1256 réponses à ce sujet

[Xellith]

someone else 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.

www.youtube.com/watch

I dunno.  OVER TIME - Organic beings being altered at the deepest level and over time being moulded into a slave race where few organic traces were left.

There will be just as much conflict today as there was 10 years ago even if synthesis was to occur.  Machines will be rebuilt and conflict will resume.  Synthesis doesnt make you stronger.  I doubt it makes you smarter.  All it seems to do is alter your genetic makeup.

Therefore "Without us to stop it.  Synthetics would destroy ALL Biosynthetics".  Grats. You lost the game.  Reaper Option isnt an option.

Modifié par Xellith, 12 juin 2012 - 08:21 .

[antares_sublight]

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

[quote]antares_sublight wrote...

[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]

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.[/quote]
Anakin was talking in a situational sense, saying that people should be "made to" come to the right decisions.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
So again, you're wrong. You proved yourself wrong. All bets are off.[/quote]
Aww, no $1000 now? Cheapskate.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
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.[/quote]
All that was tangental to the point. Who are you arguing with? Not me. When did I "zealously protest" politicians in general? Seriously, you are insane.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[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]Except that it's not. See above![/quote]
Except that it is. See above!

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]No, I said I was overestimating at 7. Plus I gave you plenty of evidence and quotes.[/quote]

You provided just one quote that only proved your own ignorance - of what I was talking about, and in general.[/quote]
You only asked for one quote (and I gave two). One quote was enough for me to make a comment. Not difficult to grasp that.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]Pro-synthites have no room to accuse anyone of speculation, first of all.[/quote]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.
[/quote]
Yeah, 7 years old was waaaaaaaaaay overestimating it.

My point is that it's all speculation. You simply can't defend synthesis.

[clennon8]

@Xelith: You need to fix that quote, man. I'm not the one who said that.

@antares: That dude you're wasting all your time on isn't worth wasting your time on. Most of the Synth people are pretty smart, if misguided. He's an exception.

[Gold Dragon]

As for the Geth (and EDI) surviving Destroy, I just simply Role-play that an EMS of 4500, the beam doesn't effect about a third of the total Geth population (with a few more surviving due to uploading themselves to another location).  EDI loses control over Eva's body (but the body is otherwise undamaged), but when the Geth locate the Normandy Crash site, they help her regain the body, and move her completely into Eva's body.

As for Shepard, she gets upset with Kaidan when comunications get re-established.  He got her pregnant, then ran off.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

antares_sublight wrote...

Anakin was talking in a situational sense, saying that people should be "made to" come to the right decisions.

LOL!!!! No he wasn't. He was supporting it broadly, whether people always agree with the system or not.

You really have no clue.

Aww, no $1000 now? Cheapskate.

My wager was very clear: where do I support my own supposed dictatorship? You never found it, because it does not exist.

All that was tangental to the point. Who are you arguing with? Not me. When did I "zealously protest" politicians in general? Seriously, you are insane.

Don't act purposely dense now. I told that nincompoop Angry Bird that she should get a reality check and realize that politicans everywhere make decisions affecting people's health, well-being, life-and-death. You swooned in and proclaimed that I was endorsing dictatorships, which obviously you would believe is such a horrible thing, but then I revealed this practice within democratic systems.

Now, do you still protest to what I said?

Except that it is. See above!

That's not going to work for you, not when you're wrong.

You only asked for one quote (and I gave two). One quote was enough for me to make a comment. Not difficult to grasp that.

Quotes don't matter if they don't prove anything. Hell, I used your quotes to prove you wrong.

Just ask Bill Casey. All he ever does is post worthless quotes everywhere.

Yeah, 7 years old was waaaaaaaaaay overestimating it.

Again, repeating lies when you have nothing to say. That's okay, I get it, you have nothing to say. Carry on.

My point is that it's all speculation. You simply can't defend synthesis.

