1256 réponses à ce sujet

[CrutchCricket]

jtav wrote...
You'll excuse me if I refuse to interpret the end as a hellish nightmare and treat all choices as good in their own way.

Except you're not treating all choices as good in their own way if you flat out refuse one of them. If you believe the stupid holokid about synthesis you likely believe him about synthetics rising up and all that crap. So why not kill the geth and prevent their eventual rebellion?

[akenn312]

MisterJB wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
 the difference is is that once the Relays are rebuilt, life will resume as it should in Destroy.

Wonderful.

Taboo-XX wrote...

Moral relativism does not take into account what a good and bad life is. That's the issue. You only care about success, nothing else matters.

You think it's good. Millions of others might not.

Physical benefits can be, objectively, described as positive. There has to be a middle ground between respecting the wishes of other people and doing what is good not only for them but also for the whole.

Oh my. It's not anyones place to do something they think that is good for everyone else without those people's consent or knowledge. That would be totally unethical, no extremely unethical. Romanticizing this as a type of simple upgrade is...shocking.

Doctors don't just go around giving people new body parts just because it would improve them. That's like one doctor thinking that all women need to have breast implants, so he creates a machine that forces implant surgery on every woman on the planet. What would you consider that person? Well some would think of him as a great guy, but that's a joke. Seriously he would be widely considered a monster, unethical. and selfish.

What about the women that are okay and fine with their bodies the way they are?  What about women that hate the thought of having implants? Just because a few women choose implants already does not mean now the whole planet should. Even if this doc does this because the galaxy is in peril. Even if the implants improve their lives in general. He cannot do this to every woman in the galaxy. Sci-Fi story or no.

You can't force something that changes a being into something else just because you think it will improve them or would look cool. They must have a say in this. No matter what. I don't care if they get cool terminator robot parts people should always be given a choice to live their lives the way they want to. To take that choice away to just end a threat is scary

The implications of such thinking are..I don't know. To try to romanticize such a concept is even more shocking.

Modifié par akenn312, 11 juin 2012 - 06:48 .

[jtav]

And that's great for you, Taboo. But other people have game universes that are different from yours. In mine, they are alive.

I do not--will not--view Synthesis or Control as terrible.

[Joe Del Toro]

The only serious point I'd make is even if you don't view it as killing people or whatever, you can't headcanon out the fact that you just violated everyone. Everyone. Against their will, consent, knowledge. Believe it's a haven all you like. That's still f*cking disturbing.

[Taboo]

Yes. I'm not the only one thinking people are romanticizing this ****.

I do not like killing Legion. It's one of the most horrific things I've ever seen in a video game, but I have to make a choice.

[MisterJB]

General User wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Ethics should not take precedence over the practical results.

And you can never please everyone.

One of the "practical results" of Synthesis is that thousands of uncontrolled Reapers are let loose in to the galaxy to do as they will.  How in the world is that remotely acceptable?

If we judge the Reapers as we do other sentients, it is hard to believe that every single one of them would be ok with cyclic "genocide". Therefore, it is not just possible but probrable that their "personalities" will differ after the Catalyst stop exerting its will over them.
The risk presented by this new species is real but assuming we will be at war with them is no different than assuming the turians are just waiting for the right opportunity to continue the First Contact War. It's possible but it's not a certainty.
Some Reapers might choose war and power, others might rebuild the Mass Relays as a way to atone for what they did.

And this is risk is also counterbalanced by the benefits synthetic upgrades for all races will bring.

Joe Del Toro wrote...
Aye, mate. Not known for his ethics, but rather his results, yes?

Also known for pursuing his own brand of justice no matter what. This is akin to some people who insist the Reapers must be destroyed on principle alone.

[jtav]

@Crutch

Destroy is good if you're the Romantic sort or if you believe a certain end to the Reaper threat is most important. And, as it happens, I don't believe the Catalyst re: synthetics wiping out organics. But I can cause a singularity with all life as a beneficiary.

[antares_sublight]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

The only serious point I'd make is even if you don't view it as killing people or whatever, you can't headcanon out the fact that you just violated everyone. Everyone. Against their will, consent, knowledge. Believe it's a haven all you like. That's still f*cking disturbing.

Not to mention that, like I said, COUNTLESS SPECIES across the galaxy will be eliminated by this because it fundamentally alters the balance and niche of all life forms. No genocide, but galaxy-wide species extinction?

[Joe Del Toro]

MisterJB wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...
Aye, mate. Not known for his ethics, but rather his results, yes?

Also known for pursuing his own brand of justice no matter what. This is akin to some people who insist the Reapers must be destroyed on principle alone.

Please don't think I was calling you the Punisher. I just loved the way you said what you did.

[Taboo]

I do not choose Destroy because I want the Reapers destroyed. They need to be stopped in the least damaging way possible.

They are stopped in Destroy and no further interference is commited.

[jtav]

An "extinction" in which everyone retains their personal identities and no one dies? Some extinction.

[antares_sublight]

jtav wrote...

