9087 réponses à ce sujet

[Vigilant111]

kookie28 wrote...

Honestly the more you guys talk about Synthesis the better it sounds.

and an easy option by comparison, with seemingly little sacrifice

[kookie28]

Vigilant111 wrote...

kookie28 wrote...

Honestly the more you guys talk about Synthesis the better it sounds.

and an easy option by comparison, with seemingly little sacrifice

If I didn't have to kill myself to do it then I'd be all for it.

Why can't I drag Anderson up there with me? 

[Kulthar Drax]

While I personally disagree with your assessment on synthesis overall, I appreciate the effort and input in coming up with the synthesis stuff. But if you need to write THAT much in order to try and explain why synthesis may or may not be a good thing, then the game ending has failed to begin with.

[Uncle Jo]

Veneke wrote...

1. You've every right, it just isn't relevant.

2. That I honestly have no idea about. I've looked around and the only reasonable answer I can find is that the Catalyst needed the Crucible for Synthesis to be an option. It's pretty weak though, tbh.

3. Well, we can comprehend it - it's just that if it's being used as canon we need a canonical explanation. We don't have one of those, hence threads like these.
 
4. There's bugger all we can do about the Catalyst. He's there and we can't very well ignore him. The narrative integrity of ME 3 after that (which to be fair is somewhat tarnished) relies upon whether we can trust him or not. If we can't ME 3 loses all narrative integrity and the endings collapse under their own weight (see Indoc theory) or we accept the Catalyst as telling the literal truth. If you don't support Indoc theory and still want to believe that Bioware didn't decide to discard every single rule for telling a story's ending then you're only left with the option to trust the Catalyst at face value.
 
It's a ****ty choice, make no mistake.

5. Aye, there's no more cycle but if the Catalyst is telling the truth - see above - then Destroy is the worst possible ending because there'll be a repeat of Quarian-Geth conflict in the future, a conflict that organics will ultimately lose. Again, we assume the Catalyst is telling the truth here - see above.

6. Yes you are. This is a morality argument here though - which is irrelevant despite Taboo's numerous attempts to make it relevant to OP.

7. Not only is it irrelevant, but your (and others) opinion that synthesis somehow removes democracy and freedom of opinion, interpretation etc is flawed and not based on anything ingame. Fair to say that there's bugger all to base anything about Synthesis on ingame but this is as much conjecture as OP with even less substance.
 
8. Yes that was a goal of the OP and it's perfectly relevant to argue against what he says. It isn't relevant to argue against the possibility of Synthesis though - because the possibility exists ingame. It'd be like me saying that Destroy couldn't work so it's not a valid option. It's nonsense.

1. You like the word "irrelevant" do you ?

2. and 3. You need a canonical explanation? Refer to the game and to what the brat said, since you made the choice to trust him. He pretty clearly stated  that you're going to create a new framwork/system (DNA), which is about to modify everyone on a galactic scale... This naturally with Shep's "energy" and a lot of space magic.

4.Agreed, he's here. Question is : Is he really what he pretends to be? But that is another debate.
I know the IT pretty much and to be honest, it makes sense to me. As long as Bioware doesn't make a clear statement about it, I'll take it as the most plausible explanation.
BUT I don't want to initiate the classical pro- / anti- War, there is other threads for this, and since the debate here is Synthesis taken at face value, I'll consider it from only this point of view.

5. Nope. The Control option gives absolutely no guarantee that you really can control them (remember, the reapers are here since millions of years and faaaaaaaar more advanced and intelligent than us. What is Shepard by the way? A pain in the *ss, a hero, sure, and... ah yes, a mere 34 years old human). And the Reapers are still out there. Who says that they are not going to troll us again? You already know my opinion about Synthesis...

So you're still willing to launch a preemptive galactic genocide, based on a simple assumption? Cool man.

You're right on one thing. It depends on how much do you trust the Space troll. Personally I don't. Even at face value.
Someone who already lies by the greetings can't be trusted.

- "I'm the Catalyst" (something which is not changed by the events),
- A few minutes later... "The Crucible changed me"

6. See 1. Remember me of something (not completely related to this point but still relevant), Why did we kill/stop Saren in Mass Effect 1 ?

