1304 réponses à ce sujet

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The thing your missing here is the full equation. The act of genocide was done becasue of the extreme events around Shepard. The only time  you can  say the choice is the will of the person doing it is when the choice is choosen in an event not forcing it. If you had no reason to and did it for some political /social reason, then the person is at full fault.

This a choise or everyone dies event.

But it was a choice because the Catalyst gave you other options. I'm not saying nobody should choose Destroy, but they must accept that genocide is a result of that choice.

that's not genocide. And there is nothing "systematic" or "methodical" about shooting the tube. That's like saying a guy that chooses to save an entire train of people whilst sacrificing his 2 yr old in the wreck, is a "murderer". Well, view it however you like but I dont think he set out that day to Kill his son....I think an unforeseen set of circumstances led to that point where the man was met with a choice he had to make, and he made a decision for the greater good. I wouldn't label him a murderer. Just as I don't label Destroy genocide.

Again, other options were offered that had everyone live. Destroy, when Shepard chose it, sacrificed all synthetic life and therefore shepard commited genocide.

[drayfish]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

I dont care if it had a soul or not. It's still not genocide.

Care to explain?

sure

My Shepard's goal since ME1 was to Destroy the Reapers. I did not waver or second-guess myself at the very last minute when my one and only chance of victory was at hand. I knew since the beginning that there would be tremendous sacrifice. However, I didn't install Reaper upgrades in the Geth. I had no way of knowing Destroy would destroy all Reaper tech until it was time to make a decision. It's not like I threw all the Geth in prison camps and proceeded to methodically exterminate them. They were collateral damage from my decision to whipe out the Reapers. By a set of unforeseen circumstances, they were effected by the Crucible. Victory at any cost.....even though synthetic life will occur again. So, YAY!!! lol

That's akin to saying all Humans being killed is okay because somewhere in the galaxy other organic life will eventually evolve. 

your point? I wrote all of that and all you can focus on was my last line? If said humans were to be collateral damage of some chain reaction of events, well, so be it. I didn't systematically proceed to round them up and exterminate the entire species

So it's not genocide as long as the player can rationalise it away to themself - even though they had other choices that would have avoided such slaughter?

Ah, Bioware.  Creating a scenario in which players can commit soul-shrivelling horror and gladly pardon themselves. 

So arty.

Modifié par drayfish, 08 octobre 2012 - 06:57 .

[shodiswe]

Yate wrote...

I've seen this view expressed in various places, and I wanted to set the record straight.

The Destroy ending is not genocide. The geth are not living things. They are machines that can be rebuilt. It's said as much by the catalyst.

If you sold Legion to Cerberus, a perfect copy of it is made by the geth. 'Death' is not the same for synthetics as it is for organics.

Even if you want to argue the geth are alive and have souls (they do not) their 'lives' are not the same as organic lives. If you delete a few of Legion's programs, it's central intelligence is not destroyed. It is a hivemind. Same is true for EDI, who uses the first-person only because it was designed to interface with humans. 'Death' for them is not permanent or absolute.

Destroy is not genocide. If the relays can be rebuilt, so can the geth.

Yate wrote...

Define a soul then get back to me.

We keep having this argument over and over, if humanity was wiped out then there is a good chacne the Salarians coudl clone us and there would be humans again. Would that be the same thing?

Then they could tell us that we used to do their laundry and travel all around the galaxy to beat people up for their givernment and that we should do it for them just because we're in their debt if nothign else matter..

To be alive is to have the ability to have an opinion and a distinct feel of want and priorities.

They want to live, they want to evolve they want to improve and they got goals of their own.
So, unless your argument is based on a religious belief that you are special then you got no argument what so ever.

And having such a narrowminded religious belief would in my mind make you a bad person. All bad in the world commes from people ratinalizing their evil deeds. Lenin, stalin, hitler, polpot, people who thought that some individuals were less worth than others because they were different from themselves or simply because it fit their own selfish needs.
When you can't save all it's better to save those you can, but when there is no good reason to kill billions other than a need for revenge... I shoudln't have to say any more than that.

Modifié par shodiswe, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:01 .

[dreman9999]

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The thing your missing here is the full equation. The act of genocide was done becasue of the extreme events around Shepard. The only time  you can  say the choice is the will of the person doing it is when the choice is choosen in an event not forcing it. If you had no reason to and did it for some political /social reason, then the person is at full fault.

