318 réponses à ce sujet

[Tealjaker94]

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Okay, you disagree with her interpretation of an open ending, good to see your excersising your free will to do so.

 How can it be open ended if synthesis is presented as the best open by far?

You'll have to explain that one to me, because so far it seems like it's presented pretty badly.

Apart from losing Shepard, what is the down side? The reapers help rebuild, and everything is great. They are quickly surpassing anything they did before and may even surpass life and death. This solution the
game practically begs you to chose. No more synthetic/organic problems, everything is cool.

Listen to yourself...you're...indoctrinated.

[MissMaster_2]

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Okay, you disagree with her interpretation of an open ending, good to see your excersising your free will to do so.

 How can it be open ended if synthesis is presented as the best open by far?

You'll have to explain that one to me, because so far it seems like it's presented pretty badly.

Apart from losing Shepard, what is the down side? The reapers help rebuild, and everything is great. They are quickly surpassing anything they did before and may even surpass life and death. This solution the
game practically begs you to chose. No more synthetic/organic problems, everything is cool.

How about forcing everyone in the galaxy in to a future they might not want?

Modifié par MissMaster_2, 22 août 2012 - 01:53 .

[devSin]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

You're right about the irony. Shepard is just derp-derp for trying to stop the Reapers. Looks like the antagonists get the last laugh.

I get this terrifying suspicion that the Reapers are the failed attempt at synthesis, and the Catalyst just keeps on creating them, hoping that maybe one day it will turn out right.

The ending is basically going to change (via future DLC) from stopping the Reapers to initiating the *true* synthesis. So there will be no doubt in your mind when you get to the garden what the right choice is supposed to be.

If that doesn't work, they'll probably add runway strips to the beam with flashing green lights.

DinoSteve wrote...

Too late, someone already called me on it. I do really wish she'd shut up though, when she speaks BSN tears it self apart.

She was not speaking for herself. She was speaking for the team.

You may wish she would stop talking, but unless you think she was lying, you can't deny what she said.

This wasn't a story or lore statement (where there truly aren't any answers—she just has to make do with what little explanation the writers have been forced to fabricate these past several months), where your caution would definitely be understandable based on her past efforts to discuss the ending.

[inko1nsiderate]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

That Guy From YouTube made a pretty good post today about what is wrong with synthesis.

Synthesis is described as "the pinnacle of evolution". But that statement is in conflict with itself, because contradicts just what evolution is.

All that Synthesis will do is lead to cultural and technological stagnation. Mordin would probably say that it would make us no better than the Collectors.

You are correct, evolution is not teleological; there cannot be a pinnacle because there is no goal. That being said, synthesis is akin to the Transhumnist concept of signularity.  

There is no reason to think that this transhumanist singularity will actually lead to a stagnation of culture the way Mordin describes it.  That being said, the way synthesis is presented in game gives 'Mordin's dilema of technology' more traction as an argument against synthesis.

Have you seen SG-1?  The ancients 'ascended' to a 'higher plane of existance', but still have new challenges and problems and higher planes of existance to get to through meditation and whatever passes for culture up there. This is an analogy that explains why I don't think this 'Mordin's dilema of technology' argument holds against current, real world, conceptions of the Transhumanist singularity.

All the issues of actual evolution and 'Mordin's dilema of technology' aside, many very smart people believe the singularity is inevitable.  It just has nothing to do with evolution or natural selection and more to do with the exponential progress of technology.

Modifié par inko1nsiderate, 22 août 2012 - 01:56 .

[Epic777]

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Okay, you disagree with her interpretation of an open ending, good to see your excersising your free will to do so.

 How can it be open ended if synthesis is presented as the best open by far?

You'll have to explain that one to me, because so far it seems like it's presented pretty badly.

Apart from losing Shepard, what is the down side? The reapers help rebuild, and everything is great. They are quickly surpassing anything they did before and may even surpass life and death. This solution the
game practically begs you to chose. No more synthetic/organic problems, everything is cool.

How about forcing everyone in the galaxy in to a future they might not want?

As yes, I remember, 'synthesis cannot be forced', yet ask no one's opinon if they wanted to be half machine before synthesizing the galaxy

[MystEU]

Retweeting.

[Conniving_Eagle]

Synthesis is hilarious.

The Catalyst...

"[Synthesis] cannot be forced."

