204 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

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.

I don't need to tell you how nonsense these "laws" (They aren't) are, do I?

[wantedman dan]

SMichelle wrote...

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  )

Then we can sufficiently deduce my post is not discussing you. 

[Forbry]

o Ventus wrote...

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.

I don't need to tell you how nonsense these "laws" (They aren't) are, do I?

There's definitely a lot of truth in there! If you can't see that, I really wonder why you play Scfi-games at all.

[DGMockingJay]

Messi Kossmann wrote...

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

In a work of science fiction, where everything, from Relays to Biotic powers, and Mass effect fields,  is deifned, any work or scientific feat performing unseen and never before actions is essentialy coming out out as space magic..

U create a world on logic, but u can't bend them so much and so often that the players in the universe start loosing the grip on the fiction and willing participation......

There is a reason, why Harry Potter did not find a magic wand that would kil Voldy in 1 spell... Because it would b Muggle Sceince in the world of Harry Potter..

Also, this quote is applicable in real world, not a space sci fi, where everything is already magic...

Modifié par DGMockingJay, 04 juillet 2012 - 08:24 .

[Forbry]

If you, for example, would "ship" a TV to a far less developed civilization, they would also regard that as magic and it would scare the sh*t out of them.

[Forbry]

DGMockingJay wrote...

Messi Kossmann wrote...

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

In a work of science fiction, where everything, from Relays to Biotic powers, and Mass effect fields,  is deifned, any work or scientific feat performing unseen and never before actions is essentialy coming out out as space magic..

U create a world on logic, but u can't bend them so much and so often that the players in the universe start loosing the grip on the fiction and willing participation......

There is a reason, why Harry Potter did not find a magic wand that would kil Voldy in 1 spell... Because it would b Muggle Sceince in the world of Harry Potter..

Yeh, yeh... your Liara is also a very realistic future creature.. sure, sure... 

[Mr.House]

EC Merge made me throw up, literately.

[KotorEffect3]

synthesis beats the crap out of refusal.

[Forbry]

Well, apparently YOU lost grip... I think synthesis COULD exist, without knowing and/or understanding its exact ins and outs

[inko1nsiderate]

Billyg3453 wrote...


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.

 

Hmm.  I need to rewatch the Synthesis cutscenes.  I think I might be misremembering them.  I don't remember there being an implication that synthetics were more alive in Synthesis, only the implication that they might be sceond class citizens in Control (with the Geth surrounded by Reapers and seperated from the Quarians) and that they are able to acheive a better understanding of organics and vice versa.  If my memory of this is correct, then the reason why EDI pontificates on being alive is because she is both alive and free. 

Modifié par inko1nsiderate, 04 juillet 2012 - 08:27 .

[Allaiya]

PurebredCorn wrote...

Yes synthesis is a beautiful lie.

QFT

[Karimloo]

>Implying they are even the same people they were before they were synthesized.

[UrgentArchengel]

I appreciate you opinion, But I still prefer Destroy for a lot of reasons. Hell, I prefer Control over Synthesis. Synthesis just never sit well with me. Now don't be going all "selfish for sacrificing EDI/Geth to save yourself". I choose destroy because it was my mission, and EDI/Geth were Sadly in the crossfire. Control and Synthesis are just too similar to Reaper methods of "Order". And with destroy, it's saves the whole galaxy, and ends the reaper threat for good, without Dictator Shep or f'ed up DNA.

[Ieldra]

@OP:
Nice to see another one who chose Synthesis. As you see, we appear to be a hated minority here. It doesn't matter. Synthesis is a way into a bright future where we'll transcend fundamental limitations of our previous existence. There are too many things in the post-Synthesis civilization which are too fascinating to ignore...

And here my litany of corrections of misperceptions:
(1) Synthesis does not remove individuality
(2) Synthesis does not remove free will
(3) Synthesis does not make everyone the same
(4) Synthesis does not brainwash anyone.
(5) Synthesis has some utopian imagery, but it's main theme is ascension. That is the antithesis of the stagnation usually associated with utopias.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 04 juillet 2012 - 08:31 .

[Pockydon]

And you're a horrible human being...

[Forbry]

All I know is, what the GAME explains and shows us and that doesn't sound or look bad. At all.

[wantedman dan]

Forbry wrote...

All I know is, what the GAME explains and shows us and that doesn't sound or look bad. At all.

Eugenics isn't bad, huh?

[inko1nsiderate]

Pockydon wrote...

And you're a horrible human being...

Nice.  Making sweeping moral judgements about another human being because the choice they made... in a video game.

[DGMockingJay]

inko1nsiderate wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...


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.

 

Hmm.  I need to rewatch the Synthesis cutscenes.  I think I might be misremembering them.  I don't remember there being an implication that synthetics were more alive in Synthesis, only the implication that they might be sceond class citizens in Control (with the Geth surrounded by Reapers and seperated from the Quarians) and that they are able to acheive a better understanding of organics and vice versa.  If my memory of this is correct, then the reason why EDI pontificates on being alive is because she is both alive and free. 

But EDI was alive and FREE even before

But I am more concerned about geths.. Yes, they say geths now share human emotions like preference, like and dislikes and haterad and such. But my understanding was that geths did it even before Synthesis ever since they acquired Reaper code on Rannoch.. Seems like Geths got nothing out of Synthesis IMO then.

Also, Synthesis should be not an option in the ending where u choose to go destroy Geths on Rannoch. Why u need synthesis when there are no synthetics to make peace with..

