9089 réponses à ce sujet

[His Name was HYR!!]

You can watch Shepard be violent and brutal firing a gun all series long.


Shepard running... without getting tired after two steps and in proper sprinting form? Now THAT'S something!

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 18 juin 2012 - 03:15 .

[Ieldra]

I was just thinking about how Synthesis sticks out for basically telling us nothing concrete about what will happen, and how the idea of mental networking appears to pop up frequently in Synthesis scenarios.

What would everyone have thought if the third option (perhaps in that case named differently) had been described as giving organics this mental networking ability and making synthetics and organics able to link to each other and conjoin minds? Basically what the geth have, only not limited to synthetics. The rationale would've been facilitating understanding between the two "domains of consciousness" and removing the disadvantage from organics that would have made a singularity so dangerous or in more general terms, synthetics the stronger in any conflict. What if it had been described that way, without telling us anything about the means?

I think this would link rather well to two themes: the principle that understanding mitigates conflicts, which we have enacted in the games again and again, and the idea of conjoining minds as a type of ascension, with both good (geth) and bad (Reapers) examples present in the game.

Several of the proposed scenarios amount to this, including mine, but linking it with the idea of "merging synthetics and organics" raises some difficulties and requires a specific class of implementation methods. As an added difficulty, certain phrases of the description appear to imply that the change is more fundamental that this. But ignore this for now: what would everyone have thought if this had been a canonical result of Synthesis?

Modifié par Ieldra2, 18 juin 2012 - 03:27 .

[Ieldra]

jtav wrote...
Speaking of the imagery, I'd forgotten how much I like it. Shepard drops his gun and is no longer limping. Instead he takes a flying leap into the light. No pain or struggle, just light.

Indeed. I find it incomprehensible how anyone can think this is intended to point at something bad. Add the Normandy scene with Joker and EDI and it becomes almost blatantly obvious. Only the bad writing ruins the impression.

I still dislike the Normandy scene for its neo-Luddism, but that's another story.

[antares_sublight]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I was just thinking about how Synthesis sticks out for basically telling us nothing concrete about what will happen, and how the idea of mental networking appears to pop up frequently in Synthesis scenarios.

What would everyone have thought if the third option (perhaps in that case named differently) had been described as giving organics this mental networking ability and making synthetics and organics able to link to each other and conjoin minds? Basically what the geth have, only not limited to synthetics. The rationale would've been facilitating understanding between the two "domains of consciousness" and removing the disadvantage from organics that would have made a singularity so dangerous or in more general terms, synthetics the stronger in any conflict. What if it had been described that way, without telling us anything about the means?

I think this would link rather well to two themes: the principle that understanding mitigates conflicts, which we have enacted in the games again and again, and the idea of conjoining minds as a type of ascension, with both good (geth) and bad (Reapers) examples present in the game.

Several of the proposed scenarios amount to this, including mine, but linking it with the idea of "merging synthetics and organics" raises some difficulties and requires a specific class of implementation methods. As an added difficulty, certain phrases of the description appear to imply that the change is more fundamental that this. But ignore this for now: what would everyone have thought if this had been a canonical result of Synthesis?

So, all competition of any kind (market, evolutionary, etc) is gone? If they can hide things, then the purpose is broken. Stale.

And "principle of understanding" is overrated - See "human wars".

[Ieldra]

Eh...where did you get that from? I didn't say you'd be forced to reveal everything to everyone all the time. None of the proposed scenarios has that.

But trust you to find the least pleasant implementation possible and dismiss anything else as irrelevant. Typical.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 18 juin 2012 - 03:38 .

[Vigilant111]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I was just thinking about how Synthesis sticks out for basically telling us nothing concrete about what will happen, and how the idea of mental networking appears to pop up frequently in Synthesis scenarios.

