Refuse in the place of Destroy

Page 3 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by DSharrah on Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:46 am

IronicParticle wrote:
SwobyJ wrote:

I'm ok with shooting that.

*snip*
That seems like a fallacy, maybe I'm wrong.

But again, if the reapers are trying to get you to shoot the tube... then clearly, comparing it to the Proto-Reaper is what they WANT you to do. Again, the tube itself does not symbolize the Reapers. It is a manifestation of destroy, in your mind. The kid seems to prefer you shoot the tube, instead of focusing on the fact that he is the enemy. Remember, how we believe they swapped colors around and whatnot to confuse us? The same thing can be said about the tube, they put the tube there because they knew we'd make the connections they want us to.

Basically, of course you can compare it to that. That's the point I was making, they make us want to shoot it.

Which again, the tube is not a manifestation of the Reapers. The Catalyst is. So you aren't shooting the Reapers, you are literally shooting the idea of "destroy" itself.

Edit: So again, this idea is not so easily dismissed.

Of course this is all assuming that everything you see after point X (where you believe the hallucination begins) is a hallucination and only a hallucination...and this does not encompass all the "strings" of IT...for example WNT (Waking Nightmare Theory) suggests that what you see at the end is only partially hallucination - and that your actions taken do have real world implications. So while you say shooting the tube may just be another reaper trick...WNT suggests that shooting the tube actually destroys the reapers - now what you see may not be exactly how it happens, but it does happen. I think that I lean a little bit more towards WNT than pure hallucination - which means for me the choice is the choice that gets rid of the reapers.

_________________
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 Terramine on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:19 am

DSharrah wrote:
Of course this is all assuming that everything you see after point X (where you believe the hallucination begins) is a hallucination and only a hallucination...and this does not encompass all the "strings" of IT...for example WNT (Waking Nightmare Theory) suggests that what you see at the end is only partially hallucination - and that your actions taken do have real world implications. So while you say shooting the tube may just be another reaper trick...WNT suggests that shooting the tube actually destroys the reapers - now what you see may not be exactly how it happens, but it does happen. I think that I lean a little bit more towards WNT than pure hallucination - which means for me the choice is the choice that gets rid of the reapers.
Well I am of the mindset that this will bring about their fall, or at least the fall of Harbinger. But I already think that with regular IT, meaning it's all a dream. Bioware said it plain as day, it's a mind battle. A battle has casualties, in fact casualties is usually how they are won. So whoever loses this battle, should end up a casualty... which means indoctrination for Shepard and ???? for harbinger.

I don't see how in WNT, Destroy is probably a good thing. It more likely means you shoot someone you know, maybe Anderson. Because again, the Reaper is the boy. Aim your gun at him, not your resolve. I mean it's possible it leads to the destruction of the Reapers, but that's more LOLWUT than anything else. Then they DEFINITELY should've hated Destroy more than Refuse.

_________________
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 BleedingUranium on Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:34 am

Eryri wrote:I must admit, I have a soft spot for Refuse. I think I would be happiest if both it and Destroy were viable ways to break indoctrination. It feels like the more "Captain Kirk" or even "Captain Picard" thing to do. Refusing to stoop to the cynical level of your enemies, and finding another way (even if that other way is not immediately apparent).

On the other hand I do also understand why most people here think it seems like giving up. Being unable to make the hard choices. I suppose it would fit best for role playing reasons if Shepard had accrued a monstrously high ems, and genuinely believed that he/she could win by sheer force of arms, rather than it being empty bluster, but given the overwhelming superiority of the Reapers that would need something like +100 000 ems.

Kirk? Probably. But Picard? No way.


