428 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Eryri wrote...
Indoctrination doesn't even need to come into it. The child is a representative of Shepard's enemies, and an enemy known for being manipulative and deceitful at that. The child could just be using good old fashioned lying to induce Shepard to commit suicide in one of three amusingly symbolic and grotesque ways. The fact that it would take the trouble to do so, implies that Shepard may still be a threat to it. Which may mean that there really is a "kill reapers" button somewhere on the Citadel, possibly even on the control panel next to TIM and Anderson's softly cooling corpses, that the Catalyst would really rather Shepard didn't find.

This is sounding just a little desperate. And not very convincing. Once he's got Shepard out of the room with that imaginary button he could stop pretending.

[Eryri]

AlanC9 wrote...

Eryri wrote...
Indoctrination doesn't even need to come into it. The child is a representative of Shepard's enemies, and an enemy known for being manipulative and deceitful at that. The child could just be using good old fashioned lying to induce Shepard to commit suicide in one of three amusingly symbolic and grotesque ways. The fact that it would take the trouble to do so, implies that Shepard may still be a threat to it. Which may mean that there really is a "kill reapers" button somewhere on the Citadel, possibly even on the control panel next to TIM and Anderson's softly cooling corpses, that the Catalyst would really rather Shepard didn't find.

This is sounding just a little desperate. And not very convincing. Once he's got Shepard out of the room with that imaginary button he could stop pretending.

More desperate than accepting the Catalyst's asinine suggestions on the basis that we're probably going to die anyway?

[Eretikas]

magnetite wrote...
Don't want to sound off here, but this is a game about choice, remember?

Actually, people work hard so they don't have to make hard choices. Having 3 bad choices at the end is what ruined this game for many. Why not to offer 3 good choices at the end if you have Very High EMS? Gamers can always play as renegade or make bad decisions if they want more difficult choices or "realism" as they see it. Forcing your main paragon character to commit suicide and achieve goals (offered by your enemy) through immoral actions was really bad decision by Bioware.

It is ironic that in the game about  choice with best ending, Shepard the "Frankenstein" decides to modify all living forms in the Galaxy without giving them any choice .

Modifié par Eretikas, 20 mai 2013 - 11:02 .

[Iakus]

chemiclord wrote...

You don't have any "control" in games either.  There is literally NOTHING you can do that the game does not allow you to do.  You aren't interacting.  You're reading from a script.  A script that was written and completed long before you ever ran the program the first time.

If you go to your job, and your superior says, "You can do [A] or you can do [B], but you have to do one," that isn't control.  Being given options does not mean you control the situation.

A forest stands before me.

I can't make the forest go away.  I can't turn it into a field.  I can't make the trees move.  I don't have that kind of control.

I can,. however, control myself.  I can choose which path to take through the forest.  Avoiding some obstacles, contending with others.  

Unless, of course, the park rangers herd me onto one path leading to one place and one destination...

[Iakus]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

The catalyst never says that Shepard's humanity will be preserved. In fact it stresses that Shepard's connection to his humanity will be forever lost. And as I said to jtav (who'm I think you're misunderstanding), Shepard's thoughts continue. But do they continue the same way as before? He's now in a different level of existence. He has his memories and prior organic thoughts, but with his new nature, these may be rendered irrelevant. And I don't doubt he can feel the synthetic facsimile of emotion, but I do believe that this facsimile is now something that can and will be changed upon acquisition of further information and data. This Shepard is fundamentally different from the one you know as an organic. 

I think that with his new nature, he would have (possibly instantaneously) developed a new, different perspective.

Eternal. Infinite. Immortal. The man/woman I was used these words, but only now do I truly understand them. 

Yeah, I'd say divergence starts right from the get-go

[chemiclord]

iakus wrote...

A forest stands before me.

I can't make the forest go away.  I can't turn it into a field.  I can't make the trees move.  I don't have that kind of control.

I can,. however, control myself.  I can choose which path to take through the forest.  Avoiding some obstacles, contending with others.  

Unless, of course, the park rangers herd me onto one path leading to one place and one destination...

But you DON'T control yourself in video games.  You HAVE to press forward into that forest.  You HAVE to choose a path.  That is not control.  You are compelled by the story to go in certain directions.  Video games allow a layer of complexity that allows you to experience that story in different ways each time... but that's the extent of it.

Modifié par chemiclord, 20 mai 2013 - 11:24 .

