Refuse in the place of Destroy

Page 6 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:25 pm

SwobyJ wrote:-The Reapers are the enemy
-You're in a Reaper
-Everything is the matrix (of organic and synthetic life)
You're not a literalist? What you're saying is literalist. Not ITer.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:30 pm

TurianRebel212 wrote:
Terramine wrote:Here's my thing. The reveal was never meant to be in ME3. It either never was going to be revealed, or the reveal is ME4. And people criticize the idea that the ending to ME3 would be in the next game. But the truth is, the ending to ME3 still wouldn't be in ME4.

In a trilogy, the endings are all open until the very last one in the set. Bitching that the reveal isn't in ME3 is like bitching that ME2's ending wasn't in ME1 and ME3's ending isn't in ME2. The reveal wouldn't be ME3's ending even if it was placed in the game, the reveal would still be AFTER the ending. ME1 is going to school and ME2 is the studying, ME3 is the test and ME4 is the grade.

Anywho sorry for going off into a tangent. You will see Shepard alive, in ME4.

You will see Shepard alive, in ME4.

Exactly, because Destroy is the intended ending and Shepard only survives in high EMS destroy. This is why destroy is the odd man and out. In all the other "paths", two keys things occur-

1) Shepard dies
2)Reapers Survive


It is really that simple, but many lack the will to pass the "crucible".
Also this is so wrong I don't even. Even from a Destroyer's perspective, Synthesis and Control still have Shepard alive. Just INDOCTRINATED or something to that effect.

Choose synthesis = Shepard lives in a literal sense
Choose control = Shepard lives in a literal sense
etc.

The decision room and what happens in it, isn't real. So ergo, Shepard will wake up back on earth when harbinger tased him into dream land. However, in Synthesis, Control and Destroy... Shepard DIES in this mind world. What do you think the implications are for that? See Shepard in this mind world, is the physical manifestation of his consciousness just like in dreams how you tend to actually be in your body like in real life. That's the manifestation you, the consciousness, takes. And Shepard's consciousness DIES in 3 of the endings. And PS Refuse isn't one of them.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:36 pm

In this mind world, the choices all have Shepard die minus refuse right? But you don't realize the symbolism here. Not only does Shepard die in synthesis, as in his body within this mind world. But making that choice? Requires shepard to give up who he is. Control is the same, Shepard is not a controller, so to then make him choose that is to kill WHO HE IS. And yet at the same time, he also dies "physically" in this mind world.

And Destroy, he also dies "physically" inside this mind world choosing Destroy. Indicating that he also is giving up who he is.

If this is a mind world, and Shepard WITHIN this mind world is a manifestation of WHO HE IS. For him to die inside this world is for who he is to die.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:41 pm

Speaking of which. People keep talking about what we DONT see Shepard do in Refuse. "Oh we don't see Shepard do anything, he just gives up". Which I've addressed.

But you know what else we don't see him do? Die. We don't see him die. Which in a way is the same thing as the breath scene... no scratch that, it's what you guys seem to think the breath scene is when in fact the breath scene isn't. It isn't showing shepard lives. He died in that mind world yo, so if he wakes up in Destroy he's dead on the inside and this is fact. Unless you reject the idea that the decision room is a mind world, unless you believe it and what happens is real. You must accept that Shepard's consciousness just died shooting that tube. Implications are obvious then in context to the breath scene.

But in refuse, he's going to wake up still. The difference is, instead of a breath scene, the implications are drawn from what we DONT see. Namely, Shepard doesn't die in the mind world. He survives, who he is survives. So when he wakes up in ME4, he will be alive inside and out.

Before anyone continues this conversation, refute this. Because honestly you guys are just throwing your position at me over and over without actually refuting what I say. So far I've been winning this debate and especially with this point in this post... as long as it remains I refuted Destroy in one blow and proven Refuse in the same blow.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by dorktainian on Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:59 pm

wait a mo.  nobody has proved anything....because bioderp gave us 16 vastly different endings to speculate over....

 Suspect

and the breath scene is in one ending only  bounce 

and we want to destroy the reapers  lol! 

but hey.... speculationz for everyone  Mad 

_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Catalyst

Posts : 3499
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 48

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:35 pm

dorktainian wrote:wait a mo.  nobody has proved anything....because bioderp gave us 16 vastly different endings to speculate over....

