449 réponses à ce sujet

[Manton-X2]

Honestly, if you think about it, the Synthesis option is like something you'd expect to hear from an 8 year old writing a story in school. "If everyone is the same, then we would all get along and there wouldn't be any fighting. The end."

Lets ignore the fact that every single human being on this planet is the same species and that we've been trying to kill each other off for tens of thousands of years. What exactly does this space magic re-write of evolution and nature gain you?

Beyond that, besides the nature of the synthesis and control endings, there's another thing that annoys the crap out of me:

I spent ME 1 defending the galaxy and fighting to the death against Saren and his notion which boils down to Synthesis.

I spent all of ME 2 and huge chunks of ME 3 defending the galaxy and fighting to the death against TIM and his notion which boils down to Control.

But after a 2 minute chat with a totally unknown entity with motives and motivations I know nothing about, I'm going to suddenly choose one of those options? This is exactly why I will now play the game and enjoy it for what it is and I stop playing once I talk to EDI and Tali at the final Earth planning meeting. Stupid crap.

[M Hedonist]

Valadras21 wrote...

Yeah, I'm playing god in synthesis. But everyone in the galaxy benefits from my choice. Something is gained that could offset the loss of the relays and the citadel. Much better than committing genocide in destroy. I would wipe out the Geth, billions of sentient self aware life forms, and the Reapers, each of which represent a galactic civilization. Remember, the Reapers are victims of the cycle as well. I simply cannot understand how one could be willing to sacrifice so much, given alternatives. So, the way I see it, who cares if I play god?

Because you do not know whether or not you are helping the galaxy through Synthesis. You cannot possibly know the exact consequences of Synthesis from the few lines the Catalyst gives you. It might have all kinds of unpleasant drawbacks.

[M0keys]

Valadras21 wrote...

Yeah, I'm playing god in synthesis. But everyone in the galaxy benefits from my choice. Something is gained that could offset the loss of the relays and the citadel. Much better than committing genocide in destroy. I would wipe out the Geth, billions of sentient self aware life forms, and the Reapers, each of which represent a galactic civilization. Remember, the Reapers are victims of the cycle as well.

Only victims in the way ****s were victims of WW2 and I don't bring that up lightly (wow, the name of the old german national socialists is a banned word here? )

and the galactic civilizations are all husked organ-parts of reapers anyway. they're not alive. if anything, you're finally putting trillions of dead souls to rest

I don't support destroy ending though.

Modifié par M0keys, 23 avril 2012 - 09:41 .

[KingKhan03]

lx_theo wrote...

KingKhan03 wrote...


What are you even talking about now? you made the thread to discuss with other people and then used insults to get your point across.

That post had nothing to do with my argument. It was an offshoot of me being annoying at the irrational ending hatred. Simply that. My point didn't have to do with why people thought it, only with how the popular interpreatation makes no sense.

Then you jumped in here and decided to try and attack me for 'debating people with insults'... or however you phrased it.

Oh you're annoyed? OMG thats so sad. Welcome to the internet.


Seriously what you basically said was "here's my argument BTW YOU"RE ALL ANNOYING PRICKS".

Modifié par KingKhan03, 23 avril 2012 - 09:42 .

[NoUserNameHere]

Valadras21 wrote...

Yeah, I'm playing god in synthesis. But everyone in the galaxy benefits from my choice. Something is gained that could offset the loss of the relays and the citadel. Much better than committing genocide in destroy. I would wipe out the Geth, billions of sentient self aware life forms, and the Reapers, each of which represent a galactic civilization. Remember, the Reapers are victims of the cycle as well. I simply cannot understand how one could be willing to sacrifice so much, given alternatives. So, the way I see it, who cares if I play god?

Killing the Reapers is self-defense, I don't care what anybody says. Where was this sympathy for the Collectors when you had that third option to allow them to continue living unpunished? Oh, wait....

[Sal86]

lx_theo wrote...

KingKhan03 wrote...


