lx_theo wrote...
So please, stop making the silly threads attacking the Synthesis option.
See, that's kind of the point. Synthesis doesn't even need atacking,l because it is so painfully flawed that the only way anyone can justify it as a positive option is by closing their eyes, covering their ears and singing "la la la la it'll all be alright in the end."
We have a total lack of understanding about the entire Synthesis process and it's implications. "Synthesis" was NEVER considered by either the Shepard and your allies or by the Illusive Man. It's the Catalyst's proposal, the Catalyst's new "solution", and we know nothing about it or how it would work.
The Catalyst offers no explanations as to how it takes effect, the methodology or reasoning behind it. We have no understanding of the science involved, the benefits, the drawbacks, the long term consequences. For all we know at the point we make the decision, we could be husking the entire galaxy. And there's no way of knowing the answers to any of these questions as all we have to draw on is less than 60 seconds of sketchy dialogue. All
we can do is make assumptions, guess, hypothesise and apparently hope.
All we know is the Catalyst's FIRST "solution" (whether there is actually a problem to solve in the first place is another matter worthy of debate) was harvesting all advanced organic life, and the cycle of extinction. An abhorrent method we've been fighting against for three games.
So. If this empirical evidence suggests that the Catalyst couldn't give a monkey's uncle about organics - any -organics - even if we ignore the horrifying moral implications of Synthesis, why should we accept that re-writing the genetic structure of all life in the galaxy into a form that the Catalyst itself sees fit will be in any way shape or form beneficial to us, our loved ones, our allies and friends?
We can't, simple as that.
Modifié par ElSuperGecko, 23 avril 2012 - 11:27 .