685 réponses à ce sujet

[The Angry One]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Nazara was the catalyst to their schism, yes. The greater worries are:

(a) how easily it carved out so many of them to join its cause.

( how blasé the true Geth were about letting their reputation get dragged through the mud. Especially when they (a) monitor EVERY organic transmission and the extranet, and ( know that organics couldn't tell a Geth from a Heretic if they read its serial number.

What exactly did you want the Geth to do? They know organics do not trust AIs.
So what, they appear and state "Do not worry organics! We are on your side, those other Geth that work for Sovereign are not the same as us!"

Nobody would believe them. They are not blase, they are just afraid.

I'm not out to kill anyone. Synthesis surely doesn't.

Not the point of what I said, my point is if you're going to judge all Geth by the acts of a ffew misguided and controlled beings then I'll judge all organics by the actions of the indoctrinated and the Rachni and we can all be as judgemental and sanctimonious as the Catalyst!

By the way, Synthesis terminates all organic life forever and replaces it.

[Reorte]

Synthesis imposes a massively invasive change on absolutely everyone but that change wouldn't do much to stop the so-called problem the Catalyst claims it's trying to solve. Also, even in a universe with such things as mass effect fields its so wildly implausible that it almost makes me want to cry. If your in-game universe accepts such a thing as synthesis as possible then literally anything you can imagine should also be possible and that's a real story-killer. Hell, the Infinite Improbability Drive made more sense, was better explained, and its implications better examined.

[kookie28]

The Angry One wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Jenonax wrote...
Welcome to the forums, dude. Ieldra2 above has a long thread full of interesting discussions about Synthesis. Be warned, very polarizing though.

It's the anti-Synthesis fanatics who are polarizing. I've repeatedly said that I consider all three choices viable depending on the players' interpretation of things and personal ideology. Apparently that's not acceptable to the fundamentalists here. I've been bombarded with...historical epithets so incessantly that I've seriously considered leaving BSN altogether. Never thought BSN would turn out to be such a cesspool of intolerance.

HAHAHA!
You speak of intolerance while lauding an option that represents intolerance. That tells us diversity is bad, and the only way to end conflict is to make everybody the same.
Mind you I shouldn't be shocked. The irony of pro-synthesis people yelling and screaming that your opinions should be heard, while Synthesis itself is an act that ignores all opinion, all counter-thought, all dissent to impose it's new paradigm on all beings whether they like it or not is delicious.

Are we really taking this stupid video game ending so personally? 

"I THINK YOUR ENDING IS INTOLERANT THEREFORE YOU ARE INTOLERANT!  YOU INTOLERANT BASTARD."

[The Angry One]

Optimystic_X wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Given that the Reapers used technological gifts to stall and manipulate the galaxy so they coudl commit genocide is enough to be weary of their "gifts".

Good thing WE built the Crucible then.

With schematics that could only have come from the Reapers or their creators.

[Jenonax]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Jenonax wrote...
Welcome to the forums, dude. Ieldra2 above has a long thread full of interesting discussions about Synthesis. Be warned, very polarizing though.

It's the anti-Synthesis fanatics who are polarizing. I've repeatedly said that I consider all three choices viable depending on the players' interpretation of things and personal ideology. Apparently that's not acceptable to the fundamentalists here. I've been bombarded with...historical epithets so incessantly that I've seriously considered leaving BSN altogether. Never thought BSN would turn out to be such a cesspool of intolerance.

I meant the whole idea of synthesis being polarizing.  People are either cool with it or they hate it.  I really didn't mean to insult you personally.  Its just the way I speak sometimes.  In short sentances.  I type too quickly.

I have no problem with you or anyone else liking synthesis.  In truth I don't much care. I hate all the endings, I picked control because I was confused and went the whatever way looked nicer.  Thinking about it now I would have stood still and let the Reapers win rather than pick any of the poorly explained so called choices.  I await the EC to explain what the hell was going on and then pass judgement on what I thought was best.  I have far bigger problems with the story as a whole than three cheap non endings that as of yet don't make sense.  Another Deus Ex Machina beginning with 'C' springs to mind, but that's besides the point.

I'm sorry you feel like you need to leave the BSN, I really am as I was impressed with the way you truly stick to your guns about the choice you made.  You like synthesis, great.  But it is polarizing and that creates tension.  There are people that hate the idea of it, I hate the idea of it.  But the people we should be arguing with are Bioware and they aren't talking so we turn on each other. 

