9089 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

I consider green to be calming, personally.

Although I'm also leaning more towards Control than Synthesis now, both because it'd be easier for Shepard to be resurrected, and because it offers a time gap so Synthesis can be tried out on smaller scales and with greater care. Heck, if the Shepard-Catalyst is still intact, Synthesis could be unleashed at any point assuming the right template person was found, so all the possibilities remain.

[Samtheman63]

Steelcan wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

"hey shepard, i know im your enemy and everything and i know ive been a naughty boy and killed a few trillion people but if you do me a favor and pick synthesis we can all be friends
it will end life as you know it cause everyone will turn into synthetic/organic hybrids, which is basically what we are trying to do anyway lol

oh, you ll die too, as you have to jump down a hole to activate it. but pleeeeease!"



who am i?

. Is there a question there or are you just trolling people who disagree with you?

how am i trolling?

i notice you avoided the question too, did i make you realise how silly you have to be to pick synthesis?

[DirtyPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...

I consider green to be calming, personally.

Although I'm also leaning more towards Control than Synthesis now, both because it'd be easier for Shepard to be resurrected, and because it offers a time gap so Synthesis can be tried out on smaller scales and with greater care. Heck, if the Shepard-Catalyst is still intact, Synthesis could be unleashed at any point assuming the right template person was found, so all the possibilities remain.

I thought of that; controlled synthesis. I toyed with it for a few days but came to the conclusion that given the amount of trust the council showed in human-shepard, they are likely to show even less trust in a reaperlord-shepard to allow for synthesis. Also the crucible is gone. Synthesis would require the construction of another one.

As for shepard resurrecting, there are some good ideas in this thread alone. No problem is too big for head cannon!

[Steelcan]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

"hey shepard, i know im your enemy and everything and i know ive been a naughty boy and killed a few trillion people but if you do me a favor and pick synthesis we can all be friends
it will end life as you know it cause everyone will turn into synthetic/organic hybrids, which is basically what we are trying to do anyway lol

oh, you ll die too, as you have to jump down a hole to activate it. but pleeeeease!"
who am i?

. Is there a question there or are you just trolling people who disagree with you?

how am i trolling?
i notice you avoided the question too, did i make you realise how silly you have to be to pick synthesis?

. I didn't, I always pick destroy

[Samtheman63]

Steelcan wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Samtheman63 wrote...

"hey shepard, i know im your enemy and everything and i know ive been a naughty boy and killed a few trillion people but if you do me a favor and pick synthesis we can all be friends
it will end life as you know it cause everyone will turn into synthetic/organic hybrids, which is basically what we are trying to do anyway lol

oh, you ll die too, as you have to jump down a hole to activate it. but pleeeeease!"
who am i?

. Is there a question there or are you just trolling people who disagree with you?

how am i trolling?
i notice you avoided the question too, did i make you realise how silly you have to be to pick synthesis?

. I didn't, I always pick destroy

thats good

off topic, my grammar isnt perfect, i dont try, but why are you putting a full stop at the start of every sentence?  it goes at the end

[Steelcan]

. Just something I do on forums, my own little unique thing

[His Name was HYR!!]

 Green is my third favorite color.


Purple is #1 for me though. Next is brown.

[Ieldra]

Ajosraa wrote...
I admit, I like Synthesis in concept. Thats it, im out of the closet;P Though my thoughts on it are a little complex and conflicted, add me to the ball. Yes, I admit some of the bad attitudes of some have kept me from admitting it. I still like destroy also...just for a chance to maybe ride off into the sunset. But I like the idea of synthesis and think its interesting. Sorry if this sounds a bit out of the blue, but I had to confess:P

Yeah...complex and conflicted. That's it. I don't think you can be completely comfortable with Synthesis, but then, that goes for the other options as well.

The "ride off into the sunset" aspect of Destroy is appealing I admit, but there are some nice ideas for bringing Shepard back after Synthesis as well. It just needs a little more work.

