313 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

I still think the vagueness of synthesis was very, very intentional, and not the product of poor writing decisions.

[The Angry One]

xsdob wrote...

People have attributed fannon and unconfirmable negatives to synthesis, a consequence of the endings vague nature and disgruntled speculation. As it stands an actual discussion of synthesis is impossible because the majority here have embraced their negativly spun fannon as fact and that all who oppose that fact are seen as being stupid beyond reason, hence the entire "It's only an option if you don't think" responses from this fanbase to fellow fans.

I'd say let's wait till the extended cut comes out and actually explains the consequences of what happened and explains in greater detail the endings, that way an actual discussion on the merits can be had.

No. Look, the eco-system collapses, the mass panics and the darker implications like mass control and brainwashing may be conjecture and extrapolation, but the imposition of synthesis on the trillions of beings in the galaxy without their knowledge or consent is absolute fact, and THAT is one of the biggest problems.

[Bill Casey]

Larger survey...
What people chose...



What they think the best choice is...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 09 juin 2012 - 06:46 .

[dreamgazer]

The Angry One wrote...

Say Taboo is it just me or does that chicken avatar look like the synthesis wave is approaching in the background?

That's why the chicken looks so pissed.  It's about to be turned into a robot chicken.

[Taboo]

dreamgazer wrote...

I still think the vagueness of synthesis was very, very intentional, and not the product of poor writing decisions.

Too bad the political implications are there regardless.

[GarethJShep]

Destroy is best

[Joe Del Toro]

dreamgazer wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Say Taboo is it just me or does that chicken avatar look like the synthesis wave is approaching in the background?

That's why the chicken looks so pissed.  It's about to be turned into a robot chicken.

ba-dum-tss!

Win.

[dreamgazer]

Taboo-XX wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I still think the vagueness of synthesis was very, very intentional, and not the product of poor writing decisions.

Too bad the political implications are there regardless.

True, but the vagueness allows for benign thought about possibility, preservation, and advancement.  

That's compelling---not just for Shepard, but for the players. 

[Ageless Face]

Joe Del Toro wrote...


You put it forward like it was something you could believe. It's text, we can't gain deeper meaning than what is written.

Ah, come on, I'm having a laugh, don't take it personal, like.

I tried to make an argument. When you make one, it's always sound as you believe it.

And not everybody like to be laughed at.

[Taboo]

Too bad Robot Chicken is funny.

Synthesis is not even dark humor. It's just disgusting.

[Vigilant111]

HagarIshay wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

@HagarIshay: being different is not a problem, the problem is that people won't accept these differences due to the most stupid, petty reasons

I know that. But if synthesis wil actually make synthetics and organics have the same DNA, it will be harder for people to find something to pick about. It will still save people.



God, I didn't even PICK synthesis! I just tried to answer the OP what are the benefits of synthesis! What is with everyone jumping on me?!! 

Well, if those organics are THAT stupid and rely on synthesis as a means to stop racism, then by all means destroy them for being such ignorant and intolerant a-holes

I think it is pretty clear that no good could come from synthesis, organics and synthetics are too different

[estebanus]

HagarIshay wrote...



Think about racism, for example. How many lives would have been spared if there was no specific color to anyone?

Not many, since europeans have waged the most wars against themselves. How would civil wars then erupt, if you say having the same DNA prevents wars?

Looking back in history, wars have almost always been between humans of the same ethnicity/race. Also today, the main casualties of war are in Africa, where it is also people of the same ethinicity/race fighting each other. DNA has nothing to do with war. Differing opinions are.

Also, europeans have always waged wars against each other, haven't they? for example, the french revolution? Or the 100 years war between England and France? Or maybe the 30 years war between the catholics and protestants? Did these wars have anything to do about different DNA? No, because they had the same DNA!

[teh DRUMPf!!]

[quote]The Angry One wrote...

That's not the same.[/quote]

It's exactly the same. I'm imposing something on you that I think will benefit you without your consent.[/quote]

With certain death as an alternative?


[quote][quote]You'll excuse me if I don't buy the "new DNA" thing either. Kinda hard to do when no synthetics have DNA. I see this wording as figurative, metaphorical. Not literal.

