204 réponses à ce sujet

[inko1nsiderate]

Billyg3453 wrote...

Still have never gotten a straight answer on this question

But I have an answer that relies on current predictions from futurism, as well as visual cues from the cutscene itself.  But don't worry, I'm probably still a tool.

Modifié par inko1nsiderate, 04 juillet 2012 - 07:58 .

[Messi Kossmann]

I love Synthesis too, but just after EC.
And Haters Gonna Hate!

[Billyg3453]

inko1nsiderate wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

Ok acknowledged.
What is synthetic-organic DNA?

It largely functions on the principle of regular DNA, but now has pico scale electronics  that allow information to be stored in a digial way.  Hence, it has the biological transference of information (a la DNA), but can also store and transmit information due to the new pico scale eletronic lattices we see being created around the DNA in the cutscene.

While I do appreciate that you did answer the question (and I had never heard this of this before), as you probably imagined, it was rhetorical.
My problem with synthesis is not the same "U FORCE SAME ON EVERY1" that a lot of people have. To me, it doesn't make sense.

Edi told me 30 minutes ago she felt alive, and the Geth and Quarians were already building Rannoch. The only difference between Synthesis is that the Reapers are now our friends, people have green eyes, and Shepard is dead.

I feel like I had already accomplished Synthesis. What the Catalyst and Edi tell me is that, although Mass Effect had taught me otherwise, Synthetic life wasn't truly "life" without Synthesis, which to me is (cliched) a betrayal of themes.

But again, thank you for at least answering that question. I will no longer use it as my rhetorical response to "I like synthesis" posts.

inko1nsiderate wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

Still have never gotten a straight answer on this question

But
I have an answer that relies on current predictions from futurism, as
well as visual cues from the cutscene itself.  But don't worry, I'm
probably still a tool.

I was responding to the other posters response when you said this, which was the general answer I had been given before. I'm being serious when I saw I appreciate you actually gave me a scientific answer.

Modifié par Billyg3453, 04 juillet 2012 - 08:00 .

[legion999]

<throws up on monitor>

[Welsh Inferno]

Rhiens VI wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

What is synthetic-organic DNA?

Something resulting from space magic.

What is Mass Effect?

[Whatever42]

inko1nsiderate wrote...

It largely functions on the principle of regular DNA, but now has pico scale electronics  that allow information to be stored in a digial way.  Hence, it has the biological transference of information (a la DNA), but can also store and transmit information due to the new pico scale eletronic lattices we see being created around the DNA in the cutscene.

So... it mimics normal DNA? And somehow stores additional information on the subatomic level? 

Interesting. To what end? How does this new DNA behave?

[Messi Kossmann]

Clarke's three laws:

1 - When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

2 - The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.

3 - Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Modifié par Messi Kossmann, 04 juillet 2012 - 08:12 .

[Billyg3453]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

Rhiens VI wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

What is synthetic-organic DNA?

Something resulting from space magic.

What is Mass Effect?

Element zero
can increase or decrease the mass of volume of space-time when subjected to an electrical current. With a positive current, mass is  increased. With a negative current, mass is decreased. The stronger the current, the greater the magnitude of the dark energy mass effect. In space, low-mass fields allow FTL travel and inexpensive surface-to-orbit transit. High-mass fields create artificial gravity and push space debris away from vessels. In  manufacturing low-mass fields permit the creation of evenly-blended  alloys, while high mass compaction creates dense, sturdy construction materials. The military makes extensive use of mobility enhancing technologies, with mass effect utilizing fighting vehicles standard  front-line issue in most  military forces. Mass effect fields are also essential in the creation of kinetic barriers or shields to protect against enemy fire.

Bad argument. Mass Effect is backed in the game's lore for three games. Synthesis is not.

Modifié par Billyg3453, 04 juillet 2012 - 08:03 .

[ld1449]

Fuzzfro wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Well, I don't see how you could describe the Catalyst's description of Synthesis as "logical" in any way, but I'm happy that you enjoyed your green ending.

The power and capabilities of the crucible are beyond any technology we know, It manages to acheive a seemingly farfetched result (synthesis) but let's not forget it also has the capabilities to turn shepard into some sort of unkown entity so he can control reapers and can wipe out every synthetic.You can't explain how either of those exactly work much like  you can't with synthesis. So it's important to aknowledge the power of the crucible and the way it works is beyond our understanding.

Actually I can.

We all know the Reapers have a unique signature unlike any other AI

Reaper IFF

Geth with Reaper Code

ect.

The Destroy ending would target these things

Since every geth now has the code and since Edi was made by Reapers, its not a leap of logic to assume the destruction ending targets this especially since I see reapers falling/shutting down, not exactly blowing up to smithereens.

Also in control, Shepard was rebuilt entirely by the lazarus project, practically rebooting his/her brain through any number of artificial means.

If they could do that restore the same mind morals thought processes ect, I can suspend my disbelief enough in the power of Reaper technology and the crucible in what is essentially an upload of Shepard.

But synthesis. Yeah that one kinda stretches a bit too far for my tastes

[Welsh Inferno]

Billyg3453 wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...

Rhiens VI wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

What is synthetic-organic DNA?

Something resulting from space magic.

What is Mass Effect?

Element zero
can increase or decrease the mass of volume of space-time when
subjected to an electrical current. With a positive current, mass is
increased. With a negative current, mass is decreased. The stronger the
current, the greater the magnitude of the dark energy mass effect.
In space, low-mass fields allow FTL
travel and inexpensive surface-to-orbit transit. High-mass fields
create artificial gravity and push space debris away from vessels. In
manufacturing low-mass fields permit the creation of evenly-blended
alloys, while high mass compaction creates dense, sturdy construction
materials.
The military makes extensive use of mobility enhancing
technologies, with mass effect utilizing fighting vehicles standard
front-line issue in most
military forces. Mass effect fields are also essential in the creation of kinetic barriers or shields to protect against enemy fire.