I can. And I often have sans speculation. But I'm not going off on that tangent. Not here, anyway.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 12 juin 2012 - 08:27 .

[Taboo]

STOP. STRAW MANNING.

THE CHOICE IS THE ISSUE.

ADDRESS IT.

[clennon8]

He's not going to. I'd adivse everyone to just stop talking to that guy. Seriously.

[Xellith]

clennon8 wrote...

He's not going to. I'd adivse everyone to just stop talking to that guy. Seriously.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

clennon8 wrote...

@antares: That dude you're wasting all your time on isn't worth wasting your time on. Most of the Synth people are pretty smart, if misguided. He's an exception.

I'm sorry. What right have you to judge who's smart/misguided here?

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Taboo-XX wrote...

STOP. STRAW MANNING.

THE CHOICE IS THE ISSUE.

ADDRESS IT.

Taboo, seriously, STFU already. You have no idea what he and I are talking about here. Because it's not about "the choice" at all, it's something completely different.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 12 juin 2012 - 08:36 .

[antares_sublight]

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

[quote]antares_sublight wrote...

Anakin was talking in a situational sense, saying that people should be "made to" come to the right decisions.[/quote]

LOL!!!! No he wasn't. He was supporting it broadly, whether people always agree with the system or not.

You really have no clue.[/quote]
It's the same thing. Saying someone should force the decisions in situations.


[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]Aww, no $1000 now? Cheapskate.[/quote]My wager was very clear: where do I support my own supposed dictatorship? You never found it, because it does not exist.[/quote]
And I never said you did. Your insanity was showing through because you made a wager against a statement I never made about something you didn't say. I'll bet you $100,000 you can't find a post in this thread where I proclaim carrots are actually fruit. The fact that you can't shows you're wrong. A wrong wrong wrong liar.


[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]All that was tangental to the point. Who are you arguing with? Not me. When did I "zealously protest" politicians in general? Seriously, you are insane.[/quote]
Don't act purposely dense now. I told that nincompoop Angry Bird that she should get a reality check and realize that politicans everywhere make decisions affecting people's health, well-being, life-and-death. You swooned in and proclaimed that I was endorsing dictatorships, which obviously you would believe is such a horrible thing, but then I revealed this practice within democratic systems.

Now, do you still protest to what I said?[/quote]
The post from you that I quoted, in addition to the one about politicians, was the basis of my statement. An elected politician taking actions that he/she feels is necessary is not the same thing as an unelected dictator who answers to no one for anything at any time. (Shepard isn't elected for anything, by the way).

I protest the fact that you're arguments are ridiculous and it's like your punching your own face.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]Except that it is. See above![/quote]

That's not going to work for you, not when you're wrong.[/quote]
Shucks.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]You only asked for one quote (and I gave two). One quote was enough for me to make a comment. Not difficult to grasp that.[/quote]
Quotes don't matter if they don't prove anything. Hell, I used your quotes to prove you wrong.[/quote]
But it did, and you didn't. A-ha.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
Just ask Bill Casey. All he ever does is post worthless quotes everywhere.[/quote]
I didn't know that was your name. Hi Bill.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]Yeah, 7 years old was waaaaaaaaaay overestimating it.[/quote]
Again, repeating lies when you have nothing to say. That's okay, I get it, you have nothing to say. Carry on.[/quote]
So 7 is a "lie"? 5? 6?

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
[quote]My point is that it's all speculation. You simply can't defend synthesis.[/quote]
I can. And I often have sans speculation. But I'm not going off on that tangent. Not here, anyway.[/quote]
So, repeating lies when you have nothing to say?

Modifié par antares_sublight, 12 juin 2012 - 08:38 .

[Taboo]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

STOP. STRAW MANNING.

THE CHOICE IS THE ISSUE.

ADDRESS IT.

Taboo, seriously, STFU already. You have no idea what he and I are talking about here. Because it's not about "the choice" at all, it's something completely different.

