Ieldra2 wrote...
@Taboo:
People are not all the same. I don't know what's gotten into you people that you deny what's it front of your eyes just because you don't the idea of Synthesis for totally unrelated reasons. If you're going to argue against it, at least stop these asspulls.
Ieldra2 wrote...
That's not putting you in their shoes. That's putting them in yours.
Taboo-XX wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
@Taboo:
People are not all the same. I don't know what's gotten into you people that you deny what's it front of your eyes just because you don't the idea of Synthesis for totally unrelated reasons. If you're going to argue against it, at least stop these asspulls.
They are not the same, but they ARE one big organism.
I don't understand it either.
It's not an asspull. It's a fact.
MegaSovereign wrote...
Synthesis only affects life. Synthetic tech (like the Normandy) aren't all green and ****.
Ieldra2 wrote...
That's not putting you in their shoes. That's putting them in yours.
Welsh Inferno wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
That's not putting you in their shoes. That's putting them in yours.
The reaction would be the same. Stupid reaction at that.
Taboo-XX wrote...
MegaSovereign wrote...
Synthesis only affects life. Synthetic tech (like the Normandy) aren't all green and ****.
That's what I meant.
LIFE is all one big organism, but they retain their indivduality.
Rocks are still rocks.
SOMEONE at the Bioware Offices took a bit from a bong and thought this was cool.
Taboo-XX wrote...
But a forced harmony. Forced being the key word here.
Taboo-XX wrote...
That's what I meant.
LIFE is all one big organism, but they retain their indivduality.
Rocks are still rocks.
SOMEONE at the Bioware Offices took a bit from a bong and thought this was cool.
Nerevar-as wrote...
Taboo-XX wrote...
MegaSovereign wrote...
Synthesis only affects life. Synthetic tech (like the Normandy) aren't all green and ****.
That's what I meant.
LIFE is all one big organism, but they retain their indivduality.
Rocks are still rocks.
SOMEONE at the Bioware Offices took a bit from a bong and thought this was cool.
Synthesis is a literal miracle. In an Space Opera that had tried to justify most of its SF aspects. Of course someone took a bit from a bong.
mauro2222 wrote...
SpectreVeldt wrote...
Besides 'brainwashing' being a poor word choice
Well, if you change someone's favourite colour by force, it's considered brainwash. The magnitude or extent doesn't matter.
AngryFrozenWater wrote...
Enthalpy wrote...
Yes, we see krogans having krogan children with krogans of the opposite sex. Doesn't that mean that their "racial identies" are preserved? And why must we assume that they are kept happy by indocrination? Are they not allowed to be happy because Tuchanka is being rebuilt, or Rannoch reclaimed, or the Citadel repopulated without imminent threat?
Yes, I consider them to have a right to exist. I consider myself as having no right to destroy them if the alternative (getting rid of their directive to harvest the denizens of the current cycle) means that both parties may survive. I consider them as having roughly the same rights as any enemy soldier, and I wish to avoid the slaughter thereof if and only if such an option is available to me.
It doesn't matter whether Control/Destroy offers "heaven" or "hell". The problem is that Shepard forces Control/Destory, a solution that is offered by the Catalyst and therefore are manifestations of aspects of its will, and by doing that Shepard betrays its synthetic allies (as well as future generations according to singularity theories, which I think have merit). Destruction of the reapers seems to be the logical choice for Shepard and his allies, but to accomplish that goal a Control/Destroy Shepard would sacrifice a portion of them so others might survive. Shepard sees synthetics as acceptable sacrifices. In Synthesis, Shepard chooses for his allies to shoulder the outcome, whatever it may be, equally. I would like to draw analogy with the short story "The Space Traders" by Bell I mentioned earlier.
My main Shepard chose Synthesis without believing in utopia. The EC only made me more at peace with the choice.
"Are they not allowed to be happy because Tuchanka is being rebuilt, or Rannoch reclaimed, or the Citadel repopulated without imminent threat?"
That happiness must be fake. Especially because we see an animation where they realize their radical racial identity change and seem to have no problem with that at all. No shock, no fear, no panic. Just happy faces. It puzzles me that you do not view that as suspect.
"I consider them as having roughly the same rights as any enemy soldier, and I wish to avoid the slaughter thereof if and only if such an option is available to me."
