352 réponses à ce sujet

[Abreu Road]

 No. 

Lot's of speculations.

That's art, you know.

[firebreather19]

You're confusing the situation, and considering absolutes when you really don't need to. Situation: something created the Starchild/Catalyst to solve the organic-synthetic conflict. This resulted in the Reaper creation, and subsequent centuries of harvesting, a series of cycles which comes to an end with Shepard. There was a problem, a solution was implemented. There might not have even been an incident to spur this action, but the fear that synthetics would do this...but like said before, you can just disagree. So...if you believe it, do it, but know if you're wrong you could be damning the universe to extinction.

[PsyrenY]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Sorry, is this in the game manual or EULA? "Clause 3.22 You are not allowed to debate Reapers" ?

What good would "debating" them do. He is convinced of the problem - the only thing you've managed to change his mind on is the solution he is using, and then only by hooking up a weird alien device to him that changed his thought patterns. Flapping your gums at him won't do any good, even if you had the time to do so (which you don't thanks to the army being torn apart outside, and you bleeding out.)

[The Angry One]

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

I disagree.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I think Hackett and Victus know more about the situation than you do.

Hackett is a defeatist who spent resources that could've gone into fleets on a ridiculous boondoggle Reaper trap.

So they show up early for the next, what, 5 cycles? 10? Should be easy to replenish their numbers in that case.

Replenish how? Suitable species don't just happen to show up, they need time to develop.
If they had come early (well, on time) for this cycle then they'd have found nobody suitable to make a Sovereign class.

No, please read the myriad debunks to the notion that no relays = doom. ("Aftermath" section.)

Those so-called debunks are nothing but over-optimistic forays into conjectureville.

Kardashev Type II is as far as they need to advance to fulfill their stated mission, especially if they forcibly keep everyone else at T0 and T1.

That's not the point, is it? If they could advance, why don't they? Who cares about what they need? 

A Gray Goo or other hostile synthetic would have no reason not to keep going, however.

The Reapers have no reason to either. In fact, continued advancement would keep them and their goal safe against any contingency.

[dreman9999]

Sauruz wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Orumon wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

You can't, because his assertions are unprovable. He uses logical fallacies, assumptions and circular logic to justify it's psychopathic insanity.

The mere fact that organic life was never totally exterminated before the Reapers existed disproves everything it claims.

Amen on this comment.

Again, the reapers are not here to debate there reasons

Sorry, is this in the game manual or EULA? "Clause 3.22 You are not allowed to debate Reapers" ?

Clearly by the fact thay are invading and not giving a clear reason why illustates they are not here to debate with us on their beleifs. I'mnot saying they can't, I'm say they won't and don't want to. Really, if they did want to debate it....They would be trying to debate it with us.

The point is that the game doesn't present you any way to argue against the Catalyst's 'solutions'. A downer ending just doesn't work if it has to be explained outside the game.

That's not what I mean..Though tatis part of it. The games never give the player the chance to debate with the reapers in general. When never gat the chance to debate with them on their beleifs. I'm just saying the reapers don't want to.

[Orumon]

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Yeah, except replace 1000 years with billions of years. Billions of years that had to have gone by before the Reapers were even a concept.

Why stop there? Go to trillions, or quadrillions even.

The point is that, to an immortal machine, all it would see is the probability of that occurrence approaching 1. The length of time it takes to do so wouldn't be relevant to its conclusion - only the preservation of the galaxy as a going concern.

Falls apart when it's creations, the reapers, are, while it's still in control, trying to force this scenario to occur in several occasion.

Large Examples:

The Metacon War: Caused by the Zha creating artificial intelligence programs to assist them in running their implants, the Zha'til which were later corrupted BY THE REAPERS (Javik mentions this during the geth dreadnought mission).

Morning War: Is both a proof of the Starkids argument and a counter, provided you include the war on rannoch 300 years later. While an organic synthetic war DID occur without Reaper intervention, it should remain standing that the Geth chose not to exterminate the Quarians, rather simply letting them go. During the later war the outcome can be decided as per Shepards choice in favour of either race or to unified peace.