[Phatose]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

The catalyst never says that Shepard's humanity will be preserved. In fact it stresses that Shepard's connection to his humanity will be forever lost. And as I said to jtav (who'm I think you're misunderstanding), Shepard's thoughts continue. But do they continue the same way as before? He's now in a different level of existence. He has his memories and prior organic thoughts, but with his new nature, these may be rendered irrelevant. And I don't doubt he can feel the synthetic facsimile of emotion, but I do believe that this facsimile is now something that can and will be changed upon acquisition of further information and data. This Shepard is fundamentally different from the one you know as an organic.

Synthetic facsimile?  Wow man.  I mean, just wow.
I herby charge that Organics who aren't me only have facsimiles of emotions.  Very well faked facsimiles, but fakes nonetheless.  Can you show they aren't just really good fakes?

[KaiserShep]

But it IS a copy. No matter how you slice it, the original source of Shepard's thoughts and personality is dead and gone. It's a synthetic facsimile because it didn't manifest itself in this form. It was tantamount to copying data. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 20 mai 2013 - 11:38 .

[Phatose]

No, it's not. His body,and his brain are gone.

Those are not his mind, and his mind is the source of his through and personality.

[KaiserShep]

I didn't say that they were his mind, but they are the source. There's no way around that.

[Phatose]

They aren't the source. They are substrate. You cannot hand me a piece of brain and say "Here is where Shepard's sadness comes from."

The mind is a pattern plus a process. It is the source of emotions. The brain is a meat computer.

[Tron Mega]

Phatose wrote...

No, it's not. His body,and his brain are gone.

Those are not his mind, and his mind is the source of his through and personality.

the moment shepard becomes sheaprd-reaper-god, who can definitively say sheaprd mind is still the same? its impossible to know unless it gets written that way and someone at bioware spells it out fir us.

in all actuality sheaprd-reaper is NOT the same. he refers to himself in past tense doesnt he? how do we know his mind is still the same? you cant tell me becoming a reaper-god wont/wouldnt/couldnt change perspective(especially when theres no attachment to the former self).

i cant imagine(no one can) becoming a reaper-god. how am i supposed to be like "nah, shepards still a bro at heart" when its not (my) shepard?

Modifié par Tron Mega, 20 mai 2013 - 11:56 .

[AlanC9]

Eryri wrote...
More desperate than accepting the Catalyst's asinine suggestions on the basis that we're probably going to die anyway?

The difference is that we really are going to die anyway if the Crucible doesn't work, but nothing's forcing you to make up nonsense.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

There is no emotion to synthetics. They cannot feel emotion. Only organics can feel emotion. They can develop feedback loops and develop preferences for positive feedback and feel repulsed by negative feedback. Upon acquisition of new data, they can reevaluate their feedback and change it if appropriate. It's a facsimile. But that is not emotion. I'm not saying that synthetics are any less of life because of it. But they aren't organics. They can't feel what organics can. They don't have biology as we do.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

Eryri wrote...
More desperate than accepting the Catalyst's asinine suggestions on the basis that we're probably going to die anyway?

The difference is that we really are going to die anyway if the Crucible doesn't work, but nothing's forcing you to make up nonsense.

How do you know the Crucible doesn't work.

You don't even know what it'se is supposed to do.

For all you know, the Catalyst is simply trying to sabotage the Crucible before it can finish doing...whatever.

"Sure.  Shooting that pipe will totally wipe us all out.  Trust me on that."

"Go ahead, grab those wires.  Nothing will short out.  You;'ll have total control over us.

"Jump in the beam.  All the cool kids are doing it.  It totally won't introduce foreign contaminants to a precision device."

Modifié par iakus, 21 mai 2013 - 12:57 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Phatose wrote...

They aren't the source. They are substrate. You cannot hand me a piece of brain and say "Here is where Shepard's sadness comes from."

The mind is a pattern plus a process. It is the source of emotions. The brain is a meat computer.

No it is not. And we will not know that a machine can have anything other than simulated emotions until one actually does. Until that time everything is head canon. You are arguing a fictional projection. You are stating the brain is a meat computer. The brain is the center of our awareness, of our creativity. To this day no machine, no computer has the same ability. A machine can simulate creating music, but cannot actually create music. It is still done off a program, not off a machine's self-awareness.

Stop arguing head-canon and come back to reality.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Eryri wrote...
More desperate than accepting the Catalyst's asinine suggestions on the basis that we're probably going to die anyway?

