365 réponses à ce sujet

[brfritos]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

I think that regardless of whether or not you agree with the Starchild's logic (and I happen to agree with it, especially if you substitute the word "kill" organics with the word "preserve" organics) the simple fact is that the Starchild - and whoever created the Starchild - agrees with his logic, and has a giant Reaper army to back it up.

You disagree with his logic, you gotta fight through the Reapers and prove him wrong and end the cycle, which... is exactly what Shepard does.

I agree with this, that's why I usually choose the Destroy ending, with all his implications.
But the choices given could reflect a little more Shepard's decisions in the game, they are too arbitrary.

For example, the Sintesis end only appears because your EMS.

How it would be if this particular ending was based in your decison on Rannoch?
The Destroyer don't believe it when Shepard says organics and synthetics don't have to kill each other, but you have the chance to prove him wrong.

Therefore this would bring much more closure and sense than a cutsecene.

Ok, I was mean in the last comment.

[Il Divo]

Tigerman123 wrote...

He doesn't say that synthetics are more likely to go to war than organics, his argument is that synthetics are capable of driving organic life to extinction to due their potential to far exceed them technologically. The rachni, even the Reapers had military strength and scientific understanding which was at least comprehensible to the citadel species; the entire point of a post singularity civilisation is that wouldn't be possible, that they could wipe us out on a whim or incidentally, especially because this isn't hard scifi and the cap on what is feasible is very high, eg the crucible

Actually, having just rewatched the ending, he doesn't even say that much, leaving it to the audience to extrapolate. It's funny because we've all spent the last seven pages arguing about synthetics vs. organics and the Catalyst only actually mentions it once during the ending sequence.

"No, you can't. Without us to stop it, synthetics would destroy all organics. "

And that's all we get from the ending sequence.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 mai 2012 - 02:06 .

[The Razman]

Il Divo wrote...

The reason why your argument is so funny is that it attempts to extrapolate a pattern from isolated, weak examples. Shepard spent three games fighting synthetics trying to kill him. He also spent those three games fighting organics, machine gods, mutant bugs, and whatever else your mind can think of. But of course, I don't see anyone extrapolating some pattern that war between all life is inevitable, which would actually make far more sense as a motivation. Apparently there's something special about synthetics that makes them more likely to go to war with organics than any other species. But for some odd reason, the Catalyst can't point out what that is.

Sgt Stykr wrote...

So what? In all three games Shepard also fights plenty of organics
that want to kill him. Does that mean all organics must be exterminated
as well, just because a few organics dare to attack Shepard?

The
Starchild is nothing but a genocidal loose cannon, and makes the likes
of Genghis Khan, Hitler, and Mao look like Mr. Rogers in comparison.
Such a force must be opposed and disagreed with at any opportunity.

I'm sorry ... did any of the organics which Sheperd was fighting have a technological superiority so great that they could exterminate all life in the galaxy? Because your posts are completely meaningless otherwise. We've already been over (in the OP) the technological threshold beyond which synthetics would have the power to destroy all life in the galaxy.

[Il Divo]

The Razman wrote...

I'm sorry ... did any of the organics which Sheperd was fighting have a technological superiority so great that they could exterminate all life in the galaxy? Because your posts are completely meaningless otherwise. We've already been over (in the OP) the technological threshold beyond which synthetics would have the power to destroy all life in the galaxy.

You're right. The Geth were completely beyond our comprehension having spent the last 200 years beyond the...oh wait, they weren't. In fact, the Quarians themselves had actually managed to repel them by ME3, place them on the defensive, and force them to the point of desperation where they had to make a deal with the Reapers in order to survive

So last I checked, both the Krogans and the Rachni came closer to actually destroying the galaxy, while the Salarians managed to produce a bioweapon capable of mass genocide. And given Mutually Assured Destruction theory which existed during the Cold War, I think I'm pretty safe in saying the Catalyst's claims are crap. Because you see, we don't need robots to blow ourselves to hell.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 mai 2012 - 02:11 .

[Sgt Stryker]

Il Divo wrote...

The Razman wrote...

I'm sorry ... did any of the organics which Sheperd was fighting have a technological superiority so great that they could exterminate all life in the galaxy? Because your posts are completely meaningless otherwise. We've already been over (in the OP) the technological threshold beyond which synthetics would have the power to destroy all life in the galaxy.

