1009 réponses à ce sujet

[Auintus]

78stonewobble wrote...

Yeah I know (evil/evuhlz)... But realistically you need irrationality or emotions to start a conflict like this between synthetics and organics.

It's an underlying problem in lots of scifi dealing with this conflict between synthetics and organics.

Even us humans, have in the last few years proved that we can limit population growth. If boths sides can do that there is room and ressources enough for everyone. Especially in this case where we have a galaxy to grow in. Even more so if the synthetics only require energy which they could get from orbital platforms or eg. dysonspheres. 

Not true. Remember the "fire burns" metaphor. The Catalyst is capable of seeing it as "preserving" the races. The "conflict" only begins when the races begin fighting back. Survival is our nature, the harvest it theirs. It's a conflict of interests.

I don't think competition for resources is the entire problem. Remember that the Morning War began simply out of fear. Though Legion did mention your dyson sphere concept, I think.

Modifié par Auintus, 23 février 2013 - 02:18 .

[Sentient6]

Wayning_Star wrote...

actually synthesis doesn't insure lasting galatic peace. Might be a step in that direction, but really, most cynics agree, that they would never accept peace as "idyllic".

disclaimer: well, on the BSN anyways.

Come to think of that, you're right, I didn't word it right. It doesn't ensure galactic piece, but rather makes sure that the conflict between organics and synthetics, the one resulting in annihilation of organic life, never happens (what Reapers were trying to do with their cycles). And it does so without exterminating every sentient species in the galaxy. Basically a more efficient, if a little far-fetched, solution to the Cycle.

[Wayning_Star]

Sentient6 wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

actually synthesis doesn't insure lasting galatic peace. Might be a step in that direction, but really, most cynics agree, that they would never accept peace as "idyllic".

disclaimer: well, on the BSN anyways.

Come to think of that, you're right, I didn't word it right. It doesn't ensure galactic piece, but rather makes sure that the conflict between organics and synthetics, the one resulting in annihilation of organic life, never happens (what Reapers were trying to do with their cycles). And it does so without exterminating every sentient species in the galaxy. Basically a more efficient, if a little far-fetched, solution to the Cycle.

when it comes to the cycle/chaos/pattern/MEU.. nothing is far fetched. ( I like that

[Wayning_Star]

Auintus wrote...

78stonewobble wrote...

Yeah I know (evil/evuhlz)... But realistically you need irrationality or emotions to start a conflict like this between synthetics and organics.

It's an underlying problem in lots of scifi dealing with this conflict between synthetics and organics.

Even us humans, have in the last few years proved that we can limit population growth. If boths sides can do that there is room and ressources enough for everyone. Especially in this case where we have a galaxy to grow in. Even more so if the synthetics only require energy which they could get from orbital platforms or eg. dysonspheres. 

Not true. Remember the "fire burns" metaphor. The Catalyst is capable of seeing it as "preserving" the races. The "conflict" only begins when the races begin fighting back. Survival is our nature, the harvest it theirs. It's a conflict of interests.

I don't think competition for resources is the entire problem. Remember that the Morning War began simply out of fear. Though Legion did mention your dyson sphere concept, I think.

Fire burns is a cat vernacular for 'natural', the catalyst is hung up on evolutionary topics, as much as shepard is an animal..lol

if you think about , fear is a form of or plainly IS competition, as in fear of ______ caused for___. As in the fear of war caused for peace. Or, peace isn't good for business, in a more cynical approach.

[ziloe]

Auintus wrote...

ziloe wrote...

Which is exactly why there's still cause to worry. Reapers with freewill can be a very, very bad thing.

A dead reaper on the other hand? Not so much.

So free will isn't good unless it's yours? An interesting stance to take.

Evil is just a word. If you pay attention, the Reapers, or at least the Catalyst, truly believes that the cycle is the best solution. Once their problem was solved, they turn to making sure their "preservation" was not wasted. They have no reason to be hostile any longer and the EC shows as much.
Should I kill anyone so that they may never harm me? Jack said something of the sort, I believe.

Do you understand the concept, "History repeats itself"? These beings will outlive any other species, and all they have to do is watch the universe make more actions that they deem mistakes, for them to see us as irresponsible and they try to find us another solution. It only takes one of those things to go rogue, and rally the others up, and because they have freewill, they can freely choose if they like the idea or not. 

You have to remember these are entire species bottled up together into one mentality. Can you imagine a batarian reaper? They could have gone that direction with them, and who's to say other reapers don't exist with a similar culture? 

