1081 réponses à ce sujet

[zambot]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

You're absolutely correct. We shouldn't let real facts, like Shepard barely being able to walk, or the Keeper you pass by on the way to that room, get in the way of the issues as you see them.

Alright, the Catalyst can make the Keepers do whatever it wants and go wherever it wants.
Like for example opening the Citadel relay in ME1. This is why ME2 and ME3 never happened.

I thought it pretty obvious by that point in ME3 that they regained control of the Citadel. You know, because it moved. And those very same doors shut. And because we saw that Keeper busy doing its thing for them.

But perhaps I'm wrong and the Keepers just took the Citadel for a joyride on its own. Or perhaps my wife was right when she joked that Keeper was really the true form of the Catalyst. (Oz: "Ignore the Keeper in the hallway!")

Still doesn't change that if it were truly 100% fact that Synthesis was what they really wanted, he wouldn't have told you the truth about what the other buttons did. Thats one fact thats inescapable.

Off topic, but I had always assumed that it was TIM that took control of the Citadel, believing he was moving it to get it ready to use against the reapers, but instead was fulfilling the reapers' wishes because he was indoctrinated.

[Memnon]

savionen wrote...

The Catalyst's theories were never proven, so no. They're theories, and there's no evidence ingame either.

This is a really salient point here - and it's not the Catalyst's theories, it's the theory of the Catalyst's creators, who I've maintained all along are morons. They observe a few samples and extrapolate to mean if it happens x times it will happen infinity times. Then they build an AI to broker peace between AI and Organics, and then they supply the AI with warships ... it's a good thing that they were killed so their idiocy could be forever removed from the galaxy

[RiouHotaru]

wantedman dan wrote...

You do realize that the ENTIRETY of the Catalyst's argument is based on logical fallacy, correct?

Actually, his explanation of the conflict is logically SOUND.  In fact, we have an actual in-game example of the conflict playing out.  Geth vs. Quarians.  The Quarians made the geth to serve them and help them.  However, improvements reached a plateau.  In order to go beyond this plateau, the Quarians gave the Geth their collective consciousness function, which caused the Geth to evolve beyond their base programming.  This caused the Quarians to freak out, and in fear of the implications, tried to kill the Geth.


Really, the Catalyst's argument is far-fetched.  His solution seems extreme, but remember:

"They did not approve, but it was the only solution."

At the time, the only thing he and his creators could think of was to overpower synthetics and prevent them from wiping out their (by which I mean the Catalyst's creators) civilization, by means of the first Reaper.  That the Catalyst continued the cycle is the result of him analyzing his already existing data-points, and coming to the reasonable conclusion that this incident would continue to occur because his data showed the pattern of repetition.  Organics create synthetics, synthetics surpass organics, and the two come into conflict and try to kill each other.  Javik's statement about the Metacon War supports this pattern as well.

As for his attempt at Synthesis, the timing of it doesn't matter:

If he tried it before the Reaper Solution, then it means it was one of his alternative solutions that wasn't feisable at the time.

If he tried it AFTER, that at some point after he started the Cycle, he came upon a means to stop the cycle, but found it was impossible to impliment, and thus stuck with his original solution.

Either way, it doesn't hurt his argument.

[Fawx9]

Torrible wrote...

zambot wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
You should have never made the Hitler anology, even though it made perfect sense, people will judge it as nonsense just because of "Godwin's law"

Except it isn't.  Hitler's (might as well since we're going off the deep end) views of the Jews were based off a personal racial bias, not out of anything remotely resembling fact.

The Catalyst's solution is based off the countless encounters of organics and synthetics.  It cannot, by default, be racially biased.  The vague reference to a "final solution" being used by both is hyperbole at best.  Again, the point of Godwin's law is to avoid the comparison because the comparison is usually always an exaggeration.

You do realize that the ENTIRETY of the Catalyst's argument is based on logical fallacy, correct?

Not only that, but the entire ending is based on space magic that has no basis at all in reality or even the reality that was created by the fiction itself.  It's utter nonsense.  And yet, people are still trying to tell other people why such and such choice is evil or wrong.  wtf really.  wtf.  