7. I'll repeat something that I've already said in a previous post: one of the main thems in Mass Effect is trying to "find a way to coexist peacefully despite of being different" Isn't a little bit the way how... democracy works?
Deciding to change every one without asking them, because YOU think it's better, isn't somehow authoritarian?
How can it be irrelevant?

8. Please tell me what is relevant to talk about here...

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 23 mai 2012 - 01:02 .

[kookie28]

I'm glad my Shepard is a sociopath. At least his reason for not picking Synthesis made sense.

[Uncle Jo]

Ieldra2 wrote...

So...you're saying again that the Catalyst is lying? We've been there, remember? This assumption has to be rejected because of narrative consistency.

Anyway, the first step isn't implausible at all. A mind is information and a collection of processes that process it. Doesn't matter if it's organic or synthetic. It's perfectly possible for an organic mind to be digitalized and transmitted on electromagnetic waves. Otherwise, upload technology - which exists in the ME universe - wouldn't be possible. The Crucible does something infinitely more complex than just "disintegrating" Shepard, else the Catalyst's line wouldn't make any sense. Exactly how it uses that information, that's a rather different question, but transmitting Shepard's mind that way should pose no problem at all. If you can accept Legion's personality dissemination, you can also accept Shepard's.

The same could be done with Shepard's body, with one step more. Information can describe matter, and that information can be stored, replicated, transmitted etc.. You could rebuild Shepard from scratch with both sets of information, molecular nanotechnology and a huge amount of energy.

Yes pretty much. Narrative consistency? Sure, whatever...

Anyway, that's not the point. Do you read my posts sometimes? Where is the damn organic part by the synthetics in your explanation? Digitalized information?

Edit: Nope I can't. Or I have to suppose that synthetics and organics are fundamentally working the same way... No way in hell.

Cloning+implementation of digitalized informations. Sure man, that'll be definitely Shepard...

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 23 mai 2012 - 01:00 .

[Ieldra]

Kulthar Drax wrote...
While I personally disagree with your assessment on synthesis overall, I appreciate the effort and input in coming up with the synthesis stuff. But if you need to write THAT much in order to try and explain why synthesis may or may not be a good thing, then the game ending has failed to begin with.

I fully agree that an exposition that makes sense is absolutely needed. I have some hope for the EC.

The absolutely infuriating thing is that they had an ending exposition that made sense in the leaked script, but they changed it into something that doesn't make sense. WTF...

[Ieldra]

@Uncle Jo:
Ah...and there we differ. The body of an organic is just as much a machine as that of a synthetic (agreeing with Engineer Adams here who makes exactly that point in the debate with Chakwas). That it uses carbon compounds instead of metal alloys as carriers for the electric impulses that make up mental processes is irrelevant. The only fundamental difference lies in the way a synthetic body is made compared to an organic body which ich makes synthetics easier to upgrade - which results in the singularity if you follow the Catalyst.

Also, upload technology exists in the ME universe. So it must be possible to digitalize an organic mind and make it run on synthetic hardware. And restore it later to another organic brain.

[Vigilant111]

Uncle Jo wrote...

Veneke wrote...

1. You've every right, it just isn't relevant.

2. That I honestly have no idea about. I've looked around and the only reasonable answer I can find is that the Catalyst needed the Crucible for Synthesis to be an option. It's pretty weak though, tbh.

3. Well, we can comprehend it - it's just that if it's being used as canon we need a canonical explanation. We don't have one of those, hence threads like these.
 
4. There's bugger all we can do about the Catalyst. He's there and we can't very well ignore him. The narrative integrity of ME 3 after that (which to be fair is somewhat tarnished) relies upon whether we can trust him or not. If we can't ME 3 loses all narrative integrity and the endings collapse under their own weight (see Indoc theory) or we accept the Catalyst as telling the literal truth. If you don't support Indoc theory and still want to believe that Bioware didn't decide to discard every single rule for telling a story's ending then you're only left with the option to trust the Catalyst at face value.
 
It's a ****ty choice, make no mistake.

5. Aye, there's no more cycle but if the Catalyst is telling the truth - see above - then Destroy is the worst possible ending because there'll be a repeat of Quarian-Geth conflict in the future, a conflict that organics will ultimately lose. Again, we assume the Catalyst is telling the truth here - see above.

