1010 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

Necanor wrote...

Haha, Xil and David heroically defending the rights of their beloved AIs.

I think that's all fine and well, but AIs don't even exist yet. No hypothetical or theory deserves this level of passion. Some people at this site latch on their pet fantasy subjects like they're actual realities (look at the dudes who vehemently defend magic rights vs Qun in the DA section). As long as people are just having fun with it and roleplaying devil's advocate, that's cool.. but sometimes I can't tell who's serious or not.

These things evoke passion because they're thematically representative of elements of the real world. The mage/templar conflict is basically security vs. freedom, the qun/Tevinter conflict is individualism vs. collectivism, the question of AIs points to ideas about whether "we're all machines" (Engineer Adams) or there is some extra element to organic intelligent life (Dr. Chakwas). It is not at all surprising or weird that people get passionate about that.

Very, very true. Only for me, the synthetic/organic thing wasn't so much about the nature of existence (we're clearly meant to see them as alive in ME), but more the application of justice. Do we treat people equally, hold them to the same standards? It's patronizing and unjust to do otherwise.

Justice is a heavily, heavily situational thing much of the time.

Thats why we have these things called laws and constitutions

[AlanC9]

Han Shot First wrote...
The Catalyst survives in Synthesis. If that wasn't the case, the Catalyst would not need to explicitly state that it would die in Destroy as be replaced in Control as death would be the outcome in all endings. There is no dialogue indicating that the Catalyst is destroyed or deactivated in Synthesis. That the Catalyst prefers Synthesis over the other two options also, IMO, suggests its survival. Synthesis is in its best interests.

Xil, I think you should go ahead and concede this. Synthesis is a win for the Reapers; or rather, for the Catalyst. (I don't think the Reapers per se can win in any ending, except maybe some Control variants; though in Synthesis they're doing about the same as everybody else, so if you think Synthesis is a win it's a win for them too)

The more interesting question is why Shepard should care what the Catalyst thinks.

What if the Reapers one day find a new 'solution' and begin the cycles anew? Would the complete annihilation of humanity, the Asari, the Turians, the Salarians, the Krogan, and every other sapient space-faring civilization be worth Shepard not having been willing to accept collateral damage?

As long as we're spinning hypotheticals, what if the Catalyst was right all along and organics are exterminated by advanced synthetics? Certainty is not available here.

Anyway, solution to what? In Synthesis the organic/synthetic distinction has been abolished.

Modifié par AlanC9, 20 octobre 2013 - 05:28 .

[Br3admax]

Xilizhra wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

The reapers and catalyst kept using the word chaos with a negative
association, but frankly, I never actually saw chaos is a particularly
bad thing. The cosmos are unpredictable. Despite our best efforts, we
shape our lives around it, not the other way around. The only people who
find evolution mystical are generally anti-evolution, which has always
struck me as a really bad punchline to a very depressing joke.

I don't find evolution mystical; what I find mystical is the idea that undirected evolution is superior to directed.

Let me spell this out for you: What is evolution? Think about that for a second. If you understand how evolution works, then you should know why directed evolution is a bad idea. 

I hardly see how directed evolution is a bad idea when humanity's alterations to its environment have uplifted us so much, while undirected evolution of the human form has more or less been left in the dust by humanity's progress. Obviously, many alterations to the environment are highly destructive, and that's certainly not good, but the ultimate point is that directed seems to be the only evolution we have left that can alter us in helpful ways (and, of course, you can use directed evolution to be directly helpful to that which you evolve, as opposed to the general randomness of undirected).

"Evolution we have left?" Wut?
"Randomness?"

Are you sure that you know what evolution is? I'm starting to have my doubts. and no, genetic modification is not benefical in the long run. And it certainly isn't more beneficial than natural selection. 

[KaiserShep]

Gene therapy in the MEU has little to do with evolution, as gene therapy for non-reproductive cells, like the muscles, skin, eyes, whatever else that a lot of people go through in that universe, do not pass on to the next generation anyway.

[DeinonSlayer]

Steelcan wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
These things evoke passion because they're thematically representative of elements of the real world. The mage/templar conflict is basically security vs. freedom, the qun/Tevinter conflict is individualism vs. collectivism, the question of AIs points to ideas about whether "we're all machines" (Engineer Adams) or there is some extra element to organic intelligent life (Dr. Chakwas). It is not at all surprising or weird that people get passionate about that.

