1388 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

jtav wrote...
Not if you believe that memory and thought are identity, that replicating them is replicating Shepard. That thing is Shepard, if Shepard were vastly more intelligent, with near godlike abilities.

Exactly. As far as I'm concerned, memory and thought are identity. Claiming the Control entity is not Shepard is like claiming one-year-old me wasn't me. In some sense, it's true, but it doesn't matter. 

[Ieldra]

jtav wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

It just occurred to me that perhaps part of the reason I object to Control and Synthesis is that they're both much more "religious" than Destroy, and I basically think religion is for chumps.

But that isn't a fully formed thought yet. I'll need to dwell on it some more.

Might be something to that. I'm a non-practicing Catholic and it's not much of a leap for me to draw parallels between things I believe and Synthesis and Control.

I'm not religious and I think the same as you of Control and Synthesis. But then, I'm familiar with quite a few SF universes that feature mind uploading, switching bodies etc.... This is a well-established genre convention so if people keep objecting to it just because this time the target hardware is Reaper hardware I suspect it's for unrelated reasons. 

[SpamBot2000]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Spambot:
I started this in response to your claim that anyone with lots of power ended up a tyrant. Well, his man by all accounts wasn't a tyrant. He was known, among other thing, by contributions to human rights and religious tolerance. As for the "constant wars", count the wars waged by the US in the last 40 years. Looked at from some distance, you could think it was constant war when it actually wasn't.

It's a valid argument. "Perpetual war for perpetual peace", in the phrase of Gore Vidal. Because the end of the draft made it possible for the majority of the population to shield themselves from the human costs of war.

But that's really beside the point. The Control ending places the Shepard-Reaper into a practically divine position for ever. That is an infinite potential for tyranny. What is there to counter that? Infinite integrity and wisdon? Out of what exactly do those emerge?

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 22 décembre 2012 - 02:57 .

[Ieldra]

Rifneno wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

That still just means Shepard is no longer human and still alive as an Ai.

By that "logic", all the people that the Reapers juiced to make a new Reaper are still alive too.

Shepard: "You know what they are."
Legion: "Billions of organic minds, uploaded and conjoined in an immortal machine body. 'Each a nation'"

I'd say that possibility exists.

[Ieldra]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Spambot:
I started this in response to your claim that anyone with lots of power ended up a tyrant. Well, his man by all accounts wasn't a tyrant. He was known, among other thing, by contributions to human rights and religious tolerance. As for the "constant wars", count the wars waged by the US in the last 40 years. Looked at from some distance, you could think it was constant war when it actually wasn't.

It's a valid argument. "Perpetual war for perpetual peace", in the phrase of Gore Vidal. Because the end of the draft made it possible for the majority of the population to shield themselves from the human costs of war.

But that's really beside the point. The Control ending places the Shepard-Reaper into a practically divine position for ever. That is an infinite potential for tyranny. What is there to counter that? Infinite integrity and wisdon? Where di those emerge from?

If may seem a strange answer, but....why not? If Shepard has potential for tyranny and you multipy it by infinity, then any potential for wisdom also gets multiplied by infinity. Bascially, if Shepard was less of a tyrant and more of a mediator before he ascended then there's no reason to believe that balance will change.

[DirtyPhoenix]

Taken from another game,so not canon but food for thought:

"What are we but the sum of our memories? We are the stories we live, the tales we tell ourselves."

I abide by that. As far as I'm concerned, if someone copies my thoughts and memories, for all intents and purpose, he has created another "me".

[Rifneno]

pirate1802 wrote...

Taken from another game,so not canon but food for thought:

"What are we but the sum of our memories? We are the stories we live, the tales we tell ourselves."

I abide by that. As far as I'm concerned, if someone copies my thoughts and memories, for all intents and purpose, he has created another "me".

And when you mix in the same "understanding" as the Reapers have, those thoughts are altered.  Immeasurably.  You've made another Harbinger, not another Shepard.  Sucks to be the rest of the galaxy.

[Ieldra]

Rifneno wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

Taken from another game,so not canon but food for thought:

"What are we but the sum of our memories? We are the stories we live, the tales we tell ourselves."

