209 réponses à ce sujet

[Kunari801]

davishepard wrote...

The Synthesis end the problem that the Catalyst presents, and stop the Reapers. The control option is bad for Shepard, the destroy option is bad for the synthetics and the synthesis is bad for Shepard and invasive, yes, for everyone. You have to consider what you will sacrifice, because stopping the Reapers won't came for free, and at the ending of the game trilogy, after losing everyone that you lose, Shepard (and you, the players), should have realized it. 

Ah yes, the pick your war crime ending: 

[Jonathan Shepard]

Kunari801 wrote...

davishepard wrote...

The Synthesis end the problem that the Catalyst presents, and stop the Reapers. The control option is bad for Shepard, the destroy option is bad for the synthetics and the synthesis is bad for Shepard and invasive, yes, for everyone. You have to consider what you will sacrifice, because stopping the Reapers won't came for free, and at the ending of the game trilogy, after losing everyone that you lose, Shepard (and you, the players), should have realized it. 

Ah yes, the pick your war crime ending: 

That's beautiful.

[wright1978]

The central conflict is indeed against a synthetic race.

However theme
ME1: Uniting a diverse band of aliens and humans and their diversity helping to prevent the genocide of all life.
ME2: uniting a rag tag band of humans of aliens and their diversity helping to prevent the genocide of the human race.
ME3: Uniting the various diverse alien races ....starbrat nonsense...more nonsense....loads of speculation about nonsense

[Gill Kaiser]

davishepard wrote...

Gill Kaiser wrote...

No, "Reapers vs organics" there too. You can't hinge a concept about an entire state of being on one species. Every one of your "synthetic vs organic" examples is directly caused by the Reapers.

Why you fail in see that Reapers are machines/synthetics? Some kind or problem, denial, or just the will to bash what a team member said because you, I don't know, feel so awesome in doing so?

You really can't see the distinction? If the Reapers are the only antagonistic synthetic race, how does the theme escalate to a broader concept like "organics vs synthetics" instead of simply "organics vs Reapers"? That's like saying that if the Turians started a galactic war, the theme would be "dextros versus levos", instead of just "everyone vs turians". The only way the theme would escalate to "dextros vs levos" is if the quarians also, independently of the turians, decided to fight levos. At that point it becomes a broader philosophical issue related to the common thread between two antagonistic forces. If the quarians never got involved, or were coerced into the war by the turians, it's still just "everyone versus the turians", because the driving force of the conflict is not dextro amino acid-based life, but simply a single species that just happens to be dextro-based.

If the geth were inherently hostile to organics, then perhaps I could see the theme being "organics vs synthetics". Ylu need at least two examples before the issue extends beyond a single group's actions. Unfortunately the Geth are peaceful and only attack organics in self-defence or under Reaper influence. Their synthetic nature therefore actively undermines the concept of the "synthetics vs organics" theme instead of bolstering it.

By the end of the series it shouldbe patently obvious that the theme is "the galaxy versus the Reapers". Every species, synthetic and organic alike, are unity against their common enemy. The fact that they're synthetic is not the prime motivator. The fact that they're killing everyone, is.

[feliciano2040]

aj2070 wrote...

Synthesis = Harrison Bergeron = cheap way to eliminate conflict.

Or Hegelian philosophy at work.

[knightnblu]

element eater wrote...

i saw it as about diversity seeing all races as they are equals and that they achieve there greatest through cooperation rather then dominance


when people cooperate and accept others:
-turians and humans old enemies but when the cooperate they create the normandy
-saren would have succeeded if not for the combined efforts of the ME1 team
- the collectors a life form devoid of individuality and free will are defteated by a team made up of lots of differant individual races and viewpoints
-ME3 the reapers would win if it wasnt for everyone putting aside there differances and fighting togethor

those who deny it
-cerberus want only human dominance and they loose there humanity seeking it
-batarians isolate themselves and seek dominance on there own they loose everything
- the asari leaders refuse to share information and they loose thessia as a rresult if they'd been more forthcoming it wouldnt have come to that
- Javiks cycle looses because they lack diversity 

That is an oversimplification. There is strength in diversity, but only when it is united by common beliefs. This is the primary concept behind the UFP in Star Trek. Each individual people are united by the common bonds of shared values. Each race contributes its own unique strengths while its weaknesses are covered by an allied race. Mistakes are still made both by the UFP and by the individual races because that is the nature of organic life which is essentially an agent of entropy.
 
