374 réponses à ce sujet

[chkchkchk]

SOVEREIGN SAYS: The Reapers left behind mass relays (etc) so that organics would develop along the paths the Reapers desire. So if the whole point is to stop organics from creating synthetics, why do the Reapers cause organics to develop into civilizations that create synthetics.

IT IS COMPLETE GIBBERISH.

[cavs25]

Okay so why havent the Reapers rebelled agaisn't god kid? ("The created will always rebel agaisnt their creator")
yea... good try to make sense of logic that doesnt make sense.
And if god kid is a computer that looks for the best solution why give Shepard choices?
You think Shepard knows what to do?

[Erield]

terdferguson123 wrote...

1.) The Catalyst explains to Shepard that it was tasked with preserving Galactic life, in order to do this it needs to destroy advanced civilizations via the Reapers before said advanced civilizations develop the means to destroy themselves and potentially destroy ALL of galactic life.

- The Catalyst can easily see this self destructive behavior present in Organics (saying because Shepard united the Geth/Quarians is proof that the Catalyst is wrong is an incredibly silly argument, this is one example in a small time frame of galactic life, the galaxy has been around for close to 13 billions years)

2.) The Catalyst is a computer/AI, it only understands mathematics. The mathematics behind the probobility of organics destroying themselves eventaully is astounding, in turn, the Catalyst must do what is most mathematically efficient to prevent this from happening.


-The Catalyst sees that the most efficient way to reach it's goal is to never let advanced civilizations go long enough to allow this to happen. To do this, it uses the Reapers as a way to stop galactic extinction from happening, by destroying and harvesting advanced civilizations, this in turn gives the under-evolved life a chance to grow, until they themselves become powerful enough to create that which can destroy themselves.

3.) The catalsyst, Does. Not. Understand. Organic. Moral. Behavior. It cannot get any simpler than this. It does not believe that destroying advanced civilizations is wrong/right/moral/etc, becuase it lacks the ability to "believe" anything. It can only do what it is tasked to do, and that is prevent galactic extinction in the most mathematically efficient way that it can.

4.) Why does the Catalyst destroy the Mass Relays no matter what I choose?

     - Think of it this way: The Crucible is a backup plan in case the Reaper solution ever needs to be stopped. However, the Catalyst still must meet it's obligation to stop advanced organics from destroying all galactic life. The best way it can see to do this without the Reapers is to cut off all galactic ties via the destruction of the Mass Relays.

1.  From a purely logical standpoint, the argument that the Geth disprove the Star Child's logic is flawed; you are correct.  However, from a storytelling standpoint, there is no reason to include a sympathetic Geth race that does not conform to the "Synthetics rebel and destroy all organic life" argument.  If Bioware really wanted us to buy Star Child's argument, then the only in-game evidence provided should not have been diametrically opposed to what was argued.  If they did include in-game evidence to suggest that the Star Child is full of ****, then there should have been some kind of argument to prove/disprove the Star Child's statements.  There is none of this.  

We see A happen; we never see B.  We are later told that A is a lie, and B will always happen, without any supporting evidence.  We then say, "Oh.  Right.  B.  I knew that."

2.  It is far more likely that organics will destroy all organic life through some non-synthetic intelligent means.  Super-weapons that wipe out all life on a planet, etc.  Organic life is the greatest threat to organic life, so why go to all the trouble of preserving it?  Why is it so important for sentient organic life to be preserved?  The Star Child is a synthetic intelligence capable of thought; he never once expresses the importance of organic life, just the importance of preserving it. 

Furthermore, it would make much more logical sense to harvest races before they create advanced synthetic life (Like the Geth. 300 years before ME1.  WTF was Sovereign doing?  Too busy snorting coke in the bathroom somewhere?).  It would make even more sense for them to harvest races before they have the possibility of becoming a threat.  Reapers are a limited resource.  The loss of even one dreadnought is what, ~50,000 years of evolution and harvesting down the drain?  Why risk that?  Instead, harvest pre-spaceflight or early spaceflight species for maximum gain.

