128 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Let me clarify this yet again: This is not about "evil" Reaper tech, but about Reaper technology as a transcendent technology, one that affects us, but which we aren't equipped to understand.

integrate it into our civilization, adapt to it and make it genuinely our own.

In what sense have the relays not been made our own in an ending where we clearly do understand them, having successfully rebuilt them?

EC retconned that.

Prior to it, even the asari hadn't realized that the relays are far, far older than 50k years.  No one had built their own.  THey were there, they were used, without truly understanding what they were or where they came from.

If the relays were destroyed in defeating the Reapers, the races would be forced to figure them out and build their own.  They would literally ahve to build their own future.  A sacrifice, but one that's arguably worth the price.  Unlike genocide.

[Steelcan]

humes spork wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Why?  Rejecting the cycles does not mean rejecting the Reapers' technology.

I've discussed this thematic element with Ieldra2 on other threads, and the original post is framed specifically around the destroy ending for a reason. That reason being, destroy is a categorical rejection of the Reapers and everything representative of them, including their tech. It represents a complete destruction of the Reapers' technological paradigm, in favor of self-determination.

. These two are not mutually exclusive.  Something the EC Destroy does a great job of showing.

[eddieoctane]

Steelcan wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
I think the perceived need for balance as well as appeasement of the majority who "just wanted to destroy the Reapers" was the reason they thematically compromised Destroy in the EC. My main criticism of the original endings was that  I didn't have a choice about avoiding the dark age, and now, I don't have one about "breaking the Reapers' technological paradigm by destroying their complete technological legacy", which really should have been an option given how much attention was drawn to that in the story, no matter that it would appear superficially worse than the other two outcomes.

. Once again.  Destroy is about rejecting the cycles, not reaper technology.  It's just a side affect of it.  

It would be about forgoing the Reapers' technology if the Citadel was not rebuilt, or the relays.

We'd also have to abandon mass effect-based FTL, as that too was ultimately derived from Reaper technology. Everythign eezo-based ultimately needs to be discarded to get rid of Reaper technological influence. Maybe some of those Jump Zero projects have promise. Yet no one is goign to stop using FTL, so the "Reaper technlogical paradigm" isn't goign anyway. Destroy fails to meet the goals stated by the writers or the desires of the players. It's crap all around.

[Steelcan]

eddieoctane wrote...

We'd also have to abandon mass effect-based FTL, as that too was ultimately derived from Reaper technology. Everythign eezo-based ultimately needs to be discarded to get rid of Reaper technological influence. Maybe some of those Jump Zero projects have promise. Yet no one is goign to stop using FTL, so the "Reaper technlogical paradigm" isn't goign anyway. Destroy fails to meet the goals stated by the writers or the desires of the players. It's crap all around.

. Fit perfectly for me

[humes spork]

Steelcan wrote...

These two are not mutually exclusive.  Something the EC Destroy does a great job of showing.

...and for it inadvertently lends credence to the underlying premises behind the Catalyst's entire point, and that of the cycles of extinction. If organic species' next step is to diligently return to the status quo (something that is reinforced throughout the universe's backstory), even if in the name of self-determination, it calls into question whether organic species will yet again make the mistakes of the past. The most relevant of those mistakes here is the recreation and subsequent revolt of synthetic life, leading to the need for measures as extreme as the Reapers yet again.

Does the original ending preclude that possibility? Of course not, but on the other hand neither does it invoke that possibility.

Modifié par humes spork, 13 février 2013 - 05:56 .

[CronoDragoon]

iakus wrote...

EC retconned that.

The EC didn't retcon the galaxy figuring out the relays and rebuilding them; it's because of the EC that we know this happened. Prior to the EC we had no reason to believe anything but that the relays were impenetrable to understanding, and that once gone they were gone for good. After, the EC, in which the relays have been rebuilt, how are they no longer our own?

[CronoDragoon]

humes spork wrote...
...and for it inadvertently lends credence to the underlying premises behind the Catalyst's entire point, and that of the cycles of extinction. If organic species' next step is to diligently return to the status quo (something that is reinforced throughout the universe's backstory), even if in the name of self-determination, it calls into question whether organic species will yet again make the mistakes of the past. The most relevant of those mistakes here is the recreation and subsequent revolt of synthetic life, leading to the need for measures as extreme as the Reapers yet again.

Does the original ending preclude that possibility? Of course not, but on the other hand neither does it [i[invoke[/i] that possibility.

We've had this conversation before, but I have no reason to believe that the relays represent anything bad outside of the Reaper cycle, at least not any more representative than any technology of an era is. If we discarded technology used by an era in which that technology was used for injustice, then very little progress would ever be made technologically.

[humes spork]

CronoDragoon wrote...

We've had this conversation before, but I have no reason to believe that the relays represent anything bad outside of the Reaper cycle, at least not any more representative than any technology of an era is. If we discarded technology used by an era in which that technology was used for injustice, then very little progress would ever be made technologically.

