard is more easy to Indoctrinate because in a way our squadmates form a wall that protects Shepard. The more close friend's Shepard has with him, the more Shepard can keep him/herself from falling under the Reapers control.

[ElSuperGecko]

http://en.wikipedia....il_Marksmanship

 

and I'm pretty damn certain those Husks and Marauders try to kill me after being hit by the beam.

 

One spoof wikipedia example does not a convincing argument make.  You've essentially resorted to "BaD WrItINgZ", just as I predicted.

 

And it was three Husks and one Marauder.  Token resistance, nothing more than that.  Literally minutes earlier, Shepard successfully held off multiple Marauders, Banshees, Ravagers and Brutes while protecting the missile batteries.  The Reapers are aware of Shepard's abilities.  If Shepard succumbs to three Husks and a solitary Marauder - even in his/her weakened state - then he/she clearly isn't worthy of further attention.  Please tell me you didn't succumb to three Husks and one Marauder.

 

For an extended analysis, however, here are the pertinent facts:

 

• Harbinger arrives in London to defend the entry point for the Citadel.

• Harbinger picks off every single member of Hammer team with pinpoint accuracy., eliminating Makos, foot troops, aerial vehicles with effortless, contemptuous ease.

• The Normandy arrives - and Harbinger STOPS.  Dead it's tracks.  Harbinger watches Shepard and the Normandy, and waits.

• The Normandy evacs, and Harbinger IMMEDIATELY turns it's attention to Shepard - attacking him/her with JUST enough power to weaken, disorientate and stun.

•  Harbinger LEAVES, giving Shepard (assuming he/she is competent enough to still take down token resistance from the Reaper's weakest forces) clear and free access to the Citadel.

 

Following Harbinger's attack, Shepard is entirely at their mercy.  If they wanted Shepard dead, Shepard would be DEAD.  But no - Harbinger wipes out Shepard's escort, then ushers him onwards.  Harbinger ALLOWS Shepard to pass.  Shepard ONLY makes it onto the Citadel because the Reapers WANT him/her to make it onto the Citadel.

 

The Reapers WANT Shepard to make it onto the Citadel.

 

The Reapers WANT Shepard.

 

QED.

[Eryri]

http://en.wikipedia....il_Marksmanship
 
and I'm pretty damn certain those Husks and Marauders try to kill me after being hit by the beam.

While you are correct in that being a plot hole, it's not as though Bioware's writing is completely immune to those. (Although one could head canon that a Shepard weak enough to be taken out by a marauder and 2 husks is not worth "ascending", or whatever the reapers might plan to do with him / her). It's also relatively minor compared to the gaping chasms of nonsense that open up if we take that wretched ending literally.
Stuff like the Reaper overlord being on the Citadel the whole time that Sovereign was desperately and clumsily trying to get in, in order to open a relay that the other Reapers didn't even really need, given the speed they got in from Darkspace. Or the Reapers conveniently forgetting that once they regained the Citadel, they could shut down the Relay network and strand the Crucible thousands of light years away. These can be worked around reasonably well if the Reapers deliberately intended to lure Shepard to Earth (perhaps to be integrated as the CPU of the new reaper, to borrow another plot point from Babylon 5) and if he was knocked out in London, so the dreaded Catalyst might not even exist on the Citadel to ruin the plot of ME1.

This is why I think Bioware should adopt IT for ME4. Broadly speaking it patches far more ( and far more serious) plotholes than it introduces.

[Farangbaa]

One spoof wikipedia example does not a convincing argument make.  You've essentially resorted to "BaD WrItINgZ", just as I predicted.

 

And it was three Husks and one Marauder.  Token resistance, nothing more than that.  Literally minutes earlier, Shepard successfully held off multiple Marauders, Banshees, Ravagers and Brutes while protecting the missile batteries.  The Reapers are aware of Shepard's abilities.  If Shepard succumbs to three Husks and a solitary Marauder - even in his/her weakened state - then he/she clearly isn't worthy of further attention.  Please tell me you didn't succumb to three Husks and one Marauder.

 

For an extended analysis, however, here are the pertinent facts:

 

• Harbinger arrives in London to defend the entry point for the Citadel.

• Harbinger picks off every single member of Hammer team with pinpoint accuracy., eliminating Makos, foot troops, aerial vehicles with effortless, contemptuous ease.

• The Normandy arrives - and Harbinger STOPS.  Dead it's tracks.  Harbinger watches Shepard and the Normandy, and waits.