You're right. The Geth were completely beyond our comprehension having spent the last 200 years beyond the...oh wait, they weren't. In fact, the Quarians themselves had actually managed to repel them by ME3, place them on the defensive, and force them to the point of desperation where they had to make a deal with the Reapers in order to survive

So last I checked, both the Krogans and the Rachni came closer to actually destroying the galaxy, while the Salarians managed to produce a bioweapon capable of mass genocide. And given Mutually Assured Destruction theory which existed during the Cold War, I think I'm pretty safe in saying the Catalyst's claims are crap. Because you see, we don't need robots to blow ourselves to hell.

Let me also add the following. After their rebellion, the only hostile interactions the geth had with organics was due to Sovereign's interference. The mainstream geth were quite content to sit behind the Perseus Veil. That's right, the only reason these particular synthetics even went to war with organics is because one of Space Hitler's pawns made them do it. The Reapers cause organic-synthetic violence. They are not the answer to that problem.

[The Razman]

Il Divo wrote...

The Razman wrote...

I'm sorry ... did any of the organics which Sheperd was fighting have a technological superiority so great that they could exterminate all life in the galaxy? Because your posts are completely meaningless otherwise. We've already been over (in the OP) the technological threshold beyond which synthetics would have the power to destroy all life in the galaxy.

You're right. The Geth were completely beyond our comprehension having spent the last 200 years beyond the...oh wait, they weren't. In fact, the Quarians themselves had actually managed to repel them by ME3, place them on the defensive, and force them to the point of desperation where they had to make a deal with the Reapers in order to survive

So last I checked, both the Krogans and the Rachni came closer to actually destroying the galaxy, while the Salarians managed to produce a bioweapon capable of mass genocide. And given Mutually Assured Destruction theory which existed during the Cold War, I think I'm pretty safe in saying the Catalyst's claims are crap. Because you see, we don't need robots to blow ourselves to hell.

I'm so confused right now, because your tone seems to suggest you're arguing with me ... but the first paragraph was agreeing with me, so I don't know what to think. The fact that the Geth and the AIs don't have the power to destroy everything is the point.

The whole point is that organics will always be on the same technological level as each other, so whatever we do to each other is whatever we do to each other. Synthetics, once the technological singularity is achieved, will be far superior to all organic species. As the Reapers so eloquently demonstrate with their ability to wipe us all out without breaking a sweat.

There's no mututally assured destruction theory in a space as large as the galaxy either, so I don't really know what you're talking about.

[Sgt Stryker]

The Razman wrote...
The whole point is that organics will always be on the same technological level as each other, so whatever we do to each other is whatever we do to each other. Synthetics, once the technological singularity is achieved, will be far superior to all organic species. As the Reapers so eloquently demonstrate with their ability to wipe us all out without breaking a sweat.

I'm sorry, but that is patently false. Suppose there are two organic species who meet each other and hostilities break out. Race A has dreadnoughts and mass accelerators. In terms of space tech, Race B is in the 1960s. Which race will win the war? Hint: It's the one that can do orbital bombardment. By Space Hitler's logic, the Reapers should exterminate Race A in order to make room for Race B, and then come back around in a few centuries to kill off Race B.

[brfritos]

The Razman wrote...

I'm sorry ... did any of the organics which Sheperd was fighting have a technological superiority so great that they could exterminate all life in the galaxy? Because your posts are completely meaningless otherwise. We've already been over (in the OP) the technological threshold beyond which synthetics would have the power to destroy all life in the galaxy.

Actually that's one of my main critiscims about ME3.

In ME1 the Reapers appears as indestructible Gods, when in fact they aren't. The Alliance used only ONE fleet to fight Sovereign, since the others were busy fighting Geth in another part of the galaxy.

In ME2 they are capable of maintaining "alive" an species for 50.000 thousands years to use them as slaves despite the copious amounts of resources needed and we develop weapons that destroy Collector ships with two shots and wipped out their base using one frigate and twelve mercenaries.

But in ME3 they are Cyberdemons accompained by Barons of Hell and all fleets are simply wiped out with little difficulty.
I don't know what the Reapers are doing, maybe playing those Asari/Hanar porno games that sells in Shin Akiba, because if you read the Codex and some planets descriptions they pretty much owned everyone.

That's doesn't seem reasonable.

Modifié par brfritos, 12 mai 2012 - 02:29 .

[The Razman]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

The Razman wrote...
The whole point is that organics will always be on the same technological level as each other, so whatever we do to each other is whatever we do to each other. Synthetics, once the technological singularity is achieved, will be far superior to all organic species. As the Reapers so eloquently demonstrate with their ability to wipe us all out without breaking a sweat.

