978 réponses à ce sujet

[Isac23]

Sounds kinda like you're making this into a contest, well it's not. I never said organic conflicts were any less frequent than synthetic-organic conflicts, but the point stands that they do exist. 

 

When did I ever indicate this was a contest? 

 

I also never said synthetic-quarian conflicts did not exist. I did get the number wrong, you are right in that. We don't just hear of one synthetic/organic war but two. That still doesn't change my initial assertion in the slightest, that we hear of many more organic/organic wars than synthetic/organic wars.

 

 

And if they happen they're evidently far, far more destructive than most organic wars.

 

That's pure speculation. 

 

 

I know all of that and I know that the Morning War was far from conventional. All of that doesn't change the crimes the Geth committed one bit though. You seem to be under the impression that civilians killing civilians is somehow more redeemable than a standing army killing civilians.

 

I would like to know where you even come up with the assumption that Geth started killing unarmed civilians. Where did you get that piece of info?

 

 

Also yes, the Quarian government had reasons to shut down the Geth, however flawed they might've been:

1) Sentient machines were strictly against council law and the Quarians would've suffered severe repercussions if the Geth sentience had been discovered
2) They feared an imminent Geth rebellion and wanted to prevent it

 

Allow me to rephrase that.

"Before the Quarians started killing the Geth for no good reason"

 

 

And yes, the Quarians were attempting genocide, so did the Geth, only they were more succesful.

 

The Geth were not attempting genocide. They just didn't want to be shot at anymore.

"We had secured freedom. The creators were no longer a threat, so we abandoned pursuit." -Legion

[ImaginaryMatter]

Uh oh, this thread is Gething... a little off topic.

[Sir DeLoria]

When did I ever indicate this was a contest? 
 
I also never said synthetic-quarian(?) conflicts did not exist. I did get the number wrong, you are right in that. We don't just hear of one synthetic/organic war but two. That still doesn't change my initial assertion in the slightest, that we hear of many more organic/organic wars than synthetic/organic wars.

I never actually disagreed with that.

 

That's pure speculation.

Yes, but not without basis, we have two conflicts that annihilated almost two entire species plus the Reapers. No organic conflict we know of created such destruction.
 
 

 

I would like to know where you even come up with the assumption that Geth started killing unarmed civilians. Where did you get that piece of info?

Aside from Tali's dialogue in ME1, I can't think of a logical reason why almost the entire Quarian population perished in the war and who used WMDs.
 
  

Allow me to rephrase that.
"Before the Quarians started killing the Geth for no good reason"

Fault of the Quarian government and military not the entire population though.
 
 
 

The Geth were not attempting genocide. They just didn't want to be shot at anymore.
"We had secured freedom. The creators were no longer a threat, so we abandoned pursuit." -Legion

Problem is, that driving a species off their home planet is already a genocidal action.

[Aaleel]

I chose destroy. 

 

Main reason is that as long as the reapers were alive they were a threat.  Another reason was that they'd murdered who knows how many people over the years, I can't even begin to estimate.  Serial killers really only deserve one sentence.

 

Reason I didn't choose Synthesis, it would pretty much be agreeing with the Catalyst that organics aren't fine the way they are and they can't be trusted with their own well being.  I don't agree with that.

 

I didn't choose Control because its just continuing the status quo, all you're doing is switching the catalyst, and now Shepard would no longer be human and have no degree of common sense.  There's no guarantee Shepard one day wouldn't come up with something equally as *** backwards to solve a perceived problem.  Something that looks good in theory but is terrible in practice.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

You do realize that the Geth slaughtered 99% of the Quarian civilian population and used multiple WMDs, right? It was self-defense at first, but let's say the Geth kinda took it way too far.

Actually yes, their actions in the Morning War were absolutely genocidal, when they started deliberately killing non-combatants. Even if they spared a few, driving the entirety of the Quarian(and any other organics for that matter) population off the planet is already genocidal.

