370 réponses à ce sujet

[Zavox]

Auintus wrote...

Zavox wrote...

Who are you to say whether it's a good transformation or not? If there's one thing that's sure, it's that never does everyone agree fully.

First of all, you have no rights to decide for all of humanity. Secondly, you're changing their very being solely on your own 'logic' (if we can call it that). Thirdly, decisions on ones own body can only be made by the owner of the body.

I'm pretty sure, if given enough time, I could sum up an entire paper of why both Synthesis and Control are an atrocity. Ethically or otherwise.

I'm the guy with the button, so to speak. I have to make the choice. Synthesis makes the most sense to me, so that's what I pick. It's not like I can say, "Hey can you call off the Reapers for a second, I need to get a second opinion on this." And what about the Geth? Did they get a say in your ending? Were they given a choice?

Emergency situation, the choice had to be made right then. Would have been better if every individual had been given a choice, didn't happen that way. Half the time people don't know what's best for them anyway.

In Destroy, you eradicate the memories, the cultures, of an entire race for every Reaper you kill. Multiple genocides on an enormous scale. The memories of entire species erased irrevocably. And then you have to include the Geth. Thousands of races destroyed. Don't tell me it's better than Synthesis.

Of course it's better. While you unintentionally destroy the Geth, (What reasoning do you have for believing the brat by the way?) you keep the status quo other than that. To suggest eradicating cultures by destroying the reapers is ridiculous, their culture is already destroyed and enslaved.

In synthesis however, you alone decide every single being should be altered and combined to create some kind of supposed utopia. In essence you're destroying every single culture of any existing race at the time. (What reasoning do you have to assume all is well, instead of everyone ending up being controlled by AI?)

Either way, the endings (all of them, although destroy is definately the lesser evil) are deplorable. While I realize difficult decisions have to be made, all of the current ones are over the edge, and I would rather refuse and try my luck. By making a choice you're essentially sacrificing the soul and humanity of every species, I'd rather we didn't exist if that were the case.

Can't we be united in diversity? I do not see why assimilation seems a better option to you.

Anyway, the way the endings stand currently, if Bioware were to release a sequel, the Mass Effect with it's diversified races, thoughts and politics is no more due to synthesis. Grand ending... In my opinion if Bioware doesn't at some time pull the IT card out of their hats, Mass Effect as we know it is over.

[Steelcan]

jtav wrote...

Except once the Catalyst's control is broken, they become friendly.

. Well on Control they are still connected to the Catalyst, and in Synthesis they have been joined (forcibly) to every other living thing.  What you are talking about would require the Catalyst to be destroyed, but not the reapers.

[Aarkaan]

CosmicGnosis wrote...



mattrhodes.deviantart.com/#/d4s82ur


This is concept art from BioWare. It's called Crashed on Eden.

Here's the description:

"Some characters get to have their moment."

Yeah, Joker and EDI don't get this moment without Synthesis.

... I think Synthesis may be their preferred ending.

EDIT (12/9/2012): Because I've been seeing some IT-inspired anti-Synthesis posts lately, I thought that I would bump this thread to challenge those arguments. I think the image in the OP is evidence that BioWare always intended Synthesis to be a good ending, perhaps the best. I'm not sure that I really want a "best" ending because such a thing could invalidate all other choices, but I can't ignore the evidence that BioWare likes Synthesis.

Synthesis is the "everybody wins" choices. Shepard is the only one who dies. It's the special "third-choice" that often appears in conversations throughout the trilogy. Interestingly, the memorial scene in the Extended Cut actually has unique music for the Synthesis ending: Synthesis has a contemplative piano piece that plays when Shepard's name is placed on the memorial. Destroy and Control, however, share the same music.

There is also the EMS issue. You can get the best variant of Destroy, minus the breath scene, before you can get Synthesis. Synthesis has the highest EMS requirement of all the endings, with the exception of Destroy's breath scene. I think this is significant. Really, the only gameplay evidence that High-EMS Destroy is supposed to be better than Synthesis is that single breath scene. That's it. Given the presentation, it just doesn't seem as favored as Synthesis.

Yes, there are some bizarre ethical problems with the choice, and I would really like the writers to explain their rationale. Judging by the fanbase's reaction, Synthesis is the most hated choice, despite the evidence pointing to it as the ideal choice. In fact, I think that's what makes people hate it even more: they think that BioWare's writers have either intentionally or unintentionally loaded their best ending with loathsome ethical implications.

