1300 réponses à ce sujet

[Fawx9]

translationninja wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

Hyrist wrote...

You consider the alteration of life a violation, then why are you on a forum board trying to convince others of your viewpoint?

Information is as much of a life changer than any other compelling force of the Galaxy, yet we do not pause a moment in educating someone from another culture about the 'facts' instead of leaving them to discover it through their own ,and often violent, devices.

It's a double standard that is as clear as day to me. We as a culture say "Oh no, we can't violate the individuality of species, that's wrong! Yet we do so, unceasingly in the social context, daily."

Synthsis is the end argument. Everyone has the access to the same information pool, everyone has the knowledge of the same history. How to build is known, the mysteries of the Universe are, for the most part, resolved. In the end the result becomes merely personal preference - a conversation that ultimately should not end up the way we are discussing it here, and honestly would not take place when the entirety of a person's perception of a matter could be relayed quicker than the time it would take for the individual to inaccurately post it here.

Furthermore, it would be much more difficult to lie about your opinion, which some people sadly actually do to fit the crowd.

So no, I have no qualms about Synthsis, as many people attempt socially in our life - you encounter this any time you preach religion or are preached at. This way of achieving the goal of unifying the perception of sentience is painless, quick, and does so in a manner that is not invasive to free will beyond the fact that it happens. And to be frank, some people could use a little eureka moment to realize just how hypocritical they're being on this matter.

Yes we've 'uplifted' cutures before, and most of the time its been a huge mistake. The Aboriginals are still in a state of dissarray after enlisting them in special schools to teach them the proper way to live.

The fact you force this on everyone in a matter of minutes instead of helping them to learn and discover for themselves is basically the same mistakes we made when we did it in the past.

Synthesis hardly compares to making first contact with an aboriginal tribe and handing them some combs and lots of bottles of firewater, don't you think?

Not what I'm talking about. Look into the schooling system that was put in place in Canada. It's not exactly pretty what happened, even if it was done with 'good intentions'. Having your culture fundamentally changed over night  can destory a community or a nation. That's a risk I'm not willing to take with synthesis, and it's stupid that such an idea was ever thought of.

[Aylyese]

lx_theo wrote...

No. It simply clarified and further explained it. Simpke as that.

This is still a weird thing that you have a problem with this. I said all that matters is each individual opinion when it comes down to choice, and no opinion should be disrepected unless it fall into the category of attacking other's opinion's for the sake of discrediting them. I then went on to explain that, even though your opinion obviously does not have this, people are believing that they may need to take a back seat when it comes to a crisis. That's why people are able to pick synthesis. It's part of their opinion, and only supports their, not devalues any others.

And I guess you're develuing my opinion some. I picked all three main ones over my three runs. 

Wait. I think my brain just exploded.

No opinion should be disrespected "unless" = devaluing an opinion.

Even though "my" opinion is not X other peoples is, and that only supports their opinion, not devaluing mine? (or anyone else in the galaxy who would not want to be part synthetic, like Javik for example).

Maybe you can rephrase all that because it reads like a giant contradiction. 

translationninja wrote...

You can struggle as and twist it and turn it as much as you want, talk about violation etc., nothing can change the fact that stating synthesis is "worse" a.k.a preferring destroy over synthesis makes you a genocidal mass murderer.

Maybe a genocidal mass murderer with strong beliefs about a topic (DNA modification), and maybe a genocidal mass murderer whom believes to be absolutely right and making a necessary sacrifice (don't they all think that?) but still a mass murderer nontheless.

There is neither moral ambiguity or room for interpretation in that. All the races came together for a big final stand. So either all of them come out or none. No man left behind. There is no "oops sorry, you guys got the short straw because we others have decided...uhm...yeah...sorry gotta go, hope the wiping out of your species isn't too much of an inconvenience, but you know how Fred gets when it comes to his DNA.

 

Morailty is not ambiguous. You would not force a person to do anything against their will before. Why now? Because you are afraid to die.

