Destroy is exactly what the Reapers have been doing. Wiping out the threat's the only way to deal with it.
Sure, if you generalise enough - humans realised that germs were causing disease, and the first thing we did was wiping out polio... humans sure are bloodthirsty
Uh. I'm not going to argue that humans are bloodthirsty. I figure that's the sort of thing most people capable of turning on the news have got figured out.
I'm also not going to say destroy's a carbon copy of the whole Reaper MO. I'm just saying that kneejerking that 'control and synthesis are doing what the reapers want!' is fairly useless. You can say the same thing about destroy. Hell, it even has a lot in common with the actual solution implemented by the Catalyst (wipe 'em back to the stone age!), though it's less extreme.
I just think it's a tad facetious to put one ending up on a pedestal as the right choice when it has the same problem (Reaper suggested, Reaper approved!) as the others.
And they all work, unless Bioware broke the fourth wall to lie directly to us.
I subscribe to it.
As for the Reapers using Red: they use a whole lotta red. Every cycle. On all machines. Shepard's red is actually tamer, because it doesn't break all the machines ever, just the smart ones. That's what the cycles are: destroying what the Reapers see as a potential threat.
On the bright side, I'm assuming red takes out Avina, which is pretty much the best reason to use it.
Here's the link, it's worth a look. 
Man, I remember that thread. It was the best.
THERE WAS EVEN MORE BOOZE IN THE CITADEL DLC.
Intoxication confirmed.
And they all work, unless Bioware broke the fourth wall to lie directly to us.
Considering the whole feeling of the Intelligence as an experimenter, I personally consider what we saw to be both true and untrue.
True enough to not kill the fanbase. Untrue enough to move the story forward past green glowing eyes on everyone.
I think it just might be hard for many people to get out of the binary thinking of 'fake or real' and only that - but I realize this could be arrogant of me.
Don't get me wrong -- I think the whole Catalyst is largely illusory, like the ending of Leviathan. And I think (obviously) a lot of the stuff in the extended cut slides are symbolic and certainly not meant to paint a clear picture of where the galaxy goes from here.
But the damn note from the authors, well, I'm pretty sure those (both of them) are straightforward.
And if they aren't, I may as well assume asari are actually red and it's been an elaborate hoax this whole time.
Lies. The asari are really green!
I still buy into it absolutely. I could make it dorky and long and elaborate but the short version is as follows:
Point 1:
Saren wanted synthesis. Reapers win.
Illusive man wanted control. Reapers win.
You spend the span of 3 games set out to destroy the reapers, and some star brat is going to convince you otherwise in the final 5 minutes of the game??
Point 2:
You see what reaper "magnetohydrodynamic" cannons can do. They slice through ships and cities like butter. On priority: rannoch when battling a low class reaper if the beam gets close, Shep gets toast. Yet... at the rush at the very end to the beam... Harbinger the biggest baddest reaper out there blasts you dead on... flesh wound?!?!? Seriously. Seriously?!?! I wont even go into detail about the whole Illusive man magically on the citidel and the shot that hurts you, Anderson magically being there, flipping paragon/renegade conversation options and all the other convincing aspects.... The fact that you even live after being hit by Harbringers beam with just a flesh wound immediately screams to me: You just entered a dream world/full indoctrination and everything that happens past that point is all in your head.
You spend the span of 3 games set out to destroy the reapers, and some star brat is going to convince you otherwise in the final 5 minutes of the game??
No you do not. You spend 2 games trying to prevent them from coming, and 1 game to try and prevent being destroyed yourself.
Destroying the Reapers has never been the goal, it's always been about stopping them.
Oh and eh.. please answer these questions:
Why does the Catalyst only offer you destroy in low-EMS with Collector base destroyed? In the best possible situation for the Reapers, with the galaxy at it's weakest.
Why does the Catalyst make that option depend on what Shepard did with the Collector base?
No you do not. You spend 2 games trying to prevent them from coming, and 1 game to try and prevent being destroyed yourself.
Destroying the Reapers has never been the goal, it's always been about stopping them.
Ah yes, semantics.
Regardless... my point still remains. And in the first game you do end up distroying 1 so... 
Second game... collectors/collector base (assuming direct control).... so... yeah. Semantics.
Ah yes, semantics.
Regardless... my point still remains. And in the first game you do end up distroying 1 so...
Second game... collectors/collector base (assuming direct control).... so... yeah. Semantics.
This is not about semantics. Destroying them only really becomes an option in ME3. ME1 is completely about preventing them from coming.
I don't know what exactly Shepard's doing in ME2.. nobody does though I think 
And please answer the questions I edited in after you started typing your post.
This is not about semantics. Destroying them only really becomes an option in ME3. ME1 is completely about preventing them from coming.
I don't know what exactly Shepard's doing in ME2.. nobody does though I think
And please answer the questions I edited in after you started typing your post.
It's all speculation, "artistic integrity" and whatnot.