3.  To say that it can not understand is flawed; it would be more precise to say that it does not understand.  It is seemingly an AI; it, like EDI and the geth, is capable of changing its programming to more accurately reflect the kinds of thoughts and behaviors of organics.  That it has chosen not to do so simply means that it has never tried to understand organic moral behaviors.

4.  A plausible explanation.  I think that the Relays are destroyed as a part of the process of unleashing the Catalyst's backup plan (the Crucible) just due to the energy using up all of the dark matter that powers them--but you give a reason why that is necessary.

[Evil Minion]

Bantz wrote...

Atmospeer wrote...

Bantz wrote...

cavs25 wrote...

Ummm so why not just wipe out the evil synthetics the organics create?

exactly, if reapers showed up to destroy the geth and only the geth because of the possible threat they could be to organics in the future I'd fight to protect the geth (in honor of legion) but i'd undestand it. But the idea that Organics might create synthetics that might in turn someday possibly destroy organics therefor an army of synthetics must wipe out organics to protect them from being destroyed by the synthetics they might someday create is a weak and poorly thought out conclusion no matter how you try to reason it.

Atmospeer wrote...

Because organics will progress and in time can make synthetics more advanced than Reapers, how can they wipe them out then?

 

Reapers aren't synthetic. Secondly you describe it as if they're protecting every organic being, that's not what they're doing, they're preserving the existence of organic life in general.

by liquifying people and turning us into a giant human robot? (which is at least partially synthetic, i'll grant you that reapers aren't 100% synthetic but they are a mix of the two) How is that "preserving"? It's slaughering entire races so you can make more half/half creatures so you can grow your army and come back 50k years later to do it over. Not to mention a lot of reapers are destroyed in the process which means those races that were slaughtered to create those reapers are now lost and no longer "preserved". 

This logic makes about as much sense as me saying,  I really like lions, so to protect lions I'm going to go out, round up all lions, KILL THEM ALL, and have them stuffed and put into a museum so that people can remember what Lions were. See they've been preserved nicely.

Erm.....

Yeah, that's exactly why we're fighting The Reapers.

Their "logic" is screwy.

"But "screwy logic" is not a "plothole."

[Welsh Inferno]

terdferguson123 wrote...

I am going to make an edit to my original post because a lot of people are having massive confusion about this thread. Let me restate, the original post was to explain the Catalyst's ORIGINAL logic, it originally was only attempting to stop the inevitable Galactic Extinction at any cost.

However, what this thread did not go into, and what I want to make very clear, is that it is VERY possible (and what everyone should be reflecting on) that the Catalyst, upon seeing Shepard there who had united the Galaxy against the Reapers, had a moment of reflection about it's original premise possibly not being the best way. To look at it from a mathematical perspective, the variables had changed.

EDI shows us throughout the game that it is possible for an AI to change it's stance, although I don't think its very common (even Legion has one purpose, and will do anything to make it happen) This may have happened, and I think this is where the REAL speculation should be coming from.

Even so, you would think that this AI would ask the opinion(For Shepards perspective)of the organic who managed to unite a galaxy of Organic and Synthetics to work together, co-exist and fight a common enemy in the largest galactic armada that this Galaxy has ever seen.

[skarocksoi]

Couple of points.
1. AI's are shown to be more than capable of determining things simply "by math", and are capable of deeper emotional considerations. Examples of this are EDI and the geth. Otherwise Legion would have never helped Shepard and EDI probably would have let the crew of the Normandy die on several occasions.

2. The Reapers aren't merely simple synthetic AI's, they are an organic-synthetic hybrid, which I would assume would mean they are even less likely to do things strictly by what is statistically the better choice.

3. The technology of all civilizations is based off of Reaper tech and develops along the paths that the Reapers choose, as stated by themselves. This then creates a self-fulfilling prophesy of civilizations developing technology to create synthetics that will in turn, turn against its creators, which necessitates the need for the Reapers. If the Reapers instead let civilizations develop on their own, perhaps they wouldn't be needed at all.

