336 réponses à ce sujet

[Sepharih]

Bad King wrote...
But was Saren really something new? By the end of the game he was a fully synthetic frogman controlled by Sovereign. None of the organic Saren was left due to the bullet that penetrated his brain.

He was just an advanced husk, just like how Illusive man thought he could control the reapers when he was already indoctrinated.
That means that the two proponents for synthesis and control respectively were nothing but reaper puppets who had delusions of grandeur.

That's part of the problem with the endings.

[Mr. C]

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
There is something VERY wrong with imposing the ideal of a joining between flesh and machine on every living thing without their knowledge or consent.
THAT is what Saren wanted, and THAT is what synthesis does.

It's for their own good.
Shepard can't afford to make a census and see who wants Synthesis and who doesn't because the Reapers threaten to destroy the Crucible.

Who are you to tell billions of sentient beings what is "for their own good"?

Modifié par Mr. C, 01 mai 2012 - 05:03 .

[BD Manchild]

I think you're right. Basically, in my view, if you chose Synthesis you might as well have let Saren win from the get-go.

[MisterJB]

Taboo-XX wrote...
Do you........do you understand the political undertones? Have you ever studied...........anything? Do you honestly believe that all problems are going to go away if we recognize each other as sentient? Are you serious? I do that know. I recognize all the races as sentient, only a select few seem to not see it that way. Bioware seems to be blisfully unaware of this.

Do I believe that Synthesis will magically create an utopia from day to night? No. But it certainly gives everyone a much better chance than we have now. Of course, people from the same race kill each other on a daily basis, that's undeniable.

And, if nothing else, the physical benefits Synthesis can grant are simply far too good to pass up.

I think quite a few people would care if ONE person made a descision to rewrite the way the galaxy functions.

If it's for the better, those people are being unreasonable.

[alsonamedbort]

BD Manchild wrote...

I think you're right. Basically, in my view, if you chose Synthesis you might as well have let Saren win from the get-go.

How? He may have espoused support for Synthesis the same way TIM supported control, but if either of them had won in-game neither of those options would have been achieved.  Shepard would have just been killed/defeated, the Reapers would've won, and the cycle would've continued sans Crucible.

[Bad King]

Sepharih wrote...

Bad King wrote...
But was Saren really something new? By the end of the game he was a fully synthetic frogman controlled by Sovereign. None of the organic Saren was left due to the bullet that penetrated his brain.

He was just an advanced husk, just like how Illusive man thought he could control the reapers when he was already indoctrinated.
That means that the two proponents for synthesis and control respectively were nothing but reaper puppets who had delusions of grandeur.

That's part of the problem with the endings.

Saren's idea was quite different to what synthesis offers IMO. As for TIM, it's clear that the reapers didn't want him controlling them which is why they attacked Sanctuary and stopped him from opening the Citadel arms for the crucible. Him wanting control was just the reapers' way of dividing organics, they never wanted him to go all the way. If the galaxy was united in wanting to control the reapers, perhaps they'd have indoctrinated organics and made them want to destroy the reapers- it would still cause the desired rift amongst organics.

Modifié par Bad King, 01 mai 2012 - 05:04 .

[Ultra Prism]

After watching ME1 cutscenes of Saren's conversations .... Synthesis is totally what Saren wanted .... Union of steel and flesh ... strengths of both and weaknesses of none

[ElitePinecone]

Lizardviking wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...
Or they forgot Saren's character.

It would confuse everyone who hadn't played ME.

But... choosing exactly what we'd been working to avoid in the first game does seem a little like narrative ridiculousness. 

(Heck, Saren almost gives us more information about synthesis than the Catalyst)

Did you even read my first line in what you just quoted?

I wrote something else then got confused and bleh.

My point was that I think it's closer to your first point (Saren is too confusing to new players) than just 'Bioware forgot Saren existed'. We know he showed up in ME2's Stolen Memory (with appropriate gags), but... it's frustrating that nobody in ME3 ever mentions that his goal (or his indoctrinated goal?) was actually organic-synthetic synthesis rather than just being 'lol evil Reapers'. As in, he was as self-righteous about it as TIM. Saren is practically the best reminder for players of the theme of organics v synthetics that ME banged on about in the first game, but we hardly know he existed by 3. 

