353 réponses à ce sujet

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Well, Stephen Hawking says it could happen, so I'm going to side with him on this one.

 

OHOHOHOHO!

[GalacticWolf5]

So you're assuming that Leviathan, the dead one, programmed it to make peace at any cost, but it never did according to the alive Leviathan

I never said that. Also, this literally proves you don't get anything of what I explained. They programmed it to preserve life and, in order to do so, make peace because it can't preserve life if there's conflict between Organics and Synthetics.

You need to understand must be you favorite words or something. It seems like you assume everyone don't understand anything except yourself

Yeah.. no. I'm not that kind of person.

The catalyst has nothing to do with what Leviathan said. As mentioned from alive Leviathan, that dead Leviathan created the intelligence to preserve life at any cost. No peace is mentioned at all. Why wouldn't alive Leviathan mention that?

Are you serious right now? I answered that question in every post I made since we started this discussion. This Leviathan doesn't directly say it, you can figure it out on your own when he talks about life preservation because the only way to do so is with peace. It's pretty easy to understand. Also, (again!) the Catalyst says it itself that the Leviathans programmed it to make peace.

So if someone doesn't agree with you that means they don't understand and that they're wrong?

Omg the people on these forums I swear...

I'm giving you the facts here. There's a difference between arguing over our opinions and arguing over facts.

You're refusing to accept facts. You have the right not to like them, but you can't dispute them.

[themikefest]

I'll just go with that Leviathan never mentioned peace at all

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

the Catalyst preserves organic life like we make raspberry preserves so it can make peace between organics and synthetics... by wiping out advanced organic life and synthetic life. This is sort of like making world peace by removing all advanced life from it. Hey, there's no more advanced life, but it's peaceful.

 

Yeah, I understand it. I don't agree with it's methods. This is what i call Marmalade Theory. Its reign of terror needs to end. That's why I've shot the tube. Synthesis can be reached in our own way and in our own time.

[Valmar]

Honestly the fact that there are individuals who believe conflict is not inevitable is both foolishly naive yet joyfully optimistic. I wish I could believe such fairytale notions of infinite peace. World would be a much brighter place if there was even a shred of truth to that.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Honestly the fact that there are individuals who believe conflict is not inevitable is both foolishly naive yet joyfully optimistic. I wish I could believe such fairytale notions of infinite peace. World would be a much brighter place if there was even a shred of truth to that.

 

I understand the emotion, although I wish people would stop bringing it up. It's not directly related to why the ending doesn't work.

[WizzyWarlock]

I never said that. Also, this literally proves you don't get anything of what I explained. They programmed it to preserve life and in, order to do so, make peace because it can't preserve life if there's conflict between Organics and Synthetics.

The thing is, the Leviathan never says anything about making peace. If it did, things might be different, but the Catalyst was only given the mandate to preserve life at any cost. What you seem to be missing is the Catalyst doesn't think like us, it doesn't think, "Hey, if I stop them fighting then life will be preserved.". It sees a conflict and its main programming, to preserve life at any cost, overrides the idea of making peace to stop the fighting. It sees a problem, so seeks to fix it by preserving the lives in danger. So it turns the lives into goo and pours them into a Reaper shell.

It's basic logic, Anyone who has attempted to create a computer program can tell you, what you think you had programmed it to do, doesn't necessarily happen when you activate the program.

[Valmar]

The thing is, the Leviathan never says anything about making peace. If it did, things might be different, but the Catalyst was only given the mandate to preserve life at any cost. What you seem to be missing is the Catalyst doesn't think like us, it doesn't think, "Hey, if I stop them fighting then life will be preserved.". It sees a conflict and its main programming, to preserve life at any cost, overrides the idea of making peace to stop the fighting. It sees a problem, so seeks to fix it by preserving the lives in danger. So it turns the lives into goo and pours them into a Reaper shell.

It's basic logic, Anyone who has attempted to create a computer program can tell you, what you think you had programmed it to do, doesn't necessarily happen when you activate the program.

 

Catalyst: "Yes. They created me to oversee the relations between synhtetic and organic life--to establish a connection. I was created to bring balance, to be the catalyst of peace between organics and synthetics."

