229 réponses à ce sujet

[Han Shot First]

Because the Catalyst is right in the MEU.
  
 

 

The Catalyst is right?

 

[CosmicGnosis]

I think a good middle ground would have been to get conflicting and contradictory ideas about what the Reapers' true purpose was.

For example, you could have Harbinger boasting that their true purpose was simply organic ascension. But then you could get the Rannoch Reaper claiming they do it to save organic life from a technological singularity. You could have the Geth speculating that the Reapers' true purpose is to perhaps create a "super-hive mind" by linking all their neural networks. You could have the characters finding Prothean recordings hypothesizing that the Reapers exist to prevent any advanced species from subjugating and dominating lesser species for too long.

Ultimately, it could be left to the player to decide which goal is most likely, or if any of them are believable at all.

Good idea. I would have accepted this.

[Farangbaa]

The Catalyst is right?
 

Name me an instance of awakened AI in the MEU that did not at least kill (or otherwise get him/her completely out of the picture, i.e. the Citadel AI) it's direct creator(s).

They all did.

You can use example from every cycle, except the Zha'Til. Because they are the MEU's true, and only example natural Synthesis. (and only rebel against their creators when the Reap0rz come along)

[10K]

I really didn't care what the reaper's purpose was. But I would've liked if they were working out of their own accord, not puppets.

[ImaginaryMatter]

People don't want to believe that this is true, so they immediately hate it. Of course, BioWare failed at clearly conveying their point, so they are to blame as well. 

 

I think that's missing a large point. A large reason why the ending is bad is because it fails as ending to a story on almost every front. Once you dig through all the inconsistencies, incoherence, and other narrative failings the moral, philosophical, whatever ramifications aren't really worth discussing any more or even noticeable.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Name me an instance of awakened AI in the MEU that did not at least kill (or otherwise get him/her completely out of the picture, i.e. the Citadel AI) it's direct creator(s).

They all did.

 

That doesn't prove the Catalysts point at all though. It isn't simply talking about just conflict but conflict that will lead to the destruction of all organic life.

[Arcian]

Did you want the Reapers to have a "noble" purpose? That is, did you want the ultimate goal of the Reapers to be something "good", but the problem was their misguided method of solving it?

 

Or did you want the Reapers to have no purpose? Did you want them to be straightforward monsters with no compelling reason for doing what they did?

 

Or did you want the Reapers to have a purpose, but have it forever remain a secret? Perhaps a few hints as to what their goal was, but only enough to prevent them from being simple monsters?

Option A, though I don't want it to be an absolutely noble purpose that will make them seem like misunderstood saviors a'la the ending of Mass Effect 3.

 

I want it to seem noble from their perspective, but despicable from ours, just to drive home how different we are, why we cannot coexist and why the Reapers must be the ones who die. That way, they avoid looking like monsters who do evil for the lulz, while still being monsters who do evil.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Originally I wanted them to be inscrutable, but eventually I came around to the idea that they should at least have an *understandable* purpose. Whether we'd find it to be noble or not is an open question, but there should at least be a somewhat reasonable thought process by which they decided to do what they do. This is perhaps more for sociopolitical reasons than anything else. I usually dislike stories in which the villains are "just evil" or "only understand force" - I feel like it reinforces a somewhat arrogant and simplistic attitude towards conflicts in real life.

 

I actually think that, post-EC and post-Leviathan, the Catalyst and the Reapers turned out to be a pretty good example of the right way to create a seemingly incomprehensible antagonist and then reveal the twisted logic behind their actions. My objections to the ending had more to do with the limited nature of the choices presented to Shepard and the lack of a clear reason for the limitations. (If Destroy, Control, and Synthesis in all their complexities can be successfully implemented by the Crucible, isn't it at least possible that the Catalyst, perhaps working with EDI, the geth, and the best scientists among the organics could devise a better solution without the negative side effects?)

[AlanC9]

Option A, though I don't want it to be an absolutely noble purpose that will make them seem like misunderstood saviors a'la the ending of Mass Effect 3.

 

Do most people actually think that? My understanding is that Psychevore's something of an outlier here.

[AlanC9]

I don't think there's a goal out there noble or valuable enough to have melting people come off as a understandable.

 

 

Really? No matter what the consequences of not melting the people would be?

 

People often talk like they're good Kantians, but they're usually either lying or haven't thought their own positions through.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Do most people actually think that? My understanding is that Psychevore's something of an outlier here.

 

I think they are misunderstood saviors (although I also think the Catalyst didn't really think this through), I just think it was a dumb revelation.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Really? No matter what the consequences of not melting the people would be?

