2565 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Shepard had to prove that humanity (ie; organics) had evolved enough to be given the opportunity.

Given the Reapers murder all advanced life every fifty thousand years or so, I don't think much evolving was going on.

[Iakus]

Yeah, but if "personnal growth" leads to war and destruction, isn't peace by other means preferable?

No.

 

Utopia doesn't justify the means

[Elhanan]

Given the Reapers murder all advanced life every fifty thousand years or so, I don't think much evolving was going on.

Given that many would rather destroy or control their enemy than find a solution for peace, perhaps they have a point....

[Iakus]

That's an irrelevant bit of hair-splitting. Paths, whichever you're on, even ones towards intellectual enlightenment, can lead to war, they don't have to lead to peace. That is essentially the paradox that the Catalyst describes.

By that logic, Synthesis can lead to war too.

 

Edit:  in fact, War would be a virtual certainty unless it fraks with people's minds to prevent it somehow.

[Elhanan]

By that logic, Synthesis can lead to war too.
 
Edit:  in fact, War would be a virtual certainty unless it fraks with people's minds to prevent it somehow.

Or they manage to cease looking out for themselves, and gain some empathy for all.

[Iakus]

Or they manage to cease looking out for themselves, and gain some empathy for all.

Which could be done without Synthesis.

[Iakus]

Given that many would rather destroy or control their enemy than find a solution for peace, perhaps they have a point....

And Getting Smilies Painted on Your Soul is somehow better?

[Elhanan]

Which could be done without Synthesis.

Doing nothing and control are right out, and destroy must ignore an entire species. Synthesis is the only choice that looks beyond the blinders.

[Iakus]

Doing nothing and control are right out, and destroy must ignore an entire species. Synthesis is the only choice that looks beyond the blinders.

I disagree with doing nothing.

 

Turning off the game and calling BS on the whole situation is a perfectly valid response.

[Elhanan]

I disagree with doing nothing.
 
Turning off the game and calling BS on the whole situation is a perfectly valid response.

Yeah; rage quit always works....

[Iakus]

Yeah; rage quit always works....

It doesn't "always"work.

 

But in this particular case, I find it to be the most appropriate response.   

[Elhanan]

It doesn't "always"work.
 
But in this particular case, I find it to be the most appropriate response.

Personally do not mind the endings; tis the final never ending spawn battle that I loathe, the Star Child has never been a fave (eg; V), and TIM can commit suicide like so many other characters (usually shoot him myself).

[Cobretti ftw]

It doesnt matter. all 3 endings are incoherent.
But i was unable to kill all synthetic life. so i had to go for control. But it was very forced. I would have controlled the reapers and tasked them to suicide themselfs on the nearest star. they try to force a situation on you and that really broke the endings for me.

[Natureguy85]

And in one sentence you ignore how often animals were used to help create a lot of stuff. Like Oxen solving the problem of how to plow multi acre fields in a day. We had the idea of wanting to farm larger bits of land at a time and it was the oxen/horse/donkey that made it possible.

Throw another failed analogy on the pile! People used the oxen for brute strength, sure, but the oxen didn't design the plow or pull it on their own. People had the problem, saw the solution, and used animals to achieve it. The Catalyst apparently never thought to build a big battery to power the Synthesis device.

Now if they couldn't for some reason and need organics to do it, so they plant the crucible plans as some have suggested, and the attack was to push organics to make it, similar to XCOM, you might have a comparison.

[gothpunkboy89]

So your argument is that speculation is legitimate only when people guess positive things about the endings? Like I said before, it would be costly for the game to cover even a small part of the fascinating, multi-faceted subject that is called sentient life, be it organic or synthetic. The game attempted to bring up the premise of organic vs synthetic as this grandest dilemma throughout the history of time yet offered shallow, ill-considered solutions, and decorated them with a thin veneer of sophistication, hoping that everyone will go "oh wow, the world's greatest riddle of all time has just been solved with a solved with a giant bang!"

