76 réponses à ce sujet

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Steelcan wrote...

M25105 wrote...

We proved that the murdering kid was wrong when we made the Quarians and the Geth made peace with each other.

. We proved him wrong when the quarians blew the geth out of the sky.

That's not proving him wrong, that's blowing the Geth out of the sky.

[Steelcan]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

M25105 wrote...

We proved that the murdering kid was wrong when we made the Quarians and the Geth made peace with each other.

. We proved him wrong when the quarians blew the geth out of the sky.

That's not proving him wrong, that's blowing the Geth out of the sky.

. It's proving that we can overcome our synthetic creations.  We aren't doomed.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Steelcan wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

M25105 wrote...

We proved that the murdering kid was wrong when we made the Quarians and the Geth made peace with each other.

. We proved him wrong when the quarians blew the geth out of the sky.

That's not proving him wrong, that's blowing the Geth out of the sky.

. It's proving that we can overcome our synthetic creations.  We aren't doomed.

But you're also propagating the Catalyst in his other problem. Organics vs. Synthetic conflict will always ensue.

Making peace really gives you a better leg to stand on against the Catalyst. You're proving him wrong on both of his problems. Double the fall for him.

And willfully denying assets from the Geth is kind of ****ed up. You'd rather see the Geth die over Rannoch than have them help you in the fight. After they offer to help. What's with that?

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 25 avril 2013 - 01:01 .

[Auld Wulf]

Argolas wrote...

Well said. The premise that synthetic life will always seek to exterminate organic life has been proven many times over, the rest follows logically.

Actually, that's completely wrong!

It's more that the apex race will always seek to subjugate or exterminate any life below it. Synthetics being built with superior materials does tend to give them a leg up. But before the Reapers, the Leviathans existed. Slavery is slavery, the Leviathans and the Reapers are much the same.

How do you fix this? Fix the organic condition. Fix nature. Make everyone equal and level the playing field. Cosmic says it himself. By entering into a mutual partnership with an AI, we could actually create a condition where all humans are equal. The Helios AI of Deus Ex is a fine example of this, but I doubt you've actually seen that considering your opinions.

[Xilizhra]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Who cares when the universe ends or if it ends. I'll be dead well before then.

I think the Catayst has been doing a little natural selection for a cycle that would eventually kick his butt and end the reapers. Unintentionally of course, but still. "The Created will always rebel against their creators." Thus organics will eventually wipe out the reapers from the galaxy. It is inevitable. We are more resourceful than the Catalyst realized. It will happen unless some idiot picks synthesis.

If this is true, Synthesis is even more clearly the only option. I don't want the Reapers destroyed. The only problem is that Synthesis' explanation isn't good enough for my Shepard to really want to pick it...

[Mangalores]

Auld Wulf wrote...

...

It's more that the apex race will always seek to subjugate or exterminate any life below it.  ...

We don't try or seek to subjugate or exterminate any life below us. These kinds of statements of absolute truth when there is none or are clear exaggerations are really why the Catalyst is not believeable.

[Xilizhra]

Mangalores wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

...

It's more that the apex race will always seek to subjugate or exterminate any life below it.  ...

We don't try or seek to subjugate or exterminate any life below us. These kinds of statements of absolute truth when there is none or are clear exaggerations are really why the Catalyst is not believeable.

We don't? That's news to me. Certainly we want to control all life forms on this world that could ever compete with us in anything.

[Mangalores]

Xilizhra wrote...

...
We don't? That's news to me. Certainly we want to control all life forms on this world that could ever compete with us in anything.

Where? We exploit resources in nasty ways but intentional subjugation or extermination is very new to me. We happen to exterminate species and we do subjugate specific animals for gain but we don't base any of our decisions on them being a threat to our apex status.

In the same vein the British didn't try to exterminate either Germany or the US, both challengers to her apex status in the 19th century. The Austrians didn't try it against Prussia. Rome didn't try it against the Sassanids or the Franks, or the Visigoths, or the Osthrogoths, or the Lombards. And all these countries are not necessarily known for playing nice. Rome did destroy Carthage... one city within the Punic realm, then 2 centuries later one of the emperors was an African of Punic descent.

