3618 réponses à ce sujet

[Omega4RelayResident]

You know whats funny... I replayed Legion's Loyalty mission over and over... I came to the conclusion that rewritting the Geth is the smart choice... the fool proof choice if everything Legion told me was the truth.

Basically the wording Legion choose pointed to the conclusion that the Geth that he is a part of have 0 animosity towards organics... for the Reaper struggle ahead I see the Geth helping us... literally the words Legion chose pointed to the fact that the Geth are safe allies if he was telling the truth... the was no point in any conversation that made me feel that Legion might be lying or trying to use me and then later betray me in ME3...

I make this assumption based on the fact that I am sure that Legion chooses his words very carefully. As long as he was not lying I think we honestly may be safe. I went through all the different conversational choices possible and all of his responses pointed to the fact that...

A) The Heretic Geth will literally lose their previous perspective and mentality all together... so their experiences and concusions WILL NOT be shared with Legion's Geth... the Virus will literally make it as though the Heretics never existed for his people. So the Heretics will only have the "all sapient beings have a right to self determinate" mentality

Also it seems like the Geth will go into deep space in seclusion away from organic space once the Reaper threat is over... Beyond cooexistance and the drive for survival the Geth seem to care less whether or not organics are a part of their existance once the Reaper threat is over...

The only way that these points that I have concluded would be incorrect is if Legion was lying to us all along. Yes this may in fact be a very strong twist that the writters may sping on us. I dont want to put all my eggs in one basket but I strongly feel that an aliance with the Geth is the right choice unless the writers are making this the plot twist that backfires on us all.

If you dont believe me please replay his Loyalty mission over and over and choose a variety of conversation choices with Legion and pay close attention to his meaning and words. Also in the first conversation make sure to take the conversation option "They are just machines"... for some reason the Renegade statements reveal a lot about Geth intentions as opposed to the Paragon statements that make Legion remind you that Geth morality is not the same as organic morality. Its odd why they did it this way.

Modifié par Omega4RelayResident, 25 septembre 2011 - 12:29 .

[111987]

Doesn't Legion say that all the memories and experiences of the Heretics will become a part of the Geth collective? They won't have the same perspective, but those memories will exist. Of course this could be a good thing, as they worked intimately with Sovereign, a Reaper. On the flip side though, like Legion says, there is no guarantee the Geth won't reach the same decision again, and serve the Reapers.

[Omega4RelayResident]

111987 wrote...

Doesn't Legion say that all the memories and experiences of the Heretics will become a part of the Geth collective? They won't have the same perspective, but those memories will exist. Of course this could be a good thing, as they worked intimately with Sovereign, a Reaper. On the flip side though, like Legion says, there is no guarantee the Geth won't reach the same decision again, and serve the Reapers.

No in the coversation where the "Reattaching your rogue limb" analogy comes up he states that the experiences of the Heretics will in fact be lost... thats why he seems conflicted about the rewrite... the Geth value all experiences as precious to their people... the argument of perspective gained through experience...

Its the second conversation you have with him in front of the first Geth hub you come accross.... replay it and you will see... if you have a save point right before Legion's Loyalty mission

[111987]

Omega4RelayResident wrote...

111987 wrote...

Doesn't Legion say that all the memories and experiences of the Heretics will become a part of the Geth collective? They won't have the same perspective, but those memories will exist. Of course this could be a good thing, as they worked intimately with Sovereign, a Reaper. On the flip side though, like Legion says, there is no guarantee the Geth won't reach the same decision again, and serve the Reapers.

No in the coversation where the "Reattaching your rogue limb" analogy comes up he states that the experiences of the Heretics will in fact be lost... thats why he seems conflicted about the rewrite... the Geth value all experiences as precious to their people... the argument of perspective gained through experience...

Its the second conversation you have with him in front of the first Geth hub you come accross.... replay it and you will see... if you have a save point right before Legion's Loyalty mission

Um, you might wanna re-watch the 'rogue limb' scene. Legion clearly states that their PERSPECTIVE will be lost, not their experiences.

