9089 réponses à ce sujet

[Taboo]

Refuse isn't so much giving in in my opinion, as it is a complete betrayal of everyone who put their trust in you.

It's beyond ridiculous.

You have permission to use the Crucible. Any of the three options will most likely be accepted by the galaxy. Regardless of my feelings on Synthesis and Control I cannot believe someone could be so irresponsible.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 07 août 2012 - 04:26 .

[MegaSovereign]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Refuse isn't so much giving in in my opinion, as it is a complete betrayal of everyone who put their trust in you.

It's beyond ridiculous.

You have permission to use the Crucible. Any of the three options will most likely be accepted by the galaxy. Regardless of my feelings on Synthesis and Control I cannot believe someone could be so irresponsible.

Exactly this.

Even if Refusal resulted in a conventional victory (ignoring the fact that this simply isn't feasible, but whatever), it would save more lives to simply use the Crucible to end the war.

If they gave us the choice between destroying the Reapers conventionally or destroying them with the Crucible, I would personally still choose using the Crucible.

[Taboo]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Refuse isn't so much giving in in my opinion, as it is a complete betrayal of everyone who put their trust in you.

It's beyond ridiculous.

You have permission to use the Crucible. Any of the three options will most likely be accepted by the galaxy. Regardless of my feelings on Synthesis and Control I cannot believe someone could be so irresponsible.

Exactly this.

Even if Refusal resulted in a conventional victory (ignoring the fact that this simply isn't feasible, but whatever), it would save more lives to simply use the Crucible to end the war.

If they gave us the choice between destroying the Reapers conventionally or destroying them with the Crucible, I would personally still choose using the Crucible.

Right? 

Even Destroy is going to kill less than a conventional victory.

A stigma is attached because it kills all Synthetics, but given the choice between that and Conventional Victory, I'd shoot the tube every damn time.

[Versus Omnibus]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Refuse isn't so much giving in in my opinion, as it is a complete betrayal of everyone who put their trust in you.

It's beyond ridiculous.

You have permission to use the Crucible. Any of the three options will most likely be accepted by the galaxy. Regardless of my feelings on Synthesis and Control I cannot believe someone could be so irresponsible.

And it's that irresponsiblity that makes me despise Refuse. I can understand those who chose Destroy and Control, but to simply do nothing with everything and everyone depending on you is completely unacceptable.

[Taboo]

It's all about what your Shepard wants. My Canon Shepard wants it over and done with, without interference past that. He picks Destroy, always. I would totally have other Shepards lined up for the other two endings but I cannot believe any Shepard I would create would be so stubborn.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 07 août 2012 - 04:41 .

[saracen16]

You just couldn't ignore me, could you, TAO?

The Angry One wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Ever since the EC the idea that the Reaper minions and Synthesized people are in some way similar is off the table. I have no idea why people bring that in through the backdoor. Except for the usual suspects of course.

Oh really? Explain why it is. The only difference between a husk and a victim of synthesis is autonomous control, and in the end it's just a different form of indoctrination.
I have no idea why people think otherwise. Except for the usual suspects, of course.

Riiiight. Everything you speak, TAO, is 100% truth and we're all blithering idiots for thinking otherwise. You've failed to argue that husks and synthites are the same to the core. A form of "indoctrination" based - according to another of your posts - on seriously superficial similarities between EDI's speech and the conversation with Sovereign. There is nothing "indoctrinating" about changing the fundamental matrix of life (DNA) into something hybridized with synthetics (i.e. nothing at all like the husks who, according to Mass Effect Retribution and other sources, are organic bodies infiltrated with synthetic tubing), and there is nothing to indicate that the cycle continued.

You're the one who needs to do the explaining, not Ieldra2. As far as we know, you made the outrageous statement and therefore the burden of proof is with you.

We're waiting.

Do you have anything except buzzwords? "Matrix of life" means nothing. Either come up with real answers or don't sit there and judge what others say.

To you, it means nothing. To me, it means the framework of life, the fundamental building blocks of it. There is no more real answer than what I have answered to Ieldra2 or what Brooker_T proposed. That's not judgement, that's speculation. And if anyone is judging, it's you.

Once again. The method is different, but the ultimate result is the same, and none of you have yet to prove otherwise.

