897 réponses à ce sujet

[nuculerman]

Gyspy Jive wrote...
Yeah, because all of the Japanese people totally supported what their govenerment and military were doing. ****ing ingorant post, bro. 

Again, in my haste, I did not list every example of an "innocent" japanese person.  And I regret saying "every."  I meant most.  Anyone wilfully taking part in supporting the current Japanese regime was guilty.  This includes women making food to send it to their troops, and engineers building planes for their pilots to fly--even if some of those examples were against the war and just too scared to say anything.

[Taboo]

nuculerman wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

How about the people that suffered from radiation sickness afterwords?  The point is that in war sometimes you have to give orders taht kill 10 in order to save a thousand.  Even Captain Anderson (in ME1) states this.  You try to avoid such situations but you can not flinch from them in a command position when they arise.  Given the choice of ending an existential threat like the Reapers forever at the cost of one race (regardless of race), it's not a hard choice.  You end the threat forever.

-Polaris

Thank you for disagreeing with me without calling me revolting.

Again, my argument is simply the Japanese government is morally responsible for those sick people, not the US government.  You can disagree with me, as is your right.  I'm simply stating my opinion, to help explain why I think synthesis is less immoral than destroy.

As for war, there are obviously times when you have to make a choice, neither of them moral.  I'm not disputing that.  In fact, as bad as the ending is it highlights this well.  We were given three choices, none of them moral.

Which is the awful truth of what we have. Nothing you said has any lack of credence. You are more than correct. But I believe that options must be weighed depending on the situation.

They call that a neutral alignment in D and D don't they? I haven't played Baldur's Gate in YEARS.

[Mylia Stenetch]

Taboo-XX wrote...

nuculerman wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

How about the people that suffered from radiation sickness afterwords?  The point is that in war sometimes you have to give orders taht kill 10 in order to save a thousand.  Even Captain Anderson (in ME1) states this.  You try to avoid such situations but you can not flinch from them in a command position when they arise.  Given the choice of ending an existential threat like the Reapers forever at the cost of one race (regardless of race), it's not a hard choice.  You end the threat forever.

-Polaris

Thank you for disagreeing with me without calling me revolting.

Again, my argument is simply the Japanese government is morally responsible for those sick people, not the US government.  You can disagree with me, as is your right.  I'm simply stating my opinion, to help explain why I think synthesis is less immoral than destroy.

As for war, there are obviously times when you have to make a choice, neither of them moral.  I'm not disputing that.  In fact, as bad as the ending is it highlights this well.  We were given three choices, none of them moral.

Which is the awful truth of what we have. Nothing you said has any lack of credence. You are more than correct. But I believe that options must be weighed depending on the situation.

They call that a neutral alignment in D and D don't they? I haven't played Baldur's Gate in YEARS.

True Neutral:
A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn't feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil-after all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she's not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way. 


Also chatic neutral is looking after ones self, in the pursuit of freedom. While Lawful Neutral is the law and nothing else.

Modifié par Mylia Stenetch, 26 avril 2012 - 09:30 .

[Mylia Stenetch]

Nyoka wrote...

Problem is they're now backtracking saying maybe the geth and EDI don't die. Meaning, Synthesis was meant to be the paragon ending, but this decision is not very paragon and they didn't realize that. Too impressed by their own metaphors and symbols to really think about it, probably.

No Synthesis would not be the paragon ending. The Paragon/Renegade system is thrown out the door for the end of the game. Truly the closest would be control (even though people hate it) You are showing true altrusitic means. You sacrifice yourself it save everyone in the galaxy even saving the reapers. It can also be Renegade since you want to kill everyone why not make the reapers do it for you?

Destroy follows the paragon way still cause you are making a sacrifice even if it is a large one for the greater good of society. You know you cannot save everyone all the time but you are going to make the best of it. Renegade could pull the pragmatic view, conventional means cannot kill them, you wanted to do this since you saw Soverign. You do not care how many people you have to kill this ends now.

Synthesis, I am still trying to see sometimes. I will come back to it.

Modifié par Mylia Stenetch, 26 avril 2012 - 09:34 .

[Velocithon]

Wow I'm just speechless.

The past week has literally just dissolved all hope I had left for Bioware. I'm seriously contemplating just leaving this site and forgetting about ME altogether. It's just too painful now.

[Seryl]

MisterJB wrote...

adneate wrote...

MisterJB wrote...
What if, rather than push a button to eliminate homosexuality, we could push a button that would eliminate homophobia?

Is it really any better though, we haven't really solved the problem of ignorance and intolerence by ourselves we've simply found a way to forcibly remove one aspect of it. It wasn't achieved and we as a society haven't evolved or grown as a result of it, we didn't come to the conclusion that it was wrong we were programmed to not do it anymore.

I wouldn't push it, progress has to be earned not given. Earning it is more important than the final outcome, it is how we truly understand the concept and have the tools to solve other problems.

