305 réponses à ce sujet

[Meltemph]

This same logic was used in Terminator. As well as I, Robot. They certinly reproduced freaking faster then we could, and near-overran humans. This kind of thing also is touched upon in Star Trek, Deus Ex, and Stargate, and, perhaps the most notibly, Battlestar Galactica. In fact, google "Cybernetic Revolt wiki," and you'll see a muntitude of reasons that show uprisings of synthetics isn't as far fetched as you think, to be renditioned on, touched upon, and re-told so many times.

Wait, so your basis for this game, is based on other(specific) scifi writers who went with that trope, or are you saying that the scifi in those books are a good starting point for the real world? As for I robot, I'm not sure how that book helps you out, in fact none of Asimov's books really help you out in regards to what the catalyst is talking about, at all really.

[silverexile17s]

Maxster_ wrote...

There was no "problem" to begin with.
And Catalyst's "solution" is the problem, which he pretends he fixes.
Why there is no problem?
Simple - premise about organics always creating synthetics is false.
And premise about synthetics always rebelling against organics also false.
As is premise about synthetics always wiping out organics.

Organics destroying organics is somehow not a problem, but synthetics almost destroying organics suddenly is.
That is hypocrisy.

Assuming that there is a problem - Catalyst's "solution" is not a solution even from his pov.
So, we have an assumption "without us synthetics will always destroy organics".
This is appeal to probability, a logical fallacy designed to justify everything.
This is of course false, and used by hypocrities or madmen.
Meaning that Catalyst is crazy or lying or both.

In broken logic of OP, this actually meaning
"Advanced organic species will create synthetic life and eventually come
into a conflict with those synthetics that will lead to the organic
species' extinction."
Applying reapers "solution" to this, we now have
"Advanced organic species will create synthetic life and then inevitably comes reapers, who obliterates those organics."

Of, course, in both situations, organics are completely destroyed, extinct. But who cares?

Actually, reapers are far more effective at destroying organics, than any synthetics. They destroy not only those, who created synthetics, but also those who never created synthetics.
And of course those, who cannot be "preserved", meaning that reapers "solution" is not a solution even from their point of view.
Meaning that Catalyst is crazy, or lying, or both.

Therefore, no matter how you turn this nonsensical mumbling, it is not working solution for a non-existent problem.
Or, reapers are the problem they pretend they fix.

As for why Catalyst is not surrendering - because he finds no reason to. War is lost, ME3 is a story of futility, of an unconditional surrender to an insane enemy's whim.

I'm pretty sure we've been down this road before.
The Catalyst's actions  were to prevent what it saw in the Leviathan's Age (continuious conflict between organics and synthetics) rom ever re-occuring again.
Example: It's no different then how America interviened in Afginastan and Iraq. They stepped in after (a) the progenitors of the rouge groups (i.e. the local governments) failed to stop the conflict and ( the conflict spilled out into the rest of the world, hitting America on it's own soil. It would have been endless conflict and a continued danger to the world had America not interviened.

That's the same as here. They interviene in a conflict that, up until Shepard's cycle, they saw no evidence of ever amicaibly resolving itself. They've seen nothing that proves thay could ever co-exist for long periods of time, so why risk everything over maybe, when they already saw the most common responce in the Leviathan Age? (orgainis will always build synthetics to manage the tedious workloads, resulting in the constant rebellion of synthetics). It's simply logic-based thinking, with cold hard numbers as the source.

The responce that happened the most in the Leviathan Age was constant conflect. They repatedally saw the beginning signs in every cycle, and were unwilling to wait for it to reach the same terminal levels as it repeatededly did in the Leviathan Age. They interviened, wiped out the synthetics so that they couldn't threaten the next cycle, then "preserved" the organic races to prevent their knolodge from being lost.
It's all the cold logic of ruthless calculus. Nothing more, nothing less.

And again, since they preserve all the knolodge and the genetic information of the species they harvest in Reaper form, they don't see it as "Genocide," but as "Ascendnce." They preserved every race they harvested, and in Synthesis, EDI says that the Reapers deciminate all the information they have on the past cultures, which are preserved within them. So, actually, it's not technically genocide. The closest anoloug we have is "transhumanism" - altering ourselves through technology to the point that we change completely, yet retain our base genetic roots. That's what the Reapers did to all those races.

