224 réponses à ce sujet

[wizardryforever]

I feel like this line is quite often ignored when people form their opinion of synthesis.  Shepard asks the Catalyst why it never tried synthesis before, and the Catalyst responds that it did, but every attempt failed.  To which Shepard asks "Why?"  "Because they were not ready.  It is not something that can be. . . forced.  You are ready."  This doesn't jive with the popular "synthesis forces a change on the galaxy!" line of logic that is so prevalent.  It flat-out contradicts it, in fact.  Of course, people try to backpedal and twist the words the Catalyst uses to mean that it needs a willing organic to initiate synthesis.  That doesn't work either, because it is still being forced.  The Catalyst doesn't say "I cannot force it" or "We cannot force it." he says "it is not something that can be forced."  Implying that nobody can force it.

As much as the above is rooted in in-game facts, I'll delve a bit into my personal interpretation (or "headcanon" if you will).  When the Catalyst says "You are ready" he is referring to this cycle of life, not just Shepard.  Why is this relevant?  Well, because it means that on some level, genetic, unconscious, subconscious, whatever, the galaxy is ready for synthesis.  Thus, choosing it is only doing what is best for the galaxy at large.  Again, my personal headcanon, so excuse this paragraph from your rebuttals of the first paragraph.

There are a lot of reasons why people don't like synthesis (most of which I disagree with, in that I think the person is misinterpreting the ending), but this thread is about the "forced" argument that is thrown around so much.  I hope (vainly, perhaps) that we can discuss this civilly, without flaming.

[KrAzY WiSh]

Are you saying that Synthesis isn't forced onto everyone?

[Hrothdane]

The problem I have is that I'm supposed to just take his word for it that we are ready. In the few minutes I spend talking to him, he's already shown me that his judgements and grasp of deductive reasoning are lacking.

Even if I did have faith in his ability to arrive at conclusions via sound logic, I would require evidence to back up his assertions, which he seems loathe to give me. He could explain why he thinks we are ready in more detail, but he doesn't. Whether or not that is his fault or due to the limited time we apparently have is irrelevant; I will not make such an extraordinary decision without extraordinary evidence.

[blueumi]

if we are misinterpreting it could be because bioware did not do a good job of explaining it to us that or the fact it's such a far fetched and ridiculous ending that most people can see the flaw in it

it's not like the rest of the galaxy are ready or even had a say in the matter so it is still forced on them

[wizardryforever]

Hrothdane wrote...

The problem I have is that I'm supposed to just take his word for it that we are ready. In the few minutes I spend talking to him, he's already shown me that his judgements and grasp of deductive reasoning are lacking.

Even if I did have faith in his ability to arrive at conclusions via sound logic, I would require evidence to back up his assertions, which he seems loathe to give me. He could explain why he thinks we are ready in more detail, but he doesn't. Whether or not that is his fault or due to the limited time we apparently have is irrelevant; I will not make such an extraordinary decision without extraordinary evidence.

That's the thing though.  Most people are willing to believe what he says about everything else, or at least believe that he believes it, but they suddenly get skeptical when he brings up synthesis.  If we take what the Catalyst says with a grain of salt, then pretty much everything he says is called into question.

Besides, he cites why he knows that synthesis cannot be forced: he tried it before and it failed every time.  Presumably, because he tried to force it on an un-ready galaxy.  Interestingly, he doesn't say what happened to the previous cycles that he tried to actually force synthesis on.  They were of course harvested, but what were the results of the failure?  One's headcanon of that answer could play a significant part in making your choice without metagaming.

But of course, when we actually watch the synthesis ending, we see that it worked perfectly, as intended.  So clearly, the galaxy actually was ready.

[wizardryforever]

blueumi wrote...

if we are misinterpreting it could be because bioware did not do a good job of explaining it to us that or the fact it's such a far fetched and ridiculous ending that most people can see the flaw in it

it's not like the rest of the galaxy are ready or even had a say in the matter so it is still forced on them

I have to ask, did you even read the thread title?  It cannot be forced.  So no, it is not forced.  You know, on account of it not being forceable.

