Aller au contenu

Photo

Genocide of the GETH and EDI


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
287 réponses à ce sujet

#251
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 601 messages

Hyrist wrote...

I can see how some people can find that to be wrong, especially as it effects every living thing out there.

But there are a lot of positives to consider in that choice as well.

I simply can't accept that doing something that has that big an impact on everyone could possibly be acceptable without consent from everyone, and the implications about the long-term effects it could have on life haven't been addressed. If it somehow allowed everyone to choose it or not it would be much more appealing.

A lot of my Synthesis dislike also stems from its utter absurdity which completely destroys my suspension of disbelief.

#252
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 601 messages

Vormaerin wrote...
Not to mention, there's no reason to believe that the Quarians can't build more Geth next week.

Hackett sounded pretty definite with his everything can be rebuilt although when considering which choice to make I usually take the view that it's only right to judge it based on the information available at the time of the decision.

#253
De1ta G

De1ta G
  • Members
  • 724 messages
I really don't see how there is so much debate about this. I made Saren kill himself after persuading him that we was wrong about being able to join with the Reapers(Synthesis). And then I made TIM kill himself after persuading him that he was wrong about controlling the Reapers(Control). And then I just go and do one of those options because, hey. They told me I could! No way. The goal was to kill the reapers at ANY cost even if you are paragon. And that goal is completed through Destroy.

#254
AxStapleton

AxStapleton
  • Members
  • 645 messages

Reorte wrote...

Hyrist wrote...

I can see how some people can find that to be wrong, especially as it effects every living thing out there.

But there are a lot of positives to consider in that choice as well.

I simply can't accept that doing something that has that big an impact on everyone could possibly be acceptable without consent from everyone, and the implications about the long-term effects it could have on life haven't been addressed. If it somehow allowed everyone to choose it or not it would be much more appealing.

A lot of my Synthesis dislike also stems from its utter absurdity which completely destroys my suspension of disbelief.


I agree that as a player it just seemed completely and utterly absurd that the Crucible could be used as a magic shortcut. I liked the themes that the EC endings presented but they didn't make the Synthesis ending look any less gimmicky.

#255
Hyrist

Hyrist
  • Members
  • 728 messages

Reorte wrote...

Hyrist wrote...

I can see how some people can find that to be wrong, especially as it effects every living thing out there.

But there are a lot of positives to consider in that choice as well.

I simply can't accept that doing something that has that big an impact on everyone could possibly be acceptable without consent from everyone, and the implications about the long-term effects it could have on life haven't been addressed. If it somehow allowed everyone to choose it or not it would be much more appealing.

A lot of my Synthesis dislike also stems from its utter absurdity which completely destroys my suspension of disbelief.


I understand. But consent is almost implied in the fact that you were given all of the Galaxy's forces and the trust that the Crucible would work, regardless of the lack of knowledge of how it would work. 

And personally, I don't care so much about suspension of disbeleif in a work of fiction. People mistakenly consitered Mass Effect a Hard Science Fiction, when in truth it's alway been a Space Opera.

#256
Nerevar-as

Nerevar-as
  • Members
  • 5 375 messages

Hyrist wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Hyrist wrote...

I can see how some people can find that to be wrong, especially as it effects every living thing out there.

But there are a lot of positives to consider in that choice as well.

I simply can't accept that doing something that has that big an impact on everyone could possibly be acceptable without consent from everyone, and the implications about the long-term effects it could have on life haven't been addressed. If it somehow allowed everyone to choose it or not it would be much more appealing.

A lot of my Synthesis dislike also stems from its utter absurdity which completely destroys my suspension of disbelief.


I understand. But consent is almost implied in the fact that you were given all of the Galaxy's forces and the trust that the Crucible would work, regardless of the lack of knowledge of how it would work. 

And personally, I don't care so much about suspension of disbeleif in a work of fiction. People mistakenly consitered Mass Effect a Hard Science Fiction, when in truth it's alway been a Space Opera.


Going from biotic powers to an energy wave altering every organic and synthetic living being at a molecular level, including their genes so their children will be the same, and it also has to change thinking patterns because there´s no way to believe everybody would happily accept that is a bit too much for me. Especially considering the same machine couldn´t discriminate when shutting down synthetics...