Modifié par Aylyese, 04 juillet 2012 - 02:49 .

[Imakassafabrication]

Synthesis is what Saren wanted for organics.....yep

[Pangaron]

I am against it because:
1 - Windmills do not work that way!
2 - I am not going to be a "friend" with someone who is responsible for killing MANY, MANY, MANY folks and still do not think it is very wrong, even if we both smoke the green stuff.
3 - I do not believe the ****** and also I do not believe in utopia. The name speaks for itself.
4 - Very politically incorrect example, but I will go ahead anyway (freedom of speech). If I had an option to turn each heterosexual and homosexual into bisexuals (everyone would be happy, huh?), I definitely would not do it, because it is not my right to do so and if you cannot understand that such decisions are very wrong, then I am sorry for you. And yeah, destroying (genocide) or controlling (cure, eh?) them is not nice either. I used to pick destroy, because I did not believe that EDI and Geth are actually gone (I just do not trust the brat at all), but now it seems that the only moral choice is not to choose any of the evils. Just watch X-men trilogy, it is the same stuff all over again.

[Legbiter]

That krogling with the green glowing eyes....yikes!

[nos_astra]

Before the EC DLC most people here on BSN didn't care much for Synthesis (well, that was my impression). We all took a good hard look at what we knew and found the implications to be unpleasant.

Now Synthesis just feels dishonest to me. I'm fairly sure that 2 plus 2 makes 4, but Bioware insist it's actually 5. The prettiest 5 ever, complete with rainbows and unicorns. It's really weird.

Modifié par klarabella, 04 juillet 2012 - 03:29 .

[Malditor]

I wonder if each choice killed off a different race, turian, krogan, salarian OR you could pick synthesis how many people would kill off another race.... It seems easy to trivialize the destruction of the synthetics as they aren't really "alive" and some people already killed them off in the game. Refuse doesn't fall into the same catagory though as it is letting all die because whomever doesn't feel any of the choices acceptable.

[Caladors]

I think the reason is for a lot of people who have a long history of playing video games and whom have played many other games they see this as a direct rip from J.C. Denton's answer to Dues Ex.
And those who have played those games saw them trying for superficial depth where there was none. For Dues Ex which the game is named after the very thing we face at the end of the series a Dues Ex Machina both in the literary and literal sense, it simply doesn't fit. Dues Ex did a lot of Easter egg-esque stuff like, J.C see what we did there he has to save humanity, poke, poke, nudge, nudge.

But for a lot of this it doesn't fit the mass effect universe. The Mass Effect universe is a universe of causality. Villains in this a pro active they're not just sitting around waiting for things to happen they have goals and the world goes on as you do things elsewhere. Mass effect one had this to degrees but it still seemed like the world waited for you. As an example Liara if late comments about how she thought you were hallucinations because she has been here for so long. But mass effect 2 really reinforced the cause and effect, living world galaxy where stuff happens even if you don't do things.

In mass effect 2 if your not fast enough most of your crew is harvested by the collectors. This is the kind of universe your in. So to find yourself against a D&D-esque Dues Ex Machina Big Bad End Guy.
That was kind of jarring. One could understand if he was just the interface left behind by the survivors of Iilos that went to the Citadel, another Victory VI instead of Vigil VI.

So that was shocking then the idea of you don't choose renegade or paragon. That their was only one good choice which was synthesis which irked a lot people because of the insidious way it was suggested to be the right path. Wile choosing Destroy or Control were really other peoples choices, Anderson and the Illusive man respectively. Synthesis is 'your' choice.

It just smacked of not fitting into the universe. Add that with everything else people were bound not to like it. It's a lot like Wesley Crusher or Wolverine. For those of you who don't know what I am talking about it's like that character your told to love and the makers are continually showing you stuff that say's don't you love him. The whole time your sitting there saying no I don't love him stop making me swallow it. And that is essentially the problem, your told to love it on a number of levels and because of that you hate it.

[Malditor]

Caladors wrote...