 

People often talk like they're good Kantians, but they're usually either lying or haven't thought their own positions through.

Well hey if you can find an idea that would make the action seem worth it to me I'm all ears.

 

So I'm either a liar or not thinking hard enough? Lovely characterization that.

[AresKeith]

Is this a Seival thread?

[themikefest]

No.

 

My purpose is clear. Destroy them.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Come on, gang. The Reapers are the first true melting pot. Peopleburger preserved in a shell. Machines doing what they're told by another machine. This is a story of survival of the fittest. They have been killing us by the billions. We built the Crucible. We're up there. They are different than us. They already chose themselves as the pinnacle of life. It comes down to survival and I am not going to choose them. End of story.

[Arcian]

Is this a Seival thread?

Speaking of which, where is Seival? Haven't seen him around since the dawn of the new forums.

[AlanC9]

Well hey if you can find an idea that would make the action seem worth it to me I'm all ears.

 

So I'm either a liar or not thinking hard enough? Lovely characterization that.

 

I said "often" and "usually." You might actually be one of the raving moral absolutists. It's not that they don't exist, it's that a lot of people talk the talk but wouldn't walk the walk

 

Would you walk the walk? Let's say the Catalyst was right all down the line, and the choice was either liquefying folks or total extinction of organics. You'd pick the extinction? It would have been better had humans never existed?

[AlanC9]

Not at all. When Shep and crew first arrive on the scene, and Gerrel was describing the situation, to me it seemed the quarians were on their way to winning the war until the geth turned to the reapers for help. Without the upgrades the geth would have lost the war.

 
Sure. But the upgrades are what prevents quarian victory.
 
 
If the question is 

would peace have been possible if the geth didn't get the reaper upgrades?

.. then the answer is no. Peace is not possible without the upgrades because the quarians always destroy the geth.

[GreyLycanTrope]

I said "often" and "usually." You might actually be one of the raving moral absolutists. It's not that they don't exist, it's that a lot of people talk the talk but wouldn't walk the walk

 

Would you walk the walk? Let's say the Catalyst was right all down the line, and the choice was either liquefying folks or total extinction of organics. You'd pick the extinction?

I'm raving now, really? You realize people just can have certain standards or value judgements without falling into specific categories or generalizations, no?

 

We're dead either way I'd personally take the option to try and self determinate over getting gooped, yes.

[AlanC9]

I'm raving now, really? You realize people just can have certain standards or value judgements without falling into specific categories or generalizations, no?

I'm not quite sure what your point is there. I'm saying that people who will do the "right thing" regardless of consequences have bad values. However, I don't think that there actually are very many such people. And I'm not at all sure you're one of them.
 

We're dead either way I'd personally take the option to try and self determinate over getting gooped, yes.

You're ducking the question. Let's leave humans aside for a minute. Is it really not OK to goop some organics in order to prevent all of them, now and in the future, from dying out?

[GreyLycanTrope]

Sure. And some value judgments are bad.

 

You're ducking the question. Should the Catalyst have simply let synthetics win two billion years ago. Would it have been ethically preferable for humans to have never existed?

As are some assumptions

 

I wasn't aware I was the acting Catalyst in this hypothetical, but if given the choice over a species which was apparently incapable of ensuring it's own survival I wouldn't take measures to marmalade them or allowing others to develop just so they can go through the same process. They'll get erased either ways so I don't see much point in cataloging them in Reaper form no. Seriously what is the point of doing that? Nothing is gained in the long run.

[GreyLycanTrope]

I'm not quite sure what your point is there. I'm saying that people who will do the "right thing" regardless of consequences have bad values. However, I don't think that there actually are very many such people. And I'm not at all sure you're one of them.

No real point, just subtly hinting that the unintended implication that I might be a raving ideologue following the unintended implication that I'm probably lying might not be the best way to dislodge ones foot from ones mouth.

[Iakus]

No real point, just subtly hinting that the unintended implication that I might be a raving ideologue following the unintended implication that I'm probably lying might not be the best way to dislodge ones foot from ones mouth.

You get used to getting stuff like that.

[GreyLycanTrope]

You get used to getting stuff like that.

Have to get reused to it my friend, haven't been in this section for a while.

[Iakus]

Have to get reused to it my friend, haven't been in this section for a while.

Alan's actually fairly reasonable, if rather dismissive and snarky.  He's at least willing to debate points.

 

I've been called a fool, a weakling, a coward, even evil for my stance on the endings.