1256 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Honestly? Synthesis makes me nauseous.

I can see why people would pick it though...I just can't agree with it. Just no. I'm not gong to face the antagonist after 3+ years, the bastards who may have caused at least one of my squad to die, who had me killed, who slaughtered who knows how many people and tell them "Oh yeah you're right. Let's all change to please you."

No. Just...no.

[InHarmsWay]

antares_sublight wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

antares_sublight wrote...

With the amount of retconning pro-synthites have to do, it's exactly as fair to say that Destroy doesn't actually kill any geth. The Destroy ending is a happy one, a winning ending and therefore in my universe the geth don't die. Victory!

Destroy is totally the best because only the Reapers are destroyed and nobody else.

All right. And Shepard comes back after choosing Synthesis. That's the level of retcon you're talking about here.

The synthetics are dead in Destroy, one way or the other. Shepard is dead in Synthesis. Those are core elements you cannot just dismiss. And both fit their particular option rather well.

why? there's no evidence that the Geth are dead.

Exactly! Destroy doesn't actually kill anyone! I saw the clip at the end, I didn't see any dead Geth, did you? Therefore, using the same logic and conclusion-leaping-to as Pro-Synthites, no genocide actually occurs in Destroy either!

You know, I don't think the Catalyst said it would kill the geth. I think its exact words were, "You could kill all the synthetics if you want."

[Ryzaki]

"You could kill all synthetics if you want...including the geth." 

[o Ventus]

Ryzaki wrote...

"You could kill all synthetics if you want...including the geth." 

But not EDI, apparently.

[Ryzaki]

o Ventus wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

"You could kill all synthetics if you want...including the geth." 

But not EDI, apparently.

One would think EDI would count as Reaper tech. (Or a Synthetic) he simply doesn't single her out. Which is odd considering you'd think he'd think that EDI would be closer to Shepard than the Geth.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 12 juin 2012 - 07:31 .

[clennon8]

@ieldra: You see it as a witch hunt. I would say it's more a case of righteous indignation.

Righteous indignation can be very annoying, I'll grant you. But sometimes righteous indignation actually is... righteous. To be quite frank, you simply don't have a leg to stand on. Your entire defense of Synthesis consists of an assumption of moral reltativism and hopeful speculation. That's it. That's all you've got.

I mean, I tried temporarily putting aside the moral issue (I know how my moral absolutism bothers you) to discuss possible unintended consequences of merging all organic and synthetic life, but you guys just won't have it. Apparently, it simply isn't possible for any bad thing to come of Synthesis. Apparently, we're all just supposed to pat you guys on the back and congratulate you for your wise choice? Instead of having the temerity to disagree with you?

[teh DRUMPf!!]

[quote]antares_sublight wrote...

You're an idiot. Re-read what I wrote. I didn't say you were supporting YOUR dictatorship in THAT thread. Your bet stipulation was about something specific I never said or claimed you said. I said that the way you talk about synthesis in terms of dictatorships sounds like Anakin. That post I quoted, in addition to your comment earlier in that thread are what I was referring to. So, want my paypal address?[/quote]

The joke's on you, kid! My comment was an over-arching statement, applicable not only to autocracy but also democracy, and I have proof!

In my state, environmental regulation agencies are being run by friends of the state's governor, who've been lenient toward the governor's corporate partners and their environmental practices. These practices are hazardous and a pose a danger to the health of people in certain areas of my state. But, these corprorations have profitted greatly and have put unemployed people to work. If the governor tightens up regulation, corporations cut back and those jobs. The laid-off workers suffer again, maybe they starve. The economy as a whole suffers for that, too. As is, though, he's risking others' health and future complications that can be very difficult for them. Example of democratic leaders making decisions on people's health and people's well-being.

The war on terror: Obama has authorized drone strikes that he claims has lead to the successful elimination of some terrorists in the Middle East. Terrorists, who threaten many lives. In doing so, many civilians in the area are killed - collateral damage, they call it. Some would argue that's a little self-defeating. IF you value foreign lives equally to others, some people think all human life is equal. Examples of democratic leaders making decisions on who lives, who dies.

There it is. That's my rebuttal to being told "someone like me" shouldn't have political power because I'm making what I feel is the best decision for everyone. That nitwit named TEH ANGRY WUN!!11 doesn't realize that's true of political leadership EVERYWHERE, democratic or autocratic, so she just proved that she's completely out-of-touch and a blithering fool. And so did you.

