1009 réponses à ce sujet

[elitecom]

ziloe wrote...

 I find it odd that the highest EMS would grant you the option, Synthesis. Having replayed the whole series over again recently, the final epic in the series was about uniting the various races and overcoming the odds, together. 

The beauty of society is that we each bring something unique to the table. Synthesis essentially takes all of that away, and though it may be more efficient, it removes that in born want of a better existence. We strive to better ourselves, and that experience makes us stronger.

And of course, as Uncle Ben once said, "With power comes great responsibility." Had it just been handed to us (with or without our consent), it would create chaos, similar to rewarding a child for doing nothing.

Why? Because we didn't earn it, and most of all, it would have been the biggest troll of the Reapers yet. Essentially, it would have made us just like them. Maybe not in the same form, but it would remove that unique beauty that is our universe.

That said, for me the right choice would be Destroy. I loved EDI and Legion, however, their existence was a detriment to society. If you think I'm wrong, consider the Geth merging themselves with the Quarians suits, to "help" them develop better antibodies, etc. Without Destroy, the cycle would continue, albeit in a new form.

I just have to say that I find it incredible that we think and believe so alike. What you wrote practically mirrors my take on Synthesis. Through Synthesis something unique and beautiful is lost, namely us humans, our humanity is lost, forever. You can always create new robots, but organic evolution is pretty much unique takes millions of years. Robots or synthetics are easily replaced, we are not. That is why I oppose Synthesis so vehemently.

I guess if you have watched the ending to Battlestar Galactica, you didn't like it either? It's almost exactly the same as the Synthesis ending, and exactly as bad.

Also destroy is definitely the option for me too. Although the Geth were certainly interesting and it is sad to see them be destroyed, they can always be rebuilt, same with EDI.

Modifié par elitecom, 05 janvier 2013 - 11:09 .

[BleedingUranium]

Indy_S wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

It's a tall order to expect consistent foreshadowing from people who can't even keep their themes straight. They probably didn't even think they'll ever make a sequel when they made all those Prothean visions and Saren's "fate" in ME1. To think they were planning ahead for the third ending of their third game.. lol.

ME was planned as a trilogy, so yes they did plan ahead. And the themes have always stayed the same in ME, very solid themes actually.

Cerberus was the name given to a bunch of mooks in the first game to try and create a small conspiracy of horrific experiments. Then it became the driving force of the second game. That is inconsistent. showing that they did not plan ahead.

What you said is literally the exact opposite of not planning ahead.

[Indy_S]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

ME was planned as a trilogy, so yes they did plan ahead. And the themes have always stayed the same in ME, very solid themes actually.

Cerberus was the name given to a bunch of mooks in the first game to try and create a small conspiracy of horrific experiments. Then it became the driving force of the second game. That is inconsistent. showing that they did not plan ahead.

What you said is literally the exact opposite of not planning ahead.

When the first game was published, Cerberus had no future, nothing about it was planned. The fact that they reused elements can appear as planning but it doesn't mean it is. If the trilogy was planned out, Mass Effect 2 would have moved the overall plot forward. It didn't. It introduced and resolved a smaller conflict while providing only exposition on the larger conflict. Robin Hood gathered his band of Merry Men and attacked a convoy. There was no repercussion. The band discusses the Sheriff's taxes. The End. That is the equivalent of that story.

The fake out of Shepard's death at the end of the first game and and his actual death at the start of the second implies no planning.

[BleedingUranium]

Indy_S wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

ME was planned as a trilogy, so yes they did plan ahead. And the themes have always stayed the same in ME, very solid themes actually.

Cerberus was the name given to a bunch of mooks in the first game to try and create a small conspiracy of horrific experiments. Then it became the driving force of the second game. That is inconsistent. showing that they did not plan ahead.

What you said is literally the exact opposite of not planning ahead.

When the first game was published, Cerberus had no future, nothing about it was planned. The fact that they reused elements can appear as planning but it doesn't mean it is. If the trilogy was planned out, Mass Effect 2 would have moved the overall plot forward. It didn't. It introduced and resolved a smaller conflict while providing only exposition on the larger conflict. Robin Hood gathered his band of Merry Men and attacked a convoy. There was no repercussion. The band discusses the Sheriff's taxes. The End. That is the equivalent of that story.

The fake out of Shepard's death at the end of the first game and and his actual death at the start of the second implies no planning.

That's like arguing that The Two Towers wasn't planned because its focus isn't the main plot. Almost every middle story in a trilogy does this.

That also has nothing to do with planning, one way or the other.

[Indy_S]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

ME was planned as a trilogy, so yes they did plan ahead. And the themes have always stayed the same in ME, very solid themes actually.

