1300 réponses à ce sujet

[KingZayd]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'd rather see resistance against the Reapers than slavery.
"Is not submission preferable to extinction"? I say no. You may disagree, but don't you dare, don't you DARE label my Shepard a criminal and a fanatic because she isn't a coward who does the bidding of the things the galaxy came together to fight against.

I just did. And you can still pick Destroy; it'll both satisfy some of your bloodlust and kill all the Reapers so they won't have any input on things anymore. I still consider it suboptimal unless IT is canon, but it's at least something.
In any case, it's only temporary submission because the Catalyst is expended. In Synthesis, it's equality thereafter; in Control... well, then maybe the galaxy is submitting to the Reapers, but they're no longer conducting the cycle and may be a force for good.

By your logic it was.

Why does this even matter?

In synthesis there is not true equality. Reaper > SynthKrogan>SynthVolus etc.

Refusal is the only ending that brings about true equality: We can all be Reapers together.

[Xilizhra]

I'm sorry, bloodlust? What? Me wanting to defy a threat that wants to corrupt and destroy everything is bloodlust?
Are you serious?

Either that or incredible callousness.

And no. I will not sacrifice the Geth because the spacebaby tells me to.

So... you don't trust the Catalyst on anything except what it says shooting it will do? Why? That aside from the fact that apparently a result is less horrible if you're not doing it personally.

There's no equality when everything is forced to become the same, and destroy is still submission, because you're allowing the Catalyst to dictate the future of the galaxy.

The Catalyst dictates the future of the galaxy in Refusal too.

My mentioning of Saren serves to remind how pointless synthesis is as a choice.

No it doesn't. It's an irrelevant red herring from a previous event, as well as an association fallacy.

[Carlthestrange]

The eternal debate continues!

[Xamufam]

Sheepie Crusher wrote...

Here are SOME of the logical gaps in this ending

- What stops the new synthesized civilization from constructing normal synthetics again?

- What happens to all the primitive civilizations that don't even know what a computer is? how will they react to the  change?

- how does the beam differenciate between AI and VI? or do all VI become self aware as well

- Why do everyone just agrees to forget and forgive the Reapers?

- How do you combine DNA with a computer program?

- Do the Geth platforms also gain DNA? does every Geth program permanently bound to it's current platform?

1 more how do you stop life from beginning again & create synthetics again?
science.discovery.com/videos/100-greatest-discoveries-shorts-origin-of-life.html

[syllogi]

d-boy15 wrote...

I though this thread was about "what is the reason many people don't like synthesis?"

Personally, I find it patently ridiculous.  I can accept a lot of space-magicky things in my sci-fi, but the idea that the Catalyst has been hanging around for all these millenia with this obvious solution to everyone's problems...but was sitting on it's glowy hands, waiting for the Shepard-Messiah to push a button...lol, no thanks.  

I don't like Synthesis for many reasons, but the silliness is the main reason I wouldn't choose it.  It's the fantastical "Ice Cream Reapers" ending, and while I don't judge others for choosing it, it's so not how I want to end this trilogy.

Modifié par syllogi, 03 juillet 2012 - 01:23 .

[ghost9191]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'd rather see resistance against the Reapers than slavery.
"Is not submission preferable to extinction"? I say no. You may disagree, but don't you dare, don't you DARE label my Shepard a criminal and a fanatic because she isn't a coward who does the bidding of the things the galaxy came together to fight against.

I just did. And you can still pick Destroy; it'll both satisfy some of your bloodlust and kill all the Reapers so they won't have any input on things anymore. I still consider it suboptimal unless IT is canon, but it's at least something.
In any case, it's only temporary submission because the Catalyst is expended. In Synthesis, it's equality thereafter; in Control... well, then maybe the galaxy is submitting to the Reapers, but they're no longer conducting the cycle and may be a force for good.

By your logic it was.

Why does this even matter?

to be fair the reapers and geth don't really have blood so i wouldn't consider it bloodlust. but that is my opinion and i am not trying to force it on others
;)

[EricHVela]

I go with the Krogan analogy that Krogans would likely not have agreed to synthesis. It was forced upon them. Even after Synthesis, we don't know if they would prefer to be pure Krogans.

I equate that with being made "Tranquil" in Dragon Age. Once they are "Tranquil", they don't feel bad about it. However, Dragon Age: Kirkwall has an incident that shows the horror that a Tranquil would feel about it if they could still feel.

How would the Krogan feel about it if they could still feel like a true Krogan?

EDIT: Some said that "it doesn't matter". Tell that to the Tranquil.

Modifié par ReggarBlane, 03 juillet 2012 - 01:24 .

[Xilizhra]

Carlthestrange wrote...

The eternal debate continues!

It has, however, supplanted Paragon/Renegade debates, which is refreshing.