Yes it is. You Straw Man EVERY time you bring up vaccinations and seat belts and whatever the hell you're using to justify the AFTERMATH.

You do not justify the choice.

Either justify it or do not, but do not go around NOT accepting responsiblity for it like other people have.

[jtav]

The expected results justify the choice. If I believed there was no benefit, I wouldn't make the choice.

[clennon8]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

@antares: That dude you're wasting all your time on isn't worth wasting your time on. Most of the Synth people are pretty smart, if misguided. He's an exception.

I'm sorry. What right have you to judge who's smart/misguided here?

Haha.  That's kind of a funny thing to say, all things considered.  Rights.  haha.

Oops, broke my own advice.  Last and only time, I promise.

Modifié par clennon8, 12 juin 2012 - 08:43 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

antares_sublight wrote...

It's the same thing. Saying someone should force the decisions in situations.

The dictatorship itself is not situational, just the authoritarian approach to it - when people don't agree.

... which is nothing like what *I* was saying.

And I never said you did. Your insanity was showing through because you made a wager against a statement I never made about something you didn't say.

I misinterpreted the post. I apologize.

Upon further review, it's still an incorrect statement of my beliefs.

An elected politician taking actions that he/she feels is necessary is not the same thing as an unelected dictator who answers to no one for anything at any time. (Shepard isn't elected for anything, by the way).

Of course it's not the same thing, but there are pros and cons to each, and one is not always better than the other in a given set of circumstances.

By the way, while you're often reminded of Anakin, you may also remember that Garrus says a little something himself about the "need" for cold-hearted dictators. Surely, that's even more alarming than Anakin's ideals of a benevolent dictatorship, but he raises a valid point all the same. I don't see people jumping on his throat for that statement.

But it did, and you didn't. A-ha.

Keep telling yourself that.

I didn't know that was your name. Hi Bill.

Now you're just babbling.

HYR 2.0 wrote...

So, repeating lies when you have nothing to say?

I have plenty to say, just don't wish to say it here. It's not like I don't state my opinion on this matter daily so I'm not sure what there is not to believe.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Yes it is. You Straw Man EVERY time you bring up vaccinations and seat belts and whatever the hell you're using to justify the AFTERMATH.

You do not justify the choice.

Either justify it or do not, but do not go around NOT accepting responsiblity for it like other people have.

What the hell are you talking about vaccinations and seat belts? Those words have never come off my keyboard.

He and I are NOT talking about if Synthesis is justified. Not here, anyway. So please stay out of this conversation.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

clennon8 wrote...

Haha.  That's kind of a funny thing to say, all things considered.  Rights.  haha.

Oops, broke my own advice.  Last and only time, I promise.

... what on Earth is this post supposed to mean? 

Eh, what do I care? Just another member of this site's lowest-common-denominator.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 12 juin 2012 - 09:08 .

[Ryzaki]

Lizardviking wrote...
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!? <_<

Yeah but it loses some impact if you don't really care about any of the Synthetics he's talking about.

Not sure.

Because ARTISTIC INTERGRITY.

[jla0644]

akenn312 wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

I will never understand why some of you, and you know who you are, cannot tolerate the fact that others choose not to take Synthesis in the direction you took it. If you're so damn concerned about choice and free will, let them have theirs without calling them fascists for it.  Does it really hurt you that they wanted to take it in a positive direction, that they were able to get something positive out of this trainwreck of an ending? Why does it offend you if they do that? It does not affect you in the slightest. You're only coming off as intolerant and self-righteous. And some of you are becoming quite unhinged in your hatred.

It's the message and the blind acceptance of this message just to make an ending work that should be challenged, anyone that says that violating consent is okay or try to make a positive spin on it should be challenged. You also can't stop people from speaking out, you can disagree with what they say but they have a right to challenge it.

Making violating free will a cute happy thing is a bad concept, I cannot stress this enough. Next thing we can do is make the Holocaust all positive and happy. Again why all of a sudden is violating basic human rights okay?

