Yes, because his philosophical points were still true regardless. And he was badass, so there was definite bromance between him and my badass shepard.
What truth was there?
Yes, because his philosophical points were still true regardless. And he was badass, so there was definite bromance between him and my badass shepard.
The red ending only destroys life on earth if you have a very low EMS. If you have an EMS of over 2800 then the red ending does not destroy life on Earth.
The argument about life being destroyed in the solar system is down to the destruction of the relays. It was established that by destroying the relay you create a blast wave that destroys the system the relay is situated in. However some believe that the "space magic" does the relay destruction in a super duper wonderful way so that it completely and utterly cancels out the established lore of the game.
Yes, because his philosophical points were still true regardless. And he was badass, so there was definite bromance between him and my badass shepard.
Counter-productive? That's what I can't get over. If he truly believes that the problem is inevitable, how is shutting down a solution? These are the sort of things a conversation could have cleared up without having to fundamentally change the ending. Fuck, not calling the options 'solutions' would do wonders here...Yeah that's how I rationalize it too. But it seems a bit... if he doesn't have some kind of self-preservation instinct, or at least feeling of self-importance, why create a solution in the first place.
So why not just call them off? I know, fail-safes, self-preserving after all, Catalys can't actually do shit, etc. I feel like you need to at least hint at something like this to make it believable. Vague is one thing, questionable another. That's where it all breaks down for me. The construction is too flimsy.Then again, if he genuinely was at a loss for the right path, now that his aeons old solution failed working, then taking himself/the reapers out of the equation would seem a valid solution.
Considering their culture, they most likely started the war with their synthetics.
What truth was there?
That they are immortal and not constrained by time, while it is strongly tied to our existential being. They are created for a purpose, know their creator, while our existence is a mystery and we are without a purpose.
Counter-productive? That's what I can't get over. If he truly believes that the problem is inevitable, how is shutting down a solution? These are the sort of things a conversation could have cleared up without having to fundamentally change the ending. Fuck, not calling the options 'solutions' would do wonders here...
So why not just call them off? I know, fail-safes, self-preserving after all, Catalys can't actually do shit, etc. I feel like you need to at least hint at something like this to make it believable. Vague is one thing, questionable another. That's where it all breaks down for me. The construction is too flimsy.
Guess what? The reapers caused that. They had the AIs of the Zha'til corrupted and they took over their masters. Man the reapers really are bad at the whole synthetics killing organics thing.
You could argue that once they attain self-awareness, they are without a purpose as well. Self-preservation takes centre stage as it did with the Geth.That they are immortal and not constrained by time, while it is strongly tied to our existential being. They are created for a purpose, know their creator, while our existence is a mystery and we are without a purpose.
And this means they will always choose to kill us...cause Javik said they would? Do they all consult "A Guide to Being Sentient Synthetics: How to Kill Dem Organics."
It at least means they are at least existentially, for lack of a better word, not human. Because of this a threat and also not necessarily bad to destroy.
First step in stopping synthetics from destroying organics: help synthetics destroy organics.
No shit.
Are they immortal with a clear idea who made them and for what?And having different cultures, psychology, physiology...so maybe we should kill them just to be safe?
Why would that mean they would want to destroy us?Are they immortal with a clear idea who made them and for what?
Are they immortal with a clear idea who made them and for what?
They are immortal? Funny, I seems to remember blowing up the heretical geth programs. I remember the destruction of their mega server scared the geth enough to look to the reapers for help.
First step in stopping synthetics from destroying organics: help synthetics destroy organics.
Killing Legion in ME2 doesn't seem to matter though.
Why would that mean they would want to destroy us?
Hubris. But then you'd think they'd be above that. But then Reapers with their ultimate hubris. But then Reapers want to help, actually. But then that's poo, because they are synthetic.Why would that mean they would want to destroy us?
Because we are god and it is only natural to want to kill god. It's what we did.
Hubris. But then you'd think they'd be above that. But then Reapers with their ultimate hubris. But then Reapers want to help, actually. But then that's poo, because they are synthetic.
...Which just goes to shows that the Reapers work best without an explicitly stated motivation, or at least with some other motivation.