• The Normandy evacs, and Harbinger IMMEDIATELY turns it's attention to Shepard - attacking him/her with JUST enough power to weaken, disorientate and stun.

•  Harbinger LEAVES, giving Shepard (assuming he/she is competent enough to still take down token resistance from the Reaper's weakest forces) clear and free access to the Citadel.

 

Following Harbinger's attack, Shepard is entirely at their mercy.  If they wanted Shepard dead, Shepard would be DEAD.  But no - Harbinger wipes out Shepard's escort, then ushers him onwards.  Harbinger ALLOWS Shepard to pass.  Shepard ONLY makes it onto the Citadel because the Reapers WANT him/her to make it onto the Citadel.

 

The Reapers WANT Shepard to make it onto the Citadel.

 

The Reapers WANT Shepard.

 

QED.

 

Everything you just said is pretty much explained by the wiki article. Harbinger is as strong as the plot demands him to be, and as weak/stupid as the plot demands him to be.

 

Except the last few bits, that's all in your head.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

But why should they make him one of their own if he disappoints them?  FailShep disappoints them.  FailShep is unworthy.  FailShep is a scrub.  That's why Synthesis isn't offered to FailShep.  That's why Synthesis is the hardest ending to achieve (bar one, of course).

 

How is it disappointing when the task is supposed to be nigh-impossible to begin with? No organics on their best days before him has ever come close to doing what even the worst Shepard achieves canonically: dead Reapers (Sovereign, Arnie, three more in ME3).

 

He also embodies a union of flesh and steel without ill effects, something the Catalyst would covet.

 

If that's not "worthy," who the hell is?

[ElSuperGecko]

Everything you just said is pretty much explained by the wiki article. Harbinger is as strong as the plot demands him to be, and as weak/stupid as the plot demands him to be.

 

Except the last few bits, that's all in your head.

 

 

So you're sticking adamantly to your "BaD wRiTiNgZ" guns then.  Good for you; we have little more to debate,

 

 

How is it disappointing when the task is supposed to be nigh-impossible to begin with? No organics on their best days before him has ever come close to doing what even the worst Shepard achieves canonically: dead Reapers (Sovereign, Arnie, three more in ME3).

 

He also embodies a union of flesh and steel without ill effects, something the Catalyst would covet.

 

If that's not "worthy," who the hell is?

 

Ask the Catalyst; it's the one who snorts derisively in FailShep's direction, and offers him/her "more choice than they deserve" (yet less than completionist Shep).

 

I actually agree with your points.  Why wouldn't the Reapers want Shepard?

[Farangbaa]

So you're sticking adamantly to your "BaD wRiTiNgZ" guns then.  Good for you; we have little more to debate,

 

No, I do not. 

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Stuff like the Reaper overlord being on the Citadel the whole time that Sovereign was desperately and clumsily trying to get in, in order to open a relay that the other Reapers didn't even really need, given the speed they got in from Darkspace.

 
ugh, this again?
 

Or the Reapers conveniently forgetting that once they regained the Citadel, they could shut down the Relay network and strand the Crucible thousands of light years away. These can be worked around reasonably well if the Reapers deliberately intended to lure Shepard to Earth (perhaps to be integrated as the CPU of the new reaper, to borrow another plot point from Babylon 5) and if he was knocked out in London, so the dreaded Catalyst might not even exist on the Citadel to ruin the plot of ME1.

 
Word-of-God (Weekes) says the Keepers kept the Reapers from regaining full control of the Citadel.

[CronoDragoon]

So you're sticking adamantly to your "BaD wRiTiNgZ" guns then.  Good for you; we have little more to debate,

 

Question: Why should I believe IT as opposed to Extreme IT?

[ElSuperGecko]

Question: Why should I believe IT as opposed to Extreme IT?

 

That's entirely up to you.  Look at the material presented to you within the games and draw your own conclusions.  If you're able to justify one interpretation over another, if you think the evidence supports one idea over another, you can believe whatever you want to.  Open ending friend, you have choice - more than you know.

 

Personally, I'm not prescriptive.  My interpretation may well clash with that held by others, but I'm not going to attack them over it.  That doesn't mean I won't question their interpretation or play Devil's Advocate, of course.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Note true. Since ME2 the Reapers have wanted Shepard, Dead or alive. In ME3 Shepard is the symbol of " Hope". Shepard and his/her squadmates have rallied the galaxy to form a counter offensive force to take back Earth, and recapture the Citadel. Wouldn't the Reapers want Shepard on their side? I know I would.