[blueumi]

did anyone beside sheaprd agree no it was done with out them having a say and if they are controlled by the reapers forcing their logic on to all the life forms it's still forced

[D24O]

I'm not a fan of the Catalyst, and I don't share many of his views, so his endorsement means little to me.

[blueumi]

it's what the reapers want so of course star child would say what ever it took to get shepard to do it so it is still possilbe that they are now reapers and have nothing left of who they were befor

[Iakus]

Who is "you?" Shepard? Humanity? The galaxy?

Just how universal does this "readiness" require? Are the asari ready? The turians? The krogan? Salarians? Yahg?

How about the nonspacefaring races? Is every tree, bird, and blade of grass ready? Then there's the Reapers themselves and their husks...

[zambot]

There's also the obvious: If it could be forced, then the Catalyst would have forced it already.

So yes, it's blindingly obvious the writers intended for everyone to be "ready" and for it to be a welcomed change. I think this rubs people the wrong way because it is just so unrealistic.

[wizardryforever]

D24O wrote...

I'm not a fan of the Catalyst, and I don't share many of his views, so his endorsement means little to me.

So a bland statement of facts counts as endorsement, now?  The fact that it cannot be forced is clearly delineated by the only source of information we have on the subject.  What the Catalyst actually thinks about the options comes afterward (or possibly before, I get the order confused), but when Shepard asks for details, you get details, not opinions.  This is where the thread title line comes up.

[SparkyRich]

Ok, so look; I have some really good stuff here. This drug will make you ten times smarter, faster, stronger, more handsome/beautiful, increase your lifespan twenty-fold and make you a billionaire - all with absolutely no deleterious side effects. I'm going to sneak up on you and administer this drug to you against your will - or, at best without your knowledge or consent. Is this morally acceptable?

[zambot]

SparkyRich wrote...

Ok, so look; I have some really good stuff here. This drug will make you ten times smarter, faster, stronger, more handsome/beautiful, increase your lifespan twenty-fold and make you a billionaire - all with absolutely no deleterious side effects. I'm going to sneak up on you and administer this drug to you against your will - or, at best without your knowledge or consent. Is this morally acceptable?

You left out the "and if I don't give you this drug, you will be killed by giant robots".

[blueumi]

also he said this was attempted before and failed so it coud fail again shepard can be the one and only ready person the rest have no idea and did not agree to join

[D24O]

wizardryforever wrote...

So a bland statement of facts counts as endorsement, now?  The fact that it cannot be forced is clearly delineated by the only source of information we have on the subject.  What the Catalyst actually thinks about the options comes afterward (or possibly before, I get the order confused), but when Shepard asks for details, you get details, not opinions.  This is where the thread title line comes up.

But how is it a fact? The Catalyst saying so doesn't cut it for me. I don't place much stock in his assesment, the only reason I trust the choices to work is metagaming, I know they do. Until the EC came out I didn't have control as my canon ending because I didn't place any stock in my enemy's word. Whether its forced or not is something that I don;t think Shepard, at least the one I played, would allow the Catalyst, or himself to determine.

[inversevideo]

OP I'm not sure I am following you correctly.

From my perspective, it does not matter if Starkid tells me the galaxy is ready for synthesis, or even that he is correct. I don't see how any individual can decide to impose a change on any other individual, without permission.

It would be like thinking that hot blonde in the coffee shop is ready for sex, and then, without any communication with her whatsoever, you go over and start having sex with her. It is a violation.

I think folks decide synthesis is okay, because the EC shows happy shiny beings, and there is that great speech by EDI. But how do you know that those who were changed are happy with the change? And are they happy with the change or because they were re-written, and in the re-writing of their DNA, so changed to be happy?

It is a very slippery slope, and there are no answers. Shepard is not a geneticist, she cannot know the price of synthesis, nor does she have the time to study the issue, presuming she could.

Yet here she is being asked to make a life altering decision, for trillions of beings, regarding their very genetic structure, all on the advice of a genocidal machine. And doing this without anyone's permission, I don't understand how that is not forcing a change on the galaxy, by negating the choice/free will of those you are changing.