Space magic.

[Messi Kossmann]

Fandango9641 wrote...

SMichelle wrote...
I find Synthesis to be the most morally repugnant of all the choices. 

+1

All options are morally repulsive, depending on your point of view!!!

[Billyg3453]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...


Element zero
can increase or decrease the mass of volume of space-time when
subjected to an electrical current. With a positive current, mass is
increased. With a negative current, mass is decreased. The stronger the
current, the greater the magnitude of the dark energy mass effect.
In space, low-mass fields allow FTL
travel and inexpensive surface-to-orbit transit. High-mass fields
create artificial gravity and push space debris away from vessels. In
manufacturing low-mass fields permit the creation of evenly-blended
alloys, while high mass compaction creates dense, sturdy construction
materials.
The military makes extensive use of mobility enhancing
technologies, with mass effect utilizing fighting vehicles standard
front-line issue in most
military forces. Mass effect fields are also essential in the creation of kinetic barriers or shields to protect against enemy fire.

Space magic.

Space Magic backed by in game lore.
Which synthesis is not.

[inko1nsiderate]

Billyg3453 wrote...


Edi told me 30 minutes ago she felt alive, and the Geth and Quarians were already building Rannoch. The only difference between Synthesis is that the Reapers are now our friends, people have green eyes, and Shepard is dead.

I feel like I had already accomplished Synthesis. What the Catalyst and Edi tell me is that, although Mass Effect had taught me otherwise, Synthetic life wasn't truly "life" without Synthesis, which to me is (cliched) a betrayal of themes.

This is an argument I can understand and respect.  I don't get the idea that Synthesis is supposed to be synthetics finally becoming truly alive, so much as it is rampant futurism.  I think the 'EDI alive' speech is just because it is the only ending where EDI gets full control over her life.  You are right that she does say she is alive earlier in the game, and so if the synthesis ending is viewed as truly enabling her to be alive I can see how that is a betrayal of themes.

Billyg3453 wrote... 
I was responding to the other posters response when you said this, which was the general answer I had been given before. I'm being serious when I saw I appreciate you actually gave me a scientific answer.

I appologize for that.  I was impatient, and I'm a little giddy over the Techo Turian.  I have no idea how I hadn't seen that video before.

Modifié par inko1nsiderate, 04 juillet 2012 - 08:09 .

[ld1449]

Messi Kossmann wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

SMichelle wrote...
I find Synthesis to be the most morally repugnant of all the choices. 

+1

All options are morally repulsive, depending on your point of view!!!

note that he said most meaning he probably includes the others in his view

[SMichelle]

legion999 wrote...

<throws up on monitor>

There, there.  It will be okay. 

[Forbry]

legion999 wrote...

<throws up on monitor>

More green stuff?

[Shelondias]

I thought it was really nice, everyone gets a chance at a new beginning with billions of years of ancient knowledge to draw on for the future.
The reapers being allowed to live was a source of trepidation, sure, but if it turns out later on in the narrative that they were just as much victims of indoctrination as those they indoctrinated- well that makes things a bit more interesting. I mean look how helpful they're being with no one telling them what to do- untold centuries of war can take its toll on you and perhaps they're out for a bit of atonement.

[Ghost]

To each their own.

[Messi Kossmann]

ld1449 wrote...

Messi Kossmann wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

SMichelle wrote...
I find Synthesis to be the most morally repugnant of all the choices. 

+1

All options are morally repulsive, depending on your point of view!!!

note that he said most meaning he probably includes the others in his view

But for me, I prefer that all are equal than being controlled by a God who controls the most powerful beings of the Galaxy. That's why I chose to control my Renegade Shep.

[Billyg3453]

inko1nsiderate wrote...

This is an argument I can understand and respect.  I don't think get the idea that Synthesis is supposed to be synthetics finally becoming truly alive, so much as it is rampant futurism.  I think the 'EDI alive' speech is just because it is the only ending where EDI gets full control over her life.  You are right that she does say she is alive earlier in the game, and so if the synthesis ending is viewed as truly enabling her to be alive I can see how that is a betrayal of themes.

A legitamite debate on the ending!
Essentially what this is coming down to is what our definition of life is in the Mass Effect universe. It seems you believe that Edi has achieved a new and more legitamite form of life in Synthesis, where I think she had already achieved it/was achieving it actively.

I enjoy this more than yelling.

I appologize for that.  I was impatient, and I'm a little giddy over the Techo Turian.  I have no idea how I hadn't seen that video before.

That's okay. I also get very excited when I feel I've clearly got the better of someone

[SMichelle]

ld1449 wrote...


note that he said most meaning he probably includes the others in his view

Indeed.  None of the endings leave you with clean hands.

[wantedman dan]

So basically, what this thread is telling me is, you all are paranoid that you chose Synthesis because you're afraid you're gonna get dissent.

I see.

[Forbry]

Messi Kossmann wrote...

Clarke's three laws:

1 - When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

2 - The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.

3 - Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

+1000000

[SMichelle]

wantedman dan wrote...

So basically, what this thread is telling me is, you all are paranoid that you chose Synthesis because you're afraid you're gonna get dissent.

I see.

Well, my Shepard chose Destroy.  (But that's another thread  )

[BigBadMammogram]

Fuzzfro wrote...

I couldn't stand the first endings, but I was one of the retakers but now we have to accept this is the best its going to be. Just try and make the most out of what we have.

That DOES NOT mean we have to accept it.The endings still suck. This game had the potential to be as great as Star Trek, and bioware ruined it with this game.

So yes, the endings are slightly better after the EC. But thats only because there was no way for them to make the endings worse.