Legion: "Yes. Once they return to us and upload their MEMORIES, we will share their experience of being altered...It is not clear if Geth can be 'traumatized.'

www.youtube.com/watch=Legion's quote about memories and trauma (Paragon)

www.youtube.com/watch=Rogue Limb Analogy (Renegade)

Modifié par 111987, 25 septembre 2011 - 12:44 .

[SandTrout]

I still consider it a possible risk that the Heretics perspective could reemerge, and the practice of using a virus to keep the Geth unified is the AI equivalent of executing/brainwashing political dissenters.

The returned Heretics specifically would not likely reuse virus to turn the Geth to against organics, but a small faction within the Geth Consciousness could, theoretically, choose to introduce a virus in order to persuade the general Consensus toward a destructive path.

In essence, we must consider the possibility of setting a precedent within Geth 'culture' that makes the use of such viruses acceptable.

Modifié par SandTrout, 25 septembre 2011 - 12:58 .

[Omega4RelayResident]

111987 wrote...

Omega4RelayResident wrote...

111987 wrote...

Doesn't Legion say that all the memories and experiences of the Heretics will become a part of the Geth collective? They won't have the same perspective, but those memories will exist. Of course this could be a good thing, as they worked intimately with Sovereign, a Reaper. On the flip side though, like Legion says, there is no guarantee the Geth won't reach the same decision again, and serve the Reapers.

No in the coversation where the "Reattaching your rogue limb" analogy comes up he states that the experiences of the Heretics will in fact be lost... thats why he seems conflicted about the rewrite... the Geth value all experiences as precious to their people... the argument of perspective gained through experience...

Its the second conversation you have with him in front of the first Geth hub you come accross.... replay it and you will see... if you have a save point right before Legion's Loyalty mission

Um, you might wanna re-watch the 'rogue limb' scene. Legion clearly states that their PERSPECTIVE will be lost, not their experiences.

Legion: "Yes. Once they return to us and upload their MEMORIES, we will share their experience of being altered...It is not clear if Geth can be 'traumatized.'

www.youtube.com/watch=Legion's quote about memories and trauma (Paragon)

www.youtube.com/watch=Rogue Limb Analogy (Renegade)

Yes the memories are there... but I am sure that Legion's Geth have achieved assumptions of Heretic perspective because the schizm was over the Reapers. Specifically over Nazara... the assumptions of perspective would align with the Heretic actual memories... but the Perspective is forever lost. The "Mathematical Error" is corrected and therefore the perspective never existed as far Legion's Geth are concerned. The memories exist but the decision to follow Sovereign never existed. Its like as if you played through ME2 and realized you did something wrong in ME1... not action wise but decision wise... such as who should be the human Councilor... Anderson or Udina. You go back and change that decision or keep it the same and upload that into ME2... your memories exist... but the decision only happened one way by the interpretation of your game.

I simply see it as that the Geth will stick to their decision because the Heretic perspective is lost, but the memories remain and now the Geth are "metagaming" their own decisions about the Reapers. They know of the outcomes but stick to their guns.


So you are concerned with the memories comming back to bit you on your ass leater on. I understand that.

Legion states: "There is a non zero probability of error" when it comes to the rewritting plan... however how much do you want to bet that the Legion betrayal in ME3 would be centered around Shepard's choices involving the Quarians, Overlord, and the CB. Legion's Geth would see Shepard using the CB and threfore come to the conclusion that if Organics are using the tech of the "Old Machines" so could they. If you destroy the CB it would strengthen the resolve of the Geth to not use the Reapers tech.

I still think that there is enough evidence that IF Legion is being honest the Geth would be an ally. If he is lying then this whole situation was in fact a setup.

Modifié par Omega4RelayResident, 25 septembre 2011 - 01:58 .

[Grim Intent]

Am I the only one with a sane opinion on the collector base? Correct me if I'm wrong, but throughout the games every time someone has come across Reaper Technology and tried to study it/harness it haven't they all become indoctrinated and either crazy or a plain husk all together? There are several examples of this including but not limited to Amanda Kensen in the ME2 DLC and of course let's not forget Saren's tragic Indoctrination at the hands of Sovereign in ME1. Keeping the base would most likely be a poor decision based on what we already know of Reaper Technology, regardless of your Paragon or Renegade stance. That is, if you truly are worried about the fate of humanity and the known galaxy in Mass Effect. Just saying...