Synthesis would be jarring in Star Trek, and Mass Effect tried to be much more down to earth than ST IMHO.

#257
Vormaerin

Vormaerin
  • Members
  • 1 582 messages

Reorte wrote...

Hackett sounded pretty definite with his everything can be rebuilt although when considering which choice to make I usually take the view that it's only right to judge it based on the information available at the time of the decision.


Yeah, but that's what I'd be thinking if told the Geth would be destroyed:  "oh yeah, and how do you plan to keep us from restoring them right away?"    They aren't a biological species that can be wiped out and never be restored to viability.

#258
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 601 messages

Hyrist wrote...

Reorte wrote...
't accept that doing something that has that big an impact on everyone could possibly be acceptable without consent from everyone, and the implications about the long-term effects it could have on life haven't been addressed. If it somehow allowed everyone to choose it or not it would be much more appealing.

A lot of my Synthesis dislike also stems from its utter absurdity which completely destroys my suspension of disbelief.


I understand. But consent is almost implied in the fact that you were given all of the Galaxy's forces and the trust that the Crucible would work, regardless of the lack of knowledge of how it would work. 

And personally, I don't care so much about suspension of disbeleif in a work of fiction. People mistakenly consitered Mass Effect a Hard Science Fiction, when in truth it's alway been a Space Opera.

We're talking about more than just the forces that take part in the war. There's a vastly bigger part of the galaxy that has no knowledge of it. That also sounds a bit like pretending that leaders in war have the full support of the populace and are therefore complicit in what their forces do. I think that it could be regarded as acceptable - by them - if it's the only alternative to death by Reaper but the long-term implications make me wonder if refusal is a better choice from a completely dispassionate point of view. Life that's unable to change doesn't sound like a good thing.

Suspension of disbelief goes further in soft science fiction than hard (and I agree that it is a space opera) but it can only go so far before breaking. Where that line lies obviously varies from person to person but I like them to establish their exceptions early and then stick within plausible extrapolations of those. Space opera gets more room for initial space magic than hard sci-fi does (which usually tries to avoid any scientific exceptions and sticks at most to engineering ones).

Edit: Considering the general tone of this thread I think some of this post sounds a little confrontational. I've not thought of a good way of editing it down so hope this excuse will do instead :)

Modifié par Reorte, 29 juin 2012 - 08:43 .


#259
AxStapleton

AxStapleton
  • Members
  • 645 messages

Hyrist wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Hyrist wrote...

I can see how some people can find that to be wrong, especially as it effects every living thing out there.

But there are a lot of positives to consider in that choice as well.

I simply can't accept that doing something that has that big an impact on everyone could possibly be acceptable without consent from everyone, and the implications about the long-term effects it could have on life haven't been addressed. If it somehow allowed everyone to choose it or not it would be much more appealing.

A lot of my Synthesis dislike also stems from its utter absurdity which completely destroys my suspension of disbelief.


I understand. But consent is almost implied in the fact that you were given all of the Galaxy's forces and the trust that the Crucible would work, regardless of the lack of knowledge of how it would work. 

And personally, I don't care so much about suspension of disbeleif in a work of fiction. People mistakenly consitered Mass Effect a Hard Science Fiction, when in truth it's alway been a Space Opera.


The fact that it is a space opera doesn't excuse that up until the ending, there was nothing in the narrative to suggest that a great beam of green energy could fundementally change every single living thing in existence. As a theory in the ME universe, eventual Synthesis could take place because organics constantly use synthetic parts to augment or repair themselves based on what information we are provided with.  Suspending disbelief isn't a case of letting it go because it could be realistic but letting certain things go because it is consistent with everything else presented in  the plot.

#260
CoolHanc101

CoolHanc101
  • Members
  • 117 messages

Reikilea wrote...

Edi had too big breasts and high heels for me to take edi´s whole idea of "being" seriously. So not gonna cry over it. In fact I welcomed it.

But the geth. Somethimes you need to sacrifice something in order to do what is right, or best. If you believe destroying the is the only option. Its just sacrifice. People do it a lot in the war. Same thing happened to my country in the second world war. We got over it.

And its quite tricky when you equip the geth with the reaper code and then decide to destroy everything that is reaper... Reaper code, get it?!

