337 réponses à ce sujet

[Sir DeLoria]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

It's 'badass' to kill innocent people?

Is it badass to be a white-knight paragon of justice and goodness?

It can be, hard to generalize really.

[David7204]

Obviously, it's hilarious when innocent people die in fiction like Aqua Teen Hunger Force or something.

We have to draw a line somewhere between stuff like that and people getting turned into skeletons and Mass Effect. Nobody has ethical arguments about ATHF.

[The Heretic of Time]

o Ventus wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

So having money is not advantageous compared to someone who has none?

If you're breaking even, you're broke. If you aren't making enough, you're in debt.

That's irrelevant. Recieving money is still beneficial as opposed to recieving no money.

Recieving money for having children is called a child benefit, even though that child benefit often does not cover the expenses you have to pay for your child.

It doesn't matter if the mother is breaking even or in depth, the fact that she recieves money from the state for her child is still called a child benefit. Because recieving that money benefits her and the child.



I'm sorry o Ventus, but you really, really, REALLY are wrong on this.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 12 août 2013 - 01:03 .

[billy the squid]

o Ventus wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

So having money is not advantageous compared to someone who has none?

If you're breaking even, you're broke. If you aren't making enough, you're in debt.

And what does that matter? Having money is better than having none. I do things for money which is a personal gain, because it benefits me personally. Anything else is needless twaddle and obfuscating.

[Xilizhra]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

It's 'badass' to kill innocent people?

Is it badass to be a white-knight paragon of justice and goodness?

It's all that's worthwhile. At least, for ME's PC.

[David7204]

A serious question MassivelyEffective0730. Is it 'badass' to kill innocent people for no reason in real life?

Modifié par David7204, 12 août 2013 - 01:08 .

[billy the squid]

shingara wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

David7204 wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

And inoccent until proven guilt still hasn't changed the situation from the action being disregarded because they may not have done it in another instance.

I'm not disregarding it. In fact, that's the entire point. Yes, the player can have some of the squadmates do awful things, but that doesn't mean the squadmates are necessarily awful because of it. It works both ways. And not only do players overwhelmingly pick the 'good' options, but the story generally supports them.

So other than "my point is valid, because I said so" you've got nothing. I don't make Zaeed leave them, he's already willing to do that. You've disregarded the basic premise of law, being judged on actions, not because he might not have done it, therefore he can't possibly lack "Heroism"

This is also ignoring the fact that Zaeed is a mercenary who kills people for money.

 So what makes zaeed different to someone in the militery ?

Nothing. One is govenrment licensed, the other isn't. Its splitting hairs.

Modifié par billy the squid, 12 août 2013 - 01:06 .

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

Obviously, it's hilarious when innocent people die in fiction like Aqua Teen Hunger Force or something.

We have to draw a line somewhere between stuff like that and people getting turned into skeletons and Mass Effect. Nobody has ethical arguments about ATHF.

So, what, are you saying that innocent people being killed in ATHF is okay (which I don't recall anyone else even mentioning besides you), but innocent people being killed in something like ME isn't?

[Xilizhra]

David7204 wrote...

A serious question MassivelyEffective0730. Is it 'badass' to kill innocent people in real life?

I don't think "badass" has any objective meaning, so I doubt this can be adequately answered, unfortunately.

[The Heretic of Time]

[quote]shingara wrote...

This is also ignoring the fact that Zaeed is a mercenary who kills people for money.

[/quote]

 So what makes zaeed different to someone in the militery ?

[/quote]

The fact that the military serves the government while a mercenary serves whoever is willing to pay him (but ultimately he serves himself).

[shingara]

billy the squid wrote...

Nothing. One is govenrment licensed, the other isn't. It's splitting hairs.

 So the basis of the argument is perspetive on whos giving the orders?

[David7204]

o Ventus wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Obviously, it's hilarious when innocent people die in fiction like Aqua Teen Hunger Force or something.

We have to draw a line somewhere between stuff like that and people getting turned into skeletons and Mass Effect. Nobody has ethical arguments about ATHF.

So, what, are you saying that innocent people being killed in ATHF is okay (which I don't recall anyone else even mentioning besides you), but innocent people being killed in something like ME isn't?

That's exactly right, yes. I was providing the sillest example I could think of.

Modifié par David7204, 12 août 2013 - 01:06 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

o Ventus wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Payment is a personal gain, whether it covers your expenses or not. 

You're still gaining something. You're still receiving a benefit.

I don't see it as a benefit if you aren't able to do anything with it.

