Caliann5 wrote...
Just throwing my two cents in on the whole Synthesis issue... (and after just 8 months, wow, I'm fast). 
First of all, while I sort of (if I squint really, really hard) appreciate what Bioware tried to do with Synthesis ('tried' being the operative word here), I, or any of the Shepards that I've created, would have never chosen that particular ending. I'll explain why in a bit. That said, the fact that an ending doesn't appeal to a player, doesn't mean that such an ending - if done right - isn't a valid one. And here we come to the problem - it just wasn't done right.
This applies to the whole 10 minute mess that was the original ending (with the EC removing some of the glaring black-hole-sized inconstancies, plot holes and providing at least some closure).
Bioware created an amazing story, and that's something we can all agree on. Considering the shear scope, complexity and, yes, the incredible attention that went into the creation of the whole Mass Effect universe, it's not surprising that the guys at Bioware didn't want their (epic) story to end with a run-of-the-mill end-boss fight. Good call - I wouldn't want it to either.
They wanted their ending to be provoking and different and I applaud the intent if not the execution.
Now, there have been tons and tons of threads that explained in depth why the Space Brat (that is it's canon name
as far as I'm concerned) just doesn't work as a plot device. To name a few reasons, we have: removing player agency, narrative inconsistency, introducing new concepts so late in the game with no foreshadowing whatsoever, introducing concepts late in the game that contradict the previously established themes of the game. I wont get into the whole circular logic argument (for me, its logic isn’t as much circular as it is fundamentally flawed, but can be valid from the limited perspective of an AI that was created for a singular purpose). In short, the Space Brat is a deus ex machina plot device where an unsolvableproblem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object (quote shamelessly stolen from the Wiki).
(I also have a whole other issue with the Crucible as a plot point – ‘So we’re building this huge Prothean thing, right? … Hmmm… It’s a weapon, you say? … And we have no idea what it does? … Cool! Let’s do it!’ – but the situation is desperate enough for them to try pretty much anything, so I can let it slide. I also have a whole related issue with auto dialogue, but that’s neither here nor there.)
Now, deus ex machina is a time honored plot device that has it’s uses, but it just doesn’t work here. Just a
few general points and I’ll concentrate on the Synthesis ending and try and explain why it doesn’t work for me from a story telling standpoint and from Shepard’s perspective as a protagonist (and if I missed some nuances from
the EC ending, i apologize in advance).
In general:
Why is the Space Brat offering Shepard these choices at all?
All we get is a vague line ‘the Crucible changed me’ (er, how? do tell… no, really) and that its solution “doesn’t work anymore”. In the EC we also get some more details about the creators of the Space Brat (a race that ended up as the first Reaper apparently, after being nearly wiped out by synthetics and creating the Space Brat as a form of defense… poor guys just couldn’t catch a break). After that the Space Brat – an AI that clearly has a huge bug in it’s programming - offers Shepard three choices. Now, consider this from the AI’s perspective, which is an entity created with a single purpose – finding the solution to the organics vrs. synthetics conflict, and the choices in short boil down to this:
Destroy
“No, Shepard, really, I’m kind of tired of this crap, so can you please stop your dawdling and push that red button over there, so I can finally get some shut-eye and leave this problem solving to someone
else. Man, my circuits hurt from all this thinking.”
Control
“You’re so awesome for a puny human that I’ll just hand over my immense army to you. How is it that you’re still just a Commander, by the way? Push that blue button and I can finally get some shut-eye, and you can try and solve that organics vrs. synthetics conflict all by your lonesome. Sucker. Man, I’m good.”
Synthesis
"I give up. You people just can’t play nice. I can finally get some shut-eye and my circuits still hurt. Oh, push green.”
See what I mean? Now, I suppose that the general idea was that the Space Brat had seen the error of its ways and the long run failure of its original plan, but the necessary leap of reasoning just isn’t present in the in game dialogue we get. For example, if we consider that each Reaper is a composite of one organic civilization wiped out by the Reapers in previous Cycles and that one of the mandates of the Space Brat is to preserve those remains and allow new civilizations to take their place, presenting Shepard with the option to destroy them not only doesn’t make sense, but should also be in direct conflict with the AI’s basic programming. Also, destroy ends all existing synthetic life in the galaxy, but doesn’t stop organics from making new ones. An acceptable risk for some Shepards, but is it an acceptable risk for the AI?