[Omega4RelayResident]

Grim Intent wrote...

Am I the only one with a sane opinion on the collector base? Correct me if I'm wrong, but throughout the games every time someone has come across Reaper Technology and tried to study it/harness it haven't they all become indoctrinated and either crazy or a plain husk all together? There are several examples of this including but not limited to Amanda Kensen in the ME2 DLC and of course let's not forget Saren's tragic Indoctrination at the hands of Sovereign in ME1. Keeping the base would most likely be a poor decision based on what we already know of Reaper Technology, regardless of your Paragon or Renegade stance. That is, if you truly are worried about the fate of humanity and the known galaxy in Mass Effect. Just saying...

I agree with you about the CB.

[Big I]

Grim Intent wrote...

Am I the only one with a sane opinion on the collector base? Correct me if I'm wrong, but throughout the games every time someone has come across Reaper Technology and tried to study it/harness it haven't they all become indoctrinated and either crazy or a plain husk all together?

I agree that keeping the base is a bad idea, but the relays, the Citadel, the Thanix cannon and EDI are all based on Reaper technology, it's not all bad.

[Labrev]

LOL @ people who choose ******-soaked hair for their malesheps. It looks so bad.

[BlueMagitek]

Grim Intent wrote...

Am I the only one with a sane opinion on the collector base? Correct me if I'm wrong, but throughout the games every time someone has come across Reaper Technology and tried to study it/harness it haven't they all become indoctrinated and either crazy or a plain husk all together? There are several examples of this including but not limited to Amanda Kensen in the ME2 DLC and of course let's not forget Saren's tragic Indoctrination at the hands of Sovereign in ME1. Keeping the base would most likely be a poor decision based on what we already know of Reaper Technology, regardless of your Paragon or Renegade stance. That is, if you truly are worried about the fate of humanity and the known galaxy in Mass Effect. Just saying...

Except for EDI.

And the Thanix Cannon.

And the Reaper IFF.

And the Mass Relays.

You shouldn't go around tossing out advantages given to us against a race of sentient ships that are far, far better outfitted than we are.  Throwing away something because it "might" be a threat is a poor decision.  And even if we don't get super Reaper tech or an insight to them (and given that the CB, you know, makes Reapers, it's unlikely we'll get nothing), we get oodles of Collector Tech and whatever information they might have possessed (and they do have better stuff than we do; they're responsible for Grunt, after all). 

[Grim Intent]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Grim Intent wrote...

Am I the only one with a sane opinion on the collector base? Correct me if I'm wrong, but throughout the games every time someone has come across Reaper Technology and tried to study it/harness it haven't they all become indoctrinated and either crazy or a plain husk all together? There are several examples of this including but not limited to Amanda Kensen in the ME2 DLC and of course let's not forget Saren's tragic Indoctrination at the hands of Sovereign in ME1. Keeping the base would most likely be a poor decision based on what we already know of Reaper Technology, regardless of your Paragon or Renegade stance. That is, if you truly are worried about the fate of humanity and the known galaxy in Mass Effect. Just saying...

Except for EDI.

And the Thanix Cannon.

And the Reaper IFF.

And the Mass Relays.

You shouldn't go around tossing out advantages given to us against a race of sentient ships that are far, far better outfitted than we are.  Throwing away something because it "might" be a threat is a poor decision.  And even if we don't get super Reaper tech or an insight to them (and given that the CB, you know, makes Reapers, it's unlikely we'll get nothing), we get oodles of Collector Tech and whatever information they might have possessed (and they do have better stuff than we do; they're responsible for Grunt, after all). 

Yes, but most of those things are a two way street. The Mass Relays are helpful yes, but so far haven't been able to be fully replicated not to mention they will probably be the means for how the reapers end up invading. The Reaper IFF was clearly not without it's faults considering it gave your ship a near fatal virus and If not for EDI would've been a complete disaster not to mention it got your ENTIRE crew abducted. I don't know where you got your info regarding EDI being based on reaper technology in the game so I don't know what to say on that. As for the Thanix Cannon, it uses some advanced means of energy manipulation that was reverse engineered from sovereign tech salvaged by the turians, but that is about the only aspect of the cannons that are based on reaper tech. The rest is good old fashioned Turian ingenuity. I agree that keeping the Collector base could yield some beneficial results, but the risk is too great in my opinion and it's not like you're keeping the base for yourself anyhow. You'd be surrendering it to TIM who's motives are clearly questionable at best..

