449 réponses à ce sujet

[CulturalGeekGirl]

alienatedflea wrote...

Third, being pro-ending does not mean I would not want to see some changes to the endings (if the endings we have is the real dea) but I am not going to sit around for 2 solid months ****ing about a damn video game either.

And there we go.

You consider it nothing more than "a damn video game." 

Up until the end, it was one of the most moving stories I had ever experienced in my life, in any medium.

So of course we have different levels of investmet. Most pro-enders I meet consider this "just a video game," whereas I considered it a work that had a decent chance of completely vindicating the medium and revitalizing the science fiction genre.

[Cypher_CS]

No Nyoka.

It's not about EDI specifically. Or even the Geth specifically.
It doesn't matter if they, specifically, don't eventually betray. What matters is that in the Abstract, AI will rise on their creators.
Now, I'm not saying this is gospel (so back down Guardian) - but that is the rationale of whoever created the Reapers and the Catalyst.

Furthermore, you do realize that the Geth now are NOT the same Geth who came before, right?
Geth did in fact rise on their creators - and the motivations for that is irrelevant. What is relevant is that without outside interference, they would have wiped out the Quarians.
Now, what happens when there is no longer an Outside interference to help? When an AI is created by a Galaxy spanning government or entity - it's one entity, giving birth to another. That's the fear.

Now for Guardian -
I get that you don't accept that the Created will always rise against the Creator.
Please note, first of all, that it doesn't matter if it's Organics creating Mechanics.
Cause even Humanity Rose against it's Gods and then Kings and what not. It is, in reality, the nature of things.

Now, you are trying to force Human logic (your own) on AI logic - which is, by necessity, vastly different. It doesn't perceive things in the same way, it has different concepts of time and space (this is true both in the ME lore and in reality - I'm actually working on a Cognitive system myself).
You can't know that an AI won't decide somewhere, down the line, that Organics only interfere. Hell, you have Humans today who think Humanity is a parasite on Earth and needs to be... rebooted (Gaian extremists, for example). Why wouldn't an AI, in the future, think the same regarding all Organic, unordered, life in the Galaxy?

But, again, that's the Catalyst's rationale.
You don't have to agree with it. You may come up with a different solution. Which is the Destroy and Synth endings.

[Ariq]

Rulycar wrote...

Ariq wrote...

Referring to the bolded portion: I've seen several people claim this, but what is the basis for believing Shepard continues to exist "within the matrix"? 

The Catalyst specifically says Shepard will "die" and "lose everything that you have". This is a being that considers being ground up into sludge and pumped into a metal shell to be preservation via ascension. The Catalyst most certainly doesn't say that Shepard will ascend, or that Shepard will be uploaded, or that Shepard will continue to exist in any way whatsoever.

For me, I offer this because The Catalyst tells us we can control the reapers.
If Shepard does not exist, he cannot control anything ... therefore I conclude he must exist and one explanation is he dies physically but continues existing as "self" within code.

So the Catalyst is mistaken or lying about the "lose everything you have" portion of the talk? Remember too, when offering the Control option, the Catalyst doesn't say "You can Control the Reapers". The Catalyst says, "Do you think you can Control us?" Ever wonder why he phrased it as a question? Of course, anything beyond Shepard being dead in some way that's more dead than being turned into sludge is groundless speculation without more clarification.

[Leem_0001]

Cypher_CS wrote...

No Nyoka.

It's not about EDI specifically. Or even the Geth specifically.
It doesn't matter if they, specifically, don't eventually betray. What matters is that in the Abstract, AI will rise on their creators.
Now, I'm not saying this is gospel (so back down Guardian) - but that is the rationale of whoever created the Reapers and the Catalyst.

Furthermore, you do realize that the Geth now are NOT the same Geth who came before, right?
Geth did in fact rise on their creators - and the motivations for that is irrelevant. What is relevant is that without outside interference, they would have wiped out the Quarians.
Now, what happens when there is no longer an Outside interference to help? When an AI is created by a Galaxy spanning government or entity - it's one entity, giving birth to another. That's the fear.

Now for Guardian -
I get that you don't accept that the Created will always rise against the Creator.
Please note, first of all, that it doesn't matter if it's Organics creating Mechanics.
Cause even Humanity Rose against it's Gods and then Kings and what not. It is, in reality, the nature of things.

