Ieldra2 wrote...
@AlexMBrennan:
That's perfectly ok. As long as you don't go and insist that other people are stupid, evil or insane for having a different perspective. That's what gets me in these threads: people's irrational insistence that theirs is the only acceptable perspective. It's like a Crusade.
BTW, the new exposition by the Catalyst is rather concrete in comparison to what came before. I can work with that. Also it wasn't that hard to predict where Synthesis was going - the EC scenario is very close in spirit to what I speculated it would be before it came out.
Agreed that questioning people's judgement or intelligence based on their choice is absurd. I'm completely in favor of the destroy ending now, but pre-EC, I chose synth. That was in large part because I was shocked by how abrupt and out of place the end felt that I didn't care, but it seemed better.
Two things solidified my opinion:
1: The more I thought about synthesis, the less it made sense from a psychological standpoint. Is synthesis something I would do to myself? Sure, assuming it didn't re-write my personality or identity. As is, the ending is so unexplained that I can't guarantee that, and in leiu or a very clear explanation by the writers on how it changes the minds of so many individuals, all of whom hated the reapers, many of whom would object to being hybridized, and all of whom had an emotional stake in the war, I can't help but assume that the crucible achieved this in the most direct way possible. If it can rewrite dna, it can rewrite thought patterns and programming. I can't support that.
2: I see no reason to accept that the catalyst cares abotu individuals, or is even sane. It decided, countless times, to amalgamate civilizations into single reapers, and appears to have no care for individual lives or identities, based on its willingness to a. create reaperized troops and b. directly dominate the minds of even its own reapers, as shep does in control. So who should I assume that it cares to preserve the personality and mind of all the "chaotic" organics if shep chooses synthesis. If the catalyst wouldn't care, would it even mention it? Does it even think about identity that way? Moreover, the catalyst decided to wipe out its own creators based on this logic, so at best it has no care for individual minds, and at worst its program is horribly flawed, which is what allowed it to turn on its creators, so why should I trust its judgement? I consider it an untrustworthy source.
Edit: 3. It claims that synthetics turning on organics is inevitable and unresolvable. We have no evidence of that beyond its word, with the exception of our experience with the geth and EDI, both of which are very much resolvable. The story itself primes us to not believe that these conflicts can't be resolved, so why trust the catalyst, a brand new antagonist, over past direct experience that comprised huge sections of the game? It seems more likely that the catalyst refuses to believe that conflict can be resolved, and has no evidence otherwise because it's been wiping civilizations out before they can prove that synthetics and organics can get along.
Modifié par Argable, 05 juillet 2012 - 02:59 .
Retour en haut