Unexplained technology is not space magic. It has basis in the MEU reality. It may seem like magic to primitives like us of course. Consider things that are already achievable pre-synthesis: Shepard coming back from the dead, 20 times light speed travel, fully self-aware A.I. 

YOU CANNOT CHANGE DNA, MACHINES DONT EVEN HAVE DNA THAT OUR DNA CAN ACCEPT.

[Dandynermite]

zambot wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

You're absolutely correct. We shouldn't let real facts, like Shepard barely being able to walk, or the Keeper you pass by on the way to that room, get in the way of the issues as you see them.

Alright, the Catalyst can make the Keepers do whatever it wants and go wherever it wants.
Like for example opening the Citadel relay in ME1. This is why ME2 and ME3 never happened.

I thought it pretty obvious by that point in ME3 that they regained control of the Citadel. You know, because it moved. And those very same doors shut. And because we saw that Keeper busy doing its thing for them.

But perhaps I'm wrong and the Keepers just took the Citadel for a joyride on its own. Or perhaps my wife was right when she joked that Keeper was really the true form of the Catalyst. (Oz: "Ignore the Keeper in the hallway!")

Still doesn't change that if it were truly 100% fact that Synthesis was what they really wanted, he wouldn't have told you the truth about what the other buttons did. Thats one fact thats inescapable.

Off topic, but I had always assumed that it was TIM that took control of the Citadel, believing he was moving it to get it ready to use against the reapers, but instead was fulfilling the reapers' wishes because he was indoctrinated.

I was sure it mentions the reapers moving it? to protect it or something?

(that's vaguely what I remember anyway, not like I am going to play it again to find out after the ec joke)

[Torrible]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Destroy: Sure the Catalyst and reapers die... but you achieve THEIR GOAL by destroying synthetics.

Synthesis: What the catalyst wanted, it does even SAY SO IN DIALOGUE.

The Catalyst states that choosing destroy will result in the cycle starting again without any sort of restriction. Using the Catalyst's words, their goal has been about the preservation of organic life.

Even if the destroy ending destroys all currently existing synthetics, if we're already taking the Catalyst's words as evidence, then we can definitively conclude that choosing destroy does not accomplish, in any way, the purpose of the Reapers. It's decidedly not what the Catalyst wanted, even excluding any sort of self preservation.

Nothing is stopping synthetic life from being created again. The Catalyst states this is actually inevitable. Whether or not they're doomed to fight organics is up to the future to prove the Catalyst wrong.


My $0.02

Furthermore, from 
http://social.biowar...ndex/12975245/1 (by HYR 2.0)

Do the absolute bare minimum to get to the end (Collector Base destroyed, since it's less EMS than if kept) and Destroy is the only option available to you. Destroy does absolutely nothing to advance the Reapers' agenda, and hell, the Catalyst is very obviously negative about the prospect of you choosing it. And yet, he presents you the option anyway rather than hiding it and keeping the Reaper status-quo.

The next option in a normal scenario is handing over control - this, to an almost completely unknown variable (who's general agenda has been very anti-Reaper from the start). Again, that the Catalyst would take an unnecessary risk like that to “further his agenda” is an absolutely moronic claim.
And synthesis is the last possible unlockable option. We can even know that without metagaming because it's in his (new) dialogue - it's only available if he feels the galaxy is ready for it. Otherwise, he would default to two alternatives that are decidedly anti-Reaper agenda. If the motive of the catalyst were trickery through the selection of this choice, it would not be the last unlockable option on the list.
And in the event that it IS unlocked, why would he even bother offering Destroy and Control along side of it rather than just Synthesis straight-up??

[Memnon]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Actually, his explanation of the conflict is logically SOUND.  In fact, we have an actual in-game example of the conflict playing out.  Geth vs. Quarians.  The Quarians made the geth to serve them and help them.  However, improvements reached a plateau.  In order to go beyond this plateau, the Quarians gave the Geth their collective consciousness function, which caused the Geth to evolve beyond their base programming.  This caused the Quarians to freak out, and in fear of the implications, tried to kill the Geth.

In my playthrough, I restored peace between Geth and Quarians without turning anyone into a Reaper

[Heeden]

zambot wrote...
It's a little late. OP already godwinned his/her own thread.