6. Yes you are. This is a morality argument here though - which is irrelevant despite Taboo's numerous attempts to make it relevant to OP.

7. Not only is it irrelevant, but your (and others) opinion that synthesis somehow removes democracy and freedom of opinion, interpretation etc is flawed and not based on anything ingame. Fair to say that there's bugger all to base anything about Synthesis on ingame but this is as much conjecture as OP with even less substance.
 
8. Yes that was a goal of the OP and it's perfectly relevant to argue against what he says. It isn't relevant to argue against the possibility of Synthesis though - because the possibility exists ingame. It'd be like me saying that Destroy couldn't work so it's not a valid option. It's nonsense.

1. You like the word "irrelevant" do you ?

2. and 3. You need a canonical explanation? Refer to the game and to what the brat said, since you made the choice to trust him. He pretty clearly stated  that you're going to create a new framwork/system (DNA), which is about to modify everyone on a galactic scale... This naturally with Shep's "energy" and a lot of space magic.

4.Agreed, he's here. Question is : Is he really what he pretends to be? But that is another debate.
I know the IT pretty much and to be honest, it makes sense to me. As long as Bioware doesn't make a clear statement about it, I'll take it as the most plausible explanation.
BUT I don't want to initiate the classical pro- / anti- War, there is other threads for this, and since the debate here is Synthesis taken at face value, I'll consider it from only this point of view.

5. Nope. The Control option gives absolutely no guarantee that you really can control them (remember, the reapers are here since millions of years and faaaaaaaar more advanced and intelligent than us. What is Shepard by the way? A pain in the *ss, a hero, sure, and... ah yes, a mere 34 years old human). And the Reapers are still out there. Who says that they are not going to troll us again? You already know my opinion about Synthesis...

So you're still willing to launch a preemptive galactic genocide, based on a simple assumption? Cool man.

You're right on one thing. It depends on how much do you trust the Space troll. Personally I don't. Even at face value.
Someone who already lies by the greetings can't be trusted.

- "I'm the Catalyst" (something which is not changed by the events),
- A few minutes later... "The Crucible changed me"

6. See 1. Remember me of something (not completely related to this point but still relevant), Why did we kill/stop Saren in Mass Effect 1 ?

7. I'll repeat something that I've already said in a previous post: one of the main thems in Mass Effect is trying to "find a way to coexist peacefully despite of being different" Isn't a little bit the way how... democracy works?
Deciding to change every one without asking them, because YOU think it's better, isn't somehow authoritarian?
How can it be irrelevant?

8. Please tell me what is relevant to talk about here...

I think you would like this:

" I just want to be myself." My Shepard says

This is a response to the "A different ascension - the Synthesis compendium" post by Ieldra2. I respect the sentiments made but I reject the idea that if you choose the destroy option then you must be inflexible, and are unable to adapt to change.

To me racial diversity is extremely important, to become the same as everyone else, just for the sake of galactic peace, too much sacrifice. Peace must be achieved by will in acknowledgement ofeach other's differences, not by assimulating each other

The ascension to a better power and immortality does not interest me one bit, I know it sounds grim but death is what makes life all that meaningful, because u only live once; as with becoming a bigger power, it loses its meaning when everyone becomes the same, no one is more powerful than the other (this is the point where I respect your opinion
the most cos it is very plausible that galactic peace can be achieved this way), so "bigger power" will lose its comparison base, therefore rendered meaningless.

Modifié par Vigilant111, 23 mai 2012 - 01:23 .

[Ieldra]

@Vigilant111:
Nowhere is it remotely suggested that Synthesis will make everyone the same. I don't know where that misperception comes from. Actually, in my interpretation the basic chemistry of organics won't be changed at all, even less their minds etc.. There are just synthetic symbionts added which add potential. Tools for self-improvement. Yes, everyone gets the same tools, but what you do with them is still your business. I guess at the start nobody will know the full potential, and some research will be done into what's possible. After a time, people may have the option to become longer-lived, but they don't have to use it.

Or do Joker and EDI look the same to you? Do any of the team members stepping out of the Normandy look not like themselves, even with the skin patterns and the subtle eye change?