This a choise or everyone dies event.

But it was a choice because the Catalyst gave you other options. I'm not saying nobody should choose Destroy, but they must accept that genocide is a result of that choice.

that's not genocide. And there is nothing "systematic" or "methodical" about shooting the tube. That's like saying a guy that chooses to save an entire train of people whilst sacrificing his 2 yr old in the wreck, is a "murderer". Well, view it however you like but I dont think he set out that day to Kill his son....I think an unforeseen set of circumstances led to that point where the man was met with a choice he had to make, and he made a decision for the greater good. I wouldn't label him a murderer. Just as I don't label Destroy genocide.

Genocide is not inherit with how you do it. It only a defind as an act the cause death to a large group or ethiciity. It matters not if you did not kill the directly.

Even dictators are charged with genocide when they themselves did not kill the group of people directly.

[dreman9999]

shodiswe wrote...

Yate wrote...

I've seen this view expressed in various places, and I wanted to set the record straight.

The Destroy ending is not genocide. The geth are not living things. They are machines that can be rebuilt. It's said as much by the catalyst.

If you sold Legion to Cerberus, a perfect copy of it is made by the geth. 'Death' is not the same for synthetics as it is for organics.

Even if you want to argue the geth are alive and have souls (they do not) their 'lives' are not the same as organic lives. If you delete a few of Legion's programs, it's central intelligence is not destroyed. It is a hivemind. Same is true for EDI, who uses the first-person only because it was designed to interface with humans. 'Death' for them is not permanent or absolute.

Destroy is not genocide. If the relays can be rebuilt, so can the geth.

Yate wrote...

Define a soul then get back to me.

We keep having this argument over and over, if humanity was wiped out then there is a good chacne the Salarians coudl clone us and there would be humans again. Would that be the same thing?

Then they could tell us that we used to do their laundry and travel all around the galaxy to beat people up for their givernment and that we should do it for them just because we're in their debt if nothign else matter..

To be alive is to have the ability to have an opinion and a distinct feel of want and priorities.

They want to live, they want to evolve they want to improve and they got goals of their own.
So, unless your argument is based on a religious belief that you are special then you got no argument what so ever.

And having such a narrowminded religious belief would in my mind make you a bad person. All bad in the world commes from people ratinalizing their evil deeds. Lenin, stalin, hitler, polpot, people who thought that some individuals were less worth than others because they were different from themselves or simply because it fit their own selfish needs.
When you can't save all it's better to save those you can, but when there is no good reason to kill billions other than a need for revenge... I shoudln't have to say any more than that.

It not from rationalizing their evil deaes...It's from indiferences. Even good people can rationalize the horrible thing they do.....It's when they becaome indifferent with it  is when they fall out of grace.

Modifié par dreman9999, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:05 .

[shodiswe]

dreman9999 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The thing your missing here is the full equation. The act of genocide was done becasue of the extreme events around Shepard. The only time  you can  say the choice is the will of the person doing it is when the choice is choosen in an event not forcing it. If you had no reason to and did it for some political /social reason, then the person is at full fault.

This a choise or everyone dies event.

But it was a choice because the Catalyst gave you other options. I'm not saying nobody should choose Destroy, but they must accept that genocide is a result of that choice.

that's not genocide. And there is nothing "systematic" or "methodical" about shooting the tube. That's like saying a guy that chooses to save an entire train of people whilst sacrificing his 2 yr old in the wreck, is a "murderer". Well, view it however you like but I dont think he set out that day to Kill his son....I think an unforeseen set of circumstances led to that point where the man was met with a choice he had to make, and he made a decision for the greater good. I wouldn't label him a murderer. Just as I don't label Destroy genocide.

Genocide is not inherit with how you do it. It only a defind as an act the cause death to a large group or ethiciity. It matters not if you did not kill the directly.

Even dictators are charged with genocide when they themselves did not kill the group of people directly.

Yes, exactly, and their goals didn't even have to be to kill a group. Hitler didn't have the jews killed just for the sake of killing jews, he thoguht he was making the world better and removing differences and causes for conflict. Which is still Genocide even if the killing itself wasn't the goal of his policies, just a sideeffect of his goals to create a better world.
That's how such thigns happen, people with strong beliefs who think it's ok to sacrifise some people for the greater good.
When you willingly sacrifise some peopel because you think the world will become a better place or because you want revenge on someone else then it's not a good deed, it's just genocide no matter what.