The basic concept is offensive, Hitler had a right to have his views but people had a right to fight against him. We have that right to challenge this view. You can't violate a persons free will to choose. You can't change people into whatever you wish them to be. Debate them all you want but you can't switch them into something you want them to be.

lol, and hatred of a meaningless choice in a videogame has claimed the rationality of yet another poster.

If you don't like the idea behind it, great. You can pretend it
doesn't exist,  you'll never have to choose it. But this idea that it is
somehow dangerous, that people who choose it are somehow budding
fascists who approve of violating human rights and forcing their will on
people, is competely and totally insane. You are trying to turn this
into something more abstract and general, instead of what it is -- a
video game, a means of entertainment, not a personal statement of one's
political beliefs.

Challenge and discuss all you want. But that's not what you and the other haters are doing. You are trying to prove that your opinion of Synthesis is the only correct one, the only one that a moral and virtuous person could possibly have. And it isn't possible to do that.

The "message and the blind acceptance of this message"? WTF are you even talking about? The endings were horrible. Of course people are trying to make the ending better, even if it's just in their heads. Who are you to tell them they are wrong for doing that, just because you don't care for the choice?

Taboo will never answer this question, so maybe you will, since you seem to be suggesting the same things he does: do you really believe that when Bioware was coming up with the three choices, that they intended Synthesis to be all about violating free will, about fascism, about making life sterile and homogenous, about agreeing with Saren and Harbinger? Do you really think that's what they meant Synthesis to be? Do you really think the people who prefer Synthesis over the other choices are choosing it because they support these things? If your answer is "no", then all this talk about it being dangerous is utter nonsense. If your answer is "yes", then I'm not sure what to say..

IMO, Shepard and Shepard alone is forced to make a decision that will forever change the galaxy. Shepard cannot consult anyone or ask anyone what they want. The galaxy will forever have to live what that choice, red, blue, or green. The galaxy gets no choice, no matter what Shepard decides. If he chooses red, a race of fully evolved AI allies will be wiped out. Maybe in the name of avoiding genocide, in the name of achieving peace, Shepard is willing to accept merging organic and synthetic, even without their consent. If that's not acceptable to your Shepard, if killing the geth is more accpetable, or if becoming the most powerful being in the galaxy is more acceptable, then you have your choice. It's not as black and white as you're making it. You're doing something unethical whichever way you go. The question is which is more acceptable to you.

But please, stop pretending like you're on some great moral crusade to save us from Bioware and all the peope they have converted to their ways through Synthesis.

Modifié par jla0644, 12 juin 2012 - 11:27 .

[o Ventus]

The "But you don't have to pick it!" excuse holds little water, I'm afraid.

[lordhugorune]

I just completed the game a second time - and chose Synthesis, again, just as I had the first time, after thinking about it. Unless you're convinced by indoctrination theory, which I consider a possibility but not a certainty, it really is the best ending, as it evolves life. Destroy may give satisfaction, for those who like vegeance, but the costs are too great. I did consider control, but it's really a waste of the opportunity that synthesis provides.

Obviously, I don't consider synthesis 'turning everyone into husks' - although if people want to interpret the game that way, they have that option. Hopefully the extended cut will clarify that this is not, in fact, the case.

[KingZayd]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

So, repeating lies when you have nothing to say?

I have plenty to say, just don't wish to say it here. It's not like I don't state my opinion on this matter daily so I'm not sure what there is not to believe.

this bit makes you look as if you're talking to yourself? did someone mess up the quotes when smashing the pyramid?

Modifié par KingZayd, 12 juin 2012 - 11:40 .

[clennon8]

Just to quickly clarify, I don't think Synthesis turns everyone into husks. Synthesists should drop the notion that all anti-Synths believe that. I actually don't care exactly how Synthesis manifests. Not one tiny bit. I'm fairly certain the EC will make it out to be pretty fantastic, and all you Synth-heads will be gloating. I don't care. All I care about is the actual decision point and the process that goes into making the fateful choice.

