132 réponses à ce sujet

[Rogue Unit]

blacqout wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...

blacqout wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...

blacqout wrote...

CyberF3y wrote...

Sorry, not synthetics vs organics exactly but created vs creators... I went back and watched the conversation again.

When he argues that synthetics would kill all organics, my Shep proved that wrong. Peace is possible between the Geth and Quarians (and the Quarians shot first, the Geth were simply protecting their own to escape.) This is not an absolute. Synthetics and Organics are at peace in my game.

And I'm not talking about Shepard in question #2. I'm talking about the catalyst. He is not organic. He may be an odd hybrid, but he does not appear to be organic. Thus he was a created form. What happened to his creators? Not knowing what the catalyst is adds to the problem. I feel people want to know who the catalyst is, how it was created, and why the destruction of multiple civilizations was left to this one AI-like being.

The more I see the three ending choices, the more I want to believe the indoc theory. The whole thing makes less sense than the dark energy ending.

You're correct, holding the line is not helping the children. However, those who decided to become part of the movement saw the potential to do some good in the world and decided to put their efforts in making use of the energy of the protestors. Giving to charity can be cathartic to those who are hurting. It was a good gesture of positivity that should not be dismissed. Child's Play DID distance themselves because they cannot be associated with any group, political or otherwise. It detracts from the message of charity which is to just help others. It was understandable. The charity drives in the Retake movement are to help people who are already focused do some good while waiting for a response from BioWare.

No, it is synthetics versus organics, regardless of the terminology used. The Reapers' specified purpose is to prevent synthetics from destroying organics. 

How much of a hand did the Protheans have in the development of younger species, like humanity? I don't recall precisely, but i remember the phrase "interventionary evolutionists" being used in a codex entry in the first game. 

To some extent, the Protheans "created" humanity. The Reapers hit the citadel in their cycle and are said to have gained access to all their records. They'd have known about Earth... but they didn't "ascend" humanity. Why? Because it's about synthetics.

Now I'm truly confused. If the bolded statement is true, why did the Reapers give the Geth (synthetics) upgrades that would allow them to wipe the quarians (organics) out before they had a chance to "preserve" them? Why not let the quarians take the geth out, then swoop in an harvest the weakened quarians?

What do you mean "if"? The Catalyst says as much. "Without us to stop it, Synthetics will destroy all organics. We created the cycle so that never happens. That's the solution."

Obviously they're not infallable tactitions. But i'm glad i could clear that up for you.

Still doesn't explain why he's using the Geth to completely erase an organic race if that what he claims he trying to prevent. Nice try though. It'd be different if he was going to "preserve" them, but no.

Okay. 

So we know that the Reapers create only one capital ship per cycle. Given that they were attempting to make a human Reaper in ME2, and that they took the Citadel, which was full of human remains and used as some sort of processing center, to Earth, we can safely assume that they were going to try using humans again. 

We learn in ME2 that a lot of humans are needed, and that in order to obtain enough genetic material, they'd need to target Earth. We learn in ME3, that Reaper Destroyers are significantly smaller than the Capital ships. That is to say, far fewer Quarians would be needed. They could afford to just completely destroy a whole lot of them and still stay true to the mission.

That the Quarians don't have a planet probably makes storing them a bit more complicated for the Reapers. They're adapting to the situation by using the Geth. 

When the Geth win the war, they don't just destroy "a whole lot" of them, they cause the quarians to go extinct.

No quarians = no destroyer
No destroyer = complete loss of quarians genetic material forever

Starkid just did exactly what he claims he doesn't want happening.

[Father_Jerusalem]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

blacqout wrote...
It wouldn't make much sense for the Reapers to just attack the synthetic upstarts, because the organic races that created them would make the same mistakes again if left unchecked. The Reapers aren't so much protecting the organic races from themselves - more like young organic races from the more advanced ones that will meddle in dangerous things like artificial life.
I only said that the Catalyst's logic made sense. Your questions don't really pertain to that.

Well, I asked for a cannon answer with ingame proofs, not baseless assumption.

