And here lies the foundation of our disagreement. If you were all powerful being who saw people rioting and refusing vaccines, you would have done nothing. I would have forcibly vaccinated them allTaboo-XX wrote...
Gexora wrote...
I think the point is that the RACE which didn't want to be changed DID change several times, when faced with possible extinction.Taboo-XX wrote...
MisterJB wrote...
No, they clearly chose change over death at least twice in ME3.Taboo-XX wrote...
Ouch, Makes Synthesis look like a ****.
And the geth reach a consensus. That means they would all rather die than be changed.
They chose an upgrade.
One race.
One.
Synthesis effects everyone.
However, we are missing EDI's point here. She didn't mean it like "all change is bad", which is stupid, because changing is what keeps us going. Evolution IS change.
It was more like "death is preferable to becomnig a Reaper puppet". But according to the endings and the Catalyst, we didn't. We remained ourselves, but changed. Some might not take this change well. But people rebelled agains vaccination
offtopic - oh how I miss Harby! Even the horrible endings would have been fine with him around, saying all this bull**** in his sexy boomy voice
People have every right to protest against vaccines. They also run the risk of dying from diseases that are easily preventable.
The key word here is choice.
Why my Shepard will choose Synthesis
Débuté par
Gexora
, mai 17 2012 06:35
#151
Posté 17 mai 2012 - 09:43
Gexora
-
- Members
- 765 messages
Retour en haut
#152
Posté 17 mai 2012 - 09:46
ediskrad327
-
- Members
- 4 031 messages
yay for becoming a bunch of paste eating freaks with glowing eyes and dooming the undeveloped races to extinction!
#153
Posté 17 mai 2012 - 09:48
dreman9999
-
- Members
- 19 067 messages
And that's the problem with the reapers...They are too consern with the wellbeing of other to see that how they help them is wrong. Let them be and suffer for their choice.Gexora wrote...
And here lies the foundation of our disagreement. If you were all powerful being who saw people rioting and refusing vaccines, you would have done nothing. I would have forcibly vaccinated them allTaboo-XX wrote...
Gexora wrote...
I think the point is that the RACE which didn't want to be changed DID change several times, when faced with possible extinction.Taboo-XX wrote...
MisterJB wrote...
No, they clearly chose change over death at least twice in ME3.Taboo-XX wrote...
Ouch, Makes Synthesis look like a ****.
And the geth reach a consensus. That means they would all rather die than be changed.
They chose an upgrade.
One race.
One.
Synthesis effects everyone.
However, we are missing EDI's point here. She didn't mean it like "all change is bad", which is stupid, because changing is what keeps us going. Evolution IS change.
It was more like "death is preferable to becomnig a Reaper puppet". But according to the endings and the Catalyst, we didn't. We remained ourselves, but changed. Some might not take this change well. But people rebelled agains vaccination
offtopic - oh how I miss Harby! Even the horrible endings would have been fine with him around, saying all this bull**** in his sexy boomy voice
People have every right to protest against vaccines. They also run the risk of dying from diseases that are easily preventable.
The key word here is choice.
#154
Posté 17 mai 2012 - 09:48
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
Gexora wrote...
And here lies the foundation of our disagreement. If you were all powerful being who saw people rioting and refusing vaccines, you would have done nothing. I would have forcibly vaccinated them all
Don't mistake my lack of action as apathy. I care very much. I just don't believe that such a policy is acceptable.
#155
Posté 17 mai 2012 - 09:58
Gexora
-
- Members
- 765 messages
Well, that's nothing new. I have been told that many times. Like for example when I told people than Jaime Lannister, the character of the Song of Ice and Fire, was totally right to kill his murdering, sadistic and simply insane king he was sworn to protectTaboo-XX wrote...
Gexora wrote...
And here lies the foundation of our disagreement. If you were all powerful being who saw people rioting and refusing vaccines, you would have done nothing. I would have forcibly vaccinated them all
Don't mistake my lack of action as apathy. I care very much. I just don't believe that such a policy is acceptable.
#156
Posté 17 mai 2012 - 09:59
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
Gexora wrote...
Well, that's nothing new. I have been told that many times. Like for example when I told people than Jaime Lannister, the character of the Song of Ice and Fire, was totally right to kill his murdering, sadistic and simply insane king he was sworn to protectTaboo-XX wrote...
Gexora wrote...
And here lies the foundation of our disagreement. If you were all powerful being who saw people rioting and refusing vaccines, you would have done nothing. I would have forcibly vaccinated them all
Don't mistake my lack of action as apathy. I care very much. I just don't believe that such a policy is acceptable.
Quite a few characters deserve that fate actually. We can totally agree on that.
#157
Posté 18 mai 2012 - 05:16
ardensia
-
- Members
- 424 messages
[quote]Gexora wrote...
<snipped>
Can I please quote you in the OP? With copyright and everything. This is what I wanted to say but couldn't quite manage it
[/quote]
Sure, feel free. Also, thank you for the cookie.
[quote]The Night Mammoth wrote...
<snipped>
I think I might bow out of this little dance from now on.
[/quote]
Damn, this was my favorite part, since included the possibility of me getting free digital food. But as these posts are already tl;dr, I'll concur.
[quote]
Don't get me wrong about synthesis, anyone is free to interperate and choose as they see fit, that goes without saying. I can't really argue against many of them, even though I find everything about each choice to be morally abhorent on practically every level. Even destroy is disgusting. It advocates the extinction of an entire species, mass murder, as a solution to save the greater whole. [/quote]
Yes.
[quote]What I can't accept is extrapolating from the basis that first: the Catalyst should be taken at face value, and second: that its dilemma is absolutely real.
[/quote]
I've turned this sentence over a few times in my head and I'm not sure I'm quite grasping it. Are you saying that you can't accept the idea of coming to conclusions about the ending that are made by taking the Catalyst at face value, and that you strongly don't agree with accepting the idea that its self-described conflict is a definite issue? If not, then please clarify/skip ahead a bit, 'cause the next thing I'm going to write will be based on the idea that this is what you meant.
This is one of those places where you're getting the incredibly strong broken base among fans. Honestly? I think that if you and many other fans are well within your rights as the roleplayer behind Shepard to get to the Catalyst and not buy a single word it says. The ending is too vague and the Catalyst is too ill-defined and introduced too late in the game to expect everyone to just trust it.
My goal here isn't to make you believe the Catalyst, and it certainly isn't to make you think the end was good writing. My goal is to try and explain why someone else... someone who is not you... might reach the ending and not have a problem accepting the Catalyst's arguments as presented. If a player has already come to conclusions that line their thought process up with the Catalyst's before even reaching it, it becomes a lot easier for that person to accept the ending at face value.
[quote]
[quote]I don't think the Catalyst's predictions are based on the high probability of it happening so much as the non-zero probability of it happening. And if you've lived for 50 bajillion years and seen synthetic life move toward eventual domination of organic life (see: the group in the Prothean cycle who stuck AIs in their heads and eventually became dominated by the AIs), [/quote]Quick pause here; that was because of the Reapers. Carry on.[/quote]
I looked up the video on this, 'cause I've only played through ME3 once and organic memory isn't perfect, but Javik doesn't mention anything about Reaper influence on the AI in question. Though, if you want to nitpick, he doesn't say there wasn't Reaper influence, either.
Moving along.
[quote]<snipped, ref here if needed>
Ants can't be reasoned or communicated with.
I would try every other possible solution that doesn't sacrifice them before choosing to destroy, and I would never do so with a clear conscience. [/quote]
This is actually kind of my point.
Ants actually have complicated communication structures that allow them to function together as a colony. They exist and maintain themselves. They find resources, build shelters, quarantine the sick, and even have their own little ant wars. And while they can do some pretty nasty and inconvenient things to the world around them, there are people who would argue that you can't just wipe out a species of ant because it has a tendency to absolutely take over any place it deems to belong to it.
However, we do not communicate with ants because they are too far beneath us. Their communication tactics are (arguably) inferior, and they lack the foresight one gains by living for 70-some-odd years rather than a few months. So, when they become a problem, we simply exterminate them. If we're feeling particularly sentimental about preserving the species despite our need for extermination, we might extract a colony and place it in an ant farm, if we have the technology. If we don't, we might simply pin a few dead ants to cards and tell other people about them when they come over for tea.
Now, if one of those ants were to reach a level where it was able to recognizably communicate with us, it would GREATLY alter our approach, especially if that ant and its colony were to have developed some sort of anti-human device. Now, we'll probably be pretty pissed at it if it shows up with the intention of destroying us without any dialogue, and likewise if it plans to insert itself into our brains somehow and take over our bodies.
But what if we humans have an option that, while fundamentally changing how the colony functions, will break down that barrier between us so that humans and ants can relate to each other? We've never thought of it as a viable possibility before because no ant has ever expressed interest in communicating with us in a way that was particularly meaningful, much less pointed a gun at our heads and said, "We're ending this cycle NOW!!!"
You see where I'm going with this?
[quote] Organic life is intelligent, it can be reasoned with. [/quote]
And I'm certain the ants think they communicate just fine, too. And they do.. within the bounds of their own self interests. (I assume you meant sentient life rather than organic life, since there are quite a few things that are organic and not sentient to any level where we might attempt to reason with them.)
But when your perspective outspans that of an ant's to the point that even hundreds of their lives don't amount to yours, even their best communications can't help but be short-sighted. They are concerned about keeping the colony in working order for the few months that they are alive. You are concerned with the well-being of your entire property, everyone who comes onto it, pets living on it, your radish garden, and the house's ultimate resale value.
The Catalyst is the human houseowner. We are the ants. And we are so concerned about our own little existence in the here and now that we can't fully grasp how our path is ultimately going to lead to the destructon of the pantry. And the baby birds its daughter is trying to raise from eggs. And other unique ant colonies.
And Shepard is the first time an ant has brought together the colony in such a way that the houseowner has decided to take notice instead of reaching for the Raid and the pin cards.
[quote]<snipped>
Now I can agree in part. Evidently, it allows for a stupid number of theories, from it being all a dream, to the Catalyst being a liar, even as far as Hackett being indoctrinated. If ever you needed one redeeming factor this would be it.
[/quote]
Hooray! Here, at least, we have reached a consensus!
[quote]And the music, BioWare never fail to dissapoint in that regard. [/quote]
I think they may have erred on the side of too subtle here, too, in places, but yes. The music is beautiful.
[quote]However, their attempts at being vague are transparent, ironically. Synthesis is painted as the best conclusion. There are no implied downsides. It requires the most preparation, the most work to achieve, whilst both control and destroy are portrayed with obvious costs. Certain developers have made comments regarding it. I can't accept that. [/quote]
Mmm. It's like they were trying too hard to bring you in line with the Synthesis choice at the end to make up for the lack of buildup. Problem is, when people feel like they're being shoehorned into something that they didn't see coming, they are most likely to reject it outright. Ideas that are spontaneously pressed upon us tend to feel wrong.
[quote] The choice of ambiguity will always come with its own cost. People want answers. Leave anything important unanswered and the other flaws become obvious. etc. etc.
[/quote]
And this is why despite my feelings about the ending, I cannnot say it is good. There are ways to impliment ambiguity and promote speculation that don't break the fourth wall for a significant chunk of your audience. We can (and have) nitpick(ed) the hell out of other points throughout the entirety of the series, but the majority of people will let these slide if at least most the important questions get answered. And there are too many important questions unanswered, everything else starts to fall apart at the seams.
<snipped>
Can I please quote you in the OP? With copyright and everything. This is what I wanted to say but couldn't quite manage it
[/quote]
Sure, feel free. Also, thank you for the cookie.
[quote]The Night Mammoth wrote...
<snipped>
I think I might bow out of this little dance from now on.
[/quote]
Damn, this was my favorite part, since included the possibility of me getting free digital food. But as these posts are already tl;dr, I'll concur.
[quote]
Don't get me wrong about synthesis, anyone is free to interperate and choose as they see fit, that goes without saying. I can't really argue against many of them, even though I find everything about each choice to be morally abhorent on practically every level. Even destroy is disgusting. It advocates the extinction of an entire species, mass murder, as a solution to save the greater whole. [/quote]
Yes.
[quote]What I can't accept is extrapolating from the basis that first: the Catalyst should be taken at face value, and second: that its dilemma is absolutely real.
