650 réponses à ce sujet

[Vaenier]

Reiella wrote...

Not sure I follow this quite right, think I'm mis-intepreting it, but it looks like you are trying to defend one contrived plot device in ME by attacking another contrived plot device?

I am not sure what you mean, but if you think I am doing somthing stupid, then you are most likely correct.

[TheRevanchist]

These CB debates are rather old honestly...why do we keep debateing over something we know next to nothing about? We don't know if it will help or if it will only shoot us in the foot. Only Bioware knows this and we won't get an answer until ME3...so why does everyone keep trying to push their OPINIONS onto to others and claim it to be "logic" when in reality it can't be logic if we all we know is it makes human slurpee?

[In Exile]

Vaenier wrote...
I think I am complaining that they are giving a choice between shooting myself in the left leg or the right leg, but i rather not shoot myself at all. I want to give the base to the Geth [or council, or myself]. If they get nothing out of it, I dont care. I blow it up and be on my way. There doesnt have to be anything useful, I just rather find out first before blowing it up. I do not want to have the game think i want human dominance because I wanted to save alien lives.

Those aren't options, though. The options are reaper base for potential human dominance and cerberus application, or total destruction.

That being said, the geth are unlikely to care. Legion after the SM makes it pretty clear the geth would not have kept the base.

[Inverness Moon]

Imperium Alpha wrote...

Keeping the base = Humans destroy the reapers but take they're place
Destroying the base = Humans sacrifices themself to save all organics life in the galaxy

End of the story

"I Was a Teenage Reaper"

Those aren't equivalent ends though.

In Exile wrote...

Those aren't options, though. The options are reaper base for potential human dominance and cerberus application, or total destruction.

That being said, the geth are unlikely to care. Legion after the SM makes it pretty clear the geth would not have kept the base.

That is not true. What the geth were clear about was not letting the technology from the base shape how they would develop in the future. That is the advice Legion gives to Shepard if he keeps the base, and it is appropriate.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 18 décembre 2010 - 01:56 .

[luakel]

Imperium Alpha wrote...

Keeping the base = Humans destroy the reapers but take they're place
Destroying the base = Humans sacrifices themself to save all organics life in the galaxy

End of the story

That would... really, really suck.

Although if humanity's heroic sacrifice were handled right, it could also be awesome. Like, we could trap all the reapers on Earth and then drive Earth into the sun or use a Death Star Thanix Cannon to blow Earth up. It would throw science out the window but it would be epic.

[Inverness Moon]

luakel wrote...

That would... really, really suck.

Although if humanity's heroic sacrifice were handled right, it could also be awesome. Like, we could trap all the reapers on Earth and then drive Earth into the sun or use a Death Star Thanix Cannon to blow Earth up. It would throw science out the window but it would be epic.

They would use the newly constructed Geth Star to destroy the Earth.

I'll take my chances being a reaper though. Should be pretty interesting. 

[In Exile]

Inverness Moon wrote...
That is not true. What the geth were clear about was not letting the technology from the base shape how they would develop in the future. That is the advice Legion gives to Shepard if he keeps the base, and it is appropriate.

Which is equivalent to not using the base, since using it to develop or reverse engineer any sort of technology would shape how humans develop their future. It's invariable. Either the base has no useful technology, in which case it won't matter whether we keep it or, or it will only marginally alter the balance of power, in which case it barely matters whether we keep it or not, or it can equalize the incredible gap between us and the reapers, in which case it is impossible for it not to alter our development.

[Vaenier]

In Exile wrote...

Vaenier wrote...
I think I am complaining that they are giving a choice between shooting myself in the left leg or the right leg, but i rather not shoot myself at all. I want to give the base to the Geth [or council, or myself]. If they get nothing out of it, I dont care. I blow it up and be on my way. There doesnt have to be anything useful, I just rather find out first before blowing it up. I do not want to have the game think i want human dominance because I wanted to save alien lives.

Those aren't options, though. The options are reaper base for potential human dominance and cerberus application, or total destruction.

That being said, the geth are unlikely to care. Legion after the SM makes it pretty clear the geth would not have kept the base.

You dont have to use their technology, you just have to learn how to break it.

Legion said the base is "data only" and that destroying it will not bring those who died back, but saving may prevent further deaths.

it was retconed a record 3 minutes later in the same game. I am dissapoint

Modifié par Vaenier, 18 décembre 2010 - 02:05 .

[luakel]

Inverness Moon wrote...

They would use the newly constructed Geth Star to destroy the Earth.