[Uncle Jo]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Uncle Jo:
Ah...and there we differ. The body of an organic is just as much a machine as that of a synthetic (agreeing with Engineer Adams here who makes exactly that point in the debate with Chakwas). That it uses carbon compounds instead of metal alloys as carriers for the electric impulses that make up mental processes is irrelevant. The only fundamental difference lies in the way a synthetic body is made compared to an organic body which ich makes synthetics easier to upgrade - which results in the singularity if you follow the Catalyst.

Also, upload technology exists in the ME universe. So it must be possible to digitalize an organic mind and make it run on synthetic hardware. And restore it later to another organic brain.

Thought so... You make absolutely no difference between organics and synthetics, not just physically but also mentally... The latter just evolve faster. That's all. Cool story bro.

The fundamental point is that the organics are capable of reproduction. The synthetics can't.

This little difference changes a looooooooooooooot of things.

Told you already that you scare the hell out of me? Yes? I repeat it again.

[Taboo]

Veneke wrote...

I must have missed the synthesis = authoritarianism link. Care to point it out to me?

You enforce a choice upon a large group of people based upon the views of one person. Do I really have to spell it out for you?

I shouldn't have to tell you anymore than that.

[Vigilant111]

@Ieldra2: a hell of an assumption u are making here, mixing of DNA is not a simple procedure, any misstep will result in mutation, phenotype must reflect genotype, I doubt that this so called energy could ensure a seamless transition and like a nuclear blast, effects of it on organics may not always be immediate or appearent after sometime

Modifié par Vigilant111, 23 mai 2012 - 01:52 .

[antares_sublight]

Still haven't heard about just how intelligent these parasitic nanites are and just how much control they have over their hosts. You say they lie dormant in non-intelligent species like plants and microorganisms, monitoring them until they reach some particular evolutionary stage at which point the nanites begin to manipulate the life form as they see fit? And these things are distributed amongst all life in the galaxy?

By the way, how do these nanites reach all life forms anyway? How do they reach fish at the bottom of the ocean, microbes deep in the crust of a planet, some worker in a mine dozens of miles underground?

[Uncle Jo]

While we're talking about synthetics, here a quote from Legion (the greatest squademate ever)

"Geth build our own future. The heretics asked the Old Machines to give them the future"

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 23 mai 2012 - 02:04 .

[Vigilant111]

and one more thing that really bugs me is that why does the citadel requires Shepard's energy added to release the that beam anyway, so everyone can get a piece of Shepard? why can't he just press a button like in control or destroy

Modifié par Vigilant111, 23 mai 2012 - 02:05 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Uncle Jo wrote...

While we're talking about synthetics, here a quote from Legion (the greatest squademate ever)

"Geth build our own future. The heretics asked the Old Machines to give them the future"

... as he accepts the Reaper upgrades that make the geth more intelligent in ME3.

And I'll follow suit. The Reapers may be our enemies, but that doesn't mean we can't use all thing Reaper-related to our advantage

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 23 mai 2012 - 02:08 .

[kookie28]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Veneke wrote...

I must have missed the synthesis = authoritarianism link. Care to point it out to me?

You enforce a choice upon a large group of people based upon the views of one person. Do I really have to spell it out for you?

I shouldn't have to tell you anymore than that.

Democracy is overrated.

Especially when you're pressed for time and, you know, the Reapers are about to annihilate everything.

[Vigilant111]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

While we're talking about synthetics, here a quote from Legion (the greatest squademate ever)

"Geth build our own future. The heretics asked the Old Machines to give them the future"

... as he accepts the Reaper upgrades that make the geth more intelligent in ME3.

And I'll follow suit. The Reapers may be our enemies, but that doesn't mean we can't use all thing Reaper-related to our advantage

enlighten me, how come the Geth can get reaper upgrade but the organics cannot?

that would be the answer why organics and synthetics are different: how come I cannot catch virus from my laptop or vice versa? genetic make-up has to be similar to combine

I like the Geth, and I believe that synthetics can be good, but that doesn't mean combining DNA would be probable, or even possible, u might have a chip in u brain or a pacemaker, but DNA is a whole different game

[dreman9999]

Vigilant111 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

While we're talking about synthetics, here a quote from Legion (the greatest squademate ever)

"Geth build our own future. The heretics asked the Old Machines to give them the future"

... as he accepts the Reaper upgrades that make the geth more intelligent in ME3.

