550 réponses à ce sujet

[JamieCardillo]

When completing the game for the first time (Yessir, I did play through multiple times. Sorry if that blew any minds.), I found the most interesting choice to be the synthesis option. Of course, like everyone else, I was very displeased to discover there was almost no difference between any of the endings, but the concept in itself still intruiges me.

I understand a lot of people are unhappy with the pure fantasy of somehow molding the DNA of organics with synthetics, and the only apparent change is green eyes, blahblahblah. I get that part, believe me, I am currently in the Mass Effect Forum. But what I'm not understanding is why some fans are borderline insulted by this choice. Sure, it's not very easy to comprehend, but it's my belief we aren't supposed to fully comprehend it. It's a the final evolution of life. Scientists today still have some difficulty explaining precisely how evolution works. I honestly don't have any other points to make to defend the choice because I really don't know what part of it is in need of any defending.

And just to be clear: as the title would indicate, I am just asking a question. What I have written above is meant only to be used as a basis for others to explain what I'm missing; it is not meant to be an attempt to spread any idealism or convert members of the Red or Blue Churches to the all-holy Green Church. I understand the degree to which a lot of you are pissed off at the endings, but I'm only asking that you respond with legitimate, nonbeligerent answers to my question.

*A reply to some comments:
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/12237187/3#12237988

Modifié par JamieCardillo, 25 mai 2012 - 09:07 .

[Wabajakka]

Everyone is now a robot.

There's your answer.

[Taboo]

Because violation of consent.

[aj2070]

Short version: You are forced to destroy two separate forms of life to artificially create a third. Others will elaborate.

Then there is that whole "final step of evolution" line...  Supposedly evolution has no "final step"; that's the point.


Edit: Ninja'd by of all people, Taboo. :innocent:

Modifié par aj2070, 25 mai 2012 - 07:50 .

[darkchief10]

because you're playing god/thread

[Taboo]

darkchief10 wrote...

because you're playing god/thread

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Synthesis = Slavery

thats why

[OblivionDawn]

Some people use words like "galactic rape" and other hyperbolic phrases to say that Synthesis is basically changing organic life without giving them a choice.

But if the change is clearly for the better of the entire galaxy (based on the ending), then I don't see what the problem is.

[Edolix]

You're violating every being in the galaxy and destroying its diversity at the same time.

Modifié par Edolix, 25 mai 2012 - 07:50 .

[Mr. Big Pimpin]

It makes absolutely no sense. Plus, the Reapers, the main enemy of the trilogy, just leave, and don't have to answer for anything they've done.

Modifié par Mr. Big Pimpin, 25 mai 2012 - 07:50 .

[JesseLee202]

Taboo-XX wrote...

darkchief10 wrote...

because you're playing god/thread

[TheCrazyHobo]

Because it makes no sense:

{SPOILER} Robots don't have DNA.

[Necrotron]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Because violation of consent.

This. 

[justafan]

OblivionDawn wrote...

Some people use words like "galactic rape" and other hyperbolic phrases to say that Synthesis is basically changing organic life without giving them a choice.

But if the change is clearly for the better of the entire galaxy (based on the ending), then I don't see what the problem is.

The path to hell is paved with the best intentions.

Modifié par justafan, 25 mai 2012 - 07:54 .

[OblivionDawn]

justafan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

Some people use words like "galactic rape" and other hyperbolic phrases to say that Synthesis is basically changing organic life without giving them a choice.

But if the change is clearly for the better of the entire galaxy (based on the ending), then I don't see what the problem is.

The path to hell is paved with the best intentions.

How exactly is Synthesis the "path to hell?"

[ohiocat110]

I get how a big red energy pule destroys the Reapers (and all machines apparently).
I get how a big blue energy pulse controls the Reapers.
I don't get how a big green energy pulse implants cybernetics in everybody...or for that matter turns the Geth partially organic(?).

