472 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Eain wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Being alive means you eventually die, machines don't die they are always destroyed/shutdown/broke in one way or another

Maybe if things don't die we suddenly discover that the term "being alive" is actually pretty meaningless.

Also if humans die how does that differ from a machine shutting down? Pretty sure that if my PC's processor breaks my computer shuts off. If my brain breaks my body shuts off. No difference at all.

lol

I was expecting we'd arrive back to this eventually. Proves my point, too. Not to you of course, but to other readers: your cognitive system isn't advanced enough to process the information you're being given, and so you revert to a default response when you can't generate semantically relevant output.

Yeah I just went there.

It's not the same.  Seriously if you PCs processor shut down I'm sure you'd go out and buy another, you can't do that with living things

You're not understanding his ponit. What makes us who we are is our perspective, memories and ego. If that is wiped out of our minds, the person we were is dead. Think of it like brain death, it's a condition when the for brian dies or too damage to properly function (The part where we think) and the hind brian is intact(The part that controls movement and the automatic functions of the brain).
If a person ever recovers from brain death, they'll have permanent memory lose, meaning everything that person was is dead.
This is one of the point of the series...Remeber Legions loyalty mission?

[nitefyre410]

Eain wrote...

*snip* 
The only reason we can't is because medical science isn't far enough yet. There's nothing magical about us, you know. There will come a day where science can artificially grow hearts and put them into people's bodies to replace crappy ones. We already know how to translate neural information to digital code, and then use that code to control machines with. In fact that knowledge is being used in a control system for a medical exoskeleton in development as we speak.

Science is capable of doing amazing things, and the more we learn about controlling our biological side the more we discover that we don't differ that much from any other sort of machinery. If you don't want to believe that, that's your call, but your agreement is of little relevance to what modern science is doing today.

 

Exactly... 

Now wether or not we should if we do ge that  far is another question for another day but  the should does  negated the ablitiy to.    

In the end  Destory is merely agreeing with the opposite of  The Catalyst stand point which falls in to  the very same pattern that  brought this about  in the first place.

Modifié par nitefyre410, 25 avril 2012 - 01:08 .

[Oni Changas]

I'm gonna agree with the OP. The endings killed the mystique and wonders of the series and have no merit. Why the **** are we still discussing them as if they do?

[HellbirdIV]

Seriously, Destroy ending. The geth (and any cyborgs who need their synthetic parts to survive) are simply necessary casualties - it is better that they die because of the Destroy ending together with the Reapers, than that the Reapers just harvest them in the end because you failed to act when necessary.

The geth will die either way, you can't stop it unless you choose Synthesis or Control.

[The Angry One]

Vigil_N7 wrote...

If it was never intended for Shepard to control the reapers, then Weekes wouldn't have alluded to controlled reapers being used as FTL drives. So essentially, given the information, we can deduct that with control, the citadel remains intact, the relays are destroyed, synthetics (geth and EDI) function per the norm, the cycle is broken and the reapers can be used for whatever purpose Shepard wishes.

Weekes didn't write the ending, and his views on salvaging Reapers after destroy are.... naive at best.
He's just trying to rationalise and defend a nonsensical ending. He can hardly come out and deplore it if he wants to keep his job after all.

Synthesis is less clear, and is such a galaxy-altering event that its nigh on impossible to determine what will happen next, as we have no idea even what being an organic-synthetic is like. 

The point is, whatever these hybrids are like, it won't stop conflict and arms races.
The Zha'till were hybrids too, funny how they never stopped fighting others.

The cycle is more than just the 50,000 year killbot-a-thon, at least according to the Catalyst. It's the inevitability of synthetics exterminating organics. How does synthesis change things? Oh, well. Synthetics will exterminate hybrids instead. What's to stop them?
Either the Catalyst is lying or is ignorant (in which case none of the "new solutions" are necesarry) or the cycle will inevitably continue regardless.

Modifié par The Angry One, 25 avril 2012 - 01:18 .

[Naerivar]

dreman9999 wrote...
You're not understanding his ponit. What makes us who we are is our perspective, memories and ego. If that is wiped out of our minds, the person we were is dead. Think of it like brain death, it's a condition when the for brian dies or too damage to properly function (The part where we think) and the hind brian is intact(The part that controls movement and the automatic functions of the brain).
If a person ever recovers from brain death, they'll have permanent memory lose, meaning everything that person was is dead.
This is one of the point of the series...Remeber Legions loyalty mission?

I do not really agree with this. Is a person that lost their memory not the same person anymore? (did their character traits vanish, did they someway act differently?). We all lose a lot of our memory daily. At this moment I don't even remember what I ate yesterday evening, the information is probably still there, and I could recall it. But over ten weeks? Not a chance. Does this mean I am a different person in ten weeks (You can practically make this time scale as small as you want) than I am now?

