52 réponses à ce sujet

[Terrorize69]

Im sure alot of you have seen this, with the amount of topics can't seem to find it lol..taken from a video on youtube just a couple of quotes.

God-Child: "The created will always rebel against their creators"

*Flashback* Geth Prime: "You are welcome to return to Rannoch Admiral Raan, with us."

Again..

God-Child: Without us to stop it, synthetics will destroy all organics.

*Flashback* Geth Prime: "You are welcome to return to Rannoch Admiral Raan, with us."

Ok despite that and the fact Shepard dosn't feel like pointing that fact out, or the fact that Geth and Quarian ships are fighting side by side just outside..

He is the Reaper's creator, why havnt they followed his logic and rebelled..

Does that child speak a word of truth from the moment he opens his mouth? Seems to me he's just a pissed of kid whos unhappy that Harry Potter finally ended.

[Laurencio]

Temporary peace between the Geth and the Quarians does not disprove starchild's conclusion.

[daguest]

I pointed this out some time ago. According to SC logic, reapers should have rebelled against him long time ago.
Some guy answered they were half organics, and thus are not fully synthetic....
Anyway, space magic and plot holes are all over the ending, not worth trying to find a solution.

Right now, I don't want to be a BW writters trying to "explain" the ending.

Laurencio wrote...

Temporary peace between the Geth and the Quarians does not disprove starchild's conclusion.

For 300 years the Geths only defended themselves (except when Sovereign came). With Legion's death, peace is near.
There is more chance to see another Krogan rebellion wipe the rest of the galaxy than a geth rebellion.

Modifié par daguest, 16 avril 2012 - 12:17 .

[likta_]

Laurencio wrote...

Temporary peace between the Geth and the Quarians does not disprove starchild's conclusion.

The reapers never rebelling against the catalyst does that. If the reapers rebelled against their organic creators and the catalyst is just their leader, then they chose to save organic life instead of killing it. So that disproves starchilds conclusion for sure.

[Wes Finley]

Ipso Facto, Quid Pro Quo, Vis a vis, ergo Checkmate.

Modifié par Wes Finley, 16 avril 2012 - 12:23 .

[sefudargo]

should have reworded that
the created will eventually rebel aguinst the creator (geth and quarian)
doesn't mean that they will always be at eachother. maybe one day they may come to understand each other (geth and Quarian)
should have said
" the Created will eventually rebel aguinst the creator and leave a wake of destruction and possible extinction" would have been better

[someone else]

Laurencio wrote...
Temporary peace between the Geth and the Quarians does not disprove starchild's conclusion.

did you play ME3 btw?   Please tell me at what point the Geth "rebelled" against the Quarian oppressors?   IIRCC, the Quarians freaked when the Geth started questioning the reason for their new-found self-awareness and launched a pre-emptive attempt at genocide

[Laurencio]

likta_ wrote...

Laurencio wrote...

Temporary peace between the Geth and the Quarians does not disprove starchild's conclusion.

The
reapers never rebelling against the catalyst does that. If the reapers
rebelled against their organic creators and the catalyst is just their
leader, then they chose to save organic life instead of killing it. So
that disproves starchilds conclusion for sure.

We don't really know what the catalyst is, might just be a reaper for all we know, part of the same technology and creation of the reapers. Even if you subscribe to the idea that reapers are created by starchild, that they haven't rebelled yet doesn't prove anyhting.

daguest wrote...



I pointed this out some time ago. According to SC logic, reapers should have rebelled against him long time ago.

Some guy answered they were half organics, and thus are not fully synthetic....

Anyway, space magic and plot holes are all over the ending, not worth trying to find a solution.



Right now, I don't want to be a BW writters trying to "explain" the ending.

Laurencio wrote...



Temporary peace between the Geth and the Quarians does not disprove starchild's conclusion.

For 300 years the Geths only defended themselves (except when Sovereign came). With Legion's death, peace is near.

There is more chance to see another Krogan rebellion wipe the rest of the galaxy than a geth rebellion.

It doesn't matter. In no way does a temporary peace between the Geth and Quarians in the current galactic period conclusively prove that they will not end up wiping out the Quarians in the end. No one said it had to be done "now".

someone else wrote...