Like if I was given a working Audi LMS prototype. That would be amazing, but I wouldn't be able to drive it anywhere in this country, because it wouldn't be legal. Not much of a "benefit" to having a totally badass car if you can't drive it.

It's a benefit. According to economics, specifically what John Maynard Keynes briefly referred to in The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money; 

"any resource or positive gained, however fleeting, is growth."

It might not be a net gain overall, but payment, no matter what the amount, is a gain. A benefit.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Xilizhra wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

It's 'badass' to kill innocent people?

Is it badass to be a white-knight paragon of justice and goodness?

It's all that's worthwhile. At least, for ME's PC.

It's not worthwhile for my Shepard in Mass Effect.

In fact, as I recall, I don't have to be a white-knight paragon of justice and goodness. In fact, I prefer not to be that.

[Xilizhra]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

It's 'badass' to kill innocent people?

Is it badass to be a white-knight paragon of justice and goodness?

It's all that's worthwhile. At least, for ME's PC.

It's not worthwhile for my Shepard in Mass Effect.

In fact, as I recall, I don't have to be a white-knight paragon of justice and goodness. In fact, I prefer not to be that.

Indeed you don't, provided you're fine with hurting people who don't need to be hurt, and doing less good than what is possible.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

A serious question MassivelyEffective0730. Is it 'badass' to kill innocent people for no reason in real life?

That entirely depends on your perspective.

Is it?

[David7204]

I was asking for your perspective. Mine is that no, it isn't the least bit 'badass' at all. It's horrific.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Xilizhra wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

It's 'badass' to kill innocent people?

Is it badass to be a white-knight paragon of justice and goodness?

It's all that's worthwhile. At least, for ME's PC.

It's not worthwhile for my Shepard in Mass Effect.

In fact, as I recall, I don't have to be a white-knight paragon of justice and goodness. In fact, I prefer not to be that.

Indeed you don't, provided you're fine with hurting people who don't need to be hurt, and doing less good than what is possible.

I'm can deal well with the first if it's beneficial to my goals and strategy.

We have different perspectives of 'good'. We discussed this last night.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 12 août 2013 - 01:11 .

[o Ventus]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

I'm sorry o Ventus, but you really, really, REALLY are wrong on this.

Except I'm not. Unlike most things that happen here, this actually IS a difference in subjectivity. I consider something to be a "benefit" when it provides me with a means to sustain myself (or otherwise improve myself) or puts me in a position above someone else. If it does either of these things, then that's great. If not, then I see it as little more than something else to carry around.

If you miss a 10,000 dollar payment on your house, I wouldn't call your next 5,000 dollar paycheck a "benefit", because now your house has been foreclosed.

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

That's exactly right, yes. I was providing the sillest example I could think of.

You are FULLY aware of how retarded that sounds, yes?

[Xilizhra]

I'm can deal well with the first if it's beneficial to my goals and strategy.

We have different perspectives of 'good'. We discussed this last night.

I'm going to assume that you have goals other than "stop the cycle," because you certainly never need to do anything bad to do that.

[o Ventus]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm can deal well with the first if it's beneficial to my goals and strategy.

We have different perspectives of 'good'. We discussed this last night.

I'm going to assume that you have goals other than "stop the cycle," because you certainly never need to do anything bad to do that.

Depends on what you view is "bad".

[David7204]

o Ventus wrote...

David7204 wrote...

That's exactly right, yes. I was providing the sillest example I could think of.

You are FULLY aware of how retarded that sounds, yes?

And why exactly is it 'retarded'?

Modifié par David7204, 12 août 2013 - 01:14 .

[The Heretic of Time]

o Ventus wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

I'm sorry o Ventus, but you really, really, REALLY are wrong on this.

Except I'm not. Unlike most things that happen here, this actually IS a difference in subjectivity.

No it really isn't. Unless you're saying the dictionary is subjective.

The dictionary says that being paid is a benefit, PERIOD. There is no "if" to it, you're getting paid, you're recieving a benefit, it's a simple as that.

Again, I'd like to point out the term "child benefit" to you, which is money you get from the gov for your child. It's ALWAYS called a benefit, regardless of whether that money covers your expenses or not.

[Xilizhra]

o Ventus wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm can deal well with the first if it's beneficial to my goals and strategy.

We have different perspectives of 'good'. We discussed this last night.

I'm going to assume that you have goals other than "stop the cycle," because you certainly never need to do anything bad to do that.

Depends on what you view is "bad".

Harm/kill people who aren't trying to harm/kill you or others is the biggest one, but then there's applying excessive force towards those who are doing so nonlethally... which you don't have to do either.