I don't know. I often find myself just as perplexed by the endings as I was back in March. If BioWare tried to convey some kind of message, it really wasn't coherent. I respect their decision to make the fans feel uncomfortable and force us to really think about the choices, but they made the choices so divisive and ambiguous that they have permanently damaged the franchise in the eyes of some people. And that is tragic.

cripy...

[DeinonSlayer]

Auintus wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...
I really, REALLY don't want to get into this again. Think of it this way: Israel is the most militarized nation on Earth. Service is compulsory for both men and women. Their military (including reserves) is still only 7.75% of the population. Draft everyone physically fit for fighting, and you bring it up to 35%. Neither of these figures is 99%. Also see the addition I made to my last post. Legion doesn't represent what the Quarians were fighting back then - the VI doesn't give a rat's ass how many civilians it kills.

The Quarians aren't the same as that. When the fleet aimed to retake Rannoch, they used everything. The civilian fleet was used in combat, same as the more military elements. Quarians had forsaken the differences between civilians and military, proof that they can. Why would a logic-based thought process spare anything that would later come back to haunt it?

We're talking about the Morning War here. They weren't in ships then. "Unthinkable slaughter" is genocide, not war. Point is, the Geth are not the blameless angels so many wish to view them as - and Legion is the first to tell you this.

Besides, regarding the "modern" war, most of the civilian fleet was armed long before the renewed Geth conflict to defend against pirate attack. Most of the civilians on board aren't taking part in the fighting. Most, in fact, don't even want to be there, but the fleet's dependency on the liveships forces them to move as a whole.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Steelcan wrote...

. Yes, and we should.  We should kill them for what they have done, indoctrination is not an excuse, if anything it's another reason to kill them

And the point I'm making: indoctrination actually *is* an excuse. We killed the indoctrinated largely because they forced our hand in some way, and were beyond saving.

We did not, however, kill them as punishment for their crimes.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 10 décembre 2012 - 07:49 .

[Steelcan]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

. Yes, and we should.  We should kill them for what they have done, indoctrination is not an excuse, if anything it's another reason to kill them

And the point I'm making: indoctrination actually *is* an excuse. We killed the indoctrinated largely because they forced our hand in some way, and were beyond saving.

We did not, however, kill them as punishment for their crimes.

. That's not really an issue in the war, post war....

what do you think will happen to Cerberus POW's?  That they will be allowed to leave and lead productive lives?

[DeinonSlayer]

Steelcan wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

. Yes, and we should.  We should kill them for what they have done, indoctrination is not an excuse, if anything it's another reason to kill them

And the point I'm making: indoctrination actually *is* an excuse. We killed the indoctrinated largely because they forced our hand in some way, and were beyond saving.

We did not, however, kill them as punishment for their crimes.

. That's not really an issue in the war, post war....

what do you think will happen to Cerberus POW's?  That they will be allowed to leave and lead productive lives?

I thought they had ocular flashbangs designed to kill them in the event of capture?

[Steelcan]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

. Yes, and we should.  We should kill them for what they have done, indoctrination is not an excuse, if anything it's another reason to kill them

And the point I'm making: indoctrination actually *is* an excuse. We killed the indoctrinated largely because they forced our hand in some way, and were beyond saving.

We did not, however, kill them as punishment for their crimes.

. That's not really an issue in the war, post war....

what do you think will happen to Cerberus POW's?  That they will be allowed to leave and lead productive lives?

I thought they had ocular flashbangs designed to kill them in the event of capture?

. Not everyone listens to orders.....  And they are harder to disarm, not impossible.

[Auintus]

Zavox wrote...

Of course it's better. While you unintentionally destroy the Geth, (What reasoning do you have for believing the brat by the way?) you keep the status quo other than that. To suggest eradicating cultures by destroying the reapers is ridiculous, their culture is already destroyed and enslaved.

In synthesis however, you alone decide every single being should be altered and combined to create some kind of supposed utopia. In essence you're destroying every single culture of any existing race at the time. (What reasoning do you have to assume all is well, instead of everyone ending up being controlled by AI?)

Either way, the endings (all of them, although destroy is definately the lesser evil) are deplorable. While I realize difficult decisions have to be made, all of the current ones are over the edge, and I would rather refuse and try my luck. By making a choice you're essentially sacrificing the soul and humanity of every species, I'd rather we didn't exist if that were the case.

Can't we be united in diversity? I do not see why assimilation seems a better option to you.