4. It would make far more sense for the Reapers to just destroy all organic life, not just the most advanced ones, to prevent synthetics from rising against their creators. Unless there is some imperative for the Reapers that organic life must live, but if that is the case, then it would make more sense to just destroy the synthetics.

5. In this cycle, the only major case of a synthetic rising against its creators was the geth, and they were only fighting for self-preservation. The only time the geth were aggressive was when they were under the control of the Reapers. If not for the influence of the Reapers, probably no major galaxy threatening incident would have ever come from synthetic life.

6. It would have made more sense if the Starchild would have stated that organics would eventually destroy themselves through fighting or whatever, but he specifically stated the issue was with synthetics rising against their masters. Which the Reapers initiated in this cycle. That shows that the reasoning and this entire ending was slapped together without much thought. It really can't be explained in any rational fashion as it currently stands.

[Ariq]

"Does this unit have a soul?"

"The answer is 'yes,' Legion."

I refute you thusly.

[PopDisaster]

Read through the OP, but not the rest of the thread past page 1, so if it's been mentioned, then sorry for the redundancy.

The "star child" also says that the created will always rebel against its creators. (Not the exact line, but you know what I'm talking about.) IF this is true, then this means the Reapers will eventually turn on their "creator," which is whatever this "star child" is. What is his solution to this? It's never addressed. We can't argue this point with him. It creates an inconsistency in his logic.

In regards to point one and as far as circular logic goes (which I don't believe you addressed, but many have a problem with), it isn't completely circular because he doesn't destroy all life - just the advanced ones. The problem I have with this is that it makes evolution stagnate. Regardless of AI or self destruction, all life is stopped when it comes to a certain point. And ONLY because it's assumed that life will destroy itself. This can't have ever been a proven truth if life still exists. We could argue that maybe it's happened before and so the catalyst re-created all life... but it seems unlikely because if he had that power, he could just keep recreating life rather than destroying it and there would be no need for the Reapers.

[Kashola]

chkchkchk wrote...

SOVEREIGN SAYS: The Reapers left behind mass relays (etc) so that organics would develop along the paths the Reapers desire. So if the whole point is to stop organics from creating synthetics, why do the Reapers cause organics to develop into civilizations that create synthetics.

IT IS COMPLETE GIBBERISH.

[Ziggeh]

terdferguson123 wrote...

However, what this thread did not go into, and what I want to make very clear, is that it is VERY possible (and what everyone should be reflecting on) that the Catalyst, upon seeing Shepard there who had united the Galaxy against the Reapers, had a moment of reflection about it's original premise possibly not being the best way. To look at it from a mathematical perspective, the variables had changed.

I think it was because they'd reached a point where the cycle was no longer sustainable, successive generations had become better at fighting them, the loss of the Keeper signal and the presence of Shepard with the crucible proved to him that the failure of the Reapers was at some point inevitable. Unless a new solution was found he would fail in his task.

Which does make the choice he gives you a bit of an odd concept, but maybe the capacity to create a new solution  was outside of his function, so he was flailing a bit.

[Tritium315]

Dude, I'll tell you the same thing I tell everyone who seems to think they're the only ones who "get" the catalyst. You're not the only person in the world with an IQ above 20. We all understand what the catalyst was saying and we all get what Bioware was trying to play at. The fact of the matter is understanding what someone is telling you is miles away from agreeing with their logic. The catalyst's plan is retarded, there are a million other things they could to prevent the same thing from happening that do not involve killing everyone every 50k years.

Off the top of my head:

Don't leave relays so the galactic civilizations are isolated allowing you to only have to cull them every million years (or however long it takes people to almost get to FTL tech).

Don't leave the galaxy and just sit around the citadel, telling organics as they find it not to make robots.

Just kill synthetics as they rise up as opposed to empowering them, like they did with the Geth and Zha'ti (or whatever they were called).

Pretty much anything would work better than what they came up with. Like I said, everyone gets the logic, we all understand. The reason people make the "yo dawg" pictures is because the logic really is that stupid, not because people don't understand the reapers are actually "pruning" the galaxy.