A certain someone else seems to be missing that the choices are metaphors only, and that the Reapers aren't the ones presenting them, just acknowledged that they exist. The kid/Harbinger can colour the choices however he wants, but he cannot change what exists. And to address the silly "but the kid would rather Shepard choose Destroy than do nothing" argument: A villain would be more impressed with a hero that successfully resisted torture than one that gave in to it. The kid is mad in refuse because he's disappointed Shepard wasn't actually as awesome as he thought he was, and now he's both broken him and wasted all his time and effort. Also, Harbinger doesn't believe destroying the Reapers could actually happen, so he doesn't care if that's what Shepard wants to do. However, a Shepard that isn't willing to do that anymore clearly does not have the amazing mental strength Harby was impressed by.
avatar
BleedingUranium
Thresher Maw

Posts : 1921
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 24
Location : BC, Canada

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Apr 17, 2013 6:30 am

BleedingUranium wrote:
*snip*
"A certain someone else seems to be missing that the choices are metaphors only, and that the Reapers aren't the ones presenting them, just acknowledged that they exist."

So Synthesis and Control are valid? Lets not forget that it's a baseless assumption too, founded on 0 evidence. The basic ideas are not the Reaper's, but ironically Refuse is also a destroy ending and it most definitely comes from Shepard. So what is Destroy? Where does it come from?

"And to address the silly "but the kid would rather Shepard choose Destroy than do nothing" argument: A villain would be more impressed with a hero that successfully resisted torture than one that gave in to it. The kid is mad in refuse because he's disappointed Shepard wasn't actually as awesome as he thought he was, and now he's both broken him and wasted all his time and effort. Also, Harbinger doesn't believe destroying the Reapers could actually happen, so he doesn't care if that's what Shepard wants to do. However, a Shepard that isn't willing to do that anymore clearly does not have the amazing mental strength Harby was impressed by."

First impossible, there is only indoctrinated or not indoctrinated. There is no such thing as what you suggest. Either you stick to your resolve, and you end up breaking free unlike anyone has ever done. Or you move away from your resolve by picking Synthesis, Control and Refuse(in Destroyers viewpoint)/Destroy(in Refuser's viewpoint) and end up indoctrinated. There is nothing else because if you believe Destroy is Shepard's resolve, then Refuse is not, and thus results in indoctrination.

Second this is a mind battle. If Harbinger loses the battle he dies, he can't deny this. The thing is he doesn't think Shepard will win because he's a puny Organic, so why would he even expect a risk of Shepard picking Destroy? In turn, why would he be motivated to trash talk Destroy(like Destroyers claim he is going out of his way to do, instead of promoting it) if he doesn't think there is a threat there?

It's hilarious, if you don't make the HUGE and IMPOSSIBLE assumption that Refuse ruins Shepard. It has just as much evidence as Destroy, but less flaws about it.

Do you know what I find interesting?

Pre-Refuse: Either you choose Shepard's resolve, or you get indoctrinated. This is why Destroy was hated so much, because Shepard would win the mind battle. This is literally how ITers felt.

Post-Refuse: Bend everything to cling to Destroy. Change it from a mind battle where you either win or get indoctrinated, into where the top contender for the way out is hand-waved away as ruining Shepard. From then on, continue to pretend like it's invalid because of that hand-waving idea. I mean, the most logical conclusion wouldn't to be to drastically change everything just to maintain your ending choice, it would've been to still view the endings under the same interpretation of how things are happening.

I mean the most interesting? The quotes spouted in support of Destroy are vastly by everyone but Shepard. Yet:

"Not if we lose our humanity in the process! I'm out there fighting to stop crap like this!" - Commander Shepard

"I don't think so. I'm gonna stop the Reapers, but I won't sacrifice the soul of our species to do it." - Commander Shepard

_________________
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 BleedingUranium on Wed Apr 17, 2013 6:44 am

"Not if we lose our humanity in the process! I'm out there fighting to stop crap like this!" - Commander Shepard

"I don't think so. I'm gonna stop the Reapers, but I won't sacrifice the soul of our species to do it." - Commander Shepard

It's funny, you use those quotes as if you understand them.
avatar
BleedingUranium
Thresher Maw

Posts : 1921
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 24
Location : BC, Canada

