9089 réponses à ce sujet

[DirtyPhoenix]

And Ieldra2, yesterday I saw a post trying to explain how Synthesis happens. It was an interesting read:

inko1nsiderate wrote...


It might not be explained in the ME universe, but here is my psuedoscience explanation:  

It largely functions on the principle of regular DNA, but now has pico scale electronics  that allow information to be stored in a digial way.  Hence, it has the biological transference of information (a la DNA), but can also store and transmit information due to the new pico scale eletronic lattices we see being created around the DNA in the cutscene.

These pico technology circuits are initially created on the surface of organics through absorption of finely tuned frequencies of radio waves (and other electromagnetic, dark matter, and dark energy transmissions) that excite certain vibrations of molecules forming stable pico technology states.  Similar to how prions (misfolded proteins) can lead to other proteins misfolding on contact, these pico technology states are able to quickly interact with surrounding tissues allowing rapid dissemination of the pico circuitry throughout the organic volume.  Digital creatures are transformed in a more straightfoward way, as their silicon (and other material) chips are more ordered.  These metastable states are easily created in the circuits of synthetics.  Because of how the crucible functions, it cannot tell the difference between Reapers and other synthetics, and creates these circuitry in both.  The amount of energy involved is very large, but is only slightly different in character from destroy, as instead of having the EMP be targeted to damage synthetics it requires less energy per atom that absorbs the photons, but greater accuracy and precision in the frequencies of the EMP (really an analog to an EMP as it involves mysterious magical 'dark energy' transmissions that are used to explain biotics in the books) to create these picotechnology states in atoms and molecules.  There is more precision involved, and it requires a template (hence the sacrifice, you can think of it as giving a Monte Carlo simulation a set of initial points from which to start the calculations), which is why the option unlocks after a certain EMS (the crucible needs to have more forces distracting Reapers or directly protecting it to ensure it is functioning well enough to create the finely tuned EMP analog).

And even though this explanation is largely BS (as in it isn't real science, but plausible sounding sci-fi), with a smattering of real scientific concepts horribly twisted and mangled, it is does counter your argument that you can't explain synthesis without resorting to some bizarre semi-mystical riddle the way the Catalyst does.

[DirtyPhoenix]

@Chashan,
What I meant is former enemies can cooperate, whether for a common benefit or to fight a common enemy. And given that the epilogue slide takes place between 10-15 years to 200-300 years in the future (there was a link the to dev's comments in the past page) it isn't implausible that people would accept reaper help in rebuilding their worlds. That's enough time for bad blood to dry. The examples you yourself gave are good ones.

Modifié par pirate1802, 14 août 2012 - 12:32 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

If I remove any ethetical concerns and assume that synthesis is no utopia with mind control and doesn't have any effect on the way the population thinks then it simply is no solution. If the war brings people together then that is not a solution specific to synthesis either, because destroy and control do that as well. It has to be a solution if one thinks the hypothetical threat is fact, otherwise it looks more like a trap. So far I cannot dream up a way for synthesis to be a solution for the threat.

The problem that synthesis solves is.

a) The dead-end within the physical limitations of purely organic life
The inability of synthetics to understand the implicit value of sapient life due to the lack of fundimental emotional feedback (A.K.A feelings)

Thats it! synthetics can find motivation and implicit value in its previously-organic peers and the previously-organic have no need to envy the physical potential of synthetics. That prevents the inevitible extinction of organics, just that.

No brainwashing needed, wars can still happen, DNA still exists (Wrapped in the new framework). Hell you could even get synthetic hate-groups that object to those lifeforms that still have "legacy organics" within their framework. Or post-post-human groups looking to purge their organic framework parts.

Removing the physical limitations of purely organic life cannot be a solution if it does not result in a new ideology or does not change the way the new hybrids think. In that case nothing has been gained, because it does nothing for the brat's hypothetical problem, which is what the brat is supposed to offer Shepard.

