465 réponses à ce sujet

[SeptimusMagistos]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

But like I've said, Destroy can be paragon. If there are no Geth around to "sacrifice for the greater good" what is the problem?

There is at least one other synthetic race in existence, and there might be more.

CronoDragoon wrote...

 What this leads to is a very
unbalanced portrayal of the conflict from game to game, with the
quarians the innocent victims in ME1 and the geth evil robots

This was never the case. The quarians always admitted that they tried to kill all geth with no provocation and the player has the option to point out that this makes it very hard to sympathise with them.

Modifié par SeptimusMagistos, 18 juin 2013 - 05:52 .

[CronoDragoon]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...
This was never the case. The quarians always admitted that they tried to kill all geth with no provocation and the player has the option to point out that this makes it very hard to sympathise with them.

I acknowledged that the quarians were not necessarily presented as innocent, but given the portrayal of the geth in ME1 you either identify with the quarians or no one. There is certainly absolutely no nuance to the geth before ME2.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

We should have just showed this to the Reapers.

It would make them realize that there is nothing they can do to us that we aren't already doing to ourselves...

They would probably fly into the nearest star in abject despair.

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 18 juin 2013 - 06:16 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

But like I've said, Destroy can be paragon. If there are no Geth around to "sacrifice for the greater good" what is the problem?

There is at least one other synthetic race in existence, and there might be more.

CronoDragoon wrote...

 What this leads to is a very
unbalanced portrayal of the conflict from game to game, with the
quarians the innocent victims in ME1 and the geth evil robots

This was never the case. The quarians always admitted that they tried to kill all geth with no provocation and the player has the option to point out that this makes it very hard to sympathise with them.

There is one known, and could be is a speculation. The one known has been powered down once already and has recovered (see Citadel DLC). Yes, that's right, powered down as in turned off, disconnected, with no ill effects, in complete opposition to what is written in the codex about blue box AIs. How do I know this?

Shepard: "Okay, power up EDI and let's get the Normandy back in full operation." == right after she either shoots or sends Brooks off to the Alliance (I shot her given the Alliance's lax security with Balak).

So the codex was retconned. Not being powered would make the blue box just like a box of parts. Pieces of metal and silicon and whatever other semi-conductors aren't going to explode on their own without power or code running through them.

Shepard had communication with Hackett before "Glowboy."

Shepard thus could contact the Normandy. "This is Shepard. Power down EDI." Hit Destroy. Destroy the reapers. Go through the whole thing. Normandy crashes on the planet. Power up EDI. Sexbot is toast. Joker's sexbot "EDI" goes on the board. Then EDI returns to being the blue globe AI she once was. EDI is not dead.

But Shepard doesn't do anything of the sort because we have no control over our characters since the ending with the starbrat conversation is basically a cutscene, but if I had control, I would contact the Normandy and instruct Adams to set a system restore point, then power down EDI immediately and don't take no for an answer. Let's hope Samantha backed up EDI's software recently just in case of program issues.

Thus EDI is saved. Hence, it is paragon.

[AlanC9]

CronoDragoon wrote...

It wasn't just the wording. The quarians got the shaft in ME3 in general, with BioWare counting on the quarian presence in ME1/2 to count for something, such that people by the end of the Rannoch arc would be split between the geth and quarians. What this leads to is a very unbalanced portrayal of the conflict from game to game, with the quarians the innocent victims in ME1 and the geth evil robots, a balance approach in ME2, and ME3 with the quarians as selfish idiots and the geth as innocent victims.

I don't see the difference between ME2 and ME3 here unless Shepard doesn't do Legion's mission to resolve the Heretic situation. With the Heretics reprogrammed or exterminated, we've got the same situation in ME2 that we have in ME3.

[AlanC9]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

There is one known, and could be is a speculation. The one known has been powered down once already and has recovered (see Citadel DLC). Yes, that's right, powered down as in turned off, disconnected, with no ill effects, in complete opposition to what is written in the codex about blue box AIs. How do I know this?

Shepard: "Okay, power up EDI and let's get the Normandy back in full operation." == right after she either shoots or sends Brooks off to the Alliance (I shot her given the Alliance's lax security with Balak).

You're putting an awful lot of faith in what sounded to me like sloppy language from Shepard. My headcanon-fu is not that strong.

[Phatose]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

But like I've said, Destroy can be paragon. If there are no Geth around to "sacrifice for the greater good" what is the problem?

There is at least one other synthetic race in existence, and there might be more.

CronoDragoon wrote...

 What this leads to is a very
unbalanced portrayal of the conflict from game to game, with the
quarians the innocent victims in ME1 and the geth evil robots

This was never the case. The quarians always admitted that they tried to kill all geth with no provocation and the player has the option to point out that this makes it very hard to sympathise with them.

There is one known, and could be is a speculation. The one known has been powered down once already and has recovered (see Citadel DLC). Yes, that's right, powered down as in turned off, disconnected, with no ill effects, in complete opposition to what is written in the codex about blue box AIs. How do I know this?

Shepard: "Okay, power up EDI and let's get the Normandy back in full operation." == right after she either shoots or sends Brooks off to the Alliance (I shot her given the Alliance's lax security with Balak).

So the codex was retconned. Not being powered would make the blue box just like a box of parts. Pieces of metal and silicon and whatever other semi-conductors aren't going to explode on their own without power or code running through them.

Shepard had communication with Hackett before "Glowboy."

