9089 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

Shaigunjoe wrote...
Could we maybe get a definition of vitalism and how people think it pertains to ME3?

From the Wikipedia article on the subject:

"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".

I maintain that the use of terms like "essence" (of individuals or species) and "organic energy" is suggestive of vitalism. It is suggestive because if it isn't vitalism, then the reality behind those terms could be expressed in terms better suited to a scientific understanding. The refusal to use "destructive analysis" (cut SM dialogue) instead of "extracting someone's essence" suggests that there is a difference and that the non-scientific term is more appropriate.

I don't know if that was done intentionally. I suspect it's rather a side effect of deliberate obfuscation and avoidance of clarity. Or just a result of comic book logic. That doesn't make the result better though. 

Modifié par Ieldra2, 22 mars 2013 - 03:16 .

[Shaigunjoe]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...
The designers of the crucible recognized that the catalyst was needed, so they new about the catalyst, which means they new what its purpose was.  If they didn't, how would they design something that would 'change' an advanced AI and present it with 'new possibilities'?

I can't help but suggest that the "initial designers" probably didn't know about the Catalyst, but that, as the cycles passed more and more capability was added to the design, eventually resulting in the ability to use the Relay network.

Just because the Crucible is stated to "change" the Catalyst, it doesn't imply that this needed to be intentional.

If the Catalyst is bount to solve it's problem, and it _knows_ that the cycle is the only way (having tested other options) and the Crucible contains data that makes it obvious that there _is_ another way and that it is _better_ then all of the Catalyst's previous obligation must be re-evaluated in light of the new information, it has been "changed" by the data. This doesn't require any foreknowledge on the part of any of the cycles of Crucible designers

Oh no, I'm not trying to say its 100% happened this way, but that it isn't unreasonable that it could be, there are many blanks to fill in, and you can fill them in as you like.  Sure, it might not have been intentional, making it coincidental, a pretty big coincidense I would think, but not impossible.

[Shaigunjoe]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...
Could we maybe get a definition of vitalism and how people think it pertains to ME3?

From the Wikipedia article on the subject:

"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".

I maintain that the use of terms like "essence" (of individuals or species) and "organic energy" is suggestive of vitalism. It is suggestive because if it isn't vitalism, then the reality behind those terms could be expressed in terms better suited to a scientific understanding. The refusal to use "destructive analysis" (cut SM dialogue) instead of "extracting someone's essence" suggests that there is a difference and that the non-scientific term is more appropriate.

I don't know if that was done intentionally. I suspect it's rather a side effect of deliberate obfuscation and avoidance of clarity. Or just a result of comic book logic. That doesn't make the result better though. 

Ah, neat.  Especially the bit about the cut dialogue.  That just adds more fuel (like I need more fuel) for me to think that the showdown in the citadel is 'the legend of the Shepard" as told throughout the ages, drastically repurposed for a non-scientific audience. 

Modifié par Shaigunjoe, 22 mars 2013 - 03:23 .

[Ieldra]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...
Could we maybe get a definition of vitalism and how people think it pertains to ME3?

From the Wikipedia article on the subject:

"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".

I maintain that the use of terms like "essence" (of individuals or species) and "organic energy" is suggestive of vitalism. It is suggestive because if it isn't vitalism, then the reality behind those terms could be expressed in terms better suited to a scientific understanding. The refusal to use "destructive analysis" (cut SM dialogue) instead of "extracting someone's essence" suggests that there is a difference and that the non-scientific term is more appropriate.

I don't know if that was done intentionally. I suspect it's rather a side effect of deliberate obfuscation and avoidance of clarity. Or just a result of comic book logic. That doesn't make the result better though. 

Ah, neat.  Especially the bit about the cut dialogue.  That just adds more fuel (like I need more fuel) for me to think that the showdown in the citadel is 'the legend of the Shepard" as told throughout the ages, drastically repurposed for a non-scientific audience.

:lol:
I've thought along similar lines, at times. The problem, however, is: we are playing the scene, and many players envision Shepard as being "not just a stupid grunt" (Engineer-Shepard in Omega), having a grounding in science solid enough, at least, to reject vitalism. If your hypothesis is correct, then it was excessively bad storytelling for a game with roleplaying elements.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 22 mars 2013 - 03:41 .

[Obadiah]

I'd rather there was some sort of destructive analysis of Shepard that went into the Synthesis explosion, but I just don't see that as possible with just jumping into the energy beam.