Shepard unites the various and sundry peoples of the galaxy and in so doing forms a powerful synergy that multiplies the might of the galaxy making them the equals of the Reapers. That is the fleet that arrives in Sol to do battle and I guarantee you that the Reapers experienced a moment of pause when they saw what was heading their way.
 
Add in that the races of the galaxy are fighting for their very survival and for everything that they hold dear and you have a will forged of diamond. Had I been Shepard I would much rather have gone down fighting than to meekly submit to the abomination providing me with my three choices. The Reapers may have won, but I guarantee you we would have bled them for their victory and so much so that the next Reaping cycle would have been their last given Liara's black boxes seeded across the galaxy which would have warned them of their peril.
 
I am not saying that you are wrong, just that you may have over emphasized the diversity.

[element eater]

^im not gunna say it wasnt an oversimplification. And i do actualy agree with you, I should have included you points in my post. 

but i think what makes there combinbed force so formidable is that they are all differant. Each contributes something another might not. If all the races had more closely resembled each other i dont think  the force would be so effective.

also i have next to no knowledge about star trek so that referance was lost on me 

edit: im not sure if tghis post sounds right but ive gotto stop now so ill just hope it does

Modifié par element eater, 26 avril 2012 - 02:48 .

[DamonD7]

Paragon_Interrupt wrote...

Green glowing baseball hat confirmed as apex of evolution.

lol, worth quoting!

[Iakus]

Kunari801 wrote...

davishepard wrote...

The Synthesis end the problem that the Catalyst presents, and stop the Reapers. The control option is bad for Shepard, the destroy option is bad for the synthetics and the synthesis is bad for Shepard and invasive, yes, for everyone. You have to consider what you will sacrifice, because stopping the Reapers won't came for free, and at the ending of the game trilogy, after losing everyone that you lose, Shepard (and you, the players), should have realized it. 

Ah yes, the pick your war crime ending: 

Picture's worth a thousand words

[goose2989]

-Skorpious- wrote...

Synthesis should never have been in the game in the first place if the developers can't explain its reasoning/inclusion without getting frustrated.

I mean c'mon.

[a.m.p]

I'm sorry, but now I am really, honestly confused.

Fan:
There was always only life, in different forms.

Gamble:
is EDI alive? do you consider that a form of life?

Errr... yes? Just, you know, different.

Modifié par a.m.p, 26 avril 2012 - 04:16 .

[MOELANDER]

If they really were so hellbent on making a game about synthetics against organics I suggest they should just ask Pappy EA to buy them the license for Terminator franchise games.

[NYG1991]

Synthesis reminds me of Magneto's plan to fix the mutant/human conflict in the first X-Men movie.

[jeff359]

Stygian1 wrote...

Gamble has no clue what he's talking about.

Sorry, someone had to say it. Not an insult, but he blatantly missed the main themes of the series.

I agree he came so close but missed by not going
the rest of the way, it’s kind of disheartening. It’s like saying the soldiers
in any war and the reason not the different ideals of the leaders behind the
soldiers.  And saying the only way to remove conflict is to remove any differences... yikes.

[LKx]

Mystiq6 wrote...

I apologize in advance to Mike Gamble but I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking there's a huge difference in how BioWare sees their game and how the fans do.   Especially after reading these tweets. I'm going directly against what he asked people not to do on Twitter but I feel this is important enough to bring up in discussion.

TL;DR in bold. (Even the TL;DR has quite a bit of text, sorry.)

Below are a series of tweets and responses from Mike Gamble:

The themes of ME are all about the organic and synthetic struggle. Synthesis breaks the chain forever.

Fan:
Synthesis is even worse than control... What if some people would rather choose death than be a half-machine?

Gamble:
but the idea is there is no concept of machine or organic anymore. There is only life.

Fan:
Did I miss something then? I don't recall organic vs synthetic being all that big of a theme.

Gamble:
geth vs organics. reapers vs organics.

Fan:
how do you figure thats one of the main themes? I never got that impression at all playing ME

Gamble:
cycle of sentient synthetic machines, and the struggle against organics.

