296 réponses à ce sujet

[UrgentArchengel]

Pottumuusi wrote...

UrgentArchengel wrote...

Pottumuusi wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

I'm speechless Pottumuussi...

I just cannot convey how morally repulsive your stance is to me... I'm simply to stunned.

Same to you, mate.

Not every murderer is mentally usntable or ill... that statement is demostrably false.

Have at it.

Let me help...It depends on context.  If somebody tries to kill you, and you happen to kill them in self defense, you are a killer but not mentally unstable.  I will agree that if somebody tries to inadvertently kill somebody under first degree and what not, must have a problem somewhere.

I thought it was pretty clear that I was talking about murder and not justifiable homicide or some such.

It still is technically murder, it's just as you said, justifiable.  Oh well, back to happy thoughts 

[T-0pel]

Skull Bearer wrote...

Pottumuusi wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Pottumuusi wrote...


You still didn't answer if you thought we should get revenge on criminals.
In my opinion the only reason to imprison murderers is to keep them from killing people.
You can even give them real food and show them a movie every weekend. It's not like anyone who is ****ed up enough in the head to become a murderer is going to be scared out of it by the possibility of punishment.

It is not a question of revenge. You cannot let someone who's commited crimes on that scale to spend their lives free. It is a disservice to all of their victims.

I don't think there are any good reasons to go after murderers if you know they wont commit any more crimes.
Of course this isn't of relevance in real life, since there is always the possibility that even an old and pathetic Pol Pot will pick up a gun and shoot someone.

However, this kind of thinking is relevant in both my hypothetical and the synthesis ending.

In my hypothetical, you are omniscient and you know this guy wont do anything ever again.

In the syntesis ending it makes sense that the reapers wont attack anyone ever again since the starchild said that this will end the cycle.

So if you think that the reapers should be punished somehow, or that they are getting away with it, it is a question of revenge.

Apologies for the Godwin's violation, but one of the reasons Hitler felt so confident about the whole Final Solution thing was that Turkey in WW1 had gotten away with genocide without repercussion.

What? Where did you hear that? He felt so confident because he genuinaly beleived Germany will be able to conquer whole Europe and become unbeatable. He never even thought about consequences, just look at how the war ended! He refused to believe that he lost up until very final stages of the war and he gave orders to activly destroy German nation, its people and cities, because he belived there is no point in its continued existence if his plan did not work.

[YNation913]

I don't necessarily agree with it, but I've thought a lot about what the writers tried to get across with synthesis.

I feel that your conversation with Vendetta is crucial to understanding the writers' attempt to tie it all together, so I'll start there. Vendetta describes the evolution of life as a cyclical pattern that always reaches a peak and subsequently resets itself. That peak is the conflict between organics and synthetics, a conflict that has appeared under many different contexts and circumstances, but one that ultimately ends with intelligent life being blasted back into the stone age at the end of each cycle.

Now this is the crucial bit: Vendetta reveals that the Reapers actually serve this pattern and are not its masters.

This leads to my understanding of the situation, which is as follows: each side of this conflict is correct in that they recognize that this peak in the evolution of life is a problem that needs to be solved since life can not evolve past it. But there is something wrong with the way each faction chooses to go about solving this problem.

The Reapers try to manage this problem through control; by leaving their technology for civilizations to use, they control the course of evolution so that they know when to intervene before civilization advances too far, and in their view, preserve life before it destroys itself. But appart from being repulsive, the Reaper's solution is actually in service of the pattern, as life reaches its peak, it's blasted back to the stone age.

The goal of Shepard's faction is to simply eliminate the opposition, which would hopefully allow life to move past the peak. As it happens, though, the only way to eliminate something as powerful as the Reapers is to eliminate everything else like them, which creates a problem with this solution as well. The cost of destroying the opposition is the destruction of all synthetic life and most of the technology that life relies on, effectively blasting life back into the stone age, making this solution in service to the pattern as well.

So synthesis, it would seem, is designed to solve this problem permanently, giving each form of life the abilities it needs to prevent the entropy that leads to the evolutionary peak, effectively eliminating the cycle.

Now personally, I don't believe that this should be the only way to move past the peak; ideally, there should be a way to destroy the Reapers while preserving the cooperative synthetics in the galaxy. As it stands, this just isn't possible.

[Motherlander]

Good point OP.

It's like saying to the German National socialist Party of WWII (Because this fourm apprarently doesnt let me use the name of the party): "If you accept that we are all the same for now, you don't need to pay for your crimes in the past."

A very good moral point which perhaps Bioware has missed.

So there is obviouslt no cost to committing genocide.

Modifié par Motherlander, 09 avril 2012 - 12:59 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

For genocide, we can also go to the Cultural Revolution in China, Pol Pot, Rwanda, Turks did to Armenia, Stalin did his share, the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the taking of lands from native peoples in North and South America. The list kind of goes on and on. Hitler doesn't have the corner of the market on genocide.

And they set up Shepard in Arrival by killing over 300,000 Batarians justifying it to save the galaxy from an immediate Reaper invasion, as if that helped. So you're as guilty as sin too. Oh and if you let the council die when you could have saved it, let's not forget the 10,000 deaths you're responsible for aboard the Destiny Ascension. Shepard became a monster.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 09 avril 2012 - 01:06 .