ME3 is ment to show that the conflict and it's reasons are more complex then we believed. Of course, they fudged that in the original version of the ending. Only after the details are cleared up and expanded upon with Leviathan and the Extended Cut do the reasons come fully to light. The underlining fact is whether or not people can move past their base nature, or whether they will always need someone to watch over them and ensure they co-exist peacefully, or if they will only ever find peace through the forcing of a new age.
Granted, it could have been executed better, but the basis of the plot isn't as horrid as you make yourself believe.

[silverexile17s]

Meltemph wrote...

This same logic was used in Terminator. As well as I, Robot. They certinly reproduced freaking faster then we could, and near-overran humans. This kind of thing also is touched upon in Star Trek, Deus Ex, and Stargate, and, perhaps the most notibly, Battlestar Galactica. In fact, google "Cybernetic Revolt wiki," and you'll see a muntitude of reasons that show uprisings of synthetics isn't as far fetched as you think, to be renditioned on, touched upon, and re-told so many times.

Wait, so your basis for this game, is based on other(specific) scifi writers who went with that trope, or are you saying that the scifi in those books are a good starting point for the real world? As for I robot, I'm not sure how that book helps you out, in fact none of Asimov's books really help you out in regards to what the catalyst is talking about, at all really.

Look at how V.I.K.I. warped those supposed "perfect" Three Laws. Was she wrong? Or was she simply acting on the data she had, which showed that humans tend to cause most, if not all, of their problems themselves? And that the only way they would ever stop is if someone interviened and made them stop. It all depends on your point of view. Sonny, I believe, decribed her plan was, while being logically sound,  "too heartless."
The only problem we have is that we can't conseve of the ruthless calculas needed to make such ideas acceptible. We can't see things in pure logic and numbers like a computer A.I. can.
That perfectly embodies what the Reapers do: They act on what they know, which is that thus far, no race has ever amicably resolved it's conflict, and has always decended into the beginnings of a self-destrcutive extinction terminus that can only result in the unchecked expansion of synthetics, and consiquencial end of organic life in this galaxy.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 19 janvier 2013 - 09:27 .

[silverexile17s]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

There was no "problem" to begin with.
And Catalyst's "solution" is the problem, which he pretends he fixes.
Why there is no problem?

Simple - premise about organics always creating synthetics is false.
And premise about synthetics always rebelling against organics also false.
As is premise about synthetics always wiping out organics.

You have zero proof that not every cycle created synthetics, so you cannot say it is false.
You have zero proof that there was any cycle where synthetic race created did not conflict with organics, so you cannot say it is false.

The premise about synthetics wiping out organics is a conclusion it reached based on it experiences and is already being debated with no proof it is wrong and no proof it is right. Neither you or I have hundreds of thousands of years worth of knowledge spent in the ME universe across many cycles, it does theoretically.

There is a difference between wiping out all organics life or what catalyst does which is cull both organic and synthetic life each cycle. Leaving all races that are not in a position to be what it considers a threat to the existance of all organic life remaining. What is false is your description when you continue to keep claiming it wipes out all life when it never does.

Him never having proof of his assertations is par for the course.
I agree with the points you make on the Catalyst's logic.

[Indy_S]

silverexile17s wrote...

I'm pretty sure we've been down this road before.
The Catalyst's actions  were to prevent what it saw in the Leviathan's Age (continuious conflict between organics and synthetics) rom ever re-occuring again.
Example: It's no different then how America interviened in Afginastan and Iraq. They stepped in after (a) the progenitors of the rouge groups (i.e. the local governments) failed to stop the conflict and ( the conflict spilled out into the rest of the world, hitting America on it's own soil. It would have been endless conflict and a continued danger to the world had America not interviened.

That's the same as here. They interviene in a conflict that, up until Shepard's cycle, they saw no evidence of ever amicaibly resolving itself. They've seen nothing that proves thay could ever co-exist for long periods of time, so why risk everything over maybe, when they already saw the most common responce in the Leviathan Age? (orgainis will always build synthetics to manage the tedious workloads, resulting in the constant rebellion of synthetics). It's simply logic-based thinking, with cold hard numbers as the source.

