407 réponses à ce sujet

[Argolas]

Bill Casey wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

No he doesn't, are you saying Stargazer
actuly knows the exact conversation that takes place with Shepard and
his/her LI in their private quarters? 

Are you saying he knows Shepards dreams?

He's
retelling a legend, he doesn't know the vague details. Theonly thing he
probably knows is that Shepard stopped the Reapers and changed them,
that's it. 

I've never really seen such a dumb argument tbh.

Actually, I'm saying the entire trilogy was made up by Stargazer to lure children into his van. That's why Shepard dreams of chasing children through the woods. The Stargazer is projecting...

I think you over-interpret that scene, but I will consider it for moment.
I would find that more than disturbing. If the story is told, the pictures we see would be in the listener´s mind. Not only is the story as we see it far too long and complex for a child, reaper forces like cannibals and banshees are not exactly what you would discribe to a child in detail...

[Volc19]

Bill Casey wrote...

Volc19 wrote...

But then you shoot a tube... and the reapers die.

Seriously, why is it that the primary function of the Crucible is activated through shooting part of it until it explodes?

Because it's not the Crucible...
It's a metaphor...

Metaphors don't activate anti-doomsday machines in science fiction. Sonic Screwdrivers, big red buttons and reversing the polarity of the neutron flow do.

[Argolas]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Argolas wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Well, technically 'evolution' is mutation and the higher reproductive success of some mutations. Therefore there is no end point to evolution, and evolution does not lead to increased 'closeness' of different forms of life. In fact, a standard evolutionary process is speciation, a species gradually splitting into more than one species. So the 'synthesis' is antievolutionary if anything.

I disagree. Evolution makes us adapt to our environment, if the external factors change and we survive, we will adapt. If we succesfully hunt game and eat it, our teeth will adapt to help us do that. If we eat grass, our stomach will adapt. If we do not need a part of the body anymore it won´t stay, for example if we leave the water and begin living on the land, our gills will disappear.
Evolution, by definition, means adapting and not splitting into diversity, this is rather a result of different circumstances, for example if part of a species leaves the water and another part stays there. Diversity between species that have been the same before is caused by different circumstances and not by evolution itself.

The adaptation to environment happens over very long periods of time by random mutation and some mutations having a higher reproductive success. That's Chuck Darwin for you, a biologist of some note.

I never said adaption would happen quickly. It does not and this is the good thing about Synthesis occuring naturally. And adaption is, by definition, never random.

[Bill Casey]

Bill Casey wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Destroy is shortsighted, the galaxy will destroy itself via the construction of Synthetics.

Catalyst said synthesis is inevitable...
So which is it?

[tvman099]

Every single choice is "bad" because they all require you to have some kind of faith that what the Starkid is saying is true. Obviously nobody who played the game had any reason to accept a single thing it said, but it would seem that Bioware overlooked the possibility that people might not trust the word of the malevolent Reaper AI overlord responsible for thousands of galactic extinction events.

That being said, since the Starkid turned out to be truthful (in a manner of speaking) after all, destroy is the only acceptable option if you want to make sure the madness stops for good. Even if you pick control and make the Reapers fly into the sun, replacing the old Catalyst with a new one that could ultimately go nuts and start the cycle over again doesn't strike me as the brightest idea in the world.

Synthesis is just lol. There's no defending it. It's a joke.

Modifié par tvman099, 24 septembre 2012 - 08:28 .

[RiouHotaru]

tvman099 wrote...

Every single choice is "bad" because they all require you to have some kind of faith that what the Starkid is saying is true. Obviously nobody who played the game had any reason to accept a single thing it said, but it would seem that Bioware overlooked the possibility that people might not trust the word of the malevolent Reaper AI overlord responsible for thousands of galactic extinction events.

That being said, since the Starkid turned out to be truthful after all, destroy is the only acceptable option if you want to make sure the madness stops for good. Even if you pick control and make the Reapers fly into the sun, replacing the old Catalyst with a new one that could ultimately go nuts and start the cycle over again doesn't strike me as the brightest idea in the world.

Synthesis is just lol. There's no defending it. It's a joke.

Well good thing the original Catalyst wasn't nuts.

[fr33stylez]

Why do people think that Leviathans or whoever had the right to determine how the galaxy should handle any 'inevtiable conflict'?