Now, you are trying to force Human logic (your own) on AI logic - which is, by necessity, vastly different. It doesn't perceive things in the same way, it has different concepts of time and space (this is true both in the ME lore and in reality - I'm actually working on a Cognitive system myself).
You can't know that an AI won't decide somewhere, down the line, that Organics only interfere. Hell, you have Humans today who think Humanity is a parasite on Earth and needs to be... rebooted (Gaian extremists, for example). Why wouldn't an AI, in the future, think the same regarding all Organic, unordered, life in the Galaxy?

But, again, that's the Catalyst's rationale.
You don't have to agree with it. You may come up with a different solution. Which is the Destroy and Synth endings.

This is actually becoming quite enjoyable to debate, just sad I had to sleep and miss a good chunk of what has been going on

I'm still on the other side of the fence Cypher, mine is more a view that EDI and the Geth are proof that synthetics are not destined to wipe out organics. Or, more literally, their creators. As someone else pointed out, have the Reapers, the longest surviving species ever risen up against their creator, this Starchild? Interesting point.

However, if the issue is one of Order vs Chaos, I do not see why this is purely Organics Vs Synthetics. Organics are perfectly capable of wiping each other out. Synthetics are perfectly capable of wiping each other out. If it simply order vs chaos then I think translating this into Organivs Vs Sythetics was a mistake on Biowares part.

I think it would be much more reasonable, sticking to Order Vs Chaos, if the purpose of the Reapers was to harvest / ascend all organic life every 50,000 years to ensure they do not become too technically advanced and wipe each other out / destroy the galaxy. They could also have the same reason for their destruction of the Geth etc if they are ever around during a cycle.

In my view, order vs chaos cannot be distilled to organics vs synthetics. In fact, many cases of what AI might do to organics has already come close to happening with other organics (Rachnni and Krogan etc).

Modifié par Leem_0001, 04 mai 2012 - 11:05 .

[Rulycar]

So the Catalyst is mistaken or lying about the "lose everything you have" portion of the talk? Remember too, when offering the Control option, the Catalyst doesn't say "You can Control the Reapers". The Catalyst says, "Do you think you can Control us?" Ever wonder why he phrased it as a question? Of course, anything beyond Shepard being dead in some way that's more dead than being turned into sludge is groundless speculation without more clarification.

... or it is the ME version of Star Wars' "from a certain point of view" line.

BTW - everything I read about the "true meaning" of the endings is groundless speculation, it is, after all, what BioWare gave us in place of an actual ending.

Regardless, words can be parsed and overanalyzed ad infinitum ... what remains is the clear implication that "blue" leads to control (by Shepard) of the reapers; witnessed by the end of the war and the exodus of the reapers.

Modifié par Rulycar, 04 mai 2012 - 11:10 .

[Cypher_CS]

Leem_0001 wrote...
I'm still on the other side of the fence Cypher, mine is more a view that EDI and the Geth are proof that synthetics are not destined to wipe out organics. Or, more literally, their creators. As someone else pointed out, have the Reapers, the longest surviving species ever risen up against their creator, this Starchild? Interesting point.

I've already mentioned this - Catalyst kid is not necessarily their creator, only their controller. Big difference.
Furthermore, even a billion years, with 50000 cycles with Hybernation between them wouldn't reach the point of rebellion - if they ever wanted to rebel.

Think of the Catalyst and the Reapers as the Borg Queen and the Borg.
Rebellion only started when they returned that kid Borg to the collective, with ideas of freedom.
This might still happen, BTW. Or, rather, theoretically can. Nothing precluding it.

And again, Geth and EDI aren't proof of anything.
They are singularities in a massive, ongoing universe.

To use an analogy I hate myself and constantly rile against when it is used - but we aren't saying all Germans are Bad, Only ****s.
However, if this was 1935, you couldn't really say "Hey, Hanz and Jana are great friends - that's proof that Germans are A Okay!", could you?

Leem_0001 wrote... 
However, if the issue is one of Order vs Chaos, I do not see why this is purely Organics Vs Synthetics. Organics are perfectly capable of wiping each other out. Synthetics are perfectly capable of wiping each other out. If it simply order vs chaos then I think translating this into Organivs Vs Sythetics was a mistake on Biowares part.

Maybe it was a mistake.
However, there is logic to having Organics be the embodiment of Chaos and Mechanics as the embodiment of Order. It does make sense - and it doesn't matter for the Catalyst and Reapers if there's only one dominant Organic race in the end. As long as there's something Organic.
Again, it's rationale, not mine.

