188 réponses à ce sujet

[JBONE27]

I will try to make this as spoiler free as possible.  Mass Effect 3's Synthasis ending got evolution wrong.  There is no ultimate goal in evolution.  It is an ongoing process.  It is how life-forms adapt to their envoronments, and has nothing to do with combining organics and synthetics.

That is all... Thank you. 

[Zalbik]

More space magic?

[cactusberry]

I thought it was obvious that godchild was biased.

[WhiteKnyght]

JBONE27 wrote...

I will try to make this as spoiler free as possible.  Mass Effect 3's Synthasis ending got evolution wrong.  There is no ultimate goal in evolution.  It is an ongoing process.  It is how life-forms adapt to their envoronments, and has nothing to do with combining organics and synthetics.

That is all... Thank you. 

How would we know if there is or isn't a final stage of evolution before we reach it? We don't even understand much about evolution as it is.

Your opinion is subjective.

Modifié par The Grey Nayr, 04 avril 2012 - 12:34 .

[Izhalezan]

Fuuuuuussssiiooonnnn......................HAH!

[StabGuy]

There is no ultimate goal in evolution

That we know of.

[LOLandStuff]

What I wonder is why Starchild didn't do that in the first place. Why harvest for 10 of billions of years and then offer that option to some random guy who happens to walk in. Besides that the logic is mind boggling.

[Izhalezan]

LOLandStuff wrote...

What I wonder is why Starchild didn't do that in the first place. Why harvest for 10 of billions of years and then offer that option to some random guy who happens to walk in. Besides that the logic is mind boggling.

Why is starchild so seemingly powerless? he can't seem to just kill you and go about his genocide, and he didn't just manually open the relay back in me1, he's a rather odd guy.

[linkrulesx10]

The theory *pretty much law of evolution* has been researched alot and we understand it quite well. And there is no ultimate goal apart from continuing to exist, even then thats not so much a goal but a sideeffect of darwinian naturual selection, if you can't breed your species will not exist.

This is a good part of why the synthesis ending rubbed me the wrong way, just what is it even...

[WhiteKnyght]

LOLandStuff wrote...

What I wonder is why Starchild didn't do that in the first place. Why harvest for 10 of billions of years and then offer that option to some random guy who happens to walk in. Besides that the logic is mind boggling.

Because he didn't have the Crucible slapped on to the Citadel.

By his own admission, its why there are more possibilities. Think of the Crucible as an amplifier.

Also the reason why he cant do it himself is probably because he cant interface with or control the Crucible. As it's not a reaper construct or a computer system.

[Izhalezan]

linkrulesx10 wrote...
 a sideeffect of darwinian naturual selection, if you can't breed your species will not exist.

Pandas defy this, though we're kinda helping.

[WhiteKnyght]

linkrulesx10 wrote...

The theory *pretty much law of evolution* has been researched alot and we understand it quite well. And there is no ultimate goal apart from continuing to exist, even then thats not so much a goal but a sideeffect of darwinian naturual selection, if you can't breed your species will not exist.

This is a good part of why the synthesis ending rubbed me the wrong way, just what is it even...

Studying something and understanding it are two different hings. You cant prove the purpose of evolution anymore than you can prove the existence of God or what He's planning.

All we really have are educated guesses/opinions.

Modifié par The Grey Nayr, 04 avril 2012 - 12:47 .

[What a Succulent Ass]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

I will try to make this as spoiler free as possible.  Mass Effect 3's Synthasis ending got evolution wrong.  There is no ultimate goal in evolution.  It is an ongoing process.  It is how life-forms adapt to their envoronments, and has nothing to do with combining organics and synthetics.

That is all... Thank you. 

How would we know if there is or isn't a final stage of evolution before we reach it? We don't even understand much about evolution as it is.

Your opinion is subjective.

This is just silly. "Evolution" is a human-devised concept that attempts to explain reactive adaptations in living organisms. It cannot have a "goal" since, by definition, it's just the descriptor of a natural phenomenon. If you want to say that living organisms are purposefully being ushered toward some ascended plane of existence, then you'd have a point. But since we have no context (or basis) for that idea, it's just nonsense.

[LOLandStuff]

They could have let a civilization finish the Crucible then get some guy and toss him in the beam to end everything.
The brat is just so full of s**t.

[WhiteKnyght]

Random Jerkface wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

I will try to make this as spoiler free as possible.  Mass Effect 3's Synthasis ending got evolution wrong.  There is no ultimate goal in evolution.  It is an ongoing process.  It is how life-forms adapt to their envoronments, and has nothing to do with combining organics and synthetics.

