561 réponses à ce sujet

[Anduin The Grey]

Meltemph wrote...

Wolven_Soul wrote...

EvilMind wrote...

Synthesis is the best ending, its the next step in evolution which is a good thing. People who whine about it just dont look at the bigger picture, in the long run synthesis is a good thing

It is not the next step of evolution.  Evolution is a completely natural process, and nothing about synthesis, or synthetic augmentation is natural. 

I am not saying I am against the idea of humanity eventually augmenting themselves in such ways, as at least they would have a choice in the matter.  I am just saying it is not in anyway a natural state of evolution.

The ending isnt transhumanism.  Transhumanism is like replacing something with tech.  What snythesis is, is an extreme form of eugenics, quitel iterally.  The kid even says this when he says it creates a new fromework, a new DNA.  You are "fixing" the "undesirable" traits in organics, essentially, is what the kid is trying to argue, which is why he thinks it fixes his solution.  

Remember he never stated that the crucuible is forcing him to do any of this, but that it gives him new possibilities, that is how it changed him.  There is no indication that it changed him beyond this.  The arguement with synthesis, I think, isnt because it is what it is, but because you mentally have to fix people in your own image or in your own "pefect" image, since the game doesnt give you anything.  This causes a problem...as you can see.

The Catalyst also mentions his absolute refusal to act on any of the new possibilities made available to him, it is quite content to let the REapers continue to do their thing, personally I thought the whole point of being consumed by two endings was to incorporate everything your Shepard was into and to influence the final result, but that's just an assumption

[Wolven_Soul]

Anduin The Grey wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...

If synthesis was the "best ending" Bioware alluded to post-release, I would be terrified to be in a room alone with one of the devs.

Honestly this alone with the fact that you basically capitulate to Space Hitler makes me not even want to look at any of my Mass Effect games.
To know that the people behind them think the philosophy of synthesis and cooperation with a mass murderer is a "good" ending? It fills me with dread.

You're not capitulating to space hitler, you could just sit there and watch the Reapers burn the universe, you just don't get a cut scene for that because Shepard is going to use what resources he has on hand to stop them. The catalyst makes it very clear that unless you make a choice that's exactly what it plans to do.

That is still capitulating.  The fact that if we do not make a choice the galaxy burns does not mean it is not giving in.

[kyg_20X6]

Problems with 'synthesis':

1. How could a device change every being, organic and synthetic, at the molecular level to be a perfect, flawless meld of the two? It seems almost impossible for a device, created in the manner the Crucible was, to have such a precise effect.

2. The moral question of forcing such a huge change on the entire galaxy (at least for many) against its will. Unlike with the Genophage, or the Quarian/Geth conflict, Shepard has no one to bounce the idea off except its proponent. As EDI says, 'moral choices shouldn't be made in a vacuum'.

3. All your decisions in just ME3, not to mention the series, if you played a Paragon/Paragade prove that synthetics/organics can work together (and want to). And, rather than want to dominate and become more superior, synthetics (as evidenced by Legion/Geth/EDI) want to become more organic (at least in their thinking). The Geth didn't start the war with the Quarians and didn't pursue them. Saren's army was both organic AND synthetic (Krogans) and was coerced into fighting the galaxy by the Reapers, via promises of advancements, genophage cures and a little indoctrination. The other major threats to the galaxy were either organic - Krogans & Rachni - or Reapers: Collectors, Cerberus and themselves. The major threats to galactic peace have been organics and Reapers. And everything in ME3 tells synthetics and organics can coexist peacefully, at least after Shepard's actions. Even in a Renegade playthrough, you pretty much have to ignore this possibility and be a dick for there to be no peace. Hell, even the AI on the Citadel in ME1 only wanted to get to Geth space and live in peace.

3. Synthesis, IMO, negate a lot of the good work you've done in ME3. You've got the Geth and Quarians to work together, the Geth are helping the Quarians adapt. How is that effected when you suddenly make them all cyborgs? Is there any reason for them to work together? Same thing with the Genophage cure bring Krogans/Turians closer together. And what if you didn't cure the Genophage, would synthesis cure it? What about EDI bringing together her synthetic, corporeal self and a more organic point of view. Is all that rended moot by the fact that she, and everyone else, are now half organic/synthetic? Shepard got everyone to work together on their own terms, often mutually beneficial, synthetics are thinking more organically: all without synthesis.