I think the reason is for a lot of people who have a long history of playing video games and whom have played many other games they see this as a direct rip from J.C. Denton's answer to Dues Ex.
And those who have played those games saw them trying for superficial depth where there was none. For Dues Ex which the game is named after the very thing we face at the end of the series a Dues Ex Machina both in the literary and literal sense, it simply doesn't fit. Dues Ex did a lot of Easter egg-esque stuff like, J.C see what we did there he has to save humanity, poke, poke, nudge, nudge.

But for a lot of this it doesn't fit the mass effect universe. The Mass Effect universe is a universe of causality. Villains in this a pro active they're not just sitting around waiting for things to happen they have goals and the world goes on as you do things elsewhere. Mass effect one had this to degrees but it still seemed like the world waited for you. As an example Liara if late comments about how she thought you were hallucinations because she has been here for so long. But mass effect 2 really reinforced the cause and effect, living world galaxy where stuff happens even if you don't do things.

In mass effect 2 if your not fast enough most of your crew is harvested by the collectors. This is the kind of universe your in. So to find yourself against a D&D-esque Dues Ex Machina Big Bad End Guy.
That was kind of jarring. One could understand if he was just the interface left behind by the survivors of Iilos that went to the Citadel, another Victory VI instead of Vigil VI.

So that was shocking then the idea of you don't choose renegade or paragon. That their was only one good choice which was synthesis which irked a lot people because of the insidious way it was suggested to be the right path. Wile choosing Destroy or Control were really other peoples choices, Anderson and the Illusive man respectively. Synthesis is 'your' choice.

It just smacked of not fitting into the universe. Add that with everything else people were bound not to like it. It's a lot like Wesley Crusher or Wolverine. For those of you who don't know what I am talking about it's like that character your told to love and the makers are continually showing you stuff that say's don't you love him. The whole time your sitting there saying no I don't love him stop making me swallow it. And that is essentially the problem, your told to love it on a number of levels and because of that you hate it.

Wait, people hate wesley and wolverine??
I don understand what you are saying though, however that is one of the arguments I can concede to, that it doesn't fit the story that's why they don't like it. Because that's a logical response whereas most of the other responses are emotional.

[Forbry]

Caladors wrote...

I think the reason is for a lot of people who have a long history of playing video games and whom have played many other games they see this as a direct rip from J.C. Denton's answer to Dues Ex.
And those who have played those games saw them trying for superficial depth where there was none. For Dues Ex which the game is named after the very thing we face at the end of the series a Dues Ex Machina both in the literary and literal sense, it simply doesn't fit. Dues Ex did a lot of Easter egg-esque stuff like, J.C see what we did there he has to save humanity, poke, poke, nudge, nudge.

But for a lot of this it doesn't fit the mass effect universe. The Mass Effect universe is a universe of causality. Villains in this a pro active they're not just sitting around waiting for things to happen they have goals and the world goes on as you do things elsewhere. Mass effect one had this to degrees but it still seemed like the world waited for you. As an example Liara if late comments about how she thought you were hallucinations because she has been here for so long. But mass effect 2 really reinforced the cause and effect, living world galaxy where stuff happens even if you don't do things.

In mass effect 2 if your not fast enough most of your crew is harvested by the collectors. This is the kind of universe your in. So to find yourself against a D&D-esque Dues Ex Machina Big Bad End Guy.
That was kind of jarring. One could understand if he was just the interface left behind by the survivors of Iilos that went to the Citadel, another Victory VI instead of Vigil VI.

So that was shocking then the idea of you don't choose renegade or paragon. That their was only one good choice which was synthesis which irked a lot people because of the insidious way it was suggested to be the right path. Wile choosing Destroy or Control were really other peoples choices, Anderson and the Illusive man respectively. Synthesis is 'your' choice.

It just smacked of not fitting into the universe. Add that with everything else people were bound not to like it. It's a lot like Wesley Crusher or Wolverine. For those of you who don't know what I am talking about it's like that character your told to love and the makers are continually showing you stuff that say's don't you love him. The whole time your sitting there saying no I don't love him stop making me swallow it. And that is essentially the problem, your told to love it on a number of levels and because of that you hate it.

