1085 réponses à ce sujet

[3DandBeyond]

memorysquid wrote...

EDI is shackled but also free within constraints until Joker unlocks her.  As would be an actual human in shackles.  The question is the bounds of the constraints.  The Catalyst tells you how he is constrained.  He is constrained to find a solution to organic/synthetic discord.  He is constrained not to be able to activate the Crucible by himself.  You know he is shackled as a result. 

I don't get why you are fighting this.  You have some dog in the fight, you want the Catalyst to be morally culpable or something.  That he is shackled is plainly presented in the game.

The Catalyst basically says he has no constraints.  His problem is not constrained because he has changed it.  He was to find a solution to some problem that did or will exist, not to create that problem.  He was to find peace and creates war and seeds the galaxy with tech that will advance people to create synthetics that will cause the conflict he sees as inevitable.  If he is shackled or constrained by his programming, then that's a pretty odd interpretation of what he was supposed to do.

It's like hiring a cop to fight crime.  His job is to fight crime and keep the peace.  He is constrained to do that. If he does this and then opens up Meth labs and gives people guns and then runs in with other cops under his control and starts shooting people to stop the crime, I don't think he is doing what he was supposed to do.

Nowhere is it ever said the kid is shackled nor is it plainly presented.  His programming is warped.  It doesn't even matter how that happened.  He has gone off track.  His solution or giant people sucking machines.  I am sure this was the intent of his programming. 

If I have a dog in the fight, so do you.  In a discussion, everyone does or they have no opinion.

[Armass81]

Ive said many times that i have personally been two minds on the whole ending thing, especially after EC which in my mind made the thing adequate, not good, certainly not great, adequate. I can see what Bioware tried to do with the whole catalyst revelation. The thing is it wasnt necessary, they already had the whole thing in the bag, all that was needed was an easy slide to the end. Myabe they got overly ambitious and Casey just decided we needed this one "awesome final twist" in the end... no, just no. It wasnt necessary, certainly not like this. Maybe it looked good on the paper, but in the game... it just falls on its face.

There was no need to put this puppetmaster behind puppetmasters to the story at the last minute and give it a mediocre explanation, at the same time both cheapening the lore and the reapers themselves and then give us 3 endings of which one is a totally nonsensical, Alice in Wonderland kind of fantasy magic. If I was in charge of the story theres no way I would have ended it like this, and I havent gone to any story writing classes. This is such a bad mistake you have to ask yourself over and over again, if these people are supposed to be professionals, what the hell were they thinking with this? If a fan can write a better ending than the storyteller, something is seriously wrong. Maybe they should go back to school...

Modifié par Armass81, 10 août 2012 - 05:46 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Much as I don't get on with dreman9999 and I find the majority of his posts almost indecipherable. He is right in broad strokes. In that:

The Catalyst never broke it's programming.
The Catalyst has never killed anyone
The 3 ending are _all_ due to the Crucible not the Catalyst (the AI)

Firstly the Reapers are not bound by the same restrictions that the Catalyst has. the Catalyst can give the Reapers purpose that doesn't explicitly including killing and then simply _allow_ the Reapers to kill, as long as the _end_ results are in-line with its programming.
Secondly the Reapers _try_ to use living organics, storing their DNA, minds and memories in their Reaper, those races that do not resist are "ascended" wholesale, with all their minds and memories stored. Those that resist have less and less of their living minds and more DNA from corpses, this is what Harbinger means when he says "If you continue to resist there will be a cost"
Thirdly if you can't see how an AI tasked with such a complex concept as "peace" could conclude that harvesting and storing civilisations is a valid solution you haven't read enough Asimov.

You can chose not to believe all that, but it _is_ what Bioware intended and it does make sense in the context of AI as presented in comparable Sci-Fi. It was _really_ poorly presented in the OC but much better in the EC

[3DandBeyond]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Much as I don't get on with dreman9999 and I find the majority of his posts almost indecipherable. He is right in broad strokes. In that:

The Catalyst never broke it's programming.
The Catalyst has never killed anyone
The 3 ending are _all_ due to the Crucible not the Catalyst (the AI)

Firstly the Reapers are not bound by the same restrictions that the Catalyst has. the Catalyst can give the Reapers purpose that doesn't explicitly including killing and then simply _allow_ the Reapers to kill, as long as the _end_ results are in-line with its programming.
Secondly the Reapers _try_ to use living organics, storing their DNA, minds and memories in their Reaper, those races that do not resist are "ascended" wholesale, with all their minds and memories stored. Those that resist have less and less of their living minds and more DNA from corpses, this is what Harbinger means when he says "If you continue to resist there will be a cost"
Thirdly if you can't see how an AI tasked with such a complex concept as "peace" could conclude that harvesting and storing civilisations is a valid solution you haven't read enough Asimov.

