256 réponses à ce sujet

[CosmicGnosis]

Javik hates synthetics. Javik wants to kill synthetics. Destroy kills synthetics. Javik would be proud.

If you believe that synthetics are equal to organics, this is not good. It's one of the main reasons why I find Destroy so contemptible. You might argue that synthetics are just collateral damage, and that there is no deeper meaning inherent within their deaths. I can't accept that interpretation. To me, it seems clear that Destroy affirms the freedom of organic life and invalidates synthetic life. This is represented by Shepard's survival; his organic aspect survives the destruction of his synthetic aspect.

This is not a philosophy that I support. I will not throw synthetics out the airlock. I will not obliterate an entire "lifetype". I will not suppress a unique perspective on the nature of existence.

Javik's philosophy is loathsome. Destroy validates it. Fans like to speak of free will. All of that brave talk about freedom and self-determination applies only to organic life.

Modifié par CosmicGnosis, 06 novembre 2012 - 06:10 .

[Bill Casey]

Just pick refuse already...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 06 novembre 2012 - 06:15 .

[AlanC9]

I don't see how Javik's getting validated. If Shepard wants to sign on with Javik's ideas it's OK, but it's possible to pick Destroy without agreeing with him.

And if you really believe that Synthetics shouldn't be thrown out the airlock, why are you picking Destroy?

[Bill Casey]

AlanC9 wrote...

And if you really believe that Synthetics shouldn't be thrown out the airlock, why are you picking Destroy?

Because the other options are even more abhorrent...

[Vigilant111]

So control does not validate Javik? Given the chance, do u think Javik wouldn't want to control the reapers who happen to be partial synthetic beings? Is control respectful of all synthetic life in general? or is it only respectful to the Geth? To me, control produces more resentment towards synthetic life because Shepard AI presents itself as someone above all life, and organics do not like that, it is in their nature

Javik is not the avatar of destroy, he is the avatar of ignorance and misunderstanding

I'd like to think Shepard more or less influenced and corrected Javik his racist views, much like he / she did with Ashley's distrust of aliens, and that is what Mass Effect is all about

[Ticonderoga117]

I picked Destroy to kill Reapers, because any other option has the terrible chance of backfiring horribly. Besides, the Catalyst already validates Javik.

[dorktainian]

destroy ftw. refuse ftw in 50000 years.

[Ieldra]

Yes, CosmicGnosis, that's what I've always said. Destroy is a thematically pro-organic choice, as it affirms the "chaos" of organic life against the domination of synthetics. It goes hand in hand with Dr.Chakwas' affirmation that organics are something special (in that conversation on the Normandy somewhen between the Rannoch missions). It doesn't matter that some people don't choose it for that reason, the idea is still there.

[David7204]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Besides, the Catalyst already validates Javik.

Do people not see the contradiction of both agreeing with what the Catalyst says and basing the choice on it, and then complaining that the Catalyst uses "FALSE LOGIC"?

Modifié par David7204, 06 novembre 2012 - 07:06 .

[Ticonderoga117]

David7204 wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Besides, the Catalyst already validates Javik.

Do people not see the contradiction of both agreeing with what the Catalyst says and basing the choice on it, and then complaining that the Catalyst uses "FALSE LOGIC"?

Yeah. Luckily I don't pick the choice due to his reasoning. I pick it because it kills the Reapers.

[David7204]

...The Catalyst somewhat discourages Destroy. So if you think he's full of crap, Destroy is the choice that goes along with that.

[Karrie788]

No, it's not good, but I didn't shoot the tube to please my Prothean friend. If Destroy didn't kill all synthetics, I'm pretty sure even more people would pick it.
All endings have bad implications. It's about choosing the lesser evil in your eyes. Which Destroy was for me.

[KotorEffect3]

If I agreed with Javik's take on synthetics I would have killed off the Geth at the end of the Rannoch arc. I didn't do that. I picked destroy to kill the reapers. Unfortunately the Geth had to be sacrificied in order to rid the galaxy of the reaper menace.

[Ticonderoga117]

David7204 wrote...

...The Catalyst somewhat discourages Destroy. So if you think he's full of crap, Destroy is the choice that goes along with that.

That too. Part of the idea.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Catalyst already validates Javik.

QFT.

My opinion of Javik is funny because while I tend to agree with most of the things he says, I end up doing almost everything differently than he would. He'd sabotage the genophage cure; I was close, but decided against it. He'd free the rachni-queen as an ally; I say it's too risky given her exposure to Reaper tech (kind of contradicts what Javik says earlier about mercy, though). Javik wants Legion tossed out the airlock, would destroy the geth in a heartbeat; I'm more inclined to save them on Rannoch than the quarians, disagree that they can't be allies.

And then of course, choosing Synthesis at the end of the game. But hey, he told me not to care what others think.

[Vigilant111]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Yes, CosmicGnosis, that's what I've always said. Destroy is a thematically pro-organic choice, as it affirms the "chaos" of organic life against the domination of synthetics. It goes hand in hand with Dr.Chakwas' affirmation that organics are something special (in that conversation on the Normandy somewhen between the Rannoch missions). It doesn't matter that some people don't choose it for that reason, the idea is still there.