I would say that low EMS collector base destroyed… correct me if I’m wrong but collector base was a human processing plant? Working on the next gen reaper(s)… the human reaper.
I mean who knows how many 50k year cycles past. 10, 100, a million? I would assume that as a species rise that can actually threaten and/or they show great interest in… Reaper dreadnaughts evolve (are created) into the new species form throughout the cycles. You blew up their friggin processing plant… *shrug*
Just my take.
The Reapers destroy AI. Destroy destroys AI. You're doing exactly what the Reapers do. Reapers win.
Does anyone see how silly arguments by infinite simplification is yet?
Seriously.
The Reapers destroy AI. Destroy destroys AI. You're doing exactly what the Reapers do. Reapers win.
Does anyone see how silly arguments by infinite simplification is yet?
Seriously.
Ultimately...
Space Magic.
/thread
And as for saying that because TIM advocates control or Saren for synthesis, it's about as annoyingly kneejerky and simplistic as saying "Ghengis Khan liked horses and swept over the world in a cavalry wave of blood, so anyone who likes riding horses is probably planning on conquering most of the known world soon."
It's all speculation, "artistic integrity" and whatnot.
I would say that low EMS collector base destroyed… correct me if I’m wrong but collector base was a human processing plant? Working on the next gen reaper(s)… the human reaper.
I mean who knows how many 50k year cycles past. 10, 100, a million? I would assume that as a species rise that can actually threaten and/or they show great interest in… Reaper dreadnaughts evolve (are created) into the new species form throughout the cycles. You blew up their friggin processing plant… *shrug*
Just my take.
Hahaha. Are you serious man?
The rate of killing during a harvest is staggering - during the invasion of Earth, at least 400 Processors were present, and the number of humans processed each day was estimated at 1.86 million. At such a rate, the entire planet would be depopulated in a decade.
And that's just one part of silly of your post.
And as for saying that because TIM advocates control or Saren for synthesis, it's about as annoyingly kneejerky and simplistic as saying "Ghengis Khan liked horses and swept over the world in a cavalry wave of blood, so anyone who likes riding horses is probably planning on conquering most of the known world soon."
It also bothers me when people use that argument. Especially in Saren's case when it seems like he's only compared to Synthesis for the sole purpose of damning it.
To me Saren was much closer to TIM and Control if we have to bother with categorizing him. Like TIM he was Indoctrinated and when he went on his spiel about flesh-and-machine he was talking about it in the context of what benefit the Reapers could provide, like TIM who wanted to control them for the benefit they could provide.
Hahaha. Are you serious man?
The rate of killing during a harvest is staggering - during the invasion of Earth, at least 400 Processors were present, and the number of humans processed each day was estimated at 1.86 million. At such a rate, the entire planet would be depopulated in a decade.
And that's just one part of silly of your post.
Oh I’m sorry, i dint realize that each of those processors was creating a human reaper. Maybe I too was indoctrinated.
I never claimed I had all the answers. I just watched all the YouTube vids on IT and played the game. IT makes far more sense to ME - MY perception and what I've taken from the game. Opinions are like a-holes man, everyone’s got one. Glad you find it silly and I could entertain you.
Sorry for visiting this section of the forums... and I remember why I stay clear. People are just way to serious and treky fan like here, back to multiplayer.
EDIT: While attacked for collector ems and destroy... I do notice how not a single acknowledgement on Shep taking a Harbinger laser to the face w/ a mere flesh wound btw. Just sayin.
Well, I don't know about your Shepard, but mine was so banged up from being on the edge of the beam that she could only hold a dinky pistol and her armor was melted to her flesh. And she couldn't bioticly charge Maurader Shields and the Huskateers, even though their ilk was trivial a few seconds ago.
I don't think she ever took a direct hit. And I certainly don't think it made her mind go wibbly wooby wibbly, but hey, interpretation.
And if you don't want to talk about a topic, pros and cons, especially a divisive topic... Why'd you come over to this part of the forums? We're a contentious lot because debating and discussion is fun. I certainly don't mean to jump down your throat or tell you you're flat out wrong and a bad person for it. I'm just discussing.
Well, I don't know about your Shepard, but mine was so banged up from being on the edge of the beam that she could only hold a dinky pistol and her armor was melted to her flesh. And she couldn't bioticly charge Maurader Shields and the Huskateers, even though their ilk was trivial a few seconds ago.
I don't think she ever took a direct hit. And I certainly don't think it made her mind go wibbly wooby wibbly, but hey, interpretation.
And if you don't want to talk about a topic, pros and cons, especially a divisive topic... Why'd you come over to this part of the forums? We're a contentious lot because debating and discussion is fun. I certainly don't mean to jump down your throat or tell you you're flat out wrong and a bad person for it. I'm just discussing.
I saw it on main forum about who still believes in IT. Just sayin I do
If i remember correctly if you uninstall the "update" and look at the ending that ships w/ original release, you are hit straight on. DLC extended ending makes the laser almost a direct hit.
