1300 réponses à ce sujet

[zambot]

iAFKinMassEffect3 wrote...

It's disturbing to think about and you're no longer you.
You may even lose control of your own body, you will become an abomination

Neither of these things are implied by the ending.  If that's what you believe happens after attaining ultimate knowledge and understanding, then that's your interpretation of transhumanism.

[zambot]

Aedan276 wrote...

Your disagreement is insensible.

That was not necessary.  

Aedan276 wrote... 
Saren's manifesto to Shepard on Virmire was text book transhumanism. 

"We're going to augment ourselves and modify our organic nature with cybernetics until we achieve a level of affinity and power that makes us reconcilable and useful to the Reapers." 

Transhumanism in response to the threat of annihilation by Synthetic beings is still transhumanism. 

If you cannot tell the difference between Sauren's desire to be "useful" to the Reapers, and the implied tranhumanist utopia created by Synthesis, then I am afraid we should just stop talking.  As ridiculous as I find the space magic behind synthesis, It is plainly obvious to me that the writers were not trying to fulfill Sauren's wishes at the end of the synthesis "movie".  

[Aedan276]

zambot wrote...

Aedan276 wrote...

Your disagreement is insensible.

That was not necessary.  

Aedan276 wrote... 
Saren's manifesto to Shepard on Virmire was text book transhumanism. 

"We're going to augment ourselves and modify our organic nature with cybernetics until we achieve a level of affinity and power that makes us reconcilable and useful to the Reapers." 

Transhumanism in response to the threat of annihilation by Synthetic beings is still transhumanism. 

If you cannot tell the difference between Sauren's desire to be "useful" to the Reapers, and the implied tranhumanist utopia created by Synthesis, then I am afraid we should just stop talking.  As ridiculous as I find the space magic behind synthesis, It is plainly obvious to me that the writers were not trying to fulfill Sauren's wishes at the end of the synthesis "movie".  

The point of contention isn't the relative social standing of the peoples of the galaxy in relation to the Reapers (brainwashed servants versus co-equals working toward a utopia) but that the moral that the peoples of the galaxy enjoyed a right to determine their destinies (as individuals, peoples, and as a galaxy) which persisted through the narrative of the ME series was abruptly abandoned and received little to no acknowledgement in the original endings. Nobody gave Shepard permission to spur them into "the final stage of evolution," and since the beginning the Reapers have been hostile to free will and self-determination that each species has depended on to find meaning in their existence -- to the point that their primary weapon, Indoctrination, destroys personal will and is portrayed as the ultimate evil.

The basic logic at work then seemed to be that the benefits of the Synthesis ending overruled any possible negative moral implication of forcing people in a mode of existence they didn't choose for themselves. In its own context that logic might be legitimate, but it didn't fit the themes or tone of the rest of the series. It definitely didn't relate at all to what was happening at the Collector Base in ME2, or the showdown between Sovereign/Saren and Alliane/Shepard in ME1. Shepard wasn't thinking about making anyone half-Synthetic when he repurposed or destroyed the Collector Base. He was thinking about how he was going to stop the Reapers from controlling and killing everyone. 

The Extended Cut is a little bit better, since Shepard is allowed to voice that the decision is a morally problematic one, regardless of the positive benefits, in keeping with his usual tendency to object to abuses or perversions of aspects of existence natural to living beings. 

Modifié par Aedan276, 05 juillet 2012 - 06:04 .

[zambot]

Aedan276 wrote...

zambot wrote...

Aedan276 wrote...

Your disagreement is insensible.

That was not necessary.  

Aedan276 wrote... 
Saren's manifesto to Shepard on Virmire was text book transhumanism. 

"We're going to augment ourselves and modify our organic nature with cybernetics until we achieve a level of affinity and power that makes us reconcilable and useful to the Reapers." 

Transhumanism in response to the threat of annihilation by Synthetic beings is still transhumanism. 

If you cannot tell the difference between Sauren's desire to be "useful" to the Reapers, and the implied tranhumanist utopia created by Synthesis, then I am afraid we should just stop talking.  As ridiculous as I find the space magic behind synthesis, It is plainly obvious to me that the writers were not trying to fulfill Sauren's wishes at the end of the synthesis "movie".  

