165 réponses à ce sujet

[The Angry One]

nuculerman wrote...


Because there won't be.  Which is your queue synthesis isn't the euthanization all anti-synthesis-ers claim it is.  Races retain their unique culture.  Individuals retain their free will.  Krogans still hate Salarians, and Batarians still hate Humans.  Life continues exactly as it would have, except there's no need to create AI's because the pinnacle of evolution has already been reached.  No AI's means no end to all organic life.

Hey look, someone is presenting headcanon as fact again!

Man there's so much wrong with this I don't know where to begin.

- There's no such thing as a "pinnacle" of evolution.
- We see nothing of how people think after synthesis.
- Why exactly won't machines or AI be created? A dedicated AI would still be superior to an organic hybrid mind.
- Did the Geth and EDI suddenly vanish or something? Newsflash: EDI's right there. EDI's an AI. She's still made of metal. Except now she has green lines that mean she's part organic. Apparently.

Given Bioware's responses, this is clearly the intention of the synthesis ending.  It was terribly explained, and anyone who didn't pick it is totally justified, but the assumptions about what it means, how everyone will be Reapers now, etc are clearly totally wrong.  It's Bioware's IP, and their intention, hind sight being 20/20, is pretty clear at this point.

Once again.  The ending was handled terribly.  It wasn't clear what you were signing up for in any of the choices.  Bioware dropped the ball.  /thread.

The meaning behind synthesis is blatant, and frankly makes me question the morality of certain people.

[Taboo]

The Angry One wrote...
The meaning behind synthesis is blatant, and frankly makes me question the morality of certain people.

The implications are....................unpleasent to say the least.

SOMEONE didn't do their research.

[nuculerman]

Linkenski wrote...

The synthesis part is the ending that was really the ending to start screaming "INDOCTRINATION" IMO because of what saren says about combining synthetics and organics in the virmire mission, in which HE IS INDOCTRINATED!!!

I'm pretty sure the EC won't be a fleshed out take all about indoctrination, but i hope that we'll get hints, that you are in fact manipulated, after the synthesis choice.

If it is it'd just be to appease fans like you who complain louder than everyone else.  Synthesis was meant to be the "good" ending.  You aren't combining synthetics and organics.  You're creating a whole new type of existence, where synthetic/organic are meaningless.  How do you do this?  Well space magic, of course!

The intention of synthesis is obviously noble.  The way it was explained was abysmal, and the reprecussions and negative foreshadowing were obviously not thought of by whoever came up with it at the last minute (Casey Hudson).

[The Angry One]

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Bad King wrote...

Omg they both said evolution of life! Richard Dawkins is indoctrinated!

Let's forget the context in which both sentences were said, shall we?

Yes, you did forget.

Saren referred to getting implants that allowed the Reapers to control him.

Synthesis creates one type of life rather than organic and synthetic.

Context, people. The Angry One agrees.

"The relationship is symbiotic. Organic and machine intertwined, a union of flesh and steel. The strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither.

I am a vision of the future, Shepard. The evolution of all organic life. This is our destiny, join Sovereign and experience a true rebirth!"

How is that not describing synthesis again?
Don't play the context game, you've already lost.

[M Hedonist]

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Oh, of course, peace is eternal. I forgot that stupid people can think that. I don't agree with its previous method either. But it makes sense for a being like itself to see individual life as meaningless enough that perserving the species through harvesting being a better option than before.

And putting evolution in a statement does;'t make them the same. The Catalyst obviously meant that Synthesis creates a type of life better than organic or synthesis.

Silly me and my different opinions. Shame on me for not conforming.

How does synthesis guarantee peace then? It doesn't. The Catalyst assumes it does, because it is racist. It thinks all the problems in the universe stems from organics and synthetics being different.

It doesn't. When you ask the Catalyst if there will be peace, he avoids the question and says the cycle will end. He obviously know it won't assure peace, or that everyone will accept the new fate. What he does know is that it eliminates the need for the cycle because it eliminates the issue of the technological singularity (which is a very real problem)

Now you've got me interested. How does Synthesis stop Technological Singularity?

[Mr.House]

nuculerman wrote...
The intention of synthesis is obviously noble.  

I think I just lost my dinner.

[lx_theo]

The Angry One wrote...

Given Bioware's responses, this is clearly the intention of the synthesis ending.  It was terribly explained, and anyone who didn't pick it is totally justified, but the assumptions about what it means, how everyone will be Reapers now, etc are clearly totally wrong.  It's Bioware's IP, and their intention, hind sight being 20/20, is pretty clear at this point.

