897 réponses à ce sujet

[nitefyre410]

Taboo-XX wrote...

*snip* .

Problem?

Uwe Boll has no talent and yet still gets financing.

Mac Walters writing reminds me a bit him at times. The same type of gross immaturity. Not in an Autschwitz sense but just in how childish it is.

From what I have come to understand Mr. Walters has had no education in the field of writing?

That would explain this abomination known as Synthesis.

 

I knew Uwe Boll  was terrible but I did not know he was completely classless...  somethings are not meant to be laugh matters...     

That would be a good guess... though I doubt that is an excuse considering most included are ametuers are best and can see the problems with not just Synsthesis but all the endings. 

Modifié par nitefyre410, 28 avril 2012 - 09:05 .

[Taboo]

Fingertrip wrote...

It's a game,fiction. It's not real.

Some ppl. )

One that was grounded in reality until someone rolled a twenty on a die roll and did critical damage with their "Speculative Space Magic Spell".

Mass Effect 3 failed it's saving throw.

[nicethugbert]

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

The only choice that leaves both life and free will preserved is Synthesis, although a sacrifice must be made.

At the cost of what makes them.........them.

Can you imagine playing god and making a descision for EVERYONE?

Unethical. Immoral. Repugnant.

I do not agree.  I see nothing in the game that gives the impression that personality is altered.  Your DNA is merely a mix of organic and synthetic.  It's just a hardware upgrade.

No. The Catalyst says a new lifeform is created. There are no longer humans. There are no longer asari. There are no longer Turians.

It removes the undesirable parts in both species and combines them into a new whole.

Do you understand the political implications in that?

Do the members of this new life form forget what their favorite movie is because they are a new species?  Do they divorce their spouses because they are a new species?  You assume that new species means new person.  In some narrow sense you might be able to say that the members of the new species are no longer the same persons.  But, the individuals could argue otherwise and not find significance in your distinctions.

Yes, I understand the political implication.  A government may decide to turn us into flying pigs for the good of the public just as they may drop atomic bombs for the public good or poison water tables for the public good or ...

Modifié par nicethugbert, 28 avril 2012 - 09:06 .

[Shaigunjoe]

Taboo-XX wrote...

You change the entire combination when you mess with the code of DNA itself. Adding an "S" to the GTCA it's coding changes the species.

SGTCA is a new DNA type.

It's a new form of life.

We still don't even know if synthetics have DNA.

No one did any research, nor did they appear to take high school biology.

Who derped?

I still don't understand why you are confused by this.

Do synthetics have DNA?  No, they do not, under our current DNA framework.  Thats why this new type of DNA is necessary, so that EDI is no longer AI, just I.

[Taboo]

nicethugbert wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

The only choice that leaves both life and free will preserved is Synthesis, although a sacrifice must be made.

At the cost of what makes them.........them.

Can you imagine playing god and making a descision for EVERYONE?

Unethical. Immoral. Repugnant.

I do not agree.  I see nothing in the game that gives the impression that personality is altered.  Your DNA is merely a mix of organic and synthetic.  It's just a hardware upgrade.

No. The Catalyst says a new lifeform is created. There are no longer humans. There are no longer asari. There are no longer Turians.

It removes the undesirable parts in both species and combines them into a new whole.

Do you understand the political implications in that?

Do the members of this new life form forget what their favorite movie is because they are a new species?  Do they divorce their spouses because they are a new species?  You assume that new species means new person.  In some narrow sense you might be able to say that the members of the new species are no longer the same persons.  But, the individuals could argue otherwise and not find significance in your distinctions.

Yes, I understand the political implication.  A government may decide to turn us into flying pigs for the good of the public just as they may drop atomic bombs for the public good or poison water tables for the public good or ...

I don't know. Bioware seems to have thought that I wouldn't need to know this and presented me with political implications so unpleasent it makes me question the person who wrote synthesis.

You are restructuring DNA at the very basic level. Things are going to change.

Plus no one was asked for their opinion on the matter which makes the choice all the more disgusting.

[Taboo]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

You change the entire combination when you mess with the code of DNA itself. Adding an "S" to the GTCA it's coding changes the species.

SGTCA is a new DNA type.

It's a new form of life.

We still don't even know if synthetics have DNA.

No one did any research, nor did they appear to take high school biology.

Who derped?

I still don't understand why you are confused by this.

