225 réponses à ce sujet

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Steelcan wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

. It is in no way submission.  Synthesis is submission.  Destroy is not.

That's crap. It can only be "submission" if you're coerced into it. You can only get Synthesis with High-EMS Destroy *and* Control next to it. If you choose Synthesis, it's because it's your choice, because you have all the power not to.

. It's submission to the Catalyst's assertions.

Again false.

Exhibit A - many synthesizers indicate that the catalyst's assertions are not a factor in their decision. (29% for the 3rd option, 55% for the 4th option, a combined 84%).

Exhibit B - most ME3 players would not change their decision if the catalyst were removed from the scene entirely.

[Steelcan]

Sideria wrote...

When you agreed with someone, is it submission ?

. So organics are doomed to synthetics?  Despite all evidence to the contrary?

[Silcron]

GT Zazzerka wrote...

EDI CAN a person.

sorry to edit but if I remember correctly EDI can develop to one or not depending on your conversation with it on ME3. 

And if it's about Destroy one live in exchange to get rid of the reapers forever? It surely seems better than the millions of batarians that died to DELAY the reapers. 

You want to add the geth? Well they did sign with the reapers twice. And who says the reaper code inside them can't corrupt them? The ORIGINAL geth can be easily rebuild, evne better. After all Tali's father almost got it. 

[Sideria]

Steelcan wrote...

Sideria wrote...

When you agreed with someone, is it submission ?

. So organics are doomed to synthetics?  Despite all evidence to the contrary?

All evidence ?
Ask any scintific if one, two or three occurence (geth, edi... ) of a event is sufficient evidence... Is not for nothing that the LHC wait for 5 sigma before annoucing anything.

The catalyst had billions of years to make his opinions of the subject. And I have faith in the organic stupidity to always going for war by fear of synthetics superiority.

Maybe the current cycle can solve this problem by itself.. but it will be a long and bloody path.

[BD Manchild]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

It's a lot of thought out processes and a lot of time on people's hands (myself included). I personally don't believe that SuperMac and Casey (they were the two writers of the ending) really had a clue as to what they were going for, minus wanting the intellectual, enemotional, "thought provoking" ending. But yeah, there's an essay in that site that details just how badly they screwed up with the narrative cohesion.

As for Refuse, no. I support them, but I don't pick it myself. I'm saying in the context of what you said. If I have no reason to believe anything the Catalyst says and that he's deliberately trying to trick me, the only thing left I can do is refuse, which means I'm screwed, no matter how many war assets I have (I have over 17,000 and it doesn't do jack squat. Yes our choices certainly "matter").

Yeah, I've read that essay and I happen to agree with many of its points. It's one I feel someone at Bioware ought to read and consider if they haven't already.

As to Refuse, now I see where you're coming from (sorry for jumping to conclusions before), and I agree, especially as it just makes the Refuse ending (well, any of the endings, really) a massive slap in the face. It's a major fault of the ending that, in the end, all that effort you've put in to gathering war assets, even the choices you've made throughout the whole trilogy, essentially count for nothing. I've just noticed, for instance, that there's an asset for the Crucible that allows for precise targetting, so why couldn't this device precisely target the Reapers and leave the Geth and EDI alone? It makes replays of the series entirely worthless in my eyes.

[Ieldra]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
Wow....I must say I didn't expect this from you. I'm not in the same position, but yes, I justify Synthesis on a similar reasoning. I don't feel comfortable about making the choice for the whole galaxy, but in the end, what is lost is inconsequential compared to what is gained. Some may disagree, but whatever you do, every decision affects the whole galaxy, and every decision has a price, so you might as well go for the best outcome.

Just remember that not everyone shares your vision of best outcome.

In destroy we can rebuild. We can remake the future. And synthesis (a better version, one not presented by the Reapers, and one not filled with plot holes and mystic crap) can be achieved eventually, this time embraced voluntarily by the galaxy and for the right reasons (advancement, new foundations for the future, etc.)

How do you I don't make the decision for the right reasons? If the organic/synthetic conflict were the only significant factor in my decision, I'd choose Control. I make my decision for the hyper-advanced post-Synthesis future that has a place for everyone - even the "other".

[Steelcan]

Sideria wrote...