Once again.  The ending was handled terribly.  It wasn't clear what you were signing up for in any of the choices.  Bioware dropped the ball.  /thread.

The meaning behind synthesis is blatant, and frankly makes me question the morality of certain people.

No, I'm pretty sure you're just intolerant.

I guess its wrong of people to choose life over genocide.

[The Angry One]

lx_theo wrote...

No, I'm pretty sure you're just intolerant.

I'm intolerant of intolrance. Funny how that works.

I guess its wrong of people to choose life over genocide.

"Is not submission preferable to extinction?"

[Giggles_Manically]

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Given Bioware's responses, this is clearly the intention of the synthesis ending.  It was terribly explained, and anyone who didn't pick it is totally justified, but the assumptions about what it means, how everyone will be Reapers now, etc are clearly totally wrong.  It's Bioware's IP, and their intention, hind sight being 20/20, is pretty clear at this point.

Once again.  The ending was handled terribly.  It wasn't clear what you were signing up for in any of the choices.  Bioware dropped the ball.  /thread.

The meaning behind synthesis is blatant, and frankly makes me question the morality of certain people.

No, I'm pretty sure you're just intolerant.

I guess its wrong of people to choose life over genocide.

And some people it seems like to stand on an pretend moral high ground tossing **** down at others just to make themselves feel so much higher and nobler.
Just sayin

[o Ventus]

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Given Bioware's responses, this is clearly the intention of the synthesis ending.  It was terribly explained, and anyone who didn't pick it is totally justified, but the assumptions about what it means, how everyone will be Reapers now, etc are clearly totally wrong.  It's Bioware's IP, and their intention, hind sight being 20/20, is pretty clear at this point.

Once again.  The ending was handled terribly.  It wasn't clear what you were signing up for in any of the choices.  Bioware dropped the ball.  /thread.

The meaning behind synthesis is blatant, and frankly makes me question the morality of certain people.

No, I'm pretty sure you're just intolerant.

I guess its wrong of people to choose life over genocide.

It's hardly genocide when the species inside the Reapers have already been killed off during their harvest cycle.

Never mind that you're giving the finger to the other couple trillion sentient organics who may or may not actually WANT to live as a half-synthetic hybrid.

Also never mind that synthesis should be impossible, seeing as how synthetics don't have DNA to synthesize.

[M Hedonist]

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Given Bioware's responses, this is clearly the intention of the synthesis ending.  It was terribly explained, and anyone who didn't pick it is totally justified, but the assumptions about what it means, how everyone will be Reapers now, etc are clearly totally wrong.  It's Bioware's IP, and their intention, hind sight being 20/20, is pretty clear at this point.

Once again.  The ending was handled terribly.  It wasn't clear what you were signing up for in any of the choices.  Bioware dropped the ball.  /thread.

The meaning behind synthesis is blatant, and frankly makes me question the morality of certain people.

No, I'm pretty sure you're just intolerant.

I guess its wrong of people to choose life over genocide.

Or, theoretically, you could just take 'Control' and instantly order every reaper to fly right into the next sun.
With endings this vague and open for interpretation you really can't make direct comparisons over how much more "right" or "wrong" they are than each other.

[Bad King]

The Angry One wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Bad King wrote...

Omg they both said evolution of life! Richard Dawkins is indoctrinated!

Let's forget the context in which both sentences were said, shall we?

Yes, you did forget.

Saren referred to getting implants that allowed the Reapers to control him.

Synthesis creates one type of life rather than organic and synthetic.

Context, people. The Angry One agrees.

"The relationship is symbiotic. Organic and machine intertwined, a union of flesh and steel. The strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither.

I am a vision of the future, Shepard. The evolution of all organic life. This is our destiny, join Sovereign and experience a true rebirth!"

How is that not describing synthesis again?
Don't play the context game, you've already lost.

It clearly isn't: "Organic and machine intertwined, a union of flesh and steel... The evolution of all organic life." He is maintaining the boundary between organic and synthetic- he wants organics to have synthetic implants but to remain in the 'organic' category.

Synthesis is completely different: it proposes scrapping the organic and synthetic categories and having one genetic code for all life. The only similarity is that they both say "evolution".

Modifié par Bad King, 27 avril 2012 - 09:56 .