If I am, than it will also mean that I am a different person now than I will be in one minute. Because I am sure there will be a certain thing I forgot in that time interval. When you look at it like that, it doesn't really matter anymore whether people become different anymore.

And if we accept that the person I was a minute ago is now dead. Then we seriously need to redefine our definition of murder, because we'd all be guilty.

I am not really disagreeing with all your ideas, just trying to point out consequences.

[dreman9999]

The Angry One wrote...

Vigil_N7 wrote...

If it was never intended for Shepard to control the reapers, then Weekes wouldn't have alluded to controlled reapers being used as FTL drives. So essentially, given the information, we can deduct that with control, the citadel remains intact, the relays are destroyed, synthetics (geth and EDI) function per the norm, the cycle is broken and the reapers can be used for whatever purpose Shepard wishes.

Weekes didn't write the ending, and his views on salvaging Reapers after destroy are.... naive at best.

Synthesis is less clear, and is such a galaxy-altering event that its nigh on impossible to determine what will happen next, as we have no idea even what being an organic-synthetic is like. 

The point is, whatever these hybrids are like, it won't stop conflict and arms races.
The Zha'till were hybrids too, funny how they never stopped fighting others.

The cycle is more than just the 50,000 year killbot-a-thon, at least according to the Catalyst. It's the inevitability of synthetics exterminating organics. How does synthesis change things? Oh, well. Synthetics will exterminate hybrids instead. What's to stop them?
Either the Catalyst is lying or is ignorant (in which case none of the "new solutions" are necesarry) or the cycle will inevitably continue regardless.

1. He may not be writing the ending bu he is writing EC, so his say has ground.

2. He's form a race of machines with a history of great deception....

[Shaigunjoe]

The Angry One wrote...


The point is, whatever these hybrids are like, it won't stop conflict and arms races.
The Zha'till were hybrids too, funny how they never stopped fighting others.

The synthetic ending does not create hybrids in the sense that you are using.  It is basically an entirely new DNA framework, and it is impossible to say what would happen based on earlier cyborgs behavior, as the same rules would not apply.  Its basically not a new life form, but new life in general, triple helix for everyone or something, as we do not know exactly how the new framework is built.

[The Angry One]

dreman9999 wrote...
1. He may not be writing the ending bu he is writing EC, so his say has ground.

This is speculation, I've not seen any confirmation on who's working on the EC.

2. He's form a race of machines with a history of great deception....

Again if he's lying, then there never was a cycle to begin with. Hence, synthesis literally changes nothing no matter what.
Well aside from nuking the mass relays, yeah thanks for that.

[The Angry One]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

The synthetic ending does not create hybrids in the sense that you are using.  It is basically an entirely new DNA framework, and it is impossible to say what would happen based on earlier cyborgs behavior, as the same rules would not apply.  Its basically not a new life form, but new life in general, triple helix for everyone or something, as we do not know exactly how the new framework is built.

Yeah, whatever. "New DNA" with beings that have no DNA. Yeah, no. That doesn't work. That's crap.
In any case, it doesn't matter how they are hybrids, they are still hybrids - the same as the Zha'till. The same as Saren.

[dreman9999]

Naerivar wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
You're not understanding his ponit. What makes us who we are is our perspective, memories and ego. If that is wiped out of our minds, the person we were is dead. Think of it like brain death, it's a condition when the for brian dies or too damage to properly function (The part where we think) and the hind brian is intact(The part that controls movement and the automatic functions of the brain).
If a person ever recovers from brain death, they'll have permanent memory lose, meaning everything that person was is dead.
This is one of the point of the series...Remeber Legions loyalty mission?

I do not really agree with this. Is a person that lost their memory not the same person anymore? (did their character traits vanish, did they someway act differently?). We all lose a lot of our memory daily. At this moment I don't even remember what I ate yesterday evening, the information is probably still there, and I could recall it. But over ten weeks? Not a chance. Does this mean I am a different person in ten weeks (You can practically make this time scale as small as you want) than I am now?

If I am, than it will also mean that I am a different person now than I will be in one minute. Because I am sure there will be a certain thing I forgot in that time interval. When you look at it like that, it doesn't really matter anymore whether people become different anymore.

And if we accept that the person I was a minute ago is now dead. Then we seriously need to redefine our definition of murder, because we'd all be guilty.

I am not really disagreeing with all your ideas, just trying to point out consequences.

