227 réponses à ce sujet

[Enhanced]

KingZayd wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Ok, they "magically diappear". Now, how is that a bad thing?

How are you planning on doing that without removing individuality?

Conflict doesn't have to result from having individuality or certain belief systems. They can become intelligent enough to finds way avoid all conflicts.

That's incredibly naive. Individuality ---> different wants, different opinions, different moralities, different priorities. Assuming finite resources (pretty reasonable assumption I'd say), conflict is inevitable.

Naive? This is a video game, anything is possible. There's nothing about synthesis that says conflict is inevitable. Even in real life differences does not always to lead to conflicts.  In the epilogue, EDI implies that any conflicts can continue to be prevented or peacefully resolved: "With peace across the galaxy and with unlimited access to knowledge, to recover the greatness that was lost and surpass it." She's not just talking about organic/synthetic conflicts there.

Modifié par Enhanced, 22 mai 2013 - 12:01 .

[PsyrenY]

KingZayd wrote...

It's just an example. And no it isn't. Supposedly the Reapers were only harvesting us due to the control. With freedom they could try to wipe us all out. Isn't a big part of the supposed synthetics vs organics issue, that due to the differences in power, we're going to get wiped out?

We are no longer pure organics post-Synthesis, thus the lower power of pure organics is a non-issue - there aren't any left. And as we plainly see in the ending slides, the liberated Reapers have no desire to wipe us out or continue the harvest at all.

KingZayd wrote...
Not necessarily. The Reaping is currently limited to only advanced races. It could change to just wiping out other of those life forms.

Without the Catalyst, the only minds left guiding a Reaper are the reaped civilizations that have come before. In the absence of a controlling intelligence, why would they want to visit the same fate on other organics that was visited on them? It makes no sense.

KingZayd wrote...

My Shepard was very much concerned with galactic peace. Hence the efforts on Rannoch to stop the killing.
That Blue Suns mission may have been one I refused to complete. It's been a while so I can't remember, but with my paragon I remember there was one mission I wasn't too comfortable with. I definitely remember completing the other 2 missions.

Did you also cure the genophage? Even with Wrex and Eve in charge, Eve warns you that "he is just one Krogan. If enough clans want to go to war, he may not be able to stop them." And Wrex already wants 10 new colonies. Will that turn out peacefully? It might, but it also might not, and unfortunately even the most Paragon Shepard can only hope for the best - just like with using the Crucible.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 22 mai 2013 - 03:23 .

[Indy_S]

Optimystic_X wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

It's just an example. And no it isn't. Supposedly the Reapers were only harvesting us due to the control. With freedom they could try to wipe us all out. Isn't a big part of the supposed synthetics vs organics issue, that due to the differences in power, we're going to get wiped out?

We are no longer pure organics post-Synthesis, thus the lower power of pure organics is a non-issue - there aren't any left. And as we plainly see in the ending slides, the liberated Reapers have no desire to wipe us out or continue the harvest at all.

But what were synthetics are still immortal and faster while what were organics are still mortal and slower. There's still a clear distinction between the two. Calling the city Budapest doesn't stop there from being a difference between Buda and Pest. Synthetics are still superior.

KingZayd wrote...
Not necessarily. The Reaping is currently limited to only advanced races. It could change to just wiping out other of those life forms.

Without the Catalyst, the only minds left guiding a Reaper are the reaped civilizations that have come before. In the absence of a controlling intelligence, why would they want to visit the same fate on other organics that was visited on them? It makes no sense.

Where did the Catalyst go? There's nothing to say that he freed the Reapers or that they are capable of living with freedom. If they are benevolent, it could be because the Catalyst is forcing that benevolence on them. And because a distinction remains between what were synthetics and what were organics, he might still decide that even this plan has not worked when a conflict starts between the two. Reverting to the cycles is a real danger.

[DeinonSlayer]

@OP

Because it sucks.

[KingZayd]

Optimystic_X wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

It's just an example. And no it isn't. Supposedly the Reapers were only harvesting us due to the control. With freedom they could try to wipe us all out. Isn't a big part of the supposed synthetics vs organics issue, that due to the differences in power, we're going to get wiped out?