To me, whatever happened to Shep in that beam was chaotic and beyond the direct control of anyone. My theory is that Conrad Verner's Dark Energy Dissertation is correct, and the differences in the passage of time caused by massive amounts of Dark Energy in the Crucible caused some kind of hyper-evolution in Shepard's body, evolving his synthetic infused cells into the self-replicating nanides before his disintegration.

The explosion, however, is controlled by the Catalyst and Crucible Citadel.

Modifié par Obadiah, 22 mars 2013 - 03:58 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

Could we maybe get a definition of vitalism and how people think it pertains to ME3?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitalism

Vitalism is the doctrine, often advocated in the past but now rejected by mainstream science,[1] 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".[2] 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".

Wereas what is being positied here (by me at least) is that sentience is a subtle quantum effect that is present in current organic sentients and that the Synthesis nanotech provides a framework that allows a "seed" quantum effect to grow into synpathetic structure that allows pure sapient intelegences (in this case mostly synthetic) to attain sentience.

For those who ans unsure how I'm using the terms Sentience vs Sapience:

"Sapience Sapience is often defined as wisdom, or the ability of an organism or entity to act with appropriate judgment".

The bit I find the most important

"Sapience describes an essential human property that bestows 'personhood' onto a non-human"

Compare to:

Sentience is the ability to feel, perceive or be conscious, or to have subjective experiences"

and IMHO the most important bit

"Eighteenth century philosophers used the concept to distinguish the ability to think ("reason") from the ability to feel ("sentience")"

[Mobius-Silent]

Obadiah wrote...
The explosion, however, is controlled by the Catalyst and Crucible.

No, I'm absolutely convinced that the Catalyst is incapable of fireing or activating the Crucible, hence it bringing Shepard up on the "lift of light"

In a previous leaked script is was stated that the Catalyst lost all control of the Reapers once the Crucible was connected, that wasn't retained but I think it's now obvious that Bioware intended the Catalyst to be powerless (Something that really didn't come across in the OC ending but was better in the EC) Only if Shepard refused to activate the Crucible does the Catlayst continue the Cycle.

IMHO:

Power -> Crucible
Software -> Crucible
Control-console -> Crucible
Software-for-synthesis -> Crucible
Destroy-conduit -> Crucible
Distribution-mechanism -> Citadel

I've addressed how the consoles come from the Crucible in another thread which is summarised in this image

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mars 2013 - 03:49 .

[JasonShepard]

I've been lurking around and glancing at the conversation for the past few pages.

A few points:
I'm fairly sure the vitality issue is just a case of comic book science and/or overly generous simplification. This is a setting that includes examples of synthetic life, after all, and usually vitality and synthetic life are incompatible. (Although Orson Scott Card's books just provided me with a counter example - I didn't like it there either, and in that case it's made explicit and unavoidable...) Back in ME, I just put it down as the Catalyst being low on time and making an overt simplification to explain some sufficiently advanced tech.

On the topic of destructive reading: speaking from having studied Advanced Quantum Physics, there is some scientific basis in the idea that destructive reading is the only form of reading - ie, that if you want to extract all the information out of a quantum system without changing it, you have to destroy it. (Note that measuring something quantum usually changes it, thanks to Heisenberg. This idea is closely related to the concept of Quantum Teleportation.) And, in current thinking, the brain is almost certainly a quantum system. So I'm quite happy for Shepard to be destroyed in Synthesis (and Control).

And whoever it was that mentioned a quantum cascade - that would be bad. As in, entire-universe-dissolves-on-a-subatomic-scale level of bad. (Fun fact - one theory suggested that the LHC would cause one. We turned it on anyway.) So I'd rather avoid having that in Mass Effect.

EDIT:

Mobius-Silent wrote...

I've addressed how the consoles come from the Crucible in another thread which is summarised in this image

Who originally made that image, do you know? I've seen it around a bit, I even have it bookmarked from HYR 2.0 using it once, but I'm curious as to who put it together.

Modifié par JasonShepard, 22 mars 2013 - 03:53 .

[Shaigunjoe]

JasonShepard wrote...

I've been lurking around and glancing at the conversation for the past few pages.

A few points:
I'm fairly sure the vitality issue is just a case of comic book science and/or overly generous simplification. This is a setting that includes examples of synthetic life, after all, and usually vitality and synthetic life are incompatible. (Although Orson Scott Card's books just provided me with a counter example - I didn't like it there either, and in that case it's made explicit and unavoidable...) Back in ME, I just put it down as the Catalyst being low on time and making an overt simplification to explain some sufficiently advanced tech.

