285 réponses à ce sujet

[Kabraxal]

Because I spent the whole game, and series to an extent, trying to bridge the gaps between species. And ME3 is definitely hard work towards the Geth integrating and EDI finding her place as another sentient being. So killing eithe rof them seems stupid and makes much of the themes of the game rather pointless.

Also... it doesn't really favour certain members to keep throwing around "sexbot" like that wins their argument... it only shows that they have a deep bias against EDI and aren't interested in any real reasoning.

[Clayless]

DEATHSCOPE wrote...

BerzerkGene wrote...

Probably when she became a person. But i generally don't like destroy not because of her, but because it kills the Geth. I like the geth.

You mean you liked Legion. He's the only Geth that you've ever interacted with anyway.

For me, I don't really care for the Geth after Legion died. Toasters have been shooting at me for three games straight.

Legion died for his people, everything he did was for him, saying you don't care for them is pretty much the same as saying you don't care for Legion as his people basically defined his character.

[Joccaren]

I personally do it for THE ENTIRE GETH RACE.

As you said, one individual - Shepard - dying vs an entire race dying. Its obvious which one is preferable in that regard.

[DEATHSCOPE]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

DEATHSCOPE wrote...

BerzerkGene wrote...

Probably when she became a person. But i generally don't like destroy not because of her, but because it kills the Geth. I like the geth.

You mean you liked Legion. He's the only Geth that you've ever interacted with anyway.

For me, I don't really care for the Geth after Legion died. Toasters have been shooting at me for three games straight.

Legion died for his people, everything he did was for him, saying you don't care for them is pretty much the same as saying you don't care for Legion as his people basically defined his character.

I don't see it that way. Legion's individual programs defined him, not his people. Sure he tried to save his people, just like Garrus or Liara. But could I like Garrus but not his people? Yes, I can.

[Transairion]

I care about EDI, and I care about the Geth, I liked them. Well, it was hard to like them in ME1 when they were so cross with me (Luna VI EDI and Saren's Geth), but ME2 really changed my mind about them. Legion was the greatest squadmate in ME2 in my opinion.

A better question is why does anyone have to die at all? There is no good reason except Bioware wanted three different endings, and wanted each to be picked "equally". So if the Destroy ending was nothing but "Reapers die", you know who'd pick it? Everyone, everywhere.  A sacrifice-less Destroy has literally no downside to it.

But Bioware didn't want that, they wanted them to be "evenly picked", so they gave Destroy a pretty lame downside that kicks Paragons in the nads. You saved the Geth? LOL not anymore. Encouraged EDI to be more human? LOL wasted effort. Of course, Control and Synthesis are kind of nonsense to introduce right at the very end of the game, so the majority of people pick Destroy anyway.

Literally the only reason synthetics die is because without that downside, no-one would pick anything but Destroy, especially since all the other options result in Shepards death.

[K_Os2]

She and Joker made me laugh brightened the mood when it counted and then she got a body and I was like cool for a little bit and then their relationship...

Modifié par K_Os2, 05 août 2012 - 08:07 .

[Melra]

I didn't care one bit, she's a machine.

[Kabraxal]

So are humans though.. just biological instead of mechanical. Being a machine doesn't mean consciousness isn't possible... I mean really, the fact that we are conscious is a mystery so an AI reaching our level of sentience isn't that odd or unbelievable.

[Melra]

Well I still don't care about EDI, never really have. Everything else is more important.

[RadicalDisconnect]

Melrache wrote...

I didn't care one bit, she's a machine.

I congratulate thy supreme logic and reasoning. 

 

On another note, I really hope in the Leviathan DLC they can give EDI a pair of Alliance uniform or utilities. That can remove so much of the complaints.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 05 août 2012 - 08:26 .

[daaaav]

Yes Yes, the cameltoe was a little off the mark but honestly, whats with all the sexbot nonsense?

Edi was curious about humans, already had a female voice and made herself a body, an attractive body.

What the bloody hell is wrong with that? Should Edi be completely asexual and adrogenous? Why?

I liked Edi and her character arc.

[o Ventus]

Kabraxal wrote...

So are humans though.. just biological instead of mechanical. Being a machine doesn't mean consciousness isn't possible... I mean really, the fact that we are conscious is a mystery so an AI reaching our level of sentience isn't that odd or unbelievable.

As I said before, AIs and machines can be built in a matter of weeks, but it takes millions of years for organics to evolve and years to mature.