We are no longer pure organics post-Synthesis, thus the lower power of pure organics is a non-issue - there aren't any left. And as we plainly see in the ending slides, the liberated Reapers have no desire to wipe us out or continue the harvest at all.

KingZayd wrote...
Not necessarily. The Reaping is currently limited to only advanced races. It could change to just wiping out other of those life forms.

Without the Catalyst, the only minds left guiding a Reaper are the reaped civilizations that have come before. In the absence of a controlling intelligence, why would they want to visit the same fate on other organics that was visited on them? It makes no sense.

KingZayd wrote...

My Shepard was very much concerned with galactic peace. Hence the efforts on Rannoch to stop the killing.
That Blue Suns mission may have been one I refused to complete. It's been a while so I can't remember, but with my paragon I remember there was one mission I wasn't too comfortable with. I definitely remember completing the other 2 missions.

Did you also cure the genophage? Even with Wrex and Eve in charge, Eve warns you that "he is just one Krogan. If enough clans want to go to war, he may not be able to stop them." And Wrex already wants 10 new colonies. Will that turn out peacefully? It might, but it also might not, and unfortunately even the most Paragon Shepard can only hope for the best - just like with using the Crucible.

a) The point is the gap in power between Reaper and non-Reaper is still immense. Just because we can now upgrade, does not mean we are already equal in power.

The Reapers already have their overarching personalities. Harbinger is not a bunch of Leviathans, he is Harbinger. That personality has developed extensively over time, similarly to how Legion's personality arises from his constituent programs when they've all been together so long. Why do you think his personality will just magically transform now?

c) Yes. Even if the Krogans rebelled, the galaxy would be able to stop them. The same does not apply to the Reapers. Against the Reapers we don't have a chance.

Modifié par KingZayd, 22 mai 2013 - 05:24 .

[PsyrenY]

KingZayd wrote...

a) The point is the gap in power between Reaper and non-Reaper is still immense. Just because we can now upgrade, does not mean we are already equal in power.


The Reapers already have their overarching personalities. Harbinger is not a bunch of Leviathans, he is Harbinger. That personality has developed extensively over time, similarly to how Legion's personality arises from his constituent programs when they've all been together so long. Why do you think his personality will just magically transform now?

c) Yes. Even if the Krogans rebelled, the galaxy would be able to stop them. The same does not apply to the Reapers. Against the Reapers we don't have a chance.

a) That would only matter if conflict would break out again before we had a chance to upgrade. This clearly is not the case.

Because the Catalyst tells you they will. "The Reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilizations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us." That second part is the key - we will be connected, not to the personalities of the Reaper entities themselves, but to the civilizations stored within. Those voices will direct the Reaper, and they would have no desire to visit upon others what was done to them.

c) Again, this only matters if they continue to attack in Synthesis. I have no reason to believe they will, and the epilogue proves me right.

Indy_S wrote...

But what were synthetics are still immortal and faster while what were organics are still mortal and slower.

Indy_S wrote...

For now. But EDI's epilogue shows that the gap is shrinking rapidly, far more rapidly than in any other ending.
Where did the Catalyst go? There's nothing to say that he freed the Reapers or that they are capable of living with freedom. If they are benevolent, it could be because the Catalyst is forcing that benevolence on them.

Again, he specifically states we will be connected to the civilizations inside the Reaper. This is not possible if he is still directing them - otherwise, we would only be connected to him, as he would still be directing their actions.

Now, you could argue that he is lying - but he has no logical reason to do so, given that honest Synthesis fits his criteria for a solution.

[EphemeralOne]

HiddenInWar wrote...

 Literally, not the soliders on earth, not the asari, turians, krogan. 

I know that synthesis would be confusing at first but...the Reapers are technically no longer reaping...

From memory, it means that all organic life is now linked up to an almost global consciousness and the reapers and machine life now understand organic life. 

What is the point in celebrating when you finally come to the realisation that you are now a part of the synthetic life you were trying to destory? 

From a player perspective, I never chose synthesis because it flies in the face of everything that you work for in the game, and it means to make a choice to forever change every species whether they want it or not. 