Now if there had only been the Destroy option, and no other possible options save for Refuse, then it's very different, everyone is already doomed and you have to save who you can, but picking genocide when there are viable alternatives that will save everyone, is genocide since it's very much deliberate.

[shodiswe]

dreman9999 wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Yate wrote...

I've seen this view expressed in various places, and I wanted to set the record straight.

The Destroy ending is not genocide. The geth are not living things. They are machines that can be rebuilt. It's said as much by the catalyst.

If you sold Legion to Cerberus, a perfect copy of it is made by the geth. 'Death' is not the same for synthetics as it is for organics.

Even if you want to argue the geth are alive and have souls (they do not) their 'lives' are not the same as organic lives. If you delete a few of Legion's programs, it's central intelligence is not destroyed. It is a hivemind. Same is true for EDI, who uses the first-person only because it was designed to interface with humans. 'Death' for them is not permanent or absolute.

Destroy is not genocide. If the relays can be rebuilt, so can the geth.

Yate wrote...

Define a soul then get back to me.

We keep having this argument over and over, if humanity was wiped out then there is a good chacne the Salarians coudl clone us and there would be humans again. Would that be the same thing?

Then they could tell us that we used to do their laundry and travel all around the galaxy to beat people up for their givernment and that we should do it for them just because we're in their debt if nothign else matter..

To be alive is to have the ability to have an opinion and a distinct feel of want and priorities.

They want to live, they want to evolve they want to improve and they got goals of their own.
So, unless your argument is based on a religious belief that you are special then you got no argument what so ever.

And having such a narrowminded religious belief would in my mind make you a bad person. All bad in the world commes from people ratinalizing their evil deeds. Lenin, stalin, hitler, polpot, people who thought that some individuals were less worth than others because they were different from themselves or simply because it fit their own selfish needs.
When you can't save all it's better to save those you can, but when there is no good reason to kill billions other than a need for revenge... I shoudln't have to say any more than that.

It not from rationalizing their evil deaes...It's from indiferences. Even good people can rationalize the horrible thing they do.....It's when they becaome indifferent with it  is when they fall out of grace.

If you are able to rationalize genocide then I would think you are fairly indifferent to other peoples lives.

[Mcfly616]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The thing your missing here is the full equation. The act of genocide was done becasue of the extreme events around Shepard. The only time  you can  say the choice is the will of the person doing it is when the choice is choosen in an event not forcing it. If you had no reason to and did it for some political /social reason, then the person is at full fault.

This a choise or everyone dies event.

But it was a choice because the Catalyst gave you other options. I'm not saying nobody should choose Destroy, but they must accept that genocide is a result of that choice.

that's not genocide. And there is nothing "systematic" or "methodical" about shooting the tube. That's like saying a guy that chooses to save an entire train of people whilst sacrificing his 2 yr old in the wreck, is a "murderer". Well, view it however you like but I dont think he set out that day to Kill his son....I think an unforeseen set of circumstances led to that point where the man was met with a choice he had to make, and he made a decision for the greater good. I wouldn't label him a murderer. Just as I don't label Destroy genocide.

Again, other options were offered that had everyone live. Destroy, when Shepard chose it, sacrificed all synthetic life and therefore shepard commited genocide.

this isn't going anywhere lol I didn't make the crucible. Those that did make the crucible didn't deliberately direct it towards the Geth. They got Reaper upgrades, not by my doing. And the Crucible purges Reaper tech. I never foresaw that. And if thats the price to rid the galaxy of the Reapers, well, that is the best choice in the end. A clean slate. Those other choices didn't not complete my goal. Which was to kill the Reapers at any cost.

[Eterna]

ghost9191 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

@Etarna5

your headcanon is no more valid then mine. and that is what i mean. when you have someone watching over you like that how would you grow, them solving your problems and such , rebuilding for you. is it not better to have the races learn and rebuild on their own , eh this is off topic though .