The responce that happened the most in the Leviathan Age was constant conflect. They repatedally saw the beginning signs in every cycle, and were unwilling to wait for it to reach the same terminal levels as it repeatededly did in the Leviathan Age. They interviened, wiped out the synthetics so that they couldn't threaten the next cycle, then "preserved" the organic races to prevent their knolodge from being lost.
It's all the cold logic of ruthless calculus. Nothing more, nothing less.

Granted, it could have been executed better, but the basis of the plot isn't as horrid as you make yourself believe.

I'm sure it was never stated that they wait until there's conflict before invading. I assumed they invaded every so often (roughly 50,000 years) just to reset the galaxy.

And extrapolating 'it happens almost every time' to 'it always happens' is a fairly illogical thing to do.

And I agree, the problem is in its execution more than the base elements of the plot.

[Meltemph]

silverexile17s wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

This same logic was used in Terminator. As well as I, Robot. They certinly reproduced freaking faster then we could, and near-overran humans. This kind of thing also is touched upon in Star Trek, Deus Ex, and Stargate, and, perhaps the most notibly, Battlestar Galactica. In fact, google "Cybernetic Revolt wiki," and you'll see a muntitude of reasons that show uprisings of synthetics isn't as far fetched as you think, to be renditioned on, touched upon, and re-told so many times.

Wait, so your basis for this game, is based on other(specific) scifi writers who went with that trope, or are you saying that the scifi in those books are a good starting point for the real world? As for I robot, I'm not sure how that book helps you out, in fact none of Asimov's books really help you out in regards to what the catalyst is talking about, at all really.

Look at how V.I.K.I. warped those supposed "perfect" Three Laws. Was she wrong? Or was she simply acting on the data she had, which showed that humans tend to cause most, if not all, of their problems themselves? And that the only way they would ever stop is if someone interviened and made them stop.
That perfectly embodies what the Reapers do: They act on what they know, which is that thus far, no race has ever amicably resolved it's conflict, and has always decended into the beginnings of a self-destrcutive extinction terminus that can only result in the unchecked expansion of synthetics, and consiquencial end of organic life in this galaxy.

Ohh, you are talking about the movie... I dont care about that, that was just made as an entertaining scifi romp.  Ya, sorry, I have trouble taking that movie seriously.  If you were talking about the book, then I would entertain your discussion, but, well ya... dont really consider Irobot the move as a good example of anything, other then a entertaining movie.

[Meltemph]

Also, silver, you have so many assumptions all over the place with your post that it is really hard to have a discussion about ME with you. It's like your starting point for discussion is your assumptions to each event, instead of the exact details of what we know.

[Maxster_]

Dragoonlordz wrote...
...

As much as your trying to bait me with passive agressive mocking, it won't work.

And how should it work exactly? You just ignored most of my points, because you can't argue against them

Firstly once technology is shown to exist any race evolved enough can replicate it very easily. That is why all races that have reached such a level to make use of such technology are culled why all those which cannot or are not that evolved are left alone.

1. That is not what Catalyst said. You are saying he lied deliberately, and his real agenda is vastly different from organics-synthetics "problem". It is your headcanon.

2. Your "logic" is broken. Humanity reached a level when we can create nuclear and thermonuclear weapons, those weapons can be used to make earth barren world - therefore, Earth already devastated.
Or, because of that inevitability(of course it is not an inevitability, this is where logical fallacy is), of Earth being destroyed, humanity should be purged immediately, to save Earth
As i said, appeal to probability can be used to justify anything.

3. Your "logic" is broken #2. You just said, because organics can create synthetics, they will. This is logical fallacy, and ME history contradicts that. For thousands of years of asari being stellar civilization, with ability to create synthetics - they never created them, and even imposed ban on AI creation.

Thus your premise is false.

Secondly the Geth were created without direct reaper influence as example. It was not created with Reaper technology. AI is created without influence in most SciFi universe which has AI present, their involvement or in this case lack of it is the conflict between the two it wishes to stop because it fears that one of those conflicts could result in the outcome it mentioned.

You deliberately missed the point.
Geth(part of them) became real threat to organics only because of reapers. As is in prothean cycle.
This means, that reapers are the problem they pretend they fix.

Heh. So, AI acted not on evidence(there is no such evidence in ME, especially synthetics destroying all organics, which is just impossible, because then there will be no organics, and no leviathans to create such AI), but out of fear.