Very, very true. Only for me, the synthetic/organic thing wasn't so much about the nature of existence (we're clearly meant to see them as alive in ME), but more the application of justice. Do we treat people equally, hold them to the same standards? It's patronizing and unjust to do otherwise.

Justice is a heavily, heavily situational thing much of the time.

Thats why we have these things called laws and constitutions

Which are themselves subject to debate as heated as anything seen here.

Watching our congress and president sling mud over the shutdown (calling each other suicide bombers, hostage-takers and the like), then profess friendship on C-SPAN, served as a stark reminder that, today, we are governed by children.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 20 octobre 2013 - 05:28 .

[Morty Smith]

dreamgazer wrote...

What if people talk about how other people influence ideas by doing certain things? 

Or, what if people talk about the things that were crucial to certain people coming up with their ideas?

Funny, In both cases you are talking about a single subject.

[AlexMBrennan]

As long as we're spinning hypotheticals, what if the Catalyst was right all along and organics are exterminated by advanced synthetics? Certainty is not available here.

No, but we have evidence that the Reapers are fine with solutions we consider unacceptable whilst we have no evidence whatsoever for the claim that advanced synthetics wipe out their creators and all life in the galaxy (ignoring Leviathan)

[KaiserShep]

Times like that, you'd be glad to have a few Admiral Xens on your side.

[Ieldra]

StreetMagic wrote...
The galaxy under Synthesis will be strong and even stable, but I hope it eventually gets it's ass kicked in an intergalactic war with the equivalent of Species 8472 or the Q. Someone that dwarfs even a Synthesized Milky Way. No matter how well Synthesis works, I still hate it.

That's interesting. May I ask why?

Edit:
Forget it, found your answer. As I see it, there is nothing inherently preferable in natural evolution as opposed to artificial evolution. I see it as a desirable goal to chart our own. Neither is it inherently preferable to use technology you developed on your own, as opposed to getting it from elsewhere. Technology exchange has been common throughout human history, and I see no reason why I should reject something useful just because someone else had it first. That's just stupid. 

Edit2:
We shape our environment, which in turn shapes us. For a technological civilization of any level, "evolution driven by nature" alone does not exist. As long as you cannot explain why nature is inherently preferable to artifice, I must indeed conclude that your preference is rooted in notions of the sacred. 

Modifié par Ieldra2, 20 octobre 2013 - 06:13 .

[Ieldra]

There is always the need to understand. That exists independent of the source. If you acquire technology from somewhere else, there are insights to be gained while you analyze it, if you develop it on your own, there are other insights from the process. I think your preference is rooted in Protestant work ethic, where it's assumed something is worth less if gained through less effort. As opposed to that, I think the value of a technology is rooted in the benefit for those who use it. How you got it, and how much effort it took, is a secondary concern, as long as you're not complacent in acquiring an understanding of it. With regard to Synthesis, this is one technology. There is no reason to believe that people will suddenly become complacent. 

Modifié par Ieldra2, 20 octobre 2013 - 06:20 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Okay, so this one is on page 21. And with Tali dead because she died in the SM, and this being a game of numbers, you know, Xil, war assets, you have to condemn one of these two races to death. You have to condemn either the Quarians or the Geth to death. You get 856 war assets if you condemn the the Geth to death, or you get 525 war assets if you condemn the Quarians to death. I think you choose to keep the Quarians alive. Yes, Han'Gerrel is an idiot, but it's all about numbers.

The Quarian - Geth plot was so simplistic you'd think a child had written it.

But that ending? It was such a train wreck, and I am going against the conventional wisdom of BSN. I don't blame Mac Walters for it. This goes back to Drew and the way he set up indoctrination. Dead reapers can indoctrinate. You can't defeat them conventionally. You have mess on the planets that you need to clean up and your people get indoctrinated cleaning it up and it starts over again. It's set up so you need a d.e.m. Boss fight with Harbinger? LOL.