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:57 am

IronicParticle wrote:First impossible, there is only indoctrinated or not indoctrinated. There is no such thing as what you suggest. Either you stick to your resolve, and you end up breaking free unlike anyone has ever done. Or you move away from your resolve by picking Synthesis, Control and Refuse(in Destroyers viewpoint)/Destroy(in Refuser's viewpoint) and end up indoctrinated. There is nothing else because if you believe Destroy is Shepard's resolve, then Refuse is not, and thus results in indoctrination.
Not true. Shiala disproves this. Shiala was indoctrinated, yet do to her connection to the Feros colonists she was able to break free of it. She hears the voices still, yes, but her connection to others not only slows it down, but actually halted the process. So she is in a position of "indoctrinated, yet not indoctrinated".
avatar
Hanako Ikezawa
The Thorian

Posts : 3094
Join date : 2013-01-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Restrider on Wed Apr 17, 2013 8:39 am

BleedingUranium wrote:

Kirk? Probably. But Picard? No way.


A certain someone else seems to be missing that the choices are metaphors only, and that the Reapers aren't the ones presenting them, just acknowledged that they exist. The kid/Harbinger can colour the choices however he wants, but he cannot change what exists. And to address the silly "but the kid would rather Shepard choose Destroy than do nothing" argument: A villain would be more impressed with a hero that successfully resisted torture than one that gave in to it. The kid is mad in refuse because he's disappointed Shepard wasn't actually as awesome as he thought he was, and now he's both broken him and wasted all his time and effort. Also, Harbinger doesn't believe destroying the Reapers could actually happen, so he doesn't care if that's what Shepard wants to do. However, a Shepard that isn't willing to do that anymore clearly does not have the amazing mental strength Harby was impressed by.

I think you know very little about torturing people and the intent behind it. Most torturers would actually enjoy it to see their victim break. After all, that's the entire reason for the torture.

An individual resisting would actually make most of them uncomfortable/mad because it renders the MO ineffective/useless. Especially to a point where they do not know how to break him anymore. It would end in a failure.

Of course this all depends on the torturer. Those who enjoy their doings (= sadists) want to see their victim suffer and submit (=break), although a resisting individual at the same time means that they can prolong the torture. Until a point is reached where even the sadistic torturer starts to feel mad, because he cannot break the individual.
A non-sadistic torturer would want to end it as fast as possible, to get the results and be done with it (= those who say "Come on, just say what we need and let's be done with this!"). Again, a resisting individual would prolong the torture and make the non-sadistic torturer uncomfortable.

_________________
IT's Top Ten||IT Variations||BSN Census||First Playthrough Choice||IT and Refuse
The Decision Chamber and you||IT Discussion Flowchart||IT Council||IT Personality Test
avatar
Restrider
Blood Pack Warrior

Posts : 934
Join date : 2013-01-07
Location : Democratic Republic of New Germany - Phase 1 Space

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Restrider on Wed Apr 17, 2013 8:48 am

Oh, and to be on topic again, this is a repost from the Refuse thread (most people seem to have ignored):

Note that in this version the Guardian does NOT say "I know that you have thought about destroying us"! I will check if that line was changed after the EC.
Okay, here is the original ending. And the extended cut.

I'll compare the Destroy dialogue in the OC and the EC starting from "The Crucible changed me, created new possibilites. But I can't make them happen".
I will color-code some interesting aspects.
Shepard is confrontational towards the Guardian
The Guardian wants Shepard to choose
The Guardian threatens Shepard
The Guardian tries to sway Shepard away from certain choices


OC:

Guardian: "I know you've thought about destroying us."
--Flash Forward--
G: "You can whipe out all synthetic life, if you want. Including the Geth. Even you are partly synthetic."
Shepard: "But the Reapers will be destroyed?"
G: "Yes, but the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back."
S: "Maybe..."
--Jump to Control--


EC:

G: "If there is to be a new solution, you must act. It is now in your power to destroy us."
--Flash Forward--
G: "But be warned, others will be destroyed as well. The Crucible will not discriminate. All synthetics will be targeted. Even you are partly synthetic."