Hmm, so that's what those flashlight heads are for...

Inverness Moon wrote...
I'll take my chances being a reaper though. Should be pretty interesting. 

Can we make the shapes a bit different though? I don't want a bunch of Terminator!Human-Reapers running around, it'd be cooler if our reapers could be shaped like bears or something.

In Exile wrote...

Which is equivalent to not using the base, since using it to develop or reverse engineer any sort of technology would
shape how humans develop their future. It's invariable. Either the base
has no useful technology, in which case it won't matter whether we keep
it or, or it will only marginally alter the balance of power, in which
case it barely matters whether we keep it or not, or it can equalize the incredible gap between us and the reapers, in which case it is impossible for it not to alter our development.

Well, it would alter our development, but not necessarily shape it. I feel like what Legion is warning against is the idea of letting the Reapers control how their technology is used; that's why the majority of the geth rejected Sovereign, because they saw that it would be in control if they accepted. Even if the Reaper tech allows humanity to advance greatly, chances are we're not going to be using it in ways that the Reapers intended, especially since they're synthetics and we're not. So gaining the tech potentially at the base would be a major change for humanity, but it's not going to fundamentally change how we operate; just like humans weren't going to let the Council control them after the relays and eezo were discovered.

[TheRevanchist]

luakel wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

They would use the newly constructed Geth Star to destroy the Earth.

Hmm, so that's what those flashlight heads are for...

Inverness Moon wrote...
I'll take my chances being a reaper though. Should be pretty interesting. 

Can we make the shapes a bit different though? I don't want a bunch of Terminator!Human-Reapers running around, it'd be cooler if our reapers could be shaped like bears or something.

In Exile wrote...

Which is equivalent to not using the base, since using it to develop or reverse engineer any sort of technology would
shape how humans develop their future. It's invariable. Either the base
has no useful technology, in which case it won't matter whether we keep
it or, or it will only marginally alter the balance of power, in which
case it barely matters whether we keep it or not, or it can equalize the incredible gap between us and the reapers, in which case it is impossible for it not to alter our development.

Well, it would alter our development, but not necessarily shape it. I feel like what Legion is warning against is the idea of letting the Reapers control how their technology is used; that's why the majority of the geth rejected Sovereign, because they saw that it would be in control if they accepted. Even if the Reaper tech allows humanity to advance greatly, chances are we're not going to be using it in ways that the Reapers intended, especially since they're synthetics and we're not. So gaining the tech potentially at the base would be a major change for humanity, but it's not going to fundamentally change how we operate; just like humans weren't going to let the Council control them after the relays and eezo were discovered.

No the Geth want to find their own tech path to greatness, they don't want to use tech freely given because to them they are not really progressing. They are simply taking tec that already exists, they are taking the "free pass" as it were...instead of unlocking techology themselves and earning their place amung the galaxy. They refuse the tec of the Reapers because they would rather develop technology on their own so they feel like they earned in it.

The Heritics simply chose another path...they wanted the Reapers to grant them power through technology and embraced that path of development. 

[Xilizhra]

Legion said the base is "data only" and that destroying it will not bring those who died back, but saving may prevent further deaths.

Legion isn't offering an opinion, just an observation.

[Inverness Moon]

In Exile wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...
That is not true. What the geth were clear about was not letting the technology from the base shape how they would develop in the future. That is the advice Legion gives to Shepard if he keeps the base, and it is appropriate.

Which is equivalent to not using the base, since using it to develop or reverse engineer any sort of technology would shape how humans develop their future. It's invariable. Either the base has no useful technology, in which case it won't matter whether we keep it or, or it will only marginally alter the balance of power, in which case it barely matters whether we keep it or not, or it can equalize the incredible gap between us and the reapers, in which case it is impossible for it not to alter our development.

Defeating the reapers is more important that ensuring we develop along some sort of unique path.

Edit: I also disagree that you have to choose between developing along your own path or saving the collector base.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 18 décembre 2010 - 02:50 .

[Vaenier]

Xilizhra wrote...

Legion said the base is "data only" and that destroying it will not bring those who died back, but saving may prevent further deaths.

Legion isn't offering an opinion, just an observation.

Did Bioware just fail to realise that you dont have to use their technology in order to gain an advantage from it? Legion originally seemed to understand you dont have to use their technology to beat them. I dont want to use it, I just want to learn how to break it.