What are you even talking about now? you made the thread to discuss with other people and then used insults to get your point across.

That post had nothing to do with my argument. It was an offshoot of me being annoying at the irrational ending hatred. Simply that. My point didn't have to do with why people thought it, only with how the popular interpreatation makes no sense.

Then you jumped in here and decided to try and attack me for 'debating people with insults'... or however you phrased it.

Sorry, I know that's a typo, but I lol'd.

You made a snide comment that has nothing to do with your argument. You can't be surprised that it ruffled some feathers.

[Ryoten]

lx_theo wrote...

 Why do people think that Synthesis would make organics cyborgs or something along those lines? It makes no sense that people would be forced into a cyborg form. In fact, it makes so little sense that it also doesn't make sense that anyone would think that's what it meant. A bit... perplexing, I must say.

The Catalyst told of how synthesis would create a new DNA. He said nothing about how it would alter the physical forms of anyone. What does make sense is that if Synthesis only effects DNA and Sythetic's equivalent. They would be merged to create one fundamental building block of life rather than the two distinctly different ones that were there before. A Geth would simply be another species, like a Human is to a Turian. This is actually the only way it can make sense. If people were transformed into synthetics or cyborgs or something along those lines, it destroys the ability to write a future story coming after because of the huge variation it would force. People still have their free will. They still have their individuality. They are still who they are. The only logical interpretations of synthesis would be ones that change species at such a fundamental level that it can put them on the same playing field without changing the uniqueness of each species and individual. Any interpretation that does not take this in account will not make sense. I don't really understand why anyone would think those to be true. Maybe they are so bitter at the ending they choose to look for the interpretation they can hate on the most?

So please, stop making the silly threads attacking the Synthesis option.

I hate synthesis because you're pretty  much giving the reapers what they want.  It's been their goal the whole game.  You have been fighting against that.  Also, the catalyst says that synthesis is the "final evolution".  This is incorrect.  Darwinism has taught us that there is no final evolution.  Evolution is constant.  For their to be a apex or end, is completely contrary to the deffinition of evolution in general.

[LadyWench]

I agree with everyone who has clearly outlined their counterpoints to the OP. If Synthesis does NOT do what you claim it isn't doing, why the hell does EVERYTHING, including the plants, have glowing green circuitry at the end?

The Catalyst doesn't tell us that Synthesis will just give synthetics DNA, the result of which would actually be more like what you describe. It says it will COMBINE ALL THE DNA of synthetics (which is...facepalm) and organics together. It's not like Geth are now to organics what humans are to turians. It's more like taking whole, unshelled peanuts along with grapes and sheafs of wheat, mashing them together with a hammer, and telling me it's going to make a perfectly edible and perfect-looking PBJ sandwich. Impossible and, frankly, even if it were possible, stupid and against the whole "diversity is a good thing" morale they've been touting since ME1.

Modifié par LadyWench, 23 avril 2012 - 09:44 .

[MisterJB]

legion999 wrote...
Understanding by removing our diversity?

On what do you basis do you claim diversity will be gone? 
All life on Earth is based on DNA but not all life is the same. 
 

Peace when, unless the personalities of people are forcibly changed, individuals will want war or revenge? 

Individuals always want war and revenge. The point of Synthesis is not to prevent war between organics. The point is to end war between organics and synthetics.
One possibility is that it will allow synthetics to feel emotions like empathy thus, being able to judge actions on morality. It might prevent a war simply because they will feel bad if they commit genocide. 
There's one piece of evidence for this, EDI rests her head on Joker's shoulder in the Synthesis ending, a common organic gesture of affection.

Another option: War between Geth was unheard of until the Reapers came. If Synthesis allowed organics to reach consensus, to communicate at the speed of tought; a much more effective means of communication; imagine how many wars could be prevented.

Immortality of every being in the galaxy so overcrowding will become a huge issue especially with a cured genophage? Sorry but no thank you.