Laurencio wrote...
Temporary peace between the Geth and the Quarians does not disprove starchild's conclusion.

did you play ME3 btw?   Please tell me at what point the Geth "rebelled" against the Quarian oppressors?   IIRCC, the Quarians freaked when the Geth started questioning the reason for their new-found self-awareness and launched a pre-emptive attempt at genocide

Of course I did. The fact that the Geth wiped out 99% of the Quarian population indicates a sort of rebellion, even if it was in "self defence". However, that is neither here, nor there. At no point in ME1, ME2 or ME3 do you conclusively prove that the Geth will not eventually rebell against the Quarians and wipe them out. At no point do you disprove that synthetics will one day wipe out all organic life.

Why? Because it is impossible to disprove. Statements as vague as "in the end all synthetics will rebell against organics", can not be disproven unless you can see all of time. Making a definite conclusion based on 3 years, where 2 years and 11 months of which the Geth were in a devestating war with the Quarians, is impossible. Especially when arguing against a "race" that has been around for hundreds of thousands, if not even billions of years.

[Eckswhyzed]

Laurencio wrote...

Of course I did. The fact that the Geth wiped out 99% of the Quarian population indicates a sort of rebellion, even if it was in "self defence". However, that is neither here, nor there. At no point in ME1, ME2 or ME3 do you conclusively prove that the Geth will not eventually rebell against the Quarians and wipe them out. At no point do you disprove that synthetics will one day wipe out all organic life.

Why? Because it is impossible to disprove. Statements as vague as "in the end all synthetics will rebell against organics", can not be disproven unless you can see all of time. Making a definite conclusion based on 3 years, where 2 years and 11 months of which the Geth were in a devestating war with the Quarians, is impossible. Especially when arguing against a "race" that has been around for hundreds of thousands, if not even billions of years.

I brokered peace between the geth and the quarians. I hope it will last. But the Catalyst can still be right. There have been THOUSANDS of cycles before, and so we can take what the Catalyst says as truth (I do, but that's not what we're arguing here).

Sure, goood for you, peace for a few decades. That doesn't mean much when you're talking in thousands, millions or billions of years.

[Flextt]

I think no side is right on the matter. The cases shown to us are meant to be representative for the respective species. This is a narrative device to help us extrapolate the single instance to the bigger picture and help building a relationship. Unfortunately, almost none of these instances are in favor, not even indirectly, of Starchild's arguments, especially if you play Paragon Shepard. The consequence is a perceived disconnection: We got to build up all those relationships and in the end, we are forced to abandon them on the notion of an infinitely more intelligent lifeform?
Of course, since they function as narrative devices, they are not really viable as empirical data to prove or disprove any opinion on the matter.
Fact is: The logic of Starchild is not necessarily right or wrong, except truly for his statement "The Reapers are my solution. I created them" <--> "The created will always rebel against their creators." in conjunction with Sovereign's statement on Reaper's independence. What stays and what is important, is the disconnect. The rest is nitpick and conjecture.

[Pairikas]

Laurencio wrote...

Temporary peace between the Geth and the Quarians does not disprove starchild's conclusion.

Maybe, but there is no Reason for a Shepard who made Peace between Geth and Quarians to just accept that logic.

[Laurencio]

Pairikas wrote...

Laurencio wrote...

Temporary peace between the Geth and the Quarians does not disprove starchild's conclusion.

Maybe, but there is no Reason for a Shepard who made Peace between Geth and Quarians to just accept that logic.

No arguments here. You can't actually win the discussion though, so in the end it's a very pointless discussion, ending with you either having to accept the logic, and the solutions given, accept destruction, or find an alternate solution. I would have prefered the alternate solution, but if the three options are truly the only options available to end the reapers, then the starchilds logic can not be disproved, and arguing against it is pointless.

Flextt wrote...

I think no side is right on the matter. The cases shown to us are meant to be representative for the respective species. This is a narrative device to help us extrapolate the single instance to the bigger picture and help building a relationship. Unfortunately, almost none of these instances are in favor, not even indirectly, of Starchild's arguments, especially if you play Paragon Shepard. The consequence is a perceived disconnection: We got to build up all those relationships and in the end, we are forced to abandon them on the notion of an infinitely more intelligent lifeform?
Of course, since they function as narrative devices, they are not really viable as empirical data to prove or disprove any opinion on the matter.
Fact is: The logic of Starchild is not necessarily right or wrong, except truly for his statement "The Reapers are my solution. I created them" <--> "The created will always rebel against their creators." in conjunction with Sovereign's statement on Reaper's independence. What stays and what is important, is the disconnect. The rest is nitpick and conjecture.