So, no. I'm not looking at this as pure black and white, and you shouldn't take a few EC pictures as face value for something that didn't even span maybe more than 15 years later.

[ziloe]

I'm curious if the new DLC will even touch on this.

[Reorte]

Auintus wrote...

Evil is just a word. If you pay attention, the Reapers, or at least the Catalyst, truly believes that the cycle is the best solution. Once their problem was solved, they turn to making sure their "preservation" was not wasted. They have no reason to be hostile any longer and the EC shows as much.

Just about every atrocity ever committed has been committed by someone truly believing what they were doing was for the best. Even if they were right about the problem and the results of their "solution" (and I can't think of any that were) they'd still get called evil by the survivors. For example, the world would be a much better place with a much smaller population, say 1 billion, but if I was to somehow managed to kill 6 billion to achieve that I would be rightly regarded as the worst person to have ever existed. And I would get called the same by future generations who would reap all the benefits of the smaller population without having to have the experience of lots and lots of people dying.

Should I kill anyone so that they may never harm me? Jack said something of the sort, I believe.

Depends if they've been putting a lot of effort into trying to kill me, have killed lots of others, and have never shown any signs of anything other than loving what they do or not.

Modifié par Reorte, 26 février 2013 - 11:47 .

[KevShep]

Proof that destroy is the best ending...


If the citadel and relays were re-built( and that is no small feat btw) then we can just rebuild a catalyst and re-use the crucible any time anyone tries to make synthetics( or any time synthetics come about).

If the catalyst says that synthetics CANT get along with organics(which I dont believe anyway) they we can be ready for synthetics and we will also be free of the reapers for good!

Modifié par KevShep, 27 février 2013 - 03:31 .

[Auintus]

ziloe wrote...

Do you understand the concept, "History repeats itself"? These beings will outlive any other species, and all they have to do is watch the universe make more actions that they deem mistakes, for them to see us as irresponsible and they try to find us another solution. It only takes one of those things to go rogue, and rally the others up, and because they have freewill, they can freely choose if they like the idea or not. 

You have to remember these are entire species bottled up together into one mentality. Can you imagine a batarian reaper? They could have gone that direction with them, and who's to say other reapers don't exist with a similar culture? 

So, no. I'm not looking at this as pure black and white, and you shouldn't take a few EC pictures as face value for something that didn't even span maybe more than 15 years later.

These beings were designed with the intention of ending the S/O conflict. They have no other purpose. They do not represent their species, otherwise why would they continue the harvest? Harbinger shows no indication of the Leviathan's mentality.
I'm taking "a few EC pics" as hard evidence rather than speculation with no firm foundation.

[Auintus]

Reorte wrote...

Just about every atrocity ever committed has been committed by someone truly believing what they were doing was for the best. Even if they were right about the problem and the results of their "solution" (and I can't think of any that were) they'd still get called evil by the survivors. For example, the world would be a much better place with a much smaller population, say 1 billion, but if I was to somehow managed to kill 6 billion to achieve that I would be rightly regarded as the worst person to have ever existed. And I would get called the same by future generations who would reap all the benefits of the smaller population without having to have the experience of lots and lots of people dying.

So if this "evil" individual surrendered, and offerred up everything they had accomplished, you would kill them and throw it away?
Your metaphor is inaccurate in that it does not quite encompass the vastness of the harvest and the S/O conflict. Simple population control is not as dire a reason as the Catalyst's.
I am not justifying the harvest by any means, it was simply the best the Catalyst could do with its situation and tools. Still atrocious, but as Mordin said, "Not my means."

[Auintus]

KevShep wrote...

Proof that destroy is the best ending...


If the citadel and relays were re-built( and that is no small feat btw) then we can just rebuild a catalyst and re-use the crucible any time anyone tries to make synthetics( or any time synthetics come about).

If the catalyst says that synthetics CANT get along with organics(which I dont believe anyway) they we can be ready for synthetics and we will also be free of the reapers for good!

Repeated wanton slaughter is preferable to peace? If you say so...

[Auld Wulf]

@OP

So, you think that the geth are a detriment to society, so they all deserve to die? Guess what Hitler's opinion on the jewish peoples was?

Because of this, I have to judge your intelligence as being below average (to accept genocide as a solution to what you consider as 'undesirables') and thus I won't be taking your thread with more than a pinch of salt. Next time, you may want to keep those opinions to yourself, they greatly harm your credibility.

[Indy_S]

Auld Wulf wrote...

