9089 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

Xilizhra wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...
There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

Indeed. And actually, every organic is affected in the same way. Sounds like the opposite of racism, elitism or whatever.

It is elitist when nobody desires synthesis, but Shepard. And it is elitist when Shepard is the only one or a member of a small group who believes that it is better for the races. Why not simply admit your Shepard is an elitists? In that case you are clear. What's the problem with it? It feels like a homephobe is angry because people confront him with his homophobic behavior.

It's not elitist, it's the fact that Shepard absolutely cannot, given the circumstances, accept input from anyone else. She can't accept input on whether everyone wants to die, whether they want to exterminate the geth, whether they want to live under Reaper guns forever, anything. This is a non-argument because it applies to every ending.

Shepard already got that input.

AngryFrozenWater write...

I can understand that a race decides that synthesis is the way to go. However, in this case it is not voluntary. None of the races are consulted. There is no opt-in and there is no opt-out. It is irreversible. And thus elitism surfaces again in the form of the violation of the right of self-determination by forcing synthesis without their consent. That violation is also true for the control option, but not for the destruction one. Ever since ME1 it is clear that everyone willing to help Shepard wants the destruction of the reapers. In ME3 Shepard once again gets the green light and actively forms alliances with nations, gangs and individuals to destroy the reapers. Everyone seems to be prepared to die for it.

Everyone rejected the control option, the Illusive Man's path, by actively fighting Cerberus. They also rejected the synthesis option, Saren's path, by joining forces to fight him and Sovereign. Even Wrex thought that, even though Saren may hold the key to the genophage cure, it was better to fight him. Saren asked you "Is submission not preferable to extinction?" Even EDI can tell you the answer to that one.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 01 juillet 2012 - 04:05 .

[Xilizhra]

Saren was rejected because he didn't have the means to bring about Synthesis and was indoctrinated. Shepard never said that synthesis was a bad thing, just that the Reapers weren't trustworthy and would kill all the organics anyway. There was never an opportunity before to achieve Synthesis without Reaper control.

As for Control, I think TIM was being fought mostly because he kept attacking civilians and allied military forces.

[saracen16]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...
There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

Indeed. And actually, every organic is affected in the same way. Sounds like the opposite of racism, elitism or whatever.

It is elitist when nobody desires synthesis, but Shepard. And it is elitist when Shepard is the only one or a member of a small group who believes that it is better for the races. Why not simply admit your Shepard is an elitists? In that case you are clear. What's the problem with it? It feels like a homephobe is angry because people confront him with his homophobic behavior.

It's not elitist, it's the fact that Shepard absolutely cannot, given the circumstances, accept input from anyone else. She can't accept input on whether everyone wants to die, whether they want to exterminate the geth, whether they want to live under Reaper guns forever, anything. This is a non-argument because it applies to every ending.

He already got that input.

AngryFrozenWater write...

I can understand that a race decides that synthesis is the way to go. However, in this case it is not voluntary. None of the races are consulted. There is no opt-in and there is no opt-out. It is irreversible. And thus elitism surfaces again in the form of the violation of the right of self-determination by forcing synthesis without their consent. That violation is also true for the control option, but not for the destruction one. Ever since ME1 it is clear that everyone willing to help Shepard wants the destruction of the reapers. In ME3 Shepard once again gets the green light and actively forms alliances with nations, gangs and individuals to destroy the reapers. Everyone seems to be prepared to die for it.

Everyone rejected the control option, the Illusive Man's path, by actively fighting Cerberus. They also rejected the synthesis option, Saren's path, by joining forces to fight him and Sovereign. Even Wrex thought that, even though Saren may hold the key to the genophage cure, it was better to fight him. Saren asked you "Is submission not preferable to extinction?" Even EDI can tell you the answer to that one.

How is synthesis "submission"? Saren's version was not synthesis. It was submission to the Reapers and eventual harvesting and "ascension". Synthesis is different.

Modifié par saracen16, 01 juillet 2012 - 04:07 .

[Vigilant111]

saracen16 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Shepard doesn't have to get the input now, can choose other options and decide later

So you're trying to call in a vote from the entire galaxy while Earth is burning?

No, I am asking u to choose something else, this is a political hot potato that Shepard is not required to handle

He IS required to handle it, and his qualifications are irrelevant. He is in a position to make that choice given the circumstances, and HE HAS TO because NO ONE ELSE is there.

