463 réponses à ce sujet

[Rasofe]

Torrible wrote...

Rasofe wrote...

Torrible wrote...

http://bauersteven.b...tion-error.html 

The above is a short article that may be relevant to this thread. 

Nyah, I'd rather go with the Self-Serving Bias on this one. Fundamental Attribution Error is something we usually make of other things' motives, that we assume their nature is more influental in their behaviour than their situation. I don't see how this fits into Reapers, who don't really have a situation.

Self-serving bias is actually the fundemental attribution error reversed and the article talks about that as well. The fundamental attribution error is relevant to this thread because some people here have decided the Catalyst did all that harvesting because of his evil nature, ignoring the situation he was in: that he was programmed/cursed to obey his prime directive.

Um. I'd say that to be programmed to obey prime directive is in fact a disposition and not a situation. But that's not a debate I feel like having.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

Master Che wrote...
Some people seem to stuck on flaming the game and the ending because it didn't end they way they wanted it to.  They don't even want to hear anything that will go against their bias.

No it's more like, I didn't like how the great game was brought to conclusion. Anything wrong with that? 
Sorry but you can't just persuade me to like it. It's a matter of taste difference.

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 02 juillet 2012 - 06:59 .

[SpamBot2000]

I find it hard to get over my bias of favoring making sense over kasikjkas djnk nbsdajik.

[NM_Che56]

Let me ask this:

Who here knows what HAL9000 is?

[Tirranek]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

I find it hard to get over my bias of favoring making sense over kasikjkas djnk nbsdajik.

Very little makes sense when you stare at it long enough. Even life itself

[NM_Che56]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Master Che wrote...
Some people seem to stuck on flaming the game and the ending because it didn't end they way they wanted it to.  They don't even want to hear anything that will go against their bias.

No it's more like, I didn't like how the great game was brought to conclusion. Anything wrong with that? 
Sorry but you can't just persuade me to like it. It's a matter of taste difference.

Taste is one thing.  But some people evidently missed the point based on some of their statements or questions and the errors therein. 

If you "get it" but you don't "like it", then I can't fault you.

If you don't like it because you misinterpreted stuff, that's another thing.

[NM_Che56]

Tirranek wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

I find it hard to get over my bias of favoring making sense over kasikjkas djnk nbsdajik.

Very little makes sense when you stare at it long enough. Even life itself

Say any given word enough times.  You get lost and realize the word itself has no meaning other than what you give it.

[Rasofe]

Master Che wrote...

Let me ask this:

Who here knows what HAL9000 is?

Ai do. But it's out of context. Hal 9000 was flawlessly logical. None of the AI in this game have flawless logic.

[sth128]

Master Che wrote...

Taste is one thing.  But some people evidently missed the point based on some of their statements or questions and the errors therein. 

If you "get it" but you don't "like it", then I can't fault you.

If you don't like it because you misinterpreted stuff, that's another thing.

You are assuming there exists some kind of canon interpretation to things. There isn't.

[Dusen]

I think a better way of stating it would be this: If lighting strikes your house and sets fire to it do you not still fight the fire? Are you not at metaphorical "war" with the fire destroying your house? Do you not attempt to "destroy" the fire with water? Do you just let your house burn because the fire is only doing what it was made to do?

As it's already been said though, you can't really effectively argue against something that refuses to accept logic.

Modifié par Dusen, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:11 .

[CronoDragoon]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Dessalines wrote...

Lol, I am still trying to figure out if the Crucible is just a powersource, then the Citadel already has the ability to control, destroy, and synthesize.

You can read above as some people rationalize it:
- yes, the citadel already has all these abilities. all it needs a power source
- yes, crucible was anticipated as power source
- why catalyst did it? because he was programmed to, and had no choice.

No, the Citadel did not have this potential beforehand. The Crucible changes the Catalyst, and the Citadel, in order to make these new options possible.

I agree with your last part.

[NM_Che56]

Rasofe wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Let me ask this:

Who here knows what HAL9000 is?

Ai do. But it's out of context. Hal 9000 was flawlessly logical. None of the AI in this game have flawless logic.

If Hal9000's logic was flawless, then it would have accepted deactivation if it was wrong about its prediction of a device failure, no?  Isn't it logical to switch off a machine that is unrealiable?

