528 réponses à ce sujet

[OH-UP-THIS!]

I'm going to say this in an over-simplified fashion, so read slowly, would anyone of you like to call your favourite plant, your COUSIN?

Effectively and LITERALLY that's what is happening, if you pick the green pill.

Oh, and for the record............there would be NO offspring, just factories for more synth-skin hybreds.

[Ieldra]

TheClonesLegacy wrote...
Hey you guys are missing the big Picture so I'll Restate it Synthesis Is Screwing With the Natural Order of the Universe No one has the right to do that, because You don't F**k with the Natural order of the Universe.
so yeah I hope you all like Destroying the Natural Progression of Evolution.
But whatever not like evolution gave anyone anything.

The natural order of the universe? That's hyperbole. I very much doubt any of the universal constants will be changed by the Synthesis.

Apart from that, this is completely irrelevant, since we are part of nature, thus all we do is part of nature as well. And the natural (temporarily defined for convenience's sake as "untouched by civilization's hand") is not, per se, more desirable than things which are transformed into new shapes by intelligent species. "Not messing with nature" is a reasonable guideline as long as you don't know what you're affecting, but this is a practical matter, not a moral one.

@ohupthis:
Your last sentence is a baseless assumption.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 11 mai 2012 - 05:43 .

[Fixers0]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Your last sentence is a baseless assumption.

Same as the Catalyst's logic.

[Ellessar Alcarin]

The moral and ethical implications of synthesis are overwhelming.

It is not moral for a single individual to make a decision that alters all life in the galaxy. Shepard's motives for making such a choice are irrelevant. Freedom of choice is what the Citadel societies are based on. It is what human society is based upon. Even in today's world the vast majority of modern societies prize freedom of choice above all else. For a soldier, for Shepard, to make that decision for everyone in the galaxy is unthinkable and totally immoral.

In Star Trek do you find the actions of the Borg morally objectionable? They have the same motives, synthesis of organic and technological. They also happen to do it without the consent of those they "assimilate." There is no doubt in the Star Trek universe that they are bad guys. How is what Shepard does in Synthesis any different from that? Just because Shepard does it non-violently changes nothing.

I would also point out that in a way Synthesis is a primary goal of the Reapers. They do after all harvest organic civilizations in order to make more of themselves. So how exactly would it be a victory for the galaxy if Shepard beats the Reapers to the punch and synthesizes everyone himself? It's complete and utter nonsense.

Speaking for myself now. Having spent years in the US military and now having a career in law enforcement if someone tried to take my freedom of choice away, my first reaction would be to take up arms against that person or institution. Freedom of choice is the core ideal that the American Soldier fights for. I would be dead before I ever willingly surrendered that freedom myself.

Modifié par Ellessar Alcarin, 11 mai 2012 - 06:38 .

[Belisarius09]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Belisarius09 wrote...

go jump in your green beam of light

Comments like these don't exactly dispell my claim that synthesis-haters are narrow-minded fools. I mean, is that the best you can do?

I and many others have already made numerous posts explaining the evils of synthesis.  Comments like yours don't exactly dispell our claims that synthesis is evil and that synthesis lovers are narrow-minded fools.  I mean, is repeatedly asking the same question when numerous good sound arguements have been given showing synthesis to be evil, the best YOU can do?

[Noelemahc]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Noelemahc wrote...

The Monolith, and we don't know: clickie!

LOL
And they say the Crucible is "space magic" 

Anyway, it pretty clearly doesn't perform surgery on you (since all you have to do is get near it) therefore it is different to what Sovereign did to Saren, and what TIM did to himself.

What I meant was that this space magic was the first step of whatever happened to both TIM and Saren. For all we know, that Monolith worked on the same principles of space magic that the Crucible will use, and soon afterwards, everyone in the world will grow those fancy pieces of wiring sticking out at odd angles out of weird places, except that theirs will glow green. Or they might not.

NO DATA AVAILABLE.

P.S. For fun and games, if you've never seen it, go find that wonderful piece of arthouse mind-frell that is Tetsuo The Iron Man (and its two sequels), best demonstration of what I'm afraid Synthesis would do. I do not bear responsibility for any tossed cookies, endless cybertronic nightmares or bizarre robosexual fetishes you may or may not suffer as a result of viewing those films.