And here you go again: repeating the same asinine lies and expecting us to believe it as the truth without any proof of it whatsoever. You're the one who made the statement and thus the onus of proof is on you. Your arrogance and smugness are showing.

There are MANY stark differences. Organics gain synthetic technology, while synthetics gain an understanding of organics. For organics, the matrix of life is changed. For synthetics, they gain an understanding of the complexities of organic behavior. These are quoted verbatim from what the Catalyst explained in the game. The changes for both are different, but the end result is removing the barriers of misunderstanding between them (i.e. removing the source of conflict).

However, they are not husks: they retain free will and are not brainless zombies who follow a hive mind collective. There is no proof that they do not lose their individuality, especially from the EC slideshow and EDI's dialogue. They don't even follow the Reapers anymore. Hell, the Reapers help the organics REBUILD. If the Reapers were being followed, there wouldn't be such a thing. Hence, your point falls short.

And really people, taking stuff from other unrelated fictional universes and saying that makes synthesis okay?
Well, if you can do that, so can I. Synthesis works!

Wait, what?! Mass Effect Retribution is an unrelated universe?! OMG... you really have lost all credibility. Next time, you come out and try to claim some fictional high-ground, I'll remind you of your intellectual dishonesty... and your ignorance of the source material.

But back to the debate: you're being dishonest as usual. Synthesis is not at all like the Borg collective, who are absorbed into one hive mind. The Borg's construction is a parasitic machine-organic relationship, parasitic in the sense that the machine component absorbs the individual into the Borg Collective's hive mind consensus. Synthesis is different: it involves fundamental changes in the building blocks of life. It does NOT sway individuals towards a particular viewpoint. If anything, the JC Denton ending in Deus Ex Invisible War connects everyone to Helios by making them fully augmented with nanites and linking them to the AI. This is different from synthesis, where people are not conjoined towards one individual consciousness.

And you're still lacking in proof. 

We're waiting.

Taboo-XX wrote...

Refuse isn't so much giving in in my opinion, as it is a complete betrayal of everyone who put their trust in you.

It's beyond ridiculous.

You have permission to use the Crucible. Any of the three options will most likely be accepted by the galaxy. Regardless of my feelings on Synthesis and Control I cannot believe someone could be so irresponsible.

 

No other cycle succeeded in using the Crucible. Thousands of cycles have passed. This cycle is the first to use it. There is irresponsibility in even not trying to use the Crucible, the only thing known to possibly defeat the Reapers themselves. There is no other recourse that is responsible. Trying to defeat them conventionally would be repeating the same mistakes of previous cycles, condemning your species to ash.

On retrospect, the Illusive Man was right during Shep's accusation of him being indoctrinated on Thessia: "I could say the same about you, wasting your time on a war that can't be won." To fight the Reapers 100% conventionally would be to submit to their cycle and allow it to continue. To fight them on their own terms, with the Crucible, would be to defeat them.

Modifié par saracen16, 07 août 2012 - 09:24 .

[Ieldra]

Versus Omnibus wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Refuse isn't so much giving in in my opinion, as it is a complete betrayal of everyone who put their trust in you.

It's beyond ridiculous.

You have permission to use the Crucible. Any of the three options will most likely be accepted by the galaxy. Regardless of my feelings on Synthesis and Control I cannot believe someone could be so irresponsible.

And it's that irresponsiblity that makes me despise Refuse. I can understand those who chose Destroy and Control, but to simply do nothing with everything and everyone depending on you is completely unacceptable.

I think there's a misperception in the pro-Refuse arguments: the notion that by doing nothing to prevent X you're somehow not responsible for X, even if you were in the perfect position to prevent it. It doesn't work that way. Ethics isn't just about avoiding things you're not supposed to do, but also about doing things you're obliged to do. Also, the good is always something concrete, sticking to some abstract
principle means nothing if it doesn't achieve anything concrete.

As I see it, any of the three main options is better than letting the cycle continue.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

The whole arguement that Saren wanted Synthesis (which is inaccurate to say the least) and so Synthesis is evil just screams of the old "Hitler likes X so liking X makes you evil too" type of arguements.

