atheelogos wrote...
The Starchild wasn't talking about biological evolution. He was refering to technological evolution
Modifié par Richard 060, 04 avril 2012 - 03:39 .
The Grey Nayr wrote...
If you look at evolution with an open mind, it's not a straight line, there are several variables and possibilities. Rather than being the apex of existence, synthesis might simply be the last possible form of evolution. And while achieving that, other areas will continue to improve.
The Razman wrote...
You can say that, but at the same time its obvious that evolution is a progressive process; we can say with certainty that more complex and advanced creatures and organisms exist today than did several million years ago.
If it's a progressive process, then there must be a logical end, or peak to it.
Modifié par NewUszi, 04 avril 2012 - 04:06 .
Except that's not what happened with either Dragon Age or Mass Effect. In DA:O, we are given an exposition in the beginning of the game that alerts the player to immediate bias by prefacing its premise with "The Chantry teaches us." This theme of dichotomous truth and dogma, reality and mythology, permeates the entire game. The player character can question the validity of the darkspawn's origin (to which NPCs will answer they don't know), and the amount of mysticism is entirely left up to the player. Nothing illustrates this better than Leliana's faith (and the entire Andraste's Ashes arc) in juxtaposition to Morrigan's darwinistic cynicism: the frame of reference of just how mystical the universe is is entirely up for choice, and it works because it is a constantly reinforced theme. On the end of story mechanics, our applied phlebotonium is lyrium. We are never given a proper explanation on how it works, but since it is the premise the plot is based around, and the setting is magical, we needn't have one. We are, however, given the basic parameters on how far it can go as a plot device, which is crucial. As far as the central antagonists go, they are demonstrably semi-intelligent (hence why the Architect doesn't feel like an arsepull), have a crude semblance of a caste system, and rally around the only observed darkspawn authority, the Archdemon. Pulling a bait-and-switch of the magnitude Mass Effect 3 did would look like this:The Grey Nayr wrote...
One difference between Mass Effect and Dragon Age, and a lot of other media is that we're not given a complete frame of reference about the world/universe at the beginning of the story. What we are given is what the people living at that point in time believe it to be, which isn't always the truth. So instead of reading/watching/playing while aware of things the people in the story aren't, we are as in the dark as them. It also gives them more creative freedom.
Scene
In the last five minutes during the fight against the Archdemon, right before the final blow, the Warden is hit by a bolt of fire. Severely injured, we see her collapse on the ground. There is a white fade-in as we see a ghostly figure appear and beckon her to her feet. When she asks who he is, he explains he is the High Wizard and has existed since time immemorial. The darkspawn are not actually corrupted humans/elves/dwarves, but his Solution to magical chaos. He created them. Without the darkspawn, magicians will inevitably destroy non-magicians and all living things in Thedas. But the fact he keeps getting pwnt by Grey Wardens proves his Solution won't work anymore. In order to solve the problem of Chaos, the Warden must a) Become Queen ArchBroodmother of all the darkspawn, and die. 
Destroy the darkspawn and Archdemon, but kill all magicians as collateral damage. And die. Or C) Jump into a beam of light that turns all living creatures of Thedas into abominations. Also, the Warden will die. Regardless of what you choose, all lyrium in the world will be destroyed.
Credits
Modifié par Random Jerkface, 04 avril 2012 - 04:29 .
Even if all organisms converted to a standard DNA (which is a wat all of its own), considering how fragmented the galaxy is at the end of the game, they would still continue to evolve in manners that suit the environment. This would lead to speciation.Richard 060 wrote...
unless DNA of ALL life becomes standardised (i.e. identical), then there's going to be some variation in the genetic patterns of different lifeforms.
Modifié par Random Jerkface, 04 avril 2012 - 05:01 .
Random Jerkface wrote...