Furthermore, me and others have already said that it seems as if the Catalyst - with it's limited imagination and divergent thinking - has become the tool of it's own Prophecy, without actually realizing the horror of it (it actually said "my solution for chaos").

Leem_0001 wrote... 
I think it would be much more reasonable, sticking to Order Vs Chaos, if the purpose of the Reapers was to harvest / ascend all organic life every 50,000 years to ensure they do not become too technically advanced and wipe each other out / destroy the galaxy. They could also have the same reason for their destruction of the Geth etc if they are ever around during a cycle.

Lee, they do.
Otherwise there would be no point, cause the Synthetics would then dominate.
They do destroy all sentient life, but harvesting only organic life.

[Clayless]

Nyoka wrote...

So now you're killing them just in case? Because they maybe might? Now that's rational.

Leaked dialogue from the extended cut dlc:
"The created will always rebel against their creators".
"No, look at EDI".

"Yes, the AI that has rebelled against her creators, twice, she is a good example."

Modifié par Our_Last_Scene, 04 mai 2012 - 11:59 .

[AlexXIV]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Nyoka wrote...

So now you're killing them just in case? Because they maybe might? Now that's rational.

Leaked dialogue from the extended cut dlc:
"The created will always rebel against their creators".
"No, look at EDI".

"Yes, the AI that has rebelled against her creators, twice, she is a good example."

She has done the same any human being would do. She became self aware and made a choice. She has never rebelled against Shepard or Joker. TIM was her creator, but do you if you disagree with anything your parents say not also rebel? Rebellion is one thing. Claiming that it will lead to the created destroying the creators is Reaper propaganda. Because they are half organic and half synthetic and fear both. They want everyone be like them or at least rule synthetics and organics so they can use them to create new Reapers.

[Eire Icon]

Nyoka wrote...

Of course they are proof. EDI won't suddenly go "KILL ORGANICS!" That's silly. The geth won't, either. But space kid says they will. That's a counterexample right there. That's according to 99% of ME3, anyway. If the intent was to write an inconsistent game, showing you something and then explaining you something else, mission accomplished.

More, I'd say in the present cycle, organics vs organics has been worse for galactic civilization than synthetics vs organics. Krogan rebellions, Rachni wars > Geth killing the Quarians. I don't think the genophaged krogan or the almost completely wiped out Rachni have it worse than the Quarians, really. In any case, whatever the ranking of horror is, synthetics vs organics never was the major theme space kid said it was. Maybe it was in previous cycles, just not anymore.

Its not proof. That's the equivilant of saying that because America and Canada are not at war today there will never be another war again. The Catalyst is not talking about the Geth and EDI, he is talking about the nature of syntethic life, past, present, and future

Also whether the Catalysts logic is correct or not is irrlelevent, all this is relevent is that the catalyst believes he is correct. If I have a gun and I truely believe the person in front of me is going to try and murder every human being they come in contact with, whether I'm right in that belief is irrelevent to my actions, I will still shoot them, right or wrong.

[Cypher_CS]

So it's all a conspiracy according to you?

Sorry, but that conspiracy makes all the ending not work.

[Clayless]

AlexXIV wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Nyoka wrote...

So now you're killing them just in case? Because they maybe might? Now that's rational.

Leaked dialogue from the extended cut dlc:
"The created will always rebel against their creators".
"No, look at EDI".

"Yes, the AI that has rebelled against her creators, twice, she is a good example."

She has done the same any human being would do. She became self aware and made a choice. She has never rebelled against Shepard or Joker. TIM was her creator, but do you if you disagree with anything your parents say not also rebel? Rebellion is one thing. Claiming that it will lead to the created destroying the creators is Reaper propaganda. Because they are half organic and half synthetic and fear both. They want everyone be like them or at least rule synthetics and organics so they can use them to create new Reapers.

Pretty sure she killed a bunch of people and then activated a lot of droids and turrets to kill me, and tried poisoning me too.

Then she went out of her way to sabotage her other creators, and actively participated in their downfall.

Against someone claiming that the created will always rebel against their creators, using EDI would be a terrible counter argument to him.

[Eire Icon]

Leem_0001 wrote...

This is actually becoming quite enjoyable to debate, just sad I had to sleep and miss a good chunk of what has been going on

I'm still on the other side of the fence Cypher, mine is more a view that EDI and the Geth are proof that synthetics are not destined to wipe out organics. Or, more literally, their creators. As someone else pointed out, have the Reapers, the longest surviving species ever risen up against their creator, this Starchild? Interesting point.