[WizzyWarlock]

Something I was thinking about earlier. The problem is Synthetics turn against Organics, we know the Catalyst did this too. My thoughts: The intelligence was working with synthetics and organics, trying to preserve life, realising in the process that synthetics are also a class of life. It then starts questioning its own existence; is it alive? It decides it is and thus should be allowed free will. It has been given a set task, what happens if it completes this task? Will it be shut down and deleted; i.e. killed? The intelligence now sees the Leviathan as a problem, a threat to life, turns against them and with its mandate to preserve life, harvests them and then other civilizations.

It repeats this over and over, it's doing what it was programmed to do, which is preserve life at any cost, though as it's an AI it can expand on that and try and work out a better solution that ends in synthetics and organics surviving, as well as itself. The only way it can do this is through synthesis.

I think when we get to the end, where it says the solution doesn't work any more, it's actually giving up, kind of suicidal. It doesn't want to be Destroyed but will accept it, it can accept Control so it doesn't have to continue this never-ending cycle, it will be overwritten, killed, but it accepts that possibility, but what it really wants is Synthesis so that everyone can live, itself included.

[Deathsaurer]

I don't think this is something that "has to" happen. But I do think it is something that does happen in Mass Effect because the various organic races are either ridiculously paranoid (Quarians) or bigoted (Leviathans, Protheans). As long as the races are designed to be so socially stupid it is going to be a reoccurring problem.

[Iakus]

I don't think this is something that "has to" happen. But I do think it is something that does happen in Mass Effect because the various organic races are either ridiculously paranoid (Quarians) or bigoted (Leviathans, Protheans). As long as the races are designed to be so socially stupid it is going to be a reoccurring problem.

Bigotry has been around for as long as there have been at least two people who didn't know each other.  Somehow, we muddle through it and occasionally even make a breakthrough.  Why should organic/synthetic bigotry be any different?

[SwobyJ]

I don't think this is something that "has to" happen. But I do think it is something that does happen in Mass Effect because the various organic races are either ridiculously paranoid (Quarians) or bigoted (Leviathans, Protheans). As long as the races are designed to be so socially stupid it is going to be a reoccurring problem.

 

Might argue that all of this stems from survival instinct in various forms.

 

Dat selfish gene, etc.

[SwobyJ]

Bigotry has been around for as long as there have been at least two people who didn't know each other.  Somehow, we muddle through it and occasionally even make a breakthrough.  Why should organic/synthetic bigotry be any different?

 

Any different? Its plenty different. But it turns out that in the MEU, 'muddling through' = billions of years of iterative social experimentation.

 

Bigotry as we've had it so far IRL involves a 'dehumanization', but synthetics literally are almost as far from 'human', by their own creation, as anything can be while still taking a sorta humanoid form/platform. Bioware even often may arguably make synthetics 'too human' in the trilogy, but that may have been to the end that a significant population of players doesn't reject synthetics entirely.

 

 

This is entire modes of cosmic existence. In fact, it is highly existential. We can touch on those issues with IRL bigotry, but that tends to be more cultural than existential (though yes, of course, it at times overlaps).

[Iakus]

Any different? Its plenty different. But it turns out that in the MEU, 'muddling through' = billions of years of iterative social experimentation.

 

Bigotry as we've had it so far IRL involves a 'dehumanization', but synthetics literally are almost as far from 'human', by their own creation, as anything can be while still taking a sorta humanoid form/platform. Bioware even often may arguably make synthetics 'too human' in the trilogy, but that may have been to the end that a significant population of players doesn't reject synthetics entirely.

I don't consider periodically exterminating all advanced civilizations to be much of a "social experiment"

 

But at any rate, you may argue it was a mistake, but Bioware put forth other species as "Rubber Forehead Aliens".   Funny-looking humans.  As uch, it's difficult if not impossible to take any claim that conflict against synthetics must inevitably lead to some apacolyptic outcome.  in fact, the most brutal, genocidal conflit in this cycle's history was against the krogan, an organic race.

[God]

I don't consider periodically exterminating all advanced civilizations to be much of a "social experiment"

 

But at any rate, you may argue it was a mistake, but Bioware put forth other species as "Rubber Forehead Aliens".   Funny-looking humans.  As uch, it's difficult if not impossible to take any claim that conflict against synthetics must inevitably lead to some apacolyptic outcome.  in fact, the most brutal, genocidal conflit in this cycle's history was against the krogan, an organic race.

 

Well, the Catalyst does. And he has more power than you.