[Ieldra]

saracen16 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@saracen16:
I can live with not knowing how the Crucible or the Citadel works. But as opposed to the physics behind that technology, we know rather well how the human body works, and thus, Shepard's dispersal is something that must be explained. I am 100% unwilling to accept some non-physical nonsense like "Shepard's organic/synthesis essence". What the hell is that? Being organic or synthetic is an attribute of a whole organism, and it applies purely to its design principle. You can't just break that down to the molecular level.

Taking a mystical concept and surrounding it with technobabble doesn't create something that works in SF. The ground rules for such things need to be established in advance.

You bring up a very good point, Ieldra2, one which I concede to.

Brooker's explanation of nanites is valid. Another possibility would be that E = mc-squared (that is, mass is a form of energy). The mass within Shepard's body is converted to pure, raw energy, and that is stored in the Crucible's initial burst. The alteration of the dark energy transmissions of the Crucible are sent out, and that energy reintegrates with organic or synthetic matter and converts it into mass (i.e. organics gain the synthetic technology within Shepard while synthetics gain the wave forms of Shepard's organic mind and its complexities.

That's just one possibility... Of course, explanations being what they are, they are only theories. The mass effect relays send out and amplify these transmissions and propagate them throughout the galaxy...

I can make up some scenarios about how the Crucible effects the Synthesis, and they'll be completely compatible with the ME universe and the principles we've seen at work there. But: none of those scenarios explain how Shepard's dispersal fits in. Shepard converted into energy means nothing compared to what the Crucible can generate, and if it was just about "more energy", then any other object of the same mass would do. I gather what's needed is rather the information that makes up Shepard, but what kind of information exists within Shepard that enables Synthesis? Shepard doesn't represent a synthesized pattern, the synthesised "matrix", he's an augmented organic.

@Ranger Jack Walker:
The argument "It's what Saren wanted" is an attempt at invoking guilt by association, a specific form of  Association fallacy.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 07 août 2012 - 08:28 .

[His Name was HYR!!]

 Yes but we've established The Butthurt One has miserable knowledge of the lore.


"Durr, what do rachni have to do with krogan?"

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 07 août 2012 - 08:26 .

[saracen16]

Ieldra2 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@saracen16:
I can live with not knowing how the Crucible or the Citadel works. But as opposed to the physics behind that technology, we know rather well how the human body works, and thus, Shepard's dispersal is something that must be explained. I am 100% unwilling to accept some non-physical nonsense like "Shepard's organic/synthesis essence". What the hell is that? Being organic or synthetic is an attribute of a whole organism, and it applies purely to its design principle. You can't just break that down to the molecular level.

Taking a mystical concept and surrounding it with technobabble doesn't create something that works in SF. The ground rules for such things need to be established in advance.

You bring up a very good point, Ieldra2, one which I concede to.

Brooker's explanation of nanites is valid. Another possibility would be that E = mc-squared (that is, mass is a form of energy). The mass within Shepard's body is converted to pure, raw energy, and that is stored in the Crucible's initial burst. The alteration of the dark energy transmissions of the Crucible are sent out, and that energy reintegrates with organic or synthetic matter and converts it into mass (i.e. organics gain the synthetic technology within Shepard while synthetics gain the wave forms of Shepard's organic mind and its complexities.

That's just one possibility... Of course, explanations being what they are, they are only theories. The mass effect relays send out and amplify these transmissions and propagate them throughout the galaxy...

I can make up some scenarios about how the Crucible effects the Synthesis, and they'll be completely compatible with the ME universe and the principles we've seen at work there. But: none of those scenarios explain how Shepard's dispersal fits in. Shepard converted into energy means nothing compared to what the Crucible can generate, and if it was just about "more energy", then any other object of the same mass would do. I gather what's needed is rather the information that makes up Shepard, but what kind of information exists within Shepard that enables Synthesis? Shepard doesn't represent a synthesized pattern, the synthesised "matrix", he's an augmented organic.

Right, but I meant that when he is broken down to pure energy that itself can be resynthesized to mass, but not necessarily the same mass that it originated from. If I am understanding you correctly, and correct me if I'm wrong, you're asking a two-fold question... what makes Shepard's dispersal, not that of any other object, so unique? And what within Shepard would enable synthesis?