[Taboo]

o Ventus wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Given Bioware's responses, this is clearly the intention of the synthesis ending.  It was terribly explained, and anyone who didn't pick it is totally justified, but the assumptions about what it means, how everyone will be Reapers now, etc are clearly totally wrong.  It's Bioware's IP, and their intention, hind sight being 20/20, is pretty clear at this point.

Once again.  The ending was handled terribly.  It wasn't clear what you were signing up for in any of the choices.  Bioware dropped the ball.  /thread.

The meaning behind synthesis is blatant, and frankly makes me question the morality of certain people.

No, I'm pretty sure you're just intolerant.

I guess its wrong of people to choose life over genocide.

It's hardly genocide when the species inside the Reapers have already been killed off during their harvest cycle.

Never mind that you're giving the finger to the other couple trillion sentient organics who may or may not actually WANT to live as a half-synthetic hybrid.

Also never mind that synthesis should be impossible, seeing as how synthetics don't have DNA to synthesize.

[lx_theo]

Sauruz wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Oh, of course, peace is eternal. I forgot that stupid people can think that. I don't agree with its previous method either. But it makes sense for a being like itself to see individual life as meaningless enough that perserving the species through harvesting being a better option than before.

And putting evolution in a statement does;'t make them the same. The Catalyst obviously meant that Synthesis creates a type of life better than organic or synthesis.

Silly me and my different opinions. Shame on me for not conforming.

How does synthesis guarantee peace then? It doesn't. The Catalyst assumes it does, because it is racist. It thinks all the problems in the universe stems from organics and synthetics being different.

It doesn't. When you ask the Catalyst if there will be peace, he avoids the question and says the cycle will end. He obviously know it won't assure peace, or that everyone will accept the new fate. What he does know is that it eliminates the need for the cycle because it eliminates the issue of the technological singularity (which is a very real problem)

Now you've got me interested. How does Synthesis stop Technological Singularity?

Technological Singularity refers to the idea that Synthetic type life has a much higher threshold than organic life does (since organic life uses techology to enhance their abilties, and synthetic life is that enhancing technology).

Eventually, Synthetic life will surpass organics, and eventually the inevitability of war (peace has its inevitability too, but can only be accomplished if there are two sides to have peace with at the end) comes along. Time isn't an issue either, as with probability it will happen eventually. At a point, Synthetics will have surpassed organics to the point that they will be able to win any war they fight with them. With enough time, the decision will be made to simply eliminate organics.

According to the Catalyst, this decision with singlarity is inevitable. Synthesis creates one life, eliminating the possibility of a Technological singularity.

Modifié par lx_theo, 27 avril 2012 - 09:59 .

[The Angry One]

Bad King wrote...

It clearly isn't: "Organic and machine intertwined, a union of flesh and steel... The evolution of all organic life." He is maintaining the boundary between organic and synthetic- he wants organics to have synthetic implants but to remain in the 'organic' category.

Synthesis is completely different: it proposes scrapping the organic and synthetic categories and having one genetic code for all life. The only similarity is that they both say "evolution".

He's creating no boundary, Saren is explaining how organic and synthetic is brought together to create the final evolution.
It is exactly the same. The Catalyst seperates organics and synthetics for this purpose too.

[nuculerman]

The Angry One wrote...

Hey look, someone is presenting headcanon as fact again!

Man there's so much wrong with this I don't know where to begin.

- There's no such thing as a "pinnacle" of evolution.
- We see nothing of how people think after synthesis.
- Why exactly won't machines or AI be created? A dedicated AI would still be superior to an organic hybrid mind.
- Did the Geth and EDI suddenly vanish or something? Newsflash: EDI's right there. EDI's an AI. She's still made of metal. Except now she has green lines that mean she's part organic. Apparently.

There is such a thing as pinnacle of evolution in many scientific circles.  It's pretty obvious to me Casey Hudson read the Singularity by Ray Kurzweil a month before the game went gold and said "oh, shiiiiit."

No we don't.  Everything I said is a conclusion based off the assumption Casey Hudson isn't a closet ****, and his intentions with synthesis was noble, though, terribly executed and even more terribly explained.

That's your assumption.  Considering starChild said it's the end of evolution, it's obviously a poor assumption, if we take starChild's words at face value.  Your assumption also has no grounding in science.  Mostly because a synthetic/organic hybrid mind has no real grounding in science, and the implications of creating one, or even defining one, are not known.  Again, I don't argue this was well thought out.  Just think space magic and move on.

Again, like I said, it was clear the intention was not to make everyone the same race and change their personality. The physical/mental implications of this are anyone's guess.  But you're arguing with your interpretation of poorly explained science, not with the actual intention of the syntehsis ending.