@bold, no it isn't.

[TheIdiocyWizard2.0]

I really liked EDI, and she had wonderful character development, but I still go with destroy. I don't do it lightly, but I feel that ridding the galaxy of the Reapers once and for all must be done. It sucks that I have to give EDI up, but that's my choice.

[Kabraxal]

o Ventus wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

So are humans though.. just biological instead of mechanical. Being a machine doesn't mean consciousness isn't possible... I mean really, the fact that we are conscious is a mystery so an AI reaching our level of sentience isn't that odd or unbelievable.

As I said before, AIs and machines can be built in a matter of weeks, but it takes millions of years for organics to evolve and years to mature.

@bold, no it isn't.

Thought it's taken decades to build what little programming we have now... it would be centuries in ME time.  Computer progress has already been proven to be faster than any other technolgoical leap by an astounding rate, so whose to say this isn't a kind of evolution that ends up resulting into a consciousness pararellel to our own?

We place far too much value on organic processes when we don't even understand consciousness on ANY level in relation to an actual biological system.  It is a complete and utter mystery and thus us saying an AI can't be conscoiusness of equal value is quite absurd and shows are arrogant ignorance.  

And @Melcrache... that's fair.  THere are characters I'd gladly trade or didn't care about *cough* Zaeede* cough*

[DirtyPhoenix]

Kabraxal wrote...
THere are characters I'd gladly trade or didn't care about *cough* Zaeede* cough*

Or Jacob. Or....*gasp* Jack.

[CrazyRah]

EDI is a machine so i don't care all that much about her demise. It suck that she do die but i get as sad as when my toaster perhaps die.

[o Ventus]

Kabraxal wrote...

Thought it's taken decades to build what little programming we have now... it would be centuries in ME time.  Computer progress has already been proven to be faster than any other technolgoical leap by an astounding rate, so whose to say this isn't a kind of evolution that ends up resulting into a consciousness pararellel to our own?

Because you need organics to create the synthetic intelligence....?

... Unless you're saying that synthetics can create themselves.

We place far too much value on organic processes when we don't even understand consciousness on ANY level in relation to an actual biological system.

That's because consciousness is tied to the brain. inb4 "we don't understand how consciousness works!"

It is a complete and utter mystery and thus us saying an AI can't be conscoiusness of equal value is quite absurd and shows are arrogant ignorance.

Again, no it isn't.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Just to restate my views on the matter.

I feel mostly ambivalent about EDI and the Geth who aren't Legion.

Do I think it's a bummer that they die in destroy? Yes.

Do I let that stop me? Hell no.

[beaverskenneth]

I've noticed a lot of people refer to her as a sexbot. Kind of an unfair term. Maybe they didn't need to give her big fake jugs or an ass worthy of Miranda's, but those things are minor details. I believe it was necessary to have her deviate from her previous role a bit and become a squad member. I mean, why not? Ever since ME2, I wondered what it would be like to have EDI groundside, and ME3 gives us that. I know I am not the only one, either.

She doesn't become a romance to Joker if you discourage the romance, so if you are complaining about it, then it's most likely your fault. Kind of like...DURRRR. But anyway, I believe that what causes most people to choose anything other than destroy (other than curiosity) is the hope that humanity won't lose its place in the galaxy. By choosing destroy, you destroy more than just the Geth and EDI. You destroy most advanced technology, including the relays. Hackett says they are rebuilding them, but how the hell are they doing that if their technology was lost? Hmmmm?!?!?!?!

Yeah, the extended cut ending is still a mindf**k, people. Don't believe it, and continue to support the Indoctrination Theory! I'll remind you all that Bioware STILL has not actually said, "No, Shepard was not being indoctrinated," so don't give up hope. There's just far too much evidence to point to the contrary.

[D24O]

Mfw people with their false dichotomies. EDI =/= toaster, one is sapient and sentient, one toasts bread. Seriously, it's not that hard to realize that they're different.

[Gryphon7]

I'm still not exactly sure why the energy specifically designed to kill Reapers had to kill the Geth and Edi too, aside from making the Destroy option anything but the default win button choice.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

D24O wrote...

Mfw people with their false dichotomies. EDI =/= toaster, one is sapient and sentient, one toasts bread. Seriously, it's not that hard to realize that they're different.

You have clearly never seen the depths of evil toasters will sink to.

They are made from pure hate.

[D24O]

Only in the Big MT research facility. The rest are pretty cool though.