Shortly before they referred to a Catalyst quote as head-canon and redefined "making stuff up" as "reading between the lines".
I can see why their threads get so popular though, it's pretty hilarious how much they twist (or ignore) the in-game lore, although it would be more entertainingif they had a deeper understanding to male a proper parody.

[zambot]

Torrible wrote...

zambot wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
You should have never made the Hitler anology, even though it made perfect sense, people will judge it as nonsense just because of "Godwin's law"

Except it isn't.  Hitler's (might as well since we're going off the deep end) views of the Jews were based off a personal racial bias, not out of anything remotely resembling fact.

The Catalyst's solution is based off the countless encounters of organics and synthetics.  It cannot, by default, be racially biased.  The vague reference to a "final solution" being used by both is hyperbole at best.  Again, the point of Godwin's law is to avoid the comparison because the comparison is usually always an exaggeration.

You do realize that the ENTIRETY of the Catalyst's argument is based on logical fallacy, correct?

Not only that, but the entire ending is based on space magic that has no basis at all in reality or even the reality that was created by the fiction itself.  It's utter nonsense.  And yet, people are still trying to tell other people why such and such choice is evil or wrong.  wtf really.  wtf.  

Unexplained technology is not space magic. It has basis in the MEU reality. It may seem like magic to primitives like us of course. Consider things that are already achievable pre-synthesis: Shepard coming back from the dead, 20 times light speed travel, fully self-aware A.I. 

"Unexplained technology" is a little euphamistic for a technology that has the ability to create something called "synthetic dna" and instantly disperse it to every thing in the galaxy as well as grant "understanding" to EDI and the geth.  Unless the blue fairy was using unexplained technology in Pinnocio.  I guess that's possible.

[wantedman dan]

RiouHotaru wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

You do realize that the ENTIRETY of the Catalyst's argument is based on logical fallacy, correct?

Actually, his explanation of the conflict is logically SOUND.  In fact, we have an actual in-game example of the conflict playing out.  Geth vs. Quarians.  The Quarians made the geth to serve them and help them.  However, improvements reached a plateau.  In order to go beyond this plateau, the Quarians gave the Geth their collective consciousness function, which caused the Geth to evolve beyond their base programming.  This caused the Quarians to freak out, and in fear of the implications, tried to kill the Geth.


Really, the Catalyst's argument is far-fetched.  His solution seems extreme, but remember:

"They did not approve, but it was the only solution."

At the time, the only thing he and his creators could think of was to overpower synthetics and prevent them from wiping out their (by which I mean the Catalyst's creators) civilization, by means of the first Reaper.  That the Catalyst continued the cycle is the result of him analyzing his already existing data-points, and coming to the reasonable conclusion that this incident would continue to occur because his data showed the pattern of repetition.  Organics create synthetics, synthetics surpass organics, and the two come into conflict and try to kill each other.  Javik's statement about the Metacon War supports this pattern as well.

As for his attempt at Synthesis, the timing of it doesn't matter:

If he tried it before the Reaper Solution, then it means it was one of his alternative solutions that wasn't feisable at the time.

If he tried it AFTER, that at some point after he started the Cycle, he came upon a means to stop the cycle, but found it was impossible to impliment, and thus stuck with his original solution.

Either way, it doesn't hurt his argument.

...

The Catalyst appeals to the probability that the created rebelling against the creators as being bad, wrong, and something to be fearful of, definitively.

That is a logical fallacy and completely undermines his argument.

I shake my head at your explanation.

[Cutlass Jack]

zambot wrote...

Off topic, but I had always assumed that it was TIM that took control of the Citadel, believing he was moving it to get it ready to use against the reapers, but instead was fulfilling the reapers' wishes because he was indoctrinated.

Well according to what was actually said, TIM told the reapers the Citadel was really the catalyst and they moved it. Its somewhat supported that the Reapers moved it because Berkenstein (nearest world) was destroyed in the process.

But they never showed it, and I still couldnt figure out why TIM, even as nuts as he was, would ever think it was a good plan to tell them about it.

[zambot]

Dandynermite wrote...

zambot wrote...

Off topic, but I had always assumed that it was TIM that took control of the Citadel, believing he was moving it to get it ready to use against the reapers, but instead was fulfilling the reapers' wishes because he was indoctrinated.