The meaning behind synthesis is blatant, and frankly makes me question the morality of certain people.

Yes it is.  And it's blatantly not what you've made it out to be.  I'll choose to assume no one is a closet na-zi, and you can continue to assume what bioware wanted for a "good" ending was to force everyone to think the same way, become reapers, and lose all their free will.

[Vox Draco]

o Ventus wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Given Bioware's responses, this is clearly the intention of the synthesis ending.  It was terribly explained, and anyone who didn't pick it is totally justified, but the assumptions about what it means, how everyone will be Reapers now, etc are clearly totally wrong.  It's Bioware's IP, and their intention, hind sight being 20/20, is pretty clear at this point.

Once again.  The ending was handled terribly.  It wasn't clear what you were signing up for in any of the choices.  Bioware dropped the ball.  /thread.

The meaning behind synthesis is blatant, and frankly makes me question the morality of certain people.

No, I'm pretty sure you're just intolerant.

I guess its wrong of people to choose life over genocide.

It's hardly genocide when the species inside the Reapers have already been killed off during their harvest cycle.

Never mind that you're giving the finger to the other couple trillion sentient organics who may or may not actually WANT to live as a half-synthetic hybrid.

Also never mind that synthesis should be impossible, seeing as how synthetics don't have DNA to synthesize.

I think he refers also to the Geth talking about Genocide...

And I just wonder: How are people so okay with playing such a risky games by choosing control or synthesis? Both will have the reapers still around and other things are all up to speculations. Will Shep control the reapers in a good way? Will synthesis REALLY ascend the people of the galaxy into higher beings? Or will the galaxy just stagnate? You know, evolution is also progressing and adapting to nw things...

Interesting...in synthesis the Reapers are still there, and suddenly also the most powerful form of half-synthetics...should make you think twice...

[Giggles_Manically]

nuculerman wrote...

Linkenski wrote...

The synthesis part is the ending that was really the ending to start screaming "INDOCTRINATION" IMO because of what saren says about combining synthetics and organics in the virmire mission, in which HE IS INDOCTRINATED!!!

I'm pretty sure the EC won't be a fleshed out take all about indoctrination, but i hope that we'll get hints, that you are in fact manipulated, after the synthesis choice.

If it is it'd just be to appease fans like you who complain louder than everyone else.  Synthesis was meant to be the "good" ending.  You aren't combining synthetics and organics.  You're creating a whole new type of existence, where synthetic/organic are meaningless.  How do you do this?  Well space magic, of course!

The intention of synthesis is obviously noble.  The way it was explained was abysmal, and the reprecussions and negative foreshadowing were obviously not thought of by whoever came up with it at the last minute (Casey Hudson).

So its basically noble to do the Reaper's work for them?

Okay.

[o Ventus]

Vox Draco wrote...

I think he refers also to the Geth talking about Genocide...

And I just wonder: How are people so okay with playing such a risky games by choosing control or synthesis? Both will have the reapers still around and other things are all up to speculations. Will Shep control the reapers in a good way? Will synthesis REALLY ascend the people of the galaxy into higher beings? Or will the galaxy just stagnate? You know, evolution is also progressing and adapting to nw things...

Interesting...in synthesis the Reapers are still there, and suddenly also the most powerful form of half-synthetics...should make you think twice...

Killing off the geth is morally abhorrent, yes, but damn does it make for fun opportunities with fan fiction.

Then again, killing the 300,000 batarians in Arrival was also pretty crappy.

[The Angry One]

lx_theo wrote...

Technological Singularity refers to the idea that Synthetic type life has a much higher threshold than organic life does (since organic life uses techology to enhance their abilties, and synthetic life is that enhancing technology).

Eventually, Synthetic life will surpass organics, and when inevitability of war comes along. Time isn't an issue either, as with probability it will happen eventually. At a point, Synthetics will have surpassed organics to the point that they will be able to win any war they fight with them. With enough time, the decision will be made to simply eliminate organics.

Wrong. Singularity refers to the idea that we have no concept of what an AI can achieve and can't predict it. Hence SINGULARITY.
Also, this does not guarantee conflict, nor does it guarantee that synthetic life will exterminate organic, it's all assumption based on intolerance.

According to the Catalyst, this decision with singlarity is inevitable. Synthesis creates one life, eliminating the possibility of a Technological singularity.

Said one life then creates machines with AI.

...

...

...

Oops.

