272 réponses à ce sujet

[AdmiralCheez]

@Xil: What would I like to keep?  The basic elements of our nature and personality. Lose that, and we lose who we are. If we're to really grow, we have to educate ourselves and learn to deal with our shortcomings. Our flaws are things we have to overcome, not replace. There's no point in perfection--it's an existential dead end, stagnant by definition.

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 20 octobre 2012 - 05:56 .

[AdmiralCheez]

Sajuro wrote...

It always sucked to be geth, they don't even have sex. But the forced re-education magic didn't make it any better. Considering all of the options, destroy is still the best for the geth since they die with the false hope of Shepard not cocking it up.

Hey look!  Something on topic!  Bless you in doing what I have failed to do, O mighty Sajuro!

[Xilizhra]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

@Xil: What would I like to keep?  The basic elements of our nature and personality. Lose that, and we lose who we are. If we're to really grow, we have to educate ourselves and learn to deal with our shortcomings. Our flaws are things we have to overcome, not replace. There's no point in perfection--it's an existential dead end, stagnant by definition.

You would keep our flaws? I doubt your judgment in this case. I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice what we are; such continuity has no inherent value.

[Sajuro]

Xilizhra wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

@Xil: What would I like to keep?  The basic elements of our nature and personality. Lose that, and we lose who we are. If we're to really grow, we have to educate ourselves and learn to deal with our shortcomings. Our flaws are things we have to overcome, not replace. There's no point in perfection--it's an existential dead end, stagnant by definition.

You would keep our flaws? I doubt your judgment in this case. I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice what we are; such continuity has no inherent value.

Would we still be human if we got rid of our flaws?

[AdmiralCheez]

Xilizhra wrote...

You would keep our flaws? I doubt your judgment in this case. I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice what we are; such continuity has no inherent value.

Those same flaws prevent us from having the judgment to know what to get rid of in the first place.  What if love's not a virtue after all, but an outdated mechanism for kin loyalty?  What if altruism is ultimately detrimental?  What if we really are better off without art, without hope, without pleasure?

We'd be machines, Xil.  That's what perfection is: pure logic, without any of the instinctive shortcuts left over from back when we didn't have the processing power to independently consider each decision.  There'd be no beauty anymore, because beauty is something we made up.  There'd be no good or evil, because they're labels we invented to define our behavior.

What if things were perfect, Xil?  What if, in the beginning matter and antimatter were produced in equal amounts?  Then there'd be no universe.  What if matter was distributed evenly when the universe first expanded?  Then gravity would fail to pull things together, and there'd be no planets or stars.  What if stars never died?  Then the heavy elements that make us up would never have been forged and subsequently released into the universe.  What if the early biosphere reached equilibrium?  What if there were no mutations or shifts in environment?  We would never have evolved.  What if we never struggled against the elements and ourselves?  Then we'd never become intelligent and civilized.  What if we never wasted our time with fantasy?  Then we'd lose the products of our dreams.

We are the children of freak coincidence, forged by our challenges, given direction by our flaws.  We are the avatars of disequilibrim, the chaos that thinks.  The universe we were spawned in is every bit as imperfect and subject to entropy as we are.  And the machines we build, even they aren't flawless.

Perfection doesn't exist, and if it did, we wouldn't be here.

[Hey]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

You would keep our flaws? I doubt your judgment in this case. I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice what we are; such continuity has no inherent value.

Those same flaws prevent us from having the judgment to know what to get rid of in the first place.  What if love's not a virtue after all, but an outdated mechanism for kin loyalty?  What if altruism is ultimately detrimental?  What if we really are better off without art, without hope, without pleasure?

We'd be machines, Xil.  That's what perfection is: pure logic, without any of the instinctive shortcuts left over from back when we didn't have the processing power to independently consider each decision.  There'd be no beauty anymore, because beauty is something we made up.  There'd be no good or evil, because they're labels we invented to define our behavior.

What if things were perfect, Xil?  What if, in the beginning matter and antimatter were produced in equal amounts?  Then there'd be no universe.  What if matter was distributed evenly when the universe first expanded?  Then gravity would fail to pull things together, and there'd be no planets or stars.  What if stars never died?  Then the heavy elements that make us up would never have been forged and subsequently released into the universe.  What if the early biosphere reached equilibrium?  What if there were no mutations or shifts in environment?  We would never have evolved.  What if we never struggled against the elements and ourselves?  Then we'd never become intelligent and civilized.  What if we never wasted our time with fantasy?  Then we'd lose the products of our dreams.

