Ryzaki wrote...
wantedman dan wrote...
Hackulator wrote...
No, there really isn't. Letting everyone die because of your pride is not moral.
Said this earlier today, but it is applicable now.
Your false sense of personalization is adorable.
the utter stupidity of placing all your bets (at the beginning of a war no less) on a weapon who's function you're not even sure of and that you can barely comprehend utterly baffles me.
Ticonderoga117 wrote...
RiouHotaru wrote...
The point of this thread is point out the blatant hypocrisy. The same hypocrisy that occurs when people claim Synthesis is a violation of the galaxy's free-will but Refusal is morally sound.
Because everyone signed up to fight the Reapers and kill them, not let them live and get free WiFi.
I don't see any hypocrisy there.
Modifié par Torrible, 07 juillet 2012 - 08:01 .
Heeden wrote...
I mean from Shep's personal morality, the stain on his soul so to speak.
Refuse leaves him totally innocent, no blood on his hands.
Synthesis causes a change but is the next least violation.
Control enslaves the will of other sentient beings to Shep's control.
Destroy kills many sentient beings.
A lot of people argue that Shep, despite being a spectre, has no right to make decisions on this scale so from their moral stand-point Refuse is the only choice. I disagree with them because I believe it is a consequential not a moral decision, but I understand and respect their stance.
Hackulator wrote...
wantedman dan wrote...
Your false sense of personalization is adorable.
Is there some country where this sentence makes some sort of sense? I literally have no idea what you are trying to say to me here. I feel its likely you will respond with some sort of insult, because that is easier than explaining muddled thinking, but I am hoping I am wrong.
Fawx9 wrote...
Hackulator wrote...
Grimwick wrote...
Is the point of this thread trying to point out that we call one space magicky thing space magic but others not? That's hilarious.
Pretty much. Or, "as long as there is random technobabble associated with my space magic, that makes it ok": Or maybe "There is a distinct point in time when new space magic becomes unacceptable."
Basically, none of these opinions really have any logical backing. If we had suddenly found the Crucible at the end of the game with no prior knowledge of it and it had saved us, then people might have some sort of valid argument, but that is not how it went. We've known about the Crucible since the second mission of the game. It is a standard McGuffin, and not really worse (or better) than the McGuffin in a million other stories. If you don't know what a McGuffin is, you probably don't know enough about writing to be taking part in this conversation in a meaningful and knowledgable manner.
Twisting around words must be fun. No one is debating the McGuffin that is the crucible. It was stated as a way to defeat the reapers and thats what we went ahead in the game with.
What we are debating is that nothing prepared the player to believe that the process that Synthesis uses is, well, believable with the game. Again I ask where are we foreshadowed that what we are building might power a machine that lets us alter the DNA of everyone in the galaxy? Cause all I heard throught the game was it was the only way to defeat the reapers until the last 5 minutes.
Ticonderoga117 wrote...
How does that change DNA and create synthetic implants?
wantedman dan wrote...
Ryzaki wrote...
wantedman dan wrote...
Hackulator wrote...
No, there really isn't. Letting everyone die because of your pride is not moral.
Said this earlier today, but it is applicable now.
Your false sense of personalization is adorable.
the utter stupidity of placing all your bets (at the beginning of a war no less) on a weapon who's function you're not even sure of and that you can barely comprehend utterly baffles me.
Don't question the Macguffin. It will do nothing but anger you.
Modifié par Ryzaki, 07 juillet 2012 - 07:58 .
Ryzaki wrote...
Just gave me the impression that everyone in Shep's cycle were idiots and the Refuse ending was natural selection at best. Until that damn tweet. <_<
Heeden wrote...
Ryzaki wrote...
I wouldn't agree with that much. Morally wise my choices are Destroy > Control > Refuse > Bad variations of the previous > Mission Failed > Synthesis.
But yeah I tend to pick Destroy. Sorry EDI and the Geth.
Refuse seems too petty on BW's part for me to take it seriously and no it's not because Shep loses. I was expecting and looking forward to that. It's the presentation of it.
I mean from Shep's personal morality, the stain on his soul so to speak.
Refuse leaves him totally innocent, no blood on his hands.
Synthesis causes a change but is the next least violation.
Control enslaves the will of other sentient beings to Shep's control.
Destroy kills many sentient beings.
A lot of people argue that Shep, despite being a spectre, has no right to make decisions on this scale so from their moral stand-point Refuse is the only choice. I disagree with them because I believe it is a consequential not a moral decision, but I understand and respect their stance.
Heeden wrote...
Ticonderoga117 wrote...
How does that change DNA and create synthetic implants?
It doesn't, it changes the matrix of all organic life and allows them to integrate fully with technology which is the stated effects of Synthesis in the expanded explanation.
Modifié par DGMockingJay, 07 juillet 2012 - 08:01 .
Hackulator wrote...
Heeden wrote...
Ryzaki wrote...
I wouldn't agree with that much. Morally wise my choices are Destroy > Control > Refuse > Bad variations of the previous > Mission Failed > Synthesis.
