309 réponses à ce sujet

[eventhewaves]

BloodClaw95 wrote...

N-No. It's not something you can comprehend...

This isn't complicated!  What else is there to understand?!

[stysiaq]

The freaking little bastard makes no sense at all, so basically you're free to pick a line from his dialogue and start a thread about how total bullcrap that line is.

[shepskisaac]

TheMerchantMan wrote...

Further:

The Catalyst, a synthetic is protecting organics from synthetics by killing them. Because synthetics will always rebel against organics. Yet he himself, again a synthetic is ostensibly trying to protect organics, something he says synthetics are inevitably incapable of doing.

He is a walking contradiction. Or using insane troll logic.There's no way someone could have wrote this and thought it wasn't crap.

He is not trying to protect organics from synthetics. He's trying to protect organics from AIs. Shep and biotic people are also synthetics to a degree. Reapers are synthetic, but they all have organic minds. These organics minds are bounded by organic limitations. AIs are not. The problem of ME3 is that it doesn't articulate it clear enough that this is about AI, not "all synthetic life".

Modifié par IsaacShep, 28 mars 2012 - 10:08 .

[Ziggeh]

Delta_V2 wrote...

Ok, reading those lines again, I've just realized there is yet another contradiction. The starchild talks about fighting chaos, but then goes on about the created inevitably rebelling against the creator. Being able to predict an outcome with 100% certainty is basically the opposite of chaos.

One of these statements is an outright lie.

The inevitability of the improbable.

Assuming synthetic life contains the possibility of wiping out all organic life, given enough time it becomes an inevitability.

[pharsti]

Are you trying to apply logic and sense in the ending?

Stop right there, youre doing it wrong. Only thing youre supposed to apply is speculation.
Not even kidding.

[mcsupersport]

IsaacShep wrote...

Reapers are synthetics, but they're not AIs. Key difference.

Are you sure??  They are NOT just mindless machines, they are at least a VI and probably a full AI.  

But one other nail in the coffin of his argument is for the Catalyst to be around that many millions(billions) of years then he is an AI himself....

Now he says an AI will destroy all life, and thus his solution is to only destroy advanced life to protect primitive life, yet here is an AI(the Catalyst) that has been around millions(billions) of years, controlling the most advanced warships in history and he is "protecting" organic life.  So his premise is faulty at best, and plain loco at worst(probably).

[Aetika]

Well, I am still trying to wrap my head around the why Starchild even gives Shepard choices to stop Reapers, when he is the one who created and control them. It´s like Sauron giving Frodo advices how to destroy the Ring:?
The more I think about the ending, the less sense it makes...

Modifié par Aetika, 28 mars 2012 - 10:10 .

[Untamed_skies]

Ziggeh wrote...

Untamed_skies wrote...

It's not much better by any means, but it makes a tiny bit more sense in that context.

I think that depends on your perspective. From the position of Shepard et al theirs not difference at all, but Space Boy probably sees it as quite a sweet deal for organics, what with the getting to exist in the first place.

And since all his solutions leaves organics alive, (If he can fuse synthetic and organic life into one in a split second I'm willing to believe he has super powers that prevent teh relays from destroyinge verything). We don't have a right to complain. But opinions are fun for that exact reason.

[sistersafetypin]

Nighthunteer wrote...

minormiracle wrote...
Starchild: I control the Reapers. They are my solution.
Shepard: Solution? To what?
Starchild: Chaos. The created will always rebel against their creators.

If
the Starchild created a solution to a problem, and that solution was
the Reapers, how come the Reapers haven't rebelled against the Starchild
yet?

Woah, didn't even cross my mind! That is a nice catch!

That is honestly something I never even considered, but you're absolutely right. The entire ending is one massively compounded fallacy

[Ziggeh]

TheMerchantMan wrote...

Further:

The Catalyst, a synthetic is protecting organics from synthetics by killing them.

What he is protecting is the existence of organic life in the abstract, he is quite clearly not protecting individual organic beings.

[mcsupersport]

IsaacShep wrote...

TheMerchantMan wrote...

Further:

The Catalyst, a synthetic is protecting organics from synthetics by killing them. Because synthetics will always rebel against organics. Yet he himself, again a synthetic is ostensibly trying to protect organics, something he says synthetics are inevitably incapable of doing.

He is a walking contradiction. Or using insane troll logic.There's no way someone could have wrote this and thought it wasn't crap.

He is not trying to protect organics from synthetics. He's trying to protect organics from AIs. Shep and biotic people are also synthetics to a degree. Reapers are synthetic, but they all have organic minds. These organics minds are bounded by organic limitations. AIs are not. The problem of ME3 is that it doesn't articulate it clear enough that this is about AI, not "all synthetic life".