We are the children of freak coincidence, forged by our challenges, given direction by our flaws.  We are the avatars of disequilibrim, the chaos that thinks.  The universe we were spawned in is every bit as imperfect and subject to entropy as we are.  And the machines we build, even they aren't flawless.

Perfection doesn't exist, and if it did, we wouldn't be here.

I totally imagine you posting this while listenting to U2's beautiful day 

[DeinonSlayer]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

You would keep our flaws? I doubt your judgment in this case. I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice what we are; such continuity has no inherent value.

Those same flaws prevent us from having the judgment to know what to get rid of in the first place.  What if love's not a virtue after all, but an outdated mechanism for kin loyalty?  What if altruism is ultimately detrimental?  What if we really are better off without art, without hope, without pleasure?

We'd be machines, Xil.  That's what perfection is: pure logic, without any of the instinctive shortcuts left over from back when we didn't have the processing power to independently consider each decision.  There'd be no beauty anymore, because beauty is something we made up.  There'd be no good or evil, because they're labels we invented to define our behavior.

What if things were perfect, Xil?  What if, in the beginning matter and antimatter were produced in equal amounts?  Then there'd be no universe.  What if matter was distributed evenly when the universe first expanded?  Then gravity would fail to pull things together, and there'd be no planets or stars.  What if stars never died?  Then the heavy elements that make us up would never have been forged and subsequently released into the universe.  What if the early biosphere reached equilibrium?  What if there were no mutations or shifts in environment?  We would never have evolved.  What if we never struggled against the elements and ourselves?  Then we'd never become intelligent and civilized.  What if we never wasted our time with fantasy?  Then we'd lose the products of our dreams.

We are the children of freak coincidence, forged by our challenges, given direction by our flaws.  We are the avatars of disequilibrim, the chaos that thinks.  The universe we were spawned in is every bit as imperfect and subject to entropy as we are.  And the machines we build, even they aren't flawless.

Perfection doesn't exist, and if it did, we wouldn't be here.

Damn. I should write that down somewhere.

[Maxster_]

Xilizhra wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Okay Xil, no offense but I'm starting to seriously think you're crazy.

Not denying that magically turning everyone into nice people wouldn't be hella fun on some level, but seriously. Seriously. Medication's the closest I'm ever getting to that sort of thing, and I choose to take the stuff.

Crazy? Maybe. But human nature is a black hole of moral weakness, xenophobia and cruelty. What we are will never be what we can be, unless we change what we are.

Forced cyborgization is forced. Who are you to decide such things for everyone? God(if it could exist)? Benevolent tyrant? Uberhuman?
I really hope that you will never be in power. Such disregard for self-determination and rights will bring your country no good.

[Xilizhra]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

You would keep our flaws? I doubt your judgment in this case. I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice what we are; such continuity has no inherent value.

Those same flaws prevent us from having the judgment to know what to get rid of in the first place.  What if love's not a virtue after all, but an outdated mechanism for kin loyalty?  What if altruism is ultimately detrimental?  What if we really are better off without art, without hope, without pleasure?

We'd be machines, Xil.  That's what perfection is: pure logic, without any of the instinctive shortcuts left over from back when we didn't have the processing power to independently consider each decision.  There'd be no beauty anymore, because beauty is something we made up.  There'd be no good or evil, because they're labels we invented to define our behavior.

What if things were perfect, Xil?  What if, in the beginning matter and antimatter were produced in equal amounts?  Then there'd be no universe.  What if matter was distributed evenly when the universe first expanded?  Then gravity would fail to pull things together, and there'd be no planets or stars.  What if stars never died?  Then the heavy elements that make us up would never have been forged and subsequently released into the universe.  What if the early biosphere reached equilibrium?  What if there were no mutations or shifts in environment?  We would never have evolved.  What if we never struggled against the elements and ourselves?  Then we'd never become intelligent and civilized.  What if we never wasted our time with fantasy?  Then we'd lose the products of our dreams.

We are the children of freak coincidence, forged by our challenges, given direction by our flaws.  We are the avatars of disequilibrim, the chaos that thinks.  The universe we were spawned in is every bit as imperfect and subject to entropy as we are.  And the machines we build, even they aren't flawless.

Perfection doesn't exist, and if it did, we wouldn't be here.