[zambot]

inversevideo wrote...
Yet here she is being asked to make a life altering decision, for trillions of beings

Yes, this is the entire point of the ending.  You (Shepard) get to decide the fate of trillions of beings.  This is not unique to synthesis.   You don't hold a vote to decide whether to wipe out the Geth, elect Shepard as supreme dictator, change everyone's dna, or take your chances with the reapers.  There isn't time for a democratic process.  Shepard has to make a choice, drawing from everything he/she learned.  You make that choice, and the galaxy lives with whatever you choose.

You are the hero the story; that is your job.

[GreyLycanTrope]

It just come off as a contradiction to me.
"Synthesis can't be force, now force a solution on the whole galaxy Shepard, before I decide to go back to that solution I just said wouldn't work anymore and Reaper you all, come on chop chop I'm on the clock here"

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 06 septembre 2012 - 01:47 .

[wizardryforever]

inversevideo wrote...

OP I'm not sure I am following you correctly.

From my perspective, it does not matter if Starkid tells me the galaxy is ready for synthesis, or even that he is correct. I don't see how any individual can decide to impose a change on any other individual, without permission.

It would be like thinking that hot blonde in the coffee shop is ready for sex, and then, without any communication with her whatsoever, you go over and start having sex with her. It is a violation.

I think folks decide synthesis is okay, because the EC shows happy shiny beings, and there is that great speech by EDI. But how do you know that those who were changed are happy with the change? And are they happy with the change or because they were re-written, and in the re-writing of their DNA, so changed to be happy?

It is a very slippery slope, and there are no answers. Shepard is not a geneticist, she cannot know the price of synthesis, nor does she have the time to study the issue, presuming she could.

Yet here she is being asked to make a life altering decision, for trillions of beings, regarding their very genetic structure, all on the advice of a genocidal machine. And doing this without anyone's permission, I don't understand how that is not forcing a change on the galaxy, by negating the choice/free will of those you are changing.

To continue your example, attempting to sex it up with the blonde can either work, in which case you actually were right about her being ready.  Or it could fail (probably spectacularly), indicating that you were wrong about her being ready.  Simply put, synthesis working at all (and across the galaxy) proves the Catalyst right about the galaxy being ready.  If it had failed, then we'd know that the galaxy wasn't ready.  In this case, "ready" can mean a lot of things.  A lot of people dislike the lack of explicit consent, but ignore the implicit consent.  The people of the galaxy expect the Crucible to end the war with the Reapers, and it does in all three endings.  The thing is that each ending is mutually exclusive, and only Shepard ever knows that there are options at all.  No one else knows enough about how the Crucible interacts with the Catalyst to tell what form the beam will take or what its effects are.  So as far as they know, Synthesis was the only option.

Another thing that I'd like to point out is that synthesis fails as a concept unless the change is universal.  Otherwise you have the same conflict as before, with the unupgraded organics (or synthetics) causing problems with the technologically superior synthesites.  Thus the entire galaxy would have to implicitly be ready in order for the Catalyst to even suggest it at all.  His grasp of the situation and his views on the solution are very clear.

And yes, much of the ending is open to interpretation.  But the forcibility (or the actual lack thereof) of synthesis is not, ultimately.

[Hrothdane]

wizardryforever wrote...

Hrothdane wrote...

The problem I have is that I'm supposed to just take his word for it that we are ready. In the few minutes I spend talking to him, he's already shown me that his judgements and grasp of deductive reasoning are lacking.

Even if I did have faith in his ability to arrive at conclusions via sound logic, I would require evidence to back up his assertions, which he seems loathe to give me. He could explain why he thinks we are ready in more detail, but he doesn't. Whether or not that is his fault or due to the limited time we apparently have is irrelevant; I will not make such an extraordinary decision without extraordinary evidence.

That's the thing though.  Most people are willing to believe what he says about everything else, or at least believe that he believes it, but they suddenly get skeptical when he brings up synthesis.  If we take what the Catalyst says with a grain of salt, then pretty much everything he says is called into question.

Besides, he cites why he knows that synthesis cannot be forced: he tried it before and it failed every time.  Presumably, because he tried to force it on an un-ready galaxy.  Interestingly, he doesn't say what happened to the previous cycles that he tried to actually force synthesis on.  They were of course harvested, but what were the results of the failure?  One's headcanon of that answer could play a significant part in making your choice without metagaming.