For the one billionth time: Destroy is not pro-organic because new synthetics will rise to wipe out all organics, does being wiped out sound pro-organic to you? does not being able to reconcile with the Geth sound pro-organic to you?

[DeinonSlayer]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Catalyst already validates Javik.

QFT.

My opinion of Javik is funny because while I tend to agree with most of the things he says, I end up doing almost everything differently than he would. He'd sabotage the genophage cure; I was close, but decided against it. He'd free the rachni-queen as an ally; I say it's too risky given her exposure to Reaper tech (kind of contradicts what Javik says earlier about mercy, though). Javik wants Legion tossed out the airlock, would destroy the geth in a heartbeat; I'm more inclined to save them on Rannoch than the quarians, disagree that they can't be allies.

And then of course, choosing Synthesis at the end of the game. But hey, he told me not to care what others think.

Trying to wrap my head around that reasoning... it's too risky to save the Queen due to her exposure to Reaper tech, but it's perfectly safe for the Geth to augment themselves with Reaper code after what happened with the IFF?

[teh DRUMPf!!]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Trying to wrap my head around that reasoning... it's too risky to save the Queen due to her exposure to Reaper tech, but it's perfectly safe for the Geth to augment themselves with Reaper code after what happened with the IFF?

What does IFF have to do with anything? You can't indoctrinate synthetics.

[TheBlackBaron]

Are you kidding? It's a great thing. Javik is more prescient and more rational than a significant portion of the BSN.

[DeinonSlayer]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Trying to wrap my head around that reasoning... it's too risky to save the Queen due to her exposure to Reaper tech, but it's perfectly safe for the Geth to augment themselves with Reaper code after what happened with the IFF?

What does IFF have to do with anything? You can't indoctrinate synthetics.

Remember the backdoor coded into the IFF that knocked out the Normady so the Collectors could hit it? It's a pretty damning example of what happens when blind trust is placed in their tech. You'd trust Reaper-written code not to, say, turn the entire Geth fleet against you a second time?

[RiptideX1090]

Synthesis Validates the Catalyst, Soveriegn, and Harbinger. Control validates Harper, Henry Lawson, and Sanctuary.

I'd take validating Javik over those two any day.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Remember the backdoor coded into the IFF that knocked out the Normady so the Collectors could hit it? It's a pretty damning example of what happens when blind trust is placed in their tech. You'd trust Reaper-written code not to, say, turn the entire Geth fleet against you a second time?

Yes. Synthetics are extremely tech-savvy, so if Legion thinks he can integrate it into the geth and make it work, I support.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 06 novembre 2012 - 08:10 .

[Han Shot First]

Destroy is not a war crime.

Destroy is the only ending that truly guarantees that the Reaper threat has been ended for all time. As such, is the only ending that guarantees the survival of every organic space faring civilization for the foreseeable future. Even it comes at the cost of losing the Geth (which is collateral damage at best), it falls under the umbrella of military necessity.

Military necessity is a legal concept used in international humanitarian law (IHL) as part of the legal justification for attacks on legitimate military targets that may have adverse, even terrible, consequences for civilians and civilian objects. It means that military forces in planning military actions are permitted to take into account the practical requirements of a military situation at any given moment and the imperatives of winning. The concept of military necessity acknowledges that even under the laws of war, winning the war or battle is a legitimate consideration, though it must be put alongside other considerations of IHL."

http://www.crimesofw...tary-necessity/


The Geth also can be rebuilt. Even if individuals are lost, their civilization isn't.
 
In a war where billions of lives have already been lost and with extinction looming for humanity and every other sapient space faring species in the galaxy, should Shepard really waste time worrying about the loss of individual Geth? Unlike with organics, death is not necessarily final for them.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 06 novembre 2012 - 08:20 .

[DeinonSlayer]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Remember the backdoor coded into the IFF that knocked out the Normady so the Collectors could hit it? It's a pretty damning example of what happens when blind trust is placed in their tech. You'd trust Reaper-written code not to, say, turn the entire Geth fleet against you a second time?

Yes. Synthetics are extremely tech-savvy, so if Legion thinks he can integrate it into the geth and make it work, I support it.

Yeah, they were tech-savvy enough to get dominated by it once. EDI was really confident about the IFF, too.

EDIT: Sorry, that came off more passive-aggressive than intended. To each their own; I just don't see it as you do.

For the record, I agree with you about the Rachni Queen, though. I wouldn't trust her enough to sacrifice Aralakh Company to ensure her escape (and after telling us that the Reapers found her by "hearing her song," I wouldn't want her drawing them to the location of the Crucible project). Likewise, I don't trust the Reaper code (or Legion) enough to risk 17 million lives on the conviction that it won't turn them again (I would not under any circumstances allow the Flotilla to be destroyed). I'd be far more amenable to Quarian/Geth peace if the Reaper code were off the table. I've made peace in one playthrough out of three, but it left a bad taste in my mouth.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 06 novembre 2012 - 08:24 .