Aller au contenu

Photo

What if.... The Remnants are


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
107 réponses à ce sujet

#51
shodiswe

shodiswe
  • Members
  • 4 999 messages

Doubt that anyone has to worry about that idea coming to pass. Considering how human evolution has actually worked over hundreds of millions of years (if you want to count the first mammals), I think it would be illogical for a "twist" like that to happen.

@AtreiyaN7

Throw in modern medicine, genetic engineering and technology, and evlution will speed up the same way technology and the population growth has speed up. Evolution no longer Controls human evolution outside of the poorest and most primitive areas on the Earth where no modern medicine can be hard.(some djungle tribe with no Contact with the outside World)

Modern medication has put evolution and Healthy selection through evolution out of existance for the most part. sick people with bad genes, alerrgies, asthma, weak immunesystems or hyperactive immunesystems that's trying to kill them, are keept alive by means of medication which allows them to reproduce and pass their genes and problems on to the next generation, allowing them to accumulate. Making ach sucessive generation sicker than the previous one, requiering even more Medical aid. Go back one hundred+ years and your genes would have determined wether or not you would live long enough to procreate and spread your genes. Now it's mostly about what medicines are on the market.

The counter could be genetic therapy and engineering to fix Medical problems and the selection, rather than trying to manage the ever more sickly population, you make sure the people who are born get their Medical problems fixed or selceted before birth so that the population is keept Healty.
The alternative woudl be to ban all medication and let evolution do it's work again to ensure a healthy population.

We have already turned out backs on the natural evolutionary processes that have keept our species and every other species on the planet Health for billions of years. If you throw evolution out the window, then you have to be prepared to deal with the consequences and replace it's funtion with something else.
Just giving each new generation more pills than the previous one wont be a working solution, it would just doom humanity to horrible fate worse than most can immagine.

Kind of like how the Asguards Went extinct in Star Gate SG1. But instead of it being cloning that broke their Health to a Point where they could no linger sustain themselves, it would be the deterioration of the genetics and accumulation of gentic defects that would do the job.

With evolution thrown out the window, there is no mechanic that will keep the human genom strong or healthy. I don't know if anytone has ever said this Before, but, I do think it will be a problem and we can see that several chronic diseases are increasing with each generation in parts of the World with good Medical care and wellfare. It's called wellfare disseases and several other things. There is a reason for their increase for certain, and it's not just diet or Lifestyle that's increasing the cancer, obesity, asthma, alergies, autoimmune dissesses, diabetes and more.

Once people start fixing genetic Health issues, what's to stop them from making other modifications aswell? Laws and rules maybe? Theological beliefs? Would Changes to the genom to enhance beyond just curing disseases and speeding up evolution or taking it into your own hands be wrong at all?
I'm sure there is a lot to be discussed and considered about these issues and soon we will have to make a stand on these issues. Because it's right around the corner. Is it the future or is it all a misstake? We have already taken steps that will be hard to undo, and telling everyone to abandon Medical knowledge and technology will be hard. To abandon genetic research and it's applications might be equaly hard, and one might not be feasible in the long run without the other, since it might turn out to be a necessity if all are to live.

There is plenty of those tough issues out there, so it would be easy to create moral, theological and scientific issues about a lot of different things, other than Synthetic VS organic.

#52
Kabooooom

Kabooooom
  • Members
  • 3 996 messages

@AtreiyaN7

Throw in modern medicine, genetic engineering and technology, and evlution will speed up the same way technology and the population growth has speed up. Evolution no longer Controls human evolution outside of the poorest and most primitive areas on the Earth where no modern medicine can be hard.(some djungle tribe with no Contact with the outside World)

Modern medication has put evolution and Healthy selection through evolution out of existance for the most part. sick people with bad genes, alerrgies, asthma, weak immunesystems or hyperactive immunesystems that's trying to kill them, are keept alive by means of medication which allows them to reproduce and pass their genes and problems on to the next generation, allowing them to accumulate. Making ach sucessive generation sicker than the previous one, requiering even more Medical aid. Go back one hundred+ years and your genes would have determined wether or not you would live long enough to procreate and spread your genes. Now it's mostly about what medicines are on the market.

The counter could be genetic therapy and engineering to fix Medical problems and the selection, rather than trying to manage the ever more sickly population, you make sure the people who are born get their Medical problems fixed or selceted before birth so that the population is keept Healty.
The alternative woudl be to ban all medication and let evolution do it's work again to ensure a healthy population.

We have already turned out backs on the natural evolutionary processes that have keept our species and every other species on the planet Health for billions of years. If you throw evolution out the window, then you have to be prepared to deal with the consequences and replace it's funtion with something else.
Just giving each new generation more pills than the previous one wont be a working solution, it would just doom humanity to horrible fate worse than most can immagine.