[lx_theo]

The Angry One wrote...

Bad King wrote...

It clearly isn't: "Organic and machine intertwined, a union of flesh and steel... The evolution of all organic life." He is maintaining the boundary between organic and synthetic- he wants organics to have synthetic implants but to remain in the 'organic' category.

Synthesis is completely different: it proposes scrapping the organic and synthetic categories and having one genetic code for all life. The only similarity is that they both say "evolution".

He's creating no boundary, Saren is explaining how organic and synthetic is brought together to create the final evolution.
It is exactly the same. The Catalyst seperates organics and synthetics for this purpose too.

A Symbiotic realtionship is completely different than making the two things one in the same.

[General User]

nuculerman wrote...
There is such a thing as pinnacle of evolution in many scientific circles.

Which?  Because there sure isn't in any of the biological sciences.

[Bad King]

The Angry One wrote...

Bad King wrote...

It clearly isn't: "Organic and machine intertwined, a union of flesh and steel... The evolution of all organic life." He is maintaining the boundary between organic and synthetic- he wants organics to have synthetic implants but to remain in the 'organic' category.

Synthesis is completely different: it proposes scrapping the organic and synthetic categories and having one genetic code for all life. The only similarity is that they both say "evolution".

He's creating no boundary, Saren is explaining how organic and synthetic is brought together to create the final evolution.
It is exactly the same. The Catalyst seperates organics and synthetics for this purpose too.

Not at all. The catalyst says that the energy from the crucible will combine all synthetic and organic life into a new farmework, a new genetic code which is merged from both but represents neither.

Saren meanwhile wanted to create "a union of flesh ant steel" to fulfill "the evolution of all organic life." That isn't a new framework just people with bits of metal rammed into them.

[The Angry One]

nuculerman wrote...

There is such a thing as pinnacle of evolution in many scientific circles.  It's pretty obvious to me Casey Hudson read the Singularity by Ray Kurzweil a month before the game went gold and said "oh, shiiiiit."

No there is not. Evolution is a reactionary process. Adaptation to enviroment. There is no "plan" and no "end" or "pinnacle".

No we don't.  Everything I said is a conclusion based off the assumption Casey Hudson isn't a closet ****, and his intentions with synthesis was noble, though, terribly executed and even more terribly explained.

You can assume all you like, the implications are there all the same.

That's your assumption.  Considering starChild said it's the end of evolution, it's obviously a poor assumption, if we take starChild's words at face value.  Your assumption also has no grounding in science.  Mostly because a synthetic/organic hybrid mind has no real grounding in science, and the implications of creating one, or even defining one, are not known.  Again, I don't argue this was well thought out.  Just think space magic and move on.

I refuse. I will use logic, as I've always used in Mass Effect. It's held up before, with suitable versimilitude.

Again, like I said, it was clear the intention was not to make everyone the same race and change their personality. The physical/mental implications of this are anyone's guess.  But you're arguing with your interpretation of poorly explained science, not with the actual intention of the syntehsis ending.

It's not poorly explained, the concept is poor. Period. Nothing about this "new life" excludes the possibility of war, or the possibility of creating AIs. Pure machines will still be more efficient.

Yes it is.  And it's blatantly not what you've made it out to be.  I'll choose to assume no one is a closet na-zi, and you can continue to assume what bioware wanted for a "good" ending was to force everyone to think the same way, become reapers, and lose all their free will.

Again, assume what you want. The Catalyst is a genocidal murderer. This is a fact in the game.
The Catalyst basis it's actions on a philosophy of intolerance and racism, and Shepard is forced to accept this philosophy, one of those options - synthesis - being the embodiment of it.

I don't know what to believe about the ones who wrote and approved it. Maybe they just didn't think it through, but the disturbing implications are there.

[Bad King]

lx_theo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Bad King wrote...

It clearly isn't: "Organic and machine intertwined, a union of flesh and steel... The evolution of all organic life." He is maintaining the boundary between organic and synthetic- he wants organics to have synthetic implants but to remain in the 'organic' category.

Synthesis is completely different: it proposes scrapping the organic and synthetic categories and having one genetic code for all life. The only similarity is that they both say "evolution".

He's creating no boundary, Saren is explaining how organic and synthetic is brought together to create the final evolution.
It is exactly the same. The Catalyst seperates organics and synthetics for this purpose too.

A Symbiotic realtionship is completely different than making the two things one in the same.

Indeed. For a symbiotic relationship to exist, a boundary must be maintained.