You misunderstand me. By immortality I mean, organics may no longer require food or sleep to survive, much like synthetics don't.
Instead, we could do it simply for pleasure. This could even allow the alien fleets stranded on Sol to survive.

[DJBare]

Sauruz wrote...

Valadras21 wrote...

Yeah, I'm playing god in synthesis. But everyone in the galaxy benefits from my choice. Something is gained that could offset the loss of the relays and the citadel. Much better than committing genocide in destroy. I would wipe out the Geth, billions of sentient self aware life forms, and the Reapers, each of which represent a galactic civilization. Remember, the Reapers are victims of the cycle as well. I simply cannot understand how one could be willing to sacrifice so much, given alternatives. So, the way I see it, who cares if I play god?

Because you do not know whether or not you are helping the galaxy through Synthesis. You cannot possibly know the exact consequences of Synthesis from the few lines the Catalyst gives you. It might have all kinds of unpleasant drawbacks.

I actually enjoyed his post because he was at least being honest about his choice, others are attempting to use excuses for their choice.

[lx_theo]

DJBare wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

DJBare wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

To play god is to choose the path o the universe forever and ever. Rewriting is just a method. You're still choosing how everything will be then from there on out.

Okay, it appears the other guy won't answer, maybe you will, I choose not to accept your synthesis gift, I choose to remain the individual that I am, your counter argument is?

You are still the individual that you are.

A code is simply that. A code. If it says the same thing, than it makes no difference in who you are.

Not accepted, I want to remain precisely as I am, getting older and one day to die of  old age hopefully.

I choose to not let the Geth die and not let genocide happen. Your counter argument is?

[malakim2099]

Valadras21 wrote...

Yeah, I'm playing god in synthesis. But everyone in the galaxy benefits from my choice. Something is gained that could offset the loss of the relays and the citadel. Much better than committing genocide in destroy. I would wipe out the Geth, billions of sentient self aware life forms, and the Reapers, each of which represent a galactic civilization. Remember, the Reapers are victims of the cycle as well. I simply cannot understand how one could be willing to sacrifice so much, given alternatives. So, the way I see it, who cares if I play god?

Because eliminating diversity is precisely what the geth are so adamantly against.

They want ALL life to self-determinate (except for the heretics). They do NOT want their existence determined for them.

Frankly, I think they would rather be destroyed than be forced to submit to organic bits. Though I wish Legion was still functional for THAT conversation. Could we have it as a LI then?

Legion: Shepard-Commander, I apparently have... organic parts.
Shepard: ... GO TO MY ROOM!

EDIT: And do the geth die in destroy? The Starchild clearly says that Shepard is synthetic, so she should die if she chooses Destroy... but Destroy had my Shepard survive. And we do NOT see EDI/Geth dying in the cinematics, only Reapers and Mass Relays. So we know the Starchild lies as it is.

Modifié par malakim2099, 23 avril 2012 - 09:44 .

[MisterJB]

M0keys wrote...
Because they're the ones you're changing in an attempt to save. if their opinions don't matter then you're no more moral than a computer program

Morals don't matter. Only the results.
Does evolution take into account morals?

[lx_theo]

Ryoten wrote...
I hate synthesis because you're pretty  much giving the reapers what they want.  It's been their goal the whole game.  You have been fighting against that.  Also, the catalyst says that synthesis is the "final evolution".  This is incorrect.  Darwinism has taught us that there is no final evolution.  Evolution is constant.  For their to be a apex or end, is completely contrary to the deffinition of evolution in general.

The Reaper's goal was to harvest people for new Reapers. So I disagree that synthesis was their intent.

By final evolution, I got the impression that it meant in terms of how DNA and such works.

[M0keys]

MisterJB wrote...

legion999 wrote...
Understanding by removing our diversity?

On what do you basis do you claim diversity will be gone? 
All life on Earth is based on DNA but not all life is the same. 
 

Peace when, unless the personalities of people are forcibly changed, individuals will want war or revenge? 