Kind of like how the Asguards Went extinct in Star Gate SG1. But instead of it being cloning that broke their Health to a Point where they could no linger sustain themselves, it would be the deterioration of the genetics and accumulation of gentic defects that would do the job.

With evolution thrown out the window, there is no mechanic that will keep the human genom strong or healthy. I don't know if anytone has ever said this Before, but, I do think it will be a problem and we can see that several chronic diseases are increasing with each generation in parts of the World with good Medical care and wellfare. It's called wellfare disseases and several other things. There is a reason for their increase for certain, and it's not just diet or Lifestyle that's increasing the cancer, obesity, asthma, alergies, autoimmune dissesses, diabetes and more.

Once people start fixing genetic Health issues, what's to stop them from making other modifications aswell? Laws and rules maybe? Theological beliefs? Would Changes to the genom to enhance beyond just curing disseases and speeding up evolution or taking it into your own hands be wrong at all?
I'm sure there is a lot to be discussed and considered about these issues and soon we will have to make a stand on these issues. Because it's right around the corner. Is it the future or is it all a misstake? We have already taken steps that will be hard to undo, and telling everyone to abandon Medical knowledge and technology will be hard. To abandon genetic research and it's applications might be equaly hard, and one might not be feasible in the long run without the other, since it might turn out to be a necessity if all are to live.

There is plenty of those tough issues out there, so it would be easy to create moral, theological and scientific issues about a lot of different things, other than Synthetic VS organic.

We will never abandon modern medicine. Both practicality wise and ethically. If I agreed with that, I wouldn't practice medicine every single day. I would just quit my profession and say good luck. The hallmark of a civilized society is that it cares for the weakest and most helpless among them.

Also, it is erroneous to conclude that ALL diseases are genetic in origin, or that all of those infirmed have a genetic defect and not just bad luck to become infected with a particular pathogen.

With the rate of human reproduction, genetic propagation of maladaptive alleles is actually not terribly significant at all. At least not compared to something like the founder effect. And by the time any maladaptive genes DO accumulate to a large degree in the population, gene therapy will be pervasive in our society.

So I disagree with the fundamental argument that you are making, but I do agree with your logical conclusion - we WILL embrace genetic engineering, and it will change us as a species. Prior to quitting it to further my education in medicine, I was a scientist working with genetic engineering in plants, attempting to create a staple food that could grow in nitrogen poor soil. So, I have a unique view on the matter as my professional experience spans both medicine and genetics.

I imagine, as people are terrified by the idea since they dont understand genetics, that the change will be a slow one. Gene therapy will probably become more widespread first. Designer babies and military adaptation will probably be among the first commercial cultural uses that people embrace, but will happen later I imagine. Eventually, elective genetic engineering will become so commonplace that it will permeate parts of our society that we can't even predict right now.

#53
Ghostknob

Ghostknob
  • Members
  • 185 messages

You are repeating yourself. I already responded to your post, how about you respond to that instead of just posting the same again? :P


Phone was possessed yesterday what can I say. ☺. All I really hope for is that they give the same feel in terms of your squad mates. I actually cared about some and actively disliked others but they made you feel something at least.

#54
marcelo caldas

marcelo caldas
  • Members
  • 394 messages

First off, the 50,000 years cycle thing is an average. You think that EVERY cycle reaches the same harvest-worthy tech level at fifty thousand years? No. Some take longer, some shorter, which is why Sovereign was necessary. Furthermore, the listed dates for some of the pre-Prothean era civilizations show that this was not the case.

Secondly, you completely overlooked the obvious reason WHY a species would be that advanced:

That they evaded the harvest, somehow.

Which is, guess what, the SAME thing that the Ark colonists probably did - which at this point I think is the pretty obvious shoe in for the plot of MEA, regardless of if it isn't confirmed yet. It's obvious.

So, you have a MW species that makes it to Andromeda and therefore surpasses every subsequent MW species in technological achievement. That basic concept is not problematic at all. It wouldn't be anthropocentric...but it would be "Milky Way centric". Which, like I mentioned, I wouldn't like. It makes more sense for an Andromedan species to be the Remnant, especially if there was no harvest there. Otherwise you have two separate MW civilizations building an ark ship to Andromeda? Probably dumb.


Andromeda is overrun by AIs cause there was no reapers to stop the inevitable.
  • Maniccc et Mcfly616 aiment ceci

#55
Killroy

Killroy
  • Members
  • 2 828 messages

Andromeda is overrun by AIs cause there was no reapers to stop the inevitable.