Important: any = all


The claim is that it is an irrevocable norm against all life.

Modifié par Mangalores, 25 avril 2013 - 04:09 .

[Xilizhra]

Where? We exploit resources in nasty ways but intentional subjugation or extermination is very new to me. We happen to exterminate species and we do subjugate specific animals for gain but we don't base any of our decisions on them being a threat to our apex status.

Killing any predatory animals that could compete with herding efforts, for instance.

[Mangalores]

Xilizhra wrote...

Killing any predatory animals that could compete with herding efforts, for instance.

Which is not any life but very specific life. And thus far mankind rarely intentionally exterminated a species but pushed said species out of the shared environment and it could happen to be exterminated in the process. The intention was never to exterminate them. We just were being nasty. But we try to reintroduce certain predators back into European environment and preserve remaining environments which is a non absolute approach to the issue.

[JShepppp]

Xilizhra wrote...

Mangalores wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

...

It's more that the apex race will always seek to subjugate or exterminate any life below it.  ...

We don't try or seek to subjugate or exterminate any life below us. These kinds of statements of absolute truth when there is none or are clear exaggerations are really why the Catalyst is not believeable.

We don't? That's news to me. Certainly we want to control all life forms on this world that could ever compete with us in anything.

The key with the synthetic vs organics being an actual problem - aside from the fact that the Catalyst was programmed to believe it was and can't change its programming - is that we actually do not know what super powerful synthetics would want. We have NO examples that we can base our ideas on, because the idea of super-advanced synthetics is basically a problem with a technological singularity. That's when synthetics begin evolving at a rate such that organics can never catch up. As the name implies, we cannot fathom what such a species may want, nor why. The end result of synthetic superiority is the following:

Organics will be at the mercy of synthetics.

That is the only 100% guaranteed outcome. We do not know if it is good or bad. But the idea that organics have no bargaining power makes them essentially slaves and is an imbalance of power that makes true peace impossible because one side has no say. This is one reason why the Catalyst must harvest at a certain time - when synthetics start to appear each cycle. Note that the Catalyst "saves" synthetics as well and is rather indiscriminate in whom it "helps" - it is only biased in the sense that synthetics cannot advance too far because then the Catalyst, like us, cannot predict what happens beyond a technological singularity.

So the key is that YOU may want to control or subjugate others. I may do so too if I had such power. But that doesn't mean that the super-powerful synthetics would. However, they essentially would control the other races, because they would have the power to wipe them out and subjugate them if the races disagreed. This is a different kind of slavery, but a slavery nonetheless.

[JShepppp]

Steelcan wrote...

The issue with this is that the Crucible proves that organics are not doomed. If they can successfully challenge the Reapers, the granddaddy of all synthetics, they don't have much to fear from anything else.

Furthermore I see no evidence to support that organics ARE doomed to synthetics, whatsoever.

And thanks for the downer ending.

Well, the fact that the Quarians can beat the Geth without Reaper upgrades simply shows that the Geth aren't advanced enough yet. The Catalyst's argument refers to synthetics who self-evolve such that organics can never catch up. It explicitly states this - its problem only comes into play when the created surpass the creators by definition. Clearly, this has not yet happened in ME3 as the Quarians can wipe out the Geth.

[JShepppp]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

M25105 wrote...

We proved that the murdering kid was wrong when we made the Quarians and the Geth made peace with each other.

. We proved him wrong when the quarians blew the geth out of the sky.

That's not proving him wrong, that's blowing the Geth out of the sky.

. It's proving that we can overcome our synthetic creations.  We aren't doomed.

But you're also propagating the Catalyst in his other problem. Organics vs. Synthetic conflict will always ensue.

Making peace really gives you a better leg to stand on against the Catalyst. You're proving him wrong on both of his problems. Double the fall for him.

