296 réponses à ce sujet

[AxisEvolve]

SpiffsGhost wrote...
These are my thoughts in defense of Synthesis. You are more than welcome to not agree. That's why I love this game.

One person deciding what is moral for everyone else is immoral if you ask me. 

[The Angry One]

Pottumuusi wrote...

The Angry One wrote...


Merely because you are no longer able to commit a crime doesn't mean you should be free from punishment.
That is a breakdown of basic morality.

You are describing vengeance.

Vengeance serves no purpose in my eyes. Nothing can be gained from it. It wont fix anything.
The only thing it will do is extinguish your bloodlust, and that isn't very moral in my opinion either.

So basically mass murderers can do what they like as long as they totally extra special pinky swear promise not to do it again according to you.
Otherwise, to punish them is "vengeance". Whatever. Pseudo-philosophy irritates me.

[SpiffsGhost]

anlk92 wrote...



Well synthesis does not have any objective advantages to it. Destroy at least makes sure that the Reaper threat is gone. If you believe Shepard can hold it together, he can find a way to get rid of them completely in the control ending too. But in synthesis you do that change to life without any clear advantages, you're just hoping that the Reapers will now leave you alone forever. What you're doing is basically agreeing to Reapers' terms and doing what they told you to do so that they will hopefully stop their cycle.

Synthesis has no objective advantages? The Reapers leave because there is no reason to reap without the threat of synthetic domination. The Reapers can now be considered allies (or at least equals). Material struggles will be a thing of the past. The bias towards any one species is removed.

- Spiff

[KingKhan03]

The Angry One wrote...

Pottumuusi wrote...

The Angry One wrote...


Merely because you are no longer able to commit a crime doesn't mean you should be free from punishment.
That is a breakdown of basic morality.

You are describing vengeance.

Vengeance serves no purpose in my eyes. Nothing can be gained from it. It wont fix anything.
The only thing it will do is extinguish your bloodlust, and that isn't very moral in my opinion either.

So basically mass murderers can do what they like as long as they totally extra special pinky swear promise not to do it again according to you.
Otherwise, to punish them is "vengeance". Whatever. Pseudo-philosophy irritates me.

But extra special pinky swears are flawless!

[Daedalus1773]

The Angry One wrote...

I've been thinking about this, and we already know the moral implications of forcing a new paradigm on trillions of beings along with basically following Saren's vision.

Aside from that, we have the fact that the Reapers get away with it.
Now, I'm of the opinion that the Reaper agenda succeeds in any end, but at least in destroy and control you can at least think that the Reapers are held to account.
In destroy, the Reapers are dead. In control, you can reason that Shepard will have them all kill themselves, or use them as a force for good or whatever.
With synthesis they just leave. Presumably as "free" as any one else. That doesn't sit  right with me.

Controlled or not, indoctrinated or not, they are mass murderers. They revel in cruelty and torture.
Harbinger alone is a war criminal of such appalling scope that he'd make any human war criminal in our entire history shriek in terror. Yet with synthesis presumably he flies off to live his life. So long, good luck?

The Reapers win ending is in the game alright, it's just mislabelled as the "best" ending.

You dare to criticize the artistic vision!!!

Heh. You know who else was an artist AND a mass murderering war criminal, right?

Godwin'd!

Modifié par Daedalus1773, 08 avril 2012 - 09:23 .

[SpiffsGhost]

AxisEvolve wrote...

SpiffsGhost wrote...
These are my thoughts in defense of Synthesis. You are more than welcome to not agree. That's why I love this game.

One person deciding what is moral for everyone else is immoral if you ask me. 

Then why even play the game? You're making "moral" decisions at every major point in the entire series. You have just invalidated any reason to play this amazing game.

- Spiff

[DJBare]

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

[Zix13]

DJBare wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

For some people, apparently.

[Kawamura]

DJBare wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

See, I don't know if that's true or not.