 

FsvF2uo.jpg


  • marcelo caldas et KaiserShep aiment ceci

#56
Linkenski

Linkenski
  • Members
  • 3 452 messages

As long as it doesn't suddenly involve time-travel or if it's a carbon copy of the Reapers I'm okay.

 

EDIT: oh yeah, if Andromeda's remnants are just AIs that surpassed their creators a bazillion years ago and now rule the place that would be a huuuuuuge slap in the face to everyone and reignite the shitty ending controversy. Bioware needs to take a hint already. We are done with that ****.


  • ArabianIGoggles et marcelo caldas aiment ceci

#57
Ghostknob

Ghostknob
  • Members
  • 185 messages
Seriously though we all know the story will have the obligatory "oh ****. Really? " moment all 3 of its predecessors had and it will most likely involve a way of tying both galaxies together somehow.

#58
JediMindTrix

JediMindTrix
  • Members
  • 283 messages

"Bioware needs to take a hint already"

 

What exactly has Bioware Montreal done that makes you believe that haven't taken any 'hints'?

 



#59
ArabianIGoggles

ArabianIGoggles
  • Members
  • 478 messages

As long as it doesn't suddenly involve time-travel or if it's a carbon copy of the Reapers I'm okay.

 

EDIT: oh yeah, if Andromeda's remnants are just AIs that surpassed their creators a bazillion years ago and now rule the place that would be a huuuuuuge slap in the face to everyone and reignite the shitty ending controversy. Bioware needs to take a hint already. We are done with that ****.

I feel the same way.  Time travel feels like incredibly crappy writing.  It's one of the main things that makes Interstellar a **** movie, IMO.



#60
Guest_Puddi III_*

Guest_Puddi III_*
  • Guests
Robot dinosaur space pirates is what they need to be.
  • Lee80 aime ceci

#61
Feybrad

Feybrad
  • Members
  • 1 420 messages

I feel the same way.  Time travel feels like incredibly crappy writing.  It's one of the main things that makes Interstellar a **** movie, IMO.

 

What makes Interstellar a **** Movie is the Power of Love.


  • WillieStyle et marcelo caldas aiment ceci

#62
Linkenski

Linkenski
  • Members
  • 3 452 messages

What makes Interstellar a **** Movie is the Power of Love.


Indeed. That movie actually had one of the better executions of time travel, but it did fall apart when it went into the "we sent ourselves here" territory.

I wouldn't mind if Schlerf and co. takes inspiration from that movie, as long as they know which parts might be a good idea to avoid copying.
  • marcelo caldas aime ceci

#63
WillieStyle

WillieStyle
  • Members
  • 1 298 messages
The beauty of all these arguments is that there's no time travel required. Thanks to good ole relativity, time dilation means that the Remnants could have been the Milky Way species who originally sent the Ark and yet have still gotten to Andromeda millions of years before ME:A begins.

All you would need to explain this time difference is technological advancement. Without the giant space squids in the way, the Milky Way species advanced technologically. At some point, the chose to head to Andromeda with FTL drives that were much faster than those on the original Ark. Time dilation kicks in, and the original Ark arrives millions of years afterwards, by which time the Milky Way species have abandoned their original colonies for some reason. The more I think about it, the more I love it.

#64
Tim van Beek

Tim van Beek
  • Members
  • 199 messages

Thanks to good ole relativity, time dilation means that the Remnants could have been the Milky Way species who originally sent the Ark and yet have still gotten to Andromeda millions of years before ME:A begins.

All you would need to explain this time difference is technological advancement. Without the giant space squids in the way, the Milky Way species advanced technologically. At some point, the chose to head to Andromeda with FTL drives that were much faster than those on the original Ark. Time dilation kicks in, and the original Ark arrives millions of years afterwards, by which time the Milky Way species have abandoned their original colonies for some reason. The more I think about it, the more I love it.

Both versions have been done over and over in sci-fi (discovering an ancient advanced species that was alien or one that were actually Humans, or not Humans but from Earth etc.etc.), so whatever BioWare chooses to do, they'll have to come up with some other stuff to make it interesting, like "what happened to the Remnants?". But answer "who are the Remnants?" in any way you like and you're still in the company of thousends of predecessors...

 

Oh no, now I will have to think about how general (or special) relativity and its time dilation could be integrated with FTL drives. Oh well, let's just say that General Relativity was killed by Cerberus on Horizon. 



#65
Kabooooom

Kabooooom
  • Members
  • 3 996 messages

The beauty of all these arguments is that there's no time travel required. Thanks to good ole relativity, time dilation means that the Remnants could have been the Milky Way species who originally sent the Ark and yet have still gotten to Andromeda millions of years before ME:A begins.