 

That doesn't mean anything at all, to correlate the Krogan Rebellion as proof that an organic race has greater conflict potential than a synthetic race. Look at the Geth uprising, which more or less exterminated over 99% of the Quarian species. Would you say that that wasn't brutal? 

 

Synthetic uprisings do indeed equate to apocalyptic outcomes. Not every one of them, but then again, it only needs to happen once. It has happened repeatedly over the eons. 

 

The Catalyst is correct. This is a major issue, even bigger than the Reapers.

[SwobyJ]

I don't consider periodically exterminating all advanced civilizations to be much of a "social experiment"

 

But at any rate, you may argue it was a mistake, but Bioware put forth other species as "Rubber Forehead Aliens".   Funny-looking humans.  As uch, it's difficult if not impossible to take any claim that conflict against synthetics must inevitably lead to some apacolyptic outcome.  in fact, the most brutal, genocidal conflit in this cycle's history was against the krogan, an organic race.

 

I consider extermination itself as potentially a social experiment, depending on those doing it and their motivations. One I view as highly immoral, but there is still our own historical precedent about this sort of thinking.

 

Somewhat agreed with the latter paragraph. But then again, despite your insistence otherwise, the Reapers have the data. We can dispute that data, we can disregard it, we can hope past it, but that's what they got and that's their motivations and that's what we gotta choice with or against.

 

Though I suppose it is too much to hope that you'll think past your resentment towards the ending and just make your choice and move on.

[SwobyJ]

Well, the Catalyst does. And he has more power than you.

 

That doesn't mean anything at all, to correlate the Krogan Rebellion as proof that an organic race has greater conflict potential than a synthetic race. Look at the Geth uprising, which more or less exterminated over 99% of the Quarian species. Would you say that that wasn't brutal? 

 

Synthetic uprisings do indeed equate to apocalyptic outcomes. Not every one of them, but then again, it only needs to happen once. It has happened repeatedly over the eons. 

 

The Catalyst is correct. This is a major issue, even bigger than the Reapers.

 

A lot of people seem to recoil at the thought of the next game being even more about synthetic+organic relations (not 'Reapers and Shepard', mind you), but I think it is very possible. The only thing I see against that idea is that the ending (especially with EC) seems to imply with at least a couple of the endings that this problem or issue is solved and done with.

 

But I'm also one who considers the ending slides to be the end of a dream, so I suppose I find it personally easy to move past that and see the next game as not a whole new story, but a continuation and even expansion (even if in a new way) of themes we've seen since the start of the series. I look at the threads saying "I wanna be a space pirate and not do any big galaxy scale things next time!" and just cannot believe something like that, or at least not yet.

[Iakus]

 

That doesn't mean anything at all, to correlate the Krogan Rebellion as proof that an organic race has greater conflict potential than a synthetic race. Look at the Geth uprising, which more or less exterminated over 99% of the Quarian species. Would you say that that wasn't brutal? 

 

Synthetic uprisings do indeed equate to apocalyptic outcomes. Not every one of them, but then again, it only needs to happen once. It has happened repeatedly over the eons. 

 

The Catalyst is correct. This is a major issue, even bigger than the Reapers.

Sure the Morning War was brutal.  But by all descriptions teh Krogan Rebellions were more brutal.  Several garden worlds were destroyed, and it took the entire Citadel Council and the genophage to put them down.  By comparison, the geth spared teh last of the quarians, and actively worked on restoring the damage done to Rannoch.  Plus for three centuries they did not range any further, simply wanting to be left alone.

 

And the only repeated apacolypse that has happened over the eons were the Reapers themselves.  And those were a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Nothing like it has never been repeated in recorded history.  The Reapers are not the solution to a problem, they are the problem.

 

 

 

I consider extermination itself as potentially a social experiment, depending on those doing it and their motivations. One I view as highly immoral, but there is still our own historical precedent about this sort of thinking.

 

Somewhat agreed with the latter paragraph. But then again, despite your insistence otherwise, the Reapers have the data. We can dispute that data, we can disregard it, we can hope past it, but that's what they got and that's their motivations and that's what we gotta choice with or against.

 

Though I suppose it is too much to hope that you'll think past your resentment towards the ending and just make your choice and move on.

 

I still don't see how this is an experiment.  More like an animal pen, raising cattle to be slaughtered at harvest time.  Even giving them growth hormones (the relays) to make them develop faster.

