Aller au contenu

Photo

Renegades and Paragons should have equal consequences.

Débuté par SarunasAndSoOn , déc. 19 2011 05:06

  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
1127 réponses à ce sujet

#251
Killjoy Cutter
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 05:51

Killjoy Cutter
  • Members
  • 6 005 messages

gosimmons wrote...

I agree, I hope ME3 is less inclined to making us play one way or the other.


Agreed... being railroaded down one "personality path" because the only way to resolve some situations later is to have enough "nice" or "bastard" points... not so good.

#252
Lotion Soronarr
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 05:54

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A bit earlier people were rebutting my claim that every single instance of studying reaper tech ended wiht a decisive advantage with "sure, it worked beofre - which only makes it more likely to fail now!"


And never mind the lost team and near-disaster at the derelict Reaper... or fiasco of the research team studying Object Rho... or the loss of an entire mining colony when they uncovered a Reaper artifact (ME2 N7 mission)... or, well, we get the idea. 

It's something of a very risky mixed bag, this "Reaper artifact" thing.


And there's always the track record of their other projects... Overlord... Teltin... creepers, husks, and Rachni...


And here we go again..

"10 out of 10 times we did X it resulted in Y.
Therefore, the 11th time is highly likely not to!"

Is this what you call logic?
EVERY. SINGLE. TIME we studied repaer tech we ended with a VITAL advantage.

But you can't possibly acknowledge that, can you?
Does not compute for you?

No, you have to unsecesfully attempt to somehow turn the facts around.

The Derelict reaper is not an issue. It too yielded a vital advantage without which the Collectors could not be defeated.

Confirmation bias in effect folks. Grab your pencils and take notes!

#253
Guest_Luc0s_*
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 05:55

Guest_Luc0s_*
  • Guests
[quote]BellaStrega wrote...

Speaking of logic, you just made an "appeal to authority." In this case, you're saying that any true doctor, scientist, or soldier would tell you the same. And this is after I already referred to an article on research that involves scientists saying the opposite - that emotions are inherent to decision making, and that people who lack emotions find it very difficult to make decisions.

Your appeal to authority is incorrect because you're not citing anyone, you're simply making a vague handwavey comment that everyone in those particular professions who is competent at their job would agree with you. This is an unsupportable claim. Also, some of those invoked aren't even specialists in a field that could explain the possible roles that emotions take in decision making. Soldiers aren't trained in neuroscience, and neither are most doctors or scientists. And by qualifying those who agree with you as "good" you make a backhanded appeal to your own authority, by preemptively qualifying those who disagree with you as incompetent or "bad" doctors, scientists, and soldiers.
[/quote]

No sorry, no appeal to authority here. When I said that any doctor, soldier or scientist would say the same, I wasn't appealing to their "authority". I was just using them as an example because they have to make decisions based on rational thought and logic on a daily basis.

But sure, if it makes you feel better, forget about my last line in my previous comment. Forget about my "appeal to authority". Just forget I ever said it.




[quote]BellaStrega wrote...

This makes no sense - my computer does not have a will of its own. It operates on instructions that were written by human beings to tell it what to do when any given thing happens. Its decisions are already mapped out for it by the programs that humans wrote that run on it. Human brains are not computers in the same sense as my desktop computer, and were most assuredly not coded by other humans. Rather, it's a different kind of system that is capable of learning on its own without the need for externally applied software.
[/quote]

Sure, computers aren't smart enough to learn on their own, NOT YET anyway. But we're working on it. Some computer-scientists already managed to build an A.I. that is capable of learning. It's still basic stuff though. The A.I. that is capable of defeating chess professionals in a game of chess by actively learning from their opponent comes to mind.

Speaking about chess, this is a good example of making rational decisions based on logic, not on emotions.

When you play chess, I bet you make your moves based on your rational thought. You make a move based on what you think is logical. I bet you don't move your chess pieces based on emotion, else you'd be a horrible chess player.

I used to be a chess player. I wasn't a real pro, though I did almost win a match against the European chess champion (I lost, but I was pretty darn close!). When I was still a chess n00b, I based my decisions on fear. I was always afraid of getting "slaughtered", so I always played really cautious. I can tell you, that is not a good way to play chess. I let my emotions (fear) rule over my logic and thus I made horrible decisions.

When I learned to make decisions based on pure rational thought, I was able to win chess matches over and over again.