What would everyone have thought if the third option (perhaps in that case named differently) had been described as giving organics this mental networking ability and making synthetics and organics able to link to each other and conjoin minds? Basically what the geth have, only not limited to synthetics. The rationale would've been facilitating understanding between the two "domains of consciousness" and removing the disadvantage from organics that would have made a singularity so dangerous or in more general terms, synthetics the stronger in any conflict. What if it had been described that way, without telling us anything about the means?

I think this would link rather well to two themes: the principle that understanding mitigates conflicts, which we have enacted in the games again and again, and the idea of conjoining minds as a type of ascension, with both good (geth) and bad (Reapers) examples present in the game.

Several of the proposed scenarios amount to this, including mine, but linking it with the idea of "merging synthetics and organics" raises some difficulties and requires a specific class of implementation methods. As an added difficulty, certain phrases of the description appear to imply that the change is more fundamental that this. But ignore this for now: what would everyone have thought if this had been a canonical result of Synthesis?

hmm, chip in brain?

Privacy issues?

[Ieldra]

@Vigilant111:
Let's suppose you could guard your privacy as a rule, even though intrusion attempts would likely become a new problem.

[antares_sublight]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Vigilant111:
Let's suppose you could guard your privacy as a rule, even though intrusion attempts would likely become a new problem.

So, if each life form is able to hide information, then what has actually been solved by networking everything together? Massive deception and trust issues!

[antares_sublight]

Ieldra2 wrote...
But trust you to find the least pleasant implementation possible and dismiss anything else as irrelevant. Typical.

No, I'm asking questions of practicality to poke holes in your fanfiction. Totally different.

[Taboo]

jtav wrote...

But it's also violent imagery. Gunfire, explosions, fire in the sky. Not at all appealing to me personally.

I'm tempted to say something if you catch my drift. But you're exactely right here, it isn't appealing. Everything is jolly good in Synthesis, which would be incorrect. I'd imagine some people are going absolutely ape **** when they notice what's happening.

We're all playing out fantasy scenarios in our heads. I'd imagine life is going to be VERY difficult for people in all the endings. The only thing that Bioware can do damage Synthesis more is make it appear as if everyone is happy in the EC. I won't be able to help you if that happens.

I don't think I'll make a fantasy Destroy though. Things are going to be very difficult for people, and my Shepard knows that. But he'll be able to explain his reasoning and help with morale.

[Ieldra]

antares_sublight wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Vigilant111:
Let's suppose you could guard your privacy as a rule, even though intrusion attempts would likely become a new problem.

So, if each life form is able to hide information, then what has actually been solved by networking everything together? Massive deception and trust issues!

This is based on the idea that mental communication transcends certain barriers to understanding normal language has. Which means less misunderstandings. And don't forget the conjoining of minds.

[Ieldra]

@Taboo:
Yes, life is going to be difficult. But why should any scenario be more gloomy than necessary? The mass starvation of the quarians and the turians for instance is unnecessary if the quarians live. Why not assume that the quarian liveships solve the problem until the turians get their own production running?

[Taboo]

Ieldra2 wrote...

antares_sublight wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Vigilant111:
Let's suppose you could guard your privacy as a rule, even though intrusion attempts would likely become a new problem.

So, if each life form is able to hide information, then what has actually been solved by networking everything together? Massive deception and trust issues!

This is based on the idea that mental communication transcends certain barriers to understanding normal language has. Which means less misunderstandings. And don't forget the conjoining of minds.

No Ieldra. No.

I wouldn't be able to live with such a thing. Privacy is a right, and this is intrusive. People lose things this way.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 18 juin 2012 - 03:49 .

[Vigilant111]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Vigilant111:
Let's suppose you could guard your privacy as a rule, even though intrusion attempts would likely become a new problem.

Any guard = ineffeiciency, its all or nothing, you wanna be open, you gotta reveal all, that is what trust is, what synthesis should be, otherwise there is no point

If synthesis didn't happen, it would make sense to share infomation and thoughts while keeping privacy cos I don't think synthetics would judge u, but after synthesis, synthetics also share organic attributes, not to mention greed and jealousy

[antares_sublight]

Ieldra2 wrote...

antares_sublight wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Vigilant111:
Let's suppose you could guard your privacy as a rule, even though intrusion attempts would likely become a new problem.