Modifié par Tritium315, 24 mars 2012 - 07:59 .

[terdferguson123]

ShaneP wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

I posted this in another thread, but I think it deserves it's own since so many are confused about this.

This post is going to explain why the Catalyst used the Reapers as a solution to prevent galactic extinction.
Before I continue, I want to make one thing very clear: in order to understand the logic of the Catalyst you need to think similarly to how a computer/AI would. With that said, if a computer is tasked with preventing Galactic extinction, it is going to do what is most MATHEMATICALLY probable to prevent it from happening, regardless of morals.

The point, however that is missed by this ending is that the catalyst is acting as if it's actions are merciful, when in fact it is quite happy to mercilessly slaughter any organics that provide resistance to it's plans. The logical thing to do would be for the reapers to periodically purge the galaxy of any overly advanced AI technology, not to purge it of organic races.

1.) The Catalyst explains to Shepard that it was tasked with preserving Galactic life, in order to do this it needs to destroy advanced civilizations via the Reapers before said advanced civilizations develop the means to destroy themselves and potentially destroy ALL of galactic life.

  A few points regarding number 1:

- Is it so hard to believe that organics, left to their own devices, may eventually create something that is       incredibly harmful to the galaxy? Look no further than what we as Humans have created in such a short span of time. Humans have existed on Earth for roughly 100 thousand years, we have been scientifically active for aroune 4000-5000 years, with scientific advancement speeding up rapidly in modern times. During this short span of time, we have developed the means to easily destroy ourselves (nuclear warfare), imagine what would happen if organics all over the galaxy were given the entire galactic life span to scientifically create things that may potentially harm and most definately eventually destroy all life.

- The Catalyst can easily see this self destructive behavior present in Organics (saying because Shepard united the Geth/Quarians is proof that the Catalyst is wrong is an incredibly silly argument, this is one example in a small time frame of galactic life, the galaxy has been around for close to 13 billions years)

That still doesn't answer one simple question: What the hell right a machine or group of machines have to make these decisions for us. The purpose of machines is to serve their creators, not to destroy organic life. Organic life by it's very nature has the potential to be destructive even without hazardous AI experiments because of the way we consume resources just to maintain our species. I for one believe that we're likely on earth (in reality I mean not in the ME universe) to run out of resources long before our AI technology rises up and kills us all.

The very nature of evolution and natural selection is destructive, and to destroy organic life for that very reason is just fallacious.

2.) The Catalyst is a computer/AI, it only understands mathematics. The mathematics behind the probobility of organics destroying themselves eventaully is astounding, in turn, the Catalyst must do what is most mathematically efficient to prevent this from happening.

Points on number 2:

-The Catalyst sees that the most efficient way to reach it's goal is to never let advanced civilizations go long enough to allow this to happen. To do this, it uses the Reapers as a way to stop galactic extinction from happening, by destroying and harvesting advanced civilizations, this in turn gives the under-evolved life a chance to grow, until they themselves become powerful enough to create that which can destroy themselves.

Again, though, how the hell can you apply mathematical answers to a non mathematical problem? It's made quite plain that the reapers are completely unable to feel empathy or compassion. You cannot apply such black and white reasoning to life, if you did the world would be a very bleak place. The universe is massive, it has forces that simply cannot be controlled, not even by machines as powerful as the reapers. That kind of logic may fly in a game, but as our race often finds out to it's cost there are always unforseen consequences to tampering with the natural order things. And that is what the reapers are in effect doing.

3.) The catalsyst, Does. Not. Understand. Organic. Moral. Behavior. It cannot get any simpler than this. It does not believe that destroying advanced civilizations is wrong/right/moral/etc, becuase it lacks the ability to "believe" anything. It can only do what it is tasked to do, and that is prevent galactic extinction in the most mathematically efficient way that it can.

In conclusion, the Catalyst makes perfect sense with it's logic when given the perspective that it is only an AI/Computer/ or even a tool with a single purpose.