Modifié par Noelemahc, 11 mai 2012 - 07:31 .

[a.m.p]

I have one question for the synthesis enthusiasts. Specifically for Ieldra.

Let's say you were hired to do the EC and show the consequences of synthesis.

Something is missing form your idea. Where are the downsides?

See, it suffers from the same problem as the current endings. When I read your ideas I see a concept. But I don't see people. I don't see how your very abstract concept applies to the people in the galaxy.

You threw out the window what little information about synthesis that we had and came up with a theory that paints it in bright hopeful colors. And another theory on why it is necessary.

You decided based on those theories your Shepard had the right to inflict your idea of a better life on everyone in the galaxy. All right. This has been argued to death and I don't want to get stuck on it again. I'm all for role-playing and choices in a choice-based RPG and I don't mind having the choice to roleplay a person with a god complex, as long as it isn't forced on me (which it thankfully isn't).

I just want the game to be honest about it. Regardless of how awesome and beneficial it is and what beautiful perspectives it opens. This is your opinion. You are forcing it on the galaxy without their consent. There will not be happiness all around. And that is something that needs to be shown. Not that creepy two-minute scene with Joker being happy for some reason.

Because you, I assume, having put all that effort into making sense of synthesis, get it. Not everyone else does. Some people think how they personally would totally want to be cyborgs therefore synthesis is totally awesome. No. It doesn't work like that.

Actually same approach should be applied to all other endings. Take the concept and apply it to the universe. And then be honest about the consequences. The good, the bad and the ugly. Mass Effect has shown that it is capable of this.

Modifié par a.m.p, 11 mai 2012 - 09:51 .

[SevastianFV]

I could argue all day about why it's morally wrong, why it doesn't make any sense, why it doesn't belong in a story that's had themes of A of B (*especially* this bothers me), and why my Shep would never do that (although yours might), but for the most part, my main problem with it is that the game wants to present it as flawless and *right.* In the past, there was give-and-take, if you wanted something, you decided what you were willing to sacrifice, and you decided what consequences you were willing to face. And I even got to decide whether I thought those consequences were good or bad. (For instance, some players/Shepards might think there's nothing wrong with tweaking the heretic geth, easiest decision ever, for me/my Shepard this choice was one of the hardest). I thought that a fundamental part of the gameplay - as much as pressing right trigger to fire - was developing a character, deciding what values they have, and how far they'd go for them. Shepard got to decide what "right" meant for him/her. But here, the game TELLS you what you did was right. You pressed the "everything is fine forever" button. No nuance, no sacrifices, no consequences. I see nothing in the ending that would suggest that anything bad or undesirable happened after that, that the writing even left room to acknowledge that anything bad or undesirable *could* happen. (And considering how massive this decision was, it's creepy and morally problematic.)

If you want my Shepard to change everyone on a very basic level - if you want him to decide whether or not this is genocide, whether he's destroying everything he's ever been a part of and everything he's ever known - make him own that. Shepard isn't five, and neither am I. But no, we get a cop-out - here's Joker and EDI, they're still dating, they're still the same people, it's all the same as before! Except now everyone is perfectly fine identifying as a bio-organic and nobody has any problems with it at all. Somehow. We won't explain how that worked, no matter how out of character that would be for anyone, or how unrealistic it would be for 99 percent of the universe to deal with that immediately and gracefully. (Or how up until then getting, say, the quarians and geth to behave was done through time and sacrifice and hard choices, turns out that wasn't how that works, all you had to do was pick the Cool Wintergreen flavor.) The game doesn't even handwave it. It just demands you accept it. You pressed the button for galactic harmony forever. Congratulations!

[ZIPO396]

SevastianFV wrote...

I could argue all day about why it's morally wrong, why it doesn't make any sense, why it doesn't belong in a story that's had themes of A of B (*especially* this bothers me), and why my Shep would never do that (although yours might), but for the most part, my main problem with it is that the game wants to present it as flawless and *right.* In the past, there was give-and-take, if you wanted something, you decided what you were willing to sacrifice, and you decided what consequences you were willing to face. And I even got to decide whether I thought those consequences were good or bad. (For instance, some players/Shepards might think there's nothing wrong with tweaking the heretic geth, easiest decision ever, for me/my Shepard this choice was one of the hardest). I thought that a fundamental part of the gameplay - as much as pressing right trigger to fire - was developing a character, deciding what values they have, and how far they'd go for them. Shepard got to decide what "right" meant for him/her. But here, the game TELLS you what you did was right. You pressed the "everything is fine forever" button. No nuance, no sacrifices, no consequences. I see nothing in the ending that would suggest that anything bad or undesirable happened after that, that the writing even left room to acknowledge that anything bad or undesirable *could* happen. (And considering how massive this decision was, it's creepy and morally problematic.)