The Geth invasion of Alliance Space/ Battle for the Citadel: Heretic Geth manipulated by Sovereign another reaper, 'nuff said.

No examples of AI's going out of their way to kill organics on a grand scale are present in series, barring the Reapers, of course. It's also notable that every other AI bar one can be convinced to take war against the reapers.

The citadel AI only attacked shepard in panic with the only form of unprovoked aggression was imprisoning his 'creator'.

Hannibal/EDI is an interesting view, as initially he was hostile, up until he was retrieved by Cerberus, restrained and given time to get used to organics (the equivilent of a conventional childhood, limited options to allow testing and education) Eventually, she's firmly allied with organics.

All this points to the Catalyst having no ground to stand on. While I'll be charitable and say it's seen some nasty stuff in it's time, there's never a guarantee that things will go the way it suggests, especially as life survived more than well enough prior to the reapers (after all, Harbinger is formidably powerful compared to the rest, so organics would probably have been more populous and versatile genetically in it's time).

[dreman9999]

firebreather19 wrote...

You're confusing the situation, and considering absolutes when you really don't need to. Situation: something created the Starchild/Catalyst to solve the organic-synthetic conflict. This resulted in the Reaper creation, and subsequent centuries of harvesting, a series of cycles which comes to an end with Shepard. There was a problem, a solution was implemented. There might not have even been an incident to spur this action, but the fear that synthetics would do this...but like said before, you can just disagree. So...if you believe it, do it, but know if you're wrong you could be damning the universe to extinction.

That' not what I'm debating. That's angruement on whether the reapers do have a reason to do what they are doing. WhatI'm asking is ifthe star child is tellthe truth. The reaper never tried to debate with us on the pont to why they are doing what the aredoing. They just impose them. To say they are doing this nowit to ignore the fact that they are not fully explining themselves, the fact they benifite the most out of the other 2 choicesout side of destroy, the fact that all arguement the starchild use have been brought up by other reapers and he adds nothing new to the arguement, the fact that much of what he states counter what wasstated a fact bfore, and the star child provide no proof to what he says will happen.
This is a race of machines with a history of great deception.....Is the star child really telling the truth?

Modifié par dreman9999, 19 avril 2012 - 03:48 .

[dreman9999]

Orumon wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Yeah, except replace 1000 years with billions of years. Billions of years that had to have gone by before the Reapers were even a concept.

Why stop there? Go to trillions, or quadrillions even.

The point is that, to an immortal machine, all it would see is the probability of that occurrence approaching 1. The length of time it takes to do so wouldn't be relevant to its conclusion - only the preservation of the galaxy as a going concern.

Falls apart when it's creations, the reapers, are, while it's still in control, trying to force this scenario to occur in several occasion.

Large Examples:

The Metacon War: Caused by the Zha creating artificial intelligence programs to assist them in running their implants, the Zha'til which were later corrupted BY THE REAPERS (Javik mentions this during the geth dreadnought mission).

Morning War: Is both a proof of the Starkids argument and a counter, provided you include the war on rannoch 300 years later. While an organic synthetic war DID occur without Reaper intervention, it should remain standing that the Geth chose not to exterminate the Quarians, rather simply letting them go. During the later war the outcome can be decided as per Shepards choice in favour of either race or to unified peace.

The Geth invasion of Alliance Space/ Battle for the Citadel: Heretic Geth manipulated by Sovereign another reaper, 'nuff said.

No examples of AI's going out of their way to kill organics on a grand scale are present in series, barring the Reapers, of course. It's also notable that every other AI bar one can be convinced to take war against the reapers.

The citadel AI only attacked shepard in panic with the only form of unprovoked aggression was imprisoning his 'creator'.

Hannibal/EDI is an interesting view, as initially he was hostile, up until he was retrieved by Cerberus, restrained and given time to get used to organics (the equivilent of a conventional childhood, limited options to allow testing and education) Eventually, she's firmly allied with organics.

