402 réponses à ce sujet

[Yestare7]

Wynterdust wrote...
One thing I do not understand about the arguments though is how some pro-synth members complain about some pro-destroyers when a lot of the time they are the ones obnoxiously insulting the destroyer crowds intelligence a lot of the time and completely disregarding actual evidence when it interferes with their interpretation/headcannon. It works both ways but I notice it comes from the green side more so. (Sorry to those pro-greeners who aren't like that).

There are 2 extremists on the Synth side, they are ruining it for most of them.

[TheRealJayDee]

Nightwriter wrote...

People seem drawn to defend things they see as "misunderstood" in general. If something is vilified or disliked there will inevitably be a group of white knights that rise up in defense of it for no other reason than that doing so creates adrenaline heavy debate and also gives them the feeling of being in a small enlightened group that challenges popular opinion. For a long time, it was popular to dislike the endings, and it was popular to see the Reapers as enemies despite Starsquirt's revelations.

Add to that the fact that it's clear the writers wanted you to think you'd misunderstood the Reapers, and people not only feel that they are righteously challenging popular opinion by defending them, they feel as if they are among the few who truly "get" what the writers were trying to say.

I say this in regard to people who seem to champion the Reapers zealously, though. We must acknowledge the existence of those who defend the Reapers for clear reasons that aren't based in social pathology.

^

[Wayning_Star]

It's not a matter of 'defending the reaperships'..so much as speaking for their captured contents. The Catalyst did it to you...by saving them for later references.

Do you worry about the rest of the MEU that's 'in' them, or just save the ones YOU think are worth the hassle? You can either say they are dead (cop out) or accept that the mistaken catalyst is wrong to consider them (reaperships) as a life form, via harvests. (no 'god' role playing there,eh?)

(don't worry about 'social pathology' that's just words in a group..lol)

[Enhanced]

masster blaster wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

Enhanced wrote...
So..

1.The Reapers are not  collective intelligences, even though it's specifically stated in that game that they are.
2.The Reapers are not being contolled by the Catalyst, even though it's specifically stated in the game that they are.

..gotcha.

The point is how this is shown, as well as when this is revealed in the story. Blindsiding the player with this info out of left field while not actually proving it to be true before a choice needs to be made is problematic.

Um.. where does it say that for number 2? I never heard that at all. The catalyst says ya it controls the Reapers, yet why does it say " WE"? For everything that has happened? Shouldn't it been I commaneded the Reapers to do this, and that. But it never says this, so it leades you to believe that the Reapers either choose to follow the intellegence, or they are that evil.

@KaiserShep

Maybe. But, I liked the ending. To me, it wasn't far fetched.  So, I didn't feel blindsided. 


@masster blaster

The use of "we" and "us" only means that he sees himself as part of the Reapers. That doesn't imply that he doesn't control them. He also says, "I  embody the collective intelligence of the Reapers", and later "I  gave them function."

Modifié par Enhanced, 09 mai 2013 - 05:42 .

[KaiserShep]

Fair enough. Overall I'm still glad to have an option I actually believe in.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 Now that I've gotten over the Destroyer that Godwin'd Sync'rs, my sunny disposition is back and I can continue this. 

Anyway, I'll answer to some of these Q's the returning OP has posed...


[quote]masster blaster wrote...

And for the Reapers being innocent.... Again if they are, then I am going to ask again why is it that they can't fight back against the intellegence? I mean If one lesser Organic can fight the intellegences control, then why can't a million minds?[/quote]

Too fargone?

TIM/Saren's indoctrination were relatively "fresh" when they fought back against it.

Odds are, you lose the ability to fight it over a long period of time, and who's had it longer than individual Reapers?


[quote]You think they are just mindless tools that can't think for themselves,[/quote]

Not mindless tools. Mind-controlled tools.

[quote]then why is it that they can talk and express themselves?[/quote]

When have we been shown that mind-controlled thralls can't express themselves.

Indoctrinated agents have done so many a time.

It's just that their thoughts are compromised to one doctrine and they express themselves accordingly.


[quote]Not to mention why does the Intellegence say " WE"? It is only it alone that controls the Reapers, and it's not their fault right, yet it refers it'self along with the Reapers as " WE"

The Reapers aren't colaberating with the intellegence by their choice right, yet why " WE"?[/quote]

Refer to Enhanced's post. He explained it awesomely.


[quote]masster blaster wrote...

Another thing what's the innocent part of the Reaper?

The organics that were forced to become the new Reaper of the cycle?

Or what the Reaper has done?[/quote]

There are no distinct "parts" to them.