Same with Starcraft II by the way. Only recently I managed to climb up from the bronze league into the diamond league. The only reason I managed to climb up from the bronze league into the diamond league is because I managed to put aside my emotions such as fear, anger and hatred (all those emotions are experienced during a Starcraft II match, and I learned to put aside all 3 of them).

How did I manage to put aside my emotions? Not by trying to put them away. That's impossible. No, I used an antient Budddhist meditation technique. I learned to acknowledge my emotions and observe them from a distance. I'm able to analyze my own emotions, acknowledge them for what they are and then I can place them whever I want. I have full control over them. So I can put them aside so they won't interfere with my decision-making during my Starcraft II matches.



I guess real combat in real-life won't be any different than my Starcraft II matches. To be a succesful commander, you need to be able to gain control over your emotions and not let them screw up your capability of rational decision-making.



[quote]BellaStrega wrote...
[quote]
Seriously, this is the biggest bull I've ever heard. Go back to school and learn some basic 101 biology and basic 101 psychology. While you're at it, see if you can get a course in basic 101 computer science too.
[/quote]

Resorting to insults now? Isn't that a bit emotional and thus illogical by your definitions?
[/quote]

Yes, you're right. I'm sorry.

As you can see, I'm also just a human being with emotions. I never said I was anything else. I'm not the zen-master which has full 100% control over his emotions, though I try my best to master my emotions and gain full control over them.


[quote]BellaStrega wrote...

I've taken 101 biology and 101 computer science, and I assure you that this combination of study taught me that human brains and computers aren't interchangeable. Perhaps you should consider remedial courses?
[/quote]

Well, I guess one of us studied at a crappy university, because I also studied basic biology and I'm studying advanced computer-science next to my game-design degree right now as we speak. And the way I understand a computer, I works pretty much like a brain, but at a MUCH more basic level.

But once our technology improves, we'll be capable of setting up more advanced digital neural networks. A neural network with the same capacity as a brain would be the solution. When we're capable of doing that, we'd be capable of creating true A.I.'s that are smarter than humans.

Of course, there are those 10 complications/problems that you probably are familiar with if you indeed studied computer science. So I bet it will take a few decades before we're capable fo creating true artificial intelligence. But I do believe it's possible in the long run.


[quote]BellaStrega wrote...

As for psychology, I read about it nearly every day, and while I am not completely up to date on the topic, I can generally track down most information I need, if I don't already have it. That's how I found the research that says that lack of emotions makes decision making difficult, but I see perhaps that actual science may not be welcome in this discussion.
[/quote]

Gettig cocky now aren't we?

I'm familiar with the research that you quoted. It's from the 1770's, when humans hardly had any real knowledge about how the brain works. Though Hume might be correct, it still doesn't change the practical facts of how humans justify their decisions.

When you try to put aside your feelings (whether or not you're capable of doing so, is irrelavent), you come to different conclusions than when you don't try to put aside your feelings.

When humans make decisions, their brain is in battle. Their primitive part of the brain (our emotions and basic instincts) battles with the modern part of the brain (our human part, the part that allows us to use logic and rationality). 

When we try to make rational decisions, we try to make decisions REGARDLESS of our emotions. The fact that the actual-decision making does take place in the part of the brain that regulates emotions, as well as in the part that regulates our rational thinking, is curious indeed, but it doesn't change the facts that someone who tries to put aside his emotions is more capable of making logical decisions than someone who lets his emotions rule him.

A good example:

Imagine your mother had an accident. Now she's in coma. She will never wake up again and her body is kept alive by a machine, but her brain is pretty much dead already.

Now, there are 2 options:

1. Pull the plug.
2. Keep her body alife by the machines for god knows how long.


Now, what would be the logical thing to do, and what would be the emotional thing to do?

I can imagine that someone who can't get over the fact that his/her mother is practically dead, wouldn't want to pull the plug. He/she would want to keep the body alife, living in an illusion that by keeping the body alife, he/she is keeping the mother alife. That's not very logical is it? It's a decision ruled by emotion, but not logical. We as outsides, who don't have any emotional connections with this woman, might want to argue that it's better to pull the plug. Keeping her body alife is useless. Pulling the plug is the most logical decision to make. Don't you agree? You'd agree if you didn't let your emotions interfere. But the son/daughter of this woman in coma will not agree. He/she will disagree because his/her thoughts are ruled by emotions, not rational thinking.


PS: Back on-topic now? Because this is getting extremely off-topic.