I note distinct Dr. Pangloss-esque tendencies here. If there was no universe, that would be fine; none would be around to experience its lack. If there were no planets or stars, that would be fine; no elements, and that would be fine too.  The biosphere reaching equilibrium? Likely a better outcome than what we have now. However, fantasy isn't really a flaw, as it's necessary for us to advance past our current benighted state.

It's not, in my mind, freak coincidence so much as something that just happens from time to time. Not particularly impressive or noteworthy, at least not yet. What we are are avatars of foolishness and weakness, grasping at glimpses of hope and enlightenment, in true terms as well as false. What we should not do is accept our own imperfections as a species, for to do so is to exalt our current status over something that would be better even if it was alien. We would remain where we are simply because we would fear what we don't understand... as ever.

[Vlta]

Oh you pro-synthesis fanatics I do enjoy your delusions

@Cheez apology for continuing the OT but the synthesis talk is starting to drive me up a wall, they're in almost every thread..

@Xilzhra, it really sounds like you just hate humanity and think that your vision is the one that must be forced onto others in fact I think most pro-synthesis think this way. Now don't get me wrong I love a good autocratic Ideology but why would I want a galaxy that's always peaceful I mean sure holding hands skipping through a field? That would become boring very fast, unless of course everyone's minds are altered, then I simply wouldn't care(and a mind can be altered through various means). There must be a balance to all things synthesis breaks that balance. You should also learn to accept life as is.
Also Uber Alles is an appropriate song coming from you

As for the Geth they'll never catch a break as bioware seems to enjoy using them as the galaxies punching bag. Well them and Cerberus but that's another story...

[Ledgend1221]

GI is the tops!
It sucks to be an organic.

[Samtheman63]

im a machine and dont have feelings, none of this matters

[Xabungle]

Isn't it possible that some survived in data caches as software in server storage? Obviously the mobile platforms that were anywhere near mass relays are gone but I could just be completely off target.

[pmac_tk421]

Xilizhra wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Okay Xil, no offense but I'm starting to seriously think you're crazy.

Not denying that magically turning everyone into nice people wouldn't be hella fun on some level, but seriously. Seriously. Medication's the closest I'm ever getting to that sort of thing, and I choose to take the stuff.

Crazy? Maybe. But human nature is a black hole of moral weakness, xenophobia and cruelty. What we are will never be what we can be, unless we change what we are.

Yeah. Synthesis is a great leap forward for the whole galaxy. If I had to pick between now and a scientific/cultural golden age, I'm picking the golden age, also because without using synthesis such an event is impossible.
But anyway, you speak about self determination and it being violated in synthesis. It is the same in destroy. The geth don't get a vote in whether they die or not. The quarians don't get a vote in whether their new allies die. No one who takes use of technology gets a vote in whether it gets damaged or not.(the catalyst says in the EC that tech in general will be damaged, but can be repaired). And this goes for all endings, no one votes on the Relays being damaged, and in destroy, there are no reapers to help rebuild, and find me a non-reaper who knows how to build a relay... 

Modifié par pmac_tk421, 20 octobre 2012 - 04:33 .

[AdmiralCheez]

Vlta wrote...

@Cheez apology for continuing the OT but the synthesis talk is starting to drive me up a wall, they're in almost every thread..

Yeah, starting to think I should just ignore them...

As for the Geth they'll never catch a break as bioware seems to enjoy using them as the galaxies punching bag. Well them and Cerberus but that's another story...

I should make a companion thread:

"Boy, it sucks to be Cerberus."

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 20 octobre 2012 - 06:41 .

[pmac_tk421]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Vlta wrote...

@Cheez apology for continuing the OT but the synthesis talk is starting to drive me up a wall, they're in almost every thread..

Yeah, starting to think I should just ignore them...

As for the Geth they'll never catch a break as bioware seems to enjoy using them as the galaxies punching bag. Well them and Cerberus but that's another story...

I should make a companion thread:

"Boy, it sucks to be Cerberus."

I disagree with you but I don't find you insane nor do I ignore you. Also, you are the majority here. Don't start going on about snthesis fans everywhere, just check my endings poll.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I warned them. Don't upload the code. Did Legion listen? No. Well, Legion, and the rest of you geth, if you upload reaper code and get destroyed in the end, don't blame Commander Shepard. Blame yourselves.

And EDI? It is not my fault that The Illusive Man built her from parts taken directly from Sovereign, is it? No, it is not. TIM could have made a blue box like other AIs, but this is Cerberus: bringing you tomorrow's problems today.

