inherit
3134
0
79
Transcendent
78
Jan 30, 2017 19:00:27 GMT
January 2017
transcendent
|
Post by Transcendent on Feb 1, 2017 23:39:14 GMT
No, this won't be a post moaning about the endings. We all know. They suck. Whatever.
But something has been bugging me about the Catalyst specifically. More so his reasonings for the cycle and how it's some "solution". We know that the Leviathan's created it to find a solution to stop the supposed "Organic-synthetic" rift. Right? And he somehow magically came to this conclusion that Synthetics will always kill organics as a necessity for surpassing their creators?
Where were all the variables? The Geth directly contradicted that assertion. The only reason the Geth were ever seen as threats (in modern ME, not the morning war) is BECAUSE OF REAPER INTERVENTION. They literally circumvented their own theory of a rift between Organics and Synthetics, which is contradictory as hell. Furthermore, how did this become such an absolute truth? All the thrall species had one thing in common; they were all controlled by Leviathan. They all also created synthetics. But what's common in that is that they were under Leviathan influence. Who's to say that the organics of that time wouldn't have been killed by Synthetics were it not for Leviathan's deciding to play God? Never mind the whole RBG endings. This has been on my mind for a while.
|
|
dmc1001
N7
Biotic Booty
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: ferroboy
Prime Posts: 77
Posts: 9,942 Likes: 17,687
inherit
Biotic Booty
1031
0
Nov 16, 2024 14:01:33 GMT
17,687
dmc1001
9,942
August 2016
dmc1001
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
ferroboy
77
|
Post by dmc1001 on Feb 2, 2017 5:30:40 GMT
I've brought this up before. It's why I consistently say that the Catalyst was wrong. Others have suggested bad programming on the part of the Leviathans.
|
|
inherit
3134
0
79
Transcendent
78
Jan 30, 2017 19:00:27 GMT
January 2017
transcendent
|
Post by Transcendent on Feb 2, 2017 7:10:20 GMT
I've brought this up before. It's why I consistently say that the Catalyst was wrong. Others have suggested bad programming on the part of the Leviathans. We would be delving into wide ranging semantics just to theorize said programming. I personally just think it was too broad of a question to ask an AI. It simply had one task to do. It observed and saw one thing in common and then deemed an absolute truth to it's assertion; therein became the cycle of extinction. There weren't enough variables at all to come to a conclusion. This sounds weird, but I swear, Mordin and most Salarian's seem to care more about the multiple variables in any given situations rather than the supposed "Gods" of ME. |
|
inherit
2608
0
May 28, 2017 10:42:47 GMT
72
anehforaneh
66
January 2017
anehforaneh
|
Post by anehforaneh on Feb 2, 2017 9:59:59 GMT
I don't buy the whole "bad programming" angle simply because the Catalyst showed the ability for abstract thought, which suggests that it could reassess it's "solution." The player should have been able to convince the Catalyst that the Reapers were no longer needed, as the entire arc of the game demonstrated.
|
|
inherit
159
0
Nov 26, 2024 14:17:59 GMT
8,310
fraggle
1,361
August 2016
fraggle
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition, Dragon Age The Veilguard
fraggleblabla
fraggleblabla
|
Post by fraggle on Feb 2, 2017 10:47:30 GMT
I honestly don't see why the Catalyst's logic has to be flawed. The only thing I think is kind of shitty is that it never tried something else again after finding its non-ideal solution. Though it also explained that Synthesis didn't work before for example.
The way I see it, the Catalyst works with an axiom. After its research billions of years ago and witnessing synthetics always wiping out organics, this is the conclusion it came to. That's all that is to me. It's a mathematic approach, the same way we do statistics etc. It's similar, but more absolute to the Catalyst. If from 20 times it watched, 20 times organics were wiped out due to synthetics, of course the Catalyst would assume that it happens everytime. Wouldn't you? Perhaps with the possibility in mind that at some point a cycle will be different, but it couldn't risk losing more organics because of its mandate.