All evidence ?
Ask any scintific if one, two or three occurence (geth, edi... ) of a event is sufficient evidence... Is not for nothing that the LHC wait for 5 sigma before annoucing anything.

The catalyst had billions of years to make his opinions of the subject. And I have faith in the organic stupidity to always going for war by fear of synthetics superiority.

Maybe the current cycle can solve this problem by itself.. but it will be a long and bloody path.

. Organics win against synthetics if the Reapers don't get involved.  Proven by the quarian/geth war and the Metacon/Prothean war

[Sideria]

Steelcan wrote...

Organics win against synthetics if the Reapers don't get involved.  Proven by the quarian/geth war and the Metacon/Prothean war

The Geth spare the Quarian ... and the war began because some stupid organic were afraid. Idem in the council archives -> stupid organic killed peaceful synthethic.

The metacon war we know only by the point of view of Javik.
And it's just what ? Three conflict. It's nothing, you can't extrapolate from just that.

Who win is not the point, the point is that conflict always occurs.

Modifié par Sideria, 14 mars 2013 - 05:08 .

[MegaSovereign]

Lieber wrote...

That line at the end of the DLC felt like a slap in the face.

No, you won't beat the odds, you'll submit and end the war on the enemy's terms and you'll die, or you'll survive by committing genocide.

It's not the enemy's terms. The Crucible is the product of resistance. The Catalyst is bound by the choices just as Shepard is.

[Steelcan]

Sideria wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Organics win against synthetics if the Reapers don't get involved.  Proven by the quarian/geth war and the Metacon/Prothean war

The Geth spare the Quarian ... and the war began because some stupid organic were afraid. Idem in the council archives -> stupid organic killed peaceful synthethic.

The metacon war we know only by the point of view of Javik.
And it's just what ? Three conflict. It's nothing, you can't extrapolate from just that.

Who win is not the point, the point is that conflict always occurs.

. No the pint is that organics will always lose.  He is very clear about this.  And yes we can extrapolate since we never see any alternative.  And the geth are not peaceful. The are violently isolationist any ship, regardless of intent or passengers was shot down for over 300 years without so much as a radio hail.

[Sideria]

The geth were forced into this situation by the fear of extermination. And it's highly probable that the Metacon creator were exterminated.
The Leviathan created the catalyst after seeing organics being exterminated.

You can't extrapolate from too few occurences when other theories are plausible.

I sincerly don't think that the catalyst want to bull**** you. He could just let you dying with Anderson. My Shepard think that what he said make sense.

[mereck7980]

 The concept behind Synthesis may be sound, but the manner in which it is applied makes me very uncomfortable.  Like many others have stated, picking this option FORCES the rest of the galaxy to change what they are at their core.  Many may believe that the end justifies the means, but I personally don't think any one person should ever have the power to change the fundamental essence of every living being in the galaxy.  

The co-mingling of organic life and synthetic constructs is probably the inevitable outcome of any advanced civilization.  The problem with this scenario is that for this type of change to occur without massive UNFORESEEN consequences it has to occur naturally in its own time.  People have to want for this change to occur, forcing them to be something radically different from what they are will inevitably lead to some type of conflict in the future.  

Another problem with Synthesis is that it the Reapers still exist.  I don't see how anyone can be comfortable with the idea that these massively powerful hyper intelligent beings will just play nice after the rest of the galaxy "becomes like them".  Remember, they aren't really changed by the firing of the crucible in this scenario.  They were already organic/techno hybrids.  All they loose is their motivation to harvest.  They (and the Catalyst who also survives the endgame) are still their.  The EC implies that they now play nice and help rebuild, but honestly how long can that last?  It is entirely illogical to assume that these beings, who have only ever destroyed/harvested other civilizations will just become gentle giants.  What if something happens that changes the Catalyst's mind and it decides it needs to intervene in the affairs of "lesser" beings again?  Shepard has one, and only one chance to remove this threat, which is the reason Destroy is the best option.  

EDIT: One last thing.  Why is it assumed that in order for organics and synthetics to live in peace they must be intertwined?  Didn't Shepard prove that both can live toghether as long as they respect each other's right to exist and try to work through their differences in a mutually productive way?  Yes EDI and the Geth may die with Destroy, but their sacrifice may allow future generations to actually live peacefully with their synthetic creations instead of just trying to elimniate them once they gain self awareness.  