The point of contention isn't the relative social standing of the peoples of the galaxy in relation to the Reapers (brainwashed servants versus co-equals working toward a utopia) but that the moral that the peoples of the galaxy enjoyed a right to determine their destinies (as individuals, peoples, and as a galaxy) which persisted through the narrative of the ME series was abruptly abandoned and received little to no acknowledgement in the original endings. Nobody gave Shepard permission to spur them into "the final stage of evolution," and since the beginning the Reapers have been hostile to free will and self-determination that each species has depended on to find meaning in their existence -- to the point that their primary weapon, Indoctrination, destroys personal will and is portrayed as the ultimate evil.

The basic logic at work then seemed to be that the benefits of the Synthesis ending overruled any possible negative moral implication of forcing people in a mode of existence they didn't choose for themselves. In its own context that logic might be legitimate, but it didn't fit the themes or tone of the rest of the series. It definitely didn't relate at all to what was happening at the Collector Base in ME2, or the showdown between Sovereign/Saren and Alliane/Shepard in ME1. Shepard wasn't thinking about making anyone half-Synthetic when he repurposed or destroyed the Collector Base. He was thinking about how he was going to stop the Reapers from controlling and killing everyone. 

The Extended Cut is a little bit better, since Shepard is allowed to voice that the decision is a morally problematic one, regardless of the positive benefits, in keeping with his usual tendency to object to abuses or perversions of aspects of existence natural to living beings. 

The difference between Indoctrination and Forced Tranhumanism is slavery vs. assault.  The only ending for a Shep who wants to ensure that every individual in the galaxy has a say in their own destiny is "refusal" or arguably "control" (if you believe Shep has the capability to fly all the reapers into a black hole after his transformation).

Of course synthesis is such utter nonsense you could probably headcanon that the process is reversible since we all have inifite knowledge, so anyone who wants to opt-out post decision can do it.

[RiouHotaru]

jtav wrote...

Or, for that matter, they don't show all the people who die because of disease and malnutrition in Destroy. The presented the details that conveyed the mood they wanted. Storytellers do that.

It's also entire possible those outcomes didn't occur.  You imply that colonies aren't self-sufficent, and even if they aren't, that there isn't relief aid.

Remember, Destroy implies conventional FTL is used until the relays are fixed.  It's still possible to supply a colony, it just takes longer.

[Aedan276]

zambot wrote...

Aedan276 wrote...

zambot wrote...

Aedan276 wrote...

Your disagreement is insensible.

That was not necessary.  

Aedan276 wrote... 
Saren's manifesto to Shepard on Virmire was text book transhumanism. 

"We're going to augment ourselves and modify our organic nature with cybernetics until we achieve a level of affinity and power that makes us reconcilable and useful to the Reapers." 

Transhumanism in response to the threat of annihilation by Synthetic beings is still transhumanism. 

If you cannot tell the difference between Sauren's desire to be "useful" to the Reapers, and the implied tranhumanist utopia created by Synthesis, then I am afraid we should just stop talking.  As ridiculous as I find the space magic behind synthesis, It is plainly obvious to me that the writers were not trying to fulfill Sauren's wishes at the end of the synthesis "movie".  

The point of contention isn't the relative social standing of the peoples of the galaxy in relation to the Reapers (brainwashed servants versus co-equals working toward a utopia) but that the moral that the peoples of the galaxy enjoyed a right to determine their destinies (as individuals, peoples, and as a galaxy) which persisted through the narrative of the ME series was abruptly abandoned and received little to no acknowledgement in the original endings. Nobody gave Shepard permission to spur them into "the final stage of evolution," and since the beginning the Reapers have been hostile to free will and self-determination that each species has depended on to find meaning in their existence -- to the point that their primary weapon, Indoctrination, destroys personal will and is portrayed as the ultimate evil.

The basic logic at work then seemed to be that the benefits of the Synthesis ending overruled any possible negative moral implication of forcing people in a mode of existence they didn't choose for themselves. In its own context that logic might be legitimate, but it didn't fit the themes or tone of the rest of the series. It definitely didn't relate at all to what was happening at the Collector Base in ME2, or the showdown between Sovereign/Saren and Alliane/Shepard in ME1. Shepard wasn't thinking about making anyone half-Synthetic when he repurposed or destroyed the Collector Base. He was thinking about how he was going to stop the Reapers from controlling and killing everyone. 