You can chose not to believe all that, but it _is_ what Bioware intended and it does make sense in the context of AI as presented in comparable Sci-Fi. It was _really_ poorly presented in the OC but much better in the EC

The kid says he gave them function not purpose.  He says they gave him purpose.  That seems to mean that their existence gives him the reason to do what he does.  He gives them function.  He tells them what to do.  They do it which gives him his purpose.  This creates the circle.  The purpose they give him becomes stopping them by destroying organics.  The function he gives them is ascending organics (which any organic could tell you looks a lot like death).

Again, how can you say he has not killed anyone?  Please, honestly look at what he says and what's happened.  He controls them-they kill-thus he kills.  They don't just "ascend" everyone.  I could just as easily say that that Harbinger quote means you resist you die.

I don't care what Asimov (and I've read plenty) says, that's irrelevant here.  The kid was to find peace.  He creates war and he knows what that is.  It doesn't just happen.  He creates it.  He created a viscious circle of consequences.  He seeds tech that advances organics that then must be harvested so they will not create synthetics that will cause war and thus creates war to kill organic life and "ascend" some organic life and seeds tech to start it all over again.  The only conflict that will always exist is the one he created.

You have not read dreman.  On the one hand he says the kid is the victim of his programming, on the other hand he fooled his programming.


You are speculating as to what BW meant since much of what they meant came from the stories of other people in other games and movies.  B5, BSG, the Matrix, Deus ex and so on.  That's why the "message" is so muddied and malleable.  There is no one coherent message and no one coherent meaning for the kid at all.  Based on what he says he is reaper god.  He's in charge.  He thinks he's serving his purpose by doing things people dislike.  And those ascended minds that are all now within him, would tell him this is not good.  If the ending was at all logical which it isn't.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 10 août 2012 - 05:56 .

[guacamayus]

In my opinion some people are trying to understand this by using our own morality and that's the wrong way to look at it. The catalyst doesn't give a crap about individuality, it's all about the species. It 'preserves' millions of individual minds inside a single structure. Every mind belongs to the same species, a new creature capable of behaving like an individual as if all those minds were nothing more than cells of an organic being.
My point is that if a hundred million organics are killed during the war but they are able to create a reaper then the goal is achieved because the concept of murdering an individual is something that this type of AI (isolated, coded to protect organics as a group above all else) can't even understand or care about.

[tyrvas]

@ 3DandBeyond
the Kid says he gave the reapers function.
made them work as he thought they should, which is the reaper cycle,
a purpose he has imposed on them, which the reapers believe is what they where created for..

Modifié par tyrvas, 10 août 2012 - 06:33 .

[Mobius-Silent]

3DandBeyond wrote...
If the ending was at all logical which it isn't.

Here's the thing: you are dismissing all the intended points that lend credibility to the story, then complain it's illogical.

Thats cool, but simply put: you're never going to be happy, the story you want isn't the story Bioware wanted to tell, but that is your problem, not theirs.

The ending wasn't good (I have no problem with that point), but once they cleared up the vagueness with the EC it is perfectly consistent, Leviathan will add to that and (from what you say) you will most likely become less and less happy.

I re-itterate if you believe this:

The kid was to find peace.  He creates war and he knows what that is.  It doesn't just happen.  He creates it.  He created a viscious circle of consequences.  He seeds tech that advances organics that then must be harvested so they will not create synthetics that will cause war and thus creates war to kill organic life and "ascend" some organic life and seeds tech to start it all over again.  The only conflict that will always exist is the one he created

You are simply missing the whole point of ending, it will never make sense to you because you are wrong.

Again, how can you say he has not killed anyone?  Please, honestly look at what he says and what's happened.  He controls them-they kill-thus he kills.  They don't just "ascend" everyone.  I could just as easily say that that Harbinger quote means you resist you die.

You see this is classic Azimov, these issues were hashed out in the 1950s so this is not a new concept.

If a "robot" initiates a process that _could_ end up with harm being committed to a human but knows that it can stop the process before that harm happens it is only the "Omission of action" section of the three laws that stops the robot from doing it.
The example in I Robot is a robot that has a weakened 1st law (so that it can work alongside humans in dangerous environment without constantly "saving" humans from the danger) that removes the "omission of action part" The robot could drop a heavy weight down onto a human if it knew that it could stop the weight before it impacted, once it was no longer holding the weight is was _gravity_ that was acting and would eventually kill the human hence the robot was not compelled to prevent the death.