[Krunjar]

syllogi wrote...

d-boy15 wrote...

I though this thread was about "what is the reason many people don't like synthesis?"

Personally, I find it patently ridiculous.  I can accept a lot of space-magicky things in my sci-fi, but the idea that the Catalyst has been hanging around for all these millenia with this obvious solution to everyone's problems...but was sitting on it's glowy hands, waiting for the Shepard-Messiah to push a button...lol, no thanks.  

I don't like Synthesis for many reasons, but the silliness is the main reason I wouldn't choose it.  It's the fantastical "Ice Cream Reapers" ending, and while I don't judge others for choosing it, it's so not how I want to end this trilogy.

And that good sir is  a perfectly .. valid .. opinion!

See what i did there? It's so fekkin easy.

[ghost9191]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm sorry, bloodlust? What? Me wanting to defy a threat that wants to corrupt and destroy everything is bloodlust?
Are you serious?

Either that or incredible callousness.

And no. I will not sacrifice the Geth because the spacebaby tells me to.

So... you don't trust the Catalyst on anything except what it says shooting it will do? Why? That aside from the fact that apparently a result is less horrible if you're not doing it personally.

There's no equality when everything is forced to become the same, and destroy is still submission, because you're allowing the Catalyst to dictate the future of the galaxy.

The Catalyst dictates the future of the galaxy in Refusal too.

My mentioning of Saren serves to remind how pointless synthesis is as a choice.

No it doesn't. It's an irrelevant red herring from a previous event, as well as an association fallacy.

pretty sure synthesis fits the defintion for callous

in the sense you disregard everyones opinion but your own, and you have to be pretty unfeeling to do so. i feel for the geth in destroy, not so much the reapers. but i feel it is the safest and best course. ends the current threat and gives hope for a future

Modifié par ghost9191, 03 juillet 2012 - 01:26 .

[Carlthestrange]

Xilizhra wrote...

Carlthestrange wrote...

The eternal debate continues!

It has, however, supplanted Paragon/Renegade debates, which is refreshing.

True enough, but give it time. A month or so, you'll be just as sick of Synthesis debates as you were about the Paragon/Renegade ones.

[Ridwan]

22 pages now, and some still don't get why the rest of us don't want to be turned into a living freakshow.

[The Angry One]

Xilizhra wrote...

Either that or incredible callousness.

The only callousness I see is selling the galaxy to the Reapers out of fear.
No paragon would do that. Hell, no renegade would.

So... you don't trust the Catalyst on anything except what it says shooting it will do? Why? That aside from the fact that apparently a result is less horrible if you're not doing it personally.

Well if we're going to go that route, why are you trusting it that it'll do anything at all?
After all, breaking a component in order to activate a device is counter-intuitive.

The Catalyst dictates the future of the galaxy in Refusal too.

Yes, but you're not helping it do that.

No it doesn't. It's an irrelevant red herring from a previous event, as well as an association fallacy.

Again, we now know the Catalyst wants synthesis and has tried it before.
Therefore, perhaps Saren wasn't being misled. Perhaps the Catalyst and Saren were going to try again.

This makes the last 3 years of the game pointless for synthesis choosers. Might as well have let Saren win.

[nitefyre410]

Carlthestrange wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Carlthestrange wrote...

The eternal debate continues!

It has, however, supplanted Paragon/Renegade debates, which is refreshing.

True enough, but give it time. A month or so, you'll be just as sick of Synthesis debates as you were about the Paragon/Renegade ones.

 
 
A month?...I'm sick fo them ... now

Modifié par nitefyre410, 03 juillet 2012 - 01:28 .

[Zelto]

IscrewTali wrote...

Let's not stop a fatal illness thats spreading through our race like wildfire, instead try to live with it and doom the species to extinction. Id say that's different from trivial disorders. Dont assume i'd start seeking perfection in individuals, when all i'm after is prevent total extinction.

So stop the spread using steralisation. What about AIDS, might as well get that while your at it, oh and anyone else carrying a genetically spread disorder. Right, so now no more genetic disorders. Does that not seem to you to be the first step on attempting perfection, becasue it really does to me. And the fact is once someone takes the first step, then someone behind then will take the second. To me synthysis is simple all the steps taken in one huge leap. Screw freewill, personal choice you will be cured of your humanity! and apparently will be brainwashed at the same time to allow for peaceful co-existance with everyone.

[Xilizhra]

The only callousness I see is selling the galaxy to the Reapers out of fear.
No paragon would do that. Hell, no renegade would.

Successful ones of both would.

Well if we're going to go that route, why are you trusting it that it'll do anything at all?
After all, breaking a component in order to activate a device is counter-intuitive.

In that case, the result will be the same as Refusal and you don't lose anything.