S (Paragon): "But the Reaper will be destroyed?"
G: "Yes, but the peace won't last. Soon your children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back."
S: "There has to be another way."
G: "There is."
--Jump to Control--

S (Renegade): "I made it this far... we'll destroy you without setting it off."
G: "Impossible (slightly pissed in my view). You are vastly outnumbered. You have sacrificed many of your resources to reach this point. If you do not use the Crucible the Reapers won't be stopped and the cycle continues."
S: "I don't believe you." (THE FUCK!!!!)
G: "Your belief is not required."
S: "There has to be another way."
G: "There is."
--Jump to Control--

Now, let's skip the entire Control/Synthesis nonsense and jump to the point right after Synthesis has been presented to you.

G: "Your time is at an end. You must decide." (something similar is in the OC, but differently worded)
S (Renegade obviously): "No! I'm gonna end this war on my terms!"
G: "Then you will die knowing that you failed saving everything you fought for."
S (Renegade obviously): "I fight for freedom. Mine and everyone's. I fight for the right to choose our own fate. And if I die, I'll die knowing that I did everything I could to stop you and I'll die free."
G: "SO BE IT. The cycle continues."
--Cutscenes--


As I said in the OP, I had mixed feelings about Refuse, due to the rather tragic way it ends (if literal) and the general flak it gets from literalists (but who cares about them anyways) and a huge chunk of ITers as well. However, revising the dialogues and taking into account the difference between OC and EC, the bias towards Destroy does not seem that great anymore.
Most of the arguments were based on Shepard's and the Guardian's dialogue, and they were true for the OC. In the EC, Destroy is not that negatively depicted by the Guardian. Refuse wins the "piss-off-the-Guardian" contest by a long shot.
Of course there are still external things, such as the Breath Scene speaking for Destroy and I am by no means trying to sway people away from Destroy, but considering the dialogue I have just examined I have come to a personal conclusion:

Most handwave Refuse for the wrong reasons:

1. They have still in mind the OC, where Destroy clearly was depicted as the Guardian's least favourite choice (the dialogue of the Guardian was more aggressive, too).
2. They have not seen/experienced Refuse via dialogue, or only the last speech. Yet, the entire end-dialogue, where you have always to pick Renegade is important.
3. Considering points 1 and 2, people tend to the -- in my eyes false -- impression that Refuse is giving up, being mentally broken or other interpretations I have heard so far.

Please reconsider your attitude when talking about Refuse after you have read the dialogue and seen the videos.





_________________
IT's Top Ten||IT Variations||BSN Census||First Playthrough Choice||IT and Refuse
The Decision Chamber and you||IT Discussion Flowchart||IT Council||IT Personality Test
avatar
Restrider
Blood Pack Warrior

Posts : 934
Join date : 2013-01-07
Location : Democratic Republic of New Germany - Phase 1 Space

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by dorktainian on Wed Apr 17, 2013 10:07 am

for the millionth time. refusal is a victory if you look at it from a different perspective. the reapers drive our choices through manipulation and then at the very final you refuse to choose from the choices they give you.

this in effect means they can no longer control you. you have issued them with a statement of free intent.

this starts with one man (shepard) and spreads until the reapers can no longer influence our choices or decisions.

_________________
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 Apr 17, 2013 11:04 am

BleedingUranium wrote:"Not if we lose our humanity in the process! I'm out there fighting to stop crap like this!" - Commander Shepard

"I don't think so. I'm gonna stop the Reapers, but I won't sacrifice the soul of our species to do it." - Commander Shepard

It's funny, you use those quotes as if you understand them.
Oh come on, backstabbing friends is not keeping your Humanity. I believe that in the past, you acknowledged that Refuse is the ending where you keep your Humanity. Whereas Destroy is pragmatic.

Even if you didn't, it's very clear what Bioware defined as Humanity as you explained to TIM how he had already betrayed Humanity and he ended up shooting himself.