But yeah I tend to pick Destroy. Sorry EDI and the Geth.
Refuse seems too petty on BW's part for me to take it seriously and no it's not because Shep loses. I was expecting and looking forward to that. It's the presentation of it.
I mean from Shep's personal morality, the stain on his soul so to speak.
Refuse leaves him totally innocent, no blood on his hands.
Synthesis causes a change but is the next least violation.
Control enslaves the will of other sentient beings to Shep's control.
Destroy kills many sentient beings.
A lot of people argue that Shep, despite being a spectre, has no right to make decisions on this scale so from their moral stand-point Refuse is the only choice. I disagree with them because I believe it is a consequential not a moral decision, but I understand and respect their stance.
Refuse leaves him totally innocent with no blood on his hands? Are you serious? What sort of screwed up moral compass do you have.
Let's I'm in a room at a nuclear missile silo, and one of the missiles has been activated and is about to fire at a major city. All I have to do to stop this is press the "cancel" button. Is it your contention that, if I choose not to press that button, I have done nothing morally wrong?
wantedman dan wrote...
Hackulator wrote...
wantedman dan wrote...
Your false sense of personalization is adorable.
Is there some country where this sentence makes some sort of sense? I literally have no idea what you are trying to say to me here. I feel its likely you will respond with some sort of insult, because that is easier than explaining muddled thinking, but I am hoping I am wrong.
Then, instead of being obtuse about things, you could ask questions. Y'know, like what rational people do when they think they don't understand what someone else is saying.
wantedman dan wrote...
If your other option is to inflict genocide upon a civilization or race to stop it, which do you choose?
Modifié par Hackulator, 07 juillet 2012 - 08:03 .
Ryzaki wrote...
My Shepard wouldn't see Synthesis as the least violation. On sheer scale alone it vastly outruns all the others. But opinions and all that right?
Modifié par Heeden, 07 juillet 2012 - 08:04 .
wantedman dan wrote...
I refuse to accept the tweet's existence. I absolutely refuse. Fitting, I know.
Oh, great MacCrucible, impart upon me your infinite capacity for war crimes!
DGMockingJay wrote...
Can u EXPAND on that?? I mean the matrix of life, and the integrating thingy, with the technology. It sounds like science mumbo jumobo to me..
Heeden wrote...
Ryzaki wrote...
My Shepard wouldn't see Synthesis as the least violation. On sheer scale alone it vastly outruns all the others. But opinions and all that right?
Indeed, the momentum of the moral decision is the weight of the deed multiplied by the magnitude of it's effect; and the weight of the deed is fully subject.
I firmly believe "freedom is the right of all sentient beings" and Synthesis is the one that idealises that the most, but I learned that from Optimus Prime so it could be a subtle form of synthetic indoctrination.
Torrible wrote...
And enough of this talk about consent. So Shepard didn't sought everyone's consent before giving them green eyes, immunity from diseases, higher intelligence, ability to interface with machine etc. So perhaps, that's not good. But the consent of the Geth (in Destroy) and billions of sentient beings (in Refusal) were not sought either. Nobody asked them, "do you want to be part synthetic like everyone else or do you want to sacrificed when there are other options that will allow you to live?"
Hackulator wrote...
Expectations shown to be correct.wantedman dan wrote...
If your other option is to inflict genocide upon a civilization or race to stop it, which do you choose?
If one will kill a billion, and one will kill a million, its pretty obvious.
Heeden wrote...
DGMockingJay wrote...
Can u EXPAND on that?? I mean the matrix of life, and the integrating thingy, with the technology. It sounds like science mumbo jumobo to me..
No, there wasn't enough time...
Ryzaki wrote...
...I need to watch the latest Transformers movie. But everyone keeps telling me it blows.
Heeden wrote...
Ticonderoga117 wrote...
How does that change DNA and create synthetic implants?
It doesn't, it changes the matrix of all organic life and allows them to integrate fully with technology which is the stated effects of Synthesis in the expanded explanation.
wantedman dan wrote...
Hackulator wrote...
Expectations shown to be correct.wantedman dan wrote...
If your other option is to inflict genocide upon a civilization or race to stop it, which do you choose?
If one will kill a billion, and one will kill a million, its pretty obvious.
Please. To come in wihtout an argument and then proclaim, "LOL UR TROLLIN'" is childish at best.
It's a non-option and poor narrative.
Ticonderoga117 wrote...
Yes, it does. As soon as mystic green wave thingy goes by, you clearly see synthetic implants on EVERYONE. Unless that is just biolumenscense that just happens to look like circuitry.
We already know the Catalyst is full of crap about a lot of things, and the game still shows us the above.
Ticonderoga117 wrote...
Yes, it does. As soon as mystic green wave thingy goes by, you clearly see synthetic implants on EVERYONE. Unless that is just biolumenscense that just happens to look like circuitry.
We already know the Catalyst is full of crap about a lot of things, and the game still shows us the above.
Retour en haut