 

Having Shepard as a pawn for the Reapers is a major blow for the galaxy. Morale wise, is shot to hell. Organic and synthetic races would see their greatest hero work with the Reapers and that would put a huge strain on the war effort. Not to mention our squadmates. Many of them will be devastated with the lose of Shepard, especially our LI if you have romanced anyone. It would be a huge insult for the Reapers to just merely show Shepard to them and to the galaxy that in the end Shepard was converted to the Reapers side, so that means nobody can resist the Reapers.

 

Now it is true it would be simply to just kill Shepard, which they do of course through out the trilogy, yet it works both ways. If Shepard is not fit to become an Indoctrinated agent for the Reapers, then they simply kill him/er, however Shepard would become a BEACON of hope if Shepard is killed in combat. If Shepard works for the Reapers, then that symbol of hope dies for the galaxy lost it's leader in the fight, a hero, and a friend. It is a risky move on the Reapers both ways because if the Reapers force Shepard to go under rapid Indoctrination, then Shepard would become a mindless husk. They need Shepard for all he/she is and worth, much like how TIM wanted Shepard, exactly like him/her self.

 

So in a way it's a win win for the Reapers, yet if Shepard picks Destroy and wakes up from either the Normandy attacking Harbinger, Hammar, or some Sword fleet distracting Harbinger from finishing off Shepard, then our Shepard wakes up, and resisted Indoctrination for with for now or forever. My theory on the " forever" is that Liara( However Liara will die because her mind will take on the Reaper's Indoctrination towards Shepard, causing Liara to become a husk like creature, not like the husk we see, but just her body would be all that is left), the rachni queen ( She might live or die, her linking her mind towards Shepard would save Liara, but the there is a possibility that she may die or be driven insane) from ME1, or the Leviathans link their minds with Shepard, causing Shepard to not be taken in by Reaper Indoctrination again, since the more minds you have linked with one another like Zhu's hope. The better your odds are of not becoming Indoctrinated. IT is why when ever Shepard is alone, Shepard is more easy to Indoctrinate because in a way our squadmates form a wall that protects Shepard. The more close friend's Shepard has with him, the more Shepard can keep him/herself from falling under the Reapers control.

 

Okay, but if they kill Shepard the war is over. It's not going to continue. The Crucible will never dock, the Victory Fleet will loose as predicted, and the ground forces on Earth will be slaughtered (which is pretty morale breaking for everyone else). Also, even assuming all of this is a dream and the Indoctrination fails, what then? Shepard is lying unconscious on the ground, as soon as they realize the Indoctrination failed the Reapers are going to do what they did 99.9% of the rest of the time -- he's going to get blasted to death and then everyone dies.

 

Shepard is unneeded. The failed assault was the organics last throw, if it fails they are done for. Their morale will break from having their one and only plan fail along with the death of the bulk of their remaining military forces. They also don't need Shepard in a thinking capacity. He only has to perform menial tasks -- hell they could probably even rig him with animatronics and puppet him, no one would know and it would accomplish the same thing; namely that Shepard would appear to be working for the Reapers now after they already won.

 

Also -- and this is probably the most important part -- the Indoctrination that supposedly happens in IT isn't anything at all like the Indoctrination in the story, it's something completely new. Indoctrination isn't trying to break someone's will, it's electromagnetic waves that physically damage a part of the brain -- you can't resist Indoctrination. It's even been one of the major themes of all the Indoctrinated characters' arcs that all the antagonist are strong willed people who succumbed to Indoctrination, showing how truly awful a method it was for subverting organics.

 

One spoof wikipedia example does not a convincing argument make.  You've essentially resorted to "BaD WrItINgZ", just as I predicted.

 

And it was three Husks and one Marauder.  Token resistance, nothing more than that.  Literally minutes earlier, Shepard successfully held off multiple Marauders, Banshees, Ravagers and Brutes while protecting the missile batteries.  The Reapers are aware of Shepard's abilities.  If Shepard succumbs to three Husks and a solitary Marauder - even in his/her weakened state - then he/she clearly isn't worthy of further attention.  Please tell me you didn't succumb to three Husks and one Marauder.

 

For an extended analysis, however, here are the pertinent facts:

 

• Harbinger arrives in London to defend the entry point for the Citadel.