And willfully denying assets from the Geth is kind of ****ed up. You'd rather see the Geth die over Rannoch than have them help you in the fight. After they offer to help. What's with that?

As said above, the Catalyst's goal is lasting peace, which the Quarian/Geth peace is not an exemplar of. The Catalyst has already seen temproary peace come and go, as it says. How can we say, without bias and arrogance, that we are different in our peace of a few months over what the Catalyst has seen in a billion (at least) years?

Also, if the Quarians wipe out the Geth, then the Geth just were not advanced enough. The Catalyst's assertion only regards synthetics who surpass their creators, as it says. The Geth were not that advanced as evidenced by their possible extinction. It would be the next group of synthetics that would be the problem. That is, the Catalyst is not necessarily disproven by the Quarians exterminating the Geth because the sample set isn't amongst the population of circumstances the Catalyst describes.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Steelcan wrote...

The issue with this is that the Crucible proves that organics are not doomed. If they can successfully challenge the Reapers, the granddaddy of all synthetics, they don't have much to fear from anything else.

Furthermore I see no evidence to support that organics ARE doomed to synthetics, whatsoever.

And thanks for the downer ending.

How many countless trillions died to make that happen? How many times, through the billions of years the reapers have been alive, could they have wiped out all organic life in the galaxy, but choose not to because they wanted them preserved in a cycle?

Had their goal been to wipe out organic life, organic life would have been wiped out. Just because it took a couple of mass extinction to get a leg up on an enemy who was showing mercy the whole time, does not make you able to cope with an enemy who would not hold back.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Mangalores wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Killing any predatory animals that could compete with herding efforts, for instance.

Which is not any life but very specific life. And thus far mankind rarely intentionally exterminated a species but pushed said species out of the shared environment and it could happen to be exterminated in the process. The intention was never to exterminate them. We just were being nasty. But we try to reintroduce certain predators back into European environment and preserve remaining environments which is a non absolute approach to the issue.

We enslave animals who we find tasty and remove them from their natural enviroments, control them from birth to eventual slaughter, forcibly abort some, forciblty impregnate others, and preform selective breeding to ensure the best chances for a good animal yeild of other quality or quantity of meat, dairy, or other products such as eggs.

Animals who could threaten us are hunted to just before the line of extinction and kept there, we hold them in specific ares, closing off large swaths of their former lands in order to build our own, and we call this a mercy. We than take the ones we believe we can use, and place them, again from birth to death, inside display cases to entertain us. Those who still give in to their natural predatory insticts or who resist the enslavement by attacking a human are quickly euthinized for the good of the status quo.

That's not even going into the chemical warfare we use daily against animals we consier pest, annoyances, or just plain don't like to look at because they are creepy. For these animals, there is no safe haven, it is death on sight and the more of them die, the better.

So tell me, my good sir, where it is we do not exploit nature and our fellow organic species in order to better ourselves? I myself am fine with this system, because in the game of conquest and domination, we won. But I don't see this equality and none exploitation argument your proporting.

[Wayning_Star]

Ymladdych wrote...

If the Catalyst is trying to fight Nihilism, he's once again showing a propensity for logical fallacy, since you can't fight an objective truth with a subjective opinion. Just because he (or you) find synthesized life more "worthwhile" or "superior" than pure organic or pure synthetic doesn't make it true for the Universe, much less true for other subjective points of view, such as mine, or anybody else's.

Do you know why? Because the Catalyst (or you) would still be using standards that YOU think are important, but may or may not actually *be* important.

Case in point: "Overlord" and the Illusive Man's ME3 experiments prove that both Shepard and the Reaper framework can be hacked. If all galactic life is integrated into that framework, then they're all vulnerable. All it would take is one tech savvy visitor from another galaxy...or maybe the Leviathans. Every other positive to Synthesis would be irrelevant in comparison.

And before anyone writes another long-winded excuse as to why this could never happen, I'm going to refer ya'll to the Stargazer scene.