 

Sometimes I do get frustrated with some of the synthesis / control supporters here: their arguments about the conflict between organics and synthetics sounded so succinct, shrewd and pragmatic right until the point of Citadel explosion then they suddenly turned into idealists and optimists! It is like magic!

 

It is not because their owners don't understand them, it is because their owners are irresponsible. People understand physical pain so why do they still kill and eat animals? Something else is at work here

 

Sure, if you think attaining happiness and fulfillment in life is "child-like". I do not need a lecture about whether the physical world is real or whether our senses are real cos that is a whole other debate. Though I do admit some questions were not well thought-out. However, since synthesis alters life on a fundamental level for the sake of solving the organic vs synthetic conflict, I would like to think that any life-related questions are relevant, no matter how trivial

 

True but if this superior life-form is older than you, then it must have gotten a head start than you, can you say you can advance technology at an accelerated pace at will, trying to catch up? What if this life-form uses a completely different kind of technology which only has a slight advantage over you, so no matter how much you advance per day you will never catch up? The universe is full of mysterious stuff. For synthesis to be truly effective against any threat, organics and synthetics must roughly equal in their capabilities thus complementing each other, otherwise, one party is just dragging the other's feet while the inferior of the two can never be eliminated because of "understanding"

No speculation is only valid if there is at least a shred of evidence in the game to back up the claims. Complaints about the Destroy ending can be evidence in the senseless conflict that started between Quarians and Geth that took millions of lives. Which even in the middle of a galaxy wide invasion still continued on. Only ending because an out side force (Shepard) call them all ****** morons and that the Reapers were the real threat. Without that outside intervention and without the threatening presence of the Reapers the fighting would have continued till one of them was dead. With Control ending depending on if you are paragon or renegade. The ending speech by Shepard can cause some problems. Like I think the renegade ending it says something like making peace at all cost. Or something a long that line. Which really makes it seem like AI shep would be willing to wipe out entire cities at a time if needed to preserve the peace. And if any group objected to it's methods they couldn't do anything about it.

 

Synthesis on the other hand the complaints are pulled out of thin air. I've seen them range from turn everyone into exact genetic copy to forces them into a Reaper hive mind so they can not think for themselves. And a lot of odd things that aren't even vaugly supported any were by the game. That is where the difference is and what is valid speculation and what isn't.

 

People kill and eat animals because we need to kill and eat for survival. We are omnivores not herbivores. We need meat and protein in our diet. Much in the same way a Leopard is capable of understanding hurt and pain but they kill the monkey anyways so they can eat.

 

No your statement of what it really means to understand someone is child like because it is so simplistic. Not everyone who commits suicide is some obvious case were you can tell they are going to do it weeks in advance. Many times there are no hints or indications for anyone who knows them they are going to do that. And the people they leave behind start to grasp for straws to understand the reason why they did what they did. Because they feel like they know them so well from birth that they should have seen it coming.  And that is the thing between organic races there are at least small connections. Things that is shared between them. The loss of a loved one is something Asari and Salarians can share. The pride in being able to take the worst the galaxy has to throw at you and keep going is a shared spark between Krogan and Turian. There is no similar spark between organic and synthetics because of how they fundamentally think and act differently.

[gothpunkboy89]

Throw another failed analogy on the pile! People used the oxen for brute strength, sure, but the oxen didn't design the plow or pull it on their own. People had the problem, saw the solution, and used animals to achieve it. The Catalyst apparently never thought to build a big battery to power the Synthesis device.

Now if they couldn't for some reason and need organics to do it, so they plant the crucible plans as some have suggested, and the attack was to push organics to make it, similar to XCOM, you might have a comparison.

 

 

And yet the thing that organics created that took dozen's perhaps hundred of redesigns to create what was seen in game. Was nothing but a brute force battery. A way to generate a massive amount of energy and have that energy spread across the galaxy.