1081 réponses à ce sujet

[wantedman dan]

CrutchCricket wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...
Directly, no. Indirectly, yes.

If I must become the enemy to stop the enemy, I have no justification in stopping him in the first place.

You could've directly ended it by shooting the thing, grabbing the things, or throwing yourself down the beamy thing. You directly refused. As a result everybody dies.

I'm not arguing which one is morally right (I don't even care). I'm saying they all have **** attached to them. No option is good. You will be atrocious regardless. So just pick your poison.

Which is why the endings fail on such egregious levels. 

[WYLDMAXX]

The Angry One wrote...

Irrelevant. You CANNOT come to an understanding with the Reapers, and no organic would be stupid enough to try.

Agreed. 

It is madness for sheep to talk peace with a wolf. - Thomas Fuller

[Heeden]

Xellith wrote...
Catalyst: "SO BE IT. I WILL CONTINUE TO USE THIS SOLUTION I JUST SAID WILL NOT WORK ANYMORE.  BECAUSE IM SMART LIKE THAT."
/extinction

If Shepard is dumb enough to want the cycle to continue that's fine, the Catalyst learned enough from our cycle that the next lot don't even have to fight a war.

[Ticonderoga117]

Heeden wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

The harvesting was a means to an end. That was not their goal. Their goal was synthesis. Listen to the Catalyst.

Their goal was peaceful coexistence between synthetics and organics, synthesis is the best way of achieving this goal.

How? Oh right, because we are all synthetics now. Gotcha.

[The Angry One]

Heeden wrote...

Their goal was peaceful coexistence between synthetics and organics, synthesis is the best way of achieving this goal.

There is no co-existence. Organics and synthetics are merged.
It is not the best way. Rannoch proved that.

The goal is not inherently evil, the solution is not inherently evil.

Galactic violation without consent is inherently evil.

Nothing suggests it turns everyone in to Reapers, if that was the Catalyst's goal he could have achieved it after the first Harvest by continuing until all the non-advanced races were interred as well.

It permanently rewrites life into the Reaper's image.

Your Godwin invocation is flat-out stupid.

It is a perfectly valid comparison, you just don't like it. Keep your insults out of my topic or stop posting here.

[Baronesa]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

I love that some people have almost the complete polar opposite view to what BioWare intended with the endings. Its funny. Would of helped if they wrote the entire thing better though..

That is something that happens all the time... there are as many interpretations as people who are exposed to any media.

[MegaSovereign]

wantedman dan wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...

I love that some people have almost the complete polar opposite view to what BioWare intended with the endings. Its funny. Would of helped if they wrote the entire thing better though..

Good intentions pave the road to Hell.

So what about bad intentions?

[CrutchCricket]

wantedman dan wrote...
Which is why the endings fail on such egregious levels. 

Well, some people insist "no right choice" is the most interesting scenario... but I'll just leave that alone.

[wantedman dan]

CrutchCricket wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...
Which is why the endings fail on such egregious levels. 

Well, some people insist "no right choice" is the most interesting scenario... but I'll just leave that alone.

It's an absurd line of thought, especially when the narrative provides "right choices" all throughout.

[Welsh Inferno]

Baronesa wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...

I love that some people have almost the complete polar opposite view to what BioWare intended with the endings. Its funny. Would of helped if they wrote the entire thing better though..

That is something that happens all the time... there are as many interpretations as people who are exposed to any media.

I know that. Its still funny nonetheless.

[Caenis]

So what's it matter to you guys if people believe Synthesis is Ok? What happens to your world, does it all come crashing down because people don't believe Destroy is an OK option for them in their canon? Would you be happier if everyone suddenly bowed down to your holy beliefs and started pressing the Destroy button? Because at this point I don't understand WHY people are getting so ANGRY about the decisions that people made in their own game and their opinions for it.

[wantedman dan]

MegaSovereign wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...

I love that some people have almost the complete polar opposite view to what BioWare intended with the endings. Its funny. Would of helped if they wrote the entire thing better though..

Good intentions pave the road to Hell.

So what about bad intentions?

Typically those are the rails for the bullet trains.

[Heeden]

The Angry One wrote...

Synthesis is domination of the Reaper ideal. Not understanding.

The Reaper ideal is to Harvest the galaxy before organics can create a synthetic race capabel of extincting them, this is no longer in effect post-Synthesis. Seriously, watch the Synthesis epilogue - you will notice several Reapers and none of them are slaughtering everyone. EDI even mentions how they become part of the galactic community.

There is no organic life.  There are only hybrids. Approved by the Reapers. LOOK at them for heaven's sake, don't tell me they aren't changed.

Glowy-magic is not robot parts, it doesn't make us part-machine any more than biotic abilities make us part-blackhole. You'd make a better argument saying most people already were hybrids, because they wear technological armour, fly around in technological ships and generally live surrounded technology. Synthesis facilitates that relationship, it doesn't OMG half-a-toaster or whatever silly meme you imagine.

They are hybrids, regardless of the method. Also, look at husks. Reapers have been doing this for billions of years in a smaller scale.

Husks actually do replace many (most?) biological systems with technological ones, in fact if you look closely you can notice many metallic parts that are not present when humans are Synthesised showing there is a difference. You will also notice that husks don't seem to exercise free-will prior to Synthesis; whereas post-Synthesis beings do.