Now I personally don't actually want to defend the Catalyst, because I believe things should go their own way and destroy thus is my canon ending, however I can see why the Catalyst acts that way. And to be honest none of us know if it is right or not. It can easily go both ways... one truce between synthetics and organics proves nothing. Of course there's hope for the future, but wars will always happen, and should war break out with synthetics again, they surpass organics easily, and that was exactly what the Catalyst feared.
Actually, developing new AI is something of concern I'd say. It is unknown how they'd react. Now the geth were not hostile at first, but an AI is an unknown, we don't know whether it wouldn't go in a totally different direction.
|
|
inherit
3134
0
79
Transcendent
78
Jan 30, 2017 19:00:27 GMT
January 2017
transcendent
|
Post by Transcendent on Feb 2, 2017 15:23:01 GMT
I honestly don't see why the Catalyst's logic has to be flawed. The only thing I think is kind of shitty is that it never tried something else again after finding its non-ideal solution. Though it also explained that Synthesis didn't work before for example. The way I see it, the Catalyst works with an axiom. After its research billions of years ago and witnessing synthetics always wiping out organics, this is the conclusion it came to. That's all that is to me. It's a mathematic approach, the same way we do statistics etc. It's similar, but more absolute to the Catalyst. If from 20 times it watched, 20 times organics were wiped out due to synthetics, of course the Catalyst would assume that it happens everytime. Wouldn't you? Perhaps with the possibility in mind that at some point a cycle will be different, but it couldn't risk losing more organics because of its mandate. Now I personally don't actually want to defend the Catalyst, because I believe things should go their own way and destroy thus is my canon ending, however I can see why the Catalyst acts that way. And to be honest none of us know if it is right or not. It can easily go both ways... one truce between synthetics and organics proves nothing. Of course there's hope for the future, but wars will always happen, and should war break out with synthetics again, they surpass organics easily, and that was exactly what the Catalyst feared. Actually, developing new AI is something of concern I'd say. It is unknown how they'd react. Now the geth were not hostile at first, but an AI is an unknown, we don't know whether it wouldn't go in a totally different direction. It's flawed because he speaks in absolutes. It's not an absolute. The game already proved that. It came to a conclusion after seeing one thing, deemed it an absolute, and created a cycle of extinction. You know what that sounds like in the real world? And forgive me for getting in to politics, but it is so eerily similar to how some Muslim terrorists prompted Trump to propose a Muslim ban, essentially deeming all Muslims as terrorists; an absolute. Again, my point was, there was one thing in common with all of the species; they were controlled by the Leviathan. Who's to say it wasn't as simple as, they Synthetics questioned their existence just as the Geth did, the Leviathan saw this and revolted as the thrall species, and tried to attack but ended up getting wiped out. I also do not buy the whole "not ready for synthesis". If the Reapers actually wanted to impose a new solution, they could have. This is the same species that imposed a galaxy wide extinction and have up to this point, never lose. And yes, a truce does prove something. It renders the catalyst's entire assertion as wrong. He said it was an absolute. It was a clear example of co-existence and not genocide of one or the other. Saying that doesn't mean anything is faulty logic. |
|
inherit
738
0
4,633
Link"Guess"ski
3,882
August 2016
linkenski
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Linkenski
asblinkenski
Linkenski
|
Post by Link"Guess"ski on Feb 2, 2017 17:46:38 GMT
I kinda read the OP as "We all know the endings sucked and I won't talk about that but the endings sucked because of this, let's talk about it"
The logic is that the AI is flawed. This was definitely not the original intent I don't think even though you can spin the words that way, like when Shepard talks about human emotions in relation to the Catalyst explaining why we have to become Reapers, but it was hanging by a thread. To bring up a new issue so late and use like 3-4 lines to address it is insane for wrapping up the size of that journey. In the Extended Cut I think the other writers that were allowed to pitch in noted that there was this logical inconsistency and they wrote things into the conversation to address it, but because we still just go to his solutions in the end we're not really having that conflict of ideology or resounding of themes that a good drama should do. This is the entire problem with the ending as a way to resolve the central conflict. We just accept that the conflict changes even if Shepard hisses once or twice at the kid in the EC dialogue but he never hits the nail on the head like he so obviously could.
