550 réponses à ce sujet

[SAmaster01]

For me it just came completely out of left field, as Mass Effect had nothing to do with nothing about cyborgism. I guess it makes sense for a solution between a synthetic-organic conflict, but again, that was not the major point of Mass Effect. Not to mention, there is no logical way for it to work, how does it make organic synthetic? Vice-versa? How does it differentiate between sentient synthetic life and toasters? Is all matter in the universe now organic-synthetic? Nothing to do with nothing, and confusing as hell.

[o Ventus]

kookie28 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

kookie28 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

kookie28 wrote...

Hey you remember that time we saw all DNA in the galaxy get raped?

lol me neither.

So you're saying that the DNA of every single living creature in the galaxy wasn't instantaneously shifted into a singular form?

Huh.

I saw no penetration.  That would be a sweet porno though.

I hope, for your sake, that you're aware that there is more than 1 definition for "rape". Knowing this, Synthesis does a pretty good job at "raping" everyone's DNA.

No I wasn't aware.  Please tell me more about your mastery of the English language and your previously demonstrated philosophical prowess.

Dictionary.com wrote...

4. an act of plunder; violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation. Ex. The rape of the countryside

[WizenSlinky0]

kookie28 wrote...

No I wasn't aware.  Please tell me more about your mastery of the English language and your previously demonstrated philosophical prowess.

I'm detecting the subtle flavor of sarcasm!

[Jere85]

I see people claiming things about joker and edi being able to have a relationship now...

Does synthesis build a womb inside of her? grant her the right "parts" for joker to do his thing?
No.

I know im being blunt and pretty far from the truth here, but all i see is our refridgerators coming to life. Synthesis is not some salvation. Its silly, especially because its not explained how synthesis will work, will they construct their new babies, Will reapers be peaceful? or just rule the one race that now exist? We are one race on this earth, that doesnt mean we don't fight and have wars.

The thing is, nothings explained. So imo synthesis is just a bad cop-out.

[TheClonesLegacy]

 *sigh*
Read my Thread....
You'll know why I hate the Blasted thing
http://social.biowar.../index/12155225

[MzAdventure]

EsterCloat wrote...

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.

This.

[JamieCardillo]

CuseGirl wrote...

TheBull wrote...

You know i really get tired of people always asking the same stupid question: "Why do you hate Synthesis so much"???

You really want to know why we hate Synthesis, because (and here it is where it gets funny)
SAREN from ME 1 tried to accomplish the EXACT same thing and you know what most players did to him......persuaded him into SUICIDE and now 5 years later its supposed to be the best ending.......Why did we stop him in the first place??? It would have saved us time, money and heartache.

It's not a stupid question. Obviously the OP has an opinion on synthesis and maybe his opinion clouded him from seeing the reasons why others disagreed (a common problem on BSN).

I don't think my opinion has in any way been "clouded," rather I just think synthesis was not explained as well as it should have been, causing it to be a misunderstood option.

[JamieCardillo]

Darksaberexile wrote...

Why synthesis doesn't work, imo:
1. The Reapers still exist, and can decide to go back to reaping at any time.

2. What's to stop the people altered by synthesis from making synthetics? Jumping into a magic space beam doesn't prevent building synthetics, which is the reason the Catalyst gives us for starting the cycle in the first place.

I don't believe that was really the purpose of the synthesis option....
I'm pretty sure the reason for creating a new framework for synthetics and organics to form a better understanding of each other (like gaining access to the Geth Consensus maybe?), preventing future conflicts in that way rather than completely wiping the other out.

[Zix13]

1. Unethical on many levels
2. You forgot about the reaper conflict and decided to turn everyone into cyborgs instead.
3. No knowledge of what it actually does
4. You trigger it by jumping into a green deathray
5. Might just mean speeding up harvesting: "Pinnacle of Evolution" sound familiar?
6. Why the hell does your reaper killing machine have the functionality to turn everyone into cyborgs?
7. Wasn't choice and chosing one's own path quite an important theme in the series?

Modifié par Zix13, 25 mai 2012 - 11:54 .

[Iakus]

...7.  Flies in the face of the whole "Variation is good" theme of the entire trilogy.

Modifié par iakus, 25 mai 2012 - 11:56 .

[Navasha]

Honestly, just allowing the reapers to win this cycle is a preferable outcome than wiping out all life in the galaxy and allowing the reaper general to re-write everyone after whatever fashion it chooses.

If they wanted people to choose the "green" ending then they should have come up with a way for synthetics and organics to cohabitat peacefully without needing to change everyone against their will.

People were fighting against the reapers to preserve their way of life, their culture, their identities. Synthesis quite simply washes all of that away by fundamentally altering everyone. There are no more Asari/Krogan/Humans/Vorcha/etc.... All that they were has been destroyed and re-written by an alien AI program.

Nope... If simply surrendering to the reapers or choosing synthesis... I would have let the reapers finish their cycle. At least then, the next cycle might have a chance to do better.

[JamieCardillo]

matthewmi wrote...

Oh look this thread again....but as others have said synthesis is very unethical. I feel really bad for primitive societies who now have glowing eyes and synthetic parts or religious groups that have had their bodies altered in ways that are against their religion etc.....

You make a good point.

Oh wait, now I see you're on that cyborg mindset. Sorry, I thought you understood the one basic concept of synthesis that was made obvious. Unless I didn't have a high enough EMS to see the part where the Starchild lined up each inhabitant of the galaxy and gave them each their own custom prosthetic body part.