The difference is that we really are going to die anyway if the Crucible doesn't work, but nothing's forcing you to make up nonsense.

How do you know the Crucible doesn't work.

You don't even know what it'se is supposed to do.

For all you know, the Catalyst is simply trying to sabotage the Crucible before it can finish doing...whatever.

"Sure.  Shooting that pipe will totally wipe us all out.  Trust me on that."

"Go ahead, grab those wires.  Nothing will short out.  You;'ll have total control over us.

"Jump in the beam.  All the cool kids are doing it.  It totally won't introduce foreign contaminants to a precision device."

The physical execution of each ending option was rather retarded.

Why does shooting something activate it? 

Why the hell are there two random rods on the bottom of the citadel? 

Why does jumping into an energy beam suddenly activate it?

[AlanC9]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

No it is not. And we will not know that a machine can have anything other than simulated emotions until one actually does.

You think there's maybe something magic about nerve cells? Really?

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

How do you know the Crucible doesn't work.

You don't even know what it'se is supposed to do.

For all you know, the Catalyst is simply trying to sabotage the Crucible before it can finish doing...whatever.

A Shepard who worries about that can just stand there for a while and watch nothing happen. Well, nothing except a lot of organics being killed, of course.

[KingZayd]

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...

How do you know the Crucible doesn't work.

You don't even know what it'se is supposed to do.

For all you know, the Catalyst is simply trying to sabotage the Crucible before it can finish doing...whatever.

A Shepard who worries about that can just stand there for a while and watch nothing happen. Well, nothing except a lot of organics being killed, of course.

Actually I did watch. It was the the same Ship being shot at on loop. Never blew up either.

[Eryri]

AlanC9 wrote...

Eryri wrote...
More desperate than accepting the Catalyst's asinine suggestions on the basis that we're probably going to die anyway?

The difference is that we really are going to die anyway if the Crucible doesn't work, but nothing's forcing you to make up nonsense.

You may call it that Alan. I call it speculating.

[KingZayd]

JasonShepard wrote...

Two responses in one - Eryri, I've responded to you in the second half of this post.

KingZayd wrote...

So how come you can copy an organic mind onto an AI, but you can't copy an AI? The lore tells us that AIs can't be copied or moved due to the quantum bluebox issue. The raw data (memory) will transfer but the personality will reset.

The difference between what is possible for Citadel tech (which is what the Codex is based on - remember that it is written in-universe. This is the same Codex that referred to Sovereign as a Geth Dreadnought.) and what the Crucible appears to be capable of. Transfer of quantum states and information isn't just theoretically possible - we've done it in the real world. It's how Quantum Teleportation works. However, doing it on a scale beyond a handful of particles is entirely beyond us - but not necessarily beyond the Crucible.

KingZayd wrote...

Also the Starchild also said Shepard also losing everything if he chose control. That makes more sense if he loses his personality.

I'll admit that I can't really argue against this point, but that actual statement is painfully vague (which is a criticism of how the endings were written). Shepard clearly doesn't lose his memories, or his tone of voice, or his values (Shepard-AI mentions that his purpose has not changed).

KingZayd wrote...

And the EC does not actually confirm your idea at all. Instead the AI talks as if it's a different entity that remembers being Shepard. It's the whole reason it refers to Shepard either in the third person, or as "the person I was".The last one is because despite being a different entity, with its own personality, it still remembers having been Shepard.

I refer to the person I was four years ago in the third person - for example, he hadn't played Mass Effect yet. "The man/woman I was" implies a continuity of persona to me.

Interesting thing about the quantum state transfer.

Do you already refer to yourself in the third person when talking to yourself in the past? StarShepard never refers to Shepard as simply I. ALWAYS he/she, or the person I was. To me it looks as if it's making it explicit that they are not the same entity, but due to the data transfer, remembers being Shepard.

[KingZayd]

Auld Wulf wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Phatose wrote...

[...] according to Christianty, everybody is worth forgiving.

Most Religions share that theme.  And most people don't live up to it.

[...] of course most people don't live up to it, because we view them as guidelines which is what they actually are

Some people can most certainly live up to it, but they are exceptional people.

Others see things like ethics as 'bendable guidelines' which only apply when it's convenient and comfortable for them, from a selfish perspective. The selfless person is an ultimately rare creature; the example of a selfless person, for example, is someone who would be willing to put their lives on the line in order to not rat out their friends, and would endure anything to remain loyal. However, 1984 is a representation of how weak of character and will most people are.

