543 réponses à ce sujet

[Vigilant111]

grey_wind wrote...

It's obvious Synthesis was meant to be the perfect peaceful resolution, the Paragon ending.

Unfortunately for him, the fans thought about it more than Hudson.

No, you must look past rudimentary terms such as "paragon" and "renegade" when describing synthesis, peace does not immediately indicate paragon; renagade and war may not always overlap. Besides, those labels have already been taken by destroy and control, if you are to take the ending at face value

That said, yes, BW did attempt to make synthesis a fairy tale solution to a hypothetical problem, it is their endorsed version of the ending, and this is one of the reasons why I strongly despise it

Modifié par Vigilant111, 04 octobre 2012 - 07:35 .

[Maxster_]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Paragon Shep gets refusal ending/not mentioned that there is one of the best speech since first ME/, as a fu to your ideals dude .!..

[Applepie_Svk]

Maxster_ wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Paragon Shep gets refusal ending/not mentioned that there is one of the best speech since first ME/, as a fu to your ideals dude .!..

Refusal is exactly what you can call as idealistic, despite the odds are not in our favour - Shepard stands facing the inevitable failure and yet refusing some wicked solution created by mad creature. 

 In most of the endings is Shepard dead meat, leap of faith for such a big decision is hilarious - without meta gamming is the only logic choice refusal because you have no idea if the Catalyst saying truth 

[Hey]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Paragon Shep gets refusal ending/not mentioned that there is one of the best speech since first ME/, as a fu to your ideals dude .!..

Refusal is exactly what you can call as idealistic, despite the odds are not in our favour - Shepard stands facing the inevitable failure and yet refusing some wicked solution created by mad creature. 

 In most of the endings is Shepard dead meat, leap of faith for such a big decision is hilarious - without meta gamming is the only logic choice refusal because you have no idea if the Catalyst saying truth 

I ****ing love apple pie,,, damn...

[acidic-ph0]

The ending is unfair to people who like good writing.

[SneakyDuc]

Which of those articles does synthesis break is at the same time upheld by refuse or destory for that matter. The enviroment refers to the conditions that exsist within the sentient's life, such as the fleet of controlled reapers, the impending death of civilization, the lack of artifical life, or the cyborgization of all life. Only refuse ends with the ultimate death of current life and civilization and the complete destruction of all rights and society. I get what your saying that it is wrong to make a choice for another being, and I agree, but you are there and the choice has be made. The only point I wnat to get across is that good or evil is not determined by the event that was chosen, but by those effected by the event and it rests solely on their prespective.

[vurtual3]

The ending is very unfair to both people incapable of understanding the concepts around it and people incapable of letting go of their video game characters. It's super unfair.

[Keltic]

I think the whole problem is not about who understood what but rather what people were led to believe in several press statements in the year before release, If Bioware had alway played the line that the game would be a dark ending then fair enough but with comments that implied if you put enough effort in you would get a positive ending people were mislead and thats really what caused the problems.

[Kataphrut94]

Paragon and Renegade don't really apply to the endings, but I suppose Destroy is easier to choose if you're Renegade. Besides, Paragons have it easy for the majority of the series, perhaps it's for the best that they be taken down a peg.

At a pinch, I would still consider Destroy to be Renegade, Synthesis to be Paragon and Control is suitable for both, hence the slight change to the final monologue depending on your allignment.

Paragon options tend to be high risk, high reward - note that they're the ones who save the Council at the risk of losing to Sovereign, they're the ones who revive the rachni and krogan and they're the ones who support the geth. These are all decisions which could be considered dangerous or naive, but the players who stay true to these ideals often reap higher rewards than the ones who make the safer decisions. That is how it applies to synthesis - it's idealistic, naive, many would call it insane, but it is ultimately carried out with the best intentions and is most beneficial to the post-war galaxy.

[daecath]

No, the ending is unfair towards players that are inclined towards things making sense.

[Element_Zero]

Part of the problem I have with Synthesis can really be boiled back to the storyline in ME 1 and 2.

Doesn't anyone remember project Overlord? What did Archer do to his brother? and What were his reasons for it?

ME 1: I recall Sovereign saying the Reapers developed the Mass Effect Relays to control how technology was developed.

ME2 : Conversations with Mordin concerning how the Protheans were indoctrinated. <<< Even those involving how people developed. Some of the Geth reprogramming.

ME3: varied conversations with a variety of characters. Some tied to how the Krogan Wars started.

There is one other thing that no one seems to consider. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone 'now synthesized' from trying to build a pure AI / synthetic again.

Course I've said these things before.

Now that dosen't mean the route one takes with these endings was the right nor wrong way either, again these things really do depend on how you value things in the story or yourself. Some of your views may be totally rational to you but to others their going to be totally irrational.

To me the ending is a bit unfair to the paragons sense none of the endings are totally devoid of evil depending on how you view the choices.

[CaIIisto]

Completely fair for muppets who'll swallow any old sh*t though. To be fair....

