476 réponses à ce sujet

[Chala]

BUT I LIKE GREEN!!!

[RadicalDisconnect]

Why must one of the endings be canon? Are they planning on a sequel? The best case scenario is that they would seriously ****** off 40% to 50% of the fanbase by choosing destroy as canon.

[ShepnTali]

Most Definitely Sane wrote...

Where did you hear about synthesis being canon?

And Taboo, how would synthesis happen if the Reapers, and I assume Starchild, are destroyed?

Word on the street. It seems the devs in general think along those lines. That's the extent of it at this point as far as I know. This is my preemptive strike against it. And yes, I know it matters little. But, being campaign season, I vote no.

[devSin]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Synthesis WILL happen. But it doesn't have to be through Shepard's actions.

But then there's no merit to it not being done through Shepard's actions. You had a chance to create the perfect future, the certain future, and you squandered it.

Making synthesis mandatory is simply saying that one choice was correct (you had the choice to do the right thing, the necessary thing, to create the new future that is coming no matter what), that anything else is just a case of "well, we may all have ended up in the same place, but at least the person who made the decision chose to let us endure all that crap in between so that it could happen spontaneously after a few thousand years".

If it's simply an inevitably, then it is not a choice, and every other ending is wrong. If you want to complete the trilogy correctly, you must choose synthesis, becase BioWare has said now that any future version of the setting will be post-synthesis. As the brat said, this is the next stage of life, and it is one that must be taken—the ending is not some noble choice to protect your morals or preserve life or give people the right to determine their own values, their own future; the ending is whether you have the courage to lead people up out of the darkness and into the light that is waiting for them.

If you chose anything but synthesis, you lacked that courage, and you failed. That is BioWare's Mass Effect.

[Grizzly46]

ShepnTali wrote...

Most Definitely Sane wrote...

Where did you hear about synthesis being canon?

And Taboo, how would synthesis happen if the Reapers, and I assume Starchild, are destroyed?

Word on the street. It seems the devs in general think along those lines. That's the extent of it at this point as far as I know. This is my preemptive strike against it. And yes, I know it matters little. But, being campaign season, I vote no.

In other words, this is a rumor with no connection to the real world we normal people live in.

Just let it drop.

[Chala]

I'm pretty sure that they'll mix ALL the endings:
- We have some green guys and some "pure" organics.
- Krogans whose genophage was cured no matter what, they can say that it was done to avoid their extinction.
- Quarian survivors that the Geth allowed to live on Rannoch/Geth that were rebuilt by the quarians.
- The technology aquired on the study of Mass Relays and Citadel allowed to extract info on the Reapers/rebuilt them as servants.
- There is a Guardian on the Citadel, some say it's Shepard, others say that it's a new IA developed by the Council to fill the hole left by the Catalyst on taking care of the Citadel.

And when you ask to someone, they'll will say: "It was a long time ago... The details are very vague".

Remember this post when the game will be announced.

[ShepnTali]

Grizzly46 wrote...

ShepnTali wrote...

Most Definitely Sane wrote...

Where did you hear about synthesis being canon?

And Taboo, how would synthesis happen if the Reapers, and I assume Starchild, are destroyed?

Word on the street. It seems the devs in general think along those lines. That's the extent of it at this point as far as I know. This is my preemptive strike against it. And yes, I know it matters little. But, being campaign season, I vote no.

In other words, this is a rumor with no connection to the real world we normal people live in.

Just let it drop.

That, I will not do. Other posters have more information. Like DevSin and Taboo.

[Hrothdane]

No synthesis without thesis and antithesis!
--Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

[Most Definitely Sane]

ShepnTali wrote...

Grizzly46 wrote...

ShepnTali wrote...

Most Definitely Sane wrote...

Where did you hear about synthesis being canon?

And Taboo, how would synthesis happen if the Reapers, and I assume Starchild, are destroyed?

Word on the street. It seems the devs in general think along those lines. That's the extent of it at this point as far as I know. This is my preemptive strike against it. And yes, I know it matters little. But, being campaign season, I vote no.

In other words, this is a rumor with no connection to the real world we normal people live in.

Just let it drop.

That, I will not do. Other posters have more information. Like DevSin and Taboo.

It would be appreciated if you get said information before you make a thread.
Seriously, I'd like to know why I'm saying "no" to synthesis being the official canon when no sources indicating this have been released.

[ShepnTali]

Then don't say no, and carry on. I don't need posting instructions. Now smile, and enjoy life. Preferably not green. But it's ok.

[PKSovereign]

Worse than thousand genophages.

[devSin]

All the hullabaloo is from a conversation at Gamescom.

Among the noise, Jessica described the team's take on synthesis and why it's their preferred ending for the game, also mentioning that it will be the basis for any future content that takes place after the events of ME3.

To be sure, there is nonsense in there, but I think that's to be expected for a lot of lore and story questions (simply because questions like how Shepard could survive and where Shepard even is truly don't have answers). And of course she has to bend over backward to accommodate indoctrination. But if the recounting is accurate, the discussion of synthesis strikes me as authentic (there's no way she'd go into it like that if she was just making stuff up).

If you choose not to believe her, that's fine, but I think there's enough indication both within the game and outside of it that this really is the truth.

FFZero wrote...

Jessica pretty much said the endings we have are 100% final and if we think anything will be added to the endings after the final choice then we have misunderstood things. She equated the ending of ME3 to Schrödinger's cat, it can be IT or it can be literal, neither is right or wrong. She also said something I find quite disturbing. The reason why Synthesis is seen as the best ending by some BW people is the fact that like the Starbrat says, it is inevitable. Synthesis will happen sooner or later. She said if they were to set a Mass Effect game in the future Synthesis will have taken place, either as a consequence of Shepard’s choice or because it’s naturally occurred.