If this Reaper-based super meta-organism still exists in their time, why is the Stargazer telling the kid anything? Couldn't he just download it from the network? Why would details be lost if they could access EDI and everyone else's memories? Plus, if everyone's immortal and free from illness, why does Stargazer sound like a frail old man?

And before anyone writes another long-winded excuse about the "true" nature of Synthesis, I have a question: if all ya'll Synthesizers can't agree on what it IS even with all your EC meta-gaming ('cause I see a lot of different opinions, even amongst supporters), then how is Shepard qualified to wager ALL GALACTIC LIFE on something he couldn't possibly understand at the time he needs to make the choice?

It's especially egregious when you remember that part of the conversation goes something like this:

Catalyst: "Well, we've tried a similar solution in the past, but it failed. Trust me, though, I know it'll work THIS time!"

A pro-Synthesis Shepard's response: "It will affect all life, you say? Woo, hoo-hoo! I'm in, baby!"

This is wrong on so many levels, the least of which is Shepard's critical thinking skills. When you consider that we have laws about ethical genetic modification and experimentation now, and MEU lore confirms that both the Alliance and the Council still have such laws in effect - Shepard is not only violating his oaths as a soldier and committing treason against both levels of government, but he's also making himself a war criminal of immeasurable proportions.

A war crime, by the way, where pro-Synthesizers can't possibly predict the consequences, even with all their EC meta-gaming, because they don't even really know what they're doing to the galaxy, as evidenced by the high variance of their headcanons. (Some say it's universally networked communication; some say no, that it's just giving synthetics organic features; others think it blends people together like the Thorian, where they feel each other's pain and thoughts.)

Destroyers, on the other hand, show no such variance.

Pre-EC, 98% of Destroyers would tell you: "I killed 1% of the galactic population so the other 99% could live free from the Reapers."
Post-EC, 98% of Destroyers would tell you: "I killed 1% of the galactic population so the other 99% could live free from the Reapers."

And before anyone writes another long-winded tirade about, "How could *any* of those versions of Synthesis be bad?!" Well, ignoring the fact that Shepard was trusted to preserve a way of life, not change everybody on his own whims, and also ignoring the fact that understanding doesn't bring peace, only acceptance and/or geographical separation...

There's an apt quote from Mr. Nihilist himself, Friedrich Nietzsche, "When you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you."

In other words, ONE danger of universal understanding is that it would be simultaneous and multidirectional, NOT unidirectional, and unless the Reaper framework imposes some modicum of control, this super meta-organism would not discriminate "good" understanding from "bad" understanding. So, synthetics might finally understand organics, but so would everyone understand the pleasure a serial killer gets from cutting people up. Or, how a Banshee felt getting Reaperfied before she started killing everyone, and how she feels about both things now that she's "restored." Wives would finally understand that their husbands hate That One Question, because, yes, they really DO look fat in that dress. Boyfriends would receive confirmation that yes, size matters and they're smaller than the last 30 guys she's been with.

Do these seem like things that would bring harmony? Really? To me, they seem like things that would destroy psyches and relationships quicker than a slug froths from salt. Shepard, himself, even reflects on the potential psychic trauma of such an event during Legion's ME2 loyalty mission. I think I'm estimating low when I say that easily, 5% of the population would off itself in the first week...unless the Reapers started imposing behavioral controls.

Just to put these numbers in perspective, if Earth's population was cut in half by the Reapers, 5% of 5.5 billion would be 275 million people. On Earth alone, and if they only kill themselves. The irony is that I saw a pro-Synthesis, self-proclaimed paragon of empathy, write something to the effect of, "Too bad...not my problem. That would be their choice." Oh, yeah. Your hands are clean, huh? How nice for you...

Now, I'm stating psychological facts here. I'm sure Synthesizers will point to the EC epilogue and say, "But that didn't happen!" To which I'll reply, "Hmmm, you're right. I wonder WHY?!" In spite of Jessica Merizan's earnest quotation from "A Tale of Two Cities," I'm afraid I'm gonna have to go with Occam's Razor on this one (the Reapers are imposing control), especially when the alternative requires a crapload of headcanoned and inconsistent rationalizations that even pro-Synthesizers can't agree on.