I'm sorry, but that is patently false. Suppose there are two organic species who meet each other and hostilities break out. Race A has dreadnoughts and mass accelerators. In terms of space tech, Race B is in the 1960s. Which race will win the war?

Race A. Hence, organic life persists.

I should've clarified, I didn't say individual SPECIES will always be on the same technological level. Just organic life in general. It's impossible to wipe out all organic life just through imbalances between species. The Protheans proved that by conquering the galaxy.

[Il Divo]

The Razman wrote...

I'm so confused right now, because your tone seems to suggest you're arguing with me ... but the first paragraph was agreeing with me, so I don't know what to think. The fact that the Geth and the AIs don't have the power to destroy everything is the point.

That is inherently the point. The Catalyst's  your assumptions are couched in this idea that synthetics are technologically superior. So...where is this coming from? The Geth had two hundred years isolation to prove that they could evolve beyond organics to the point where they don't need us and to obtain technology far and above what we have. So thermal clips and gameplay excuses not withstanding, what have the Geth produced to bump us up agains the wall?

The whole point is that organics will always be on the same technological level as each other, so whatever we do to each other is whatever we do to each other. Synthetics, once the technological singularity is achieved, will be far superior to all organic species. As the Reapers so eloquently demonstrate with their ability to wipe us all out without breaking a sweat.

Which is a bad argument. See World War II. Not every country possessed nuclear warheads. The Catalyst's claims regarding a technological singularity are no different than one country getting their hands on advanced, deadly technology. Both Japan and Germany still exist in a post World War II era. This has nothing to do with synthetics vs. organics, but the inevitable result of one group gaining too much power.

There's no mututally assured destruction theory in a space as large as the galaxy either, so I don't really know what you're talking about.

Apparently every organic species in the galaxy hitting each other with their own equivalent of the genophage wouldn't be enough to cause MAD?

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 mai 2012 - 02:32 .

[Sgt Stryker]

Il Divo wrote...

That is inherently the point. The Catalyst's  your assumptions are couched in this idea that synthetics are technologically superior. So...where is this coming from? The Geth had two hundred years isolation to prove that they could evolve beyond organics to the point where they don't need us and to obtain technology far and above what we have. So thermal clips and gameplay excuses not withstanding, what have the Geth produced to bump us up agains the wall?

Heh, for the sake of being facetitious, I'd say thermal clips were a step backwards, rather than progress. 

[The Razman]

Il Divo wrote...

That is inherently the point. The Catalyst's  your assumptions are couched in this idea that synthetics are technologically superior. So...where is this coming from?

... no? They aren't technologically superior. That's the whole point. They will be if the technological singularity is allowed to occur. Which is why the cycles stop that from happening by making sure our technology never evolves to that point.

If the Geth buggering off for a couple of hundred years was enough time for them to evolve into Reaper-likes ... then the cycles would've failed way, way before this. Seriously, that's pretty obvious, I'm not sure what you're trying to even say.

Which is a bad argument. See World War II. Not every country possessed nuclear warheads. The Catalyst's claims regarding a technological singularity are no different than one country getting their hands on advanced, deadly technology. Both Japan and Germany still exist in a post World War II era.

Except that we're talking about synthetics, not "another country". Your analogy would require aliens with vastly superior technology coming in, not something as wimpy as nuclear warheads.

Apparently every organic species in the galaxy hitting each other with their own equivalent of the genophage wouldn't be enough to cause MAD?

Every organic species ... releasing a Genophage agent simultaneously into the atmosphere of every single inhabited planet in the galaxy ...?

I don't reaaaaaally see that happening.

[Il Divo]

Tell that to Bioware. Reloading apparently is an advantage.

[Il Divo]

The Razman wrote...

... no? They aren't technologically superior. That's the whole point. They will be if the technological singularity is allowed to occur. Which is why the cycles stop that from happening by making sure our technology never evolves to that point.

If the Geth buggering off for a couple of hundred years was enough time for them to evolve into Reaper-likes ... then the cycles would've failed way, way before this. Seriously, that's pretty obvious, I'm not sure what you're trying to even say.

Actually, the point was that they weren't anywhere near more advanced than we are. The technological singularity concept relies on the idea that synthetics can move past us, which the Geth did not do even remotely, with 200 years in isolation. In short: the technological singularity concept is BS. Even more so since you're the one here defending it, not the Catalyst, whose claim consists of one sentence existing in a vacuum separated from the rest of the storyline.

Except that we're talking about synthetics, not "another country". Your analogy would require aliens with vastly superior technology coming in, not something as wimpy as nuclear warheads.