[Taboo]

I don't like the riding off into the sunset bit. Picking Destroy for that reason is selfish. That's why I get frustrated with people who do it out of either petty vengeance or worse yet a respective.

Yeah, it's a really, REALLY nice bonus but I simply can't accept said standpoint.

"Canon" is unique for each person. I'd like think that Destroy without meta-gaming is an action meant to create freedom and the possibility for all life to choose how it gets to proceed. It's aggressive, but I'm not muddying the waters with simple classifications of "Paragon" or "Renegade". If there is a strength to the endings they no longer rely on the so called "Paragon Bias". Nothing is really clear.

I hate, hate those "We destroy them or they destroy us banners."

[Steelcan]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I don't like the riding off into the sunset bit. Picking Destroy for that reason is selfish. That's why I get frustrated with people who do it out of either petty vengeance or worse yet a respective.

Yeah, it's a really, REALLY nice bonus but I simply can't accept said standpoint.

"Canon" is unique for each person. I'd like think that Destroy without meta-gaming is an action meant to create freedom and the possibility for all life to choose how it gets to proceed. It's aggressive, but I'm not muddying the waters with simple classifications of "Paragon" or "Renegade". If there is a strength to the endings they no longer rely on the so called "Paragon Bias". Nothing is really clear.

I hate, hate those "We destroy them or they destroy us banners."

. So why do you pick destroy?  I do it to preserve free will and because the Catalyst is lying.  The fact that Shepard survives is just a bonus

[atheelogos]

Ieldra2 wrote...

atheelogos wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
Did I scare everyone away?

The Citadel is destroyed (it explodes and as opposed to Destroy, we don't see it rebuilt in the epilogue) which means that the Catalyst isn't around any more.

I never noticed that before. Well That just supports what I've been saying. The Reapers are free in Synthesis and choose help rebuild of their own free will.

Indeed.

Tbh, it is somewhat ambiguous. The explosion scene is the same as in Destroy, but neither the relays nor the Citadel appear anywhere in the Synthesis epilogue, as opposed to both others. I think this is intentional and ties in with the "Dawn of an Era" theme where something new and exotic will take the place of the old infrastructure, but of course it is open to interpretation.

I have suggested a mass effect-based alternative method for long-range FTL in my thread Out of the dark age: relays, FTL and rebuilding galactic civilization (scroll down to the lower part of the OP). This was long before the EC, but the scenario is compatible. 

I'll give it a read. thanks for posting it^_^

[DirtyPhoenix]

My favourite colour is red, though obviously not in context of ME3 endings. Red, white and black can make anything appear classy..

[DirtyPhoenix]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I hate, hate those "We destroy them or they destroy us banners."

Out of the three, destroyers have the biggest ego.. I've noticed this much in my few days at BSN.

[Shermos]

Even though I prefer control to synthesis, I admire the effort Synthesis supporters have put into this thread. We need to stand together to argue our points against the Destroyers .

[DirtyPhoenix]

The thing I don't like about destroyers is that most of the act like religious zealots: our way is the only true way and you are stupid/immoral if you don't select it.. gimme a break.

[Argolas]

pirate1802 wrote...

The thing I don't like about destroyers is that most of the act like religious zealots: our way is the only true way and you are stupid/immoral if you don't select it.. gimme a break.

I am a very strong Destroy supporter, but I do not like the "We destroy them or they destroy us." banners either because this is not the point of that option though.
And I do not remember acting like a religious Zealot. Yesterday, I politely asked a question to Synthesis supporters on this thread (two pages back I think). My question was considered and answered, everyone stayed polite.

We may have different opinions, but that does not make civil discussion impossible, although this is not only about a game, but also about beliefs and ethics.

[Ieldra]

Argolas wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...
The thing I don't like about destroyers is that most of the act like religious zealots: our way is the only true way and you are stupid/immoral if you don't select it.. gimme a break.

