113 réponses à ce sujet

[SirDoctorofTARDIS]

This is not a Synthesis bashing thread. While it isn't an ending I would chose I understand
why some like it. However, I think we can all agree that Synthesis came out of
nowhere. So would the endings have been better with only Destroy, Control
(Which are foreshadowed as uses for the Crucible throughout the game) and
Refuse (Doesn't require the Crucible to be activated)?

Modifié par Awesomness, 06 septembre 2012 - 10:11 .

[JimJamBimBam]

Jesus, what the hell happened here?!

[ghost9191]

well makes more sense i guess, i mean have destroy , the "paragon" and control would be renegade, kinda like ME2 . control or destroy your ending. Synthesis did kinda come out of nowhere and left me with a ill feeling just because it was considered the best lol

but makes sense to be in tthere also because it is what the reapers have been trying to accomplish

[DirtyPhoenix]

I'd rather have Synthesis foreshadowed and explained better than removed altogether. I know that's not gonna happen but so is what OP is suggesting.

[Icinix]

Interesting formatting aside...

...it wouldn't matter what flavour you made the endings - the issues are with their presentation and lead up.


On the flip, if the four endings were presented without the Catalyst and the non-sensical random child and herp derp Reapers leaving the one and only way into the Citadel unguarded - and indeed all the other little ones - the endings probably would have been quite digestible....well....at least...edible...or at the very least - have them near your mouth without feeling the need to regurgitate.

[Comsky159]

Yes. It'd just be a moral conundrum, rather than the moral conundrum+superfunhappytime'aryan race'ending.

[Candidate 88766]

I think it should've been destroy and control. This is how I personally would've done it:

Get rid of the Starchild, get rid of the Reaper motive of trying to prevent war; just keep them as Lovecraftian horrors from the depths of space, and just have destroy and control.

Control's success depends on your support of Cerberus. When TIM reaches the Citadel, he changes stuff in the systems that allows control to become viable. If you've been helping Cerberus to some extent (keeping the Collector Base, allowing project Overlord to continue, etc), then the chance of control being successful increases.

You pick destroy if you feel you've done enough to ensure peace in the galaxy (a cured krogan ruled by Wrex, or perhaps simply not curing them at all; ensuring peace on Rannoch, or eliminating the geth, etc). You control if you feel that either humanity should be the dominant race (using the Reaper forces to assert their control) or if you feel that the galaxy will be left too unstable by your choices (the quarians, not the geth, were wiped out on Rannoch, or a cured krogan are led by Wreav, etc) and thus needs protection.

Or something like that. Of course, this would probably need some plot changes, but in simple terms this is how I would've had the endings. No synthesis, just destroy and control.

As for how you make the choice: after you have defeated TIM, Shepard collapses and you either crawl towards Anderson (basically leaving the Crucible to do its thing; you get the scene with Shepard and Anderson together, and the Crucible fires automatically - its sole purpose when built was to destroy the Reapers, so it makes sense it activates automatically) or you crawl towards the control panel than TIM was fiddling with (reaching the panel will make Shepard interefere with the Crucible's firing, instigating the control ending, but if Anderson is alive he will try to dissuade Shepard and ultimately will pick up TIM's dropped gun and try to shoot you - if you wish to instigate the control ending with Anderson alive, you will be forced to shoot him).

Just realised I've gone quite a way from the original question. Yes, I think the ending would've been better without synthesis.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 06 septembre 2012 - 10:46 .

[SpamBot2000]

Yes it would, and even better with no child to make you pick. Your ending would flow from choices made in the game, not at the Game Over screen.

[George Costanza]

Yes. It wouldn't have made the ending much better. But if it wasn't an option at all it would have at least removed some of the, "Haha, no seriously, you're telling me these magical green space lasers are going to somehow change everyone's DNA and make them part rob... wait, you serious?" from the climax.

The final fifteen minutes still comes from nowhere and doesn't fit. It still has plot holes and daft gaps in logic. But removing Synthesis and including Refuse (but a better version than the middle finger we got in the Extended Cut) would have made for a better ending.

[ghost9191]

think i would have liked it better with the whole, choose to side with cerberus and control reapers, or go with the alliance and destroy them. different endings for them and all.

a more give humans power over the aliens and such, human dominance if you will. or favor uniting the galaxy . think that might have played out better then TIM being indoctrinated, Decided which would be better , controlling or destroying your enemy

Modifié par ghost9191, 06 septembre 2012 - 10:44 .

[Rhayak]

I agree that Synthesis had very little, if none at all, lead-up, unlike Control or Destroy.