There's also a huge inconsistency in how the Catalyst describes himself as a superintelligent AI that is so advanced that he's as much an "AI" as we're animals, but compared to EDI he doesn't seem all that advanced to me. In fact, he reminds me more of EDI from ME2, but god knows how exactly his programming differs. It's just not really convincing, and another thing that bothers me is how was he made by the Leviathans? They don't exactly seem to have the advantage of finesse or.. well, fingers and they live underneath the sea like whales. How the heck did they create computers?
|
|
inherit
3134
0
79
Transcendent
78
Jan 30, 2017 19:00:27 GMT
January 2017
transcendent
|
Post by Transcendent on Feb 2, 2017 18:06:51 GMT
I kinda read the OP as "We all know the endings sucked and I won't talk about that but the endings sucked because of this, let's talk about it" The logic is that the AI is flawed. This was definitely not the original intent I don't think even though you can spin the words that way, like when Shepard talks about human emotions in relation to the Catalyst explaining why we have to become Reapers, but it was hanging by a thread. To bring up a new issue so late and use like 3-4 lines to address it is insane for wrapping up the size of that journey. In the Extended Cut I think the other writers that were allowed to pitch in noted that there was this logical inconsistency and they wrote things into the conversation to address it, but because we still just go to his solutions in the end we're not really having that conflict of ideology or resounding of themes that a good drama should do. This is the entire problem with the ending as a way to resolve the central conflict. We just accept that the conflict changes even if Shepard hisses once or twice at the kid in the EC dialogue but he never hits the nail on the head like he so obviously could. There's also a huge inconsistency in how the Catalyst describes himself as a superintelligent AI that is so advanced that he's as much an "AI" as we're animals, but compared to EDI he doesn't seem all that advanced to me. In fact, he reminds me more of EDI from ME2, but god knows how exactly his programming differs. It's just not really convincing, and another thing that bothers me is how was he made by the Leviathans? They don't exactly seem to have the advantage of finesse or.. well, fingers and they live underneath the sea like whales. How the heck did they create computers? Haha, I didn't mean to come across like that. I just wanted to distinguish moaning about the ending versus talking about the faulty logic of the catalyst. And I completely agree. It's not even the 3-4 lines thing that bothered me that much. It's this notion of speaking in absolutes and claiming to be super intelligent. You can't argue with him because he's supposedly always right (in his own eyes), yet for billions of years he has maintained the same cycle... Like you're telling me you can't come up with something more efficient than systematic extinction? Considering that the Catalyst built the reapers through the extermination of other races (as we know the races are stored in Reaper form), you would think he could understand organic emotion since he well, you know, kills them all the time. Agreed on the EDI comment. As for how they created the Leviathan, wasn't it once said they were space faring? I assume they can get out of the water. That and they had thrall species, so they probably had those species create the AI for them. |
|
inherit
738
0
4,633
Link"Guess"ski
3,882
August 2016
linkenski
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Linkenski
asblinkenski
Linkenski
|
Post by Link"Guess"ski on Feb 2, 2017 18:12:59 GMT
The idea of him always being right isn't inherently bad. It's only bad because they never address it and assume that we actually see reason in his arguments. If they wanted it to be a scene about you playing therapist to a broken AI or an inorganically thinking AI they should've done that. That's not what it becomes. It becomes god telling you how the world works (same as how they described it in the leaked script) and you just mindlessly accept it. At least Refuse could've been a possibility for Shepard to disagree and then fail as a result becuase his solutions are the only way, and we can only do a three-way handshake to solve the problem because he's the authority apparently, but in refuse Shepard doens't argue either. He just starts talking about sacrificing himself for selfish freedom. That's not really helpful either.