The Extended Cut is a little bit better, since Shepard is allowed to voice that the decision is a morally problematic one, regardless of the positive benefits, in keeping with his usual tendency to object to abuses or perversions of aspects of existence natural to living beings. 

The difference between Indoctrination and Forced Tranhumanism is slavery vs. assault.  The only ending for a Shep who wants to ensure that every individual in the galaxy has a say in their own destiny is "refusal" or arguably "control" (if you believe Shep has the capability to fly all the reapers into a black hole after his transformation).

Of course synthesis is such utter nonsense you could probably headcanon that the process is reversible since we all have inifite knowledge, so anyone who wants to opt-out post decision can do it.

To varying degrees. None of them are perfect. Both 'Control' endings suggest or state that Shepard is going to actively use his power to shape the future. In the case of Paragon control it might be a benign and non-coercive way, however.

The problem is that Reapers by nature are beings to whom the concepts of self-determination and free will are alien and irrelevant, because they tend to evaluate existence in terms of algorithms rather than personal consciousness. In some senses their very existence is the ultimate offense to life and its wonders, which is why the narrative and characters (even the Geth) tend to see them as abominations. The Destroy ending does require sacrifice (most extremely your Synthentic friends and allies if you have them), but it does liberate the galaxy from the designs of the Reapers once and for all, and thus, from the power that posed the greatest and most long term threat to self-determination and free will. 

I'm not sure if anyone would "want" to opt out of Synthesis once it happened to them, anymore than a person would want to opt out of a risky vaccination once it was successfully administered. 

Modifié par Aedan276, 05 juillet 2012 - 06:34 .

[RiouHotaru]

Trans-humanism is there in the narrative, but it's very subtle and never explicitly mentioned as trans-humanism until ME3.

[Epic777]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Trans-humanism is there in the narrative, but it's very subtle and never explicitly mentioned as trans-humanism until ME3.

Which would have been needed for the synthetic vs organic theme to work.

[Epic777]

One of the things (out of the numerous) I hate about synthesis is instead of being a 'pick your poison' like the rest it turns into a fart 'green rainbows and ponies' ending. The way Bioware push the player towards this ending is embarrassing.

[Ieldra]

RiouHotaru wrote...
Trans-humanism is there in the narrative, but it's very subtle and never explicitly mentioned as trans-humanism until ME3.

*cough* Martin Burns, Chairman of the Alliance Parliamentary Subcommittee for Transhuman Studies. ME1.

The only mention it gets in ME3 is in an easily missed conversation with EDI.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 05 juillet 2012 - 07:27 .

[BatmanPWNS]

Space magic is apparently DEEP.

[Ieldra]

Epic777 wrote...
One of the things (out of the numerous) I hate about synthesis is instead of being a 'pick your poison' like the rest it turns into a fart 'green rainbows and ponies' ending. The way Bioware push the player towards this ending is embarrassing.

Really? Many people are very uncomfortable with the Reaper presence in the Synthesis ending and count that a big mark against it. And it is as morally problematic as the others. Also, with the EC I don't think anyone has anything to complain about regarding the future of the galaxy, except for those who Refused.

[Argable]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...
One of the things (out of the numerous) I hate about synthesis is instead of being a 'pick your poison' like the rest it turns into a fart 'green rainbows and ponies' ending. The way Bioware push the player towards this ending is embarrassing.

Really? Many people are very uncomfortable with the Reaper presence in the Synthesis ending and count that a big mark against it. And it is as morally problematic as the others. Also, with the EC I don't think anyone has anything to complain about regarding the future of the galaxy, except for those who Refused.

The presence of the reapers in control doesn't bother me nearly as much as their presence in synthesis. I pity them in control, because if they were independant entities as some point (a little vague now because of the sudden appearance of the catalyst), they're now under shep's control. My problem with synthesis is that it's like stepping out of a room full of people actively murdering each other, turning around, and walking in to find them playing chess and speaking civilly. Then one guy in the corner goes, "What do you mean? Of course we worked it out." It's not adequately explained, and it's presented by the leader of the race characterized by brainwashing, so I'm immediately suspicious.

