465 réponses à ce sujet

[NM_Che56]

Baronesa wrote...


So, because they disguise genocide with different words, it is not genocide any longer? and then force you to make a choice based on their own justification?

Why they spare other civilizations? easy, so they can advance and be destroyed on the next cycle... But that only makes sense if their motif was a sort of reproduction (creating a new reaper every cycle) or because they need the resources and the advanced civilizations concentrate the needed resources on big cities etc.

If the motivation is to destroy organic civilizations before they make synthetics that would kill all organics, the whole cycle makes no sense. It is based on an unproven asumption, furthermore that asumption is shown to be WRONG during the gameplay, it contradicts what the game has SHOWN us

Not quite.  Not all organics are killed by the reapers.  

[Baronesa]

tobito113 wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Luzarius wrote...

If I were you. I would usually point out a few primary arguments, then simplify them so they can reach a wider audience quickly. Hence you'll be able to get your point across quicker.  Life is about getting your thoughts across quickly, surely you know this.

So, by your logic Bioware failed in writing the ending as they obviously didn't make their point about the ending come across well, seeing that the great majority of us didn't understand it?

That might be true, but thats is because they didnt realise how hard it would be for the audience to understand the concept of destroying the few (organic civilizations) to preserve the many (all life in the galaxy) 

Oh, we UNDERSTAND the concept... so well that it is for a reason that we call it GENOCIDE.

Understanding =/= Accepting

[Kanon777]

Xandurpein wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

Must... resist ... urge .. to .. apply ... The Catalyst... logic ... to ..real... life... instances ...to .. show how broken it is...

This is no diferent than a doctor who removes someones leg to avoid an infection. Or removes a tumor to avoid killing the entire body with cancer. Its perfectly logical for reapers point of view. (inteligent life = tumor/infected leg)

The only problem here is that they "remove the tumors" even without complete proof that the body was damaged beyond repair . That makes them EXTREMISTS not ilogical/contradictory.

No, the big problem here is that the "tumors" are living, sentient beings that are being murdered.

That is MORAL problem of the reapers and its what makes them the villians of the story, not a logical contradiction. 

[SovereignFate]

Obvious troll is obvious.
It's a funny picture to show displeasure at the endings flawed logic.
Nothing to see here.
Hold the line!

[rexx1888]

op is a mega troll, just go report him for spam, point out hes trying to increase the hits for his live stream and be done with it guys...


oooorrrrr if your way smarter than me you could crash his livestream, or find his personal details and egg his house, or hack his account and buy lots of dlc on games he doesnt own.. all these things would make me happy, and probably you too

[Lextra]

crimzontearz wrote...

no

[QwibQwibLover]

tobito113 wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Luzarius wrote...

If I were you. I would usually point out a few primary arguments, then simplify them so they can reach a wider audience quickly. Hence you'll be able to get your point across quicker.  Life is about getting your thoughts across quickly, surely you know this.

So, by your logic Bioware failed in writing the ending as they obviously didn't make their point about the ending come across well, seeing that the great majority of us didn't understand it?

That might be true, but thats is because they didnt realise how hard it would be for the audience to understand the concept of destroying the few (organic civilizations) to preserve the many (all life in the galaxy) 

Jeez and here it comes again.......
yeah cuz we all wanted teh happy endings......

IT doesnt make any ****ing sense......

[ScotGaymer]

First,

Genocide is the wiping out of a single "people". People is subjective. Example dropping that asteroid on Terra Nova might have been considered Genocide because Balak would have been wiping out the whole planet's "people".

So if you are only wiping out the "advanced" civilizations (advanced is also subjective) - then it is STILL genocide.

Second,

Stop responding to this guy people.

He is IGN levels of rude.

[Kanon777]

Another problem here is that luz hates the geth (i dont care about them and used them as tools in the final war) so he wont fall for this "genocide" argument.

The geth are not alive, they are just machines pretending to be alive...

[xxLDZxx]

Luzarius wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

xxLDZxx wrote...

Pic 1 sums to 100% up what star kids says.
whats the problem?

this

I didn't see any synthetics on Thessia or Earth (except for the Reapers of course)

The star child specifically said  that the reapers "harvest advanced civilizations".

Your argument proves that you skipped dialogue.

Harvesting advanced civilizations and leaving primitive ones alone means the star child has an agenda. This concept was not reflected in the images I posted originally. Please try to understand this point of view.

Luzarius
www.twitch.tv/luzarius
"no death ruleset"

1.
Proves?
Pics or it didn't happen!

2.
the agenda of star kid is preventing advanced races to build AI that kills them, this would mean that all AI kills organics, Shepard did prove the oppose Geth and EDI are a good start.

3.
So you are "assuming" that every AI build by who ever has always killed organics?
if "yes" how do you know and if "no" why got they harvested or we didn't hear from them?

[Vergil_dgk]

It's all well and good "debunking" the pictures - but those are not meant to be taken literally. They are a satire of the confusing explanations and flawed logic that appears at the end of the game. Your debunking thread is now itself debunked.

[iamthedave3]

Come to think of it the Rachni are a bit of a quandary.

However, the Reapers don't make distinction. If it's advanced and organic, they kill it. Who knows what the Rachni might do if left alone? In the Reaper ideology, somehow they'll create a synthetic eventually.

[Elyiia]

tobito113 wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

I got it...

Luzarius, you are just trying to tell us that for you, genocide is perfectly fine and acceptable.

Good for you, bravo...

"They are just culling" wow... yeah... that CHANGES EVERYTHING!!!!

He dosent agree with the reapers, he chose destroy. But that dosent mean he cant understands the motives of the reapers and how it can feel logical for THEM. 

An argument dosent have to be illogical/contradictory for you to disagree with it. It can be a simple issue of moral values that the reapers dont have but you do.