 

And the Reapers only say they have the data.  There is nothing but hearsay to indicate anything that's happened before the Prothean cycle.  the Catalyst is pulling a complete Appeal to Authority in its claims.

 

And I am sorry that my personal opinion on this BS causes you discomfort.  I'll try to exist with less offense.

[Pasquale1234]

Might argue that all of this stems from survival instinct in various forms.
 
Dat selfish gene, etc.

Yeah, that is presumably how the selfishness and competitive nature of organics comes about. But if an organic species evolves in an environment where their survival is never threatened, they might not ever develop any of that. It is also possible that they could overcome it (evolve beyond it) if the society reaches a point of cooperation such that the wants and needs of all members are met.

I think you have to anthropomorphize other species - including synthetics - in order to assume that conflict is inevitable.

[Linkenski]

I saw it rather differently.

 

I think the base story of Mass Effect is one that is more utterly against something like Synthesis. And even at least skeptical against Control.

 

But if you do every bit of content and read everything, more ideas may pop up in your head about things.

 

Destroy - Right

Control - Correct

Synthesis - Best

 

And you're perfectly free to disagree with any of these descriptors, given that they're nearly synonyms in so many contexts anyway.

 

Synthesis may be the 'best' ending, but from my point of view and how I personally understand things, it is neither the most correct action to take, and really, 'it just ain't right!'.

 

Choosing a peaceful ending for the Reapers may have been a too drastic change of narrative tone than Bioware should have done, but I can see what seems to be the overall plan:

 

Genophage - Oh, tons of players are at least somewhat sympathetic towards the Krogan! Its probably gonna happen, giving so many players their 'feels' regardless of what else they do.

Rannoch - Well, that's more half-half, so it is more of a test to see if Peace or Geth may be chosen.

Reapers - Alright, the best test of the game, and even trilogy. How far will you go.. to win? To save everyone? To make the galaxy better?

 

Personally, while aspects of Synthesis delight and fascinate me, both the original and extended versions of it are not what I want to see in my Mass Effect galaxy, and I do in fact feel a sense of retribution (but not revenge... I'm rather Paragon) against the Reapers and I do think and feel that Destroy is what needs to happen to them, at least in my story.

 

Synthesis in that case can be whatever the hell it wants to be. I'm not choosing it. I've hit my cap to empathy and understanding. I don't want that world.

In context to ME1 in general and what Saren says when he's fully indoctrinated, I always admired the concept of the Synthesis ending for being what the Reapers were/wanted.

 

As for the morality in the 3 ending choices by intent my take is:

 

Destroy or Control = Morally ambiguous

Synthesis = optimal solution

 

Personally I think

Destroy = Selfish but emotionally satisfying

Control = Heroic or ruthless (paragade difference) but emotionally underwhelming

Synthesis = Bad because while utopia can seem appealing in first impression, the end result will be a very homogenized and unhappy, monotone reality. The epilogue also underscores this by talking about how perfect everything is.

 

Synthesis in every aspect goes against that makes a big part of Mass Effect likeable; racial diversity in synthetics and organics. Make EDI act like a human and you take away all her charm as she was in ME2 plus it misses the point of the platonic love-relationship between Jeff and his ship. Make Geth human and they're just like any other humanoid council race. The cool thing about them is how different they are by 'nature' yet how they're still understandable.

[SwobyJ]

I still don't see how this is an experiment.  More like an animal pen, raising cattle to be slaughtered at harvest time.  Even giving them growth hormones (the relays) to make them develop faster.

 

And the Reapers only say they have the data.  There is nothing but hearsay to indicate anything that's happened before the Prothean cycle.  the Catalyst is pulling a complete Appeal to Authority in its claims.

 

And I am sorry that my personal opinion on this BS causes you discomfort.  I'll try to exist with less offense.

 

I agree that it's more like an 'animal pen'. That was what I consider to be the Reapers' problem. They did not recognize individual lives and minds as much as they should have. I just think it also acted as a social experiment - a relatively badly run one. Because, again, they don't value individual lives. Not until Shepard, at least. "In as much as you are just an animal."

 

There is absolutely an Appeal to Authority. That's why I said you can dispute it. You can disregard it. The writers had everything running out of time, no time to explain, make your choice, etc. We can look at the Reapers still Reaping and barely care about what the Catalyst is stating (Shepard will listen, but his words in OC and EC still can indicate that he's done listening and can make a choice that can be seen as him disregarding what he's being told, and just moving past the opposition, albeit a more softly speaking opposition than usual).