So, no. This is not "hurr third arm" kind of change.[/quote]

I see, so you selectively choose what the Catalyst says as true or not. This isn't dishonest at all.[/quote]

Criminy cripes, it's an interpretation. I'm not ignoring anything, just making sense of it. In a literal sense, it is a combined DNA between organics and synthetics. Only, that doesn't work. There is no DNA of synthetics. Therefore, it's probably not a literal DNA change.

... why do I even bother?

[quote][quote]So basically, it was exaggeration. Sorry, I prefer to use educated conjecture and cold hard facts in my arguments.[/quote]

The cold hard fact is that both organics and synthetics are forced to accept foreign components into their bodies. That they may give them new abilities is irrelevant, and why my arm example is apt. They simply may not want this.[/quote]

There are no facts on this, aside from the glowing green. EDI, on the other hand, has no flesh.

[Taboo]

The Catalyst presents a fallacy.

No one is going to die.

Stop making **** up.

[Joe Del Toro]

HagarIshay wrote...

I tried to make an argument. When you make one, it's always sound as you believe it.

And not everybody like to be laughed at.

If you didn't believe it, but thought someone else might, then you say 'Some people might see it this way...' You don't just state it like you did.

Yes, well, you say something dumb, you get laughed at. That's reality. Not trying to be a tw*t, that really just is how it goes.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Before we have any anti or pro synthesis people foaming at the mouth let me be perfectly clear. I despise all the ending options. I find that one forces me to backstab allies, one makes me actively engage in slavary, and in the last I impose "evolution" on the entire galaxy just to please some glowing bastard.

The more I reflect on these option the more I find one to be the lesser of the evils presented given the circumstances. I'm finding Control leaves me with the least amount of guilt, which got me thinking: if the circumstances were changed would I even consider all the options presented?

Say hypothetically that Destroy killed only Reapers. In that case I would blow them to hell without a second thought, since the other two options hold no appeal to me whatsoever, as I imagine many others would as well. But I find that even under these circumstances some people would undoubtably still choose Control since it presents a different appeal. If you want humanity to be a dominant force in the galaxy or just find have that much power under at your command irresistible than sure that is still a vaild option if that is your goal.

I could not find a reason for synthesis to be appealing on it's own. It seems a means to an end and nothing more.

This has led me to conclude that maybe the ending would have been better of if synthesis wasn't present leaving only control and Destory as options and the synthetics vs organics theme was dropped and replaced with a theme relating to humanity's role and place in the galaxy (a theme which would tie in nicely to ME1 I think) and maybe ask if power always corrupts which might tie in better with TIM's story arc. Both themes also work in terms of a paragon or renegade for shepards story I think.

I could always be wrong though, so the questions I pose to you dear readers are:
Do you find aspects of Synthesis to be appealing on it own? If so what are they?
If not would something along these lines ,ironically giving us even less options, have made a better ending?

Synthesis? Never. No.

Control? I think of the organic part of the reaper vessels somewhat like the memory shard of Javik's. It contains the memories of all the people that were harvested by the reapers including the time of the reaping when they saw their loved ones turned into abominations, and perhaps the moments when they had to kill their loved indoctrinated loved ones, when they saw their loved ones harvested and processed, and when they themselves were harvested and processed. And then they were forced by the inorganic portion and controlled to do things against their will like indoctrinate, and do to other races what had been done to them. They contain only pain. What they once were died long ago. Destroying them is doing them a favor. Controlling them is just prolonging their agony. Give the organic portion of them peace. It's the synthetic portion that's doing the bad ****.

I've said this before and I'll say it again.

When you do Rannoch, do not make peace.

I warned Legion on the Normandy "Do not upload the reaper code." Bad juju. Not good. Don't do it. You'll regret this. Trust me here. And Legion agrees with me on the Normandy. But in reality did he listen? Nooooooo. On Rannoch, he starts to upload the code and I stop him. He attacks, and Tali had to stab him in the back, and just because he tried to kill be I shot him all three times.

Take this option on Rannoch. Trust me. You'll feel guilty for about 30 seconds until you see Tali happy, and it makes your choice at the end much easier because you won't have to worry about destroying one of your allies. Let the Quarians do that for you because at that time the Geth are not your allies. And besides the scene is so Shakespearean, and you need to take all three renegade interrupts to get the full "et tu Brute" impact.

Plus you completed your mission -- you delivered the Quarian fleet to Admiral Hackett. What were your orders: "The Quarians have the largest fleet in the galaxy. Deliver that fleet no matter the cost." I was only following orders.