Okay, so he / she handles it, and handled it well by choosing other options

[Xilizhra]

Okay, so he / she handles it, and handled it well by choosing other options

Genocide, genocide or conquest?

[Vigilant111]

Xilizhra wrote...

Okay, so he / she handles it, and handled it well by choosing other options

Genocide, genocide or conquest?

Genocide

[Lazengan]

Synthesis halts all organic evolution, and possibly postulates the fulity of living anymore.
Destroy is potential Genocide, but is usually the best choice in my opinion, perhaps we can rebuild EDI and the Geth with all the dead reaper bodies lying around
Control ... Shepard becomes a God, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm interesting

Modifié par Lazengan, 01 juillet 2012 - 04:17 .

[saracen16]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Okay, so he / she handles it, and handled it well by choosing other options

Genocide, genocide or conquest?

Genocide

So, genocide is better than eugenics. Okay. I hope you can live with that.

And for the record, this conversation is actually interesting.

Modifié par saracen16, 01 juillet 2012 - 04:19 .

[Vigilant111]

Lazengan wrote...

Synthesis halts all organic evolution, and possibly postulates the fulity of living anymore.
Destroy is potential Genocide, but is usually the best choice in my opinion, perhaps we can rebuild EDI and the Geth with all the dead reaper bodies lying around
Control ... Shepard becomes a God, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm interesting

You do not have to sugar coat destroy by saying "potential", but I appreciate it nonetheless

I recognise fully that is the price to pay, and have to put up with it when BW handed me the bill, the death of the Geth and EDI is totally unnecessary, it is there to balance the options

[Xamufam]

saracen16 wrote...

How is synthesis "submission"?

because every one seemed to get along, the war would have continued if it wasn't. It would never happen if it wasn't some kinda "sub mission/brainwashing" going on.  (too much bad blood)

Modifié par Troxa, 01 juillet 2012 - 04:31 .

[Vigilant111]

saracen16 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Okay, so he / she handles it, and handled it well by choosing other options

Genocide, genocide or conquest?

Genocide

So, genocide is better than eugenics. Okay. I hope you can live with that.

And for the record, this conversation is actually interesting.

What? I am not the eugenist, the Catalyst is, cos it was supposed to direct the energy towards the reapers

No need to resort to sarcasm this early

[Lazengan]

synthesis ending has REALLLY dark undertones

[saracen16]

Vigilant111 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Okay, so he / she handles it, and handled it well by choosing other options

Genocide, genocide or conquest?

Genocide

So, genocide is better than eugenics. Okay. I hope you can live with that.

And for the record, this conversation is actually interesting.

What? I am not the eugenist, the Catalyst is, cos it was supposed to direct the energy towards the reapers

No need to resort to sarcasm this early

I'm not being sarcastic. I'm being genuine. This conversation is so much better than the whole babble about the endings is otherwise.

As for your point, I didn't say you were a eugeneticist. I was arguing that you prefer genocide versus eugenics and that you have a justification for that.

[AngryFrozenWater]

MisterJB wrote...

However, this is irrelevant to this discussion because Synthesis has no base in racism or anything similar. It is the speeding and culmination of something that is going to happen regardless.

And that is your problem. That is something you do not know at all. You assume it is "inevitable". Don't make me laugh. The brat is already full of stuff that is supposed to be "inevitable". That caused a galaxy full of dead bodies.

MisterJB wrote...

Synthesis is not submission, is is the possibility of cooperation with the Reapers.

And the reapers can be trusted? Let me give you a little history:

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

They have a long history of betrayal (up to their own creators), intrigue (Saren, TIM, turning synthetics against organics), deceit (indoctrination), enslavement (ascension), genocide (of countless races which they deemed worthless to build reapers from), scare tactics (by turning the dead bodies of the races into husks to fight against those same races), harvesting civilizations (by first sowing mass relays and technology to make sure that their future victims "will develop along the paths [they] desire"), and last but not least lies (by using the hypothetical threat as a rationalization for their cyclical maniacal genocidal "ascension through destruction" reproduction method to keep them on top of the food chain). Much like a serial killer they show no emotion, nor remorse, even though they are perfectly able to use the concept of fear. The power of the brat and the boys systematically violates the right of self-determination by any means they can dream up.

Nah. They don't appear to be solid partners.

MisterJB wrote...

Also, curiously, one of the Council policies is that the creation of a true AI spells doom for all organics.

I wonder who gave them that idea? Anyway. They changed their minds about the geth. They didn't change their minds about the AI controlled reapers. The Council is smarter than I thought.

