55528 réponses à ce sujet

[spotlessvoid]

paxxton accidentally brought up a good point. If Starchild really does control the Reapers, then doesn't the fact that he didn't just make them stop instead of forcing Shepard to either sacrifice his life in control, or set the galaxy back in destroy show his inherent untrustworthiness?

[MegumiAzusa]

byne wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...

With sticks and stones?

...Why would we only have sticks and stones?

Because the sufficently advanced technology is no more after Destroy.

...Where does it say that? Are we assuming guns are synthetic life now?

For some people godchild says destroy will also destroy 'most of the technology you rely on'.

He never clarifies what this means, or what counts as technology.

Simple machines are technically technology.

Will destroy get rid of all wheels, levers, pulleys, wedges, screws, and inclined planes?

Who knows? We arent given enough information to know.

Bool 1295 has to be false from what I'm seeing here.
Also bound to that is:
"Less than 40 percent of Hammer has reported in."
"The good news is we're managing to win in some sectors. The bad news is we're losing in others."
"We're getting there. And with the Reapers pressing their advantage across all fronts, we don't have a lot of time to catch up."
Looks like bound to medium EMS/Readiness.


btw this is so much better to read the comics than the browser xD

Modifié par MegumiAzusa, 18 mai 2012 - 09:49 .

[RavenEyry]

Paxxton, please stop and think. You seem to be justifying your opinion by putting the best possible interpretation of control against the worst possible interpretation of destroy and thus come off sounding very biased. For a balanced argument you need to go best against best or worst against worse or both against both.

[MegumiAzusa]

spotlessvoid wrote...

paxxton accidentally brought up a good point. If Starchild really does control the Reapers, then doesn't the fact that he didn't just make them stop instead of forcing Shepard to either sacrifice his life in control, or set the galaxy back in destroy show his inherent untrustworthiness?

No, it's bound by programming to continue, even if it would say the truth.

[byne]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

1: We're talking about the literal endings, aye? [/qoute]

I wrote a disclaimer in one of the posts.

byne wrote...

Destroy destroys the Reapers. It only destroys all tech if your EMS is low.

And what about synthetic life? It's destroyed. What is life then? Ah,yes.
Technology can also be wiped out as someone sugggested.

byne wrote...

>wants to use the Crucible

No, he doesn't.

byne wrote...

>take too long to choose and the Reapers destroy the Crucible

Attempt on preserving the cycle.

byne wrote...

3: So are you saying submission is preferable to extinction?

Is control of the Reapers submission to them? No.

byne wrote...
4: The Reapers are not machines with codes as we understand them. They are the amalgamation of hundreds of thousands of harvested organics. Whether their 'programs' can be changed at all is a complete unknown. Choosing control just because you think they can is taking a gamble with every life in the galaxy just because you have a hunch.

I oversimplified that. They are considered evil for what they did. But Control give the opportunity to change that for the better.

I dont understand the point you're trying to make by asking what life is. Destroy destroys synthetics, not organics. If you are trying to make a point with that and I missed it, please clarify.

If godchild didnt want to use the Crucible he would have just left Shepard to bleed out and die next to the Citadel control panel next to TIM and Anderson. He clearly wants to use it since he brought Shepard to the room where she could make a choice on how to use it.

If the Reapers are attempting to preserve the cycle, they are pretty clearly not controlled by godchild, because godchild says his solution (the cycles) will no longer work. He wouldnt direct the Reapers to try and preserve a system he himself called broken.

Control is submission. You agree to lose everything you have, everything that makes you you, in order to become one with the Reapers and control them.

And your last point? Changing the Reapers for the better? You're like a step away from saying you want to teach the Reapers to love. They are an abomination. Purge them from the galaxy. Nothing of value will have been lost. Not even technical upgrades we could have gotten from them. We got Thanix cannons from studying the corpse of Sovereign, we can study the corpse of every Reaper in existence once they're all dead.

[Rifneno]

RavenEyry wrote...

Paxxton, please stop and think.

If he comes back and goes, "Oh my God, it was nanites!", I'm blaming you.

[paxxton]

RavenEyry wrote...

Paxxton, please stop and think. You seem to be justifying your opinion by putting the best possible interpretation of control against the worst possible interpretation of destroy and thus come off sounding very biased. For a balanced argument you need to go best against best or worst against worse or both against both.

If this is your impression then know that I'm not doing this. This is just a discussion not a political rally.

