1256 réponses à ce sujet

[Heeden]

akenn312 wrote...

Yes the thing has similarities that are questionable, but the fact that people are romanticizing it as a wonderful choice with no drawbacks and a start of a amazing utopia is what I have the main issue with. This choice has consequences that are just as bad or even worse than the others. You might not want to see it in a bad way but someone else can see it. This choice to change all life because one person thinks is a better future is not just some fantasy land thing that has no repercussions it's a serious thing to do and it's not something to argue is a great and wonderful la la land result.

Most of the pro-synth posters admit there are possible dark outcomes for their choice, just as there are positives for control and destroy, However the choice is made based on knowledge and opinions of the ME galaxy. Someone will only pick Synthesis if it chimes with what they believe the best advancement of the galaxy will be. No doubt Synthesis will cause massive social upheaval. No doubt some of those changes will be bad. However peaceful coexistence with artificial life-forms is the best chance we have for creating a utopia, and Synthesis is the only way to achieve this without genocide or enslavement.

The choice does have a fascist ascetic to it and that is not something you just take lightly or fan-fiction away. Be honest with what it is about. If you think Destroy is genocide then stop covering up what synthesis is. That's all.

I've said, the dystopic outcome to Synthesis is far more likely to result in some form of malevolent or mundane communism. The key ingredients for fascism just aren't there.

[Aurora313]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Kind of like how everyone commited genocide against the Collectors?

OH WAIT. THAT'S TOTALLY OKAY ISN'T IT?

Stop throwing out crap at people. Destroying the Reapers is no different than that.

It's totally not, but Shepard was still trying his damnedest to figure out a way to save them before Mordin told him it was impossible and more of a mercy to let them die than attempt to do otherwise.

[jtav]

And this time, we can actually save our enemy. There are options. Peace is possible. I'll try for it, risky as it is.

[InHarmsWay]

Aurora313 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Kind of like how everyone commited genocide against the Collectors?

OH WAIT. THAT'S TOTALLY OKAY ISN'T IT?

Stop throwing out crap at people. Destroying the Reapers is no different than that.

It's totally not, but Shepard was still trying his damnedest to figure out a way to save them before Mordin told him it was impossible and more of a mercy to let them die than attempt to do otherwise.

Shepard did not do his damndest to save the Collectors. He ask Mordin simply if they could be saved. Mordin said no. He accepted that.

That was the end of it.

[Heeden]

InHarmsWay wrote...

Shepard did not do his damndest to save the Collectors. He ask Mordin simply if they could be saved. Mordin said no. He accepted that.

That was the end of it.

He exhausted all available lines of enquiry, consulted with the finest scientific minds that could be reached and regretfully accepted the inevitable >.>

[akenn312]

Heeden wrote...
I've said, the dystopic outcome to Synthesis is far more likely to result in some form of malevolent or mundane communism. The key ingredients for fascism just aren't there.

This is as basic as I can make it. You in a few posts back said you considered the Salarian's creating the Genophage and playing with eugenics out of fear of a Krogan rebellion to keep the peace a dileberate fascist aesthetic within the game. 

Well with Synthesis, that is a choice to play with eugenics to stop the singularity between organics and synthetics so organics won't be destroyed by the created synthetics. It is done out of fear from what the Catalyst tells you. It is the same basic concept. You change people without their knowledge for what you felt was the greater good on a fear of what might happen. 

The ethics issues are there, the aesthetics are there.

Modifié par akenn312, 15 juin 2012 - 12:42 .

[o Ventus]

jtav wrote...

And this time, we can actually save our enemy. There are options. Peace is possible. I'll try for it, risky as it is.

I hope, for your sake, that by "the enemy", you aren't referring to the Reapers.

[jtav]

I am referring to the Reapers. The green beam hits them and they leave. And they don't come back even when their controller is dead. The indoctrination has been broken. I consider that pretty sublime.

[jla0644]

Taboo-XX wrote...

No one has addressed the post about Fascism I made on the previous page. No one.

Touch it Synthesis people. Try it.

Feel it. Understand what you speak of.

At this point, why would anyone want to engage you in debate? Your posts are rude. Your posts are condescending. Pay attention. Condescending. Feel it. Understand (see, that's annoying, isn't it? And you do it in every post. Every. Post. Pay attention. Know it. Understand it).  You constantly try to impress people by throwing around book titles, words and terms you think make you sound smart. You act as though the moment you state your opinion on something, it instantly becomes an unassailable fact.

Are you really surprised when people simply tire of  you and wish to move on?

And now, against my better judgment...

I completely disagree with your characterization of Synthesis in the post to which you referred. The one time I chose Synthesis, human perfection, strength and improvement had nothing to do with it. Those things never entered my mind. I didn't see Synthesis as making people better, just different. Being partly synthetic isn't going to make people be better people, imo. They will still have flaws, they will still do ****ty things to their fellow man. Merging organics and synthetics doesn't remove the organic part.

Synthesis does not create a galaxy full of perfect supermen. That has never been how I viewed it. That's how you see it, and I will admit it's a perfectly valid way to see it. But it isn't the only way.

