181 réponses à ce sujet

[RiouHotaru]

For whatever reason, people have this obsession with interpreting the endings in the worst possible manner. Pay them no heed, OP.

If Synthesis feels right to you, then it's right for you. No amount of nay-saying or over-interpretation can change that.

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...
Synthesis has done nothing to address other issues.

Isn't that what you people wanted? That it leaves us with free will, and thus for conflict in other areas to possibly arise? :innocent:

Make up your goddamn minds already.

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
Synthesis has done nothing to address other issues.

Isn't that what you people wanted? That it leaves us with free will, and thus for conflict in other areas to possibly arise? :innocent:

Make up your goddamn minds already.

No. I simply see no reason to enact it if all it's going to do is fix a hypothetical issue.

All you've really done is determine how life should develop based upon a hypothetical issue and hubris.

It certainly works, but it's underpinnings are full of a god complex.

[Tealjaker94]

Destroy is the right option. Control is the left option. Synthesis is the center option. I rest my case.

[Taboo]

It's also painfully unrealistic.

It comes out of nowhere and makes me laugh myself to sleep at night sometimes.

It's a fantasy ending more than anything else. If that's how people want their story to end I have no personal qualms with them.

Everyone else will be over here, sitting at the realism bar with drinks and complimentary french fries.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Why synthesis is bad:

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 11 août 2012 - 10:16 .

[UltimateZero]

I liked the synthetic ending i basically set my male shepard up for it. He knows that synthetics will always go against organics. He sympathizes with organics and synthetics. Even if he destroys or controls the reapers a new synthetic will raise and kill organics it's a never ending cycle. By combining them both organics and synthetics are the same. Organics have no need to create synthetics and synthetics can sympathize with organics.

My shepard does not believe in sacrificing any one. He helps everyone and saves everyone he can.

Modifié par UltimateZero, 11 août 2012 - 09:58 .

[Taboo]

Because realism will always be better than fantasy.

[F4H bandicoot]

Taboo-XX wrote...

It's also painfully unrealistic.

It comes out of nowhere and makes me laugh myself to sleep at night sometimes.

It's a fantasy ending more than anything else. If that's how people want their story to end I have no personal qualms with them.

Everyone else will be over here, sitting at the realism bar with drinks and complimentary french fries.

Do you  do it like this guy??

 

Modifié par F4H bandicoot, 11 août 2012 - 09:59 .

[Tealjaker94]

UltimateZero wrote...

My shepard does not believe in sacrificing any one. 

How'd Virmire go? And Priority:Tuchanka? And Priority:Rannoch?

Modifié par Tealjaker94, 11 août 2012 - 10:01 .

[Taboo]

F4H bandicoot wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

It's also painfully unrealistic.

It comes out of nowhere and makes me laugh myself to sleep at night sometimes.

It's a fantasy ending more than anything else. If that's how people want their story to end I have no personal qualms with them.

Everyone else will be over here, sitting at the realism bar with drinks and complimentary french fries.

Do you  do it like this guy??

 (snip)

No, like this guy, Jack Nicholson.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

UltimateZero wrote...

I liked the synthetic ending i basically set my male shepard up for it. He knows that synthetics will always go against organics. He sympathizes with organics and synthetics. Even if he destroys or controls the reapers a new synthetic will raise and kill organics it's a never ending cycle.

My shepard does not believe in sacrificing any one. He helps everyone and saves everyone he can.

You don't know that. That's what Starbrat tells you. Damn him and his reapers. They interfered. There could have been peace. They needed to be destroyed. They not only killed organics. They used synthetics as tools to help them then killed them afterward like they were pests. They did this each cycle.

[Podge 90]

I don't like Synthesis, not because it 'rapes' anyone, not because it 'molests' anyone, but simply because it is laughably ridiculous.

I mean, Control is amazingly stupid, but at least the principle was suggested with Overlord.  And Destroy is the only way we can actually defeat the Reapers.  But Synthesis?  Happily ever after with the Reapers?  Green eyes?

rofl.  ME3 lost all credibility right there, in my eyes.  In my green, glowing eyes.

Why is it that a lot of the people who like Synthesis also liked the original endings?  Is there genuinely a correlation between one portion of dumbdumbs and the other portion of dumbdumbs?

Modifié par Podge 90, 11 août 2012 - 11:00 .