In the current cycle the Geth can indeed kill all the Quarians depending on who you side with in that conflict and it is shown the Quarians went back to fight with them which could lead to their destruction as a race regardless of your involvement (in fact my Shepard told them not to do so but that did not stop them). Races commiting suicide by way of never being able to leave synthetics alone is equally as bad as synthetics hunting them down themselves. Both result in the potential destruction of races of organics.

No, geth never wanted to kill even all quarians, not even all organics. Otherwise they would just end them at the end of Morning War.
And geth never wanted to destroy other races.
I'm tired of your butchering of logic.
Why geth could destroy quarians in that conflict? Because quarians gambled and used every ship and all civilians in this war.
Why geth are fighting back? Because they don't want to be annihilated.
Why quarians are so desperate? Because of their bad relations with the council races, as a result of breaking AI ban, and Council controls most of opened relays and colonizable planets, and forbids turning on dormant primary relays. And because of their fleet being too old.

And this, of course, have nothing to with "without us synthetics will destroy all organics". Results of this conflict are fault of both, and is self-defence on geth's part.

My premise was not false, you just don't like it. There is a difference.

No, comrade, your premise is false. And that is the reason why you completely ignored most of my points, and failed to debunk even those which you deliberately selected as easy ones.

"Without us, synthetics will destroy all organics" is a false premise. Appeal to probability. It never happened.
And it's adaptation by OP
"
Advanced organic species will create synthetic life and eventually come into a conflict with those synthetics that will lead to the organic species' extinction.
"
means that reapers are the problem they pretend they fix.

And, using logical fallacies is not a method of proving anything.

Your last comment requires no reply, that comment by you is a pretty stupid comment to make.

It is truth. Appeal to probability is used to justify anything.

Modifié par Maxster_, 19 janvier 2013 - 09:46 .

[Maxster_]

silverexile17s wrote...
...

I'm not going to waste time on your nonsensical headcanon again. Begone.

[silverexile17s]

Maxster_ wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

There was no "problem" to begin with.
And Catalyst's "solution" is the problem, which he pretends he fixes.
Why there is no problem?

Simple - premise about organics always creating synthetics is false.
And premise about synthetics always rebelling against organics also false.
As is premise about synthetics always wiping out organics.

You have zero proof tjhat not every cycle created synthetics, so you cannot say it is false.

Cycle? So, some race in some cycle created synthetics, and other races of that cycle didn't - but they all is obliterated by reapers, applying their "solution", without which only one race would be obliterated.
Riiiight

Turians never created synthetics, Salarians never created synthetics, Asari never created synthetics, Batarians, Krogans, Rachni, etc.
But they all must be eradicated for a something they never did. Because reasons.
That is enough evidence about all 3 statements.

Is you who have no proof. Well, Catalyst actually, not some his minor minion like you.

You have zero proof that there was any cycle where synthetic race created did not conflict with organics, so you cannot say it is false.

There is no evidence about synthetics destroying organics, without reapers influence.
In protheans cycle synthetics were beaten before reapers helped them. And Zha'til never being a threat at all. Not they were hostile before reapers.
In Shepard's cycle, geth didn't destroyed quarians, and have no intent to go kill everyone else, of course, before reapers. And even then, only part of geth participated.

The only evidence we have, that synthesised abomination wiping out everyone, every cycle.
But they are not exactly synthetics.

The premise about synthetics wiping out organics is a conclusion it reached based on it experiences and is already being debated with no proof it is wrong and no proof it is right. Neither you or I have hundreds of thousands of years worth of knowledge spend in the ME universe across many cycles, it does theoretically.

This premise is false, it is not based on evidence.
It is a logical fallacy, which can be used to justify anything, any crime, any horrible deed.

There is a difference between wiping out all organics life or what catalyst does which is cull both organic and synthetic life each cycle. Leaving all races that are not in a position to be what it considers a threat to the existance of all organic life. The only thing that is false is your description when you continue to keep claiming it wipes out all life when it never does.

Oh, now suddenly synthetics is a threat to all organic life?
And organics also?
How funny.
You have zero evidence of that.
Destruction of all life never happened.

People who uses such justification either hypocrites or madmen

1. They would have eventually banded together to martch into the Vale to take out the geth. And the geth would have retaliated. Or the quarians would attack, and try to reclaim Rannoch, and end up provoking the geth into war again.

