Tup3xi wrote...
Have you though whether or not its logic was flawed from the beginning? I'm not buying it that a machine with broken logic is supposedly right, no matter how many years it has been there observing. It's broken, twisted, evil and flawed machine.
That twisted machine itself is causing endless repetition. There's no way it would know what would actually happen in the future without this mass murdering. What the hell does it know anyway... As far as I know the only thing it has been observing is the countless mass murdering cycles (every time).
In my opinion this whole ending conversation just proves how broken it really is.
You assume it's a machine because of the form it's presented in? I don't. Not to say it isn't, but it might not be.
As said, you trust it or you don't. That's your first choice, why you choose to trust it or not is up to you.
After that comes the colourchoice, motivated by your first decission. But If you don't trust him, then you can logically conclude everything he says is a lie (because it could be). And ALL you have to go on to pick is colours and past personal experience, your best guess.
An ending is arguably better for provoking thought.
This would have worked better though, if people weren't so unhappy with the outcomes. Then again, if they weren't shocked, it wouldn't be as thought-provoking.
If they do add more endings, I'm honestly happy for them not being there from the get-go. What this has done, atleast for me, is force one to think about things in ways you otherwise wouldn't have.
Modifié par Ottemis, 19 mars 2012 - 05:17 .