I would surmise that first of all, he/she just happened to be the right object at the right time: a living (important because of active brainwaves, memories, and neurotransmitters) augmented organic with synthetic components who can disperse his/her matter into the Crucible.

The Catalyst would do the programming and alter the transmission by amplifying those materials and dispersing it to the rest of the galaxy. How it does that is anyone's guess, but there probably has to be some other voluntary element that makes this spread specifically a synthesizing one, and not one due to chance alone. That's where, I think, the Catalyst would fit in. I don't think it's just a matter of Shepard jumping into the beam and presto, you have your first post-organic society. There has to be a voluntary element: the Catalyst.

The same question can extend to the other endings: why does shooting a tube cause all synthetics to die off? Why does grabbing the electrodes cause Shepard to ascend to demi-godhood?

[saracen16]

Versus Omnibus wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Sigh. Commander Shepard does not have the right to rewrite all life in the Reaper's image, no matter what kind of decision they've made before. They do not speak for all life, everywhere, that they have never encountered.

And what right do those who Refused have to doom everyone to be harvested? You keep talking about how wrong it is to force change on people, and it is, but nothing is worse then condemning trillions to die because you choose to do nothing.

I can't believe many people did not catch on this from ME1. Shepard NEVER had a "right" to make these decisions, but he/she had to make them. It's part of being a commanding officer: people look up to you to make the tough decisions because no one else will. No one will want to save or exterminate the Rachni, no one will want to save either Ashley or Kaidan (they'll want both), and no one will want to rescue or sacrifice the Council. Do you want the Rachni to live and give them the chance to commit genocide, or do you want to commit genocide and kill the Rachni? Who are you going to save: a lone lieutenant who has the mind of a savvy politician, or a soldier who has sisters at home waiting for her? Do you want to sacrifice the council and earn the ire of the galactic community while humanity gains power? Or do you want to save them and continue humanity's second-rate treatment in galactic politics?

Shepard is put into situations in which making a choice is the only way out. It doesn't matter what other people think of the decision, but rather what Shepard thinks is important for the parties involved. To refuse the Crucible would be to force everyone to fight a losing war. To destroy the synthetics would be to reset the galaxy but deny synthetics the right of self-determination, and so on and so forth. It all comes down to what you think is an acceptable cost to your decisions.

Modifié par saracen16, 07 août 2012 - 08:51 .

[Ieldra]

saracen16 wrote...
If I am understanding you correctly, and correct me if I'm wrong, you're asking a two-fold question... what makes Shepard's dispersal, not that of any other object, so unique? And what within Shepard would enable synthesis?

Exactly...

I would surmise that first of all, he/she just happened to be the right object at the right time: a living (important because of active brainwaves, memories, and neurotransmitters) augmented organic with synthetic components who can disperse his/her matter into the Crucible.

The Catalyst would do the programming and alter the transmission by amplifying those materials and dispersing it to the rest of the galaxy. How it does that is anyone's guess, but there probably has to be some other voluntary element that makes this spread specifically a synthesizing one, and not one due to chance alone. That's where, I think, the Catalyst would fit in. I don't think it's just a matter of Shepard jumping into the beam and presto, you have your first post-organic society. There has to be a voluntary element: the Catalyst.

If Shepard is a factor, and it's not something that can be reduced to the physical makeup of his body (which doesn't have a synthesized pattern) then the defining pattern for the Synthesis must be found in the information that makes up Shepard's personality. That, in turn, means that within the parameters explained by the Catalyst, Shepard shapes the details of the Synthesis. Like a kind of destructive upload, only that instead of storing the mind like the Reapers do, parts of it are used as a....mold?

The same question can extend to the other endings: why does shooting a tube cause all synthetics to die off? Why does grabbing the electrodes cause Shepard to ascend to demi-godhood?

It's not the same. The tube, the electrode and the jump itself are gameplay elements I don't have to recast using in-world logic. What follows, that I need to explain. Could be a destructive virus targeting code above a certain complexity threshold in Destroy, a destructive uploading overwriting specific parts of the Catalyst's code in Control. Synthesis? No intuitive mechanism presents itself.

[saracen16]

Ieldra2 wrote...