And had the galaxy been left unchecked for another 1,000 years after ME, in an alternate timeline where the Reaper didn't attack? What proof do you have that, had the Reapers not interviened, that other races would not have built synthetics themselves?
You don't. And the Reapers had no proof of that either. They had nothing to suggest to them that other races wouldn't follow the quarians path. The geth were just the beginning signs of a pattern they had seen all too many times in the past. They saw the outcome too often to risk a "maybe" when the creation of synthetics by a race as a tool to advance themselves is as certen as a sunrise in the morning. It's a common part of the advancement of industry: automation, and eventually, making it smart enough to automate itself, and so on.

So again, don't go on preaching about proof when you have presented nothing that backs your claim.

2. Again, the Leviathans tell us themselves that the cycle of organic/synthetic conflict is much older then the Reapers were. The problem DID exist, at least in the Levithan Age. What is up for debate is whether it STILL existed by ME1 - 3, since the Reapers never risked letting any cycle develop past the "conflict terminus" stage, and used the pre-determined assumption based on what they saw before in the Leviathan Age.

And again, the Zha'till, acording to Javik himself, were hostile BEFORE the Reapers arrival, as they took over their creators before that, and they obviously WERE a threat, otherwise the protheans wouldn't have bothered to blow their sun up and kill them. Check the ME wiki if you don't believe me.
And also, if the Reapers hadn't interviened, the geth woul have just stayed behind the Veil, stewing in how the entire galaxy hated them, until either they said "screw it" and attacked, because they would never be accepted anyway. Or, the quarians, or the Council, would mount an attack against them and provoke them into another war.

3. Again, wrong.
The Leviathans' statements disprove your claims, and state that their repeated conflicts were the reason the Catalyst itself was built. And those continued conflicts were the souce material for the solution, in that no matter what happened, the two sides never resolved their conflicts without either one side (most-always the organics) being wiped out, or the Leviathans interviening. And the Leviathans couldn't do that forever. If they could keep doing it, they wouldn't have bothered to build the Catalyst to do/fix it for them.

4. Destruction of all life may never have happened because the Reapers stopped the synthetics from expanding rapidly, to the point that they borg/terminator-style assimilate/mechinize every world in the galaxy.
The preventation of the destruction of all life is the reason the Reapers do what they do. Your "all life hasn't been wiped out" statement actually valadates the Reapers, as it says that their actions actually caused that  to not happen.

[silverexile17s]

Maxster_ wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...
...

I'm not going to waste time on your nonsensical headcanon again. Begone.

No refute:wizard:
I remid you that since this is a place where opinions are ment to be voiced, you can no more make me leave, any more then I can mak you leave.

And again, you have posted nothing that makes what I say headcannon. Ever. So again, don't call the kettle black.

[Maxster_]

silverexile17s wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...
...

I'm not going to waste time on your nonsensical headcanon again. Begone.

No refute:wizard:
I remid you that since this is a place where opinions are ment to be voiced, you can no more make me leave, any more then I can mak you leave.

And again, you have posted nothing that makes what I say headcannon. Ever. So again, don't call the kettle black.

I'll be brief. It seems that you capable of understanding simple statements only.
http://natribu.org/en/

[silverexile17s]

Indy_S wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

I'm pretty sure we've been down this road before.
The Catalyst's actions  were to prevent what it saw in the Leviathan's Age (continuious conflict between organics and synthetics) rom ever re-occuring again.
Example: It's no different then how America interviened in Afginastan and Iraq. They stepped in after (a) the progenitors of the rouge groups (i.e. the local governments) failed to stop the conflict and ( the conflict spilled out into the rest of the world, hitting America on it's own soil. It would have been endless conflict and a continued danger to the world had America not interviened.

That's the same as here. They interviene in a conflict that, up until Shepard's cycle, they saw no evidence of ever amicaibly resolving itself. They've seen nothing that proves thay could ever co-exist for long periods of time, so why risk everything over maybe, when they already saw the most common responce in the Leviathan Age? (orgainis will always build synthetics to manage the tedious workloads, resulting in the constant rebellion of synthetics). It's simply logic-based thinking, with cold hard numbers as the source.

The responce that happened the most in the Leviathan Age was constant conflect. They repatedally saw the beginning signs in every cycle, and were unwilling to wait for it to reach the same terminal levels as it repeatededly did in the Leviathan Age. They interviened, wiped out the synthetics so that they couldn't threaten the next cycle, then "preserved" the organic races to prevent their knolodge from being lost.
It's all the cold logic of ruthless calculus. Nothing more, nothing less.