That is all... Thank you. 

How would we know if there is or isn't a final stage of evolution before we reach it? We don't even understand much about evolution as it is.

Your opinion is subjective.

This is just silly. "Evolution" is a human-devised concept that attempts to explain reactive adaptations in living organisms. It cannot have a "goal" since, by definition, it's just the descriptor of a natural phenomenon. If you want to say that living organisms are purposefully being ushered toward some ascended plane of existence, then you'd have a point. But since we have no context (or basis) for that idea, it's just nonsense.

Evolution is also something that happens over the course of thousands to millions of years. We haven't even had the concept for two centuries yet.  The most we can do is look at what things used to be and what they are now, and make assumptions.

Our lifespan is too short to learn anything truly significant in our lifetime and our concept is too young to be truly refined.

The point is neither you or I can prove it one way or the other. So you cant fault the writers for making a FICTIONAL purpose.

[What a Succulent Ass]

LOLandStuff wrote...

The brat is just so full of s**t.

No kidding. If he has the power to somehow fundamentally alter life on a genetic level (robot DNA? DAFUQ? Does that mean that the Normandy would be a giant flesh monster if EDI hadn't gotten a body?), then he can surely direct his magic kamehameha to just the reapers.

****.

[WhiteKnyght]

LOLandStuff wrote...

They could have let a civilization finish the Crucible then get some guy and toss him in the beam to end everything.
The brat is just so full of s**t.

And how would the Catalyst know what it would do before it's attached?

The civilizations building it believed it to be a doomsday weapon, the Reapers probably went along the same logic.

[What a Succulent Ass]

The Grey Nayr wrote...
The point is neither you or I can prove it one way or the other. So you cant fault the writers for making a FICTIONAL purpose.

You're missing the point. Evolution is simply a theory that explains how and why organisms adapt to environmental stressors. What you're describing isn't evolution, it's some sort of cosmic directive. If such a directive existed, then evolution would just be a microcosm of that, a means to an end. Slightly semantic, sure, but the distinction is important when you have something as fantastic as the Guardian pulling a bait-and-switch by introducing a new theme, explaining it (lol), and resolving it all within fourteen lines and ten minutes.

[CrimsonZephyr]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

I will try to make this as spoiler free as possible.  Mass Effect 3's Synthasis ending got evolution wrong.  There is no ultimate goal in evolution.  It is an ongoing process.  It is how life-forms adapt to their envoronments, and has nothing to do with combining organics and synthetics.

That is all... Thank you. 

How would we know if there is or isn't a final stage of evolution before we reach it? We don't even understand much about evolution as it is.

Your opinion is subjective.

*facepalm*

Simply put, there is no final stage because evolution is continuous. There is no such thing as "more evolved" or "less evolved" in an objecyive sense, and therefore no end goal. Evolution is due to environmental stresses and progresses in any manner that proves most beneficial -- by that I mean genes are passed on. It is not directional, and therefore can never have a final stage unless an environment were to remain absolutely constant -- which it does not do. A human now would be different from a human four thousand years ago, who would be different from a human twenty thousand years ago, but what's different in each one would be different because the environmental stresses are different.

[JBONE27]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

I will try to make this as spoiler free as possible.  Mass Effect 3's Synthasis ending got evolution wrong.  There is no ultimate goal in evolution.  It is an ongoing process.  It is how life-forms adapt to their envoronments, and has nothing to do with combining organics and synthetics.

That is all... Thank you. 

How would we know if there is or isn't a final stage of evolution before we reach it? We don't even understand much about evolution as it is.

Your opinion is subjective.

*facepalm*

Simply put, there is no final stage because evolution is continuous. There is no such thing as "more evolved" or "less evolved" in an objecyive sense, and therefore no end goal. Evolution is due to environmental stresses and progresses in any manner that proves most beneficial -- by that I mean genes are passed on. It is not directional, and therefore can never have a final stage unless an environment were to remain absolutely constant -- which it does not do. A human now would be different from a human four thousand years ago, who would be different from a human twenty thousand years ago, but what's different in each one would be different because the environmental stresses are different.

Exactly what I meant by "An ongoing process."

[WhiteKnyght]

Random Jerkface wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...
The point is neither you or I can prove it one way or the other. So you cant fault the writers for making a FICTIONAL purpose.