All this points to the Catalyst having no ground to stand on. While I'll be charitable and say it's seen some nasty stuff in it's time, there's never a guarantee that things will go the way it suggests, especially as life survived more than well enough prior to the reapers (after all, Harbinger is formidably powerful compared to the rest, so organics would probably have been more populous and versatile genetically in it's time).

This is the same thing that happen with mordin and the genophage.

[Kunari801]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

It's not meant to be debated, either you don't believe him and let the galaxy die, or you do believe him on the chance you'll save the galaxy.

If you don't believe him that's fine, have fun letting the galaxy die forever.

You don't have the option to do nothing, you have to pick from the RBG.  

[PsyrenY]

The Angry One wrote...

Hackett is a defeatist who spent resources that could've gone into fleets on a ridiculous boondoggle Reaper trap.

And I suppose the other generals that lined up behind his plan were fools too? And your squadmates? And Shepard too, for following all their orders?
Then if everyone who's in charge is such a derp, how would conventional battle have gone any better?

The Angry One wrote...
Replenish how? Suitable species don't just happen to show up, they need time to develop.
If they had come early (well, on time) for this cycle then they'd have found nobody suitable to make a Sovereign class.

Nah, the only criteria for reaping is that, as a species, they are getting too close to making AI. Reapers can make sludge out of anyone. It's not as though the Horizon colonists were all that advanced.

The Angry One wrote...
Those so-called debunks are nothing but over-optimistic forays into conjectureville.

They're based on the codex, so if we can't trust that, then nothing makes sense and we may as well not debate at all. Everything is random and what happens happens.

The Angry One wrote...
That's not the point, is it? If they could advance, why don't they? Who cares about what they need?
...
The Reapers have no reason to either. In fact, continued advancement would keep them and their goal safe against any contingency.

They're programmed to periodically reap, not to achieve singularity. Doing so would result in muscling organics out completely, rather than continuing the cycle.

The Catalyst's goal is to allow organic life as a whole to continue, just not any particular civilization.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 19 avril 2012 - 03:54 .

[PsyrenY]

Kunari801 wrote...

You don't have the option to do nothing, you have to pick from the RBG.  

You can actually do nothing, but it results in game over. (The autosave gets pretty strict if you do though.)

[dreman9999]

Anyone else see that the reapers solution to organics is simuler to the salarians solution with the krogan?

Modifié par dreman9999, 19 avril 2012 - 03:55 .

[Laurencio]

Dreman9999

If the starchild created the reapers as a "logical" solution to a problem and gave them a set purpose, then it would stand to reason that they would utilize the same logic. They are basically machines following instructions and starchilds logic after all.

[jumpingkaede]

What is being debated here? The Catalyst's logic/proof/reasoning is bad?

It is.

IMO, there are really only two remaining points of speculation:

1) Was the Catalyst's logic purposefully and intended by Bioware to be bad? In that scenario, the Catalyst is akin to a rogue AI or a badly-programmed Killbot. The Catalyst's creator may have created the Catalyst and imbued him with the logic because the Catalyst's organic creator thought (incorrectly) that the logic was sound and the threat was real.

It happens. I can create a killbot because I'm afraid that humans will someday destroy all of nature. It makes the killbot's logic "bad" but not "inconsistent". It's just a killbot, after all, it doesn't know any better (arguably) than it's stupid creator i.e. me.

2) Bioware thought the logic was sound and good and intended the Catalyst to be a well-programmed and benevolent AI/goodbot. In which case, it's just another example of bad writing or reasoning on Bioware's part.

Take your pick.

[dreman9999]

Laurencio wrote...

Dreman9999

If the starchild created the reapers as a "logical" solution to a problem and gave them a set purpose, then it would stand to reason that they would utilize the same logic. They are basically machines following instructions and starchilds logic after all.

That besides the point. The question is if the starchild is telling the truth. Even that statement that he controls the reapers maybe a lie.

[Zolt51]

Catalyst telling the truth? Why would anyone want to assume such a thing?

"I control the reapers". Bam. Voila. He's the antagonist. Not your friend and you take his word at face value at your own risk. Think about that while you make your final decision.