• Harbinger picks off every single member of Hammer team with pinpoint accuracy., eliminating Makos, foot troops, aerial vehicles with effortless, contemptuous ease.

• The Normandy arrives - and Harbinger STOPS.  Dead it's tracks.  Harbinger watches Shepard and the Normandy, and waits.

• The Normandy evacs, and Harbinger IMMEDIATELY turns it's attention to Shepard - attacking him/her with JUST enough power to weaken, disorientate and stun.

•  Harbinger LEAVES, giving Shepard (assuming he/she is competent enough to still take down token resistance from the Reaper's weakest forces) clear and free access to the Citadel.

 

Following Harbinger's attack, Shepard is entirely at their mercy.  If they wanted Shepard dead, Shepard would be DEAD.  But no - Harbinger wipes out Shepard's escort, then ushers him onwards.  Harbinger ALLOWS Shepard to pass.  Shepard ONLY makes it onto the Citadel because the Reapers WANT him/her to make it onto the Citadel.

 

The Reapers WANT Shepard to make it onto the Citadel.

 

The Reapers WANT Shepard.

 

QED.

 

What? What standard are the Reapers holding Shepard to here? No one has ever done what Shepard has done before, isn't that qualifying enough? In low EMS he still accomplished an impossible task, do the Reapers have some scale for how well people accomplish impossible tasks? Look at all the convoluted straws your gasping for: How does Shepard's ability to gun down a Marauder and 3 husks make him any more worthy? Is mortally injured marksmanship a requirement the Reapers need? That is so arbitrary. Keep in mind no one has ever gotten as far as Shepard did starting with ME1, so how exactly are the Reapers grading worthiness here if they have no standard for it?

 

That's entirely up to you.  Look at the material presented to you within the games and draw your own conclusions.  If you're able to justify one interpretation over another, if you think the evidence supports one idea over another, you can believe whatever you want to.  Open ending friend, you have choice - more than you know.

 

Personally, I'm not prescriptive.  My interpretation may well clash with that held by others, but I'm not going to attack them over it.  That doesn't mean I won't question their interpretation or play Devil's Advocate, of course.

 

No, the ending really isn't that open. There is literally a message directly from the developers at the end of the game that congratulates you for finishing the story and ending the Reapers threat (even in Control and Synthesis).

[AlanC9]

Of course, the whole point of the theory is that the developers are lying. It's evidence-proof.

 

Not that getting involved with this nonsense can't be fun, but rational argument won't get you anywhere.

[SwobyJ]

No, the ending really isn't that open. There is literally a message directly from the developers at the end of the game that congratulates you for finishing the story and ending the Reapers threat (even in Control and Synthesis).

 

Yep! We won!

[ZerebusPrime]

You're a winner.  *gives prize of additional apartment music which won't actually be in your apartment or anywhere else*

[AlanC9]

See what I mean?

[ElSuperGecko]

What? What standard are the Reapers holding Shepard to here? No one has ever done what Shepard has done before, isn't that qualifying enough? In low EMS he still accomplished an impossible task, do the Reapers have some scale for how well people accomplish impossible tasks? Look at all the convoluted straws your gasping for: How does Shepard's ability to gun down a Marauder and 3 husks make him any more worthy? Is mortally injured marksmanship a requirement the Reapers need? That is so arbitrary. Keep in mind no one has ever gotten as far as Shepard did starting with ME1, so how exactly are the Reapers grading worthiness here if they have no standard for it?

 

How bizarre.  How does that comment relate in any way to th text you quoted?  Did you quote the correct post?  If you actuallylook at my post to HYR earlier, you'll see I'm actually in agreement with you.  The Catalyst isn't, of course - maybe you should consider the importance of that?

 

 

No, the ending really isn't that open. There is literally a message directly from the developers at the end of the game that congratulates you for finishing the story and ending the Reapers threat (even in Control and Synthesis).

 

I disagree.  "ending the Reaper threat" is an amusingly ambiguous piece of wording.  It is nicely applicable to every single ending choice (bar Refuse of course, which is simply inaction).  And it doesn't necessarily mean "defeated the Reapers" or "saved everyone" either, does it?  After all - if your race has become a Reaper itelf, then they're no longer subject to a "Reaper threat", are they?

[ImaginaryMatter]

How bizarre.  How does that comment relate in any way to th text you quoted?  Did you quote the correct post?  If you actuallylook at my post to HYR earlier, you'll see I'm actually in agreement with you.  The Catalyst isn't, of course - maybe you should consider the importance of that?