I think the writers made that particular change because they didn't want to trivialize the cooperative action taking place between Shepard and Catalyst, not out of offense over players shooting him or disliking the ending. Shepard's personal organic-synthetic conflict is himself vs. Catalyst/Reapers, so Shepard turning physically hostile towards the Catalyst (as opposed the verbal hostility that triggers Refuse) should really be met with the same response from the Catalyst. You don't make progress on organic-synthetic relations by repeating the mistakes of past organics -- trying to pick fights with those far your superior.
On-topic, this is yet another out-of-world issue where I've found no good IT explanation: Refuse. They insist that Destroy is a rejection of the Catalyst, but to choose Destroy, you have to -- at bare minimum -- believe that the Catalyst indeed willfully points you to his and the Reapers' end, for whatever reason. That's still influence, from him to you. Refuse, on the other hand, is 100% rejection of Catalyst's influence. If there's any truth to the notion that indoctrination is taking place onto Shepard through the Catalyst, then Shepard should not accept anything from him, not even the promise of destroying the Reapers. And, also as of EC, Shepard cannot choose anything but Refuse if he/she remains hostile towards the Catalyst throughout the conversation. In the end, there's no way to choose Destroy without being at least slightly influenced by and cooperative with the Catalyst, no matter what one's motivations are. It's literally impossible.
And the IT explanation is "Well, you can't give up," but that again already assumes that any action by Shepard in that moment will change anything, an idea only planted in your head by the Catalyst (again, influence). It also assumes Refuse leads to failure, but what if BioWare decided to let it *somehow* result in victory, feasibly following the lore or not? Let's not kid ourselves: IT would be singing a VERY different tune.
So yeah, that's another out-of-game hole in IT, I haven't even dug my nose into all the in-game material that works against it...
See, this is just a misconception about IT.
In IT, the entire decision chamber sequence (at the very least that part), only takes place in Shepard's mind.
The catalyst wants only one question answered. Can Shepard be persuaded to see things from the Reapers' perspective, or does Shepard still want to destroy the Reapers?
That's all it is. Nothing we see happening in that chamber happens for real; Shepard doesn't actually shoot that tube, the Reapers aren't actually destroyed.
So it doesn't matter that the catalyst "offers" you destroy. He just wants to know if that resolve can be broken.
In refuse, you're worthless to him, because you don't want to accept the Reaper 'solutions', but you don't want to use the Crucible to destroy the Reapers either.
It's not about defying the catalyst. It's just about one thing: does Shepard still want to destroy the Reapers?
You're not "going along" with the catalyst at all if you pick destroy. All that you do is show that you still want to do what you set out to do.
Let's not forget that Shepard dies in every possible ending, even in most destroy endings.
Many IT-ers think it's likely that:
- If you want to control the Reapers, you will end up being controlled (maybe an agent, maybe a lesser Reaper, like a destroyer)
- If you want to destroy the Reapers, then you will end up being destroyed
- If you want synthesis, then Shepard's goal and Reapers' goal are aligned, and you've probably established the birth of a new Reaper.
Harbinger: "They will succumb and ascend, or they will be annihilated."
Only when you have an exceptionally high amount of war assets, Shepard survives destroy. This seems to indicate that Shepard had enough war assets to protect him/her.
Anderson: "Even the most experienced veteran is going to find themselves in situations they haven't trained for. In those instances, and there's more than I'd like to admit, your instincts are the only thing keeping you alive. That, and the men and women you're fighting beside."
And let us not forget the low-EMS destroy version. Where the only option the Catalyst gives you is to destroy them. I have never seen a satisfying answer from the IT-crowd on that one either.
Shepard does not live up to their expectations. Shepard didn't do everything he could to bring the fleets to the Reapers, didn't put much effort in making the Crucible the best he could. He failed as a leader, and isn't even worthy of ascension or useful as a Reaper agent. If destroy is Shep's only option, that means he destroyed the collector base, and thought it unwise to study the Reaper (tech). If Shepard had kept the collector base, that would mean Shepard was open to learning about the Reapers (like TIM), and therefore more easily corruptible. Therefore, if you kept the collector base, control is your only option.
If you have low EMS, the catalyst greets you with "Why are you here?". It speaks volumes. You're useless to him.
And when destroy is your only option, that just means the catalyst knows you can't be corrupted, nor does he want to, because you made no effort worthy of leadership. It doesn't matter to him that you want to destroy the Reapers, because it will only happen in your head, a beautiful vision before dying. In reality, the Reapers will simply destroy Shepard.
Also...
Notice similarities.
Just makes sense.
It's almost like models get reused in games and Shepard has some kind of eye implants that might show while their face is meltin... Oh. Wait.
OMG, stop the presses - there is a round shape! It must be the specific wheeled vehicle we saw earlier!
Btw, you can use gibbed to give Shepard "illusive eyes" so that screenshot proves nothing
Retour en haut