461 réponses à ce sujet

[darkpassenger2342]

ld1449 wrote...

...Passenger...you might wanna check that last statement.

 yeah? what about it?

[ld1449]

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

snip*
just because you think the developers are idiots that have no understanding of english doesnt mean they do.
snip*

This.

[darkpassenger2342]

The Angry One wrote...

Because the writer didn't understand it either. This happens quite frequently in sci-fi, unfortunately.
That's all I have to say to you on that.

 so you do in fact, claim that you know more about the ending than the people who wrote it?

[darkpassenger2342]

ld1449 wrote...

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

snip*
just because you think the developers are idiots that have no understanding of english doesnt mean they do.
snip*

This.

 dude, it was edited before you even corrected me, the time shows it. gimme a break and pay attention to the subject.

[darkpassenger2342]

ld1449 wrote...

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

snip*
just because you think the developers are idiots that have no understanding of english doesnt mean they do.
snip*

This.

just forget it i dont want to argue with you for no reason so i will reserve any negative comments.
 i typed a sentence with incorrect sentence structure , even though i corrected it within 2 minutes. fail by me.

Modifié par darkpassenger2342, 06 juillet 2012 - 08:51 .

[ld1449]

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

snip*
just because you think the developers are idiots that have no understanding of english doesnt mean they do.
snip*

This.

 of all the things you could have typed, you chose to criticise me on a mistype, that  I swiftly corrected, over something with actual purpose?

I suggest you calm yourself. I didn't critisize, I pointed it out. I've already stated my reasons for believing Synthesis is a horrible option and why people can view it interpret it as such.

And how swiftly you got to it aparently isn't swift enough considering I had time to read it, post my asking for you to look at it, read you asking me why, and then me quoting and answering that so don't spit acid at everything that moves in this thread of yours.

[darkpassenger2342]

i said i didnt want to argue with you. i typed a mistake in one of my 20 posts on this thread and you called me out on it within 1 minute of it posting.. so im not the only one " spitting acid"
i made a grammatical error and phrased a sentence improperly how many different ways can i say it.
there are enough reasons to argue here. 

Modifié par darkpassenger2342, 06 juillet 2012 - 08:53 .

[Baronesa]

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Because the writer didn't understand it either. This happens quite frequently in sci-fi, unfortunately.
That's all I have to say to you on that.

 so you do in fact, claim that you know more about the ending than the people who wrote it?

Look... when you talk about evolution... there is a definition... and Synthesis does not meet it.

And seriously... WTF was that about evolution and Darwinism?

If I accept gravity am I a Newtonian? If I accept the Big Bang Theory am I a LaMaitresian or whatever?

[CptData]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

NOT choosing synthesis?

I disagree. Actually...I think it's quite the opposite.
Who are we to make that kind of decision to turn everyone into bio-mechanical beings?

Let's put it this way: choosing an ending where the Reapers continue to exist - after all what had happened - is betraying all souls of those who died in the cycles before.

Modifié par CptData, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:03 .

[darkpassenger2342]

the theory of evolution applies to LIVING things.
the definition of evolution applies to inanimate objects as well...... cars, planes, society can EVOLVE..
amazing.... you guys overstating this misinterpretation of evolution are way out on a limb.
and going out of your way to insult me when i am not misunderstanding anything.
i suppose the ending was all a lie to some of you, but i believed it and they said it was the final form of evolution...
 you trying to change the word doesnt change the ending... wow.

Modifié par darkpassenger2342, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:07 .

[Omega2079]

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

Do people Ever CHOOSE to evolve???
does any creature? *cough * organic??
not that i can remember.
evolution never was, and never will be a choice.

Individuals don't evolve. They can't. Species as a whole do evolve.

Synthesis is a completely different process of change.

Synthesis is a directed change to an intentional goal. It's a near opposite of evolution.

[darkpassenger2342]

funny, because they said it was the ultimate evolution. i guess i have to choose between your word and theirs.

[Omega2079]

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

funny, because they said it was the ultimate evolution. i guess i have to choose between your word and theirs.

They used a netaphore, not the natural process.

They also said they were beyond our understanding.

Modifié par Omega2079, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:16 .

[Zeppex]

Synthesis is fundamentally wrong and revolting in my opinion. Who the hell am I to decided everyone in the galaxy becomes part synthetic. People should have a choice. FREE WILL is a fundamental right of all creatures.

Choosing synthesis a slap to every race that came before the ME cycle. Especially the races that created the Reapers, the catalyst said they were turned against there will. Oh what synthesis do, yeah thats right turn people against their will.

Id rather die trying then to be half synthetic. IMO OFC

[Pantegana]

Just blow the blasted things (reapers) up and have a pint. Cheers

[Ieldra]

@darkpassenger:
If you want to find some ammunition for your debate, you may find some in these threads:

A different ascension - the Synthesis compendium.
On the nature of the Catalyst and the Reapers, and why Synthesis is an attractive choice

I might also add that Javik says that "all life that has ever existed is watching you" (paraphrased), and I take that rather literally to apply to the Reapers as enslaved avatars of past civilizations, bound by the Catalyst to do to others what was done to them, as much victims as servants of the cycle.

I am not with you in one point though: Synthesis is a risky choice. I can fully understand people who don't want to choose it for that reason, even though I agree that the Reapers as avatars of past civilizations must be factored into anyone's decision. Saying "they're already dead" or "it's a mercy-killing" is a cop-out.