A few lines later...

"My creators became the first Reaper. They did not approve. But it was the only way."

Modifié par Conniving_Eagle, 22 août 2012 - 01:59 .

[MissMaster_2]

Epic777 wrote...

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Okay, you disagree with her interpretation of an open ending, good to see your excersising your free will to do so.

 How can it be open ended if synthesis is presented as the best open by far?

You'll have to explain that one to me, because so far it seems like it's presented pretty badly.

Apart from losing Shepard, what is the down side? The reapers help rebuild, and everything is great. They are quickly surpassing anything they did before and may even surpass life and death. This solution the
game practically begs you to chose. No more synthetic/organic problems, everything is cool.

How about forcing everyone in the galaxy in to a future they might not want?

As yes, I remember, 'synthesis cannot be forced', yet ask no one's opinon if they wanted to be half machine before synthesizing the galaxy

That is what I'm sayin! I don't think Javik would be down for that ish'. 

Modifié par MissMaster_2, 22 août 2012 - 01:59 .

[Genetic Destiny]

gorezeelar wrote...

So organics improve themselves by synthesize themselves, while synthetics, wanting a better understanding of life, make themselves organics. 

I don't see how synthetics can become organic...unless they hack/upload themselves into a synthesized being.

[KENNY4753]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Synthesis is hilarious.

The Catalyst...

"[Synthesis] cannot be forced."

A few lines later...

"My creators became the first Reaper. They did not approve. But it was the only way."

I never noticed that.

Modifié par KENNY4753, 22 août 2012 - 02:02 .

[inko1nsiderate]

Flog61 wrote...

In this day and age, where we find treatments for the sick and can allow the disabled to lead almost normal lives, evolution has slowed right down. There is no survival of the fittest, there are no visible changes (our immune systems may become more advanced, but this is far from what synthesis entails)



I would also say that the whole idea of evolution is that one group evolves to outclass another, and to survive better in their respective environment. In this way, it seems a bit odd to expect every race in the galaxy to be at exactly the same stage of synthesis at exactly the same time, providing shepard does not choose synthesis in the end of me3.

Simply put: evolution does not work that way.

First, evolution has no goal, and is entirely about changes of genetic material over time.  Survival of the fitest is so laughably simplistic.  Evolution is more complicated than that.

Second, there are a few cases of 'evolution' I can point to in humanity "post technology":

1)  Certain human populations retain the ability to metabolize lactose after childhood.   This is a genetic trait, and counts as a change in genetic characeristics of humanity as a direct result of technology (namely, domestication).

2)  Birth weights used to be sharply peaked, to wit, the weight people were when they were born all fell in a small range.  WIth technology people outside of this range would survive child birth and early childhood at higher rates, and as such we've seen a spreading out of birth weights that cannot be solely described by better technology and actually represents a wider allelic frequency (aka change in genetic traits leading to a wider diversity of phenotypes).

3)  Certain genetic phenotypes will go extinct.  Particularly certain eye and hair colors.  If our genetic makeup is changing enough to slowly phase out the natural existence of certain kinds of obvious phenotypes, then it is plausible that more complicated forms of evolution will continue to occur in humanity regardless of our technology.

I am sure there are others as these are only the ones I learned about in introductory college level biology courses.

Modifié par inko1nsiderate, 22 août 2012 - 02:04 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

KENNY4753 wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Synthesis is hilarious.

The Catalyst...

"[Synthesis] cannot be forced."

A few lines later...

"My creators became the first Reaper. They did not approve. But it was the only way."

I never noticed that.

yep great bit of logic there.

[Genetic Destiny]

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Okay, you disagree with her interpretation of an open ending, good to see your excersising your free will to do so.

 How can it be open ended if synthesis is presented as the best open by far?

You'll have to explain that one to me, because so far it seems like it's presented pretty badly.

Apart from losing Shepard, what is the down side? The reapers help rebuild, and everything is great. They are quickly surpassing anything they did before and may even surpass life and death. This solution the
game practically begs you to chose. No more synthetic/organic problems, everything is cool.

How about forcing everyone in the galaxy in to a future they might not want?

Everyone seems to be perfectly fine with it and the reapers now. There seems to be no hint of reluctance, anger or distrust...which is strange.