But of course, when we actually watch the synthesis ending, we see that it worked perfectly, as intended.  So clearly, the galaxy actually was ready.

Whether he believes what he is saying is true is irrelevant to whether or not it is true.

Shepard has no way of knowing with any degree of logic-based certainty how the decision will work out at the time with the information given by the Catalyst. He shows himself to either be incapable or unwilling to provide a sound logical argument. It is nothing personal against him, but he fails to make his case, so I won't choose it.

It is a total leap of faith, and I don't like leaps of faith. I have faith in friends, loved ones and ideals, but I cannot place faith in the leader of my enemies after 10 minutes of conversation. If you can, that is your decision. I question your judgement, but it is your choice.

[wizardryforever]

Hrothdane wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

Hrothdane wrote...

The problem I have is that I'm supposed to just take his word for it that we are ready. In the few minutes I spend talking to him, he's already shown me that his judgements and grasp of deductive reasoning are lacking.

Even if I did have faith in his ability to arrive at conclusions via sound logic, I would require evidence to back up his assertions, which he seems loathe to give me. He could explain why he thinks we are ready in more detail, but he doesn't. Whether or not that is his fault or due to the limited time we apparently have is irrelevant; I will not make such an extraordinary decision without extraordinary evidence.

That's the thing though.  Most people are willing to believe what he says about everything else, or at least believe that he believes it, but they suddenly get skeptical when he brings up synthesis.  If we take what the Catalyst says with a grain of salt, then pretty much everything he says is called into question.

Besides, he cites why he knows that synthesis cannot be forced: he tried it before and it failed every time.  Presumably, because he tried to force it on an un-ready galaxy.  Interestingly, he doesn't say what happened to the previous cycles that he tried to actually force synthesis on.  They were of course harvested, but what were the results of the failure?  One's headcanon of that answer could play a significant part in making your choice without metagaming.

But of course, when we actually watch the synthesis ending, we see that it worked perfectly, as intended.  So clearly, the galaxy actually was ready.

Whether he believes what he is saying is true is irrelevant to whether or not it is true.

Shepard has no way of knowing with any degree of logic-based certainty how the decision will work out at the time with the information given by the Catalyst. He shows himself to either be incapable or unwilling to provide a sound logical argument. It is nothing personal against him, but he fails to make his case, so I won't choose it.

It is a total leap of faith, and I don't like leaps of faith. I have faith in friends, loved ones and ideals, but I cannot place faith in the leader of my enemies after 10 minutes of conversation. If you can, that is your decision. I question your judgement, but it is your choice.

Well all the endings are leaps of faith, ultimately.  That's the reason people use for refusing.  As abhorent as refusal is, people won't make that leap of faith based on distrust or just paralyzing indecision (pretty much every argument stems from those).  And really, I have nothing against people role-playing Shepard and not using metagame knowledge when they pick the choice.  It's the people who use metagame arguments against synthesis that I was addressing here.

[Shadow Quickpaw]

I believe what the Catalyst meant by "cannot be forced" is a purely physical sense. Synthesis is not something that was physically possible in previous cycles, while it can apparantly be achieved in the present cycle.

The objection is a moral one. Not a physical one. You cannot tell me that every single being that exists in the Milky Way at that moment would be happy with this change. In fact, given the overwhelming opinion AGAINST synthetic life at the time (compounded by the Reapers), it is highly probable that most beings would chose to die rather than become something they hate so passionately. That is the forcing that is being done here, no one but Shepard has any choice in the matter. Any change that is not your own decision is FORCED.

And no forced change is morally acceptable, to the views of most of the galaxy. This is what TIM failed to understand, but the Geth do (ironically). That "technology is not a straight line. There are many paths to the same end." And that many, including Shepard, would in fact chose death over being altered into a cyborg by another.

[JShepppp]

Synthesis is the most symbolic, and I feel that this is what it means when Shepard makes the choice as the avatar for the cycle. I view that statement as more symbolic than anything, and I accept it that way.