You're missing the point. Evolution is simply a theory that explains how and why organisms adapt to environmental stressors. What you're describing isn't evolution, it's some sort of cosmic directive. If such a directive existed, then evolution would just be a microcosm of that, a means to an end. Slightly semantic, sure, but the distinction is important when you have something as fantastic as the Guardian pulling a bait-and-switch by introducing a new theme, explaining it (lol), and resolving it all within fourteen lines and ten minutes.

But my point is that you cant prove that there isn't a cosmic directive, or a point of adaptation where life would be able to deal with any enviornmental stressor and not need to evolve any more.

Plus Mass Effect has been hinting at synthesis being the pinnacle of evolution all the way back to Sovereign in ME1, with the discovery of the Human Reaper Larva building on it. You're only concern is looking for any reason to hate on the Star Child. When in reality you'll have to bash Sovereign, Harbinger, and the Collectors along with him.

[Uszi]

OP Kind of fails, since "evolution" has many meanings, the biological one being only one of them and not the first entry in the dictionary.

That said, true, biological evolution has nothing to do with the ME3 Synthesis.

It might be some sort of philosophical evolution, but it certainly has nothing to do with inherited traits affecting variable survivability.

[WhiteKnyght]

In ME1, Sovereign specifically described the Reapers as the "Pinnacle of Evolution" and the "End of everything."

In ME2, we discover that Harbinger and the Collectors were using humans to create a new Reaper, and we learn that the Reapers are actually hybrids of organic and inorganic life. Harbinger even specifically refers to the process as ascendence and perfection.

In ME3, we learn that The Catalyst does the Cycle to allow organic life to continue while allowing the old life to ascend and be preserved as Reapers. The Destroyer on Rannoch even says "It is not something you can understand." This directly references and adds clarity to what's been said and hinted at in the past. While the original purpose of the Cycle may have changed at some point, the point about the reapers creation and existence has been consistent from day one.

Modifié par The Grey Nayr, 04 avril 2012 - 01:16 .

[JBONE27]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

In ME1, Sovereign specifically described the Reapers as the "Pinnacle of Evolution" and the "End of everything."

In ME2, we discover that Harbinger and the Collectors were using humans to create a new Reaper, and we learn that the Reapers are actually hybrids of organic and inorganic life. Harbinger even specifically refers to the process as ascendence and perfection.

In ME3, we learn that The Catalyst does the Cycle to allow organic life to continue while allowing the old life to ascend and be preserved as Reapers. The Destroyer on Rannoch even says "It is not something you can understand." This directly references and adds clarity to what's been said and hinted at in the past. While the original purpose of the Cycle may have changed at some point, the point about the reapers creation and existence has been consistent from day one.

That doesn't mean they're not wrong.  They still are when it comes to evolution.  Perhaps, they were simply programed to believe it, but that doesn't change the fact that it runs counter to evolution theory.

[WhiteKnyght]

JBONE27 wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

In ME1, Sovereign specifically described the Reapers as the "Pinnacle of Evolution" and the "End of everything."

In ME2, we discover that Harbinger and the Collectors were using humans to create a new Reaper, and we learn that the Reapers are actually hybrids of organic and inorganic life. Harbinger even specifically refers to the process as ascendence and perfection.

In ME3, we learn that The Catalyst does the Cycle to allow organic life to continue while allowing the old life to ascend and be preserved as Reapers. The Destroyer on Rannoch even says "It is not something you can understand." This directly references and adds clarity to what's been said and hinted at in the past. While the original purpose of the Cycle may have changed at some point, the point about the reapers creation and existence has been consistent from day one.

That doesn't mean they're not wrong.  They still are when it comes to evolution.  Perhaps, they were simply programed to believe it, but that doesn't change the fact that it runs counter to evolution theory.

Also you forget that during ME3, EDI wonders if the mass effect phenomenon only occurs in one universe, a finite bubble area. Which by that logic, another universe would have its own set of laws and possibilities. You're judging Mass Effect by our universe's laws, when arguably it's not our universe. Their Earth may share a common history with ours, but it's a different universe entirely.

Their universe could have its own evolutionary process that is similar, yet different than what we perceive ours to be. Holding them to our standards is completely stupid. And if you stuck to your guns on that, you'd also have to criticize anything out of the ordinary in any fictional work. From Biotics in ME to magic in Dragon Age to Superman being able to defy gravity.

You're critcisms are shallow. You're ignoring the fact that the writers can shape their universe as they see fit just because you don't like it.

Modifié par The Grey Nayr, 04 avril 2012 - 01:20 .