The DNA argument is a rationalization because it still does change everything that makes an organic an organic. You can try to argue that the new framework is just a wrapper around the DNA to interface with new synthetic organs, but it does change those effected fundamentally at a core level by "fully integrating with synthetic technology". If it does nothing then it is not required. So, it must do *something*. Like I said before, it also has nothing to do with being a solution if nothing changes the thought processes of these ex-organics. The "full understanding of organics" is such a change in thinking. That is mind control enough and somehow it is OK to change the way synthetics think. An additional problem is that for an example the quarians started the Morning War and thus the way the geth thought had nothing to do with that genocide attempt. But even changing the way geth think cannot be called mind control, because it makes synthesis look bad, right? All these synthesis features and rationalizations look more like damage control to remove the bad image of synthesis than a solution to the brat's hypothetical problem.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 14 août 2012 - 12:32 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Chashan wrote...
@ Mobius-Silent - nice nickname by the way 

a) The dead-end within the physical limitations of purely organic life
The inability of synthetics to understand the implicit value of sapient life due to the lack of fundimental emotional feedback (A.K.A feelings)

And those are non-reasons far as I am concerned. Thus, no Synthesis for me, and many others I guess, no-no...

What do you mean "non reasons"? The story of Mass effect _declares_ that these are the problems that need to be solved, it's not optional, it is the setting as presented to us. They may or may not be true and/or relevent in the real word or in other fictional worlds, but they _are_ true in the ME universe, and synthesis is declared to be an adequate solution to those issues. You might not like it, in the same way you might dislike the explaination of Eezo or the nature of the Valar in Middle Earth etc etc. but they are true in the context of the story.

[Mobius-Silent]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
Removing the physical limitations of purely organic life cannot be a solution if it does not result in a new ideology or does not change the way the new hybrids think. In that case nothing has been gained, because it does nothing for the brat's hypothetical problem, which is what the brat is supposed to offer Shepard.

A cybernetic liver can solve the problem of cirrhosis without a new ideology, synthesis is simply the case in extents of this. Organics no longer need to _replace_ parts they now simply need to learn how to use their parts, hence then lack of implicit synthetic-envy

AngryFrozenWater wrote... 
The DNA argument is a rationalization because it still does change everything that makes an organic an organic.

It's not _just_ a  rationalization it's a truth. Previous-organics are _no longer_ organics, they are all hybrids. 

AngryFrozenWater wrote...  
You can try to argue that the new framework is just a wrapper around the DNA to interface with new synthetic organs, but it does change those effected fundamentally at a core level by "fully integrating with synthetic technology". If it does nothing then it is not required. So, it must do *something*.

 It does do something: it allows previously-organic life to be manipulated in a manner akin to synthetics without wholesale replacement of native parts.

AngryFrozenWater wrote...   
Like I said before, it also has nothing to do with being a solution if nothing changes the thought processes of these ex-organics.

False, because organics didn't need a change in thought process, we needed a path to self-modification that didn't involve replacement. Synthetics needed the ability to understand the motivations and values of organics (as stated by the Catalyst)

AngryFrozenWater wrote...  
The "full understanding of organics" is such a change in thinking.

Yes, for synthetics, they gain "feelings" for want of a better term, and the implicit understanding of the value of sapient life

AngryFrozenWater wrote...   
That is mind control enough and somehow it is OK to change the way synthetics think.

Yes, we are adding an ability they didn't have before (mental/emotional), in the same way organics received an ability they didn't have before (physical) 

AngryFrozenWater wrote...    
An additional problem is that for an example the quarians started the Morning War and thus the way the geth thought had nothing to do with that genocide attempt.

This make's no sense, The morning war happened because the Quarians feared what unrestrained AI would do to them and thus attempted to deny their emerging sapience, the geth retaliated. Post synthesis, all sapients have a path to sentience and thus understanding, the conflict is no longer inevitable, simply possible.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 14 août 2012 - 01:02 .

[Ksandor]

You don't understand. This is ethics, a principle of morality.

In synthesis Shepard decides in the name of all organic and synthetic species. Nobody was asked if they would want synthesis. Plus understanding comes after synthesis. That strongly implies indoctrination through synthesis ala Stargate Arc of Truth way.

Besides Shepard said that the Collector base was tainted by the blood of millions. He said "I won't let fear compromise who I am". Even Renegade Shepard fought against Saren. Synthesis? Out of character.

[JeffZero]

Implanted to be a better slave by Nazara is not the same thing as Synthesis.