Modifié par mereck7980, 14 mars 2013 - 06:21 .

[Steelcan]

Sideria wrote...

The geth were forced into this situation by the fear of extermination. And it's highly probable that the Metacon creator were exterminated.
The Leviathan created the catalyst after seeing organics being exterminated.

You can't extrapolate from too few occurences when other theories are plausible.

I sincerly don't think that the catalyst want to bull**** you. He could just let you dying with Anderson. My Shepard think that what he said make sense.

. What we know for certain.  The Protheans were winning until the Reapers got involved, the quarians were winning until Reapers got involved.  Those are the only two instances we get first hand accounts from.  If the Catalyst bothered to counter these points we'd be somewhere.  But he doesn't.  He ignores them even though they disprove him.  What was true millions of years ago, isn't necessarily true anymore.

[Sideria]

Why the organics systematically go for war with the syntehtics if they have nothing to fear from them. It doesn't make sense. This two war are more like preemptive strike again synthetics.

The catalyst have seen countless of war in countless of cycle. And he wants to protect all life, sapient, sentient, organics and synthetics. I can easly imagine his point of view, though i highly disaproves his method.

[Steelcan]

Sideria wrote...

Why the organics systematically go for war with the syntehtics if they have nothing to fear from them. It doesn't make sense. This two war are more like preemptive strike again synthetics.

The catalyst have seen countless of war in countless of cycle. And he wants to protect all life, sapient, sentient, organics and synthetics. I can easly imagine his point of view, though i highly disaproves his method.

. What about the Zha'til?  The organics didnt do anything then.

The Catalyst is bound by his programming, he can't or won't end the cycles.  Despite the fact his problem doesn't exist.

[ConanTheLeader]

Ironhandjustice wrote...

I was full of rage with the last scene of the DLC.

Ashley said : "You will beat all odds, and I'll be waiting you"

AH YES. I'VE DISMISSED THAT CLAIM.

So, I still choose a happy ending. Starkid Synthesis can go to hell.

Liara said something similar to me and at first I thought "aww" but then wondered if I should have taken that more literally as Bioware hinting at canonising an ending as there is only one type of ending where you can get back with a loved one.

[Sideria]

Huh, the Zha'til is the Metacon war antagonist.

Levianthan said that the cycle is a temporary solution until better is found. For the catalyst, Shepard and the Crucible are an opportnuity for a better solution. And destroy is simply a reboot.

The biggest differences between our point of view, is that I think that the problem of the catalyst is a true problem, and you don't.
And if the catalyst has been created for nothing, yes the whole plot of game seems like a joke ^^
But no it's not a fact, it's an opinion. You choose to believe that he is wrong.

Modifié par Sideria, 14 mars 2013 - 07:07 .

[Auld Wulf]

ConanTheLeader wrote...

Liara said something similar to me and at first I thought "aww" but then wondered if I should have taken that more literally as Bioware hinting at canonising an ending as there is only one type of ending where you can get back with a loved one.

I can't see that. I always respect BioWare for having the quads (heh) to actually stand against the common view and to follow their own passions. Even the EC was only clarification, rather than undoing the ending as it was. If the fans had had their way, we would have had the IT canonised... and I'm sorry, but IT is just a bad idea.

I think they're just offering nice platitudes, that's all. Which is something that's been done throughout the entire game. The LI constantly says things like that, not just in the Citadel DLC.

Besides, the geth are one of the most unique things about the game, they're something that truly belongs to BioWare. They're theirs. And they spent so much effort making them something relatable, so that everyone else could appreciate them. I can't see them cheerily kicking that effort and their most unique creation to the sidewalk.

I respect them as artists, now. And artists value their creation. Canonising Destroy goes back on every single artistic statement they've ever made.

[DeinonSlayer]

Sideria wrote...

Huh, the Zha'til is the Metacon war antagonist.

Levianthan said that the cycle is a temporary solution until better is found. For the catalyst Shepard and the crucible is an opportnuity for a better solution. And destroy is simply a reboot.