If Chris Hepler and Chris Priestly had kept their mouths shut at SDCC in April 2012 there would have been no controversy about the fate of Shepard in the high EMS destroy. It was the fact that Hepler was one of the writers that put it over the top and was not overruled by Walters.

On March 22 2012, when I chose destroy, I got the breath scene. I saw: "oh Shepard lived." I still felt like **** about it. Why? (I faced the either/or with the Geth in that game BTW and should have had a peace choice. I chose the Quarians. I had destroyed the heretics.) I just wanted to see Liara again, and that would never happen because the Normandy was crashed on some planet god knows where, and it looked like they'd never get off of it. The mass relays were destroyed. What happened to everyone else? Would the Turians and Quarians starve? How would they get home? Was anyone even alive? I blew up the galaxy on March 22 2012 at 3:20 am.

With the EC, it really doesn't change all that much unless you accept Control or Synthesis. In Synthesis it's implied the reapers would fix the relays, in Control it's shown.

I'll tell you what. I think the devs really screwed up when they decided to "dehumanize" or "dealienize" the enemy. When they made Cannibals out of the Batarians, Brutes out of the Krogan, Banshees out of the Asari, Marauders out of the Turians, Husks out of Humans, etc., they made a huge mistake. I know they did it to scare 12 year olds. It doesn't fit with the stories Garrus and Javik tell. It doesn't fit with the story the PTSD Asari tells. Indoctrinated soldiers? yes. Making this a zombie shooter? No. This was a version of Gears 4 Dead. If they had made them simply indoctrinated soldiers (I know there are people who will object to this but to hell with them), I'd have had a lot easier time with visualizing the aftermath of Synthesis and Control, but as it is with the game currently it is off the hook and ridiculous. It is one of the things people make fun of with those endings. I couldn't wrap my head around it. Indoctrinated soldiers the way Garrus and Javik described it? Yes. I could go there. 

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 20 octobre 2013 - 06:23 .

[AlanC9]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

As long as we're spinning hypotheticals, what if the Catalyst was right all along and organics are exterminated by advanced synthetics? Certainty is not available here.

No, but we have evidence that the Reapers are fine with solutions we consider unacceptable whilst we have no evidence whatsoever for the claim that advanced synthetics wipe out their creators and all life in the galaxy (ignoring Leviathan)

Why ignore Leviathan?

Also note that the Reapers aren't a long-term threat. The organics will be able to handle them in... a century or two, say?  ( Of course, Sheplysts who don't want that to happen can just start Indoctrinating key people, if subtler means are not available)

Modifié par AlanC9, 20 octobre 2013 - 06:27 .

[KaiserShep]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...
I'll tell you what. I think the devs really screwed up when they decided to "dehumanize" or "dealienize" the enemy. When they made Cannibals out of the Batarians, Brutes out of the Krogan, Banshees out of the Asari, Marauders out of the Turians, Husks out of Humans, etc., they made a huge mistake. I know they did it to scare 12 year olds. It doesn't fit with the stories Garrus and Javik tell. It doesn't fit with the story the PTSD Asari tells. Indoctrinated soldiers? yes. Making this a zombie shooter? No. This was a version of Gears 4 Dead. If they had made them simply indoctrinated soldiers (I know there are people who will object to this but to hell with them), I'd have had a lot easier time with visualizing the aftermath of Synthesis and Control, but as it is with the game currently it is off the hook and ridiculous. It is one of the things people make fun of with those endings. I couldn't wrap my head around it. Indoctrinated soldiers the way Garrus and Javik described it? Yes. I could go there. 

This was one of the big things that I considered when I dealt with the choices. The non-destroy endings gloss over this, for obvious reasons, but aside from the reapers, brutes, banshees, husks, marauders, ravagers, etc. were all miserable beings best left eradicated. I agree about the indoctrinated soldiers. Of course, husks have been present the entire series, but we could at least have something like the indoctrinated salarians from ME1. Once everything is turned into zombies, it becomes really really simple. They all die, and that's really all there is to it. Their lives are already over anyway, so nothing is lost when I snuff a banshee.

[AlexMBrennan]

Why ignore Leviathan?

Because I am not going to pay Bioware to fix their ending by delivering crucial forshadowing, much like I wouldn't pay extra to have my burger cooked.