All bets are off, you just proved yourself utterly and completely wrong about your statement.


[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
Now then, you've found a post where I claim that democracy is not the ideal for every culture, in which place dictatorship is a solid solution. So, still not meeting my criteria of trying to prove that I want to impose my own universal dictatorship on the galaxy.[/quote]
Find my quote where I said you want to impose your own universal dictatorship. I'll send you $1000. [/quote]

Whoops. I believe I misread it, my mistake.

To clarify, you're saying that I endorse dictatorship with a good dictator in charge. You liken it to Anakin who spoke of imposing this on society in general. So, I endorse dictatorships with good dictators on all of society.

Is that about right?


[quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
You either have ******-poor reading comprehension or are clutching at straws in a very desperate attempt to prove yourself. Or both![/quote]
Yeah, you're definitely less than 7 years old.[/quote]

I see when you have nothing to say, you just repeat the lies you perpetrate.

"7 year old! 7 year old! 7 year old!" =,,,( 



[quote]At least that's some concrete evidence, something that anti-Synthesis does not have.[/quote]

It's not evidence of anything. Like I said, if anything they're behaving abnormally given what they've just gone through. And the concrete evidence that it's a genetic change? Pro-synthites have to throw that out.[/quote]

OMFG WOW BACK TO SPECULATIONS PULLED RIGHT OUT OF THIN AIR!!!

That cutscene plays out the exact same way as it does Destroy and Control, plus a display of affection NOT seen in the other two. That is a cold hard fact my friend, and if you're going to CHOOSE to deny it, then you have no right to tell others what they can/can't believe without evidence.

antaeres_suBLIGHT = raging hypocrite.


[quote]Yeah, definitely less than 7 for sure.[/quote]

And whatever I am, you've proven inferior to that.

Have a seat. There's a nice spot for you in the corner.

[antares_sublight]

InHarmsWay wrote...

antares_sublight wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

antares_sublight wrote...

With the amount of retconning pro-synthites have to do, it's exactly as fair to say that Destroy doesn't actually kill any geth. The Destroy ending is a happy one, a winning ending and therefore in my universe the geth don't die. Victory!

Destroy is totally the best because only the Reapers are destroyed and nobody else.

All right. And Shepard comes back after choosing Synthesis. That's the level of retcon you're talking about here.

The synthetics are dead in Destroy, one way or the other. Shepard is dead in Synthesis. Those are core elements you cannot just dismiss. And both fit their particular option rather well.

why? there's no evidence that the Geth are dead.

Exactly! Destroy doesn't actually kill anyone! I saw the clip at the end, I didn't see any dead Geth, did you? Therefore, using the same logic and conclusion-leaping-to as Pro-Synthites, no genocide actually occurs in Destroy either!

You know, I don't think the Catalyst said it would kill the geth. I think its exact words were, "You could kill all the synthetics if you want."

Let's use the Pro-Synthite tool of just ignoring what the Catalyst directly states and forget he even said that. He couldn't, because he just couldn't have meant that.

He clearly actually meant "You could kill all the reapers who intentionally killed organics, not the ones who were being forced to against their will and certainly none of the other good synthetics, if you want".

[Taboo]

o Ventus wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

"You could kill all synthetics if you want...including the geth." 

But not EDI, apparently.

If she doesn't die in the EC, it's a straight shot to the finish line for me.

Shoot the pipe, go home, Miranda.

Nice.

[lillitheris]

Ryzaki wrote...

"You could kill all synthetics if you want...including the geth." 

COULD. But I don’t wanna, so they all survive! Hooray!

[Ryzaki]

lillitheris wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

"You could kill all synthetics if you want...including the geth." 

COULD. But I don’t wanna, so they all survive! Hooray!

Yup. I'm guessing with high EMS Shep just goes "SCREW YOU REAPERS!" and only blows up the Reapers. Perfect ending.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Ryzaki wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

"You could kill all synthetics if you want...including the geth." 

But not EDI, apparently.

One would think EDI would count as Reaper tech. (Or a Synthetic) he simply doesn't single her out. Which is odd considering you'd think he'd think that EDI would be closer to Shepard than the Geth.

I think it is to remind Shepard of the scale of damage he would cause if he chose destroy. EDI is just one person, but the Geth are an entire people/civilization.