The Asari and Prothean had the same relationship, it seemed to work well for them. 

the protheans were wiped out . which left the asari alone. and that is my point. protheans wiped out leaving the asari to learn and grow on their own. reapers get wiped out leaving the races to grow on their own rather then having a future handed to them. blinding them to other alternatives, but that is more of a argument against synthesis

I'm sorry. But it's the same case. The prothens left there tech with them and they advance. Heck, with out the protheans the asari would not be here.

yes., which they had to figure out on their own. reapers give knowledge and rebuild, the races do not have to achieve a understanding of it or anything, just as they did with the citadel m, the keepers were always there so they did not need to dig deeper to truly figure out what it is.

without the reapers the races will have to rebuild on their own, over come on their own. just as the asari had to

The Reapers don't give knowledge at all. They simply rebuild and protect. Only in Synthesis is the knowledge shared. The reapers rebuilding everything they destroyed hardly seems like much of a problem anyways. 

Modifié par Eterna5, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:14 .

[Mcfly616]

dreman9999 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The thing your missing here is the full equation. The act of genocide was done becasue of the extreme events around Shepard. The only time  you can  say the choice is the will of the person doing it is when the choice is choosen in an event not forcing it. If you had no reason to and did it for some political /social reason, then the person is at full fault.

This a choise or everyone dies event.

But it was a choice because the Catalyst gave you other options. I'm not saying nobody should choose Destroy, but they must accept that genocide is a result of that choice.

that's not genocide. And there is nothing "systematic" or "methodical" about shooting the tube. That's like saying a guy that chooses to save an entire train of people whilst sacrificing his 2 yr old in the wreck, is a "murderer". Well, view it however you like but I dont think he set out that day to Kill his son....I think an unforeseen set of circumstances led to that point where the man was met with a choice he had to make, and he made a decision for the greater good. I wouldn't label him a murderer. Just as I don't label Destroy genocide.

Genocide is not inherit with how you do it. It only a defind as an act the cause death to a large group or ethiciity. It matters not if you did not kill the directly.

Even dictators are charged with genocide when they themselves did not kill the group of people directly.

yeah...and those dictators also ordered it to be done.....


I didn't order the Geth to be upgraded with Reaper tech and then say "hey, let's make the crucible destroy all Reaper tech so we can get rid of these stupid Geth."


Unforeseen circumstances

[Maxster_]

drayfish wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

I dont care if it had a soul or not. It's still not genocide.

Care to explain?

sure

My Shepard's goal since ME1 was to Destroy the Reapers. I did not waver or second-guess myself at the very last minute when my one and only chance of victory was at hand. I knew since the beginning that there would be tremendous sacrifice. However, I didn't install Reaper upgrades in the Geth. I had no way of knowing Destroy would destroy all Reaper tech until it was time to make a decision. It's not like I threw all the Geth in prison camps and proceeded to methodically exterminate them. They were collateral damage from my decision to whipe out the Reapers. By a set of unforeseen circumstances, they were effected by the Crucible. Victory at any cost.....even though synthetic life will occur again. So, YAY!!! lol

That's akin to saying all Humans being killed is okay because somewhere in the galaxy other organic life will eventually evolve. 

your point? I wrote all of that and all you can focus on was my last line? If said humans were to be collateral damage of some chain reaction of events, well, so be it. I didn't systematically proceed to round them up and exterminate the entire species

So it's not genocide as long as the player can rationalise it away to themself - even though they had other choices that would have avoided such slaughter?

Ah, Bioware.  Creating a scenario in which players can commit soul-shrivelling horror and gladly pardon themselves. 

So arty.

Well, we have plenty of people who easily commit those things in real life, given the power.
I don't think that's EAWare fault.

Modifié par Maxster_, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:15 .

[dreman9999]

Mcfly616 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The thing your missing here is the full equation. The act of genocide was done becasue of the extreme events around Shepard. The only time  you can  say the choice is the will of the person doing it is when the choice is choosen in an event not forcing it. If you had no reason to and did it for some political /social reason, then the person is at full fault.

This a choise or everyone dies event.

But it was a choice because the Catalyst gave you other options. I'm not saying nobody should choose Destroy, but they must accept that genocide is a result of that choice.

that's not genocide. And there is nothing "systematic" or "methodical" about shooting the tube. That's like saying a guy that chooses to save an entire train of people whilst sacrificing his 2 yr old in the wreck, is a "murderer". Well, view it however you like but I dont think he set out that day to Kill his son....I think an unforeseen set of circumstances led to that point where the man was met with a choice he had to make, and he made a decision for the greater good. I wouldn't label him a murderer. Just as I don't label Destroy genocide.