And finally, as a parting sentiment to those forumites who scorn Destroy for its blue collar, simplistic appeal, I leave you with another quote: "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes
a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite
direction." - Albert Einstein

one extreme to another extreme extreme,long winded extreme? Albert later digresses on his support of the fat boy politics of  Nihilism.

How can any discuss the venture if that very venture is unexplainable?

Synthesis is still canon..sorry.

[NT121784]

Wouldn't the synthetics miss us eventually?

[N7Gold]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

1. Destruction of all synthetic life. For a time, organics will again be free to exist like they always have. But synthetics will be built again, the conflict will return, and there will be nobody to save organic life. Synthetics will win. Why, then, does the Catalyst accept this as a solution? Well, it doesn't have much of a choice. If Shepard chooses Destroy, the Catalyst can't stop him. It's possible, though, that the Catalyst gives organics the benefit of the doubt. They are, after all, more resourceful than it had realized. There is a small hope that organics will find a solution.

Destroying the Reapers is the right solution to choose. The Reapers made us feel helpless knowing that there will be another organic vs synthetic war if they die off. We have the strength to find our own solutions to conflicts. The Reapers want us to feel weak and helpless just so they can impose their own solution on behalf of the Leviathans. The fact that some of us here have made peace between the geth and quarians proves this.

[TheRealJayDee]

Read the thread title as "Fighting Nihlus". So disappointed now...

[sharkboy421]

Argolas wrote...

The most intelligent being in the galaxy should be a sufficient source, don't you think?

Synthetics must, by definition, surpass organics. Organics will always panick and try to kill them. Synthetics will  always answer with annihilation.

For me the issue is that the catalyst presents us with what is supposed to be a very important conclusion that has very little supporting evidence in the games themselves.

During the genophage arc we are constantly barrage by people who believe that curing or not curing is the best solution.  However they have a lot information to use to support their opinion and this is all information that we have access too.  We have seen how violent and brutal the krogan are yet we have also seen how much the genophage has degraded their culture.  Which ever decision is made, there is plenty of evidence in game to support it.

I personally am having trouble coming up with evidence provided in game (in any of the games) that supports the catalyst's claim about organics and synthetics.  There is the law against AI by the Council but again we are never told why it is there.  The geth were created well after that law was established.  And ME2 and 3 clearly state the geth were not the aggressors in that war (though they are far from innocent.) 

Javik mentions the Metacon War during the prothean cycle, but until the Reaper arrived the protheans were winning.  The geth we fight are the "heretic" geth who have been influenced by the Reapers.  The Luna VI (who is the AI that becomes EDI) "awoke" during a live fire excercise and paniced.  Yes it killed people but it didn't because they were organic, it killed them because it did not understand what was happening and thought they were trying to kill it.

The closest example I can think of is that AI stealing credits in ME1.  And it only tries to kill you because it believes you will kill it. . .so you have to kill it to save yourself.  There was nothing wrong with the amount of focus Bioware gave the synthetic/organic situation in any of the ME games.  It worked really well during the quarian/geth arc.  The problem for me is when it suddenly becomes the focus of the narrative during the last ten minutes.

There is simply not enough information about the "why" of it for it to be the primary focus on the game.  And I have a hard time using the catalyst as a reliable source.  During the ending of ME3 Bioware makes a lot of missteps of just telling us when during the rest of the trilogy they did a really good job of showing us. 

The idea of a synthetic/organic conflict is fine and would even fit into the ME universe, but to me it never felt like the main focus of the games.  And if it was supposed to be then I feel that the games did a really poor job of conveying that.

[ElSuperGecko]

The eventual heat death of the universe is just one suggestion for the ultimate fate of the universe. There's others. The newer cyclical/oscillating universe theories based on those first considered by Einstein, for example.