[BlueMagitek]

Mass Relays, for all their faults, allowed us to expand and explore quickly. As we don't have a Warp or a God Emperor to guide us through one, they're about the best thing we've got when it comes to moving quickly. Yes, the Reapers can use them too (as they've built them and all), but there's nothing inherently wrong with them.

The Reaper IFF has faults, but it didn't indoctrinate anyone or turn them into husks. Yes, there was a danger to it, but it allowed the party to take on the Collectors and make it through the Omega relay without being torn to pieces.

EDI is based on Reaper Tech, she tells you as much in ME2 if you talk to her.

The Thanix Cannon is in the same boat as EDI; based on Reaper Tech.

Giving it to TIM is a bad idea? I don't know, I think I'd rather have someone with questionable motives to have a hoard of advanced technology and have him help me now against the race of sentient starships who want to (and have previously) commit mass genocide. Cerberus can be dealt with later if need arises.

[Grim Intent]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Mass Relays, for all their faults, allowed us to expand and explore quickly. As we don't have a Warp or a God Emperor to guide us through one, they're about the best thing we've got when it comes to moving quickly. Yes, the Reapers can use them too (as they've built them and all), but there's nothing inherently wrong with them.

The Reaper IFF has faults, but it didn't indoctrinate anyone or turn them into husks. Yes, there was a danger to it, but it allowed the party to take on the Collectors and make it through the Omega relay without being torn to pieces.

EDI is based on Reaper Tech, she tells you as much in ME2 if you talk to her.

The Thanix Cannon is in the same boat as EDI; based on Reaper Tech.

Giving it to TIM is a bad idea? I don't know, I think I'd rather have someone with questionable motives to have a hoard of advanced technology and have him help me now against the race of sentient starships who want to (and have previously) commit mass genocide. Cerberus can be dealt with later if need arises.

Okay so check it out, here's how I'm going to end this debate in my favor. Cerberus is a confirmed enemy in ME3, regardless of your decisions or your Paragon/Renegade alignment. So, you lose.

Modifié par Grim Intent, 25 septembre 2011 - 03:24 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Grim Intent wrote...

Am I the only one with a sane opinion on the collector base?

No. You aren't even one.

[BlueMagitek]

Someone seems a bit salty. The entire topic is dedicated to finding the correct moral decision revolving the Collector Base. Just chill out.

Now, we don't know why Cerberus is an enemy. We don't know where they get their legions of soldiers (as Cerberus has no where near legions of troops in ME 2), we've no ideas of their motives or their quarrel with Shepard.

Given all of TIM's characterization and his actions in outside material that I've heard about, he's not doing it to help the Reapers, so dismissing keeping the Collector Base is still rather presumptuous of you.

[Grim Intent]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Someone seems a bit salty. The entire topic is dedicated to finding the correct moral decision revolving the Collector Base. Just chill out.

Now, we don't know why Cerberus is an enemy. We don't know where they get their legions of soldiers (as Cerberus has no where near legions of troops in ME 2), we've no ideas of their motives or their quarrel with Shepard.

Given all of TIM's characterization and his actions in outside material that I've heard about, he's not doing it to help the Reapers, so dismissing keeping the Collector Base is still rather presumptuous of you.

I don't even know why there are 100 plus pages of debate on this seemingly obvious topic. According to Bioware, the Good (or correct, if you view it as such) moral choice is destroying the base since it nets you a ton of Paragon points, and the Renegade or bad moral choice it to keep it as it gives you a similar amount of renegade points. What is there to debate, really? If you haven't already figured it out, Cerberus isn't exactly an organization of good morals based on their track record so it makes sense that the Illusive Man was using you to further his own agenda, as many morally unjust people do. Just because the Illusive Man doesn't work for the Reapers doesn't make him a good person, and even that remains to be seen. We don't know whether or not Cerberus are working for the Reapers, but we do know they are the enemy so I can't justify giving advanced technology to someone with a shady past and VERY questionable motives regardless of the benefits that could be attained. Hence, surrendering the base being considered a Renegade action. I'm just stating facts based on what I know. 