[Element_Zero]

Ah yes I forgot to mention that throughout ME 1's story. . . After Shepard has contact with the Prothean beacon. What nightmare is repeated? I seem to recall wires and what not growing in flesh.

[Jadebaby]

The endings are unfair on everyone.

[Getorex]

LucasShark wrote...

I'd say it is: because every single option is horrid.

Two posts that cover two absurdities at the base of the entire crucible thingamajiggy are here social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/14320293/8#14330307 

Then there's the simple fact that all Shepard had to do was hand the star child a q-tip that he had swabbed around his cheek. "Here you go, kid, a DNA sample.  Right there's ALL you need to make me specifically.  If you actually need a physical body, well look around.  They're lying all over the ground and floating around in space!  Pick one.  I'm still kinda using mine.  Double bonus for you, though: not only do you have my DNA sample in your hand there, but ANY body you pick to use will have it's own DNA building instructions contained within itself!  Easy weasy peasy."

Cerberus was apparently capable of building a new clone of Shepard from scorched cinders.  The Reapers are way moreadvanced so they should be able to 3D PRINT a new Shepard, if they need a Shepard, within an hour or two.  Also, the Reapers have demonstrated they can do "synthesis" without needing the crucible.  What do you think husks are? They are amalgams of varous people mixed with synthetic: cyborgs.  That is what a synthetic is.  Just do the husk thing but stop short of totally borking the subject's marbles, leaving their brain intact.  BOOM! Synthetic mixed with organic.  

[Ozida]

acidic-ph0 wrote...

The ending is unfair to people who like good writing.

This. 10 times this. *sight*

[Getorex]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

Paragon and Renegade don't really apply to the endings, but I suppose Destroy is easier to choose if you're Renegade. Besides, Paragons have it easy for the majority of the series, perhaps it's for the best that they be taken down a peg.

At a pinch, I would still consider Destroy to be Renegade, Synthesis to be Paragon and Control is suitable for both, hence the slight change to the final monologue depending on your allignment.

Paragon options tend to be high risk, high reward - note that they're the ones who save the Council at the risk of losing to Sovereign, they're the ones who revive the rachni and krogan and they're the ones who support the geth. These are all decisions which could be considered dangerous or naive, but the players who stay true to these ideals often reap higher rewards than the ones who make the safer decisions. That is how it applies to synthesis - it's idealistic, naive, many would call it insane, but it is ultimately carried out with the best intentions and is most beneficial to the post-war galaxy.

Well the destroy ending is very artificially contrived the way it was done.  Why the hell would you advance TOWARDS the high-energy device that you are shooting up, which is itself causing minor explosions?  Clearly, it is to be considered that if you keep it up, it will fail catastrophically.  You do NOT want to get up close and personal with a high-energy device that is exploding/failing catastrophically.  You stand back.  In fact, after the first explosion you might take some steps BACK.  Maybe find some cover and pull out a rifle so you can do the deed from a safe distance.  

I think I'll just lob this grenade through this here window and immediately dive in after it and toss another grenade into the room.  Just to be sure.

The synthesis endng was contrived and naive.  It is also not at all clear why they needed Shepard's body to do it.  ANY body, living or not, should suffice as a template.  There's nothing special about Shepard.  He's just a human who was in the right place at the right time (or wrong place at the wrong time) in ME1 to KNOW about the Reapers.  He's not superhuman.  He's not a specially great example of humanity.  He's just human.  Pick a body, ANY body, preferably one that is no longer being used.

Modifié par Getorex, 04 octobre 2012 - 11:19 .

[Ratimir]

The ending is unfair to players who are inclined towards Mass Effect.

[Chardonney]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Anyway, I think that Synthesis was intended to be the perfect Paragon ending. Most players seem to not have the same opinion as Bioware about that one, though.

Agreed. My Shep is always like 80/20 or 90/10 paragon and I will still always, always choose destroy. Nothing will ever change that, ever.   

[Seival]

I think that each ending has something interesting for both types of Shepard...

...By the way. Control has 6 different variants, each based on Shepard's personality and some previous actions. No other endings based on your Shepard's personality so much.

[Ratimir]

Getorex wrote...

The synthesis endng was contrived and naive.  It is also not at all clear why they needed Shepard's body to do it.  ANY body, living or not, should suffice as a template.  There's nothing special about Shepard.  He's just a human who was in the right place at the right time (or wrong place at the wrong time) in ME1 to KNOW about the Reapers.  He's not superhuman.  He's not a specially great example of humanity.  He's just human.  Pick a body, ANY body, preferably one that is no longer being used.

I disagree. At the start of the series there was nothing special about Shep, but between Prothean beacons, Prothean ciphers, Vulcan Asari Mindmelds (One of which may have included second-hand exposure to the Thorian), Project Lazarus and exposure to indoctrination devices, Shep is pretty darn special by now. The problem is that there's no attempt to connect any of this to Synthesis. Just that stupid meaningless bit about Shepard's "energy" being added to the Crucible, with absolutley no explanation of (a) what the smeg "energy" means in this context or ( what is so crucially different about Shep's "energy".