You want a cannon answer, eh?

Okay.

BOOM!

Please learn the difference between cannon and canon before you try to speak. Also, it's and its, they're there and their, and really, just grammar in general.

Thank you.

[neonism]

why is this in the no spoiler allowed part of the forum?

[Father_Jerusalem]

Rogue Unit wrote...

blacqout wrote...

CyberF3y wrote...

Sorry, not synthetics vs organics exactly but created vs creators... I went back and watched the conversation again.

When he argues that synthetics would kill all organics, my Shep proved that wrong. Peace is possible between the Geth and Quarians (and the Quarians shot first, the Geth were simply protecting their own to escape.) This is not an absolute. Synthetics and Organics are at peace in my game.

And I'm not talking about Shepard in question #2. I'm talking about the catalyst. He is not organic. He may be an odd hybrid, but he does not appear to be organic. Thus he was a created form. What happened to his creators? Not knowing what the catalyst is adds to the problem. I feel people want to know who the catalyst is, how it was created, and why the destruction of multiple civilizations was left to this one AI-like being.

The more I see the three ending choices, the more I want to believe the indoc theory. The whole thing makes less sense than the dark energy ending.

You're correct, holding the line is not helping the children. However, those who decided to become part of the movement saw the potential to do some good in the world and decided to put their efforts in making use of the energy of the protestors. Giving to charity can be cathartic to those who are hurting. It was a good gesture of positivity that should not be dismissed. Child's Play DID distance themselves because they cannot be associated with any group, political or otherwise. It detracts from the message of charity which is to just help others. It was understandable. The charity drives in the Retake movement are to help people who are already focused do some good while waiting for a response from BioWare.

No, it is synthetics versus organics, regardless of the terminology used. The Reapers' specified purpose is to prevent synthetics from destroying organics. 

How much of a hand did the Protheans have in the development of younger species, like humanity? I don't recall precisely, but i remember the phrase "interventionary evolutionists" being used in a codex entry in the first game. 

To some extent, the Protheans "created" humanity. The Reapers hit the citadel in their cycle and are said to have gained access to all their records. They'd have known about Earth... but they didn't "ascend" humanity. Why? Because it's about synthetics.

Now I'm truly confused. If the bolded statement is true, why did the Reapers give the Geth (synthetics) upgrades that would allow them to wipe the quarians (organics) out before they had a chance to "preserve" them? In this scenario it looks like they're not only letting a synthetics race destroy an organic race, but are acutally helping them. Why not let the quarians take the geth out, then swoop in an harvest the weakened quarians? That way the quarians can be preserved in a new Reaper destroyer.

Because they have no interest in harvesting the Quarians? I mean... seriously, how hard was that to think of?

The Reapers don't care about the Quarians. So they gave the Geth Reaperified tech to cause chaos and disharmony so that while the galaxy was focused on the Geth, the Reapers could slip in unannounced.

Holy cow, tactics 101.

[Rogue Unit]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...

blacqout wrote...

CyberF3y wrote...

Sorry, not synthetics vs organics exactly but created vs creators... I went back and watched the conversation again.

When he argues that synthetics would kill all organics, my Shep proved that wrong. Peace is possible between the Geth and Quarians (and the Quarians shot first, the Geth were simply protecting their own to escape.) This is not an absolute. Synthetics and Organics are at peace in my game.

And I'm not talking about Shepard in question #2. I'm talking about the catalyst. He is not organic. He may be an odd hybrid, but he does not appear to be organic. Thus he was a created form. What happened to his creators? Not knowing what the catalyst is adds to the problem. I feel people want to know who the catalyst is, how it was created, and why the destruction of multiple civilizations was left to this one AI-like being.

The more I see the three ending choices, the more I want to believe the indoc theory. The whole thing makes less sense than the dark energy ending.