[clennon8]

Wow, this thread has been helpful. I'm with you guys. Destroy really is the best ending! I'm gonna blast those Reapers into oblivion, then go hang out with EDI and my geth buddies! YEAH!

[antares_sublight]

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

The joke's on you, kid! My comment was an over-arching statement, applicable not only to autocracy but also democracy, and I have proof![/quote]
And my reference to your comment was that it sounded a lot like Anakin talking about the virtues of a dictatorship, which is just what you were saying.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
There it is. That's my rebuttal to being told "someone like me" shouldn't have political power because I'm making what I feel is the best decision for everyone. That nitwit named TEH ANGRY WUN!!11 doesn't realize that's true of political leadership EVERYWHERE, democratic or autocratic, so she just proved that she's completely out-of-touch and a blithering fool. And so did you.[/quote]
Made me laugh, thanks.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
All bets are off, you just proved yourself utterly and completely wrong about your statement.[/quote]
I think you're talking to someone else here, or you've totally lost it. What I said you said is in fact what you were saying.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]
[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
Now then, you've found a post where I claim that democracy is not the ideal for every culture, in which place dictatorship is a solid solution. So, still not meeting my criteria of trying to prove that I want to impose my own universal dictatorship on the galaxy.[/quote]
Find my quote where I said you want to impose your own universal dictatorship. I'll send you $1000. [/quote]

Whoops. I believe I misread it, my mistake.

To clarify, you're saying that I endorse dictatorship with a good dictator in charge. You liken it to Anakin who spoke of imposing this on society in general. So, I endorse dictatorships with good dictators on all of society.

Is that about right?[/quote]
All I said was that you made statements endorsing dictatorships that sound a lot like Anakin's statements endorsing dictatorships, which is in fact what you were saying. The "good" part is your own interpretation, Mr. Skywalker.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
You either have ******-poor reading comprehension or are clutching at straws in a very desperate attempt to prove yourself. Or both![/quote]
Yeah, you're definitely less than 7 years old.[/quote]

I see when you have nothing to say, you just repeat the lies you perpetrate.

"7 year old! 7 year old! 7 year old!" =,,,( 
[/quote]
No, I said I was overestimating at 7. Plus I gave you plenty of evidence and quotes.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]At least that's some concrete evidence, something that anti-Synthesis does not have.[/quote]It's not evidence of anything. Like I said, if anything they're behaving abnormally given what they've just gone through. And the concrete evidence that it's a genetic change? Pro-synthites have to throw that out.[/quote]

OMFG WOW BACK TO SPECULATIONS PULLED RIGHT OUT OF THIN AIR!!!

That cutscene plays out the exact same way as it does Destroy and Control, plus a display of affection NOT seen in the other two. That is a cold hard fact my friend, and if you're going to CHOOSE to deny it, then you have no right to tell others what they can/can't believe without evidence.[/quote]
Pro-synthites have no room to accuse anyone of speculation, first of all.
Secondly, I explicitly said before that the endings are the same. There are no signs of affection in the others because Joker and EDI are only together in synthesis.
All your blathering missed my point that you have to throw out concrete evidence that there is a genetic change (new DNA, framework, etc). And yet you accuse me of hypocrisy? When I specifically said that the endings were all the same?

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
antaeres_suBLIGHT = raging hypocrite.[/quote]
yeah, I hate that guy.


[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]Yeah, definitely less than 7 for sure.[/quote]

And whatever I am, you've proven inferior to that.

Have a seat. There's a nice spot for you in the corner.[/quote]
Thanks, you can keep sitting in your high-chair.

Modifié par antares_sublight, 12 juin 2012 - 07:43 .

[dreman9999]

Lizardviking wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

"You could kill all synthetics if you want...including the geth." 

But not EDI, apparently.

One would think EDI would count as Reaper tech. (Or a Synthetic) he simply doesn't single her out. Which is odd considering you'd think he'd think that EDI would be closer to Shepard than the Geth.

I think it is to remind Shepard of the scale of damage he would cause if he chose destroy. EDI is just one person, but the Geth are an entire people/civilization.

So what? The catalyst can still destory could kill EDI and the Geth. They is not reason for the catalyst to not say both.

[KingZayd]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Opsrbest wrote...
We should skip all the banter and jump right to the heart of the issue and discuss: The paradigm of Synthesis.