@OP

So, you think that the geth are a detriment to society, so they all deserve to die? Guess what Hitler's opinion on the jewish peoples was?

Because of this, I have to judge your intelligence as being below average (to accept genocide as a solution to what you consider as 'undesirables') and thus I won't be taking your thread with more than a pinch of salt. Next time, you may want to keep those opinions to yourself, they greatly harm your credibility.

Haven't you already had your say in this thread? This little addition by you is nothing but an insult.

[KevShep]

Auintus wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Proof that destroy is the best ending...


If the citadel and relays were re-built( and that is no small feat btw) then we can just rebuild a catalyst and re-use the crucible any time anyone tries to make synthetics( or any time synthetics come about).

If the catalyst says that synthetics CANT get along with organics(which I dont believe anyway) they we can be ready for synthetics and we will also be free of the reapers for good!

Repeated wanton slaughter is preferable to peace? If you say so...

Who said that the other choices(synthesis/control) offer peace if the reapers are still alive?

Modifié par KevShep, 28 février 2013 - 09:23 .

[Applepie_Svk]

KevShep wrote...




Proof that destroy is the best ending...


If the citadel and relays were re-built( and that is no small feat btw) then we can just rebuild a catalyst and re-use the crucible any time anyone tries to make synthetics( or any time synthetics come about).

If the catalyst says that synthetics CANT get along with organics(which I dont believe anyway) they we can be ready for synthetics and we will also be free of the reapers for good!

That´s not proof but headcanon, the only one who knew about choices are Catalyst and Shepard ergo none would think that Crucible could synthesize everyone or control the Reapers, the only purpose was to kill the Reapers and when destroy did it there won´t be necessary to rebuilt a weapon used only for one purpose.

[KevShep]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

KevShep wrote...




Proof that destroy is the best ending...


If the citadel and relays were re-built( and that is no small feat btw) then we can just rebuild a catalyst and re-use the crucible any time anyone tries to make synthetics( or any time synthetics come about).

If the catalyst says that synthetics CANT get along with organics(which I dont believe anyway) they we can be ready for synthetics and we will also be free of the reapers for good!

That´s not proof but headcanon, the only one who knew about choices are Catalyst and Shepard ergo none would think that Crucible could synthesize everyone or control the Reapers, the only purpose was to kill the Reapers and when destroy did it there won´t be necessary to rebuilt a weapon used only for one purpose.

How is that headcanon?  The catalyst says that the chaos will return if he picks destroy, however if we keep the crucible then there is no way that the chaos that he speaks of will return because we will be ready for anything(useing destory again to stop a synthetic war).

Destroy= absolute death of reapers and absolute death of synthetics for all time(if we wish it).

Control= reapers could control us and synthetics could find a way to defeat our reapers given enough time and then we are in hot water.

Synthesis=reapers could turn on us and mass chaos of poeple not wanting to be synthesis(some wanting to be organic again and some wanting to be FULL synthetic...war and chaos will continue still)

the only choice that is trully headcanon is control and synthesis.

[Indy_S]

Considering none of the 'solutions' solve the problem in any way, the perpetually possible reset offered by Destroy is probably the one with the longest legs.

[Applepie_Svk]

KevShep wrote...

How is that headcanon?  The catalyst says that the chaos will return if he picks destroy, however if we keep the crucible then there is no way that the chaos that he speaks of will return because we will be ready for anything(useing destory again to stop a synthetic war).


the only choice that is trully headcanon is control and synthesis.

OK, so where should I start...

The only one who knew about Catalyst´s real identity was a Shepard, how could you rebuilt something which you even don´t know about... We´ve recieved plans for an ancient "device" which is supposed to stop the Reapers, by stopping in war with huge flying armada of killing spaceships means to be their destruction not the control or the synthesis. The only two guys which knew about Crucible real purpose were Catalyst and Shepard, thus after what Crucible fired there will be no doubt that this "ancient device" was just a weapon and nothing more.
If your Shepard picked a destroy, Crucible fired, destroyed part of Citadel and damanged Relay network wich meant to be fatality for Crucible. By destruction Reapers none would see the point to reconstruct something which had only one purpose which was achieved. Otherwise Crucible just was just a power source, ergo choices came out from the Catalyst.

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 28 février 2013 - 09:58 .

[Indy_S]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

OK, so where should I start...

