288 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

@ Zilihzra, the catalyst only dies in destroy, he says it himself. He is replaced in control but he is still there, and in synthesis he is laughing that Shepard was stupid enough to pick it, but seriously nothing happens to him in synthesis

[Xilizhra]

Steelcan wrote...

I'm back..........

@Knighnblu, you are right in regards to the justice aspect of destroy over the other endings, but even beyond that there is a moral argument for it, and a logical one for destroy. Synthesis and control are morally abhorrent and a compromise with the reapers, there is no reason to pick them

There are hard limits on your perception if you believe there are no reasons to choose either. You can disagree with the reasons, like I disagree with Destroy, but that doesn't mean the reasons don't exist.

[jtav]

That is why destroy is the only option and it is because the Reapers need killing. They have it coming and anything less just spits in the face of the trillions of souls lost to an insane AI.

That's precisely the attitude that turned me off Destroy for so long. I don't care about who "has it coming." I only want to preserve as much life as I can as ethically as I can. That the way to do that involves the loss of what remains of a thousand civilizations should be looked on as tragedy.

[Xilizhra]

jtav wrote...

That is why destroy is the only option and it is because the Reapers need killing. They have it coming and anything less just spits in the face of the trillions of souls lost to an insane AI.

That's precisely the attitude that turned me off Destroy for so long. I don't care about who "has it coming." I only want to preserve as much life as I can as ethically as I can. That the way to do that involves the loss of what remains of a thousand civilizations should be looked on as tragedy.

Erm, that preserves less life than Control. I'm fairly sure that Control produces fewer ethical problems, although I'm not Catholic (or Christian, or religious) and you may see it differently.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 14 octobre 2012 - 11:41 .

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

I'm back..........

@Knighnblu, you are right in regards to the justice aspect of destroy over the other endings, but even beyond that there is a moral argument for it, and a logical one for destroy. Synthesis and control are morally abhorrent and a compromise with the reapers, there is no reason to pick them

There are hard limits on your perception if you believe there are no reasons to choose either. You can disagree with the reasons, like I disagree with Destroy, but that doesn't mean the reasons don't exist.

. Yeah I was kind of harsh, poor word choice, let me phrase it this way
  I see no logical, rational, or moral reason for synthesis or control.  Others may disagree and that is perfectly fine

[Xilizhra]

Steelcan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

I'm back..........

@Knighnblu, you are right in regards to the justice aspect of destroy over the other endings, but even beyond that there is a moral argument for it, and a logical one for destroy. Synthesis and control are morally abhorrent and a compromise with the reapers, there is no reason to pick them

There are hard limits on your perception if you believe there are no reasons to choose either. You can disagree with the reasons, like I disagree with Destroy, but that doesn't mean the reasons don't exist.

. Yeah I was kind of harsh, poor word choice, let me phrase it this way
  I see no logical, rational, or moral reason for synthesis or control.  Others may disagree and that is perfectly fine

Then consider the disagreement fully in place.

[Steelcan]

jtav wrote...

That is why destroy is the only option and it is because the Reapers need killing. They have it coming and anything less just spits in the face of the trillions of souls lost to an insane AI.

That's precisely the attitude that turned me off Destroy for so long. I don't care about who "has it coming." I only want to preserve as much life as I can as ethically as I can. That the way to do that involves the loss of what remains of a thousand civilizations should be looked on as tragedy.

. Well control preserves life, but violates the reaper's right to free will, synthesis takes no one's free will into account

[Xilizhra]

Steelcan wrote...

jtav wrote...

That is why destroy is the only option and it is because the Reapers need killing. They have it coming and anything less just spits in the face of the trillions of souls lost to an insane AI.

That's precisely the attitude that turned me off Destroy for so long. I don't care about who "has it coming." I only want to preserve as much life as I can as ethically as I can. That the way to do that involves the loss of what remains of a thousand civilizations should be looked on as tragedy.

. Well control preserves life, but violates the reaper's right to free will, synthesis takes no one's free will into account

So you believe in the Reapers' right to free will, but not right to life? Why?

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
I'm back..........
@Knighnblu, you are right in regards to the justice aspect of destroy over the other endings, but even beyond that there is a moral argument for it, and a logical one for destroy. Synthesis and control are morally abhorrent and a compromise with the reapers, there is no reason to pick them

There are hard limits on your perception if you believe there are no reasons to choose either. You can disagree with the reasons, like I disagree with Destroy, but that doesn't mean the reasons don't exist.

