985 réponses à ce sujet

[jackmeup]

ElementL09 wrote...

The Reapers are an abomination.

this is exactly right even though each reaper thinks for itself it was made from an atroscity so yes they were controlled by catalyst but they shoudve never existed in the first place

[jtav]

But they are here now, and we have a duty to them. If they can be pacified, they have a right to exist.

[Ticonderoga117]

jtav wrote...

But they are here now, and we have a duty to them. If they can be pacified, they have a right to exist.

What? No. Just no. Killing them is the only option since thier mere existance puts everyone at risk. They were a mistake when the Leviathans/Catalyst made them, and they still are. Time to go.

[dreman9999]

jtav wrote...

But they are here now, and we have a duty to them. If they can be pacified, they have a right to exist.

No we don't. A much as I pitty them I will not bend to them. My resposiblity is to the races ofthe galexy...Not them.

[jtav]

We have a duty to all sapient life equally, regardless of how it came into being. If destroying them is the only way to stop the harvest, then it's justified self-defense. But it's better to free them, if we can.

[Argolas]

AlanC9 wrote...

Argolas wrote...
I said this before, the term "genocide" involves genes which synthetics do not have, that indicates how far away of true current morality we actually are here. It is a hypothetical question.

Fixed. Unless you're saying that sentient synthetics are impossible.

Point taken. I do not know if it is impossible, although I certainly hope so.

[Reap_ii]

jtav wrote...

We have a duty to all sapient life equally, regardless of how it came into being. If destroying them is the only way to stop the harvest, then it's justified self-defense. But it's better to free them, if we can.

Destorying them is freeing them from a forced existence they would have obviously said "NO!" to if they were given the choice.  so, if you can free them, Destroy is the solution.  if you could ask them now, they would probably want to be destroyed.  if i were a husk, i wouldnt want to be aware of it, or be controlled for that matter, id rather be destroyed. 

[Bill Casey]

jtav wrote...

If destroying them is the only way to stop the harvest

It is...

[jtav]

Reap_ii wrote...

jtav wrote...

We have a duty to all sapient life equally, regardless of how it came into being. If destroying them is the only way to stop the harvest, then it's justified self-defense. But it's better to free them, if we can.

Destorying them is freeing them from a forced existence they would have obviously said "NO!" to if they were given the choice.  so, if you can free them, Destroy is the solution.  if you could ask them now, they would probably want to be destroyed.  if i were a husk, i wouldnt want to be aware of it, or be controlled for that matter, id rather be destroyed. 

That's euthanasia. Forced euthanasia, at that.

[Reap_ii]

jtav wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

jtav wrote...

We have a duty to all sapient life equally, regardless of how it came into being. If destroying them is the only way to stop the harvest, then it's justified self-defense. But it's better to free them, if we can.

Destorying them is freeing them from a forced existence they would have obviously said "NO!" to if they were given the choice.  so, if you can free them, Destroy is the solution.  if you could ask them now, they would probably want to be destroyed.  if i were a husk, i wouldnt want to be aware of it, or be controlled for that matter, id rather be destroyed. 

That's euthanasia. Forced euthanasia, at that.

Euthanasia is a better fate than being an aware/controlled husk, banshee, or brute.  do you agree or disagree with this statement? 

[Solaxe]

Bill Casey wrote...

It is...

I don't see people being harvested in other endings, maybe you need glasses

[Bill Casey]

Solaxe wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

It is...

I don't see people being harvested in other endings, maybe you need glasses

Maybe you need to replay the trilogy...
Maybe you'll realize what the ending is...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 27 octobre 2012 - 07:02 .

[Volc19]

Bill Casey wrote...

Solaxe wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

It is...

I don't see people being harvested in other endings, maybe you need glasses

Maybe you need to replay the trilogy...
Maybe you'll realize what the ending is...

You know, the endings are all on Youtube now. The age of speculations has ended, we know what happens.

[Sonashi]

jtav wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

jtav wrote...

We have a duty to all sapient life equally, regardless of how it came into being. If destroying them is the only way to stop the harvest, then it's justified self-defense. But it's better to free them, if we can.

Destorying them is freeing them from a forced existence they would have obviously said "NO!" to if they were given the choice.  so, if you can free them, Destroy is the solution.  if you could ask them now, they would probably want to be destroyed.  if i were a husk, i wouldnt want to be aware of it, or be controlled for that matter, id rather be destroyed. 

That's euthanasia. Forced euthanasia, at that.

Is euthanasia a bad thing? A crime? I don't know the answer but everybody has different beliefs so don't blame Reap_ii for that. Are the Reapers innocent? You can't expect a one, straight answer.

Do you remember that small sidequest on the Citadel when you could either let the Batarian live or turn the machine off. Whatever decision you made, you didn't gain any specific points, probably just reputation pts, i don't remember. Even BioWare didn't want to judge that. 

Shall we speculate some more? If it's better to free them then Control is nogo? What would you choose if Synthesis and Refuse didn't even exist?

[Bill Casey]

Volc19 wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Solaxe wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

It is...

