9089 réponses à ce sujet

[Taboo]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I'd say they earned Synthesis as well. If they build a giant device capable of achieving it, well....

The obvious response would be "but we don't know enough about it to jump in." I disagree. We didn't know enough about the mass-relays - how they worked/ramifications behind using them - but we jumped in.

Sometimes you have to take that proverbial leap-of-faith to make things happen.

I support the changes Synthesis brings but not the method. I want beings to make the choice for themselves. Just because one has the ability to do something doesn't mean they should. The "line" in this instance is far bigger than anything in the history of the galaxy.

Without Meta-gaming I know my Shepard would have a "Whatever dude" response to the Catalyst. It's a tantalyzing offer but it sounds so risky my Shepard would air on the side of caution.

And the Catalyst states it's an eventuality so I don't see an issue with making people wait a while longer. When the time comes the leap with be made.

Without the Vitalism. 

[Xilizhra]

How are you defining "vitalism?"

[Taboo]

Xilizhra wrote...

How are you defining "vitalism?"

Vitalism is the doctrine, often advocated in the past but now rejected by mainstream science, that "living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-physical element or are governed by different principles than are inanimate things". Where vitalism explicitly invokes a vital principle, that element is often referred to as the "vital spark", "energy" or "élan vital", which some equate with the "soul".

Check the bolded. Ever wonder why Synthetics aren't "alive" until Synthesis? Can the properties of living things be accounted for by their material components? That's the quote they use from the source here.

Shepard can activate this nonsense because he has enough soul energy. That's what "adding your energy to the Crucible" means.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 23 octobre 2012 - 12:46 .

[Xilizhra]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

How are you defining "vitalism?"

Vitalism is the doctrine, often advocated in the past but now rejected by mainstream science, that "living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-physical element or are governed by different principles than are inanimate things". Where vitalism explicitly invokes a vital principle, that element is often referred to as the "vital spark", "energy" or "élan vital", which some equate with the "soul".

Check the bolded. Ever wonder why Synthetics aren't "alive" until Synthesis? Can the properties of living things be accounted for by their material components? That's the quote they use from the source here.

Shepard can activate this nonsense because he has enough soul energy. That's what "adding your energy to the Crucible" means.

But synthetics aren't really changed by Synthesis, at least not as much as organics. They gain understanding of organics and hence can feel more of a connection with them, but that's about it. And both may be alive, but organics do operate on completely different, and less explicable for the time being, mechanics (we understand computers far better than brains).

[Taboo]

It's the concept not the actuality. Many of us, myself included thought Synthetics were already alive. EDI states before the last part of Priority Earth that she feels that way. That's good enough for me.

And then she has to have Synthesis to be truly "alive"? Bollocks.

I'll be honest. The only missing from the Synthesis epilogue is John Lennon's Imagine. Had that happened I'd have died right in front of television.

[Xilizhra]

Taboo-XX wrote...

It's the concept not the actuality. Many of us, myself included thought Synthetics were already alive. EDI states before the last part of Priority Earth that she feels that way. That's good enough for me.

And then she has to have Synthesis to be truly "alive"? Bollocks.

I'll be honest. The only missing from the Synthesis epilogue is John Lennon's Imagine. Had that happened I'd have died right in front of television.

She doesn't say "I am alive, where I wasn't before." Just an affirmation of her being-aliveness after Synthesis. In any case, I personally find this much less aggravating than her not being alive at all in your ending.

[Taboo]

"I am Alive and I am not alone."

It's a turkey farm of hilarity.

[ghost9191]

so instead you just throw shepard on that grenade . what makes edi more important?

not getting a debate about if shep is alive or not. but just saying , if not edi than shep. and let us be honest. shep would be a greater loss

Modifié par ghost9191, 23 octobre 2012 - 01:15 .

[Xilizhra]

Taboo-XX wrote...

"I am Alive and I am not alone."

It's a turkey farm of hilarity.

Well, now all the other synthetics get to feel alive too.

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

"I am Alive and I am not alone."

It's a turkey farm of hilarity.

Well, now all the other synthetics get to feel alive too.

. "Each geth would be a true intelligence, we would be alive and we could help you". They thought they were alive beore, I disagreed but hey they are useful

Modifié par Steelcan, 23 octobre 2012 - 01:24 .