This is _classic_ AI theory.

In much the same way the Catalyst gave the Reapers function/purpose that was conceived of prevent synthetics scrubbing all organic like while preserving as much of their civilisation as it could. In an ideal harvest there would the 100% harvesting of live organics all their memories and identity would be used to make up the new reaper, the more resistance and the more the Reapers would be forced to kill.

Think about the "Virtual aliens" in the ME codex, they were once organic and uploaded their minds into a giant computer, the same thing that the reapers are doing, the only difference is that the minds are not being individually simulated any more, they are being used in one enormous mind.

That is horrific to us... but there is no different to a machine, the data is the same, it's just how it is used afterwards. This is what synthesis does, its allows synthetics to implicitly understand the value of each conciousness and a entity rather that just looking at it's inputs and outputs, it gives then feelings (not organic parts).

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 10 août 2012 - 07:03 .

[3DandBeyond]

tyrvas wrote...

@ 3DandBeyond
the Kid says he gave the reapers function.
made them work as he thought they should, which is the reaper cycle,
a purpose he has imposed on them, which the reapers believe is what they where created for..

I agree he gave them function.  They gave him purpose-that's also what he says.  I don't think the reapers believe they were created for such a purpose.  He controls them to do what they do.

The kid was created for a reason, to do something.  He created the reapers using the constructs his creators created-he put his creators in one.

The kid used the reapers, but he says his creators gave them form (they made the constructs), he gave them function (told them what to do), and they gave him purpose (they provide the need for him to exist).  Purpose is the reason for something to exist.  He does not say he gave them purpose but says function-he gave them their role.

What this could mean (and it's opinion but does have rationale based on what happens in the game) is the kid defined what the reapers would do.  The reapers do it and thus proves he is right.  And since everything the kid does is circular logic that fits with all that he says.

He says conflict will always exist between organics and synthetics and it will, because he causes it.  He repeatedly does this so he creates a need for the reapers that cause the problem (the conflict), that he is then needed to keep from happening by sending the reapers.  And even in doing this he is also carrying on what his creators started because his creators are in the first reaper and in harvesting they create new reapers so it starts the cycle again.  His creators give them form, he gives them function and they give him purpose.  That's the basis of all that he does or why he does it the way he does it.

[Massa FX]

@mobius-silent. So... what is wrong with 3D's summary of events? Wait. ... Are you Demon999 in disguise?

[Baronesa]

Cheesus... is this still going?

There is no sAlution for this thread...

This is beyond definAtion -.-

[Applepie_Svk]

Massa FX wrote...

@mobius-silent. So... what is wrong with 3D's summary of events? Wait. ... Are you Demon999 in disguise?

[3DandBeyond]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
If the ending was at all logical which it isn't.

Here's the thing: you are dismissing all the intended points that lend credibility to the story, then complain it's illogical.

Thats cool, but simply put: you're never going to be happy, the story you want isn't the story Bioware wanted to tell, but that is your problem, not theirs.

The ending wasn't good (I have no problem with that point), but once they cleared up the vagueness with the EC it is perfectly consistent, Leviathan will add to that and (from what you say) you will most likely become less and less happy.

I re-itterate if you believe this:

The kid was to find peace.  He creates war and he knows what that is.  It doesn't just happen.  He creates it.  He created a viscious circle of consequences.  He seeds tech that advances organics that then must be harvested so they will not create synthetics that will cause war and thus creates war to kill organic life and "ascend" some organic life and seeds tech to start it all over again.  The only conflict that will always exist is the one he created

You are simply missing the whole point of ending, it will never make sense to you because you are wrong.

You say that without proof.  And I've said what the writers say in the game.  Point me to where I am wrong.  You can't make a general assertion about things that the writers say is so and then tell me I'm missing the point.  You apparently have envisioned dialogue that does not exist.  Where am I wrong in this statement?

The whole point of the ending is what?  Do illuminate.  The point of the ending is some insipid belief that all is futile and that winning means "on someone else's terms" based on the inability or lack of desire to write an actual ending.  Each choice requires Shepard do something Shepard (maybe A Shepard) has already rejected and never would do.  It's also fantasy with lots more talking and a happy slideshow used to gloss over what previously and logically was shown to be a destroyed galaxy.  It is the denial of self-determination because God Shepard sounds and looks cool, evolution as the positive way to learn and advance, because green eyes look cool and oooh cyborgs, and it rejects the notion that new life is really life unless it is organic based-it is lesser life.  But hey we got to destroy the reapers and the relays are A-OK.