Even apart from the technical details of synthesis-via-Reaper compared to via the Catalyst (and go on, someone ask Bioware to explain how glowy green waves achieve anything material? Or how new species are made? How organics become partly synthetic, or vice versa? What is "a new DNA"? Or the final stage of evolution?), the ethical problems inherent in one person making a decision that irreversibly alters all live, everywhere, forever are... monstrous. It's a decision the game forces the player to make, but far from being seen as abhorrent the game treats it as practically the best outcome ("the perfect ending", according to the November beta .tlk files). 

Nothing justifies decisions about a person's body being made without their explicit consent or at the very least consensual representative power (and even then it's murky), power that nobody invests in Shepard beyond hoping s/he'll defeat the Reapers. Attempting galactic peace on the advice of a celestial magic space-god that alters life without its consent is just so wrong. 

[MisterJB]

Mr. C wrote...
Who are you to tell billions of sentient beings what is "for their own good"?

Look at what Reaper technology can do. Look at Grayson and Saren and all of Cerberus troops. How they have become so much more powerful and resilient than anything else in the galaxy.
Imagine if this could be achieved without the loss of "free will" for every organic being. How is that not for their good?

[Eain]

MisterJB wrote...

Do I believe that Synthesis will magically create an utopia from day to night? No. But it certainly gives everyone a much better chance than we have now. Of course, people from the same race kill each other on a daily basis, that's undeniable.

And, if nothing else, the physical benefits Synthesis can grant are simply far too good to pass up.

The physical argument is basically the only one I can think of that makes synthesis worth it. But the whole idea that organic and synthetic life can only be reconciled by merging them is the same as saying black and white people can only coexist if they interbreed.

That's just bollocks.

[ElitePinecone]

MisterJB wrote...

If it's for the better, those people are being unreasonable.

So... Shepard as a paternalistic benevolant dictator? Shepard knows best, because those silly organics who might care about something as precious as their own immutable existence could complain if they were abruptly transformed into an organic-synthetic hybrid via glowy space magic with mechanical parts and holograms on their skin? Or those synthetics who just worked so hard to achieve their own existence on their own terms are irretrivably transformed because Shepard and a space-god think it's a good idea? 

If something's done without informed consent, it's morally indefensible. 

(And now I realise why "LOTS OF SPECULATION FOR EVERYONE!" was a thing.) 

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

ElitePinecone wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...
Or they forgot Saren's character.

It would confuse everyone who hadn't played ME.

But... choosing exactly what we'd been working to avoid in the first game does seem a little like narrative ridiculousness. 

(Heck, Saren almost gives us more information about synthesis than the Catalyst)

Did you even read my first line in what you just quoted?

I wrote something else then got confused and bleh.

My point was that I think it's closer to your first point (Saren is too confusing to new players) than just 'Bioware forgot Saren existed'. We know he showed up in ME2's Stolen Memory (with appropriate gags), but... it's frustrating that nobody in ME3 ever mentions that his goal (or his indoctrinated goal?) was actually organic-synthetic synthesis rather than just being 'lol evil Reapers'. As in, he was as self-righteous about it as TIM. Saren is practically the best reminder for players of the theme of organics v synthetics that ME banged on about in the first game, but we hardly know he existed by 3.

If Bioware wanted to avoid confusiong they could perhaps have the vision of Saren picking Synthesis only happen if the game is an import all the way back from ME1?

[Eain]

MisterJB wrote...

Mr. C wrote...
Who are you to tell billions of sentient beings what is "for their own good"?

Look at what Reaper technology can do. Look at Grayson and Saren and all of Cerberus troops. How they have become so much more powerful and resilient than anything else in the galaxy.
Imagine if this could be achieved without the loss of "free will" for every organic being. How is that not for their good?

How exactly are any of them more powerful? Just curious? Saren had a robotic arm, nothing to do with altering life on the genetic level. Cerberus tooks are basically husks in armour, puppets on strings.

As Peter Griffin would say:

These are facts.

[M Hedonist]

MisterJB wrote...

Mr. C wrote...
Who are you to tell billions of sentient beings what is "for their own good"?

Look at what Reaper technology can do. Look at Grayson and Saren and all of Cerberus troops. How they have become so much more powerful and resilient than anything else in the galaxy.
Imagine if this could be achieved without the loss of "free will" for every organic being. How is that not for their good?

For some reason I instantly read that comment in that frenzied voice TIM has at the end. You're delusional, and nothing anybody says is gonna change your mind.

[Sepharih]

Bad King wrote...
Saren's idea was quite different to what synthesis offers IMO.

Sounds pretty close to me, at least the way he describes it.

[The Angry One]

MisterJB wrote...

