550 réponses à ce sujet

[frylock23]

Malditor wrote...

Your questions don't match up to what I said. A great dane and chihuahua are both dogs, 2nd line both horses, 3rd both human. To match up to what happens in the game at the end you'd have to say a cat and a dog, horse and a cow, or even more accurately a human and any animal because when it comes to the other alien races we aren't even close to them.

You make a lot of assumptions on what happens and will happen. I do as well, difference is I don't tell you that you are wrong with what you think.
I don't assume that all races will be able to interbreed because of this change. And the catalyst never says that or hints at it ether. And if they can't interbreed they aren't the same species.

The Joker/EDI as Adam and Eve glimpse at the end hints at it.

[Malditor]

That doesn't hint at them being adam and eve, just that they survived. Being that they were already in a relationship doesn't imply that suddenly they'll be able to start having offspring. But like I said, you assume one thing, I assume another. Basically we both are right/wrong until the EC comes out, if it explains it in further detail.

[o Ventus]

Malditor wrote...

That doesn't hint at them being adam and eve, just that they survived. Being that they were already in a relationship doesn't imply that suddenly they'll be able to start having offspring. But like I said, you assume one thing, I assume another. Basically we both are right/wrong until the EC comes out, if it explains it in further detail.

If you don't think that Joker and EDI aren't a blatant Adam & Eve reference, then I think its time to take my leave.

Also never mind that you can call off the relationship before it starts, but that has nothing to do with it at all.

[frylock23]

Shepard Wins wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I am religious, monotheist. And I support Synthesis.

As for "playing god" - legitimate criticism, but an overblown one too.

Cool story bro. Religion has nothing to do here.

You missed the part where 'haters call synthesis a dream ending for all the non-religious players.

First time I hear that. Many more call synthesis simply an abomination, or better yet, "just bloody stupid".

I love it when people who disagree are called "haters." It really elevates the discourse.  


I do think that the imagery can be construed as man re-creating/perfecting the universe in his image. This is making it a possible secular humanist ending, yes. Whether or not you see it that way is up to you.

The part I dislike the most about synthesis is the implication of changing everyone at the genetic level without their consent and what it takes to think that's OK to do. If synthesis were more like control where all it took was for Shepard to take the plunge by himself into synthesis, I wouldn't have nearly the problem with it that I do. Heck, I might even have a Shepard who'd choose it.

[jaktuk]

Uncle Jo wrote...

jaktuk wrote...


I think you are interpreting what the catalyst says about DNA a little too litterally. It is pretty obvious from his voice if you listen to it that "DNA" is symbolic speaking not to be interpreted litterally. What would synthetic "DNA" even be, it does not make any sense. You can not combine synthetic and organic DNA. For the resulting organism to be partial organic, it must retain its DNA, or it is not an organic being. The synthesis does not neccesarily have to mean anything more than each race having high tech cybernetic implants being implanted into them eg. Shepard Kai Leng and so on.

No. I don't believe a single word this damn liar is spitting out. I'm consequent, I'm not taking him litterally or not just when it's convenient to me. Please don't try to explain how synthesis works, 'cause no one can. All that it requires is (a lot of) space magic and the suicide of Shep.
But that's not the point. Even if I'm wrong, it doesn't change the fact that you're going to affect deeply the whole galaxy (in an unknown way just as you implied it) without anyone's consent.
I also don't buy the argument "it's for the greater good of everyone". I reject revolutions from above. The history is full from examples of people who thought like this and how it turned out when things went wrong.

How will Shepard be able to know if the majority would agree to Synthesis, he has no way to do an election in the middle of a giant war? He clearly has no option to do so, which mean he has to make the choice himself. It is a hard choice and I do not like Synthesis in itself I simply just think it is far better than control (doing what TIM wanted, and we do not even know if he will be able to control the reapers) and detroy (extermining the geth, who just helped you against the reapers). Sometimes you have to be hard enough to make a choice which you believe will be "for the greater good". Revolutions from below have failed because no one wanted to make the difficult choices. If sympathic people do not want to take power because they think "the end does not justify the means", then cold hearted dictators who do not have trouble with making such decision will take over.

[frylock23]

jaktuk wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

jaktuk wrote...


I think you are interpreting what the catalyst says about DNA a little too litterally. It is pretty obvious from his voice if you listen to it that "DNA" is symbolic speaking not to be interpreted litterally. What would synthetic "DNA" even be, it does not make any sense. You can not combine synthetic and organic DNA. For the resulting organism to be partial organic, it must retain its DNA, or it is not an organic being. The synthesis does not neccesarily have to mean anything more than each race having high tech cybernetic implants being implanted into them eg. Shepard Kai Leng and so on.