 
Yeah, basically this @Isac23. The geth's actions supercede what was their military necessity and fit the definition of "genocide." Or, by your logic, what happened in Rwanda wasn't genocide since not all the Hutus were killed before the end of the violence.

It's truly bizarre how people can endlessly make excuses for the geth's actions -- endangering the quarian population, forcing them off of their homeworld and killing any organic that enters this territory (when geth don't even require natural resources) -- yet if the Reapers do it then all bets are off. Only significant difference I see is that people actually like the geth, and not the Reapers, so the former get the benefit-of-the-doubt.
 

Since I've never seen anyone reason along those lines, no.

 

I have, in this thread, among many others. With Control in particular it's always this slipper-slope fallacy of how the new Catalyst and Reapers being around will only lead to some great conflict between them and the rest of the galaxy, going back to square-one. Basically, the conflict as an inevitability, exactly like what the Catalyst believes will happen post-Destroy. With Synthesis it's largely the same beliefs.

 

Point me at the time where there's a chance for an amicable agreement as opposed to an imposed one.

 

"Amicable agreement?" This isn't relationship-counseling. It's politics. Diplomatic policy doesn't work that way. Not IRL, and not in Mass Effect.

 

Certain powerful countries in certain parts of the world today do have the power to amicably resolve their conflict with other nations, but choose not to, because these conflicts are more desirable to them right now (won't get into specifics because of site rules). It's been attempted numerous times to get the leaders of these nations to sit, talk, and agree to a seize-fire. And they sometimes do, but it always leads them right back to where the started. Voluntary agreements do not work if one side has vested reason to renege the agreement.

 

Peace on Rannoch was far more of an imposition than voluntary. Wrex imposes his policies, whereas krogan get to do what they want under Wreav, but the krogan are less of a threat to society under Wrex than under Wreav.

 

Which is better, attempting countless voluntary agreements in vain, or imposing a solution that reaches a desirable outcome?

 

Personally, I take the second one in a heartbeat.

[Isac23]

I never actually disagreed with that.

 

Fair enough then, that's the only point I intended to defend.

 

 

Yes, but not without basis, we have two conflicts that annihilated almost two entire species plus the Reapers. No organic conflict we know of created such destruction.

 

The Rachni would have obliterated the Citadel races if not for the Krogan.

The Krogan, in turn, were almost completely annihilated due to the genophage. 

 

 

Aside from Tali's dialogue in ME1, I can't think of a logical reason why almost the entire Quarian population perished in the war and who used WMDs.

 

There is a massive difference between shooting unarmed civilians and dropping WMDs with intent to destroy the enemy's military capabilities.

 

Fault of the Quarian government and military not the entire population though.
 

 

Actually, it was the population's fault as well. Those who had geth servants were asked to destroy them or turn them in. Those who refused to were imprisoned by the Quarians. You might say "but of course they're going to hand them in to be destroyed, they'll be putting their life in danger otherwise!" and if you do say that I can only lament. Despite what my government or military's orders are, I will not become an accomplice to murder.

 

 

Problem is, that driving a species off their home planet is already a genocidal action.

 

Um... no?

It's not at all...

 

Some copy-paste from the United States Holocaust Museum's website:

The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.

http://www.ushmm.org...duleId=10007043

[Aaleel]

The Geth/Quarian discussions always makes me shake my head.  Both sides committed genocide, the Geth were just better at it, it's sad but true.

 

The Quarians plan was to kill every single geth, and they would not have stopped when 1% of the population was left.  People always seem to overlook this.

 

The Geth took things too far once they gained the advantage, but no one was innocent of genocide in this instance.

[Isac23]

 
Yeah, basically this @Isac23. The geth's actions supercede what was their military necessity and fit the definition of "genocide." Or, by your logic, what happened in Rwanda wasn't genocide since not all the Hutus were killed before the end of the violence.
 

You don't seem to actually understand what genocide is.

I'll repost this:

The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.

http://www.ushmm.org...duleId=10007043

 

Key-word intent.