On your point, with use even whne we lose memeory, we gain now memeory in it place and are core beliefs, ideals and ego say intact....This is an evalution of our ego not a death.  In the case of memeory lose at the level close to brain death people change completly, traits change,perspectives changes, ideals change....It is a case where everything you are is gone...And even if you keep some or most of your traits, the person you where before is gone to...Think of it like lobotamy....It's like unding a protion of progress you had  before only to rest at a diffent point, that would mean the new development you have now will make you a different person then you were before.
Think of this way, what ifyou fell in love with someone so deeply that you would die for them and that person felt the same....What would happen if someone erases every memeory of the person you loved from you mind to the point that if you met them, you would not know them? Wouldn't that mean you are different.

The different is that dramatic difference normal memory lose and a massive memory loss is. Me forgeting where my keys are doens't make me a new person, me forgeting who my  friends and are family does.

[The Angry One]

Fibonacci wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Nothing wrong with destroy

Agree.

Starchild lied.  The geth survive. Shepard survives. 

Earlier in the game during one of the chats with Hackett, Shepard mentions that TIM is trying to control the reapers.  Hackett gives you the clue you need: "Dead Reapers is how we end this war."

2012: The year wishful thinking replaced proper storytelling in videogames.

[Shaigunjoe]

The Angry One wrote...

Yeah, whatever. "New DNA" with beings that have no DNA. Yeah, no. That doesn't work. That's crap.
In any case, it doesn't matter how they are hybrids, they are still hybrids - the same as the Zha'till. The same as Saren.

Thats kinda the only way it could work, you keep thinking in terms of current DNA framework, in which it wouldn't work, which is why they needed something else.  It is like the affinity gene in NDT, this kind of thing has been done before.

[dreman9999]

The Angry One wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
1. He may not be writing the ending bu he is writing EC, so his say has ground.

This is speculation, I've not seen any confirmation on who's working on the EC.

2. He's form a race of machines with a history of great deception....

Again if he's lying, then there never was a cycle to begin with. Hence, synthesis literally changes nothing no matter what.
Well aside from nuking the mass relays, yeah thanks for that.

1. It's not speculation.
2. He's not lieing about that, that has been comfermed from other reapers and prothean VI's. And no I don't thing Synthesis is the awnser...It's what the reapers want ed all along.

[TheOptimist]

Nyoka wrote...

Synthesis has no redeeming qualities. Scratch it out.

Control would have been good if you directly take the means to control the reapers from the illusive man's cold dead hands. You want control, you take it. Not just obey space kid.

Destruction must have side effects or else it would been the perfect choice, making picking control pointless. You don't like killing the geth, fine, kill the earth instead or whatever. Or destroy the mass relays. But there has to be a downside to the destruction of the reapers to make the other choice not pointless.

No.  I want to WIN, not pick randomly from three horrible options, and we should have the ability to do that, provided we did everything right, just like in the suicide mission.

[The Angry One]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Yeah, whatever. "New DNA" with beings that have no DNA. Yeah, no. That doesn't work. That's crap.
In any case, it doesn't matter how they are hybrids, they are still hybrids - the same as the Zha'till. The same as Saren.

Thats kinda the only way it could work, you keep thinking in terms of current DNA framework, in which it wouldn't work, which is why they needed something else.  It is like the affinity gene in NDT, this kind of thing has been done before.

Doesn't change that synthetics have no DNA. You cannot apply new DNA from or to something that has none.

[The Angry One]

dreman9999 wrote...

1. It's not speculation.

Citation needed.

2. He's not lieing about that, that has been comfermed from other reapers and prothean VI's. And no I don't thing Synthesis is the awnser...It's what the reapers want ed all along.

Confirmed? No it wasn't, the closest the Reapers ever come to talking about this is the Destroyer's nonsencial rant about order and chaos, which won't be changed by synthesis in the least.

[xxskyshadowxx]

Everyone on the forums is putting far more thought into the endings than the writers ever did...it blows my mind.

[Eain]

Nyoka wrote...

Synthesis has no redeeming qualities. Scratch it out.

Control would have been good if you directly take the means to control the reapers from the illusive man's cold dead hands. You want control, you take it. Not just obey space kid.

Destruction must have side effects or else it would been the perfect choice, making picking control pointless. You don't like killing the geth, fine, kill the earth instead or whatever. Or destroy the mass relays. But there has to be a downside to the destruction of the reapers to make the other choice not pointless.

I agree that there should be a downside to destroying the Reapers. You don't walk away from a war like this without serious damage. Sure. I would've been cool with sacrificing an object rather than a species though. So yeah, the Earth instead of the Geth. Humanity's spread across the stars anyway, so while the loss of Earth would be painful it wouldn't destroy an entire species. It also relates more closely to the original theme of the game, ie take earth back.

[ZIPO396]

xxskyshadowxx wrote...

Everyone on the forums is putting far more thought into the endings than the writers ever did...it blows my mind.

Well since that ending we don't really have much else to do but speculate.