Genocide is not inherit with how you do it. It only a defind as an act the cause death to a large group or ethiciity. It matters not if you did not kill the directly.

Even dictators are charged with genocide when they themselves did not kill the group of people directly.

yeah...and those dictators also ordered it to be done.....


I didn't order the Geth to be upgraded with Reaper tech and then say "hey, let's make the crucible destroy all Reaper tech so we can get rid of these stupid Geth."


Unforeseen circumstances

1. Shoting the pipe is like ordering genocide.

2. It not he reaper tech that was their end...The crucible effects all tech.

[Iconoclaste]

shodiswe wrote...

If you are able to rationalize genocide then I would think you are fairly indifferent to other peoples lives.

The "bad" idea was to portray the destruction of synthetic entities as a "genocide", so people argued that synthetics are "expandable", at least much more than any "organic" species. Being able to "rationalize" a concept is not "agreeing" with it or its outcome. I think this is being unfair to the debater.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:17 .

[dreman9999]

shodiswe wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Yate wrote...

I've seen this view expressed in various places, and I wanted to set the record straight.

The Destroy ending is not genocide. The geth are not living things. They are machines that can be rebuilt. It's said as much by the catalyst.

If you sold Legion to Cerberus, a perfect copy of it is made by the geth. 'Death' is not the same for synthetics as it is for organics.

Even if you want to argue the geth are alive and have souls (they do not) their 'lives' are not the same as organic lives. If you delete a few of Legion's programs, it's central intelligence is not destroyed. It is a hivemind. Same is true for EDI, who uses the first-person only because it was designed to interface with humans. 'Death' for them is not permanent or absolute.

Destroy is not genocide. If the relays can be rebuilt, so can the geth.

Yate wrote...

Define a soul then get back to me.

We keep having this argument over and over, if humanity was wiped out then there is a good chacne the Salarians coudl clone us and there would be humans again. Would that be the same thing?

Then they could tell us that we used to do their laundry and travel all around the galaxy to beat people up for their givernment and that we should do it for them just because we're in their debt if nothign else matter..

To be alive is to have the ability to have an opinion and a distinct feel of want and priorities.

They want to live, they want to evolve they want to improve and they got goals of their own.
So, unless your argument is based on a religious belief that you are special then you got no argument what so ever.

And having such a narrowminded religious belief would in my mind make you a bad person. All bad in the world commes from people ratinalizing their evil deeds. Lenin, stalin, hitler, polpot, people who thought that some individuals were less worth than others because they were different from themselves or simply because it fit their own selfish needs.
When you can't save all it's better to save those you can, but when there is no good reason to kill billions other than a need for revenge... I shoudln't have to say any more than that.

It not from rationalizing their evil deaes...It's from indiferences. Even good people can rationalize the horrible thing they do.....It's when they becaome indifferent with it  is when they fall out of grace.

If you are able to rationalize genocide then I would think you are fairly indifferent to other peoples lives.

Ofcourse you can rationalize genocide...That does not mean you'll like it or want to do it. Every person that picks destroy rationalize it. It's jerks like the op who try to be indiffent about it.
My point is that if you do have any empathy you'll hate yourself for picking destory.

Modifié par dreman9999, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:25 .

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Mcfly616 wrote...
 this isn't going anywhere lol I didn't make the crucible. Those that did make the crucible didn't deliberately direct it towards the Geth. They got Reaper upgrades, not by my doing. And the Crucible purges Reaper tech. I never foresaw that. And if thats the price to rid the galaxy of the Reapers, well, that is the best choice in the end. A clean slate. Those other choices didn't not complete my goal. Which was to kill the Reapers at any cost.

Catalyst explains before you choose that all synthetic life will die, so you knew exactly what Destroy was going to do before you did it. Like I said, if Destroy fits your Shepard, fine. You just have to accept that you commited genocide in the process.

[Iconoclaste]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...
 this isn't going anywhere lol I didn't make the crucible. Those that did make the crucible didn't deliberately direct it towards the Geth. They got Reaper upgrades, not by my doing. And the Crucible purges Reaper tech. I never foresaw that. And if thats the price to rid the galaxy of the Reapers, well, that is the best choice in the end. A clean slate. Those other choices didn't not complete my goal. Which was to kill the Reapers at any cost.

Catalyst explains before you choose that all synthetic life will die, so you knew exactly what Destroy was going to do before you did it. Like I said, if Destroy fits your Shepard, fine. You just have to accept that you commited genocide in the process.