Anyway, the way the endings stand currently, if Bioware were to release a sequel, the Mass Effect with it's diversified races, thoughts and politics is no more due to synthesis. Grand ending... In my opinion if Bioware doesn't at some time pull the IT card out of their hats, Mass Effect as we know it is over.

You can't call it unintentional when you know it will happen. "Sacrifice" would be a better word. The Catalyst hides nothing, it has no reason to. It has lost and allows you to dictate the terms of your victory. Keeping the status quo is not preferable to improvement.

No, they are not combined. They remain seperate, independent, but they are integrated with technology to a fundamental degree. We are already integrating with our technology. How long?

I am sacrificing nothing's soul. They are not destroyed, they are not forced into one universal mind. They are integrated with technology and that is the extent of it. If you would choose death over improvement, you can end yourself after the wave passes, but most characters appear happy.

Not assimilation. You completely misunderstand if you think that.

[Auintus]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

We're talking about the Morning War here. They weren't in ships then. "Unthinkable slaughter" is genocide, not war. Point is, the Geth are not the blameless angels so many wish to view them as - and Legion is the first to tell you this.

Besides, regarding the "modern" war, most of the civilian fleet was armed long before the renewed Geth conflict to defend against pirate attack. Most of the civilians on board aren't taking part in the fighting. Most, in fact, don't even want to be there, but the fleet's dependency on the liveships forces them to move as a whole.

The point is that any of them could become militant. There is no reason to think that they would act otherwise, considering the slow erosion of their sympathizers.

There was a great enough concensus to allow the attack to begin. Koris tries holding back civilian ships, yes, but in the end even he had to make the decision to go for war.

[Codename_Code]

"On Eden" sounds pretty metaphorical to me. And why are they laughing and looking around like humans that discovered a new planet earth ? The indoctrinated eyes ?, gross. Im playing ME1 right now and Saren is what synthesis represents, a trap.

[DeinonSlayer]

Auintus wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

We're talking about the Morning War here. They weren't in ships then. "Unthinkable slaughter" is genocide, not war. Point is, the Geth are not the blameless angels so many wish to view them as - and Legion is the first to tell you this.

Besides, regarding the "modern" war, most of the civilian fleet was armed long before the renewed Geth conflict to defend against pirate attack. Most of the civilians on board aren't taking part in the fighting. Most, in fact, don't even want to be there, but the fleet's dependency on the liveships forces them to move as a whole.

The point is that any of them could become militant. There is no reason to think that they would act otherwise, considering the slow erosion of their sympathizers.

There was a great enough concensus to allow the attack to begin. Koris tries holding back civilian ships, yes, but in the end even he had to make the decision to go for war.

Exactly as I said - in the Morning War, they killed civilians, children, because they might be a threat. If you want to think that's justified, I find it disturbing, but I won't try to change your mind. We had two threads about this already. No need to hijack a third.

[Auintus]

DeinonSlayer wrote...
Exactly as I said - in the Morning War, they killed civilians, children, because they might be a threat. If you want to think that's justified, I find it disturbing, but I won't try to change your mind. We had two threads about this already. No need to hijack a third.

Yeah, but you have to consider that they think differently from...Never mind. This thread's supposed to be over a picture or something, right?

[DeinonSlayer]

Auintus wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...
Exactly as I said - in the Morning War, they killed civilians, children, because they might be a threat. If you want to think that's justified, I find it disturbing, but I won't try to change your mind. We had two threads about this already. No need to hijack a third.

Yeah, but you have to consider that they think differently from...Never mind. This thread's supposed to be over a picture or something, right?

Yeah.

Synthesis sucks, rah rah.

[Fedi.St]

yeah you just don't get it rah rah rah.

[Zavox]

Auintus wrote...

Zavox wrote...

Of course it's better. While you unintentionally destroy the Geth, (What reasoning do you have for believing the brat by the way?) you keep the status quo other than that. To suggest eradicating cultures by destroying the reapers is ridiculous, their culture is already destroyed and enslaved.

In synthesis however, you alone decide every single being should be altered and combined to create some kind of supposed utopia. In essence you're destroying every single culture of any existing race at the time. (What reasoning do you have to assume all is well, instead of everyone ending up being controlled by AI?)

Either way, the endings (all of them, although destroy is definately the lesser evil) are deplorable. While I realize difficult decisions have to be made, all of the current ones are over the edge, and I would rather refuse and try my luck. By making a choice you're essentially sacrificing the soul and humanity of every species, I'd rather we didn't exist if that were the case.

Can't we be united in diversity? I do not see why assimilation seems a better option to you.