[Heeden]

A Golden Dragon wrote...

As for the Geth (and EDI) surviving Destroy, I just simply Role-play that an EMS of 4500, the beam doesn't effect about a third of the total Geth population (with a few more surviving due to uploading themselves to another location).  EDI loses control over Eva's body (but the body is otherwise undamaged), but when the Geth locate the Normandy Crash site, they help her regain the body, and move her completely into Eva's body.

As for Shepard, she gets upset with Kaidan when comunications get re-established.  He got her pregnant, then ran off.

I figured we could just fix them again, simples.

[akenn312]

jla0644 wrote...


lol, and hatred of a meaningless choice in a videogame has claimed the rationality of yet another poster.

If you don't like the idea behind it, great. You can pretend it
doesn't exist,  you'll never have to choose it. But this idea that it is
somehow dangerous, that people who choose it are somehow budding
fascists who approve of violating human rights and forcing their will on
people, is competely and totally insane. You are trying to turn this
into something more abstract and general, instead of what it is -- a
video game, a means of entertainment, not a personal statement of one's
political beliefs.

Challenge and discuss all you want. But that's not what you and the other haters are doing. You are trying to prove that your opinion of Synthesis is the only correct one, the only one that a moral and virtuous person could possibly have. And it isn't possible to do that.

The "message and the blind acceptance of this message"? WTF are you even talking about? The endings were horrible. Of course people are trying to make the ending better, even if it's just in their heads. Who are you to tell them they are wrong for doing that, just because you don't care for the choice?

Taboo will never answer this question, so maybe you will, since you seem to be suggesting the same things he does: do you really believe that when Bioware was coming up with the three choices, that they intended Synthesis to be all about violating free will, about fascism, about making life sterile and homogenous, about agreeing with Saren and Harbinger? Do you really think that's what they meant Synthesis to be? Do you really think the people who prefer Synthesis over the other choices are choosing it because they support these things? If your answer is "no", then all this talk about it being dangerous is utter nonsense. If your answer is "yes", then I'm not sure what to say..

IMO, Shepard and Shepard alone is forced to make a decision that will forever change the galaxy. Shepard cannot consult anyone or ask anyone what they want. The galaxy will forever have to live what that choice, red, blue, or green. The galaxy gets no choice, no matter what Shepard decides. If he chooses red, a race of fully evolved AI allies will be wiped out. Maybe in the name of avoiding genocide, in the name of achieving peace, Shepard is willing to accept merging organic and synthetic, even without their consent. If that's not acceptable to your Shepard, if killing the geth is more accpetable, or if becoming the most powerful being in the galaxy is more acceptable, then you have your choice. It's not as black and white as you're making it. You're doing something unethical whichever way you go. The question is which is more acceptable to you.

But please, stop pretending like you're on some great moral crusade to save us from Bioware and all the peope they have converted to their ways through Synthesis.

Nice try but the meaning of this choice still has in it the basic concept that it's okay to do whatever you want to people if you think you know whats good for them. Video game or not it puts out a message that it's okay to do something like this. Which it is not. Pro-Synthesis enders are saying now people with handicaps are weak and need to be fixed, that people with any perceived weakness should be changed even if they don't want it. These are bad seeds to plant in peoples minds. 

My answer to your question is not a simple no or yes. 

I don't think Bioware or any of you saw it at first, but you see it now and don't care which is a little more disturbing. It actually makes me feel sorry for you in a way. Just to win a game you pick a choice that would violate consent and force something on everyone without their knowledge. Saying it's just a game is irrelevant and just a way to make yourself think it's ok to get behind something like this.

The fact that you are trying to defend this thought process because this is just a game and the endings are horrible is pretty much where I say WTF. 

Also I am just pointing out what this violation implies.
You can have your sweet little ascension I just think you are a tyrant for doing it. 

Modifié par akenn312, 13 juin 2012 - 12:50 .