@Crutch

Destroy is good if you're the Romantic sort or if you believe a certain end to the Reaper threat is most important. And, as it happens, I don't believe the Catalyst re: synthetics wiping out organics. But I can cause a singularity with all life as a beneficiary.

How does it benefit organic life that is yet to evolve? Over time, new organic life WILL appear, but it will forever be locked out of the galaxy because it faces dangers from at least one, if not two, singularity life forms.
How about life forms that are in their early stages when synthesis occurs? Depending on the crazy pro-Synthite theory, they're either frozen as they are forever (final stage of evolution), or they will be "forcefully evolved" by these parasite nanites that are the drivers of Synthesis.

[Rhazeal]

"Y'all got on this boat for different reasons, but y'all come to the same place. So now I'm asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all. Sure as I know anything, I know this - they will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, ten? They'll swing back to the belief that they can make people... better. And I do not hold to that. So no more runnin'. I aim to misbehave." -Malcom Reynolds

Forcefully changing a single unwilling or unaware entity to conform to your subjective definition of perfection is reprehensible. I'm not certain the vocabulary exists to accurately descrbe such an action committed against an enitre galaxy.

[CrutchCricket]

jtav wrote...

@Crutch

Destroy is good if you're the Romantic sort or if you believe a certain end to the Reaper threat is most important. And, as it happens, I don't believe the Catalyst re: synthetics wiping out organics. But I can cause a singularity with all life as a beneficiary.

If you don't believe him, especially about the claim on which his entire pitch is based, why choose the option he endorses?

[antares_sublight]

jtav wrote...

An "extinction" in which everyone retains their personal identities and no one dies? Some extinction.

Did you not hear the part about how it affects ALL LIFE IN THE GALAXY??????????????????????????????????????

Think of the pollenation cycle, it's a delicate,  balanced and fundamental part of life. If plants and bees are hybrids now, and the reproduction cycle has totally changed, then many life forms are completely inadapted to the new "framework" and will die off. Unless you're one of the pro-synthites that believes that nanites will instantly and radically change the very fabric of the organism, in which case all you have are parasites setting up their own galactic system of life and manipulating all life forms to how they think it should be. Very paragon...

Yes, you've avoided genocide, but you've caused the extinction of countless species across every life-holding world in the galaxy. Congrats?

Modifié par antares_sublight, 11 juin 2012 - 06:52 .

[MisterJB]

akenn312 wrote...
Oh my. It's not anyones place to do something they think that is good for everyone else without those people's consent or knowledge. That would be totally unethical, no extremely unethical. Romanticizing this as a type of simple upgrade is...shocking.

The example of breast implant is just silly. Breast implants are completely cosmetic and beauty is subjective.
However, a father will vaccine his child despite the child's complaints that the needle is scary, won't he? It is for the child's own good.

Modifié par MisterJB, 11 juin 2012 - 06:53 .

[jla0644]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Because Romanticism is wrong. All the choices are unethical. Face the reality of the situation.

The purpose of art is to tell a truth, not disguise it. When used for the latter it is known as propaganda. American Cinema is particularly good and it, especially Fox News.

Some people are going to be very upset with this choice and if they aren't they're going to be forced to be happy. You cannot have it both ways. Which is it? Accept the reality of the choice.

The reality? The reality is it's a make believe world, filled with made up people. It's a fantasy. It's role playing. It's not a statement of your political beliefs. Get off your soap box. Yes, Synthesis, the way you choose to see it, is a terrible thing. Fortunately for the rest of us, we don't have to see it the way you do. We can see Synthesis as it was intended, as a stupid way to solve a stupid problem -- and more importantly, without the fascism. I'm sorry you're incapable of doing that.

For some reason you've chosen to be personally offended that they even put Synthesis in the game, that the fact that they even thought of it is somehow dangerous, that it is going to lead us to some authoritarian future, that anyone who chose the Synthesis ending is a Hitler waiting to happen. And I think you've gone right out of your mind. You sound perfectly reasonable when you aren't discussing Synthesis, but for some reason Synthesis makes you lose all rationality.

And I don't have to agree with your idea of the "purpose of art". Especially in this case, when it's a videogame.

[MisterJB]

CrutchCricket wrote...

jtav wrote...

@Crutch

Destroy is good if you're the Romantic sort or if you believe a certain end to the Reaper threat is most important. And, as it happens, I don't believe the Catalyst re: synthetics wiping out organics. But I can cause a singularity with all life as a beneficiary.

If you don't believe him, especially about the claim on which his entire pitch is based, why choose the option he endorses?

You don't need to believe apocalyptic claims to understand that synthetic upgrades are a good thing.

[Reorte]

jtav wrote...

And that's great for you, Taboo. But other people have game universes that are different from yours. In mine, they are alive.

I do not--will not--view Synthesis or Control as terrible.

Then you're no better than every nutter throughout history who's tried to impose his will on everyone else. Possibly not because of Control - I simply find no reason whatsoever to trust it (and the only valid way of using it would be to achieve Destroy in a less destructive manner), but Synthesis is simply undefensible by anyone who claims to have an ethical bone in their body.