You're correct, holding the line is not helping the children. However, those who decided to become part of the movement saw the potential to do some good in the world and decided to put their efforts in making use of the energy of the protestors. Giving to charity can be cathartic to those who are hurting. It was a good gesture of positivity that should not be dismissed. Child's Play DID distance themselves because they cannot be associated with any group, political or otherwise. It detracts from the message of charity which is to just help others. It was understandable. The charity drives in the Retake movement are to help people who are already focused do some good while waiting for a response from BioWare.

No, it is synthetics versus organics, regardless of the terminology used. The Reapers' specified purpose is to prevent synthetics from destroying organics. 

How much of a hand did the Protheans have in the development of younger species, like humanity? I don't recall precisely, but i remember the phrase "interventionary evolutionists" being used in a codex entry in the first game. 

To some extent, the Protheans "created" humanity. The Reapers hit the citadel in their cycle and are said to have gained access to all their records. They'd have known about Earth... but they didn't "ascend" humanity. Why? Because it's about synthetics.

Now I'm truly confused. If the bolded statement is true, why did the Reapers give the Geth (synthetics) upgrades that would allow them to wipe the quarians (organics) out before they had a chance to "preserve" them? In this scenario it looks like they're not only letting a synthetics race destroy an organic race, but are acutally helping them. Why not let the quarians take the geth out, then swoop in an harvest the weakened quarians? That way the quarians can be preserved in a new Reaper destroyer.

Because they have no interest in harvesting the Quarians? I mean... seriously, how hard was that to think of?

The Reapers don't care about the Quarians. So they gave the Geth Reaperified tech to cause chaos and disharmony so that while the galaxy was focused on the Geth, the Reapers could slip in unannounced.

Holy cow, tactics 101.

The point


-----------------


Your head


This isn't about the Reapers' war tactics. It's about the Starkid's logic of "preventing synthetics from wiping out organics" yet he uses synthetics to do the exact thing he claims he wants to prevent.

The only way to somewhat justify his twisted way of "saving us from synthetics" is the fact the he "preserves" the organics race they reap in a Reaper dreadnought/destroyer. But he doesn't he even bother to do this with the quarians, he just lets the geth wipe them from the face of the galaxy. It's contradictory to his "solution".

[CyberF3y]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...

blacqout wrote...

No, it is synthetics versus organics, regardless of the terminology used. The Reapers' specified purpose is to prevent synthetics from destroying organics. 

How much of a hand did the Protheans have in the development of younger species, like humanity? I don't recall precisely, but i remember the phrase "interventionary evolutionists" being used in a codex entry in the first game. 

To some extent, the Protheans "created" humanity. The Reapers hit the citadel in their cycle and are said to have gained access to all their records. They'd have known about Earth... but they didn't "ascend" humanity. Why? Because it's about synthetics.

Now I'm truly confused. If the bolded statement is true, why did the Reapers give the Geth (synthetics) upgrades that would allow them to wipe the quarians (organics) out before they had a chance to "preserve" them? In this scenario it looks like they're not only letting a synthetics race destroy an organic race, but are acutally helping them. Why not let the quarians take the geth out, then swoop in an harvest the weakened quarians? That way the quarians can be preserved in a new Reaper destroyer.

Because they have no interest in harvesting the Quarians? I mean... seriously, how hard was that to think of?

The Reapers don't care about the Quarians. So they gave the Geth Reaperified tech to cause chaos and disharmony so that while the galaxy was focused on the Geth, the Reapers could slip in unannounced.

Holy cow, tactics 101.

Ugh, I may have hit the wrong button.

The Quarians are a very technologically advanced civilization and one of the older species in the cycle.  If the Reapers are to preserve organic life, why cherry pick whic races live?  The Quarians are done developing.  They can make synthetics.

The argument that was made was if the Reapers preserve life, why would they allow it to go extinct without harvesting it?

[Il Divo]

blacqout wrote...

Well, this dynamic could go on forever. That you've failed to actually explain how the Catalyst's logic is broken tells me all i need to know. Namely that you're a little confused about the whole thing.