MisterJB wrote...

Synthesis also offers a way to not make this a certainty.

It was never a certainty. It only exists in the minds of the brat and its boys.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 01 juillet 2012 - 04:44 .

[SpectreVeldt]

Trying to read through a lot of these posts. Quite a few seem to agree with certain points (thus repeating them). I would just like to note that some people should perhaps think about the difference between a sentient being merging with technology and a sentient being merging with a different sentient being. Quite a few arguments thus far have operated under the assumption that the aforementioned are the same. (Hint: they are not.)

Additionally, I keep seeing the statement that Synthesis is inevitable anyway, so no problem with the Catalyst 'giving' it now. Which is much like saying: human nuclear weapons are inevitable, so no problem giving human cavemen those tools now. There are...many...problems with Synthesis. The underlining idea stated here is just one in particular.

Some arguing against Synthesis state that they have a huge problem with forcing that option on a galaxy, etc. (Insert quick note about no single (absolute) moral standard.) Is that really the only problem you had with it? It goes so much deeper than that.

[Enthalpy]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Enthalpy wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

I think being elitist is stemming from the opinion that synthetics are indeed superior in term of fire power and efficiency

No, Shepard is not in postion to DECIDE the fate of the galaxy, but merely influence it in a certain way

If we consider the Reapers and the fully-powered geth dreadnought as examples of synthetic firepower and efficiency, then I think we can conclude that they are indeed superior to organic spaceships. Doesn't mean synthetics are superior to organics in every single way, though. We have yet to see geth art.

Yes, they are indeed superior yet we killed one of them throughout the game, and it only takes one, they are superior yes, but they are not invincible, well, not in ME anyway

It has never been stated that they were invincible. I don't see where your point lies with that statement.

[Vigilant111]

saracen16 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Okay, so he / she handles it, and handled it well by choosing other options

Genocide, genocide or conquest?

Genocide

So, genocide is better than eugenics. Okay. I hope you can live with that.

And for the record, this conversation is actually interesting.

What? I am not the eugenist, the Catalyst is, cos it was supposed to direct the energy towards the reapers

No need to resort to sarcasm this early

I'm not being sarcastic. I'm being genuine. This conversation is so much better than the whole babble about the endings is otherwise.

As for your point, I didn't say you were a eugeneticist. I was arguing that you prefer genocide versus eugenics and that you have a justification for that.

If I prefer eugenics I would choose to destroy the organics wouldn't I? cos they are the weaker ones, but the Crucible does not allow me to do such things, ultimately it is the Crucible that decides who dies and who lives, I am only interested in getting rid of the reapers, I can only choose for what's best for the galaxy (cliche), and that is the end of the reapers

Modifié par Vigilant111, 01 juillet 2012 - 04:55 .

[Vigilant111]

Enthalpy wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Enthalpy wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

I think being elitist is stemming from the opinion that synthetics are indeed superior in term of fire power and efficiency

No, Shepard is not in postion to DECIDE the fate of the galaxy, but merely influence it in a certain way

If we consider the Reapers and the fully-powered geth dreadnought as examples of synthetic firepower and efficiency, then I think we can conclude that they are indeed superior to organic spaceships. Doesn't mean synthetics are superior to organics in every single way, though. We have yet to see geth art.

Yes, they are indeed superior yet we killed one of them throughout the game, and it only takes one, they are superior yes, but they are not invincible, well, not in ME anyway

It has never been stated that they were invincible. I don't see where your point lies with that statement.

That synthetics have weaknesses just like us, so no need for synthesis? U need synthesis cos they are superior right? Why do u need synthesis to upgrade fire power and efficiency? aren't computers already doing that for u?

[Enthalpy]

Troxa wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

How is synthesis "submission"?

because every one seemed to get along, the war would have continued if it wasn't. It would never happen if it wasn't some kinda "sub mission/brainwashing" going on.  (too much bad blood)

Or maybe, just maybe, people realised that trying to kill nonchalant, even benevolent or repentant Reapers, would be a really really bad idea.

[saracen16]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

They have a long history of betrayal (up to their own creators, intrigue (Saren, TIM, turning synthetics against organics), deceit (indoctrination), enslavement (ascension), genocide (of countless races which they deemed worthless to build reapers from), scare tactics (by turning the dead bodies of the races into husks to fight against those same races), harvesting civilizations (by first sowing mass relays and technology to make sure that their future victims "will develop along the paths [they] desire"), and last but not least lies (by using the hypothetical threat as a rationalization for their cyclical maniacal genocidal "ascension through destruction" reproduction method to keep them on top of the food chain). Much like a serial killer they show no emotion, nor remorse, even though they are perfectly able to use the concept of fear. The power of the brat and the boys systematically violates the right of self-determination by any means they can dream up.