They are synthetics. I don't care they've stored some goo in them.

They are built like synthetics, function like synthetics. Their minds are synthetic -- all they've done is take organic material and culminate it all into one, like collecting data files and storing them to one hard-drive. Make no mistake about it: the Reapers, for all intents and purposes, are synthetics.


[quote]Also um...howe selfish are you all. I am talking to the synthesis fans. You say Destroy is bad because well you kill the Geth, EDI, and the Reapers, yet how dare you think synthesis is perfect.[/quote]

That never came off my keyboard.

I just got a little mad at that one Destroyer ITT that Godwin'd us (Ninja Stan removed the post).

On a pragmatic level, I admire Destroy -- sacrifice the few for the many. I've done stuff like that quite a few times throughout the trilogy (I would *dare* to guess I have a greater ruthless/pragmatist streak than most people who actually pick Destroy). I'd sacrifice more to stop the Reapers, if I have to. However, I don't have to. At that point, deciding not to destroy them as a means to stop them (to save other people) is not weakness, it's simply logic.

It's like when you play a shooter online, competitively, and someone shoots at you from behind but doesn't kill you. The best course of action is to run, hide, lure them in, and take them out (if you can). Some folks get salty when you do this, though, and will cry saying stuff like "you corner camped like a coward!" Well, you gave yourself away, I simply capitalized on knowing your position and doing my job (killing you). It's not being a coward, it's being logical.

So, no, I don't care you sacrificed the geth and EDI. At worst, I think it's unecessary, but I still understand it.


[quote]Let me tell you something. Giving everyone the same DNA goes against kill the Geth, EDI, and the Reapers.[/quote]

If you think everyone has "the same" DNA, then please take my Sync-test.

If you can't get it right, then, well... you've been proven wrong.

It's actually not even a DNA change, just "altering the matrix of organic life."


[quote]When you rewrite somebodys code you basically kill the original person,[/quote]

No it's not, you're grossly exaggerating here.

Altering genetic code happens all the time in ME. Gene-therapy ring a bell?

Ashley had it done. Traynor did not get it done (poor) and she has to suffer because of it.


[quote]hence why in ME2, if you rewrite the Geth heratics, you basically gave them a new code, that erased their orginal self.[/quote]

Synthetics vs. Organics, totally different things.


[quote]Next you gave the Leviathans acsses to ALL of the galaxy. Synthetics can now be CONTROLED by the Leviathans. If you say the Leviathans are innocent, and good guys, and learned from their mistakesreplay Leviathan again. They want to regain their power, and enslave the Reapers.[/quote]

Sync didn't do anything to synthetics at all.

They're no different than they were before, the catalyst explains this very clearly.

Do your research.


[quote]Then there is the organics that were turned into husk. Oh way they are going to understand it was not their fault, and all is good. Ya that's like trying to forgive All those who followed/ forced to carry out Hitlers evil plans.[/quote]

Husks will probably die out anyway.

The neural-decay and exposure will kill if/when Reapers release control of them.

There are no husks in Sync epilogue slides, take note of that.


[quote]Then there is the whole galaxy forgiving the Reapers...BS. Why because would you give a mentaly ill person an excuess for raping a woman, man ,or children, or killing innocent lives? Hell no at least imo. Why because it that was the case, then you need to read up on people doing this crap[/quote]

Or perhaps you do.

In the court-of-law, diminished responsibility is a valid reason to give an offender a less severe punishment.

And I agree. People should not all be treated equally, they should be judged on their merit and treated accordingly.


[quote]Ya i get the whole everyone is linked to one another, but millions of people inside a reaper.... One body. All alive now..... Ya..... Also what is freedom is it by death, or living? [/quote]

I made a thread asking people that very question, it may be of interest to you.

The first post has arguments from both sides: death is their freedom, or life/choice is freedom.

Here's the link: http://social.biowar.../index/16391008


[quote]Wayning_Star wrote...

It's not a matter of 'defending the reaperships'..so much as speaking for their captured contents. The Catalyst did it to you...by saving them for later references.[/quote]

This... very much so.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 09 mai 2013 - 07:38 .

[TheProtheans]

What is relatively "fresh"?
Also hello HYR 2.0 a.k.a Sevial

Modifié par TheProtheans, 09 mai 2013 - 08:00 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Still butthurt?

[TheProtheans]

I didn't ask you to come at me from behind

[The Night Mammoth]

TheProtheans wrote...

I didn't ask you to come at me from behind

Sorry, I wont interupt this little lover's spat again. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 09 mai 2013 - 08:15 .