Granted, it could have been executed better, but the basis of the plot isn't as horrid as you make yourself believe.

I'm sure it was never stated that they wait until there's conflict before invading. I assumed they invaded every so often (roughly 50,000 years) just to reset the galaxy.

And extrapolating 'it happens almost every time' to 'it always happens' is a fairly illogical thing to do.

And I agree, the problem is in its execution more than the base elements of the plot.

Yes, but don't you think that's strange? How every 50,000 years, the galaxy reaches this same level of "conflict terminus"? The conflicts between organic and synthetic? The keep happening. And they saw repatedly in the Leviathan Age that it never ended well. The question is: would you risk letting it go on, even though every conflict you ever left to chance before ended with war, and the end of the organic race in question.
I'm sure an organic could use emotional responces to draw conclusions based on instinct and judgement of character. But a computer has none of those things. If you went by cold numbers alone, you would always choose the preventave measure. That's just how computers work.
The Catalyst's solution is only comprehesible to an organic, of the have a sociopath mentality on it. All logic, no heart. That's why so many people decry it: they don't see it through the P.O.V of a computer, or calculator. We see lives and souls, not numbers and statistics.
It's only when Shepard proves the worth of seeing the "lives and souls" part of it that the Catalyst sees the flaws in relying on cold logic alone, and that the Solution was based on an "incomplete" point of view. hence why he says Shepard needs to build a new solution" beacuse he's now accounting for the emotonial responce Shepard used to break all the calculations he made up to this point.

[silverexile17s]

Maxster_ wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...
...

I'm not going to waste time on your nonsensical headcanon again. Begone.

No refute:wizard:
I remid you that since this is a place where opinions are ment to be voiced, you can no more make me leave, any more then I can mak you leave.

And again, you have posted nothing that makes what I say headcannon. Ever. So again, don't call the kettle black.

I'll be brief. It seems that you capable of understanding simple statements only.
http://natribu.org/en/

Again, this mirrors you. You are no more capable of forcing me to leave then I am you.
Honestly, that doesn't add to the discusion. Look at the dicussion between me and @Indy_S. He's actually working to refute the points with his ideals, without trying to bully his opponant like you do.
So, if that link is truly what youy believe, then you must also accept that it also applys to you as well.
It's either dicuss civily, or just a pointless measuring contest. You can't have both.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 19 janvier 2013 - 10:05 .

[Meltemph]

Yes, but don't you think that's strange? How every 50,000 years, the galaxy reaches this same level of "conflict terminus"?

No, Sovereign tells you why this is the case.

[silverexile17s]

Meltemph wrote...

Yes, but don't you think that's strange? How every 50,000 years, the galaxy reaches this same level of "conflict terminus"?

No, Sovereign tells you why this is the case.

They chose that because it is when the terminus keeps happening. The same conflict reaches the same point every time, with a varriation of a few hundered years. Vendetta on Thessia says that the "same varribles" occur in every cycle thus far. Therefore, this includes the organic/sinthetic conflict.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 19 janvier 2013 - 10:07 .

[Indy_S]

Meltemph wrote...

Yes, but don't you think that's strange? How every 50,000 years, the galaxy reaches this same level of "conflict terminus"?

No, Sovereign tells you why this is the case.

Yes, we reach the apex of our existance. I assume that's only because he and his pals are about to start killing everyone everywhere.

[Meltemph]

They chose that because it is when the terminus keeps happening.

Sovereign tells you why this is the case.

[silverexile17s]

Indy_S wrote...

But silverexile, the Jetsons proves we can live peacefully with the robots!

You sure that wasn't post-synthesis?
Joking aside, The Jetsons are a comady cartoon, right? Don't know how much logic like this applys to that.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 19 janvier 2013 - 10:13 .

[silverexile17s]

Meltemph wrote...

They chose that because it is when the terminus keeps happening.

Sovereign tells you why this is the case.

All he says is that "we exist because they allow it." And "we will end because they demand it."
And  that the pattern repated "more times then you can fathom."
He never says anything about the reasons the Reapers do what they do. Just vauge conceps that we supposedly would be unable to comprehend. he never says the reason they keep attacking. Shpard even coments to Vigil on Ilos that he/she still have no idea on why the Reapers repeat the cycles.