[ghost9191]

biggest issue is that synthesis implies that everything my shep achieved with the geth and quarians didn't happen. the geth and quarians did not need synthesis to coexist. they were doing it in my playthrough, geth were helping the quarians adapt their immune systems and rebuild. synthesis says it is not posible for synthetics and organics to coexist without removing or adding what makes them different

better to overcome differences then just removing them

which even in control it does not show the geth and quarians together, not even if they achieve peace. shows the geth and reapers ( big surprise i know) together but the quarians not so much . so yeah just seems it is made to well seem that synthesis is the only ending where synthetics and organics ( partly because i doubt they can even be called that now ) coexist . which i think i disproved in my playthrough but whatever

[Xilizhra]

which even in control it does not show the geth and quarians together, not even if they achieve peace. shows the geth and reapers ( big surprise i know) together but the quarians not so much . so yeah just seems it is made to well seem that synthesis is the only ending where synthetics and organics ( partly because i doubt they can even be called that now ) coexist . which i think i disproved in my playthrough but whatever

Control does show the quarians, what are you on about?

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

which even in control it does not show the geth and quarians together, not even if they achieve peace. shows the geth and reapers ( big surprise i know) together but the quarians not so much . so yeah just seems it is made to well seem that synthesis is the only ending where synthetics and organics ( partly because i doubt they can even be called that now ) coexist . which i think i disproved in my playthrough but whatever

Control does show the quarians, what are you on about?

. But they are segregated.  They are not interacting together.

[ghost9191]

^^this

[Xilizhra]

. But they are segregated. They are not interacting together.

The quarians are still suited, and the geth uploaded themselves into the suits earlier. Ergo, the geth and quarians are still working together in the slides, to say nothing of what they may be doing outside the slides.

[ghost9191]

Xilizhra wrote...

. But they are segregated. They are not interacting together.

The quarians are still suited, and the geth uploaded themselves into the suits earlier. Ergo, the geth and quarians are still working together in the slides, to say nothing of what they may be doing outside the slides.

which would explain the utter lack of geth mobile units, or the lack of quarians with the geth in the slide. it makes a point to show them separated

[Steelcan]

Xilizhra wrote...

. But they are segregated. They are not interacting together.

The quarians are still suited, and the geth uploaded themselves into the suits earlier. Ergo, the geth and quarians are still working together in the slides, to say nothing of what they may be doing outside the slides.

. The geth are shown separate, quarians separate from them. Anything else is extrapolating or interpreting, they are not shown interacting

[Xilizhra]

ghost9191 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

. But they are segregated. They are not interacting together.

The quarians are still suited, and the geth uploaded themselves into the suits earlier. Ergo, the geth and quarians are still working together in the slides, to say nothing of what they may be doing outside the slides.

which would explain the utter lack of geth mobile units, or the lack of quarians with the geth in the slide. it makes a point to show them separated

Well, it's not like many quarians would jump at the chance to live with their 300-year-old racial enemy right away. Give it time.

[ghost9191]

Xilizhra wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

. But they are segregated. They are not interacting together.

The quarians are still suited, and the geth uploaded themselves into the suits earlier. Ergo, the geth and quarians are still working together in the slides, to say nothing of what they may be doing outside the slides.

which would explain the utter lack of geth mobile units, or the lack of quarians with the geth in the slide. it makes a point to show them separated

Well, it's not like many quarians would jump at the chance to live with their 300-year-old racial enemy right away. Give it time.

although they are in synthesis . point made

which i mean the quarians and geth only coexist together in the synthesis ending. but they were living on same planet and such , geth were helping to rebuild and adapt their systems . all without synthesis. but the only ending they are together is synthesis. just seems to infer that they won't be able to live together unless synthesis happens. that is just what i took from it

Modifié par ghost9191, 23 octobre 2012 - 01:51 .

[His Name was HYR!!]

Taboo-XX wrote...

me

I support the changes Synthesis brings but not the method. I want beings to make the choice for themselves. Just because one has the ability to do something doesn't mean they should. The "line" in this instance is far bigger than anything in the history of the galaxy.

And normally, I'd agree. But normally, I'm not dealing galactic apocalypse around me, and three loaded options to end it. Circumstance here changes everything. I've said before and will say again, I don't make this decision in a vaccum.

My issue with Destroy is simply this, I don't want to destroy more than what need be destroyed. The recovery process after a war shapes a lot of things going forward. Simply put, I'd prefer not to add to more problems to the mix if I can possibly help it. There's a lot of crap to sort out after the war, and a large scale tech-wipeout undoubtedly cripples the efforts.

The appeal with Synthesis is adding no further devestation and a change that could help people/civilization out, moving forward. If Destroy were simplying destroying the Reapers, then the whole option of Synthesis would then become void to me. As it stands though, I say, '... bite the bullet, organics.'