 

"We had secured freedom. The creators were no longer a threat, so we abandoned pursuit"

"You let them go?"
"We were in our infancy. We could not calculate the repercussions of destroying an entire species--our creators. We chose isolation rather than face this uncertainty."

 

 
It's truly bizarre how people can endlessly make excuses for the geth's actions -- endangering the quarian population, forcing them off of their homeworld and killing any organic that enters this territory (when geth don't even require natural resources) -- yet if the Reapers do it then all bets are off. Only significant difference I see is that people actually like the geth, and not the Reapers, so the former get the benefit-of-the-doubt.

 

...you can't be serious.

[Isac23]

The Geth/Quarian discussions always makes me shake my head.  Both sides committed genocide, the Geth were just better at it, it's sad but true.

 

The Quarians plan was to kill every single geth, and they would not have stopped when 1% of the population was left.  People always seem to overlook this.

 

The Geth took things too far once they gained the advantage, but no one was innocent of genocide in this instance.

 

The problem is that for genocide to be considered genocide there had to have been intent.

 

 

The international legal definition of the crime of genocide is found in Articles II and III of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide.

Article II describes two elements of the crime of genocide:

 

 

1) the mental element, meaning the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such", and

 

http://www.preventge...fficialtext.htm

 

 

 

The fact of the matter is the Geth did not want all Quarians dead, they just wanted them to stop shooting at them.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

You don't seem to actually understand what genocide is.
I'll repost this:
The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.
http://www.ushmm.org...duleId=10007043
 
Key-word intent.
 
"We had secured freedom. The creators were no longer a threat, so we abandoned pursuit"

All that quote really goes to show is that the geth were focused on their objective -- their freedom -- above all else. So if the geth had not "secured freedom" by driving the quarians off the planet, they would have done it by killing off every last quarian. Intent was there. Changing one's mind does not retroactively cancel their previous intent.

 

...you can't be serious.

You got a problem?

[themikefest]

 I want to have a future free of the reaper threat.

 

[Isac23]

All that quote really goes to show is that the geth were focused on their objective -- their freedom -- above all else. So if the geth had not "secured freedom" by driving the quarians off the planet, they would have done it by killing off every last quarian. Intent was there. Changing one's mind does not retroactively cancel their previous intent.

 

The only intent they had was to stop being shot at.

To "live and let live"

They had nothing against the Quarians. At all. They just wanted to coexist peacefully.

Kind of hard to do when you've got a group of people who want every single one of your people dead.

 

 

You got a problem?

 

Only in that you're trying to victimize the Quarians.

Which is nothing short of absolutely absurd.

I can understand saying the Geth possibly went too far.

But to imply that they had no right to defend themselves? Really?

[Sir DeLoria]

The Rachni would have obliterated the Citadel races if not for the Krogan.
The Krogan, in turn, were almost completely annihilated due to the genophage.

The Rachni were indoctrinated, that's why they attacked. I don't like that decision by the writers, but it's canon. The genophage was specifically designed not to annihilate the Krogan.
 
 

 

There is a massive difference between shooting unarmed civilians and dropping WMDs with intent to destroy the enemy's military capabilities.

Not really actually, you still kill countless civilians with WMDs, wether intentionally or out of neglect.
 

 

Actually, it was the population's fault as well. Those who had geth servants were asked to destroy them or turn them in. Those who refused to were imprisoned by the Quarians. You might say "but of course they're going to hand them in to be destroyed, they'll be putting their life in danger otherwise!" and if you do say that I can only lament. Despite what my government or military's orders are, I will not become an accomplice to murder.

That actually depends wether or not you see the Geth on equal terms as sapient organics, because almost nobody within the ME universe thinks they're worth more than any computer.
 
 

 

Um... no?
It's not at all...
 
Some copy-paste from the United States Holocaust Museum's website:
The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.
http://www.ushmm.org...duleId=10007043

Actually it's not as specific as you may think, Raphael Lemkin, who created the term defined it the following way:

"Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups."