[o Ventus]

MegaSovereign wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...

I love that some people have almost the complete polar opposite view to what BioWare intended with the endings. Its funny. Would of helped if they wrote the entire thing better though..

Good intentions pave the road to Hell.

So what about bad intentions?

Bad intentions go to jail.

[Welsh Inferno]

Caenis wrote...

So what's it matter to you guys if people believe Synthesis is Ok? What happens to your world, does it all come crashing down because people don't believe Destroy is an OK option for them in their canon? Would you be happier if everyone suddenly bowed down to your holy beliefs and started pressing the Destroy button? Because at this point I don't understand WHY people are getting so ANGRY about the decisions that people made in their own game and their opinions for it.

Someone is wrong on the internet. 

They must be proven wrong.

Modifié par Welsh Inferno, 05 juillet 2012 - 05:22 .

[MegaSovereign]

wantedman dan wrote...

CrutchCricket wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...
Which is why the endings fail on such egregious levels. 

Well, some people insist "no right choice" is the most interesting scenario... but I'll just leave that alone.

It's an absurd line of thought, especially when the narrative provides "right choices" all throughout.

Bioware has done this sort of thing before. They give you false dilemmas where they shouldn't exist. Remember the Collector Base? Your only two choices was to either give the base to terrorists or destroy it. Wanna give it to the Alliance or keep it for yourself? Nope can't do that the narrative demands otherwise.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 05 juillet 2012 - 05:22 .

[wantedman dan]

Caenis wrote...

So what's it matter to you guys if people believe Synthesis is Ok? What happens to your world, does it all come crashing down because people don't believe Destroy is an OK option for them in their canon? Would you be happier if everyone suddenly bowed down to your holy beliefs and started pressing the Destroy button? Because at this point I don't understand WHY people are getting so ANGRY about the decisions that people made in their own game and their opinions for it.

The only one angry here is you, lol.

Even TAO is having a moment of ambivalence.

[CrutchCricket]

wantedman dan wrote...
It's an absurd line of thought, especially when the narrative provides "right choices" all throughout.

Yeah, Shepard's been the master of taking the third option... right until the last 5 min.

I'm of the opinion that if you want to make people choose different options, make those choices worth it, don't **** on the other ones.

Make each choice a different kind of victory.

[The Angry One]

Caenis wrote...

So what's it matter to you guys if people believe Synthesis is Ok? What happens to your world, does it all come crashing down because people don't believe Destroy is an OK option for them in their canon? Would you be happier if everyone suddenly bowed down to your holy beliefs and started pressing the Destroy button? Because at this point I don't understand WHY people are getting so ANGRY about the decisions that people made in their own game and their opinions for it.

Once again, if BioWare stopped sabotaging the other endings to prop synthesis up, maybe I wouldn't care so much.
Also, synthesis goes against everything about Mass Effect. Not just some things, EVERYTHING.
It spits on ME's themes of diversity and resistence of the Reapers. It tells us Saren was right, everyone else was wrong, and has very disturbing racist undertones.

But in the end that's not what this topic is about, synthesis supporters are trying to derail it into that because nobody can dare point out the giant flaws in it.
I made this topic to point out that synthesis as a function of the Crucible makes no sense.

[wantedman dan]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Bioware has done this sort of thing before. They give you false dilemmas where they shouldn't exist. Remember the Collector Base? Your only two choices was to either give the base to terrorists or destroy it. Wanna give it to the Alliance or keep it for yourself? Nope can't do that the narrative demands otherwise.

That was hardly narrative-breaking, however.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

I love that some people have almost the complete polar opposite view to what BioWare intended with the endings. Its funny. Would of helped if they wrote the entire thing better though..

Because they created the endings thinking that everyone was going to see it as they did, when instead we saw it with logic and reason.

[legion999]

MegaSovereign wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...

I love that some people have almost the complete polar opposite view to what BioWare intended with the endings. Its funny. Would of helped if they wrote the entire thing better though..

Good intentions pave the road to Hell.

So what about bad intentions?

They're the signs that tell you how many miles/kilometres are left to go.

[MegaSovereign]

wantedman dan wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Bioware has done this sort of thing before. They give you false dilemmas where they shouldn't exist. Remember the Collector Base? Your only two choices was to either give the base to terrorists or destroy it. Wanna give it to the Alliance or keep it for yourself? Nope can't do that the narrative demands otherwise.

That was hardly narrative-breaking, however.

Yes but I remember there was a huge ****storm on BSN about which decision was right one. Similar to one we have now about which ending is the right decision.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 05 juillet 2012 - 05:25 .

[Heeden]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

And the green glowey stuff isn't technology? What is it then, bio-luminescent paint?

Space magic, or more accurately Shepards organic-energy, but for all intents and purpose space magic; like biotics, FTL and all the other flashy stuff the game is plastered in.

[o Ventus]

wantedman dan wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Bioware has done this sort of thing before. They give you false dilemmas where they shouldn't exist. Remember the Collector Base? Your only two choices was to either give the base to terrorists or destroy it. Wanna give it to the Alliance or keep it for yourself? Nope can't do that the narrative demands otherwise.

That was hardly narrative-breaking, however.

Nor was it the culmination of the entire trilogy.