Yes, but you're not helping it do that.

So you care more about personal standards than the welfare of the galaxy?

This makes the last 3 years of the game pointless for synthesis choosers. Might as well have let Saren win.

Maybe. But back then, we had no evidence to support that except Saren himself, who was clearly indoctrinated and didn't genuinely believe in his rationale, otherwise he wouldn't have shot himself when given the chance.

[Carlthestrange]

nitefyre410 wrote...

A month?...I'm sick fo them ... now

I've been okay with them the past week or so, but I must admit... starting to get tired of this eternal debate. Might take a break from the forums soon. See if it dies down.

[translationninja]

The Angry One wrote...


Again, we now know the Catalyst wants synthesis and has tried it before.
Therefore, perhaps Saren wasn't being misled. Perhaps the Catalyst and Saren were going to try again.

This makes the last 3 years of the game pointless for synthesis choosers. Might as well have let Saren win.

It would be really pointless of me to point out that the "huskification" Saren knew as synthesis has really nothing to with what happens when the crucible fires, wouldn't it?

[ghost9191]

Xilizhra wrote...

The only callousness I see is selling the galaxy to the Reapers out of fear.
No paragon would do that. Hell, no renegade would.

Successful ones of both would.

Well if we're going to go that route, why are you trusting it that it'll do anything at all?
After all, breaking a component in order to activate a device is counter-intuitive.

In that case, the result will be the same as Refusal and you don't lose anything.

Yes, but you're not helping it do that.

So you care more about personal standards than the welfare of the galaxy?

This makes the last 3 years of the game pointless for synthesis choosers. Might as well have let Saren win.

Maybe. But back then, we had no evidence to support that except Saren himself, who was clearly indoctrinated and didn't genuinely believe in his rationale, otherwise he wouldn't have shot himself when given the chance.

so what makes yhou think shepard isn't indoctrinated, without metagaming?

[The Angry One]

Xilizhra wrote...

Successful ones of both would.

"We'll fight and win without it. I won't let fear compromise who I am."

Or I guess a Shepard who blew up the Collector Base wasn't "successful".

In that case, the result will be the same as Refusal and you don't lose anything.

Assumption. For all I know breaking the tube breaks the Crucible for good, or indoctrinates everyone making things even easier for the Reapers.

So you care more about personal standards than the welfare of the galaxy?

I care more about a future free of the Reapers than committing genocide/becoming a dictator/reformatting everyone into a Reaper.

Maybe. But back then, we had no evidence to support that except Saren himself, who was clearly indoctrinated and didn't genuinely believe in his rationale, otherwise he wouldn't have shot himself when given the chance.

He did believe it, that was his goal. He just got indoctrinated along the way and thought he could no longer achieve it, ironically because Shepard convinced him.

[-Skorpious-]

I'll start seriously judging synthesis when it becomes less ridiculous in its execution.

[The Angry One]

translationninja wrote...

The Angry One wrote...


Again, we now know the Catalyst wants synthesis and has tried it before.
Therefore, perhaps Saren wasn't being misled. Perhaps the Catalyst and Saren were going to try again.

This makes the last 3 years of the game pointless for synthesis choosers. Might as well have let Saren win.

It would be really pointless of me to point out that the "huskification" Saren knew as synthesis has really nothing to with what happens when the crucible fires, wouldn't it?

Different method. Same result.

[Carlthestrange]

-Skorpious- wrote...

I'll start seriously judging synthesis when it becomes less ridiculous in its execution.

Now thats an argument I can relate to.

[translationninja]

Carlthestrange wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

A month?...I'm sick fo them ... now

I've been okay with them the past week or so, but I must admit... starting to get tired of this eternal debate. Might take a break from the forums soon. See if it dies down.

I had a 4 post exchange with a gentleman of the "destroy" faction a few pages back that ended on a "glad we can agree to disagree note."

That was quite refreshing...

[Forbry]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm sorry, bloodlust? What? Me wanting to defy a threat that wants to corrupt and destroy everything is bloodlust?
Are you serious?

Either that or incredible callousness.

And no. I will not sacrifice the Geth because the spacebaby tells me to.

So... you don't trust the Catalyst on anything except what it says shooting it will do? Why? That aside from the fact that apparently a result is less horrible if you're not doing it personally.

There's no equality when everything is forced to become the same, and destroy is still submission, because you're allowing the Catalyst to dictate the future of the galaxy.

The Catalyst dictates the future of the galaxy in Refusal too.

My mentioning of Saren serves to remind how pointless synthesis is as a choice.

No it doesn't. It's an irrelevant red herring from a previous event, as well as an association fallacy.

I think you have a very... very...(!)... good point here and one that I do not have seen written by anyone else before...
One thing though, I think TAO is for refusing, not shooting the tube...