[quote]AngryFrozenWater wrote...
It has taken a bit longer than expected, saracen16. But here it goes...
[quote]saracen16 wrote...
[quote]AngryFrozenWater wrote...
It is unacceptable, because none of Shepard's allies gave any indication that they wanted to pursue that goal.[/quote]
The same can be said for the decision to save or sacrifice the Council, save or kill the Rachni queen, or even destroy or preserve the Collector Base, or every other bloody decision in the Mass Effect universe. Circumstances did not allow "phoning a friend" or "getting help from the audience". I agree that the decision does sound forced, but then so is the decision to refuse because refusing the Crucible means defying the orders of your superiors and knowingly letting the Reapers win in this cycle. Each choice has a balance of consequences.[/quote]
None of the above examples, which were relatively easy, compare to the scale and the importance of the three final decisions.[/quote]
Right, but these choices were not easy at the time they were made. Their relevance right now is diminished because the choice has already been made. I'm sure we would feel the same after the final decision of ME3 as well if they made a sequel. However, when the choices were around, they were difficult choices to make: should I let the Rachni go and risk another invasion? Should I let the Council die and risk an uprising against humans?
[quote]If I look at the pacts Shepard made then the defeat and destruction of the reapers were always preferred. Control over the reapers was only the Illusive Man's goal. And submission was only Saren's goal. These last two don't have much to do with freedom, diversity and self-determination, common themes in much of Shepard's adventures. All Shepard's allies rejected controls and submission and sooner or later decided to fight against them. Talking to them those involved helped a lot to help Shepard make a balanced decision.[/quote]
We do not have any proof that any of the others in the galaxy believe that they should destroy the Reapers. Hell, the reasons Cerberus and Saren fight Shepard are VERY different. Cerberus is fighting for human dominance and as such opposes all galactic civilizations. Saren fought because he was just another tool for the Reapers. If synthesis was the goal of the Reapers all along, we should have had that by now.
[quote]So, although I could not pickup a phone, the game has informed me in great detail what my allies wanted.[/quote]
That's your perspective, which is fine, but I can not assume what my allies would want because they have not seen the alternatives. Many of them want to defeat the Reapers in any way possible. They do not have an informed decision to make. It is even possible that the geth or EDI would flat-out reject the destroy option. The Quarians would even have wanted a control option. As for the Krogan, synthesis would give them an advantage evolutionarily speaking. We can't assume that we have the galaxy's best interest at heart. We are deciding on behalf of everyone but we are using our own beliefs to balance the consequences.
[quote]Shepard was forced to select one of the three decisions, once again by the brat and its boys, who are totally not trustworthy.[/quote]
I disagree: you can not ascribe human qualities to machines that are guided by a purpose or a logic. That purpose changed with the Crucible, which made the three options newly possible.
[quote]Their hypothetical threat caused more harm than synthetics will ever be able to inflict. Controlling the reapers or submission to the reapers cannot be solutions for the problems these same reapers created. That's because the reapers are not the solution to any of our problems, they are the cause. Without their trail of cyclical atrocities and violations of the right of self-determination we wouldn't be in this trouble.[/quote]
Correction: their programming as it is before the ending is the cause of our troubles. They did not factor in any desires or hopes of organics. They only cared about preserving organic life in their own twisted way. To them, the ends justify the means. They are not guided by ambitions, moral or ethical codes, or motives, but only by the purpose they were made for. And their threat isn't hypothetical. They realized that conflict is inevitable, and that synthetics will eventually surpass their creators, seeing them as obsolete while the creators themselves slip into decadency and non-chalance. The same happened in the Dune saga prior to the Butlerian Jihad.
[quote][quote]saracen16 wrote...
The warriors of the galaxy signed on to fight the Reapers, but not all of them are willing to die.[/quote]
Nobody wants to die. Not even soldiers, from who it is to be expected that they may fall. The reapers know that all to well and will use that against their enemy. Demoralizing them like EDI mentioned, or luring them to surrender, like they did in London, or turn the dead bodies into husks. Talk to Jarvik for more interesting stories like these. And because they did all that we should consider another option than their destruction? We should suddenly trust them? Ask the brat about their past.[/quote]
For me to take this conversation seriously, I request you refer to "the brat" as the Catalyst. Ad hominems are an insult to a worthy enemy. Anyways, soldiers sacrifice themselves for their people, and that's a given. However, to call for the genocide of the enemy makes you no better than them. In fact, it's borderline racism. The Reapers are living things as well, themselves being the collective psyche of civilizations that came before. No matter what they did to all galactic civilizations or what the geth did to the Quarians, murder is murder and one murder is too many, even by them of course. Recall the Heretic Station: kill them or pull their teeth? What's the difference? They're killed both ways, take away their fighting spirit (Grunt).
