People who say EDI and Geth die in Destory ending
#26
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:30
#27
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:31
#28
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:31
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
#29
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:33
That is probably actually true. If the game removed synthesis and presented you with simply Control or Destroy, it would have tied in much nicer with the themes of the game, and not given destroy the downsides that it did.Reorte wrote...
Then it's Synthesis that kills the geth - without that and its demonstration that Space Magic exists there would be little reason to think that they're actually dead. God, I hate Synthesis.
Synthesis ruins everything
#30
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:33
#31
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:34
#32
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:35
EDI and the Geth are not the same type of AI that the Reapers are. The Reapers gain their processing power (at least, I presume they do) from the gestalt consciousness of billions of dead organic organisms. They are ORGANIC CONSTRUCTS, just like EDI states in the end of ME2.
EDI and the Geth, despite having "Reaper code", are PURELY SYNTHETIC.
SO exactly how is the crucible to target both pure synthetics and organic constructs, and yet not kill Organics or destroy complex computers (such as neural implants, sophisticated VI's like glyph)?
#33
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:35
It isn't Reaper code that kills them, it is writing magic that says "All synthetic life will die".Aramiss Ducati wrote...
This particular AI didn't need no reaper code to become self aware, so there are loopholes that could explain edi and the geth surviving in destroy.
Because it is written it will happen.
The geth and Edi are dead. Stop trying to get around it
#34
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:36
-WeAreLegion- wrote...
Basically, the way I see it, EDI's dead and gone and the Geth are back to the point they were before the code was uploaded. However, the Geth can, on their own, advance to the point that they are individuals once more.
Pretty much my thoughts on this
#35
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:36
#36
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:38
I imagine the same happens to the Geth. You can rebuild both, but they will be something new, shaped by new experiences.
#37
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:41
D24O wrote...
I certainly would've picked it if not for that.Billyg3453 wrote...
-snipReorte wrote...
The only explanation is more Space Magic unfortunately.
If the geth didn't die, 90% of people would pick destroy, as opposed to the 60ish% that do now
And that's a real problem...
Bioware shoved a bunch of artificial weight into the Destroy option because Control and Synthesis can't stand on their own merits...
Modifié par Bill Casey, 02 juillet 2012 - 09:42 .
#38
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:41
DiebytheSword wrote...
Their unique, individual personalities are lost when they shut down, that's why its mentioned multiple times that you can't simply move EDI to another vessel. The Normandy dies, she dies.
I imagine the same happens to the Geth. You can rebuild both, but they will be something new, shaped by new experiences.
I agree with this. I like to think the "new geth" would have access to the history and memories of the old Geth as I think those achieves survive the EMP blast. So they would be shaped by both their new experiences and the memories of the old geth
#39
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:42
Sisterofshane wrote...
Here's one thing I don't understand...
EDI and the Geth are not the same type of AI that the Reapers are. The Reapers gain their processing power (at least, I presume they do) from the gestalt consciousness of billions of dead organic organisms. They are ORGANIC CONSTRUCTS, just like EDI states in the end of ME2.
EDI and the Geth, despite having "Reaper code", are PURELY SYNTHETIC.
SO exactly how is the crucible to target both pure synthetics and organic constructs, and yet not kill Organics or destroy complex computers (such as neural implants, sophisticated VI's like glyph)?
Sigh. Because Walters & Hudson said so, probably hoping people would go to Synthesis. We have to accept that from a machine that has the power of God in Synthesis. Instant harmless rewrite of life for all species. Volus don´t even breathe oxigen, and who knows what else is out there, but no problem! Telling IAs apart? Too complicated, sorry.
#40
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:44
I think working with the Geth altered many Quarian perceptions and preconceived notions...
If one side just wiped out the other, I can't see a future for the Geth post Destroy...
Modifié par Bill Casey, 02 juillet 2012 - 09:51 .
#41
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:47
Modifié par RR1107, 02 juillet 2012 - 09:51 .
#42
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:53
However the Catalyst says we will be able to easilly repair anything that is damaged (if you have high EMS) which should include EDI and the Geth. The counter argument says that whilst you could repair their bodies, the period of deactivation would mean they were no longer the same individual. You may remember they said the same thing about Shepard when they Lazarussed him.
Basically the bodies can be fixed, whether or not this means they are resurrected depends on how your head-canons are callibrated.
#43
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:56
Nerevar-as wrote...
Sisterofshane wrote...
Here's one thing I don't understand...
EDI and the Geth are not the same type of AI that the Reapers are. The Reapers gain their processing power (at least, I presume they do) from the gestalt consciousness of billions of dead organic organisms. They are ORGANIC CONSTRUCTS, just like EDI states in the end of ME2.
EDI and the Geth, despite having "Reaper code", are PURELY SYNTHETIC.
SO exactly how is the crucible to target both pure synthetics and organic constructs, and yet not kill Organics or destroy complex computers (such as neural implants, sophisticated VI's like glyph)?
Sigh. Because Walters & Hudson said so, probably hoping people would go to Synthesis. We have to accept that from a machine that has the power of God in Synthesis. Instant harmless rewrite of life for all species. Volus don´t even breathe oxigen, and who knows what else is out there, but no problem! Telling IAs apart? Too complicated, sorry.
I never said that the other endinds made much sense. This is a thread specifically about EDI and the Geth, and this is my beef with that specific crucible function.
#44
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 09:59
War sucks and victory always comes with a cost.
Get over it.
#45
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 10:02

EDI
#46
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 10:02
#47
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 10:03
#48
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 10:03
Krunjar wrote...
Destroy dousn't descriminate between reaper code and non reaper code. All synthetic life means ALL. Anything smarter than a VI is toast ... Period.
Modifié par Enhanced, 02 juillet 2012 - 10:04 .
#49
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 10:06
iAFKinMassEffect3 wrote...
I was under the impression that everything with Reaper code used to strengthen it was eliminated from the galaxy.
We could end the thread with this rebuttal. It is kinda sad though, even when you clearly have EDI's face pop up if you choose Destroy.
#50
Posté 02 juillet 2012 - 10:07
Firecell11 wrote...
Sorry if this has been already postet.
1. Geth are software. They can upload themselfs in any platform that has enough processing power
2. Same with EDI. Her robotic body was just a platform like those of the geth. She is still existing in the Normandy.
3.In the epilogue of destroy ending we see spaceships. You CANNOT fly a spaceship without computers.
So hardware and software are not destroyed. You're welcome to proof me wrong.
1. Geth are software. But if the hardware platforms they use are borked then they are screwed. Which is what happened.
2, EDI is servers on the Normandy. Destroy borked a lot of technology. Including the servers. EDI name goes on the wall.
3. So? Spaceships use computers. Its called rebooting. If a human being goes braindead. And you bring it back. Is it the same? Not really. Geth and EDI's experiences are prolly gonna be wiped. Even if they arnt. Will they be the same if they are ever restored?
4. Prove you wrong? You havent really provided anything solid for anyone to prove wrong. Just sayin.





Retour en haut