Individuals always want war and revenge. The point of Synthesis is not to prevent war between organics. The point is to end war between organics and synthetics.
One possibility is that it will allow synthetics to feel emotions like empathy thus, being able to judge actions on morality. It might prevent a war simply because they will feel bad if they commit genocide. 
There's one piece of evidence for this, EDI rests her head on Joker's shoulder in the Synthesis ending, a common organic gesture of affection.

AFAIK there is every indication that the synthetics in ME3 do have emotions. Not always in the same ways that we do, but they do feel things like shame and love. Synthesis ending does not magically grant synthetics emotions.

[Rhazeal]

sammysoso wrote...

If you alter someone's DNA, you are fundamentally changing them.

Also, synthetic life in the Mass Effect universe doesn't have DNA, so what would you be "combining?"

The whole notion of "final evolution" is pure idiocy. Evolution doesn't have some endpoint, not sure what science class the writers attended....

And why would Synthesis solve the problem of the created destroying the creator? We would still build things to make our lives easier after the ending, why wouldn't those things eventually rebel?

Synthesis is so stupid, it's appalling a professional writer would ever think that it works.

Bolded for emphasis.


Also how does green light contain the mass, information and  intelligence requisite to successfully rewrite the funadamantal building blocks of each individual galaxy wide regardless of their organic or synthetic state. The level of space magic required for the synthetic ending is so much more complex than the destroy or control endings that it might as well be a light that can terraform every rock to a garden class planet and stabilize every star to accomodate the planets.

It's that ludicris. It is painfully obvious that synthesis endured no logical scrutiny or peer review before being forced on us as the 'best' ending.

Modifié par Rhazeal, 23 avril 2012 - 09:47 .

[MisterJB]

Sauruz wrote...
Because you do not know whether or not you are helping the galaxy through Synthesis. You cannot possibly know the exact consequences of Synthesis from the few lines the Catalyst gives you. It might have all kinds of unpleasant drawbacks.

I am the first to admit that it is a tremendous risk.
I simply deem the possible positive consequences to be worth it.

[malakim2099]

MisterJB wrote...

M0keys wrote...
Because they're the ones you're changing in an attempt to save. if their opinions don't matter then you're no more moral than a computer program

Morals don't matter. Only the results.
Does evolution take into account morals?

Evolution is a natural process over millions of years.
Shepard is choosing to change everything in an instant flash of green light.
No being has the right to destroy diversity and make everything the same. Otherwise why did you oppose Saren in the first place?

[Sal86]

MisterJB wrote...

M0keys wrote...
Because they're the ones you're changing in an attempt to save. if their opinions don't matter then you're no more moral than a computer program

Morals don't matter. Only the results.
Does evolution take into account morals?

It does if they are evolutionarily advantageous. Why do think humans have morals?

[lx_theo]

Sal86 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

KingKhan03 wrote...


What are you even talking about now? you made the thread to discuss with other people and then used insults to get your point across.

That post had nothing to do with my argument. It was an offshoot of me being annoying at the irrational ending hatred. Simply that. My point didn't have to do with why people thought it, only with how the popular interpreatation makes no sense.

Then you jumped in here and decided to try and attack me for 'debating people with insults'... or however you phrased it.

Sorry, I know that's a typo, but I lol'd.

You made a snide comment that has nothing to do with your argument. You can't be surprised that it ruffled some feathers.

Eh, fair point. And yes, it's definitely a typo, lol. 

[M0keys]

MisterJB wrote...

M0keys wrote...
Because they're the ones you're changing in an attempt to save. if their opinions don't matter then you're no more moral than a computer program

Morals don't matter. Only the results.
Does evolution take into account morals?

Apparently it does. Morals mean that certain people will fight for certain things, thus selecting for things to survive and pass on their DNA.

[M Hedonist]

MisterJB wrote...

legion999 wrote...
Understanding by removing our diversity?

On what do you basis do you claim diversity will be gone? 
All life on Earth is based on DNA but not all life is the same. 
 

