132 réponses à ce sujet

[blacqout]

Drake_Hound wrote...

Eh blacqout , eh with syria don't even go there cause after egypt and lybia ...
No reasonable middle east country is going to go trough that again .

When after a coup they are stuck with a none working infrastructure , a brutal civil war incoming in libya , another stale mate in egypt , that prevent a modern working country who was slowly progressing towards democracy , now setback into chaos with fundamentalist coming back stronger then before .

So you so sure about what you read on the media is the same as reality ?
When the camera moves on ?

As i understand it, political discussion isn't allowed on this forum. After my warning from one of the BioWare people, i decided to try to follow the rules more closely. 

It's just a recent example of a rebellion. I didn't say whether i supported it or not. 

[brfritos]

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. 

Except you have a scenario of making peace between Quarians and Geth, so actually the whole discussion is flawed, Shepard proved that synthetics and organics CAN coexist and don't need merge.
This single fact alone turns the Synthetic end a WTF an the entire discussion pointless.
And don't forget that depending of your actions the synthetic end is not even available!

Wich also turns the Destroy end in a war crime and annihilation, so humanity therefore should be treated like the Batarians (a PoS race) or the Krogans (a bunch of animals).

And why Shepard is so submissive to the Catalyst, since we are talking about it?
If people wants to find logic where it doesn't exists, fine.
But at least let's apply logic in a cohesive manner.

[JBONE27]

brfritos 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. 

Except you have a scenario of making peace between Quarians and Geth, so actually the whole discussion is flawed, Shepard proved that synthetics and organics CAN coexist and don't need merge.
This single fact alone turns the Synthetic end a WTF an the entire discussion pointless.
And don't forget that depending of your actions the synthetic end is not even available!

Wich also turns the Destroy end in a war crime and annihilation, so humanity therefore should be treated like the Batarians (a PoS race) or the Krogans (a bunch of animals).

And why Shepard is so submissive to the Catalyst, since we are talking about it?
If people wants to find logic where it doesn't exists, fine.
But at least let's apply logic in a cohesive manner.

I said his logic would make sense, but yes your points are completely valid and correct.

[Dridengx]

Wootball_ wrote...

Which part of the 'NO ME3 SPOILERS ALLOWED' bit of the forum name didn't you understand??

No love for the gamer who has yet to finish the game. these selfish people. I feel sorry for those who get spoiled by people who feel compeled to talk about the ending in the wrong place

[blacqout]

brfritos 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. 

Except you have a scenario of making peace between Quarians and Geth, so actually the whole discussion is flawed, Shepard proved that synthetics and organics CAN coexist and don't need merge.
This single fact alone turns the Synthetic end a WTF an the entire discussion pointless.
And don't forget that depending of your actions the synthetic end is not even available!

Wich also turns the Destroy end in a war crime and annihilation, so humanity therefore should be treated like the Batarians (a PoS race) or the Krogans (a bunch of animals).

And why Shepard is so submissive to the Catalyst, since we are talking about it?
If people wants to find logic where it doesn't exists, fine.
But at least let's apply logic in a cohesive manner.

What happens if Shepard doesn't intervene? The Geth were winning in ME3. They would have utterly annhiliated their "creators".

Without the intervention of a man whose actions were so incredible he became an actual legend, the Catalyst is proven correct there and then. 

Also, the Catalyst clearly states that the "peace cannot last" when describing the control option. This would intimate that it's aware that peace between man and machine is temporarily possible.

Do you honestly think that there are any guarantees that the Geth and Quarians will live in perfect harmony from now until forever? 

[Tirigon]

blacqout wrote...

Hmm. I suppose we can add the concepts of free will and choice to the rapidly growing list of things you don't fully understand.

And I suppose we can add you to the list of arrogant, insulting douchebags I will ignore from now on.

[blacqout]

No need for petty name-calling, Trigon. I'm just trying to help you understand.

[The_Shootist]

A Way In Which Star Child's' Logic Makes Sense 

We are the Borg. Resistance is futile.

[JBONE27]

The_Shootist wrote...

A Way In Which Star Child's' Logic Makes Sense 

We are the Borg. Resistance is futile.

I prefer Doctor Who.

Assimilate or be deleted.

[wellsoul2]

blacqout wrote...
What happens if Shepard doesn't intervene? The Geth were winning in ME3. They would have utterly annhiliated their "creators".
Without the intervention of a man whose actions were so incredible he became an actual legend, the Catalyst is proven correct there and then. 

The catalyst is saying that the Reaper cycles are good, because otherwise the synthetics destroy all organics.

It's logic is that it's better to destroy the organics and preserve their technology via the Reapers for the next cycle.

This pruning then allows new organic races to develop leaving them room to grow to the next cycle.

I'm guessing Starchild is saying this is better than the alternative - Organics creating a Synthetic Race that

destroys all organics and will not allow new organic races to exist..creating a lifeless Synthetic Dominated Galaxy.

The Starchild says the Reaper Cycle is the only thing that works. In this way organic life gets a new start each

cycle...like the seasons.  Organics grow and prosper...are harvested and after winter new races of organics again.