No. I don't believe a single word this damn liar is spitting out. I'm consequent, I'm not taking him litterally or not just when it's convenient to me. Please don't try to explain how synthesis works, 'cause no one can. All that it requires is (a lot of) space magic and the suicide of Shep.
But that's not the point. Even if I'm wrong, it doesn't change the fact that you're going to affect deeply the whole galaxy (in an unknown way just as you implied it) without anyone's consent.
I also don't buy the argument "it's for the greater good of everyone". I reject revolutions from above. The history is full from examples of people who thought like this and how it turned out when things went wrong.

How will Shepard be able to know if the majority would agree to Synthesis, he has no way to do an election in the middle of a giant war? He clearly has no option to do so, which mean he has to make the choice himself. It is a hard choice and I do not like Synthesis in itself I simply just think it is far better than control (doing what TIM wanted, and we do not even know if he will be able to control the reapers) and detroy (extermining the geth, who just helped you against the reapers). Sometimes you have to be hard enough to make a choice which you believe will be "for the greater good". Revolutions from below have failed because no one wanted to make the difficult choices. If sympathic people do not want to take power because they think "the end does not justify the means", then cold hearted dictators who do not have trouble with making such decision will take over.

"For the Greater Good" sounds all noble and wonderful until you get sacrificed to it. When that happens come back and revisit this conversation and see how you feel about it then.

[Rafficus III]

Simply because you stray from your main mission: destroying the Reapers. Yes, you found a solution, but one provided by a holographic child meant to be portrayed to toy with Shepard's emotions; so something is immediately amuk. Ultimately it undercuts whatever theme of evolution we are to be provided with in ME, as now we have simply all become likened where in an ever expanding universe we have reached an apex and then remained stagnant. Also, it robs players the mentality of peace through diversity; something that has been a recurring theme throughout the series as Shepard rallies different species to overcome an evil larger than political problems.

PS: Why couldn't I drip a bit of the blood dripping from my left abdomen into that beam of light to provide my DNA, while preserving my own life? 

Modifié par hornedfrog87, 27 mai 2012 - 07:10 .

[JamieCardillo]

Arian Dynas wrote...



Synthesis. What could POSSIBLY go wrong?

The only picture I don't disagree with here is Project Overlord, as it is my belief the advancements of synthesis could allow human interaction with synthetic consensus. Of course, Overlord was a disgusting abomination that was dangerously forceful, where as Synthesis appears to just occur naturally.

Everything else here is just indoctrination nonsense. Until it is adapted into the EC, I will take no IT assertions as fact. Not saying I'm against IT, but I'm insistent on waiting for further clarification until I put my blinders on.

[Grimwick]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I am religious, monotheist. And I support Synthesis.

As for "playing god" - legitimate criticism, but an overblown one too.

Cool story bro. Religion has nothing to do here.

You missed the part where 'haters call synthesis a dream ending for all the non-religious players.

Never seen someone say that to be quite honest.

I'm atheist and I find synthesis the worst out of the three... 

[Verit]

Why is it despised? Other than the moral issues involved, which other people already explained, it also makes no sense. It doesn't solve anything. And here's another thing I haven't seen mentioned a lot, but it really makes me see Synthesis as something that goes counter not only to Shepard's belief but even the Catalyst's very own objective:

Synthesis. You take two lifeforms and form a new one. This means that, like it or not, Organic life will cease to exist. What you create is an artificial life form. I don't see how anyone can debate that. It's not a natural evolution, it's the Crucible forcibly changing things. This means that the lifeform that's created as a result is, in fact, by definition a synthetic lifeform. So congratulations, you just turned everyone into synthetics. The Reapers are upgraded as well and will still be stronger than anything else in the galaxy. You don't even have control over them since the Catalyst survives. And all this is supposed to bring peace? What a joke.

Modifié par -Draikin-, 27 mai 2012 - 08:29 .

[Bill Casey]

Grimwick wrote...

What on earth is a 'new framework'? It doesn't make any sense...

I thought that was an odd way of putting it...
And then I noticed this line from the ending to ME2...


The Illusive Man: This is our chance, Shepard. They were building a Reaper. Their knowledge -- that framework -- could save us...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 27 mai 2012 - 09:32 .

[Leafs43]

The reapers want Shepard's DNA.


You know what reapers do with DNA? They build reapers with it.


Does that sound like a good idea?

[Whatshisnameagain]

I guess I'll throw in my opinion in here...

Why I didn't choose/like synthesis was due to the feeling that I felt like I finishing what the reapers had intended...by changing everyone (just the advanced civilizations? (whats left of them at least)) into a organic-synthetic hybrid being.

[BP20125810]

1. Synthesis is not making everyone the same, it's just upgrading them.

2. The only downside to synthesis that I can think of it that it takes away most of the human race's flaws. But what are we without our flaws? Our mistakes and negativities are what make us who we are and define our personality.

3. For like the fiftieth time, most of the negativity towards synthesis is due to Bioware's lack of explanation towards it. You don't really need that much extra info in the Control and Destroy endings, but telling the gamer your going to combine robots and people and then making everybody green is an absolute failure in getting the point across. Does anybody here truly know what synthesis does. Besides changing your skin, NOTHING else is explained. To have such a fascinating option and then to simply brush it aside with a two sentence exposition is a travesty in and of itself.