Is it right? No, of course not and if you feel like your under attack then I'm sorry.  No one should have to be.  We are being left in a void of confusion with people throwing out theories and ideas that people may or may not agree with and ultimately no one is going to be proven correct until Bioware release the EC.  

[The Angry One]

kookie28 wrote...

Are we really taking this stupid video game ending so personally? 

Because I loved Mass Effect, and I loved BioWare.
To find out that the makers of the series I love endorse such an intolerant, racist, oppressive outcome is shocking.

"I THINK YOUR ENDING IS INTOLERANT THEREFORE YOU ARE INTOLERANT!  YOU INTOLERANT BASTARD."

If you repeatedly claim that the ending is the best, make it the ending players work the most for, have the protagonist unable to counter the claims that this ending is great and will solve everything then yes. I have to wonder.

Modifié par The Angry One, 02 juin 2012 - 02:03 .

[glacier1701]

The issue with Synthesis is that its purpose is to end the conflict between organics and synthetics by making everyone the same. Thus there is now no need for conflict. The problem with this is how is this accomplished? If the ONLY thing changed is the 'dna' which is what we see (albeit only a little) with the crashed Normandy scene the thought patterns of everyone is still the same. Thus the actions of people will still be the same which means conflict which while it is NOT organic versus synthetics is still conflict. Heck the Reapers are still around right so why would people NOT kill them since they did after all just kill billions!!! If Synthesis does change people's thought patterns then congratulations you've just achieved the whole purpose of the Catalyst and the whole galaxy is now indoctrinated. In either case the whole purpose of the fight to defeat the Reapers has been thrown out and why did you even bother to fight back in the first place?

 In short synthesis looks good but even the smallest peek under the cover shows it to be a sham. It is the very antithesis of what Shepard has been fighting for for the whole ME series.

[kookie28]

The past month on BSN has made me realize that no one on BSN can just take a look at the other side of the fence.

I'm the only sane Destroy advocate. Shame.

[KDD-0063]

I always think that the ending's main problem is in its basis:

1) Defeating the reapers in one single battle is unrealistic
2) The sudden change of theme from 'us vs reapers' to AI singularity
3) There is absolutely no satisfaction whatsoever

and in my opinion, the first of these three problems is the most important. A more realistic Priority: Earth can be glorious, but the actual war vs the reapers should take months, years or even centuries.

The god child's logic, while glaring, can be explained away. Even if it can't, it's his logic after all.

Modifié par KDD-0063, 02 juin 2012 - 02:05 .

[Mims]

Synthesis is just infuriating in its lack of explanation. If this was dragon age, or magic had been built into the framework of the game, I'd buy it more. Hell, I could swallow it if they set up some sort of bizarre quasi-religious background like Battlestar.

But it just can't make sense to me. The way it is presented, to me, feels like a betrayal of the game.

I do enjoy reading what people write on it though. It seems like the people most satisfied with the endings tend to like synthesis.

[The Angry One]

kookie28 wrote...

The past month on BSN has made me realize that no one on BSN can just take a look at the other side of the fence.

I'm the only sane Destroy advocate. Shame.

Alright, sparky.
There is an all powerful being with a magic machine. It has just told you that conflict on Earth will never cease and everybody will end up killing each other, unless you use the magic machine to merge all races and ethnicities into one.

Would you consider it wise, or a racist?

I have looked at the other side of the fence. Do not scream because I didn't like what I saw.

[kookie28]

The Angry One wrote...

kookie28 wrote...

Are we really taking this stupid video game ending so personally? 

Because I loved Mass Effect, and I loved BioWare.
To find out that the makers of the series I love endorse such an intolerant, racist, oppressive outcome is shocking.

"I THINK YOUR ENDING IS INTOLERANT THEREFORE YOU ARE INTOLERANT!  YOU INTOLERANT BASTARD."

If you repeatedly claim that the ending is the best, make it the ending players work the most for, have the protagonist unable to counter the claims that this ending is great and will solve everything then yes. I have to wonder.

I haven't seen many people say there is a best ending.  Besides you know, "You failed the test."

Point still stands.  Making an argument about a video game ending (Which is bad no matter what you choose) so personal that you resort to comparing the other side to genocidal figures in history, then you definitely need to see a doctor.
 
Which is, not to mention, far more offensive than your ilk make Synthesis out to be.

Stop making every single person that picked Destroy look like a psychopath, please.