Modifié par devSin, 21 août 2012 - 07:18 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

BringBackNihlus wrote...

devSin wrote...

All the hullabaloo is from a conversation at Gamescom.

Among the noise, Jessica described the team's take on synthesis and why it's their preferred ending for the game, also mentioning that it will be the basis for any future content that takes place after the events of ME3.

To be sure, there is nonsense in there, but I think that's to be expected for a lot of lore and story questions (simply because questions like how Shepard could survive and where Shepard even is truly don't have answers). And of course she has to bend over backward to accommodate indoctrination. But if the recounting is accurate, the discussion of synthesis strikes me as authentic (there's no way she'd go into it like that if she was just making stuff up).

FFZero wrote...

Jessica pretty much said the endings we have are 100% final and if we think anything will be added to the endings after the final choice then we have misunderstood things. She equated the ending of ME3 to Schrödinger's cat, it can be IT or it can be literal, neither is right or wrong. She also said something I find quite disturbing. The reason why Synthesis is seen as the best ending by some BW people is the fact that like the Starbrat says, it is inevitable. Synthesis will happen sooner or later. She said if they were to set a Mass Effect game in the future Synthesis will have taken place, either as a consequence of Shepard’s choice or because it’s naturally occurred.

A bit of nonsense?

The bolded part is the best. Just...what the hell.

"You fight against inevitability, dust struggling against cosmic winds."

Did Harby indoctrinate Bioware?

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 21 août 2012 - 07:21 .

[Most Definitely Sane]

devSin wrote...

All the hullabaloo is from a conversation at Gamescom.

Among the noise, Jessica described the team's take on synthesis and why it's their preferred ending for the game, also mentioning that it will be the basis for any future content that takes place after the events of ME3.

To be sure, there is nonsense in there, but I think that's to be expected for a lot of lore and story questions (simply because questions like how Shepard could survive and where Shepard even is truly don't have answers). And of course she has to bend over backward to accommodate indoctrination. But if the recounting is accurate, the discussion of synthesis strikes me as authentic (there's no way she'd go into it like that if she was just making stuff up).

If you choose not to believe her, that's fine, but I think there's enough indication both within the game and outside of it that this really is the truth.

FFZero wrote...

Jessica pretty much said the endings we have are 100% final and if we think anything will be added to the endings after the final choice then we have misunderstood things. She equated the ending of ME3 to Schrödinger's cat, it can be IT or it can be literal, neither is right or wrong. She also said something I find quite disturbing. The reason why Synthesis is seen as the best ending by some BW people is the fact that like the Starbrat says, it is inevitable. Synthesis will happen sooner or later. She said if they were to set a Mass Effect game in the future Synthesis will have taken place, either as a consequence of Shepard’s choice or because it’s naturally occurred.

Ah. Thank you.

[devSin]

BringBackNihlus wrote...

A bit of nonsense?

The bolded part is the best. Just...what the hell.

You missed the context.

The nonsense is the speculative stuff about lore and story events ("Shepard is on the Citadel!" But there is no concrete. "Shepard is on a secret part of the Citadel!" (THEN HOW COULD SHE EVER BE RESCUED, HUH?)). Total nonsense, and you don't even need to really pay attention to see it (she's just doing the best she can to piece together answers from what few explanations the team has been forced to fabricate the past several months). It's also the reason why people might be inclined to dismiss the things she says ("the Normandy landed on Mars!").

But the highlighted portion is very much a simple statement about where the team is at and how they see the series progressing—something that she could actually know (and she spent a week or two with the team in Canada before the extended cut dropped, as well as helping to facilitate all the feedback about the ending), and not something she would just make up (for really no reason: she was talking to somebody who believed Shepard was being indoctrinated, definitely not a person who'd you'd try to placate by saying synthesis is the right choice).

Modifié par devSin, 21 août 2012 - 07:30 .

[Jadebaby]

[ShepnTali]

I think it's safe to assume then... synthesis isn't all that and a bag of chips. Or else, how could the game be any fun?

[AresKeith]

inb4maaazeorothersynthesissupporters

how do they think Synthesis is Sci-fi or they just don't care?

[devSin]

BringBackNihlus wrote...

I've gone on about this in the Miranda thread on the romance forum, but I think "speculation/ing" is a total cop-out on BioWare's part. It's them telling us that they couldn't write a completely coherent ending to the series, and we're just supposed to deal with it and image what happens.

I begin to fear that it was just designed to get them from points A to B, "A" being Shepard/Reapers and "B" being post-evolution transcendent man/machine life.

Either they lacked the capacity or the desire to support that bridge with a cohesive story.

It never should have been part of this game (and definitely not as an ultimate choice). If it was going to happen anyway, let it happen after the events of ME3, not (potentially) because of them. All it does is deny whatever reasons Shepard had for choosing otherwise.

My Shepard chose something else because all life is precious. You don't need to be the same to have the same value.

Except that apparently you do. And so the future will be synthesized, despite his "noble" sacrifice, which turns out to be merely forestalling the inevitable, the inability to see what is true and what is right. Shepard had the choice to make the future—and he chose not to.

Modifié par devSin, 21 août 2012 - 07:55 .

[saracen16]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Tommyspa wrote...

Why would I say no to the best ending?

Because it's non-sensical, doesn't solve his problem, and has no right to be in Mass Effect?

And who the hell are you to say that?

[Blue Face Beast]

I thought Synthesis was a nice ending.

It kinda looked like Battlestar Galactica ending. A mixed race of cylon-humans finally living together and making a new race, a new beginning, a new future.

All of this has happened before and all of this will happen again lol