Actually, no. My biggest issues with synthesis are all literary. It's thrown out of left field by a guy on the other team, and the writers expect me to take it seriously?

Modifié par Argable, 05 juillet 2012 - 07:40 .

[Quething]

Ieldra2 wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...
Trans-humanism is there in the narrative, but it's very subtle and never explicitly mentioned as trans-humanism until ME3.

*cough* Martin Burns, Chairman of the Alliance Parliamentary Subcommittee for Transhuman Studies. ME1.

The only mention it gets in ME3 is in an easily missed conversation with EDI.

Interesting note about that conversation:

After EDI defines transhumanism (loosely), Shepard asks "Am I transhuman?"

EDI says "That would be telling." Shepard responds with pique, and EDI explains it was a joke, then assures Shepard that she is, indeed, purely human, despite her cybernetic upgrades. Shepard, with clear and extreme discomfort, angrily orders, "Never do that again."

The clear implication of this scene is that BioWare's Shepard, the one we can't control who supercedes our own Shepards all through ME3, is profoundly protective of and insecure about her natural humanity. The suggestion that she might not be 100% pure home-grown au naturel organic, that there's anything at all inhuman about her, terrifies her, and EDI's joke cuts her so deeply that she can offer only a curt, infuriated equivalent to "shut up," when every other tasteless joke in the game gets a long, wordy "don't say that and this is why." She explicity rejects transhumanism, as applied to her personally. The idea disturbs her on the deepest possible level.

She also repeatedly rejects Control, of course. So it's not like Synthesis is unique in either being epic hypocrisy or epic change-of-heart depending on how you view it. But it's an interesting new shade to the discussion.

[Malditor]

Caladors wrote...

What don't you understand?

Malditor wrote...

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.

Was just a typo, that was supposed to read I DO understand. Sorry.

[Zandilar]

 

DKJaigen wrote...

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. 

My DNA is contained within each and every cell of my body. It is not just the blueprint, it is a fundamental part of who I am. When you change my DNA, you are changing the fundamental building blocks of my body. You are changing who I am. (I think you misunderstand DNA. If you were to take every cell in my body and alter the DNA in some way, such as changing my sex chromosomes from XX to XY, it would change me. In the case of the sex chomosome example, you'd make me male (not straight away, it would take some time for my body to make necessary changes). Now think about that - some paternalistic figure somewhere out in the universe suddenly decides you'd be better off the opposite gender without asking you if you want to be changed - how is that any less of a violation than rape?)

Human rights and most of our laws (in common law countries, at least, and probably in other legal systems too) start from the position that the human body is invoilate. That is why murder, assault, rape and such are all illegal, and why we have the concept of tresspass of body in Tort law - they violate our bodies. This alteration of DNA is no less horrific than any of those crimes. Justify it however you wish, it still is abhorrent to most human beings.

(Disclaimer: If I were given a CHOICE? I might actually agree to be changed. My major problem with the synthesis ending, aside from the whole space magic thing, is with the lack of consent rather than what the actual change does.)

[DKJaigen]

Zandilar wrote...

 

DKJaigen wrote...

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. 

My DNA is contained within each and every cell of my body. It is not just the blueprint, it is a fundamental part of who I am. When you change my DNA, you are changing the fundamental building blocks of my body. You are changing who I am. (I think you misunderstand DNA. If you were to take every cell in my body and alter the DNA in some way, such as changing my sex chromosomes from XX to XY, it would change me. In the case of the sex chomosome example, you'd make me male (not straight away, it would take some time for my body to make necessary changes). Now think about that - some paternalistic figure somewhere out in the universe suddenly decides you'd be better off the opposite gender without asking you if you want to be changed - how is that any less of a violation than rape?)

Human rights and most of our laws (in common law countries, at least, and probably in other legal systems too) start from the position that the human body is invoilate. That is why murder, assault, rape and such are all illegal, and why we have the concept of tresspass of body in Tort law - they violate our bodies. This alteration of DNA is no less horrific than any of those crimes. Justify it however you wish, it still is abhorrent to most human beings.