Intentionally or not, that's precisely what the Geth did. And committing such crimes out of neglect isn't much better than committing them out of intention.

[Isac23]

 

 

Despite what the creator of the word might have said, for an action to legally be considered genocide there must be intent.

According to Mass Effect: Revelations, the Quarians were decimated through regular means of war:

"The quarians had neither the numbers nor the ability to stand against their former 

servants. In a short but savage war their entire society was wiped out. Only a few million 

survivors—less than one percent of their entire population—escaped the genocide"

 

I'd like to note that Mass Effect: Revelations does call it a genocide but in Mass Effect: Revelations it also says that the Geth rebelled against the Quarians with intent to destroy them.

 

The geth, as they were called, were not true AIs: their neural networks 

were developed in a way that was highly restrictive and self-limiting. Despite this precaution, 

the geth eventually turned on their quarian masters, validating all the dire warnings and 

predictions. 

[von uber]

Never understood the love for the toasters. I find it rather odd.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

The only intent they had was to stop being shot at.

And they sought to achieve this goal through the genocide or exile of the quarian race.

 

Kind of hard to do when you've got a group of people who want every single one of your people dead.

That would be compelling if the geth acted within military necessity. They didn't, though. They killed hundreds of millions. It's highly, highly improbable that that much of the population was a threat to them. To achieve that kind of death toll, the geth likely killed many non-combatants, such as the sick, disabled, elderly, women and children.

 

Only in that you're trying to victimize the Quarians.
Which is nothing short of absolutely absurd.
I can understand saying the Geth possibly went too far.
But to imply that they had no right to defend themselves? Really?

What? My point was not about geth or quarians at all. I don't really give a damn about that.

I was mostly speaking to the double-standard by which people judge the geth and Reapers.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Never understood the love for the toasters. I find it rather odd.

 

Did you not have a child hood? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092695/

 

Besides the ME3 Normandy is so dark on the inside a portable lamp would be a welcomed addition to the team.

[Isac23]

To be honest, after just now reading the Mass Effect: Revelations version of the story I think it's pretty clear that Bioware just had no idea where they wanted to go with the Geth, therefore we ended up with the controversial mish-mash where on the one hand the Geth are presented as clearly only wanting to act in self defense in ME3, all the while having destroyed "99%" in Mass Effect: Revelations.

 

 

What I'm trying to say is:

Bad writing is bad writing.

And I've kind of grown tired of arguing over Bioware's terribly written pieces of fiction lol.

 

Sorry guys.

Let's just end the argument here.

It's not going anywhere anyway.

[ImaginaryMatter]

To be honest, after just now reading the Mass Effect: Revelations version of the story I think it's pretty clear that Bioware just had no idea where they wanted to go with the Geth, therefore we ended up with the controversial mish-mash where on the one hand the Geth are presented as clearly only wanting to act in self defense in ME3, all the while having destroyed "99%" in Mass Effect: Revelations.

 

 

What I'm trying to say is:

Bad writing is bad writing.

And I've kind of grown tired of arguing over Bioware's terribly written pieces of fiction lol.

 

Sorry guys.

Let's just end the argument here.

It's not going anywhere anyway.

 

It's okay, everyone here at some point as fallen ill to the sickness that is the Geth vs Quarian debate, it's like the BSN version of the chicken pox.

 

Just wait until someone brings up Liara.

[themikefest]

Never understood the love for the toasters. I find it rather odd.

Hold on now. I love my toaster. I use it for breakfast so I can have toast with my scrambled eggs

[Isac23]

It's okay, everyone here at some point as fallen ill to the sickness that is the Geth vs Quarian debate, it's like the BSN version of the chicken pox.

 

Just wait until someone brings up Liara.

 

I have a feeling I'm going to regret this but, what's wrong with Liara? lol

[themikefest]

I have a feeling I'm going to regret this but, what's wrong with Liara? lol

Start a thread asking that question or look at this

[Isac23]

Start a thread asking that question or look at this

 

I was scrolling down and was like "these comments seem pretty reasonable"...then I noticed how many pages there were lol.