The one non-choice were self-determination and free will is affirmed is punished.

And again the only synthetics repeatedly at conflict with organics to any unstoppable extent have been reapers.  So they are the problem the kid should solve and he doesn't.  In 2 endings, they are left alive and people develop according to them and whatever programming exists.

[Massa FX]

Baronesa wrote...

Cheesus... is this still going?

There is no sAlution for this thread...

This is beyond definAtion -.-

Isn't it insanity in action? 

Debate is fine, but the endless head to brick wall (all sides) got old around page 10. 

Although its fairly entertaining to check back here and read back through the pain. Im surprised mods havent shut down this thread.

Modifié par Massa FX, 10 août 2012 - 07:00 .

[3DandBeyond]

Baronesa wrote...

Cheesus... is this still going?

There is no sAlution for this thread...

This is beyond definAtion -.-

I think I should have stopped when I read the kid who is shackled fooled his programming.  This is indeed the black hole.  But it actually has been interesting.  I see that even people that hate the kid and think the endings are poorly written, like the kid and like the endings.  I understand all.

I actually wanted to see if people meant what they were saying and I can now honestly say, "I don't know."

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 10 août 2012 - 07:03 .

[tyrvas]

@ 3DandBeyond, you said it yourself "he gave them their role" a purpose.

[3DandBeyond]

tyrvas wrote...

@ 3DandBeyond, you said it yourself "he gave them their role" a purpose.

I agree I have never argued that he didn't.  I believe he did.  He says he controls them.  I kind of tend to take that for granted since he's there at the top of the world acting as their spokesman.  He is responsible for all they do-that's what I've said.  I've tried actually discussing with others that seem to think he's helpless.

I am in no way arguing with you.   I was just stating that he says his creators gave them form, he gave them function, they gave him purpose.  Function is just more than purpose.  It encompasses purpose, but it also defines how you accomplish it.  He is telling them what to do and how to do it.  And they give him purpose, which is really a reason for being-they don't tell him how to do anything.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 10 août 2012 - 07:12 .

[AresKeith]

this whats happening to the thread lol

[Baronesa]

The Catalyst is a shackled AI, enslaved by his programing... but moved beyond that programing and turned his creators into Reapers (lolwut?)

The Reapers are just tools, machines... but are also sentient beings enslaved by the Catalyst... and are also willing participants of the Catalyst plans... all at the same time... -.-U

The catalyst is not killing anyone! "technically speaking"


And for whatever argument you bring... they change something else to suit their position against the new argument, and then revert to another position, that is mutually exclusive of the one shown 2 seconds ago... and continue arguing... and that is... IF they even respond to your whole argument.

This has really become madness.

[3DandBeyond]

Baronesa wrote...

The Catalyst is a shackled AI, enslaved by his programing... but moved beyond that programing and turned his creators into Reapers (lolwut?)

The Reapers are just tools, machines... but are also sentient beings enslaved by the Catalyst... and are also willing participants of the Catalyst plans... all at the same time... -.-U

The catalyst is not killing anyone! "technically speaking"


And for whatever argument you bring... they change something else to suit their position against the new argument, and then revert to another position, that is mutually exclusive of the one shown 2 seconds ago... and continue arguing... and that is... IF they even respond to your whole argument.

This has really become madness.

Yes yes but it's still kind of funny. 

[Mobius-Silent]

3DandBeyond wrote...The whole point of the ending is what?  Do illuminate.

Organics want to persist, created synthetics don't have implicit understanding of the worth of a consciousness, this scism creats conflict, one that synthetics will eventually win due to physical superiority.

3DandBeyond wrote... The point of the ending is some insipid belief that all is futile and that winning means "on someone else's terms" based on the inability or lack of desire to write an actual ending.

 This optinion only exists because you refuse to accept that the 3 ending functions are all part of the Crucible and thus not "someone else's terms" but actually the fruit of their labours.

3DandBeyond wrote... Each choice requires Shepard do something Shepard (maybe A Shepard) has already rejected and never would do.

if you don't understand the context and you pass that ignorance on to your Shepard then sure Shepard is simply going to be unsatisfied with the options available. I imagine you're one of those people who equate synthesis with Saren as well (Which is a trivial misunderstanding)

3DandBeyond wrote... It's also fantasy with lots more talking and a happy slideshow used to gloss over what previously and logically was shown to be a destroyed galaxy.