I am a very strong Destroy supporter, but I do not like the "We destroy them or they destroy us." banners either because this is not the point of that option though.
And I do not remember acting like a religious Zealot. Yesterday, I politely asked a question to Synthesis supporters on this thread (two pages back I think). My question was considered and answered, everyone stayed polite.

We may have different opinions, but that does not make civil discussion impossible, although this is not only about a game, but also about beliefs and ethics.

If it were not about beliefs and ethics, I doubt the debates would be as....passionate as they are. It's too bad that the original endings were so depressing. I believe if the EC had been the original ending, the debates about the merits and flaws of the final choice options would not be so intermingled with general anti-ending sentiments.

As for zealots, you obviously are not of that kind, but I don't think there was ever anything posted like "Synthesis is the only option" or "Control is the only option" with the particularly condescending and insulting insinuation that everyone who doesn't agree is indoctrinated. That was the exclusive domain of the pro-Destroy faction. There have been dozens, if not hundreds of threads expressing that opinion in one or the other way since March. More to the point, I have never heard a pro-Control or pro-Synthesis post saying Destroy shouldn't be in the game.

BTW, what is the point of the Destroy option in your opinion?

[DirtyPhoenix]

Argolas wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

The thing I don't like about destroyers is that most of the act like religious zealots: our way is the only true way and you are stupid/immoral if you don't select it.. gimme a break.

I am a very strong Destroy supporter, but I do not like the "We destroy them or they destroy us." banners either because this is not the point of that option though.
And I do not remember acting like a religious Zealot. Yesterday, I politely asked a question to Synthesis supporters on this thread (two pages back I think). My question was considered and answered, everyone stayed polite.

We may have different opinions, but that does not make civil discussion impossible, although this is not only about a game, but also about beliefs and ethics.

Which is why I said most, not all.

[Argolas]

Ieldra2 wrote...

BTW, what is the point of the Destroy option in your opinion?

It is a bit OT here, but fine.

My first point is self-determination.

Since the cycle started, organics were dominated by reaper tech. For example, Souvereign explains in ME1 that the reapers left the citadel and the relay to ensure that organics develop along the "paths we [the reapers] disire". Another example: Legion explains the difference between getting technology from someone else and developing it yourself ("blind for alternatives"), this goes along with Mordin´s speech about progress should be based on needs and not forced from the outside like the salarians "ascended" the Krogan which led to a galactic crysis.
In Control, the reapers repair the relays themselves, organics still use reaper tech while they do not need to understand it, and since they have other concerns after the war (rebuilding, resting, mourning) they will not care as long as it works just as they did before. Basically, the only thing that changes in Control compared to before is that the reapers stopped killing because they have a new leader. Additionaly, I dislike the concept of mind-control in general.

In Synthesis, the reapers will give the other species the knowledge of both themselves and the cycles before them. This is very, very similar to what the salarians did to the Krogan. I think the galaxy is not ready for any knowledge that they could not achieve themselves yet, it is like giving guns to monkeys. Plus, they are once again dependant on the reapers because you can´t assume they will understand all that immediatly to an extend that they could reproduce the technology in case the reapers dicide to stop sharing knowledge, yet the other species might already depend on it.

Only in Destroy, the reaper influnce is truly broken. No one depends on them anymore because they are dead, yet the galaxy still needs the technology like the relays. Based on that need, they take care of it and actually succeed in repairing the citadel and the relays, and rather quickly because Hackett does not seem to have become much older in the epilogue. This means the galaxy fully understands the mass effect technology now, it is no longer a means to control them.

My second point is danger.

The main danger of Control is, in my opinion, that the holoshep (who is based on a human) is more powerful than the whole rest of the galaxy combined. I do not know if he might go mad after seeing all of his friends die or, a few thousend, million or whatever years later when even all races he knew do not exist anymore. And I do not know if he might get hacked or replaced by a similar technology like the crucible. A lot of individuals will seek the power to control the most powerful fleet in the galaxy, and they will have a lot of time to figure out how to do it. Just imagine other people like Illusive Man: Ruthless, ressourceful, ambitious, those people will always exist.