On the topic of destructive reading: speaking from having studied Advanced Quantum Physics, there is some scientific basis in the idea that destructive reading is the only form of reading - ie, that if you want to extract all the information out of a quantum system without changing it, you have to destroy it. (Note that measuring something quantum usually changes it, thanks to Heisenberg. This idea is closely related to the concept of Quantum Teleportation.) And, in current thinking, the brain is almost certainly a quantum system. So I'm quite happy for Shepard to be destroyed in Synthesis (and Control).

And whoever it was that mentioned a quantum cascade - that would be bad. As in, entire-universe-dissolves-on-a-subatomic-scale level of bad. (Fun fact - one theory suggested that the LHC would cause one. We turned it on anyway.) So I'd rather avoid having that in Mass Effect.

EDIT:

Mobius-Silent wrote...

I've addressed how the consoles come from the Crucible in another thread which is summarised in this image

Who originally made that image, do you know? I've seen it around a bit, I even have it bookmarked from HYR 2.0 using it once, but I'm curious as to who put it together.

Wasn't a quantum cascade what caused so many problems in Half-Life?

[Mobius-Silent]

JasonShepard wrote...

And whoever it was that mentioned a quantum cascade - that would be bad.

Don't cross the streams, Okay. All right. Important safety tip. Thanks, Egon.

Sorry I made up a term to cover what I was intending to say, which was somethng like:

"A persistant quantum state that has a subtle and unpredictable effect on the physics and biochemical interaction of Organic complexes within which that state is retained. Such that, as organic processes like sensory reaction cascade through the organic matrix to and from the brain, the tiny changes result in large alteration in the process of conciousness (a-la chaos theory) in the manner that we commonly refer to as sentience as opposed to sapience"

I described that as a "quantum cascade" perhaps "emotional augumentation of reason due to process cascade through material containing a specific manner of quantum state" is better (if a lot wordier)

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mars 2013 - 04:00 .

[JasonShepard]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

SNIP

Wasn't a quantum cascade what caused so many problems in Half-Life?

Hmm... I think you might be right, but if so, it was a bad misuse of the term. Then again, it's speculative science anyway, and Half-Life is notably softer science than Mass Effect.
Also, I was applying the term in the context of cascading from one particle in the universe to another, as opposed to... tearing a hole in the fabric of space-time...

EDIT:

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Don't cross the streams, Okay. All right. Important safety tip. Thanks, Egon.

"A persistant quantum state that has a subtle and unpredictable effect on the physics and biochemical interaction of Organic complexes within which that state is retained. Such that, as organic processes like sensory reaction cascade through the organic matrix to and from the brain, the tiny changes result in large alteration in the process of conciousness (a-la chaos theory) in the manner that we commonly refer to as sentience as opposed to sapience"

I described that as a "quantum cascade" perhaps "emotional augumentation of reason due to process cascade through material containing a specific manner of quantum state" is better (if a lot wordier)

Okay, yeah, that sounds a bit better. Quantum Implant might work, if I'm understanding you correctly - ie, a quantum state that alters the chain of events associated with sensation and thought.

(Sorry for jumping on the point - a Quantum Cascade is a lesser known doomsday scenario that would work akin to what what we see the Crucible do: A rapidly expanding sphere of particles in a completely new state within the universe, expanding at near lightspeed. So I was worried you were applying the actual doomsday scenario, but just handwaving away the whole 'deconstructing the universe' side of it. A bit like having an explosion without the destruction.)

Modifié par JasonShepard, 22 mars 2013 - 04:07 .

[Mobius-Silent]

JasonShepard wrote...
Who originally made that image, do you know? I've seen it around a bit, I even have it bookmarked from HYR 2.0 using it once, but I'm curious as to who put it together.

Me. if anything isn't clear I'm happy to explain, it was the best I could do at the time

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mars 2013 - 04:02 .

[JasonShepard]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

JasonShepard wrote...
Who originally made that image, do you know? I've seen it around a bit, I even have it bookmarked from HYR 2.0 using it once, but I'm curious as to who put it together.

Me. if anything isn't clear I'm happy to explain, it was the best I could do at the time

No, I just wanted to say thanks for putting it together! I'm guessing you don't mind me referring people to it whenever the topic of "We were just given choices by SpaceKid!" comes up?

[Mobius-Silent]

JasonShepard wrote...
No, I just wanted to say thanks for putting it together! I'm guessing you don't mind me referring people to it whenever the topic of "We were just given choices by SpaceKid!" comes up?