Anyway, the way the endings stand currently, if Bioware were to release a sequel, the Mass Effect with it's diversified races, thoughts and politics is no more due to synthesis. Grand ending... In my opinion if Bioware doesn't at some time pull the IT card out of their hats, Mass Effect as we know it is over.

You can't call it unintentional when you know it will happen. "Sacrifice" would be a better word. The Catalyst hides nothing, it has no reason to. It has lost and allows you to dictate the terms of your victory. Keeping the status quo is not preferable to improvement.

No, they are not combined. They remain seperate, independent, but they are integrated with technology to a fundamental degree. We are already integrating with our technology. How long?

I am sacrificing nothing's soul. They are not destroyed, they are not forced into one universal mind. They are integrated with technology and that is the extent of it. If you would choose death over improvement, you can end yourself after the wave passes, but most characters appear happy.

Not assimilation. You completely misunderstand if you think that.

You don't know it will happen, you're putting faith in whatever he says. There's a couple of glaring inconsistencies between what he says and what can happen during the game. Such as, but not limited to, the peace between the Geth and Quarians while he explicitly denies it as possible. There's no reason to believe his word, in fact, it seems so ridiculous (synthesis/space magic) that it seems much more prudent to put your stock elsewhere. 

I cannot see why you would think he has no reason to lie, if anything it makes him more likely to lie about it if it's a way out for him. Besides, if you refuse, you lose. So no, the boy hasn't lost. (Queue Admiral Ackbar: "It's a trap!"). Also, he mentions that Shepard is also partly synthetic. We know that Shepard can't live without his synthetics, so what gives when he breathes in the best Destroy version?

... They are integrated, essentially made the same by a "new DNA". Furthermore, if this somehow gives them understanding of each other and it is the only solution toward peace between the factions, it also implies they have the same thought patterns (conclusions) and therefore the same culture. Which is what I said, you're assimilating cultures with the risk of something alot worse. (It could be a trap)

You're very well sacrificing humanities soul. You're combining them with tech involuntarily, and if they don't want it, they can off themselves? That sort of reasoning shows you've already thrown humanities (and in ME, the races) diversity (and thus it's soul) in the bin. For clarification, I'm not implying an unified mind, I'm implying an unified culture and thought process. Synthesis implies that because all races and AI become 'one' the peace is kept, and it's not possible otherwise. I for one vehemently disagree with that position.

As for a final question on the matter. Why is it that with synthesis the peace between everyone will be kept, why is it impossible for a fraction to break off and attack the other faction? What does synthesis change in everyone that such a thought does not remain?

I think when you'll come to a satisfactory answer, you will see that synthesis creates an unified thought pattern, a sense of whole, of togetherness through DNA. If you think that notion is an utopia to strife for.. then I'm sorry for you.

[Ieldra]

Zavox wrote...
They are integrated, essentially made the same by a "new DNA". Furthermore, if this somehow gives them understanding of each other and it is the only solution toward peace between the factions, it also implies they have the same thought patterns (conclusions) and therefore the same culture. Which is what I said, you're assimilating cultures with the risk of something alot worse. (It could be a trap)

No. Synthethics with a DNA-analogue are an oxymoron. This is a metaphor and actually, the EC shows that the difference still exists. Also, understanding does not require cultural similarity. Neither does it require similar thought patterns.

You're very well sacrificing humanities soul. You're combining them with tech involuntarily, and if they don't want it, they can off themselves? That sort of reasoning shows you've already thrown humanities (and in ME, the races) diversity (and thus it's soul) in the bin. For clarification, I'm not implying an unified mind, I'm implying an unified culture and thought process. Synthesis implies that because all races and AI become 'one' the peace is kept, and it's not possible otherwise. I for one vehemently disagree with that position.

Again. No. There is no "soul of humanity." That's a term used for propaganda by people who want others to conform to their idea of what it means to be human. A mere physical change does not make you any less you, and more than a physical change is neither explicitly mentioned nor implied for organics in the Synthesis exposition. Also, all life on Earth is based on DNA
and we are still very much not all the same. To "conclude" that
Synthesis makes us that is such a gross overinterpretation that it borders on insanity.

As for a final question on the matter. Why is it that with synthesis the peace between everyone will be kept, why is it impossible for a fraction to break off and attack the other faction? What does synthesis change in everyone that such a thought does not remain?