I guess if we're doing this space magic thing, we're going all out with it. 

[BP20125810]

The short answer - People don't really understand it, so they fear it. I wish Bioware did a better job of explaining it to us during the end game.

Once you really look at it, its actually my favorite and one of the better choices in my opinion.

[JamieCardillo]

BP20125810 wrote...

The short answer - People don't really understand it, so they fear it. I wish Bioware did a better job of explaining it to us during the end game.

Once you really look at it, its actually my favorite and one of the better choices in my opinion.

At least I'm not the only one that isn't afraid to give it a chance. I'm hopeful that once the EC comes out, a better explanation of what it actually is will turn some people's opinions.

[Icinix]

BP20125810 wrote...

The short answer - People don't really understand it, so they fear it. I wish Bioware did a better job of explaining it to us during the end game.

Once you really look at it, its actually my favorite and one of the better choices in my opinion.

No. Its not about a lack of understanding or about fear.

I just wouldn't wish my body to be altered without my consent.

[legion999]

BP20125810 wrote...

The short answer - People don't really understand it, so they fear it. I wish Bioware did a better job of explaining it to us during the end game.

Once you really look at it, its actually my favorite and one of the better choices in my opinion.

And back to square one with the "you don't get it!" arguement.

[o Ventus]

BP20125810 wrote...

Once you really look at it, its actually my favorite and one of the better choices in my opinion.

This one part of your post leaves me scratching my head.

[Bill Casey]

Synthesis gets worse the more you think about it...
Especially within the context of the Mass Effect narrative...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 26 mai 2012 - 12:09 .

[Zix13]

JamieCardillo wrote...

matthewmi wrote...

Oh look this thread again....but as others have said synthesis is very unethical. I feel really bad for primitive societies who now have glowing eyes and synthetic parts or religious groups that have had their bodies altered in ways that are against their religion etc.....

You make a good point.

Oh wait, now I see you're on that cyborg mindset. Sorry, I thought you understood the one basic concept of synthesis that was made obvious. Unless I didn't have a high enough EMS to see the part where the Starchild lined up each inhabitant of the galaxy and gave them each their own custom prosthetic body part.

I guess if we're doing this space magic thing, we're going all out with it. 

Cyborg is used because you're creating a part-man part-machine. What else would you call it?

[PsyrenY]

If the only or main reason you don't like it is because of the non-consensual alteration issue, then I perfectly understand that. That's going to come down to each Shepard's individual ethics and preferences.

It's all the other arguments against it that cause my eyes to roll out of my head.

[o Ventus]

Bill Casey wrote...

Synthesis gets worse the more you think about it...
Especially within the context of the Mass Effect story...

You could cut out "Mass Effect" and replace it with literally any other science fiction series, and it would make just as much sense. Not because of thematic conflicts, but because it takes the "Science" out of "Science Fiction".

Modifié par o Ventus, 26 mai 2012 - 12:10 .

[Stump01]

Apocaleepse360 wrote...

Orange Tee wrote...

Everyone is now a robot.

There's your answer.

I don't think people fully understand synthesis. In fact, I don't think they even slightly understand it.

Synthesizing does not make organics become robots. It's not removing anything. It's simply adding on to what they've got. The same thing goes for synthetics. So let's sum this up into basics, shall we? (Please bare with me here, as the theory behind synthesis, or my theory on what Bioware intended for synthesis should I say, is quite difficult to explain.)

With organics, their minds will likely become augmented. In fact, their minds is the most likely place where most of the changes will take place. Thinking will be faster, memories will be improved as will reflexes... That's just naming a few.

As for synthetics, most of the organic traits they'll get will be through feelings. They'll be able to feel emotions that they were otherwise incapable of feeling. Including love, so that basically means that Joker and EDI would be able to have a proper relationship, hence the ending scene with the two if you picked synthesis.

Now, I'm not saying that synthesis would be the ultimate peacemaker like Star Child claims it to be, because for as long as there are sentient beings, there will always be war. Ultimately this will likely stop wars between organics and synthetics, but what's stopping the synthetics from joining wars that organics have with each other?

Also, no this should not stop reproduction. Each being is made in their own little way. The asari use the genetic material they gather from "melding", humans, krogan, quarians, turians - well, we should all know here unless we haven't been told about the birds and the bees. Finally you have the salarians, who lay eggs. I'd imagine geth would still be created in their usual way, especially if you consider the fact that they are software, not hardware. Yes, they are part organic after synthesis, but that doesn't mean that they lose their synthetic traits, as I've said before.

Sorry, I know you said it was your theory on what BW intended, but absolutely none of this was said in the game.

[legion999]

Optimystic_X wrote...

If the only or main reason you don't like it is because of the non-consensual alteration issue, then I perfectly understand that. That's going to come down to each Shepard's individual ethics and preferences.

It's all the other arguments against it that cause my eyes to roll out of my head.

What that it makes no sense? Resource wise is impossible? Contradicts previous themes? Morally wrong aside from the non-consensual alteration? Will ruin eco-systems? Which?

[PsyrenY]

Stump01 wrote...

Sorry, I know you said it was your theory on what BW intended, but absolutely none of this was said in the game.

Let's hope EC sheds some light on it, then.

For myself, I sincerely doubt Bioware intended Synthesis to be negative. They certainly had the ability to portray it that way, if they wanted to.