delta_vee wrote...
I think what Taboo's getting at is that any explanation of the Synthesis option is entirely paratextual. We have almost nothing in-game (on the page, as it were) to support either the idea of the Singularity or the inevitability of conflict afterward. Paratext can be extremely useful in its own ways, but basic interpretation of the text should never be reliant upon it. Since the game we received was such a fundamentally literalist text, using paratextual ideas to explain it runs counter to the framework used to interpret the remainder of the game ... such an approach cannot be generalized or even suggested as any sort of canonical reading.
You appreciate of course that I said exactly that in the post immediately above yours?
Veneke wrote...
No one suggests that Synthesis is explained ingame. If it did, this thread wouldn't exist. There is ingame evidence that can be used to substantiate the theory but it isn't explained - nothing regarding the end of ME 3 is, in point of fact. That's why we have all the speculation. The evidence the OP uses from the game itself is quite clear. I'll paraphrase...
Given that nothing is explained from the endings it necessitates guesswork and examples drawn from the game before the ending to explain them. Nor is anyone suggesting a canonical ending - if there was an explained canonical ending, we wouldn't be here speculating.
Modifié par Veneke, 21 mai 2012 - 02:56 .
Retour en haut
rely more on the original explanation of Synthesis as opposed to the one that made it in the game.