Sorry, but in my opinion, Synthesis is the most dangerous of all possible endings. The peace you achieve there is not guaranteed to last since there are going to be new organics, and even the synthesized species themselves are capable of creating new synthetic slaves, thus if the "catalyst"´s logic is right, there will be synthesized-synthetic war instead of organic-synthetic war. I could think of another alternative: With the technology they gain, the council races could dominate the whole galaxy like the Leviathans did before, because what is the place of those extremely primitive organics that would live next to the synthesized superpeople?
And then there is the possibilty of the "catalyst" doing what it was meant to do in the first place: "Minor" species created dangerous synthetics, and the Leviathans wanted to restore order- not order as in peace, but order as in put down a rebellion. Bascially, the Leviathans´ means of mind-control were not effective enough and required "artifacts". The catalyst´s purpose could have been to "establish a connection between synthetics and organics" (catalyst quote) so the Leviathans could use this connection for their mindslaving. Here´s a quote.

N7Gold wrote..
.
I don't know how I missed it, but the DLC Leviathan passes down subtle
hints that Synthesis leads to a lifetime of enslavement and subjugation
by the Leviathans. This is why the Intelligence (Catalyst) calls
Synthesis the "ideal solution", the Intelligence (Catalyst) needs an
organic that'll be a catalyst for organics and synthetics to share the
same DNA, to "establish a connection" so that Leviathan's race can be able to control the minds of organics and synthetics easily without the use of those artifact crystal balls because Synthesis connects them all via Leviathan's quantum entanglement signals.

Do any of you remember what Anne Bryson was telling EDI and Shepard before getting the idea to allow Leviathan to contact them?

Anne:
"We think of the Rachni as telepathic, but there is no such thing. At
short range, the queen gives off pheromones to give orders. At long
range, she uses an organic kind of quantum entanglement communicator.
Whatever Leviathan does must be similar, entangling particles to stimulate neural activity. It uses the artifact to establish a connection, then it controls the mind of anyone near it. "


Intelligence: "I was first created to oversee the relations between synthetic and organic life, to establish a connection. But our efforts always ended in conflict."

So
this means the whole organic vs synthetic conflict is the Catalyst and
Reapers fault. contrary to our initial belief, the Catalyst is not
trying to actually achieve peace between organics and synthetics,
he's trying to find out what makes organics and synthetics relate to
each other in order to create a new DNA that will connect organics and
synthetics to the Leviathans quantum entanglement network so they can be
controlled and subjugated. See, the artifact balls they have are not
very effective in establishiing a connection, the Leviathans tasked the
Catalyst to find a way to establish a connection to lesser races so that
they can not only bring "order" to the galaxy, but also control it,
with very little or no lesser races rebelling against their thralls.

Final point: My headcanon

There is reason to believe that the geth actually survive high EMS destroy, if not, at least new synthetics that are not slaves will be created. Synthetic life can be accepted in society after the war because they participated (I achieved peace between Geth and Quarians). This social acceptance of the generally peaceful synthetics (note that we never heard of a war in ME that was caused by synthetics) will ensure that there is no need of war. Even more than that, natural synthesis (as suggested by Jessica Merizan) could happen: Organics and Synthetics who spend time together adapt to each other. The best example would be EDI who clearly was a pure rational AI at the beginning of ME2, but learned to feel and love by spending time with Joker, Shepard and the others. Note that EDI feels alive even without crucible-synthesis ("But only now do I feel alive. That is your inluence, Shepard."). Organics use more and more tech on themselves: Biotic implants directly connect biology and tech, lots of people are genetically modified... eventually, evolution will make organics adapt to the tech we use and even more to the presence of synthetics. So to sum up, in my headcanon, Synthesis happens naturally in a slow process over many generations that is not harmful. This also gives the galaxy time to deal with the Leviathan threat (ME4?).


I think those are my most important points if I have not forgot anything.