I abide by that. As far as I'm concerned, if someone copies my thoughts and memories, for all intents and purpose, he has created another "me".

And when you mix in the same "understanding" as the Reapers have, those thoughts are altered.  Immeasurably.  You've made another Harbinger, not another Shepard.  Sucks to be the rest of the galaxy.

For someone who rejects a literal interpretation of Control as headcanon, you're quite good at making oen up yourself. There is no evidence that there's anything left of the Catalyst's thoughts on acceptable methods in the Control Entity.

[SpamBot2000]

Ieldra2 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Spambot:
I started this in response to your claim that anyone with lots of power ended up a tyrant. Well, his man by all accounts wasn't a tyrant. He was known, among other thing, by contributions to human rights and religious tolerance. As for the "constant wars", count the wars waged by the US in the last 40 years. Looked at from some distance, you could think it was constant war when it actually wasn't.

It's a valid argument. "Perpetual war for perpetual peace", in the phrase of Gore Vidal. Because the end of the draft made it possible for the majority of the population to shield themselves from the human costs of war.

But that's really beside the point. The Control ending places the Shepard-Reaper into a practically divine position for ever. That is an infinite potential for tyranny. What is there to counter that? Infinite integrity and wisdon? Where di those emerge from?

If may seem a strange answer, but....why not? If Shepard has potential for tyranny and you multipy it by infinity, then any potential for wisdom also gets multiplied by infinity. Bascially, if Shepard was less of a tyrant and more of a mediator before he ascended then there's no reason to believe that balance will change.

99.99 % of good governance and 0.01 % of tyranny still make for 100,000 years of tyranny in a billion years. And let's face it, that is just the beginning.

Look, it is one thing if you prefer to picture a happy Control ending for your game of Mass Effect. Arguing that there is no "rational ethical argument" against picking it is quite another. Which is why you have a thread with people professing their preference for autocracy and hatred of the 'weakness' of democracy in a Real World context. I do find these views alarming. They bear a striking similarity to writings about the crisis of democracy in the 1930s. 

You want your happy ending in the game and are willing to picture it for yourself. Fine. But you being willing to advocate totalitarian philosophy just to be able to congratulate yourself on the 'rational, ethical' soundness of your choice is taking the sci-fi fantasy into places many will find objectionable.

[Ieldra]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Spambot:
I started this in response to your claim that anyone with lots of power ended up a tyrant. Well, his man by all accounts wasn't a tyrant. He was known, among other thing, by contributions to human rights and religious tolerance. As for the "constant wars", count the wars waged by the US in the last 40 years. Looked at from some distance, you could think it was constant war when it actually wasn't.

It's a valid argument. "Perpetual war for perpetual peace", in the phrase of Gore Vidal. Because the end of the draft made it possible for the majority of the population to shield themselves from the human costs of war.

But that's really beside the point. The Control ending places the Shepard-Reaper into a practically divine position for ever. That is an infinite potential for tyranny. What is there to counter that? Infinite integrity and wisdon? Where di those emerge from?

If may seem a strange answer, but....why not? If Shepard has potential for tyranny and you multipy it by infinity, then any potential for wisdom also gets multiplied by infinity. Bascially, if Shepard was less of a tyrant and more of a mediator before he ascended then there's no reason to believe that balance will change.

99.99 % of good governance and 0.01 % of tyranny still make for 100,000 years of tyranny in a billion years.

That would still be significantly better than what humans have achieved in their history. Of course Control looks bad if you compare it to an ideal future that will never exist. I find doing that intellectually dishonest. And because people keep doing that I'll keep pointing out the flaws in their reasoning.

And let's face it, that is just the beginning.

According to whom? Why should the balance change?

Look, it is one thing if you prefer to picture a happy Control ending for your game of Mass Effect. Arguing that there is no "rational ethical argument" against picking it is quite another. Which is why you have a thread with people professing their preference for autocracy and hatred of the 'weakness' of democracy in a Real World context. I do find these views alarming. They bear a striking similarity to writings about the crisis of democracy in the 1930s. 

You want your happy ending in the game and are willing to picture it for yourself. Fine. But you being willing to advocate totalitarian philosophy just to be able to congratulate yourself on the 'rational, ethical' soundness of your choice is taking the sci-fi fantasy into places many will find objectionable.