[RiouHotaru]

One issue OP.

The fire isn't the reason the house is burning:

You are.

You set fire to the house. Therefore YOU are responsible. The fire is only doing what it's supposed to do: burn.

[NM_Che56]

sth128 wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Taste is one thing.  But some people evidently missed the point based on some of their statements or questions and the errors therein. 

If you "get it" but you don't "like it", then I can't fault you.

If you don't like it because you misinterpreted stuff, that's another thing.

You are assuming there exists some kind of canon interpretation to things. There isn't.

Then why are the producers (Mike Gamble) and others (Tully Ackland) supplementing things via posts and twitter?  Obviously the creators have something in mind.

There's no ONE canon, but there are a set of outcomes based on your choices.  Outcomes that, implied or displayed, were predetermined.

Modifié par Master Che, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:18 .

[Rasofe]

Dusen wrote...

I think a better way of stating it would be this: If lighting strikes your house and sets fire to it do you not still fight the fire? Are you not at metaphorical "war" with the fire destroying your house? Do you not attempt to "destroy" the fire with water? Do you just let your house burn because the fire is only doing what it was made to do?

As it's already been said though, you can't really effectively argue against something that refuses to accept logic.

The thing is, the metaphor just doesn't work for Reapers. At all. The Catalyst simply ignores the fact that the Reaper fleet sustained large casualties in this cycle and so whole cycles of life were lost in the process of this extinction. The conflict between the Reapers and Organics is an actual war, not a simple cleaning operation, because it has taken a toll on both sides. Therefore, the Catalyst has failed to do what it was designed to do - again - and is simply dodging the facts.

[Rasofe]

Master Che wrote...

Rasofe wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Let me ask this:

Who here knows what HAL9000 is?

Ai do. But it's out of context. Hal 9000 was flawlessly logical. None of the AI in this game have flawless logic.

If Hal9000's logic was flawless, then it would have accepted deactivation if it was wrong about its prediction of a device failure, no?  Isn't it logical to switch off a machine that is unrealiable?

Nope.
In a way that I can't explain because I'm not as Flawless as HAL.
Please don't ruin one of the worst (best) villains in movie history for me...

Modifié par Rasofe, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:18 .

[CronoDragoon]

Tirranek wrote...

Rasofe wrote...

Damn it, I think I'm getting tired of this argument.

Are we debating whether it's right what the Reapers are doing, whether they are accountable, or whether what the Catalyst said is logical? Because if it is one of the first two, then there's just nothing to debate about. They are absolutely no way that what the Reapers are doing is right or that they are unaccountable. There are no analogies that can be pulled in this situation. In the context of the Mass Effect trilogy, the Reapers are doing the wrong thing, they must be stopped, they are sapient creatures that actively acknowledge their desire to commit genocide, and there is no humanisation involved. They are alien, and they are responsible for their alien ways.

Whereas if it is about logic, see my previous commentary. But I get the sense no one is interested.

Finding it very interesting personally. Now I'm just trying to remember if the games ever show the Reapers have a desire to kill, rather than simply stating that the civilizations cannot prevent their destruction.

Sovereign clearly holds a deep disdain for organics. Since, as some nice person pointed out earlier, his mind was made from an organic race, it seems the two possible conclusions are 1. After he was Reaper-ized his mind came to enjoy the power and looked down upon organics or 2. The obvious explanation that Sovereign was not designed with the Catalyst's motivations in mind. (ie, ME1 was not designed with ME3 in mind)

[Forbry]

Rasofe wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Silent Fantasy wrote...

Fire has nothing to do with war itself. It's a weapon, a byproduct of fighting, and a naturaly created, and dangerous, thing that happens. No matter how it's created, it has nothing to do with war itself and is always doing what it's supposed to do. Burn. Reapers are tools and are only doing what they were created to do.
Sounds like a good analogy to me, but this fanbase is beyond rediculous, so of course it wont be understood even when it's simple and everyone will whine about it not making sense because they don't have the mind to think about it.

Some people seem to stuck on flaming the game and the ending because it didn't end they way they wanted it to.  They don't even want to hear anything that will go against their bias.