Nah. They don't appear to be solid partners.

You're ascribing human and organic qualities to them. They are machines, and machines have a purpose. They run by logic, not emotion. Serial killers run by emotion, but show no remorse. They do not experience guilt the way we do. They weigh in advantages and disadvantages, and their logic dictates that they reap. They do not have what you would call ambition and other human traits. They believe that they are doing the best for organic civilizations by preserving them. They're wrong, of course, but that doesn't stop them from believing. They run on logic, not emotion. Their menacing statements are a reflection of their inevitability. "The cycle must continue. Every organic civilization must be harvested to bring order to the chaos." "We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it." Their programming demands it, not some maniacal or ambitious drive.

They are not evil the same way a classic villain is evil. If anything, they are a tragic construct, a mistake that went unchecked for eons on end.

[AngryFrozenWater]

MisterJB wrote...

By possibility I meant that the Reapers could have decided to not cooperates with us.

General knowledge in the ME universe argues that the creation of an AI race means the death of organics. It may not be a certainty but it is a possibiltiy and we should take the necessary steps to prevent it.

And thus the reapers exterminate all organics they encounter? Seems rather counterproductive. Especially when those they commit cyclical genocide against are those that our saviors claim to protect.

Out of curiosity... Who asked the reapers to the party? Why are they so eager to stick their noses into affairs that are none of their business. If they really were "concerned" then why not simply ask "Hey, guys, we have a problem. And maybe so have you. Care to sit down and talk about? We might help each other out." But, no. The brat and the boys first started killing and asked questions later. That's the wrong attitude, you know. You don't make many friends with that. Especially when the pile of dead bodies has risen to legendary proportions.

[Xamufam]

Enthalpy wrote...

Troxa wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

How is synthesis "submission"?

because every one seemed to get along, the war would have continued if it wasn't. It would never happen if it wasn't some kinda "sub mission/brainwashing" going on.  (too much bad blood)

Or maybe, just maybe, people realised that trying to kill nonchalant, even benevolent or repentant Reapers, would be a really really bad idea.

And you think that would stop them there is just too much bad blood

[saracen16]

Vigilant111 wrote...

If I prefer eugenics I would choose to destroy the organics wouldn't I? cos they are the weaker ones, but the Crucible does not allow me to do such things, ultimately it is the Crucible that decides who dies and who lives, I am only interested in getting rid of the reapers, I can only choose for what's best for the galaxy (cliche), and that is the end of the reapers

Then you would pick the destroy option.

[saracen16]

Troxa wrote...

Enthalpy wrote...

Troxa wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

How is synthesis "submission"?

because every one seemed to get along, the war would have continued if it wasn't. It would never happen if it wasn't some kinda "sub mission/brainwashing" going on.  (too much bad blood)

Or maybe, just maybe, people realised that trying to kill nonchalant, even benevolent or repentant Reapers, would be a really really bad idea.

And you think that would stop them there is just too much bad blood

Maybe, but wounds heal when the Reapers make up for what they destroyed. 

[Enthalpy]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Enthalpy wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Enthalpy wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

I think being elitist is stemming from the opinion that synthetics are indeed superior in term of fire power and efficiency

No, Shepard is not in postion to DECIDE the fate of the galaxy, but merely influence it in a certain way

If we consider the Reapers and the fully-powered geth dreadnought as examples of synthetic firepower and efficiency, then I think we can conclude that they are indeed superior to organic spaceships. Doesn't mean synthetics are superior to organics in every single way, though. We have yet to see geth art.

Yes, they are indeed superior yet we killed one of them throughout the game, and it only takes one, they are superior yes, but they are not invincible, well, not in ME anyway

It has never been stated that they were invincible. I don't see where your point lies with that statement.

That synthetics have weaknesses just like us, so no need for synthesis? U need synthesis cos they are superior right? Why do u need synthesis to upgrade fire power and efficiency? aren't computers already doing that for u?

Synthesis was never about firepower or efficiency; in case you haven't read the OP, please do read it. Synthesis isn't even about who's "superior," in whatever arbitrary scale we choose. It is about eliminating the basis of the Reapers' need to continue the cycles.