[/quote]

Modifié par Luc0s, 20 décembre 2011 - 06:12 .

#254
Lotion Soronarr
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 05:56

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

Someone With Mass wrote...

Then again, compared to the Reapers, all dangers are negligible.

Cerberus can however be a threat to Shepard and the work that he/she is trying to do in order to counterattack the Reapers, since their goals are clearly not aligned with each other. That could be a reason enough for some to not give them potential weapons.


They arne't? Didn't look that way during the suicide mission.

#255
Someone With Mass
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 05:56

Someone With Mass
  • Members
  • 38 560 messages
I think they should do something more diverse and have certain other things than just the Renegade/Paragon score get a reasonable outcome.

If you save/kill a certain person or retrieve a certain item, that can help you resolve a future issue without the help of the P/R score.

Almost like in Tali's trial, where you can rally the crowd if you saved both Kal'Reegar and Veetor.

Or make the neutral response become worth a damn without shooting yourself in the foot.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 20 décembre 2011 - 06:02 .

#256
Someone With Mass
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 05:58

Someone With Mass
  • Members
  • 38 560 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
They arne't? Didn't look that way during the suicide mission.


Look a little further than that.

Shepard is planning to save the galaxy. TIM is planning to control it.

#257
Alamar2078
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 05:58

Alamar2078
  • Members
  • 2 618 messages
When I first saw the thread my reactions were:

-- Oh no not this thread again ...
-- Is there anything unique to say that wasn't said before??

As for the topic itself a "pure" Paragon && a "pure" Renegade sbould both have their ups & downs. I don't think both sides necessarily have to be exactly equal. As long as the scales don't radically tip to one side or the other I'll be happy enough.

A Renegade may want most of the galaxy to burn except Earth. Those sorts of Renegades may end up with an ending mostly to their liking. A Paragon may want everyone to live without having to compromise any principles. They may get an ending mostly to their liking.

While these endings are radically different as long as both types of "characters" get similar levels of what they want I believe the endings are plenty equal enough.

The problem with a game like this is that there are so many possible character types it certainly isn't going to be easy to give every possible character the exact endings they want. Everyone will have to compromise.

Finally there are different types of prices to pay.  A Renegade that wants a Human-only galaxy may mostly get that but have to sacrifice Earth to insure that.  A Paragon may have a mostly smurfy ending on a Galactic scale but may have to sacrifice their LI / many friends "for the greater good".  When we have different types of prices [tactical vs. emotional] it's really hard to say who got more of what they wanted because these things are hard to quantify.

Modifié par Alamar2078, 20 décembre 2011 - 06:01 .

#258
Dean_the_Young
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:04

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 676 messages
[quote]Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

Oh really? Prior patterns which show that victory at the end of ME2 is no more difficult to attain for a predominantly renegade important than it is for a paragon one?[/quote]If you ignore the galactic setting, spectre status, the vanilla loyalty mission in which Renegade loses a squadmate's loyalty and a squadmate, and various other galactic settings of not.

So, sure. If you ignore the worldbuilding, it's all the same. If you ignore the worldbuilding, there's no context in the first place and we can only look at individual cases rather than patterns.

[quote]
Patterns that show that show a paragon path leading to failure of a loyalty mission, relying on the dubious persuation system in the end?[/quote]When the dubious persuasion system is a key element, a Paragon exemption for the Paragon option of 'screw loyalty' is not a failure of Paragonism. It's the vindication of it. At worst, it says half-hearted Paragons fail... but pure paragons still succede.

Unlike, say, the Tali loyalty mission in which the Renegade gets no exemption whatsoever for a non-persuasion Renegade selection.

Also unlike the Tali loyalty mission, unloyal Zaeed loses no signficant utility, and has no significant world-building consequence afterwards despite one of the largest PMC's in the galaxy undergoing a decapitation strike.

[quote]
Patterns that show a major advantage in favor of renegade players on another loyalty mission?

That other loyalty mission being Samara's. You can literally not know anything about Morinth's interests and successfully convince her to take you to her place if you're Intimidation skills are high. There is an Intimidate line preceding every response to make yourself look good. No Charm. And when I've played, Paragon careers tend to need to do three things at the club to catch her eye, where Renegades have done it in just two.[/quote]You can persuade Morinth to be interested if your Paragon skills are high as well. You also have the same number of attention-gathering events.

The Morinth investigation is a place where the Paragon and Renegade successes are equal. The seduction of Morinth isn't weighted one way or the other.