This is not very different from killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians in Arrival. The player simply has no choice. Should we ask for refund?

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:23 .

[Mcfly616]

shodiswe wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The thing your missing here is the full equation. The act of genocide was done becasue of the extreme events around Shepard. The only time  you can  say the choice is the will of the person doing it is when the choice is choosen in an event not forcing it. If you had no reason to and did it for some political /social reason, then the person is at full fault.

This a choise or everyone dies event.

But it was a choice because the Catalyst gave you other options. I'm not saying nobody should choose Destroy, but they must accept that genocide is a result of that choice.

that's not genocide. And there is nothing "systematic" or "methodical" about shooting the tube. That's like saying a guy that chooses to save an entire train of people whilst sacrificing his 2 yr old in the wreck, is a "murderer". Well, view it however you like but I dont think he set out that day to Kill his son....I think an unforeseen set of circumstances led to that point where the man was met with a choice he had to make, and he made a decision for the greater good. I wouldn't label him a murderer. Just as I don't label Destroy genocide.

Genocide is not inherit with how you do it. It only a defind as an act the cause death to a large group or ethiciity. It matters not if you did not kill the directly.

Even dictators are charged with genocide when they themselves did not kill the group of people directly.

Yes, exactly, and their goals didn't even have to be to kill a group. Hitler didn't have the jews killed just for the sake of killing jews, he thoguht he was making the world better and removing differences and causes for conflict. Which is still Genocide even if the killing itself wasn't the goal of his policies, just a sideeffect of his goals to create a better world.
That's how such thigns happen, people with strong beliefs who think it's ok to sacrifise some people for the greater good.
When you willingly sacrifise some peopel because you think the world will become a better place or because you want revenge on someone else then it's not a good deed, it's just genocide no matter what.

Now if there had only been the Destroy option, and no other possible options save for Refuse, then it's very different, everyone is already doomed and you have to save who you can, but picking genocide when there are viable alternatives that will save everyone, is genocide since it's very much deliberate.

you're either a very sick individual or you are very uneducated. I've studied the Holocaust for 10 years and you sir are the biggest hypocrite here. If anything, you just literally tried to "rationalize" Hitler's actions. News Flash: Hitler's goal was Genocide, regardless of how he "felt" about it or what his "policies" were. He wanted them EXTERMINATED. His goal was the complete annihilation of the Jews. Lol to say anything less is a contrived lie. I could not give a damn about if he thought he was doing good for the world. The man was a lunatic.

By the way, Shepard never woke up and started directing everyone to kill all Geth and that it was for the betterment of the galaxy. No, he arrived at a point where he could end a threat that's been manipulating and terrorizing the galaxy for millions upon millions of years. And upon arriving at that point, he was told that destroying the Reapers would effect anything derived from Reaper tech. That sucks....but it don't make it genocide.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Iconoclaste wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Catalyst explains before you choose that all synthetic life will die, so you knew exactly what Destroy was going to do before you did it. Like I said, if Destroy fits your Shepard, fine. You just have to accept that you commited genocide in the process.

This is not very different from killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians in Arrival. The player simply has no choice. Should we ask for refund?

Shepard had two other choices that kept everyone alive, thus different from Arrival.
Also, Shepard did accept that destroying the Alpha Relay would kill 300,000 batarians, and was deeply affected by having no choice.

[Obadiah]

Thought experiment: If the atomic bomb dropped in World War 2 on Hiroshima happened to destroy all members of a small defined culture/ethnic group of about 1000 people that happened to live there, would that be genocide?

Modifié par Obadiah, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:28 .

[Mcfly616]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...
 this isn't going anywhere lol I didn't make the crucible. Those that did make the crucible didn't deliberately direct it towards the Geth. They got Reaper upgrades, not by my doing. And the Crucible purges Reaper tech. I never foresaw that. And if thats the price to rid the galaxy of the Reapers, well, that is the best choice in the end. A clean slate. Those other choices didn't not complete my goal. Which was to kill the Reapers at any cost.