I was sure it mentions the reapers moving it? to protect it or something?

(that's vaguely what I remember anyway, not like I am going to play it again to find out after the ec joke)

Right, but I assumed the method by which they moved it was through TIM since he is inexplicably on the Citadel when Shep goes up.  I "speculated" that TIM was not in his base because he was busy taking control of the citadel and moving it because the reapers suggested to him (through indoc) that this was a good idea.  It's all speculation of course since none of this is actually explained.

EDIT:

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Well according to what was actually said, TIM told the reapers the Citadel was really the catalyst and they moved it. Its somewhat supported that the Reapers moved it because Berkenstein (nearest world) was destroyed in the process.

But they never showed it, and I still couldnt figure out why TIM, even as nuts as he was, would ever think it was a good plan to tell them about it.

 

TIM telling the reapers about anything (since he did not know he was indoctrinated) makes no sense.  The best I could "speculate" there is that he did thinking he was luring them into some sort of trap to control them.

Modifié par zambot, 05 juillet 2012 - 08:21 .

[alberto4395]

MegaSovereign wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

A third explanation: recall that our cycle can have synthetics work on the crucible too. We aren't the first cycle to have a synthetic race fight the Reapers. (100% fact - Starkid says this himself.) But if machines see Synthesis as logical/desirable, they would have been glad to build that function into the Crucible, possibly even without the organics they were working with realizing they did so.

Show me one synthetic race that has actively desired synthesis.
Look at the Geth, they find the idea of compromise with the Reapers repugnant. But suddenly synthetics fighting the Reapers are going to want to become one with them.

Gotta disagree there TAO.

I remember clearly that the Geth went to the Reapers for help during the Geth/Quarian war. They prefer submission over extinction.

Also synthetic life is actively seeking perfection through understanding. And since the Geth don't have the same morals as organics, I doubt they would care if synthesis was forced on them.

This was before the Geth became true AI and once they were they decided to fight the reapers to the end like the rest of us.

[Fiery Phoenix]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

They understand what the Reapers are.
They don't understand how the Reapers think.

Do you have to understand fire to know that when it burns, it's only doing what it was created to do?

Get your pocket calculator ready...

Let's calculate, just for fun, what would happen if the reapers exterminated Earth's current population in each cycle. Just for fun. The actual size of a galaxy population would be much larger, but let's see where it gets us.

A billion years. So type: 1000000000 (a 1 followed by 9 zeroes).
Press the divide.
Enter 50000 (a 5 followed by 4 zeroes).
Press multiply.
Enter 7000000000 (the current population of Earth, a 7 with 9 zeroes).
Press total.

You got all that, big boy?

The reapers would have killed 140,000,000,000,000 organics.

Just a number, right? Just because of a "cleansing fire".

Usually they lock people up who have no empathy. They have a name for it. You figure it out.

I like this. So very much.

[RiouHotaru]

Stornskar wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Actually, his explanation of the conflict is logically SOUND.  In fact, we have an actual in-game example of the conflict playing out.  Geth vs. Quarians.  The Quarians made the geth to serve them and help them.  However, improvements reached a plateau.  In order to go beyond this plateau, the Quarians gave the Geth their collective consciousness function, which caused the Geth to evolve beyond their base programming.  This caused the Quarians to freak out, and in fear of the implications, tried to kill the Geth.

In my playthrough, I restored peace between Geth and Quarians without turning anyone into a Reaper

Shepard is an outlier.  And you usually ignore outliers in probability unless they occur more than once, in which case they stop being outliers and start being relevant.  Remember, the Catalyst isn't human, and doesn't think like one.

wantedman dan wrote...

The Catalyst appeals to the probability that the created
rebelling against the creators as being bad, wrong, and something to be
fearful of, definitively.

That is a logical fallacy and completely undermines his argument.

I shake my head at your explanation.

It's not a fallacy to see a pattern in a set of data and assume that the pattern, having repeated itself often enough, is likely to occur again.  In the Catalyst's experience, synthetics and organics will inevitably come into conflict, resulting in the synthetics likely annihilating the organics.  Again, he has the advantage of having seen this happen several times before.