4. The effects this change, if it somehow worked perfectly, would have on society: I can see CLEAR AS DAY there would be factionalism and strife. There would be organics who want to go back to being organics. Vice versa for synthetics. There would be organics who embrace the tech and want more, synthetics who want to be more organic. And don't think even the two groups that, say, want to be more organic would support eachother: one embraces synthesis and the other abhors it. A lot of people would resent Shepard (and maybe the Alliance) for what happened. There would be war and acts of terrorism. Any major breakthroughs in making people more synthetic, for example, would be attacked by pro-organics. If a whole species adopted a certain POV, the scale of conflict would leap to galactic levels. And the REAPERS ARE STILL AROUND and NOT under Shepard's control. Who do you think they'd support? Do you think they'd deal peacefully with those who resisted synthesis?

Either way you slice it...

You pick synthesis, you're gonna have a bad time.

[Cypher_CS]

Meltemph, you are jumping to conclusions while claiming yourself it left a lot to be explained.
A new DNA doesn't mean it's fixing undesirable traits. It just might mean adding something like this:
http://io9.com/59032...-the-real-thing and still leaving evolution to deal with which traits become dominant and which aren't.

No where does it even suggest that bad traits are removed.

Matthewmi,
First of all - all three choices are moral evils.
There is no Good choice. Even Control destroys a central piece of civilization and gives absolute power to... whatever will hold it after Shepard is incinerated by it.

And you'd reproduce the same way.

[Anduin The Grey]

Wolven_Soul wrote...

Anduin The Grey wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...

If synthesis was the "best ending" Bioware alluded to post-release, I would be terrified to be in a room alone with one of the devs.

Honestly this alone with the fact that you basically capitulate to Space Hitler makes me not even want to look at any of my Mass Effect games.
To know that the people behind them think the philosophy of synthesis and cooperation with a mass murderer is a "good" ending? It fills me with dread.

You're not capitulating to space hitler, you could just sit there and watch the Reapers burn the universe, you just don't get a cut scene for that because Shepard is going to use what resources he has on hand to stop them. The catalyst makes it very clear that unless you make a choice that's exactly what it plans to do.

That is still capitulating.  The fact that if we do not make a choice the galaxy burns does not mean it is not giving in.

You only capitulate if you want to see a cut scene. There is absolutely no way the Catalyst will act on any of the new possibilities presented to it and unfortunately, so it would seem, the only three options open to you is what the Crucible has 'Patched' the Catalyst with.

Your 4th choice is obvious, continue to watch Earth burn and wait another 37 million years in the hope that the Crucible has been improved to include more options.

None of them may be ideal options but story wise they are the only options you have open to you.

[Meltemph]

The Catalyst also mentions his absolute refusal to act on any of the new possibilities made available to him, it is quite content to let the REapers continue to do their thing, personally I thought the whole point of being consumed by two endings was to incorporate everything your Shepard was into and to influence the final result, but that's just an assumption

Actually the kid said he "cant" do it, which raises more questions then answers.

Meltemph, you are jumping to conclusions while claiming yourself it left a lot to be explained.
A new DNA doesn't mean it's fixing undesirable traits. It just might mean adding something like this:
http://io9.com/59032...-the-real-thing and still leaving evolution to deal with which traits become dominant and which aren't.

what you jsut linked and what the kid is talking about is not the same ting. Besides that point, the kid infers that this will fix his problem, which would only be possible with removing traits that make someone want to destroy what they create or vise versa.

[Wolven_Soul]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Tietj wrote...

I'm personally repulsed at the idea of synthesis. I imagine there are quite a few other individuals in the galaxy who are.

My fear for the extended cut (which I'm generally optimistic about, however) is that it will expand on synthesis being the "best" choice, through a lot of narrative contrivance. "And every being in the galaxy was very happy that Shepard chose green..."

Michael Gamble said that they are going to fix the EMS issue because they seem to have realized that people do NOT believe Synthesis is the best ending. People like Destroy and it shows.

Genocide(Destroy) is never justified I really hope people do not like destroy

I guess you do not agree with the Vulcan philosophy that the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.  Yeah destroying the geth sucks, but to avoid something as morally repugnant as synthesis, I will make that sacrifice and honor their memory.

[matthewmi]

Cypher_CS wrote...

Meltemph, you are jumping to conclusions while claiming yourself it left a lot to be explained.
A new DNA doesn't mean it's fixing undesirable traits. It just might mean adding something like this:
http://io9.com/59032...-the-real-thing and still leaving evolution to deal with which traits become dominant and which aren't.

No where does it even suggest that bad traits are removed.

Matthewmi,
First of all - all three choices are moral evils.
There is no Good choice. Even Control destroys a central piece of civilization and gives absolute power to... whatever will hold it after Shepard is incinerated by it.

And you'd reproduce the same way.

This new DNA must be amazing.  Guess you'd have to increase your dietary intake of metals and silicates.