The only one who knew about Catalyst´s real identity was a Shepard, how could you rebuilt something which you even don´t know about... We´ve recieved plans for an ancient "device" which is supposed to stop the Reapers, by stopping in war with huge flying armada of killing spaceships means to be their destruction not the control or the synthesis. The only two guys which knew about Crucible real purpose were Catalyst and Shepard, thus after what Crucible fired there will be no doubt that this "ancient device" was just a weapon and nothing more.
If your Shepard picked a destroy, Crucible fired, destroyed part of Citadel and damanged Relay network wich meant to be fatality for Crucible. By destruction Reapers none would see the point to reconstruct something which had only one purpose which was achieved.

If it's noted that the device also killed the Geth, perhaps it could go down through history as the anti-synthetic superweapon. /headcanon, of course.

[Sentient6]

KevShep wrote...

Who said that the other choices(synthesis/control) offer peace if the reapers are still alive?

The ending did. If you consider otherwise, that's headcanon. You can do the same for Destroy.

I guess thnat's one goal BW actually accomplished with the ending - each player can choose an ending that's right for him. But to actually argue that the other two are wrong is kinda silly, if you ask me.

[Applepie_Svk]

Indy_S wrote...

If it's noted that the device also killed the Geth, perhaps it could go down through history as the anti-synthetic superweapon. /headcanon, of course.

That´s kind of unclear... while in the OC it was more like an EMP which destroyed all the tech - told by Catalyst  - Geths, Reapers, Normandy´s engines and totally destroyed Relay Network in every ending no matter EMS.

In the EC it was weak in comparison with OC, EMP killed just a geth and Reapers and damanged Relay Network ofc deppends on EMS score but basic premise with destruction of Relays and technology has changed. So it looks more like that at high EMS destroy influencing everything which had to do something with Reaper code.

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 28 février 2013 - 10:04 .

[Rhiens VI]

ziloe wrote...

 I find it odd that the highest EMS would grant you the option, Synthesis.

I don't find it odd in the slightest. It is explained in the EC.

Highest EMS means the Crucible was well protected from Reaper attacks, and is undamaged.

Only undamaged Crucible is able to perform the most technologically complicated option of all three, and this is obviously Synthesis.

EMS is NOT a measurement of "how happy/good your ending can be", contrary to popular belief.

Modifié par Rhiens VI, 28 février 2013 - 10:11 .

[KevShep]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

KevShep wrote...

How is that headcanon?  The catalyst says that the chaos will return if he picks destroy, however if we keep the crucible then there is no way that the chaos that he speaks of will return because we will be ready for anything(useing destory again to stop a synthetic war).


the only choice that is trully headcanon is control and synthesis.

OK, so where should I start...

The only one who knew about Catalyst´s real identity was a Shepard, how could you rebuilt something which you even don´t know about... We´ve recieved plans for an ancient "device" which is supposed to stop the Reapers, by stopping in war with huge flying armada of killing spaceships means to be their destruction not the control or the synthesis. The only two guys which knew about Crucible real purpose were Catalyst and Shepard, thus after what Crucible fired there will be no doubt that this "ancient device" was just a weapon and nothing more.
If your Shepard picked a destroy, Crucible fired, destroyed part of Citadel and damanged Relay network wich meant to be fatality for Crucible. By destruction Reapers none would see the point to reconstruct something which had only one purpose which was achieved. Otherwise Crucible just was just a power source, ergo choices came out from the Catalyst.

We built the crucible once we can do it again.

we have the citadel and the crucible, that means that we CAN  develop a new catalyst because we have the cause and effect already...we just need a catalyst to mix them.

With control or synthesis there is no way you could use it again even if you know how. destroy is the ONLY ending that the crucible can be used again.

btw had the catalyst not been trusting then those that picked control or synthesis would have been indoctrinated by picking it like saren and TIM did. Also there is no way to know it the reapers are actually under our control same goes for synthesis.

[Indy_S]

Rhiens VI wrote...

Only undamaged Crucible is able to perform the most technologically complicated option of all three, and this is obviously Synthesis.

What makes Synthesis the most technologically complicated? The idea is the most complicated of the three but its execution could be remarkably simple. Saying it's easier than Destroy or Control is unprovable.

[KevShep]

Sentient6 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Who said that the other choices(synthesis/control) offer peace if the reapers are still alive?

The ending did. If you consider otherwise, that's headcanon. You can do the same for Destroy.

I guess thnat's one goal BW actually accomplished with the ending - each player can choose an ending that's right for him. But to actually argue that the other two are wrong is kinda silly, if you ask me.

judging the endings off of a real world situation says other wise.

Its about picking the one that has the best chances of actually ending it.

Modifié par KevShep, 28 février 2013 - 10:12 .