Modifié par kookie28, 02 juin 2012 - 02:11 .

[Ieldra]

@Angry One:
None of the choices take anyone's opinion into account. The only real argument you and your faction have is to yell "Don't believe the Catalyst" at every opportunity, because for those who do believe it, the question they'd have to ask is: "Would you rather that your descendants be killed by synthetics, live under the overlordship of an ascended human, or that you'll get synthetic symbionts that upgrade your capabilities in several ways"?

But of course, *that's* different. /sarcasm

@Jenoxas:
Sorry that you became the target for my rant. I might have misunderstood.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 02 juin 2012 - 02:11 .

[kookie28]

The Angry One wrote...

kookie28 wrote...

The past month on BSN has made me realize that no one on BSN can just take a look at the other side of the fence.

I'm the only sane Destroy advocate. Shame.

Alright, sparky.
There is an all powerful being with a magic machine. It has just told you that conflict on Earth will never cease and everybody will end up killing each other, unless you use the magic machine to merge all races and ethnicities into one.

Would you consider it wise, or a racist?

I have looked at the other side of the fence. Do not scream because I didn't like what I saw.

I don't have a problem with your opinion.  I have a problem with the way you express it.

[Vigilant111]

Ieldra2 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...
Nobody, not even Ieldra2, has yet provided a remotely plausible explanation of how Synthesis works and achieves its stated goal of forever ending war between synthetic and organic species (because of that division).

War was never the problem. Casual extinction because of disregard was. Synthesis removes the intrinsic power imbalance between organics and synthetics, or at least reduces it to a manageable level. So yes, I have provided a rationale as for why Synthesis is a solution and its technological base. What I haven't done, and don't think I need to do, is provided an explanation of the process.

U cannot dismiss war like that, as it results from the esculation of this power imbalance, that being said, power imbalance should be removed on a voluntary basis, like joint-agreement of destruction of nuclear weapons, demilitarisation, and peace shouldn't be the by-product of people sharing physical or mental attributes

Modifié par Vigilant111, 02 juin 2012 - 02:11 .

[The Angry One]

kookie28 wrote...

I haven't seen many people say there is a best ending.  Besides you know, "You failed the test."

BioWare has, in game by making it the ending you work for the most and in tweets and such.

Point still stands.  Making an argument about a video game ending (Which is bad no matter what you choose) so personal that you resort to comparing the other side to genocidal figures in history, then you definitely need to see a doctor.

I have compared no one to genocidal figures aside from the Catalyst itself, because it is a genocidal maniac.
I am simply stating that the Catalyst's philosophy is racist, and that philosophy is the driving force behind synthesis.

If you endorse synthesis, you may not be racist, but you are being naive about what it is and what it does, and are trying to headcanon your way out of it's truly despicable nature.

[Ieldra]

The Angry One wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Given that the Reapers used technological gifts to stall and manipulate the galaxy so they coudl commit genocide is enough to be weary of their "gifts".

Good thing WE built the Crucible then.

With schematics that could only have come from the Reapers or their creators.

I think that qualifies as a baseless assertion.

[kookie28]

The Angry One wrote...

kookie28 wrote...

I haven't seen many people say there is a best ending.  Besides you know, "You failed the test."

BioWare has, in game by making it the ending you work for the most and in tweets and such.

Point still stands.  Making an argument about a video game ending (Which is bad no matter what you choose) so personal that you resort to comparing the other side to genocidal figures in history, then you definitely need to see a doctor.

I have compared no one to genocidal figures aside from the Catalyst itself, because it is a genocidal maniac.
I am simply stating that the Catalyst's philosophy is racist, and that philosophy is the driving force behind synthesis.

If you endorse synthesis, you may not be racist, but you are being naive about what it is and what it does, and are trying to headcanon your way out of it's truly despicable nature.

Oh I've heard the racist argument before.  Making all the different races in the galaxy equal to each other.

Or I'll even go your route and say that they're all exactly the same.  (Although, humans were still human shaped so I'm going to assume that Turians were still Turian shaped, etc.)

I'm sure African Americans would be outraged by that thought.

Modifié par kookie28, 02 juin 2012 - 02:14 .

[The Angry One]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Angry One:
None of the choices take anyone's opinion into account. The only real argument you and your faction have is to yell "Don't believe the Catalyst" at every opportunity, because for those who do believe it, the question they'd have to ask is: "Would you rather that your descendants be killed by synthetics, live under the overlordship of an ascended human, or that you'll get synthetic symbionts that upgrade your capabilities in several ways"?