You don't even need Paragon or Renegade persuasions at all to corner Morinth, so it can't even be used as a mutual exclusive context. The only mutually exclusive is that choosing Morinth herself is Renegade... though what was supposed to be a Renegade teammate was farce.


[quote]

Galactic extinction? Vigil's data file regained control of the Citadel.[/quote]But only temporarily. It's only a matter of time until Sovereign regains control.

[quote]
Revisit ME: Genesis. At the point of the DA decision, no mention is made of the possibility that Sovereign will regain control of the Citadel. It was never a concern.[/quote]Genesis also made no mention of the Geth. Or Feros. And most of the other parts of the backstory and lore around the major choices.


[quote]
You are mistaken. If it were mid-low I'd have gotten it on speed-runs I've been doing lately. One of which had me taking Paragon options 75% of the time, still not enough to unlock Charm at the end of the mission. Only other disputes I couldn't settle w/ pursuade were the aforementioned - Vasir, Kelham, Catfight...[/quote]That's not how the mechanic works. It's the points available as you open areas, not the percentage of times you take the Paragon options.

The percentage requirement raises, but it's a mid-low compared to the other persuades. If you put it off towards the endgame, however, all persuasion are out of the leage.


[quote]
Nope. The only objective of loyalty-missions is to secure the loyalty of a squadmate for the O4-mission.[/quote]Never says that anywhere in the game. Arbitrary definition.

[quote]
I stopped believing the "paragons always win" myth with this mission. If it were true, one would've been able to save the workers and then catch Vido. I figured as much when I first played and took the paragon path the first time. So much for that.[/quote]You also apparently began denying trends when you found what you felt the first non-uniformity.

[quote]
What were you realistically expecting as an outcome? At best, it cripples them for a short time before they replace their leader. [/quote]Since the Blue Suns are notorious in the in-fighting and backstabbing, it could also easily have lead to a sustained lack of consolidation. Or they could have introduced a plot thread of someone else (Zaeed, Cerberus, whoever) moving in if Vido died.

That they don't do anything with it is a weakness of the writing... and a lack of difference of the Paragon and Renegade outcomes. Distinction is good.


[quote]Otherwise, Zaeed is another Grunt. And depending on the mission, that 1 point difference can mean the life or death of a squadmate, or maybe more.[/quote]Unless you deliberatly fail or don't do a number of missions, not really. Given that he's not a specialist in any situation, the only circumstance in which that point comes into play is... if you didn't do other loyalty missions. Zaeed always brings up the average to the survivability levels.


[quote]

I should rephrase: not all decisions have equally large consequences/outcomes to them.[/quote]Which no one was claiming.



[quote]
Zaeed goes on an excursion of his own to hunt down Vido again, with a squad. His squad all dies on the mission as the objective is completed. So, so much for the four (count 'em, it was four) refinery workers saved on Zorya, seeing as likely the same number of people died anyway in the ensuing mission to do the same thing. And who knows how many would die later as a result of Vido getting away, the dude shot a bunch of refinery workers himself that we saw back on Zorya. Yeah, I'm chalking up "L" here for the paragon path.
*end spoilers*

[/quote]A refinery, the workers we didn't see, and no given worse actions by Vido compared to normal... is called a loss compared to Zaeed losing a couple rent-a-guns?


Your perception is off.

[quote]

You will excuse me for not going down this path. A certain Lotion left a bad taste in my mouth.
[/quote]So making **** up through exageration is better?

#259
AlexXIV
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:13

AlexXIV
  • Members
  • 10 670 messages
Actually the Tali LM disappointed me a bit. Originally my Shep would tell the triad what really happened on the Alarei. Because my Paragon never lied, nor saw the need to. It's I think the first and only time my Shep lied, or at least obscured the truth, which is pretty close. I went back to a prior save game because I couldn't take Tali being mad at me ... I know, I know ... weak ...

Point is I think the Paragon choice should have been to tell the truth. And I am also disappointed that Tali did not understand that telling the truth is the right call. Even if it hurts. Her father broke all laws and safety protocols. It was his fault and his responsibility and he should have lived up to it. Even dead.

Sometimes I think Bioware got the renegade/paragon thing wrong. I guess because there isn't really a clear line what paragon and renegade means. I would assume that paragons are lawful, and renegades bend/break laws when they see fit. But sometimes Bioware makes the 'play nice' choice the paragon choice even if it means breaking rules.