Cerberus was the name given to a bunch of mooks in the first game to try and create a small conspiracy of horrific experiments. Then it became the driving force of the second game. That is inconsistent. showing that they did not plan ahead.

What you said is literally the exact opposite of not planning ahead.

When the first game was published, Cerberus had no future, nothing about it was planned. The fact that they reused elements can appear as planning but it doesn't mean it is. If the trilogy was planned out, Mass Effect 2 would have moved the overall plot forward. It didn't. It introduced and resolved a smaller conflict while providing only exposition on the larger conflict. Robin Hood gathered his band of Merry Men and attacked a convoy. There was no repercussion. The band discusses the Sheriff's taxes. The End. That is the equivalent of that story.

The fake out of Shepard's death at the end of the first game and and his actual death at the start of the second implies no planning.

That's like arguing that The Two Towers wasn't planned because its focus isn't the main plot. Almost every middle story in a trilogy does this.

That also has nothing to do with planning, one way or the other.

The difference is that The Two Towers did move the plot forward. The central quest is to destroy the ring, Frodo and Sam meet Gollum, discover the Black Gate is closed, set up the conflict for the Battle of the Pelennor Fields and take the path up the staircase and through Shelob's Lair. Progress is made. (The movie shifts parts of this to the third movie, making it less critical.)

As for planning, and specifically planning for the synthesis ending, it's quite a leap to apply transhumanism as a resolvable theme when it never was a focus prior. It was barely present in Shepard's resurrection and the idea of removing individuality with it, such as blending into a Reaper, is not the intention of the authors, so the incident is irrelevant. Saren had implants, husks were processed humans. That was the extent of this theme in the first game and if they felt that needed a two-game-later payoff, it's absurd. 

[ElSuperGecko]

Troxa wrote...
Nowhere in the vision is there a fusion betwen synthetics & organics - that's exactly what the Prothean vision shows.  Watch it again.

Not the same kind of synthesis nanotechnology vs string manipilation - you have no idea "what kind of Synthesis" the Crucible causes, because it is never explained to Shepard.  Shepard can only go off your past experiences with the Reapers and the horrors the Catalyst has caused.

it invalidate the kind of synthesis that the crucible has - see above, you have no idea "what kind of Synthesis" the Cruicible causesw, because it is never explained to you.  Any way you choose to interpret it is nothing more than your own headcanon.

not naive the reapers if the reapers had the power they would need physical bodies & they would not need too reap civilizations they would have the powers of a true god. Even the crucible has no narrative legitimacy. as players we need a lot more information - excatly, now you're getting it.  We can only go on what we have seen and heard during the course of the trilogy, and all evidence suggests that Synthesis would be a nightmarish abomination, which we have been warned about numberous times as I pointed out above.

No where in me 1 saren killed himself because he was a cyborg - and nowhere did I say he did.  I said Saren's fate and his "vision of the future" is a foreshadowing of Synthesis.

all relevent it's a science fiction & we have no lore about  synthesis no explenation how it works - all irrelevant because in your own words we don't know "what kind of Synthesis" the Crucible uses.  We're not given that information, we are not told anything and are simply expected to take the Catalyst's "perfect solution" on faith.  Others have done that before.  They were indoctrinated, and ended up as husks - which is clear foreshadowing, and a warning about Synthesis.

[Trigunvts]

Synthesis leaves too many questions unanswered which is why its not a desirable choice for me and for others. Just my opinion though. Also I think the ending sequence with synthesis just looks like starchild took a green crayon to all organic life.

[Xamufam]

@ElSuperGecko
1. That prothean vision is just mumbo jumbo (the prothean did'nt even know what the crucible did)

2. If you are talking about that the beam creates nanobots & distributes. There is just to little mass for the crucible to even work. That is how the husks are created.

3. And even the crucible is out of place.

4. How could so many diverse cycles design a device that surpasses the technology of the Reapers? How is that even possible?

5. We have to be given that information because we are building it do you think we can build for example: a particle accelerator whitout knowing what it does?

Modifié par Troxa, 06 janvier 2013 - 06:08 .

[ziloe]

Trigunvts wrote...

Synthesis leaves too many questions unanswered which is why its not a desirable choice for me and for others. Just my opinion though. Also I think the ending sequence with synthesis just looks like starchild took a green crayon to all organic life.

It's been said before, but it looks to me like Overlord all over again.

[ziloe]

elitecom wrote...

ziloe wrote...

 I find it odd that the highest EMS would grant you the option, Synthesis. Having replayed the whole series over again recently, the final epic in the series was about uniting the various races and overcoming the odds, together. 

The beauty of society is that we each bring something unique to the table. Synthesis essentially takes all of that away, and though it may be more efficient, it removes that in born want of a better existence. We strive to better ourselves, and that experience makes us stronger.