ROFL. I am not aware of your posting history, but misconceptions like this are exactly the reason why I keep posting about this. Autocracy does not equal totalitarianism. The example I posted was meant to illustrate exactly that. Most of the autocratic systems in history were neither totalitarian nor military in nature. What I'm arguing is that an autocratic system is not bad by its nature as an autocratic system, it's just more susceptible to a single-point failure (in the person of the ruler). That makes it impractical to maintain for a long time since the risk of getting someone who will wreck the country will increase. Control won't have that risk because there is no succession.

Also, yeah, that's a risk, but you do have to wonder where history will go if governments and parties increasingly avoid taking unpopular measures because it won't get them re-elected. I don't believe in the wisdom of the crowd. All that will ever get us is mediocrity. As long as that's enough things will be fine, but what if it's not enough any more?

Look, I'm not advocating autocracy here. I'm living in a democratic country, I'm glad of it and I wouldn't change it if I could. For now. But people should avoid stating their ideology as if it were a proven truth. It's just a belief people have because it empowers them, or gives them the delusion of being empowered if you're cynic. I maintain there is nothing inherently bad in Control.   

Also, please note that my preferred and personal canon ending is Synthesis. I really have no personal "justify my favorite ending" stake in here. I am posting about Control because I dislike people's hypocrisy when talking about it.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 22 décembre 2012 - 03:52 .

[SpamBot2000]

The galactic Reaper overlord as the authoritarian in chief does have some totalitarian potential. You can roll on the floor, clutching your aching sides as much as you like, but you're not really successfully refuting anything by it.

You are saying this galactic overlording is the only 'rationally ethical' choice, and that people are saying they reject it on ethical grounds because of 'hypocrisy'. When people point out the ethical problems of assuming divinity over everyone who lives anywhere, for ever, you dismiss this argument by pure denial. Is that your measure of intellectual honesty?

You just want to pronounce everyone not in blissful denial of the corruptibility of everyone a timorous hypocrite, cringing in the light of reason you cast. Why so needy for such total validation?

[The Heretic of Time]

Rifneno wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

loungeshep wrote...

Destroy you get to head cannon shep surviving, synthesis you get to keep edi and the geth, refusal you get to feel like a...something.

I actually really like control though.

There's no "headcanon" to it.  Shepard survive high EMS destroy.  You keep nothing in synthesis.  You've successfully genetic raped the entire galaxy in one fell swoop.  Way to be WORSE than the Reapers.

Yes there is headcanon to it. There is ONLY your headcanon. Bioware themselves said that the breathing scene in high EMS Destroy could just as well be Shepards last breath before he dies. It requires headcanon to say Shepard lives in High EMS Destroy.

You know as little about medicine as you do about... well, anything else.  You're pretty well ignorant of everything from what I've seen.  Anyway, the contents of End03_Shepard_Alive clearly show an inhale, not an exhale.  The infamous "last breath" sound, ask any doctor or nurse that tends to hear it a lot such as ones at nursing homes, is an exhale.  The sudden audible inhale such as what hear here, is generally when someone is brought back after a period of not breathing.  Oh, and BW's official collector's guide states the Shepard survives EMS destroy.  "Shepard lives."  Now go rob a train or something.

And yet all that doesn't matter because the Word of God said that the breathing scene could also very well be Shepards last breath. It's said by the devs, their word is The Word of God. The Word of God has the final say here.

Besides, the "official" guide isn't even written by BioWare themselves, or any BioWare employee for that matter. It is a well known fact that the guide has a few errors.


Someone can headcanon that Shepard dies after his final breath, and that headcanon would be as much worth as your headcanon where Shepard lives. Deal with it.

[SeptimusMagistos]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

Taken from another game,so not canon but food for thought:

"What are we but the sum of our memories? We are the stories we live, the tales we tell ourselves."

I abide by that. As far as I'm concerned, if someone copies my thoughts and memories, for all intents and purpose, he has created another "me".

And when you mix in the same "understanding" as the Reapers have, those thoughts are altered.  Immeasurably.  You've made another Harbinger, not another Shepard.  Sucks to be the rest of the galaxy.