[taliefer]

is there any evidence at all that combing organic and synth life in the mass effect universe is the pinnacle of evolution?

the reapers are the only example of combined synth and organic life, and i would hardly call them good.

and in the synth ending, joker still limps, and tali still wears here suit....so what are the benefits? we are shown and told none

[Motherlander]

taliefer wrote...

is there any evidence at all that combing organic and synth life in the mass effect universe is the pinnacle of evolution?

Agreed. What a bizarr concept to just assume is correct.

Personally I always though there was no pinalcle to evolution. Evolution just is.

Driven to improve and advance. But doomed to ultimtely be undone.

Just like the ending in ME3.

Very consistent with the message Bioware gave us that "Life is pointless, just like our video game."

[DnVill]

haha EMP grenades will be made illegal.

[NormanRawn]

Motherlander wrote...

taliefer wrote...

is there any evidence at all that combing organic and synth life in the mass effect universe is the pinnacle of evolution?

Agreed. What a bizarr concept to just assume is correct.

Personally I always though there was no pinalcle to evolution. Evolution just is.

Driven to improve and advance. But doomed to ultimtely be undone.

Just like the ending in ME3.

Very consistent with the message Bioware gave us that "Life is pointless, just like our video game."

I agree, let evolution decide how the galaxy will unfold. First they impose their way of thinking, saying synthetic life can't be left to evolve to a point where it removes organics.

Then they decide the universe should be forced to evolve, based on what the Crucible introduces.

Reapers have been playing God for too long.

"Life is pointless, just like our video game."

I like it, should have replaced "Take Earth Back", enough false advertising

Modifié par NormanRawn, 09 avril 2012 - 01:26 .

[Dyorgarel Inkin]

The Angry One wrote...

they are mass murderers. They revel in cruelty and torture.

Exactly the way mankind treats animals generally.

We are the reapers.

[A Comedian]

The strongest thing that bothered me upon choosing Synthesis was that it homogenizes the galaxy. Isn't that completely against what we were fighting for: the unification of races DESPITE their differences? Why would anyone want to forcefully and redundantly push that cooperation by creating an incestuous, monotonous species devoid of genetic variability and possibility?

"All life precious. Universe demands diversity!" - Some Guy who Died

[nightsinger]

Zix13 wrote...

nightsinger wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

We are each a nation, independent, free of all weakness. They aren't geth or collectors, they may be servants of the starchild, but ultimately, they are entities confined to each reaper. "Harbinger speaks of you" Would have no meaning if they were controlled directly by starchild. 

Might make more sense if the starchild actually IS harbinger. Maybe he is just using the image of the child to disguise his real nature. If that would be the case, Harbinger/starchild might not be the creator of the Reapers but instead just something like their leader (maybe simply the first Reaper).

If that is the case, then it wouldn't present Shep with the option to destroy it. It would be all like " Your extinction is inevitable, gg mutha****a " 

I do suspect that it is harbinger however, but no matter how you look at it the Starchilds motivations make no sense. Unless indoctrination, but..... that's obviously not what was intended, since they weren't backing it up with additional content. 

You are right about Destroy, although one could argue that this is what Shepard wanted all along and the starchildhad to offer it in order to maintain the illusion. He did make it sound relatively bad in comparison to the other choices at least. 

Anyway, I agree about Indoctrination being the only remotely viable explanation at the moment. That they didn't back it up with additional content does not necessarily mean that it was not their intention. After all, they did not provide any additional content explaining the starchild whatsoever. Again I tend to agree, however, and think that they probably just didn't think this through at all.

To get back to topic, I agree with the OP that Synthesis is the worst possible ending. You make a choice to fundamentally change the very nature of every single being in the galaxy, without knowing the implications. The starchild says it is the best solution, but what does he know? It is clear that he was wrong about the Reapers being needed. Also he has commited genocide multiple times in the past and has always gotten away with it. It just doesn't feel right to believe in anything he says, let alone his "final evolution of life". This is his vision, the vision of a mass murderer. No way he should be allowed to go for it, Shepard cannot allow this... if he is still sane.

[Tyrzun]

The Angry One wrote...

I've been thinking about this, and we already know the moral implications of forcing a new paradigm on trillions of beings along with basically following Saren's vision.

Aside from that, we have the fact that the Reapers get away with it.
Now, I'm of the opinion that the Reaper agenda succeeds in any end, but at least in destroy and control you can at least think that the Reapers are held to account.
In destroy, the Reapers are dead. In control, you can reason that Shepard will have them all kill themselves, or use them as a force for good or whatever.
With synthesis they just leave. Presumably as "free" as any one else. That doesn't sit  right with me.

Controlled or not, indoctrinated or not, they are mass murderers. They revel in cruelty and torture.
Harbinger alone is a war criminal of such appalling scope that he'd make any human war criminal in our entire history shriek in terror. Yet with synthesis presumably he flies off to live his life. So long, good luck?

The Reapers win ending is in the game alright, it's just mislabelled as the "best"
ending.

