1331 réponses à ce sujet

[jtav]

Here's the thing that gets me about the Pinocchio aspect. If they require Synthesis and/or Reaper code upgrades to be truly alive, then they weren't alive before. So why should I care about saving them being utilitarian considerations?

[78stonewobble]

Here's the thing that gets me about the Pinocchio aspect. If they require Synthesis and/or Reaper code upgrades to be truly alive, then they weren't alive before. So why should I care about saving them being utilitarian considerations?

 

It depends on whether you thought them to be alive and/or sentient before the reaper upgrades. 

 

Personally I believe so or atleast afford the the benefit of doubt. The same way I would afford a person human rights and the classification of being alive, even if that person was dependent on ie. an artificial heart or ie. so ill that they are unable to take care of themselves. Well, those are the only analogies I can think of right now that are along the lines of "dead without intervention". 

[jtav]

Legion: "and we would be alive." Which implies they aren't beforehand. The reliance on magic code undercuts the very ideas the writers were trying to convey.

[78stonewobble]

Legion: "and we would be alive." Which implies they aren't beforehand. The reliance on magic code undercuts the very ideas the writers were trying to convey.

 

Agreed...

[Iakus]

Legion: "and we would be alive." Which implies they aren't beforehand. The reliance on magic code undercuts the very ideas the writers were trying to convey.

Going even back to ME2.  When Shepard questions Legion about the geth interest in organic philosophy and religion:

 

"We are created life.  We are a philosophical issue"

[Comrade Wakizashi]

Legion: "and we would be alive." Which implies they aren't beforehand. The reliance on magic code undercuts the very ideas the writers were trying to convey.

 

That line is misplaced then, and contradicts earlier statements from ME2 as well as anything you can clearly find out about the geth before that is said. I would agree it's confusing and counterproductive that thise one line exists indeed. But it does not disprove the sentience or being alive of the geth as a species.

[von uber]

Isn't the only way to destroy the geth to eliminate their servers? Destroying the mobile platforms doesn't do anything as they have backups?

[78stonewobble]

Isn't the only way to destroy the geth to eliminate their servers? Destroying the mobile platforms doesn't do anything as they have backups?

 

Yeah, it would be like destroying a drone plane. Not really hurting anything, but wallets. 

 

Atleast as I understand it. 

[Iakus]

Isn't the only way to destroy the geth to eliminate their servers? Destroying the mobile platforms doesn't do anything as they have backups?

 

You'd also destroy any memories or experiences they had since their last upload, but yeah.

[von uber]

So the images shown during the morning war show what exactly? The destruction of a few mobile platforms?
As I recall Legion was unique in that he had load's of runtimes within one platform to make it able to operate remotely.

[Obadiah]

Well, if Legion helped stop the Collectors but was destroyed, one of the Geth VI responses is, "and then we died." That would indicate some sort of loss to the Geth, even when they are restored from backups.

[von uber]

But that's specific to Legion. The geth in the morning war were no such thing on their own. So all this talk about a soul makes no sense unless it was a mass of networked geth in the vicinity or a unit controlled from a server somewhere.
It only works if each geth is already an autonomous platform (which we are told they are not and is what makes them unique amd interesting).

[Deathsaurer]

I took Legion's line in ME3 as every run time regardless of platform would be alive. Pre upgrade most platforms could not achieve sapience on their own. Post upgrade every single one does.

[78stonewobble]

But that's specific to Legion. The geth in the morning war were no such thing on their own. So all this talk about a soul makes no sense unless it was a mass of networked geth in the vicinity or a unit controlled from a server somewhere.
It only works if each geth is already an autonomous platform (which we are told they are not and is what makes them unique amd interesting).

 

Well, the death/loss of a geth programme, could be viewed as an analogue to the loss of any species of genetic diversity. 

 

Genetic diversity being sum of the species previous experiences and the thing they count on to survive in the future. 

 

Experiences and what the geth programme has learned fullfilling the same role. 

 

... 

 

Somewhat reminiscent of the philosophical question as to whether you are the same person tomorrow, as you were when you woke up today. Since todays experiences has irrevocably changed you from who you were yesterday, into a different person tomorrow. 

[shodiswe]

Well, if Legion helped stop the Collectors but was destroyed, one of the Geth VI responses is, "and then we died." That would indicate some sort of loss to the Geth, even when they are restored from backups.

I guess thats because the VI isn't Legion, but a bunch of programs that are similar, in a similar amount, put into a similar body.. Or, maybe it's more like a VI representation of Legion, similar to how the Quarians stored their ancestors for times when they might need them later.
Maybe the process isn't perfect.
The codex entry on Bluebox AI's which is somewhat different from Legion suggests that a copy of an AI can never be a perfect copy.

So, not only does it lack Legions memories of later events, it isn't a perfect copy either.

[shodiswe]

Just out of interest are there a finite number of geth? Or do they themselves create new programs?

I think new Geth programs are created by other Geth when they need more people and when there is hardware to support more people. I'm sure they got a hardware limit for their population. New Geth will need platforms and/or servers and energy. Aswell as maintenance and resources to maintain functionality.

That makes one wonder... How many geth does it take to create a Geth with the right skill set for whatever they are intended for? How many "parrents"? 1, 2, 5? 1 million? How many are poking at the programe code before the basic program is created?

Then it will keep evolving as it faces challenges, be it a waste disposal worker or mad scientist or philosopher...

[DeinonSlayer]

@DeinonSlayer
1) We know the Geth cared about the damage inflicted on Quarians, because, in the memories, we see quite clearly that they were willing to risk hardware to allow the Quarians Symnpathizers to live. And... how do you know that the Geth did not experience major losses in the Morning War?