I don't see people being harvested in other endings, maybe you need glasses

Maybe you need to replay the trilogy...
Maybe you'll realize what the ending is...

You know, the endings are all on Youtube now. The age of speculations has ended, we know what happens.

Clearly you don't...

[dreman9999]

Bill Casey wrote...

Volc19 wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Solaxe wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

It is...

I don't see people being harvested in other endings, maybe you need glasses

Maybe you need to replay the trilogy...
Maybe you'll realize what the ending is...

You know, the endings are all on Youtube now. The age of speculations has ended, we know what happens.

Clearly you don't...

I don't see any of the reapers harvesting oganics or synthetics in control or synthesis

[teh DRUMPf!!]

dreman9999 wrote...

I don't see any of the reapers harvesting oganics or synthetics in control or synthesis

You need to put your Destroy-red IT glasses on. 

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 27 octobre 2012 - 08:21 .

[Someone With Mass]

dreman9999 wrote...
 don't see any of the reapers harvesting oganics or synthetics in control or synthesis

I can't see any indication that they can't or won't.

The AI in Control can start a cycle all over again just like the Catalyst with no-one being able to stop it and Synthesis doesn't really stop the Reapers at all, since it's not completing their goal of "preserving" life.

[AlanC9]

Someone With Mass wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
 don't see any of the reapers harvesting oganics or synthetics in control or synthesis

I can't see any indication that they can't or won't.

The AI in Control can start a cycle all over again just like the Catalyst with no-one being able to stop it and Synthesis doesn't really stop the Reapers at all, since it's not completing their goal of "preserving" life.

In Control, why would it? Surely you're not saying that the Catalyst's logic was that compelling.

In Synthesis, what is it preserving life from?

How do you reconcile either outcome with the Stargazer?

And are these your real impressions, or are you just making stuff up?

[AlanC9]

I implied a false dichotomy above. A lot of people on this board make stuff up about the endings to back up whatever their interpretation of the ending was, but it's rarely a conscious process. Pre-EC, that was how we got nova theory and Getorex' Planet Incestus bit.

[spirosz]

Who wants to catch a movie with Reaper Joe over there?

[fr33stylez]

Killing Reapers is not genocide, that's ridiculous.

That is unless you equate the sentient organic beings that were forcibly kidnapped and processed into goo with the Reaper that were used to create. And if that the case, why are you stopping the Reaper cycle at all? You're just the same as you were whether you're a human or part of a Reaper, right?

And if you really care about the sanctity of all life, it makes no sense to force synthesis on trillions of people as an alternative to killing the Reapers.

Modifié par fr33stylez, 27 octobre 2012 - 09:39 .

[dreman9999]

Someone With Mass wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
 don't see any of the reapers harvesting oganics or synthetics in control or synthesis

I can't see any indication that they can't or won't.

The AI in Control can start a cycle all over again just like the Catalyst with no-one being able to stop it and Synthesis doesn't really stop the Reapers at all, since it's not completing their goal of "preserving" life.

Control has the shepard Ai stop them because from doing so. They follows it's commands like they did the catalysts.

In synthesis, the already satified there programing becausethey found a new way to perserve life.

So no more harvesting.

[Ieldra]

fr33stylez wrote...
Killing Reapers is not genocide, that's ridiculous.

That is unless you equate the sentient organic beings that were forcibly kidnapped and processed into goo with the Reaper that were used to create. And if that the case, why are you stopping the Reaper cycle at all? You're just the same as you were whether you're a human or part of a Reaper, right?

The lack of differentiation in arguments like this never ceases to amaze me. The Reapers should never have been created, and nobody denies that the Reaperization was evil. However, a Reaper is "billions of organic minds, uploaded and conjoined". It doesn't matter how they were created, they are valid life. Actually, there is no such thing as "invalid life" at all.  

And if you really care about the sanctity of all life, it makes no sense to force synthesis on trillions of people as an alternative to killing the Reapers.

Again the lack of distinction. I value life, but not any specific biochemical composition thereof. What the hell does it matter if some process changes my DNA into some other stuff with added functionality, as long as I remain who I am? I'm not saying applying this to the whole galaxy isn't problematic, but the idea of the "sanctity of life" is much abused in arguments like yours.

[Someone With Mass]

AlanC9 wrote...

In Control, why would it? Surely you're not saying that the Catalyst's logic was that compelling.

In Synthesis, what is it preserving life from?

How do you reconcile either outcome with the Stargazer?

And are these your real impressions, or are you just making stuff up?

AIs are unpredictable that way.

More synthetics, created by organics that aren't affected by the Catalyst's lame excuse of a solution. You know, when new lifeforms are created on new worlds. Unless Synthesis effectively stops that process, which makes it even more stomach-wrenching.

I can't care less about the Stargazer or what that scene implies. It's just a picture that was blatantly ripped from a quick Google search with dialogues that was inspired by the letter from some middle school kid.

I have several impressions of the endings and could tell you how some of them disgust me, but that's not the topic of this thread.