[KaiserShep]

There are three main issues I have with synthesis. First would be the grotesque green glow everyone gets, though that's more of a superficial matter, but another more pressing one is the hokey promise of "lasting peace". This semi-synthetic web of kumbaya is supposed to create a greater level of understanding, but what does that really entail? How does this overcome all of the issues that come with individuality? How does this affect future advancement by way of discovery? A lot of these things are not addressed at all, or am I supposed to simply dispose of those things for a greater cause? That doesn't seem like something any one person should ever have the power to decide upon. The catalyst lets on that the essense of past civilizations are stored in reaper form, but all of this is just a nice way of glossing over how it actually facilitates all of this. It's not like joining younger generations into an overmind or something, and this leads me to issue #3: I'm being told that this is the ideal solution, by an entity that systematically exterminates entire species, liquefying its victims to create more death machines, and take more victims to corrupt their bodies to serve as semi-synthetic zombie-like infantry. Regardless of everything else, my one and only goal toward the end of the campaign would be to eradicate the existence of not only reapers, but husks, ravagers, marauders, banshees, cannibals, brutes, harvesters, scions, and whatever other monsters they unleashed upon the galaxy. The potential to repurpose them, for any reason, would not change my mind on this matter, for the same reason why we wouldn't want zombies, good or bad, to continue to exist among us. It's the same reason I destroyed the Collector base, rather than saving it in hopes of getting more leverage on the reapers. 

The catalyst and reapers are wrong in their assertion about organics vs. synthetics, mainly because their direct intervention are the real cause of escalation in the current cycle in the first place. Think about this. The Quarians and Geth stayed largely separate from one another for hundreds of years, and the Geth didn't start venturing beyond the Perseus Veil until Sovereign was able to rally a percentage of them. But before this, the geth decided to leave the Quarians alone in hopes of developing in isolation. Sure, the Quarians did incite more violence between their people and the geth, but if not for Sovereign's interference, this would have been a matter that threatened little more than the Quarians. So far as we can tell, the synthetic wars have  always been largely isolated and temporary. The one and only race to truly screw everyone over with synthetics were the leviathans, who positioned themselves as lord over everything to start with. So essentially, you only have one real example where synthetics truly threaten everything, and it's those same synthetics that claim that they are the solution to the synthetic war. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 26 avril 2013 - 04:14 .

[KaiserShep]

woops I meant to edit and pressed quote by accident. /doublepost

Modifié par KaiserShep, 26 avril 2013 - 04:14 .

[Ymladdych]

Wayning_Star wrote...
How can any discuss the venture if that very venture is unexplainable?

Thank you for emphasizing my point. The Catalyst may have more processing power than organics, but it's still operating from a subjective, 3-dimensional point of view. Consequently, trying to disprove Nihilism, or any other "Objective Truth" topics, would be an illogical effort in futility. I would say the same thing if OP suggested The Catalyst was trying to disprove the existence of a Universal Creator.

Synthesis is still canon..sorry.

Maybe. Maybe not. We'll see, won't we?

[CosmicGnosis]

N7Gold wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

1. Destruction of all synthetic life. For a time, organics will again be free to exist like they always have. But synthetics will be built again, the conflict will return, and there will be nobody to save organic life. Synthetics will win. Why, then, does the Catalyst accept this as a solution? Well, it doesn't have much of a choice. If Shepard chooses Destroy, the Catalyst can't stop him. It's possible, though, that the Catalyst gives organics the benefit of the doubt. They are, after all, more resourceful than it had realized. There is a small hope that organics will find a solution.

Destroying the Reapers is the right solution to choose. The Reapers made us feel helpless knowing that there will be another organic vs synthetic war if they die off. We have the strength to find our own solutions to conflicts. The Reapers want us to feel weak and helpless just so they can impose their own solution on behalf of the Leviathans. The fact that some of us here have made peace between the geth and quarians proves this.

You know, it's really hard for me to accept Destroy as an empowering and inspirational ending when it involves the destruction of an entire domain of life.