I don't believe the premise of a rogue ancient AI is bad, I just feel it's been done before. No one demands a HAL, and Catalyst is more like a Star Trek AI (Which raises the question, if Kirk could talk all those advanced machines into submission, why can't Shepard talk this one into surrender? Oh well.)

It's also irritatant it shows up as a stupid child. But I think what the team meant with this is that the head villain is not in fact just another Reaper.

Although I doubt the logic for choosing it is a 100% clean, I loved the "kid-form". It gave me an extra "WTF-feeling" (in a good way) and it gave the ending some extra chills and I really loved that link it made, between the end, between the beginning of the game (that kid is actually the first person you get to see, when it's playing) and Shepard's dreams.

[Gogzilla]

Its called perspective.

From the reaper POV its not war, its simply what they do.

Not everything has to use the same reference point or adhere to the same interpretations or abide by similar concepts.

[Rasofe]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Tirranek wrote...

Rasofe wrote...

Damn it, I think I'm getting tired of this argument.

Are we debating whether it's right what the Reapers are doing, whether they are accountable, or whether what the Catalyst said is logical? Because if it is one of the first two, then there's just nothing to debate about. They are absolutely no way that what the Reapers are doing is right or that they are unaccountable. There are no analogies that can be pulled in this situation. In the context of the Mass Effect trilogy, the Reapers are doing the wrong thing, they must be stopped, they are sapient creatures that actively acknowledge their desire to commit genocide, and there is no humanisation involved. They are alien, and they are responsible for their alien ways.

Whereas if it is about logic, see my previous commentary. But I get the sense no one is interested.

Finding it very interesting personally. Now I'm just trying to remember if the games ever show the Reapers have a desire to kill, rather than simply stating that the civilizations cannot prevent their destruction.

Sovereign clearly holds a deep disdain for organics. Since, as some nice person pointed out earlier, his mind was made from an organic race, it seems the two possible conclusions are 1. After he was Reaper-ized his mind came to enjoy the power and looked down upon organics or 2. The obvious explanation that Sovereign was not designed with the Catalyst's motivations in mind. (ie, ME1 was not designed with ME3 in mind)

Or 3 - just because something is made out of biomatter doesn't mean it thinks its organic.

[Rasofe]

@Forbry
Cool, but you're in the minority there. Not that it matters.

@Gogzilla
Which is totally true but it isn't logical. It either ignore the true definition of the term war, the previous mission that the catalysts task was to avoid war between synths and orgs, or that taking casualties warrants the status of war.

So yeah, the Reapers are stupid and their logic is very flawed. AS THE OP made a joke about.

[Forbry]

Rasofe wrote...

Dusen wrote...

I think a better way of stating it would be this: If lighting strikes your house and sets fire to it do you not still fight the fire? Are you not at metaphorical "war" with the fire destroying your house? Do you not attempt to "destroy" the fire with water? Do you just let your house burn because the fire is only doing what it was made to do?

As it's already been said though, you can't really effectively argue against something that refuses to accept logic.

The thing is, the metaphor just doesn't work for Reapers. At all. The Catalyst simply ignores the fact that the Reaper fleet sustained large casualties in this cycle and so whole cycles of life were lost in the process of this extinction. The conflict between the Reapers and Organics is an actual war, not a simple cleaning operation, because it has taken a toll on both sides. Therefore, the Catalyst has failed to do what it was designed to do - again - and is simply dodging the facts.

Don't get what you're saying here....

[Siansonea]

Yeah, it was a stupid line. And we were expecting...?

[Forbry]

Rasofe wrote...

@Forbry
Cool, but you're in the minority there. Not that it matters.

@Gogzilla
Which is totally true but it isn't logical. It either ignore the true definition of the term war, the previous mission that the catalysts task was to avoid war between synths and orgs, or that taking casualties warrants the status of war.

So yeah, the Reapers are stupid and their logic is very flawed. AS THE OP made a joke about.

I know but remember that many fans do not visit fora to express their opinion and frankly, I think that people who are not satisfied are more eager to speak up ergo I think that there are a whole lot of fans that did like the game and did like the ending, you just don't see/hear them..

[Giga Drill BREAKER]