And of course, as Uncle Ben once said, "With power comes great responsibility." Had it just been handed to us (with or without our consent), it would create chaos, similar to rewarding a child for doing nothing.

Why? Because we didn't earn it, and most of all, it would have been the biggest troll of the Reapers yet. Essentially, it would have made us just like them. Maybe not in the same form, but it would remove that unique beauty that is our universe.

That said, for me the right choice would be Destroy. I loved EDI and Legion, however, their existence was a detriment to society. If you think I'm wrong, consider the Geth merging themselves with the Quarians suits, to "help" them develop better antibodies, etc. Without Destroy, the cycle would continue, albeit in a new form.

I just have to say that I find it incredible that we think and believe so alike. What you wrote practically mirrors my take on Synthesis. Through Synthesis something unique and beautiful is lost, namely us humans, our humanity is lost, forever. You can always create new robots, but organic evolution is pretty much unique takes millions of years. Robots or synthetics are easily replaced, we are not. That is why I oppose Synthesis so vehemently.

I guess if you have watched the ending to Battlestar Galactica, you didn't like it either? It's almost exactly the same as the Synthesis ending, and exactly as bad.

Also destroy is definitely the option for me too. Although the Geth were certainly interesting and it is sad to see them be destroyed, they can always be rebuilt, same with EDI.

It's nice to know the sentiment is shared. I honestly really never got into Galactica though. There are still a few shows I've really not gotten to see, that people raved about. Only recently did I finally get through all of Breaking Bad, lol. 

The way I saw the endings, was similar to how I views the options in the end of Deus Ex. Dunno if you ever played that. I felt like it literally ripped off that. Even in the extended cut, it also does the whole narration bit that happened in the their last title.

And yeah, I can see the Geth being rebuilt, definitely. I don't see how hard it would be, if they really thought it to be a good idea.

[CosmicGnosis]

elitecom wrote...

ziloe wrote...

 I find it odd that the highest EMS would grant you the option, Synthesis. Having replayed the whole series over again recently, the final epic in the series was about uniting the various races and overcoming the odds, together. 

The beauty of society is that we each bring something unique to the table. Synthesis essentially takes all of that away, and though it may be more efficient, it removes that in born want of a better existence. We strive to better ourselves, and that experience makes us stronger.

And of course, as Uncle Ben once said, "With power comes great responsibility." Had it just been handed to us (with or without our consent), it would create chaos, similar to rewarding a child for doing nothing.

Why? Because we didn't earn it, and most of all, it would have been the biggest troll of the Reapers yet. Essentially, it would have made us just like them. Maybe not in the same form, but it would remove that unique beauty that is our universe.

That said, for me the right choice would be Destroy. I loved EDI and Legion, however, their existence was a detriment to society. If you think I'm wrong, consider the Geth merging themselves with the Quarians suits, to "help" them develop better antibodies, etc. Without Destroy, the cycle would continue, albeit in a new form.

I just have to say that I find it incredible that we think and believe so alike. What you wrote practically mirrors my take on Synthesis. Through Synthesis something unique and beautiful is lost, namely us humans, our humanity is lost, forever. You can always create new robots, but organic evolution is pretty much unique takes millions of years. Robots or synthetics are easily replaced, we are not. That is why I oppose Synthesis so vehemently.

I guess if you have watched the ending to Battlestar Galactica, you didn't like it either? It's almost exactly the same as the Synthesis ending, and exactly as bad.

Also destroy is definitely the option for me too. Although the Geth were certainly interesting and it is sad to see them be destroyed, they can always be rebuilt, same with EDI.

How is our "humanity" lost in Synthesis? Adding synthetic parts to your body no longer makes you human?

Also, your 200 millionth great-grandparents were fish. Yeah, humans evolved from fish. Guess we lost our "fishiness"? Evolution allows species to evolve into new species. So if humans wish to "evolve", we're gonna have to "lose our humanity" eventually.

[BleedingUranium]

Indy_S wrote...

As for planning, and specifically planning for the synthesis ending, it's quite a leap to apply transhumanism as a resolvable theme when it never was a focus prior. It was barely present in Shepard's resurrection and the idea of removing individuality with it, such as blending into a Reaper, is not the intention of the authors, so the incident is irrelevant. Saren had implants, husks were processed humans. That was the extent of this theme in the first game and if they felt that needed a two-game-later payoff, it's absurd.

Exactly.

[Indy_S]

So does Synthesis give babies robot parts? Because robot parts don't grow... And why did it give leaves circuits? To supplement photosynthesis? The circuits are glowing which means it's losing energy... Now to the Geth, do they have a reproductive system now? The species seems incapable of self-propagating now, all the previous methods just make robot geth, not hybrid geth. And if they do have a reproductive system, see the baby problem above.

Synthesis seems like an abomination to me.