 Suspect

and the breath scene is in one ending only   bounce 

and we want to destroy the reapers   lol! 

but hey.... speculationz for everyone   Mad 
No but, if you believe in indoctrination theory. Then you must accept that Shepard, in this mind world... is the consciousness rather than the body. Because it's obviously not his physical body in that case, but at the same time... this "entity" is the one the player ends up being given control of here. So it's not an unconscious part of the dream that wouldn't make sense. It looks like Shepard, talks like Shepard, is Shepard in every way really. And for that matter, he's the one making "decisions" here. Why? Unless he's a self-aware agent to be in a position of making decisions.

All around basically, this entity you control IS Shepard. It's Shepard's consciousness.

So ask yourself, what are the implications... of said consciousness dying?

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:43 pm

Your response dork,is irrelevant. I have proven my case IF you at the very least accept that Indoctrination Theory is happening.

1.Indoctrination theory is happening
2.That means this is a mind world and we are guiding Shep's consciousness.
3.If his consciousness dies, the implications are obvious and inevitable.

If you accept number 1, you must accept number 2 and 3. If I'm wrong, then challenge this claim at any point.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by DSharrah on Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:59 pm

You are assuming that is all or nothing...if its IT than it all has to be hallucination...to me the scary part of IT is that it doesn't all have to be hallucination. I think more along the lines of waking nightmare than full on hallucination...what happened in the decision chamber happened - but maybe not exactly in the way that we see it happening. IT does not mean that the only possibility is that it is a full on hallucination.

_________________
Renegade Shep's response to Starbinger the Reaperbieber stating that destroy would wipe out all synthetics:

"Does that mean it will kill your smug ass too?"



avatar
DSharrah
Space Cow

Posts : 816
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 37
Location : Lying in some rubble...

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Guest on Thu Jul 10, 2014 12:38 am

DSharrah wrote:You are assuming that is all or nothing...if its IT than it all has to be hallucination...to me the scary part of IT is that it doesn't all have to be hallucination.  I think more along the lines of waking nightmare than full on hallucination...what happened in the decision chamber happened - but maybe not exactly in the way that we see it happening.  IT does not mean that the only possibility is that it is a full on hallucination.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by DoomsdayDevice on Thu Jul 10, 2014 2:47 am

I still don't see how wanting to destroy the Reapers could be indoctrination. Any other indoctrinated agent we've seen would work against those that would destroy the Reapers.

It does not make sense.

_________________
"A good leader is someone who values the life of his men over the success of the mission, but understands that sometimes the cost of failing a mission is higher than the cost of losing those men." - Anderson
avatar
DoomsdayDevice
Being of Light

Posts : 2960
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Probing Uranus

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Thu Jul 10, 2014 5:14 am

DoomsdayDevice wrote:I still don't see how wanting to destroy the Reapers could be indoctrination. Any other indoctrinated agent we've seen would work against those that would destroy the Reapers.

It does not make sense.
I'll explain that in 3 words: The Illusive Man

When confronted at the very end about being indoctrinated, Shepard tells TIM to prove he's not indoctrinated. He tells him to go ahead and control the Reapers. And when TIM kills Shep, he walks AWAY from the panel. He does NOT go to control the Reapers. The thing you have to remember is, an indoctrinated agent doesn't need to actually make complete logical sense. Only enough to formulate a justification for helping the Reapers at any point. TIM was trying to pull a fast one on the Reapers. But the problem is, in doing so he had to join them FIRST. He had to help them, and let them in first. He thought he was AGAINST them though.

How is control less against the Reapers than destroying them? It stops their harvest if successful doesn't it? So yeah.

I don't know the actual thought process it would require. But remember that TIM and Saren didn't actually technically seem all that different even upon being indoctrinated. It's subtle like that, it's the kind of thing where your best bro or someone who knows you sees you're not acting like yourself and goes... waitaminute... DUDE YOU'RE INDOCTRINATED AND IT JUST DAWNED ON ME! You know, like Shepard did with TIM.

And god Doomsday, I don't know why I'm writing this huge thing out... because there's 1 glaring problem with your whole post... "It does not make sense." YOU MAKE NO SENSE WHEN INDOCTRINATED, IT MAKES NO SENSE TO JOIN THE REAPERS IN THE FIRST PLACE, IT'S FUCKING BATSHIT RETARDED... DUH!