If you want my Shepard to change everyone on a very basic level - if you want him to decide whether or not this is genocide, whether he's destroying everything he's ever been a part of and everything he's ever known - make him own that. Shepard isn't five, and neither am I. But no, we get a cop-out - here's Joker and EDI, they're still dating, they're still the same people, it's all the same as before! Except now everyone is perfectly fine identifying as a bio-organic and nobody has any problems with it at all. Somehow. We won't explain how that worked, no matter how out of character that would be for anyone, or how unrealistic it would be for 99 percent of the universe to deal with that immediately and gracefully. (Or how up until then getting, say, the quarians and geth to behave was done through time and sacrifice and hard choices, turns out that wasn't how that works, all you had to do was pick the Cool Wintergreen flavor.) The game doesn't even handwave it. It just demands you accept it. You pressed the button for galactic harmony forever. Congratulations!

Oh oh oh I can tell you what happens when you pick synthesis to. Eventually far down the line the new species make synthetics that wipe them out. Oh wait. I know you can stop that by networking everyone and taking away their individuality, privacy and/or free will. Oh wait.

That's the bad you get in Synthesis.

Modifié par ZIPO396, 11 mai 2012 - 09:42 .

[Ieldra]

a.m.p wrote...
I have one question for the synthesis enthusiasts. Specifially for Ieldra.

Let's say you were hired to do the EC and show the consequences of synthesis.

Something is missing form your idea. Where are the downsides?

See, it suffers from the same problem as the current endings. When I read your ideas I see a concept. But I don't see people. I don't see how your very abstract concept applies to the people in the galaxy.But whatever.

You threw out the window what little information about synthesis that we had and came up with a theory that paints it in bright hopeful colors. And another theory on why it is necessary.

You decided based on those theories your Shepard had the right to inflict your idea of a better life on everyone in the galaxy. All right. This has been argued to death and I don't want to get stuck on it again. I'm all for role-playing and choices in a choice-based RPG and I don't mind having the choice to roleplay a person with a god complex, as long as it isn't forced on me (which it thankfully isn't).

I just want the game to be honest about it. Regardless of how awesome and beneficial it is and what beautiful perspectives it opens. You are forcing it on the galaxy without their consent. There will not be happiness all around. And that is something that needs to be shown. Not that creepy two-minute scene with Joker being happy for some reason.

Because you, I assume, having put all that effort into making sense of synthesis, get it. Not everyone else does. Some people think how they personally would totally want to be cyborgs therefore synthesis is totally awesome. No. It doesn't work like that.

Actually same approach should be applied to all other endings. Take the concept and apply it to the universe. And then be honest about the consequences. The good, the bad and the ugly. Mass Effect has shown that it is capable of this.

I would be totally ok with that. In fact, the utopian aspect implied by the "final evolution" expression is something I'd see Synthesis divested of. I have explained why it is reasonable to think the overall results will be beneficial, but yes, there will still be conflict, there will be people who don't like the post-Synthesis civilization, people who'd think Shepard was the greatest monster in history if they knew he was responsible and there had been other options. With Destroy, there would be people who remember Shepard as "the man/woman who destroyed civilization" if they knew there had been other options. With Control, there would be people who'd call for the immediate destruction of the Citadel because they fear Shepard's evil empire. Etcetera etcetera.

But that also goes for the other side: what I would like to see is the game showing that all the high-EMS options are "good" options. In Destroy, you're at last completely free of the Reapers and their legacy, in Control, you have saved galactic civilization, in Synthesis, you have paved the way to "a new ascension for organic and synthetics alike" (leaked script).

Edit:
One caveat though: it could be that nobody knows what happened on the Citadel. As far as anyone knows, what actually happened was the only option. That would mean in all endings, relief about the end of the Reaper threat would be the primary emotion. It's as likely that people would just curse fate for the results they don't like and go on with their lives.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 11 mai 2012 - 10:06 .