And, if nothing else, the physical benefits Synthesis can grant are simply far too good to pass up.

You mean like curing Joker?

OH WAIT.

As an aside, your avatar is most appropriate for your stance. Bravo.

Modifié par The Angry One, 01 mai 2012 - 05:13 .

[adneate]

As far as I'm concerned Synthesis boils down to one single question, Do the hybrids have free will?

If the answer is yes then Synthesis solves nothing since the hybrids have total free will they can do whatever they want, including things that are stupid and bad. They could make pure synthetics simply because even though it doesn't tire them or exhaust them they don't like cutting grass or doing menial tasks. They can kill each other because someone has something they want or their just jealous for many of the same reasons we are. As true individuals they capable of the exact same compassion and barbarism that we are now.

If the answer is no then they are all effectively prisoners to the will of another, their lives are fundamentally less diverse and less "organic" than ours. They do not fail, they do not experience loss or many other emotions since their existence and morality is imposed by an outside force. They are not asked to comply to told why they simply obey blindly, they are more pathetic and salves in a more fundamental state than could ever be thought possible. The live their lives in world of illusion, a literal allegory of the cave. One in which there is nobody who can drag them back into the painful light of the real.

[Taboo]

MisterJB wrote...

Mr. C wrote...
Who are you to tell billions of sentient beings what is "for their own good"?

Look at what Reaper technology can do. Look at Grayson and Saren and all of Cerberus troops. How they have become so much more powerful and resilient than anything else in the galaxy.
Imagine if this could be achieved without the loss of "free will" for every organic being. How is that not for their good?

Keep digging your hole mate.

[PsyrenY]

Mr. C wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
There is something VERY wrong with imposing the ideal of a joining between flesh and machine on every living thing without their knowledge or consent.
THAT is what Saren wanted, and THAT is what synthesis does.

It's for their own good.
Shepard can't afford to make a census and see who wants Synthesis and who doesn't because the Reapers threaten to destroy the Crucible.

Who are you to tell billions of sentient beings what is "for their own good"?

Commander f***ing Shepard.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 01 mai 2012 - 05:14 .

[Tom Lehrer]

MisterJB wrote...

Mr. C wrote...
Who are you to tell billions of sentient beings what is "for their own good"?

Look at what Reaper technology can do. Look at Grayson and Saren and all of Cerberus troops. How they have become so much more powerful and resilient than anything else in the galaxy.
Imagine if this could be achieved without the loss of "free will" for every organic being. How is that not for their good?

By forcing it on everyone you are taking away their free will. You are forcing youself on eveyone in the galaxy in the single largest act of rape that has been thoguht of.

[ElitePinecone]

MisterJB wrote...

Mr. C wrote...
Who are you to tell billions of sentient beings what is "for their own good"?

Look at what Reaper technology can do. Look at Grayson and Saren and all of Cerberus troops. How they have become so much more powerful and resilient than anything else in the galaxy.
Imagine if this could be achieved without the loss of "free will" for every organic being. How is that not for their good?

Because you don't give them free will in making that decision.

If the choice had been "make Reaper tech available to everyone who wants it, when they want it, if the downside is merging organic and machine" I'd be the first to support it.

But you aren't giving them a choice in Synthesis. It's forced, universal and immediate. 

The effects are remarkable, sure - but nothing justifies denial of free will to the entire galaxy just because the player, or the Catalyst, or Shepard, or the writers think it's a good idea. 

[The Angry One]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Keep digging your hole mate.

Look at his avatar, are we sure it's not an attempt at irony?

[The Angry One]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Mr. C wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
There is something VERY wrong with imposing the ideal of a joining between flesh and machine on every living thing without their knowledge or consent.
THAT is what Saren wanted, and THAT is what synthesis does.

It's for their own good.
Shepard can't afford to make a census and see who wants Synthesis and who doesn't because the Reapers threaten to destroy the Crucible.

Who are you to tell billions of sentient beings what is "for their own good"?

Commander f***ing Shepard.

Not even my ultra renegade Shepard is that arrogant.

[PsyrenY]

The Angry One wrote...

Not even my ultra renegade Shepard is that arrogant.

Was he arrogant enough to nuke 300k Batarians? Or unilaterally decide the fate of the Rachni?

[dreman9999]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Saren cured the genophage too, obviously doing so makes you evil.

Man, snap judgments are so much easier when we can strip context out of everything.

Oh will you stop. If you can tell me what so different synthesis is fromwhat Saren want and how it solve the grand problem, then you can have your say.