[o Ventus]

jtav wrote...

I am referring to the Reapers. The green beam hits them and they leave. And they don't come back even when their controller is dead. The indoctrination has been broken. I consider that pretty sublime.

What do you have to prove that the Reapers are indoctrinated?

I mean actual proof, not speculation or headcanon or anything cut from the old script.

Modifié par o Ventus, 15 juin 2012 - 01:01 .

[KingZayd]

o Ventus wrote...

jtav wrote...

I am referring to the Reapers. The green beam hits them and they leave. And they don't come back even when their controller is dead. The indoctrination has been broken. I consider that pretty sublime.

What do you have to prove that the Reapers are indoctrinated?

I mean actual proof, not speculation or headcanon or anything cut from the old script.

I also suspect the Reapers might be indoctrinated.. almost certainly if Vendetta's ideas of there being a controller are true. I'm not pro-synth btw. In fact it's my least favourite choice   the worst choice in my opinion.

Modifié par KingZayd, 15 juin 2012 - 01:07 .

[Heeden]

akenn312 wrote...
This is as basic as I can make it. You in a few posts back said you considered the Salarian's creating the Genophage and playing with eugenics out of fear of a Krogan rebellion to keep the peace a dileberate fascist aesthetic within the game.

No, I was referring to the Salarian's obsession with breeding programs. The point I was labouring to get across is having one thing in common with fascist ideology does not make a society or concept inherently fascist.

Well with Synthesis, that is a choice to play with eugenics to stop the singularity between organics and synthetics so organics won't be destroyed by the created synthetics. It is done out of fear from what the Catalyst tells you. It is the same basic concept. You change people without their knowledge for what you felt was the greater good on a fear of what might happen. 

The ethics issues are there, the aesthetics are there.

There's no eugenics specified in Synthesis. Yes there is enforcing change out of fears for an uncertain future but that is not a unique characteristic to fascism, it's pretty much the mandate of any government or organisation that attempts to create order.

Modifié par Heeden, 15 juin 2012 - 01:18 .

[clennon8]

The Reapers probably flew off to kill themselves or go into permanent hibernation in dark space. That's what I would have them do if I were writing it. Even if they were unwilling slaves of the Catalyst, they were still born of mind-numbing atrocity and then spent the last billion years mercilessly slaying trillions of sentient beings. They have to be seriously messed up. I don't really see the point of making their salvation a big priority. Sometimes it's better to just kill the bad guy(s).

[Zix13]

jtav wrote...

And this time, we can actually save our enemy. There are options. Peace is possible. I'll try for it, risky as it is.

Peace is not possible. There is no way any sane person would be like, they turned by family into cybernetic zombies that then tried to kill me, yea, I'm down for peace. No. JUST NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[clennon8]

Yeah, I have to say that saving the Reapers is probably the wackiest justification for Synthesis yet. A complete non-starter.

[memorysquid]

Heeden wrote...

I've said, the dystopic outcome to Synthesis is far more likely to result in some form of malevolent or mundane communism. The key ingredients for fascism just aren't there.

Glowy eyes and circuit imprinted leaves are key ingredients for communism, but not fascism?  Anyone who tries to read that far into the hand waving magical nonsense of synthesis is trying waaaaay too hard.

[o Ventus]

clennon8 wrote...

Yeah, I have to say that saving the Reapers is probably the wackiest justification for Synthesis yet. A complete non-starter.

[clennon8]

Transhumanism? Sounds cool. I can understand the appeal.

Save the geth? Peachy. I can sympathize with that goal.

Save the Reapers? I'm sorry, what now? Did you forget to put a troll-face on the end of that?

[memorysquid]

clennon8 wrote...

Yeah, I have to say that saving the Reapers is probably the wackiest justification for Synthesis yet. A complete non-starter.

Why?  If the Catalyst controlled them, and we are offered multiple reasons in the cutscenes that verify he does after the fact, then they weren't responsible for their actions.  Plus, the Reapers, assuming Bioware isn't going to pull something out of complete left field to patch this mess over, are the stored collective intelligence of millions of years worth of galactic civilizations.  Destroying the Reapers is committing galactic genocide countless times over.

[o Ventus]

memorysquid wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Yeah, I have to say that saving the Reapers is probably the wackiest justification for Synthesis yet. A complete non-starter.

Why?  If the Catalyst controlled them, and we are offered multiple reasons in the cutscenes that verify he does after the fact, then they weren't responsible for their actions.  Plus, the Reapers, assuming Bioware isn't going to pull something out of complete left field to patch this mess over, are the stored collective intelligence of millions of years worth of galactic civilizations.  Destroying the Reapers is committing galactic genocide countless times over.

The reapers still have some degree of autonomy. There's nothing to imply the Reapers are completely brainwashed or indoctrinated.

Destroying the Reapers is akin to letting the troubled species inside them finally rest in peace. Even if anything of them exists (Which is inherently horse****, but another matter altogether), I doubt omnicide is high on their priority list. Hell, Paragon Shepard says as much to the dying Reaper on Rannoch.