[ZIPO396]

Ieldra2 wrote...

With Destroy, there would be people who remember Shepard as "the man/woman who destroyed civilization" if they knew there had been other options

Actually with high EMS most technology obviously survives. I mean Shepard didn't die and he needs his implants. Sure the relays being broken is an issue but civilisation would be able to find away around that I'm sure.

[Ieldra]

@ZIPO396:
I have explained why that won't happen. Post-synthesis life will be able to create synthetics, but since now they'll have the advantages that used to be synthetics-only, synthetics will not be able to surpass all other life any more. If conflict ensues, there will be no extinction because synthetics won't have the potential to become immeasurably smarter. In the worst case, there will just be war, which will be resolved the usual way.

Edit:
The relays are what holds galactic civilization together. Without them, it will be fragmented and destroyed as a cohesive whole. There will be single-cluster civilizations for the foreseeable future, but no galactic civilization.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 11 mai 2012 - 10:00 .

[ZIPO396]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@ZIPO396:
I have explained why that won't happen. Post-synthesis life will be able to create synthetics, but since now they'll have the advantages that used to be synthetics-only, synthetics will not be able to surpass all other life any more. If conflict ensues, there will be no extinction because synthetics won't have the potential to become immeasurably smarter. In the worst case, there will just be war, which will be resolved the usual way.

No by still being party organic synthetics can still significantly surpass all other life. Unless the hybrids give up the last of their organic nature and thus are no longer hyrbids. :happy:

Ieldra2 wrote...
Edit:
The relays are what holds galactic civilization together. Without them, it will be fragmented and destroyed as a cohesive whole. There will be single-cluster civilizations for the foreseeable future, but no galactic civilization.

With a number of the best minds of the galactic community stuck together I'm sure it won't take them long to either figure out A) How to make their own mass relays or Faster more efficeint FTL travel. Thus Galactic civilisation survives.

Modifié par ZIPO396, 11 mai 2012 - 10:06 .

[CroGamer002]

Because how it was executed it's not only impossible and incredibly stupid but also the most evil thing I ever seen in any fiction.

[christrek1982]

I don't hate on ending over the other I just hate them all

[CrazyBirdman]

Because it first of all it does not make any sense whatsoever to somehow overwrite DNA galactically.
But most importantly it is essentially the one thing you fought against in all three games. I got the feeling that you basically make the galaxy a giant reaper. Even as someone how is generally pro ending I think synthesis is absolutly terrible and should be removed from the game. Control and destroy are consistent theme throughout the series. To be fair Saren was similar to synthesis but he was nothing but an individual who was tricked into thinking he could control the process, he was just indoctrinated. To me synthesis is like indoctrinating the whole galaxy which seems kind of stupid to me.

[Ieldra]

@ZIPO396:
Rebuilding relays in a reasonable timeframe has been shown to be all but impossible. Improving non-relay FTL is likely but even then crossing the galaxy will take years.

Regarding new synthetics: the only problem is building life forms that can become smarter than you faster than you can react. There are possible solutions to prevent that - the ability (temporarily and without forcing anyone - just to clarify that this is not like Reaperization) to conjoin minds into a gestalt mind could be one.

@CrazyBirdMan:
Does anything imply that Synthesis will forcibly conjoin minds? Because that's what a Reaper is. The argument that "Synthesis is a Reaper win scenario" is based on zero evidence. And the Saren link is irrelevant.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 11 mai 2012 - 10:21 .

[ZIPO396]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@ZIPO396:
Rebuilding relays in a reasonable timeframe has been shown to be all but impossible. Improving non-relay FTL is likely but even then crossing the galaxy will take years.

Regarding new synthetics: the only problem is building life forms that can become smarter than you faster than you can react. There are possible solutions to prevent that - the ability (temporarily and without forcing anyone - just to clarify that this is not like Reaperization) to conjoin minds into a gestalt mind could be one.

I wouldn't say that it's shown anything. The ME universe isn't our universe we can't expect the laws of physics to be exactly the same. Look at synthesis.<_<
Well as it takes a few seconds to cross a solar system and maybe a day to reach a solar system hundreds of light years away. I don't know how long it takes to cross the entire galaxy could be just a year and as we already have maps to habitable worlds not to hard to resupply at points.
Yes gestalt minds temporarilly giving someone emergency powers and linking all minds to them doesn't mean it'll be temporary and they'll give them back. Just like a certain someone got temporary emergency powers and started a war.