Please, go right ahead, that's why I put it together.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mars 2013 - 04:19 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Oh my word... I've just thought of something.

If I'm right that:

• The reason synthesis "can't be forced" is because a strong, consenting emotional matrix is needed to "seed the process"
• That this matrix is quantum in nature and the read-process is destructive
• That Legion's destructive "personality upload" to the Geth was a similar matrix being transmittited after having evolved due to exposure to many forms of tech combined with the Geth's unique "accidental" genesis.

Legion may well have been able to kick-start synthesis had he been present, in fact, any willing post-upload-Geth may be able to.

That would make a _hell_ of an alternate if-you-saved-the-Geth ending

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mars 2013 - 04:57 .

[Ieldra]

Mobius-Silent wrote...
The reason synthesis "can't be forced" is because a strong-consenting emotional matrix is needed to "seed the process"

An odd way to phrase it, but similar to what I think - the "seed entity" must know of Synthesis and associate something specific with it, and if that association is something not considered desirable then this entity won't enact Synthesis. So whoever jumps into the beam automatically has that "strong-consenting matrix", and within certain constraints set by the nature of the process, Synthesis will work as imagined.

That this matrix is quantum in nature and the read-process is destructive

I still think it's more a matter of technology. Sure, the brain is a quantum state, but thoughts and memories aren't encoded on the quantum level. The destructive reading works either way.

That Legion's destructive "personality upload" to the Geth was a similar matrix being transmittited after having evolved due to exposure to many forms of tech combined with the Geth's unique "accidental" genesis.

I have a harder time believing this. Your typical AI has a quantum blue box, but geth platforms don't have that, since they don't have an identity of their own. A mere code upgrade wouldn't change that. So....I still think Legion's sacrifice makes no sense.

Legion may well have been able to kick-start synthesis had he been present, in fact, any willing post-upload-Geth may be able to.

If I'm right, then Legion could've initiated Synthesis without dying...

[Ieldra]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
The explosion, however, is controlled by the Catalyst and Crucible.

No, I'm absolutely convinced that the Catalyst is incapable of fireing or activating the Crucible, hence it bringing Shepard up on the "lift of light"

In a previous leaked script is was stated that the Catalyst lost all control of the Reapers once the Crucible was connected, that wasn't retained but I think it's now obvious that Bioware intended the Catalyst to be powerless (Something that really didn't come across in the OC ending but was better in the EC) Only if Shepard refused to activate the Crucible does the Catlayst continue the Cycle.

IMHO:

Power -> Crucible
Software -> Crucible
Control-console -> Crucible
Software-for-synthesis -> Crucible
Destroy-conduit -> Crucible
Distribution-mechanism -> Citadel

I've addressed how the consoles come from the Crucible in another thread which is summarised in this image

I'm not so sure about the consoles - and it really doesn't matter all that much in a scene with so much artistic license - but I agree with your other conclusions. As I said elsewhere, it's easy to see the intent but the original endings were damaged by the decision to keep the conversation "high level", i.e. to explain nothing (I wonder if that was just an excuse for not having to not having to explain things. With the incoherence of certain parts of the EC this seems reasonable).

[Absaroka]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...
The designers of the crucible recognized that the catalyst was needed, so they new about the catalyst, which means they new what its purpose was.  If they didn't, how would they design something that would 'change' an advanced AI and present it with 'new possibilities'?

I can't help but suggest that the "initial designers" probably didn't know about the Catalyst, but that, as the cycles passed more and more capability was added to the design, eventually resulting in the ability to use the Relay network.

Just because the Crucible is stated to "change" the Catalyst, it doesn't imply that this needed to be intentional.

If the Catalyst is bound (required) to solve it's problem, and it _knows_ that the cycle is the only way (having tested other options) and the Crucible contains data that makes it obvious that there _is_ another way and that it is _better_ then all of the Catalyst's previous obligation must be re-evaluated in light of the new information, it has been "changed" by the data. This doesn't require any foreknowledge on the part of any of the cycles of Crucible designers

Exactly, there is no indication of just how the original designers conceived of the initial device that would eventually be developed into the Crucible that does require the Catalyst for it to work as it exists now. That the Crucible "changes" the Catalyst is not specific at all, it can mean anything.