Fan:
There was always only life, in different forms.

Gamble:
is EDI alive? do you consider that a form of life?

I also never got the impression that organic vs synthetic was one of the major themes of Mass Effect. It seems sort of forced in the ending. It felt like more of a means to an end than the running theme of the series. A struggle for life, maybe. Fighting for your own freedom and uniting all forms of life.

The question about EDI seems to go counter to evidence presented in the game itself. I'm still not sure if I see EDI as "alive" but there's no denying the scene with Legion and him finally referring to himself in the first person. Later, EDI admits to being afraid.

I'm not convinced Synthesis breaks the chain forever. It will, at least until fully organic life evolves again on the infinite time scale -- the same thing used to defend the Catalyst's arguments that at some point synthetics will wipe out all organic life. Or until the "Semisynetics/Semiorganics" create a true synthetic again. Machines must still exist or ships would cease to exist, unless you're trying to tell me the Normandy is now part organic, because that would just be creepy.

I haven't heard anything yet that makes any sense out of this ending and this isn't helping my confidence in the Extended Cut. I want it to be great but I don't think I can move on as long as synthetic vs organic is supposed to be a major theme when that's not how I see the game. The most popular fan interpretations seem to be the ones that turn the major theme from synthetic vs organic back into fighting for life and uniting the galaxy, such as the Indoctrination Theory.

Take the scene with Javik and how he describes what the downfall of the Protheans was. In his cycle, all organic races were united under one banner. The trouble is, their diferences disappeared under the Prothean empire. Because in this cycle each race is left alone to their own devices -- along with their strengths and weaknesses -- the organic races stand a better chance. Diversity, something that seems to stem from Mass Effect 1 when your squadmates at the beginning of the game dislike alien races but are still forced to ally with them. Protheans refused to ally and preferred to just take over. Synthesis erases the differences between types of "life" (assuming you refer to Legion and EDI as alive).

I also find it hard to believe that both sides of the Synthesized "race" will suddenly join up with one another like nothing ever happened. The geth fought each other and they are both sides of the same coin. I don't think a human synthetic is going to much like a reaper organic. They did try to exterminate us, after all.

Far apart from the reapers, the krogan and rachni, at one point, seemed to be almost as big a threat as the reapers. Choosing to exterminate the quarians, who wanted to kill off the geth; the rachni, who were so easily controlled by the reapers; and the krogan, who out of sheer brutality were posing a danger themselves; seems to show that even without synthetics, organics have enough problems to be getting on with. It isn't without putting aside differences that the major threat can be removed. Synthesis does not put aside any differences, only the superficial one. Control doesn't do much of anything (if the Catalyst can be trusted) that Destroy doesn't do, it's just an insurance plan.

Is the crux of the fan outrage at the ending that most players don't see the major theme as synthetics vs organics? Nevermind that nothing in the game seems to give any reasonable explanation to any of the choices making sense in the context of the game (not to mention how the hell Synthesis is supposed to work on a practical level).

I saw both Dragon Age as a series of forced, sort of myopic moral dilemmas. You're forced to choose between what the player would see as the lesser of two evils in nearly every decision Dragon Age allowed. The decisions in those games seemed very much constructed. While Mass Effect's choices were as constructed, it didn't feel like shows like CSI and NCIS where the empathy is bored into you with a jackhammer. By ignoring the unity of geth and quarians and denying organics a chance by themselves (and teasing the player by allowing Shepard to live), Mass Effect veers down that road that I so disliked about Dragon Age.

If the intent of Thessia and Tuchanka were to make the player second guess themselves in the end, it didn't work. This is just like the "lesser of two evils" choices that I disliked in Dragon Age. Those scenes made me side with the geth and EDI, which is why I consider Destroy the best ending. Synthesis just ruins individuality. Control is no assured hope because the Catalyst can't be trusted. Destroy kills off the reapers and with a high enough EMS, EDI doesn't die so the geth aren't dead either. It rides right along with what I, as a player, have been led to believe by the game. All the others run completely counter.

I just don't think any type of extra explanation is going to change people's minds that easily.