Do synthetics have DNA?  No, they do not, under our current DNA framework.  Thats why this new type of DNA is necessary, so that EDI is no longer AI, just I.

How do you add that to something? How do you merge the two? What benefits do the original synthetics get? EDI doesn't seem to change much.

She now has endorphins? Dopamine? Cells? In her synthetic body? That didn't have DNA to begin with?

You cannot simply...........uh.........the speculations.

[nicethugbert]

MakeMineMako wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

The only choice that leaves both life and free will preserved is Synthesis, although a sacrifice must be made.

At the cost of what makes them.........them.

Can you imagine playing god and making a descision for EVERYONE?

Unethical. Immoral. Repugnant.

I do not agree.  I see nothing in the game that gives the impression that personality is altered.  Your DNA is merely a mix of organic and synthetic.  It's just a hardware upgrade.

Regardless, it's still forced on everybody. It's a question of free will and individual choice in their own destiny. Something "Synthesis" takes away.

It's also a violation of sorts.

It's just as repugnant and has the same totalitarian feel as "Control" and "Destroy".

Given the 3 choices, I take synthesis.  It's the lesser of the three evils.  One option commits genocide, another slavery.  This one leaves everybody alive and free, perhaps at a cost, but alive and free nonetheless.


That does not make it a bad ending or a bad story.  To you it does, perhaps, but it's a matter of opinion.  Life is full of tough choices of the extra crappy kind.  No reason why games can't have them too.

[Shaigunjoe]

Taboo-XX wrote...
How do you add that to something? How do you merge the two? What benefits do the original synthetics get? EDI doesn't seem to change much.

She now has endorphins? Dopamine? Cells? In her synthetic body? That didn't have DNA to begin with?

You cannot simply...........uh.........the speculations.

Yes, you listed questions that should be asked when dealing with a whole new DNA framework, the implications are mind boggling, so much so that it is no wonder they left it alone as to fully describe it as the biological implications of such are best up to the imagination and the bare bones details of how synthesis works is not the point of the synthesis ending to begin with.

[nicethugbert]

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

The only choice that leaves both life and free will preserved is Synthesis, although a sacrifice must be made.

At the cost of what makes them.........them.

Can you imagine playing god and making a descision for EVERYONE?

Unethical. Immoral. Repugnant.

I do not agree.  I see nothing in the game that gives the impression that personality is altered.  Your DNA is merely a mix of organic and synthetic.  It's just a hardware upgrade.

No. The Catalyst says a new lifeform is created. There are no longer humans. There are no longer asari. There are no longer Turians.

It removes the undesirable parts in both species and combines them into a new whole.

Do you understand the political implications in that?

Do the members of this new life form forget what their favorite movie is because they are a new species?  Do they divorce their spouses because they are a new species?  You assume that new species means new person.  In some narrow sense you might be able to say that the members of the new species are no longer the same persons.  But, the individuals could argue otherwise and not find significance in your distinctions.

Yes, I understand the political implication.  A government may decide to turn us into flying pigs for the good of the public just as they may drop atomic bombs for the public good or poison water tables for the public good or ...

I don't know. Bioware seems to have thought that I wouldn't need to know this and presented me with political implications so unpleasent it makes me question the person who wrote synthesis.

You are restructuring DNA at the very basic level. Things are going to change.

Plus no one was asked for their opinion on the matter which makes the choice all the more disgusting.

It proves that important decisions should not be left to people who are bleeding to death.

Incidentally, synthetic dna, invented recently.

Modifié par nicethugbert, 28 avril 2012 - 09:22 .

[Taboo]

I agree with both of you.

Nothing makes sense in a Universe that should.

[Iakus]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I don't know. Bioware seems to have thought that I wouldn't need to know this and presented me with political implications so unpleasent it makes me question the person who wrote synthesis.

You are restructuring DNA at the very basic level. Things are going to change.

Plus no one was asked for their opinion on the matter which makes the choice all the more disgusting.

things have to change or Synthesis is nothing but a parlor trick.  Mentality has to be altered or it does nothing but put a metal foil on people's meat-suits. 

Could peace be achieved between the krogan and salarians by blending their genetics into a single "salogan" species without doing something to their minds to make them recognize each other as a single people?

That's a big chunk of what makes Synthesis so horrific.  More than just the physical violation, ,you're screwing with people's minds, their free will, to impose this "new solution" 

After all, oyu're imposing peace by getting rid of "undesirable thoughts"

[MakeMineMako]

nicethugbert wrote...