And I'll follow suit. The Reapers may be our enemies, but that doesn't mean we can't use all thing Reaper-related to our advantage

enlighten me, how come the Geth can get reaper upgrade but the organics cannot?

The same way EDI is be made with reaper tech and have reaper codes and not turn us over to the reapers. She is the clear examle the reaper tech works way differently with synthetics then organics.

[dreman9999]

kookie28 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Veneke wrote...

I must have missed the synthesis = authoritarianism link. Care to point it out to me?

You enforce a choice upon a large group of people based upon the views of one person. Do I really have to spell it out for you?

I shouldn't have to tell you anymore than that.

Democracy is overrated.

Especially when you're pressed for time and, you know, the Reapers are about to annihilate everything.

But we alreay have a concesus on it....Destory the reapers. Also, saying what other think of their own future is irrelivet to you choice to change them make you look far worst.

Modifié par dreman9999, 23 mai 2012 - 02:23 .

[dreman9999]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

While we're talking about synthetics, here a quote from Legion (the greatest squademate ever)

"Geth build our own future. The heretics asked the Old Machines to give them the future"

... as he accepts the Reaper upgrades that make the geth more intelligent in ME3.

And I'll follow suit. The Reapers may be our enemies, but that doesn't mean we can't use all thing Reaper-related to our advantage

He took when he was abile o not let it control him. It's the same of the rest of the technology in the universe. He chosed to be changed as well asthe geth. Everyone else did not with synthesis.

[Vigilant111]

dreman9999 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

While we're talking about synthetics, here a quote from Legion (the greatest squademate ever)

"Geth build our own future. The heretics asked the Old Machines to give them the future"

... as he accepts the Reaper upgrades that make the geth more intelligent in ME3.

And I'll follow suit. The Reapers may be our enemies, but that doesn't mean we can't use all thing Reaper-related to our advantage

enlighten me, how come the Geth can get reaper upgrade but the organics cannot?

The same way EDI is be made with reaper tech and have reaper codes and not turn us over to the reapers. She is the clear examle the reaper tech works way differently with synthetics then organics.

Yes, exactly, cos reapers are largely synthetic (I am assuming), therefore find it easier to implement programmes on other synthetics, with organics which they could not control easily by sending signals, they have to resort to abduction

[Taboo]

kookie28 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Veneke wrote...

I must have missed the synthesis = authoritarianism link. Care to point it out to me?

You enforce a choice upon a large group of people based upon the views of one person. Do I really have to spell it out for you?

I shouldn't have to tell you anymore than that.

Democracy is overrated.

Especially when you're pressed for time and, you know, the Reapers are about to annihilate everything.

Democracy will always be better than the alternatives, Fascism and Communism. Both enforce authoritarian policies and attempt to make people equals. It doesn't work because people are still ***holes. Marx never understood that. The only way to do it is to brutally supress them.

If we go with the OP's theories The Krogan will still hate the Salarians in Synthesis. They'll just be upgraded. 

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 23 mai 2012 - 02:33 .

[dreman9999]

Vigilant111 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

While we're talking about synthetics, here a quote from Legion (the greatest squademate ever)

"Geth build our own future. The heretics asked the Old Machines to give them the future"

... as he accepts the Reaper upgrades that make the geth more intelligent in ME3.

And I'll follow suit. The Reapers may be our enemies, but that doesn't mean we can't use all thing Reaper-related to our advantage

enlighten me, how come the Geth can get reaper upgrade but the organics cannot?

The same way EDI is be made with reaper tech and have reaper codes and not turn us over to the reapers. She is the clear examle the reaper tech works way differently with synthetics then organics.

Yes, exactly, cos reapers are largely synthetic (I am assuming), therefore find it easier to implement programmes on other synthetics, with organics which they could not control easily by sending signals, they have to resort to abduction

Butthe fact remains that synthetic have been show to be able to not only resist it better buthave far more spacific ways to have it used to control them. Synthetics can be talked to have that happen though...Organics can't. Organics  are much easier to haveit forced on them then synthetics. Remeber, the code has to be put in the system, EDI and the geth can stop it.

Modifié par dreman9999, 23 mai 2012 - 02:35 .