What we do know is that:
a) The Catalyst was created to solve the issue of conflict between organics and synthetics, and to that end it had attempted a flawed Synthesis as a solution in the past.
It is completely impossible to determine how many of the civilizations in the previous cycles were aware of the existence of the Catalyst or even if any of them knew of its purpose beyond its creators, the Leviathans. 
c) Several cycles tried to create a device that was passed down, modified, and expanded upon over time as a means to stop the Reapers.
d) The Crucible, the latest iteration of the device, will at bare minimum have one option and in that circumstance that option will be to either destroy or seize control of the Reapers.

So as far as I am concerned, the most probable explaination is that the Crucible is intended to either control or destroy the Reapers (whether it was meant to be one or both is another matter of contention entirely).  However, its functions can be co-opted by the Catalyst to implement a complete version of Synthesis, which it had determined would resolve the very problem it was created to solve but was otherwise unable to do up until this point.
 

[Mobius-Silent]

Absaroka wrote...
So as far as I am concerned, the most probable explaination is that the Crucible is intended to either control or destroy the Reapers (whether it was meant to be one or both is another matter of contention entirely).  However, its functions can be co-opted by the Catalyst to implement a complete version of Synthesis, which it had determined would resolve the very problem it was created to solve but was otherwise unable to do up until this point.
 

No I can't see how the Catalyst can be involved in synthesis, it has nothing to contribute, it couldn't know how it worked or it would have done it before it didn't supply the hardware it it had no reason to be capable of producing it. I can't see any way for the information we have to make sense unless 

• a) The Crucible contains everything needed for all 3 options except for a transmission medium.
• The Catalyst is completely powerless after the point of Crucible-connection.
• c) The Catalyst uses the Reapers because it itself if bound by much stricter rules than the Reaper synthetics ("You may not harm" but no "By omission of action" clause)

Otherwise we have a whole host of problems with "Why does the Catalyst bring you up?", "Why does it tell you about destroy", "Why doesn't it activate the device itself", "Why didn't it act in ME1 when you stopping Sovereign?", "Why doesn't a Reaper stop you it you start to walk toward the destroy option?", "Why does Bioware reject the assertion that fans gave that the starchild dictates the options" and "Why does it say it can't and won't choose"

IMHO the trivial idea of synthesis (as espoused by Saren) a simple melding of Organic and synthetic, achieves nothing because it either just makes the organics a bit stronger or ends up stripping them of their identity, which doesn't help but the Catalyst can't understand why, because it's an emotionless machine, it doesn't know what is missing until it sees what the Crucible can do, that is, give _them_ what they are missing. Only the tech and emotional state provided by synthesis can allow them to understand why they needed it.

Also I can't see how the most technically complex of the 3 options could be derived from the 2 simple ones, whereas it's easy to see that the tech used to enact synthesis could easily be used to destroy or control synthetics.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mars 2013 - 05:55 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Mobius-Silent wrote...
I've addressed how the consoles come from the Crucible in another thread which is summarised in this image

I'm not so sure about the consoles - and it really doesn't matter all that much in a scene with so much artistic license 

I'm not "sure" but I think it makes more sense than the other options and it nicely answers a lot of problems that people had with the OC

• Why was this playform on the Citadel,
• Why did no-one see it before
• Why were the consoles built
• Why did they align perfectly with options from the Crucible the Catalyst didn't know about

All that is satisfied by "They were in the nose of the Crucible and the base of the Presidium Tower was closed and flat until the Crucible docked" as illustrated by the EC docking cinematic and the "sliding panel" appearance of the chasm.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mars 2013 - 05:55 .

[Shaigunjoe]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...
Could we maybe get a definition of vitalism and how people think it pertains to ME3?

From the Wikipedia article on the subject:

"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".

I maintain that the use of terms like "essence" (of individuals or species) and "organic energy" is suggestive of vitalism. It is suggestive because if it isn't vitalism, then the reality behind those terms could be expressed in terms better suited to a scientific understanding. The refusal to use "destructive analysis" (cut SM dialogue) instead of "extracting someone's essence" suggests that there is a difference and that the non-scientific term is more appropriate.

I don't know if that was done intentionally. I suspect it's rather a side effect of deliberate obfuscation and avoidance of clarity. Or just a result of comic book logic. That doesn't make the result better though. 

Ah, neat.  Especially the bit about the cut dialogue.  That just adds more fuel (like I need more fuel) for me to think that the showdown in the citadel is 'the legend of the Shepard" as told throughout the ages, drastically repurposed for a non-scientific audience.