[Meltemph]

Wolven_Soul wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Tietj wrote...

I'm personally repulsed at the idea of synthesis. I imagine there are quite a few other individuals in the galaxy who are.

My fear for the extended cut (which I'm generally optimistic about, however) is that it will expand on synthesis being the "best" choice, through a lot of narrative contrivance. "And every being in the galaxy was very happy that Shepard chose green..."

Michael Gamble said that they are going to fix the EMS issue because they seem to have realized that people do NOT believe Synthesis is the best ending. People like Destroy and it shows.

Genocide(Destroy) is never justified I really hope people do not like destroy

I guess you do not agree with the Vulcan philosophy that the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.  Yeah destroying the geth sucks, but to avoid something as morally repugnant as synthesis, I will make that sacrifice and honor their memory.

Well, you could take the word of HAcket over teh word of the Starchild and just believe taht you did infact make the crucible good enough where it only hits the reapers.

[Wolven_Soul]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Anduin The Grey wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Tietj wrote...

I'm personally repulsed at the idea of synthesis. I imagine there are quite a few other individuals in the galaxy who are.

My fear for the extended cut (which I'm generally optimistic about, however) is that it will expand on synthesis being the "best" choice, through a lot of narrative contrivance. "And every being in the galaxy was very happy that Shepard chose green..."

Michael Gamble said that they are going to fix the EMS issue because they seem to have realized that people do NOT believe Synthesis is the best ending. People like Destroy and it shows.

Genocide(Destroy) is never justified I really hope people do not like destroy

After seeing how the Reapers have been harvesting the genetic destinies for millions of years I say in Destroy they have it coming :happy:

How do you know their isn't a reaper homeworld full of anti harvesting protesters that your about to wipe out along with the Geth. I mean you only speak to 3 Reapers and something that claims to of created them.

Umm, we know that there is no Reaper homeworld and no anti harvesting protestors.  When the Reapers are done reaping they all go out into dark space and chill for a while, waiting until the next time galactic civilization has advanced far enough to wipe them out again.

[Cypher_CS]

kyg

1. Must be an Aperture ray
But yeah, that's a valid point. Just a problem with showing affects of the story, though.

2. Again, all three choices are Moral Evils and Moral vacuums.

3. Depends on your playthroughs really.

3 (what, again?). They aren't cyborgs.
And basically, all the choices negate the good you've done. Hello? No Mass Relays!!! Unless you can now, somehow, work around it with the Synthesis.

4. Yeah, so?

[Cypher_CS]

matthewmi wrote...

This new DNA must be amazing.  Guess you'd have to increase your dietary intake of metals and silicates.

Huh?
No. What does that have anything to do with... anything?

[YNation913]

matthewmi wrote...

Cypher_CS wrote...

Meltemph, you are jumping to conclusions while claiming yourself it left a lot to be explained.
A new DNA doesn't mean it's fixing undesirable traits. It just might mean adding something like this:
http://io9.com/59032...-the-real-thing and still leaving evolution to deal with which traits become dominant and which aren't.

No where does it even suggest that bad traits are removed.

Matthewmi,
First of all - all three choices are moral evils.
There is no Good choice. Even Control destroys a central piece of civilization and gives absolute power to... whatever will hold it after Shepard is incinerated by it.

And you'd reproduce the same way.

This new DNA must be amazing.  Guess you'd have to increase your dietary intake of metals and silicates.

 
I think we can all agree that the nuances of the explanation leave a lot to be desired. Yes, the idea of a "new" DNA makes little sense when thinking about it too long. The real question is whether synthesis really harms life in the galaxy. I feel that based on what little we're told and shown, we have good reason to believe that it does not.

[Meltemph]

The Catalyst also mentions his absolute refusal to act on any of the new possibilities made available to him, it is quite content to let the REapers continue to do their thing, personally I thought the whole point of being consumed by two endings was to incorporate everything your Shepard was into and to influence the final result, but that's just an assumption

I should add... Each choice other then destroy has very obvious implications of Shep dying and the reapers living. Even with control, the kid states that control would control him as well(which makes even less sense, which made me question his...honesty, right away). I think these choices were always there, on the citadel, since those tubes are there, obviously. I think the crucible just makes these choices galaxy wide.

[FatalX7.0]

I will raep and molest your DNA.















WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT.

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 23 avril 2012 - 04:56 .

[matthewmi]

YNation913 wrote...

matthewmi wrote...

Cypher_CS wrote...

Meltemph, you are jumping to conclusions while claiming yourself it left a lot to be explained.
A new DNA doesn't mean it's fixing undesirable traits. It just might mean adding something like this:
http://io9.com/59032...-the-real-thing and still leaving evolution to deal with which traits become dominant and which aren't.