It's not that it's an illogical argument. It's just not explained enough and does not fit the rest of the story.

Based on ME1 and ME2 and most of ME3 it's about Shepard proving there is a better way and that all races and

types can get along and prosper together organics and synthetics.

That is why the ending is a slap in the face...Shepard is hope. Starchild is cynicism.

[MadMatt910]

Tirigon wrote...

blacqout wrote...

Hmm. I suppose we can add the concepts of free will and choice to the rapidly growing list of things you don't fully understand.

And I suppose we can add you to the list of arrogant, insulting douchebags I will ignore from now on.

I can agree the name calling is at least accurate. I recommend a google search for valentin seleznyov, and see how many forums hes been previously banned from. It is interesting to say the least, and the social network sites tell a story of their own.

My point, there is a history present

[blacqout]

You have to go back many years to find an example of me being banned from anything, and your constant following me around warning others to not engage me is bordering on harassment.

[Il Divo]

blacqout wrote...

What happens if Shepard doesn't intervene? The Geth were winning in ME3. They would have utterly annhiliated their "creators".

Without the intervention of a man whose actions were so incredible he became an actual legend, the Catalyst is proven correct there and then. 

Without the intervention of the Reapers, the Geth were on the verge of being wiped out.

Also, the Catalyst clearly states that the "peace cannot last" when describing the control option. This would intimate that it's aware that peace between man and machine is temporarily possible.

Do you honestly think that there are any guarantees that the Geth and Quarians will live in perfect harmony from now until forever? 

A logical fallacy which justifies any sort of hypothetical scenario. It's made even more ridiculous since the Catalyst is incapable of citing any actual examples to support his claims, so we have no way of determining where his reasoning comes from. You can justify any claim under the parameters that "it won't last forever".

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 avril 2012 - 08:56 .

[Tirigon]

MadMatt910 wrote...


I can agree the name calling is at least accurate. I recommend a google search for valentin seleznyov, and see how many forums hes been previously banned from. It is interesting to say the least, and the social network sites tell a story of their own.

My point, there is a history present

And how is this Valentin Seleznyov important?

[blacqout]

Il Divo wrote...

blacqout wrote...

What happens if Shepard doesn't intervene? The Geth were winning in ME3. They would have utterly annhiliated their "creators".

Without the intervention of a man whose actions were so incredible he became an actual legend, the Catalyst is proven correct there and then. 

Without the intervention of the Reapers, the Geth were on the verge of being wiped out.

Also, the Catalyst clearly states that the "peace cannot last" when describing the control option. This would intimate that it's aware that peace between man and machine is temporarily possible.

Do you honestly think that there are any guarantees that the Geth and Quarians will live in perfect harmony from now until forever? 

A logical fallacy which justifies any sort of hypothetical scenario. It's made even more ridiculous since the Catalyst is incapable of citing any actual examples to support his claims, so we have no way of determining where his reasoning comes from. You can justify any claim under the parameters that "it won't last forever".

Conratulations. You've just realised that peace between the Geth and the Quarians was not on the cards minus the intervention of a man who, some time after his death, became held in an almost mystical reverence. Well done you!

Also, it's not a "logical fallacy". The term logical fallacy has a clear and defined meaning. A logical fallacy is a mistake in reasoning. The Catalyst is not having an argument with Shepard, it's stating what it considers to be fact. It justifies precisely none of its inferences. 

You can call anything a logical fallacy under the parameter that you don't use the term correctly.

[Il Divo]

blacqout wrote...

Conratulations. You've just realised that peace between the Geth and the Quarians was not on the cards minus the intervention of a man who, some time after his death, became held in an almost mystical reverence. Well done you!

And you've just realized that this does not mean that Synthetics will not wipe out all organics, by necessity. Think for a change, please.

Also, it's not a "logical fallacy". The term logical fallacy has a clear and defined meaning. A logical fallacy is a mistake in reasoning. The Catalyst is not having an argument with Shepard, it's stating what it considers to be fact. It justifies precisely none of its inferences. 

Oopsy! You're absolutely right. A logical fallacy would require that the Catalyst is attempting to use logic, which I believe I pointed out to you a page and a half ago. We'll have to revisit this point when the Catalyst actually has something to bring to the table other than nonsensical claims.

You can call anything a logical fallacy under the parameter that you don't use the term correctly.

Please continue demonstrating this. I want to learn how to use a logical fallacy from the very best.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 avril 2012 - 09:36 .

[blacqout]

[quote]Il Divo wrote...

And you've just realized that this does not mean that Synthetics will not wipe out all organics, by necessity. Think for a change, please.

[/quote]

This is a non sequitor. We were discussing the Catalyst's insistance that a permenant peace between Synthetics and Organics isn't possible.

[/quote]

Oopsy! You're absolutely right. A logical fallacy would require that the Catalyst is using logic, which I believe I pointed out to you a page and a half ago. We'll have to revisit this point when the Catalyst actually has something to bring to the table other than nonsensical claims.