The analogy would require a nation with technology capable of wiping out a country. Which is exactly what nukes can do. So, it's relevant.

Only you and the Catalyst decided to make an arbitrary distinction between synthetics and organics, which as I said is funny because pretty much the motivation for every synthetic-organic conflict which has ever occurred has been a motivation also involved in an organic-organic conflict. Self-preservation? Check. Religion? Check. Adversity to slavery? Again, check. But based on your reasoning, there's something specifically synthetic about these actions that when a robot does them you cry "War is inevitable" but if an organic does it it's "Well, whatever".

Every organic species ... releasing a Genophage agent simultaneously into the atmosphere of every single inhabited planet in the galaxy ...?

I don't reaaaaaally see that happening.

It is inevitable, as per the Catalyst. We need a 100% foolproof solution to prevent this from ever occurring. Also remember they don't have to be released simultaneously. The Krogan didn't die overnight.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 mai 2012 - 02:49 .

[Hunter of Legends]

slyguy200 wrote...

Due to the fact that Raz's argument is insufficient to persuade anyone, I (and others) conclude that the argument that the catalysts "logic" is crap, will continue.

His logic is not crap, it is his reasoning and assumptions that are in fact incorrect.

[Bluko]

The thing about this is... what's to stop an organic race from wiping out all other forms of sentient organic life?

I highly doubt synthetics would ever be interested in destroying all life. It's like killing your neighbor because conceivably they could murder you even though for the most part your relation is passive and largely exclusive. Synthetics don't need organics and provided they do interfere with their livelyhood what do they have to gain by killing us? Synthetics aren't immortal they just don't die. Engaging in conflict is still a risk for them to some extent even if their ability to survive is much greater. Also would Synthetics really go to the trouble of eliminating every last micro-organism? That seems pretty excessive and wasteful for supposedly "efficient" machines.


Also conversely why is it any less bad for organics to wipe out all synthetics?

Here's the thing about the Reapers. They are both organic and synthetic. This is rather telling that they believe only that by making all life the same can they achieve lasting unity/peace. While they are probably correct in this assertion the problem is they force this unity rather then simply let it happen. It's for this reason the Reapers are "bad". I don't believe the Starchild's reasoning as it only applies to organics and our inherent fear of different lifeforms. Which is actually the one thing the Reapers would seem to fear I'd wager.

[Hunter of Legends]

Bluko wrote...

The thing about this is... what's to stop an organic race from wiping out all other forms of sentient organic life?

We rely heavily on them; that relationship is not mutual.

[Bluko]

Hunter of Legends wrote...

Bluko wrote...

The thing about this is... what's to stop an organic race from wiping out all other forms of sentient organic life?

We rely heavily on them; that relationship is not mutual.

Well yes Humans specifically are suppose to eat meat. Though quite frankly you don't need meat to sustain yourself. Granted Humans do pretty much have to eat plants at least. So we do have to consume other life to survive. At least for the time being until we reach a point where all food is artificial.

See that's how I saw the Reapers. They aren't inherently evil they're just doing what they need to do to survive. The whole idea they need some secret agenda or greater goal is silly.  They kill us only so that they can continue living as they are. Also it's not really difficult to theorize that eventually any species that relies heavily on technology will integrate with it. I would not be surprised if Humans in a few thousands years essentially became machines. It will be gradual of course. At first it will just be simple genetic engineering and implants that you let do nifty stuff. I mean imagine if you had an implant that let you access the internet. You would no longer have to worry about carrying a phone or anything. Then there's the darker side of things of people opting to live in virtual worlds. Though we already see this to an extent with MMOs. Prosthetic body hearts, etc.

Also the issue of population. There is a limit to just how large our population can get on Earth. So we must either begin embracing birth control a lot more or expect governments to enforce a child limit. Also this leads to unrest and makes war mongering that much easier. But if we become a mostly artificial species population will almost be a non-issue provided we have sufficient energy. Also the benefits of not dying of age or disease per say.

That's the thing the Reapers may not be wrong. Advanced spacefaring species may ultimately always become something like them. But their methods certainly are cruel and unjust. Hence why they are bad to us. Or that's what I use to think. With ME3 I especially thought Cerberus was a proxy for Reaper Ideals. I thought that was the point. I just can't take the ending as the real deal cause it just doesn't add up.

[Hunter of Legends]

Bluko wrote...

Well yes Humans specifically are suppose to eat meat. Though quite frankly you don't need meat to sustain yourself.

Actually this is a false assumption; you require meat in your diet as humans are omivurous. Simply eating one or the other will not sustain a healthy diet.