Far apart (again) from the theme, when I first got to the ending, I saw it as the ultimate choice of the game's dialog system: do you go paragon, renegade or neutral. I almost don't think any of them solve the problem of synthetic vs. organic. I see it as a contrived theme with no possible resolution, even in Destroy, but at least Destroy lets Shepard keep his morals and eliminate the immediate threat. There's still time to work it out ("hope", as the Catalyst calls it). The Catalyst served its purpose of allowing the game's ending to take a 180 but in doing so toyed with my interpretation of the game thus far, which is [/i]why the Indoctrination Theory is so appealing: it returns the world to my version of normal.[i]

ME is definitly going to be confirmed the "Lost" of videogames.

While i see that ME was a lot about synthetics vs Organics, things turned out to be a lot more complicated that what the catalyst want to sell you (at least in my playthrough), but the writers seem to have ignored that.

[Leem_0001]

'knightnblu :
Shepard unites the various and sundry peoples of the galaxy and in so doing forms a powerful synergy that multiplies the might of the galaxy making them the equals of the Reapers. That is the fleet that arrives in Sol to do battle and I guarantee you that the Reapers experienced a moment of pause when they saw what was heading their way.

Add in that the races of the galaxy are fighting for their very survival and for everything that they hold dear and you have a will forged of diamond. Had I been Shepard I would much rather have gone down fighting than to meekly submit to the abomination providing me with my three choices. The Reapers may have won, but I guarantee you we would have bled them for their victory and so much so that the next Reaping cycle would have been their last given Liara's black boxes seeded across the galaxy which would have warned them of their peril.'

This would have been better than what we got.

[chester013]

So he was saying Synthesis is the only way that EDI or the Geth could be alive? The whole story arc of EDI and more importantly Legion was that Synthetics could indeed be considered as alive, or am I missing something? What happened to self-determination? The variety of life in the galaxy and achieving goals working together despite our differences was always a positive thing wasn't it?

I mean yeah organics v synthetics is a theme, but it's like saying I'm having fries and a burger for dinner; it's not the main course. 

Other issues aside, I personally find synthesis creepy and unsettling. Equally, I find the idea of actual, real people thinking that this is a great solutions to the, and I hesitate to say this because I never got the memo, central theme of the mass effect series pretty damned weird.

Modifié par chester013, 26 avril 2012 - 04:52 .

[Mystiq6]

My iPhone is working against me so I have to do it like this.

I can accept that organic vs synthetic is a theme of the game but not a MAJOR theme, or at the very least not the single biggest. Semantics. I think it's safe to say we're still in agreement. I'll clarify the OP when I'm not forced to type on a phone.

I also think I know where this theme disconnect is coming from. I'll try to explain that, too.

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...
I don't see anyone here saying it's not, so stop talking out your ass.

Here is the quote from the OP:

"I also never got the impression that organic vs synthetic was one of the major themes of Mass Effect"

He even bolded it, so unfortunatly I cannot take anythign else you say seriously, since you do not know how to properly read sentences.

Now I feel embarassed.

The OP is wrong, in that regard. It has always been a major theme, but always beneath several others in terms of importance. 

Modifié par Mystiq6, 26 avril 2012 - 04:49 .

[chester013]

Leem_0001 wrote...

'knightnblu :
Shepard unites the various and sundry peoples of the galaxy and in so doing forms a powerful synergy that multiplies the might of the galaxy making them the equals of the Reapers. That is the fleet that arrives in Sol to do battle and I guarantee you that the Reapers experienced a moment of pause when they saw what was heading their way.

Add in that the races of the galaxy are fighting for their very survival and for everything that they hold dear and you have a will forged of diamond. Had I been Shepard I would much rather have gone down fighting than to meekly submit to the abomination providing me with my three choices. The Reapers may have won, but I guarantee you we would have bled them for their victory and so much so that the next Reaping cycle would have been their last given Liara's black boxes seeded across the galaxy which would have warned them of their peril.'

This would have been better than what we got.

Indeed, a pyrric victory for the reapers would have made for a more interesting ending I think. Although that means you can't continue the franchise within 50,000 years of the last game now does it?

[Mims]

Words cannot even describe my loathing for the synthesis ending. Honestly I'd rather have the worst destroy ending than the 'best' synthesis ending.

[Although I try my best to sympathize with people who do like it. I just cannot rationalize it on any level.]