Like if our enemy was using bullet proof vests made from the liquified corpses of your allies. You dont have to adopt them yourself, you just have to develop ammo to make them ineffective. Or if you find an enemy code machine. You are not going to use it for yourself, you are just going to break their code to make it ineffective. Is this idea too crazy? I feel crazy...

Inverness Moon wrote...

I also disagree that you have to choose between developing along your own path or saving the collector base.

And you say in one sentense what I have been trying to figure out how to say for pages now... Thank you.

Modifié par Vaenier, 18 décembre 2010 - 02:57 .

[ISpeakTheTruth]

Xilizhra wrote...

Legion said the base is "data only" and that destroying it will not bring those who died back, but saving may prevent further deaths.

Legion isn't offering an opinion, just an observation.

Very true just like his loyalty mission he mearly stated what one of the options were he never endorsed it.

Out of everyones reaction to the base being destroyed I liked Legion's the most. It made me feel a kindship with him and the Geth when he said something like "Humanity was given the chance to transcend to gain a future for your race everything the Geth espire for but you rejected it to reach your goal on humanities terms... you are more like the Geth than we thought."

When I heard that it made me love the Geth because they were put in a very similar situation by Soverin. It told them that it could give them everything that they wanted if they served it and they refused because like my Shepard he knew that if you reach your goal by selling your soul you've accomplished nothing and what you have isn't realy yours.

[Sajuro]

Inverness Moon wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...
That is not true. What the geth were clear about was not letting the technology from the base shape how they would develop in the future. That is the advice Legion gives to Shepard if he keeps the base, and it is appropriate.

Which is equivalent to not using the base, since using it to develop or reverse engineer any sort of technology would shape how humans develop their future. It's invariable. Either the base has no useful technology, in which case it won't matter whether we keep it or, or it will only marginally alter the balance of power, in which case it barely matters whether we keep it or not, or it can equalize the incredible gap between us and the reapers, in which case it is impossible for it not to alter our development.

Defeating the reapers is more important that ensuring we develop along some sort of unique path.

Edit: I also disagree that you have to choose between developing along your own path or saving the collector base.

So we can wipe ourselves out as our technology exceeds our cultural advancements, because that worked out so well for the Krogan oh.. wait.

[In Exile]

luakel wrote...
Well, it would alter our development, but not necessarily shape it. I feel like what Legion is warning against is the idea of letting the Reapers control how their technology is used; that's why the majority of the geth rejected Sovereign, because they saw that it would be in control if they accepted. Even if the Reaper tech allows humanity to advance greatly, chances are we're not going to be using it in ways that the Reapers intended, especially since they're synthetics and we're not. So gaining the tech potentially at the base would be a major change for humanity, but it's not going to fundamentally change how we operate; just like humans weren't going to let the Council control them after the relays and eezo were discovered.

I think it's more fundamental than that.

It's the theme that plays into what Mordin says too - technology before a species is ready changes what that species is. When the salarians uplifted the krogans and gave them guns, the guns didn't alter krogan society. They had the same tribal structure, the same expansions and violent attitude - the guns just made them more dangerous.

That's what the theme of the game is, at least with regard to technology. If we absorb repear tech, we'll have capacities that were absolutely beyond our keen in that technological frame. That's what's going to alter our development.

It's not that we'll make human slurpee to build a reaper, or turn our own people into husks. But we will be like gods compared to what we were if we adopt any major part of repear tech, and it won't be through our natural evolution, and that's what we give up.

That's why the writers basically railroad Shepard into the whole 'not giving up my humanity to win' and 'we do this my way' speeches.

[luakel]

kylecouch wrote...
No the Geth want to find their own tech path to greatness, they don't want to use tech freely given because to them they are not really progressing. They are simply taking tec that already exists, they are taking the "free pass" as it were...instead of unlocking techology themselves and earning their place amung the galaxy. They refuse the tec of the Reapers because they would rather develop technology on their own so they feel like they earned in it.

The Heritics simply chose another path...they wanted the Reapers to grant them power through technology and embraced that path of development. 

Hm, if that's what the geth think, then how come Legion (initially) supports keeping the base and using it to get something out of all those dead colonists?

And in any case, the Heretic/True Geth situation is a bit different than the Collector base. I guess we're not going to know until ME3 whether the Reapers left behind some booby traps at the base or not, or even whether the Reapers planned on the base's capture at all. If the Reapers were planning on this all along, then keeping the base is just as bad as what the heretics chose, because we're being steered down the path that the Reapers directly want us to go down. But if the Reapers were too caught up in their own arrogance to plan ahead, then we're simply using technology. And maybe the true Geth disagree with that, but whatever. Technology has no moral value, it's just there, and what it's used for is far more important than what developed it. The Collectors did horrible things, and they were punished severely for it. And unless there's a catch (which there probably is), then humanity "earned" that tech by taking out its previous controllers.

