779 réponses à ce sujet

[Beregar]

General User wrote...

Beregar wrote...
Still at the same time I would wipe out the last remnants of species that came before. Their extinction would be truly complete then.

I think Shepard put it best when talking to the Reaper on Rannoch: "Whatever species you were made from died a long time ago.  Now they can finally rest in peace.

Or like they used to say on Buffy the Vampire Slayer (edited for Mass Effect of course:)), "when you fight a [Reaper] you're not fighting that [species they were made from], you're fighting the thing that killed them."

Yes well. I find it hard to take black and white approach on things, or follow the "hollywood morality". Even if the species died the Reapers would be most likely a massive collection of knowledge dating back millions of years. More like living memory than undead abomination in my eyes I suppose.

I suspect in ME universe I'd be one of those scientists getting indoctrinated by reapers for studying them. Definitely not worth the price because then I would not be able to utilize that knowledge, but at the same time I would find it very hard to destroy all that either. There are few crimes worse than loss of history and knowledge.

[Last Hearth]

jlb524 wrote...

TudorWolf wrote...
Yes, it's pretty damn damn morally ambiguous that you're making this choice for all life without their consent, but the payoff seems worth it.

That argument has always been odd to me considering no one had a choice of which type of life they were before synthesis either.

Ridiculous argument. No one has a choice in whether they'll die or not (everyone dies), so me killing you it's not taking away a choice from you.

Yes, that's the argument you're making.

[Ieldra]

Beregar wrote...
Yes well. I find it hard to take black and white approach on things, or follow the "hollywood morality". Even if the species died the Reapers would be most likely a massive collection of knowledge dating back millions of years. More like living memory than undead abomination in my eyes I suppose.

Indeed. I think the problematic aspect of ME's presentation is that the Reapers and their minions aren't just presented as evil, but as abominations, an offense against nature. No one says it explicitly, but the imagery, the body horror, is made to evoke that impression. Which is why most players are completely unable to see beyond this visceral reaction that leads to the desire to destroy.

For me, who has always been suspicious of the notion of abominations, and detached myself from the visceral response in order to embrace a more rational morality, this desire to destroy based on a black and white view of the world is deeply suspicious. That's why I appreciate the final choice in the game as it is. The Synthesis is beautiful because it overcomes fundamental opposites. Invoking evil by association ("This was Saren's solution") is not a rational counterargument, but based on emotional responses to events only accidentally connected with the rationale behind the Synthesis.  

Modifié par Ieldra2, 14 mars 2012 - 11:16 .

[General User]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Beregar wrote...
Yes well. I find it hard to take black and white approach on things, or follow the "hollywood morality". Even if the species died the Reapers would be most likely a massive collection of knowledge dating back millions of years. More like living memory than undead abomination in my eyes I suppose.

Indeed. I think the problematic aspect of ME's presentation is that the Reapers and their minions aren't just presented as evil, but as abominations, an offense against nature. No one says it explicitly, but the imagery, the body horror, is made to evoke that impression. Which is why most players are completely unable to see beyond this visceral reaction that leads to the desire to destroy.

For me, who has always been suspicious of the notion of abominations, and detached myself from the visceral response in order to embrace a more rational morality, this desire to destroy based on a black and white view of the world is deeply suspicious. That's why I appreciate the final choice in the game as it is. The Synthesis is beautiful because it overcomes fundamental opposites. Invoking evil by association ("This was Saren's solution") is not a rational counterargument, but based on emotional responses to events only accidentally connected with the rationale behind the Synthesis.  

What makes you say that organic and synthetic life are "fundamental opposites"?

[pomrink]

Robot food.

[zombitologist]

 I will agree that seeing EDI and Joker made this my prefered ending overall. It at least made Shepard's sacrifice have some meaning that wouldn't have been solved as well by the other two endings.

[Ieldra]

General User wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Beregar wrote...
Yes well. I find it hard to take black and white approach on things, or follow the "hollywood morality". Even if the species died the Reapers would be most likely a massive collection of knowledge dating back millions of years. More like living memory than undead abomination in my eyes I suppose.

Indeed. I think the problematic aspect of ME's presentation is that the Reapers and their minions aren't just presented as evil, but as abominations, an offense against nature. No one says it explicitly, but the imagery, the body horror, is made to evoke that impression. Which is why most players are completely unable to see beyond this visceral reaction that leads to the desire to destroy.

For me, who has always been suspicious of the notion of abominations, and detached myself from the visceral response in order to embrace a more rational morality, this desire to destroy based on a black and white view of the world is deeply suspicious. That's why I appreciate the final choice in the game as it is. The Synthesis is beautiful because it overcomes fundamental opposites. Invoking evil by association ("This was Saren's solution") is not a rational counterargument, but based on emotional responses to events only accidentally connected with the rationale behind the Synthesis.  

What makes you say that organic and synthetic life are "fundamental opposites"?

I think we're supposed to take the Catalyst's assertion at face value. Yes I know, it contradicts the peaceful quarian/geth scenario but the Catalyst is millions of years old and would have more experience. It's bad writing, but wouldn't you think anything else would be glaringly obvious? Bioware isn't exactly known for subtlety in their games.

[Salonae]

Synthesis ending is a rape metaphor. Forcibly implanting your genetic code in everyone.

[Kentuckan]

Obviously this man is wrong and we should force our views of that particular ending on him.

Seriously why can't we just let those who have found solace with their particular ending enjoy it?

[Ieldra]

SwimDevil wrote...
I will agree that seeing EDI and Joker made this my prefered ending overall. It at least made Shepard's sacrifice have some meaning that wouldn't have been solved as well by the other two endings.

Indeed. Also the Joker/EDI scene symbolizes what the Synthesis is set to achieve. I only wish Shepard could somehow come back from it. A scenario where Shepard's fragmented mind reforms somehow seems almost like a natural extension and wouldn't devalue the sacrifice if it was unexpected, a gift of a gentler fate.

Ah...now I've started to dream of addons to the endings like others here. Won't happen. I'll have to relegate that to headcanon. 

[Almostfaceman]

Kentuckan wrote...

Obviously this man is wrong and we should force our views of that particular ending on him.

Seriously why can't we just let those who have found solace with their particular ending enjoy it?

That's interesting, so you post on a public forum so that everyone can agree with you? Or do you do it so we can discuss it? 

I'm of the opinion that I came up to the Citadel to kick Reaper Arse. Pretty much the only way to do that is the Destroy option (ugh). I do not have the right to foist some Reaper synthetic genetic code on all life, nor do I trust that I can "control" the Reapers when pretty much the opposite happens. No, I do not trust Starchild. What really sucks arse is for some unexplained reason, the Destroy option takes out EDI and the Geth. And me. Sheesh.

[Greed1914]

I thought it was probably the best ending, then I realized that by choosing it I had gone against one of my Shepard's core values: that we should set our own path.  I'm not sure if forced evolution fits with that.

[Kentuckan]

Almostfaceman wrote...

Kentuckan wrote...

Obviously this man is wrong and we should force our views of that particular ending on him.

Seriously why can't we just let those who have found solace with their particular ending enjoy it?

That's interesting, so you post on a public forum so that everyone can agree with you? Or do you do it so we can discuss it? 

I'm of the opinion that I came up to the Citadel to kick Reaper Arse. Pretty much the only way to do that is the Destroy option (ugh). I do not have the right to foist some Reaper synthetic genetic code on all life, nor do I trust that I can "control" the Reapers when pretty much the opposite happens. No, I do not trust Starchild. What really sucks arse is for some unexplained reason, the Destroy option takes out EDI and the Geth. And me. Sheesh.

Oh I'm not trying to be a white knight or anything by any means, I just found it funny how everyone immediately started disagreeing with him and what not. As I said before I picked the synthesis ending  on my first playthrough ... personally I'm not very happy with that ending, but I didn't want to pick destroy because it would of killed EDI and undone all my efforts of working with the Geth.

[augustburnt]

Ive made sweet sweet love to my PC every night since I chose synthesis.

[Almostfaceman]

augustburnt wrote...

Ive made sweet sweet love to my PC every night since I chose synthesis.

[Ieldra]

Karrie788 wrote...
You changed their very nature without their consent. How are you not taking away their free will?

Free will is only affected if your ability to make choices is affected. There is no indication that this happens. If you take Joker and EDI as evidence, they appear to be pretty much themselves.

This aversion against the Synthesis is probably based on an intuition that the physical nature of the human body is inviolable. The same intuition leads people to speak out against genetic engineering. Has a fetus the right to remain genetically unmodified or do the parents have the right to change their unborn children? Personally, I hold the opinion that change without consent is acceptable if it can reasonably be expected to be perceived as beneficial. Take Miranda's genetic engineering, for instance. Who in their right mind wouldn't want a longer life, better health, increased intelligence and physical coordination?

Taking this stance, it is now a matter of interpretation: what changes will the Synthesis bring? If you read transhumanist SF, which often explores this theme of the melding of man and machine, you will most often find that it is exactly the point to give individuals more control over their individual physical makeup. It is the antithesis of a hivemind, a highly individualistic perspective. I choose to interpret the Synthesis along those lines and posit that the fundamental nature of life is changed as to give individuals more options to change themselves. On the synthetic side, individuals will gain organic traits like empathy and the capacity to love.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 15 mars 2012 - 07:55 .

[saturos2]

IsaacShep wrote...

Nefelius wrote...

ye, but why couldn't i just toss dead Anderson in the beam?

Because he wasn't a partially synthetic like Shep was, thought it was clear.

but wouldnt it make everyone more sythetic than organic?

[Ashilana]

IsaacShep wrote...

Forgetting about all the plotholes why did the Normandy ended up on the jungle planet, I'm REALLY liking the synthesis ending. it requires Shep to sacrifice himself completely (in control ending it's just the body), yet seeing EDI and Joker smile and how life got trasformed was just beautiful.

Forcing all life in the universe to become reaperized... is beautiful?  Sure is an odd kind of beautiful.

Last time I checked free will was nifty.

[Lunaluxlepus]

I don't want no goddamn god-like figure altering my body and lifestyle in a whim

[amgroove2]

This particular ending would be against everything My Shep stood for. Forcing something on all organics in the galaxy. Especially after his conversations with EDI reinforcing the importance of free-will and choice as being what makes organic life special. This option felt like it was the worst of the three to actually choose...but that is my interpretation.

[Dormitorius]

Yeah cause some beam will somehow fuse your DNA with synthetic components with no harm. Radiation is like the only thing that can mess with your DNA, you go stand in a reactor and tell me that synthesis ending is beautiful, and somehow makes sense in a game that tries its best to keep things rooted in plausible science.

[Ieldra]

Ashilana wrote...
Forcing all life in the universe to become reaperized... is beautiful?  Sure is an odd kind of beautiful.

Look at the Reapers. Look at Joker and EDI after the Synthesis? See any similarities? I don't.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 15 mars 2012 - 07:59 .

[Ieldra]

I see this "A new....DNA" as a metaphor for something we don't understand. Clearly the change is in the realm of Sufficiently Advanced Technology. The phrasing is unfortunate because it uses precise scientific terms which results in it not making any sense at all. It would've been better to use the original vague phrasing from the leaked script: "We synthetics will become more like you, and organic life will become like us." That would have had precedence in the story with Shepard on the organic side and EDI on the synthetic side.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 15 mars 2012 - 08:05 .

[saturos2]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Ashilana wrote...
Forcing all life in the universe to become reaperized... is beautiful?  Sure is an odd kind of beautiful.

Look at the Reapers. Look at Joker and EDI after the Synthesis? See any similarities? I don't.

i veiw them as husk with green lights. face it sythesis is pointless.

[Kentuckan]

amgroove2 wrote...

This particular ending would be against everything My Shep stood for. Forcing something on all organics in the galaxy. Especially after his conversations with EDI reinforcing the importance of free-will and choice as being what makes organic life special. This option felt like it was the worst of the three to actually choose...but that is my interpretation.

It seems every ending violates the freewill of certain beings in a way. Synthesis, as you correctly put it has you forcing all forms of life to undergo a sort of change with unknown repercussions. Destruction has you imposing your will on all synthetics by forcibly ending their existence, and control which is the most egregious but also the most acceptable form of this has you assume direct control of the reapers.

I really wish the options were a bit more varied. There just seems to be no middle ground (for me anyway) when it comes to making that final ultimate decision.