[HellishFiend]

Xavendithas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

 Hey all. I've been gone for a few days so I have a lot of catching up to do. In the meantime I wanted to bring up a new topic: the Rannoch Reaper.

Has anyone noticed how the camera pulses? At first I thought it was a glitch, but it seems to be deliberate. I'm thinking it could be infrasonic noise. As we know, infrasonic noise is below the range of hearing, but can be FELT subconsciously and as a vibration. Indoctrination signals?

Also, I've noticed that the Reaper's red eye stays lit even though he is supposedly dead, AND the camera angle shows it a lot during the ensuing geth/quarian peace/war cutscenes.

Thoughts, anyone?

The derelict reaper scene in ME2 makes it seem as though the reapers have more of a passive indoctrination field that is always present. Just being in the vicinity of the reaper will have a subtle effect on the person. Do they establish in the lore anywhere if this is the case or if the reaper can boost the signal through infrasonics and the like?

I'm not sure, to be honest. We know "rapid indoctrination is possible", according to the codex, but we dont know exactly how it works. 

[spotlessvoid]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

paxxton accidentally brought up a good point. If Starchild really does control the Reapers, then doesn't the fact that he didn't just make them stop instead of forcing Shepard to either sacrifice his life in control, or set the galaxy back in destroy show his inherent untrustworthiness?

No, it's bound by programming to continue, even if it would say the truth.

Starchild is just a shackled AI?
When was it determined that Starchild was bound by programming and not acting of it's own will?

If so then the response to the crucibles creation and the ensuing 3 options presented would have been programmed in by Starchilds creators. Why would his creators know about the crucible ahead of time and also still leave the citadel vulnerable?

[RavenEyry]

paxxton wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

Paxxton, please stop and think. You seem to be justifying your opinion by putting the best possible interpretation of control against the worst possible interpretation of destroy and thus come off sounding very biased. For a balanced argument you need to go best against best or worst against worse or both against both.

If this is your impression then know that I'm not doing this. This is just a discussion not a political rally.

I say that because you're argument seems to be control gives Shepard complete and total dominance over the reapers while destroy kills anything synthetic, wipes out technology, and makes your tooth fillings fall out.

I could counter by saying control just makes the reapers leave for a while but destroy kills them with no collatarel damage.

Both arguments are valid with the information we have, but both are unbalanced and biased, thus not being very good arguments.

[TSA_383]

RavenEyry wrote...

Paxxton, please stop and think.

I'm beginning to see why the Anti-IT brigade see us as optimists...

[DJBare]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...
Seen that one as well, but if it was an Indoctrination device there is no reason at all the reapers should have taken the Citadel and moved it to Earth. Leave it where it is, let the Crucible connect and voila, Reapers win. It would make no sense for them to defend the Citadel.

But i will agree something is off about the Crucible.

Unless it's sphere of influence is limited to a single solar system.

[RavenEyry]

TSA_383 wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

Paxxton, please stop and think.

I'm beginning to see why the Anti-IT brigade see us as optimists...

He's getting overzelous, not being stupid. No need to get passive aggressive, especially towards people on our side.

[spotlessvoid]

RavenEyry wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

Paxxton, please stop and think.

I'm beginning to see why the Anti-IT brigade see us as optimists...

He's getting overzelous, not being stupid. No need to get passive aggressive, especially towards people on our side.

yep, good ol paxx is wrong, but he is still one of us. Even though he and Starchild obviously have a thing going ; )

[paxxton]

byne wrote...

I dont understand the point you're trying to make by asking what life is. Destroy destroys synthetics, not organics. If you are trying to make a point with that and I missed it, please clarify.

Sufficiently advanced technology must be considered as synthetic life. But what does it mean "sufficiently advanced"? Today's computers would seem sentient for 19th Century people.

byne wrote...
If godchild didnt want to use the Crucible he would have just left Shepard to bleed out and die next to the Citadel control panel next to TIM and Anderson. He clearly wants to use it since he brought Shepard to the room where she could make a choice on how to use it.

Megumi made quite a point which gave me an idea. He has no choice. The moment Shepard is on the Citadel the Catalyst enters a conditional programming scheme.

byne wrote...
If the Reapers are attempting to preserve the cycle, they are pretty clearly not controlled by godchild, because godchild says his solution (the cycles) will no longer work. He wouldnt direct the Reapers to try and preserve a system he himself called broken.

That might be because the Catalyst has self-preservation protocols (a timer) in case the cycles are endangered.

byne wrote...
Control is submission. You agree to lose everything you have, everything that makes you you, in order to become one with the Reapers and control them.

Whatever. Just kidding.

byne wrote...
And your last point? Changing the Reapers for the better? You're like a step away from saying you want to teach the Reapers to love. They are an abomination. Purge them from the galaxy. Nothing of value will have been lost. Not even technical upgrades we could have gotten from them. We got Thanix cannons from studying the corpse of Sovereign, we can study the corpse of every Reaper in existence once they're all dead.

This is anologous to saying that because knives can be used to kill you should destroy all the knives in the universe. And then no pizza can be cut into pieces.

[HellishFiend]

I'd like to point out that a hallmark of false logic is that it "sounds good", but doesnt hold up when you examine it's logical process and check it for fallacies. Starbrat's dialog was intentionally designed by Bioware to be just that. There is no doubt in my mind.

People arguing for starbrat's logic are doing nothing but repeating the bits that "sound good".

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...
And your last point? Changing the Reapers for the better? You're like a step away from saying you want to teach the Reapers to love. They are an abomination. Purge them from the galaxy. Nothing of value will have been lost. Not even technical upgrades we could have gotten from them. We got Thanix cannons from studying the corpse of Sovereign, we can study the corpse of every Reaper in existence once they're all dead.

This is anologous to saying that because knives can be used to kill you should destroy all the knives in the universe. And then no pizza can be cut into pieces.

Actually it's not analogous to that at all. Do the Reapers sit idly by in space and wait for an organic user to come tell it what to do? 

[Big Bad]

If all the knives banded together to remove all of the lasagna from the universe, you're damn right I would try to destroy them all.

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...
And your last point? Changing the Reapers for the better? You're like a step away from saying you want to teach the Reapers to love. They are an abomination. Purge them from the galaxy. Nothing of value will have been lost. Not even technical upgrades we could have gotten from them. We got Thanix cannons from studying the corpse of Sovereign, we can study the corpse of every Reaper in existence once they're all dead.

This is anologous to saying that because knives can be used to kill you should destroy all the knives in the universe. And then no pizza can be cut into pieces.

Actually it's not analogous to that at all. Do the Reapers sit idly by in space and wait for an organic user to come tell it what to do? 

Their user is the current Catalyst just like a human is a user of a knife.

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

Their user is the current Catalyst just like a human is a user of a knife.

No, sorry, but that is just all kinds of wrong. To even reach that argument you'd have to believe and accept the conclusion of starbrat's logic, meaning the very foundation of your sentence is like a matchstick bridge with no glue. 

Modifié par HellishFiend, 18 mai 2012 - 10:24 .

[RavenEyry]

paxxton wrote...

Megumi made quite a point which gave me an idea. He has no choice. The moment Shepard is on the Citadel the Catalyst enters a conditional programming scheme.

I did wonder if the reapers(or whoever made them) made the crucible plans originally, so when a cycle successfully built it it would prove the cycle was no longer needed. Doesn't explain the awful choices instead of just making the reapers leave though.

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Their user is the current Catalyst just like a human is a user of a knife.

No, sorry, but that is just all kinds of wrong. To even reach that argument you'd have to believe and accept the conclusion of starbrat's logic, meaning the very foundation of your sentence is like a matchstick bridge with no glue. 

The point is that the Reapers must do what the Catalyst commands them to do.

Modifié par paxxton, 18 mai 2012 - 10:26 .

[byne]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

I dont understand the point you're trying to make by asking what life is. Destroy destroys synthetics, not organics. If you are trying to make a point with that and I missed it, please clarify.

Sufficiently advanced technology must be considered as synthetic life. But what does it mean "sufficiently advanced"? Today's computers would seem sentient for 19th Century people.

So you're saying the Crucible will just randomly decide all technology is in fact synthetic life and destroy it?

That doesnt even make any sense.

[TSA_383]

RavenEyry wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

Paxxton, please stop and think.

I'm beginning to see why the Anti-IT brigade see us as optimists...

He's getting overzelous, not being stupid. No need to get passive aggressive, especially towards people on our side.

Sure, but if I hear one more thing about nanites..

[RavenEyry]

paxxton wrote...

Their user is the current Catalyst just like a human is a user of a knife.

But they very much have individual intelligence. Mr. Sparkle seems more like a general than the weilder of a tool.