[Chuvvy]

I liked it when everything turned green for no raisin too.

[Genetic Destiny]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

So tell me now, what would you do if a loved one were turned into a husk?

Based on the post that started this particular discussion, are you opposed to putting husks out of their misery? You do realize that reapers rely on using husks to traumatize their enemies' loved ones and cripple morale right?

Garrus: "And for everyone you convert your enemy loses 2; the one you converted and his buddy on the other side who can't pull the trigger on a friend."

[Master Xanthan]

Its ok I guess but I prefer Destroy and Control.

[tanisha__unknown]

But the horrible eyes and all the circuits on your skin...

[Mcfly616]

I personally pick Destroy.....but all the endings are all Sci Fi goodness

[knightnblu]

Endorlf wrote...

It puzzles me that some people will use the worst possible interpretation for Synthesis to demonize it. Opinionated buzzwords like brainwashing, rape, and indoctrination are being thrown around as if they're fact.

Normally I don't respond to these types of posts, but I haven't written on Synthesis for quite some time. First off I do not intend to be argumentative, but rather illustrative. Let us speak of the individual will first.
 
The will of the individual is held to be sacrosanct. Meaning that nothing should abridge the will of the individual in such a way that it causes one to be demeaned or degraded. When intercourse is taken from another without their consent we call that rape and have written laws to protect the individual from such action. However, if rape is the use of another's person's body for sexual gratification against that person's will is wrong, then how much more so is the violation of that person's essence?
 
The action of forcing a change on an individual that forever alters that individual's DNA is a far more invasive violation than would be merely using the body of another to satisfy sexual desire. DNA is the very essence of the individual. It is the specific biological code that references that individual in all ways. When you violate that code without even so much as telling the person that you are going to do so, it is a far worse violation of the individual because you change that individual irrevocably. In short re-writing the DNA is forever, but rape ends eventually.
 
Basic changes must take place in the DNA in order to achieve the biological/machine hybrid and the flesh must also be re-written to match the new DNA. If people tell the government to keep its laws off of their body, what would they say to a Cmdr. Shepard who has forever altered their body without asking for their permission to do so or even informing them of his intent?
 
The trouble comes in when people don't even think about the potential consequences of these actions and support them just the same. I also submit that the Synthesis option is a form of galactic genocide in that all races/species are forever altered thus exterminating the previous incarnation. The revised races would be forever separated from its forebears and like the bonsai cut from it's roots, they can never be reconnected. Thus do the new beings find themselves forever cast adrift amongst the stars because they have been separated from their origins.
 
Last, but certainly not least, is that if the DNA and flesh is to be re-written then how does one know that the mind will remain the inviolate property of the individual? How do you know that the Catalyst will allow the individual to remain free? The Synthesis option could be a ploy to rewrite all organic organisms to be enslaved to his will for all time just as the Reapers are slaves to his will. Does the thought of being a slave really appeal to you?
 
The Catalyst shows no inclination toward friendship nor does he offer any good will gestures. He tells Shepard point blank that he created the Reapers, that he had his own creators forced into Reaper form and enslaved to his will, and even when he admits that his plan is no longer workable he continues the slaughter in order to pressure Shepard. I see no basis for either friendship or trust in his actions or words. In fact, I believe him to remain hostile throughout the encounter with Shepard. As such, why would I wish to go where he is trying to send me?
 
If the Catalyst wants me to choose synthesis, he wants this for a reason and I for one am not willing to accommodate him. He has steadfastly been trying to kill me for two and one half years. Why would the Crucible force him to change his mind? Because the variables changed? I don't think so.
 
The crucible may have forced him to accept other alternatives, but I seriously doubt that it would have re-ordered his higher processes or re-written his motivations. The Catalyst is an example of an insane AI. His frustration in trying to accomplish his prime directive broke his mind and he turned on his own creators out of frustration and made them the first Reaper against their will. In other words, he slaughtered them just like he has slaughtered everybody else.
 
The preservation of life in Reaper form is no more tenable than the preservation of water in gaseous form. If one were to break down water into its component gasses then you have destroyed water, not preserved it. The same can be said of preserving organics by reducing them down to their basic genetic materials. Where is the art? Literature? Culture? It is all destroyed. Yet the Catalyst maintains that life is preserved indicating his madness.
 