[Aurora313]

To the favourite colours thing - my favourite Colour is blue. Unfortunately, that's used for control. Now, I have Shepard's that pick the options each for their own reasons. I hate this whole bashing for the sake of which colour I pick. All of them have merits and downsides. All of which I have head canons for Shepard's return/memorial. Some slightly alter the endings in minor ways (EG. Shepard's body wasn't disintegrated in control, but is still for all intents and purposes, 'dead'.), others pretty much play the endings straight.... there's also the refuse ending which has my Shepard waking up in a mental hospital 3/4 years after being exposed to the Prothean Beacon, having suffered from a massive physcotic episode.... (granted, it would be a pretty awesome ending for ME as well.).


I hope there is an ME4, and I hope it's about someone new but not unrelated to Shepard. Maybe it's a descendant, or maybe a follower of the cult of Shepard or some organisation supposedly founded in Shepard's honour. I don't know.

[Ieldra]

Argolas wrote...
In Synthesis, the reapers will give the other species the knowledge of both themselves and the cycles before them. This is very, very similar to what the salarians did to the Krogan. I think the galaxy is not ready for any knowledge that they could not achieve themselves yet, it is like giving guns to monkeys. Plus, they are once again dependant on the reapers because you can´t assume they will understand all that immediatly to an extend that they could reproduce the technology in case the reapers dicide to stop sharing knowledge, yet the other species might already depend on it.

I think there are a few fundamental flaws in this reasoning:
(1) Galactic civilization will gain the knowledge, not technological items. There is no such thing as "knowledge you don't understand." If you don't understand, you don't know. If you don't know, then you can't build things using that knowledge and can't become dependent on things you don't understand. Also, this war should have shown the species of the galaxy how dangerous it is to depend on things you don't understand. I'd say they won't make that mistake again for quite some time. I don't see any virtue in destroying knowledge for the sole reason that it might be dangerous (it was one of my main Shepard's central character traits: he never destroyed information).
(2) The krogan destroyed their homeworld themselves, before the salarians came. Bakara says so. The salarians just took them into space.
(3) In the whole of human history, the psychological maturation needed to use a specific technology responsibly always came after that technology was developed. It can't be any other way, since earlier there is no incentive to learn. The only way to learn how to deal with technology is to have it and use it.  That's not to say it isn't advisable to be extremely careful in some cases, but most of the time, the "we are not ready" argument sounds to me like the reflexive rejection of a traditionalist mindset. 

Only in Destroy, the reaper influnce is truly broken. No one depends on them anymore because they are dead

Which is a sad thing, don't you think? That they're dead I mean. All that remains from the civilizations of countless cycles, and if Legion is right, billions of individual minds.

Also, on the surface, Destroy might be a good choice if you want to maximize freedom. But I think that argument is based on a limited understanding of freedom. Think of this: we all depend on technology these days. We would be more free, don't you think, if we destroyed everything we have come to depend on. Well, no, that's not how things work. Technology has also empowered us, as a civilization and as individuals we can do many things completely unimaginable to people just 200 years ago. Technology brings new options, which by definition means it increases your freedom. If you'd rather do things the old way, you still can. But you're not bound by the old limitations any more.  

Sorry, but in my opinion, Synthesis is the most dangerous of all possible endings. The peace you achieve there is not guaranteed to last since there are going to be new organics, and even the synthesized species themselves are capable of creating new synthetic slaves, thus if the "catalyst"´s logic is right, there will be synthesized-synthetic war instead of organic-synthetic war.

It was never the Catalyst's goal to prevent all conflict. It was its goal to prevent a conflict that would result in the extinction of one side. Also, building non-Synthesized synthetics would be like deliberately engineering humans without empathy. Do you really think anyone except the ME equivalent of a rogue state would do something like that? Of course it will happen, but civilization will deal with it.