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Thu Jul 10, 2014 5:19 am

DSharrah wrote:You are assuming that is all or nothing...if its IT than it all has to be hallucination...to me the scary part of IT is that it doesn't all have to be hallucination.  I think more along the lines of waking nightmare than full on hallucination...what happened in the decision chamber happened - but maybe not exactly in the way that we see it happening.  IT does not mean that the only possibility is that it is a full on hallucination.
Hmm, but as far as I know waking nightmare 1.Is not as in depth, detailed, nor backed up as classical IT. Lets also not forget that before the ending Shepard has 3 DREAMS, not hallucinations but actual dreams, that are clearly indoc induced.

Also, Shepard has no reason to be so loopy in a hallucination. His behavior is very dreamlike... not realizing you're in an hallucination is one thing, but not questioning what the hallucination says? Nonsense.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Guest on Thu Jul 10, 2014 6:15 am

@DD: (To me, not Terra) it isn't that Shepard is an 'indoctrinated agent' in Destroy.

It's that he's undergoing indoctrination and he has enough power to resist it the most possible. The most possible doesn't = curing indoctrination. It means resisting it.

Eventually this means suicide by gun. But personally I think there's still (truly) good endings in store.

Part of this is because, in whatever realm he's in, Shepard *does* do each of the 3 actions. Yep, they're not real. But they're still happening, to some extent.

For any case of indoctrination, they either:
-get dreams where everything fails and everyone dies, urging them to serve the Reapers
-get convinced they can do something against the Reapers but end up never doing it in.. any form

So yeah, I think this cycle is different. But I also think that Shepard is being indoctrinated (even with Destroy, but only at a more relatively minimal degree) and someone will be stuck in the rubble, maybe at the beginning of the next game (or maybe not, whatever), and that someone, some N7, will be alright, get a hand up, and work towards a great future.

Shepard isn't having dreams of failure nor hesitating when his goals are in front of him. What *is* affecting him, is what his goals actually *are*. How much will you help the Reapers - not how much will you be under their slavery.



A possible maybe exception to what I've explained here might be Ending-TIM. His 'it's so.. perfect' bit. But we don't know what that entails. Does he (if he's even real) just see his perfect world in itself, or does he see himself actually making that perfect world happen? Does he actually mentally experience it, or just believe it?

EC may entail much more indoctrination with Control and Synthesis, at least. Control is pretty clear about it, with "I will"s allll over the damn place. Destroy though, avoids all that. It is more conclusive.

But this doesn't mean that nothing is happening to Destroy Shepard. I don't think you'd ever call anyone, having unreal dreams in Mass Effect (forget about Shepard here), to be unaffected by indoctrination once they wake up from them. That's, even at pure IT logic, utterly nonsensical. It doesn't go poof gone. To believe that of Shepard is almost as idealistic about him as Control players think of Shepard as some space god and Synthesizers think of Shepard as some space messiah. He's not immune. But he can fight it.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Guest on Thu Jul 10, 2014 6:27 am

I just love how ME1 is horrified about Reaper technology, ME2 is creeped out about it, then ME3 is... 'oh, let's study it' - even by Alliance. And Shepard, even at most Renegade, accepts it. Reaper Heart? Sure. It if makes giant unknown machine work. For the war and all that. Reaper algorithms? Awesome, if it makes it more precise. Take Reaper tech samples for testing? Alright Mr Hackett Master Sir.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Thu Jul 10, 2014 6:54 am

SwobyJ wrote:I just love how ME1 is horrified about Reaper technology, ME2 is creeped out about it, then ME3 is... 'oh, let's study it' - even by Alliance. And Shepard, even at most Renegade, accepts it. Reaper Heart? Sure. It if makes giant unknown machine work. For the war and all that. Reaper algorithms? Awesome, if it makes it more precise. Take Reaper tech samples for testing? Alright Mr Hackett Master Sir.
Speaking of Hackett, he knows about indoctrination but sends Shepard in to be exposed to more reaper tech? The best soldier in the galaxy and you risk the Reapers obtaining him? Unless you're workin for em.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by dorktainian on Thu Jul 10, 2014 8:35 am

Terramine wrote:
SwobyJ wrote:I just love how ME1 is horrified about Reaper technology, ME2 is creeped out about it, then ME3 is... 'oh, let's study it' - even by Alliance. And Shepard, even at most Renegade, accepts it. Reaper Heart? Sure. It if makes giant unknown machine work. For the war and all that. Reaper algorithms? Awesome, if it makes it more precise. Take Reaper tech samples for testing? Alright Mr Hackett Master Sir.
Speaking of Hackett, he knows about indoctrination but sends Shepard in to be exposed to more reaper tech? The best soldier in the galaxy and you risk the Reapers obtaining him? Unless you're workin for em.

been down that road before.