I would consider giving them rights as an enemy soldier when they could be trusted, but unfortunately they cannot. They have a long history of betrayal ... and last but not least lies (by using the hypothetical threat as a rationalization for their cyclical maniacal genocidal "ascension through destruction" reproduction method to keep them on top of the food chain).
"The problem is that Shepard forces Control/Destory..."
No. The destroy option is not forced. It is mandated by the allies. It is central to all the pacts Shepard made. Anything else would be betrayal. I have often written that I do not like that the price of destruction is the genocide of the geth and the death of EDI. That's not acceptable to my Shepard by default. However, the alternatives are worse, because "submission is not preferable to extinction". Ask Saren and EDI about that. You'll get interesting answers.
"My main Shepard chose Synthesis without believing in utopia."
That's odd, because it is. And its price are the rights of the races that are sold to the brat and its boys. All that, for a hypothetical problem that only seems to exist in their minds.
Actually, I don't. I've said again and again that I don't see the post-Synthesis galaxy as an utopia where everyone is sunshine-and-rainbows happy. There are lots of problems to overcome, both practical and emotional, and of course some people will be unhappy. People will have some weird stuff to adapt to. But I think most will just be glad to be alive.mauro2222 wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
That's not putting you in their shoes. That's putting them in yours.
You're doing the same, you're assuming they see everything as positive.
Enthalpy wrote...
AngryFrozenWater wrote...
Enthalpy wrote...
Yes, we see krogans having krogan children with krogans of the opposite sex. Doesn't that mean that their "racial identies" are preserved? And why must we assume that they are kept happy by indocrination? Are they not allowed to be happy because Tuchanka is being rebuilt, or Rannoch reclaimed, or the Citadel repopulated without imminent threat?
Yes, I consider them to have a right to exist. I consider myself as having no right to destroy them if the alternative (getting rid of their directive to harvest the denizens of the current cycle) means that both parties may survive. I consider them as having roughly the same rights as any enemy soldier, and I wish to avoid the slaughter thereof if and only if such an option is available to me.
It doesn't matter whether Control/Destroy offers "heaven" or "hell". The problem is that Shepard forces Control/Destory, a solution that is offered by the Catalyst and therefore are manifestations of aspects of its will, and by doing that Shepard betrays its synthetic allies (as well as future generations according to singularity theories, which I think have merit). Destruction of the reapers seems to be the logical choice for Shepard and his allies, but to accomplish that goal a Control/Destroy Shepard would sacrifice a portion of them so others might survive. Shepard sees synthetics as acceptable sacrifices. In Synthesis, Shepard chooses for his allies to shoulder the outcome, whatever it may be, equally. I would like to draw analogy with the short story "The Space Traders" by Bell I mentioned earlier.
My main Shepard chose Synthesis without believing in utopia. The EC only made me more at peace with the choice.
"Are they not allowed to be happy because Tuchanka is being rebuilt, or Rannoch reclaimed, or the Citadel repopulated without imminent threat?"
That happiness must be fake. Especially because we see an animation where they realize their radical racial identity change and seem to have no problem with that at all. No shock, no fear, no panic. Just happy faces. It puzzles me that you do not view that as suspect.
"I consider them as having roughly the same rights as any enemy soldier, and I wish to avoid the slaughter thereof if and only if such an option is available to me."
I would consider giving them rights as an enemy soldier when they could be trusted, but unfortunately they cannot. They have a long history of betrayal ... and last but not least lies (by using the hypothetical threat as a rationalization for their cyclical maniacal genocidal "ascension through destruction" reproduction method to keep them on top of the food chain).
"The problem is that Shepard forces Control/Destory..."
No. The destroy option is not forced. It is mandated by the allies. It is central to all the pacts Shepard made. Anything else would be betrayal. I have often written that I do not like that the price of destruction is the genocide of the geth and the death of EDI. That's not acceptable to my Shepard by default. However, the alternatives are worse, because "submission is not preferable to extinction". Ask Saren and EDI about that. You'll get interesting answers.
"My main Shepard chose Synthesis without believing in utopia."
That's odd, because it is. And its price are the rights of the races that are sold to the brat and its boys. All that, for a hypothetical problem that only seems to exist in their minds.
We see the same happy faces in other endings. It surprises me that someone would not see this as an instance of utmost joy at the prospect of peace and prosperity overwhelming bewilderment or even fear at the prospect of green eyes. I think it boils down to a matter of prospective.