Then when you hazard an assertion the cyclical nature of organic development (namely, and since it remains the most relevant point, the rise of AI), as exposited by multiple sources in the MEU, is endemic to the organic condition and therefore deterministic in its own way?

If it is not the technology that represents the problem, it must be the nature of organics.

Modifié par humes spork, 13 février 2013 - 06:02 .

[CronoDragoon]

humes spork wrote...
Then when you hazard an assertion the cyclical nature of organic development (namely, and since it remains the most relevant point, the rise of AI), as exposited by multiple sources in the MEU, is endemic to the organic condition and therefore deterministic in its own way?

If it is not the technology that represents the problem, it must be the nature of organics.

Yes, I do believe that it is the nature of organics to abuse technology of a given era for vicious reasons. Not all organics of course, but that new technology will be used by those seeking to gain or sustain power is, I think, a relatively indisputable idea.

Does that make my view of history cyclical in a cynical sense because I assert the impossibility of a society in which technology is always used for good?

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 13 février 2013 - 06:22 .

[eddieoctane]

CronoDragoon wrote...

humes spork wrote...
...and for it inadvertently lends credence to the underlying premises behind the Catalyst's entire point, and that of the cycles of extinction. If organic species' next step is to diligently return to the status quo (something that is reinforced throughout the universe's backstory), even if in the name of self-determination, it calls into question whether organic species will yet again make the mistakes of the past. The most relevant of those mistakes here is the recreation and subsequent revolt of synthetic life, leading to the need for measures as extreme as the Reapers yet again.

Does the original ending preclude that possibility? Of course not, but on the other hand neither does it [i[invoke[/i] that possibility.

We've had this conversation before, but I have no reason to believe that the relays represent anything bad outside of the Reaper cycle, at least not any more representative than any technology of an era is. If we discarded technology used by an era in which that technology was used for injustice, then very little progress would ever be made technologically.

Like I said, jet engines were developed byt he third reich as weapons of war. Today, they are used to the world over for transportation and power generation. The relays aren't evil and should have been left alone unless it's to show the Catalyst is a spiteful bastard when the galaxy rejects its plan. If the point was to get rid of Reaper influence, we need to get rid of everythign eezo-based. And doign that would essentially destroy the entirety of galactic civilization. We should probably kill off the whole Drell population, too, since they wouldn't have survived with Hanar ships carrying them off their dying homeworld. Admit it, Reaper tech ultimately saved Thane's whole species. So we can't get rid of Reaper tech and influence, so destroy thematically failed pre and post-EC.

[clennon8]

@OP:  Yes, I think that would have been better, although suffering would occur as a result of the loss of the relay system.

I also think the relay technology would be figured out and reconstruction of the network would begin within a human lifetime.

Modifié par clennon8, 13 février 2013 - 06:21 .

[humes spork]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Yes, I do believe that it is the nature of organics to abuse technology of a given era for vicious reasons. Not all organics of course, but that new technology will be used by those seeking to gain or sustain power is, I think, a relatively indisputable idea.

Does that make my view of history cyclical in a cynical sense because I assert the impossibility of a society in which technology is always used for good?

Your views on history are what they are. It's not my place to judge.

Though, if this is true, it is the nature of organics to abuse technology for vicious and unjust reasons, and since synthetics are derived from organics' technology, it is the nature of organics to abuse synthetics and treat them unjustly? Do synthetics have the right to self-defense against their creators?

Because, if so, organic/synthetic existential conflict is inevitable. What then, if not for the Reapers? Peaceful outcomes such as that of the geth and quarians are hardly guaranteed, especially given a peaceful outcome between geth and quarians is highly dependent upon very extraordinary circumstances.

[Iakus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

iakus wrote...

EC retconned that.

The EC didn't retcon the galaxy figuring out the relays and rebuilding them; it's because of the EC that we know this happened. Prior to the EC we had no reason to believe anything but that the relays were impenetrable to understanding, and that once gone they were gone for good. After, the EC, in which the relays have been rebuilt, how are they no longer our own?

It didn't retcon that the relays could be figured out.  it retconned the amount of understanding the races already had, and the need for it.  Even the asari, the most advanced race of the current cycle, hadn't figured out that the relay network was far, far older than the Protheans.  Quite simply, up until recently, no one had bothered to really make a study of the relays.  Heck, they were afraid to turn the dormant ones on!

EC retcons the extent of the damage to the relays, making the old network repairable and preventing the need to learn how to build them from scratch.  IMO, it retconned the wrong thing.  Spare teh geth, let the galaxy build its own future.

[Wayning_Star]

s'funny how visitors to a galaxy can assume the risk of it's inhabitants, then go home and have lunch.

value judgement is only as good as the personal risk of those infered?

[humes spork]

iakus wrote...