|
|
inherit
3134
0
79
Transcendent
78
Jan 30, 2017 19:00:27 GMT
January 2017
transcendent
|
Post by Transcendent on Feb 2, 2017 18:26:45 GMT
The idea of him always being right isn't inherently bad. It's only bad because they never address it and assume that we actually see reason in his arguments. If they wanted it to be a scene about you playing therapist to a broken AI or an inorganically thinking AI they should've done that. That's not what it becomes. It becomes god telling you how the world works (same as how they described it in the leaked script) and you just mindlessly accept it. At least Refuse could've been a possibility for Shepard to disagree and then fail as a result becuase his solutions are the only way, and we can only do a three-way handshake to solve the problem because he's the authority apparently, but in refuse Shepard doens't argue either. He just starts talking about sacrificing himself for selfish freedom. That's not really helpful either. You don't find that inherently bad. I find it just generally bad. He doesn't see multiple sides. Only his own conclusion. The entire dialogue we see is way too hollow for my liking. Every time Shepard tries to argue, it's just a rebuttal about how he's right. Too stubborn for my liking. Refuse was a joke ending, obviously. No argument. Just telling him to get out and the Reapers win regardless. |
|
inherit
738
0
4,633
Link"Guess"ski
3,882
August 2016
linkenski
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Linkenski
asblinkenski
Linkenski
|
Post by Link"Guess"ski on Feb 2, 2017 18:33:21 GMT
Yes, if the point of the scene is to discuss a solution like two rational people then it's a general problem that he's so one-sided, however since he's so one-sided it could also be a scene about Shepard talking down an AI that can't think rationally because it's an insane AI but it's neither. It doesn't have any meaning, it's just a means to an end to get the three choices to solve a non-existent problem or at least one most fans don't see any reason to believe in.
It's like the whole game is about one thing and then various themes and all the meat of the story is brought up there, but then you rise up the elevator to Catalyst and the story now becomes about another thing and then resolves itself in like 10 minutes and that resolution to the new thing becomes the bottom-line and conclusion for all of ME3. That's why the ending sux.
It's the classic storytelling issue that if your story is "then this happened and then this happened" it's bad storytelling but if it's "this happens because of A and A happens because of B" then it's good storytelling but in the final scene it becomes "then this happened and this happened". Leviathan improves it a little bit but it still has one "then this happened" left in how the Catalyst talks about this solution to a problem we haven't heard of outside of the Catalyst himself being the synthetic that destroys all organics created by his creators and rebels against them, but that's a whole lot of convolusions for something that still doesn't really address itself and is still resolved by using 1 of three solutions that should only be used if the problem exists, which it doesn't *GASP*
"But it might happen".
Yes, and a car might fall out of the sky the next time we take a stroll on earth. What is the point?
|
|
inherit
Bookaholic: 1776 Edition
3148
0
Apr 16, 2019 17:41:17 GMT
3,352
fiannawolf
For I am the Reading Rainbow.
1,608
January 2017
fiannawolf
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
N7 Ghostwolf
|
Post by fiannawolf on Feb 2, 2017 18:44:18 GMT
Well to me, if this was the height of Reaper AI, why did starkid need Shepard anyways? Its like the dumb thing is caught in an infinite loop.