. Yeah I was kind of harsh, poor word choice, let me phrase it this way
  I see no logical, rational, or moral reason for synthesis or control.  Others may disagree and that is perfectly fine

Then consider the disagreement fully in place.

. That's the idea

[AdmiralCheez]

Xilizhra wrote...

Please don't. This is just annoying when people try to wholly invalidate a valid philosophy.

And that's why it's tempting: it IS a valid philosophy, and life as a whole may be better in a merged galaxy.  The possiblity of creating a living, breathing utopia is tempting, indeed.

But it's a utopia that we'll have to create on our own, without the Reapers.  The goal may be sound, but not the method.

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

jtav wrote...

That is why destroy is the only option and it is because the Reapers need killing. They have it coming and anything less just spits in the face of the trillions of souls lost to an insane AI

That's precisely the attitude that turned me off Destroy for so long. I don't care about who "has it coming." I only want to preserve as much life as I can as ethically as I can. That the way to do that involves the loss of what remains of a thousand civilizations should be looked on as tragedy.

. Well control preserves life, but violates the reaper's right to free will, synthesis takes no one's free will into account

So you believe in the Reapers' right to free will, but not right to life? Why?

. All sapient life has the right to self determination, the reapers have chosen a path that prohibits coexistence, the drawback to free will is responsibility. Their actions have condemned them, not anything else

[Foolsfolly]

Steelcan wrote...

jtav wrote...

That is why destroy is the only option and it is because the Reapers need killing. They have it coming and anything less just spits in the face of the trillions of souls lost to an insane AI.

That's precisely the attitude that turned me off Destroy for so long. I don't care about who "has it coming." I only want to preserve as much life as I can as ethically as I can. That the way to do that involves the loss of what remains of a thousand civilizations should be looked on as tragedy.

. Well control preserves life, but violates the reaper's right to free will, synthesis takes no one's free will into account

They have no free will. They've been harvested against their will and are now controlled by the Catalyst against their will. They're merely weapons... albeit weapons built from victims.

[jtav]

Xilizhra wrote...

jtav wrote...

That is why destroy is the only option and it is because the Reapers need killing. They have it coming and anything less just spits in the face of the trillions of souls lost to an insane AI.

That's precisely the attitude that turned me off Destroy for so long. I don't care about who "has it coming." I only want to preserve as much life as I can as ethically as I can. That the way to do that involves the loss of what remains of a thousand civilizations should be looked on as tragedy.

Erm, that preserves less life than Control. I'm fairly sure that Control produces fewer ethical problems, although I'm not Catholic (or Christian, or religious) and you may see it differently.

I'm edging back to Control, but just for the sake of argument: Control-type schemes tend not to work in the ME universe. The salarians tried to use the krogan, which beget the Rebellions. Rewriting the heretics backfires. TIM goes mad. I can see a genre savvy Shepard rejecting it on pragmatic grounds.

[Xilizhra]

And that's why it's tempting: it IS a valid philosophy, and life as a whole may be better in a merged galaxy. The possiblity of creating a living, breathing utopia is tempting, indeed.

But it's a utopia that we'll have to create on our own, without the Reapers. The goal may be sound, but not the method.

Believe that if you will, but don't prevent others who disagree from carrying it out by slamming it with "lolindoctrination." Keep all options valid, just foreshadow them better.

. All sapient life has the right to self determination, the reapers have chosen a path that prohibits coexistence, the drawback to free will is responsibility. Their actions have condemned them, not anything else

The Reapers don't have free will to begin with. They didn't choose anything, they were chosen to do so by the Catalyst.

I'm edging back to Control, but just for the sake of argument:
Control-type schemes tend not to work in the ME universe. The salarians
tried to use the krogan, which beget the Rebellions. Rewriting the
heretics backfires. TIM goes mad. I can see a genre savvy Shepard
rejecting it on pragmatic grounds.

Rewriting the heretics turns out fine if you ally with the geth in the end; it makes them stronger. And it doesn't make them more likely to join the Reapers; that happens anyway. And Henry Lawson's Sanctuary plan was working fine, it just got attacked by the Reapers before anything more substantial could come about.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 14 octobre 2012 - 11:48 .

[Steelcan]

Then if the reapers do not contain free will they are not really alive...... If they are indoctrinated into believing they have free will, then killing the, is doing them a service

[Jonata]

There's a badass still picture of Zaeed.

Even if I'm a Synthetizer myself I can't argue with that.

[Xilizhra]

Steelcan wrote...

Then if the reapers do not contain free will they are not really alive...... If they are indoctrinated into believing they have free will, then killing the, is doing them a service

But they can be released and regain free will.

