518 réponses à ce sujet

[FlyingSquirrel]

Br3ad wrote...

1. To think anyone would suddenly grow love for the enemy, especially Hackett, from Legion makes no sense.
2. No one liked the geth, and they certainly didn't learn to just because Shepard was interviewed by Allers.
3. EDI is unknown to the rest of the galaxy, how would they mourn her?

What about the fact that the entire geth fleet shows up to fight alongside the organics at the end? That ought to earn them at least a few points from people who remained skeptical of them.

[AlanC9]

ME3 had already used up a bloated word budget. I agree more talk about implications would have been good, but I'm not sure what to cut to do more of that stuff -- unless we could undo the ME2 design somehow, which would have saved a lot of alternate content from having to be made.

[rashie]

Necanor wrote...

iakus wrote...
Not be some arbitrary offscreen death that people can laugh at as they stroke their renegade epeen.

What are you talking about? I saved the poor Quarians from the evil, genocidal robot menace of the Geth. Full Paragon:innocent:

I'm not even kidding, I always get a full Paragon game.

Could you please expand on how killing the geth at Rannoch instead of in destroy ending is "saving" the poor Quarians? If you keep both alive the Geth helps the Quarians rebuild on Rannoch as well as helping the Quarians with their immune systems to remove the need for environmental suits which should be the best option if you really care about the Quarians.

In short the Geth still dies but the Quarians is better off then if you simply nuke the Geth in the long run.

[BattleCop88]

I did. When I found our they will die, I knew their deaths were forced to make every option equal. I'm pretty sure most of the others who felt sorry for them gave up on the franchise.

[Br3admax]

Quarians suck. I would never make any decisions because of them.

[SiniisteR]

Br3ad wrote...

Quarians suck. I would never make any decisions because of them.

Just wondering, how come you changed your avatar to Tali then?

Modifié par SiniisteR, 09 septembre 2013 - 03:25 .

[Br3admax]

Didn't you hear? This is what geth haters look like.

[Steelcan]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

She lets Shepard determine her outlook on both synthetic and organic life.  She has the capability to form opinions, but differs to Shepard.

What outlook does she have on synthetic and organic life that is determined by Shepard?

ME3 undoes her whole expansion into the Normandy itself.  She is only "alive" after she gets an extremely sexualized body, not when her ability to think is unshackled.

EDI doesn't care what her body looks like, almost no one in the game does. She feels alive at the end of the game, and she says that's thanks to her experiences with the Normandy crew. She was not like this at the beginning of ME2, or indeed, anywhere in ME2. 

1.  nature of organic life (more than just survivng or just survivng)
2.  purpose of synthetic life (they have no purpose like organics, or they are designed to do something)
3.  whether she persues Joker or not
those are determined by Shepard

She was like that after she fully integrated with the Normandy, not before.  She has full awareness, that is what makes her 'alive' not interacting with organics.  Otherwise she (like the geth) is just a rehash of "I wanna be a real boy girl"

[Oni Changas]

Exactly my thoughts, Steelcan. The pinnochio thing killed the geth and EDI for me, and contradicts ME2 Legion.

[General TSAR]

StreetMagic wrote...

Once she was unshackled, she began asserting personhood. Like when she called herself part of the crew.

When a combat intelligence starts referring to itself as a member of the crew, that's when it should be re-shackled.

Even the cheerleader agrees.

Modifié par General TSAR, 09 septembre 2013 - 03:51 .

[Steelcan]

General TSAR wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

Once she was unshackled, she began asserting personhood. Like when she called herself part of the crew.

When a combat intelligence starts referring to
itself as a member of the crew, that's when it should be re-shackled.

good man

[Iakus]

Yeah, can't have these uppity synthetics thinking they're people now, can we?

/sarcasm

[General TSAR]

iakus wrote...

Yeah, can't have these uppity synthetics thinking they're people now, can we?

Correct they are only tools of our will. 

[Iakus]

General TSAR wrote...

iakus wrote...

Yeah, can't have these uppity synthetics thinking they're people now, can we?

Correct they are only tools of our will. 

3/5 of a person, you mean?

[Display Name Owner]

It's weird, because EDI has likeable qualities - but I stopped liking her enough to care about her in the end.

Yes, partly because I thought the body was a bit silly both as an idea and in execution.

[General TSAR]

iakus wrote...

3/5 of a person, you mean?

Not a person at all as a matter of fact, they are tools. No different than a sledge hammer or a nuclear powered
aircraft carrier.

Modifié par General TSAR, 09 septembre 2013 - 04:03 .

[AcidwireX]

Its hard to seriously care about synthetics when we really have no precedent for them in the real world. They'll always be toasters to me. Toasters that keep joining the goddamned Reapers.

[KaiserShep]

OniTYME wrote...

Exactly my thoughts, Steelcan. The pinnochio thing killed the geth and EDI for me, and contradicts ME2 Legion.

EDI's always been an independent entity, which is entirely different from the geth. Essentially, EDI is basically a synthetic facsimile of a human consciousness from the beginning, so her trying to become more human seems like a natural growth for the character, since, after all, she was created by humans.

EDI is not far off from Data in this respect.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 09 septembre 2013 - 06:50 .

[KaiserShep]

AcidwireX wrote...

Its hard to seriously care about synthetics when we really have no precedent for them in the real world. They'll always be toasters to me. Toasters that keep joining the goddamned Reapers.

We don't really need their existence in reality to have any kind of context for them in Mass Effect, because synthetic beings are a large part of science fiction, and have been for many years. We have Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, Star Wars, etc..

[AcidwireX]

KaiserShep wrote...

AcidwireX wrote...

Its hard to seriously care about synthetics when we really have no precedent for them in the real world. They'll always be toasters to me. Toasters that keep joining the goddamned Reapers.

We don't really need their existence in reality to have any kind of context for them in Mass Effect, because synthetic beings are a large part of science fiction, and have been for many years. We have Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, Star Wars, etc..

Okay...? That doesn't change the opinions of people who already think of them as toasters. Especially Mass Effect's which have a habit of joining the wrong side.

[KaiserShep]

Funny that you keep using a term for them that comes from a series that also establishes synthetics as a form of life. Whether or not it changes the opinion of people who insist that they're just "toasters" is irrelevant to what I said. This "wrong side" stuff doesn't really matter, because I'm also talking about EDI, who is on Shepard's side.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 09 septembre 2013 - 07:59 .

[RatThing]

Where does the term "toasters" come from?