Believe him if you wish and select Synthesis if you want to, but I seriously doubt that it will work out like you think it will.

[Mcfly616]

It worked out how the Epilogue shows it did....

[JimJamBimBam]

I like Synthesis and Destroy for Paragon, Control for Renegade, and Reject when I feel like dooming the entire galaxy and rendering Shepard's work pointless

[JimJamBimBam]

knightnblu wrote...

Endorlf wrote...

It puzzles me that some people will use the worst possible interpretation for Synthesis to demonize it. Opinionated buzzwords like brainwashing, rape, and indoctrination are being thrown around as if they're fact.

Normally I don't respond to these types of posts, but I haven't written on Synthesis for quite some time. First off I do not intend to be argumentative, but rather illustrative. Let us speak of the individual will first.
 
The will of the individual is held to be sacrosanct. Meaning that nothing should abridge the will of the individual in such a way that it causes one to be demeaned or degraded. When intercourse is taken from another without their consent we call that rape and have written laws to protect the individual from such action. However, if rape is the use of another's person's body for sexual gratification against that person's will is wrong, then how much more so is the violation of that person's essence?
 
The action of forcing a change on an individual that forever alters that individual's DNA is a far more invasive violation than would be merely using the body of another to satisfy sexual desire. DNA is the very essence of the individual. It is the specific biological code that references that individual in all ways. When you violate that code without even so much as telling the person that you are going to do so, it is a far worse violation of the individual because you change that individual irrevocably. In short re-writing the DNA is forever, but rape ends eventually.
 
Basic changes must take place in the DNA in order to achieve the biological/machine hybrid and the flesh must also be re-written to match the new DNA. If people tell the government to keep its laws off of their body, what would they say to a Cmdr. Shepard who has forever altered their body without asking for their permission to do so or even informing them of his intent?
 
The trouble comes in when people don't even think about the potential consequences of these actions and support them just the same. I also submit that the Synthesis option is a form of galactic genocide in that all races/species are forever altered thus exterminating the previous incarnation. The revised races would be forever separated from its forebears and like the bonsai cut from it's roots, they can never be reconnected. Thus do the new beings find themselves forever cast adrift amongst the stars because they have been separated from their origins.
 
Last, but certainly not least, is that if the DNA and flesh is to be re-written then how does one know that the mind will remain the inviolate property of the individual? How do you know that the Catalyst will allow the individual to remain free? The Synthesis option could be a ploy to rewrite all organic organisms to be enslaved to his will for all time just as the Reapers are slaves to his will. Does the thought of being a slave really appeal to you?
 
The Catalyst shows no inclination toward friendship nor does he offer any good will gestures. He tells Shepard point blank that he created the Reapers, that he had his own creators forced into Reaper form and enslaved to his will, and even when he admits that his plan is no longer workable he continues the slaughter in order to pressure Shepard. I see no basis for either friendship or trust in his actions or words. In fact, I believe him to remain hostile throughout the encounter with Shepard. As such, why would I wish to go where he is trying to send me?
 
If the Catalyst wants me to choose synthesis, he wants this for a reason and I for one am not willing to accommodate him. He has steadfastly been trying to kill me for two and one half years. Why would the Crucible force him to change his mind? Because the variables changed? I don't think so.
 
The crucible may have forced him to accept other alternatives, but I seriously doubt that it would have re-ordered his higher processes or re-written his motivations. The Catalyst is an example of an insane AI. His frustration in trying to accomplish his prime directive broke his mind and he turned on his own creators out of frustration and made them the first Reaper against their will. In other words, he slaughtered them just like he has slaughtered everybody else.
 
The preservation of life in Reaper form is no more tenable than the preservation of water in gaseous form. If one were to break down water into its component gasses then you have destroyed water, not preserved it. The same can be said of preserving organics by reducing them down to their basic genetic materials. Where is the art? Literature? Culture? It is all destroyed. Yet the Catalyst maintains that life is preserved indicating his madness.
 
Believe him if you wish and select Synthesis if you want to, but I seriously doubt that it will work out like you think it will.

Damn dude write a book already!

[Endorlf]

knightnblu wrote...

Normally I don't respond to these types of posts, but I haven't written on Synthesis for quite some time. First off I do not intend to be argumentative, but rather illustrative. Let us speak of the individual will first.
 