No where does it even suggest that bad traits are removed.

Matthewmi,
First of all - all three choices are moral evils.
There is no Good choice. Even Control destroys a central piece of civilization and gives absolute power to... whatever will hold it after Shepard is incinerated by it.

And you'd reproduce the same way.

This new DNA must be amazing.  Guess you'd have to increase your dietary intake of metals and silicates.

 
I think we can all agree that the nuances of the explanation leave a lot to be desired. Yes, the idea of a "new" DNA makes little sense when thinking about it too long. The real question is whether synthesis really harms life in the galaxy. I feel that based on what little we're told and shown, we have good reason to believe that it does not.

I agree the explanation is super awful and I love the game as a whole.  The harm comes from making the choice to begin with, making a change to all life in the galaxy whether they want it or not would seem to fit harming life in general. 

[Cypher_CS]

They're all stuck between a rock and a hard place...

[AngryFrozenWater]

Synthesis seems to pollute the galaxy's synthetics and organics with Shepard's DNA, whether they like it or not. It is presented as being the solution that makes both synthetics and organics happy. It is as if that DNA magically provides galactic peace. The problem is that my Shepards already achieved that. All races were united, including the geth. Like the OP stated it violates the right of self-determination of the civilizations and its individual members. Because the races were already united synthesis, control and destruction are solutions to a non-existent problem. There is only one solution my Shepards are interested in: Exterminate the reapers and leave everything else intact.

[Victia]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

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

^^ This

[kyg_20X6]

Cypher_CS wrote...

kyg

1. Must be an Aperture ray
But yeah, that's a valid point. Just a problem with showing affects of the story, though.

2. Again, all three choices are Moral Evils and Moral vacuums.

3. Depends on your playthroughs really.

3 (what, again?). They aren't cyborgs.
And basically, all the choices negate the good you've done. Hello? No Mass Relays!!! Unless you can now, somehow, work around it with the Synthesis.

4. Yeah, so?

3. I used the term 'cyborgs' because I couldn't be bothered writing 'organics/synthetics' again. Maybe 'hybrids' would be better? 'Destroy' doesn't undo as much, only really the Geth/Quarian situation and that's assuming the blast ACTUALLY destroys the Geth. Like DJBare said, it seems that at the highest EMS level it only targets Reaper tech (hence why Shepard lives). I'm not sure exactly how this would effect the Reaper code in the new Geth. As for the relays, BW seems be hinting through Twitter that either: there not really destroyed, or people can use FTL until they (re)build a replacement system. If that's the case, it's upto BW to portray that as a beliveable prospect.

4. The Starchild portrays syntheis as being a an answer to the cycle of conflict/exinction. My statements in 4 show my opinion that it's going to lead to more conflict and probably mass exinction as the Reapers whipe out/indoctrinate resisters. We'll get the Reaper cycle all over again, or at least a varient of it. Couple this with the fact that Shepard brought peace w/o synthesis (well, not peace with the Reapers) and Starchild's argument has no legs to stand on.

[Shepard Wins]

It's horrendously evil and, if that wasn't enough, it's also bludgeoningly stupid (NEW DNA!!!).

[DJBare]

Anyone else feeling glad this is not reality?, seriously some of the people here would have me real nervous if this was real.

[Wolven_Soul]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...
Sorry, but the reapers are the kind of species that goes out shopping for fruit every Wednesday. They kill organic civiliaztions, that's what they were created to do.

Not, they're created for preserving something of the Reaperized species, possibly their collective minds (each of us is a nation). In any other respect, they're just the Catalyst's tools.

They are just the Catalyst's tools.  What exactly is it that they preseving anyway?  It is obvious that the wills of those they harvest are destroyed, otherwise there is no way in hell that those people would willingly work towards the Reapers goals.

I would rather my memory be preserved in a museum or something rather than some giant killer robot.

Modifié par Wolven_Soul, 23 avril 2012 - 05:05 .

[Wolven_Soul]

Ieldra2 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Destroy was never the goal of my Shepard. I always wanted to preserve something of the Reapers if it was possible without succumbing to their indoctrination. If you remove the harvesting of advanced species, the Reapers are interesting. Why would I want to destroy them except for a misplaced notion of vengeance? They were under the control of the Catalyst, after all.

By your logic, the ****s would never have been put on trial in Nuremberg.
After all, it's just vengeance right?

I mean, Sovereign and Harbinger were totally reluctant in their roles weren't they?

The Reapers are not human and can't be judged by human notions of good or evil.

Watch me.

[Biotic_Warlock]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

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

Shepaloo rape face was an easter egg?