Ce sujet est fermé
umadcommander wrote...
i rarely leave this thread, if i do its to bash synthesis but i think thats justifiedRifneno wrote...
Man, BSN scares the hell out of me. Some of these people have a moral compass that would make Vlad the Impaler take a step back. "TIM's not evil, he's just misunderstood!" "No, the asari shouldn't be punished for withholding Prothean tech that could've saved billions!" "The catalyst is just doing what it thinks is right!" "The templars are necessary, you just hate religion!"
I just find it too confusing when I try to have conversations in other threads. I was debating with a pro-ending, synthesis supporter the other day, on the subject of the synthesis ending being a mess because of the agonising continued existance of the husks, and their even more hideous variants such as Scions and Pretorians. The debate started when someone claimed that if the husks really were unhappy they could kill themselves if they wished, but it was immoral for Shepard to make that decision for them by picking Destroy. I pointed out that might be problematic for things like Scions containing several huskified people merged together, if one or more of them wanted to end it all, but the others did not.
Because I didn't want to come across as an IT zealot, I tried to argue against it from a literal point of view, so I came across as an anti-ender. And he accused me of being such, and of deliberately seeing the worst in synthesis to fit my preconceived dislike of the endings. But if IT was intended by Bioware, then I'm NOT an anti-ender. Synthesis is actually brilliant, because we were SUPPOSED to find it disgusting and unbelievable.
In the end I gave up. Too much cognitive dissonance, or whatever it is when you try to hold too many views in one tiny human brain.
Modifié par Eryri, 31 décembre 2012 - 11:22 .
Retour en haut