Banter? It's an all-out witch hunt by people unable to accept that others might have a different take on things, that others might dare take something positive away from a choice *they* don't like. As soon as someone says anything good about Synthesis, these people descend like vultures on them. Pfft. Contemptible. 

As for the paradigm of Synthesis, I believe I've touched on that in my thread A different ascension - the Synthesis compendium.

@KingZayd:
It fits the theme. You make a choice in favor of organics' purity and complete freedom. Neither is there a change like in Synthesis nor is there a pseudo-synthetic guardian who guides the development of organic civilization. The theme is freedom from synthetic interference unless you choose to re-introduce them. It's also a balance issue. For those who just want to kill the Reapers, the Destroy choice would have no significant downside if synthetics weren't dead. Just the same with Synthesis: for those who think it's generally a good thing, having Shepard alive would make it a perfect ending. I don't have anything against a perfect ending, but it should not depend on a specific choice.

No, I didn't make a choice in favour of organic purity. I made a choice in favour of destroying the reapers so that they'll never be able to cull the galaxy again. I don't care if somewhere along the line organics decide to "upgrade" themselves. I just think the organics vs synthetics thing is a misdirect, distracting us from the real problem. The reapers themselves.

You're likening the sacrifice of a race (the Geth) with the sacrifice of 1 person (Shepard), which is rather unbalanced isn't it? Especially when it's hinted quite strongly in the game, that Shepard will most likely die in the end. I picked destroy assuming Shepard was going to die anyway. So Destroy is presented as having the same "downside" as Synthesis, and more.

Modifié par KingZayd, 12 juin 2012 - 07:43 .

[Ryzaki]

Lizardviking wrote...
I think it is to remind Shepard of the scale of damage he would cause if he chose destroy. EDI is just one person, but the Geth are an entire people/civilization.

I'm pretty sure he doesn't even bring her up if the Geth are destroyed already though. Plus he could've said Geth and EDI. But of course he says COULD and who knows. Destroy might end up being the Perfect ending after all. After all Shep was partly Synthetic and s/he's alive at the best destroy ending. Shep probably just stunned/crippled (Heavily but enough to recover from) Synthetics that weren't Reapers (including him/herself) and destroyed the Reapers outright.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 12 juin 2012 - 07:44 .

[akenn312]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Opsrbest wrote...
We should skip all the banter and jump right to the heart of the issue and discuss: The paradigm of Synthesis.

Banter? It's an all-out witch hunt by people unable to accept that others might have a different take on things, that others might dare take something positive away from a choice *they* don't like. As soon as someone says anything good about Synthesis, these people descend like vultures on them. Pfft. Contemptible. 

As for the paradigm of Synthesis, I believe I've touched on that in my thread A different ascension - the Synthesis compendium.

@KingZayd:
It fits the theme. You make a choice in favor of organics' purity and complete freedom. Neither is there a change like in Synthesis nor is there a pseudo-synthetic guardian who guides the development of organic civilization. The theme is freedom from synthetic interference unless you choose to re-introduce them. It's also a balance issue. For those who just want to kill the Reapers, the Destroy choice would have no significant downside if synthetics weren't dead. Just the same with Synthesis: for those who think it's generally a good thing, having Shepard alive would make it a perfect ending. I don't have anything against a perfect ending, but it should not depend on a specific choice.

Ah, so Hitler was just a little misunderstood, I guess we should have tried to see his side of things better. he just had a difference in opinion. WW2 was just a big witch hunt.

No amount of data or speculation can give you any justification to change all life on a genetic scale. Just because Bioware tries to spin it as a positive does not make it a good concept.

It is this,



No getting around it.


Master, Master
Race, Race

Modifié par akenn312, 12 juin 2012 - 07:45 .

[Ieldra]

clennon8 wrote...
I mean, I tried temporarily putting aside the moral issue (I know how my moral absolutism bothers you) to discuss possible unintended consequences of merging all organic and synthetic life, but you guys just won't have it. Apparently, it simply isn't possible for any bad thing to come of Synthesis. Apparently, we're all just supposed to pat you guys on the back and congratulate you for your wise choice? Instead of having the temerity to disagree with you?