MakeMineMako wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

The only choice that leaves both life and free will preserved is Synthesis, although a sacrifice must be made.

At the cost of what makes them.........them.

Can you imagine playing god and making a descision for EVERYONE?

Unethical. Immoral. Repugnant.

I do not agree.  I see nothing in the game that gives the impression that personality is altered.  Your DNA is merely a mix of organic and synthetic.  It's just a hardware upgrade.

Regardless, it's still forced on everybody. It's a question of free will and individual choice in their own destiny. Something "Synthesis" takes away.

It's also a violation of sorts.

It's just as repugnant and has the same totalitarian feel as "Control" and "Destroy".

Given the 3 choices, I take synthesis.  It's the lesser of the three evils.  One option commits genocide, another slavery.  This one leaves everybody alive and free, perhaps at a cost, but alive and free nonetheless.


That does not make it a bad ending or a bad story.  To you it does, perhaps, but it's a matter of opinion.  Life is full of tough choices of the extra crappy kind.  No reason why games can't have them too.

I disagree. If anything, 'Control' offers more possibilities when trying to make chocolate ice cream out of the sh*t we are handed. Possibilities that don't involve genocide or the unnatural violation of all life at the basic level. 

If the Reapers are a slave race, then Shepard (if he maintains his mind and values) can either choose to free them and let them choose their own destiny and/or become a leader rather than a master.The Reapers may even became a force of good and positive works under Shepard's leadership, rather than a force of death and destruction.

That's the way I see it. But even at that, 'Control' still rubs me the wrong way, like the other two "choices". 

[IanPolaris]

nicethugbert wrote...


When the Geth became alive, they became individuals.  So, to assume that a synthetic life form is Geth or Geth like as you describe is to assume falsly.  Also, organics do not become useful to the reapers nor do they serve them if Shepard chooses synthesis.  The reapers become alive, therefore, free from Starchilds control and no longer have any imperative to harvest the galaxy.

Yeah but they no longer have any incentive NOT to either and harvesting other life is the only existance they have known for tens of thousands (if not millions) of years.  That's assumine the Reapers won't want to lord it over everyone with their overwhelming power anyway.

Shepard specifically asks (about synthetis), "...but there will be peace?" and Starbrat NEVER ANSWERS THE QUESTION.

So you are basically violating all life on the most basic level, killing yourself, FOR NOTHING!

-Polaris

[nicethugbert]

Droidsbane42 wrote...

If the Amish woke up and found themselves part robot one day theyd probably all commit suicide... another terrible implication

But, what if it meant that their beards regenerated over night?

[IanPolaris]

When you can explain to me how you can 'die' and "lose everything you have" and still have it be YOU that's controlling anything, I'll consider it. Frankly dead is not compatible with control in any sense I'm familiar with so it's another trick to give your life up for nothing IMO.

-Polaris

[darknessmyown]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Wait....synthesis was the hard to get option? I got it on my first play through...and still chose destroy....

Same here

[MakeMineMako]

IanPolaris wrote...

When you can explain to me how you can 'die' and "lose everything you have" and still have it be YOU that's controlling anything, I'll consider it. Frankly dead is not compatible with control in any sense I'm familiar with so it's another trick to give your life up for nothing IMO.

-Polaris

"Die" can easily mean just your body is destroyed. And "lose everything you have" can easily mean not being able to see your LI and friends ever again (at least, not in a normal, physical Human form) and not having a normal life by Human terms (starting a family, planting roots, etc.).

[nicethugbert]

MakeMineMako wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

MakeMineMako wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

The only choice that leaves both life and free will preserved is Synthesis, although a sacrifice must be made.

At the cost of what makes them.........them.

Can you imagine playing god and making a descision for EVERYONE?

Unethical. Immoral. Repugnant.

I do not agree.  I see nothing in the game that gives the impression that personality is altered.  Your DNA is merely a mix of organic and synthetic.  It's just a hardware upgrade.

Regardless, it's still forced on everybody. It's a question of free will and individual choice in their own destiny. Something "Synthesis" takes away.

It's also a violation of sorts.

It's just as repugnant and has the same totalitarian feel as "Control" and "Destroy".

Given the 3 choices, I take synthesis.  It's the lesser of the three evils.  One option commits genocide, another slavery.  This one leaves everybody alive and free, perhaps at a cost, but alive and free nonetheless.