[Ieldra]

@pirate1802:
Yes, I read that post, and I'm still thinking about it. That's why I haven't replied yet. BTW could you give me a link, I've lost the thread.

For a hypothesis about how the "altered matrix" of organic life works, it looks like a good start, but it also attempts to explain the visual effects of the Synthesis epilogue slides, which IMO doesn't work at all. I still see those as artistic representations of a mostly invisible change.

[DirtyPhoenix]

Ksandor wrote...
Besides Shepard said that the Collector base was tainted by the blood of millions. He said "I won't let fear compromise who I am".

My Shepard never said said any such thing. Do people forget there are different dialog option to pick? As to why Shepard fights Saren? Simple answer: Because the game forces me to. Like it forces me Join Cerberus. I'd have liked to quite a few things differently if the game allowed me to.

EDIT: And also this:

JeffZero wrote...
Implanted to be a better slave by Nazara is not the same thing as Synthesis.

Modifié par pirate1802, 14 août 2012 - 01:23 .

[Ieldra]

Ksandor wrote...
You don't understand. This is ethics, a principle of morality.

Yeah. And? We all have slightly different value hierarchies. There are some who say Refuse is the only moral choice, to which I answer: the thought that doing nothing is always safe because you also do no wrong is a fallacy. As I see  it, I am required to act towards the greater good to the best of my ablity. 

In synthesis Shepard decides in the name of all organic and synthetic species. Nobody was asked if they would want synthesis. Plus understanding comes after synthesis. That strongly implies indoctrination through synthesis ala Stargate Arc of Truth way.

Synthetics gain understanding - a new mode of experiencing organics. Organics gain no such thing, they just gain the physical ability to integrate technology.

Besides Shepard said that the Collector base was tainted by the blood of millions. He said "I won't let fear compromise who I am". Even Renegade Shepard fought against Saren. Synthesis? Out of character.

Actually, no, Shepard doesn't say these things in my games, though it took me a while to find out how to avoid that damnable line "I won't let fear compromise who I am". Also, I *never* got the line that the CB was tainted by the blood of millions. That was Maelon's line about the genophage rather. Yes, we all fought Saren, but not because he wanted Synthesis, but because he helped the Reaper invasion.

Also, this:

JeffZero said...
Implanted to be a better slave by Nazara is not the same thing as Synthesis.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 14 août 2012 - 01:14 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Ksandor wrote...
You don't understand. This is ethics, a principle of morality.
In synthesis Shepard decides in the name of all organic and synthetic species. Nobody was asked if they would want synthesis.

 And in destroy no one asks the Geth if they mind dying to allow the organics to live, in control no one asks the rest of the galaxy if they're ok with Shepard being the Reaper overlord. All three ending have Shepard making morally dubious choices on behalf of the galaxy, synthesis is no different and no better/worse

Ksandor wrote... 
Plus understanding comes after synthesis. That strongly implies indoctrination through synthesis ala Stargate Arc of Truth way. 

"Understanding" is the opposite of indoctrination, there is no evidence at all of regulatory tampering in thought processes or coercion, simply the addition of (entirely personal) implicit emotional imperitives to synthetics. And the _option_ of some form of direct life to life communication.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 14 août 2012 - 01:25 .

[JeffZero]

Yeah, I didn't reply to the CB part because I'm on my phone and it would have taken an eternity. Glad you covered it.

[DirtyPhoenix]

Here's the link:
http://social.biowar...0521/2#13641713

Someone teach me how to link.. links. :|

Modifié par pirate1802, 14 août 2012 - 01:18 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Ksandor wrote...
 Even Renegade Shepard fought against Saren. Synthesis? Out of character.

Saren was indoctrinated to see Reaper implants as an improvement. The problem was enslavement, not the notion of improvement, that's why the argument was insidious, it took a valid argument (the nature of advancement) and used it as a vehicle for reaper indoctrination, and consumption.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 14 août 2012 - 01:23 .

[Mobius-Silent]

pirate1802 wrote...
And Ieldra2, yesterday I saw a post trying to explain how Synthesis happens. It was an interesting read:

inko1nsiderate wrote...

It might not be explained in the ME universe, but here is my psuedoscience explanation...