For someone who rejects a literal interpretation of Control as headcanon, you're quite good at making oen up yourself. There is no evidence that there's anything left of the Catalyst's thoughts on acceptable methods in the Control Entity.

This, basically. And considering Shepard apparently hasn't become a monster even in Stargazer's time, I'd say that whatever understanding Shepard got from the Reapers didn't include their tendency for slippery slopes.

[clennon8]

Some of you talk a pretty good game, but when it comes down to it you're making some base assumptions that seem fantastically naive to me. Ultimately, offing yourself in this scenario and hoping it all turns out okay is a faith-based decision. It's an astoundingly irrational culmination of a lot of wishful rationalizations.

[SeptimusMagistos]

clennon8 wrote...

Some of you talk a pretty good game, but when it comes down to it you're making some base assumptions that seem fantastically naive to me. Ultimately, offing yourself in this scenario and hoping it all turns out okay is a faith-based decision. It's an astoundingly irrational culmination of a lot of wishful rationalizations.

I've had three games' worth of those decisions pay off. I'm just going with what I empirically know works.

[Rifneno]

clennon8 wrote...

Some of you talk a pretty good game, but when it comes down to it you're making some base assumptions that seem fantastically naive to me. Ultimately, offing yourself in this scenario and hoping it all turns out okay is a faith-based decision. It's an astoundingly irrational culmination of a lot of wishful rationalizations.

QFT.  You get a chance to definitely end the Reapers' horror once and for all.  Instead, you kill yourself and hope for the best.  Awesome logic, guys.

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Some of you talk a pretty good game, but when it comes down to it you're making some base assumptions that seem fantastically naive to me. Ultimately, offing yourself in this scenario and hoping it all turns out okay is a faith-based decision. It's an astoundingly irrational culmination of a lot of wishful rationalizations.

I've had three games' worth of those decisions pay off. I'm just going with what I empirically know works.

That just means that the series needed to stop holding your hand and making sure none of your decisions really bit you in the ass.  But your decision making abilities clearly need a great deal of work.

[The Heretic of Time]

Rifneno wrote...

 You get a chance to definitely end the Reapers' horror once and for all.  Instead, you kill yourself and hope for the best.  Awesome logic, guys.

A chance to definitely end the Reapers horror once and for all? You mean shooting a tube with red explosive liquid right in front of you and hope for the best? Yes, awesome logic, guys.


Seriously, don't try to make the Destroy decision sound more logical than the Control decision, because shooting a tube with explosive red liquid in front of you and hoping for the best isn't the slightest bit more logical than placing your hands on 2 Tesla-rods and hoping for the best. Both decisions are far-fetched and in both endings you're hoping for the best.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 22 décembre 2012 - 04:46 .

[clennon8]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

 You get a chance to definitely end the Reapers' horror once and for all.  Instead, you kill yourself and hope for the best.  Awesome logic, guys.

A chance to definitely end the Reapers horror once and for all? You mean shooting a tube with red explosive liquid right in front of you and hope for the best? Yes, awesome logic, guys.


Seriously, don't try to make the Destroy decision sound more logical than the Control decision, because shooting a tube with explosive red liquid in front of you and hoping for the best isn't the slightest bit more logical than placing your hands on 2 Tesla-rods and hoping for the best. Both decisions are far-fetched and in both endings you're hoping for the best.

Yes it is.  This crappy false equivalence didn't work the first million times, and it isn't working now.

Modifié par clennon8, 22 décembre 2012 - 04:52 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

clennon8 wrote...

Some of you talk a pretty good game, but when it comes down to it you're making some base assumptions that seem fantastically naive to me. Ultimately, offing yourself in this scenario and hoping it all turns out okay is a faith-based decision. It's an astoundingly irrational culmination of a lot of wishful rationalizations.

Hyperbole much?

The solution is not "kill yourself." Shepard's death is part of a process in Control. A downside, which is shared by all options.

And when it comes down to it, it's a much easier buy than Destroy or Synthesis, really (and I'm not a Control guy).

[SeptimusMagistos]

Rifneno wrote...

That just means that the series needed to stop holding your hand and making sure none of your decisions really bit you in the ass.  But your decision making abilities clearly need a great deal of work.

