606 réponses à ce sujet

[Tron Mega]

Bill Casey wrote...

Synthetics will kill you all, rawrghgh...
We can't get along...

It's hateful fear mongering used to justify horrible war crimes...
It's The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion in goddamn game form...

i agree.

really, i hate mass effect because it enables stupidity.

[Bill Casey]

Morocco Mole wrote...

It's a fictional race.

Artificial intelligence is not fictional...
Strong AI is a future possibility...

There is a branch of ethics centered around this, which emphasizes dignity, equality, privacy, justice, respect for diversity, non-discrimination, autonomy, and consent...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 11 juin 2013 - 12:01 .

[Kel Riever]

Again, bad story is bad. Simple as that. No excuses.

[Bill Casey]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...
Artificial intelligence is not fictional...
Strong AI is a future possibility...

There is a branch of ethics centered around this, which emphasizes dignity, equality, privacy, justice, respect for diversity, non-discrimination, autonomy, and consent...

So basically every bit of sci-fi fiction that has dealt with synthetics and organics is hateful fear mongering because we may create AI someday?

Give some examples...

[Bill Casey]

I assume you're going to go "Terminator" and "2001: A Space Odyssey", but those are films where the villain happens to be an AI. They aren't making blanket assertions...

[TheRealJayDee]

Morocco Mole wrote...

So basically every bit of sci-fi fiction that has dealt with synthetics and organics is hateful fear mongering because we may create AI someday?

I don't think he means that. I think he mostly refers to the narrative of a game in which we could establish (a maybe fleeting) peace between organics and synthetics, and even befriend an AI, only to be told at the end of the story that there can never be a peaceful co-existence between organic and artificial life. The solutions to this we get to choose from are 1) eliminating all artificial life 2) setting up a galactic uber-police or 3) eliminating the differences between both forms of life. We have no choice of taking the risk of trying to approach a self-determined co-existence. Well, yeah, we actually get that, but then everyone just dies together.

What's bothering about ME3 is that we don't get the chance of a future in which we deal with the synthetic/organic issues on our own terms.

[KiwiQuiche]

Personally I think the whole point of the ending is that being different and individuals is wrong and we all have to be the same for there to be peace and happiness.

[TheRealJayDee]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Personally I think the whole point of the ending is that being different and individuals is wrong and we all have to be the same for there to be peace and happiness.

Which is kind of a problematic lesson by itself, but also does not really fit with what many people experienced in their ME trilogy playthroughs.

[Tron Mega]

Morocco Mole wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...
I don't think he means that. I think he mostly refers to the narrative of a game in which we could establish (a maybe fleeting) peace between organics and synthetics, and even befriend an AI, only to be told at the end of the story that there can never be a peaceful co-existence between organic and artificial life. The solutions to this we get to choose from are 1) eliminating all artificial life 2) setting up a galactic uber-police or 3) eliminating the differences between both forms of life. We have no choice of taking the risk of trying to approach a self-determined co-existence. Well, yeah, we actually get that, but then everyone just dies together.

What's bothering about ME3 is that we don't get the chance of a future in which we deal with the synthetic/organic issues on our own terms.

So what I gather is you guys hate making choices that you can't paragon out of for once

try harder, maybe.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I might be crazy, but... isn't this the identical thread to the one from last week? Or was that one locked?

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

So basically every bit of sci-fi fiction that has dealt with synthetics and organics is hateful fear mongering because we may create AI someday?

I don't think he means that. I think he mostly refers to the narrative of a game in which we could establish (a maybe fleeting) peace between organics and synthetics, and even befriend an AI, only to be told at the end of the story that there can never be a peaceful co-existence between organic and artificial life. The solutions to this we get to choose from are 1) eliminating all artificial life 2) setting up a galactic uber-police or 3) eliminating the differences between both forms of life. We have no choice of taking the risk of trying to approach a self-determined co-existence. Well, yeah, we actually get that, but then everyone just dies together.

What's bothering about ME3 is that we don't get the chance of a future in which we deal with the synthetic/organic issues on our own terms.

This is my greatest frustration about it.

A future where you kill everyone, or eliminate the valuable differences between them, severely limits the Galaxy's future.

Homogenizing all species or destroying them trivializes the journey , and makes the effort of negotiating peace and uniting the various species of the galaxy pointless.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

Morocco Mole wrote...

So what I gather is you guys hate making choices that you can't paragon out of for once

Paragon is a choice throughout all three games. You don't use it to get "out" of anything, since it is the actual choice itself.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Bill Casey wrote...