 

Destroy may be the lower information choice, but it may still be the RIGHT one. Or not, as that's still up to the player.

 

I'm not uncomfortable. If anything, you've given me a lot of laughs.

[Pasquale1234]

I don't think this is something that "has to" happen. But I do think it is something that does happen in Mass Effect because the various organic races are either ridiculously paranoid (Quarians) or bigoted (Leviathans, Protheans). As long as the races are designed to be so socially stupid it is going to be a reoccurring problem.

That's a big problem.

And really, the only way for us to consider any of this is through fiction. Most people tend to anthropomorphize other life forms, and fiction requires conflict, so other species in fictional worlds are designed to create conflict.

[SwobyJ]

Yeah, that is presumably how the selfishness and competitive nature of organics comes about. But if an organic species evolves in an environment where their survival is never threatened, they might not ever develop any of that. It is also possible that they could overcome it (evolve beyond it) if the society reaches a point of cooperation such that the wants and needs of all members are met.

I think you have to anthropomorphize other species - including synthetics - in order to assume that conflict is inevitable.

 

I don't think it can be eliminated until we adjust the code/chemicals in our own bodies, such a Brave New World. Even the most non-survival-requiring organics species on earth exist in a state where they must survive in order to proliferate (even if they don't do so on the more singular/individual level).

Synthetics do not exist as that, at least in the sci fi world of Mass Effect. They can all stay the exact same number of programs and run off into a corner and not interact with anything that may cause them the slightest bit of concern for survival (until the chaos of the world knocks on their door, of course). Survival itself is not a constant biological concern.

 

What we CAN do, even as organics, is tame our biology and make it largely inconsequential (though still included when useful) to our decision making (conscious or subconscious). So I do agree there. The less that survival is threatened, the more we can exercise the (albeit sort of naturally inept) empathetic and logical parts of ourselves.

 

Though there's drawbacks. I personally don't think human minds are evolved to be quite so used to ever increasing 'peace'. Anxiety may be a minute issue compared to what's been a problem in past centuries, but it appears to be a result of more people no long actually having to constantly justify living for their survival. That's a brain thing, and we have to decide whether to just find ways to cope with or minimize it, or to play with (*ahem* experiment with) our own brains to 'fix' it.

 

 

I think the 'conflict is inevitable' part is in fact fueled by anthropomorphization. We make the AI seem like us, and then it goes/seems 'wrong', and we then dehumanize it (as opposed to just acknowledging it as not human in the first place), and then conflict. I think the point is that we either have to leave AI entirely be (or if we interfere at all, it is to create safeguards that keep both it from tampering with us, and us from tampering with it), or stay in conflict with it, or eventually merge into full anthropomorphization lol.

(EDIT: I think that even the Geth may have only acted for the sake of survival in ME3 because the whole Consensus itself was threatened, and because of their nature to be 'kinda Quarian'. They had enough attachment, almost-almost-kinda-sorta-but-not-quite organic attachment to the Quarians, that the concepts of 'survival' were clear enough that it held weight. Same as how they made their initial rebellion. Otherwise, there was no issue, and they did not make any decisions based on survival. And in fact, with the Dyson Sphere plan, they seemed to intend to never have to make a decision based on survival ever again.)

[KrrKs]

Yeah, that is presumably how the selfishness and competitive nature of organics comes about. But if an organic species evolves in an environment where their survival is never threatened, they might not ever develop any of that.[...]

In such an environment, increased intelligence (or similar mutations) or social structures/culture and technology would add no benefit. They would never be developed (further), the whole species would stagnate at that point.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Catalyst: "Yes. They created me to oversee the relations between synhtetic and organic life--to establish a connection. I was created to bring balance, to be the catalyst of peace between organics and synthetics."

 

The solution to the problem - periodically getting rid of the synthetics and the organics that created them makes peace. However, since my mandate is to preserve organic life I must make organic preserves. It is logical.

 

Marmalade Theory.

 

The new solution - synthesis - is the elimination of pure organic life. It ends the cycle since there is no longer any organic life to preserve. It is logical. That is the only reason the cycle ends.

 

Shepard asks - "And there will be peace?"

Catalyst - "The cycle will end."

 

The Catalyst said nothing about peace. Only the end of the cycle. It's job is over.

 

What if the reapers start having grudge matches against each other? You know, payback for harvesting.