[/quote]

So you accept that you misused the term "logical fallacy"? I didn't read your previous post, but if your claim about it is accurate, why would you contradict yourself by claiming the Catalyst was guilty of an un-named fallacy? Bizarre.

[/quote]

Please continue demonstrating this. I want to learn how to use a logical fallacy from the very best.

[/quote]

I'm yet to accuse anyone of using a logical fallacy (even though you're clearly guilty of argument from personal incredulity) ... so how can i continue to demonstrate misusing a term when i am yet to use it at all?

Modifié par blacqout, 12 avril 2012 - 09:47 .

[Il Divo]

blacqout wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

And you've just realized that this does not mean that Synthetics will not wipe out all organics, by necessity. Think for a change, please.

This is a non sequitor. We were discussing the Catalyst's insistance that a permenant peace between Synthetics and Organics isn't possible.

Th two issues are inherently tied together in demonstrating the Catalyst's absurdity, so it's not as unrelated as you'd like to think. Even if war between synthetic and organic were inevitable, we still have demonstrations that this does not lead to the inevitable result of synthetics exterminating organics, which itself indicates that the Reapers have jumped the gun with their solution.  

In addition, there is no such thing as permanent peace, meaning it's a loaded claim. The Catalyst is unable to demonstrate what is so special about the Synthetic-Organic distinction that makes peace between them impossible, in comparison to any other species. The Krogan could have wiped out the Council, the Rachni could have wiped out everybody, the Turians could have destroyed humanity, and the Batarians are absolutely insane. Where is this synthetics vs. organics must fight conflict which apparently is so important that t doesn't occupy the central narrative? Apparently Javik goes into it....but then, that content was supposed to be optional and not necessary to understand the storyline.

The entire presentation on the Geth-Quarian conflict which Mass Effect gives is not one of machine vs. organic. The storyline of both the Geth and EDI goes so far as to humanize them by the end, from ME1 to ME3. And yet, for some unknowable reason, we can't bring this out specifically. The Catalyst is right about eveything, without even being capable of showing Shepard why he's right. It's the absurdity of the story that they thought to asspull such a motivation for a character and then expect the audience to swallow it with no clarification.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 avril 2012 - 10:01 .

[Dasher1010]

"My kid had cancer and was going to die so I murdered him." That's the Star Child's Logic.

[Il Divo]

Dasher1010 wrote...

"My kid had cancer and was going to die so I murdered him." That's the Star Child's Logic.

Essentially, yes.

[Arkitekt]

Jesus christ blacqout, what patience you have. I couldn't suffer such amazing amounts of sheer idiocy for so long and with such restraint.

I however agree with the notion that starchild's cynic theme contradicts the rest of the trilogy, not by logic, but narratively. That is, you play the three games being told, subtly or explicitly, that synthetics are just another life form just like organics, that they deserve equal terms to organics, that peace is indeed possible, etc., only to be said otherwise in the last 5 minutes of the game, and shep's all like "okay snif".

[Il Divo]

Arkitekt wrote...

I however agree with the notion that starchild's cynic theme contradicts the rest of the trilogy, not by logic, but narratively. That is, you play the three games being told, subtly or explicitly, that synthetics are just another life form just like organics, that they deserve equal terms to organics, that peace is indeed possible, etc., only to be said otherwise in the last 5 minutes of the game, and shep's all like "okay snif".

That's the real problem: not simply the Catalyst being right. I could accept an ending like that. It's that Bioware acts like they didn't spend the last 100+ hours establishing a completely different theme. If they want the Catalyst to be right, fine. Just don't attempt to sweep everything under the rug and pretend like it never happened. If the Catalyst is so certain, let him grow a pair and actually throw it in Shepard's face that he's wrong instead of side-stepping the issue.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 avril 2012 - 10:08 .

[Tirigon]

Il Divo wrote...

Dasher1010 wrote...

"My kid had cancer and was going to die so I murdered him." That's the Star Child's Logic.

Essentially, yes.

With the difference that in the used analogy, one might argue it was to minimize suffering.

The Repaers increase it.

So the starchild's reasoning is actually more stupid.

[blacqout]

Arkitekt wrote...

Jesus christ blacqout, what patience you have. I couldn't suffer such amazing amounts of sheer idiocy for so long and with such restraint.

I however agree with the notion that starchild's cynic theme contradicts the rest of the trilogy, not by logic, but narratively. That is, you play the three games being told, subtly or explicitly, that synthetics are just another life form just like organics, that they deserve equal terms to organics, that peace is indeed possible, etc., only to be said otherwise in the last 5 minutes of the game, and shep's all like "okay snif".

I'm not a Christian, but Jesus Christ is one of the greatest teachers in all of history, and his primary weapon was patience. It'll take just as much patience on my part if i'm going to enlighten the unenlightened too.

I hope at the very least people will read this and understand that the Geth actually did rebel.

[TieRantaSaurusWrex]

*smh*

Neither side is proving their point they are just bickering.

The only coherence I've seen at all in this thread was the post about the starchild not using logic at all.