Control is also problematic from the AI’s standpoint – how would the Star Brat know that the entity that Shepard will become (awesomeness aside, we have all made some Shepards with questionable morals) would be able to achieve the purpose that the original creators programmed Star Brat with? Consider also that in the Refuse[/i]
EC ending, it’s clearly shown that we lose, so the AI should have had a whole new circle (50.000 years) to rethink
its strategy, if it is true that it had figured out that blunt aggression wouldn’t work anymore.
(I have to state that I have less of a problem with the Refuse ending than with the rest - at least that ending follows the narrative, in the sense that it's stated multiple times in the game that we can't win using conventional warfare)
Basically, destroy and control endings are the equivalent of the AI throwing its hands up in the air and yelling ‘I quit’. The only choice presented that actually makes sense from the Star Brat’s point of view is Synthesis, combining syntetic and organic life into a new life form. Wham-bam, thank you, ma’am. Problem solved. Right?
Kind of. If you squint.
Without even delving into the moral issues of rewriting an entire galaxy of sentient beings without their consent (that's Shepard's problem, the AI doesn’t care about that), or the issue of how for the love of god is this suddenly possible (the ‘Crucible changed me’ vague nonsense) – Synthesis, in my view, changes nothing in the overall
conflict between synthetics and organics in the long term for a few reasons.
1. I can’t suspend my disbelief enough to believe that the Crucible somehow transformed ALL matter in the
galaxy in this synthetic/organic hybrid (if someone can explain it to me, I’m all ears).
2. The new hybrid life form will eventually create new (pure) synthetics (for labor purposes if nothing else). Honestly, can you see the new hybrid AIs performing the repetitive physical labor that the Geth were designed for?
3. These new synthetics will eventually and unavoidably, if the Star Brat is right, turn against its creators.
I suppose one could argue that the races of the galaxy have learned their lesson and that after the war no one would dare create pure synthetics that could evolve and reach a point in time when their intelligence would become greater than human (or hybrid) intelligence.
Well, never is a long time.
More later on Shepard’s point of view and why Synthesis doesn’t work for me as a player.
These sentiments are shared by many players here. Nicely put together, btw!
Here's my counter-theory about the catalysts motives:
1) The catalyst was tasked with finding a solution for the organics vs synthetics conflict and deemed the reaping to be valid, but not very elegant.
2) The catalyst seeks a better solution and comes up with the crucible plan to create a device that can have an impact in the whole galaxy at once (technical descriptions on how that works are mysteriously lost....)
3) The catalyst tries out the crucible many cycles ago but finds that synthesis doesn't work if used ("forced") on a population that is not "ready" (exact definition of ready has been mysteriously lost...)
4) The catalyst still likes his crucible idea but has to find the proper "cycle".
5) Shepard and the rest of this cycle manage to unite the species and build the crucible completely plus manage to dock it to the citadel (with a little help from the catalyst by not interfering a lot (see laser attack at shepard that misses, crucible production not being attacked, crucible not being shot out of the sky as soon as it shows up at earth).
6) The catalyst realized that this cycle is "ready" to tackle the AI threat themselves and even that it is fit for synthesis (if the player diligently raised the EMS).
7) Shepard is the spokesperson for the whole cycle and therefore the catalyst tells her/him that finishing the crucible made a new and better solution available.
8) The catalyst tells Shepard that he should pick the solution which fits best for this cycle, thinking that Shepard should know best for some mystical reason.
So, in my opinion, the catalyst is not "giving up", but is convinced, that this cycle can provide a solution to the organics vs synthetics issue which is better than reaping.
Reasoning for destroy: this cycle is unified and aware of how to deal with synthetics. It can handle itself. More reaping is not necessary once all current AI's are being eradicated.
Reasoning for control: Shepard has proven his or her strength of will and awesome leadership plus dedication to the well-being of all life (please note: very destructive renegades and lazy sheps don't have enough EMS!) to qualify as a valid candidate to oversee the galaxy's future. He or she becomes the new guardian with better insight into the organic way of thinking (empathy and other cool sh!t).
Reasoning for synthesis: well... synthesis is like the candyland of all good stuff, isn't it? Everbody is free of limits and potentionally omniscient and eternal, all AI's are friendly now... *slow clapping*... well, sorry, got a bit carried away here. The catalyst suspects that this solution is the best to put an end to the conflict forever because the technical singularity is no longer a threat: newly built machines will never be smarter than organics with their brain attached to google.
So, that's my point of viewing anyway.
Retour en haut