But i don't see how his complete absence would have made the ending 'better'. If anything, it would have made this forum better by not providing what is perhaps the greatest object of whining and criticism.

Refuse, on the other hand: THAT's one ending that makes the ending worse by opening an unconceivably dull and selfish choice. Yeah right, kill the whole galaxy so you can say to yourself that you 'die free'. I don't recall another videogame where you can give such a huge middle finger to the world you were supposed to save.

[George Costanza]

That's not Refuse though, is it? The point of Refuse is just not playing ball with the Star**** and taking the Reapers on in war. It should be an option. And not just a glorified game over.

Synthesis being removed would make the ending slightly better for me just because it doesn't make any sense.

[GreyLycanTrope]

I asked something similar a while back and got derailed instantly. In short yes I think we would have been better off without it.

[Pitznik]

Synthesis shoold stay. Refuse should be removed entirely or just become an end to conversation, with all terminals still functioning.

[GiarcYekrub]

No Synthsis is the middle ground, the compromise solution Given solely a choice between Genocide and restricting freewill I would of been very upset at the ending.

[ghost9191]

George Costanza wrote...

That's not Refuse though, is it? The point of Refuse is just not playing ball with the Star**** and taking the Reapers on in war. It should be an option. And not just a glorified game over.

Synthesis being removed would make the ending slightly better for me just because it doesn't make any sense.

ditto on both,. if they did a better job at refuse it would have been better. but as it is now it is just let everyone die for sake of morals. which are different depending on person and race.

[Rhayak]

George Costanza wrote...
The point of Refuse is just not playing ball with the Star**** and taking the Reapers on in war. It should be an option. And not just a glorified game over.

Unless they add the possibility of conventional victory in the future, you DO take the Reapers on in war, knowing that there is zero chance the Galaxy can win. 

It still boggles me that some preferred mass genocide to property damage, becoming a Star God themselves, or accepting a slight change in DNA.

[ghost9191]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

No Synthsis is the middle ground, the compromise solution Given solely a choice between Genocide and restricting freewill I would of been very upset at the ending.

agreed, but with the choices different. depending on war assets and such. like maybe shepard controling them without dying. to control them to advance humanity. basically siding with TIM

or destroyin the reapers only , siding with the alliance. Liking the idea of coexisting equally as the races have., and not trying to put humanity on top or whatever.

basically more of a moral question and allegiance and such

[Comsky159]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

No Synthsis is the middle ground, the compromise solution Given solely a choice between Genocide and restricting freewill I would of been very upset at the ending.

How is forcibly and non-consenually rewriting  people's genetic code, turning them into the cyborg-master race the 'middle ground'?

Does the image of deformed half-machine babies put you off your lunch at all, or is that just me?

The whole concept kind of reminds me of the original Fallout's super-mutant scheme.

Modifié par Comsky159, 06 septembre 2012 - 11:11 .

[Ziegrif]

Nah I actually like synthesis.
It's like driving a huge jackhammer through the collective DNA of every single living and non living being in excistence.

I think it's fun to see just how good or horribly horribly bad the outcome would be.

You know. FOR SCIENCE!
So removing it would be bad IMO.

[GiarcYekrub]

For me personally the:
TIM character represents the Control choice
Joker/EDI characters represents the Synthsis choice
Hacket/Anderson characters represent the Destroy choice

To me the ending is a clear choice on which character/s your siding with.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Ziegrif wrote...

Nah I actually like synthesis.
It's like driving a huge jackhammer through the collective DNA of every single living and non living being in excistence.

I think it's fun to see just how good or horribly horribly bad the outcome would be.

You know. FOR SCIENCE!
So removing it would be bad IMO.

Goddammit Glados

[ghost9191]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

For me personally the:
TIM character represents the Control choice
Joker/EDI characters represents the Synthsis choice
Hacket/Anderson characters represent the Destroy choice

To me the ending is a clear choice on which character/s your siding with.

think destroy is represented by more then those 2 though. and even joker would be for it i thinnk. given his opinion through out the game. Everyone on your crew would be for destroy, besides edi and maybe liara . but that is just me. Just saying i think more then those 2 would represent destroy

[Joe Del Toro]

I hate Synthesis but I'll look at this objectively.

I agree that some foreshadowing would have at least helped remove the 'where the f*ck did that come from' aspect to it, but that foreshadowing would also have to make some headway into explaining how the hell the mechanics would work as well. That way some people might not be so horrified by the perfectly valid 'forced violation' interpretation if it's hinted at in some way that this isn't the case.

As it is, there's none of that, so I'm continuing to be horrified by it.

[XXIceColdXX]

For sure !