Same happened to batarians colony, but it had to be done in order to continue. Why no one weeps for batarians? They had such a nice eyes...


And four nice eyes!

#261
Troubleshooter11

Troubleshooter11
  • Members
  • 400 messages

filetemo wrote...

The Geth engineers working on the Crucible should have seen, by its design, that it may wipe out synthetic life.
Did they warn anybody? Not that I know.


Actually i believe starchild says that the Crucible is merely a power generator hooked up to the Catalyst that is capable of producing different kinds of energy waves. Think of it as a electric guitar hooked up to an amplifier.

#262
Ranger Jack Walker

Ranger Jack Walker
  • Members
  • 1 064 messages

Troubleshooter11 wrote...
 Think of it as a electric guitar hooked up to an amplifier.


That's not a good analogy. Think of it as a battery.

And Saren didn't want Synthesis. He was willingly to force everyone into a life of servitude. WAAY different from Synthesis. I persuaded him into killing himself not because of what he wanted but because the Reapers at that point only cared about wiping everyone out.

I didn't kill the Illusive Man because he wanted to control the Reapers but because he was pointing a gun at me and was already indoctrinated and couldn't have controlled the Reapers. In fact, I supported him most of the time. I saved the Collector Base. I believed in using it's potential to find weaknesses in the Reapers.

I chose Control because it ends the Reaper threat without needing to destroy an allied Race.

I also chose Synthesis because it allows for ascension. To go beyond our limits and seek out new challenges. I don't see it as homogenization at all. I see it as a deep understanding and linking of every species in the galaxy so that a solution more agreeable to all could be more easily achieved due to the understanding of both other organics and Synthetics that comes with Synthesis.

#263
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 601 messages

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

I also chose Synthesis because it allows for ascension. To go beyond our limits and seek out new challenges. I don't see it as homogenization at all. I see it as a deep understanding and linking of every species in the galaxy so that a solution more agreeable to all could be more easily achieved due to the understanding of both other organics and Synthetics that comes with Synthesis.

If Synthesis is technically possible (hah!) then it's possible to do that anyway, in our own time and on our own terms, voluntarily.

#264
WYLDMAXX

WYLDMAXX
  • Members
  • 377 messages
Destroy was Javik approved. How could I tell the last of the Protheans that we should let the Reapers stay?

#265
Obvakhi

Obvakhi
  • Members
  • 721 messages

WYLDMAXX wrote...

Destroy was Javik approved. How could I tell the last of the Protheans that we should let the Reapers stay?


His people are the ones that forced other races to join their empire or die.
Not a very good example on your part...

Modifié par Obvakhi, 29 juin 2012 - 09:34 .


#266
Guest_Sion1138_*

Guest_Sion1138_*
  • Guests
Genocide of EDI.

Heh.

#267
babachewie

babachewie
  • Members
  • 715 messages
I'll let commander shepard himself answer this question. skip to :53

#268
TOBY FLENDERSON

TOBY FLENDERSON
  • Members
  • 965 messages
We have the technology, we can rebuild them!

Yeah we fixed the relays and citadel we can definitely fix the geth and EDI. Remember damage doesn't mean dead, the nomandy still flies so the geth and EDI are likely more wounded then dead.

P.S. Legion and the geth totally would have sacrificed themselves to kill the reapers so its not genocide but collatoral damage.

Modifié par TOBY FLENDERSON, 29 juin 2012 - 09:45 .


#269
Hyrist

Hyrist
  • Members
  • 728 messages

Reorte wrote...
We're talking about more than just the forces that take part in the war. There's a vastly bigger part of the galaxy that has no knowledge of it. That also sounds a bit like pretending that leaders in war have the full support of the populace and are therefore complicit in what their forces do. I think that it could be regarded as acceptable - by them - if it's the only alternative to death by Reaper but the long-term implications make me wonder if refusal is a better choice from a completely dispassionate point of view. Life that's unable to change doesn't sound like a good thing.

Suspension of disbelief goes further in soft science fiction than hard (and I agree that it is a space opera) but it can only go so far before breaking. Where that line lies obviously varies from person to person but I like them to establish their exceptions early and then stick within plausible extrapolations of those. Space opera gets more room for initial space magic than hard sci-fi does (which usually tries to avoid any scientific exceptions and sticks at most to engineering ones).