[Dave of Canada]

Grim Intent wrote...

I don't even know why there are 100 plus pages of debate on this seemingly obvious topic. According to Bioware, the Good (or correct, if you view it as such) moral choice is destroying the base since it nets you a ton of Paragon points, and the Renegade or bad moral choice it to keep it as it gives you a similar amount of renegade points. What is there to debate, really?

Morals =/= Logic, they rarely meet.

[Grim Intent]

wiggles89 wrote...

We don't know whether or not Cerberus are working for the Reapers, but we do know they are the enemy so I can't justify giving advanced technology to someone with a shady past and VERY questionable motives regardless of the benefits that could be attained

Are you familiar with the term "metagaming"?

I'm just stating facts based on what I know.

lol

You have got to be kidding me... Meta Gaming? You think this is an example of Meta Gaming??
Yeah, I give up. Apparently stating the obvious and backing it up with facts and sound logic in this Forum is blasphemy...
Fantastic job coming to that conclusion, wiggles89. Your view on the topic is almost as absurd as your name.

[Grim Intent]

wiggles89 wrote...

You're hilarious. Seriously, dude, don't ever change; you're perfect just the way you are.

Oh sarcasm! How cute! You must be like, so intelligent and your opinion clearly just gained 10 superiority points.
Let me guess, you couldn't think of an intelligent way to debate so you had to resort to sarcasm to cover up your stupidity.
Yay wiggles89!
Oh, and your opinion on the topic must be on a level that transcends explanation as well, am I right?

And on that note...
Good Night Mass Effect 3 General Discussion Forum.

[SandTrout]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Morals =/= Logic, they rarely meet.

Only if you have illogical moral code. If your moral code is illogical, then I would recommend reevaluating your moral code.

I use logic extensively to determine morality by using morality as the premise, rather than the conclusion.

For example:

Moral Premise: Life should be preserved.
Situational premise: By killing this one person, I can reasonably expect to save 10 lives.

Conclusion: Killing said one person is moral.

Granted, this is a very simplified version of my morality, but it is primarily to illustrate the how flawed the arguement that 'morality is inherently illogical' is.

[SandTrout]

Grim Intent wrote...

I don't even know why there are 100 plus pages of debate on this seemingly obvious topic. According to Bioware, the Good (or correct, if you view it as such) moral choice is destroying the base since it nets you a ton of Paragon points, and the Renegade or bad moral choice it to keep it as it gives you a similar amount of renegade points.

Incorrect. Shepard's 'allignment' is always 'good' because he is always working to save the galaxy at great personal risk. Paragon and Renegade are not good and evil, they are idealistic and cynical. I forget specifically who said this, but it was from BioWare.

What is there to debate, really? If you haven't already figured it out, Cerberus isn't exactly an organization of good morals based on their track record so it makes sense that the Illusive Man was using you to further his own agenda, as many morally unjust people do. Just because the Illusive Man doesn't work for the Reapers doesn't make him a good person, and even that remains to be seen.

Weather or not TIM is a good person is irrelevant. A greedy, selfish person can still be a tool toward a moral end, or at least toward mitigating a greater evil. Also, Cerberus is not portrayed as an overtly morally 'black' organization. They are actually fall more under Well Intentioned Extremist.

We don't know whether or not Cerberus are working for the Reapers, but we do know they are the enemy so I can't justify giving advanced technology to someone with a shady past and VERY questionable motives regardless of the benefits that could be attained. Hence, surrendering the base being considered a Renegade action. I'm just stating facts based on what I know.

 At the time of the decision, no one knew that Cerberus was going to turn against us, and they had spent the entirety of ME2 aiding you against them. The morality of a decision cannot be decided by information that wasn't available at the time that the decision was made. You can't tell Ted Bundy's mother that she was immoral for not aborting him because he was responsible for a string of murders.