461 réponses à ce sujet

[wantedman dan]

Saans Shadow wrote...

Thank you!

Thank you, for what? Completely tarnishing--eradicating--the ability of sapient life to determine, for itself, the path it will take?

[ghost9191]

wantedman dan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

A nice ideal, unless we all get killed by synthetics beforehand, which would be... problematic.

So you support the forced homogenization of the entire galactic population on the whim of an unfounded probability?

which if you achieved peace between the geth and quarians you disprove before the catalyst even brings it up<_<

[Sousabird]

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

an undetermined amount has passed between the cycles, and they always end the same - war
synthesis is the ultimate solution.
interlinked minds like geth, a golden age of neverending euphoria..
 it doesnt have to be the "happy" ending.
i have viewed the other endings, and i like synthesis...
not because its got the sunshining, but the comments made by EDI are great...
i feel like it was everything the reaper creators ( i think of them as similar to the group of prothean scientists on the last planet from Me1) intended originally, but it wasnt possible because human and machine had to exist more cycles to develop a basis of understanding, as shown to us in this game as over half you crew being half machine... its evident that society especially in this ficticious time needs machines to survive, without there would be no crew, no mission, no squadmates. lets review
 shepard - obvious half machine, stated by starchild
garrus- partially robot, but only due to war injuries
jack- infused with biotics plates
zaeed - same as garrus
joker and edi- full organic, full machine, in love
miranda- basically an android, forever seeking to understand her psycho father
legion- no explanation necessary
tali - all quarians are basically half machine
the illusive man hides his half machine self from you and uses holograms until the end b/c he didnt want you to know

i dont want to waste anymore room but you get my point.

Shepard-he is held together by machines but is still human (like a cyborg but not by choice mind you)
Garrus&Zaeed- NO, they aren't part machines... my Grandpa has a prosthetic knee that doesn't make him a synthesized nut
Joker&EDI- I'll give you this one
Miranda-She is genetically altered, however she is fully human
Legion- Agreed
Tali- No quarians are definitely living beings and totally organic, they wear enviro suits because there immune system is crap.
TIM- I'll give you this as well.
HOWEVER Jack, she is infused with amps (not plates) along with all other biotics (except maybe asari)
and not to mention her's like synthesis and totally involuntary (read the angry one's posts)
Also synthesis is not evolution, evolution can not be forced like this it takes millions and billions of years, yet it happens in mere minutes?! Also, you made a choice to force "evolve" the galaxy without anyone's consent (short of your bff the catalyst) I love destroy because it lets the galaxy find their own path and develop along it leading to our own future, not one controlled by the catalyst's whims or the whims of CataShep.

[Xilizhra]

wantedman dan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I don't "support" any of the endings; I'm neutral on all except Refusal, which is simply disgusting.

I'm glad to see you appreciate the concept of self-determination.

A Shepard who chooses Refusal is proof that sometimes, self-determination isn't all that it's cracked up to be.

which if you achieved peace between the geth and quarians you disprove before the catalyst even brings it up

This is why I hesitate to actually support Synthesis, because the Cataclysm's logic in nearly all areas is rather... strange. However, I disagree with the notion that it's pure evil.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 07 juillet 2012 - 12:43 .

[wantedman dan]

ghost9191 wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

A nice ideal, unless we all get killed by synthetics beforehand, which would be... problematic.

So you support the forced homogenization of the entire galactic population on the whim of an unfounded probability?

which if you achieved peace between the geth and quarians you disprove before the catalyst even brings it up<_<

You didn't even have to achieve peace. You merely needed to enter into the Geth Consensus to learn that it wasn't the synthetics that rebelled, but rather the organic creators in their fear.

[Baronesa]

Xilizhra wrote...
Conflict is not beauty, and these "growing pains" frequently take the form of corpses. How many lives would you sacrifice for this?

Conflict is not beauty, maturing as a species is beauty

I would not sacrifice anyone... but short of brainwashing... mindcontrol, you cannot forc epeople to change in an instant. So the best thing you can do is educate and work hard... because if you strive for tolerance and acceptance, and use a method that push the differences away... then you are not really fighting for tolerance.

It is like the members of some religions... there will be peace when everyone belongs to our religion... that is the kidn of "tolerance" presented by synthesis

[wantedman dan]

Xilizhra wrote...

A Shepard who chooses Refusal is proof that sometimes, self-determination isn't all that it's cracked up to be.

I'm glad to see that you can consistently argue your own position without attacking another.

Furthermore, that thought is disgusting.

[Saans Shadow]

M25105 wrote...

Do the Synthesis crowd hate the concept of free will and overcoming adversity through our own means?

For me not at all, but i'm not willing to dominate, commit genocide, or doom my friends and lover when i promised to save them.  It's a personal choice though

[Jamie9]

M25105 wrote...

Do the Synthesis crowd hate the concept of free will and overcoming adversity through our own means?

Even after this length of time, I'm not entirely sure which choice I believe in most.

For me, a good life, freedom and the basic rights (food, shelter, free speech) are the three things that should absolutely be untouchable.

The thing is, I can't decide if Synthesis truly destroys free will. I simply don't know the specifics. But it seems to lead to a better life. So I've got conflicted opinions on whether Synthesis is right, the same as the other endings.

[Xilizhra]

Baronesa wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Conflict is not beauty, and these "growing pains" frequently take the form of corpses. How many lives would you sacrifice for this?