But of course, *that's* different. /sarcasm

I've never said any of the options are viable. Stop confusing me with a pro-Destroy because it convenes you.
I say destroy is the lesser of the 3 evils, but it is still bad.

Synthesis however not only affects the outcome of the war, but all beings of the galaxy, even those who wouldn't have been affected by the war. FOREVER. Without their knowledge or consent. That is what makes synthesis truly the worst and most vile choice.

Stop talking about upgrades as if that will convince me. Once again, I am a transhumanist. I fully believe in and endorse the benefits of cybernetic upgrades. I do not however believe that forced upgrades are justifiable by any meeans.
You simply don't have that right. Nobody does. Ever.

[PsyrenY]

The Angry One wrote...

What exactly did you want the Geth to do? They know organics do not trust AIs.
So what, they appear and state "Do not worry organics! We are on your side, those other Geth that work for Sovereign are not the same as us!"

Nobody would believe them. They are not blase, they are just afraid.

Actions speak louder than words; fly in and start shooting Heretics. The Heretics are their responsibility - any atrocity they commit against the organics only makes the Geth's dream of coexistence more impossible. Doing nothing about the problem is flatly unacceptable.

The Angry One wrote... 
Not the point of what I said, my point is if you're going to judge all Geth by the acts of a ffew misguided and controlled beings then I'll judge all organics by the actions of the indoctrinated and the Rachni and we can all be as judgemental and sanctimonious as the Catalyst!

Your analogy makes no sense. Organics comprise multiple races of countless variation; the Geth are one synthetic race. And the reason I can judge the Geth by the actions of the Heretics is because Legion tells me I can. "Neither result is an error."

The Heretics are not indoctrinated - you can't indoctrinate synthetics. They chose to follow the Reapers, chose to wage war on organics. It makes all the difference in the world.

The Angry One wrote... 
By the way, Synthesis terminates all organic life forever and replaces it.

Pure organic life, sure. Why is that so desirable? If hybrids have all the empathy and emotion of organics, plus a host of advantages normally reserved for synthetics, then what else do we really need?

[ToaOrka]

It doesn't make sense because synthetics don't have any DNA to merge with organics.

/thread

[The Angry One]

kookie28 wrote...

Oh I've heard the racist argument before.  Making all the different races in the galaxy equal to each other.

I'm sure African Americans would be outraged by that thought.

Not equal. They already are equal. The same.
Do you think they'd be happy with that? All mushed together into one race, everything homogenised? Are you serious?

[PsyrenY]

The Angry One wrote...

With schematics that could only have come from the Reapers or their creators.

I'm betting the latter is far more likely. If the Catalyst could have built his own Synthesizer, if he even knew that was an option in the millennia before you showed up, he would have.

[Shallyah]

Synthesis is the only ending in which humanity is completely wiped out, as is every other race. Even in Destroy with 1500 EMS there will be genuine humans surviving in colonies outside the Earth. With synthesis you give up on what you are, taking a gutless cowardly stance that you force unto everyone else in the galaxy because you are afraid that bad robots may try to kill you one day because an AI created a few billions of years ago told you so.

Whether it can work or not as a solution is pointless. Shepard makes the Galaxy lose the only thing that nobody could take from each person that was murdered, or died fighting - the only thing they could grasp for in their final moments - their identity.

The very concept of it is too repulsive to even consider that someone would be capable of doing that.

Modifié par Shallyah, 02 juin 2012 - 02:17 .

[Ieldra]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...
Nobody, not even Ieldra2, has yet provided a remotely plausible explanation of how Synthesis works and achieves its stated goal of forever ending war between synthetic and organic species (because of that division).

War was never the problem. Casual extinction because of disregard was. Synthesis removes the intrinsic power imbalance between organics and synthetics, or at least reduces it to a manageable level. So yes, I have provided a rationale as for why Synthesis is a solution and its technological base. What I haven't done, and don't think I need to do, is provided an explanation of the process.

U cannot dismiss war like that, as it results from the esculation of this power imbalance, that being said, power imbalance should be removed on a voluntary basis, like joint-agreement of destruction of nuclear weapons, demilitarisation, and peace shouldn't be the by-product of people sharing physical or mental attributes

In an ideal world, yes. The Catalyst claims that there are power imbalances - namely between organics and post-singularity synthetics - that can't be dealt with that way.