Catalyst explains before you choose that all synthetic life will die, so you knew exactly what Destroy was going to do before you did it. Like I said, if Destroy fits your Shepard, fine. You just have to accept that you commited genocide in the process.

rationalize your claim however you like. You're still wrong. As usual. Lol If you had to pack up and leave town because of a natural disaster, but you had only one spot left, so you chose.your kid over your dog. Knowing full well that this natural disaster would kill anybody left behind.....well by your way of thinking, that person is a murderer? Riiiight. Genius.

[dreman9999]

Mcfly616 wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The thing your missing here is the full equation. The act of genocide was done becasue of the extreme events around Shepard. The only time  you can  say the choice is the will of the person doing it is when the choice is choosen in an event not forcing it. If you had no reason to and did it for some political /social reason, then the person is at full fault.

This a choise or everyone dies event.

But it was a choice because the Catalyst gave you other options. I'm not saying nobody should choose Destroy, but they must accept that genocide is a result of that choice.

that's not genocide. And there is nothing "systematic" or "methodical" about shooting the tube. That's like saying a guy that chooses to save an entire train of people whilst sacrificing his 2 yr old in the wreck, is a "murderer". Well, view it however you like but I dont think he set out that day to Kill his son....I think an unforeseen set of circumstances led to that point where the man was met with a choice he had to make, and he made a decision for the greater good. I wouldn't label him a murderer. Just as I don't label Destroy genocide.

Genocide is not inherit with how you do it. It only a defind as an act the cause death to a large group or ethiciity. It matters not if you did not kill the directly.

Even dictators are charged with genocide when they themselves did not kill the group of people directly.

Yes, exactly, and their goals didn't even have to be to kill a group. Hitler didn't have the jews killed just for the sake of killing jews, he thoguht he was making the world better and removing differences and causes for conflict. Which is still Genocide even if the killing itself wasn't the goal of his policies, just a sideeffect of his goals to create a better world.
That's how such thigns happen, people with strong beliefs who think it's ok to sacrifise some people for the greater good.
When you willingly sacrifise some peopel because you think the world will become a better place or because you want revenge on someone else then it's not a good deed, it's just genocide no matter what.

Now if there had only been the Destroy option, and no other possible options save for Refuse, then it's very different, everyone is already doomed and you have to save who you can, but picking genocide when there are viable alternatives that will save everyone, is genocide since it's very much deliberate.

you're either a very sick individual or you are very uneducated. I've studied the Holocaust for 10 years and you sir are the biggest hypocrite here. If anything, you just literally tried to "rationalize" Hitler's actions. News Flash: Hitler's goal was Genocide, regardless of how he "felt" about it or what his "policies" were. He wanted them EXTERMINATED. His goal was the complete annihilation of the Jews. Lol to say anything less is a contrived lie. I could not give a damn about if he thought he was doing good for the world. The man was a lunatic.

By the way, Shepard never woke up and started directing everyone to kill all Geth and that it was for the betterment of the galaxy. No, he arrived at a point where he could end a threat that's been manipulating and terrorizing the galaxy for millions upon millions of years. And upon arriving at that point, he was told that destroying the Reapers would effect anything derived from Reaper tech. That sucks....but it don't make it genocide.

That not a case that it genocide or not. The just a case that he was a person at a time of no conflict did those horrible acts.
The case is different with Shepard but it does not make it any less of a genocide...It just make Shepard not a bad person for doing it because he /she had no choice.

Genocide is not defined as a horrid act of killing an ethic group that is done by the persons or group doing it own accord with nothing forcing it to do it...

It's ...http://www.thefreedi...ry.com/genocide
The systematic and widespread extermination or attempted extermination of an entire national, racial, religious, or ethnic group.

[shodiswe]

Mcfly616 wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The thing your missing here is the full equation. The act of genocide was done becasue of the extreme events around Shepard. The only time  you can  say the choice is the will of the person doing it is when the choice is choosen in an event not forcing it. If you had no reason to and did it for some political /social reason, then the person is at full fault.

This a choise or everyone dies event.

But it was a choice because the Catalyst gave you other options. I'm not saying nobody should choose Destroy, but they must accept that genocide is a result of that choice.

that's not genocide. And there is nothing "systematic" or "methodical" about shooting the tube. That's like saying a guy that chooses to save an entire train of people whilst sacrificing his 2 yr old in the wreck, is a "murderer". Well, view it however you like but I dont think he set out that day to Kill his son....I think an unforeseen set of circumstances led to that point where the man was met with a choice he had to make, and he made a decision for the greater good. I wouldn't label him a murderer. Just as I don't label Destroy genocide.