Even the asari, the most advanced race of the current cycle, hadn't figured out that the relay network was far, far older than the Protheans.  Quite simply, up until recently, no one had bothered to really make a study of the relays.  Heck, they were afraid to turn the dormant ones on!

To be charitable, here, what we know is what the asari claim, which thanks to one Vendetta becomes suspect. And, before anyone screams "retcon!" at that let's keep in mind Aethyta -- a matriarch -- mentions the asari building relays of their own, and being ridiculed for it not on the basis of impossibility but rather complacency on the part of other matriarchs. That implies the asari have at least enough understanding that building new relays is not outside the realm of possibility. That was in ME2.

And, let's keep in mind the Citadel species were wary of activating dormant relays not because of dangers inherent to the technology, but danger in the form of other advanced species.

[Iakus]

humes spork wrote...

iakus wrote...

Even the asari, the most advanced race of the current cycle, hadn't figured out that the relay network was far, far older than the Protheans.  Quite simply, up until recently, no one had bothered to really make a study of the relays.  Heck, they were afraid to turn the dormant ones on!

To be charitable, here, what we know is what the asari claim, which thanks to one Vendetta becomes suspect. And, before anyone screams "retcon!" at that let's keep in mind Aethyta -- a matriarch -- mentions the asari building relays of their own, and being ridiculed for it not on the basis of impossibility but rather complacency on the part of other matriarchs. That implies the asari have at least enough understanding that building new relays is not outside the realm of possibility. That was in ME2.

And, let's keep in mind the Citadel species were wary of activating dormant relays not because of dangers inherent to the technology, but danger in the form of other advanced species.

Keep in mind that the Conduit was as far as the Protheans had gotten as far as relay technology.  Assuming Vendetta even had that data uploaded into it before Ilos went dark, that's only small, point-to-point relays at best.  Certainly a big step up from what the other races have, but a far cry from networked relays that can send entire ships from place to place.

And regardless of why the races were reluctant to study the relays of the network, the fact is very little was done with them

[humes spork]

iakus wrote...

And regardless of why the races were reluctant to study the relays of the network, the fact is very little was done with them

Indeed, but the implication is clear it is because organic species were simply lazy, not incapable of figuring them out.

[CynicalShep]

@ humes spork

If you assume that she's telling the truth. She was "undercover" there, rather than being a matriarch bartender who just washed the bar (damn).

[fiendishchicken]

I'd rather have the relays survive.

[Iakus]

humes spork wrote...

iakus wrote...

And regardless of why the races were reluctant to study the relays of the network, the fact is very little was done with them

Indeed, but the implication is clear it is because organic species were simply lazy, not incapable of figuring them out.

Exactly my point.

Destroy the relays, and the other races will figure out how to build them on their own out of simple necessity. It may take time, and there will be a "galactic dark age" in the meantime.  But provided the relays didn't nova, they'd get through it.

And that's why I think destroying the relays is a far better price to pay than genociding all synthetic life.  The relay network can be rebuilt.  It's a difficult task, but not an impossible one.  The alternative we were given simply doesn't sit well with me.  Individual lives are irreplacable.

[DeinonSlayer]

humes spork wrote...

iakus wrote...

And regardless of why the races were reluctant to study the relays of the network, the fact is very little was done with them

Indeed, but the implication is clear it is because organic species were simply lazy, not incapable of figuring them out.

The galaxy knows how relays work. Comm relays are mass-produced by the current cycle, and operate the same way, only on a smaller scale. They've just never had an impetus to replicate the big ones before.

[humes spork]

iakus wrote...

Exactly my point.

That's hardly a retcon by any stretch of the imagination, though. Organics were lazy ****ers the entire trilogy through.

[Degs29]

I still have never chosen destroy, simply because it does wipe out the Geth.  If that was taken off the table, I'd choose destroy in a heartbeat.

[justafan]

Thematically, I believe it would have been better had the relays been destroyed. Destroy is about wiping everything Reaper away for good, relays included. To paraphrase Legion, developing along the lines the Reapers laid out blinded the galaxy from all possible alternatives.

I believe that the loss of the relays is a fair trade for destroying the reapers, and keeping the Geth alive is icing on the cake. It would be a true sacrifice, and one not felt forced on us like "it will kill all synthetic life", though I could imagine the Geth losing their upgrade in such a case, which I believe would actually be for the best.

In terms of the other endings, just keep them the way the EC made them, relays slightly damaged. I think the temptation to keep galactic society alive would more than make up for the total, yet pyrrhic, victory of destroy.

[Argolas]

Degs29 wrote...

I still have never chosen destroy, simply because it does wipe out the Geth.  If that was taken off the table, I'd choose destroy in a heartbeat.

Easy. Side with the Quarians on Rannoch, and the crucible does not do anything to the Geth 

Well, I guess I answered this thread. Yes, it would be more fitting thematically, but the plot does not have to match a theme, it's the other way around.