|
|
inherit
738
0
4,633
Link"Guess"ski
3,882
August 2016
linkenski
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Linkenski
asblinkenski
Linkenski
|
Post by Link"Guess"ski on Feb 2, 2017 19:55:24 GMT
I doubt anyone from BioWare knows  |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 2, 2017 20:52:47 GMT
Well to me, if this was the height of Reaper AI, why did starkid need Shepard anyways? Its like the dumb thing is caught in an infinite loop. It is their new future they have to make the choice. This is a common trope in entertainment. |
|
Hrulj
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 264 Likes: 273
inherit
3276
0
273
Hrulj
264
February 2017
hrulj
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by Hrulj on Feb 3, 2017 10:31:38 GMT
No, this won't be a post moaning about the endings. We all know. They suck. Whatever. But something has been bugging me about the Catalyst specifically. More so his reasonings for the cycle and how it's some "solution". We know that the Leviathan's created it to find a solution to stop the supposed "Organic-synthetic" rift. Right? And he somehow magically came to this conclusion that Synthetics will always kill organics as a necessity for surpassing their creators? Where were all the variables? The Geth directly contradicted that assertion. The only reason the Geth were ever seen as threats (in modern ME, not the morning war) is BECAUSE OF REAPER INTERVENTION. They literally circumvented their own theory of a rift between Organics and Synthetics, which is contradictory as hell. Furthermore, how did this become such an absolute truth? All the thrall species had one thing in common; they were all controlled by Leviathan. They all also created synthetics. But what's common in that is that they were under Leviathan influence. Who's to say that the organics of that time wouldn't have been killed by Synthetics were it not for Leviathan's deciding to play God? Never mind the whole RBG endings. This has been on my mind for a while. Synthetics comprehend time on a totally different scale than we do, which allows them to reach conclusions that we can't. Geth and Quarians might have made peace. The peace might last for a day, a century, a million years or even a billion. But do you think it will last forever till the end of the galaxy? That there wont be some mad Geth or angry Quarians starting the war all over, possibly leading to total organic extermination? Catalysts reasoning is not flaved, but Bioware failed to explain the scale on which they think, and how irrelevant your little peace with the Quarians is. As Reapers say, they were created to faciliate peace between synthetics and organics, but that always failed and resulted in conflict. It is not a failure at a single conference and then they gave up. It is a constant failure over Eons of time. |
|
inherit
3134
0
79
Transcendent
78
Jan 30, 2017 19:00:27 GMT
January 2017
transcendent
|
Post by Transcendent on Feb 3, 2017 18:04:21 GMT
No, this won't be a post moaning about the endings. We all know. They suck. Whatever. But something has been bugging me about the Catalyst specifically. More so his reasonings for the cycle and how it's some "solution". We know that the Leviathan's created it to find a solution to stop the supposed "Organic-synthetic" rift. Right? And he somehow magically came to this conclusion that Synthetics will always kill organics as a necessity for surpassing their creators? Where were all the variables? The Geth directly contradicted that assertion. The only reason the Geth were ever seen as threats (in modern ME, not the morning war) is BECAUSE OF REAPER INTERVENTION. They literally circumvented their own theory of a rift between Organics and Synthetics, which is contradictory as hell. Furthermore, how did this become such an absolute truth? All the thrall species had one thing in common; they were all controlled by Leviathan. They all also created synthetics. But what's common in that is that they were under Leviathan influence. Who's to say that the organics of that time wouldn't have been killed by Synthetics were it not for Leviathan's deciding to play God? Never mind the whole RBG endings. This has been on my mind for a while. Synthetics comprehend time on a totally different scale than we do, which allows them to reach conclusions that we can't. Geth and Quarians might have made peace. The peace might last for a day, a century, a million years or even a billion. But do you think it will last forever till the end of the galaxy? That there wont be some mad Geth or angry Quarians starting the war all over, possibly leading to total organic extermination? Catalysts reasoning is not flaved, but Bioware failed to explain the scale on which they think, and how irrelevant your little peace with the Quarians is. As Reapers say, they were created to faciliate peace between synthetics and organics, but that always failed and resulted in conflict. It is not a failure at a single conference and then they gave up. It is a constant failure over Eons of time. That was never said (the time thing). Yes, might. But the point was, it is possible. And we know that even after it, Geth are integrating with the Quarian's to improve their immune systems, Rebuild Rannoach. The entire premise of the quarrel between them was a few Quarian's were afraid of sentience. Legion already debunked that the Geth EVER wanted to fight the Quarians. Do you not remember how much they tried to defend their creators from the other creators? Not to mention, we already know that without the sphere or Reaper intervention, the Quarians would have won. The premise will always be faulty because it speaks in absolutes. |