I did ask the Catalyst about his past. He didn't betray his creators. He did what he was programmed to do, nothing more or less, at any cost, even if it means the deaths of his creators. They didn't approve, yes, "but it was the only solution". He didn't do it out of malevolence.
[quote]Ask the brat about the first reaper. Ask the brat about their previous synthesis experiments.[/quote]
The Catalyst tried synthesis prior to the Reaper solution but it failed for him. As for first Reaper, I know. And like I said, it was not out of malevolence, but because he saw no other alternative.
[quote]Then we have that convenient hypothetical synthetics threat that allows them to harvest organics and their tech by an "ascension through destruction" method that turns organics into goo alive before they are pushed through pipes to the reaper reproduction facility. The inferior races are exterminated (or are turned against their own to hunt them down and perish when their job is done) and the promising ones, who are not civilized enough, are spared for the next cycle.[/quote]
For the Catalyst, the ends justify the means. He's a machine, and as such is relentless in carrying out his purpose. The cold logic of the Catalyst disregards the methods by which it works as long as it is the most effective: break the enemy's morale with these horrifying creatures, round up civilians more efficiently, and spare as much as you can while swiftly eliminating any type of resist
[quote]All that is enough not to trust anything that comes out of the brats mouth. I am really surprised that others do.[/quote]
I simply don't see any reason for him to lie. I can understand why he and his kind manipulate, but I don't see any reason for him specifically to lie, not when his life is on the line.
[quote][quote]saracen16 wrote...
The cause is not hypothetical. It has been tried and tested and supported. Organics wish to maintain control of synthetics and also advance them to a point where they can be of great assistance. However, for this to be possible, synthetics must evolve.[/quote]
If you believe the brat then I am sure you have noticed what it had to say about this topic:
Shepard: But you were created...
Catalyst: Correct.
Shepard: By who?
Catalyst: By ones who recognized that conflict would always arise between synthetics and organics. I was first created to oversee the relations between synthetic and organic life... to establish a connection. But our efforts always resulted in conflict, so a new solution was required.
Shepard: The Reapers?
Catalyst: Precisely.
So they failed miserably, because their efforts always resulted in conflict. And their solution? Cyclical conflict! This time in the form of "ascension through destruction" with the occasional genocide for good measure.[/quote]
"When fire burns, is it in conflict? Or is it doing what it was created to do?" This is a logic loop that asserts the inevitability of the Reapers and the immutability of the Catalyst's belief in his own logic. Their genocide is selective, not random. They choose the most advanced civilizations, the ones most at risk of creating deadly AI. And its program, no matter how flawed, is correct because the system of the galaxy was designed that way.
[quote]But there is more:
Catalyst: My creators gave the form. I gave them function. They, in turn, gave me purpose. The Reapers are a synthetic representation of my creators.
Shepard: And what happened to your creators?
Catalyst: They became the first true Reaper. They did not approve, but it was the only solution.
Hang on. So, the first reaper was created against the will of their creators. It betrayed them to fulfill the brat's primary function "to bring balance, to be the catalyst for peace between organics and synthetics."[/quote]
It didn't betray them. To betray their trust would mean that it was pre-programmed to preserve them but did not.It is only carrying out its core programming. The Catalyst was more interested in bringing peace to the synthetics and organics in the long run. It created a cycle that stopped any possibility of that conflict leading to extermination, by harvesting those civilizations that would create such dangerous AI.
[quote]And somehow, Shepard thinks it is a good idea to trust the brat? If you think that the idea is that organic life is dear to them, then all of a sudden the brat comes with a surprising revelation.
Shepard: You said that before, but how do the Reapers solve anything?
Catalyst: Organics create synthetics to improve their own existence, but those improvements have limits. To exceed those limits synthetics must be allowed to evolve. They must, by definition, surpass their creators.
Erm... What? Synthetics must be allowed to evolve, and by allowing that they will surpass their creators? Do the reapers actively support synthetics? Why? To make the reapers more relevant or feed their cyclical genocidal maniacal reproduction method to keep them on top of the food chain?[/quote]
You're taking this out of context. He's saying that synthetics can not significantly improve the lives of the creators they were designed to help. To improve, they have to evolve. However, because of this, the synthetics will eventually realize that the organics they serve are using them, and in gaining self-awareness, realize their superiority and the inferiority of organics. Conflict will arise because the organics will still wish to assert their control over them.
"Does this unit have a soul?" ring any bells? And this is 300 years before the Reapers came.
[quote]Catalyst: The result is conflict, destruction, chaos. It is inevitable. Reapers harvest all life - organic and synthetic - preserving them before they are forever lost to this conflict.