Trust nobody

_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Catalyst

Posts : 3499
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 48

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by TurianRebel212 on Thu Jul 10, 2014 10:01 am

lol, you just went full herp derp.

Dafuq you talkin' about that's a literalist idea...... LOL.


IT explicitly states that only by choosing the correct path (high ems destroy) does Shepard break the thrall and wake up. Duh.

Jesus tits, where did you even come from bro. Damn, read up on IT, find the MK I thread on the good ole' bsn data hive and read up on it.

LOL.


HIGH EMS DESTROY IS ONE OF THE INDOCTRINATION THEORIES MAIN ARGUMENT.


Here endeth the lesson.






Shepard is dead in synthesis, and control and refuse. DEAD.

My God we need rif in here or some other well experienced ITers to give knowledge to what IT states-

But I'll breeze over the main idea.


Control and synthesis are reaper tricks and ILLUSIONS, the result in Shepard's death and full indoctrination and suicide-much like TIM And Saren. They are indoctrinated choices and clearly result in Shepard's death and the lost of this cycle.


ONLY through High Ems destroy does Shepard break the thrall and "Wake up".


Duh. Duh. duhduhduhduh.



Refuse is yet another 4th wall break and BioWare red herring, you CAN'T "win" the game. UNLESS you PLAY THE GAME.

Duh.


To this date, the ONLY and mean ONLY other "theory" or interpretation or whatever that I have examined using the lore of the series and FACTS that comes close to IT is.

Choose Wisely theory. That's it, and even then, I still feel IT is what is intended. I think CW is too radical, even tho, unlike IT. THERE ARE ZERO plotholes, but I digress.


Pretty sure it's IT. Pretty sure.


_________________
We fight or we die. I choose to be free. I choose to rid the galaxy of monsters. I choose destroy.
avatar
TurianRebel212
Banshee

Posts : 1806
Join date : 2013-02-02
Location : In the dreamscape.

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by TurianRebel212 on Thu Jul 10, 2014 10:34 am

dorktainian wrote:
Terramine wrote:
SwobyJ wrote:I just love how ME1 is horrified about Reaper technology, ME2 is creeped out about it, then ME3 is... 'oh, let's study it' - even by Alliance. And Shepard, even at most Renegade, accepts it. Reaper Heart? Sure. It if makes giant unknown machine work. For the war and all that. Reaper algorithms? Awesome, if it makes it more precise. Take Reaper tech samples for testing? Alright Mr Hackett Master Sir.
Speaking of Hackett, he knows about indoctrination but sends Shepard in to be exposed to more reaper tech? The best soldier in the galaxy and you risk the Reapers obtaining him? Unless you're workin for em.

been down that road before.  

Trust nobody


Okay Special Agent Mulder (Joking) the alliance is infiltrated by I think Leviathan or Reaper agents, but..... I really can't give iron clad evidence, only circumstantial.


And Hackett is a sketchy fucker, all you gotta do is play as Ruthless renegade Shepard in ME1 to understand way.

Dude straight up set up Shepard. Straight up.

I never trusted him. I barely. BARELY trusted Anderson. Only people I trust are Garrus, Miranda,grunt and Joker-although Joker is influenced by an AI, and AI that is made from Sovereign... LOL. Garrus is easily Shepard's most loyal and trusted ally. Easily. He joins up Shepard no questions asked in every game.

Miranda by supporting Shepard if you choose to destroy the collector base sealed her fate and truly showed an unwavering alliance to Shepard.