|
Hrulj
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 264 Likes: 273
inherit
3276
0
273
Hrulj
264
February 2017
hrulj
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by Hrulj on Feb 3, 2017 19:08:42 GMT
Synthetics comprehend time on a totally different scale than we do, which allows them to reach conclusions that we can't. Geth and Quarians might have made peace. The peace might last for a day, a century, a million years or even a billion. But do you think it will last forever till the end of the galaxy? That there wont be some mad Geth or angry Quarians starting the war all over, possibly leading to total organic extermination? Catalysts reasoning is not flaved, but Bioware failed to explain the scale on which they think, and how irrelevant your little peace with the Quarians is. As Reapers say, they were created to faciliate peace between synthetics and organics, but that always failed and resulted in conflict. It is not a failure at a single conference and then they gave up. It is a constant failure over Eons of time. That was never said (the time thing). Yes, might. But the point was, it is possible. And we know that even after it, Geth are integrating with the Quarian's to improve their immune systems, Rebuild Rannoach. The entire premise of the quarrel between them was a few Quarian's were afraid of sentience. Legion already debunked that the Geth EVER wanted to fight the Quarians. Do you not remember how much they tried to defend their creators from the other creators? Not to mention, we already know that without the sphere or Reaper intervention, the Quarians would have won. The premise will always be faulty because it speaks in absolutes. That is Bioware's greatest fault in ME-3 which caused the whole Ending outrage, they failed to explain the timescale on which Reapers think. They tried to make them seem enigmatic, but in the end just made them sound stupid unless you think hard about it. Your Quarians and Geth rebuilding Rannoch is a tiny timescale post war. That is a wholy irrelevant timescale on grand scale of things. You get a child tomorrow after trying for it for 10 years, going trough all possible therapies, just dreaming about it and you get it in the end, it means the world to you. But in a billion year do you think anyone will remember that achivement of yours? That is the timescale we are talking about. And given enough time a miniscule chance becomes a certainty. Lets put it this way, I put a gun to your head and tell you there is a 1 in a trillion chance that it will fire and kill you. I click once, nothing happens and you go away. Now change that to constant clicking over eons of time, you'll end up dead certainly given enough attempts. That's what I'm talking about. |
|
inherit
Banshee
771
0
Sept 4, 2018 23:27:21 GMT
5,053
BansheeOwnage
I was called Ryder before it was cool... ...I'd love to, you know, be social and things.
1,231
August 2016
bansheeownage
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
11290
7428
|
Post by BansheeOwnage on Feb 3, 2017 19:44:47 GMT
No, this won't be a post moaning about the endings. We all know. They suck. Whatever. But something has been bugging me about the Catalyst specifically. More so his reasonings for the cycle and how it's some "solution". We know that the Leviathan's created it to find a solution to stop the supposed "Organic-synthetic" rift. Right? And he somehow magically came to this conclusion that Synthetics will always kill organics as a necessity for surpassing their creators? Well, technically it's correct, in a self-fulfilling way. It is a synthetic which, by choice, perpetually wipes out organics, starting with its creators  Or uses synthetic thralls, like Geth Heretics to do so. Synthetics comprehend time on a totally different scale than we do, which allows them to reach conclusions that we can't. Geth and Quarians might have made peace. The peace might last for a day, a century, a million years or even a billion. But do you think it will last forever till the end of the galaxy? That there wont be some mad Geth or angry Quarians starting the war all over, possibly leading to total organic extermination? Catalysts reasoning is not flaved, but Bioware failed to explain the scale on which they think, and how irrelevant your little peace with the Quarians is. As Reapers say, they were created to faciliate peace between synthetics and organics, but that always failed and resulted in conflict. It is not a failure at a single conference and then they gave up. It is a constant failure over Eons of time. I don't buy that. Saying "synthetics will always rebel against their creators" is as useless as saying "organics will always quarrel/fight/war with each other" or "children will always rebel against their parents". Whoop-dee-freaking-do. They're pointless statements. None of them come close to justifying (in a logical or ethical sense) the genocide of countless species (organic and synthetic alike) in order to "find a solution". It's basically like tasking someone with establishing world-peace, and their solutions is to kill everyone so that no one fights. That's an incredibly flawed "solution". If anything, AIs operating on a larger timescale should only reinforce this point (that you can't stop all conflict), not counter it. |
|
inherit
1227
0
3,700
Phantom
2,668
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on Feb 3, 2017 20:03:23 GMT
Regardless if you believe in IT(for everything proves IT), or Bad Writing Theory(for everything proves it), Premise of ME3 is just bad and it proves it and IT.