Which, again is an argument that doesn't work, because a computer or anything incapable of feeling emotion should not be making decisions that it cannot fully comprehend the ramifications of. The catalyst's logic may make sense to itself, but the fact that organic civilisations have constantly rebelled against the reapers suggests that it's logic does not fly with any organic beings. As human beings we know better than perhaps any other species on earth that there are just some situations in which cold logic just doesn't fly. Yes, AI destruction is a possibility, but so are many, MANY other bad things. What right does an outside force have to interfere in that? the logical thing to do is to let nature run it's course.

4.) Why does the Catalyst destroy the Mass Relays no matter what I choose?

     - Think of it this way: The Crucible is a backup plan in case the Reaper solution ever needs to be stopped. However, the Catalyst still must meet it's obligation to stop advanced organics from destroying all galactic life. The best way it can see to do this without the Reapers is to cut off all galactic ties via the destruction of the Mass Relays.

This thread was created specifically in reference to all those "Yo dawg we heard you don't want to be killed by synthetics" posters I see everywhere, who seem to think that the Catalyst's logic is flawed. That argument is stupid because it  ignores 2 very cruicial peices of information:

1.) The Catalyst does not think like an organic in any way
2.) The Catalyst is only destroying advanced organics as a means to prevent them from destroying themselves and ALL other galactic life.

The catalyst doesn't destroy the mass relays, the energy released through the crucible does. And actually, when you think about it the mass relay network could be argued to be the reason why so many advanced races are able to become as advanced as they do. Without the mass effect technology, even the most advanced races would be most likely to be confined to the planet or star system that they reside in. Which would make the likelihood of any AI technology that they create making it to another part of the galaxy remote at best.

The other point is that whilst the reapers created the Mass relays, it has been inferred a couple of times that the Protheans were very close to mastering the technology, as were the Asari. So the destruction of the relays isn't as much of a mitigating factor as you make out.

Ultimately though, the system of mass relays pretty much guarantees that any race that becomes advanced enough WILL spread throughout the galaxy which effectively exacerbates the problem that the reapers claim to be the solution to.

I agree, but the problem that a lot of people seemed to miss is that the Catalyst is in essence the "villain" of the entire series. It is an AI that solved the problem of galactic extinction, but it goes about it in the most warped possible way. The problem is that by the time it may have realized it's wrong doings (thats to be speculated, but he did wake Shepard up) was too late, it's back up plan, The Crucible, was already created as a way to further press the "reset" button.

[Evil Minion]

chkchkchk wrote...

SOVEREIGN SAYS: The Reapers left behind mass relays (etc) so that organics would develop along the paths the Reapers desire. So if the whole point is to stop organics from creating synthetics, why do the Reapers cause organics to develop into civilizations that create synthetics.

IT IS COMPLETE GIBBERISH.

Because developing synthetic life is inevitable when organic civilization reaches a certain point; therefore, Reapers "guide" technological evolution and when a certain level of technological advancement is reached, they "harvest" said civilization while leaving lesser developed races alone.

Most likely, the Reapers were invented by an organic who thought this was a good idea and The Reapers, being machines, are unable to change their programming; hence, stupid logic.

[dointime85]

Ariq wrote...

"Does this unit have a soul?"

"The answer is 'yes,' Legion."

I refute you thusly.

That's the interesting thing, it implies that the catalyst is actually less developed than Legion and Edi in that department. It hasn't gotten the same input that Edi gets in ME3 for example.

Modifié par dointime85, 24 mars 2012 - 08:00 .

[Lumenadducere]

I understand that Catalyst's logic as well, but by its own reasoning either it would rebel against its creators, or the Reapers would rebel against it. And yet that hasn't happened. So the Catalyst's very existence contradicts its own logic.

One of the many issues with that whole ending sequence, IMO.

[synthevol]

- The Catalyst can easily see this self destructive behavior present in Organics (saying because Shepard united

4.) Why does the Catalyst destroy the Mass Relays no matter what I choose?

     - Think of it this way: The Crucible is a backup plan in case the Reaper solution ever needs to be stopped. However, the Catalyst still must meet it's obligation to stop advanced organics from destroying all galactic life. The best way it can see to do this without the Reapers is to cut off all galactic ties via the destruction of the Mass Relays.