I shouldn't have to explain basic reasoning to you. There's a reason why slippery slope fallacies are considered red zone territory, when unexplained. The Catalyst commits a slippery slope fallacy by not providing any sort of logic to support the eventual conclusion. As it stands, the Catalyst does not make an argument. He makes a claim, an unsupported one at that. It would be like someone saying "All Republic are corrupt, so we should never allow Republics" without actually referencing any examples.
 
It's more hilarious when Bioware provides us with multiple examples in-game which contradict the claim (not logic) the Starchild makes by exploring the origin of the Geth uprising, allowing us to unite the Geth and Quarians, and through the humanization of EDI and doesn't even let us point out the existence of such examples. 

And it gets even more hilarious when the Catalyst decides to provide us with a way out when we haven't actually disproven anything he says, at least the way the scene is written. If he wants to observe whether his cycle can still work, he can wait another few hours. Shepard's resistance will have meant nothing.

That's probably why you still have a signature implying that supporting "Retake" is helping children, which as we all know it isn't. You come across as a mite dishonest.

Bioware taught me well then, given the ME3 advertising campaign.

Modifié par Il Divo, 11 avril 2012 - 07:29 .

[Tirigon]

JBONE27 wrote...

Switch the order.  Instead of "Synthetics will always turn on their creators,"  have "Organics will always turn on their creations."  Done, now he's saving synthetics... but that leaves the plot hole of what happened to all of the synthetics... unless all of them joined the reapers and use their componants to make those eldrich creatures the reapers are so fond of making. 

Yea, that makes sense,

TOO F*CKING BAD IT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED, NOR WHAT THE STARCHILD SAYS.

[CyberF3y]

Tirigon wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

Switch the order.  Instead of "Synthetics will always turn on their creators,"  have "Organics will always turn on their creations."  Done, now he's saving synthetics... but that leaves the plot hole of what happened to all of the synthetics... unless all of them joined the reapers and use their componants to make those eldrich creatures the reapers are so fond of making. 

Yea, that makes sense,

TOO F*CKING BAD IT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED, NOR WHAT THE STARCHILD SAYS.

Whoa there.  I think you need a cupcake.  

[Tirigon]

CyberF3y wrote...

Whoa there.  I think you need a cupcake.  

Naa I just had a good meal, but thank you all the same.

It is just that such "the endings make sense if we imagine something else as the ending" are ridiculous and stupid.


How would you react if I made a thread

A way in which the Starchild's logic makes sense!!
Hey what if it was just an illusion, and in reality Frodo threw the ring into mount Doom and thus defeated Sauron. the Reapers and all are merely a hallucination caused by mount Doom's poisonous gases!

That is exactly what the OP did. Granted he didnt deviate quite as far from the real ending but the idea is the same.

[blacqout]

JBONE27 wrote...

blacqout wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

blacqout wrote...



Please give me the minute and second at which the Catalyst states that Synthetics turn on their creators because they "realise they're not perfect".

1:18 "The created will always rebel agaisnt their creators."  Alright, I was wrong about the not being perfect thing, but I was completely right about the rebellion part, which was the main thrust of my argument.

Yes, you were wrong. 

If you wish to take that one line in a vacuum, you can make it mean anything. I suggest paying more attention to the rest of the conversation for some much needed context.

I'm not the one taking it in a vaccuum.  I'm taking it in how it relates to lore.  At no time did synthetics that were definitely not under reaper contol rebel against their creators, which is what rebel means.

No, you are. And because of that you don't fully understand the Catalyst's motivations. It's not about "created versus creators" at all. It's about created synthetics versus organics. Follow the dialogue more closely and you will see.

The word "rebel" actually means 'Rise in opposition or armed resistance to an established government or ruler.' ... which, amazingly, actually describes what the Geth did to the Quarians, even if the Quarians started it.

Modifié par blacqout, 11 avril 2012 - 07:50 .

[JBONE27]

Tirigon wrote...

CyberF3y wrote...

Whoa there.  I think you need a cupcake.  

Naa I just had a good meal, but thank you all the same.

It is just that such "the endings make sense if we imagine something else as the ending" are ridiculous and stupid.