Peace when, unless the personalities of people are forcibly changed, individuals will want war or revenge? 

Individuals always want war and revenge. The point of Synthesis is not to prevent war between organics. The point is to end war between organics and synthetics.
One possibility is that it will allow synthetics to feel emotions like empathy thus, being able to judge actions on morality. It might prevent a war simply because they will feel bad if they commit genocide. 
There's one piece of evidence for this, EDI rests her head on Joker's shoulder in the Synthesis ending, a common organic gesture of affection.

Another option: War between Geth was unheard of until the Reapers came. If Synthesis allowed organics to reach consensus, to communicate at the speed of tought; a much more effective means of communication; imagine how many wars could be prevented.

Immortality of every being in the galaxy so overcrowding will become a huge issue especially with a cured genophage? Sorry but no thank you.

You misunderstand me. By immortality I mean, organics may no longer require food or sleep to survive, much like synthetics don't.
Instead, we could do it simply for pleasure. This could even allow the alien fleets stranded on Sol to survive.

And you keep dreaming inside your perfect wonderful world of synthetic-organic-hybrids. You are a fool with a god complex if you actually believe that Synthesis undeniably changes life for the better.  What if you're wrong? What if you doom everybody to a life of misery and loss of identity? You're playing with things you do not understand.

[DJBare]

lx_theo wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Not accepted, I want to remain precisely as I am, getting older and one day to die of  old age hopefully.

I choose to not let the Geth die and not let genocide happen. Your counter argument is?

As much as it pains me, I choose organics freedom of choice over synthetics, that includes my favorite EDI.

[pjotroos]

lx_theo wrote...

 Why do people think that Synthesis would make organics cyborgs or something along those lines? It makes no sense that people would be forced into a cyborg form. In fact, it makes so little sense that it also doesn't make sense that anyone would think that's what it meant. A bit... perplexing, I must say.

(snip)

So please, stop making the silly threads attacking the Synthesis option.

Well, few things. First of all, there is no such thing as "an organic DNA". DNA is different, even across similar species. I don't remember my Biology 101 well enough to go into the details, but what I remember is good enough to know the writers didn't remember theirs either. They just used buzzword, making the ending completely shallow. That's one thing. Another, as someone said, is that making change on such fundamental level is bound to have unforseen consequences. Whole medicine goes out of the window. We know nothing about psychological effects. We know nothing about physical side-effects. It's playing God on a level nobody should. It's mutilating every single living being - organic or otherwise - on a whim, without giving it a proper consideration. It's deciding "from now on everyone will have scissors instead of finger and toes!" and then making it happen, just like that, simply because someone you only just met told you it's the best solution and will make everyone love everyone forever. Crossing your fingers and hoping for the best just doesn't work. Not in any narrative that tries to pass as anything other than poorly written fanfiction.

Modifié par pjotroos, 23 avril 2012 - 09:49 .

[malakim2099]

M0keys wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

legion999 wrote...
Understanding by removing our diversity?

On what do you basis do you claim diversity will be gone? 
All life on Earth is based on DNA but not all life is the same. 
 

Peace when, unless the personalities of people are forcibly changed, individuals will want war or revenge? 

Individuals always want war and revenge. The point of Synthesis is not to prevent war between organics. The point is to end war between organics and synthetics.
One possibility is that it will allow synthetics to feel emotions like empathy thus, being able to judge actions on morality. It might prevent a war simply because they will feel bad if they commit genocide. 
There's one piece of evidence for this, EDI rests her head on Joker's shoulder in the Synthesis ending, a common organic gesture of affection.

AFAIK there is every indication that the synthetics in ME3 do have emotions. Not always in the same ways that we do, but they do feel things like shame and love. Synthesis ending does not magically grant synthetics emotions.

The fact that Legion clearly has some sort of feelings for Commander Shepard in ME2 shows that synthetics have emotions. Just ask him why he's wearing N7 armor instead of just getting something more effective. It always struck me that he had admiration/respect, at the very least for Shepard.