:lol:
I've thought along similar lines, at times. The problem, however, is: we are playing the scene, and many players envision Shepard as being "not just a stupid grunt" (Engineer-Shepard in Omega), having a grounding in science solid enough, at least, to reject vitalism. If your hypothesis is correct, then it was excessively bad storytelling for a game with roleplaying elements.

I don't think it is fair to say it was bad storytelling, more so (depending on what campaign setting you are in) it could be a dick move by the DM.  Though, I feel the spirit of it is to put the story more in the players hands, to try and give the actual story the amount of flexibility and personalization that you would have if you were actually playing a pen and paper RPG and not be tied to the constraints of a video game RPG, which is less about actual role play anyway and more about choose your adventure path.

[Absaroka]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Absaroka wrote...
So as far as I am concerned, the most probable explaination is that the Crucible is intended to either control or destroy the Reapers (whether it was meant to be one or both is another matter of contention entirely).  However, its functions can be co-opted by the Catalyst to implement a complete version of Synthesis, which it had determined would resolve the very problem it was created to solve but was otherwise unable to do up until this point.
 

No I can't see how the Catalyst can be involved in synthesis, it has nothing to contribute, it couldn't know how it worked or it would have done it before it didn't supply the hardware it it had no reason to be capable of producing it. I can't see any way for the information we have to make sense unless 

a) The Crucible contains everything needed for all 3 options except for a transmission medium.
The Catalyst is completely powerless after the point of Crucible-connection.
c) The Catalyst uses the Reapers because it itself if bound by much stricter rules than the Reaper synthetics ("You may not harm" but no "By omission of action" clause)

Otherwise we have a whole host of problems with "Why does the Catalyst bring you up?", "Why does it tell you about destroy", "Why doesn't it activate the device itself", "Why didn't it act in ME1 when you stopping Sovereign?", "Why doesn't a Reaper stop you it you start to walk toward the destroy option?", "Why does Bioware reject the assertion that fans gave that the starchild dictates the options" and "Why does it say it can't and won't choose"

IMHO the trivial idea of synthesis (as espoused by Saren) a simple melding of Organic and synthetic, achieves nothing because it either just makes the organics a bit stronger or ends up stripping them of their identity, which doesn't help but the Catalyst can't understand why, because it's an emotionless machine, it doesn't know what is missing until it sees what the Crucible can do, that is, give _them_ what they are missing. Only the tech and emotional state provided by synthesis can allow them to understand why they needed it.

Also I can't see how the most technically complex of the 3 options could be derived from the 2 simple ones, whereas it's easy to see that the tech used to enact synthesis could easily be used to destroy or control synthetics.

Much of this has to do with the fact that the Catalyst is more plot device than character, that the endings are mired in more symbolism than strict logic and that the writers themselves did not think things through.

We have no idea what degree of capabilities the Catalyst had specifically, and for that matter we don't even know what what technology is behind the Crucible; it's completely possible that those that worked on the Crucible developed along technological lines divergent from the Catalyst.  The technology that serves as the basis for synthesis may already be contained in the Citadel; in fact, in the Refuse ending the Catalyst shuts off the synthesis beam which also suggests it is not so powerless once the Catalyst is docked.

Saren becoming a cyborg is also not the same as the Catalyst's past attempt(s) at Synthesis; it is an unintended parallel that also unwittingly casts Synthesis itself in a negative light. Saren was implanted with tech by Sovereign purely so he would be a more useful and controllable pawn.  It has nothing to do with resolving the conflict between organics and synthetics that the Catalyst intended with its previous attempt(s.)

There is also no good reason for the designers of the Crucible to include the Synthesis option unless they know the motives of the Catalyst.  Turning everyone into cyborgs is a completely roundabout way in addressing the Reaper threat compared to simply destroying or controlling them and also ridiculously contrived considering that they would be solving the very problem the Catalyst was created to address without knowing it.

[Wayning_Star]

soooo many writers, not enough VG's..lol

[Ieldra]

Absaroka wrote...
There is also no good reason for the designers of the Crucible to include the Synthesis option unless they know the motives of the Catalyst.

I recommend reading the quote by CulturalGeekGirl in the OP, which addresses exactly that problem.

[Wayning_Star]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Absaroka wrote...
There is also no good reason for the designers of the Crucible to include the Synthesis option unless they know the motives of the Catalyst.

I recommend reading the quote by CulturalGeekGirl in the OP, which addresses exactly that problem.

And to think that Shep is immersed within the catalyst mentality as energy, it would seem easy for it to consider what Shepard/humans might consider as 'synthesis'.

(easier than those here on old earth BSN by leaps and bounds..)