Grunt is pure "Team Shepard" starter and all star. He would NEVER. NEVER betray Shepard, I for one think Grunt could give 2 fucks about the Krogan or their future (unlike Wrex) Grunt only wants to shoot things in the face and hang out with Shepard. He only left Shepard because Shep got locked up (on his/her OWN accord). Shepard was his battle-master-meaning an unwavering, death before dishonor loyalty. I bet when Shepard told Grunt that he was going back to the Alliance, Grunt was like "Okay Shepard, but if they try to hurt you anyway, I'll eat them". Grunt FTW!

Joker wouldn't betray Shepard... Willingly, I do think he might be persuaded by EDI tho, although I think EDI is pretty loyal. Almost 100 percent sure she's alright. Almost

I'd say Liara, but..... She doesn't willingly help you in ME2 (probably to sell DLC, I know but lets just ignore that) she's kinda like, "oh you, yeah we were friends once and I'll give you info about Thane and Samara but yeah I got things to do, ceeya". So She's not as trusted as the others.

Virmie Survivor. Nope. Especially Ashley.

Tali is, pretty loyal, but.... I felt her loyalty would always be with the fleet over Shepard-this is shown in ME1 when she asks to look at classified documents, then when you refuse she's like "well fine shepard, after we get Saren I'm out, fuck you bro". I never got the "tali is the greatest" thing.

The rest of ME2's and 3's squad members are basically guns for hires and stuff and I felt once the mission was complete most would move on. With the exception of Garrus and Grunt of course.


That was a tanget, sorry bro. In short I agree, trust very little in Mass Effect. And the Alliance was always murky.


And just remember this:

CERBERUS STARTED AS AN ALLIANCE BLACK OP.


Nuff said.

_________________
We fight or we die. I choose to be free. I choose to rid the galaxy of monsters. I choose destroy.
avatar
TurianRebel212
Banshee

Posts : 1806
Join date : 2013-02-02
Location : In the dreamscape.

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by DoomsdayDevice on Thu Jul 10, 2014 9:34 pm

It doesn't matter if Shepard beats indoctrination or merely resists indoctrination in destroy.

My point still stands. Never have we seen an indoctrinated individual who wanted to destroy the Reapers. They started out that way, before they fell under the influence, sure. But from the moment they became indoctrinated they opened up to other possibilities and worked against those who wanted to destroy them.

Your argument boils down to "It makes no sense because indoctrination makes no sense."

So the game goes: "You want to destroy the Reapers, that means you're indoctrinated, haha!"

Right.

Don't worry, I know my way out.

_________________
"A good leader is someone who values the life of his men over the success of the mission, but understands that sometimes the cost of failing a mission is higher than the cost of losing those men." - Anderson
avatar
DoomsdayDevice
Being of Light

Posts : 2960
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Probing Uranus

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:16 pm

DoomsdayDevice wrote:It doesn't matter if Shepard beats indoctrination or merely resists indoctrination in destroy.

My point still stands. Never have we seen an indoctrinated individual who wanted to destroy the Reapers. They started out that way, before they fell under the influence, sure. But from the moment they became indoctrinated they opened up to other possibilities and worked against those who wanted to destroy them.

Your argument boils down to "It makes no sense because indoctrination makes no sense."

So the game goes: "You want to destroy the Reapers, that means you're indoctrinated, haha!"

Right.

Don't worry, I know my way out.
It's as simple as, IF im right and you can be indoctrinated while planning to Destroy the Reapers... right... well, then you're never going to fall through with it. It'll be all talk and no action, and you'll stop whoever legitimately wants to destroy them and make up some excuse. Like I said, I don't know the thought process behind an indoctrinated agent who's been tricked into thinking they're GOING to destroy the Reapers.

But lets put it like this. Not all forms of destroy are the same. Shooting a person, and stabbing them are 2 different things. As well intent, and practicality can be factored in. Maybe if someone proposes a plan, Shepard will be like "no this wont work, lets chase this OTHER destroy plan that i say will work cause... cause... REAPERS!".

Basically I don't understand your confusion. An indoctrinated Destroy shep WOULD stop people from destroying the Reapers. You have yet to explain how that actually contradicts itself? If Shepard doesn't genuinely want to destroy the Reapers, as per indoctrinated... just like TIM doesn't genuinely want to control the Reapers, then he can easily stop people who DO genuinely want to control the Reapers.