It troubles me greatly that the extended cut could potentially just glamorize that ending at the expense of the other two, throwing all semblance of reality out the window.

[Chronor]

I agree that 'synthetics vs. organics' was a major theme, but as many have pointed out, it was not the overarching theme of the ME series. My impression of the overarching theme is that of overcoming seemingly insurmountable odds via unity through diversity. My Shepard was just the spear point of that thrust to paraphrase Cmd. Hackett.

Another way to look at the Reapers; to me, the Reapers would still have similar impact if they were just an organic race who control such advanced technology that gives them almost overwhelming advantage in carrying out their harvest. Take this hypothesis to the next step, then no one can really claim that the ME series theme was ALL about 'synthetics vs. organics'. The Reapers remain a nightmare that needed to be eradicated.

Some points to emphasize and reiterate:
(1) Geth in ME1 was a faction of the true Geth as we find out in ME2. They followed Sovereign as a god.
(2) In ME2 Tali loyalty mission, the Geth there were the heretics.
(3) In ME3, your Shepard can broker peace between the Geth and Quarians, which simply throws out Starchild's claim that synthetics will eventually kill all organics.
(4) Each Reaper ship is a nation unto itself. Each Reaper ship is comprised of the genetic material of the harvested race from the previous cycle blended with synthetics. That harvested race still lives on, but in reality, they do not live in the sense we would associate. They have no culture, art, philosophy, or individuality - just a prime directive to harvest the next cycle. This also contradicts Starchild's reason for the existence of the Reapers, because it's just an excuse for mass murder. It is not a logical or valid solution to the supposed problem of 'synthetics vs. organics.'

[M Hedonist]

Stygian1 wrote...

Gamble has no clue what he's talking about.

Sorry, someone had to say it. Not an insult, but he blatantly missed the main themes of the series.

[ahandsomeshark]

This is not meant as an insult to Gamble or anything but was he part of ME from it's inception? Cause I feel like his quotes almost directly conflict with everything in ME1.

[Khevan77]

It was always Reapers vs the galaxy, not synthetics vs organics. In ME1 you could kinda claim the synth vs org. was valid since we had no real moviations for the geth, but since they'd been in self-exile behind the Perseus Veil for 300 years, it didn't strike me as a "Major" theme of the game. It was always about stopping Saren, then stopping the Reapers when they were revealed to be behind Saren's actions.

ME2 destroys the synth vs org. debate because of Legion and the motivations of the true geth. The Heretics were manipulated by the Reapers, so instead of synth vs. org, we get Reapers vs everybody.

Sorry, but trying to shoehorn a motivation that goes against established lore is terrible. This is why the ending is so bad, because it starts from a false premise.

Modifié par Khevan77, 26 avril 2012 - 05:41 .

[Gartives]

I hope that Gamble said what he said only because they want us to talk about ME3 all the time....
If it's only his own opinion, then ok, but if they really wanted synthesis to be the best choice.. I'll be pissed....


All the time I thought ME trilogy is about fighting for a normal life, fighting for peace, fighting against The Reapers.

When I played ME3 ... I had been thinking that main theme is uniting extremally different nations/races, with diferent interests, different cultures... against common enemy. Shepard had done what was nearly impossible to do... he unites hostile nations (krogans/salarians, quarians/geths)... It was the only way to defeat the Reapers: work together.

I thought all the time that the ME trilogy was also about friendship and loyality (in a difficult time of the war). Shepard would not be able to do what he done without his crew, his friends...

Now I hear that  this game was about synthetic vs. organics?
If it's true.. it's the saddest moment, since I saw the ending of ME3.

How will I be able to play Mass Effect again when all the reasons why I loved this game are marginalized?


Synthesis doesn't make sense... and a lot of reasons were writen in this thread.

Synthesis was Saren's purpose in ME1...
If Gamble is right, was everything what Shepard have done during ME trilogy unnecessary?
All the consequences of this war, victims, destructions (Earth, Tessia...) could have been avoided?
If only Shepard had listened to Saren's words carefully and believed him, could they do synthesis few years ago without these damages?

Do writers really wanted to show to us that Shepard was wrong all the time? REALLY?

Modifié par Gartives, 26 avril 2012 - 05:50 .