The organics will be able to handle them in... a century or two, say?

Source? I mean they are basically written to be invincible and able to violate the universe's laws at will.
Regardless, what if they decide to act sooner?

[Sir DeLoria]

How can you spare the Reapers? They butchered countless civilizationsin the most gruesome ways imaginable. If anyone derves death it's them.

Same goes for the Geth, they killed millions of civilians without a spark of mercy until the very end. Then they decided to spare the few survivors of their attrocities.

Neither deserves mercy. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. Or in the Reapers' case a life for trillions of lives.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

StreetMagic wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

There is always the need to understand. That exists independent of the source. If you acquire technology from somewhere else, there are insights to be gained while you analyze it, if you develop it on your own, there are other insights from the process. I think your preference is rooted in Protestant work ethic, where it's assumed something is worth less if gained through less effort. As opposed to that, I think the value of a technology is rooted in the benefit for those who use it. How you got it, and how much effort it took, is a secondary concern, as long as you're not complacent in acquiring an understanding of it. With regard to Synthesis, this is one technology. There is no reason to believe that people will suddenly become complacent. 

Interesting observation (the Protestant work ethic bit). I wonder if it's subconscious. It'd be funny, since I end up consciously clashing with just about every Baptist and oldschool Presbyterian type I've met. I come from a SE Asian background as well.. I wonder how the whole Protestant thing seeped in.

edit: Ironically, this would be a funny example of my own chaotic evolution as a person. Just where the hell did all of this come from?

Okay here's an example. I'm a musician/composer. I use a ton of soft-synthesizers. One of my soft synths is called Reaktor 5. I absolutely hate the thing because the presets suck and to get anything decent out of it you have to actually learn how to build the components of an analog synthesizer on your computer with it. That's how complicated it is. It came as part of a $800 package with other stuff. I'd much rather find something that has a sound close to what I want and tweak the knobs until it matches because I really don't care about going back 40 years and learning the technology that is behind synthesizers. I want to create music.

A friend of mine thinks I'm wrong in my approach. She thinks I should learn the old tech and build one using it. The advantage is that I don't have to use a soldering iron and buy a bazillion parts. They're all in the program. I've tried. I lose interest by the 6th video lesson -- there are twenty 40 minute lessons. Those are the free ones. Then there are the pay courses that go into more depth. No. I dropped another $400 and got Omnisphere and between that, Absynth, FM8, Massive, and Kontakt 5, I can tweak the sound I wanted yesterday.

So I'm using technology acquired and learned how to use it, rather than starting from scratch and building it from the ground up using the "work ethic." I also do some interesting things with it since I'm older and don't have this box I'm trying to fit everything into. I just go off in crazy directions with it.

While I might develop different insights if I took the time to learn it from the ground up, it might take a year. I'm not exactly young, and I'm not getting any younger. If I was 20 I might do that, but at my age? No.

[Xilizhra]

Okay, so this one is on page 21. And with Tali dead because she died in the SM, and this being a game of numbers, you know, Xil, war assets, you have to condemn one of these two races to death. You have to condemn either the Quarians or the Geth to death. You get 856 war assets if you condemn the the Geth to death, or you get 525 war assets if you condemn the Quarians to death. I think you choose to keep the Quarians alive. Yes, Han'Gerrel is an idiot, but it's all about numbers.

That's assuming that you destroyed the heretics; those numbers are reversed if you rewrote them.

This was one of the big things that I considered when I dealt with the choices. The non-destroy endings gloss over this, for obvious reasons, but aside from the reapers, brutes, banshees, husks, marauders, ravagers, etc. were all miserable beings best left eradicated. I agree about the indoctrinated soldiers. Of course, husks have been present the entire series, but we could at least have something like the indoctrinated salarians from ME1. Once everything is turned into zombies, it becomes really really simple. They all die, and that's really all there is to it. Their lives are already over anyway, so nothing is lost when I snuff a banshee.

Miserable? I doubt they feel much, or lose anything in Control. In Synthesis... it's unclear as to whether the husk is somehow waking up as its own life form or just expressing the sudden freedom and confusion of the Reaper that's controlling it (I suspect the latter), but while I find Synthesis very difficult to choose from a roleplaying standpoint, the one time I tried it... I've never felt so parental in a Mass Effect game. It was really quite sweet.