Your argument really fails here, when you consider mainly Synthesis but also control. Since the reapers will still be around in both of them. The Citadel Reaper says that by rewriting everyones dna and turning them into cyborgs that there will be peace and the cycle will end permanently since apparently synthetic/organics will never create full synthetics to wipe them out. Anyway there is no reason especially in Synthesis for the Relays to be destroyed. In control the Reapers are still around and alive they just now have a different controller, however we don't know the extent of the control. I for one don't believe that Shepard could make the Reapers kill themselves because that goes against a primary drive of theirs which is self preservation, but it is possible that Shepard has full control and could make the Reapers dance a Jig on Earth, but if that is the case then Shepard could just make the Reapers rebuild the relay's. So really for both Control and especially Synthesis the argument fails.

[Sunnyhat1]

Ariq wrote...

"Does this unit have a soul?"

"The answer is 'yes,' Legion."

I refute you thusly.

Exactly. And the geth archieved their individuality by adding REAPER CODE (!!!) for crying out loud.

It means the reapers themselfs are LIVING machines. With creative, outside-the-box thinking.... the whole 9 yards.

Why would anyone assume they or the catalyst are bound to programmed thinking when it's been clearly proven in the game that they are not!?

It
is
nonsense!

[PsydonZero]

terdferguson123 wrote...

Before I continue, I want to make one thing very clear: in order to understand the logic of the Catalyst you need to think similarly to how a computer/AI would.

Thus I present my counterargument to you: a simple Visual Basic program.

Premise A: Synthetics will always kill organics irrespective of context or motivation.
Action 0: Harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.
Action 1: Do not harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.

IF A = TRUE THEN 0.
ELSE 1.

With that said, if a computer is tasked with preventing Galactic extinction, it is going to do what is most MATHEMATICALLY probable to prevent it from happening, regardless of morals.

Premise A: Synthetics will always kill organics irrespective of context or motivation.
Action 0: Harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.
Action 1: Do not harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.

IF A = TRUE THEN 0.
ELSE 1.

Is it so hard to believe that organics, left to their own devices, may eventually create something that is       incredibly harmful to the galaxy? Look no further than what we as Humans have created in such a short span of time. Humans have existed on Earth for roughly 100 thousand years, we have been scientifically active for aroune 4000-5000 years, with scientific advancement speeding up rapidly in modern times. During this short span of time, we have developed the means to easily destroy ourselves (nuclear warfare), imagine what would happen if organics all over the galaxy were given the entire galactic life span to scientifically create things that may potentially harm and most definately eventually destroy all life.

It isn't hard to believe that we COULD/MIGHT/MAY create things that would lead to our destruction. It is hard to believe that we are fated to do so.

saying because Shepard united the Geth/Quarians is proof that the Catalyst is wrong is an incredibly silly argument, this is one example in a small time frame of galactic life, the galaxy has been around for close to 13 billions years)

Doesn't matter. The geth had the intelligence to rebel, the capability to kill all the quarians and every reason to rebel right down to the fundamental self-preservation dilemma of "Either they die or we die". They still didn't rebel.

The Catalyst is a computer/AI, it only understands mathematics. The mathematics behind the probobility of organics destroying themselves eventaully is astounding, in turn, the Catalyst must do what is most mathematically efficient to prevent this from happening.

Premise A: Synthetics will always kill organics irrespective of context or motivation.
Action 0: Harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.
Action 1: Do not harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.

IF A = TRUE THEN 0.
ELSE 1.

The Catalyst sees that the most efficient way to reach it's goal is to never let advanced civilizations go long enough to allow this to happen. To do this, it uses the Reapers as a way to stop galactic extinction from happening, by destroying and harvesting advanced civilizations, this in turn gives the under-evolved life a chance to grow, until they themselves become powerful enough to create that which can destroy themselves.