[The Razman]

Il Divo wrote...

Actually, the point was that they weren't anywhere near more advanced than we are. The technological singularity concept relies on the idea that synthetics can move past us, which the Geth did not do even remotely, with 200 years in isolation. In short: the technological singularity concept is BS. Even more so since you're the one here defending it, not the Catalyst, whose claim consists of one sentence existing in a vacuum separated from the rest of the storyline.

Look, I don't know if it's my fault for not putting it clearly enough, but this seems pretty obvious to me.

The whole point of the cycles is to prevent the singularity from occuring. The Geth obviously aren't going to reach the singularity because we're not at that technological stage yet. The cycles' entire purpose to prevent any cycle from reaching it. I have absolutely no idea why you're suggesting the Geth would reach the Singularity and surpass us after a couple of hundred years of isolation. It's like suggesting we leave some iPads in a locked room for a couple of hundred years and then being surprised that they haven't evolved into super-intelligent robots.

Only you and the Catalyst decided to make an arbitrary distinction between synthetics and organics,

No. The distinction is that synthetics would be technologically superior because of the singularity. Organic races which gain superiority are simply superior (temporarily). They can't wipe out all organic life in the galaxy. Synthetics could.

It is inevitable, as per the Catalyst. We need a 100% foolproof solution to prevent this from ever occurring.

Except that one is plausible and backed up by past events, and the other is near-as-makes-no-difference impossible and relies on all organic life in the galaxy ignoring its self-preservation instinct in favour of a desire to kill all other organic life in the galaxy.

I don't think you're going anywhere with this, mate.

[The Razman]

Bluko wrote...

The thing about this is... what's to stop an organic race from wiping out all other forms of sentient organic life?

Nothing. The Protheans did it.

But even if they wipe out all other life ... organic life still exists. Because they haven't wiped out themselves. That's the point; organic life is never going to wipe itself out. Only synthetic life would.

[Il Divo]

The Razman wrote...

The whole point of the cycles is to prevent the singularity from occuring. The Geth obviously aren't going to reach the singularity because we're not at that technological stage yet. The cycles' entire purpose to prevent any cycle from reaching it. I have absolutely no idea why you're suggesting the Geth would reach the Singularity and surpass us after a couple of hundred years of isolation. It's like suggesting we leave some iPads in a locked room for a couple of hundred years and then being surprised that they haven't evolved into super-intelligent robots.

Ipads can't evolve on their own. Self-aware AI do. I'm suggesting that they haven't evolved beyond us, in any capacity. If it's inevitable that they're eventually going to be so technologically advanced that we can't touch them, they should have made some small amount of progress so far, which is not the case.

No. The distinction is that synthetics would be technologically superior because of the singularity. Organic races which gain superiority are simply superior (temporarily). They can't wipe out all organic life in the galaxy. Synthetics could.

Could =/ would, while also relying on imaginary technological singularity, which the Catalyst himself does not outline, meaning its pointless. Catalyst makes no argument for why synthetics would even care enough to wipe out all organic life, akin to arguing that the U.S. would wipe out other, less advanced countries, just "because".

If you want the argument to work, start by finding some key distinction between organics and synthetics on which conflict will be inevitable, a distinction for which an organic would never go to war with another organic. Thus far, neither you, the Catalyst, or the Mass Effect series has presented anything of the sort.

Except that one is plausible and backed up by past events, and the other is near-as-makes-no-difference impossible and relies on all organic life in the galaxy ignoring its self-preservation instinct in favour of a desire to kill all other organic life in the galaxy.

I don't think you're going anywhere with this, mate.

Actually, your point is not backed up by anything. Because it's never happened. As far as we know, it hasn't even been attempted. We don't even know how the Catalyst came to this belief, as I said before. It could be he watched Terminator and The Matrix and felt inspired. We don't have a premise, a basis, evidence, whatever you want to call it. Your claim is based off nothing but "it might happen" because that's all the Catalyst gives you to work with.

And which justifies any eventuality. We fought Germany in World War II. They almost succeeded in committing genocide. It's plausible that at some point the Germans might gain technological superiority over the U.S. Ergo, the only 100% foolproof way to prevent that from happening, and so to prevent them from destroying us given that conflict is inevitable, is to wipe out Germany. That's your logic, in a nutshell.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 mai 2012 - 04:53 .

[Hunter of Legends]

The Razman wrote...
organic life is never going to wipe itself out.

This is an unsupportable claim. You can say the probability of organic life wiping itself out it X or Y but you cannot say NEVER.

That is a logical fallacy.