If Shepard is a factor, and it's not something that can be reduced to the physical makeup of his body (which doesn't have a synthesized pattern) then the defining pattern for the Synthesis must be found in the information that makes up Shepard's personality. That, in turn, means that within the parameters explained by the Catalyst, Shepard shapes the details of the Synthesis. Like a kind of destructive upload, only that instead of storing the mind like the Reapers do, parts of it are used as a....mold?

I'm not so sure that Shepard himself or herself shape synthesis, but yes, like you said, Shepard is a mold, or even a reagent in a chemical reaction of sorts. The substances are placed into the beam, and the Catalyst, serving its purpose, speeds up the reaction by which energy is reconverted to mass in the form of the synthesis function. Shepard's composition doesn't scream "synthesis", but remember that a chemical reaction is not without its components. Graphite can't spontaneously turn to diamond, but in the right temperature and pressure settings, it can.

This is why I think the Catalyst and the Crucible play a crucial role in synthesis moreso than Shepard does. Shepard is just a reagent for the reaction. Heck, a Reaper could be the reagent for synthesis as it has both organic and synthetic components.

It's not the same. The tube, the electrode and the jump itself are gameplay elements I don't have to recast using in-world logic. What follows, that I need to explain. Could be a destructive virus targeting code above a certain complexity threshold in Destroy, a destructive uploading overwriting specific parts of the Catalyst's code in Control. Synthesis? No intuitive mechanism presents itself.

It's equally valid as an analogy: does shooting the tube overload the circuit? Does control upload memories?

We don't know. We know the end result. The same applies to synthesis.

Modifié par saracen16, 07 août 2012 - 10:39 .

[Taboo]

Ieldra2 wrote...


It's not the same. The tube, the electrode and the jump itself are gameplay elements I don't have to recast using in-world logic. What follows, that I need to explain. Could be a destructive virus targeting code above a certain complexity threshold in Destroy, a destructive uploading overwriting specific parts of the Catalyst's code in Control. Synthesis? No intuitive mechanism presents itself.

I think you're thinking too much.

One might easily interpret these things as symbolic. I base that simply off of the WTF factor of the entirety of the scene. Shepard being lifted into the chamber itself after passing out speaks volumes.

Synthesis -> Jumping into the unknown.

Control -> Grabbing the reigns.

Destroy -> Walking right into (possible) danger.

[Ieldra]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
It's not the same. The tube, the electrode and the jump itself are gameplay elements I don't have to recast using in-world logic. What follows, that I need to explain. Could be a destructive virus targeting code above a certain complexity threshold in Destroy, a destructive uploading overwriting specific parts of the Catalyst's code in Control. Synthesis? No intuitive mechanism presents itself.

I think you're thinking too much.

Better to think too much than to let your emotions get the better of you regularly.

One might easily interpret these things as symbolic. I base that simply off of the WTF factor of the entirety of the scene. Shepard being lifted into the chamber itself after passing out speaks volumes.

Synthesis -> Jumping into the unknown.

Control -> Grabbing the reigns.

Destroy -> Walking right into (possible) danger.

Of course there's symbolism in it. The problem is that symbolism doesn't work if it isn't firmly rooted in in-world logic. Not in an SF story.  

[Taboo]

@ Ieldra

Sometimes you have to stop thinking though, as there is little to be done. It reminds me of people who think that there is something intellectual behind Andy Warhol films. There isn't. Simply thinking about them (or watching them) insults your intelligence. To be fair though, Bioware has not made a five hour film of a man simply sleeping. 

Mac Walters also believes it's viable to dump exposition in a falling action. We were told to never do that when writing scripts. The same applies to novels.

At this point I wouldn't be surprised at all.

I don't believe symbolism should be apparent, and should be inferred by the audience. I won't go into detail, but one might argue that symbolism occurs, at least abstractly, when Shepard romances Miranda.

Point being, one serves zero purpose, the other is inferred. Only one serves to disrupt the plot.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 07 août 2012 - 02:19 .

[DirtyPhoenix]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Refuse isn't so much giving in in my opinion, as it is a complete betrayal of everyone who put their trust in you.

It's beyond ridiculous.