All you would need to explain this time difference is technological advancement. Without the giant space squids in the way, the Milky Way species advanced technologically. At some point, the chose to head to Andromeda with FTL drives that were much faster than those on the original Ark. Time dilation kicks in, and the original Ark arrives millions of years afterwards, by which time the Milky Way species have abandoned their original colonies for some reason. The more I think about it, the more I love it.


I'm not sure if they will be a MW species, but I do think that the Remnant are responsible for both building and sending the ark to the MW to provide an escape from the harvest. The MW species will be lulled into thinking they were benevolent, only to find out that they had malicious intent later.

Pretty sure that is how it will turn out.

#66
Nitrocuban

Nitrocuban
  • Members
  • 5 767 messages

What a twist



#67
Mcfly616

Mcfly616
  • Members
  • 8 988 messages

FsvF2uo.jpg

 

tumblr_mrpxyohc7t1riibwbo10_500.gif



#68
Arcian

Arcian
  • Members
  • 2 465 messages

Well......Halo 4 lead writer

Was Halo 4's story a masterpiece? Of course not. But was still many leagues superior to the absolute garbage Mac Walters put out.



#69
commanderbutts

commanderbutts
  • Members
  • 88 messages

1. It wouldn't take that long to get to Andromeda

2. Everything you said just doesn't make sense, sorry.

 

pretty much, someone in a previous thread posted how fast the reapers can move through FTL, I think it was 30 lightyears in 24hrs they said. So I did some shitty maths and if the inhabitants of the galaxy had integrated reaper ftl, it'd take just over 80,000 year to travel to the Andromeda galaxy from earth. ; u; So you're looking at nearly a full cycle if they launch from the periphery of the galaxy. 



#70
Mcfly616

Mcfly616
  • Members
  • 8 988 messages

Was Halo 4's story a masterpiece? Of course not. But was still many leagues superior to the absolute garbage Mac Walters put out.

 No.


  • marcelo caldas aime ceci

#71
Killroy

Killroy
  • Members
  • 2 828 messages

No.


Yes.

#72
Arcian

Arcian
  • Members
  • 2 465 messages

 No.

It was absolutely and objectively superior purely from a thematic and narrative perspective. It had plot structure where ME3 had none. I'm sorry, but anyone who seriously thinks Schlerf is a worse writer than Mac Walters needs brain medication.



#73
WillieStyle

WillieStyle
  • Members
  • 1 298 messages

Both versions have been done over and over in sci-fi (discovering an ancient advanced species that was alien or one that were actually Humans, or not Humans but from Earth etc.etc.), so whatever BioWare chooses to do, they'll have to come up with some other stuff to make it interesting, like "what happened to the Remnants?". But answer "who are the Remnants?" in any way you like and you're still in the company of thousends of predecessors...

 

First of all:

I'd love to see some examples of the thousands of predecessors with plots involving long lost ancient races turning out to be humans. Heck, I'll settle for four examples.

 

Secondly:

So what?  Generalize a plot enough and absolutely nothing is original.  Stories aren't just about what they're about.  They are about how they're about.



#74
Mcfly616

Mcfly616
  • Members
  • 8 988 messages

It was absolutely and objectively superior purely from a thematic and narrative perspective. It had plot structure where ME3 had none. I'm sorry, but anyone who seriously thinks Schlerf is a worse writer than Mac Walters needs brain medication.

 nobody said who was the worse writer. I simply stated Halo 4 did not have a superior story than ME2 or 3. Other than the glorified subplot that was Master Chief and Cortana's love affair, the narrative structure was a complete mess. Completely lacking in context, terrible pacing, more than a few ridiculously written characters, the asinine ending etc etc

 

 

So, sure....if you prefer romances between genetically modified super-soldiers and holographic AI's, I guess its subjectively superior to any romantic arc in ME2 or 3.

 

 

 

 

http://www.theatlant...g-wrong/265217/

 

http://neogaf.com/fo...ad.php?t=509154

 

http://www.ign.com/blogs/net34a/feed



#75
Dantriges

Dantriges
  • Members
  • 1 288 messages

pretty much, someone in a previous thread posted how fast the reapers can move through FTL, I think it was 30 lightyears in 24hrs they said. So I did some shitty maths and if the inhabitants of the galaxy had integrated reaper ftl, it'd take just over 80,000 year to travel to the Andromeda galaxy from earth. ; u; So you're looking at nearly a full cycle if they launch from the periphery of the galaxy. 

 

231 earth years. 84000 something is the number of days.