Amioran wrote...
You cannot be serious, are you?
That's the way they behave and they tell you directly. Why they shouldn't have done the same way before? What you say makes no sense at all, do you get it? Why they should tell you a lie? For what motive?
Because they're the ones struggling to wipe out all life in the galaxy? You chose to buy into their claim. The Reapers just ass-pulled some huge one-liner about the inevitability of organics
It is obvious that they developed a solution to a problem, as the Catalyst told you. The Protheans have also memory of the same happening to them (as explained by Javik). You get to see the same pattern happening in your cycle.
Nope, we don't. We get to see the Geth and EDI cooperate with us, in the face of adversity. The Catalyst developed a solution to a problem that we didn't even know was an issue. Remember: the cycle is Reapers destroying organics. And that still meets the Catalyst's solution since that means that all organic life is not destroyed by synthetics.
I'd recommend that you try not to bust out Javik as a defense of your claims. It certainly doesn't help that Bioware told us that he's completely unnecessary to the experience.
You can estabilish that this is what happened before and the Catalyst developing a solution to the same, you don't need to have the authors tell you, it is implied in the narrative (in the way the struggle with the AIs is developed in the cycle you are in, in the way it was in the previous cycle and from what the Catalyst tells you).
Again, the Catalyst tells us nothing. Claim in isolation. It's even funnier because this was the point for the developers to lay out all these conflicts explicitly:
Catalyst: Synthetics would destroy all organics.
Shepard: But what about EDI and the Geth?
Catalyst: Nope, we've seen this happen, it always begins peacefully before things turn ugly.
Congratulations, I just gave you a premise for your argument. I just wish the Catalyst could have done you the same service.
Again, it is implied.
I understand that you want to have a point so you have to deny it at all costs, but what you say it is really climbling to mirrors.
I don't consider your fanfiction to be a threat to my arguments.
You see it happen in your cycle, you know it happened in the cycle before, the Catalyst tell you he developed a solution to a problem and that's why they come every cycle. You know they come every cycle and they have come in the past.
Again, no. Why do you continue with thesee idiotic assumptions? Point me to all the cycles where AI almost destroyed organics? Hell, Sovereign attempted to get the Rachni to murder us a good 1.8k years before the Geth were even created. And you want me to believe that the Reapers are waiting for synthetics to launch the cycle?
The Catalyst didn't imply anything. He said that he thinks it's inevitable that synthetics will murder organics. The cycle is his solution to prevent that from happening. Where do you get that he's seen this pattern of synthetics murdering organics from? It's certainly not contained in either of the two previous statements.
You don't need authors to tell you that the same exact thing has happened every cycle in the past and that's why the Reapers exists. It is obvious that's so in the way the narrative is implemented and developed. Why elsewhere the Catalyst would have developed a solution to a problem that never existed? Why the Catalyst should come every 50.000 years? (If he wanted to just kill he could whipe out all organics without problems, isn't it? Why leave some alone without a motive?).
Because he's an idiot, which is exactly the point. His logic is unknown. He just presented the audience with an insanely controversial claim, and the writers (Mac in particular) decided that we didn't need key exposition to outline how any of this crap happened. Hell, Legion in ME2 and during that side quest in ME3 at least showed us the first time the Geth ever asked about their existence and how the rebellion started.
You'd think Bioware would have actually done the same for the evil guys we've been fighting for the past three games, since now they suddenly claim to be our saviors.
The only way you can think something as this is believing that the Catalysts lies (also if there's neither a logical motivation of this happening), but this interpretation is proved wrong by what it happens in the past and present cycle, that demonstrates that what the Catalyst says it is true (at last empyrically). So, since it happened in the present and in the past, and it is either a thing having to do with parameters that can represents themselves (and you have two evidences of this happening) you have no basis at all to believe something different and to imply something different.
No, that is not the only way this can be believed. The Catalyst has a claim, not an argument, as I've pointed out to you. Your idea that the threat of a technological singularity is so deadly that we can't allow it to happen, as synthetics would wipe out all organics. This idea is built on a million different assumptions and the Catalyst doesn't give us any evidence. But his claim doesn't imply the existence of a pattern of synthetics murdering organics.
Your idea is that the Catalyst doesn't tell the Reapers to murder organics until they start fighting with synthetics. But if the threat of a singularity is so deadly that I could claim that we can't risk the possibility of organics developing AI after they surpass the Reapers. Therefore, the only way to prevent the creation of AI is to murder organics before they surpass the Reapers technologically. Which fits just as easily into the cycle, and is actually consistent about what we know of the cycle, and doesn't demand that the Reapers wait for these imaginary synthetics.
Modifié par Il Divo, 12 mai 2012 - 03:50 .
Retour en haut
I feel the same way, I really dislike the endings and deeply wish we'd gotten something that seemed more in touch with the rest of the trilogy, but I believe our arguments should focus on other matters instead of the logic of the Catalyst. Every time a Mass Effect fan, displeased with the ending, posts the Xzibit 'Yo dawg' picture found in the original post, it makes us seem incapable of understanding what happened. Disagree with the logic all you want, but boiling it down to 'We created synthetics to wipe out organics to save organics from synthetics' isn't even oversimplification, it's a direct misinterpretation of what's being said.