How can you spare the Reapers? They butchered countless civilizationsin the most gruesome ways imaginable. If anyone derves death it's them.

Ah, but I don't consider anyone to deserve death.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

KaiserShep wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...
I'll tell you what. I think the devs really screwed up when they decided to "dehumanize" or "dealienize" the enemy. When they made Cannibals out of the Batarians, Brutes out of the Krogan, Banshees out of the Asari, Marauders out of the Turians, Husks out of Humans, etc., they made a huge mistake. I know they did it to scare 12 year olds. It doesn't fit with the stories Garrus and Javik tell. It doesn't fit with the story the PTSD Asari tells. Indoctrinated soldiers? yes. Making this a zombie shooter? No. This was a version of Gears 4 Dead. If they had made them simply indoctrinated soldiers (I know there are people who will object to this but to hell with them), I'd have had a lot easier time with visualizing the aftermath of Synthesis and Control, but as it is with the game currently it is off the hook and ridiculous. It is one of the things people make fun of with those endings. I couldn't wrap my head around it. Indoctrinated soldiers the way Garrus and Javik described it? Yes. I could go there. 

This was one of the big things that I considered when I dealt with the choices. The non-destroy endings gloss over this, for obvious reasons, but aside from the reapers, brutes, banshees, husks, marauders, ravagers, etc. were all miserable beings best left eradicated. I agree about the indoctrinated soldiers. Of course, husks have been present the entire series, but we could at least have something like the indoctrinated salarians from ME1. Once everything is turned into zombies, it becomes really really simple. They all die, and that's really all there is to it. Their lives are already over anyway, so nothing is lost when I snuff a banshee.

But wasn't it amazing that the PTSD soldier recognized Neiera? Isn't it amazing that you recognized Morinth? Why were they "banshees" other than to scare 12 year olds and be the "horrible deformed mooks to kill."

Bioware had dealienized them already for you. And except for a very few characters in the game all non-"husk-like" enemies had full helms that concealed their faces making it easy to dehumanize the enemy. And they showed you that Cerberus part husk-soldier early. So they weren't really human or alien. They were simply mooks.

[KaiserShep]

Xilizhra wrote...

This was one of the big things that I considered when I dealt with the choices. The non-destroy endings gloss over this, for obvious reasons, but aside from the reapers, brutes, banshees, husks, marauders, ravagers, etc. were all miserable beings best left eradicated. I agree about the indoctrinated soldiers. Of course, husks have been present the entire series, but we could at least have something like the indoctrinated salarians from ME1. Once everything is turned into zombies, it becomes really really simple. They all die, and that's really all there is to it. Their lives are already over anyway, so nothing is lost when I snuff a banshee.

Miserable? I doubt they feel much, or lose anything in Control. In Synthesis... it's unclear as to whether the husk is somehow waking up as its own life form or just expressing the sudden freedom and confusion of the Reaper that's controlling it (I suspect the latter), but while I find Synthesis very difficult to choose from a roleplaying standpoint, the one time I tried it... I've never felt so parental in a Mass Effect game. It was really quite sweet.

I don't mean miserable in the sense that they themselves feel anything, as I consider them to be nothing more than reanimated corpses kept active through reaper nanites.

As for the last part, that seems a wee bit creepy.

[Xilizhra]

I don't mean miserable in the sense that they themselves feel anything, as I consider them to be nothing more than reanimated corpses kept active through reaper nanites.

In that case, they're tools and don't feel anything, so morally, it doesn't really matter if you destroy them or keep them.

As for the last part, that seems a wee bit creepy.

Well, I either just created a new form of life or freed an existing one from millions of years of slavery. It's understated, but glorious and, to me, heartwarming.

[dreamgazer]

Xilizhra wrote...

In Synthesis... it's unclear as to whether the husk is somehow waking up as its own life form or just expressing the sudden freedom and confusion of the Reaper that's controlling it (I suspect the latter), but while I find Synthesis very difficult to choose from a roleplaying standpoint, the one time I tried it... I've never felt so parental in a Mass Effect game. It was really quite sweet.

... parental?