[memorysquid]

Taboo-XX wrote...

YOU. COMMIT. GENOCIDE. AT. THE. END. OF. THE. SECOND. GAME.

This is no different.

All the endings have uncomfortable bearings on the real world, the only difference is that Synthesis gets the most romanticized version. I am taking these quotes from books sitting RIGHT HERE, at my desk.

I'd be more than willing to dig out my copy of "Friendly Fascism" just for you.

As Mordin points out, the Collectors have no culture, no art, no nothing.  They are closer to organic VIs than anything.  Genocide implies trying to wipe out a race; I don't think they qualify.

As to synthesis having a fascist aesthetic, maybe.  If we look at synthesis as part of the Hegelian dialectic, sure - and that does seem they way the problem was framed.  Organic thesis, synthetic antithesis, circuitboard skin and glowy eye synthesis.  Still, so what?  The alternatives are genocide or taking the path you've watched fail multiple times and literally just killed a man for trying or better yet convinced him he was such an insane douchebag for trying you got him to shoot himself.  So some game writer took a Philosophy 1001 course and liked Hegel, big deal.  In game, it is presented as the best choice and being a fictive universe, it IS the best choice.  In game you are presented with 3 choices, that is all.  If the best choice in game comes out of someone who liked the idea of Hegelian synthesis, oh well. 

I thought the medical ethical dilemma between the human and the salarian was complete BS myself; of course people who can pay for more treatment should receive more.  However, when I supported the naughty human advocating for standard triage protocol, the writers didn't even let me have the choice, the salarian just talked around her and me.  I guess the solution, if you don't like the intellectual backdrop of a game, is to write your own with a different one.

[o Ventus]

memorysquid wrote...

As Mordin points out, the Collectors have no culture, no art, no nothing.  They are closer to organic VIs than anything.  Genocide implies trying to wipe out a race; I don't think they qualify.

Remind you of someone? 

Sovereign is one of them.

[Heeden]

o Ventus wrote...

Destroying the Reapers is akin to letting the troubled species inside them finally rest in peace. Even if anything of them exists (Which is inherently horse****, but another matter altogether), I doubt omnicide is high on their priority list. Hell, Paragon Shepard says as much to the dying Reaper on Rannoch.

Wouldn't it be more akin to choosing between sparing or executing Shiala after freeing her from the Thorian?

[o Ventus]

Heeden wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Destroying the Reapers is akin to letting the troubled species inside them finally rest in peace. Even if anything of them exists (Which is inherently horse****, but another matter altogether), I doubt omnicide is high on their priority list. Hell, Paragon Shepard says as much to the dying Reaper on Rannoch.

Wouldn't it be more akin to choosing between sparing or executing Shiala after freeing her from the Thorian?

Shiala was used as a parley token by Saren to the thorian for the Cipher. Aside from that, I don't remember anything about the deal.

But again, there's nothing to imply the Reapers aren't autonomous, at least to a point.

Based on my own knowledge (Since I no longer own ME1), I'm going to say no.

[memorysquid]

o Ventus wrote...

memorysquid wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Yeah, I have to say that saving the Reapers is probably the wackiest justification for Synthesis yet. A complete non-starter.

Why?  If the Catalyst controlled them, and we are offered multiple reasons in the cutscenes that verify he does after the fact, then they weren't responsible for their actions.  Plus, the Reapers, assuming Bioware isn't going to pull something out of complete left field to patch this mess over, are the stored collective intelligence of millions of years worth of galactic civilizations.  Destroying the Reapers is committing galactic genocide countless times over.

The reapers still have some degree of autonomy. There's nothing to imply the Reapers are completely brainwashed or indoctrinated.

Destroying the Reapers is akin to letting the troubled species inside them finally rest in peace. Even if anything of them exists (Which is inherently horse****, but another matter altogether), I doubt omnicide is high on their priority list. Hell, Paragon Shepard says as much to the dying Reaper on Rannoch.

Is it sad that I like debating the ethics of the game more than the game itself?  There is plenty to outright demonstrate the Reapers are being completely controlled, although you get it from an omniscient point of view after Shepard chooses.  Synthesis Reapers break off the attack immediately after everyone goes green.  Control Reapers do whatever the hell Shep wants. 

So we see when they are free, they don't attack mixed synth/organics although they had no problem nuking Shepard, various cyborgs, and all other synthetics and organics in the galaxy combined beforehand. 

We see that they can be completely controlled by Shepard, which leaves us no reason to doubt that the Catalyst was controlling them before.  Saren thought he wasn't indoctrinated most of the time until Shepard forced him to confront the reality; the Reapers could have felt similarly or moreover could have been such tools that their every response to Shepard was dictated by the Catalyst.  And who says the species in a Reaper are so troubled they'd prefer to die?  Maybe it's VR beach volley ball on Christmas day every day inside most Reapers?  Maybe it's joy to the punks, joy to the skins, joy to the world and everybody wins?  In game, you have no clue, so your speculations are headcanon.