The right to choose is an important part of freedom. Having that choice taken from you is exactly the same as the reapers making the choice to harvest you. You are having modifications made to your body and the bodies of all life without making that choice. Pretty awful stuff if you ask me. 

[PsyrenY]

All the endings, even Refuse, involve taking choice away from other people. That is not unique to Synthesis.

[Indy_S]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Because the Catalyst tells you they will. "The Reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilizations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us." That second part is the key - we will be connected, not to the personalities of the Reaper entities themselves, but to the civilizations stored within. Those voices will direct the Reaper, and they would have no desire to visit upon others what was done to them.

I think all the Catalyst thinks of as a civilization is its accomplishments and not its people. Just a database that can be called up by the Reapers, not thousands of voices. This seems to be supported by Sovereign and Harbinger's use of the pronoun 'I' rather than 'we'.

No people, just information.

Now, you could argue that he is lying - but he has no logical reason to do so, given that honest Synthesis fits his criteria for a solution.

I won't say he's lying but I will argue that it doesn't solve his problem.

[Argolas]

I'd shoot myself in the head if I still can...

[ElSuperGecko]

Optimystic_X wrote...
All the endings, even Refuse, involve taking choice away from other people. That is not unique to Synthesis.

Incorrect.  The races of the galaxy have already made their choice when it comes to Destroy - they all chose to join the war against the Reapers, in the belief that Shepard/Hackett would find a way to win.  And they chose to do this knowing that not all of them would survive the conflict.

However, they did not choose to have who and what they are arbitrarily and irrevocably changed, potentially for the worse.

That is unique to Synthesis - making a decision which physically and permanently changes every single form of life in the galaxy.  It is not something any of them accounted for, expected or planned.  It is a decision borne of Shepard succumbing to the faulty logic of the Catalyst, giving in to it and accepting it's methods.

That is why it is an abomination, and that is why we see no-one cheering.

[Bardox9]

i hate the synthesis ending because it is the reapers ultimate goal. I was under the impression we were fighting them. Not helping them.

[PsyrenY]

Indy_S wrote...

I think all the Catalyst thinks of as a civilization is its accomplishments and not its people. Just a database that can be called up by the Reapers, not thousands of voices. This seems to be supported by Sovereign and Harbinger's use of the pronoun 'I' rather than 'we'.

Actually, they both use "we" all the time. "WE are Harbinger." "Each a nation" etc. Even the Rannoch Reaper says "we."

Indy_S wrote...



I won't say he's lying but I will argue that it doesn't solve his problem.

Logically it would. Accelerating organics prevents them from needing synthetics that can surpass them. For once we will be advancing ourselves just as quickly as relying on machines before. And with the capacity to evolve plus the accumulated knowledge of countless cycles before, we'll get the jumpstart we need to realize that potential.

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Incorrect.  The races of the galaxy have already made their choice when it comes to Destroy - they all chose to join the war against the Reapers, in the belief that Shepard/Hackett would find a way to win.  And they chose to do this knowing that not all of them would survive the conflict.

Simplistic. They all "chose Destroy" the same way Shepard did - not knowing at the time if any other way was truly feasible and certainly not knowing who would have to die to achieve it. Certainly there would be many, many folks out there who would say "yeah, go ahead and destroy the flashlight-heads too, we don't care - but obviously Shepard does, provided he brokered peace on Rannoch at all. Remember how that peace was brokered - he chose to give the code back to the Geth first, then banked on his ability to yell down Gerrell. Any Shep who ended up brokering peace leaned more towards the Geth surviving, because whether the Quarians stood down or not the Geth were getting upgraded.

ElSuperGecko wrote...

That is unique to Synthesis - making a decision which physically and permanently changes every single form of life in the galaxy.  It is not something any of them accounted for, expected or planned.  It is a decision borne of Shepard succumbing to the faulty logic of the Catalyst, giving in to it and accepting it's methods.

None of that makes it bad, only your own repugnance fallacy.

"Abomination" is a funny word. Wearing clothes of mixed fabric, and homosexuality, were once considered "abominations" too. You wouldn't be the first to be on the wrong side of history due to revulsion.