I DON'T KNOW ANYHTING, BIOWARE? THANKS, YOU JERKS. 

[SpiffsGhost]

DJBare wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

That's your opinion. I don't see it as what the Reapers wanted, but what the galaxy needed to be stable. The Reapers were created as a "solution" to maintain stability, a solution that no longer works. But I'm assuming you believe in Indoctrination Theory?

- Spiff

p.s. love that avatar Sir Connery

[cardinalally]

SpiffsGhost wrote...

cardinalally wrote...



In addition to all of the moral and ethical implications of the end that I don't like and others have already discussed so I won't go over them again.  The idea that there is a final evolution is well just flat out wrong.  Evolution has no goal, it is random therefore there can be no end.  Furthermore once a species stops evolving it stops being able to adapt to changing circumstance therefore it stagnates and dies out.  Perhaps we as a species are heading to a tech. singularity but this theme is not talked about in game and forcing it upon the races of galaxy before they are ready is probably worse.  Remember Mordin, who talked about what happens when you give a species tech. they are not ready for because they didn't develop it themselves...Problematic.  That is what I essentially see synethesis as.  The races of the galaxy aren't ready for it because it wasn't something they worked for themselves.

*Agree with others moral issues this is just in addition to all the other problems listed 

I actually don't think what the Catalyst meant by "Final Evolution" was the literal definition of evolution. As long as organic life exists (even in a 50/50 mix) there will be genetic variation and evolution will continue. What I believe he meant was the Singularity, where organics and synthetics are inevitably headed.

I actually find your arguments from Mordin's dialogue compelling, and I think this might be one case where there could be an unforseen struggle with life in the galaxy. However, Sheperd's sacrifice will not go unnoticed, and his/her ability to bring the galaxy together will still make that struggle something that the galaxy faces as a cohesive unit.

- Spiff

The issue with the whole tech singilarity is that it is never explored in the game.  So the ending lacks context for this type of theme.  I have said this on other threads, the complete lack of set up for the tech. singilarity is one of my main problems witht the ending itself.  The 'final evolution' of the Singularity therefore is without a compelling argument in game that this is in fact where everything is headed.  If this had been explored in game than this ending would have made more sense to me.

[DJBare]

Kawamura wrote...

DJBare wrote...
Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

See, I don't know if that's true or not.

It's really not that difficult, what have Reapers been doing for eons?, they take advanced races, turn them into genetic goo and add it to themselves, "organic merged with synthetic"

[jengelb1]

SpiffsGhost wrote...

anlk92 wrote...



Well synthesis does not have any objective advantages to it. Destroy at least makes sure that the Reaper threat is gone. If you believe Shepard can hold it together, he can find a way to get rid of them completely in the control ending too. But in synthesis you do that change to life without any clear advantages, you're just hoping that the Reapers will now leave you alone forever. What you're doing is basically agreeing to Reapers' terms and doing what they told you to do so that they will hopefully stop their cycle.

Synthesis has no objective advantages? The Reapers leave because there is no reason to reap without the threat of synthetic domination. The Reapers can now be considered allies (or at least equals). Material struggles will be a thing of the past. The bias towards any one species is removed.

- Spiff

The majority of violence is between members of the same ethnic groups, race, nationality.

Making everyone the same changes absolutely nothing.

[slyborg]

SpiffsGhost wrote...

AxisEvolve wrote...

SpiffsGhost wrote...
These are my thoughts in defense of Synthesis. You are more than welcome to not agree. That's why I love this game.

One person deciding what is moral for everyone else is immoral if you ask me. 

Then why even play the game? You're making "moral" decisions at every major point in the entire series. You have just invalidated any reason to play this amazing game.

- Spiff

Moral choices that affect one species (IE the Krogan genophage, destroying the Rachni or not). Not all species and machines, by essentially taking away every single bit of diversity in the galaxy. Lack of diversity may stop all this "chaos" but it is a downright ****ty way to live.

[Pottumuusi]

The Angry One wrote...

Pottumuusi wrote...

The Angry One wrote...


Merely because you are no longer able to commit a crime doesn't mean you should be free from punishment.
That is a breakdown of basic morality.

You are describing vengeance.

Vengeance serves no purpose in my eyes. Nothing can be gained from it. It wont fix anything.
The only thing it will do is extinguish your bloodlust, and that isn't very moral in my opinion either.

So basically mass murderers can do what they like as long as they totally extra special pinky swear promise not to do it again according to you.
Otherwise, to punish them is "vengeance". Whatever. Pseudo-philosophy irritates me.

I am still discussing this in terms of my original hypothetical.

Yeah, I would let them go if I, as an omniscient god, knew for sure that they will never break their Pinkie Pie promise.

However, this doesn't actually work in real life, since you can't know if they will do it again regardless of any promises made, and in fact it's likely that a murderer will repeat their offence.

I would like to point out though that statistically speaking, pandering and rehabilitation are vastly superior to punishment when it comes to preventing further offences.

Modifié par Pottumuusi, 08 avril 2012 - 09:31 .

[DocDoomII]

DJBare wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

I'll bite and paraphrase you:

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you are giving BioWare exactly what they wanted by speculating this much?

You are giving too much credit and attention to something that does not make any sense and was clearly made by someone that had recently had a lobotomy.

Modifié par DocDoomII, 08 avril 2012 - 09:30 .

[The Angry One]

Pottumuusi wrote...

I am still discussing this in terms of my original hypothetical.

Yeah, I would let them go if I, as an omniscient god, knew for sure that they will never break their Pinkie Pie promise.

However, this doesn't actually work in real life, since you can't know if they will do it again, and in fact it's likely that a murderer will repeat their offence.

I would like to point out though that statistically speaking, pandering and rehabilitation are vastly superior to punishment when it comes to preventing further offences.

If you don't believe in the death penalty, then essentially control counts as rehabilitation.
The Reapers can be made to atone for their crimes by rebuilding galactic society - whether they like it or not. It's at least better than flying off to make sandcastles or whatever.

[anlk92]

SpiffsGhost wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

That's your opinion. I don't see it as what the Reapers wanted, but what the galaxy needed to be stable. The Reapers were created as a "solution" to maintain stability, a solution that no longer works. But I'm assuming you believe in Indoctrination Theory?

- Spiff

p.s. love that avatar Sir Connery

Well the catalyst makes it clear that he prefers synthesis over the other two choices. That is the same guy who thought committing galactic genocide periodically would be a good idea.

SpiffsGhost wrote...

Synthesis has no objective advantages? The Reapers leave because there is no reason to reap without the threat of synthetic domination. The Reapers can now be considered allies (or at least equals). Material struggles will be a thing of the past. The bias towards any one species is removed.

- Spiff

But you don't know anything about the Reapers. You don't what they will do when they're free of the Catalyst's control. It is the same as setting walking nuclear bombs free, nothing can go wrong with that...

DocDoomII wrote...

I'll bite and paraphrase you:

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you are giving BioWare exactly what they wanted by speculating this much?

You are giving too much credit and attention to something that does not make any sense and was clearly made by someone that had recently had a lobotomy.

Yeah you're right about that. What we're doing is basically discussing which one of the three crimes against humanity is more preferable. That is a quite disgusting thing to do, I think I'll stop.

Modifié par anlk92, 08 avril 2012 - 09:35 .

[DJBare]

DocDoomII wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you are giving BioWare exactly what they wanted by speculating this much?

Reapers merging organics with themselves is in no way speculation, it's what they do.

Modifié par DJBare, 08 avril 2012 - 09:32 .

[Yokokorama]

The Synthesis ending is flawed, and for several reasons.

1. The whole premise of it is to avoid conflict between organics and synthetics. However, whats stopping the now hybrid organic/synthetic life-forms to go ahead and make pure synthetic life again? I could have sworn the junkyard was right around the corner.

2. The Reapers get away. Yeah, I'm seeing people complain about how vengeance isn't right, but that isn't applicable here. The Reapers have committed way too many crimes to be forgiven. In addition to that, they're way too powerful to go unchecked. Yeah, we can have them pinky swear us to never come back, but what if they do? We're certainly not going to be strong enough to do anything about it.

3. The synthesis ending really DOES fit the idea of space magic, even if we put sarcasm aside. How the hell does the Crucible take into account every living life form in the galaxy? Seriously, we're talking about billions of different species (bugs, fish, humans, apes, etc); the biodiversity is ridiculously high.

Furthermore, there is also synthetic life to take into account; how does it inject organic-ness into synthetics? I don't really care what reasoning you give me, but synthesis is the one ending I'd safely call "space magic." While Mass Effect is indeed sci-fi and has loads of stuff we cannot accomplish in real life, the fact that the Crucible can inject organic-ness into ALL synthetics and synthetic-ness into ALL organics (and somehow takes into account the diversity) cannot be labeled by anything else but magic. This is not feasible even in the ME universe.

Modifié par Yokokorama, 08 avril 2012 - 09:34 .

[firebladec]

The Angry One wrote...

firebladec wrote...

it is vengence when the action goes beyond acting as a deterent or to protecting society from something, deterents wouldnt work against the reapers, protection maybe, but not if there isnt an alternative that doesnt require it.

So they should be let off, after all the pain and suffering that they enjoyed causing simply because hybrids are not on their list of viable targets?
That's appalling.

let off? maybe, maybe not, you dont how "synthesis" would effect the reapers, it had to do something to them as they would not have stopped, suppose for the sake of arguement it that it gave them a conscience, and they had to spend an eternity of guilt? not that i have a basis for this, but there is little basis for any of it.

but in the long run what does it matter if they stop and don't do it again? is there any benefit other than making you feel better?

the point of justice is to protect society, not make people feel better, if an action goes beyond what is Necessary for that then it is not justice

Modifié par firebladec, 08 avril 2012 - 09:33 .

[kimuji]

forsaken gamer wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Is it really so hard for people to grasp you gave the Reapers exactly what they wanted by choosing synthesis?

Not necessarily.

The Catalyst stated that the Crucible changed it and opened it up to new possibilities.  This was from the work of the
Protheans and other extinct races, and by us, when the Crucible was designed and built.  They could have changed/infected the Catalyst's programming.  The Catalyst could possibly be rendered to simply being the messenger for the architects of the Crucible, by giving us these three choices.

You still do what they wanted to. The Starchild says the synthesis is a mean to prevent wars between organics and synthetics, which is precisely the Reapers goal (according to what he says about synthetics wiping out organics and the "created rebels against creator" thing). With the blue ending you force them to retreat, with the red you destroy them. But with the green ending you don't force the Reapers to retreat they do that by themselves so that means they AGREE. They accept that solution so yes, you gave them what they wanted.

[Pottumuusi]

The Angry One wrote...

Pottumuusi wrote...

I am still discussing this in terms of my original hypothetical.

Yeah, I would let them go if I, as an omniscient god, knew for sure that they will never break their Pinkie Pie promise.

However, this doesn't actually work in real life, since you can't know if they will do it again, and in fact it's likely that a murderer will repeat their offence.

I would like to point out though that statistically speaking, pandering and rehabilitation are vastly superior to punishment when it comes to preventing further offences.

If you don't believe in the death penalty, then essentially control counts as rehabilitation.
The Reapers can be made to atone for their crimes by rebuilding galactic society - whether they like it or not. It's at least better than flying off to make sandcastles or whatever.

I don't believe in the death penalty, and I do think that control is the best option, from an objective and utilitarion point of view at least.