How would you react if I made a thread

A way in which the Starchild's logic makes sense!!
Hey what if it was just an illusion, and in reality Frodo threw the ring into mount Doom and thus defeated Sauron. the Reapers and all are merely a hallucination caused by mount Doom's poisonous gases!

That is exactly what the OP did. Granted he didnt deviate quite as far from the real ending but the idea is the same.

Obviously it makes no sense, but it would make sense if it were reversed.  It's too bad Bioware didn't check with people who actually payed attention to what was going on.

[JBONE27]

blacqout wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

blacqout wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

blacqout wrote...



Please give me the minute and second at which the Catalyst states that Synthetics turn on their creators because they "realise they're not perfect".

1:18 "The created will always rebel agaisnt their creators."  Alright, I was wrong about the not being perfect thing, but I was completely right about the rebellion part, which was the main thrust of my argument.

Yes, you were wrong. 

If you wish to take that one line in a vacuum, you can make it mean anything. I suggest paying more attention to the rest of the conversation for some much needed context.

I'm not the one taking it in a vaccuum.  I'm taking it in how it relates to lore.  At no time did synthetics that were definitely not under reaper contol rebel against their creators, which is what rebel means.

No, you are. And because of that you don't fully understand the Catalyst's motivations. It's not about "created versus creators" at all. It's about created synthetics versus organics. Follow the dialogue more closely and you will see.

The word "rebel" actually means 'Rise in opposition or armed resistance to an established government or ruler.' ... which, amazingly, actually describes what the Geth did to the Quarians, even if the Quarians started it.

Except they didn't.  As we saw in the history portion of the Rannoc mission, the geth didn't so much rise, as defended.  In fact, we saw that when the fighting on the quarian side stopped, the geth stopped for 300 years, and the geth that attacked were under the control of the reapers.

[blacqout]

CyberF3y wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...

blacqout wrote...

No, it is synthetics versus organics, regardless of the terminology used. The Reapers' specified purpose is to prevent synthetics from destroying organics. 

How much of a hand did the Protheans have in the development of younger species, like humanity? I don't recall precisely, but i remember the phrase "interventionary evolutionists" being used in a codex entry in the first game. 

To some extent, the Protheans "created" humanity. The Reapers hit the citadel in their cycle and are said to have gained access to all their records. They'd have known about Earth... but they didn't "ascend" humanity. Why? Because it's about synthetics.

Now I'm truly confused. If the bolded statement is true, why did the Reapers give the Geth (synthetics) upgrades that would allow them to wipe the quarians (organics) out before they had a chance to "preserve" them? In this scenario it looks like they're not only letting a synthetics race destroy an organic race, but are acutally helping them. Why not let the quarians take the geth out, then swoop in an harvest the weakened quarians? That way the quarians can be preserved in a new Reaper destroyer.

Because they have no interest in harvesting the Quarians? I mean... seriously, how hard was that to think of?

The Reapers don't care about the Quarians. So they gave the Geth Reaperified tech to cause chaos and disharmony so that while the galaxy was focused on the Geth, the Reapers could slip in unannounced.

Holy cow, tactics 101.

Ugh, I may have hit the wrong button.

The Quarians are a very technologically advanced civilization and one of the older species in the cycle.  If the Reapers are to preserve organic life, why cherry pick whic races live?  The Quarians are done developing.  They can make synthetics.

The argument that was made was if the Reapers preserve life, why would they allow it to go extinct without harvesting it?

EDI hypothesis that the Protheans couldn't be turned itno a Reaper for whatever reasons, which is why the Reapers turned them into Collectors.  

Part of their M.O is pretecting younger races from the dangers posed by the creations of more technologically advanced ones. So by destroying the Quarians, they're still doing what they set out to do as best they could. 

Maybe the Quarians, like the Protheans, can't be turned into Reapers. Maybe the fact that they live on spaceships causes logistical problems that the Reapers just didn't have the ability to deal with, what with all the battles going on. 

This doesn't "break" the Catalyst's logic at all.

[CyberF3y]

Tirigon wrote...

CyberF3y wrote...

Whoa there.  I think you need a cupcake.  

Naa I just had a good meal, but thank you all the same.

It is just that such "the endings make sense if we imagine something else as the ending" are ridiculous and stupid.


How would you react if I made a thread

A way in which the Starchild's logic makes sense!!
Hey what if it was just an illusion, and in reality Frodo threw the ring into mount Doom and thus defeated Sauron. the Reapers and all are merely a hallucination caused by mount Doom's poisonous gases!

That is exactly what the OP did. Granted he didnt deviate quite as far from the real ending but the idea is the same.

Still a better endi--

The all caps just made you seem very, very angry.  I'm just saying calm down.  I understand the frustration though.  

[Father_Jerusalem]

Rogue Unit wrote...

Now I'm truly confused. If the bolded statement is true, why did the Reapers give the Geth (synthetics) upgrades that would allow them to wipe the quarians (organics) out before they had a chance to "preserve" them? In this scenario it looks like they're not only letting a synthetics race destroy an organic race, but are acutally helping them. Why not let the quarians take the geth out, then swoop in an harvest the weakened quarians? That way the quarians can be preserved in a new Reaper destroyer.

Because they have no interest in harvesting the Quarians? I mean... seriously, how hard was that to think of?

The Reapers don't care about the Quarians. So they gave the Geth Reaperified tech to cause chaos and disharmony so that while the galaxy was focused on the Geth, the Reapers could slip in unannounced.

Holy cow, tactics 101.

The point


-----------------


Your head


This isn't about the Reapers' war tactics. It's about the Starkid's logic of "preventing synthetics from wiping out organics" yet he uses synthetics to do the exact thing he claims he wants to prevent.

The only way to somewhat justify his twisted way of "saving us from synthetics" is the fact the he "preserves" the organics race they reap in a Reaper dreadnought/destroyer. But he doesn't he even bother to do this with the quarians, he just lets the geth wipe them from the face of the galaxy. It's contradictory to his "solution".

Because they view the Quarians as too frail to be harvested? And too advanced to be the next cycle's dominant species? So... if they're not going to be harvested... and they're not going to be left alone... what other option is there?

Thaaaaaaaaat's right.

Not to mention, it was Soverign's plan. Soverign, who has been the rear guard for 50,000 years and has been "contaminated" by seeing the organics of this cycle, perhaps he just holds a grudge against the Quarians. CLEARLY if you pay attention in ME1, this is very personal for Soverign - he's very arrogant and seems to have a personal grudge against Shepard, so it's not out of the realm of possibility that it's just his personality.

Modifié par Father_Jerusalem, 11 avril 2012 - 08:00 .

[blacqout]

JBONE27 wrote...

blacqout wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

blacqout wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

blacqout wrote...



Please give me the minute and second at which the Catalyst states that Synthetics turn on their creators because they "realise they're not perfect".

1:18 "The created will always rebel agaisnt their creators."  Alright, I was wrong about the not being perfect thing, but I was completely right about the rebellion part, which was the main thrust of my argument.

Yes, you were wrong. 

If you wish to take that one line in a vacuum, you can make it mean anything. I suggest paying more attention to the rest of the conversation for some much needed context.

I'm not the one taking it in a vaccuum.  I'm taking it in how it relates to lore.  At no time did synthetics that were definitely not under reaper contol rebel against their creators, which is what rebel means.

No, you are. And because of that you don't fully understand the Catalyst's motivations. It's not about "created versus creators" at all. It's about created synthetics versus organics. Follow the dialogue more closely and you will see.

The word "rebel" actually means 'Rise in opposition or armed resistance to an established government or ruler.' ... which, amazingly, actually describes what the Geth did to the Quarians, even if the Quarians started it.

Except they didn't.  As we saw in the history portion of the Rannoc mission, the geth didn't so much rise, as defended.  In fact, we saw that when the fighting on the quarian side stopped, the geth stopped for 300 years, and the geth that attacked were under the control of the reapers.

Except they did. Words mean things.

If you look at the history of the world, you'll see that many rebels acted in defense.

[blacqout]

According to Retakers, the Rebel Alliance in star wars wes not rebelling, because the Empire started it.

Hilarious.

100 percent of the time, the situation that caused a group to rebel was instigated by the people they are rebelling against. That's the nature of rebellion. 

Jesus.

Modifié par blacqout, 11 avril 2012 - 08:16 .

[Tirigon]

JBONE27 wrote...

Obviously it makes no sense, but it would make sense if it were reversed.  It's too bad Bioware didn't check with people who actually payed attention to what was going on.

But that is exactly my point!

Yes, it would make sense if it was reversed, but it isnt! There is no point discussing would-bes, because the chance to make it so is over, and now we have what we have.

[JBONE27]

blacqout wrote...

According to Retakers, the Rebel Alliance in star wars wes not rebelling, because the Empire started it.

Hilarious.

100 percent of the time, the situation that caused a group to rebel was instigated by the people they are rebelling against. That's the nature of rebellion. 

Jesus.

Where did it say that the Empire started it?  To the best of my understanding, the rebellion started shortly after the Empire was formed, and the Empire was formed by comitee vote.

[Tirigon]

blacqout wrote...

According to Retakers, the Rebel Alliance in star wars wes not rebelling, because the Empire started it.

Hilarious.

100 percent of the time, the situation that caused a group to rebel was instigated by the people they are rebelling against. That's the nature of rebellion. 

Jesus.

And that is why "rebels" is simply the old rulers' (derogatory) word for Freedom fighters.

[JBONE27]

Tirigon wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

Obviously it makes no sense, but it would make sense if it were reversed.  It's too bad Bioware didn't check with people who actually payed attention to what was going on.

But that is exactly my point!

Yes, it would make sense if it was reversed, but it isnt! There is no point discussing would-bes, because the chance to make it so is over, and now we have what we have.

Eh, it's just mental masturbation on my part.

[blacqout]

JBONE27 wrote...

blacqout wrote...

According to Retakers, the Rebel Alliance in star wars wes not rebelling, because the Empire started it.

Hilarious.

100 percent of the time, the situation that caused a group to rebel was instigated by the people they are rebelling against. That's the nature of rebellion. 

Jesus.

Where did it say that the Empire started it?  To the best of my understanding, the rebellion started shortly after the Empire was formed, and the Empire was formed by comitee vote.

The Empire formed after Palpatine engineered events and circumstances to make it appear a necessity. Those in the knowsaw it for what it was (a power grab and excuse to get rid of the Jedi) so rebelled. 

Not too different to the Quarians wanting to get rid of the Geth in a way.

Also, there was all the prejudice against non-humans, allowing dictators that were loyal to the Empire to run their own little bits of space as they saw fit, and more mundane things like excessive taxation.  

[Tirigon]

blacqout wrote...


The Empire formed after Palpatine engineered events and circumstances to make it appear a necessity. Those in the knowsaw it for what it was (a power grab and excuse to get rid of the Jedi) so rebelled. 

Not too different to the Quarians wanting to get rid of the Geth in a way.

Also, there was all the prejudice against non-humans, allowing dictators that were loyal to the Empire to run their own little bits of space as they saw fit, and more mundane things like excessive taxation.  

Fighting against a power-hungry tyrant and killing your synthetics because they dare to wonder if they might be alive are 2 entirely different things.

I would even go so far that except for both involving the shooting of things they have nothing in common, at all.

[Father_Jerusalem]

JBONE27 wrote...

blacqout wrote...

According to Retakers, the Rebel Alliance in star wars wes not rebelling, because the Empire started it.

Hilarious.

100 percent of the time, the situation that caused a group to rebel was instigated by the people they are rebelling against. That's the nature of rebellion. 

Jesus.

Where did it say that the Empire started it?  To the best of my understanding, the rebellion started shortly after the Empire was formed, and the Empire was formed by comitee vote.

Wait, seriously?

Uh. Moving on.