Even if you believe the silly assumption that Synthetics will wipe out all Organics (something so out of left field, BW need to release post-hoc DLC to strengthen this point), this doesn't give the Leviatan the right to fix this problem for eternity. It wasn't the Leviathans' place to create a 'permanant solution'; they're idiots for doing so.

This is why the Catalyst must be destroyed (as terrible and contrived as this option was). If the 'inevitable conflict' between organics/synthetics happens in the future, let future people deal with it. i'm not sure why people are so eager to join the Leviathans/catalyst/Reapers in their idiotic assignment. Surely, the Catalyst is proof that no one should try to dictate the future for subsequent generations.

Modifié par fr33stylez, 24 septembre 2012 - 08:28 .

[tvman099]

RiouHotaru wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

Every single choice is "bad" because they all require you to have some kind of faith that what the Starkid is saying is true. Obviously nobody who played the game had any reason to accept a single thing it said, but it would seem that Bioware overlooked the possibility that people might not trust the word of the malevolent Reaper AI overlord responsible for thousands of galactic extinction events.

That being said, since the Starkid turned out to be truthful after all, destroy is the only acceptable option if you want to make sure the madness stops for good. Even if you pick control and make the Reapers fly into the sun, replacing the old Catalyst with a new one that could ultimately go nuts and start the cycle over again doesn't strike me as the brightest idea in the world.

Synthesis is just lol. There's no defending it. It's a joke.

Well good thing the original Catalyst wasn't nuts.

Pretty sure that deciding the only way to preserve life is to repeatedly melt everyone and turn them into giant cuttlefish cyborgs is nuts.

[Volc19]

tvman099 wrote...

Every single choice is "bad" because they all require you to have some kind of faith that what the Starkid is saying is true. Obviously nobody who played the game had any reason to accept a single thing it said, but it would seem that Bioware overlooked the possibility that people might not trust the word of the malevolent Reaper AI overlord responsible for thousands of galactic extinction events.

That being said, since the Starkid turned out to be truthful (in a manner of speaking) after all, destroy is the only acceptable option if you want to make sure the madness stops for good. Even if you pick control and make the Reapers fly into the sun, replacing the old Catalyst with a new one that could ultimately go nuts and start the cycle over again doesn't strike me as the brightest idea in the world.

Synthesis is just lol. There's no defending it. It's a joke.

The Catalyst never "went nuts." It has been operating just as it has been since it's creation. It was given one goal, to prevent the conflict between synthetics and organics. It created the Reapers because it was the most efficient solution it could find.

Shepalyst's goal is to protect the Galaxy and it's populace. With this initial programming, it is unlikely that Shepard would end up murdering all life in a cyclical fashion. He'd likely spend his time preventing nuclear wars, exterminating Leviathans, and defending from new, bigger extregalactic baddies.

[Samtheman63]

Volc19 wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

Every single choice is "bad" because they all require you to have some kind of faith that what the Starkid is saying is true. Obviously nobody who played the game had any reason to accept a single thing it said, but it would seem that Bioware overlooked the possibility that people might not trust the word of the malevolent Reaper AI overlord responsible for thousands of galactic extinction events.

That being said, since the Starkid turned out to be truthful (in a manner of speaking) after all, destroy is the only acceptable option if you want to make sure the madness stops for good. Even if you pick control and make the Reapers fly into the sun, replacing the old Catalyst with a new one that could ultimately go nuts and start the cycle over again doesn't strike me as the brightest idea in the world.

Synthesis is just lol. There's no defending it. It's a joke.

The Catalyst never "went nuts." It has been operating just as it has been since it's creation. It was given one goal, to prevent the conflict between synthetics and organics. It created the Reapers because it was the most efficient solution it could find.

Shepalyst's goal is to protect the Galaxy and it's populace. With this initial programming, it is unlikely that Shepard would end up murdering all life in a cyclical fashion. He'd likely spend his time preventing nuclear wars, exterminating Leviathans, and defending from new, bigger extregalactic baddies.

It's completly nuts, murdering people and squashing them to the point where they become some kind of organic paste is not preseving them, its the opposite.

[Argolas]

tvman099 wrote...

Every single choice is "bad" because they all require you to have some kind of faith that what the Starkid is saying is true.

Destroy does not need that much faith. Shepard can assume that an additional connection to the crucible that is set up by reaper kid could be the reason the crucible is not firing. In fact, Reaper kid never tells Shepard to shoot at it, we only see Anderson doing that. This either means reaper kid has access to Shepard´s mind (manipulation!!!) or the sequence is for the player and Shepard figures out what to do himself.