That does not make it a bad ending or a bad story.  To you it does, perhaps, but it's a matter of opinion.  Life is full of tough choices of the extra crappy kind.  No reason why games can't have them too.

I disagree. If anything, 'Control' offers more possibilities when trying to make chocolate ice cream out of the sh*t we are handed. Possibilities that don't involve genocide or the unnatural violation of all life at the basic level. 

If the Reapers are a slave race, then Shepard (if he maintains his mind and values) can either choose to free them and let them choose their own destiny and/or become a leader rather than a master.The Reapers may even became a force of good and positive works under Shepard's leadership, rather than a force of death and destruction.

That's the way I see it. But even at that, 'Control' still rubs me the wrong way, like the other two "choices". 

Theoretically control can do that.  But, EDI is absent in the control ending.  Maybe Joker has her locked in his blow up doll chest.

But, in the synthesis ending, they make a happy couple.

[IanPolaris]

MakeMineMako wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

When you can explain to me how you can 'die' and "lose everything you have" and still have it be YOU that's controlling anything, I'll consider it. Frankly dead is not compatible with control in any sense I'm familiar with so it's another trick to give your life up for nothing IMO.

-Polaris

"Die" can easily mean just your body is destroyed. And "lose everything you have" can easily mean not being able to see your LI and friends ever again (at least, not in a normal, physical Human form) and not having a normal life by Human terms (starting a family, planting roots, etc.).

So to quote Shepard to the Illusive man, "You are willing to bet Humanity's existance on that?"

Really?

-Polaris

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Taboo-XX wrote...


At what point in development was it deemed the best solution to rewrite the way the universe has functioned for billions and billions of years?

At what point was it deemed ethical for one person to decide what was best for the universe? To play god?

How do you merge synthetic and organics?

How do they reproduce now? Are the usual elements no longer favorable? Are sperm and eggs obsolete?

Why is Joker still limping? His condition doesn't seem to have benefitted by being turned into something else.

Plants are now shown sentient now too. Can I no longer eat vegetables? Fruit?

Do I have to eat? Sleep?

To what extreme is the synthesis? Do I still have free will?

To what degree are the original synthetics affected? Do they grow hair and real feelings? Skin?

Joker's hat is green as well. Are synthetic fibers affected as well? Can I no longer wear certain types of pants because they might find me in them obejctionable?

1.) The universe changes itself anyway with evolution, it doesn't work the same way for billions and billions of years
2.) Ever since Shepard became a Spectre and has been playing God ever since, deciding whether or not the Rachni will live, whether the Krogan will be cured...
3.) Probably the same way you control the Reapers by touching loose wires, or destroy all Reapers/synthetics by breaking a power conduit.
4.) Pretty sure organics didn't lose any of their organic reproductive organs.
5.) When did adding machine upgrades entail curing a guy's bones?
6.) Whatcu talkin' bout, Willis??
7.) Maybe, maybe not. Not having to do either would surely have its advantages though, no?
8.) Doesn't look like anyone was being controlled after choosing green, so I'm sure you have free-will.
9.) Who knows, BW should have been more clear. But it's probably just emotions, if EDI is any hint.
10.) Never saw that either.

Anything else? Still synthesizing you foo's.

[PolyonymousC]

Completely out of touch with the fanbase and the lore that they created.

[Redwing198403]

1.) The universe changes itself anyway with evolution, it doesn't work the same way for billions and billions of years

[/quote]

That would be nature...  You shouldn't force evolution with a technological magic wand.  Every species has to evolve on their own terms.  The series says this a number of times.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Synthesis....reminds me of how the reavers were created.

[Sisterofshane]

[quote]Redwing198403 wrote...


1.) The universe changes itself anyway with evolution, it doesn't work the same way for billions and billions of years

[/quote]

That would be nature...  You shouldn't force evolution with a technological magic wand.  Every species has to evolve on their own terms.  The series says this a number of times.

[/quote]

We can even go a step farther with this and say that the reason why we continue to exist in the universe is BECAUSE of evolution. 
An inability to evolve leads to stagnation and to inability to adapt. The universe, however, has proven to us that it is ALWAYS changing. If we have reached an evolutionary "endpoint", then where to we have to go except to create more/better/advanced technology - so exactly how does "synthesis" and the end of evolution solve the problems of technological singularity?