It wasn't too much for me, because I didn't know IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A VICTORY...

You didn't know the 'relay needed to be destroyed at any cost?

"Victory" is what they call it when you achieve your military objective, even if soldiers die or there's collateral damage.

LOL @ thinking Arrival celebrated civilian death. Then again, it's not far-off from saying the ending celebrates racism.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 11 juin 2013 - 02:59 .

[dreamgazer]

Jeremiah12LGeek wrote...

I might be crazy, but... isn't this the identical thread to the one from last week? Or was that one locked?

Dude, the same thread---"you don't get the ending"; "it's about sacrifice!"---has been repeated over and over for the past fifteen months.

[txgoldrush]

dreamgazer wrote...

Jeremiah12LGeek wrote...

I might be crazy, but... isn't this the identical thread to the one from last week? Or was that one locked?

Dude, the same thread---"you don't get the ending"; "it's about sacrifice!"---has been repeated over and over for the past fifteen months.

and whining about the ending hasn't been repeated over and over? yeah, whatever

[txgoldrush]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Personally I think the whole point of the ending is that being different and individuals is wrong and we all have to be the same for there to be peace and happiness.

Wrong.

The Destroy ending with Hackett says otherwise.

[dreamgazer]

txgoldrush wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Jeremiah12LGeek wrote...

I might be crazy, but... isn't this the identical thread to the one from last week? Or was that one locked?

Dude, the same thread---"you don't get the ending"; "it's about sacrifice!"---has been repeated over and over for the past fifteen months.

and whining about the ending hasn't been repeated over and over? yeah, whatever

You're right: they both have! 

So, where do we go from here?

[KiwiQuiche]

txgoldrush wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Personally I think the whole point of the ending is that being different and individuals is wrong and we all have to be the same for there to be peace and happiness.

Wrong.

The Destroy ending with Hackett says otherwise.

Still trying to act as if personal opinions besides yours is wrong, eh? Glad to see you haven't changed.

The whole ultimate 'peace and happiness' ending that is pushed really hard is Synthesis which makes everyone the same, makes all A.I like organics, as if there is something wrong with individuality.

You can't honestly tell me that Synthesis isn't pushed really hard?

Modifié par KiwiQuiche, 11 juin 2013 - 07:52 .

[Cobalt2113]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Personally I think the whole point of the ending is that being different and individuals is wrong and we all have to be the same for there to be peace and happiness.

Wrong.

The Destroy ending with Hackett says otherwise.

Still trying to act as if personal opinions besides yours is wrong, eh? Glad to see you haven't changed.

The whole ultimate 'peace and happiness' ending that is pushed really hard is Synthesis which makes everyone the same, makes all A.I like organics, as if there is something wrong with individuality.

You can't honestly tell me that Synthesis isn't pushed really hard?

They certainly put a positive spin on synthesis, that's true.

But txgoldrush is correct. You said and I quote "we all have to be the same for there to be peace and happiness". If you pick destroy there is peace and happiness and not everyone is the same. So obviously your claim is wrong. End of discussion.

[KiwiQuiche]

Cobalt2113 wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Personally I think the whole point of the ending is that being different and individuals is wrong and we all have to be the same for there to be peace and happiness.

Wrong.

The Destroy ending with Hackett says otherwise.

Still trying to act as if personal opinions besides yours is wrong, eh? Glad to see you haven't changed.

The whole ultimate 'peace and happiness' ending that is pushed really hard is Synthesis which makes everyone the same, makes all A.I like organics, as if there is something wrong with individuality.

You can't honestly tell me that Synthesis isn't pushed really hard?

They certainly put a positive spin on synthesis, that's true.

But txgoldrush is correct. You said and I quote "we all have to be the same for there to be peace and happiness". If you pick destroy there is peace and happiness and not everyone is the same. So obviously your claim is wrong. End of discussion.

So you obviously didn't read the first word of my sentence where I wrote "PERSONALLY"?

[Dieb]

Just stumbled over this. Sorry for sheriff-ing again, but:

While I too am not as upset as other people about the endings, are we really at the point of the very headline of a topic being an implied passive-aggressive insult? Is this about solving and debating, or telling others your opinion is better than theirs?

[favoritehookeronthecitadel]

Baelrahn wrote...

Just stumbled over this. Sorry for sheriff-ing again, but:

While I too am not as upset as other people about the endings, are we really at the point of the very headline of a topic being an implied passive-aggressive insult? Is this about solving and debating, or telling others your opinion is better than theirs?

Just ignore this thread. You and everyone else. Don't feed the troll.