As opposed to destroying all the synthetics and then harvesting their parts/tech to make the Reapers stronger, which makes more sense, is in line with the Catalyst's goal and actually makes sense logistically, while the to the to-this-day unexplained means by which the Reapers convert organic tissue into synthetic compounds (Reaper reproduction, husk creation) does not.

The catalsyst, Does. Not. Understand. Organic. Moral. Behavior. It cannot get any simpler than this. It does not believe that destroying advanced civilizations is
wrong/right/moral/etc, becuase it lacks the ability to "believe"
anything. It can only do what it is tasked to do, and that is prevent
galactic extinction in the most mathematically efficient way that it
can.

Premise A: Synthetics will always kill organics irrespective of context or motivation.
Action 0: Harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.
Action 1: Do not harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.

IF A = TRUE THEN 0.
ELSE 1.

[InfiniteDemise]

Atmospeer wrote...

cavs25 wrote...

Ummm so why not just wipe out the evil synthetics the organics create?

Because organics will progress and in time can make synthetics more advanced than Reapers, how can they wipe them out then?

But space magic lets all synthetics be destroyed with a hand-wave. Why can't the SpaceGodChild just do that every single time?

[iamthedave3]

terdferguson123 wrote...

iamthedave3 wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

cavs25 wrote...

Ummm so why not just wipe out the evil synthetics the organics create?

Because, given enough time, they could potentially create Synthetics more powerful than the Reapers. The best course of action that the Catalyst as a computer with no feelings for organics whatsoever, is to destroy the root of the problem before it can happen.

Okay, but here's the problem.

Why does the Catalyst then give Shepherd the option to Destroy? Why does it give Shepherd any options at all? If the Catalyst has already considered everything and believes it has found the mathematically correct solution, any outcome other than Synthesis should be dismissed out of hand. Shepherd cannot possibly do this job better than the catalyst, so why make the offer? Without the reapers, the creation/destruction process cannot be averted, so why give that option either?

By the time Shepard reaches that point on the Citadel, the Catalyst knows Shepard has won, at this point it's only option to try and preserve its goal is fire the crucible (preferably from the catalysts side to have shepard control or merge the dna) and destroy the mass effect relays preventing galactic communication and advancement for potentially millions of years.

Save that Shepherd doesn't even know how to fire the weapon. It isn't until the Catalyst gives Shepherd a guided tour of the local switchboxes that Shepherd has any idea how to operate the device.

That doesn't look like a losing prospect to me. The Catalyst hasn't lost until it literally tells Shepherd how to kill it.

[Bantz]

Evil Minion wrote...

Bantz wrote...

Atmospeer wrote...

Bantz wrote...

cavs25 wrote...

Ummm so why not just wipe out the evil synthetics the organics create?

exactly, if reapers showed up to destroy the geth and only the geth because of the possible threat they could be to organics in the future I'd fight to protect the geth (in honor of legion) but i'd undestand it. But the idea that Organics might create synthetics that might in turn someday possibly destroy organics therefor an army of synthetics must wipe out organics to protect them from being destroyed by the synthetics they might someday create is a weak and poorly thought out conclusion no matter how you try to reason it.

Atmospeer wrote...

Because organics will progress and in time can make synthetics more advanced than Reapers, how can they wipe them out then?

 

Reapers aren't synthetic. Secondly you describe it as if they're protecting every organic being, that's not what they're doing, they're preserving the existence of organic life in general.

by liquifying people and turning us into a giant human robot? (which is at least partially synthetic, i'll grant you that reapers aren't 100% synthetic but they are a mix of the two) How is that "preserving"? It's slaughering entire races so you can make more half/half creatures so you can grow your army and come back 50k years later to do it over. Not to mention a lot of reapers are destroyed in the process which means those races that were slaughtered to create those reapers are now lost and no longer "preserved". 

This logic makes about as much sense as me saying,  I really like lions, so to protect lions I'm going to go out, round up all lions, KILL THEM ALL, and have them stuffed and put into a museum so that people can remember what Lions were. See they've been preserved nicely.

Erm.....

Yeah, that's exactly why we're fighting The Reapers.

Their "logic" is screwy.

"But "screwy logic" is not a "plothole."