[dreman9999]

The Angry One wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1. It's not speculation.

Citation needed.

2. He's not lieing about that, that has been comfermed from other reapers and prothean VI's. And no I don't thing Synthesis is the awnser...It's what the reapers want ed all along.

Confirmed? No it wasn't, the closest the Reapers ever come to talking about this is the Destroyer's nonsencial rant about order and chaos, which won't be changed by synthesis in the least.

1. Dedutive logic need to understand.
2.Did you not take to Sovergin and Vigil in ME1? listen to harbengerin ME2? Listen to the prothean VI in ME3?
It's been well comfermed, even with the reaper on rennock.

[Naerivar]

dreman9999 wrote...

Naerivar wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
You're not understanding his ponit. What makes us who we are is our perspective, memories and ego. If that is wiped out of our minds, the person we were is dead. Think of it like brain death, it's a condition when the for brian dies or too damage to properly function (The part where we think) and the hind brian is intact(The part that controls movement and the automatic functions of the brain).
If a person ever recovers from brain death, they'll have permanent memory lose, meaning everything that person was is dead.
This is one of the point of the series...Remeber Legions loyalty mission?

I do not really agree with this. Is a person that lost their memory not the same person anymore? (did their character traits vanish, did they someway act differently?). We all lose a lot of our memory daily. At this moment I don't even remember what I ate yesterday evening, the information is probably still there, and I could recall it. But over ten weeks? Not a chance. Does this mean I am a different person in ten weeks (You can practically make this time scale as small as you want) than I am now?

If I am, than it will also mean that I am a different person now than I will be in one minute. Because I am sure there will be a certain thing I forgot in that time interval. When you look at it like that, it doesn't really matter anymore whether people become different anymore.

And if we accept that the person I was a minute ago is now dead. Then we seriously need to redefine our definition of murder, because we'd all be guilty.

I am not really disagreeing with all your ideas, just trying to point out consequences.

On your point, with use even whne we lose memeory, we gain now memeory in it place and are core beliefs, ideals and ego say intact....This is an evalution of our ego not a death.  In the case of memeory lose at the level close to brain death people change completly, traits change,perspectives changes, ideals change....It is a case where everything you are is gone...And even if you keep some or most of your traits, the person you where before is gone to...Think of it like lobotamy....It's like unding a protion of progress you had  before only to rest at a diffent point, that would mean the new development you have now will make you a different person then you were before.
Think of this way, what ifyou fell in love with someone so deeply that you would die for them and that person felt the same....What would happen if someone erases every memeory of the person you loved from you mind to the point that if you met them, you would not know them? Wouldn't that mean you are different.

The different is that dramatic difference normal memory lose and a massive memory loss is. Me forgeting where my keys are doens't make me a new person, me forgeting who my  friends and are family does.

You do make a good point, but I have one problem. Where do you lay the line? What memories do define you, and what memories don't? Sure, forgetting the place of keys is trivial while forgetting the person you loved is critical. However, there will most certainly be memories halfway in between.

The only way I see to distinguish between 'keys' and 'lover' would be how much time you spend with/tinking about the relative object. But that changes over large amounts of time as well. Does that mean you are not the same person as you were twenty years ago? Most people would indeed argue that no, they are not. But does that mean the person of twenty years ago is dead?

Personally, I just see myself as always myself. I am defined as the entity that controls my body (a soul, would be the best laymen term I believe). And while my traits will change with time, I will always be me. If you want to take it mathmatically, I am a function of time. I may not be the same as 20 years ago, but I am still the same function.

Of course, it pretty much falls apart if people can proof souls don't exist (once again, I do not really mean the old fashioned soul here, rather something that defines me as me, an unchanging thing about me, like that fact that I posses this body).

[TheOptimist]

Eain wrote...

Nyoka wrote...

Synthesis has no redeeming qualities. Scratch it out.

Control would have been good if you directly take the means to control the reapers from the illusive man's cold dead hands. You want control, you take it. Not just obey space kid.

Destruction must have side effects or else it would been the perfect choice, making picking control pointless. You don't like killing the geth, fine, kill the earth instead or whatever. Or destroy the mass relays. But there has to be a downside to the destruction of the reapers to make the other choice not pointless.

I agree that there should be a downside to destroying the Reapers. You don't walk away from a war like this without serious damage. Sure. I would've been cool with sacrificing an object rather than a species though. So yeah, the Earth instead of the Geth. Humanity's spread across the stars anyway, so while the loss of Earth would be painful it wouldn't destroy an entire species. It also relates more closely to the original theme of the game, ie take earth back.

So instead of betraying the Geth you betray humanity AND all the groundforces of other species still on the planet, including Wrex, Major Kirrahe, and all the ME2 squaddies. NO. ****ING. THANKS.