Shepard thus could contact the Normandy. "This is Shepard. Power down EDI." Hit Destroy. Destroy the reapers. Go through the whole thing. Normandy crashes on the planet. Power up EDI. Sexbot is toast. Joker's sexbot "EDI" goes on the board. Then EDI returns to being the blue globe AI she once was. EDI is not dead.

But Shepard doesn't do anything of the sort because we have no control over our characters since the ending with the starbrat conversation is basically a cutscene, but if I had control, I would contact the Normandy and instruct Adams to set a system restore point, then power down EDI immediately and don't take no for an answer. Let's hope Samantha backed up EDI's software recently just in case of program issues.

Thus EDI is saved. Hence, it is paragon.

Her blue box isn't actually powered down there though.  If you bring her along for the last stretch, she's still clearly still functioning.  Shepard's just being an idiot there, and he actually means reconnect her to the Normandy's systems.

[KaiserShep]

Offline/online would still be applicable terms. Whether the box itself is powered or not is immaterial, since control over the ships's systems is still severed.

[KaiserShep]

Wouldn't the answer still be Paragons?

[SeptimusMagistos]

Cthulhu42 wrote...
Now, if you were to ask "why care about what Paragons think?" I'm afraid I wouldn't have an answer.

Because following the Paragon mode of thought has been demonstrated to consistently produce better results?

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

You have to admit it is very sloppy writing, especially now that the DLC is not post ending where I actually wanted it, but in the middle of the game, thus contradicting a lot of lore. Lore has never been Bioware's strong point. They play fast and loose with it. And they played fast and loose with the plot. Characters are Bioware's strong point.

So what happens with this is very much left up to interpretation. But you see, is what I'm saying any less credible than synthesis? No. Not now because Bioware redefined what happened to EDI during the Citadel DLC. "Power up EDI.... " Okay what about the sexbot? EDI did say that only a small portion of her resided in the sexbot and was active as long as it was in QE range of the Normandy.

Now one must forget the codex because it has been retconned by this DLC, and even though you may say I am interpreting the wording conveniently, those who choose synthesis have been interpreting the wording of that choice pretty conveniently as well. So now it is our turn.

But, now that it was cut off from the Normandy, the sexbot was powered by a power supply, right? And EDI is a huge AI program, right? So the portion of EDI that was in the sexbot wanted to reconnect, hence EDI's anger at the clone.

Now you're thinking, "she's really lost a sprocket here," but you're just not seeing it. It's all fixable now. Don't you see? Just tell Adams to shut down EDI. All Adams has to do is tell EDI he has to put EDI to sleep by turning off her power for a while otherwise EDI will die permanently.

The debate we've been having about synthetic life is irrelevant. AIs really are equipment. What separates them is that you see in the Citadel DLC is that they've developed feelings. This means they need care and nurturing. They will wear out eventually and need to be replaced. Even Cortana from Halo knew this. You can't treat them like a stupid machine because they're a lot more intelligent. They're a team mate, even though it is only temporary. They are not a throw away piece of equipment like a VI.

This way Destroy becomes paragon. Do you understand now?

[KaiserShep]

Imagine if EDI was cut off from the Normandy's systems, and suddenly, Eva woke back up. Oh what a cab ride that would be.

[Sir DeLoria]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Necanor wrote...

Destroy! Who cares about the damned Geth?

Well, Paragons. That's the point of this thread.

Now, if you were to ask "why care about what Paragons think?" I'm afraid I wouldn't have an answer.

I'm almost always a Paragon, except when it comes to Geth:innocent:

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

KaiserShep wrote...

Imagine if EDI was cut off from the Normandy's systems, and suddenly, Eva woke back up. Oh what a cab ride that would be.

However, the upside here is that EDI destroyed Eva, erasing Eva after extracting the data. So this is a win-win.

[.50CalBrainSurgeon]

Destruction. It comes down to the cold hard calculus of war where the soldier has to make a difficult decision. Avoiding that decision is like choosing not getting a painful medical procedure that is necessary to save one's life. Just because a decision will result in the deaths of many does not necessarily imply that it is an evil act. War involves tough calls and regardless of what one does, souls will perish in pursuit of victory.

Not to mention, the galaxy isn't going to simply forgive the Reapers for the genocides they have committed. There will be many demanding justice and revenge for the pain and suffering caused by the Reapers. The Reapers do not deserve to continue their existence because they have destroyed the existences of so many free willed sapient creatures.

[SeptimusMagistos]

.50CalBrainSurgeon wrote...

Destruction. It comes down to the cold hard calculus of war where the soldier has to make a difficult decision.

Yes, and for Paragons that decision has always been 'let the enemy go and spare the innocents.'

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

In the original ending, I could almost see Control as a good ending. Your head canon was wide open. You had control. You could force the reapers to clean up the mess they made. You could force them to repair all the mass relays, repair the Citadel, then send them into a black hole or send them into a white star somewhere. You had control.

Since the EC they clean up the mess they made, repair the mass relays, and now keep a watchful eye over the many. You can no longer get rid of them. Your operating system won't allow it. You are the Catalyst. Your personality (data file) replaced that of the kid's. You are now a machine.

[SeptimusMagistos]

StreetMagic wrote...

Like that scene when Sarah Connor ran into Arnold in T2. It took her awhile to warm up. She went crazy at first. Except in this, you'd have entire planet sized populations screaming and going nuts.

So we're one hi-jinx filled adventure away from the galaxy totally accepting the Reapers and trusting them to watch the kids? Sounds good to me!

[The Heretic of Time]

I think Synthesis is the most in line with the typical idealistic Paragon train of thought.

Destroy is more Renegade, and Control can be both Paragon or Renegade depending on how you look at it.

Refuse is just dumb.