[LaughingDragon]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Destroy: Sure the Catalyst and reapers die... but you achieve THEIR GOAL by destroying synthetics.

Synthesis: What the catalyst wanted, it does even SAY SO IN DIALOGUE.

The Catalyst states that choosing destroy will result in the cycle starting again without any sort of restriction. Using the Catalyst's words, their goal has been about the preservation of organic life.

Even if the destroy ending destroys all currently existing synthetics, if we're already taking the Catalyst's words as evidence, then we can definitively conclude that choosing destroy does not accomplish, in any way, the purpose of the Reapers. It's decidedly not what the Catalyst wanted, even excluding any sort of self preservation.

Nothing is stopping synthetic life from being created again. The Catalyst states this is actually inevitable. Whether or not they're doomed to fight organics is up to the future to prove the Catalyst wrong.


My $0.02

Allan,

Do you think that the reapers goal to preserve organic life, would be just as well accomplished if instead of harvesting and annihilating galactic civilization, they instead just appear to protect organics when they need it most? Like if synthetics get out of control the reapers appear to destroy the synthetics? Since they are so powerful and advanced they would be able to crush any synthetic uprising that might occur.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Rhayak wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

So becaue it is an option that reapers agree with it is automaticaly invalid although it works out better for everybody in the end,  thus ending the war?  If it stops the harvesting and allows galactic civilization to rebuild itself who cares if it is something the reapers want?  The reapers don't have an agenda other than to stop synthetics and organics from warring each other.  It is their methods that went completely wrong.

Word

Funny how only one person acknowledged what I said there while all of my haters completely ignored that. 

Not only does it agree to the Reapers, you submit to what the Reapers wanted and probaly changed and brainwashed everyone without their consent. That's the part you don't understand.

[The Angry One]

Heeden wrote...

zambot wrote...
It's a little late. OP already godwinned his/her own thread.

Shortly before they referred to a Catalyst quote as head-canon and redefined "making stuff up" as "reading between the lines".

No, thinking that this LITERALLY HAPPENED is the part that you made up.

I can see why their threads get so popular though, it's pretty hilarious how much they twist (or ignore) the in-game lore, although it would be more entertainingif they had a deeper understanding to male a proper parody.

Ah look, again with the veiled insults and false claims. Everything I say is taken directly from in game lore whereas you are headcanoning non-stop.

[Jeb231]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Of course the reapers want synthesis. They also want Control.

The goal of the reapers it to make sure synthetics don't destroy organics.

This. They are neither good nor evil simply following a logic which is arguably flawed. The reapers' purpose is to prevent synthetics from annihilating organics,  it is only logical they would put forward the choice which
they find best suited for this purpose. And the epilogue clrearly shows people don't get assimilated into reaper nations.

 

We can argue the ethics of such a choice but the logic is pretty straight forward. It doesn't matter what they want, only what you think is the best course of action to end the Reaper threat while considering the potential risk of a technological singularity..

Modifié par Jeb231, 05 juillet 2012 - 08:26 .

[wantedman dan]

RiouHotaru wrote...

It's not a fallacy to see a pattern in a set of data and assume that the pattern, having repeated itself often enough, is likely to occur again.  In the Catalyst's experience, synthetics and organics will inevitably come into conflict, resulting in the synthetics likely annihilating the organics.  Again, he has the advantage of having seen this happen several times before.

The problem being a) it is by its own design, thus making the propecy one of self-fulfillment, and still an appeal to probability.

Pointing to irrationality to excuse irrationality is... kinda sad, really.

[RiouHotaru]

LaughingDragon wrote...

Do you think that the reapers goal to preserve organic life, would be just as well accomplished if instead of harvesting and annihilating galactic civilization, they instead just appear to protect organics when they need it most? Like if synthetics get out of control the reapers appear to destroy the synthetics? Since they are so powerful and advanced they would be able to crush any synthetic uprising that might occur.

Doesn't solve the problem.  Inevitably organics would create synthetics again, just as in Destroy.  There's literally NO way to stop that happening, even if you bomb galactic civilization back to the Bronze Age.

The Angry One wrote...

Ah look, again with the veiled
insults and false claims. Everything I say is taken directly from in
game lore whereas you are headcanoning non-stop.