I could think of another alternative: With the technology they gain, the council races could dominate the whole galaxy like the Leviathans did before, because what is the place of those extremely primitive organics that would live next to the synthesized superpeople?
And then there is the possibilty of the "catalyst" doing what it was meant to do in the first place: "Minor" species created dangerous synthetics, and the Leviathans wanted to restore order- not order as in peace, but order as in put down a rebellion. Bascially, the Leviathans´ means of mind-control were not effective enough and required "artifacts". The catalyst´s purpose could have been to "establish a connection between synthetics and organics" (catalyst quote) so the Leviathans could use this connection for their mindslaving.

Could be, might be. Or it might not. Double standards, double standards, and completly hypothetical scenarios.  You reject Synthesis because it doesn't guarantee a conflict-free future and yet you choose Destroy which does the same? None of the endings guarantee anything in the future, and it's methodically dishonest to single one ending option out for that. I wonder: why do you *really* don't like Synthesis? These are just rationalizations...

There is reason to believe that the geth actually survive high EMS destroy

Yeah, and Shepard survived the Synthesis. I have a headcanon like that, but I don't pretend it's more than that.

to the tech we use and even more to the presence of synthetics. So to sum up, in my headcanon, Synthesis happens naturally in a slow process over many generations that is not harmful. This also gives the galaxy time to deal with the Leviathan threat (ME4?).

I did say in my OP that Synthesis is likely accelerating a process that would take place anyway. If you follow the Catalyst, there is just not enough time to complete the process before organic life is destroyed. I think accelerating the process is very desirable.
Regarding the Leviathans, I think the post-Destroy civilization is poorly-equipped to deal with the Leviathans. In fact, post-EC they're a very good reason to choose a different ending. Control looks particularly desirable in that regard.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 27 septembre 2012 - 01:14 .

[Taboo]

It isn't about petty vengeance. Such a thing is no excuse. Destroy offers freedom on a galactic scale. Everything stops, it's a gigantic reset button. All life can now dictate what it wishes to do, including the eventual Synthetic.

The obvious downside being the death of Synthetics and of the Reapers. The knowledge they held is a tremendous loss. But the latter can only be taken into account via meta-gaming. My Shepard has no idea just how much Synthesis would have done.

That's why I've been so intent on the idea of having Shepard and Miranda form an organization and have one of the departments be dedicated solely to studying the now defunct Reapers. I predict FTL improvements, shield improvements, weapons improvements and possibly more.

At least that's my head canon. And it isn't OOC to boot, so Ieldra can't get mad at me! 

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 27 septembre 2012 - 01:15 .

[Ieldra]

@Taboo:
LOL. So you agree that some other things are OOC?

I have a similar post-Synthesis scenario BTW. Civilization is just a little more advanced, and rather than studying the dead Reaper's technology, they develop stuff on top of it.

[Taboo]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Taboo:
LOL. So you agree that some other things are OOC?

I have a similar post-Synthesis scenario BTW. Civilization is just a little more advanced, and rather than studying the dead Reaper's technology, they develop stuff on top of it.

The one side of Miranda we did see isn't in ME3.  I just hope we get to see the other half.

As a film guy it pains me deeply to destroy such knowledge. The preservation should be paramount but I would think that my Shepard would consider freedom a bit more important.

And we'll still learn from them, albeit in a manner no where near as fast as Synthesis. We might even learn a thing or two about organic, non organic (I'm using EDI's ME2 dialouge here) life forms.

My Shepard would never, ever say no to progress.

And neither would Miranda. 

[Steelcan]

I pick destroy over the other options because it gives all life and future life the right to self determination. Control makes you dictator of the galaxy, synthesis completes the Reaper's goal of eliminating synthetic and organic conflict because now there is no difference between synthetic and organic life. They are not reliant on reaper technology after destroy . As for it destroying the reapers' knowledge, oh well, we can examine their corpses for new technology. Also Shepard has no reason to believe that synthesis or control will not just outright kill him. As for the Geth and EDI? Geth were already dead, floating hulks over Rannoch, and EDI, I really do not care about her. Besides we can rebuild the Geth after the war is over, only this time prevent them from being so intelligent.

Modifié par Steelcan, 27 septembre 2012 - 01:51 .