Starbrat's conversation goes like this if your EMS is very high: "You can destroy all synthetic life in the galaxy if you want. Even you are partly synthetic."
"But the reapers will be destroyed?"
"Yes. Or do you think you think you can control us?"

[Ageless Face]

Joe Del Toro wrote...


If you didn't believe it, but thought someone else might, then you say 'Some people might see it this way...' You don't just state it like you did.

Yes, well, you say something dumb, you get laughed at. That's reality. Not trying to be a tw*t, that really just is how it goes.

Well, thanks for the life lesson. You have been a great help.

Now I think I will leave. Too much fun for me here. 

[xsdob]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Catalyst presents a fallacy.

No one is going to die.

Stop making **** up.

Everything about the endings is made up until the EC comes out.

Destroy being the best option for everyone, people becomng abominations and rejecting the changes in synthesis, shepard remaining in control of the repaers forever and not turning into a monster.

All of it is made up until the developers manage to clarify and epilouge the endings, which the ec is going to do.

After that comes out, than we can all argue about how much we suck in eachothers eyes for the ending choices and philosophies we have, but at least we'll have actual things from the game to back those up.

Modifié par xsdob, 09 juin 2012 - 06:50 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Bill Casey wrote...

Larger survey...
What people chose...



What they think the best choice is...

Bandwagon fallacy.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Catalyst presents a fallacy.

No one is going to die.

Stop making **** up.

Except for, you know, the whole war going on. And those Reapers and everything.

[The Angry One]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

With certain death as an alternative?

Okay. So hypothetically I'll forcibly attach a third arm to your back or I'll kill you.
You prefer the analogy this way? Alright...

Criminy cripes, it's an interpretation. I'm not ignoring anything, just making sense of it. In a literal sense, it is a combined DNA between organics and synthetics. Only, that doesn't work. There is no DNA of synthetics. Therefore, it's probably not a literal DNA change.

... why do I even bother?

The logical interpretation is the Catalyst is full of it.
The Catalyst is stating "new DNA", not me. The Catalyst is asking you to take everything it says at face value.
If you do not believe that, why do you believe the rest?

There are no facts on this, aside from the glowing green. EDI, on the other hand, has no flesh.

So what are you saying? There was no change? The Catalyst was lying?
This being the case, why not pick control? It'll be virtually the same only the Reapers won't get off scott free.

Modifié par The Angry One, 09 juin 2012 - 06:52 .

[The Angry One]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Catalyst presents a fallacy.

No one is going to die.

Stop making **** up.

Except for, you know, the whole war going on. And those Reapers and everything.

Yes, the Reapers. The ones who want synthesis.

[Vigilant111]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Larger survey...
What people chose...



What they think the best choice is...

Bandwagon fallacy.

Why? too much pressure for u?

[xsdob]

This thread has pretty much gone off the rails into a "why synthesis and it's supporters sucks" thread, so how about some new leaked info from reddit? This is from the guy who leaked the rebellion dlc, so he has a better track record than the 4-chan sources.

http://www.reddit.co...to_believe_me/

Modifié par xsdob, 09 juin 2012 - 06:56 .

[Ieldra]

xsdob wrote...
People have attributed fannon and unconfirmable negatives to synthesis, a consequence of the endings vague nature and disgruntled speculation. As it stands an actual discussion of synthesis is impossible because the majority here have embraced their negativly spun fannon as fact and that all who oppose that fact are seen as being stupid beyond reason, hence the entire "It's only an option if you don't think" rhetoric from this fanbase to fellow fans.

Indeed. I'm beginning to actively despise parts of the fanbase because of this. It is getting personal.

@OP.
Yes, I see something desirable in the Synthesis option on its own. I would choose it even if the synthetics weren't destroyed in Destroy.

As for why, read my Synthesis thread. I see Destroy as a backwards-looking choice. Control is acceptable for various reasons but Synthesis is what I want for the galaxy.

I'd say let's wait till the extended cut comes out and actually explains the consequences of what happened and explains in greater detail the endings, that way an actual discussion on the merits can be had.

Scant hope of that, given the thrice-damned fanatics here. I wish people would find something good to say about *their* preferred choice instead of insisting on the worst possible interpretations of those they don't like.