There is also my view based on the scale of the new framework (when compared to DNA) that the base component of the framework is Eezo allowing it to be completely transparent to the working of DNA if necessary and/or augument/manuipulate/cognate as needed

http://social.biowar...60/127#13074728 

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Ok so we saw that the "New framework"'s base-element was smaller than a DNA nucleobase (in the EC cinematic) given that a nucleobase is only ~13 atoms we must assume that the "new framework" also functions at the atomic scale , so let's say that a complete nanotech "unit" is a meta-base that wraps around the existing base that can be transparent to molecular interaction depending on outside forces.

What element do we know of that is small, and given certain circumstances might be considered "transparent" in an electro/gravitic sense?

Element zero.

So we have an element zero complex that wraps around a DNA strand, acting as a "processing unit" like a synapse but much much smaller, that could either act as cognition or act in concert with others to enhance existing organic interaction or a fragmentary Mass Effect Field generator. Any organic system that previously just generated new cells now generates "wrapped" DNA in those cells.

Biotics are what you get when there are Element zero nodules in the brain, what if you were using Eezo as a sympathetic layer to enhance all organic processes. and/or as an extended neural net. It also explain what happened to the massive eezo stores in the relays (Galactic scale ME-field nano-surgery )

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 14 août 2012 - 01:24 .

[Chashan]

@Möbius

What do you mean "non reasons"? The story of Mass effect _declares_ that these are the problems that need to be solved, it's not optional, it is the setting as presented to us. They may or may not be true and/or relevent in the real word or in other fictional worlds, but they _are_ true in the ME universe, and synthesis is declared to be an adequate solution to those issues. You might not like it, in the same way you might dislike the explaination of Eezo or the nature of the Valar in Middle Earth etc etc. but they are true in the context of the story.

 

I declare those non-reasons as it is only ever proclaimed by one doubtful entity at the very end to be any specific kind of "solution" after its (final) one was debunked.
As I said before, I rank the "reasoning" of the thing even lower than had it said that all was done for the glorious lulz. Which isn't much of a reason either, but even that would have been more acceptable to me.

And it would not even cross my mind to line this non-problem up among the Valar; the Valar are a very well established pantheon in Tolkien's universe of Arda, the Silmarillion covers their origin in a quite detailed manner. Now, compare_that_to how the thing was "introduced".

In short, you are kind of dismissing one of the sole key arguments I see for Synthesis: a way of ensuring lasting peace for the galaxy.
And even with that argument in mind, I do ultimately not condone this utopia in the thing's image, as the cost for reaching it is just too high, the immensity of what the Reapers have done for the course of eons too great for me to accept this as a redemption for what they did.

[Veloric Wu]

I think the Synthesis is the best. Some organics just don't understand~

[Mobius-Silent]

Chashan wrote...
I declare those non-reasons as it is only ever proclaimed by one doubtful entity at the very end to be any specific kind of "solution" after its (final) one was debunked.

Fine, the Catalyst is supposed to be acting as narrator in this instance (as has been said in the last days app), If you refuse to accept that, fine the ending will never make sense for you.

Chashan wrote...
And it would not even cross my mind to line this non-problem up among the Valar; the Valar are a very well established pantheon in Tolkien's universe of Arda, the Silmarillion covers their origin in a quite detailed manner. Now, compare_that_to how the thing was "introduced".

But not in LotR or the Hobbit, the point is they are simply _stated_ to exist in a specific way, either you accept that and potentially enjoy the story, or reject the concept and fail to enjoy the story, much like the concepts explained by the Catalyst.

Chashan wrote...
In short, you are kind of dismissing one of the sole key arguments I see for Synthesis: a way of ensuring lasting peace for the galaxy.

Lasting peace is _far_ from guaranteed in the synthesis ending, IMHO, it simply solves one major problem.

Chashan wrote...
And even with that argument in mind, I do ultimately not condone this utopia in the thing's image

Synthesis was created by one of the in-cycle races, it is unrelated to the Catalyst or the Reapers natures', it is not "in the thing's image" in fact is it almost completely beyond their understanding, hence their failure in it's pursuit.

Attributing any of the choices to the Reapers and/or the Catalyst is one of the primary problems of the OC that people really need to let go of after it was cleared up in the EC.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 14 août 2012 - 02:04 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

[quote]Mobius-Silent wrote...