So, if each life form is able to hide information, then what has actually been solved by networking everything together? Massive deception and trust issues!

This is based on the idea that mental communication transcends certain barriers to understanding normal language has. Which means less misunderstandings. And don't forget the conjoining of minds.

I wasn't talking about misunderstandings, I'm talking about intentional deception. If one is able to hide what one feels is "private" in this galaxy-wide mental-network, then one is able to deceive, and so what's actually been accomplished toward galactic "understanding"?

[Taboo]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Taboo:
Yes, life is going to be difficult. But why should any scenario be more gloomy than necessary? The mass starvation of the quarians and the turians for instance is unnecessary if the quarians live. Why not assume that the quarian liveships solve the problem until the turians get their own production running?

That's a reasonable assesment, and doesn't violate what I'm looking at.

I'm not going to head canon the Geth surviving. That's what I mean.

I need to accept responsibility for my actions. That's very important to me.

[jtav]

As long as it can be turned off, I see it as pretty neat. I'm an introvert, so being forced to share is hell. OTOH, could be useful.

[Vigilant111]

*

Modifié par Vigilant111, 19 juin 2012 - 06:04 .

[antares_sublight]

jtav wrote...

As long as it can be turned off, I see it as pretty neat. I'm an introvert, so being forced to share is hell. OTOH, could be useful.

If it can be turned off, then what's the point? If all geth decide to turn it off, then.... .... profit?

[Ieldra]

jtav wrote...
As long as it can be turned off, I see it as pretty neat. I'm an introvert, so being forced to share is hell. OTOH, could be useful.

Yeah, me too. I'd never write a scenario where people are forced to share everything and call it good.

But actually, what I wanted to know is not if people like the idea, but how they'd have reacted had this been presented as the canonical result of the third option. Obviously, we won't be able to say for sure, because now is now and we can't mentally go back to the "innocence" of before, but since it would fit thematically, I think there would've been a good chance that people accepted it as written.

[Taboo]

Putting my feelings on Synthesis aside, I wouldn't want my mind linked with anyone.

I like having my thoughts, be my thoughts.

The only time I've heard of this being done was...Welt am Draht.

Which I still haven't seen. You know who Rainer Werner Fassbinder is don't you Ieldra?

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 18 juin 2012 - 09:33 .

[Nimrodell]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Putting my feelings on Synthesis aside, I wouldn't want my mind linked with anyone.

I like having my thoughts, be my thoughts.

The only time I've heard of this being done was...Welt am Draht.

Which I still haven't seen. You know who Rainer Werner Fassbinder is don't you Ieldra?

Well, see for yourself and judge if World on a Wire - part 1 can even apply to what you're currently comparing. Make sure to have some three hours of free time and judge objectively. The second part is here. If you like Fassbinder, use VideoProbava's special Fassbinder channel.

[Taboo]

I'd rather pay for the Blu-Ray from Criterion. Youtube compresses things to death.

Fassbinder shot it on 16mm, so I'm going to want to be able to see a largely uncompressed film here.

[Nimrodell]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I'd rather pay for the Blu-Ray from Criterion. Youtube compresses things to death.

Fassbinder shot it on 16mm, so I'm going to want to be able to see a largely uncompressed film here.

And you're right, Fassbinder's film deserves proper treatment - I just offered this as a part-time solution not a permanent one - because the very story about Stiller (won't say anything else - I don't like to spoil) is very intriguing - but again, let's make a deal then if you're willing. Please, if you get this film (or more likely short series of two episodes) on Blue-Ray and watch it - find me here and just whisper me if it can be apllied to what you're comparing. I hope you'll be willing to do that and remember me .

[Taboo]

I'll try.

I'll have to order it...