263 réponses à ce sujet

[Gigamantis]

Rannoch.

What about it? You know anecdotal evidence is meaningless in discussions about broad eventualities, right?

[The Angry One]

Actually if anything, it was Quarians rebelling against Quarians.
Hell you even see one example of a Geth who would rather turn itself in to the authorities than risk it's Quarian supporter come to harm.

It's not even a revolution when you have continually forced one side to defend themselves.

[jumpingkaede]

Gigamantis wrote...

It's a cycle because organics will always build synthetic life and, at least by his estimation, synthetics will always turn on organics.  Then he cleanses and the cycle starts over.  The catalyst not being able to come up with a permanent or elegant solution isn't a plothole and doesn't make his theory wrong. 

It does cause his theory to remain a theory.

Imagine that.  50,000,000,000 years ago or whenever, the Catalyst came up with a theory.  He then decided that his theory warranted the creation of the Reapers and the systematic eradication of all advanced organic life every 50,000 years.  Oh, but after 50,000,000,000 years he decides... "You know what Shepard? That theory wasn't really that good...."

This is the great antagonist/protagonist of Mass Effect?  

[dreman9999]

Sepharih wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Project overlord is an example. 

Wait....how is project overlord an example?

Because what the reapers said will happen, almost happened.

[Tleining]

Gigamantis wrote...

Rannoch.

What about it? You know anecdotal evidence is meaningless in discussions about broad eventualities, right?

Peace between Geth and Quarians, the Created (geth) are not trying to wipe out their Creators (Quarians)

Protheans: Zha'til were trying to wipe out all organics, Protheans fought back and were about to win when the Reapers stopped them.

[The Angry One]

Gigamantis wrote...

It's a cycle because organics will always build synthetic life and, at least by his estimation, synthetics will always turn on organics.  Then he cleanses and the cycle starts over.  The catalyst not being able to come up with a permanent or elegant solution isn't a plothole and doesn't make his theory wrong. 

His estimation is based on no evidence and idiotic, racist assumptions.

He says synthetics will always fight organics by their nature.
On our side we have the Geth and EDI.
On starbaby's side he has NOTHING. His assumption that all synthetics will attempt to kill organics is wrong.

He says that synthetics will always overcome organics.
On our side we have the Protheans, who did fight a war with synthetics, but constantly prevailed and brought order to the galaxy. The only time they lost was because of the Reapers.
Starbaby again has NOTHING.

His theory is wrong because it's provably wrong at every step.

[Sepharih]

Gigamantis wrote...

Rannoch.

What about it? You know anecdotal evidence is meaningless in discussions about broad eventualities, right?

Not in storytelling it isn't.

I repeat, these would be interesting ideas to debate and discuss in a vacuum, but we aren't doing that.  We're talking about the ending to a story.  If Return of the Jedi had ended with luke realizing that the emperor was right and that you could use the darkside for good and he wound up destroying hyperdrive technology to save the galaxy, then you could argue the merits of that on a philosophical level, but it's still a contradiction and nonsensical conclusion to the story.

[The Angry One]

dreman9999 wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Project overlord is an example. 

Wait....how is project overlord an example?

Because what the reapers said will happen, almost happened.

Due to an organization with an indoctrinated leader. Funny how people keep forgetting that.
Also, Overlord has nothing to do with what the Reapers said, Overlord in fact is about a hybrid. The supposed grand solution to the big problem that only exists in the Catalyst's diseased mind.

[Sepharih]

The Angry One wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Project overlord is an example. 

Wait....how is project overlord an example?

Because what the reapers said will happen, almost happened.

Due to an organization with an indoctrinated leader. Funny how people keep forgetting that.
Also, Overlord has nothing to do with what the Reapers said, Overlord in fact is about a hybrid. The supposed grand solution to the big problem that only exists in the Catalyst's diseased mind.

Beat me to it.

Modifié par Sepharih, 04 avril 2012 - 03:50 .

[The Angry One]

You know what? Even if the Catalyst was right (which it isn't), it's still out of character for Shepard to not even try to argue against it. That's the plot hole.

[Gigamantis]

jumpingkaede wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

It's a cycle because organics will always build synthetic life and, at least by his estimation, synthetics will always turn on organics.  Then he cleanses and the cycle starts over.  The catalyst not being able to come up with a permanent or elegant solution isn't a plothole and doesn't make his theory wrong. 

It does cause his theory to remain a theory.

Imagine that.  50,000,000,000 years ago or whenever, the Catalyst came up with a theory.  He then decided that his theory warranted the creation of the Reapers and the systematic eradication of all advanced organic life every 50,000 years.  Oh, but after 50,000,000,000 years he decides... "You know what Shepard? That theory wasn't really that good...."

This is the great antagonist/protagonist of Mass Effect?  