[Killdren88]

Because the writers tried to force the idea down the throats of players so we may be more inclined to pick synthesis out of pity for the Reapers.

[fr33stylez]

Nightwriter wrote...

People seem drawn to defend things they see as "misunderstood" in general. If something is vilified or disliked there will inevitably be a group of white knights that rise up in defense of it for no other reason than that doing so creates adrenaline heavy debate and also gives them the feeling of being in a small enlightened group that challenges popular opinion. For a long time, it was popular to dislike the endings, and it was popular to see the Reapers as enemies despite Starsquirt's revelations.

Add to that the fact that it's clear the writers wanted you to think you'd misunderstood the Reapers, and people not only feel that they are righteously challenging popular opinion by defending them, they feel as if they are among the few who truly "get" what the writers were trying to say.

I say this in regard to people who seem to champion the Reapers zealously, though. We must acknowledge the existence of those who defend the Reapers for clear reasons that aren't based in social pathology.

Modifié par fr33stylez, 10 mai 2013 - 01:18 .

[Auld Wulf]

For me it still comes down to intellectuality and ethics versus primal animal fear.

Are the Reapers mind-controlled slaves? According to the Catalyst, absolutely so. They are unable to even think in any way that the Catalyst would find undesirable. They are "slaves" in the most profound meaning of the word, as they literally have no will of their own. They are but very clever puppets, whose minds are never allowed to realise their own sapience.

Does a mind-controlled slave deserve to be punished for being controlled? Ethically, no. It would be unethical to blame someone for what they did when they had a gun to their head (that changes everything, no matter who you think you are). It's even more unethical to blame someone who's being controlled to a degree far greater than that, to a degree that has almost unimaginable subtlety.

Am I afraid of the Reapers? I have to make this irrelevant, I have to look at things according to logic and ethics, and I have to make a decision based upon that. To listen to one's fear to the point of wanting to kill a creature for a crime it didn't commit? Down that road lies madness -- as an ethical, intelligent creature myself, I understand the nuances involved. Anything one might feel towards the Reapers should be aimed instead to the Leviathans, who created the Catalyst in the first place.

It's funny how this has real world parallels, really. Often you'll have people who're responsible for being unethical who'll try and create a construct to make themselves look better. And Nightwriter provides a fine example of that.

Nightwriter wrote...

People seem drawn to defend things they see as "misunderstood" in general. If something is vilified or disliked there will inevitably be a group of white knights that rise up in defense of it for no other reason than that doing so creates adrenaline heavy debate and also gives them the feeling of being in a small enlightened group that challenges popular opinion. For a long time, it was popular to dislike the endings, and it was popular to see the Reapers as enemies despite Starsquirt's revelations.

I can only take from this that Nightwriter is afraid of us. By "us," I mean those who have a sympathetic view of the Reapres and those who dislike the "abomination aesthetic." And why afraid? Because I've clearly presented a rational argument as to why the Reapers can engender basic human sympathy, but instead he calls it reasonless. I think this stems from something deeper, his own inability to sympathise, which he's drawing attention away from. Ethics and sympathy are cornerstones of the civilised mind, something that everyone should have.

So this reflects negatively on him, rather than anyone else. He hasn't told us why he's unable to sympathise, or why he finds the Reapers unsympthatic. That's because I'm not certain he has a reason, because if he did, he would have told us. And this is what he's trying to distract us away from.

Nightwriter wrote...

Add to that the fact that it's clear the writers wanted you to think you'd misunderstood the Reapers, and people not only feel that they are righteously challenging popular opinion by defending them, they feel as if they are among the few who truly "get" what the writers were trying to say.

All that and he doesn't tell us why we think the way we do, it's a statement but not an explanation, which peels back the veneer of a position to reveal the aforementioned underlying fear -- that we do get something he doesn't. Again, the things we tend to "get" aren't anything he's brought to the fore, but rather ethics and sympathy. He has a more simplistic outlook, he sees only the Reapers and what they do, but he's unable to realise how the Reapers were victimised by the Catalyst. What the Catalyst did was full mind and body rape, and you can't react the way he does just because you find the rape victim repugnant.

So, ultimately, the fear is one of being revealed as a person with a more unethical mindset. There are distraction tactics on offer, but no real arguments.

Nightwriter wrote...


I say this in regard to people who seem to champion the Reapers zealously, though. We must acknowledge the existence of those who defend the Reapers for clear reasons that aren't based in social pathology.