 

 

 

I disagree.  "ending the Reaper threat" is an amusingly ambiguous piece of wording.  It is nicely applicable to every single ending choice (bar Refuse of course, which is simply inaction).  And it doesn't necessarily mean "defeated the Reapers" or "saved everyone" either, does it?  After all - if your race has become a Reaper itelf, then they're no longer subject to a "Reaper threat", are they?

 

You said the point of the husks was to test Shepard one more time. I'm asking why they would bother doing that, what would the Reapers hope to gain? It's also refers to IT in general since a lot of explanations seem to be predicated on the Reapers testing Shepard and finding him worthy or unworthy, especially when it relates to the low EMS runs.

 

Oh, Catalyst, did you read this to yourself? This is such a stretch in reasoning I'm not even sure where to begin, it's like Obi Wan's "From a certain point of view."

[ElSuperGecko]

You said the point of the husks was to test Shepard one more time. I'm asking why they would bother doing that, what would the Reapers hope to gain? It's also refers to IT in general since a lot of explanations seem to be predicated on the Reapers testing Shepard and finding him worthy or unworthy, especially when it relates to the low EMS runs...

 

No, I called them "token resistance", and pointed out that Shepard had faced much greater forces with no real difficulty.  The implication was meant to be that if the Reapers wanted to stop Shepard at that point, they could - but they didn't.  Surely Mr Shields and the Three Husketeers weren't the only Reaper forces left in London? And why did we not see ANY AT ALL once we actually boarded the Citadel - unless of course, the Reapers wanted Shepard to pass.

 

As for your second point about the Reapers testing Shepard in the low-EMS runs - this isn't solely attributable to IT, it's simply a structure that's present within the game itself.  Low EMS, Shepard has one option - Control or Destroy, depending on his/her prior actions.  Mid EMS, he/she gets both.  High EMS, Synthesis becomes available.  At the highest level of all, we get the question mark that is the breath scene.

 

As mentioned earlier, this is present in the dialogue as well.  The Catalyst's tone and attitude towards Shepard is different at low EMS than it is at higher levels.  You don't need to follow IT to see and know this to be true - low EMS, the Catalyst is clearly annoyed.  High EMS, it's not.

[ImaginaryMatter]

No, I called them "token resistance", and pointed out that Shepard had faced much greater forces with no real difficulty.  The implication was meant to be that if the Reapers wanted to stop Shepard at that point, they could - but they didn't.  Surely Mr Shields and the Three Husketeers weren't the only Reaper forces left in London? And why did we not see ANY AT ALL once we actually boarded the Citadel - unless of course, the Reapers wanted Shepard to pass.

 

As for your second point about the Reapers testing Shepard in the low-EMS runs - this isn't solely attributable to IT, it's simply a structure that's present within the game itself.  Low EMS, Shepard has one option - Control or Destroy, depending on his/her prior actions.  Mid EMS, he/she gets both.  High EMS, Synthesis becomes available.  At the highest level of all, we get the question mark that is the breath scene.

 

As mentioned earlier, this is present in the dialogue as well.  The Catalyst's tone and attitude towards Shepard is different at low EMS than it is at higher levels.  You don't need to follow IT to see and know this to be true - low EMS, the Catalyst is clearly annoyed.  High EMS, it's not.

 

You said, "If Shepard succumbs to three Husks and a solitary Marauder - even in his/her weakened state - then he/she clearly isn't worthy of further attention."

 

Also, testing Shepard is limited to the IT. In non-IT interpretations the low-EMS options are limited because the Crucible is a combination of damaged and incomplete.

[ElSuperGecko]

You said, "If Shepard succumbs to three Husks and a solitary Marauder - even in his/her weakened state - then he/she clearly isn't worthy of further attention."

 

I would have thought the rest of the paragraph would show that particular line was intended to be tongue in cheek.  I'll try to be clearer next time.  Of course, if Shepard DOES fall to Marauder Shields, then yeah, no further Reaper attention is required.

 

Also, testing Shepard is limited to the IT. In non-IT interpretations the low-EMS options are limited because the Crucible is a combination of damaged and incomplete.

 

 

Nope.

 

"We have tried a similar solution in the past, but it has always failed.  Because the organics were not ready.  It is not something that can be... forced.  YOU are ready, and you may choose it."

 

By the way, are you aware of the meanings of the word "Crucible"?