I believe they commit those atrocities to keep the singularity at bay. Yet, we blame them because they were successful and we have not experienced the trauma of such an event for ourselves. I believe their solution was cruel but effective, while you appear to believe that no such problem exists in the first place. From my perspective: now that we have identified a second possible solution, why not take it?
My interpretation of Shepard's mandate is to preserve life, not to destroy Reapers at any given cost.
Regardless of whether it is or not, at the time my Synthesis Shepard made the choice, the EC was not out and Shepard had no way of knowing the outcome. Shepard simply believed that the problem the Reapers were created to solve was a real one. It is, I think, a matter of faith.
You did notice that all endings have the same slides, right? With only slight variations like Reapers in the background or green patterns on the skin? Judged by that, all endings are Disney endings.Taboo-XX wrote...
But it's okay. because everyone is happy. In the real world I mean. This IS the Disney ending that people were so antagonistic against.
Modifié par Ieldra2, 30 juin 2012 - 11:16 .
Ieldra2 wrote...
@Taboo:
Nowhere is it said or implied that it will all be one organism.
Ieldra2 wrote...
Actually, I don't. I've said again and again that I don't see the post-Synthesis galaxy as an utopia where everyone is sunshine-and-rainbows happy. There are lots of problems to overcome, both practical and emotional, and of course some people will be unhappy. People will have some weird stuff to adapt to. But I think most will just be glad to be alive.
Modifié par mauro2222, 30 juin 2012 - 11:21 .
Ieldra2 wrote...
You did notice that all endings have the same slides, right? With only slight variations like Reapers in the background or green patterns on the skin? Judged by that, all endings are Disney endings.Taboo-XX wrote...
But it's okay. because everyone is happy. In the real world I mean. This IS the Disney ending that people were so antagonistic against.
It's just you who insist that this ending specifically shouldn't be. Because, you know, what you think is morally wrong absolutely can't have good results. It can't be what must not be, that's the prevailing attitude from the anti-Synthesis front.
I thought you meant there won't be individuals any more. Forced conjoining. That won't happen. Geth can separate from the consensus with no problem, they just usually don't because it lessens their intelligence. There is no reason to believe that people are forced to be linked up all the time - unlike the geth in the consensus.Taboo-XX wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
@Taboo:
Nowhere is it said or implied that it will all be one organism.
Everyone else has arrived at this conclusion. We are like the Geth now. Linked, but seperate individuals. This is essentially what the Reaper Code does to the Geth.
Heeden up there says the same thing.
But isn't this a GOOD thing from your perspective? We all understand one another, truly and completely.
Ieldra2 wrote...
You did notice that all endings have the same slides, right? With only slight variations like Reapers in the background or green patterns on the skin? Judged by that, all endings are Disney endings.Taboo-XX wrote...
But it's okay. because everyone is happy. In the real world I mean. This IS the Disney ending that people were so antagonistic against.
It's just you who insist that this ending specifically shouldn't be. Because, you know, what you think is morally wrong absolutely can't have good results. There can't be what must not be, that's the prevailing attitude from the anti-Synthesis front.
And you cannot say that this will happen. Your black scenario is just your projection. I say there will be some problems, of which kind I have no idea since too many details are unknown. I see the ending scenes as indicative of a *generally* bright future, not a *universally* bright future - just as the others, btw.. But apparently people here don't understand that distinction. Things must either be 100% happy or 100% dark.mauro2222 wrote...
Then you can't say that people will not suicide, that entire civilizations may enter a crisis state and nuke each other because some random god decided to change them for different reasons.Ieldra2 wrote...
Actually, I don't. I've said again and again that I don't see the post-Synthesis galaxy as an utopia where everyone is sunshine-and-rainbows happy. There are lots of problems to overcome, both practical and emotional, and of course some people will be unhappy. People will have some weird stuff to adapt to. But I think most will just be glad to be alive.
Ieldra2 wrote...
And you cannot say that this will happen. Your black scenario is just your projection. I say there will be some problems, of which kind I have no idea since too many details are unknown. I see the ending scenes as indicative of a *generally* bright future, not a *universally* bright future - just as the others, btw.. But apparently people here don't understand that distinction. Things must either be 100% happy or 100% dark.
Modifié par mauro2222, 30 juin 2012 - 11:30 .
Retour en haut