Oh my god, now there even is another synthesis threat come on board, a one where you're eyes glow pink. Run destroyers and refusers, RUN!!!

/avatar

[KingZayd]

translationninja wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

Hyrist wrote...

You consider the alteration of life a violation, then why are you on a forum board trying to convince others of your viewpoint?

Information is as much of a life changer than any other compelling force of the Galaxy, yet we do not pause a moment in educating someone from another culture about the 'facts' instead of leaving them to discover it through their own ,and often violent, devices.

It's a double standard that is as clear as day to me. We as a culture say "Oh no, we can't violate the individuality of species, that's wrong! Yet we do so, unceasingly in the social context, daily."

Synthsis is the end argument. Everyone has the access to the same information pool, everyone has the knowledge of the same history. How to build is known, the mysteries of the Universe are, for the most part, resolved. In the end the result becomes merely personal preference - a conversation that ultimately should not end up the way we are discussing it here, and honestly would not take place when the entirety of a person's perception of a matter could be relayed quicker than the time it would take for the individual to inaccurately post it here.

Furthermore, it would be much more difficult to lie about your opinion, which some people sadly actually do to fit the crowd.

So no, I have no qualms about Synthsis, as many people attempt socially in our life - you encounter this any time you preach religion or are preached at. This way of achieving the goal of unifying the perception of sentience is painless, quick, and does so in a manner that is not invasive to free will beyond the fact that it happens. And to be frank, some people could use a little eureka moment to realize just how hypocritical they're being on this matter.

Yes we've 'uplifted' cutures before, and most of the time its been a huge mistake. The Aboriginals are still in a state of dissarray after enlisting them in special schools to teach them the proper way to live.

The fact you force this on everyone in a matter of minutes instead of helping them to learn and discover for themselves is basically the same mistakes we made when we did it in the past.

Synthesis hardly compares to making first contact with an aboriginal tribe and handing them some combs and lots of bottles of firewater, don't you think?

You're right.. it's far more devestating.

[SupR G]

"RESISTANCE IS FUTILE"
-Shepard

[Ryzaki]

Why? Because it blows and worse than that it's utterly retarded.

[Baa Baa]

v TricKy v wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Because the Reapers win. Forever.

/thread

[thehomeworld]

These:

it's genetic mutation of every species in the galaxy without their knowledge or consent

the Reapers win. Forever.

It rewrites everyone into a giant lotus eater machine with the mind flayers

It's socialism on a genetic level Kim Jung Ill would be proud of this sameness

It's a terrible concept, it's like the writers are trying to say that the only way everyone can get along is to make them all the same. Homogenization

Saren and the reapers gets what they wanted

basically shepard assimilates everybody "the borg way"

Before the EC DLC most people here on BSN didn't care much for Synthesis
(well, that was my impression). We all took a good hard look at what we
knew and found the implications to be unpleasant.

Now Synthesis
just feels dishonest to me. I'm fairly sure that 2 plus 2 makes 4, but
Bioware insist it's actually 5. The prettiest 5 ever, complete with
rainbows and unicorns. It's really weird.

Modifié par thehomeworld, 04 juillet 2012 - 05:37 .

[Malditor]

Baa Baa wrote...

v TricKy v wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Because the Reapers win. Forever.

/thread

Such a false statement. The Reapers win even though they didn't wipe out every advanced race.... Reapers winning is only in the Refusal choice, at least until the next cycle.

[Forbry]

Rewriting the heretics was also the Paragon option. So as far as the game concerns, if you want to play as a Paragon, you choose synthesis (well, at least instead of destroy).

[UniversalCypher]

McCredie64 wrote...