You have permission to use the Crucible. Any of the three options will most likely be accepted by the galaxy. Regardless of my feelings on Synthesis and Control I cannot believe someone could be so irresponsible.

Infact, for all the galaxy would ever know, control/destroy/synthesis may have been the only way to fire the crucible. So as far as the others are concerned, crucible fired as intended and ended the reaper threat, with whatever side effects.

[Chashan]

Taboo-XX wrote...


No, two choices make that decision. One allows life to continue as it sees fit. 

Resolving the Reaper threat is the issue. The cost however, is what factors into play. Can you justify changing the way things have been since the beginning of time in Synthesis? Some Shepards seem to think so.

I much prefer a galactic restart button. The Reapers are Destroyed, as are other Synthetics, but all life can now self-determinate as it sees fit, without a malevolent or beneveolent dictator in Control, or Synthesis bearing over their heads.

I could care less about an "Us vs Them" Idealogy in regards to Destroy. That's a petty justification for picking it, the only one that's worse is doing it so you can survive.

Is it wrong then that one of my prime reasons for picking Destroy above the other imma-chargin'-ma-cruceeble endings is that I find its ambiente to be the most fitting, the whole sequence "flowing" smoothest out of all of them (Control in particular is quite disjointed as the epilogue transits to the eulogy-scene)? Not to mention it is the only end I can walk away from that smells like...victory.


Another thing...I know it might not entirely fit, but thinking of what being encapsulated as an individual into a Reaper-Collective might be like, I found the lyrics of Rammstein's "Ich will" disturbingly...accurate, while I was firing up that stuff on my radio just today.

Könnt ihr mich hören?
<cheering of the crowd, could even be "Hört, hört" though, German imperative of "hear"; repeated as a "reply" to the questions scratch that, it is confirming the question - thank goodness there are lyrics-sites >
Könnt ihr mich sehen?

Könnt ihr mich fühlen?

Ich versteh euch nicht

Switches to 1st person pl later on to boot...

Not to mention the interesting description of what the Indoctrination-frequence sounds like in ME1 - not identified as such yet then, true, but bear with me:
"screams/shrieks of the damned", if I recall correctly.
Something that, if we for one moment keep the verbose techno-babble of the stuff aside, would fit eerily well for what individual consciousnesses in a Reaper-construct could have to endure:
ever-lasting torment, agony, joining a chorus crying this out continuously for an eternity.

Sounds mystifying and transcending mortal understanding enough to me. In a diabolic way.

Modifié par Chashan, 07 août 2012 - 05:50 .

[BrookerT]

Someone started yet another, "Lets hate Synthesis" thread, Angry One is already there so you know how fun that threads gonna be.

[Taboo]

Oh God I'd never thought I'd see a Rammstein reference in here. Bahahaha.

Yeah, uh, Rammstein has some rather...questionable lyrical content. Unless my German is worse than I think it is I've heard some really awful things from them.

I prefer David Bowie.

Dann sind wir Helden, fur einen tag.

Much less...burnt flesh.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 07 août 2012 - 05:47 .

[saracen16]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Oh God I'd never thought I'd see a Rammstein reference in here. Bahahaha.

Yeah, uh, Rammstein has some rather...questionable lyrical content. Unless my German is worse than I think it is I've heard some really awful things from them.

I prefer David Bowie.

Dann sind wir Helden, fur einen tag.

Much less...burnt flesh.

Anyone ever tell you that you're... interesting?

[Taboo]

saracen16 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Oh God I'd never thought I'd see a Rammstein reference in here. Bahahaha.

Yeah, uh, Rammstein has some rather...questionable lyrical content. Unless my German is worse than I think it is I've heard some really awful things from them.

I prefer David Bowie.

Dann sind wir Helden, fur einen tag.

Much less...burnt flesh.

Anyone ever tell you that you're... interesting?

My eccentricies make me who I am.

My intentions are not malicious, even though I may appear agressive.

If Ieldra would stop taking everything I say so seriously we might get along better.

I would attempt Synthesis but I don't have his permission.

^ That is a joke.

[Jonata]

BrookerT wrote...

Someone started yet another, "Lets hate Synthesis" thread, Angry One is already there so you know how fun that threads gonna be.

It gets boring after the first 50.000 threads. Especially when Angry One is involved.