Bardox9 wrote...

i hate the synthesis ending because it is the reapers ultimate goal. I was under the impression we were fighting them. Not helping them.

If their ultimate goal was just as bad as they were, they would be cartoonish Captain Planet villains. That is not a story Bioware was interested in telling, and we're all the better for it. The hallmark of a good villain is a reasonable vision marred by unreasonable, extremist methods. Look at Knives from Trigun - his goal is noble, but his extremist views twist it into something horrible and remove his patience for humanity.

Even the so-called "Dark Energy Plot" planned for the Reapers to be trying to accomplish a noble end. They need to be stopped, not because of their "ultimate goal," but because of the way they chose to achieve it. The goal isn't the problem, the method is.

[EphemeralOne]

@Optimystic_X
The alliance of the races was instigated by their desire to stop the reaper threat and the main stated goal was to destroy the reapers. So most of the governments and races did sign up for a destroy ending, except for perhaps the geth.

No-one had even discussed whether they'd be okay with becoming a hybrid synthetic-organic life-form. It wasn't even up for discussion, so Shepard is making a big call to forever change the nature of life in the galaxy. It is, in essence, imposing his/her will on the galaxy.

Destroy I can understand and control I can understand. They both set out to do what was originally agreed upon (the removal of the reapers as a threat.) What synthesis does is to do this be irrevocably changing every single organic life. I personally find the idea distasteful, and even though it technically secures the 'best' outcome in regard to the preservation of life, it is similar in nature to the way the reapers acted. Their argument in reaping organic life was that it still continued in a different form. This is exactly what is happening here too.

I think the term you're looking for is 'wisdom of repugnance' as a tool for argument. The thing is, the poster laid out reasons why he or she considered it an abomination. Wisdom of repugnance argues that because your gut tells you it's wrong, it means it's wrong.

I think you're taking this a mite too seriously. You're seriously arguing that choosing an option that isn't synthesis is comparable to the real life struggles of gay people against homophobia. C'mon!

The problem with synthesis is that it is eerily similar to TIM turning his soldiers into husks. They got no say in what they were about to become. They got no chance to opt out. Irrevocably changing the meaning of life in the galaxy is a whole different ethical argument than stopping the reapers.

[JasonShepard]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

I think all the Catalyst thinks of as a civilization is its accomplishments and not its people. Just a database that can be called up by the Reapers, not thousands of voices. This seems to be supported by Sovereign and Harbinger's use of the pronoun 'I' rather than 'we'.

Actually, they both use "we" all the time. "WE are Harbinger." "Each a nation" etc. Even the Rannoch Reaper says "we."

Not quite true. There are examples of both using the first person:

Sovvy:
"I am Sovereign, and this station is MINE!" "I am the Vanguard of your Destruction." "You touch my mind, fumbling in ignorance."

Harby:
"I will find you again." (Upon death) "Struggle if you wish. Your mind will be mine." (Object Rho fight)

So although they are a gestalt entity made up of many harvested minds, I think there is an individual personality for each Reaper.

Modifié par JasonShepard, 22 mai 2013 - 02:06 .

[KingZayd]

Optimystic_X wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

a) The point is the gap in power between Reaper and non-Reaper is still immense. Just because we can now upgrade, does not mean we are already equal in power.


The Reapers already have their overarching personalities. Harbinger is not a bunch of Leviathans, he is Harbinger. That personality has developed extensively over time, similarly to how Legion's personality arises from his constituent programs when they've all been together so long. Why do you think his personality will just magically transform now?

c) Yes. Even if the Krogans rebelled, the galaxy would be able to stop them. The same does not apply to the Reapers. Against the Reapers we don't have a chance.

a) That would only matter if conflict would break out again before we had a chance to upgrade. This clearly is not the case.

Because the Catalyst tells you they will. "The Reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilizations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us." That second part is the key - we will be connected, not to the personalities of the Reaper entities themselves, but to the civilizations stored within. Those voices will direct the Reaper, and they would have no desire to visit upon others what was done to them.

c) Again, this only matters if they continue to attack in Synthesis. I have no reason to believe they will, and the epilogue proves me right.

a) I never saw any point in which the humans and synthetics were upgraded to Reaper level in the EC?
No. He doesn't.
c) How does the epilogue prove that the Reaepers never attack?