In Exile wrote...
I think it's more fundamental than that.

It's the theme that plays into what Mordin says too - technology before a species is ready changes what that species is. When the salarians uplifted the krogans and gave them guns, the guns didn't alter
krogan society. They had the same tribal structure, the same expansions
and violent attitude - the guns just made them more dangerous.

That's
what the theme of the game is, at least with regard to technology. If
we absorb repear tech, we'll have capacities that were absolutely beyond
our keen in that technological frame. That's what's going to alter our
development.

It's not that we'll make human slurpee to build a
reaper, or turn our own people into husks. But we will be like gods
compared to what we were if we adopt any major part of repear tech, and
it won't be through our natural evolution, and that's what we give up.

That's
why the writers basically railroad Shepard into the whole 'not giving
up my humanity to win' and 'we do this my way' speeches.

What defines natural evolution, though? Technically, every space-faring race in the game has had their natural evolution disrupted, because the Reapers planned on them finding the mass relays, Citadel, etc. Heck, the moment the first human found some eezo on Mars, they changed the path of the species.

The krogan situation is similar, but still distinct from this. In the krogans' case, they were given everything by the salarians, with the salarians trying to steer the krogan down the path they had in mind (first as cannon fodder vs. the rachni, then as a peaceful client race). The krogan allowed the salarians to control them, then they rebelled, and that's why we got the genophage. True, the krogan were violent before. But they were effectively used as tools by another species, in a way they had very little control over. When they tried to gain control, they got squelched.

With the heretic geth, once again, the Reapers were giving the heretics technology, and simultaneously steering them down the path that the Reapers wanted (cannon fodder vs. everyone). Just as with the krogan, the heretics' flaw was that they allowed another race to have control over how they got the technology, how they used it, etc. Of course, they never rebelled the way the krogan did.

The collector base is (for the sake of this argument) no longer being controlled by the Reapers. The Reapers are not giving us the technology there, nor are they telling us to use it in a certain way. The technology is just there. Would humans have discovered it otherwise? Probably, with time. But the technology at the base is there for the taking now, and that's the important part. Unless it's a trap of some sort (which I think it is), humans/Cerberus would be taking everything at the base, as opposed to the Reapers giving it to us.

If the Reaper tech lets humanity do things it wouldn't be capable of otherwise, OK. But that is not enough to make using it a bad thing, since we can use it for better or for worse. Only if the Reapers are controlling how we use it does a problem arise, since then humans are truly no longer in control of their own evolution.

Personally, I wish Shepard had been able to use a better Paragon option than "blah blah morals blah blah too many people died here". Like, point out how TIM doesn't even blink when accused of creating a Reaper. As Legion says, the base itself has no moral value.

Modifié par luakel, 18 décembre 2010 - 03:47 .

[In Exile]

Inverness Moon wrote...
Defeating the reapers is more important that ensuring we develop along some sort of unique path.

That's exactly the value judgement we need to make. What is our humanity - as it currently is - worth to us?

Edit: I also disagree that you have to choose between developing along your own path or saving the collector base.

This goes into the fan-fiction argument. What matters is what Bioware says we will do with the base. This is the dichotomy they seem to be setting up.

Vaenier wrote...

Did Bioware just fail to realise that you
dont have to use their technology in order to gain an advantage from
it? Legion originally seemed to understand you dont have to use their
technology to beat them. I dont want to use it, I just want to learn how
to break it.

Putting aside issues like letting the genie out of the bottle (no, I don't want to make a biological weapon - we're just experimenting with pathogens to create vacinnes!) it's not just the fact we could learn to build a better ipod or learn how to break their ipods that matter.

The real issue is that we'd be taking their entire worldview. We'd see the universe as something you traverse with Mass Relays and dark energy. Even if it's just data, it's an entire worldivew we'd take up that isn't ours.

Like if our enemy was using bullet proof vests made from the
liquified corpses of your allies. You dont have to adopt them yourself,
you just have to develop ammo to make them ineffective. Or if you find
an enemy code machine. You are not going to use it for yourself, you are
just going to break their code to make it ineffective. Is this idea too
crazy? I feel crazy...

And if you learn how to make the vests in the process? You might not use them, but what about mad scientist Steve? His morals are more loose. 