Edit: Considering the general tone of this thread I think some of this post sounds a little confrontational. I've not thought of a good way of editing it down so hope this excuse will do instead :)


In comparison with the majority of the posters I've encountered, you've been more than civil. It's enjoyable to actually have a conversation rather than seeing insults and unilateral opinions spouted back and forth.

It's difficult to have a completely dispassionate view. Ultimately if we are to take the twitter responces are true, the next cycle ultimately uses the Catalyst anyways so the point of not using the catalyst is moot - you just pass the responsbility to use it on to the next cycle. The refusal ending ultimately boils down to a matter of pride-do you die because you don't want to sacrafice your principles (and in my opinion, your pride) or do you take responsibility for the Galaxy and make a choice.

Each decission in the final bit of the game is an increasing scale of responsibility. The least bit of responsibility is refuse - you reject the notion of taking any responsibility, therefore the next cycle takes it upon themselves to use the Crucible in the eventuality that your atlernatives fail.

Destroy is the second least amount of responsibility assumed: The death of Synthetics is on your head, but it's only temporarly. New Synthetics can be made, though the old may never truely be recovered in full. Given the fear of the Reapers that was just destroied, it may be a long, long time before they be recreated. Ultimately, however, what is done after this choice is not your concern - you did your job.

Control ending assumes more responsiblity, you become the ruler/guaridan of the Galaxy with the reaper army. It's on your shoulders to rebuild and keep things peacefull between Synthetics and Organics, and you assumed the power, and inteligence, to do so. But you sacrafice yourself, and ultimately, your humanity. There is no telling if you do not eventually come to the same conclusion as the Catalyst.

Synthisis is the ultimate responsibility - but it yeilds the ultimate reward - Utopia. You do have to make the decission for the Galaxy and while some people may not wish to live in a 'perfect world/galaxy' would the cries of the dead and the suffering be worth drowning the others out? It is the ultimate 'for everyones's best interest'. Viewpoints often change the more knowledge is open to them - what happens when every single individual is granted the sum of all knowledge, but retains their individuality. The Galaxy sacrafices a lot, but gains pretty much equal parts.

Synthisis is ultimately Pandroa's Box in this regard - the consequences are beyond our understanding. But as I sit back and watch our real life - how much conflict is born of ignorance and difference, I almost feel as if it would be a mercy to do whatever you could do to end it.

As far as the concept of suspension of disbeleif - that requires a much longer post to explain and I'm out of time. But it's interesting that people can be completely ok with Indoctrination, Biotic Fields, Mass Effect in and of itself, yet not Synthisis.

#270
De1ta G

De1ta G
  • Members
  • 724 messages

Hyrist wrote...

Reorte wrote...
We're talking about more than just the forces that take part in the war. There's a vastly bigger part of the galaxy that has no knowledge of it. That also sounds a bit like pretending that leaders in war have the full support of the populace and are therefore complicit in what their forces do. I think that it could be regarded as acceptable - by them - if it's the only alternative to death by Reaper but the long-term implications make me wonder if refusal is a better choice from a completely dispassionate point of view. Life that's unable to change doesn't sound like a good thing.

Suspension of disbelief goes further in soft science fiction than hard (and I agree that it is a space opera) but it can only go so far before breaking. Where that line lies obviously varies from person to person but I like them to establish their exceptions early and then stick within plausible extrapolations of those. Space opera gets more room for initial space magic than hard sci-fi does (which usually tries to avoid any scientific exceptions and sticks at most to engineering ones).

Edit: Considering the general tone of this thread I think some of this post sounds a little confrontational. I've not thought of a good way of editing it down so hope this excuse will do instead :)


In comparison with the majority of the posters I've encountered, you've been more than civil. It's enjoyable to actually have a conversation rather than seeing insults and unilateral opinions spouted back and forth.

It's difficult to have a completely dispassionate view. Ultimately if we are to take the twitter responces are true, the next cycle ultimately uses the Catalyst anyways so the point of not using the catalyst is moot - you just pass the responsbility to use it on to the next cycle. The refusal ending ultimately boils down to a matter of pride-do you die because you don't want to sacrafice your principles (and in my opinion, your pride) or do you take responsibility for the Galaxy and make a choice.