Except that the Reapers logic is flawed. Even if somehow it is possible to wipe out every single celled organism in the entire galaxy, it's clearly never happened before.

Maybe it comes close, but the organics win. Then we have cycle 0 instead of going, "Okay let's never create synthetics again,"  they go, "Okay let's destroy all advanced civilisations every 50k years."

Finally, the Catalyst apparently doesn't understand the simple fact of "If I don't bring them up here they can never stop the Reapers using the Crucible."

Their whole train of thought is flawed.

[Iwillbeback]

SovereignFate wrote...

Obvious troll is obvious.
It's a funny picture to show displeasure at the endings flawed logic.
Nothing to see here.
Hold the line!

The OP is just silly, he is telling us stuff we already know.
But yeah there is the flawed logic of the Reapers "protecting" species only to harvest them the next round and destroy all of what remains of their brief existence.

[Frozen83]

The current civilization is their civilization and they don't want their civ. to end (as EDI says in the end). Or be transformed into the Reaper form (as Shep says in the end). They want freedom and selfdetermination. Which they are denied because the Child gives them three options. His options. Not Shepards. Or of the other races. So they are denied to say anything about it. Maybe it would have been better if Shep never had reached the Citadel...
Do you think they would have build the Crucible if they knew what was coming? I am not sure. I know that I wouldn't. Rather take my chances with the Reapers and trust in my own ingenuity. Loosing that much (mass relays) in the process of eliminating the Reaperes is too much in my book. M.

[Alexraptor1]

You are aware that the whole Organics vs Synthetics cycle is a brand new thing that snuck into ME3 and is NOT the original vision and concept of the ME trilogy? Right?

[Kanon777]

Baronesa wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Luzarius wrote...

If I were you. I would usually point out a few primary arguments, then simplify them so they can reach a wider audience quickly. Hence you'll be able to get your point across quicker.  Life is about getting your thoughts across quickly, surely you know this.

So, by your logic Bioware failed in writing the ending as they obviously didn't make their point about the ending come across well, seeing that the great majority of us didn't understand it?

That might be true, but thats is because they didnt realise how hard it would be for the audience to understand the concept of destroying the few (organic civilizations) to preserve the many (all life in the galaxy) 

Oh, we UNDERSTAND the concept... so well that it is for a reason that we call it GENOCIDE.

Understanding =/= Accepting

So? How is advocating for genocide means that youre illogical/contradictory? The reapers might have a morality issue (they are machines after all) but it dosent mean their actions are illogical...

[Baronesa]

Alexraptor1 wrote...

You are aware that the whole Organics vs Synthetics cycle is a brand new thing that snuck into ME3 and is NOT the original vision and concept of the ME trilogy? Right?

Can we say... Dark Energy and Haestrom?

Or is that not allowed now?

[Kanon777]

Alexraptor1 wrote...

You are aware that the whole Organics vs Synthetics cycle is a brand new thing that snuck into ME3 and is NOT the original vision and concept of the ME trilogy? Right?

Are you kidding me? Did you forget EVERYTHING Saren said to justify his actions? Its not a new concept, its one of the many concepts that where on the table but the dark energy stuff was NOT the only one... 

As far as i remember ME1 came before ME2, so there was much more foreshadow. And the dark energy was just a minor comment in the middle of a mission in ME2.

So the ME3 concept had more foreshadow than the dark energy one

Modifié par tobito113, 28 mars 2012 - 12:57 .

[Xandurpein]

tobito113 wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Luzarius wrote...

If I were you. I would usually point out a few primary arguments, then simplify them so they can reach a wider audience quickly. Hence you'll be able to get your point across quicker.  Life is about getting your thoughts across quickly, surely you know this.

So, by your logic Bioware failed in writing the ending as they obviously didn't make their point about the ending come across well, seeing that the great majority of us didn't understand it?

That might be true, but thats is because they didnt realise how hard it would be for the audience to understand the concept of destroying the few (organic civilizations) to preserve the many (all life in the galaxy) 

I had no problem understanding their logic at all. I question the premises they base their logic on and the inumerable plot holes created by the, in my opinion shoddy, narrative used to present this.

[Xenoaroe]

 

[DOUGEYEMASTER]

well my IQ of 89.9 that couldnt possibly in a million years understand anything you are trying to explain. I was unable to read most of the big words you were using, would it be possible for you the re-post your view in the form of a first person shooter so i may e able to understand were the logic comes from.

p.s i understand the reapers intentions perfectly well, we all get the bit about why the reapers harvest advanced life. your trying to pick an argument for the sake of being elitist and thinking you are above the average player who you say must be an idiot and is unable to follow the dialogue. Star childs logic is not flawed but it is hypocritical for him to stand on its high horse and claim these things when effectivly he is in the wrong himself. + if it is no big secret why have we not heard this from soverign or harbinger?

[Baronesa]

tobito113 wrote...

So? How is advocating for genocide means that youre illogical/contradictory? The reapers might have a morality issue (they are machines after all) but it dosent mean their actions are illogical...

Because their premise is false.

It was shown to be false IN GAME.

The premise is the created will ALWAYS rebel against the creators... if you put always there and ther eis only 1 instance on which that is not true, the whole thing falls to pieces And we have 2 instances: EDI and the Geth

[KaeserZen]

Still, no matter how the OP enriches Xzibit's statement, it's still synthetics that kill organics so organics won't build synthetics that will kill organics.

[NM_Che56]

The reapers do not kill all organics. Otherwise, there'd be no mass effect. So the meme isn't based on what was said. It's a dismissive sentiment perpetuated by people too blinded by their feelings to entertain anything other than:

1) Bad writing
2) EA pushed them to release too early
3) Drew left

Those reasons harmonize with the sting of disappointment folks are feeling.