Glade other people can actually see the ruse for what it is.  Genosice of all organic life forever against their will.

[pottypenguin]

Yeah, the synthesis ending just seems beyond wrong, and in my opinion, so out of context with Shepard and the universe. I know it wasn’t intended but it feels like the same logic of creating a homogeneous race of white skin, blonde hair, blue eyes, tall, with overall Nordic features to solve all the worlds problems.

[Pottumuusi]

UrgentArchengel wrote...

Pottumuusi wrote...

I thought it was pretty clear that I was talking about murder and not justifiable homicide or some such.

It still is technically murder, it's just as you said, justifiable.  Oh well, back to happy thoughts 

You might wanna go check up on the legal definitons of these words.

[billida]

I also think if it is the worst ending, and even more because the game want you to think it is the best ending, and i highly doubt its creators had think about all the moral implications.

-the reapers go away with it. it has always been the most terrible thing.
-end of diversity. Uniformity instead. Wow, what a great idea, and not at all against the triology theme.
-synthesis as and achievement of evolution ? well i figured somehow the ultimate evolution would be like spiritual, with all beings getting rid of the flesh or something. But anyway, evolution ending ? it means death, end of movement end of hope.
-denying free will for all the galaxy. Isn't it nice for a paragon shep ?

i could go on and on and on. This ending pretends to be peaceful, and metaphysical.
It is just green nonsense.

[goofyomnivore]

Synthesis makes me think of Aki-Zeta 5 and The Cybernetic Consciousness.

I myself am okay with Synthesis, but the part that puts me off is forcing it on everything. I just don't feel comfortable picking that for everyone and everything. I guess if people hated it bad enough they could find alternatives like dna/gene modifying to make themselves more organic.

Modifié par strive, 09 avril 2012 - 10:48 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

That is remarkably short sighted. I hate the ending more than anyone here, mainly for its failure in applying basic logic, but the fact that the reapers live and "get away with it" is beside the point. You went out to stop the cycle, not apply some form of primitive justice.

The crime of the synthesis ending has to do with logic, not the fact that you couldn't bring good ol medieval justice to them.

[Richard 060]

Worth considering also:

Evolution only ever leads to greater genetic diversity, more species, etc. - it's a 'passive' survival mechanism. Sure, not all species are successful, but the greater the amount of genetic variation active, the greater likelihood of some thriving and weathering whatever external factors change around them.

And we can see what happens when genetic variety is reduced - at the very least, any negative external factors have a detrimental effect on a greater number of species. Take weasels, first example - there is only one species of weasel, so they're all equally affected by things like diseases. Conversely, there are many species of finch worldwide - a virus could wipe out one species, but the wide gene pool of so many varied species would ensure that some would be unaffected. Diversity ensures that "life finds a way", in some form or other.


To put it succinctly; genetic diversity is what allows certain species to survive mass extinctions.

Reduce the gene pool, homogenise it, or similar? That's what in-breeding does - and we all know how that usually turns out...


So, even if nature's tried-and-tested mechanism reversed course, and all species DID evolve convergently to the same end point, the big question would be this: why on earth would that be a positive thing to happen, taking into account the above information (which, for the record, has held true for several hundred million years)?


Honestly - if you're going to create some kind of god-like, seemingly omnipotent being for your science fiction story, don't have it spout uninformed twaddle that can be easily refuted by the content of a high school science lecture or a cursory Google search...

[Jayleia]

Pottumuusi wrote...

Not every murderer is mentally usntable or ill... that statement is demostrably false.

Have at it.

You have made the claim that murderers are all mentally ill.  Therefore the burden of proof falls upon you.

Your claim can be disproven if ANY murderers are not diagnosed as mentally ill.

[AtlasMickey]

Computron2000 wrote...

AtlasMickey wrote...
By not choosing Synthesis, you are forcing an old paradigm on a thousand different islands of civilization for who knows how many years. You are robbing them of the potential for new intelligence, extended lives, greater freedom, better health, and all the positive things that come from new technological paradigms, including greater justice.

You cannot force an old paradigm when there was never a new one in the first place. This is called the status quo.

No change != change.

Except that the Crucible was a publicly funded project using resources from every civilization, so to prevent its dissemination of resources back to the public via Synthesis is to have forced those public resources into a less than optimal use.

Also, do keep in mind that many of the worst atrocities are all in the name of helping people, such as the Japanese invasion in WW2 was to help other countries economically in their "Co-prosperity sphere". Then there was that german guy in WW2, who wanted to give postive things to the germans.

This is not lost on me. I'm libertarian, pretty hardcore, but the Crucible is a defensive weapon, much unlike something that german guy would have used. 

Modifié par AtlasMickey, 11 avril 2012 - 01:43 .

[liggy002]

GlassElephant wrote...

The reapers basically win in all the endings, because all of these choices are their solution to end Starkid's perceived conflict of synthetics vs. organics.

I agree that synthesis is the worst, though.

Yeah, its pretty depressing.   However, with destroy they don't win.  We are just doomed to extinction with Chaos.  Yeah, so it's either they win, or the whole galaxy is screwed.