Because it's a terrible concept, it's like the writers are trying to say that the only way everyone can get along is to make them all the same. Homogenization I believe it's called. For example, it's as if they're telling us the best solution to stopping racism is to make everyone white.

it doesnt make every being the same, it gives every being a common bond that transcends race and origin. its not at all like your solution to racism. actually, its better compared to everybody on the planet believing in the same religion. synthesis doesnt change the fact that there will still be krogans and salarians, etc.

[PinkysPain]

I'm not against synthesis in principle, but it betrays the memory of ME2 Legion ...

[DKJaigen]

Yep that all wars , chaos and misery disappears because we can finally understand each other is a bad thing according to the naysayers.

[Zandilar]

DKJaigen wrote...

Yep that all wars , chaos and misery disappears because we can finally understand each other is a bad thing according to the naysayers.

Are you forgetting that it alters every creature's DNA (even creatures that don't have DNA, what is this, I don't even...) without their consent?

If the galaxy knew about it, I am sure there are entities that would agree to it. But there would probably be a fair number who would not.

I hesitate to use the r word, but that is what Synthesis amounts to.

If you take a step back and look at all four endings objectively, the only one that comes close to being morally "pure" is Control - no one dies, the Reapers are contained with a new set of programming driven/overseen by Shepard's disembodied self. Synthesis is not any better or worse than Destroy or Refuse.

(Disclaimer: I chose Destroy, as that was Shepard's mission right from the start. She did not make that choice unaware of the consequences, but I think she's strong enough to live with the guilt. But there is also ambiguity with the ending, what, exactly, did Destroy destroy? It destroyed the Geth and EDI, but not the Normandy (EDI is intergrated into the Normandy's systems, and the ship is later on seen taking off from the planet - did they rebuild the computers? did they reprogram the systems? did they have the right bunch of technogeeks onboard to do it in what appears to be a very short time? how does that work?) - would it be possible to rebuild both the Geth and EDI? Surely they have inert/compressed backups somewhere that might have escaped the purge?)

[Stumpykins]

I don't understand how synthesis cannot change you mentally on son level
Are the Asari and humans in ME alike?. No because as a different race they have different strengths beliefs, attitudes based on how long they live ( Asari live for a thousand years)
So it must dost thesis kills all that, but let's assume for the minute it doesn't , who cares you are still making a decision to change everyone without consent , it's like me cutting your leg off because I think you be a better person with a synthetic one....,.. Hello shouldn't you have a say on this it's YOUR LEG!!!!
And one last thing before anyone says well destroy you commit genocide , no you don't, the geth and efi help you in the war effort , they offer their lives to save others , throught me3 it's. Ads clear (subjective I know) that they want you to defeat the repeats, like Garry's days the cold calculus of war, sacrifice thus many to save that many
you take them up on that offer if u pick destroy , they are War casualties

[Stumpykins]

I hate phone predictive text

[DKJaigen]

Zandilar wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Yep that all wars , chaos and misery disappears because we can finally understand each other is a bad thing according to the naysayers.

Are you forgetting that it alters every creature's DNA (even creatures that don't have DNA, what is this, I don't even...) without their consent?

If the galaxy knew about it, I am sure there are entities that would agree to it. But there would probably be a fair number who would not.

I hesitate to use the r word, but that is what Synthesis amounts to.

If you take a step back and look at all four endings objectively, the only one that comes close to being morally "pure" is Control - no one dies, the Reapers are contained with a new set of programming driven/overseen by Shepard's disembodied self. Synthesis is not any better or worse than Destroy or Refuse.

Your DNA aint precious or holy sweetheart. Its simply the blueprint how you are created and thats it. The fact is that before  synthesis the mass effect universe sucked as much as our own In fact if find you a far greater monster then the reapers. Because you consign the entire universe to war, misery, misunderstanding ,interracial hatred and all other kinds nonsense all because you are to scared to alter yourself in something better.

So its not rape. Its simply improvement for the better.

[darkpassenger2342]

the synthesis ending turns every being into peaceful bliss...

whats the problem?
i didnt even cure the genophage and the krogans still had a baby....
perfection