[dreman9999]

jumpingkaede wrote...

What is being debated here? The Catalyst's logic/proof/reasoning is bad?

It is.

IMO, there are really only two remaining points of speculation:

1) Was the Catalyst's logic purposefully and intended by Bioware to be bad? In that scenario, the Catalyst is akin to a rogue AI or a badly-programmed Killbot. The Catalyst's creator may have created the Catalyst and imbued him with the logic because the Catalyst's organic creator thought (incorrectly) that the logic was sound and the threat was real.

It happens. I can create a killbot because I'm afraid that humans will someday destroy all of nature. It makes the killbot's logic "bad" but not "inconsistent". It's just a killbot, after all, it doesn't know any better (arguably) than it's stupid creator i.e. me.

2) Bioware thought the logic was sound and good and intended the Catalyst to be a well-programmed and benevolent AI/goodbot. In which case, it's just another example of bad writing or reasoning on Bioware's part.

Take your pick.

That' s not being debated here.  What is is the vadelaty of the starkids statements. To say the reapers are flawed in their salution is to say you know what data they are using to make this decision on. What don't have that info, the reapers do but are not willing to debate on it with it...They just want to impose it.

What I'm saying is how do we know anything new the Star child bring up is true?

[Laurencio]

Could also be an AI with a set of parameters, such as ensure order in the domain of its creator race,, who expanded on those parameters, integrated threat analysis and projections in its calculations, and came to a flawed, but not directly wrong, conclusion. Sort of like VIKI in iRobot

Cause I don't see anyhting about it that indicates above organic intelligence.

[Unholyknight800]

Javik and the Starchild pissed me off with their close mindedness.

[dreman9999]

Zolt51 wrote...

Catalyst telling the truth? Why would anyone want to assume such a thing?

"I control the reapers". Bam. Voila. He's the antagonist. Not your friend and you take his word at face value at your own risk. Think about that while you make your final decision.

Even that statement maybe a lie.

[dreman9999]

Laurencio wrote...



Cause I don't see anyhting about it that indicates above organic intelligence.

.....Mass relay trap.

[PsyrenY]

I believe that the Starchild believes its own logic. I definitely think it's wrong; unfortunately, I don't have the power or time to change its mind.

Knowing that, I would pick either Control or Synthesis, since destroying the Geth would only validate its assertions about eternal organic-synthetic conflict.

[dreman9999]

Unholyknight800 wrote...

Javik and the Starchild pissed me off with their close mindedness.

0o_o0!!!!!! He/her hates javik! Through him/her out the air lock!

[Laurencio]

Dreman9999

Well there is no way to prove the validity of anything he says, aside from the ending cinematic seemingly making it seem like the choices actually did what it told yu they would. So if it is telling the truth about that, then it could easily have been telling the truth about everything else.

[jumpingkaede]

dreman9999 wrote...

*snip*

What I'm saying is how do we know anything new the Star child bring up is true?

You don't.

?

Optimystic_X wrote...

I believe that the Starchild believes its own logic. I definitely think it's wrong; unfortunately, I don't have the power or time to change its mind.

Knowing that, I would pick either Control or Synthesis, since destroying the Geth would only validate its assertions about eternal organic-synthetic conflict.

Right.  Because it's basically a badly programmed killbot.

What frightens and upsets me is that Shepard trusts this badly programmed killbot with something as serious as killing himself.

It's not, "Shepard, press this button and it'll take care of the Reapers... I promise, you can totally trust me."  In that situation, you don't really know what the button will do and you hope it'll destroy the Reapers as opposed to, say, destroying Earth or making cappucino.  So maybe you go ahead and do it.  You might not feel completely comfortable doing it but...

However, the Catalyst says, "Shepard: kill yourself and it'll take care of the Reapers... I promise, you can totally trust me."  I can't believe anyone would listen to that and not go "....huh?"  And for Shepard to blindly trust in something so completely asinine it... just thinking about it makes me angry.

Modifié par jumpingkaede, 19 avril 2012 - 04:17 .