Actually the Reapers are an Organic construct at best, and thus would be classified as a synthetically produced organic computer AI.  They didn't develop on their own, they were created, it is just not silicon being used but orgainc matter to do the same things.  Argument can easily be made that they are a full created AI and not an organic "brain" entitiy.

[Humakt83]

Delta_V2 wrote...

Ok, reading those lines again, I've just realized there is yet another contradiction. The starchild talks about fighting chaos, but then goes on about the created inevitably rebelling against the creator. Being able to predict an outcome with 100% certainty is basically the opposite of chaos.

One of these statements is an outright lie.

Not to mention that some could argue that Synthetic beings are very opposite of Chaos, them lacking true emotions and chemistry. Also Life could be viewed as chaos and death as an order. 

Sovereign: "We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it."

Sovereign: "Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. Your lives are measured in years and decades. You wither and die. "

Modifié par Humakt83, 28 mars 2012 - 10:11 .

[shepskisaac]

mcsupersport wrote...

Are you sure??

Yes I am. Legion told what Reapers really are in ME2 already: www.youtube.com/watch Reapers ain't AIs. They have hive'collective organic mind

[Raging Nug]

eventhewaves wrote...

BloodClaw95 wrote...

N-No. It's not something you can comprehend...

This isn't complicated!  What else is there to understand?!

It... it is not a thing you can comprehend.

[Ziggeh]

Untamed_skies wrote...

And since all his solutions leaves organics alive, (If he can fuse synthetic and organic life into one in a split second I'm willing to believe he has super powers that prevent teh relays from destroyinge verything). We don't have a right to complain. But opinions are fun for that exact reason.

Oh I still think his logic is flawed, but in one small but critical way, which wierdly sounds like the only nice part: the application of value to organic life in general, rather than specific.

[eventhewaves]

Raging Nug wrote...

It... it is not a thing you can comprehend.

It is!

[ChampDude]

Oh good lord. See, I try not to think about that sequence, but every time someone point something out it gets even worse. How can so many things be wrong with such a small sequence? It's actually kind of impressive

[Ziggeh]

Humakt83 wrote...

Sovereign: "Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. Your lives are measured in years and decades. You wither and die. "

That bit does sound a bit odd, knowing what we now know.

As does making a race of machines designed to protect the existence of life, and making them arrogant dicks.

I  suppose the case could be made that the Reaper's don't really get it either. They keep insisting the cycle must continue, and maybe that's just their core program, they don't need a lot more to carry out the task.

[sheppard7]

Kid was trolling Shep.

[sheppard7]

Humakt83 wrote...

Delta_V2 wrote...

Ok, reading those lines again, I've just realized there is yet another contradiction. The starchild talks about fighting chaos, but then goes on about the created inevitably rebelling against the creator. Being able to predict an outcome with 100% certainty is basically the opposite of chaos.

One of these statements is an outright lie.

Not to mention that some could argue that Synthetic beings are very opposite of Chaos, them lacking true emotions and chemistry. Also Life could be viewed as chaos and death as an order. 

Sovereign: "We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it."

Sovereign: "Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. Your lives are measured in years and decades. You wither and die. "

Sovereign was obviously trolling too.

[Mandemon]

hand-o_death547 wrote...

This is one of the reasons I believe the indoc. theory. Bioware couldn't have been writing this crap with no one saying anything.

My theory is that in the last month when they needed to complete endings, writers foudn hidden drug cache, stoned themselves to oblivion and rewrote the ending to include star child because the star child appeared to them. Then they threatened/bribed programmers to do it.

Modifié par Mandemon, 28 mars 2012 - 10:20 .

[AlexXIV]

The more I think about it the more I come to the conclusion that the ending wasn't supposed to make sense.

You know, it's art. Like in Electronic Arts.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 28 mars 2012 - 10:20 .

[shepskisaac]

mcsupersport wrote...

But one other nail in the coffin of his argument is for the Catalyst to be around that many millions(billions) of years then he is an AI himself....

Now he says an AI will destroy all life, and thus his solution is to only destroy advanced life to protect primitive life, yet here is an AI(the Catalyst) that has been around millions(billions) of years, controlling the most advanced warships in history and he is "protecting" organic life.  So his premise is faulty at best, and plain loco at worst(probably).

Who says Catalyst is an AI? If he is an AI, then it is indeed dumb, but if he is not, then the concept of him and his solution is valid. So far there's nothing said that he is an AI.

[Raging Nug]

eventhewaves wrote...

Raging Nug wrote...

It... it is not a thing you can comprehend.

It is!

Nooo....

[Evil_medved]

uzivatel wrote...

edit: cant read

Xandurpein wrote...

The Starchild's reasoning is just faulty on so many levels, as is Shepard's surrender to his choices...

What other option does Shepard have? 

middle finger never fails.