[d-boy15]

well... before anyone from bioware tell it inevitable again.

why not try to explain it? because even in EC you can't even make it more logical.

Modifié par d-boy15, 22 août 2012 - 02:11 .

[huntrrz]

Even if the writing staff 'likes' Synthesis, if it is in place where do you go with the story? Synthesis is supposed to eliminate almost all conflict due to the sharing of data/thoughts between everyone. Stories are driven by conflict.

(And if the synthesized face some external threat, what's to say we won't root for the other side? The advanced, synthesized characters may not be as relatable to the audience.)

[Tealjaker94]

Genetic Destiny wrote...

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Okay, you disagree with her interpretation of an open ending, good to see your excersising your free will to do so.

 How can it be open ended if synthesis is presented as the best open by far?

You'll have to explain that one to me, because so far it seems like it's presented pretty badly.

Apart from losing Shepard, what is the down side? The reapers help rebuild, and everything is great. They are quickly surpassing anything they did before and may even surpass life and death. This solution the
game practically begs you to chose. No more synthetic/organic problems, everything is cool.

How about forcing everyone in the galaxy in to a future they might not want?

Everyone seems to be perfectly fine with it and the reapers now. There seems to be no hint of reluctance, anger or distrust...which is strange.

Winston Smith is very happy at the end of 1984 too.

[xsdob]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Synthesis is hilarious.

The Catalyst...

"[Synthesis] cannot be forced."

A few lines later...

"My creators became the first Reaper. They did not approve. But it was the only way."

It's consitent with the other endings,

Shepard: I won't let my freinds die fighting the reapers, joker, take them out of here!

A few minutes later...

Shepard: I'll gladly sacrifice Edi, the geth, and all my freinds on the normandy to kill you reapers.


////////////////////

Shepard: Control is wrong and no one should have control of the reapers

A few minutes later.....

Shepard: I will control the reapers, because I HAVE THE POWAHHHHH!!!!!!!

I like control and even I can make fun of it.

[Epic777]

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Okay, you disagree with her interpretation of an open ending, good to see your excersising your free will to do so.

 How can it be open ended if synthesis is presented as the best open by far?

You'll have to explain that one to me, because so far it seems like it's presented pretty badly.

Apart from losing Shepard, what is the down side? The reapers help rebuild, and everything is great. They are quickly surpassing anything they did before and may even surpass life and death. This solution the
game practically begs you to chose. No more synthetic/organic problems, everything is cool.

How about forcing everyone in the galaxy in to a future they might not want?

As yes, I remember, 'synthesis cannot be forced', yet ask no one's opinon if they wanted to be half machine before synthesizing the galaxy

That is what I'm sayin! I don't think Javik would be down for that ish'. 

I am not pleased with the ending but my problems are the narrative flow and arguments used.

[Conniving_Eagle]

Let's not forget the epilogue...

Hackett: It's gunna be OK.

EDI: I'm a real boy!

Shepard:

[scientist.salarian]

comrade gando wrote...

funny that's the exact same thing saren said, "it is inevitable" oh the irony!

Bioware's indoctrinated.

Modifié par scientist.salarian, 22 août 2012 - 02:12 .

[-Skorpious-]

Synthesis is about as inevitable as personal jetpacks were for the 21st century.

[KENNY4753]

-Skorpious- wrote...

Synthesis is about as inevitable as personal jetpacks were for the 21st century.

wait we aren't getting jetpacks?

[MissMaster_2]

xsdob wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Synthesis is hilarious.

The Catalyst...

"[Synthesis] cannot be forced."

A few lines later...

"My creators became the first Reaper. They did not approve. But it was the only way."

It's consitent with the other endings,

Shepard: I won't let my freinds die fighting the reapers, joker, take them out of here!

A few minutes later...

Shepard: I'll gladly sacrifice Edi, the geth, and all my freinds on the normandy to kill you reapers.


////////////////////

Shepard: Control is wrong and no one should have control of the reapers

A few minutes later.....

Shepard: I will control the reapers, because I HAVE THE POWAHHHHH!!!!!!!

I like control and even I can make fun of it.

Well the diff with destroy is Shep has been trying to blow them back to hell since ME1. EDI says she is willing to die for the cause too....so to me Destroy is the one that keeps Shepard true to him/her self.

Modifié par MissMaster_2, 22 août 2012 - 02:14 .