Bioware was lazy with that. Legion should be dead. He had no way to upload to anywhere else at the collector base and enough trauma would wipe out the Legion consensus regardless.
Haha, pathetic. Never change, GAF. Has anyone on the internet actually read, like, academic criticisms of film and literature? And since when is the "deconstruction" of LOST an ethotic characteristic? For me, it's a red flag that screams: "I have have poor taste and lack the capacity for critical thinking." I'm so sick of these pseudo-philosophical hacks asserting some flimsy subjective interpretation as intentional and deliberate on the writer's end. No. You aren't more insightful or any more analytic by going against the grain; you're just more wrong. Again, I guess I should tone back my vitriol given the immense reputation of "Badass Digest." I wouldn't want the intellectual prowess of Devin Faraci to crush my own positions.A lot of you guys have been asking for a well-written defense of the ending. Here it is!
Badass Digest's Devin Faraci weighs in on the ending: http://badassdigest.com/2012/04/03/t...s-spectacular/
I'll preface this by saying that Devin is one of my favorite writers on the web; he's never afraid to challenge your opinions. His deconstruction of the LOST finale is legendary and his interpretation of Inception will change the way you view the movie. He's an excellent writer, just don't get too butthurt when you disagree with him.
Dark energy would have at least worked better. They started out as a species that realized that Dark Energy would consume everything, and sacrificed more and more of their souls in an effort to stop it until they became what we see now. And to them, what would a few billions matter every 50 000 years when they're trying to save everything, and have evolved to be 'so much more'.
Its natural to want to kill the master enslaving you. Except the geth apparently, who didnt wipe out the quarians despite having the ability too.
If you let Legion upload, for most people they do.
Why would that mean they would want to destroy us?
Guess what? The reapers caused that. They had the AIs of the Zha'til corrupted and they took over their masters. Man the reapers really are bad at the whole synthetics killing organics thing.
It's salvageable, definitely.Still kinda bad though. Like why have the mass relays if mass effects accelerate entropy?
While not well explained, at all, in the Mass Effect ending this is a common sci-fi trope as the Frankenstein Complex. Used in Sci-fi to represent the fear of advancing technology, it is used to describe the fear that humans (in most sci-fi cases) have that they will be replaced by synthetic life/robots. Then there is the reverse, that synthetic life would logically conclude that it is more advanced than organic life and would feel the need to either rid itself of the threat that organic life might become, or conquer organic life since they would know what is best for it. As shown through I, Robot, Terminator, Battlestar Galactica, and numerous other books, movies, anime, etc.
While it is not expounded on at all in Mass Effect, the inevitability of such is a common theme among the fiction it pays homage to.
I should say that it is not explained as such in the ending, but similar themes are used throughout the series.
It's salvageable, definitely.
The easy out would be to make it a risk-reward thing. Keep using them, in hopes of developing a solution faster. Or: The Reapers, as immortal and more importantly timeless machine gods would be free of any mundane problem but entropy. What else would pose any threat to their existence? The cycles could them either be them trying to improve themselves even further because they've hit a wall, or it's just the way they procreate. Or it's their boot on the intergalactic communities neck.
Probably to prevent unrestricted use of mass effect.Still kinda bad though. Like why have the mass relays if mass effects accelerate entropy?
Probably to prevent unrestricted use of mass effect.
Shit, I dunno.
Isnt that giving them unrestricted use though? Since only the Protheans even came close to building one and they had the real deal to work off of.
Ha, yeah. Reverse it.But the solution to entropy is simple. Just ask Multivac to fix it.
Watched The Matrix Reloaded today. Isn't the kid situation similar to that?
picture doesn't workJust saw this on BSN. Did someone from Bioware actually say that?
Can't see shit, Cap'n. (The URL 404s)Just saw this on BSN. Did someone from Bioware actually say that?
Just saw this on BSN. Did someone from Bioware actually say that?
"If you wish to sum up the conclusion of a multi-part epic game series as "Red, Green, and Blue," then feel free to. But please don't then complain that the endings are oversimplified. You are the one who has slapped that label onto it, not us."
-Stanley Woo
My God. I can't even imagine the thought process behind that kind of post.It's an apparent quote from Stanley Woo: