169 réponses à ce sujet

[Geneaux486]

You're accepting Reaper Doctrine from the Reaper King...
It's bull****...

No, ^that's bull****.  Synthesis is the solution thought of by whichever cycle of organics introduced the function into the Crucible plans.  It's a solution that is independent from the Reapers, and it makes everything the Reapers have done, their atrocities, their losses, all completely meaningless and utterly evil.  No, you're not accepting Reaper doctrine by going with synthesis.  You're rejecting the idea that the Reapers' brutality is necesarry and finding a better way.

While I didn't like the idea of the Geth and EDI dying, I wasn't going to let the Reapers just leave. Who's to say the Catalyst won't change his own rules and send them after us again? It's not a risk I or my Shepard would be willing to take. 

It was the only way to be sure that the Reapers are gone for good.

 
Way I saw it, if killing the Reapers meant doing what the Reapers do and eradicating a race, then what's the point?  Better to choose the non-violent solution when it presents itself.  The Reapers deserve to be destroyed, yes, but not at the cost of friends and allies when there is another way.

And those who are indoctrinated in real life would believe synthesis would be the best option.

Friggin' Mass Effect hipsters...

Synthesis: People who love the Geth too much and who don't care about what Anderson/Shepard stood for.

Destroy:  People who will sacrifice a nation for their own petty revenge and ignore all alternative options, and don't care what paragon Shepard stood for.  See?  Second-guessing people's video game choices works both ways!  Maybe stop trying to gauge people's morality based on how they play a game?

You did not commit genocide. You were not aiming to destroy the geth. What the quarians were trying to do to the geth was genocide. I wish people would look at the subtleties of these issues a bit more.

What you're aiming to do is irrelevant.  They're dead, and Shepard had other options.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 20 mai 2012 - 04:00 .

[krasnoarmeets]

Nyoka wrote...

It's like the statue ending of Jade Empire. You impose peace and harmony by brainwashing everybody. Advocates call it "enlighten" everybody or whatever. The thing is you're imposing a different view to the one people had before your intervention. People wanted to make synthetics before, now they don't want to. You did that. This involves whether you believe people should be free to disagree with your enlightenment, free to refuse your peace, even free to remain wrong if they want to.

In the statue ending, a kid questions the whole scheme, and his teacher tells him that he doesn't need to know. In ME3 you deny people even the possibility of questioning your galactic plan. You force everybody to agree with space kid and with you.

For some people, that's moral.

That statue ending sounds more like the option of rewriting the Heretics in ME2 rather than the choices at the end of ME3. The catalyst has been imposing his will for millions of years on countless civilisations. Are you suggesting a galactic consensus to decide which option should be chosen? 

[Vigilant111]

What exactly are control and synthesis options sacrificing here, apart from Shepard him/herself?

[krasnoarmeets]

Synthesis is sacrificing natural evolution of species which the reapers were essentially denying anyway. Everyone becomes a combination of synthetic and organic. Sounds like a loss of individuality/uniqueness to me. Control to what end? Does that mean short term control? What will happen to the reapers? If Shepard is dead, who exactly is controlling them? In the control ending the citadel closes its arm and does not explode but the mass relays do. What is the significance of that?

[Vigilant111]

krasnoarmeets wrote...

Synthesis is sacrificing natural evolution of species which the reapers were essentially denying anyway. Everyone becomes a combination of synthetic and organic. Sounds like a loss of individuality/uniqueness to me. Control to what end? Does that mean short term control? What will happen to the reapers? If Shepard is dead, who exactly is controlling them? In the control ending the citadel closes its arm and does not explode but the mass relays do. What is the significance of that?

Loss of individuality/uniqueness to every being in the galaxy, sounds far more atrociaos than just killing Geth/EDI, whom of which strived to defy the possibility of falling under reaper control, EDI has specifically stated that she would rather die than to being preserved in this way

Also what does synthesis do to synthetics? Machines squared?

Modifié par Vigilant111, 22 mai 2012 - 09:46 .

[krasnoarmeets]

Everyone would be the same, therefore they would also become organic/synthetic.

[George Costanza]

Synthesis is an appalling idea, and even if I did bother playing Mass Effect 3 again (which is looking increasingly unlikely) I'd still never pick it, even just to see how it differs.

Unlike most of the objections to Synthesis, mine isn't on moral grounds. I see that people think that forcefully changing the DNA of everything in the galaxy is a bit naughty, and I concur, but then so is dooming the Geth and EDI. So was damning the Batarians in Arrival. Bad things happen in Mass Effect, and none of the endings came without a price.

My main issue with Synthesis is that it's absolutely ****ing stupid. I fail to see how Shepard running and jumping down a hole into some light (which was pretty gnarly actually considering he was on death's door about four minutes previous) could possibly alter the genetic makeup of life in the galaxy. Some magical energy is released from a ridiculous (and it really is ridiculous) space weapon and suddenly people start sprouting circuit boards? How does that work? How on any level, even as science fiction, does that make sense? Think about it logically. Magic energy makes people grow robot parts. Jesus wept.

Modifié par George Costanza, 22 mai 2012 - 10:20 .

[Vigilant111]

krasnoarmeets wrote...

Everyone would be the same, therefore they would also become organic/synthetic.

That sounds cool, even though not entirely credible. I am pretty sure my Shepard would ask the organics and synthetics beforehand whether they wanted to be combined cos he believes in freedom of choice.

Wait, no time!!!!! boom boom, everything synthetic is destroyed...

When they say synthetics, they meant sentient beings right? not a simple machine like a clock

[Keltikone]

The ending is bad regardless. As an ex military doctor, I worked closely with engineers, aircrew and marines, not a one of whome would have designed a machine that started by shooting a hole in a pipe.

Want some DNA ? Blood, saliva, skin samples etc, or ........ jump into a laser !

Need to control something, I know, lets make a machine that does it by killing you !


Awful concept, awful implimentation, just alround bad.

[Vigilant111]

George Costanza wrote...

Synthesis is an appalling idea, and even if I did bother playing Mass Effect 3 again (which is looking increasingly unlikely) I'd still never pick it, even just to see how it differs.

Unlike most of the objections to Synthesis, mine isn't on moral grounds. I see that people think that forcefully changing the DNA of everything in the galaxy is a bit naughty, and I concur, but then so is dooming the Geth and EDI. So was damning the Batarians in Arrival. Bad things happen in Mass Effect, and none of the endings came without a price.

My main issue with Synthesis is that it's absolutely ****ing stupid. I fail to see how Shepard running a jumping down a hole into some light (which was pretty gnarly actually considering he was on death's door about four minutes previous) could possibly alter the genetic makeup of life in the galaxy. Some magical energy is released from a ridiculous (and it really is ridiculous) space weapon and suddenly people start sprouting circuit boards? How does that work? How on any level, even as science fiction, does that make sense? Think about it logically. Magic energy makes people grow robot parts. Jesus wept.

Agreed, even sci-fi needs credibility, there are just laws of physics that u cannot defy

[jojon2se]

:7

[molecularman]

I just walked straight into the synthesis beam because I was facing that way after the friendly chat with starchild. No big deal, the ending is lame anyways

[Vigilant111]

molecularman wrote...

I just walked straight into the synthesis beam because I was facing that way after the friendly chat with starchild. No big deal, the ending is lame anyways

Your recilience is remarkable

[George Costanza]

Keltikone wrote...

The ending is bad regardless. As an ex military doctor, I worked closely with engineers, aircrew and marines, not a one of whome would have designed a machine that started by shooting a hole in a pipe.

Want some DNA ? Blood, saliva, skin samples etc, or ........ jump into a laser !

Need to control something, I know, lets make a machine that does it by killing you !


Awful concept, awful implimentation, just alround bad.

Everything about the crucible is awful. If you think about it with any sort of depth for even the shortest time you can pull the entire concept to bits. The first thing I thought with the "Destroy" option was, "Why do I have to shoot this thing?". How did that release energy that would kill the Reapers? Why does jumping into the energy produce a completely different reaction to just putting your hands into it twenty feet away? Who designed this joke of a weapon?

[Fail_Inc]

Completing Saren's plan is nice and everything BUT convincing TIM that nobody can control Reapers, making him kill himself then choosing the Control option is the best "Shepard is a jerk" moment in ME history
You can't control it bro... BUT I CAN MU HU HAHA *evil laugh*

[Baa Baa]

George Costanza wrote...

Synthesis is an appalling idea, and even if I did bother playing Mass Effect 3 again (which is looking increasingly unlikely) I'd still never pick it, even just to see how it differs.

Unlike most of the objections to Synthesis, mine isn't on moral grounds. I see that people think that forcefully changing the DNA of everything in the galaxy is a bit naughty, and I concur, but then so is dooming the Geth and EDI. So was damning the Batarians in Arrival. Bad things happen in Mass Effect, and none of the endings came without a price.

My main issue with Synthesis is that it's absolutely ****ing stupid. I fail to see how Shepard running and jumping down a hole into some light (which was pretty gnarly actually considering he was on death's door about four minutes previous) could possibly alter the genetic makeup of life in the galaxy. Some magical energy is released from a ridiculous (and it really is ridiculous) space weapon and suddenly people start sprouting circuit boards? How does that work? How on any level, even as science fiction, does that make sense? Think about it logically. Magic energy makes people grow robot parts. Jesus wept.

This

[Austin N]

Keltikone wrote...

The ending is bad regardless. As an ex military doctor, I worked closely with engineers, aircrew and marines, not a one of whome would have designed a machine that started by shooting a hole in a pipe.

Want some DNA ? Blood, saliva, skin samples etc, or ........ jump into a laser !

Need to control something, I know, lets make a machine that does it by killing you !


Awful concept, awful implimentation, just alround bad.

I read that as "ex military dictator" and was like "whaaaaaat?"

[NoUserNameHere]

Geneaux486 wrote...

You're accepting Reaper Doctrine from the Reaper King...
It's bull****...

No, ^that's bull****.  Synthesis is the solution thought of by whichever cycle of organics introduced the function into the Crucible plans.  It's a solution that is independent from the Reapers, and it makes everything the Reapers have done, their atrocities, their losses, all completely meaningless and utterly evil.  No, you're not accepting Reaper doctrine by going with synthesis.  You're rejecting the idea that the Reapers' brutality is necesarry and finding a better way.

... What if I told you that the basic idea behind the Crucible was a Starchild plant? That it could only be a Starchild plant?

There's not a thing you're doing in the final moments that is somehow sticking it to the Reaper regieme. You're just at the focal point of some Robot God's secret test of character..

[EpicManeuver1234]

Geneaux486 wrote...

You're accepting Reaper Doctrine from the Reaper King...
It's bull****...

No, ^that's bull****.  Synthesis is the solution thought of by whichever cycle of organics introduced the function into the Crucible plans.  It's a solution that is independent from the Reapers, and it makes everything the Reapers have done, their atrocities, their losses, all completely meaningless and utterly evil.  No, you're not accepting Reaper doctrine by going with synthesis.  You're rejecting the idea that the Reapers' brutality is necesarry and finding a better way.

While I didn't like the idea of the Geth and EDI dying, I wasn't going to let the Reapers just leave. Who's to say the Catalyst won't change his own rules and send them after us again? It's not a risk I or my Shepard would be willing to take. 

It was the only way to be sure that the Reapers are gone for good.

 
Way I saw it, if killing the Reapers meant doing what the Reapers do and eradicating a race, then what's the point?  Better to choose the non-violent solution when it presents itself.  The Reapers deserve to be destroyed, yes, but not at the cost of friends and allies when there is another way.

And those who are indoctrinated in real life would believe synthesis would be the best option.

Friggin' Mass Effect hipsters...

Synthesis: People who love the Geth too much and who don't care about what Anderson/Shepard stood for.

Destroy:  People who will sacrifice a nation for their own petty revenge and ignore all alternative options, and don't care what paragon Shepard stood for.  See?  Second-guessing people's video game choices works both ways!  Maybe stop trying to gauge people's morality based on how they play a game?

You did not commit genocide. You were not aiming to destroy the geth. What the quarians were trying to do to the geth was genocide. I wish people would look at the subtleties of these issues a bit more.

What you're aiming to do is irrelevant.  They're dead, and Shepard had other options.

This

Modifié par EpicManeuver1234, 30 septembre 2012 - 05:47 .