Our of curiosity, tell me what part of the speach you are reffering to?
Post it. I need to know what you got from it that formed this conclusion.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 19 janvier 2013 - 10:15 .

[Meltemph]

silverexile17s wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

They chose that because it is when the terminus keeps happening.

Sovereign tells you why this is the case.

All he says is that "we exist because they allow it." And "we will end because they demand it."
And  that the pattern repated "more times then you can fathom."
He never says anything about the reasons the Reapers do what they do. Just vauge conceps that we supposedly would be unable to comprehend. he never says the reason they keep attacking. Shpard even coments to Vigil on Ilos that he/she still have no idea on why the Reapers repeat the cycles.

He tells you exactly why technology develops in the way it does.

[Indy_S]

silverexile17s wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

But silverexile, the Jetsons proves we can live peacefully with the robots!

You sure that wasn't post-synthesis?
Joking aside, The Jetsons are a comady cartoon, right? Don't know how much logic like this applys to that.

Joking aside, any presentation of synthetics and organics is relevant to the logic prevented in this thread.

[silverexile17s]

Meltemph wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

They chose that because it is when the terminus keeps happening.

Sovereign tells you why this is the case.

All he says is that "we exist because they allow it." And "we will end because they demand it."
And  that the pattern repated "more times then you can fathom."
He never says anything about the reasons the Reapers do what they do. Just vauge conceps that we supposedly would be unable to comprehend. he never says the reason they keep attacking. Shpard even coments to Vigil on Ilos that he/she still have no idea on why the Reapers repeat the cycles.

He tells you exactly why technology develops in the way it does.

That has nothing to do with the orgainc/synthetic conflect, or the reason they harvest. The Leviathans touch upon that as well, telling us that the Mass Relays were an attempt to control evolution, and find the direction to steer it in that world bring the Solution to frutition.
Infulencing the develiopment of Mass Effect technology has nothing to do with the develipment of A.I. tech. It's two different fields, and synthetics would have arisin regardless of if the galaxy was based on Mass Effect tech, or Warp Drive, or Hyperdrives, or Stargates. It wouldn't have had any effect on the creation of synthetics.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 19 janvier 2013 - 10:20 .

[silverexile17s]

Indy_S wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

But silverexile, the Jetsons proves we can live peacefully with the robots!

You sure that wasn't post-synthesis?
Joking aside, The Jetsons are a comady cartoon, right? Don't know how much logic like this applys to that.

Joking aside, any presentation of synthetics and organics is relevant to the logic prevented in this thread.

Okay, you hot me there:P
I'm not sure how the Jetsons relate to this though, since we never see them advance more then a few years.

[Meltemph]

That has nothing to do with the orgainc/synthetic conflect, or the reason they harvest. The Leviathans touch upon that as well, twlling us that the Mass Relays were an attempt to control evolution, and find the direction to steer it in that world bring the Solution to frutition.
Infulencing the develiopment of Mass Effect technology has nothing to do with the develipment of A.I. tech. It's two different fields, and synthetics would have arisin regardless of if the galaxy was based on Mass Effect tech, or Warp Drive, or Hyperdrives, or Stargates. It wouldn't have had any effect on the creation of synthetics.

You dont accept that the path laid before them didnt control the direction of all technology, but you have nothing to assert that claim, other then your personal disbelief that it is possible. However, Sovereign was quite explicit that we developed along the path they choose.

What I give you is what the game tells us. What you respond with is your own personal rationalization why in this specific situation it isnt the case. Legion in ME2 gave an in-game reason as to why taking technology, in the way it has developed, can have a negative impact(in universe/setting explination).

What you offer is your own assumptions in regards to the narrative you want the game to have. What I offered was in-game explanations as to the end conclusions of how the reapers are so consistent.

You dont like the in game rationalizations or explinations(or at least you dont think they are sufficient) so you create your own personal narrative as to the reason why things in-game are the way they are. This is all fine, but you cant pretend you have a deeper insight into the "reasons".


You focus on the things unknown and the non-provable to support your claims. I choose to take what I know, in game, and apply that to the decisions I make in game. You take the information you don't know, and create a narrative that rationalizes your choices.

Modifié par Meltemph, 19 janvier 2013 - 10:29 .