Eh, it's a matter of means and ends. Am I willing to kill all synthetics to kill all the Reapers? No. No I'm not. Instead I'm trying this alternate method and trusting that going with the more uncertain option that saves more people pays off just one more time. Which it ultimately does, apparently.

[Vigilant111]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Some of you talk a pretty good game, but when it comes down to it you're making some base assumptions that seem fantastically naive to me. Ultimately, offing yourself in this scenario and hoping it all turns out okay is a faith-based decision. It's an astoundingly irrational culmination of a lot of wishful rationalizations.

I've had three games' worth of those decisions pay off. I'm just going with what I empirically know works.

It took me a while to understand what you have posted... you meant because expected consequences always result from your actions during the trilogy, therefore control will also follow suit? But note, the Catalyst asked you: "Do you THINK you can control us?", there exists only speculated consequences, not expected consequences

[The Heretic of Time]

clennon8 wrote...

Yes it is.  This crappy false equivalence didn't work the first million times, and it isn't working now.

I have yet to see a rebuttal to this "crappy false equavalence". As long as you can't refute it, you have no right to say it's "crappy" or "false".

[The Heretic of Time]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

That just means that the series needed to stop holding your hand and making sure none of your decisions really bit you in the ass.  But your decision making abilities clearly need a great deal of work.

Eh, it's a matter of means and ends. Am I willing to kill all synthetics to kill all the Reapers? No. No I'm not. Instead I'm trying this alternate method and trusting that going with the more uncertain option that saves more people pays off just one more time. Which it ultimately does, apparently.

It's not as if shooting a tube with red explosive liquid is any more certain than placing your hands on 2 Tesla-rods anyway. 

To think the Destroy decision is any more certain than the Control decision is a completely false argument. Honestly, don't fall for it.

If anything, the Control decision (placing your hands on 2 tesla-rods) makes more sense and is more certain than shooting at an explosive tube right in front of you (Destroy decision).

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 22 décembre 2012 - 04:56 .

[ghost9191]

well...

1) I have always said Control is the most morally right out of the choices. but does not make it right

2) No way to know that replacing catalyst ( choosing the lesser of two evils to control the reapers if you will ) with shepard will not have shepalyst become a even worse omnipotent being

3) in defeating a enemy there are only a limited number of ways. simplest is to appease them or eliminate them. Controlling your enemy usually doesn't turn out the way you want.

4) No one should really have that power. Doubt anyone would have actually been able to ( if given the choice ) decide who takes control of the reapers. the risks involved. Just too much power for one person. ppl wouldn't ( in my eyes at least ) just simply accept what shepard did . maybe over time but i don't think it would go as smoothly. Or it would at first because the ppl would not be able to oppose but over time ppl might begin to dislike the idea

those are a few of my reasons. i have always said though that control is that most morally right choice. but as said " there is doing the right thing, and there is doing something right"


you should at least agree on that Ieldra . or not but whatever

Modifié par ghost9191, 22 décembre 2012 - 04:58 .

[clennon8]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Yes it is.  This crappy false equivalence didn't work the first million times, and it isn't working now.

I have yet to see a rebuttal to this "crappy false equavalence". As long as you can't refute it, you have no right to say it's "crappy" or "false".

I've posted this before.  In this very thread, I believe.  Let's examine the options:
A) Vaporize yourself.
Vaporize yourself.
C) Shoot a tube.

Yeah, Shepard *might* die as a consequence of shooting the tube, especially since Bioware decided to dramatize the cinematic by having him stupidly walk right up to the tube as he's shooting it, but he might live.  

In Control and Synthesis, Shepard automatically kills himself, without ever having a chance to know the consequences or take any kind of corrective action.  He is wilfully killing himself, no question, period end of sentence, to enact a solution that leaves the Reapers alive and very closely parallels a solution that he has killed another major villain for trying to enact.  But somehow this is now okay because he talked to the Overlord of a race of ancient indoctrinating death machines for five minutes and he gave him <reasons>.  It is, on it's face, quite absurd.  You guys can talk in circles all you want, but you simply can't get away from that.

Modifié par clennon8, 22 décembre 2012 - 05:07 .