_________________
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 Apr 17, 2013 11:07 am

Selim Bradley wrote:
IronicParticle wrote:First impossible, there is only indoctrinated or not indoctrinated. There is no such thing as what you suggest. Either you stick to your resolve, and you end up breaking free unlike anyone has ever done. Or you move away from your resolve by picking Synthesis, Control and Refuse(in Destroyers viewpoint)/Destroy(in Refuser's viewpoint) and end up indoctrinated. There is nothing else because if you believe Destroy is Shepard's resolve, then Refuse is not, and thus results in indoctrination.
Not true. Shiala disproves this. Shiala was indoctrinated, yet do to her connection to the Feros colonists she was able to break free of it. She hears the voices still, yes, but her connection to others not only slows it down, but actually halted the process. So she is in a position of "indoctrinated, yet not indoctrinated".
But that's not what we expect from the best Shepard, and she was once indoctrinated... Shepard has YET to be indoctrinated.

It also required an entirely different process to intervene. My point is, the choices in the decision cannot lead to this. You must first be indoctrinated and then you must have something non-conventional interrupt the connection.

_________________
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 Apr 17, 2013 11:15 am

dork wrote:for the millionth time. refusal is a victory if you look at it from a different perspective. the reapers drive our choices through manipulation and then at the very final you refuse to choose from the choices they give you.

this in effect means they can no longer control you. you have issued them with a statement of free intent.

this starts with one man (shepard) and spreads until the reapers can no longer influence our choices or decisions.
Well that's why Destroy and Refuse are like at a tie. That's where it will probably stay, but again aside from giving it a try, there's also the fact that Refusers have little in the way of help to view things through the Refuse viewpoint. Which I thank Restrider for posting that about the dialogue here. I've seen it before, both in game and when he posted it in his topic. It definitely is a great contribution.

_________________
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 Hanako Ikezawa on Wed Apr 17, 2013 11:51 am

IronicParticle wrote:
Selim Bradley wrote:
IronicParticle wrote:First impossible, there is only indoctrinated or not indoctrinated. There is no such thing as what you suggest. Either you stick to your resolve, and you end up breaking free unlike anyone has ever done. Or you move away from your resolve by picking Synthesis, Control and Refuse(in Destroyers viewpoint)/Destroy(in Refuser's viewpoint) and end up indoctrinated. There is nothing else because if you believe Destroy is Shepard's resolve, then Refuse is not, and thus results in indoctrination.
Not true. Shiala disproves this. Shiala was indoctrinated, yet do to her connection to the Feros colonists she was able to break free of it. She hears the voices still, yes, but her connection to others not only slows it down, but actually halted the process. So she is in a position of "indoctrinated, yet not indoctrinated".
But that's not what we expect from the best Shepard, and she was once indoctrinated... Shepard has YET to be indoctrinated.

It also required an entirely different process to intervene. My point is, the choices in the decision cannot lead to this. You must first be indoctrinated and then you must have something non-conventional interrupt the connection.
You said nobody has broken free of indoctrination, which I said was false. In fact, even Saren and TIM broke free, but sadly they had too much Reaper tech in them to do anything else accept remove themselves as a threat.
avatar
Hanako Ikezawa
The Thorian

Posts : 3094
Join date : 2013-01-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Apr 17, 2013 12:04 pm

Selim Bradley wrote:
IronicParticle wrote:But that's not what we expect from the best Shepard, and she was once indoctrinated... Shepard has YET to be indoctrinated.

It also required an entirely different process to intervene. My point is, the choices in the decision cannot lead to this. You must first be indoctrinated and then you must have something non-conventional interrupt the connection.
You said nobody has broken free of indoctrination, which I said was false. In fact, even Saren and TIM broke free, but sadly they had too much Reaper tech in them to do anything else accept remove themselves as a threat.
Again, Benezia was doomed. Also, TIM and Saren were already indoctrinated .

There is no example where you are "ruined" from moving away from your resolve in the process of indoctrination. It's that simple. Anything else has been a product of AFTER you've been indoctrinated. Refuse is during the process, so if it's not Shepard's resolve then it's the same as Control and synthesis.