Apparently you missed the point where I quoted ardensia's blog. It's here. Read the second-but-last paragraph. I'm not painting a sunshine-and-rainbows version. There will be conflict, there will be people, perhaps even whole species, who will curse Shepard's name - or would do so if they knew there had been alternatives. There will be new horrors along with new wonders because people just are like that. But that's always the price for having new options, however they come about. With every new option, the number of subcultures will increase. Some of them will be unpleasant. But cultural diversity will increase drastically. The average power and understanding will increase.     

What there won't be is a galaxy of mind-controlled, reprogrammed or huskified people as result of the Synthesis. Because not only isn't there any evidence for it, but it goes against the spirit of the story.

[antares_sublight]

Ieldra2 wrote...
What there won't be is a galaxy of mind-controlled, reprogrammed or huskified people as result of the Synthesis. Because not only isn't there any evidence for it, but it goes against the spirit of the story.

There also isn't any evidence the geth are all killed in Destroy, and it goes against the spirit of ME3. Even less evidence EDI is destroyed, and since someone the Catalyst does mention lives, there's even some evidence to the contrary.

Modifié par antares_sublight, 12 juin 2012 - 07:52 .

[o Ventus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

What there won't be is a galaxy of mind-controlled, reprogrammed or huskified people as result of the Synthesis. Because not only isn't there any evidence for it, but it goes against the spirit of the story.

You know what else conflicts with the idea of the story? Synthesis.

ME1+2 and most of ME3 involved Shepard and co. overcoming various hardships. Synthesis instead has you conform to their standard.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Ryzaki wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...
I think it is to remind Shepard of the scale of damage he would cause if he chose destroy. EDI is just one person, but the Geth are an entire people/civilization.

I'm pretty sure he doesn't even bring her up if the Geth are destroyed already though. Plus he could've said Geth and EDI. But of course he says COULD and who knows. Destroy might end up being the Perfect ending after all. After all Shep was partly Synthetic and s/he's alive at the best destroy ending. Shep probably just stunned/crippled (Heavily but enough to recover from) Synthetics that weren't Reapers (including him/herself) and destroyed the Reapers outright.

It is ofcourse true that he does not say EDI instead of the Geth if they are dead already, but i really do not see the problem with this line of dialog. He already covered everything by saying all synthethic life.

What I really find strange however is what he means by "most of the technology you rely on", what does he mean by that? Are we talking about computers and VIs?

Urgh, why was the final conversation written by an eight year-old!? <_<

[clennon8]

Yes, Synthesis is completely anti-thematic. I can't believe we haven't touched on that until now. It's a huge problem, especially if you're going to use "spirit of the story" reasoning to justify any assumptions about Synthesis.

[Taboo]

o Ventus wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

What there won't be is a galaxy of mind-controlled, reprogrammed or huskified people as result of the Synthesis. Because not only isn't there any evidence for it, but it goes against the spirit of the story.

You know what else conflicts with the idea of the story? Synthesis.

ME1+2 and most of ME3 involved Shepard and co. overcoming various hardships. Synthesis instead has you conform to their standard.

WE DON'T NEED NO EDUCATION.

WE DON'T NEED NO THOUGHT CONTROL.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

antares_sublight wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

The joke's on you, kid! My comment was an over-arching statement, applicable not only to autocracy but also democracy, and I have proof!

And my reference to your comment was that it sounded a lot like Anakin talking about the virtues of a dictatorship, which is just what you were saying.

Well +1 for you having ******-poor reading comprehension. Otherwise, you'd know that Anakin was talking about dictatorships in general. I only believe in their "virtues" in a situational sense.

So again, you're wrong. You proved yourself wrong. All bets are off.

I also notice you conveniently deleted/ignored the part of my post where I proved this phenomenon within democratic society. So tell me now, how does it feel to know that you live under the very thing you zealously protest - leaders making decisions for people's own good? Because you do, no matter where you live.

All I said was that you made statements endorsing dictatorships that sound a lot like Anakin's statements endorsing dictatorships, which is in fact what you were saying. The "good" part is your own interpretation, Mr. Skywalker.

Except that it's not. See above!

No, I said I was overestimating at 7. Plus I gave you plenty of evidence and quotes.

You provided just one quote that only proved your own ignorance - of what I was talking about, and in general.

Pro-synthites have no room to accuse anyone of speculation, first of all.

But clearly, anti-Synthesis N@zis can do so freely while they spew speculations out their hiney to support their own claims.

Not hypocrtical at all.