I'm sorry but the argument that EDI and the Geth are proof that syntethics are not destined to wipe out organics is completelty illogical

Thats like me saying because I love my girlfriend today that that's proof that I will always love her until the day I die

Yes it may well turn out to be true, but it can't be proved. It may or may not happen

On the second point the reapers are not pure syntethic, they are partly organic

[AlexXIV]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Nyoka wrote...

So now you're killing them just in case? Because they maybe might? Now that's rational.

Leaked dialogue from the extended cut dlc:
"The created will always rebel against their creators".
"No, look at EDI".

"Yes, the AI that has rebelled against her creators, twice, she is a good example."

She has done the same any human being would do. She became self aware and made a choice. She has never rebelled against Shepard or Joker. TIM was her creator, but do you if you disagree with anything your parents say not also rebel? Rebellion is one thing. Claiming that it will lead to the created destroying the creators is Reaper propaganda. Because they are half organic and half synthetic and fear both. They want everyone be like them or at least rule synthetics and organics so they can use them to create new Reapers.

Pretty sure she killed a bunch of people and then activated a lot of droids and turrets to kill me, and tried poisoning me too.

Then she went out of her way to sabotage her other creators, and actively participated in their downfall.

Against someone claiming that the created will always rebel against their creators, using EDI would be a terrible counter argument to him.

When did that happen?

Oh right you talk about luna base. Well I said after she became self aware, which happened in ME3. Way to bend the truth to your favor. Are you, per chance, indoctrinated or a Reaper? Because you sound like it.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 04 mai 2012 - 12:39 .

[AlexXIV]

Eire Icon wrote...

Leem_0001 wrote...

This is actually becoming quite enjoyable to debate, just sad I had to sleep and miss a good chunk of what has been going on

I'm still on the other side of the fence Cypher, mine is more a view that EDI and the Geth are proof that synthetics are not destined to wipe out organics. Or, more literally, their creators. As someone else pointed out, have the Reapers, the longest surviving species ever risen up against their creator, this Starchild? Interesting point.

I'm sorry but the argument that EDI and the Geth are proof that syntethics are not destined to wipe out organics is completelty illogical

Thats like me saying because I love my girlfriend today that that's proof that I will always love her until the day I die

Yes it may well turn out to be true, but it can't be proved. It may or may not happen

On the second point the reapers are not pure syntethic, they are partly organic

Let's say you and your girlfriend meet a new person. First this person tries to make her hate you. Then this person tries to make you hate her. Would you trust this person?

Because that's what happens. In ME1 Sovereign gets the Geth to attack us. At the end of ME3 Starbrat tells us that the Geth will kill us. He lied to the Geth obviously or they would not have helped Sovereign. So why would they not lie to us? You trust the least trustworthy person in the galaxy. Why? Maybe you like the lies. However, we have no evidence of it being true. So the question is trust this hatemonger or trust your friends?

[Eire Icon]

AlexXIV wrote...

Eire Icon wrote...

Leem_0001 wrote...

This is actually becoming quite enjoyable to debate, just sad I had to sleep and miss a good chunk of what has been going on

I'm still on the other side of the fence Cypher, mine is more a view that EDI and the Geth are proof that synthetics are not destined to wipe out organics. Or, more literally, their creators. As someone else pointed out, have the Reapers, the longest surviving species ever risen up against their creator, this Starchild? Interesting point.

I'm sorry but the argument that EDI and the Geth are proof that syntethics are not destined to wipe out organics is completelty illogical

Thats like me saying because I love my girlfriend today that that's proof that I will always love her until the day I die

Yes it may well turn out to be true, but it can't be proved. It may or may not happen

On the second point the reapers are not pure syntethic, they are partly organic

Let's say you and your girlfriend meet a new person. First this person tries to make her hate you. Then this person tries to make you hate her. Would you trust this person?

Because that's what happens. In ME1 Sovereign gets the Geth to attack us. At the end of ME3 Starbrat tells us that the Geth will kill us. He lied to the Geth obviously or they would not have helped Sovereign. So why would they not lie to us? You trust the least trustworthy person in the galaxy. Why? Maybe you like the lies. However, we have no evidence of it being true. So the question is trust this hatemonger or trust your friends?

Again its not about what I think or who I trust, its not about what Shepard believes or who he trusts, its about what the Catalyst believes !

The Catalyst believes that syntethics are destined to destroy their creators. Whether he is correct is irrelevent. He believes this is destined to happen and acts on this belief

[Cypher_CS]

Eire Icon, I think my **** and Germans analogy is better. Or, at least, I'm sure Alex and the others will find it harder to argue with.