But one last thing. What do you think happens if someone magically developed a way to control the Reapers? A legitimate way? How do you think TIM would react? OH THAT'S RIGHT, HE'D STOP THEM. Cause he's indoctrinated.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by DoomsdayDevice on Fri Jul 11, 2014 10:52 pm

Because indoctrination as it has been shown doesn't work that way. It has been shown to change people's resolve. It literally changed their minds and made them want to do something else than destroying them.

Indoctrination makes people align their goals with the Reapers or at least behave in a fashion that makes them see the Reapers as useful, too valuable to destroy.

If you, despite their best efforts, still want to destroy them, and don't let them change your mind, then your resolve remains intact.

Now, foreceful (rapid) indoctrination, would be a different story. That would instantly brainwash a person.

But this is slow, patient indoctrination... the Reapers need Shepard's mind as intact as possible, and so they don't want to waste his (genetic) potential by forcefully rewriting him, which would turn him into a mindless thrall.

The way I see it, for this kind of subtle indoctrination to work, Shepard needs to open up to the Reapers' suggestions willingly. They want Shepard to willingly see their value and not directly oppose them any more.

In destroy, Shepard rejects the  Ah, yes...  catalyst's suggestions and assertions (the chaos will come back). But if Shepard changes his mind, and decides the Reapers should not be destroyed (for whatever reason), then they have succeeded.

I don't see what's so hard to understand about that. It's the basic idea of IT.

It makes absolute zero sense that the Reapers would indoctrinate someone into wanting to destroy them. You can speculate all you like, but that idea just does not jive at all with what we've seen as far as the effects of indoctrination go.

_________________
"A good leader is someone who values the life of his men over the success of the mission, but understands that sometimes the cost of failing a mission is higher than the cost of losing those men." - Anderson
avatar
DoomsdayDevice
Being of Light

Posts : 2960
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Probing Uranus

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Sat Jul 12, 2014 3:08 am

DoomsdayDevice wrote:*snip*
-1.made them want to do something else
-Response: TIM and Saren were only subtly changed. TIM has always had the resolve for control to fit perfectly, more so than destroying the Reapers even. Even IF TIM destroyed the Reapers, we all know he'd research the shit out of Reaper tech like a jackass. Saren had the resolve for synthesis perfectly, nothing changed, he was merely lead astray subtly.
-Conclusion: Refuted

-2.If you, despite their best efforts, still want to destroy them, and don't let them change your mind, then your resolve remains intact.
-Response: First off there is a fallacy here. Your conclusion is in your premise, thus inevitably you're leading the argument where you want it to go. Secondly creating a false dicotomy, not all destroy resolves are identical... and if they're not identical, they much be treated as 2 entirely different resolves all together. But let me just ask you... are Refuse and Destroy the same resolve? We both know you think they're 2 different resolves. But fact: Both are destroy resolves.
-Conclusion: Refuted

-3.Indoctrination makes people align their goals with the Reapers or at least behave in a fashion that makes them see the Reapers as useful, too valuable to destroy.
-Response: Already explained that you can do this still with a destroy response. And you didn't refute this so.
-Conclusion: Refuted x2

-4.the Reapers need Shepard's mind as intact as possible
-Response: Aka Destroy. Control changes Shepard's mind a lot, and synthesis changes his mind completely. Destroy changes it only slightly.
-Conclusion: Refuted

-5.In destroy, Shepard rejects
-Response: This is false. The catalyst suggests Destroy along with Control and Synthesis. Destroy is Starbrat's suggestion, this is irrefutable fact. Ergo he is accepting one of 3 of Starbrat's suggestions.
-Conclusion: Refuted

-6.the Reapers should not be destroyed (for whatever reason)
-Response: For whatever reason, even if that reason is destroying the reapers itself. If Shepard found a legit way to control the Reapers, TIM would try to stop him. This should explain everything to you.

If the Reapers have diverted The Illusive Man PURELY because he seeks control instead of destroy, then by all rights if a real chance to control the Reapers pops up. He should be all for it. According to you, it doesn't make sense for him to contradict the control resolve because he BELIEVES IN CONTROL. But we all know, he would contradict himself and try to stop Shepard. Fact. So indoctrinated Destroy shep would contradict himself and try to stop a destroy person. You're thinking about it all wrong, a person isn't indoctrinated because they've been shown perfect logic that leads them to avoid destroy.

