248 réponses à ce sujet

[Bill Casey]

dgcatanisiri wrote...

I don't think it eliminates freewill or self-determination, just making it so that both organic and synthetic life don't view one another as being 'the other who must be wiped out'

How does it do that without removing free will?

[ChickenMan77]

Synthesis is basically forced eugenics not really a big improvement over genocide

[Taboo]

It still doesn't explain how the heck you merge DNA and whatever Synthetics have?

Do they have a base chemical structure?

WHY was this not thought out?

[Xellith]

Synthesis is the worst thing you could ever pick. If synthesis happened to earth right now at this very second - you better believe that there would be religious wars, genocide, suicide. People would go insane.

To say "TIM wanted control, which makes it almost impossible for me to see it as a good thing" is kinda silly. Since the catalyst even hints that his personal choice is synthesis.

Destroy the reapers. Get rid of them. They are abomination and the only logical option is to get rid of them completely.

[stevefox1200]

Bioware clearly thought this was the "best" ending because it is the only one locked away and the one the best connects with the Gilligan's Planet Adam and Eve story.

I was wondering

What about all pre-spaceflight species or like monkeys? Would they be changed to?

Would like a whale suddenly get like a cyborg eye?

If so, how does that work because any type of synthetic implant would need to be installed, would it just appear on your organs after the green wave.

[ChickenMan77]

stevefox1200 wrote...

Bioware clearly thought this was the "best" ending because it is the only one locked away and the one the best connects with the Gilligan's Planet Adam and Eve story.

I was wondering

What about all pre-spaceflight species or like monkeys? Would they be changed to?

Would like a whale suddenly get like a cyborg eye?

If so, how does that work because any type of synthetic implant would need to be installed, would it just appear on your organs after the green wave.

see your opening up that closet full of nightmare fuel

[Taboo]

Yeah, well religious symbolism out of the blue is INCREDIBLY bad storytelling.

What happens to synthetics? Do they grow skin and real feelings?

[Shwiggliness]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Yeah, well religious symbolism out of the blue is INCREDIBLY bad storytelling.

What happens to synthetics? Do they grow skin and real feelings?

THIIIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSS

How does Synthesis affect Synthetics?
From the end, EDI looks exacty the same. 

[Taboo]

Shwiggliness wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Yeah, well religious symbolism out of the blue is INCREDIBLY bad storytelling.

What happens to synthetics? Do they grow skin and real feelings?

THIIIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSS

How does Synthesis affect Synthetics?
From the end, EDI looks exacty the same. 

Now she won't have to make adjustments to her programming. Her new FEELINGS will help her decide.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 22 avril 2012 - 01:19 .

[thefallen2far]

If you take away any emotional connection, concept or logic, they see the central conflict of Mass effect as Synth v Organics. A solution to this bas idea of a theme is, "if everything is synthetic and organic, then there would be no conflict." If you remove any sense of editorial critisim along the lines of practicality, morality, implications and the idea that synthv organics is a simplifiedthematic version of created v creators [Krogan and Rachni aren't synth, they were artificially advanced], an you surround yourself with "yes men" that praise your idea, you're left with a very shallow and arbitrary "extra" ending that's difficult to get but poinles in execution.

Practically, it doesn't solve the problem as the Reapers still exist, cyborgs could still make AI more powerful than they are, synths couldn't be made organic, morally, it's reprehensible, conceptually, the apex species is an abstract concept with no prctical applications like counting to infinity and is all around, not very entertaining.

Modifié par thefallen2far, 22 avril 2012 - 01:26 .

[Taboo]

thefallen2far wrote...

If you take away any emotional connection, concept or logic, they see the central conflict of Mass effect as Synth v Organics. A solution to this bas idea of a concept is, "if everything is synthetic and organic, then there would be no conflict. If you remove any sense of editorial critisim along the lines of practicality, morality, implications and the idea that synthv organics is a simplifiedthematic version of created v creators [Krogan and Rachni aren't synth, they were artificially advanced], an you surround yourself with "yes men" that praise your idea, you're left with a very shallow and arbitrary "extra" ending that's difficult to get but poinles in execution.

Practically, it doesn't solve the problem as the Reapers still exist, cyborgs could still make AI more powerful than they are, synths couldn't be made organic, morally, it's reprehensible, conceptually, the apex species is an abstract concept with no prctical applications like counting to infinity and is all around, not very entertaining.

It only really combines the problem. And with the logic that was used to write the ending who knows? What you describe in your new paragraph may well come true.

[DeviousCastle]

I just recall the conversation with Soverign on Virmire and conclude that these guys are gonna die.

Modifié par DeviousCastle, 22 avril 2012 - 01:28 .

[Taboo]

Man, the more you think about it, the amount of jimmies rustled is...................unbelievable.

[viperabyss]

thefallen2far wrote...

Practically, it doesn't solve the problem as the Reapers still exist, cyborgs could still make AI more powerful than they are, synths couldn't be made organic, morally, it's reprehensible, conceptually, the apex species is an abstract concept with no prctical applications like counting to infinity and is all around, not very entertaining.

I think Bioware's reasoning is that since you're half synthetic, you don't need to create an AI. Even if you do, you can directly interface with the AI, so there would be a lot less misunderstanding.

In the practical sense though, you are correct. You simply cannot combine the two of them together, since the logics are vastly different from each other. By your logic, the creation of AI eventually would occur. In that case, the ending decision is practically irrelevant. 

And I can't believe they would use "artistic merit" as an excuse to hide the fact that they didn't spend enough time thinking through the entire ending process. Even more unbelievable is the fact that people actually buy that excuse.

[CavScout]

Taboo-XX wrote...

CavScout wrote...

legion999 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Who thinks it is the best ending?

Bioware.

What makes you think this?

They said that you could achieve the best ending without multiplayer. THEY MEANT SYNTHESIS. 

So they didn't say what was claimed....

[Taboo]

CavScout wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

CavScout wrote...

legion999 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Who thinks it is the best ending?

Bioware.

What makes you think this?

They said that you could achieve the best ending without multiplayer. THEY MEANT SYNTHESIS. 

So they didn't say what was claimed....

I hope that they are aware the quite a lot of people find the synthesis ending repulsive. They miscommunicated. At least they know now that everyone's preferred ending is the 'breathing" scene.

[Arturia Pendragon]

Godwin's Law (with sarcasm and jest) incoming....

Control: Establish the Fourth Reich, that's one better than the Third! Dominate an entire species and force them into menial labor, or line them up and let your friends and allies take pot shots to their heart's desire!
Synthesis: Create the Master Race (Species)! Bring all organic life to the "pennacle of evolution" and give those synthetics a soul! Everyone will be the same and we'll all be better off!
Destroy: Instigate the Final Solution! Wipe out all synthetic life so only organic life can populate the universe!

Any choice is a horrible choice; unless you choose to let Marauder Shields stop you.

Modifié par Arturia Pendragon, 22 avril 2012 - 01:49 .

[kalasaurus]

I didn't like how synthesis was placed at the top of the "hierarchy" of choices. It solves some problem we're introduced to in the last 5 minutes of the game... I wouldn't have had such an issue with it if the game didn't try so hard to show how AI are misunderstood and want peace. The created rebelled against their creators, sure, but now they're done rebelling and want to be our friends.

Maybe the peace won't last, but the game really did try hard to show us how peace was possible while maintaining our own genetic diversity. And not just between the Quarians and Geth, either.

Destroy and control suck as choices, too, but at least they're solutions to the reaper threat we've known about beforehand.  They solve the problem- the reapers- that the game had throughout the trilogy.

Modifié par GlassElephant, 22 avril 2012 - 01:49 .

[d-boy15]

Bill Casey wrote...
"We’ll fight and win without it. I won’t let fear compromise who I am." - Commander Shepard


"It's not just about living 'till tomorrow. Sometimes you take a stand." - also Commander Shepard

Well, both of your quote are fit for destroy ending... 

[Taboo]

Arturia Pendragon wrote...

Godwin's Law (with sarcasm and jest) incoming....

Control: Establish the Fourth Reich, that's one better than the Third! Dominate an entire species and force them into menial labor, or line them up and let your friends and allies take pot shots to their heart's desire!
Synthesis: Create the Master Race (Species)! Bring all organic life to the "pennacle of evolution" and give those synthetics a soul! Everyone will be the same and we'll all be better off!
Destroy: Instigate the Final Solution! Wipe out all synthetic life so only organic life can populate the universe!

Any choice is a horrible choice; unless you choose to let Marauder Shields stop you.

Ah! But which one has the least fascistic overtones?

[CavScout]

Taboo-XX wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

CavScout wrote...

legion999 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Who thinks it is the best ending?

Bioware.

What makes you think this?

They said that you could achieve the best ending without multiplayer. THEY MEANT SYNTHESIS. 

So they didn't say what was claimed....

I hope that they are aware the quite a lot of people find the synthesis ending repulsive. They miscommunicated. At least they know now that everyone's preferred ending is the 'breathing" scene.

Making stuff up must be fun.

[Taboo]

CavScout wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

CavScout wrote...

legion999 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Who thinks it is the best ending?

Bioware.

What makes you think this?

They said that you could achieve the best ending without multiplayer. THEY MEANT SYNTHESIS. 

So they didn't say what was claimed....

I hope that they are aware the quite a lot of people find the synthesis ending repulsive. They miscommunicated. At least they know now that everyone's preferred ending is the 'breathing" scene.

Making stuff up must be fun.

It is. I do it all the time. I've made up my mind that synthesis and control don't exist.

[viperabyss]

d-boy15 wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...
"We’ll fight and win without it. I won’t let fear compromise who I am." - Commander Shepard


"It's not just about living 'till tomorrow. Sometimes you take a stand." - also Commander Shepard

Well, both of your quote are fit for destroy ending... 

Actually I disagree. You accept that fear when you pick an ending, since all three endings are the "solution" to the Catalyst's logic. Those two quotes show a significant difference between the Commander Shepard rallying the galaxy to fight by his side, and the Commander Shepard who picked one of the endings.

[Taboo]

Destroy fully ensures that there will be NO interference from anything Reaper relatef. But we don't know if it kills the Geth and EDI yet soooo.............

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 22 avril 2012 - 01:56 .