_________________
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 Hanako Ikezawa on Wed Apr 17, 2013 12:08 pm

IronicParticle wrote:
Selim Bradley wrote:
IronicParticle wrote:But that's not what we expect from the best Shepard, and she was once indoctrinated... Shepard has YET to be indoctrinated.

It also required an entirely different process to intervene. My point is, the choices in the decision cannot lead to this. You must first be indoctrinated and then you must have something non-conventional interrupt the connection.
You said nobody has broken free of indoctrination, which I said was false. In fact, even Saren and TIM broke free, but sadly they had too much Reaper tech in them to do anything else accept remove themselves as a threat.
Again, Benezia was doomed. Also, TIM and Saren were already indoctrinated .

There is no example where you are "ruined" from moving away from your resolve in the process of indoctrination. It's that simple. Anything else has been a product of AFTER you've been indoctrinated. Refuse is during the process, so if it's not Shepard's resolve then it's the same as Control and synthesis.
None of what you said involves what I was talking about. You said Shepard would be the first to break indoctrination. Several characters prove that wrong.
avatar
Hanako Ikezawa
The Thorian

Posts : 3094
Join date : 2013-01-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Apr 17, 2013 8:03 pm

Selim Bradley wrote: None of what you said involves what I was talking about. You said Shepard would be the first to break indoctrination. Several characters prove that wrong.
Selim you have this knack of focusing on one of my sub-points, when the only reason I mentioned it was when talking about a bigger point.

Also I specifically meant that nobody could break free from the attempt. Everyone you have listed, probably didn't even get the decision chamber... Shepard is the first Organic there(Another reason why Shepard is clearly an Anomaly, he is equal enough to the Reapers that he can have a one-on-one mind-fight with them. He actually can win a mind fight with the Reapers).

But the main thing, is that nobody had won the mind fight with the Reapers.

_________________
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 Hanako Ikezawa on Wed Apr 17, 2013 9:20 pm

IronicParticle wrote:
Selim Bradley wrote: None of what you said involves what I was talking about. You said Shepard would be the first to break indoctrination. Several characters prove that wrong.
Selim you have this knack of focusing on one of my sub-points, when the only reason I mentioned it was when talking about a bigger point.

Also I specifically meant that nobody could break free from the attempt. Everyone you have listed, probably didn't even get the decision chamber... Shepard is the first Organic there(Another reason why Shepard is clearly an Anomaly, he is equal enough to the Reapers that he can have a one-on-one mind-fight with them. He actually can win a mind fight with the Reapers).

But the main thing, is that nobody had won the mind fight with the Reapers.
It's called "pointing out weak spots". You said no one has ever broken free of indoctrination, not an indoctrination attempt. You have now altered your argument to have that very crucial word added, so the point of me posting that is completed.
avatar
Hanako Ikezawa
The Thorian

Posts : 3094
Join date : 2013-01-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Wed Apr 17, 2013 9:37 pm

Selim Bradley wrote:It's called "pointing out weak spots". You said no one has ever broken free of indoctrination, not an indoctrination attempt. You have now altered your argument to have that very crucial word added, so the point of me posting that is completed.
Come on, I was talking about Shepard so it's VERY obvious what I meant. The word is far from crucial, who in their right mind would think I meant anything other than regular IT where Shepard has yet to be 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 DSharrah on Wed Apr 17, 2013 10:26 pm

Amazing what a little creative editing can do...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8bsGxz5eI0&feature=player_detailpage

If this is how "refuse" had been presented in game, I would have loved it!

_________________
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 Maximus on Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:44 pm

I'm kinda torn between Refuse and Destroy. I'd choose Refuse, coz it's badass, Shepard rejects Starkid's BS arguements and makes his own choice Starby didn't expected. He's clearly pissed, iritated, angered to the point he reveals his true identity for a sec with that Reaperish "SO BE IT!". Sounds almost like "Fuck you, and fuck your mother, Imma rape you to death now!" He failed to break you coz you resisted. "Lill' weak human actually managed to resist ME? A GOD??!" Yeah, I'd pissed too...If I were a "God" tryin' to eradicate damn organics for "greater good"...

Refuse would be 100% perfect to me, but it lacks somethin' - The Breath Scene - The only reason I'd choose Destroy over Refuse. The question is: Is The Breath Scene real? Maybe it's the part of deception, somethin' that gives you false hope and makes you feel like a winner. If we assume that everythin' that takes place after Shepard's choices, all these EC cutscenes they made are part of the Deception, then...writers clearly don't want us to choose Refuse. It has the most negative outcome from literal and IT perspective despite bein' a natural choice. Well...natural to me anyway, I wanted to shoot that damn kid the first time I saw him, coz I hate kids and God-Kid who thinks he's above me and clearly tries to trick me into somethin' is just too much. I'd Revenant him to death with Inferno Ammo...and a couple of Inferno Grenades just to make sure He won't get up. Am I the only one around here?! *reloads Revenant* ;>

To sum it all up: IMO Writers want us to fail, to submit and become Indroctrinated...or are they? They give us false hope and present best choice with negative outcome but that doesn't necesseraly means that this is they're exact intention. They're artists after all, and artists want to show somethin' to ppl, send a message, make them think. If you fail to understand that message, too bad, you're close-minded etc. Go jump to your synthesis beam or get vaporized by control liiiiight.

Is Destroy a bad choice? Right now..I'm not sure. I just don't know, I know that it CAN be...
But you know what? If they ever release that damn "The Truth" DLC, I'd still say, "Fuck you, Starby!" No matter what cutscenes they make after the choices...Why? Coz Fuck Reapers and Fuck their system, that's why! ;>

_________________
"And in the end, as the darkness takes me, I am nothing. Now I know how you felt, my friend."
avatar
Maximus
Rampart Mech

Posts : 546
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 25
Location : Europe

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by Terramine on Mon Jun 23, 2014 7:32 pm

TurianRebel212 wrote:Shepard is a catalyst. He/she is an agent of change. But Shep does not change.


Now tell me.

What ending does Shepard NOT change in.

There is only one.

That is the "canon" ending of ME3.

It has always been.
Refuse. Destroy he accepts the reapers and their ideas to some degree. End of story. Even just in the way he sacrifices the Geth... which is to say, for some reason destroying the Reapers comes at a cost. That's not right, sacrifice is necessary but only along the way... not specifically, in the destruction of the Reapers themselves. The way it is, it's necessitating the Reaper's existence in one way or another. Even this one thing is multilayered... for example it invalidates everything Shepard has achieved up until this point and in fact lends credit to the idea that it's actually all the Reaper's doing. The peace between the quarians and geth, the credit goes to the Reapers because without them the Geth cannot even exist. In the first game Anderson tells Shepard about Saren, and when he explains that Saren killed all those people... even if you answer with "so would I" you're then forced to listen to Anderson say "only if there is no other way, Saren doesn't even look for another option".

And that's just it, if you needlessly kill off a bunch of people. You are evil, end of story. You're a bad guy. You don't even try to find another way, so you cant say that Destroy is necessary. As far as Shepard knows, he DOESN'T know that Refuse will actually result in loss. And losing because you tried to look for another way, IS preferable. Then the blood isn't on your hands, you did you job, nothing is your fault.

Lets not forget, that in the leaked ending it was Refuse and Synthesis. There was no Control and there was no Destroy. All they did, was purposely made it LOOK like there was an ABC ending... but what it really, is still a choice between compromise with the Reapers or staying as is. You guys seem really blind to not see it. See, an ABC ending... means that all 3 endings are the SAME. Everyone bitched about the vanilla ending missing the point all together. They KNOW its ABC in fact, it goes further than that. It's symbolic. It's saying that all 3 endings are a game over, because they involve giving in to the Reapers.

