185 réponses à ce sujet

[ninjaman001]

Bill Casey wrote...

On the plus side, maybe Bioware is completely wrong about synthetic life, that we can coexist just fine, and this game will just one day be seen as "super racist"...

This is what still makes me angry about the logic behind this, synthetics and organics not being able to coexist. That's life, even organics can't coexist without at some point fighting each other, what makes synthetics any different if they are also life forms? Why does it have to be just organics or just synthetics, any form of life is going to have conflict, that fact is shown through the conflict between the Geth and the heretics. They just royally ****ed up in their writing. Conflict is a fact of life.

[Iakus]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

"The good of the many outweighs the good of the few, or the good of the one."

Destroy is ethical as it stands.

"I don't believe in no win scenerios" 

[Iakus]

ninjaman001 wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

On the plus side, maybe Bioware is completely wrong about synthetic life, that we can coexist just fine, and this game will just one day be seen as "super racist"...

This is what still makes me angry about the logic behind this, synthetics and organics not being able to coexist. That's life, even organics can't coexist without at some point fighting each other, what makes synthetics any different if they are also life forms? Why does it have to be just organics or just synthetics, any form of life is going to have conflict, that fact is shown through the conflict between the Geth and the heretics. They just royally ****ed up in their writing. Conflict is a fact of life.

And the Destroy ending, which flat out rejects the Catalyst's assertions, is the one that wipes out synthetic life.

This ending was clearly not well thought out

[devSin]

Bill Casey wrote...

On the plus side, maybe Bioware is completely wrong about synthetic life, that we can coexist just fine, and this game will just one day be seen as "super racist"...

I'm already there.

[kobayashi-maru]

Hey Im following Catylist logic save life by killing it
I like your idea have same opinion about Joker and Normandy, but was trying to work within confines of what I could head cannon from game story.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

iakus wrote...

Mr. Big Pimpin wrote...

I think that may cost you quarian War Assets from not destroying the Heretics.

A small amount, yeah.

But I don't want to get to know those I will inevitably betray.  Better to simply never learn about legion, learn that the geth don't all hate organics, never get to know EDI.

Kinda like Samara's philosophy of not getting to know any more about her quarry than she needs to.

THanks a lot, Bioware 

It will cost you 300 Quarian War Assets. If you destroy the heretic base, refuse to allow him to send any intel to the Geth, and send him through the vent, Shepard isn't really betraying him because Shepard doesn't know he'll be distracted. Put yourself in Shepards shoes and go by the information Shepard has. You wouldn't know. Then you get into a numbers game on Rannoch with Geth VI or NOT Legion. Ignore the Geth Fighter base on Rannoch (this is where you go into the Geth Collective - don't). Rescue Koris then go straight for the Reaper.

That guarantees no peace option. You don't ever see the Geth side of the Morning War. You only know the Quarian side of it. It makes siding with the Quarians much easier.

And remember, you are not betraying Legion. That is NOT Legion. That is just a copy of its program from before the two of you met.

[xeNNN]

Taboo-XX wrote...

One race does not take precedence over another. A stigma is attached because they are Synthetic. They have every right to live, which makes Destroy so awful.

If all Pandas had to die to save all the other furry animals, I would kill all Pandas.

NEVER SAY NO TO PANDA!

[Taboo]

I changed my choice to mosquitoes.

Seriously, those things are AWFUL.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

iakus wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

"The good of the many outweighs the good of the few, or the good of the one."

Destroy is ethical as it stands.

"I don't believe in no win scenerios" 

And this is exactly why I came up with this. I don't believe in no-win scenarios either. There always are loopholes. If you can play morally gray enough you can slip through them.

[memorysquid]

Aaleel wrote...

I didn't have an ethical problem at all.

I made a sacrifice to definitively ensure to continuity of many other species.

If I shoot someone else, for a third party's benefit, have I really made a sacrifice?  Maybe in some old testament use of  'sacrifice' as in burnt offering on the altar, but not a personal one.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

memorysquid wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

I didn't have an ethical problem at all.

I made a sacrifice to definitively ensure to continuity of many other species.

If I shoot someone else, for a third party's benefit, have I really made a sacrifice?  Maybe in some old testament use of  'sacrifice' as in burnt offering on the altar, but not a personal one.

It's called a "Sacrificial Lamb"

[Taboo]

memorysquid wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

I didn't have an ethical problem at all.

I made a sacrifice to definitively ensure to continuity of many other species.

If I shoot someone else, for a third party's benefit, have I really made a sacrifice?  Maybe in some old testament use of  'sacrifice' as in burnt offering on the altar, but not a personal one.

If said person was attacking them with the intent to do grivous harm or injury then yes. You can sacrifice mental innocence, I know I would. The sacrifice is not physical as much as it is mental

Killing =/= Murder.

Also, let's not bring the Bible in this...

[StarcloudSWG]

It's not a "no win" scenario. At the end of Destroy, the Reapers are dead and nearly everyone else isn't.

[Iakus]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

It's not a "no win" scenario. At the end of Destroy, the Reapers are dead and nearly everyone else isn't.

The geth and EDI sure lost...

[Taboo]

Any interference past the stopping of the Reapers is unethical, as it is with any war.

The price will be paid, or all will die. It is unethical, but it is also war.

What an awful thing to have to do.

[StarcloudSWG]

iakus wrote...

The geth and EDI sure lost...

"You can destroy all synthetics if you want, even the Geth. Even you are partly synthetic."

And yet a> EDI steps off the ship and b> Shepard can survive.

Until and unless the Extended cut *shows* the Geth exploding and EDI spazzing out with her blue boxes on fire, the possibility remains that the Starbrat is lying specifically to keep you from destroying his playtoys, aka the Reapers.