[/quote]
I've turned this sentence over a few times in my head and I'm not sure I'm quite grasping it. Are you saying that you can't accept the idea of coming to conclusions about the ending that are made by taking the Catalyst at face value, and that you strongly don't agree with accepting the idea that its self-described conflict is a definite issue? If not, then please clarify/skip ahead a bit, 'cause the next thing I'm going to write will be based on the idea that this is what you meant.
This is one of those places where you're getting the incredibly strong broken base among fans. Honestly? I think that if you and many other fans are well within your rights as the roleplayer behind Shepard to get to the Catalyst and not buy a single word it says. The ending is too vague and the Catalyst is too ill-defined and introduced too late in the game to expect everyone to just trust it.
My goal here isn't to make you believe the Catalyst, and it certainly isn't to make you think the end was good writing. My goal is to try and explain why someone else... someone who is not you... might reach the ending and not have a problem accepting the Catalyst's arguments as presented. If a player has already come to conclusions that line their thought process up with the Catalyst's before even reaching it, it becomes a lot easier for that person to accept the ending at face value.
[quote]
[quote]I don't think the Catalyst's predictions are based on the high probability of it happening so much as the non-zero probability of it happening. And if you've lived for 50 bajillion years and seen synthetic life move toward eventual domination of organic life (see: the group in the Prothean cycle who stuck AIs in their heads and eventually became dominated by the AIs), [/quote]Quick pause here; that was because of the Reapers. Carry on.[/quote]
I looked up the video on this, 'cause I've only played through ME3 once and organic memory isn't perfect, but Javik doesn't mention anything about Reaper influence on the AI in question. Though, if you want to nitpick, he doesn't say there wasn't Reaper influence, either.
Moving along.
[quote]<snipped, ref here if needed>
Ants can't be reasoned or communicated with.
I would try every other possible solution that doesn't sacrifice them before choosing to destroy, and I would never do so with a clear conscience. [/quote]
This is actually kind of my point.
Ants actually have complicated communication structures that allow them to function together as a colony. They exist and maintain themselves. They find resources, build shelters, quarantine the sick, and even have their own little ant wars. And while they can do some pretty nasty and inconvenient things to the world around them, there are people who would argue that you can't just wipe out a species of ant because it has a tendency to absolutely take over any place it deems to belong to it.
However, we do not communicate with ants because they are too far beneath us. Their communication tactics are (arguably) inferior, and they lack the foresight one gains by living for 70-some-odd years rather than a few months. So, when they become a problem, we simply exterminate them. If we're feeling particularly sentimental about preserving the species despite our need for extermination, we might extract a colony and place it in an ant farm, if we have the technology. If we don't, we might simply pin a few dead ants to cards and tell other people about them when they come over for tea.
Now, if one of those ants were to reach a level where it was able to recognizably communicate with us, it would GREATLY alter our approach, especially if that ant and its colony were to have developed some sort of anti-human device. Now, we'll probably be pretty pissed at it if it shows up with the intention of destroying us without any dialogue, and likewise if it plans to insert itself into our brains somehow and take over our bodies.
But what if we humans have an option that, while fundamentally changing how the colony functions, will break down that barrier between us so that humans and ants can relate to each other? We've never thought of it as a viable possibility before because no ant has ever expressed interest in communicating with us in a way that was particularly meaningful, much less pointed a gun at our heads and said, "We're ending this cycle NOW!!!"
You see where I'm going with this?
[quote] Organic life is intelligent, it can be reasoned with. [/quote]
And I'm certain the ants think they communicate just fine, too. And they do.. within the bounds of their own self interests. (I assume you meant sentient life rather than organic life, since there are quite a few things that are organic and not sentient to any level where we might attempt to reason with them.)
But when your perspective outspans that of an ant's to the point that even hundreds of their lives don't amount to yours, even their best communications can't help but be short-sighted. They are concerned about keeping the colony in working order for the few months that they are alive. You are concerned with the well-being of your entire property, everyone who comes onto it, pets living on it, your radish garden, and the house's ultimate resale value.
The Catalyst is the human houseowner. We are the ants. And we are so concerned about our own little existence in the here and now that we can't fully grasp how our path is ultimately going to lead to the destructon of the pantry. And the baby birds its daughter is trying to raise from eggs. And other unique ant colonies.
And Shepard is the first time an ant has brought together the colony in such a way that the houseowner has decided to take notice instead of reaching for the Raid and the pin cards.
[quote]<snipped>
Now I can agree in part. Evidently, it allows for a stupid number of theories, from it being all a dream, to the Catalyst being a liar, even as far as Hackett being indoctrinated. If ever you needed one redeeming factor this would be it.
[/quote]
Hooray! Here, at least, we have reached a consensus!
[quote]And the music, BioWare never fail to dissapoint in that regard. [/quote]
I think they may have erred on the side of too subtle here, too, in places, but yes. The music is beautiful.
[quote]However, their attempts at being vague are transparent, ironically. Synthesis is painted as the best conclusion. There are no implied downsides. It requires the most preparation, the most work to achieve, whilst both control and destroy are portrayed with obvious costs. Certain developers have made comments regarding it. I can't accept that. [/quote]
Mmm. It's like they were trying too hard to bring you in line with the Synthesis choice at the end to make up for the lack of buildup. Problem is, when people feel like they're being shoehorned into something that they didn't see coming, they are most likely to reject it outright. Ideas that are spontaneously pressed upon us tend to feel wrong.
[quote] The choice of ambiguity will always come with its own cost. People want answers. Leave anything important unanswered and the other flaws become obvious. etc. etc.
[/quote]
And this is why despite my feelings about the ending, I cannnot say it is good. There are ways to impliment ambiguity and promote speculation that don't break the fourth wall for a significant chunk of your audience. We can (and have) nitpick(ed) the hell out of other points throughout the entirety of the series, but the majority of people will let these slide if at least most the important questions get answered. And there are too many important questions unanswered, everything else starts to fall apart at the seams.
Modifié par ardensia, 18 mai 2012 - 05:35 .
#158
Posté 19 mai 2012 - 07:28
Gexora
-
- Members
- 765 messages
I am mostly posting here so I can facepalm at those who make new threads about Synthesis bringing up identical points even though half of them were already proven wrong and the other half discussed to death without going to each of those threads
#161
Posté 01 juin 2012 - 05:25
Gexora
-
- Members
- 765 messages
Random bump JUST BECAUSE I CAN
Wasn't this like, the first thing posted in this thread?dreman9999 wrote...
#162
Posté 01 juin 2012 - 05:28
Zardoc
-
- Members
- 3 570 messages
Why my Shepard will choose Synthesis
Because he's a sucker.
#163
Posté 01 juin 2012 - 05:41
Gexora
-
- Members
- 765 messages
oh, but she is a femaleZardoc wrote...
Why my Shepard will choose Synthesis
Because he's a sucker.
and has a shotgun
#164
Posté 01 juin 2012 - 05:42
The Night Mammoth
-
- Members
- 7 476 messages
Gexora wrote...
oh, but she is a femaleZardoc wrote...
Why my Shepard will choose Synthesis
Because he's a sucker.
and has a shotgun
A weaponized sucker is even more dangerous.
#165
Posté 01 juin 2012 - 05:46
Gexora
-
- Members
- 765 messages
I believe you cannot call a single woman "sucker"The Night Mammoth wrote...
Gexora wrote...
oh, but she is a femaleZardoc wrote...
Why my Shepard will choose Synthesis
Because he's a sucker.
and has a shotgun
A weaponized sucker is even more dangerous.
#166
Posté 01 juin 2012 - 05:49
The Night Mammoth
-
- Members
- 7 476 messages
Gexora wrote...
I believe you cannot call a single woman "sucker"
I don't even know that means.
Fun fact! A 'jiffy' is an actual unit measurement of time!
#167
Posté 01 juin 2012 - 05:53
Gexora
-
- Members
- 765 messages
I mean, you can call a multigendered bunch "suckers" and you can call any male sucker, but you can't just call a woman that
TRIVIA TIME GUYS
The Night Mammoth wrote...
Gexora wrote...
I believe you cannot call a single woman "sucker"
I don't even know that means.
Fun fact! A 'jiffy' is an actual unit measurement of time!
TRIVIA TIME GUYS
#168
Posté 01 juin 2012 - 05:58
The Night Mammoth
-
- Members
- 7 476 messages
Gexora wrote...
I mean, you can call a multigendered bunch "suckers" and you can call any male sucker, but you can't just call a woman that
That's sexist. I'll insult our women-folk equally to how much I insult my fellow men.
The Night Mammoth wrote...
Gexora wrote...
I believe you cannot call a single woman "sucker"
I don't even know that means.
Fun fact! A 'jiffy' is an actual unit measurement of time!
TRIVIA TIME GUYS
Donkeys kill more humans every year than planes do!
#170
Posté 02 juin 2012 - 06:06
The Night Mammoth
-
- Members
- 7 476 messages
Gexora wrote...
b-but i have a donkey and he is nice!
Don't trust him I say, he's planning something even now.
#171
Posté 02 juin 2012 - 06:19
teh DRUMPf!!
-
- Members
- 9 142 messages
Gexora wrote...
You are a space Hitler! You cannot decide for all the galaxy!
Guess what, that happens in most of videogames where you are the saviour of the galaxy/earth/your country/whatever. Your choices affect the res of your people's lives. You just choose what you think it's best.
Yes, such a major change will be scary for some, but my Shepard (who went full retard at this point, but that has already been discussed) is not afraid of making a few people upset
Synthesis destroys diversity.
No it doesn't. From what we have seen, all it does is give people green eyes. Which sucks if you liked your girlfriends baby blues, but is preferable to extinction.
There are still different races, its just they have been upgraded. It's like you and I went out and got a similar tattoo - wuld change the fact we are both different.
Synthesis doesn't solve anything! You can still create new synthetics and be killed by them!
To that I can only say - F*CK Catalyst and his "created will always rebel agains the creator". I have a car and it didn't kill me yet
You are doing what Saren wanted, as opposed to what Anderson wanted.
This makes me facepalm every single time. Saren wanted to live in submission. Shepard doesn't.
And Anderson... Anderson is a simple man. A soldier. He just wants to blow all this ****ers up. But he isn't the hero of this story (neither, admittedly, are you, but you get to decide between Red, Blue or Green).
You have been indoctrinated.
Don't believe IT, don't care about IT, don't bring it into this discussion
Huzzah! Well done. :happy:
#172
Posté 02 juin 2012 - 06:22
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
It still ****s over the Going to the Sun Road and Billy the Bear.
I really hope you guys get what you want in the EC though, because this kind of speculation is just...bonkers.
I really hope you guys get what you want in the EC though, because this kind of speculation is just...bonkers.
#173
Posté 02 juin 2012 - 06:29
wright1978
-
- Members
- 8 116 messages
Nope OP, only logical explantion of synthesis imo given starbrat's presence is that it turns every organic and synthetic into a dronelike race that won't have temerity/ability to ceate new Ai's. If somebody somehow evolves out of this cul-de-sac of evolution the reapers will be there to murder them.
#174
Posté 02 juin 2012 - 06:34
Gexora
-
- Members
- 765 messages
please explain hw you came to this conclusion since there is nothing in the ending I saw to support thiswright1978 wrote...
Nope OP, only logical explantion of synthesis imo given starbrat's presence is that it turns every organic and synthetic into a dronelike race that won't have temerity/ability to ceate new Ai's. If somebody somehow evolves out of this cul-de-sac of evolution the reapers will be there to murder them.
#175
Posté 02 juin 2012 - 06:37
wright1978
-
- Members
- 8 116 messages
Gexora wrote...
please explain hw you came to this conclusion since there is nothing in the ending I saw to support thiswright1978 wrote...
Nope OP, only logical explantion of synthesis imo given starbrat's presence is that it turns every organic and synthetic into a dronelike race that won't have temerity/ability to ceate new Ai's. If somebody somehow evolves out of this cul-de-sac of evolution the reapers will be there to murder them.
Starbrat is an evil genocidal midget who believes that without reaping 'the created' will always 'destroy creators'. Synthesis is it's alternate solution. Reapers no longer view life as a threat because it has been neutered so to speak.