[Messi Kossmann]

DGMockingJay wrote...

Messi Kossmann wrote...

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

In a work of science fiction, where everything, from Relays to Biotic powers, and Mass effect fields,  is deifned, any work or scientific feat performing unseen and never before actions is essentialy coming out out as space magic..

U create a world on logic, but u can't bend them so much and so often that the players in the universe start loosing the grip on the fiction and willing participation......

There is a reason, why Harry Potter did not find a magic wand that would kil Voldy in 1 spell... Because it would b Muggle Sceince in the world of Harry Potter..

Also, this quote is applicable in real world, not a space sci fi, where everything is already magic...

Mass Effect has always been a SCFI. As much as we have several explanations, few are rational, AT LEAST WITH TECHNOLOGY AND KNOWLEDGE THAT WE HAVE TODAY!

[Allaiya]

inko1nsiderate wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...


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.

 

Hmm.  I need to rewatch the Synthesis cutscenes.  I think I might be misremembering them.  I don't remember there being an implication that synthetics were more alive in Synthesis, only the implication that they might be sceond class citizens in Control (with the Geth surrounded by Reapers and seperated from the Quarians) and that they are able to acheive a better understanding of organics and vice versa.  If my memory of this is correct, then the reason why EDI pontificates on being alive is because she is both alive and free. 

No, Edi says "I am Alive!". She doesn't say I am alive and free.

Unfortunately, this seems to imply that she wasn't alive before. It implies Tali lied -Legion didn't have a soul & his sacrifice was meaningless, and destroy is okay because geth/edi aren't really alive anyway.

Also, I think she only hugs your LI in Synthesis and not in Control as a way to show she is more 'alive'.

[Ieldra]

Forbry wrote...
All I know is, what the GAME explains and shows us and that doesn't sound or look bad. At all.

Indeed. But be prepared for the conspiracy theorists claiming it's all the result of brainwashing. Fascinating what people can come up with when they desperately don't want to accept what they're seeing. I wonder what they have to prove, really, why it's so damned important to them to fight the Synthesis ending that they'd rather reinterpret everything shown in the epilogue than to accept that it might just be as good as it looks. Which is, btw, not that much better than the other endings. They all use the same images, and all the narrators hint at a bright future.  

[Whatever42]

o Ventus wrote...

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.

I don't need to tell you how nonsense these "laws" (They aren't) are, do I?

Actually, most scientists never say anything is impossible. They merely report hypothesize and theorize on the observable and testable. If what we observe violates what we theorize then what we theorize is wrong to some degree.

Many things might be possible but we don't know it because the conditions in which they happen are unobservable. For example, using quantum entanglement for unbreakable encryption is a technology unfathomable 100ish years ago because we had never even observed behaviour at the quantum scale.

Most "magic" in science fiction is based on fantasy that exists as nothing more than thought experiments that don't violate the math. They aren't even remotely likely, of course, but since they don't violate the math, they are possible within our models. And even then, the conditions that would allow them to exist would be so extreme that us being able to create them would be incomprehensible.

But all that is hand-waved away with technobabble. Synthesis doesn't even give us that courtesy, but its hard to technobabble your way out of something so advanced we haven't even conceived of it. Of course, Asari biology falls into the same camp so meh.

[inko1nsiderate]

DGMockingJay wrote...


But EDI was alive and FREE even before

But I am more concerned about geths.. Yes, they say geths now share human emotions like preference, like and dislikes and haterad and such. But my understanding was that geths did it even before Synthesis ever since they acquired Reaper code on Rannoch.. Seems like Geths got nothing out of Synthesis IMO then.

But if you choose Control, she probably is no longer free afterwards.  If you choose destroy, she's dead.  If you choose synthesis she maintains freedom and gets to be alive still.  If you choose either of the other endings she loses something she had before: freedom or life.

The same situation applies to the Geth.  

The advantage for everyone in synthesis is this new-DNA.  That allows new ways of modifying yourself and your species to adapt in anyway you see fit without having to enslave sentient creatures to do it for you (the way Organics did with Synthetics previously).  

DGMockingJay wrote... 
Also, Synthesis should be not an option in the ending where u choose to go destroy Geths on Rannoch. Why u need synthesis when there are no synthetics to make peace with.. 

 

This is a fair point, but I think the idea is 'to end the cycle forever' or 'rampant futurism for all'.  Without the Geth it makes it less necessary, which is probably why I would never choose snythesis if the Geth were dead.

Modifié par inko1nsiderate, 04 juillet 2012 - 08:40 .

[Billyg3453]

inko1nsiderate wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...


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.

 

Hmm.  I need to rewatch the Synthesis cutscenes.  I think I might be misremembering them.  I don't remember there being an implication that synthetics were more alive in Synthesis, only the implication that they might be sceond class citizens in Control (with the Geth surrounded by Reapers and seperated from the Quarians) and that they are able to acheive a better understanding of organics and vice versa.  If my memory of this is correct, then the reason why EDI pontificates on being alive is because she is both alive and free. 

Did you believe EDI/Geth were alive before choosing Synthesis?

Unfortunately, this seems to imply that she wasn't alive before. It implies Tali lied -Legion didn't have a soul & his sacrifice was meaningless, and destroy is okay because geth/edi aren't really alive anyway.

This is my counter argument to a lot of Synthesis-ers. They say Synthesis makes the Geth/Edi alive because they weren't "actually" alive before, in which case you would have no problem destroying them.