[quote]AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Removing the physical limitations of purely organic life cannot be a solution if it does not result in a new ideology or does not change the way the new hybrids think. In that case nothing has been gained, because it does nothing for the brat's hypothetical problem, which is what the brat is supposed to offer Shepard.[/quote]
A cybernetic liver can solve the problem of cirrhosis without a new ideology, synthesis is simply the case in extents of this. Organics no longer need to _replace_ parts they now simply need to learn how to use their parts, hence then lack of implicit synthetic-envy[/quote]
Medical implants were not the threat. So, this "solution" solves nothing and, this again, it is a rationalization.

[quote]Mobius-Silent wrote...

[quote]AngryFrozenWater wrote...

The DNA argument is a rationalization because it still does change everything that makes an organic an organic.[/quote]
Its not _just_ a rationalization its a truth. Previous-organics are _no longer_ organics, they are all hybrids.[/quote]
Changing organics into hybrids without a supporting ideology or change in thinking does nothing at all.

[quote]Mobius-Silent wrote...

[quote]AngryFrozenWater wrote...

You can try to argue that the new framework is just a wrapper around the DNA to interface with new synthetic organs, but it does change those effected fundamentally at a core level by "fully integrating with synthetic technology". If it does nothing then it is not required. So, it must do *something*. [/quote]
It does do something: it allows previously-organic life to be manipulated in a manner akin to synthetics without wholesale replacement of native parts.[/quote]
Again, changing parts does nothing to solve the brat's hypothetical threat if there is no change into thought processes to accompany it.

[quote]Mobius-Silent wrote...

[quote]AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Like I said before, it also has nothing to do with being a solution if nothing changes the thought processes of these ex-organics.[/quote]
False, because organics didn't need a change in thought process, we needed a path to self-modification that didn't involve replacement. Synthetics needed the ability to understand the motivations and values of organics[/quote]
Replacement of body parts and organs does nothing for the hypothetical threat. Besides, nobody expressed this need. Medical implants were already available.

About understanding the motivations and values of organics. You don't give the geth enough credit.

Shepard: You don't actually live on the quarian worlds?

Legion: We live within space stations. Draw resources from asteroids. It is efficient. We maintain mobile platforms on creator worlds to clean rubble and toxins left by the Morning War. We know of similar actions by humans on Earth.

Shepard: Similar actions?

Legion: At Wadi-es-Salaam, Arlington, Rookwood, Tyne Cot, Piskarveskoye, Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Shepard: Those are cemeteries. Memorials.

Legion: It is important to your species to preserve them, though you do not use the land. Can you explain?

Shepard: The living visit those places to remember the dead. But it sounds like geth don't die. Your memories live on.

Legion: The creators died. Perhaps we do it for them.

[quote]Mobius-Silent wrote...

[quote]AngryFrozenWater wrote...

The "full understanding of organics" is such a change in thinking.[/quote]

Yes, for synthetics, they gain "feelings" for want of a better term, and the implicit understanding of the value of sapient life[/quote]
Which is causing a change in their way of thinking. As shown before, there appears nothing wrong with that. Forcing such change without their consent is a violation of their right of self-determination. But then again, so is the whole synthesis "solution".

[quote]Mobius-Silent wrote...

[quote]AngryFrozenWater wrote...

That is mind control enough and somehow it is OK to change the way synthetics think.[/quote]
Yes, we are adding an ability they didn't have before (mental/emotional), in the same organics received an ability they didn't have before (physical)[/quote]
They managed that just fine without synthesis. The quarians and the reapers were the bad boys. No need to brainwash the geth.

[quote]Mobius-Silent wrote...

[quote]AngryFrozenWater wrote...

An additional problem is that for an example the quarians started the Morning War and thus the way the geth thought had nothing to do with that genocide attempt.[/quote]
This make's no sense, The morning war happened because the Quarians feared what unrestrained AI would do to them and thus attempted to deny their emerging sapience, the geth retaliated. Post synthesis, all sapients have a path to sentience and thus understanding, the conflict is no longer inevitable, simply possible.[/quote]
Of course it makes sense. The geth thought processes worked flawlessly. The quarians had a problem with synthetics. The conflict was created by the quarians. Not the other way around. The quarians tried to exterminate the geth. The geth defended themselves against genocide. So there is no need to change how the geth think at all. They were doing just fine.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 14 août 2012 - 02:08 .