Remember that you'd be imposing it on plenty of people here who've said that they don't want it. Who the hell are you to force that on us? The only way I could ever consider it the lesser evil would be if it was the only alternative to certain destruction by the Reapers. Fundamentally changing every species in the entire galaxy just to save one does not add up. Killing the geth isn't as bad as the most invasive imaginable to everyone (and the same would be true if it was humans, asari, krogan, quarians, anyone you care to think of).

Plus the fact that morality aside the very idea is so stupid, and that it doesn't do anything to change the one thing it's claimed that it will...

Modifié par Reorte, 11 juin 2012 - 06:57 .

[jtav]

CrutchCricket wrote...

jtav wrote...

@Crutch

Destroy is good if you're the Romantic sort or if you believe a certain end to the Reaper threat is most important. And, as it happens, I don't believe the Catalyst re: synthetics wiping out organics. But I can cause a singularity with all life as a beneficiary.

If you don't believe him, especially about the claim on which his entire pitch is based, why choose the option he endorses?

Because I know an exposition dump when I see one and either I believe him about the consequences or I just pick a choice at random. So I chose the one that would lead to what I wanted. Pure organic life is flawed, infirm. Here's a hope of fixing it. It might not work, but I have to try.

[antares_sublight]

Also, if the technology for Destroy can be replicated over time, Synthesis has introduced a convenient remotely-operated kill-switch for all life. Hooray!

Catalyst: You can kill all synthetic and synthetic-hybrid life anywhere with this device.
Catalyst: Oh, you can also make everything a synthetic-hybrid life form with this too.

[antares_sublight]

jtav wrote...
Pure organic life is flawed, infirm. Here's a hope of fixing it. It might not work, but I have to try.

Not even the Catalyst is asserting that. He's supposedly "trying" to save organic life. Synthesis makes organic life irrelevant, and any new organic life that evolves will always be facing the same dangers that pre-Synthesis organic life faced, just from the hybrids now instead of pure-synthetics.

Modifié par antares_sublight, 11 juin 2012 - 07:00 .

[CrutchCricket]

MisterJB wrote...
You don't need to believe apocalyptic claims to understand that synthetic upgrades are a good thing.

I don't know. That guy up a few posts who was talking about pollenation cycles and stuff raises enough doubt I think.

And of course Shepard who's been fighting non-stop for how long and just got owned by a Reaper laser and had to crawl over dead bodies, yeah he's got the perfect mindset to contemplate consequences affecting life itself galaxy wide...

[General User]

MisterJB wrote...

General User wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Ethics should not take precedence over the practical results.

And you can never please everyone.

One of the "practical results" of Synthesis is that thousands of uncontrolled Reapers are let loose in to the galaxy to do as they will.  How in the world is that remotely acceptable?

If we judge the Reapers as we do other sentients, it is hard to believe that every single one of them would be ok with cyclic "genocide". Therefore, it is not just possible but probrable that their "personalities" will differ after the Catalyst stop exerting its will over them.

Some Reapers might choose war and power, others might rebuild the Mass
Relays as a way to atone for what they did.

For the entire series the Reapers have been the weapons of the enemy.  The minds supposedly inside a Reaper have endured trauma and abuse that we, quite literally, can't imagine.  To assume that "awakend" (ie post-Synthesis) Reapers would be friendly, or even sane, is ridiculous.  

MisterJB wrote...
The risk presented by this new species is real but assuming we will be at war with them is no different than assuming the turians are just waiting for the right opportunity to continue the First Contact War. It's possible but it's not a certainty.

I'm not following.  The First Contact War ended in a negotiated settlement.  Both sides sat down across a table and hashed out an agreement they both could live with.  Nothing of the sort occured in Synthesis.  How could it?  Until the Synthesis actually takes place the Reapers are all under the Catalysts control.

MisterJB wrote...
And this is risk is also counterbalanced by the benefits synthetic upgrades for all races will bring.

Rubbish.  I've yet to see a single supposed "benefit" of Synthesis that was much more than a mere shortcut to doing something we were doing already.

Modifié par General User, 11 juin 2012 - 07:04 .

[jla0644]

Rhazeal wrote...

Forcefully changing a single unwilling or unaware entity to conform to your subjective definition of perfection is reprehensible. I'm not certain the vocabulary exists to accurately descrbe such an action committed against an enitre galaxy.

Where did this idea of "pefection" come into it? Or the idea that once Synthesis occurs, people will no longer be who they were before, that their entire personality and way of thinking will completely change?

The games gives very little to work on, which is the main reason I don't choose Synthsis. There certainly isn't anything there to suggest the radical changes people seem to think occurs. It's all speculation. Understand that the people who prefer Synthesis are not looking at it in the horrifying way you are.

The first time I played through it, I took Synthesis to simply be a way to solve the problem the Reapers were created to solve. We don't know anything beyond that. Will people even notice that they are part synthetic? Will the changes be like what Shepard has? Will it change the way they think or act? Will it make everyone the same? Will it change everything about society and government and culture? We don't know. You can think that all that happens, but it's your own opinion. It's possible to think that it does none of that, and no, there is no harm or danger in that.