MAJOR SPOILERS IN THIS POST.Except that's not what happened with either Dragon Age or Mass Effect. In DA:O, we are given an exposition in the beginning of the game that alerts the player to immediate bias by prefacing its premise with "The Chantry teaches us." This theme of dichotomous truth and dogma, reality and mythology, permeates the entire game. The player character can question the validity of the darkspawn's origin (to which NPCs will answer they don't know), and the amount of mysticism is entirely left up to the player. Nothing illustrates this better than Leliana's faith (and the entire Andraste's Ashes arc) in juxtaposition to Morrigan's darwinistic cynicism: the frame of reference of just how mystical the universe is is entirely up for choice, and it works because it is a constantly reinforced theme. On the end of story mechanics, our applied phlebotonium is lyrium. We are never given a proper explanation on how it works, but since it is the premise the plot is based around, and the setting is magical, we needn't have one. We are, however, given the basic parameters on how far it can go as a plot device, which is crucial. As far as the central antagonists go, they are demonstrably semi-intelligent (hence why the Architect doesn't feel like an arsepull), have a crude semblance of a caste system, and rally around the only observed darkspawn authority, the Archdemon. Pulling a bait-and-switch of the magnitude Mass Effect 3 did would look like this:The Grey Nayr wrote...
One difference between Mass Effect and Dragon Age, and a lot of other media is that we're not given a complete frame of reference about the world/universe at the beginning of the story. What we are given is what the people living at that point in time believe it to be, which isn't always the truth. So instead of reading/watching/playing while aware of things the people in the story aren't, we are as in the dark as them. It also gives them more creative freedom.Scene
In the last five minutes during the fight against the Archdemon, right before the final blow, the Warden is hit by a bolt of fire. Severely injured, we see her collapse on the ground. There is a white fade-in as we see a ghostly figure appear and beckon her to her feet. When she asks who he is, he explains he is the High Wizard and has existed since time immemorial. The darkspawn are not actually corrupted humans/elves/dwarves, but his Solution to magical chaos. He created them. Without the darkspawn, magicians will inevitably destroy non-magicians and all living things in Thedas. But the fact he keeps getting pwnt by Grey Wardens proves his Solution won't work anymore. In order to solve the problem of Chaos, the Warden must a) Become Queen ArchBroodmother of all the darkspawn, and die.
Credits
And that still makes more sense given the setting.
In Mass Effect, we are not aware of the reapers' motivations (or true nature), but the frame of reference for the extent of their technology is set right from Eden Prime. We know they have the ability to warp organics into cybernetic body horrors by way of nanotechnology. They are not creating anything, but rather modifying it. We also know that they have a greater understanding of the organic mind than we do, and can manipulate it to their liking. This is enough of a frame of reference to justify the revelation that they have been mutating the protheans over the course of millennia using genetic engineering and cybernetic implants (again, they are creating nothing). It is even enough of a frame of reference to justify the revelation that they are *somehow* uploading human minds into a computer (the mind uploading has some basis in RL science, and it has already been done in the MEverse). Is it stupid? Yes, very. But so is all of ME2's plot. Despite this, it still fits what we know the reapers are capable of.
This goes out the window in ME3. In the last five minutes, we meet a Godbaby that tells us that he created the reapers, and that our main goal was never to stop the reapers, but to stop synthetics from killing all organic life (waaaat?). Furthermore, he has a machine that can change every single living thing in the galaxy (waaaaaaat?) into a cyborg (waaaaaaaaaat?) by creating a new form of DNA (waaaaaaaaaaaaaat?) that will also turn completely synthetic robots part organic (waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?). And all you have to do is jump into a beam of light, disintegrate, and explode (waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?). This will also somehow put an end to evolution (a natural law), by presumably putting the universe into equilibrium for eternity (by your account). That is not a revelation. That is an arsepull.
It goes to show how bad the Catalyst is when the theme of evolution (which is at least semi-consistent through I and II) is suddenly thrown out the window in the last five minutes for a robots v. people plot.
It's just bad.
Random Jerkface wrote...
This goes out the window in ME3. In the last five minutes, we meet a Godbaby that tells us that he created the reapers (wat?), and that our main goal was never to stop the reapers, but to stop synthetics from killing all organic life (waaaat?). Furthermore, he has a machine that can change every single living thing in the galaxy (waaaaaaat?) into a cyborg (waaaaaaaaaat?) by creating a new form of DNA (waaaaaaaaaaaaaat?) that will also turn completely synthetic robots part organic (waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?). And all you have to do is jump into a beam of light (waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?), disintegrate (waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?), and explode (waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?). This will also somehow put an end to evolution (a natural law), by presumably putting the universe into equilibrium for eternity (by your account).
It's implied. If he was talking about biological evolution it wouldn't make sense.Richard 060 wrote...
atheelogos wrote...