And it all ties together, you guys keep talking about how destroy is the canon ending. You don't get it. Refuse is the ending of every ITers wet dreams, or at least a promise of it. Because you say no and what do you get? IT style "SO BE IT". You guys who focus on the fact that it doesn't result in a reveal, you're in the same ball as the literalists. They never planned to reveal in this game, that's what the next game is for. And trust me if the next game is true, ALL 3 OF THOSE ENDINGS NEVER HAPPENED. And how will they get out of that?

You see, they CANT say all Destroyers are right. You don't seem to get how that alone would render all this a total failure. They'd create a shit storm and would only make things worse. But would work is, is saying that almost everyone was wrong, and that the people who got it right... got it right because of a whole lot more, than what color coding they picked.

Besides what about people who picked Destroy for non IT reasons. Maybe they just thought it was badass, or they don't trust the other options. Those are WRONG REASONS. When making art, the whole point is for people to GET what you were doing. That's the only time your interpretation or for that matter your choice truly matters. People bitch about illusion of choice, but even if they make the next game reflect all 3 choices... would your choice truly matter? How? Anyone could've picked the same choice as you, its nothing special.

But if you must figure out what Bioware is saying first, if you truly understand it. THEN your choice matters, because it's not a walk in the fucking park. And sure some people can pick refuse cause herp derp. But, it's vastly less so than the people who pick the 3 original endings cause herp derp. The vast majority of Destroyers AREN'T ITers. They are the literalists, the people who take it as is.

I could keep going, y'all don't take this subject very seriously but im just scratching the surface.

_________________
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 Mon Jun 23, 2014 7:40 pm

the only ending where the relays dont get destroyed is.......

_________________
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 CSSteele on Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:24 pm

Terra, the problem with that is simply the fact that Refuse wasn't an original option. We had to wait months for the EC to give us the option to 'win'. Add in that the only option to give the 'Shepard lives' breath scene is max assets Destroy.

Other than that, I do lean towards Refuse being the 'correct' choice, but without having a counter-point for the 2 problems I just listed, ones that fit with everything, I can't jump behind it 100%
avatar
CSSteele
Nemesis

Posts : 291
Join date : 2013-01-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by jojon2se on Mon Jun 23, 2014 9:17 pm

The one big problem I have with refuse, is that they added it when they did -- 100% a meta {matter concern}.

   If there were only the three (...or four), and they were all greatly misguided, there would be no opportunity for anybody to be a bad winner and lord it over his fellow Mass Effect fan -- we were all equally wrong.

Then a last puzzle piece could be added, either in a new game, or one final, late, ME3 DLC, just before the new game, putting all the information we have since before into proper perspective, possibly smoothing over the worst of the still inevitable backlash.

If any of the ending options (EDIT: ...counting in refuse, here...) are win- and others are lose scenarios, however; Barring some truly excellent writing, you can safely rely on "winners" and "losers" both to act in a manner that is beneath them, and I am talking backlash that dwarfs the original ending controversy, in all its aspects - player against player and player against Bioware.


Last edited by jojon2se on Mon Jun 23, 2014 9:30 pm; edited 1 time in total

jojon2se
Nemesis

Posts : 295
Join date : 2013-01-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Refuse in the place of Destroy

Post by dorktainian on Mon Jun 23, 2014 9:28 pm

many reviewers were stating at the time.... that they had wished there had been an option to give the kid the middle finger.  People were shooting the kid.  There were videos minutes long of people just shooting the kid.

I am not advocating Refuse.  I am saying that we are missing context.....even after all this time.
I chose Destroy on my first playthrough and have done since on most occasions, but can see the attraction of refusing to follow the reapers suggestions.  Shepard is alive on the citadel for a start.  The crudible turns off. If it were a trap then you just thwarted their plans.  If it were the only way then we're boned.

Also.  Sheps speech in the new refusal ending is possibly the greatest dialogue in the whole trilogy.


"Choose, but only from the choices you give us, don't you see this is wrong?"
Delenn B5.

_________________
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 Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 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