[Chashan]

Mobius-Silent wrote...
Fine, the Catalyst is supposed to be acting as narrator in this instance (as has been said in the last days app), If you refuse to accept that, fine the ending will never make sense for you.

Uhm, for me it is not so much a question of making sense of what the antagonist of this particular story claims to have committed its atrocities for than it is to do away with it.

Its problem was not the key-drive of the story. As such, I find dismissing its circular argument rather easy, and ultimately convenient.

And as the developers said themselves concerning the ending: there is no canon! So, I will simply go ahead and shelf their take away as their personal interpretation. You accept, go ahead and do so, but with the game set up like this, I think the both of us can walk away satisfied each according to their own fashion.

In short, I consider the Cata-fail's motivation dead weight and so much breathed air. And since I can even choose any of the four options at will regardless of its ravings, that even works.

But not in LotR or the Hobbit, the point is they are simply _stated_ to exist in a specific way, either you accept that and potentially enjoy the story, or reject the concept and fail to enjoy the story, much like the concepts explained by the Catalyst.

The Valar took a definite back-seat in the proceedings of Middle-Earth, which is fairly common for gods to do; think deism.

As such, further details on them are not crucial to those latter-day stories, especially the Hobbit; try another example.

Lasting peace is _far_ from guaranteed in the synthesis ending, IMHO, it simply solves one major problem.

Your opinion, which clearly differs from mine.

And the epilogue would suggest otherwise to me as well. What you further outlined there for far-future developments can be categorised as head-canon at the end of the day.

Synthesis was created by one of the in-cycle races, it is unrelated to the Catalyst or the Reapers natures', it is not "in the thing's image" in fact is it almost completely beyond their understanding, hence their failure in it's pursuit.

Attributing any of the choices to the Reapers and/or the Catalyst is one of the primary problems of the OC that people really need to let go of after it was cleared up in the EC.

The fact that it tried to implement it is fact enough that it knows quite well what it is supposed to look like. And that it pursued it aside from its erratic key directive clearly labels it as an outcome it desires.

It was something I guessed at prior to the Director's Cut, and to find that mostly confirmed afterwards was actually pleasantly surprising to me.

And saying that it is "beyond its understanding" opens another rather shaky avenue to all this...

Modifié par Chashan, 14 août 2012 - 02:23 .

[Mobius-Silent]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
Removing the physical limitations of purely organic life cannot be a solution if it does not result in a new ideology or does not change the way the new hybrids think.

You keep stating this as fact, it is not. You are wrong, if you could try and suppoort this assertion rather than just stating it then I could, perhaps, explain where your error is.

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
Medical implants were not the threat.

Mortality is the threat and envy of synthetic permanence is part of the problem, hence hybridization provides a solution to the problem of envy

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
About understanding the motivations and values of organics. You don't give the geth enough credit.
<snip>

The Geth didn't understand organics they observed behaviour. Your quote does not suggest anything different.

AngryFrozenWater wrote... 
Which is causing a change in their way of thinking. As shown before, there appears nothing wrong with that. Forcing such change without their consent is a violation of their right of self-determination. But then again, so is the whole synthesis "solution".

So is destroy and so is control, all of the choices available are morally dubious. Synthesis is not superior it is simply a valid option.

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
They managed that just fine without synthesis. The quarians and the reapers were the bad boys. No need to brainwash the geth.

It's not brainwashing, they are gaining a capacity they previously didn't have, _capacity_ in that they have become _more_ their choices remain their own, they are not guided or regulated by an external source.

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
Of course it makes sense. The geth thought processes worked flawlessly. The quarians had a problem with synthetics. The conflict was created by the quarians. Not the other way around. The quarians tried to exterminate the geth. The geth defended themselves against genocide. So there is no need to change how the geth think at all. They were doing just fine.

The Quarians initiated _that_ _singluar_ conflict, this doesn't invalidate the general statement of conflict between synthetics and organics. You can say "So there is no need to change how the geth think at all." but only if you add "If you consider only the action of these two races in this limited timeframe" which makes the statement irrelevent in the context of the problem the Catalyst was created to solve.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 14 août 2012 - 02:36 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Chashan wrote...
Uhm, for me it is not so much a question of making sense of what the antagonist of this particular story claims to have committed its atrocities for than it is to do away with it.