The biggest differences between our point of view, is that I think that the problem of the catalyst is a true problem, and you don't.
And if the catalyst has been created for nothing, yes the whole plot of game seems like a joke ^^
But no it's not a fact, it's an opinion. You choose to believe that he is wrong.

This is a source of a lot of argument. You see it as a legit problem, we don't - you're right about that.

The Metacon War's antagonists were the Reapers themselves. The Zha'til were the Heretic Geth of the Prothean cycle, according to the codex entry on the Metacon War. They were getting along fine with their creators until the Reapers corrupted them.

The thing to bear in mind is that glowboy's data sample on synthetics and organics comes solely from a period in time when all organics were thralls of the Leviathans themselves. That was a levelling factor, forcing diverse civilizations down a homogenized path. Stack the game the same way for everyone, and you can expect a pattern in your results. Two out of three synthetic-organic conflicts that we're aware of since then were instigated by glowboy himself. Without Leviathan or Reaper influence, and particularly if organic races actually help each other, as they did in the Reaper war as opposed to what the Council did while Rannoch burned, there is little reason to believe the problem cannot be quelled if it ever actually becomes a problem again.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 14 mars 2013 - 07:24 .

[Steelcan]

Sideria wrote...
And if the catalyst has been created for nothing, yes the whole plot of game seems like a joke ^^
But no it's not a fact, it's an opinion. You choose to believe that he is wrong.

. And I have evidence to back that claim up.

[ruggly]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Sideria wrote...

Huh, the Zha'til is the Metacon war antagonist.

Levianthan said that the cycle is a temporary solution until better is found. For the catalyst Shepard and the crucible is an opportnuity for a better solution. And destroy is simply a reboot.

The biggest differences between our point of view, is that I think that the problem of the catalyst is a true problem, and you don't.
And if the catalyst has been created for nothing, yes the whole plot of game seems like a joke ^^
But no it's not a fact, it's an opinion. You choose to believe that he is wrong.

This is a source of a lot of argument. You see it as a legit problem, we don't - you're right about that.

The Metacon War's antagonists were the Reapers themselves. They were the Heretic Geth of the Prothean cycle, according to the codex entry on the Metacon War.

The thing to bear in mind is that glowboy's data sample on synthetics and organics comes solely from a period in time when all organics were thralls of the Leviathans themselves. That was a levelling factor, forcing diverse civilizations down a homogenized path. Two out of three synthetic-organic conflicts that we're aware of since then were instigated by glowboy himself. Without Leviathan or Reaper influence, and particularly if organic races actually help each other, as they did in the Reaper war as opposed to what the Council did while Rannoch burned, there is little reason to believe the problem cannot be quelled if it ever actually becomes a problem again.

It does make it a little hard to take the catalyst seriously when, as you said, the two wars that we know about were instigated by the Reapers.  I suppose you could look at it that it's stuck in this loop that this "conflict" will happen, so why not just speed it up a bit.  But I also view the catalyst as a big part of the problem, when it's starting these wars and then coming in to "save" these races.  The Leviathans, thinking themselves above all problems, didn't help exactly either..

[Sideria]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Without Leviathan or Reaper influence, and particularly if organic races actually help each other, as they did in the Reaper war as opposed to what the Council did while Rannoch burned, there is little reason to believe the problem cannot be quelled if it ever actually becomes a problem again.

And I agree with that. For me the all three ending are good and bad.

Destroy : Sentient race of this cycle found their own solution, but at the price of many sacrifice, after a long and bloody path. (Plus losing all the reaper legacy of billions of year of knowledge from countless race).

Control : Sentient race of this cycle found their own solution, and Shepard Overlord "force" everybody to be on the right path.

Synthesis : Final solution already found : Peace and empathy for everybody, but no choice on this matter.

[Sideria]

Steelcan wrote...
. And I have evidence to back that claim up.

But I don't find it convincing enough.

[Steelcan]

Sideria wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
. And I have evidence to back that claim up.

But I don't find it convincing enough.

. Then we are done here.

[Sideria]

Steelcan wrote...
. Then we are done here.

Thanks for the debate, it was fun. And it allowed me to work my english

Modifié par Sideria, 14 mars 2013 - 07:39 .