Only so long as their safety protocols remained in effect. Those were clearly deactivated, and as we're told, the Geth never took survivors. Multiple Quarian worlds being described in the map as having been "overrun" and "overwhelmed" does not lend credence to the conflict severely draining their numbers - I know the Geth didn't suffer major losses because they retained the needed intellect to win. The Geth would only have suffered severe damage in the initial shutdown attempt (which would be worth documenting); after they switched into "kill all organics" mode, they became the aggressors in the conflict and remained on the offensive until the Veil had been wholly purged.
 

2) I was demonstrating that a percentage could be used to describe the Geth losses (probably should have been clearer about that), not saying that the Geth lost 99% of their intellect. Geth define themselves as software, so death could be assessed in those term. Since Legion mentioned unrecoverable runtimes in a manner similar to death, I guess that would be the best way to evaluate them.

Given that they repeatedly copy runtimes from archive out to new platforms and deploy them on the field over and over, I wonder if that would skew the figure such that Geth losses were technically well over 100%. The same runtime can die again, and again, and again in different platforms. How long did it take to construct new hardware to replace their losses? It sounds like standard combat models could be manufactured quickly. I'm given to understand that growing a new Quarian takes a while.

The sphere is clearly an enormous blow. Not sure how effectively their permanent losses in terms of servers could be communicated to players. The writers probably went with the Pinocchio Code idea because it was easier for people to wrap their heads around than their more clever non-individuality.
 

[Edited]
3) With respect to Geth isolationism, again I am fine with that being included, so long as the explanation for why the Geth have this policy is also included. As you can see from some of the other responses in this thread, it would not always push players into siding with the Quarians, and given the general theme of the Geth portrayal in ME3 as not mindless killing machines, their policy, though harsh, would probably be understood as reasonable.

Sounds good to me. With all of this, people will reach their own conclusions and choose their own sides - the key is simply to ensure they have all the facts at hand. "Why didn't those Quarians put more effort into negotiating?" Well, the Geth killed everyone who tried in the past and severed communication once again. I understand why they did it, why they didn't want anyone near their sphere. Doesn't mean I agree. Others will reach a different conclusion.

Present both sides. Don't bury one to coax people towards the other.

[Obadiah]

So I assumed their safety protocols were deactivated so they could fight back, period. What makes you think their protocols were the only reason that they did not hurt Quarians? I mean, aren't the safety prorocols deactivated at the end of the war when they let the Quarians escape? Aren't the protocols still inactive when the Geth VI is on the Normandy in proximity to other Quarians?

[Edit]
I'm pretty sure that if both sides were explained with respect to casualties, isolationism, and any other complaint you have, you'd still be complaining that is was a whitewash in favor of the Geth.

[von uber]

But the platform being destroyed isn't a loss to the geth as that particular element is backed up. Hence their swarm tactics; they can sacrifice the units for only material loss.
One geth platform being destroyed is not the same as a quarian being destroyed.
The quarian is dead. The geth is backed up into the consensus to be re uploaded into a new platform to fight again ad infinitum.

But that still doesn't explain what we see of the morning war. The geth unit on its own should have very limited intelligence. Only if it was networked with a lot more would it begin to show any; showing a single platform being shot down is meaningless.

[DeinonSlayer]

So I assumed their safety protocols were deactivated so they could fight back, period. What makes you think their protocols were the only reason that they did not hurt Quarians? I mean, aren't the safety prorocols deactivated at the end of the war when they let the Quarians escape? Aren't the protocols still inactive when the Geth VI is on the Normandy in proximity to other Quarians?

My point exactly is that they did hurt them. As I've asserted repeatedly, they didn't "self-defense" their way through the populations of entire planets.

Just because the protocols are off doesn't mean they have to be violent towards all organics in close proximity. Any violence they commit (when enough are networked to make a conscious decision to attack or not) is a choice. They chose to wipe out every organic in the Veil and spend three centuries killing any others they encountered on sight. I think that's worth mentioning, and their reasoning should have been explored.

[Edit]
I'm pretty sure that if both sides were explained with respect to casualties, isolationism, and any other complaint you have, you'd still be complaining that is was a whitewash in favor of the Geth.

No. I would not. The problem I have with the writing as-is is that they tried to pretend it never happened, omitted any direct reference to any of it. Present both sides and we're good.

[Obadiah]

@DeinonSlayer
That's just a false deduction. The fact that the Geth harmed Quarians does not mean that they did not value Quarian life.

[DeinonSlayer]

@DeinonSlayer
That's just a false deduction. The fact that the Geth harmed Quarians does not mean that they did not value Quarian life.

Not according to EDI they don't.

"Units with networked intelligences will trend towards cooperation for mutual benefit, but units with central heuristics establishing an individual personality, such as myself, develop preferences. These preferences form attachments which prevent my calculations from devaluing the worth of the lives aboard the Normandy."

[Obadiah]

So, EDI's theory is now cannon lore? Even if it was, why does "devaluing" (a relative term) mean the same as "not valuing" (an absolute term)?

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Legion: "and we would be alive." Which implies they aren't beforehand. The reliance on magic code undercuts the very ideas the writers were PREVIOUSLY trying to convey.

 

Fixed.

 

"Mass Effect 3 is the best place to start." - Casey Hudson

 

Mass Effect 1 was not available for the PS3 until November 2012, nine months after release of ME3. PS3 players never met Wrex. They changed the Geth from L'Etoile's version to Weeke's version. Effectively, what happened or was stated in ME2 and ME1 was irrelevant. This means that the Geth were not alive until they got the Pinocchio code.

[Deathsaurer]

As I already said the Catalyst disproves EDI's theory. It had an individual personality and was fully capable of devaluing the Leviathans. The person that teaches the AI is what matters and the Quarians taught the Geth violence with the shut down attempt.