[PsyrenY]

EphemeralOne wrote...

@Optimystic_X
The alliance of the races was instigated by their desire to stop the reaper threat and the main stated goal was to destroy the reapers. So most of the governments and races did sign up for a destroy ending, except for perhaps the geth. 
 

They signed up for stopping the Reapers, and sacrificing if it was necessary to do so. Since the Crucible offers 3 choices instead on one (if constructed well enough) then it is clearly not necessary.

EphemeralOne wrote...

The problem with synthesis is that it is eerily similar to TIM turning his soldiers into husks. They got no say in what they were about to become. They got no chance to opt out. Irrevocably changing the meaning of life in the galaxy is a whole different ethical argument than stopping the reapers.

"Husks" are clearly not the product of Synthesis. Contiinuing to drop that word in is an appeal to emotion fallacy.

JasonShepard wrote...

So although they are a gestalt entity made up of many harvested minds, I think there is an individual personality for each Reaper.

Which is irrelevant, because we become connected to the civilization inside the Reaper, not the Reaper itself.

[PsyrenY]

KingZayd wrote...

a) I never saw any point in which the humans and synthetics were upgraded to Reaper level in the EC?
No. He doesn't.
c) How does the epilogue prove that the Reaepers never attack?

a) EDI's narrative makes it clear we have all the same knowledge they do now.
Yes, he does. ("Nuh-uh!" "Yeah-huh!")
c) For starters, it gets the same Stargazer scene as Destroy/Control. Second, why would they?

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 22 mai 2013 - 02:26 .

[JasonShepard]

Optimystic_X wrote...

JasonShepard wrote...

So although they are a gestalt entity made up of many harvested minds, I think there is an individual personality for each Reaper.

Which is irrelevant, because we become connected to the civilization inside the Reaper, not the Reaper itself.

I'm disagreeing that there is a distinction. Based on the way Reapers use the 1st and 3rd person interchangeably, I'd say that the harvested minds, the civilisation, have coallesced into a single individual. The process may or may not be reversible, and may only apply to the oldest of the Reapers (ie, it's a gradual thing that comes from living in the same space-ship-Reaper-body for millions of years. A bit like Legion.)

EDIT:

Optimystic_X wrote...

Because the Catalyst tells you they will. "The Reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilizations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us." 

When does he say that? I regularly explore all dialogue options, and I don't remember him mentioning anything along those lines.

Modifié par JasonShepard, 22 mai 2013 - 02:31 .

[PsyrenY]

JasonShepard wrote...

I'm disagreeing that there is a distinction. Based on the way Reapers use the 1st and 3rd person interchangeably, I'd say that the harvested minds, the civilisation, have coallesced into a single individual. The process may or may not be reversible, and may only apply to the oldest of the Reapers (ie, it's a gradual thing that comes from living in the same space-ship-Reaper-body for millions of years. A bit like Legion.)

Assuming you're right, that just means that - like any individual who isn't being controlled - they will have different opinions. In such an instance, some may want to continue the harvest while some will remember what it was to be reaped and oppose it. If that's the case, we'd get a schism and a bunch of ships on our side. There's the conventional victory everyone's been clamoring for.

But really, this whole line of discussion is moot. We see no evidence of a renewed assault or continued aggression in the Synthesis epilogue, so we're tilting at windmills.

JasonShepard wrote...

When does he say that? I regularly explore all dialogue options, and I don't remember him mentioning anything along those lines.

I took that quote directly from the Extended Cut conversation on Youtube. He says it right after "The cycle will end" etc.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 22 mai 2013 - 02:34 .

[Kel Riever]

Hay! OP Necro'ed own thread! I applaud.

Answer to the original question: Because Synthesis is an abomination of anything that makes sense and accomplishes nothing for a story. Well, other than make me wonder why certain people have jobs at BioWare when a talented high school student could write better ending(s).

I do have a proposal, though.  We should shut down all threads discussing Synthesis and reopen the Romance section of the Forums.  Because at least then the arguements would be entertaining and worth talking about rather than BioWare's biggest failure.