Conflict is not beauty, maturing as a species is beauty

I would not sacrifice anyone... but short of brainwashing... mindcontrol, you cannot forc epeople to change in an instant. So the best thing you can do is educate and work hard... because if you strive for tolerance and acceptance, and use a method that push the differences away... then you are not really fighting for tolerance.

It is like the members of some religions... there will be peace when everyone belongs to our religion... that is the kidn of "tolerance" presented by synthesis

So tell me. How many lives would you sacrifice for this ideal?

[wantedman dan]

Saans Shadow wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Do the Synthesis crowd hate the concept of free will and overcoming adversity through our own means?

For me not at all, but i'm not willing to dominate, commit genocide, or doom my friends and lover when i promised to save them.  It's a personal choice though

So forced eugenics is that moral line you're willing to cross.

[Xilizhra]

wantedman dan wrote...

Saans Shadow wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Do the Synthesis crowd hate the concept of free will and overcoming adversity through our own means?

For me not at all, but i'm not willing to dominate, commit genocide, or doom my friends and lover when i promised to save them.  It's a personal choice though

So forced eugenics is that moral line you're willing to cross.

It's certainly the least bloody one. Well, Control might not be, but has some of its own issues.

[wantedman dan]

Xilizhra wrote...

So tell me. How many lives would you sacrifice for this ideal?

False dichotomy.

[ghost9191]

Saans Shadow wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Do the Synthesis crowd hate the concept of free will and overcoming adversity through our own means?

For me not at all, but i'm not willing to dominate, commit genocide, or doom my friends and lover when i promised to save them.  It's a personal choice though

not like i have been arguing about tolerence or anything but if the geth were destroyed by the quarians then shep didn't commit genocide:innocent:

[Ridwan]

Saans Shadow wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Do the Synthesis crowd hate the concept of free will and overcoming adversity through our own means?

For me not at all, but i'm not willing to dominate, commit genocide, or doom my friends and lover when i promised to save them.  It's a personal choice though

How is it saving them, when you turn them into green lobotomised freaks?

[Xilizhra]

wantedman dan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

So tell me. How many lives would you sacrifice for this ideal?

False dichotomy.

So it's false that people will die in future conflict?

[Ridwan]

Jamie9 wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Do the Synthesis crowd hate the concept of free will and overcoming adversity through our own means?

Even after this length of time, I'm not entirely sure which choice I believe in most.

For me, a good life, freedom and the basic rights (food, shelter, free speech) are the three things that should absolutely be untouchable.

The thing is, I can't decide if Synthesis truly destroys free will. I simply don't know the specifics. But it seems to lead to a better life. So I've got conflicted opinions on whether Synthesis is right, the same as the other endings.

When in doubt, use explosions my friend. Ain't no problem in the world that a bomb can't solve.

[wantedman dan]

Xilizhra wrote...

It's certainly the least bloody one. Well, Control might not be, but has some of its own issues.

So you, too, operate under the false assumption that conflict is an inherent evil.

[wantedman dan]

Xilizhra wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

So tell me. How many lives would you sacrifice for this ideal?

False dichotomy.

So it's false that people will die in future conflict?

It's fallacious to assume that it would be their, the person with whom you're arguing's, sacrifice.

[Sousabird]

I like destroy after blasting the reapers to hell we're left to create our own future and reach it at our own pace, to me that is truly the one choice worth the sacrafices made for it.

[Xilizhra]

wantedman dan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

It's certainly the least bloody one. Well, Control might not be, but has some of its own issues.

So you, too, operate under the false assumption that conflict is an inherent evil.

Death is the evil.

It's fallacious to assume that it would be their, the person with whom you're arguing's, sacrifice.

Irrelevant. If they make a choice that leads to that death, and they're aware of the stakes, it's in part their responsibility whether they pull the trigger or not.

[ghost9191]

Sousabird wrote...

I like destroy after blasting the reapers to hell we're left to create our own future and reach it at our own pace, to me that is truly the one choice worth the sacrafices made for it.

Agree, actually pretty close to how i feel.

other options you are given your future, there are multiple paths to that future and accepting anothers path blinds you to alternatives

[Jamie9]

wantedman dan wrote...

So you, too, operate under the false assumption that conflict is an inherent evil.

Conflict IS evil. It should be avoided whenever possible.

However, freedom IS worth fighting for. It IS worth sacrificing for.

Conflict should be stopped. But not by sacrificing freedom.

[Saans Shadow]

ghost9191 wrote...

Saans Shadow wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Do the Synthesis crowd hate the concept of free will and overcoming adversity through our own means?

For me not at all, but i'm not willing to dominate, commit genocide, or doom my friends and lover when i promised to save them.  It's a personal choice though

not like i have been arguing about tolerence or anything but if the geth were destroyed by the quarians then shep didn't commit genocide:innocent:

lol while this did make me laugh, I'm one of the few who believe the Reapers are victims of the catalyst as much as the entire galaxy is and believe they derserve a chance at redemption   So yeah still genocide in my eyes still but on a much larger scale considering I see each reaper as an avatar of it's parent race.

[Baronesa]

So... every struggle we have today for our rights, for our freedoms is meaningless because at some point someone will wave a magic wand and make everything go away without any suffering?

And then there is the other part... short of complete brainwashing there is no possible way for everyone to change in an instant, in the same way they have to change as time passes.

Is then brainwashing everyone preferable than simply trying to educate and change their views?

Would you rather control and literally change and mold minds rather than educate them?