We still have no proof that synthetics are dangerous, but the thinks they are. Yet it allows them to evolve and if that does not result in conflict then the reapers help the synthetics a little. The reapers turned the heretics hostile and controlled the geth during the Rannoch War. They also turned the zha'til against the zha during Javik's cycle. You know, to "help" that inevitable fate a little.[/quote]
The Reapers also used Cerberus, Saren, an offshoot Prothean cult, and other organics to aid their cause. They'll use anything to help their cause, even if it means using organics and synthetics. Reapers harvest both organics and synthetics. It is stated by the Catalyst.
[quote]Oh. So they allow the synthetics to evolve, with a little help here and there to turn synthetics against organics, and then protect those poor organic life forms by playing a god and imprison them into reaper form - no doubt helped by a little indoctrination to keep them happy. And that harvesting process also happens to be their reproduction method. How convenient.[/quote]
Read above. The Zha'til and Reaper code are just examples of the tools they give to synthetics. Don't forget that they also gave Saren upgrades as well. Also, over time, if you recall Vigil's convo, synthetics are more useful as shock troops for the Reapers than organics are and this is why Sovereign used the geth: easier to control.
[quote]But didn't the brat just say that the idea of this new reaper solution was to prevent conflicts? A cycle doesn't exactly look like a peace keeping operation. The only ones who seem to benefit from a harvesting cycle are the reapers themselves.[/quote]
...and the organic civilizations that haven't reached the stars. If the previous cycle wasn't exterminated, the Protheans would most likely have gone on to subjugate humans, asari, salarians, and turians. Also, read above: the Reapers will use any tools they can muster.
[quote]And now that Shepard stands before the brat, it suddenly understands that the reaper solution doesn't work. But no worries! It has three more solutions to solve the hypothetical problem. *shivers*[/quote]
It's the Crucible, not the Catalyst, that brought about these solutions.
[quote]Not only do the brat and his boys interfere with any civilization they cross paths with, they also make sure that these civilizations grow "along the paths they desire". Drop a mass relay here, some tech there. Intrigue a little between synthetics and organics. You know the drill. After all, this harvesting business is hard work and they need to have some results to make it all worthwhile.[/quote]
Right. They created a system for their plan to work, but that's to facilitate the harvest and to maintain their version of peace between organics and synthetics. It manipulates societies to act a certain way because of the program. All that is changed with the Crucible because the "solution" won't work anymore.
[quote]Again, that doesn't make me feel the brat and its boys can be trusted. Nor that did it give me any confidence in its hypothetical threat. For me it makes clear that the brat and its boys have created their own problem: the reapers. Someone needs to spank the kid and tell it never to dream up recursive horror like that ever again. Ow! Wait. Shepard can: The destroy option.[/quote]
That's your prerogative. I can understand that. However, I see no reason to believe that the Catalyst is wrong. Organics will always strive towards advancement and betterment. Eventually, they will create synthetics that they will be unable to stop at some point in the future. Why? Because they always want to improve, to advance. We're already on the verge of creating robots that can help at home, but we will one day reach a point where robots will become members of society that will soon demand equal rights and self-determination. The result will be conflict, and if there is anything telling about the advancement of technology, robots will see us for our obsolesence and wipe us out. Therefore, the only way is for both parties to seek understanding. Synthesis is one probable answer.
[quote]What you try to do here does not work. Elitism has nothing to do with making a decision on your own. If you are curious, grab a dictionary and connect the dots in the context of my remark.[/quote]
Elitist means someone who considers himself or herself superior in the dimensions of intellect, talent, wealth, or power. Elitism, as a result, self-entitles you to make a decision on everyone. However, Shepard was put under these circumstances in the past to make these decisions. It wasn't because of some arbitrary delegation of status, but rather a product of eventualities that led him inexorably to the choice. Therefore, in essence, elitism requires that a person be superior over something else. Let's see if I understood you...
1. If you meant that synthesis is elitism, then it isn't simply because everyone is equal but still not the same.
2. If you meant that Shepard is elitist in making that choice, it isn't the case because he has been put in that situation to make the tough call. It wasn't because he was Shepard.
[quote]I hope this wall of text didn't became too long.
[/quote]
It's fine. I enjoy productive debate.
Retour en haut
Here's the crux: you have just told (and have been telling) me that I should not discuss anything but your own (two) points. You told me like I was not allowed to discuss or come up with any other analysis (or anyone else, for that matter). That nobody else in the thread is allowed to discuss anything else besides "decision." I was encouraging scientific methodology, openness, education, and a deeper analysis, and you demanded I stop. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that is?