I'm not even talking about plotholes here, the ending has TONS of those. I agree with you the logic is completely screwy and makes no logical sense. I wasn't talking about plotholes in my post just about the stupidity of the logic and how it DOESN'T make sense. 

[terdferguson123]

Tritium315 wrote...

Dude, I'll tell you the same thing I tell everyone who seems to think they're the only ones who "get" the catalyst. You're not the only person in the world with an IQ above 20. We all understand what the catalyst was saying and we all get what Bioware was trying to play at. The fact of the matter is understanding what someone is telling you is miles away from agreeing with their logic. The catalyst's plan is retarded, there are a million other things they could to prevent the same thing from happening that do not involve killing everyone every 50k years.

Off the top of my head:

Don't leave relays so the galactic civilizations are isolated allowing you to only have to cull them every million years (or however long it takes people to almost get to FTL tech).

Don't leave the galaxy and just sit around the citadel, telling organics as they find it not to make robots.

Just kill synthetics as they rise up as opposed to empowering them, like they did with the Geth and Zha'ti (or whatever they were called).

Pretty much anything would work better than what they came up with. Like I said, everyone gets the logic, we all understand. The reason people make the "yo dawg" pictures is because the logic really is that stupid, not because people don't understand the reapers are actually "pruning" the galaxy.

Ok, I NEVER said anyone was dumb or made any comments about anyone's IQ. Secondly, I realize, and the thread and tons of other posts all state that the Catalyst is doing the most efficient job it can, regardless of how it goes about it, as long as it reaches the end goal. It's originaly logic does not care for the slaughter it commits, it just does it because it's the most efficient way to reach it's goal. I stated this over and over, it's an AI/computer, it does not think like a human, therefore the organic logic of "but this prevents them from having to destroy so and so" changes absolutely nothing in its mind. 

[Evil Minion]

Tritium315 wrote...

Dude, I'll tell you the same thing I tell everyone who seems to think they're the only ones who "get" the catalyst. You're not the only person in the world with an IQ above 20. We all understand what the catalyst was saying and we all get what Bioware was trying to play at. The fact of the matter is understanding what someone is telling you is miles away from agreeing with their logic. The catalyst's plan is retarded, there are a million other things they could to prevent the same thing from happening that do not involve killing everyone every 50k years..

SO WHAT?????

I don't think anyone who claims to "understand" their logic actually "agrees" with their logic.

"Agreeing" with "Reaper logic" is utterly beside the point.

If we "agreed" with The Reapers, we would have no reason to fight them. Now, as to WHY The Reapers have screwed-up logic is a different matter entirely.

[Egonne]

Evil Minion wrote...

The Reapers. Are. The. Villains.

If we agreed with, or accepted, their logic, we would not be fighting them, would we?

No. It is not a requirement that you accept or agree with the "logic" of the villains. Our not agreeing with them is the primary reason for them being villains.

I did not agree or accept the "logic" of The Borg or why they thought having a collective conscious was better than an individual conscious, but my not agreeing with "Borg logic" did not mean The Borg were an unforgivable plothole. We were never meant to accept "Reaper logic," and this point was driven home several times throughout the trilogy.

And this is EXACTLY the problem.  Picard would never have accepted choices from the 'borg queen' as the only way out because she/they WERE the villians and he would disagree with their thinking.  Bioware used the star kid 'super reaper' as a narrator for the ending choices, and Shepard accepted what he said as if the star kid MADE SENSE and WASN'T the villian of the entire series.

Modifié par Egonne, 24 mars 2012 - 08:04 .

[Ziggeh]

PsydonZero wrote...

Thus I present my counterargument to you: a simple Visual Basic program.

Premise A: Synthetics will always kill organics irrespective of context or motivation.
Action 0: Harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.
Action 1: Do not harvest the galaxy with the Reapers.

IF A = TRUE THEN 0.
ELSE 1.

That's not a counter argument to his position. His point is that they have decided that A = TRUE.

(END IF)

Modifié par Ziggeh, 24 mars 2012 - 08:04 .