[memorysquid]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

iakus wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

"The good of the many outweighs the good of the few, or the good of the one."

Destroy is ethical as it stands.

"I don't believe in no win scenerios" 

And this is exactly why I came up with this. I don't believe in no-win scenarios either. There always are loopholes. If you can play morally gray enough you can slip through them.

Well they exist, so better to figure out how best to deal with them than to try and ignore their presence.

[Iakus]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

iakus wrote...

The geth and EDI sure lost...

"You can destroy all synthetics if you want, even the Geth. Even you are partly synthetic."

And yet a> EDI steps off the ship and b> Shepard can survive.

Until and unless the Extended cut *shows* the Geth exploding and EDI spazzing out with her blue boxes on fire, the possibility remains that the Starbrat is lying specifically to keep you from destroying his playtoys, aka the Reapers.

a) I am yet to see any evidence EDI can survive Destruction

Shepard is only partly synthetic, and the Catalyst does not assure Shep's destruction like he does the geth

c) Jessica Merizan tweeted that geth/EDI are confirmed dead in Destroy in EC, so you may very well see EDI's quantum bluebox burst into flame or something

Hope dies last, but it's fading fast.

[Liber320]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Correction. I would kill all mosquitoes.

**** ETHICS in that regard.

Mosquitoes are terrible.

A-f**kin-greed!

Mosquitoes suck

[mass perfection]

You still wipe out galactic civilization.

[memorysquid]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Any interference past the stopping of the Reapers is unethical, as it is with any war.

The price will be paid, or all will die. It is unethical, but it is also war.

What an awful thing to have to do.

There are not one but two other alternatives.  Two!  Paragon Shep ALWAYS favors the future risk to avoid the short term ethical lapse; hence control.  And then there's whatever synthesis gets 'clarified' into.  I am curious if it involves the immortality that Javik asserts of all synthetics. 

Perhaps you are right that the Catalyst simply is following flawed logic and presuming a synthetic wipeout must or is highly likely to happen just because there is some chance - I could even see it working a base function to protect organics into this through flawed logic, rather than the authors fiating that he is literally correct and the conflict actually is inevitable and actually will wipe out all organics. 

Apply that objection to your own reasoning for destroy, then.  You are willing to wipe out the Geth and EDI and whatever other synthetic life may exist, as well as the stored consciousnesses in the Reapers to avoid a chance that they could escape control or whatever you presume synthesis must mean, despite it being so vague it could mean anything.  IOW, you follow the same flawed logic as the Catalyst. This is presuming the authors actually intended its logic to be flawed rather than being literally true.

[SnakeStrike8]

Okay; who said EDI dies on the Destroy ending? All we know is that the space magic destroys 'synthetics'. I choose to believe that this means it destroys synthetic bodies, which means that EDI is fine; Eva Core's body is dust, but EDI's programs still exist primarily in the Normandy. It's not going to be especially hurt, is it?
Same goes for the geth; the destruction of the geth bodies isn't going to off the entire race. They still have millions of programs installed in hardware that's not their bodies. They'll be fine, and so will their race.
Destroy really is the best, 'good' option, mates. Accept no substitutes!

[memorysquid]

iakus wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

iakus wrote...

The geth and EDI sure lost...

"You can destroy all synthetics if you want, even the Geth. Even you are partly synthetic."

And yet a> EDI steps off the ship and b> Shepard can survive.

Until and unless the Extended cut *shows* the Geth exploding and EDI spazzing out with her blue boxes on fire, the possibility remains that the Starbrat is lying specifically to keep you from destroying his playtoys, aka the Reapers.

a) I am yet to see any evidence EDI can survive Destruction

Shepard is only partly synthetic, and the Catalyst does not assure Shep's destruction like he does the geth

c) Jessica Merizan tweeted that geth/EDI are confirmed dead in Destroy in EC, so you may very well see EDI's quantum bluebox burst into flame or something

Hope dies last, but it's fading fast.

She doesn't; there's no proof currently, because she never exits the Normandy in destroy.  Now maybe they change that with the EC but she can exit in control and is prioritized to exit in synthesis, otherwise she doesn't come out, as it stands.

[memorysquid]

SnakeStrike8 wrote...

Okay; who said EDI dies on the Destroy ending? All we know is that the space magic destroys 'synthetics'. I choose to believe that this means it destroys synthetic bodies, which means that EDI is fine; Eva Core's body is dust, but EDI's programs still exist primarily in the Normandy. It's not going to be especially hurt, is it?
Same goes for the geth; the destruction of the geth bodies isn't going to off the entire race. They still have millions of programs installed in hardware that's not their bodies. They'll be fine, and so will their race.
Destroy really is the best, 'good' option, mates. Accept no substitutes!

The Catalyst mentions the Geth by name.  If they cave and make destroy into sunshine and lollipops I am going to throw a shoe at my computer.  Well ... and then choose red, but that is beside the point.

[Taboo]

A Paragon does not enslave beings either. You dismiss your logic in the first paragraph in the third. Are you willing to enslave that consciousness, one that is said to be long dead? It is absurd to believe that Shepard will simply take
Control to fly the Reapers into the sun.

Synthesis is above and beyond an overstepping of bounds. You have zero right to enact that change on ALL beings.

I am left with one option, one I detest, but the alternative is extinction for ALL life, not just the Geth and EDI. They do not take precedence over everyone else. It doesn't matter if they are Synthetic or not, all life is equal, as Bioware has so bludgeoned me over the head with. To ensure the safety of all life, some must be taken. That's a monstrous thing to say but I have no choice.

He presents multiple fallacies, whether Bioware intended this doesn't matter because that's what it is. This is an interpretation, no different from yours. I see an appeal to authority and an appeal to probability, as do many others on this forum.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 26 juin 2012 - 02:00 .