[Iakus]

jtav wrote...

I'm edging back to Control, but just for the sake of argument: Control-type schemes tend not to work in the ME universe. The salarians tried to use the krogan, which beget the Rebellions. Rewriting the heretics backfires. TIM goes mad. I can see a genre savvy Shepard rejecting it on pragmatic grounds.

Not to mention Project OVerlord, Cerberus attempts to control the rachni clones, etc.

Come to think of it, what would happen to the Reapers without a Catalyst controlling them?  the assumption seems to be they would become individuals again, who could be reasoned with.  But would they?   Or would they be mindless husks?  or indoctrinated intelligencestrying to complete their given tasks?  Or insane, like rachni seperated from the queen they depend on for direction?

Modifié par iakus, 14 octobre 2012 - 11:54 .

[Xilizhra]

Come to think of it, what would happen to the Reapers without a Catalyst controlling them? the assumption seems to be they would become individuals again, who could be reasoned with. But would they? Or would they be mindless husks? or indoctrinated intelligencestrying to complete their given tasks? Or insane, like rachni seperated from the queen they depend on for direction?

If Synthesis is any indication, they do become individuals again, albeit probably still being each a nation.

[Iakus]

Xilizhra wrote...

Come to think of it, what would happen to the Reapers without a Catalyst controlling them? the assumption seems to be they would become individuals again, who could be reasoned with. But would they? Or would they be mindless husks? or indoctrinated intelligencestrying to complete their given tasks? Or insane, like rachni seperated from the queen they depend on for direction?

If Synthesis is any indication, they do become individuals again, albeit probably still being each a nation.

Do they?  Or is the Catalyst still around for Synthesis, and has has been "Synthesized" along with everyone else?

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Then if the reapers do not contain free will they are not really alive...... If they are indoctrinated into believing they have free will, then killing the, is doing them a service

But they can be released and regain free will.

. When free from th indoctrinating influence the afflicted just simply ceases functioning. Vigil makes that pretty clear.  You cannot recover from indoctrination, don't bring up Shiala, she admits that she is still indoctrinated but she uses the thorian's mind connection to the others to drown out the reaper voices

[Foolsfolly]

iakus wrote...

jtav wrote...

I'm edging back to Control, but just for the sake of argument: Control-type schemes tend not to work in the ME universe. The salarians tried to use the krogan, which beget the Rebellions. Rewriting the heretics backfires. TIM goes mad. I can see a genre savvy Shepard rejecting it on pragmatic grounds.

Not to mention Project OVerlord, Cerberus attempts to control the rachni clones, etc.

Come to think of it, what would happen to the Reapers without a Catalyst controlling them?  the assumption seems to be they would become individuals again, who could be reasoned with.  But would they?   Or would they be mindless husks?  or indoctrinated intelligencestrying to complete their given tasks?  Or insane, like rachni seperated from the queen they depend on for direction?

I have no idea. Part of Sovie's speech about being a nation unto themselves lends itself heavily towards them becoming individuals (or at least collective minds). But the way the Catalyst speaks... it sounds like they're just husks on a larger scale. And perhaps Sovie, Harbinger, and Rannoch Reaper are all the Catalyst's voice similar to how all Collectors are the Collector General... who is Harbinger... who might be the Catalyst.

That's a lot of mouth pieces.

[AdmiralCheez]

Xilizhra wrote...

Believe that if you will, but don't prevent others who disagree from carrying it out by slamming it with "lolindoctrination." Keep all options valid, just foreshadow them better.

Whether it would have worked or not is left up to the reader.  In the fic, Shepard's going to say no.*  I'll be sure to keep Harbinger's** points very valid--he's offering the whole thing as a compromise.  He could have been telling the truth, but in this instance Shepard doesn't believe him.

*I considered including branching dialogue, but it's too much of a damn headache for one person writing a fanfic.

**In the fic, the Catalyst is going to be an inanimate object.  It does not control the Reapers, but rather serves as the central node in their communication/relay network.  A weak point, if you will.  This part's fuzzy, I know, but I'm working on it.  Need more in-game research and writing details and stuff.

[Xilizhra]

Whether it would have worked or not is left up to the reader. In the fic, Shepard's going to say no.* I'll be sure to keep Harbinger's** points very valid--he's offering the whole thing as a compromise. He could have been telling the truth, but in this instance Shepard doesn't believe him.

Then just remove Synthesis as a presented option altogether if it's not going to be treated in the same manner or better.