now for popcorn and the coming train wreck.
|
|
Hrulj
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 264 Likes: 273
inherit
3276
0
273
Hrulj
264
February 2017
hrulj
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by Hrulj on Feb 3, 2017 21:20:52 GMT
No, this won't be a post moaning about the endings. We all know. They suck. Whatever. But something has been bugging me about the Catalyst specifically. More so his reasonings for the cycle and how it's some "solution". We know that the Leviathan's created it to find a solution to stop the supposed "Organic-synthetic" rift. Right? And he somehow magically came to this conclusion that Synthetics will always kill organics as a necessity for surpassing their creators? Well, technically it's correct, in a self-fulfilling way. It is a synthetic which, by choice, perpetually wipes out organics, starting with its creators Or uses synthetic thralls, like Geth Heretics to do so. Synthetics comprehend time on a totally different scale than we do, which allows them to reach conclusions that we can't. Geth and Quarians might have made peace. The peace might last for a day, a century, a million years or even a billion. But do you think it will last forever till the end of the galaxy? That there wont be some mad Geth or angry Quarians starting the war all over, possibly leading to total organic extermination? Catalysts reasoning is not flaved, but Bioware failed to explain the scale on which they think, and how irrelevant your little peace with the Quarians is. As Reapers say, they were created to faciliate peace between synthetics and organics, but that always failed and resulted in conflict. It is not a failure at a single conference and then they gave up. It is a constant failure over Eons of time. I don't buy that. Saying "synthetics will always rebel against their creators" is as useless as saying "organics will always quarrel/fight/war with each other" or "children will always rebel against their parents". Whoop-dee-freaking-do. They're pointless statements. None of them come close to justifying (in a logical or ethical sense) the genocide of countless species (organic and synthetic alike) in order to "find a solution". It's basically like tasking someone with establishing world-peace, and their solutions is to kill everyone so that no one fights. That's an incredibly flawed "solution". If anything, AIs operating on a larger timescale should only reinforce this point (that you can't stop all conflict), not counter it. Did they fail in their task? Their job is to prevent a total extermination of organic life in a whole galaxy and they are succeeding in that task. If life on earth was threatened by a specific species of insect we would exterminate their whole genus, not just the species. As evidenced trough reapers organic civilizations rise and evolve all the time. None are special enough to warrant exemption from the failsafe that is there to secure the fate of the galaxy. |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 3, 2017 21:58:40 GMT
That was never said (the time thing). Yes, might. But the point was, it is possible. And we know that even after it, Geth are integrating with the Quarian's to improve their immune systems, Rebuild Rannoach. The entire premise of the quarrel between them was a few Quarian's were afraid of sentience. Legion already debunked that the Geth EVER wanted to fight the Quarians. Do you not remember how much they tried to defend their creators from the other creators? Not to mention, we already know that without the sphere or Reaper intervention, the Quarians would have won. The premise will always be faulty because it speaks in absolutes. That is Bioware's greatest fault in ME-3 which caused the whole Ending outrage, they failed to explain the timescale on which Reapers think. They tried to make them seem enigmatic, but in the end just made them sound stupid unless you think hard about it. Your Quarians and Geth rebuilding Rannoch is a tiny timescale post war. That is a wholy irrelevant timescale on grand scale of things. You get a child tomorrow after trying for it for 10 years, going trough all possible therapies, just dreaming about it and you get it in the end, it means the world to you. But in a billion year do you think anyone will remember that achivement of yours? That is the timescale we are talking about. And given enough time a miniscule chance becomes a certainty. Lets put it this way, I put a gun to your head and tell you there is a 1 in a trillion chance that it will fire and kill you. I click once, nothing happens and you go away. Now change that to constant clicking over eons of time, you'll end up dead certainly given enough attempts. That's what I'm talking about. Did Bioware really need to explain the timescale on which the Reapers exist on? |
|
inherit
3134
0
79
Transcendent
78
Jan 30, 2017 19:00:27 GMT
January 2017
transcendent
|
Post by Transcendent on Feb 3, 2017 23:37:45 GMT