There's nothing "wrong" about the statment in relation to the reapers. There is no proof what so ever that will conclusively disprove that the reapers will at some point in the future turn on their creator. If kill them then we don't disprove anything, we simply end their life cycle before they reach that point. Problem with starchild's logic isn't that it is flat out wrong, it is simply impossible to disprove, as that would require knowledge of all possible outcomes and all possible results.

Modifié par Laurencio, 16 avril 2012 - 01:26 .

[Flextt]

Exactly! We get a singularity forced down our throats, when it's core property is, that we cannot see past its event horizon. The ending is defendable through putting in more assumptions and at the same time becomes inexcusable by that. It's ambiguity towards... everything is staggering.

[Pairikas]

Laurencio wrote...

No arguments here. You can't actually win the discussion though, so in the end it's a very pointless discussion, ending with you either having to accept the logic, and the solutions given, accept destruction, or find an alternate solution. I would have prefered the alternate solution, but if the three options are truly the only options available to end the reapers, then the starchilds logic can not be disproved, and arguing against it is pointless

I don't care If I can win the Discussion with Starchild, but the least thing to do is to TRY IT. Ever Human with a little Brain Power would not accept this Logic after making Peace between Synthethics and Organics. And if you don't can change Starchilds mind then walk away and go fighting again.
It would be Okay for me if this would mean a total Victory for the Reapers.

[RaidShock]

I'm no fan of the ending, but this is what I gather:

Short term, organics and synthetics can cooperate, as illustrated by the Geth and the Quarians if you unite them. However, in the long term(Star Kid has been around a LOOOOOOOOONG time - he would know better than Shepard/us) synthetics do apparently always destroy their ORGANIC creators. (although Star Kid created the Reapers we do not know if the Reapers are even aware of him/ he is also seemingly synthetic so perhaps they do not have a problem with him)

Regardless, Star Kid created the Reapers in order to allow organic life to continue to exist. Synthetics WILL eventually obliterate their organic creators - this is a fact in the eyes of the Star Kid. Once that occurs, organic life will never be able to start up again, thus leaving a galaxy full of synthetic life. Star kid's goal is to allow organic life to continue at the price of giving it a defined lifespan.

[Flextt]

He never makes a difference between the kind of creators.

[Laurencio]

vivaladricas wrote...

People kill people and create chaos against each other, no tech necessary. Wipe everything out if you want to be true to your word. Starbaby is emo. He needs to get over it.

Starchild's goal is not to erradicate the human definition of Chaos. There is no reason to believe that his definition of chaos means war and genocide. If that was the case his solution would be far more elegant, and not involve wiping out highly advanced organic life. It is far more likely that his definition of Chaos relates to a bigger picture, maybe even the end of the galaxy/universe. Or perhaps a technological singularity.

Pairikas wrote...

Laurencio wrote...

No
arguments here. You can't actually win the discussion though, so in the
end it's a very pointless discussion, ending with you either having to
accept the logic, and the solutions given, accept destruction, or find
an alternate solution. I would have prefered the alternate solution, but
if the three options are truly the only options available to end the
reapers, then the starchilds logic can not be disproved, and arguing
against it is pointless

I don't care If I can win the
Discussion with Starchild, but the least thing to do is to TRY IT. Ever
Human with a little Brain Power would not accept this Logic after making
Peace between Synthethics and Organics. And if you don't can change
Starchilds mind then walk away and go fighting again.
It would be Okay for me if this would mean a total Victory for the Reapers.

In other words, you are ok with having the galaxy continue its cycle, accepting the starchilds logic and letting the reapers win?

Modifié par Laurencio, 16 avril 2012 - 01:53 .

[Terrorize69]

RaidShock wrote...