The will of the individual is held to be sacrosanct. Meaning that nothing should abridge the will of the individual in such a way that it causes one to be demeaned or degraded. When intercourse is taken from another without their consent we call that rape and have written laws to protect the individual from such action. However, if rape is the use of another's person's body for sexual gratification against that person's will is wrong, then how much more so is the violation of that person's essence?
 
The action of forcing a change on an individual that forever alters that individual's DNA is a far more invasive violation than would be merely using the body of another to satisfy sexual desire. DNA is the very essence of the individual. It is the specific biological code that references that individual in all ways. When you violate that code without even so much as telling the person that you are going to do so, it is a far worse violation of the individual because you change that individual irrevocably. In short re-writing the DNA is forever, but rape ends eventually.
 
Basic changes must take place in the DNA in order to achieve the biological/machine hybrid and the flesh must also be re-written to match the new DNA. If people tell the government to keep its laws off of their body, what would they say to a Cmdr. Shepard who has forever altered their body without asking for their permission to do so or even informing them of his intent?
 
The trouble comes in when people don't even think about the potential consequences of these actions and support them just the same. I also submit that the Synthesis option is a form of galactic genocide in that all races/species are forever altered thus exterminating the previous incarnation. The revised races would be forever separated from its forebears and like the bonsai cut from it's roots, they can never be reconnected. Thus do the new beings find themselves forever cast adrift amongst the stars because they have been separated from their origins.
 
Last, but certainly not least, is that if the DNA and flesh is to be re-written then how does one know that the mind will remain the inviolate property of the individual? How do you know that the Catalyst will allow the individual to remain free? The Synthesis option could be a ploy to rewrite all organic organisms to be enslaved to his will for all time just as the Reapers are slaves to his will. Does the thought of being a slave really appeal to you?
 
The Catalyst shows no inclination toward friendship nor does he offer any good will gestures. He tells Shepard point blank that he created the Reapers, that he had his own creators forced into Reaper form and enslaved to his will, and even when he admits that his plan is no longer workable he continues the slaughter in order to pressure Shepard. I see no basis for either friendship or trust in his actions or words. In fact, I believe him to remain hostile throughout the encounter with Shepard. As such, why would I wish to go where he is trying to send me?
 
If the Catalyst wants me to choose synthesis, he wants this for a reason and I for one am not willing to accommodate him. He has steadfastly been trying to kill me for two and one half years. Why would the Crucible force him to change his mind? Because the variables changed? I don't think so.
 
The crucible may have forced him to accept other alternatives, but I seriously doubt that it would have re-ordered his higher processes or re-written his motivations. The Catalyst is an example of an insane AI. His frustration in trying to accomplish his prime directive broke his mind and he turned on his own creators out of frustration and made them the first Reaper against their will. In other words, he slaughtered them just like he has slaughtered everybody else.
 
The preservation of life in Reaper form is no more tenable than the preservation of water in gaseous form. If one were to break down water into its component gasses then you have destroyed water, not preserved it. The same can be said of preserving organics by reducing them down to their basic genetic materials. Where is the art? Literature? Culture? It is all destroyed. Yet the Catalyst maintains that life is preserved indicating his madness.
 
Believe him if you wish and select Synthesis if you want to, but I seriously doubt that it will work out like you think it will.

Thank you for the post. It's well written.

About your point about making changes to the genetic structure of every individual, I would have to agree; it wasn't consensual.

However, I will have to disagree in certain aspects. I'm no biologist, but here's a thought on the effect of the Synthesis wave on DNA. It may simply alter the genetic and chemical structure of the nucleotides and how they may bond, but what if the genetic code is preserved and is expressed in the same way, only using the new framework? I know this is probably impossible in reality, but then again, if the Synthesis wave can magically alter the chemistry of genetics without causing harmful mutations, then what I'm proposing isn't necessarily a stretch.

I do agree about trusting the Catalyst. There isn't much reason to trust the collective intelligence of a race of sentient warships who were hell-bent on galactic annihilation.

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

No. I simply see no reason to enact it if all it's going to do is fix a hypothetical issue.

The future is always hypothetical until it happens. A meteor could hit tomorrow. You could be struck by lightning in your bed.

For an AI that is programmed to prevent a future hypothetical occurrence, of course the option that does that is going to be more appealing.