Let's say you take the code machine and crack the encryption, and it's an entirely new undiscovered algorithm. That fact will change how we think about encryption.

[Vaenier]

In Exile wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...
Defeating the reapers is more important that ensuring we develop along some sort of unique path.

That's exactly the value judgement we need to make. What is our humanity - as it currently is - worth to us?

Edit: I also disagree that you have to choose between developing along your own path or saving the collector base.

This goes into the fan-fiction argument. What matters is what Bioware says we will do with the base. This is the dichotomy they seem to be setting up.

Vaenier wrote...

Did Bioware just fail to realise that you
dont have to use their technology in order to gain an advantage from
it? Legion originally seemed to understand you dont have to use their
technology to beat them. I dont want to use it, I just want to learn how
to break it.

Putting aside issues like letting the genie out of the bottle (no, I don't want to make a biological weapon - we're just experimenting with pathogens to create vacinnes!) it's not just the fact we could learn to build a better ipod or learn how to break their ipods that matter.

The real issue is that we'd be taking their entire worldview. We'd see the universe as something you traverse with Mass Relays and dark energy. Even if it's just data, it's an entire worldivew we'd take up that isn't ours.

And if you learn how to make the vests in the process? You might not use them, but what about mad scientist Steve? His morals are more loose. 

Let's say you take the code machine and crack the encryption, and it's an entirely new undiscovered algorithm. That fact will change how we think about encryption.

There is nothing wrong with fundemental concepts, and the moraly lose people will continue killing each other in their moral loseness. Nothing will have changed. Except Reapers are dead and the universe is one big happy united family.

Does it really matter where inspiration comes from? The next big idea could be created in a 70s scifi show, or it can be gained from a piece of alien technology. Its origin does not make it inheritly bad. Its what you do with it that matters. If you end up replacing Reapers, it is because you wanted to do so and sought a way to acomplish that, not because the technology made you do it. [Cerberus is not part of this argument right now. I dont like them.]

[Inverness Moon]

In Exile wrote...

That's exactly the value judgement we need to make. What is our humanity - as it currently is - worth to us?

I don't see how "our humanity" has anything to do with what I said.

In Exile wrote...

This goes into the fan-fiction argument. What matters is what Bioware says we will do with the base. This is the dichotomy they seem to be setting up.

Fan-fiction has nothing to do with it. I'm disagreeing with your whole assertion that BioWare is going to make us choose or that such a choice is even necessary.

[lovgreno]

luakel wrote...
Personally, I wish Shepard had been able to use a better Paragon option than "blah blah morals blah blah too many people died here". Like, point out how TIM doesn't even blink when accused of creating a Reaper. As Legion says, the base itself has no moral value.

Yeah that line was actualy very cheesy. I would prefer something like this: "Exuse me but what part of dangerous REAPER base do you not understand mister Illusive? On the other hand I don't expect Failberus to know anything about risks so I will just blow it. I'm not gonna clean up your mess again."

[Dean_the_Young]

Sajuro wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...
That is not true. What the geth were clear about was not letting the technology from the base shape how they would develop in the future. That is the advice Legion gives to Shepard if he keeps the base, and it is appropriate.

Which is equivalent to not using the base, since using it to develop or reverse engineer any sort of technology would shape how humans develop their future. It's invariable. Either the base has no useful technology, in which case it won't matter whether we keep it or, or it will only marginally alter the balance of power, in which case it barely matters whether we keep it or not, or it can equalize the incredible gap between us and the reapers, in which case it is impossible for it not to alter our development.

Defeating the reapers is more important that ensuring we develop along some sort of unique path.

Edit: I also disagree that you have to choose between developing along your own path or saving the collector base.

So we can wipe ourselves out as our technology exceeds our cultural advancements, because that worked out so well for the Krogan oh.. wait.

We could wipe ourselves out if our technology did not exceed our cultural advancements.

There is no cultural graduation point at which you are suddenly and objectively 'qualified' to use technology, nor is there any cultural tipping point at which technology becomes suddenly less powerful.

[Reiella]

kylecouch wrote...

These CB debates are rather old honestly...why do we keep debateing over something we know next to nothing about? We don't know if it will help or if it will only shoot us in the foot. Only Bioware knows this and we won't get an answer until ME3...so why does everyone keep trying to push their OPINIONS onto to others and claim it to be "logic" when in reality it can't be logic if we all we know is it makes human slurpee?

The same reason people write fan fiction?