Actually, if anything TAO, you're the one inflicting headcanon.

According to the game, Synthesis results in a utopian-esque society wherein synthetics and organics have the ability to understand and cooperate, and are connected by what seems to be a voluntary collective linking of consciousness.  This allows for beings to understand one another on a level not thought possible before, and is implied that it could lead them to completely transcend their current existence altogether and become something completely new.

You interpret this as some sort of dark, sinister agenda on the part of the Reapers to enslave everyone via a mass conversion that turns everyone is pretty-looking husks.

The only one with headcanon is you.

Modifié par RiouHotaru, 05 juillet 2012 - 08:30 .

[KotorEffect3]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Rhayak wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

So becaue it is an option that reapers agree with it is automaticaly invalid although it works out better for everybody in the end,  thus ending the war?  If it stops the harvesting and allows galactic civilization to rebuild itself who cares if it is something the reapers want?  The reapers don't have an agenda other than to stop synthetics and organics from warring each other.  It is their methods that went completely wrong.

Word

Funny how only one person acknowledged what I said there while all of my haters completely ignored that. 

Not only does it agree to the Reapers, you submit to what the Reapers wanted and probaly changed and brainwashed everyone without their consent. That's the part you don't understand.

You physically changed people without their consent but you didn't brainwash them.  You changed them physically that is all,  you didn't change who they are,  you didn't take away their free will or their memories.  You changed their dna.  It really isn't much different than what the lazarus project did to shepard.  Also it doesn't matter if it agrees with the reapers.  The reapers don't have an agenda just a mandate.  A mandate that has now been fulfilled.  They cycle is now over and the reapers have a different function.  The reapers are just tools nothing more.

Modifié par KotorEffect3, 05 juillet 2012 - 08:28 .

[Torrible]

Fawx9 wrote...

Torrible wrote...

zambot wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
You should have never made the Hitler anology, even though it made perfect sense, people will judge it as nonsense just because of "Godwin's law"

Except it isn't.  Hitler's (might as well since we're going off the deep end) views of the Jews were based off a personal racial bias, not out of anything remotely resembling fact.

The Catalyst's solution is based off the countless encounters of organics and synthetics.  It cannot, by default, be racially biased.  The vague reference to a "final solution" being used by both is hyperbole at best.  Again, the point of Godwin's law is to avoid the comparison because the comparison is usually always an exaggeration.

You do realize that the ENTIRETY of the Catalyst's argument is based on logical fallacy, correct?

Not only that, but the entire ending is based on space magic that has no basis at all in reality or even the reality that was created by the fiction itself.  It's utter nonsense.  And yet, people are still trying to tell other people why such and such choice is evil or wrong.  wtf really.  wtf.  

Unexplained technology is not space magic. It has basis in the MEU reality. It may seem like magic to primitives like us of course. Consider things that are already achievable pre-synthesis: Shepard coming back from the dead, 20 times light speed travel, fully self-aware A.I. 

YOU CANNOT CHANGE DNA, MACHINES DONT EVEN HAVE DNA THAT OUR DNA CAN ACCEPT.

DNA is just code in the form of amino acids. It can be easily translated into machine code.  Or better still, nanomachines can be coded to read directly from the DNA in biological cells. Machines do not have DNA, just progamming code (albeit complexed enough to simulate 'soul' and 'self awareness'). There's no merging of machine and organic DNA. It's just that organic biological systems are replaced by ones that uses electrochemical signals and nanomachines in place of hormones or biochemicals. Brains will be augmented somehow to process at Geth speeds and allow interfacing with machines and synthetic devices.

Not sure how synthetics become more organic though.

Modifié par Torrible, 05 juillet 2012 - 08:28 .

[wantedman dan]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You physically changed people without their consent but you didn't brainwash them.  You changed them physically that is all,  you didn't change who they are,  you didn't take away their free will or their memories.  You changed their dna.  It really isn't much different than what the lazarus project did to shepard.

That's why everyone is so tickled to death to accept the Reapers, despite the atrocities they committed only moments before, right?

[Auckmid]

Yes, you are correct. Synthesis is the only ending where you actualy go along with the reapers plan.