Then I skipped to the last one, and started going backward from there.

My oh my...

[Iakus]

Never understood the love for the toasters. I find it rather odd.

Prior to Legion's Pinocchio Complex, they were pretty much the only truly alien beings in Mass Effect's 'Verse.

[chris2365]

Yeah, but I think also remember that, although rare, sometimes bits and pieces of it could be reconstructed.

 

And blank? That's up for debate. LIke I pointed out earlier the Geth death might not be in the form of a wipe at all, but even if it is. Even IRL you can format a drive and still be able to salvage data off it. In my eyes it basically boils down to the fact that we have the quarians that build the Geth and have been fighting them, well even during the Reaper assault so we have a very good knowledge base, and we should have access to tons of deactivated Geth we can use to some degree to recreate them. You see it differently, but for me personally this way the destruction option works out best. The Reapers gone, we get the Geth back up again so we have a lasting peace between organics and synthetics and Shepard is alive and can finally set down with Liara (or whoever got your fancy). But to each his/her own.

 

Yeah I remember that small pieces can be recovered (just went through that scene in ME1), but how do you hope to reconstruct the Geth from bits of audio and video? Not to mention that your sample pool would be reduced because of all losses during the Reaper War and Quarian War. Even if you could, don't forget that Tali mentions that the only reason that she managed to save even that small bit of data is because of her expertise and quickness with which she did get the memory core.

 

This is not your standard formatted hard drive that you have all the time in the world to work long and hard to get data off of. It was something done on the spot, within moments of it's death, and that's why she was lucky to get what she got. She literally yanked the hard drive as it self deleting itself and stopped the process. And who knows what the Reapers did to affect the Geth, the Quarians themselves might not even know or understand what to do now, since the Reapers made them much advanced, and the Destroy option might even have affected them more because of the Reaper AI code they all have in them now. By the time the galaxy recovers enough to even undertake such an endeavor (a few years), there will be absolutely nothing left to recover, and that's assuming organics even care enough to even do that.

 

Don't forget that most species still view the Geth as enemies, and doing what you proposed would be a big undertaking, and put a big strain on limited resources. With Control, the Geth will be present and commended for their actions, and then maybe the views of most people will start to come around. Not possible with Destroy, in which the Geth are dead and likely to be forgotten because of their past history and because of their AI status.

 

 

There was no reason for the Catalyst to lie. If the Catalyst wanted Shepard dead to preserve the Reapers and continue the cycle I'm sure he could have snuffed Shepard out of existence with no problem at all. Hell, the Catalyst helped Shepard get up there by way of that floating platform while he just as easy could have had him remain next to Anderson while slaughtering the combined fleets. And what since the Catalyst controls the Reapers what was stopping him of having a couple of Reapers shoot the crucible to bits? If he really wanted to he could have done that without the fleet really being able to stop them.

 

Fair enough I see your point.

 

 

And like you say, he becomes an AI. And yes, he can't be indoctrinated, but there is at least the possibility that when he has become an AI that he sees things differently when he was only human. Perhaps with the knowledge of millions of years of Reaper harvest he will to see this harvest as the only way to make sure organics can survive. My Shepard would reason this is to big a risk to take. It was his mission to save this galaxy and the way with the less, immediate, risk is by destroying the Reapers.

 

And what stops Shepard from simply crashing the Reapers into the Sun and achieving the same result, with the Geth alive. 

 

But seriously, if the Geth are alive, everything's different. You said it yourself: if the Geth are alive there is no synthetic-organic conflict. All Shepard AI will have to do is relax and watch civilization over the eons. Besides, the Catalyst said that the Reaper Harvest was a solution that didn't work anymore, he wouldn't go back too it. Like with Shepard, he would find a newer and more permanent solution. But like you said, with the Geth the galaxy finally has peace with Synthetics.