[Volc19]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Volc19 wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

Every single choice is "bad" because they all require you to have some kind of faith that what the Starkid is saying is true. Obviously nobody who played the game had any reason to accept a single thing it said, but it would seem that Bioware overlooked the possibility that people might not trust the word of the malevolent Reaper AI overlord responsible for thousands of galactic extinction events.

That being said, since the Starkid turned out to be truthful (in a manner of speaking) after all, destroy is the only acceptable option if you want to make sure the madness stops for good. Even if you pick control and make the Reapers fly into the sun, replacing the old Catalyst with a new one that could ultimately go nuts and start the cycle over again doesn't strike me as the brightest idea in the world.

Synthesis is just lol. There's no defending it. It's a joke.

The Catalyst never "went nuts." It has been operating just as it has been since it's creation. It was given one goal, to prevent the conflict between synthetics and organics. It created the Reapers because it was the most efficient solution it could find.

Shepalyst's goal is to protect the Galaxy and it's populace. With this initial programming, it is unlikely that Shepard would end up murdering all life in a cyclical fashion. He'd likely spend his time preventing nuclear wars, exterminating Leviathans, and defending from new, bigger extregalactic baddies.

It's completly nuts, murdering people and squashing them to the point where they become some kind of organic paste is not preseving them, its the opposite.

Just because it lacks empathy doesn't mean it's insane. It places no value on life, but it is working toward making sure conflict doesn't arise between organics and synthetics. The most efficient way to prevent the conflic from arising is to kill them before the conflic ever occurs, as the Catalyst reasoned that peace was always impossible. It only appears to be insane or malfunctioning because you tie those concepts to ruthless efficiency and a lack of empathy towards life.

The Shepalyst was created based on an organic mind. A mind that cares for life, and wishes to protect life as much as possible. Rather than trying to find the most efficient way to solve a problem, it is trying to find the most efficient way to keep the most amount of people alive. That is where the Catalyst and Sheparlyst differ, and understanding that is critical to understanding Control.

[Samtheman63]

Its working to make sure the conflict doesn't arise been between org/syn so that synthetics don't wipe out all organics. yet it places no value on life? that doesn't make sense.

the catalyst then gets to work by killing its creators, squashing them down into organic paste and pumping it into a synthetic shell to create the first reaper, whos job it is to perform the same task over and over.

the catalyst also believes that by turning people into reapers they are being assended to the pinnacle of evolution, and that the life of the previous species is being store in there.
the "life", of the people who have been "killed".

your right, he isn't warped, HES COMPLETLY ****ED

Modifié par Samtheman63, 24 septembre 2012 - 09:14 .

[mass perfection]

Bill Casey wrote...

Insulting?

fewbufqedbhsbklqgw

No, no...
It's rape...
God dammit...
What is wrong with people?

It's more of a vaccine than rape..

[AlanC9]

tvman099 wrote...

Every single choice is "bad" because they all require you to have some kind of faith that what the Starkid is saying is true. Obviously nobody who played the game had any reason to accept a single thing it said, but it would seem that Bioware overlooked the possibility that people might not trust the word of the malevolent Reaper AI overlord responsible for thousands of galactic extinction events..

Let's say you think he's lying. To what end? He's winning anyway. And if the Crucible is something he wants you to use, he's sure going about that in a funny way.

[AlanC9]

Argolas wrote...

Volc19 wrote...

But then you shoot a tube... and the reapers die.

Seriously, why is it that the primary function of the Crucible is activated through shooting part of it until it explodes?

I think this makes a lot of sense. The decision chamber is NOT part of the crucible, but part of the citadel. Note the cables that connect the destroy and control devices and the citadel. This room must have been prepared by reaper kid, this also explains how Synthesis is aviable although no one except reaper kid itself ever seems to know about it. The crucible must have been constructed to fire immediatly after docked, but the destroy device blocks that so Shepard must shoot it in order to trigger the crucible.

Or the Crucible was always designed around Synthesis, TIM added on the Control parts, and Destroy never was a designed function, but if you damage part of the controls you can make it happen.