[Vigilant111]

The "There is nothing special about Shepard" statement could be interpreted as it doesn't matter how powerful or smart someone is, he or she will still need a lot of people to back him / her up, hence the concept of unity, it is the PEOPLE that made Shepard a great person

The synthesis and control endings were contrived because Shepard seems to be just happened to be the right place at the right time, yet the Catalyst sounds like this whole thing has been planned all along as if the Crucible was specifically designed for Shepard

[Dr_Extrem]

synthesis:

gaining peace by building a uniformed masterrace. great idea .. it really worked! ask us germans (could contain a grain of irony). loss of individuality is a loss of freedom - we learned that the hard way and this s**t still overshadows everything - this ending is the most disgusting for me! this ending is a real ending. it leaves the civilisation in stagnation anf stagnation is death. plus the absolute loss of personal space and thoughts.

"we are the borg!"


controll:

being a noble hegemon works only, as long as the hegemon is sane. nobody knows what will hapopen to shepards essence after ... well lets say 2 millenia of isolation/companionship with insane killing mashines. eternity is a f****ng long time. at some point shepard will loose the rest of his/her humanity and will think of hin/herself to be more than just a protector. at his point, things can go in very bad directions.
peace thru forced unity does not work - at least not for long. at some point vents break and people start to argue over some desolated peace of rock. what will the noble hegemon do? extinguish the fire by whiping out the combatants? not very noble isn't it?

"be civil or, i beat you to death with your own spine


destroy:

the price here is damn high. you are willing to trade in the lifes of an entire sentient species to save another. that is nothing to take lightly. who are you to decide who is going to die? even the most basass shepard did not have this kind of god complex. in addition - the catalyst tells you, that "destroy" will destroy everything that was build with reapertech. including the citadel, the mass effect relay network and with that, galactic society. peace is not brought by resorting to anarchy.at this point shepard could not know that the galaxy will recover from such a devistating blow.

... but "at least, you got the job done" ... great work.


refusal:

doing nothing is better than doing something bad? ... well that workes out every time! ...well at least you get the satisfaction of shooting the catalyst.



all endings are bad and a dead end.

[BerzerkGene]

Everything after the Cerberus base screws a paragon.

Gained every single possible person, ship, fleet and ally? only a limited number bother to show up.
Assemble the greatest fleet in known history? You still get curbstomped because the Reapers are just oh so more powerful.
Save everyone, give full sentience to an AI race, get an AI who you're friends with into a relationship?

Either A) Kill them by shooting a tube, thereby allowing you to win the war the way that was intended, but at an insane cost(also makes you seem like kind of a jerkass).
Control the beings they oppose and would annihilate them given the chance, while possibly having a new non-logic godlike AI being unleashed.
C) Diffuse your 'essence'(whatever that means) and inexplicably fuse all life together for all time and forge an everlasting peace where everyone gets infinite knowledge, lives forever and you do exactly what your enemy wanted.
D) Do nothing and everyone dies because a military victory over the Reapers is impossible because of reasons.
Renegade Shep might be okay with Destroy, the rest, nah. Paragon Shepard would choose refuse, because he/she knows they brought every god damn thing they could and knows that killing a reaper is not impossible if you know wtf you're doing.

A real paragon option would be to call up joker when you meet starkid and tell him to shoot the crucible,killing the Catalyst, Shepard and whoever might still be alive aboard the citadel.
But nah man, pick a colour.

Modifié par BerzerkGene, 04 octobre 2012 - 01:41 .

[Getorex]

Ratimir wrote...

Getorex wrote...

The synthesis endng was contrived and naive.  It is also not at all clear why they needed Shepard's body to do it.  ANY body, living or not, should suffice as a template.  There's nothing special about Shepard.  He's just a human who was in the right place at the right time (or wrong place at the wrong time) in ME1 to KNOW about the Reapers.  He's not superhuman.  He's not a specially great example of humanity.  He's just human.  Pick a body, ANY body, preferably one that is no longer being used.

I disagree. At the start of the series there was nothing special about Shep, but between Prothean beacons, Prothean ciphers, Vulcan Asari Mindmelds (One of which may have included second-hand exposure to the Thorian), Project Lazarus and exposure to indoctrination devices, Shep is pretty darn special by now. The problem is that there's no attempt to connect any of this to Synthesis. Just that stupid meaningless bit about Shepard's "energy" being added to the Crucible, with absolutley no explanation of (a) what the smeg "energy" means in this context or ( what is so crucially different about Shep's "energy".

Nothing at all.  ATP is ATP.  Your ATP is no different than my ATP.  It is the sole store of our "energy".  Drain your ATP and you die.  So, instead you can buy a bottle of ATP and hand that to the kid.  "Here you go kid.  My energy."