Each decission in the final bit of the game is an increasing scale of responsibility. The least bit of responsibility is refuse - you reject the notion of taking any responsibility, therefore the next cycle takes it upon themselves to use the Crucible in the eventuality that your atlernatives fail.

Destroy is the second least amount of responsibility assumed: The death of Synthetics is on your head, but it's only temporarly. New Synthetics can be made, though the old may never truely be recovered in full. Given the fear of the Reapers that was just destroied, it may be a long, long time before they be recreated. Ultimately, however, what is done after this choice is not your concern - you did your job.

Control ending assumes more responsiblity, you become the ruler/guaridan of the Galaxy with the reaper army. It's on your shoulders to rebuild and keep things peacefull between Synthetics and Organics, and you assumed the power, and inteligence, to do so. But you sacrafice yourself, and ultimately, your humanity. There is no telling if you do not eventually come to the same conclusion as the Catalyst.

Synthisis is the ultimate responsibility - but it yeilds the ultimate reward - Utopia. You do have to make the decission for the Galaxy and while some people may not wish to live in a 'perfect world/galaxy' would the cries of the dead and the suffering be worth drowning the others out? It is the ultimate 'for everyones's best interest'. Viewpoints often change the more knowledge is open to them - what happens when every single individual is granted the sum of all knowledge, but retains their individuality. The Galaxy sacrafices a lot, but gains pretty much equal parts.

Synthisis is ultimately Pandroa's Box in this regard - the consequences are beyond our understanding. But as I sit back and watch our real life - how much conflict is born of ignorance and difference, I almost feel as if it would be a mercy to do whatever you could do to end it.

As far as the concept of suspension of disbeleif - that requires a much longer post to explain and I'm out of time. But it's interesting that people can be completely ok with Indoctrination, Biotic Fields, Mass Effect in and of itself, yet not Synthisis.



You said that in the destroy ending that the death of synthetics are on your head. As if anyone is going to care that you destroyed the geth. As far as everyone else is concerned, the reapers were destroyed and that's all that matters. If the geth were destroyed in the process then it was unfortunate collateral damage.

#271
wantedman dan

wantedman dan
  • Members
  • 3 605 messages

Reorte wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Genocide requires it to be deliberate which requires intention according to the dictionary.


And you deliberately chose to destroy them. You knew the consequences of the action before you decided.

For crying out loud. I was trying to be polite but now you're just making me angry since you are just blatently ignoring the the part about "deliberate" requiring intention.


Or you could understand that intentionality is only partially determines being deliberate.

You deliberately chose to kill synthetics because you were made fully aware of the consequence of choosing such. It may have been unintended consequence, but it still was a consequence you were aware of.

#272
NoUserNameHere

NoUserNameHere
  • Members
  • 2 083 messages
If you accept pre-endgame logic, Destroy is genocide of perfectly valid lifeforms.

If you accept endgame logic, EDI is only really alive after Synthesis, so Destroy is basically stopping an alien invasion by breaking all cars in the world.

#273
Alex_Dur4and

Alex_Dur4and
  • Members
  • 841 messages

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Alex_Dur4and wrote...
It's clear that Shepard developped, over time, a blind hate for them and I'm pretty sure that he would normal stop at nothing to see them burn!


Really, because my Shepard was questioning the Quarian's desire to destroy the Geth from the begining of ME1.


We are not talking about Shepard's desire to destroy the Geth here... I'm just saying that Shepard's hate for the Reapers goes far beyond his feelings towards other AIs

#274
Nerevar-as

Nerevar-as
  • Members
  • 5 375 messages

NoUserNameHere wrote...

If you accept pre-endgame logic, Destroy is genocide of perfectly valid lifeforms.

If you accept endgame logic, EDI is only really alive after Synthesis, so Destroy is basically stopping an alien invasion by breaking all cars in the world.


Yeah, apparently you are not truly alive unless part of you is organic. Yet another bad implication in synthesis.<_<

#275
Verhner

Verhner
  • Members
  • 3 messages
its just math, sacrifice EDI and the Geth or the entire galaxy. Simple chioce, you did it before in Arrival, sacrifice the Batarian system or the galaxy. I didnt blink for a second.