Edit:
Regarding "evolution": the writers use the term in a very loose sense. I don't think any state of being can ever be called "final" and still be called life - and EDI specifically says that post-Synthesis life is not stagnating. The term "final evolution" likely means that post-Synthesis civilization can take control over the direction their bodies are changing instead of being limited by the dance of random chance and selection. Replacing "natural evolution" with "artificial evolution", so to speak.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:36 .

[Jadebaby]

By the Catalyst referring to synthesis as the 'final evolution of life', really means that synthesis stops evolution.
Synthesis is f***ing disgusting. Nuff said.

[Jadebaby]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@darkpassenger:
If you want to find some ammunition for your debate, you may find some in these threads:

A different ascension - the Synthesis compendium.
On the nature of the Catalyst and the Reapers, and why Synthesis is an attractive choice

I might also add that Javik says that "all life that has ever existed is watching you" (paraphrased), and I take that rather literally to apply to the Reapers as enslaved avatars of past civilizations, bound by the Catalyst to do to others what was done to them, as much victims as servants of the cycle.

I am not with you in one point though: Synthesis is a risky choice. I can fully understand people who don't want to choose it for that reason, even though I agree that the Reapers as avatars of past civilizations must be factored into anyone's decision. Saying "they're already dead" or "it's a mercy-killing" is a cop-out.

They are an abomination. They should be put to rest.

[julio77777]

Synthesis poses major problems. Such traumatic changes happening suddendly cannot be so well received by everyone, it would first cause a series of mass suicide by those who just can't accept their new bodies, riots from those who just don't understand what's going on, some would just go mad. and that's only taking the human side of the problem. Seeing all people just accepting that and be all happy made me laugh seriously.

Also it is never explained how it works, how does Shepard's organic energy end up changing the galaxy into...what exactly ?

And finally it doesn't solve Starchild's problem at all. They can still make synthetics that would revolt and exterminate them. And in the first place organic life is pretty much extinct.

And that is just on the top of my head there is probably many other problems that I'm omitting. And unless you adress those issues that "solution" and their "everybody is happy" vision can't be taken seriously (at least by me).

Modifié par julio77777, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:40 .

[Ieldra]

@JadeBaby88:
Meaningless assertions gain you nothing. If you think Reapers are "abominations", then tell me why? You can't, because "abomination" is already a pejorative term based on a normative concept of nature. Normative concepts are always rooted in belief systems, and I don't agree with your belief system. There are no "abominations". The perception of life forms as such is an artifact of misaimed notions of the sacred, a stone age legacy we'd better overcome.

The Reapers are enemies we have every right to defend against and kill, like any other enemy threatening our survival. But they are valid life forms, and to end the war by making peace should be considered as desirable. That you might not want to pay the price and change all life, that I understand, but that's a different problem.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:44 .

[CroGamer002]

So you say Synthesis is brainwashing people?

[Vigilant111]

@Ieldra2: Don't you think the reapers view organics as abominations?

[darkpassenger2342]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@JadeBaby88:
Meaningless assertions gain you nothing. If you think Reapers are "abominations", then tell me why? You can't, because "abomination" is already a pejorative term based on a normative concept of nature. Normative concepts are always rooted in belief systems, and I don't agree with your belief system. There are no "abominations". The perception of life forms as such is an artifact of misaimed notions of the sacred, a stone age legacy we'd better overcome.

The Reapers are enemies we have every right to defend against and kill, like any other enemy threatening our survival. But they are valid life forms.

 its not so much that im trying to take a stance about whether or not this is literal evolution.... its more along the lines that i was forced to define its definiton within edi's context, which you have done as well. because to some of these guys the word was never used at all.

Modifié par darkpassenger2342, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:46 .

[The Angry One]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@JadeBaby88:
Meaningless assertions gain you nothing. If you think Reapers are "abominations", then tell me why? You can't, because "abomination" is already a pejorative term based on a normative concept of nature. Normative concepts are always rooted in belief systems, and I don't agree with your belief system. There are no "abominations". The perception of life forms as such is an artifact of misaimed notions of the sacred, a stone age legacy we'd better overcome.

The Reapers are enemies we have every right to defend against and kill, like any other enemy threatening our survival. But they are valid life forms, and to end the war by making peace should be considered as desirable. That you might not want to pay the price and change all life, that I understand, but that's a different problem.

A life form built on the pain and suffering of billions is not a valid, independant life form, it is a parasite.
Existing only to take and consume, with no true culture or life of it's own. They are abominations, and a mockery of the victims they still carry inside as material.

Modifié par The Angry One, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:46 .

[v TricKy v]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@JadeBaby88:
Meaningless assertions gain you nothing. If you think Reapers are "abominations", then tell me why? You can't, because "abomination" is already a pejorative term based on a normative concept of nature. Normative concepts are always rooted in belief systems, and I don't agree with your belief system. There are no "abominations". The perception of life forms as such is an artifact of misaimed notions of the sacred, a stone age legacy we'd better overcome.

The Reapers are enemies we have every right to defend against and kill, like any other enemy threatening our survival. But they are valid life forms.

So you are fine with abandoning things which makes us human?
And if someone makes a virus which revives dead people are they also valid life forms for you?
Where are you drawing the line?