The Starchild wasn't talking about biological evolution. He was refering to technological evolution
...and you know this HOW, exactly? Where in the 14 lines of dialogue does the Star-child say this?
Oh, wait - he doesn't.
Modifié par atheelogos, 04 avril 2012 - 05:36 .
Don't get me wrong I'm not saying the endings or the starchild's reasoning make perfect sense. I'm just saying it's easier to understand what he's talking about if you look at advancement from a Transhuman/Singularity point of view.Random Jerkface wrote...
Because anything about the ending made sense?
Whether he's talking about biology or technology, he's still wrong.
Modifié par atheelogos, 04 avril 2012 - 05:40 .
Actually, this isn't true. Humans are still physically evolving--some scientists even theorise that we are doing so at an expedited rate. To complement this, due to globalisation, we are also socially evolving faster than ever before. One of the most interesting (and relevant) studies is the decline of parochialism in humans.atheelogos wrote...
I doubt that. The environmental forces needed for such a change aren't there when it comes to species with high technology. We don't change to suit the environment. We change the environment to suit us in our current forms.
Modifié par Random Jerkface, 04 avril 2012 - 05:45 .
Random Jerkface wrote...
How exactly does synthesis preclude technological evolution?Actually, this isn't true. Humans are still physically evolving--some scientists even theorise that we are doing so at an expedited rate. To complement this, due to globalisation, we are also socially evolving faster than ever before. One of the most interesting (and relevant) studies is the decline of parochialism in humans.atheelogos wrote...
I doubt that. The environmental forces needed for such a change aren't there when it comes to species with high technology. We don't change to suit the environment. We change the environment to suit us in our current forms.
Modifié par Farbautisonn, 04 avril 2012 - 07:44 .
Farbautisonn wrote...
The starchild is just the lazyiest possible bs ending toon. I cant be nice about that.
We are given imposed objectives and mindlessly accept anything that this hologram tells us. We dont go looking for HALs memory banks. We dont press the supposedly "controlling entity" to just shut his crap down. We dont try to reason with it.
Instead we are presented with a toon that lies by omission (if it controls the reapers, it can pull them off), presents itself as the pinnacle of evolution much akin to Harbringer (just go synth, its the end goal), claims that this machine is "its solution" but refers to itself and the reapers as "we", has a machine that can merge the DNA and sentience of every being, biological or synthetic, etc...
And people think this can be fixed by "adressing" and "explaining" the endings in dlc or a patch?
I dont think so.
Frybread76 wrote...
I want to add that we shouldn't be too surprised that the ME3 writers took such liberty with the concept of evolution with the synthesis ending. In ME2, Mordin says human beings are very genetically diverse, which is a crock of you-know-what.
JBONE27 wrote...
Farbautisonn wrote...
The starchild is just the lazyiest possible bs ending toon. I cant be nice about that.
We are given imposed objectives and mindlessly accept anything that this hologram tells us. We dont go looking for HALs memory banks. We dont press the supposedly "controlling entity" to just shut his crap down. We dont try to reason with it.
Instead we are presented with a toon that lies by omission (if it controls the reapers, it can pull them off), presents itself as the pinnacle of evolution much akin to Harbringer (just go synth, its the end goal), claims that this machine is "its solution" but refers to itself and the reapers as "we", has a machine that can merge the DNA and sentience of every being, biological or synthetic, etc...
And people think this can be fixed by "adressing" and "explaining" the endings in dlc or a patch?
I dont think so.
Maybe if IT is true and the starchild is actually Harbinger. Or if the blast knocked Shepard out, and this was all a dream.
JBONE27 wrote...
Frybread76 wrote...
I want to add that we shouldn't be too surprised that the ME3 writers took such liberty with the concept of evolution with the synthesis ending. In ME2, Mordin says human beings are very genetically diverse, which is a crock of you-know-what.
To be fair, that was in comparison with other sentiant life forms. Maybe it's not the fact that humans are so diverse, but that aliens are homogenus.
JBONE27 wrote...
There is no ultimate goal in evolution. It is an ongoing process.
And what proof of there is that?Carfax wrote...
All life is fundamentally teleological in nature,
Random Jerkface wrote...
And what proof of there is that?Carfax wrote...
All life is fundamentally teleological in nature,
:wizard:
Retour en haut