[Ender Ghost]

I'd rather be a geth and be a casualty of war to save the galaxy then to by a quarian and shoot at a ship with the the galaxy's only hope onboard (and not care if (s)he lives or dies) just to gain a slight advantage in a war my opponent never wanted and had been open to end.

[AdmiralCheez]

pmac_tk421 wrote...

I disagree with you but I don't find you insane nor do I ignore you. Also, you are the majority here. Don't start going on about snthesis fans everywhere, just check my endings poll.

What I mean is that it's just not worth agruing because it comes down to this:

Me: "It's not okay to play god."
You: "Yes it is."
Me: "You're bonkers."
You: "You're immoral."

And nothing ever gets done.

[pmac_tk421]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

pmac_tk421 wrote...

I disagree with you but I don't find you insane nor do I ignore you. Also, you are the majority here. Don't start going on about snthesis fans everywhere, just check my endings poll.

What I mean is that it's just not worth agruing because it comes down to this:

Me: "It's not okay to play god."
You: "Yes it is."
Me: "You're bonkers."
You: "You're immoral."

And nothing ever gets done.

I'm the one who initialy suggested we stop arguing because you were involving head cannon.

[DarthSliver]

I decided to respond after reading the first page so here is my response.

I like this response but remember with the destruction of the dyson sphere by the invading Quarian fleet it left the Geth with only one option for survival since they lost many platforms in its destruction. Geth started to lose their ability to fight back effectively with its destructions so they were basically backed into the corner and the Quarians forced the Geth to pull the Reaper help card on them. Remember in ME2 the Geth were in between on considering Peace with the Creators than the Creators come in to wipe them out between ME2 and ME3. I stand when it comes to choosing Quarian or Geth, if i cant choose both to survive the Quarians force me to give them the short end.

For as it comes for being a Geth that was given True independence and free thinking like any Organic because of that human that helped Legion out, I would be proud to help save the galaxy from the old machines and glad the organics allow us to fight at their side for what my misguided brethren choose to do a few years ago.

Under a Control ending, I wouldnt make peace with the Reapers that seem to have now stopped their destruction over the galaxy. But I would attack them so soon after they became peaceful, I would allow the rebuild and track their movements as the galaxy flourished once again and prepare a rebellion when the time was right to finally rid the Peace Reapers from the galaxy so this could never happen again.

Under Synthesis I suppose I would understand why the Reapers still live and have a better understand of Organic freedom with free thinking I gained when finally making peace with the Creators.

Under Destroy, I would know there was a Geth Space Station beyond the Reach of the blast seeing as the Geth were trying to do many things on their own as they could without the Old Machines. (Also my headcanon tells me the Catalyst lied about all the synthetic life being destroyed because it didnt want to see its Reapers getting destroyed since the preserved life from previous cycles. Basically Destroy is its least favorable choice)

Under Refuse as a Geth I would assume the dam thing didnt work and we wasted our time building it this whole time as the Human was gathering the Galaxy forces together. So I would just continue to fight until I died and when the time came that i did die would hope my death caused the others to succeed.

[AdmiralCheez]

pmac_tk421 wrote...

I'm the one who initialy suggested we stop arguing because you were involving head cannon.

It's CANON.  With ONE "n" in the middle.

When it has two of them, you get this:



Seriously though, there's no more evidence to suggest that the geth are really dead than there is to suggest that Synthesis doesn't result in a hive mind.  All we have are a bunch of blanks we're supposed to fill in.  We're allowed to fill them in as we choose, and the fact that Bioware's heavily implying one doesn't mean we can't accept the other.

Because speculations!

[Ender Ghost]

One thing to keep in mind about geth being completely different in Me3 then in the other games is that their good writer left and bioware was left with all the bad ones resulting in the geth getting turned into generic copies of the mainstream "We're robots but we want emotions and individuality and basicly everything humans have hurr durr durr." even after they their characters were firmly rooted in what they would and wouldn't do in Me2.

Ultimately I think the writers for Me3 were xenophobic when it comes to the geth, first they ruined their characters to get them to be 'closer' to humans, and then in the end they are either killed or turned into slaves (which is what would have happened if the reapers had won anyways).

[AdmiralCheez]

@Ender Ghost: That makes me sad. The fact that it's a likely scenario makes me sadder.

[AlanC9]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
Seriously though, there's no more evidence to suggest that the geth are really dead than there is to suggest that Synthesis doesn't result in a hive mind.  

So they don't show up in the ending slides.... by accident?