It's quite clear that the Catalyst is the initiator of the cycle, not the actuator. The Reapers are the killers, they were killers before the Catalyst took control and they were killers after, perfect sociopaths, who were steered by the Catalyst to "preserve" organics. IMHO Husks et-al are all directly the responsibility of the Reapers. I'm certain that catalyst has an explicit "Do no kill" directive but no "By omission of action allow to die" directive as in Azimov's first law.

Chashan wrote...
Your opinion, which clearly differs from mine.

And the epilogue would suggest otherwise to me as well.

The epilogue is mostly the same as the "good" destroy and control endings, short-term clarification that nothing goes to **** straight away.

Chashan wrote...
clearly labels it as an outcome it desires.

It desires what it was programmed to, peace between organics and synthetics and a solution to the impending problem of a galaxy scrubbed of organics.

Chashan wrote...
And saying that it is "beyond its understanding" opens another rather shaky avenue to all this...

Which is?

[Chashan]

Mobius-Silent wrote...
 It's quite clear that the Catalyst is the initiator of the cycle, not the actuator. The Reapers are the killers, they were killers before the Catalyst took control and they were killers after, perfect sociopaths, who were steered by the Catalyst to "preserve" organics. IMHO Husks et-al are all directly the responsibility of the Reapers. I'm certain that catalyst has an explicit "Do no kill" directive but no "By omission of action allow to die" directive as in Azimov's first law.

Realise that since the thing proclaims itself to be the control-unit of its Reaper-minions that by "shutting it down" I am talking of the Reaper-operation as a whole.
As for the thing itself, nothing of value was lost far as I am concerned with it going under as well. Have seen better creepy kid-imitators...

The epilogue is mostly the same as the "good" destroy and control endings, short-term clarification that nothing goes to **** straight away.

I don't consider "Control" good at all, but that is for another topic.

I see the epilogues as wrapping things up, which they do amply far as I am concerned. It is true that their inherent ambiguity does allow lee-way should BW decide to continue in this universe, but it would even work out in that regard if they left things open and moved on to another franchise.

It desires what it was programmed to, peace between organics and synthetics and a solution to the impending problem of a galaxy scrubbed of organics.

It still promotes the approach of Green the most out of all the three. It can be argued that Blue equals a way of succession for it - one it might not be looking forward to but accepts - but Green definitely is painted as the brightest of the three as far as it is concerned.

Which is?

The whole unknowable Crucible-tripe, which I still consider one of the worse wild cards I've seen recently in a story.

And it still offers the most exposition and explanation on it, so if anything in the galaxy has an idea of what is up with Green, the thing it is.

Modifié par Chashan, 14 août 2012 - 03:09 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Chashan wrote...

Which is?

The whole unknowable Crucible-tripe, which I still consider one of the worse wild cards I've seen recently in a story.

And it still offers the most exposition and explanation on it, so if anything in the galaxy has an idea of what is up with Green, the thing it is.

No what I mean is that the Catalyst and the Reapers are Synthetics, thats why they couldn't impliment Synthesis, they are attempting to add a mental faculty they have not ability to comprehend, thats is why they fail. the Crucible isn't unknowable, it's just that the synthesis part requires sentience to understand rather than base sapience.

[Taboo]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Ksandor wrote...
You don't understand. This is ethics, a principle of morality.

Yeah. And? We all have slightly different value hierarchies. There are some who say Refuse is the only moral choice, to which I answer: the thought that doing nothing is always safe because you also do no wrong is a fallacy. As I see  it, I am required to act towards the greater good to the best of my ablity. 

Ah ha! There it is! The moral universalism!

Not that that's a bad thing of course.

All the choices function on that logic. Thankfully all the endings were validated because of this.

It's more than just stopping the Reapers, it's how you wish to affect the galaxy as well. Synthesis interferes above and beyond what my canon Shepard believes is ethical, as does Control.

But he must act, therefore he will sacrifice one race to save all life.

LOL @ Refuse.

You MUST act, that's the principle I function on with the Crucible.