I say with complete conviction that here you may speak for yourself, but you do not speak for me. I have a strong sense of ethics and I can separate my personal feelings from my ability to analyse something according to ethics, this is a depressingly rare talent.

Were the Reapers responsible for what they did? No.

Were the Reapers responsible for what they became? No.

Did the Reapers have any say in this whatsoever? No.

The Reapers are victims. I've specifically pointed out in the past that they are victims of mind and body rape. My sense of ethics tells me that if someone is raped, then mind-controlled to kill, this person is a victim, those killed are also victims. It is the one pulling the strings who isn't. I recently ran a poll, a poll titled 'is it justice you seek?' and in that poll we see that many people want to kill the Reapers because they find them repugnant.

Does it matter to you and those like you that the Reapers are rape victims? No.

Does it matter to you and those lilke you that the Reapers were controlled and forced to do these things? No.

Does it matter to you and those like you that, once freed, the Reapers are peaceful, benign creatures? No.

Does it matter to you and those like you that the Reapers are victims of the Leviathans, as much as anyone else? No.

You're just looking for stereotypical bad guys to slaughter. When the Reapers turn out to be victims as well, instead of actually stopping to think whether you should still hit the 'kill them all' button, you just hit it anyway. You slaughter them anyway, because you were promised something to kill, and by damn you're going to kill something for your own satisfaction. You've no appreciation of the higher narrative on offer. You just want to kill things.

And this is what separates us. An exceptional person appreciates a narrative in which these variables are presented. Others just want a dumb plot where, essentailly, Gud Guys Kill Dem Bad Guys. And that's all there is to it. Don't talk to me about the Reapers and forgiveness, because that never entered your head, or the heads of those like you. My poll proves it, it proves it absolutely, and that's why I often refer to BSN as an anti-intellectual ghetto. It's the same reason the ME3 ending was so reviled -- because it tried to make people think. You know, as opposed to pulling the trigger to kill things.

I understand what the Reapers are -- victims. I'm exceptional enough of a person to understand and appreciate that. And I'm an exceptional person in my ability to desire their ethical treament. It's easy to forgive them because it was never their fault.

It's a simple matter according to ethics:

The Reapers are victims of mind and body rape. If you kill a rape victim without even giving them a chance, then you're a monster. You're the monster -- not the Reapers. Plain and simple.

10/10 for exceptional narcissism

[Eryri]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Eryri wrote...
More desperate than accepting the Catalyst's asinine suggestions on the basis that we're probably going to die anyway?

The difference is that we really are going to die anyway if the Crucible doesn't work, but nothing's forcing you to make up nonsense.

How do you know the Crucible doesn't work.

You don't even know what it'se is supposed to do.

For all you know, the Catalyst is simply trying to sabotage the Crucible before it can finish doing...whatever.

"Sure.  Shooting that pipe will totally wipe us all out.  Trust me on that."

"Go ahead, grab those wires.  Nothing will short out.  You;'ll have total control over us.

"Jump in the beam.  All the cool kids are doing it.  It totally won't introduce foreign contaminants to a precision device."

The physical execution of each ending option was rather retarded.

Why does shooting something activate it? 

Why the hell are there two random rods on the bottom of the citadel? 

Why does jumping into an energy beam suddenly activate it?

Deeply so.

Although to be be fair, they're not just random rods. They're levers. "Control Levers," if you will...

That's some subtle symbolism right there Bioware. Bravo. Almost as good as initiating the destruction of synthetic life by taking out your weapon and blasting Hell out of a piece of machinery. Or taking a leap of faith that will hopefully result in some brave new utopia, in a galaxy redeemed by the sacrifice of "the Shepard," rather than just incinerate him...

Modifié par Eryri, 21 mai 2013 - 04:42 .

[AlanC9]

Eryri wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
The difference is that we really are going to die anyway if the Crucible doesn't work, but nothing's forcing you to make up nonsense.

You may call it that Alan. I call it speculating.

Speculating about a "kill Reapers" button that doesn't exist and lies that the Catalyst didn't tell? Are you maybe talking about some hypothetical alternative version of ME3?

And yes, I saw your sig. Are you actually one of the die-hards?

Modifié par AlanC9, 21 mai 2013 - 05:04 .