(Disclaimer: If I were given a CHOICE? I might actually agree to be changed. My major problem with the synthesis ending, aside from the whole space magic thing, is with the lack of consent rather than what the actual change does.)

I really care less about human rights in this case. And thats because they dont apply to the situation. . You either choose eternal war or eternal peace(and not through mind rape but through knowledge) . I dont need consent because this is a clear upgrade to the human liveform. If you dont choose it your are monster

[Cuddlezarro]

DKJaigen wrote...

I really care less about human rights in this case. And thats because they dont apply to the situation. . You either choose eternal war or eternal peace(and not through mind rape but through knowledge) . I dont need consent because this is a clear upgrade to the human liveform. If you dont choose it your are monster

Im sorry but LOL you have to be incredibly naive if you think eternal peace will last without somekind of brain washing

because "knowledge and understanding" will not make a power hungry jackass like urdnot wreav and people like him change into peace loving hippies expecially when its a krogans very nature to be agressive if anything it just gives them more tools to abuse and dominate others

so you may think im a monster but I think you are a naive fool

Modifié par Cuddlezarro, 06 juillet 2012 - 08:04 .

[Exeider]

I think the fact that this so called "Ascension" is given and not earned, knowledge of civilizations past and present all in one big melting pot.

My issue with this, I was having trouble putting it into words until i was watching several episodes of Stargate SG-1, and it hit me while watching it.

My problem is that, it wasn't earned, achieved or otherwised gained for the purpose of larger enlightenment, it was dropped on us as a, take it or die mentality. And It made me think of the difference between the Ori and the Ancients.

For the Ancients, if you DESERVE to ascend, then you should be able to do it on your own, in fact Oma Desala was an outcast because she "helped" people ascend and became personally responsible for Anubis. The Ori on the other hand hand out the will and promise of "Origin" in that they will ascend with the gods and take their place on the planes of Celestis.

It was pointed out, that because the knowledge was being spoon fed by the Ori, there is no conscious effort to attain enlightenment and there fore leads to death of the most meaningless kind. By giving up your free will you become nothing and will be nothing, you will not grow or change or exceed. Everybody is the same.

And that is my problem with synthesis, it doesn't wait for organics and synthetics to come together in their own time, or even to find a solution together, it comes in and assumes control of the situation and forces a particular being's vision of things. So because this ascension was not attained naturally, no conscious effort on the part of those that are effected, and no effort to attain the knowledge that suddenly comes into being. It literally means people are nothing more then cogs in the machine. Followers to a larger will that MAY or MAY NOT be lying to them.

In other words the will of the Ori.
"Hallowed are the Ori, Hallowed are the Children of the Ori."

-Æ

[Exeider]

DKJaigen wrote...
I really care less about human rights in this case. And thats because they dont apply to the situation. . You either choose eternal war or eternal peace(and not through mind rape but through knowledge) . I dont need consent because this is a clear upgrade to the human liveform. If you dont choose it your are monster

How very Mengalian of you.
-Æ

Modifié par Exeider, 06 juillet 2012 - 08:12 .

[RenegonSQ]

v TricKy v wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Because the Reapers win. Forever.

/thread

[sUiCiDeKiNgS13]

The EC doesn't make Synthesis seem like the Genetic Rape that I originally thought it was.
Destroy is now my least favorite option.

[Exeider]

sUiCiDeKiNgS13 wrote...

The EC doesn't make Synthesis seem like the Genetic Rape that I originally thought it was.
Destroy is now my least favorite option.

because watching nanite particles intermesh with DNA isn't hardcore enough for you?

Watching everyone go green eye, and seeing the glowing green eyes on sillouettes was really disturbing to me. It seemed like I was watching the borg collective starting up.

-Æ

Modifié par Exeider, 06 juillet 2012 - 08:15 .

[Reptilian Rob]

This thread is STILL going on?

Oh FFS when will people let other people enjoy their game?

[Exeider]

Reptilian Rob wrote...

This thread is STILL going on?

Oh FFS when will people let other people enjoy their game?

cuz we were trying to get your attention, get on skype you bast***d

-Æ