You gotta think of it like RELIGIOUS indoctrination. Children are brainwashed to believe in god for irrational reasons. They're just DUMB ENOUGH to accept it as fact anyways. Similarly, they've influenced Shepard with indoctrination and weakening his consciousnes so he'll be retarded enough to believe the nonsense they spew.
-Conclusion: Refuted

-7.It makes absolute zero sense that the Reapers would indoctrinate someone into wanting to destroy them. You can speculate all you like, but that idea just does not jive at all with what we've seen as far as the effects of indoctrination go.
-Response: I've already explained that factually TIM has always been a controller and Saren has always been a Synthesizer. Everything we've seen says that in order for a long term agent to even be possible, you have to leave their mind as unchanged as possible. That means, to leave MOST of their original resolve in tact. Aka Destroy.
-Conclusion: Refuted

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
Terramine
Destroyer

Posts : 2466
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 23
Location : USA

http://Tumblr Blog: terraminelightvoid.tumblr.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by CSSteele on Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:58 am

Seeing as  you'd rather make personal attacks, such as call me a problem and make assumptions about how I feel about various parts of the ME universe, and not actually pay attention what the things I've said, I am no longer going to engage in a discussion with you. You didn't discuss any of my points that I brought up in my previous post, you threw out that I'm 'emotional retarded rabble' .. so.. fuck you and your discussion.

My comments have always leaned pro-refuse, look back to the beginning of the thread, jack-ass and pay attention. You have yet to logically and adequately refute my main issues with Refuse over Destroy. Such as...

1.) Piss everyone off instead of just the ones that don't pay attention to the lore and thematic cohesion of the IP. And what I mean by that is anyone that plays ME3 with out the EC fails. Loses. Always, no matter what they do, no matter their EMS, no matter their choices from day 1 of ME1. It means nothing we do, at all, matters because guess what? Final test is a lose/lose. ( see my Kubiashi Maru example in my last post.) Oh, but here, download this DLC that gives a new option! And guess what? You can -always- pick it, no matter what you've done, or if you've done anything at all in the series, there are no special conditions or terms to meet except you pick the right dialogue option or shoot the brat.  

2.) High EMS Destroy shows us that Shepard wakes up and takes a breath. Is there a twist of logic in IT that allows for 'Control = gibbering animal, completely worthless, Synthesis = gibbering animal, completely worthless, Destroy = indoctrinated and agent of the Reapers'? Sure, but how many people would bother playing another ME game if it turns out that the choice that requires the 'best' choices for the overall good of the galaxy is in fact the one that dooms everything we've come to know and love about the IP ? They've had enough backlash, I think. Your argument boils down to that right there. That is what the people here have trouble with, thematically both In Universe and on an Out of Universe / Meta level, your theory makes it so that it's better for us to be a Fail-Shep and screw up left and right than to succeed, because our success is the Reapers success. That's bassackwards.

All that said.. do I like Refuse? Yeah, I did. I felt it had promise, and if it were included in the Original endings and/or required similar things as High EMS destroy does then it would have greater validity. Do I think your overall premise has merit ? I did, until you started throwing angry insults and pontificating with an ego-rant on everyone, making statements and declaring their statements 'refuted' when you are barely refuting anything. Respond or don't, I don't care, I won't be responding back to your arrogant ass.


Last edited by CSSteele on Tue Jul 15, 2014 3:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
CSSteele
Nemesis

Posts : 291
Join date : 2013-01-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Guest on Sun Jul 13, 2014 4:38 pm

Terramine, you are arrogant! You will learn.

 Harbinger

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by DSharrah on Tue Jul 15, 2014 5:31 pm

Personal interpertation is not fact.

Unless you are part of the team/individual that created the story/universe/character, nothing you claim (regardless of how much "lore" you reference) is fact.

All of us here (as far as I am aware) are participating as fans of the universe - and therefore, we are making great discussion fueled by our personal interpertations of the series and speculations on what that means.  Please stop treating your interpertations that are the only ones that are valid - as the only ones that are facts.

Let's not let this forum devolve into the same mess that the BSN turned into...

_________________
Renegade Shep's response to Starbinger the Reaperbieber stating that destroy would wipe out all synthetics:

"Does that mean it will kill your smug ass too?"



avatar
DSharrah
Space Cow

Posts : 816
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 37
Location : Lying in some rubble...

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 6 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum