561 réponses à ce sujet

[Gogzilla]

I have bit of confusion as to what the general trend is about synthesis.

At first i thought people were saying something along the same lines as me ,
that the sysnthesis ending is fundementally wrong becuase it forces it on everyone, 
Why because the starchild said it would and Shepard almost dead manages to walk in straight line and run for bit and then jump right at the end.

Its not even as if it was an issue or a theme, all of sudden here comes synthesis wether you like it or not.
Does anyone in the Mass effect universe have strong feelings on the issue one way or the other , i certainly don't remeber it being mentioned in any detail.

That being said however i keep getting the impression people just don't like the idea of syntheis all together.
Am i just reading too much into it  ? or are people really offended by the idea

I  personally firmly beleive that synthesis is one of many possible futures, and like legion said "You choose to achive it on your species own term"
I just wanted it happen via self determination, not galactic rape.

How do people feel about the idea in general ?
Comment and let us know.

EDIT: Just an additional question.

If Synthesis was not forced but it was arrived on by consensus of all participants, is it still disgusting ?

Modifié par Gogzilla, 23 avril 2012 - 02:08 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

fix your post man


and yes it is

[Unit-Alpha]

Like you said, this is essentially genetic rape, so yes, it is.

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 23 avril 2012 - 02:02 .

[The Angry One]

Synthesis is not only incredibly stupid and anti-scientific, it's also racist, disgusting and despicable.

[Edolix]

Synthesis is horrible.

[BobbyDylan]

It's sounds great to me. If you imagine Shep getting on his best Joseph Fritzel rape face, as he jumps into the beam.
Then imagine a pair of small children watch in fear as their parents writhe in pain as the transform in front of them, only to follow suite a moments later, screaming with agony.

It's kinda romantic, actually.

[GiarcYekrub]

No, its the perfect ending, where everyone lives and keeps their freewill, EDI & Joker can go on to have many Kids and everyone lives happily every after except for shep who's DNA is part of every living thing in the galaxy.

[mad_yojik]

No it is not! I actually like the synthesis ending, the only problem its a bit forced on everyone, but its "best solution" IMO.

[Gogzilla]

DinoSteve wrote...

fix your post man


and yes it is

Sorry for that , adding pictures seems to break my posts now and again.

[Zolt51]

It is *very* questionable to say the least.
I personally won't choose it. I just don't feel "entitled" to make the decision on behalf of everyone else. Even though I've just spent the last 5 years saving their collective ass.

BUT I can understand that some people would at least want to try it. It is a fascinating avenue to explore, and it's a chance that simply won't come twice.
If you take the catalyst's logic seriously, then it's practically the only option too. Other endings you just consider that the synthetics problem will just have to take care of itself in the far, far future.

[Cpt. Howdy]

Besides making no sense at all, it's pretty much the opposite of what Shepard has been fighting for all the time.

[Peranor]

Yes, I find synthesis not only to be the most nonsensical of the colours. It is also disgusting and wrong on so many levels. It scares me that BioWare hints at this being the "best" colour to end the game with.

[GiarcYekrub]

Zolt51 wrote...

It is *very* questionable to say the least.
I personally won't choose it. I just don't feel "entitled" to make the decision on behalf of everyone else. Even though I've just spent the last 5 years saving their collective ass.

BUT I can understand that some people would at least want to try it. It is a fascinating avenue to explore, and it's a chance that simply won't come twice.
If you take the catalyst's logic seriously, then it's practically the only option too. Other endings you just consider that the synthetics problem will just have to take care of itself in the far, far future.

I feel the same with the destroy/control endings, I'm not going to kill the Geth and EDI and I'm not going to rob them of their freewill

[Navasha]

Synthesis is the worst of the endings morally. Forcing every living thing in the galaxy.. including all plants and insects to fundamentally change at the very basic level, destroying literally everything. Everything we know about everything would be lost....

It is the argument of transhumanism on a galaxy-wide scale, but no one gets a choice.

Imagine you wake up one morning and everyone is suddenly transformed into a BORG. Great huh?

[Unit-Alpha]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Zolt51 wrote...

It is *very* questionable to say the least.
I personally won't choose it. I just don't feel "entitled" to make the decision on behalf of everyone else. Even though I've just spent the last 5 years saving their collective ass.

BUT I can understand that some people would at least want to try it. It is a fascinating avenue to explore, and it's a chance that simply won't come twice.
If you take the catalyst's logic seriously, then it's practically the only option too. Other endings you just consider that the synthetics problem will just have to take care of itself in the far, far future.

I feel the same with the destroy/control endings, I'm not going to kill the Geth and EDI and I'm not going to rob them of their freewill

But synthesis robs *everyone* of their free will.

[Gill Kaiser]

Synthesis is morally repugnant, makes the least amount of logistical sense, violates the themes of the series the most, and is generally utterly despicable.

[Anduin The Grey]

The Angry One wrote...

Synthesis is not only incredibly stupid and anti-scientific, it's also racist, disgusting and despicable.

I'd be interested to know what in sci-fi you didn't find disgusting and despicable? Trekkie fan maybe, how's that heisenberg compensator thingy work anyway? Very well thankyou apparently

[Taboo]

I refuse to go against evolution, the process that has kept the universe in check for billions of years. Why would I go against nature itself?

[Norrax]

lazy story telling and if i wanted sythesis of organic and machines i'd go watch star trek: the next gen

[zaeeds rage]

It's ridiculous, works inconsistently, and morally reprehensible

[Interactive Civilian]

Synthesis is what Saren wanted. Saren was indoctrinated, so that means it was what the Reapers wanted (or were willing to do).

Control was what TIM wanted. TIM was indoctrinated, so that means it was also acceptable to the Reapers.

IMHO, doing what the Reapers want is disgusting.

[Biotic Flash Kick]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I refuse to go against evolution, the process that has kept the universe in check for billions of years. Why would I go against nature itself?

because your mission is stop the reapers and take back earth.
That is why.
That is why the destroy ending in the only real ending.

Control: Reapers still and exist and you control them... for now.
Synthesis: Reaper still live and you don't have control over them.
Destroy: Reapers are dead. Earth is saved if less populated. Your goal of the third game right is completed.

Modifié par Biotic Flash Kick, 23 avril 2012 - 02:17 .

[GiarcYekrub]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Zolt51 wrote...

It is *very* questionable to say the least.
I personally won't choose it. I just don't feel "entitled" to make the decision on behalf of everyone else. Even though I've just spent the last 5 years saving their collective ass.

BUT I can understand that some people would at least want to try it. It is a fascinating avenue to explore, and it's a chance that simply won't come twice.
If you take the catalyst's logic seriously, then it's practically the only option too. Other endings you just consider that the synthetics problem will just have to take care of itself in the far, far future.

I feel the same with the destroy/control endings, I'm not going to kill the Geth and EDI and I'm not going to rob them of their freewill

But synthesis robs *everyone* of their free will.

No it doesn't, Your DNA has nothing to do with free will, you me both have human DNA doesn't stop us both from being individuals. You could look at it as gifting humanity to the synthetics as Shepard has taught Legion and EDI and it has been shown in the past that memories in the ME universe are stored in DNA promoting understanding and tolerance thoughout the galaxy.(but I guess that depends on the type of shepard you were)

[Biotic Flash Kick]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Zolt51 wrote...

It is *very* questionable to say the least.
I personally won't choose it. I just don't feel "entitled" to make the decision on behalf of everyone else. Even though I've just spent the last 5 years saving their collective ass.

BUT I can understand that some people would at least want to try it. It is a fascinating avenue to explore, and it's a chance that simply won't come twice.
If you take the catalyst's logic seriously, then it's practically the only option too. Other endings you just consider that the synthetics problem will just have to take care of itself in the far, far future.

I feel the same with the destroy/control endings, I'm not going to kill the Geth and EDI and I'm not going to rob them of their freewill

But synthesis robs *everyone* of their free will.

No it doesn't, Your DNA has nothing to do with free will, you me both have human DNA doesn't stop us both from being individuals. You could look at it as gifting humanity to the synthetics as Shepard has taught Legion and EDI and it has been shown in the past that memories in the ME universe are stored in DNA promoting understanding and tolerance thoughout the galaxy.(but I guess that depends on the type of shepard you were)

And?
It doesn't complete your mission goal.

[nycmode75]

I thought the synthesis idea and the controlling reapers idea seemed to directly contradict whatever Shepard was fighting for the whole time.