Modifié par Kel Riever, 22 mai 2013 - 02:34 .

[KingZayd]

Optimystic_X wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

a) I never saw any point in which the humans and synthetics were upgraded to Reaper level in the EC?
No. He doesn't.
c) How does the epilogue prove that the Reaepers never attack?

a) EDI's narrative makes it clear we have all the same knowledge they do now.
Yes, he does. ("Nuh-uh!" "Yeah-huh!")
c) For starters, it gets the same Stargazer scene as Destroy/Control. Second, why would they?

a) She says we have "access" to that knowledege. Presumably that's because the Reapers are providing it. If they stop, then we don't. Besides our tech is still far behind that of the Reapers. So we're far from equal in terms of power.
I watched the ending again. He doesn't.
c) And what does that prove exactly? That destroy, control and synthesis all lead to exactly the same future eventually.

Why would they?
The Reapers might decide they are the apex race and demand tribute from us if we want to live.
The Reapers might decide to "help us" along to our genetic destiny. And forcefully "evolve" us.

[PsyrenY]

KingZayd wrote...

a) She says we have "access" to that knowledege. Presumably that's because the Reapers are providing it. If they stop, then we don't. Besides our tech is still far behind that of the Reapers. So we're far from equal in terms of power.
I watched the ending again. He doesn't.
c) And what does that prove exactly? That destroy, control and synthesis all lead to exactly the same future eventually.

a) It's not instantaneous - there is a process, just a faster one than it would be without Synthesis. For instance, Reapers are already immortal, while EDI makes it clear we aren't there yet.

And here's what I don't understand about you people. You cite Mordin's rant about limitations as a reason to oppose Synthesis, yet when you see proof that we still have limitations/advancing to do, you somehow see that as a problem. Which is it?

So did I. He does. (I think we're at an impasse on this point.)

c) Right, so they are all equally valid in terms of stopping the conflict with the Reapers. If they wiped us out, clearly the Stargazer scene wouldn't be there, or at the very least it would be altered like it was in Refuse. The fact that it's the same as no more Reapers proves there was no further aggression.

KingZayd wrote...

The Reapers might decide they are the apex race and demand tribute from us if we want to live.

They didn't.

KingZayd wrote...

The Reapers might decide to "help us" along to our genetic destiny. And forcefully "evolve" us.

We already did.

[EphemeralOne]

@Optimystic_X

They signed up for stopping the reapers with the potential cost of sacrificing their lives. Not changing the nature of organic life. And I was never arguing anything about necessity, so I'm not entirely sure why you're bringing up that point. There is an expectation that their alliance is to try to destroy the reapers. Changing the nature of organic life is outside of that agreement. It's not a discussion that ever pops up between any race and shepard. Only the desire to destroy the reapers.

I am not saying they are like the products of synthesis. I am saying that they had no choice as to their modification into another form of life. Which is exactly what is happening with a synthesis ending.

Honestly, guy, I think you need to take this discussion just a fraction less seriously. It's a game and we are discussing theories and OPINIONS about why we consider a single ending to be a nonsensical choice. It's an opinion and you seem to be getting oddly defensive about it. 

Modifié par EphemeralOne, 22 mai 2013 - 02:47 .

[JasonShepard]

@Optimystic_X:

To be honest, I was just being a pedantic pain with regard to the the third/first person thing. I apologise - I get like that sometimes. (I'm not - and wasn't - arguing against Synthesis as a valid ending. I happen to like it, although I'd never pick it.)

I agree - I'd also expect some of the Reapers might be a threat once the Catalyst's Control/Indoctrination is released (Harbinger is at the top of that list), but not all of them and certainly not a united fleet. You're right that they'd all have different POVs, which is an advantage to us.

And yeah, I've found the quote now. I always pick the Renegade response with regard to Synthesis, since it sums up rather well why I can't choose it (and does a good job of highlighting the difference in perspective between Shepard and the Catalyst). Paragon response is the one with the quote you mentioned.

Youtube Link 

Modifié par JasonShepard, 22 mai 2013 - 02:46 .