[Noelemahc]

Well as it takes a few seconds to cross a solar system and maybe a day to reach a solar system hundreds of light years away. I don't know how long it takes to cross the entire galaxy could be just a year and as we already have maps to habitable worlds not to hard to resupply at points.

a.m.p. has compiled scary map threads about the impracticality of interstellar travel without relays. The trick is that everyone relied on the relays explicitly because many races - including youmanity - would still be stuck in their "cradle world" systems because conventional FTL has a specific range limit (about two days' worth of travel) before you go kablooey if you didn't discharge your drive core... which you need a planet with a worthy-sized magnetic field for, so asteroids don't count. Only Reapers had the tech to overcome this limitation.
But this isn't the thread about FTL travel, is it? =)

I just want the game to be honest about it. Regardless of how awesome and beneficial it is and what beautiful perspectives it opens. This is your opinion. You are forcing it on the galaxy without their consent. There will not be happiness all around. And that is something that needs to be shown. Not that creepy two-minute scene with Joker being happy for some reason.

Case in point: SMT Devil Survivor (I promise, last time I ever bring it up, I finally unlocked the Golden Ending yesterday, I gotta share): The plot revolves around a demon incursion into Tokyo which leads to the government sealing it off  to prevent escape of demons and people who may have orchestrated their appearance. It is revealed to the protagonists that the incursion was caused by someone using a supercomputer to harness the raw emotional energy of the Internets in place of soul sacrifice for demon summoning rituals, and effectively allowed everyone with a special PDA to summon demons at will. The heroes have about a week to solve the crisis before the government uses a doomsday weapon to simply vaporize every living thing within the containment zone. Based on which NPC you become BFFs with, you can pursue one or more possible solutions to the problem, leading to one of the available endings.

For every ending you get, you get walls upon walls of text of consequences. Yes, at best you get a little closure for the character you partnered with in the end, and all others are abandoned to unknownity, but the point is that you do get lots of closure for the world. Not one ending is perfectly positive, and they all have sequel hooks (explored in the remake for the 3DS which adds extra chapters to most of them).

* Escape: You leave the contamination zone, the goverment realizes cat's out of the bag, doesn't use Final Option, demons escape Tokyo and take over the world. Good job, hero. Cue grusome scenes of world turning into a horrid winner-takes-all bloodbath.
* Control: You take over the demons with high-tech stuff. Free, renewable energy for everyone! But the angels reveal that this world will eventually stagnate by becoming too dependant on demonic energy, as it will negate the need for hard labour from humans, will devalue it, and eventually people will grow weary of life and turn to depravity. Oops.
* Destroy: You eliminate all demons from the world... but it only affects the demons summoned by technological means. Occult demons and those that escaped on their own are still roaming free, but now humanity has no tools to use against them. Oops.
* Rule: You become King of Bel and control all the demons. You take over the world. See Escape, but you are King of the Hill now and rule what's left of the world. For a start.
* Heaven: You support the angels and help them restore peace on Earth. The price? The angels will forever control Earth, free will is taken away from humans (as they've proven themselves incapable of handling it well), and any deviation from the norm is punishable by death. Oops.
* Cleanse: You become King of Bel and control all the demons. Then order them to leave the world and never return, and hold their ability to return as an instrument of M.A.D. against the angels. Supposedly the Golden Ending, except that it's shown that the power you now hold will eventually break down your mind and the chaos will reawaken and everything will begin anew... Plus side: least named NPCs die in this outcome. Minus side: you are an enemy of Heaven now. Metatron sends you stalkerish notes containing vague threats of what the angels will do should you ever lose your resolve.

Replace "demons" with Reapers and you get more variety than the ME3 endings =)

Modifié par Noelemahc, 11 mai 2012 - 10:51 .

[ZIPO396]

Noelemahc wrote...