What the hell are you talking about?  The catalyst still 100% subscribes to his theory, but with the creation of the crucible and Shepard there to fire it he was beaten.  He basically conceded to Shepard and the crucible ended the the catalysts cleansing cycle. 

[The Angry One]

Gigamantis wrote...

What the hell are you talking about?  The catalyst still 100% subscribes to his theory, but with the creation of the crucible and Shepard there to fire it he was beaten.  He basically conceded to Shepard and the crucible ended the the catalysts cleansing cycle. 

The Crucible proves nothing. It is a completely arbitrary rule.
Oh so you built and connected the Crucible! This means... what? That you can follow instructions off an IKEA instruction manual? How does this invalidate a theory so apparently strong and righteous that it justifies the murder, enslavement and torture of quadrillions of innocent beings?

Modifié par The Angry One, 04 avril 2012 - 03:56 .

[dreman9999]

Sepharih wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
They would.  The fact that they are watching a level of life self extigish itself over and over again, would have that Machine race  think  that something is wrong with organics and wonder what  would be the cause to that  behavior.
Most of what the reapers are doing is just a case of differnet morlity from ours.

That's still stupid and nihilistic, but even if that was ultimately what their entire logic boiled down to it doesn't explain why they work so hard to preserve younger civilizations.

dreman9999 wrote...
Peace is alway temporary.

Life itself is temporary.

Gigamantis wrote...
How exactly is he wrong? Starchild has apparently seen the cycle enough to be convinced it will happen and what proof do you have that it won't?

 
Rannoch.

1.Because the conflict can get to the level of destroying the galexy.
2. Which is why, though I understand the reapers logic, don't agree with the reapers. Life and exsistance goes through a cycle of creation to distuction over and over agian, it's the nature of exsistance. As choatic organics are, it's nature may be one of the designs of the universe, that our galexies disturction is just part of the transfer of energy in the grand design of he universe....A point made in Jade empire....But that's also to say that we are ok with destroy ourselves and the our galexy.

3.Thatis just going to startour canversation all over agin with someone else

[tjmax]

Sepharih wrote...


TLDR:
Even if StarChild is right and synthetics will always rebel against their creators, his logic is still stupid.

I hear this all the time. but how is logic obtained.

When you speak of logic, such a tiny word has volumes of descriptions on the various types of logic there are.

Based on basic human morals, the logic seems "stupid". But as a machine its pure logic with out morals its much more simplified.

What is the problem?

People create AI/VI, People fear AI/VI, People try to destroy AI/VI, AI/VI kicks off on peoples butts ... For their own good.


This "problem" is not unique to mass effect but many many stories have been wrriten about the same base subject. Will Smiths I-Robot, same basic story.

People do not think logicly, there are too many other things to interfear with pure logical thinking. Emotions and morality over ride logic in many cases. Whats right and whats wrong is not always whats logical.


Logicly thinking:

Problem: people create machines that kill them
Solution: remove the machines
Problem: people create more machines that kill them.
solution: remove them and the people who are capable of creating the machines
problem solved.

You cant assume the kid gives a crap about the machines or the people, only the problem matters and providing a solution.

[Gigamantis]

The Angry One wrote...

You know what? Even if the Catalyst was right (which it isn't), it's still out of character for Shepard to not even try to argue against it. That's the plot hole.

No it's not; you need to learn what a plothole is. 

Shepard was probably minutes away from bleeding out and probably didn't see a lengthy debate as an option.  You people need to stop trying to invent plotholes where there are none. 

[dreman9999]

Tleining wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

Rannoch.

What about it? You know anecdotal evidence is meaningless in discussions about broad eventualities, right?

Peace between Geth and Quarians, the Created (geth) are not trying to wipe out their Creators (Quarians)

Protheans: Zha'til were trying to wipe out all organics, Protheans fought back and were about to win when the Reapers stopped them.

Sigh...What is the gurantee that the peace will last?

[The Angry One]

dreman9999 wrote...

1.Because the conflict can get to the level of destroying the galexy.

It never has.

2. Which is why, though I understand the reapers logic, don't agree with the reapers. Life and exsistance goes through a cycle of creation to distuction over and over agian, it's the nature of exsistance. As choatic organics are, it's nature may be one of the designs of the universe, that our galexies disturction is just part of the transfer of energy in the grand design of he universe....A point made in Jade empire....But that's also to say that we are ok with destroy ourselves and the our galexy.

Organic life has *never* been destroyed in the time before the Reapers existed. They are unecesarry.

[Tleining]

dreman9999 wrote...

esideras wrote...

The Geth did rebel, yes but It was due to self preservation. If the Quarians hadn't been such ****s they would never have rebeled.