But what if we never earn it? And even if we do, how many people will suffer in the meanwhile?
Instead, we can push one button and make a better world. Regarless of how ludicrious that sounds.
I believe that the end result; in this case, the acceptance of other people's differences; is more important that how it was achieved.

Both options are wrong. Were I put in that postion, the only moral thing
to do would be to abstain. It is not for me, or anybody else, to make
that choice.

In History past, homosexuality was viewed as a crime
and a mortal sin. Now, it is (mostly) accepted. What would your
reaction be if this choice was offered to those in the past? How would you judge them had they taken the "Remove Homosexuality at the push of a button" option? To
them, the benefits of such a choice would be free for everybody, with
none left behind and the ends of eliminating that "sin" would justify
the cost. Would you agree that what they did was a good thing then? To
them it was a better world.

[adneate]

MisterJB wrote...
But what if we never earn it? And even if we do, how many people will suffer in the meanwhile?

That suffering is what brings about the true wisdom to solve another problem, true morality and true understanding is a long and painful process there is no other way. To come to a conclusion about "The Just" and "The Good" without a long and difficult debate and introspection is like being told the answer to a math question. When the next question comes up we are just as lost as we were the first time and we don't truly know any more than we did before.

[Reidbynature]

Kunari801 wrote...

Reidbynature wrote...

Kunari801 wrote...

BouncyCaitian wrote...

Marcus Cole: 6 billion lives on Coriana. 3 billion lives on Centauri Prime. We have enough ships to make a stand at one of them, so which do you choose? It's numbers - cold, unsympathetic numbers. Let's just hope we pulled enough of the Vorlons away to give the Centauri a chance, or if they've gotten rid of any Shadow influences by now. Otherwise, I wouldn't give you 2 cents for their chances.

I loved Babylon5

Yaaaaaay. 

There are so many great quotes from B5  

G'Quon wrote, "There is a greater darkness than the one we fight. It is the darkness of the soul that has lost its way. The war we fight is not against powers and principalities; it is against chaos and despair. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain." 

Yeah, I'm not a hater or a giant fan of Babylon 5 (though I did watch quite a lot of it).  I just saw a good opportunity to post the Spaced clip that makes fun of it.

[Taboo]

Seryl wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

adneate wrote...

MisterJB wrote...
What if, rather than push a button to eliminate homosexuality, we could push a button that would eliminate homophobia?

Is it really any better though, we haven't really solved the problem of ignorance and intolerence by ourselves we've simply found a way to forcibly remove one aspect of it. It wasn't achieved and we as a society haven't evolved or grown as a result of it, we didn't come to the conclusion that it was wrong we were programmed to not do it anymore.

I wouldn't push it, progress has to be earned not given. Earning it is more important than the final outcome, it is how we truly understand the concept and have the tools to solve other problems.

But what if we never earn it? And even if we do, how many people will suffer in the meanwhile?
Instead, we can push one button and make a better world. Regarless of how ludicrious that sounds.
I believe that the end result; in this case, the acceptance of other people's differences; is more important that how it was achieved.

Both options are wrong. Were I put in that postion, the only moral thing
to do would be to abstain. It is not for me, or anybody else, to make
that choice.

In History past, homosexuality was viewed as a crime
and a mortal sin. Now, it is (mostly) accepted. What would your
reaction be if this choice was offered to those in the past? How would you judge them had they taken the "Remove Homosexuality at the push of a button" option? To
them, the benefits of such a choice would be free for everybody, with
none left behind and the ends of eliminating that "sin" would justify
the cost. Would you agree that what they did was a good thing then? To
them it was a better world.

The problem! It rears it's head again!

[nitefyre410]

Taboo-XX wrote...

*Snip* 

The problem! It rears it's head again!

 


The problem being that we are trying to make choices to solve a problem that we don't  have the God Tier level  clearance to make?  Whats  makes things worst is the Reaper threat did not need these kind of options  to be solvable. 

Modifié par nitefyre410, 26 avril 2012 - 09:39 .

[Taboo]

[quote]nitefyre410 wrote...

[quote]Taboo-XX wrote...

*Snip* 
[/quote]

The problem! It rears it's head again!

[/quote]  


The problem being that we are trying to make choices to solve a problem that we do have the God Tier level  clearance to make?

[/quote]

Problem logical thinkers?

The implications........uhhhhhhh.

[Sherbet Lemon]

Nyoka wrote...

Problem is they're now backtracking saying maybe the geth and EDI don't die.

Wait...are they saying that in Destroy, the Geth and EDI live?

*is confuzzled*

[Kunari801]

Reidbynature wrote...


Yeah, I'm not a hater or a giant fan of Babylon 5 (though I did watch quite a lot of it).  I just saw a good opportunity to post the Spaced clip that makes fun of it.

No worries, I just always tought that quote fit the Reaper War too. 

...The war we fight is not against powers and principalities; it is against chaos and despair. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain....

[nuculerman]

Seryl wrote...