Genocide is not inherit with how you do it. It only a defind as an act the cause death to a large group or ethiciity. It matters not if you did not kill the directly.

Even dictators are charged with genocide when they themselves did not kill the group of people directly.

Yes, exactly, and their goals didn't even have to be to kill a group. Hitler didn't have the jews killed just for the sake of killing jews, he thoguht he was making the world better and removing differences and causes for conflict. Which is still Genocide even if the killing itself wasn't the goal of his policies, just a sideeffect of his goals to create a better world.
That's how such thigns happen, people with strong beliefs who think it's ok to sacrifise some people for the greater good.
When you willingly sacrifise some peopel because you think the world will become a better place or because you want revenge on someone else then it's not a good deed, it's just genocide no matter what.

Now if there had only been the Destroy option, and no other possible options save for Refuse, then it's very different, everyone is already doomed and you have to save who you can, but picking genocide when there are viable alternatives that will save everyone, is genocide since it's very much deliberate.

you're either a very sick individual or you are very uneducated. I've studied the Holocaust for 10 years and you sir are the biggest hypocrite here. If anything, you just literally tried to "rationalize" Hitler's actions. News Flash: Hitler's goal was Genocide, regardless of how he "felt" about it or what his "policies" were. He wanted them EXTERMINATED. His goal was the complete annihilation of the Jews. Lol to say anything less is a contrived lie. I could not give a damn about if he thought he was doing good for the world. The man was a lunatic.

By the way, Shepard never woke up and started directing everyone to kill all Geth and that it was for the betterment of the galaxy. No, he arrived at a point where he could end a threat that's been manipulating and terrorizing the galaxy for millions upon millions of years. And upon arriving at that point, he was told that destroying the Reapers would effect anything derived from Reaper tech. That sucks....but it don't make it genocide.

Im not saying he was right, im saying he actualy belived he did the right thing. Im not saying he was sane either or anything else.
He definately had a different take on the world and what was best in his opinion. This is very much a matter of opionion as proven by this forum. People are either as said indifferent due to their own beliefs or they rationalize which brings them closer to indifferent. I belive rationalization of a belief leads to indifference or at least can bring a person closer to it.

[dreman9999]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Catalyst explains before you choose that all synthetic life will die, so you knew exactly what Destroy was going to do before you did it. Like I said, if Destroy fits your Shepard, fine. You just have to accept that you commited genocide in the process.

This is not very different from killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians in Arrival. The player simply has no choice. Should we ask for refund?

and was deeply affected by having no choice.

That depends on the Shepard...

[Mcfly616]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Catalyst explains before you choose that all synthetic life will die, so you knew exactly what Destroy was going to do before you did it. Like I said, if Destroy fits your Shepard, fine. You just have to accept that you commited genocide in the process.

This is not very different from killing hundreds of thousands of Batarians in Arrival. The player simply has no choice. Should we ask for refund?

Shepard had two other choices that kept everyone alive, thus different from Arrival.
Also, Shepard did accept that destroying the Alpha Relay would kill 300,000 batarians, and was deeply affected by having no choice.

so since he was "deeply effected" changes the fact that by your standards it would normally be genocide? Wtf?! Lol. I can't even take you seriously.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Mcfly616 wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...
 this isn't going anywhere lol I didn't make the crucible. Those that did make the crucible didn't deliberately direct it towards the Geth. They got Reaper upgrades, not by my doing. And the Crucible purges Reaper tech. I never foresaw that. And if thats the price to rid the galaxy of the Reapers, well, that is the best choice in the end. A clean slate. Those other choices didn't not complete my goal. Which was to kill the Reapers at any cost.

Catalyst explains before you choose that all synthetic life will die, so you knew exactly what Destroy was going to do before you did it. Like I said, if Destroy fits your Shepard, fine. You just have to accept that you commited genocide in the process.

rationalize your claim however you like. You're still wrong. As usual. Lol If you had to pack up and leave town because of a natural disaster, but you had only one spot left, so you chose.your kid over your dog. Knowing full well that this natural disaster would kill anybody left behind.....well by your way of thinking, that person is a murderer? Riiiight. Genius.

What do you mean "as usual"? Also, I would have my kid would put the dog on their lap. You don't seem to grasp that THE CATALYST GAVE YOU OTHER OPTIONS!