[Helios969]

Ravenard wrote...

I don't understand the meaning of the synthesis. Is illogical, cyborg( organic hull with implants) are the high level of life ?

It's supposed to be a synthesis of the best both have to offer.  Synthetics higher capacity for rational decision-making and faster intelligence.  Organics can self replicate and have emotions and empathy to guide moral decision-making.  At least that's my take.

[xbb1024]

Grimwick wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I am religious, monotheist. And I support Synthesis.

As for "playing god" - legitimate criticism, but an overblown one too.

Cool story bro. Religion has nothing to do here.

You missed the part where 'haters call synthesis a dream ending for all the non-religious players.

Never seen someone say that to be quite honest.

I'm atheist and I find synthesis the worst out of the three... 

I'm also an atheist and I can honestly say the religious angle to synthesis never occured to me. I live in a place where I don't need to discuss religion that often (its just not a part of my daily life).

[Helios969]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I am religious, monotheist. And I support Synthesis.

As for "playing god" - legitimate criticism, but an overblown one too.

Cool story bro. Religion has nothing to do here.

You missed the part where 'haters call synthesis a dream ending for all the non-religious players.

How's that?  If anything wouldn't the whole Joker/EDI Adam/Eve be more for religious people.  I am agnostic and find synthesis (without choice) abhorrent.

[christrek1982]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Because violation of consent.

this

it's like having an op somone comes along knocks you out the removes or adds something to you without even asking if it is ok.  umm I can't se even the most renagade shep being ok with that.

Modifié par christrek1982, 28 mai 2012 - 11:29 .

[xbb1024]

The 3 endings is essentially who you choose to agree with: Anderson, Illusive Man or Catalyst. Given the very brief and weak argument the catalyst makes, I'm surprised synthesis has any number of supporters.

[Ieldra]

Helios969 wrote...

Ravenard wrote...

I don't understand the meaning of the synthesis. Is illogical, cyborg( organic hull with implants) are the high level of life ?

It's supposed to be a synthesis of the best both have to offer.  Synthetics higher capacity for rational decision-making and faster intelligence.  Organics can self replicate and have emotions and empathy to guide moral decision-making.  At least that's my take.

Indeed. The exact face of what Synthesis is open to interpretation, but a combination of the best both have to offer, whatever you think that is, is exactly what it's supposed to be.

It's just that Bioware screwed the exposition up with the nonsensical phrasing.

@xbb1024:
It doesn't matter who supports what. Ideas are good or bad independently from those who support them.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 28 mai 2012 - 11:57 .

[Stump01]

xbb1024 wrote...

The 3 endings is essentially who you choose to agree with: Anderson, Illusive Man or Catalyst. Given the very brief and weak argument the catalyst makes, I'm surprised synthesis has any number of supporters.

I think the supporters of it make quite a few assumptions about what synthesis is, not that you can do anything else considering how little information is given on it.  Unfortunately, you have to do that with all of the endings, but synthesis is a bit extreme in that regard (just introduced the concept and explained it in what, 2-3 sentences).

[T-Raks]

1. Because I wouldn't want anybody making such a huge decision against the will of every individual and I definitely don't want to make a life altering decision for anyone else without their consent. I'm no god and I don't wanna play god.
2. Because I don't believe that the solution to organic problems (war or chaos as the catalyst calls it) is creating a super or master race.
3. Because I don't believe that less individuality and more machine likeness is something to aspire as an organic.

I believe that communication and building a consensus is what solves problems.

I believe that fighting for free will, freedom, a peaceful, respectful togetherness overcoming differences is worth fighting for. I believe that Shepard stands for these goals, that Shepard doesn't want to make decisions for others, that he is out there to solve the Reaper problem to give the galactic community an opportunity to learn from its mistakes, to give hope for a better future and not to shape evolution. He is not a megalomaniac scientist.

If it takes deactivating every machine for that to happen, I believe that Shepard has no problem doing it, has no problem to explain what happened so the galactic community can analyze what got them to this point and what has to be done differently to not get into this organics against synthetics war situation again.

Modifié par T-Raks, 28 mai 2012 - 12:39 .

[vixvicco]

It's disgusting. It's also what the Star Brat wanted. Anything that makes the Reaper's happy is most likely evil.

[CuseGirl]

I still don't understand how Synthesis makes the Reapers stop fighting. I mean, did Starchild send a message down to Harbinger like "ok, Shepard jumped in the beam, wrap it up!" Or did the Reapers get instant confirmation that all organic life was now "synthesized"? It seems like it's just arbitrarily decided by the writers that changing organics and synthetics into something the Reapers wanted makes them stop fighting.

[dublin omega 223]

Takes away free will, simple as that.