"I've decided that what is shown to happen doesn't happen so the game creators are wrong" Yeah, thats your problem not Bioware's

3DandBeyond wrote... It is the denial of self-determination because God Shepard sounds and looks cool

Control-shep is designed to sound really unsettling (especially, the renegade version) if you think that ending is portrayed as rainbows and unicorns you are really not paying attention.

3DandBeyond wrote... evolution as the positive way to learn and advance, because green eyes look cool and oooh cyborgs, and it rejects the notion that new life is really life unless it is organic based-it is lesser life.

"lesser life"? It posits that sapience alone isn't enough and that sentience is needed for a species to progress, organics naturally get the emotive part first and maybe develop the resoning part second, synthetics get resoning without context, without feeling/emotion, that is the problem positied by ME3

3DandBeyond wrote...  But hey we got to destroy the reapers and the relays are A-OK.

They clarified that the explosions didn't blow up the systems and were repairable, so?

3DandBeyond wrote...   The one non-choice were self-determination and free will is affirmed is punished. 

  Well yeah, ignoring the problem does not make it go away

3DandBeyond wrote...    And again the only synthetics repeatedly at conflict with organics to any unstoppable extent have been reapers.

In out pathetically limeted experience of the last few billion years, yes... _maybe_ just _maybe_ the catalyst has seen a _little_ more than we have

3DandBeyond wrote...     So they are the problem the kid should solve and he doesn't.  In 2 endings, they are left alive and people develop according to them and whatever programming exists.

 In Control the Catalyst is replaced by Shepard (So it's Shepards-without-emotions job to find a solution) and in Synthesis all new synthetics have a direct path to attaining sentience. Destroy is the only ending where nothing long-term is really solved.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 10 août 2012 - 07:27 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

dreman please stop violating language with your repeated misspellings.

That is all.

[3DandBeyond]

Mobius-Silent wrote...
"I've decided that what is shown to happen doesn't happen so the game creators are wrong" Yeah, thats your problem not Bioware's

Since you are using this to mischaracterize what I've said and to make it appear as though I said it, you are not genuinely trying to discuss anything.  Discussion with you is pointless and you are merely being argumentative.  You repeatedly use passive aggressive techniques to insult so enjoy yourself. 

Saying I don't understand something and then saying I am ignorant is unworthy of continued discussion.  Apparently what you want, so there you go.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 10 août 2012 - 07:35 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Baronesa wrote...

The Catalyst is a shackled AI, enslaved by his programing... but moved beyond that programing and turned his creators into Reapers (lolwut?)

The Reapers are just tools, machines... but are also sentient beings enslaved by the Catalyst... and are also willing participants of the Catalyst plans... all at the same time... -.-U

The catalyst is not killing anyone! "technically speaking"


And for whatever argument you bring... they change something else to suit their position against the new argument, and then revert to another position, that is mutually exclusive of the one shown 2 seconds ago... and continue arguing... and that is... IF they even respond to your whole argument.

This has really become madness.

Do you hear the voices too?!

[3DandBeyond]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

The Catalyst is a shackled AI, enslaved by his programing... but moved beyond that programing and turned his creators into Reapers (lolwut?)

The Reapers are just tools, machines... but are also sentient beings enslaved by the Catalyst... and are also willing participants of the Catalyst plans... all at the same time... -.-U

The catalyst is not killing anyone! "technically speaking"


And for whatever argument you bring... they change something else to suit their position against the new argument, and then revert to another position, that is mutually exclusive of the one shown 2 seconds ago... and continue arguing... and that is... IF they even respond to your whole argument.

This has really become madness.

Do you hear the voices too?!

I do, but they are incoherent.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 10 août 2012 - 07:55 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

The Catalyst is a shackled AI, enslaved by his programing... but moved beyond that programing and turned his creators into Reapers (lolwut?)

The Reapers are just tools, machines... but are also sentient beings enslaved by the Catalyst... and are also willing participants of the Catalyst plans... all at the same time... -.-U

The catalyst is not killing anyone! "technically speaking"


And for whatever argument you bring... they change something else to suit their position against the new argument, and then revert to another position, that is mutually exclusive of the one shown 2 seconds ago... and continue arguing... and that is... IF they even respond to your whole argument.

This has really become madness.

Do you hear the voices too?!

I do, but it's incoherent.

Yes! Let Chaos reign!

But by all the darkest powers please let it use proper spelling.