I'm no fan of the ending, but this is what I gather:

Short term, organics and synthetics can cooperate, as illustrated by the Geth and the Quarians if you unite them. However, in the long term(Star Kid has been around a LOOOOOOOOONG time - he would know better than Shepard/us) synthetics do apparently always destroy their ORGANIC creators. (although Star Kid created the Reapers we do not know if the Reapers are even aware of him/ he is also seemingly synthetic so perhaps they do not have a problem with him)

Regardless, Star Kid created the Reapers in order to allow organic life to continue to exist. Synthetics WILL eventually obliterate their organic creators - this is a fact in the eyes of the Star Kid. Once that occurs, organic life will never be able to start up again, thus leaving a galaxy full of synthetic life. Star kid's goal is to allow organic life to continue at the price of giving it a defined lifespan.

The fact that the starkid has been around for so long just shows even more how invalid his statements are simply by still being "alive" and in control.

[Laurencio]

Terrorize69 wrote...

RaidShock wrote...

I'm no fan of the ending, but this is what I gather:

Short term, organics and synthetics can cooperate, as illustrated by the Geth and the Quarians if you unite them. However, in the long term(Star Kid has been around a LOOOOOOOOONG time - he would know better than Shepard/us) synthetics do apparently always destroy their ORGANIC creators. (although Star Kid created the Reapers we do not know if the Reapers are even aware of him/ he is also seemingly synthetic so perhaps they do not have a problem with him)

Regardless, Star Kid created the Reapers in order to allow organic life to continue to exist. Synthetics WILL eventually obliterate their organic creators - this is a fact in the eyes of the Star Kid. Once that occurs, organic life will never be able to start up again, thus leaving a galaxy full of synthetic life. Star kid's goal is to allow organic life to continue at the price of giving it a defined lifespan.

The fact that the starkid has been around for so long just shows even more how invalid his statements are simply by still being "alive" and in control.

Not really. You can't disprove that sometime in the future, 1billion, 1 trillion, 10 trillion years from now the starchild will be rebelled against.

Modifié par Laurencio, 16 avril 2012 - 01:54 .

[Terrorize69]

Laurencio wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

RaidShock wrote...

I'm no fan of the ending, but this is what I gather:

Short term, organics and synthetics can cooperate, as illustrated by the Geth and the Quarians if you unite them. However, in the long term(Star Kid has been around a LOOOOOOOOONG time - he would know better than Shepard/us) synthetics do apparently always destroy their ORGANIC creators. (although Star Kid created the Reapers we do not know if the Reapers are even aware of him/ he is also seemingly synthetic so perhaps they do not have a problem with him)

Regardless, Star Kid created the Reapers in order to allow organic life to continue to exist. Synthetics WILL eventually obliterate their organic creators - this is a fact in the eyes of the Star Kid. Once that occurs, organic life will never be able to start up again, thus leaving a galaxy full of synthetic life. Star kid's goal is to allow organic life to continue at the price of giving it a defined lifespan.

The fact that the starkid has been around for so long just shows even more how invalid his statements are simply by still being "alive" and in control.

Not really. You can't disprove that sometime in the future, 1billion, 1 trillion, 10 trillion years from now the starchild will be rebelled against.

Yet untill that happens his logic fails, if he can give himself a few trillion years to see IF they will rebel against him, surely he can give us the same time.

[Pairikas]

Laurencio wrote...

In other words, you are ok with having the galaxy continue its cycle, accepting the starchilds logic and letting the reapers win?

I want Shepard with a Brain, who don't make suicide just because his enemys tells him something good happend after hes Dead.

[Terrorize69]

Pairikas wrote...

Laurencio wrote...

In other words, you are ok with having the galaxy continue its cycle, accepting the starchilds logic and letting the reapers win?

I want Shepard with a Brain, who don't make suicide just because his enemys tells him something good happend after hes Dead.

If only Saren had told Shepard in ME1 that, killing himself would fix the galaxy through space magic. He would of saved himself an aweful lot of running around.

[RaidShock]

Terrorize69 wrote...
The fact that the starkid has been around for so long just shows even more how invalid his statements are simply by still being "alive" and in control.

True. Perhaps he was some super AI created billions and billions of years ago that was able to foresee what would happen and thus took action to preserve organic life. Like I said, I'm no fan of the ending, but I do try to make some sense of it if only so that I am not disappointed by the extended cut DLC.