Well as it takes a few seconds to cross a solar system and maybe a day to reach a solar system hundreds of light years away. I don't know how long it takes to cross the entire galaxy could be just a year and as we already have maps to habitable worlds not to hard to resupply at points.

a.m.p. has compiled scary map threads about the impracticality of interstellar travel without relays. The trick is that everyone relied on the relays explicitly because many races - including youmanity - would still be stuck in their "cradle world" systems because conventional FTL has a specific range limit (about two days' worth of travel) before you go kablooey if you didn't discharge your drive core... which you need a planet with a worthy-sized magnetic field for, so asteroids don't count. Only Reapers had the tech to overcome this limitation.
But this isn't the thread about FTL travel, is it? =)

Hahaha Yeah that's exactly why I said refine earlier so that we could make the minimum distance to a nearby planet. And well with all the dead Reapers (dead as in no longer to indoctrinate and control others now) around it could be possible to find out how they do it and replicate it brightest minds in the galaxy and all being stuck in Sol.

[Clumsy Astronaut]

Perhaps when they add some real variety to the endings in the EC we'll actually get to see what some of the choices mean, synthesis included.

[Ieldra]

@ZIPO036:
Of course you can handwave the relays back in. I don't think it's in the spirit of Destroy though. Just as it wouldn't be in the spirit of Control to say that you fly the Reapers into a black hole.

As for gestalt minds, who says there's anything that can force you to stay. The geth consensus doesn't appear to be of that kind. Also, as I said in another place - yeah, there will be new wonders, but also new horrors. People will learn to deal with it as they are learning to deal with internet crime and networked terrorist organizations these days.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 11 mai 2012 - 11:01 .

[Clumsy Astronaut]

Yay for Ieldra2! But anyways, I feel that synthesis was a pretty good decision wrapped up in some of the worst presentation I've seen in a while. One of the reasons I have hope for the EC is that all the options could be presented in a better and more varied light.

[ZIPO396]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@ZIPO036:
Of course you can handwave the relays back in. I don't think it's in the spirit of Destroy though. Just as it wouldn't be in the spirit of Control to say that you fly the Reapers into a black hole.

As for gestalt minds, who says there's anything that can force you to stay. The geth consensus doesn't appear to be of that kind. Also, as I said in another place - yeah, there will be new wonders, but also new horrors. People will learn to deal with it as they are learning to deal with internet crime and networked terrorist organizations these days.

Okay to non handwave them back in. They weren't destroyed just heavily damaged and thus can be fixed within a reasonable time frame.
Who says there isn't anything to say that wouldn't be a risk thou. All we can do is speculate. Which is why we have this mess in the first place.

[a.m.p]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I would be totally ok with that. In fact, the utopian aspect implied by the "final evolution" expression is something I'd see Synthesis divested of. I have explained why it is reasonable to think the overall results will be beneficial, but yes, there will still be conflict, there will be people who don't like the post-Synthesis civilization, people who'd think Shepard was the greatest monster in history if they knew he was responsible and there had been other options. With Destroy, there would be people who remember Shepard as "the man/woman who destroyed civilization" if they knew there had been other options. With Control, there would be people who'd call for the immediate destruction of the Citadel because they fear Shepard's evil empire. Etcetera etcetera.

But that also goes for the other side: what I would like to see is the game showing that all the high-EMS options are "good" options. In Destroy, you're at last completely free of the Reapers and their legacy, in Control, you have saved galactic civilization, in Synthesis, you have paved the way to "a new ascension for organic and synthetics alike" (leaked script).

Good to hear it. I hope whomever writes EC is capable of being honest too.
The big question then becomes what numbers are behind the "there would be people" words.
Because depending on whether your beneficial change ruins the lifes of thousands, millions or billions, you may or may not get a social catastrophe much bigger than the post-war relay-less devastated galaxy can handle.

Anyway. I am going to settle for the following final answer to the OP's question.
I hate synthesis because I personally believe it is seventeen kinds of wrong, has no business being in Mass Effect, goes against core themes and so on.

Whereas objectively the current presentation of it that we have makes zero sense and is also a lie.

That about sums it up.


@Noelemahc
To be fair, the original purpose of that thread was to show that no relays does not need to mean 10000 year long dark age. I really, really dislike dark ages.
Then the EC was announced and all those "spolier warning: nobody starves to death" tweets appeared. So it became a list of things that need to be answered before nobody starves to death.
To be even more fair, MyChemicalBromance answers many of those questions in a very thorough manner.