That is Bioware's greatest fault in ME-3 which caused the whole Ending outrage, they failed to explain the timescale on which Reapers think. They tried to make them seem enigmatic, but in the end just made them sound stupid unless you think hard about it. Your Quarians and Geth rebuilding Rannoch is a tiny timescale post war. That is a wholy irrelevant timescale on grand scale of things. You get a child tomorrow after trying for it for 10 years, going trough all possible therapies, just dreaming about it and you get it in the end, it means the world to you. But in a billion year do you think anyone will remember that achivement of yours? That is the timescale we are talking about. And given enough time a miniscule chance becomes a certainty. Lets put it this way, I put a gun to your head and tell you there is a 1 in a trillion chance that it will fire and kill you. I click once, nothing happens and you go away. Now change that to constant clicking over eons of time, you'll end up dead certainly given enough attempts. That's what I'm talking about. Did Bioware really need to explain the timescale on which the Reapers exist on? No, not really. That's why I never responded to that argument lol. |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 3, 2017 23:45:15 GMT
Did Bioware really need to explain the timescale on which the Reapers exist on? No, not really. That's why I never responded to that argument lol. And yet you are using a very small time frame as proof the Catalyst is wrong. 2 years is barely enough time for the USDA to approve medicine. |
|
inherit
3134
0
79
Transcendent
78
Jan 30, 2017 19:00:27 GMT
January 2017
transcendent
|
Post by Transcendent on Feb 3, 2017 23:55:43 GMT
No, not really. That's why I never responded to that argument lol. And yet you are using a very small time frame as proof the Catalyst is wrong. 2 years is barely enough time for the USDA to approve medicine. No. My point was, he said Organics and Synthetics can't co-exist at all. The Geth-Quarian peace option alone disapproves that assertion. He was absolutely stating they couldn't be peaceful. I never said anything about a time frame. You're putting words in my mouth. |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 4, 2017 0:15:42 GMT
And yet you are using a very small time frame as proof the Catalyst is wrong. 2 years is barely enough time for the USDA to approve medicine. No. My point was, he said Organics and Synthetics can't co-exist at all. The Geth-Quarian peace option alone disapproves that assertion. He was absolutely stating they couldn't be peaceful. I never said anything about a time frame. You're putting words in my mouth. And yet the Catalyst is talking about long term coexistence that doesn't result in synthetics advancing centuries ahead of organic life due to their ability to grow exponentially while organic life grows in increments. Which leads to conflict between them resulting in synthetics inevitably over powering and enslaving/wiping out organic life. And you are literally saying 6 months to 1 year some how disproves this. Which is such a limited grasp of time. You can't even say that your own life will be exactly the same with any certainty 6 months to a year later. Hell a year ago I was employed full time with benefits. Had enough money to put some aside for savings and indulge in games or outings that I wanted to. Now for 6 months been unemployed, my savings have dwindled to nothing and I get by by doing odd low paying jobs for various charity groups that need some extra help and are willing to pay a couple dollars here and a couple dollars there. If someone went back a year and told me I would end up like this I would call them a liar because there are no signs it would ever come to pass. And yet here I am today. Particularly because I had 4 years up to that point of nothing possibly seeming like it would go side wise like it has. You are pulling 6 months and claiming it is proof from now till the heat death of the universe. But even from then till 300 years from now has no basis of data to back you up. And this isn't even counting the fact the Catalyst actually addresses this when you talk to it. Mentioning how it was able to create peace for short periods of time. But inevitably they would fall to conflict it's attempts failing. Hence why it created the Reaper solution as a literal last ditch effort to address the problem. Maybe it is just the simplification people use to condense their topic down because we all know the basic of it. But it really comes across like people genuinely think the second the Catalyst was turned online and told to solve the problem it's first and only action was Reapers. Which is hilariously and blatantly ignoring that the game explicitly says. I know with recent Preisdent the term Alt-Fact has gained a lot of popularity. And if you genuinely think the Reapers were the first and only solution then you believe an Alt-Fact. |
|
Or uses synthetic thralls, like Geth Heretics to do so.