[darkchief10]

justafan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

Some people use words like "galactic rape" and other hyperbolic phrases to say that Synthesis is basically changing organic life without giving them a choice.

But if the change is clearly for the better of the entire galaxy (based on the ending), then I don't see what the problem is.

The path to hell is paved with the best intentions.

ooh love that one mind if quote it in my sig?

[Omanisat]

Personally I hate it because it completely craps all over the established tone and feel of the series up till then. For 2.95 games my Shepard existed in a realistic, hard sci-fi universe. The rules were clear and well defined. They went out of their way to try to come up with reasonable science. Then all of a sudden *BLOOP* green space magic suddenly turns everyone in the galaxey into some third form of life. 

Modifié par Omanisat, 25 mai 2012 - 07:55 .

[Thornne]

Two reasons: How? and Why?

[EsterCloat]

There is no final evolution of life. That's not how evolution works. It's insulting that the Catalyst thinks I don't know this.

It is insulting that it says that I must choose a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

Also, the Catalyst and his Reaper horde are the most evil entities in the history of the galaxy. I make no deal with the devil.

Modifié par EsterCloat, 25 mai 2012 - 07:54 .

[HyperGlass]

You've basicly created the Borg. And that is one reason. The other: you're playing god and the choice is made without anyone else's knowlege or concent.

[justafan]

OblivionDawn wrote...

justafan wrote...

OblivionDawn wrote...

Some people use words like "galactic rape" and other hyperbolic phrases to say that Synthesis is basically changing organic life without giving them a choice.

But if the change is clearly for the better of the entire galaxy (based on the ending), then I don't see what the problem is.

The path to hell is paved with the best intentions.

How exactly is Synthesis the "path to hell?"

It may not be, but the point is we do not know the extent of Synthesis.  We are playing with fire and can't truly know if it is clearly for the better of the galaxy when it might very well destroy what makes us who we are.

[comrade gando]

The galaxy gets tuned into robots just like the reapers wanted. Reapers win shepard's dead. Does that sound like a good ending to you?

[Hiredguns23]

JamieCardillo wrote...

When completing the game for the first time (Yessir, I did play through multiple times. Sorry if that blew any minds.), I found the most interesting choice to be the synthesis option. Of course, like everyone else, I was very displeased to discover there was almost no difference between any of the endings, but the concept in itself still intruiges me.

I understand a lot of people are unhappy with the pure fantasy of somehow molding the DNA of organics with synthetics, and the only apparent change is green eyes, blahblahblah. I get that part, believe me, I am currently in the Mass Effect Forum. But what I'm not understanding is why some fans are borderline insulted by this choice. Sure, it's not very easy to comprehend, but it's my belief we aren't supposed to fully comprehend it. It's a the final evolution of life. Scientists today still have some difficulty explaining precisely how evolution works. I honestly don't have any other points to make to defend the choice because I really don't know what part of it is in need of any defending.

And just to be clear: as the title would indicate, I am just asking a question. What I have written above is meant only to be used as a basis for others to explain what I'm missing; it is not meant to be an attempt to spread any idealism or convert members of the Red or Blue Churches to the all-holy Green Church. I understand the degree to which a lot of you are pissed off at the endings, but I'm only asking that you respond with legitimate, nonbeligerent answers to my question.

Goto a writer, an English teacher, or a book enthuist tell them the entire plot of the story from ME1 all the way to the end of ME3 and the god child bit and ask "Does this plot make any since to you?"

[Sarc69]

Because I don't believe that there's the smallest legitimacy to the notion that evolution is teleological or that there is a final destination to it. Padok Wiks' arguments (such as they are - I like the character but the arguments are weak) to the contrary notwithstanding.

And if some being tells me that evolution does have an end-point, I at least want to be able to say "no it flipping well doesn't." If I'm then forced into making a decision I regard as nonsensical, at least I've had my say.

Modifié par Sarc69, 25 mai 2012 - 07:57 .