[Volc19]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Its working to make sure the conflict doesn't arise been between org/syn so that synthetics don't wipe out all organics. yet it places no value on life? that doesn't make sense.

the catalyst then gets to work by killing its creators, squashing them down into organic paste and pumping it into a synthetic shell to create the first reaper, whos job it is to perform the same task over and over.

the catalyst also believes that by turning people into reapers they are being assended to the pinnacle of evolution, and that the life of the previous species is being store in there.
the "life", of the people who have been "killed".

your right, he isn't warped, HES COMPLETLY ****ED

It is designed only to prevent that specific conflic from happening. With all the data it could gather from it's surroundings, it came to the conclusion that the cycle was the most efficient way to make sure the conflict never occurs. The 'enshrining' bit just sounds like the justification it made for itself to write off their pleads to stop, almost like a bargaining chip to the races being killed.

Again, lacking empathy and having almost no concept of the value of life doesn't translate to insanity or malfunction. It is simply doing what it was told, stopping orgainc races and synthetics races from fighting eachother. It doesn't have the empathy to see that the most efficient solution isn't the nicest.

And, while the Shepalyst may lack empathy in his new form, although whether such things like love or empathy transferred is unclear, it's primary objective cannot be taken as a cue to murder everyone. Going from "Protect everyone" to "Kill everyone" is a leap requiring malfunction or insanity, something the original Catalyst never suffered in it's +Billion years active.

[Volc19]

Bill Casey wrote...

Control is essentially a ringing endorsement of Thomas Hobbes Leviathan...
Shepard essentially creates a Sovereign from the book...

That's beyond unethical to me...
Wholly unacceptable...

So you're like a constant downer, huh?

[spirosz]

mass perfection wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Insulting?

fewbufqedbhsbklqgw

No, no...
It's rape...
God dammit...
What is wrong with people?

It's more of a vaccine than rape..

Rofl, vaccine. 

[RainbowDazed]

Let me fix this thread for you all:
Refusal > Control/Destroy/Synthesis

Refusal
Telling Catalyst that it's insane by shooting it in the face is the only sensible thing to do. None of the choices offered are good enough to choose from. It's better to die fighting than to live as someones butt-monkey. 

Control/Destroy/Synthesis
None of them are good choices. In destroy you choose that the genocide of one species is an acceptable cost for victory. Even my renegade-Shepard isn't that much of an sociopath. In control you choose that turning your self into an AIish being and enslaving one species to guarantee the peace for other species is acceptable. In synthesis you choose to take a huge leap of faith and to alter every living being in the galaxy based on what the deranged AI just told you. 

So do the only sensible thing and say **** no. And die with honor and dignity.

Thank you and good night! 

Modifié par RainbowDazed, 24 septembre 2012 - 10:07 .

[AlanC9]

RainbowDazed wrote...

Refusal
Telling Catalyst that it's insane by shooting it in the face is the only sensible thing to do. None of the choices offered are good enough to choose from. It's better to die fighting than to live as someones butt-monkey. 

Shepard's pride > the lives of every human, asari, turian, salarian, volus, .............

Yeah, right.

[OH-UP-THIS!]

This is an utter and complete waste of effort, trying to convince those that are all star-struck, that the entire SERIES has been about destroying these over-confident twits, not climbing into bed with them!!!
Yes it is Destroy>Control>synth, just typing that idea made me gag.

For the last time!!!

If you aren't with us, you're on your own...............the only way to STOP the 'reapers', is to destroy them.
Any other choice..........leaves them alive..........you decide.

[AlanC9]

ohupthis wrote...

If you aren't with us, you're on your own...............the only way to STOP the 'reapers', is to destroy them.
Any other choice..........leaves them alive..........you decide.

Yep. Alive and doing what Shep wants.

[Reorte]

tvman099 wrote...

Every single choice is "bad" because they all require you to have some kind of faith that what the Starkid is saying is true. Obviously nobody who played the game had any reason to accept a single thing it said, but it would seem that Bioware overlooked the possibility that people might not trust the word of the malevolent Reaper AI overlord responsible for thousands of galactic extinction events.

That being said, since the Starkid turned out to be truthful (in a manner of speaking) after all, destroy is the only acceptable option if you want to make sure the madness stops for good. Even if you pick control and make the Reapers fly into the sun, replacing the old Catalyst with a new one that could ultimately go nuts and start the cycle over again doesn't strike me as the brightest idea in the world.

Synthesis is just lol. There's no defending it. It's a joke.

That pretty much sums it up. All choices are bad but Destroy is the least bad. I'm pretty well in agreement with the Destroy > Control > Synthesis idea, and I really can't get my head around people who's stubborness makes them put Refuse at the top of the list (although from a really dispassionate point of view I could put it higher than Synthesis).