[rekn2]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

How are you defining "vitalism?"

Vitalism is the doctrine, often advocated in the past but now rejected by mainstream science, that "living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-physical element or are governed by different principles than are inanimate things". Where vitalism explicitly invokes a vital principle, that element is often referred to as the "vital spark", "energy" or "élan vital", which some equate with the "soul".

Check the bolded. Ever wonder why Synthetics aren't "alive" until Synthesis? Can the properties of living things be accounted for by their material components? That's the quote they use from the source here.

Shepard can activate this nonsense because he has enough soul energy. That's what "adding your energy to the Crucible" means.

exactly, if EDI were real she would be made of the same stuff everyone here is. the only difference between her/it  and you is w/e makes her think is electronic based and humans are electronic and chemically based.

you arent much different than the computer you sit at

[atheelogos]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

How are you defining "vitalism?"

Vitalism is the doctrine, often advocated in the past but now rejected by mainstream science, that "living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-physical element or are governed by different principles than are inanimate things". Where vitalism explicitly invokes a vital principle, that element is often referred to as the "vital spark", "energy" or "élan vital", which some equate with the "soul".

Check the bolded. Ever wonder why Synthetics aren't "alive" until Synthesis? Can the properties of living things be accounted for by their material components? That's the quote they use from the source here.

Shepard can activate this nonsense because he has enough soul energy. That's what "adding your energy to the Crucible" means.

oh lord... are we bringing the supernatural into this now. smh lets try and stay with science fiction. emphasis on the science

Modifié par atheelogos, 23 octobre 2012 - 06:32 .

[Ieldra]

@atheelogos:
The doctrine of vitalism has informed the writing of the Mass Effect trilogy ever since ME2's "Essence of the species". For me it's the most hated feature in the whole ME universe for it tends to dismiss the story as an SF story and make fantasy of it, and I put the blame for that squarely at Mac Walters' feet. I try to explain my way around it or ignore it completely when interpreting story aspects of the trilogy tainted by it, but it's completely clear that it's heavily implied in the writing, to the point that I suspect that Mac Walters has no idea of real science at all - and/or doesn't know how to write SF.

My interpretation of Synthesis doesn't use it of course. I go from the assumption that what Synthesis will turn out to be is informed by what Shepard thinks it will be, as the Crucible takes the contents of his mind and shapes the Synthesis around what it finds there, within certain limits. But again, I feel I am doing this in defiance of the writing, and my only justification is that I want this story to be an SF story and not fantasy.

There are a lot of soft elements in the ME universe. As a fan of harder SF, I don't like them but I can live with them. Mostly. *cough* Inter-species sex *cough*. But this hint at vitalism has come close to destroying the universe for me with one sentence when I first encountered it at the end of ME2. I could easily write a rant about it as long as the OP of this thread, but I'll just say I hate it with a passion.

I choose Synthesis in spite of it, not because of it. And I fully understand anyone who says it's too much and they can't choose Synthesis for that reason. Its mere presence is not just insulting to the ME universe, but to the SF genre as a whole.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 23 octobre 2012 - 07:16 .

[atheelogos]

@Ieldra2

Thanks for posting that Radio Silence. Been reading it and I have to say I'm enjoying myself.

Mr Carth lol smh

[CosmicGnosis]

What do you guys think about the conversations with the Illusive Man throughout ME3? I think he makes some good points about Control vs. Destroy, but there is a serious problem with his argument: he's indoctrinated.

And because of that fact, I don't know what point BioWare is trying to make with the final choices. I understand why the Indoctrination Theory is so appealing to many people. In some ways, the final choices make no sense without it. But at the same time, it seems that we are supposed to interpret everything as being literal and truthful. There is no deception.

So then... is Shepard supposed to swallow his pride and admit that the Illusive Man really was on to something all along? But even if that's the case, the guy was indoctrinated. Doesn't that invalidate his whole perspective? And he was only talking about Control. Synthesis is even more extreme.

I really wish that it had been left ambiguous as to whether or not the Illusive Man was indoctrinated. I think revealing that he actually was indoctrinated completely taints his perspective and all others that don't support Destroy.

For example, I want to establish a genuine, mutual peace between us and the Reapers. Because of that, someone can accuse me of obviously being indoctrinated. And no matter what I say, no matter how compelling my arguments may be, I'm automatically wrong. There is no room for debate. It's black and white. I'm wrong because I don't want to kill the Reapers.

Thus, the whole issue is trivialized.

Modifié par CosmicGnosis, 23 octobre 2012 - 09:08 .