#260
Guest_Luc0s_*
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:14

Guest_Luc0s_*
  • Guests

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
They arne't? Didn't look that way during the suicide mission.


Look a little further than that.

Shepard is planning to save the galaxy. TIM is planning to control it.


Look even further than that.

There is no galaxy for TIM to control if the reapers win.


So before TIM can even think about controlling the galaxy, he first needs to actually save it. Hey, doesn't that sound familiar? Yes it does! Shepard also wants to save the galaxy! OH MY, ISN'T THAT A COINCIDENCE?


So, to fix your comment:

Someone With Mass wrote...

Shepard is planning to save the galaxy. TIM is also planning to save the galaxy, only to control it afterwards.


There, fix'd.

Modifié par Luc0s, 20 décembre 2011 - 06:18 .

#261
Someone With Mass
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:20

Someone With Mass
  • Members
  • 38 560 messages
That depends.

#262
The Interloper
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:23

The Interloper
  • Members
  • 807 messages
I agree with the OP. For instance, being a paragon makes you be a jerk to mordin. We need more things like that.

#263
Guest_Luc0s_*
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:28

Guest_Luc0s_*
  • Guests

The Interloper wrote...

I agree with the OP. For instance, being a paragon makes you be a jerk to mordin. We need more things like that.


Where does paragon make you a jerk to Mordin? Can't remember that.

#264
Medhia Nox
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:28

Medhia Nox
  • Members
  • 5 066 messages
Did studying the Reaper tech in Arrival end in success? I don't recall - can someone remind me?

#265
Someone With Mass
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:29

Someone With Mass
  • Members
  • 38 560 messages

Luc0s wrote...

Where does paragon make you a jerk to Mordin? Can't remember that.


You're pretty much accusing him of being a senseless mass murderer.

#266
Medhia Nox
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:30

Medhia Nox
  • Members
  • 5 066 messages
Because he was being a senseless mass murderer.

I'd say he was being short sighted and careless - but for a Salarian, I imagine being short sighted is about as bad as you can get.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 20 décembre 2011 - 06:30 .

#267
AlexXIV
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:32

AlexXIV
  • Members
  • 10 670 messages

Luc0s wrote...

The Interloper wrote...

I agree with the OP. For instance, being a paragon makes you be a jerk to mordin. We need more things like that.


Where does paragon make you a jerk to Mordin? Can't remember that.

Paragon accuse him making the wrong call on the genophage in a rather rude tone. I picked neutral or renegade options in these talks mostly. Because the genophage was not the wrong call and neither altering it later when the Krogans adapted. The wrong call was to make Krogans strong to begin with so they could wipe out most of the Rachni. This is what started the trouble with Krogans being too fertile for such an advanced and warlike race.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 20 décembre 2011 - 06:33 .

#268
Killjoy Cutter
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:33

Killjoy Cutter
  • Members
  • 6 005 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A bit earlier people were rebutting my claim that every single instance of studying reaper tech ended wiht a decisive advantage with "sure, it worked beofre - which only makes it more likely to fail now!"


And never mind the lost team and near-disaster at the derelict Reaper... or fiasco of the research team studying Object Rho... or the loss of an entire mining colony when they uncovered a Reaper artifact (ME2 N7 mission)... or, well, we get the idea. 

It's something of a very risky mixed bag, this "Reaper artifact" thing.


And there's always the track record of their other projects... Overlord... Teltin... creepers, husks, and Rachni...


And here we go again..

"10 out of 10 times we did X it resulted in Y.
Therefore, the 11th time is highly likely not to!"

Is this what you call logic?
EVERY. SINGLE. TIME we studied repaer tech we ended with a VITAL advantage.

But you can't possibly acknowledge that, can you?
Does not compute for you?

No, you have to unsecesfully attempt to somehow turn the facts around.

The Derelict reaper is not an issue. It too yielded a vital advantage without which the Collectors could not be defeated.

Confirmation bias in effect folks. Grab your pencils and take notes!


The only one claiming that 10 out of 10 crap is you.  There are three immediate examples of studying or discovering Reaper objects turning into partial or complete disasters.  1) The derelict reaper research team was all indoctrinated, and husked or killed.  Only Shep's intervention made that anything but a complete disaster.  2)
The Object Rho research team was all indoctrinated, and actively tried to stop Shep from delaying the Reapers. 3) The mining colony was indoctrinated and lost (ME2 N7 mission). 