Yet again your interpretation is far too extreme. It is very much implied that people are still people. You (a) only get the "galactic peace" mentioned in certain circumstances, ( it isn't meant to last forever and © this is a generally peaceful golden age, that doesn't mean it's universally peaceful. The conflicts that happen are just too small to appear in the five-minute news that is the EC epilogue.

I wonder: why this obsessive tendency to turn every good thing in Synthesis into a bad thing? Do I run around and say the post-Destroy civilization will be destroyed by synthetics within a thousand years? Do I run around and say Shepard will re-instate the cycle in Control? Why THE HELL is anything connected with Synthesis automatically interpreted in the worst possible way? The EC epilogue shows that nothing of that happens, and now people claim there's an invisible influence that makes everything bad. As I see it, it's pretty much a dogma: "Synthesis is a global biochemical change, human biochemistry is sacred and that's why all effects of Synthesis absolutely must be bad".

No thanks. I don't subscribe to such silliness. I'm happy with my golden age where, as the EC epilogue tells me, the different species are still as different from each other as they were before and my ME2 team members are seen in situations perfectly in-character for them.

[Mathias]

Synthesis is the worst thing since bagpipes.

[Chashan]

I wonder: why this obsessive tendency to turn every good thing
in Synthesis into a bad thing? Do I run around and say the post-Destroy
civilization will be destroyed by synthetics within a thousand years? Do
I run around and say Shepard will re-instate the cycle in Control? Why
THE HELL is anything connected with Synthesis automatically interpreted
in the worst possible way? The EC epilogue shows that nothing of that
happens, and now people claim there's an invisible influence that makes
everything bad. As I see it, it's pretty much a dogma: "Synthesis is a
global biochemical change, human biochemistry is sacred and that's why
all effects of Synthesis absolutely must be bad".

No thanks. I
don't subscribe to such silliness. I'm happy with my golden age where,
as the EC epilogue tells me, the different species are still as
different from each other as they were before and my ME2 team members
are seen in situations perfectly in-character for them.

I think what this all boils down to that "golden age" very much can be inter-changed with "utopic", and in light of how EC-Green is made up, I do think it is within reason to view it as just that: utopeia.

Because, if it did not achieve a fundamental change that guarantees permanent effects on sapient beings to the effect of enduring, if not eternal peace, exactly what is the point of it?

Then, there is also the matter of how cooperation with the Reapers is handled, and, what I find to be even less forgivable, the way this fundamental change is supposedly "visualised" by taping everything in Green circuitry which is just plain...ugly. Especially in light of BW actually coming out and saying that it was merely an "artistic representation" of it.*
Given that, I would have wished they had opted for other means to "visualise" it; show geth capable of actual emotion - possibly even cheering 'unnaturally' for them after the wave hits on screen - , broadened perception of the individual, that kind of thing. It would certainly have been preferable to the texture-job.

And I find it ironic that you yourself got a hard time with the voodoo-y stuff going on to bring it about, yet still champion it...

*PS: I'd be interested: is there any source for that quote? I do not truly doubt the authenticity, just would like to read the actual choice of words and know the context in which that information was given.

[Auintus]

Zavox wrote...
You don't know it will happen, you're putting faith in whatever he says. There's a couple of glaring inconsistencies between what he says and what can happen during the game. Such as, but not limited to, the peace between the Geth and Quarians while he explicitly denies it as possible. There's no reason to believe his word, in fact, it seems so ridiculous (synthesis/space magic) that it seems much more prudent to put your stock elsewhere. 

I cannot see why you would think he has no reason to lie, if anything it makes him more likely to lie about it if it's a way out for him. Besides, if you refuse, you lose. So no, the boy hasn't lost. (Queue Admiral Ackbar: "It's a trap!"). Also, he mentions that Shepard is also partly synthetic. We know that Shepard can't live without his synthetics, so what gives when he breathes in the best Destroy version?

... They are integrated, essentially made the same by a "new DNA". Furthermore, if this somehow gives them understanding of each other and it is the only solution toward peace between the factions, it also implies they have the same thought patterns (conclusions) and therefore the same culture. Which is what I said, you're assimilating cultures with the risk of something alot worse. (It could be a trap)

You're very well sacrificing humanities soul. You're combining them with tech involuntarily, and if they don't want it, they can off themselves? That sort of reasoning shows you've already thrown humanities (and in ME, the races) diversity (and thus it's soul) in the bin. For clarification, I'm not implying an unified mind, I'm implying an unified culture and thought process. Synthesis implies that because all races and AI become 'one' the peace is kept, and it's not possible otherwise. I for one vehemently disagree with that position.