That's the reapers point..

no it isn't. The Synthetics in the Prothean Cycle almost proved the Reapers Point. The Zha created the Zha'til, the Zha'til realized that they were superior, so they transformed all Zha into Zha'til and eventually started a War with the Rest of the Galaxy (Organics). But the Protheans would have won that War, Proving the Catalyst wrong.

The Geth never tried to wipe out all Organics, they wanted to find their own way. As long as the Organics left them alone, they were fine with it.

[Gigamantis]

The Angry One wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

What the hell are you talking about?  The catalyst still 100% subscribes to his theory, but with the creation of the crucible and Shepard there to fire it he was beaten.  He basically conceded to Shepard and the crucible ended the the catalysts cleansing cycle. 

The Crucible proves nothing. It is a completely arbitrary rule.
Oh so you built and connected the Crucible! This means... what? That you can follow instructions off an IKEA instruction manual? How does this invalidate a theory so apparently strong and righteous that it justifies the murder, enslavement and torture of quadrillions of innocent beings?

It doesn't invalidate the theory.  The catalyst didn't admit he was wrong he just admitted he was BEATEN.  The crucible has the power to end the reapers cleansing despite what the catalyst wants to happen. 

[Sepharih]

The Angry One wrote...

You know what? Even if the Catalyst was right (which it isn't), it's still out of character for Shepard to not even try to argue against it. That's the plot hole.

That also.  I don't want to get too far into this point as it's already discussed and not really the point I'm trying to make, but this is definately what destroys the endings above all.  Starchild's logic is nonsensical....but I would actually be ok with that since he's an AI and it might be that this stupid nihilistic logic makes sense on his timeline with raw math and numbers...but my Commander Shepard never would have accepted the god child's proclomations of inevitablity and fate and would have lambasted him for OBVIOUSLY taking a form that was meant to appeal to Shepard's guilt to try and influence his decision.

[dreman9999]

The Angry One wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Project overlord is an example. 

Wait....how is project overlord an example?

Because what the reapers said will happen, almost happened.

Due to an organization with an indoctrinated leader. Funny how people keep forgetting that.
Also, Overlord has nothing to do with what the Reapers said, Overlord in fact is about a hybrid. The supposed grand solution to the big problem that only exists in the Catalyst's diseased mind.

TIM was not indoctrinated till ME3.
Hell, based on the IT and sacturay....We still don't know if TIM is indoctrinated.

[The Angry One]

Gigamantis wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

You know what? Even if the Catalyst was right (which it isn't), it's still out of character for Shepard to not even try to argue against it. That's the plot hole.

No it's not; you need to learn what a plothole is. 

A plot hole, or plothole, is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot,
or constitutes a blatant omission of relevant information regarding the
plot. These include such things as unlikely behaviour or actions of
characters, illogical or impossible events, events happening for no
apparent reason, or statements/events that contradict earlier events in
the storyline.

Shepard was probably minutes away from bleeding out and probably
didn't see a lengthy debate as an option.  You people need to stop
trying to invent plotholes where there are none. 

But Shepard can sprint like an olympic champion while bleeding out, right?

www.youtube.com/watch 21:10

[The Angry One]

dreman9999 wrote...
TIM was not indoctrinated till ME3.
Hell, based on the IT and sacturay....We still don't know if TIM is indoctrinated.

TIM was in the process of being indoctrinated since the First Contact War.

[Maimh]

"True, but your missing one detail....From whatlevel of distroction did life find away. The krogan did recover but that was just an event they casued on their planet. What of something ona galactic scale? How far can the disaster reach? There really isn't a level of distuction and living being can reach. For all we know in a war with organicsvs synthetetis, both side could build weapon that can blow up systems, and from the arrival dlc we can see very clearly that something like that can be done.What if a war between organics and synthetic, because of this weapon, come to a level of the stand off the USA /USSR was, but on a galatic stage?"

The Krogans had nuclear war, similar to what was feared during the Cold war.
Life still prevailed.

"There really isn't a level of distuction and living being can reach" - sorry I can't understand what you are trying to say, could you clean it up?

As for a ultimate weapon - A potential scenario, I will not deny it. However as you say - "For all we know" - that still implies a uncertainty, and thus cannot be regarded as something that will happen.
Perhaps I am simply an optimist, but I will not let the future be ultimately decided by the worst possible situation.

I can see the Reapers doing this, in a clearly inhuman calculation that disregards the individual person and culture. But in a game that has continuesly given me the option of hoping for a positive outcome, I find it odd that my actions becomes dictated by a ultimately tecnological determistic AI, that find genocide a suitiable solution to a so far seen theoretical problem.

[dreman9999]

Tleining wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

esideras wrote...

The Geth did rebel, yes but It was due to self preservation. If the Quarians hadn't been such ****s they would never have rebeled.

That's the reapers point..

 As long as the Organics left them alone, they were fine with it.

And that's the problem...Organics never left them alone. The natural of organics always causes conflict.