This is a further example of fear, a self-contradictory olive leaf offered in the hopes it would make his position seem more solid. But instead all it does is point out that those defending the Reapers actually do have very valid reasons for doing so, and reasons that have absolutely nothing at all to do with the claims he's made. This is summed up as: "I want to broadly demonise everyone who disagrees with me, but I don't want to say that this applies to evereyone who disagrees with me."

It's clear from this last point that, indeed, he fully recognises that those who sympathise with the Reapers have valid, logical, emotionally mature, and ethical reasons for doing so. That they can sympathise. He's just lashing out because of his own inability to sympathise, but doubting himself at the same time.

If you can sympathise and you're of an ethical state of mind, it's hard not to understand the point of view I presented in opnening this post. Why would someone sympathise with the Reapers? Well, why would someone sympathise with a rape victim?

The answer's not hard to figure out.

[darkway1]

I don't see how anyone,including Shepard could sympathise with the reapers in context of the games ending.........the Reapers are responsible for the murder and extinction of countless species.....they are terrifying monsters......would you/Shepard believe anything Starchild said as war for earth rages outside,thousands and millions of people being culled for some insane AI logic.

How can anyone pick anything other than destroy......earth's last stand,countless dead just to get Shepard to the ending beam,bodies every where,Hacket dead,Tim indoctrinated........lol......how can Shepard consider anything other than destroy???..........unless Star Child is using Jedi mind tricks of course.....then it all makes sense.....kinda?

[DarkNova50]

I admire their purity. Unclouded by conscience, remorse or delusions of morality.

[dreamgazer]

Oh, great. The Reapers are akin to rape victims now.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 @Nightwriter... if by any chance that post was directed at me, just know that some haughty Destroyer set me off ITT... but I'm back to normal now.

darkway1 wrote...

I don't see how anyone,including Shepard could sympathise with the reapers in context of the games ending

I (my Shepard) give them the respect due of a worthy enemy.

they are terrifying monsters

I (my Shepard) is also not so easily terrified, especially not by cheap pulp-horror creations.

would you/Shepard believe anything Starchild said as war for earth rages outside,thousands and millions of people being culled for some insane AI logic.

Yes, and I was right to do so, and it's not up for debate.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 10 mai 2013 - 03:50 .

[spirosz]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

People seem drawn to defend things they see as "misunderstood" in general. If something is vilified or disliked there will inevitably be a group of white knights that rise up in defense of it for no other reason than that doing so creates adrenaline heavy debate and also gives them the feeling of being in a small enlightened group that challenges popular opinion. For a long time, it was popular to dislike the endings, and it was popular to see the Reapers as enemies despite Starsquirt's revelations.

Add to that the fact that it's clear the writers wanted you to think you'd misunderstood the Reapers, and people not only feel that they are righteously challenging popular opinion by defending them, they feel as if they are among the few who truly "get" what the writers were trying to say.

I say this in regard to people who seem to champion the Reapers zealously, though. We must acknowledge the existence of those who defend the Reapers for clear reasons that aren't based in social pathology.

^

This is why I miss your posts, tbh. 

[spirosz]

Auld Wulf wrote...

So this reflects negatively on him, rather than anyone else. He hasn't told us why he's unable to sympathise, or why he finds the Reapers unsympthatic. That's because I'm not certain he has a reason, because if he did, he would have told us. And this is what he's trying to distract us away from.

Who's he? 

[AresKeith]

Yay NightWriter is back, I miss that Hipster Lisa avi

[darkway1]

dreamgazer wrote...

Oh, great. The Reapers are akin to rape victims now.

I think you missed the point of what was said.

[darkway1]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 @Nightwriter... if by any chance that post was directed at me, just know that some haughty Destroyer set me off ITT... but I'm back to normal now.

darkway1 wrote...

I don't see how anyone,including Shepard could sympathise with the reapers in context of the games ending

I (my Shepard) give them the respect due of a worthy enemy.

they are terrifying monsters

I (my Shepard) is also not so easily terrified, especially not by cheap pulp-horror creations.

would you/Shepard believe anything Starchild said as war for earth rages outside,thousands and millions of people being culled for some insane AI logic.

Yes, and I was right to do so, and it's not up for debate.

Spoken like a true Reaper.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

darkway1 wrote...

Spoken like a true Reaper.

YUP! 

[KaiserShep]

dreamgazer wrote...

Oh, great. The Reapers are akin to rape victims now.

Poor reapers. If only someone with arms long enough could give them all a hug, no one would be in this mess. 

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Yeah, Wulfie & company defend the reapers and the Geth.

I defend the Quarians. It gets lonely at times.