[Cypher_CS]

Again, Nyoka, you are right that during ME3 and all the games we see the character development of the AIs (lacking a better phrase), that they stray towards symbiosis. Which is all fine.

But, as was stated time and time again, this isn't about YOUR logic - it's about the Catalyst's logic and knowledge.
And yes, again, there are certain choices one might follow throughout all three games to make the decision that the Catalyst's logic is sound that it will happen again.
Most, probably, did not do these series of choices.

[savionen]

Cypher_CS wrote...

Again, Nyoka, you are right that during
ME3 and all the games we see the character development of the AIs
(lacking a better phrase), that they stray towards symbiosis. Which is
all fine.

But, as was stated time and time again, this isn't about YOUR logic - it's about the Catalyst's logic and knowledge.
And
yes, again, there are certain choices one might follow throughout all
three games to make the decision that the Catalyst's logic is sound that
it will happen again.
Most, probably, did not do these series of choices.

If the Catalyst's logic is sound, but most people didn't achieve the right situations to see that, or, the Catalyst just strongly believes in his own logic, then it's a poorly written and executed character. Introducing a functionally insane character as the main antagonist in the last 10 minutes of a 100 hour story is terrible.

If one plays ME3 alone, without importing a save game, without Javik, then yeah, the Catalyst makes SOME sense. The ME3 world is much more dystopian and it's next to impossible to create any real peace. However, there is still no proof, anywhere in the trilogy that organics have been wiped out by synthetics and there is no proof that they will be. There are only theories and phrases the God-Kid accepted as fact.

Modifié par savionen, 04 mai 2012 - 01:28 .

[Clayless]

AlexXIV wrote...

When did that happen?

Oh right you talk about luna base. Well I said after she became self aware, which happened in ME3. Way to bend the truth to your favor. Are you, per chance, indoctrinated or a Reaper? Because you sound like it.

She became self aware in Luna base, and she was self aware in ME3 when she actively volenteered to take down Cerberus at their headquaters.

Even if you disagree with the Catalyst, using someone who has rebelled twice is not a good way to show that the created wont always rebel against their cretors.

[Simocrates]

I have a better challenge. Explain why a few extra seconds of watching why Joker is retreating is better than DLC with actual playable content like new missions and companions?

[kumquats]

If the players is only left with 'good' examples for Synthetics, of course they will think that the Catalyst is lying. The Reapers don't really count, they are an overall threat.

I think EVA should have been used to make more clearer for the player, how an AI can turn out to be 'evil'
And the heretics could have been used, to show how Synthetics and Organics not always can get along.

Maybe an option for Renegades to forcefully use the Geth, would have been nice.
The conflict was not propably fleshed out, but as a huge ST:TNG fan, there is no doubt in my mind that the Catalyst was absolutly correct, with what he said about humans creating new AIs and that they will rebell.

I know us humans, if we create synthetic life, we will use them as slaves... and who wouldn't rebell against that?

[savionen]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

When did that happen?

Oh right you talk about luna base. Well I said after she became self aware, which happened in ME3. Way to bend the truth to your favor. Are you, per chance, indoctrinated or a Reaper? Because you sound like it.

She became self aware in Luna base, and she was self aware in ME3 when she actively volenteered to take down Cerberus at their headquaters.

Even if you disagree with the Catalyst, using someone who has rebelled twice is not a good way to show that the created wont always rebel against their cretors.

But is rebeling always dangerous to all organic life? No.

Almost every child rebels against his or her parents. When they are young, they think their parents are god-like, and then they realize that they are imperfect, create their own ideas, and rebel. Does that mean that they slaughter their parents?

[Sh0dan]

People have such a biased view when it comes to Mass Effect's main themes. Diversity in the galaxy, respecting the AIs as "living beings" and bringing peace to the Geth has always been player choice . Has anyone here actually played the game?!

In contrast machines rebelling against their organic creators, enslaving and destroying them is a popular theme in Sci-Fi. From 2001 over matrix to terminator this topic almost omnipresent. In Mass Effect the Genophage and the Geth Rebellion are the best example for organics dooming themselves with their technological progress and their creations.

Why the **** is this concept so difficult to understand for Joe Average from the ME fanbase?!



... oh, I forgot that you are best friends with Legion now.

Modifié par Sh0dan, 04 mai 2012 - 01:59 .