It would be nice to know if there were any instances of indoctrination or other issues arrising from the study of the debris from Sovereign -- I won't make any claims there, since we don't have the required information. 

And as noted, there's always Cerberus' record of repeat disasterous failure on other projects.  As already listed:  Teltin, Overlord, and every research project you come across in ME1...

#269
Killjoy Cutter
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:34

Killjoy Cutter
  • Members
  • 6 005 messages

Medhia Nox wrote...

Because he was being a senseless mass murderer.

I'd say he was being short sighted and careless - but for a Salarian, I imagine being short sighted is about as bad as you can get.


Mordin is a mass-murderer? 

Damnit, people, does the genophage actually kill anyone or not?

#270
Medhia Nox
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:38

Medhia Nox
  • Members
  • 5 066 messages
@Killjoy Cutter: I actually state what my real stance would be in the next line.

It says that there are MANY stillbirths - a stillbirth is the death of a fetus - it is not "preventative".  Looking up information on stillbirths - I find it horrific that the Salarians are so cavalier about their choice. 

Though I absolutely agree with AlexXIV - that the Salarians first, and greatest, failure was the uplifting the Krogan in the first place. 

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 20 décembre 2011 - 06:41 .

#271
Someone With Mass
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:45

Someone With Mass
  • Members
  • 38 560 messages

Killjoy Cutter wrote...
Mordin is a mass-murderer? 

Damnit, people, does the genophage actually kill anyone or not?


If you're overly technical about it, then yes. It kills the potential thousands of babies a krogan female can get.

#272
Guest_Luc0s_*
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:46

Guest_Luc0s_*
  • Guests

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

Because he was being a senseless mass murderer.

I'd say he was being short sighted and careless - but for a Salarian, I imagine being short sighted is about as bad as you can get.


Mordin is a mass-murderer? 

Damnit, people, does the genophage actually kill anyone or not?


Depends on if you count thousands of stillborn babies every single day as killing or not.


You could say the genophage is like abortion. The genophage causes a stillbirt to happen every time a female krogan gets pregnant. That's kinda how it works. It's kinda like how the abortion pill works, except the krogan don't need to take a pill, it just happens (because of the genophage).

Modifié par Luc0s, 20 décembre 2011 - 06:49 .

#273
AlexXIV
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:48

AlexXIV
  • Members
  • 10 670 messages

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Killjoy Cutter: I actually state what my real stance would be in the next line.

It says that there are MANY stillbirths - a stillbirth is the death of a fetus - it is not "preventative".  Looking up information on stillbirths - I find it horrific that the Salarians are so cavalier about their choice. 

I don't think Mordin ever said he is happy with his choice. He says it was necessary. And I tend to agree. As bad as a stillbirth may be, the fetus is probably not even intelligent enough to be considered sapient and neither is the connection of the parents as strong as to ... say a 3 or 6 years old.

We have seen Grunt and if he is any indication to Krogan's inability to restrain themselves then you don't need much imagination to realize what the world would look like if Krogans could multiply like rabbits. They would be the same problem the Rachni were, probably worse. That's why we stop Saren's experiments on Virmire too. It is a bit of a hypocracy to stop Saren to cure the genophage and then shout at Mordin for inventing it imo.

Indoctrination is not much of a factor either because Krogans are warlike by nature. So the difference of indoctrinated Krogans terrorizing the galaxy or Krogans in puberty doing it is only marginal. Fact is, by overcoming the genophage Krogans may get a chance of a place in the galaxy which doesn't make them a threat to everyone around them in the future. The only option to the genophage may have been to wipe all Krogans out in a war, like the Rachni. I think the genophage is preferable.

#274
Medhia Nox
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:50

Medhia Nox
  • Members
  • 5 066 messages
@Someone With Mass: "Overly technical"?

Would you like to view pictures of stillborn babies? I can direct you to this thing called the internet... there are many.

======

As a note - if numbers indicate anything - "life" values non-sapience over sapience. There's one suicidal species of sapient apes - and untold millions of animal and plant life that would thrive perfectly fine without sapience. 

Believing it is "superior" is purely human ego.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 20 décembre 2011 - 06:55 .

#275
Someone With Mass
Posté 20 décembre 2011 - 06:54

Someone With Mass
  • Members
  • 38 560 messages
No thank you.

Most of them aren't reaching that development stage, anyway.
Retourner dans General Discussion


  1. The BioWare Forum
  2. → Mass Effect
  3. → Mass Effect 3
  4. → General Discussion