Both options are wrong. Were I put in that postion, the only moral thing
to do would be to abstain. It is not for me, or anybody else, to make
that choice.

This.  Though I posted I would push the button, that was under the assumption one thing or the other was going to happen.

And as someone else jokingly pointed out, we do have a moral choice.  Turn the game off, and pretend our Shepard's answer to "which 3" was simply "no."  However, as it's a game, and I want to finish it, I chose one of the three.

[Taboo]

Village Idiot wrote...

Nyoka wrote...

Problem is they're now backtracking saying maybe the geth and EDI don't die.

Wait...are they saying that in Destroy, the Geth and EDI live?

*is confuzzled*

They finally realized they were staring at a problem.

Eventually you realize you are standing in a pile of ****.

[Velocithon]

Bioware just seems like complete utter retards right now. I'm sorry I don't like calling them that, but from the ****** poor job with this game to the god awful way they've handled everything...there just is no better word.

[Reidbynature]

Kunari801 wrote...

Reidbynature wrote...


Yeah, I'm not a hater or a giant fan of Babylon 5 (though I did watch quite a lot of it).  I just saw a good opportunity to post the Spaced clip that makes fun of it.

No worries, I just always tought that quote fit the Reaper War too. 

...The war we fight is not against powers and principalities; it is against chaos and despair. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain....

Sure, I can see that.  Though I never really had a good memory for things like speeches from films, tv etc.  I have a better time remembering little moments or catchphrases like "just one more, it's wafer thin". lol

[Taboo]

Velocithon wrote...

Bioware just seems like complete utter retards right now. I'm sorry I don't like calling them that, but from the ****** poor job with this game to the god awful way they've handled everything...there just is no better word.

I know great directors who have failed. But I've never seen someone fail this badly in my lifetime.

[Jedifan421]

Taboo-XX wrote...

It makes me shake my head. It's so bad people have actually stopped playing ALL the games.

Even the Star Wars prequels couldn't make people stop watching the originals.

Critical marketing failure Bioware.

Yup. Right here. I'm done until the DLC comes out. Then when it disappoints, I'll truly be done with the series. What was the ****ing point of playing those games when I got three horrendous endings that would have made Hitler dance in his grave and basically give a giant middle finger to anyone who cared about the characters besides Shepard? As is, I'll have to play multiplayer again to get back up to the level of percentage I need to see all three endings and the "additional cinematics" for each just to see what they pull out of their asses.

Also, the Star Wars prequels have affected me in watching the originals. Lucas has made so many versions of them after 1983 when he began tampering with them to align with the prequels better. I can truly only watch the original versions of all three considering the **** the Blu Ray versions did to the originals. Granted, there were some good changes but also really nonsensical ones for all three originals.

[Seryl]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I know great directors who have failed. But I've never seen someone fail this badly in my lifetime.

This is why I'm so interested in this. It is unlikely that I will see a failure this epic, and this public, again.

[MisterJB]

Seryl wrote...
Both options are wrong. Were I put in that postion, the only moral thing
to do would be to abstain. It is not for me, or anybody else, to make
that choice.

In History past, homosexuality was viewed as a crime
and a mortal sin. Now, it is (mostly) accepted. What would your
reaction be if this choice was offered to those in the past? How would you judge them had they taken the "Remove Homosexuality at the push of a button" option? To
them, the benefits of such a choice would be free for everybody, with
none left behind and the ends of eliminating that "sin" would justify
the cost. Would you agree that what they did was a good thing then? To
them it was a better world.

I've not see any indication that "Synthesis" is a "Remove homosexuality" and not a "Remove homophobia" option.
And I have already stated I would push the "Remove homophobia" button.

[Taboo]

Jedifan421 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

It makes me shake my head. It's so bad people have actually stopped playing ALL the games.

Even the Star Wars prequels couldn't make people stop watching the originals.

Critical marketing failure Bioware.

Yup. Right here. I'm done until the DLC comes out. Then when it disappoints, I'll truly be done with the series. What was the ****ing point of playing those games when I got three horrendous endings that would have made Hitler dance in his grave and basically give a giant middle finger to anyone who cared about the characters besides Shepard? As is, I'll have to play multiplayer again to get back up to the level of percentage I need to see all three endings and the "additional cinematics" for each just to see what they pull out of their asses.

Also, the Star Wars prequels have affected me in watching the originals. Lucas has made so many versions of them after 1983 when he began tampering with them to align with the prequels better. I can truly only watch the original versions of all three considering the **** the Blu Ray versions did to the originals. Granted, there were some good changes but also really nonsensical ones for all three originals.

It's a rare effect. Very few artists have ever reached that level level of popular scorn.

[Taboo]

Seryl wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I know great directors who have failed. But I've never seen someone fail this badly in my lifetime.

This is why I'm so interested in this. It is unlikely that I will see a failure this epic, and this public, again.

I'd like to go do something else but I can't look away and it seems I can do more good here.

Plus I'm waiting for funding on a project.

I have time Bioware.