As for a final question on the matter. Why is it that with synthesis the peace between everyone will be kept, why is it impossible for a fraction to break off and attack the other faction? What does synthesis change in everyone that such a thought does not remain?

I think when you'll come to a satisfactory answer, you will see that synthesis creates an unified thought pattern, a sense of whole, of togetherness through DNA. If you think that notion is an utopia to strife for.. then I'm sorry for you.

He says it won't last. Which is entirely possible. The Control ending slide doesn't show them interacting.

He wants a solution to the cycle. He understands that Shepard has a chance at that. So he'd finally get the solution to his primary programming. That is a good thing, from an AI's point of view.

Integrated with tech, not with each other. Asari, Krogan, Quarian, they are still unique, still diverse. They've just been pushed ahead in technological evolution.

It sacrifices nothing. Even these days, we are experimenting with mechanical integration. Synthesis will even occur to us one day. It is a general, overall improvement that also causes the machines of lasery death to quit killing us and start helping us. If you take offense to that, I can do nothing for you.

The peace between everyone is not kept. Synthetics and Organics no longer have a reason to war on those bounds, but there are a million other conflicts that can arise. Synthesis gives no indication that any conflict besides the one that caused the Reaper's cycles is solved.

My "Utopia" is far different from Synthesis, but here isn't the place for that. Is Synthesis better than serval genocides on a massive scale? Without a doubt. Is it the best option that the Crucible gives us? Certainly. Is it exactly what I would have wanted? No, it is not.
Your pity is unwarrented. The fact that you can't see the way I do just means you've closed you mind. I can see what you think. I think you are wrong, but I see it. That is the "uniqueness" you are trying to preserve by avoiding Synthesis(an unnecessary concern). Yet you pity me for believing as I do?

[Steelcan]

Synthesis supporters say that there is still conflict and war post synthesis, but even Wreav doesn't go to war after synthesis. Cure the genophage with Wreav and in Control/Destoy you see the krogan preparing for war. that doesn't happen in Synthesis

[Auintus]

Chashan wrote...

I think what this all boils down to that "golden age" very much can be inter-changed with "utopic", and in light of how EC-Green is made up, I do think it is within reason to view it as just that: utopeia.

Because, if it did not achieve a fundamental change that guarantees permanent effects on sapient beings to the effect of enduring, if not eternal peace, exactly what is the point of it?

Then, there is also the matter of how cooperation with the Reapers is handled, and, what I find to be even less forgivable, the way this fundamental change is supposedly "visualised" by taping everything in Green circuitry which is just plain...ugly. Especially in light of BW actually coming out and saying that it was merely an "artistic representation" of it.*
Given that, I would have wished they had opted for other means to "visualise" it; show geth capable of actual emotion - possibly even cheering 'unnaturally' for them after the wave hits on screen - , broadened perception of the individual, that kind of thing. It would certainly have been preferable to the texture-job.

And I find it ironic that you yourself got a hard time with the voodoo-y stuff going on to bring it about, yet still champion it...

*PS: I'd be interested: is there any source for that quote? I do not truly doubt the authenticity, just would like to read the actual choice of words and know the context in which that information was given.

I will not disagree with that. Synthesis could have been better shown(although I liked the tech lines).
What bugged me was that the genophage is still cured if you Synthesize(so I've heard) and Kasumi is talking to her boy despite the fact that I trashed the greybox.
I goes a bit to far in places, but overall it's the best ending imo.

[Auintus]

Steelcan wrote...

Synthesis supporters say that there is still conflict and war post synthesis, but even Wreav doesn't go to war after synthesis. Cure the genophage with Wreav and in Control/Destoy you see the krogan preparing for war. that doesn't happen in Synthesis

I wouldn't know. I don't trust wreave with the genophage cured. Got a youtube link, maybe?

Modifié par Auintus, 11 décembre 2012 - 12:27 .

[Steelcan]

Auintus wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Synthesis supporters say that there is still conflict and war post synthesis, but even Wreav doesn't go to war after synthesis. Cure the genophage with Wreav and in Control/Destoy you see the krogan preparing for war. that doesn't happen in Synthesis

I wouldn't know. I don't trust wreave with the genophage. Got a youtube link, maybe?

I searched and searched for one on youtube, evantually a friend videoed his playthrough curing the genophage under Wreav, no war slide.  Or you could dig through the Synthesis support thread, its in there somewhere.

[Steelcan]

Page 252, Synthesis: A New Ascension.