[Hey]

Indy_S wrote...

So does Synthesis give babies robot parts? Because robot parts don't grow... And why did it give leaves circuits? To supplement photosynthesis? The circuits are glowing which means it's losing energy... Now to the Geth, do they have a reproductive system now? The species seems incapable of self-propagating now, all the previous methods just make robot geth, not hybrid geth. And if they do have a reproductive system, see the baby problem above.

Synthesis seems like an abomination to me.

No, no.. Synthetics just get understanding.  duh...

[BleedingUranium]

You know what's interesting? All the memories in the Geth Consensus have the Synthesis circuits on them. Not to mention the similar green-ness of the Overlord digital reality, or the Matrix.

Almost like Synthesis is some kind of alternate reality or something

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 06 janvier 2013 - 08:25 .

[DirtyPhoenix]

I read somewhere that ME2's protagonist was originally intended to be a separate Cerberus agent through and through, but later they decided to railroad Shepard into working for them. Is this true?

[Hey]

BleedingUranium wrote...

You know what's interesting? All the memories in the Geth Consensus have the Synthesis circuits on them. Not to mention the similar green-ness of the Overlord digital reality, or the Matrix.

Almost like Synthesis is some kind of alternate reality or something

yeah the leaves having capcitors is pretty ****ing weird.  Can't be real.

[Ieldra]

CosmicGnosis wrote...
How is our "humanity" lost in Synthesis? Adding synthetic parts to your body no longer makes you human?

Also, your 200 millionth great-grandparents were fish. Yeah, humans evolved from fish. Guess we lost our "fishiness"? Evolution allows species to evolve into new species. So if humans wish to "evolve", we're gonna have to "lose our humanity" eventually.

Exactly that. I'm wondering why people are so attached to their physical nature. If we survive that long, we'll be significantly different from now in a million years or so, even assuming only natural evolution. Even more likely, technology will change us far sooner. I can't see what's so undesirable about taking a shortcut.

Apart from that, biology is messy. Beautiful? We suffer from many detrimental effects because our bodies are the result of our phylogenesis. Want an example? What's the appendix for? Any designer who designed an organism that way would be fired. To be attached to our physical nature is nonsensical.

Edit:
It is rather possible to have synthetic symbiotes in your body which get passed on from one generation to the next, i.e. from mother to child. They just need to be smaller than a cell and they'd have to replicate themselves. 

Modifié par Ieldra2, 06 janvier 2013 - 09:01 .

[CosmicGnosis]

I wish that we knew exactly how synthetics suddenly gain emotions...

[BleedingUranium]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

I wish that we knew exactly how synthetics suddenly gain emotions...

>Implying Legion didn't.

[CosmicGnosis]

Ieldra2 wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...
How is our "humanity" lost in Synthesis? Adding synthetic parts to your body no longer makes you human?

Also, your 200 millionth great-grandparents were fish. Yeah, humans evolved from fish. Guess we lost our "fishiness"? Evolution allows species to evolve into new species. So if humans wish to "evolve", we're gonna have to "lose our humanity" eventually.

Exactly that. I'm wondering why people are so attached to their physical nature. If we survive that long, we'll be significantly different from now in a million years or so, even assuming only natural evolution. Even more likely, technology will change us far sooner. I can't see what's so undesirable about taking a shortcut.

Apart from that, biology is messy. Beautiful? We suffer from many detrimental effects because our bodies are the result of our phylogenesis. Want an example? What's the appendix for? Any designer who designed an organism that way would be fired. To be attached to our physical nature is nonsensical.

Edit:
It is rather possible to have synthetic symbiotes in your body which get passed on from one generation to the next, i.e. from mother to child. They just need to be smaller than a cell and they'd have to replicate themselves.

And I don't understand what people expect deep space exploration to be like. We can't live on Earth forever. Our future is the stars. We will have to adapt ourselves to many extreme environments, and most of it will be artificial adaptations.

Nothing natural about traveling in space and visiting alien worlds.

Modifié par CosmicGnosis, 06 janvier 2013 - 09:10 .

[ElSuperGecko]

Troxa wrote...
1. That prothean vision is just mumbo jumbo (the prothean did'nt even know what the crucible did) - no, it's a warning. It clearly shows organic parts merging with synthetic, and depicts the fall of the Prothean race.

2. If you are talking about that the beam creates nanobots & distributes. There is just to little mass for the crucible to even work. That is how the husks are created. - lol, no. That's not what I'm talking about. If that is what I was talking about I would have said that.  I didn't.  I said "the fate of the Prothean race (being turned into Collectors) = a warning about Synthesis".  Your point has absolutely nothing to do with that statement.

3. And even the crucible is out of place - yes, it is, isn't it?  Funny that.

4. How could so many diverse cycles design a device that surpasses the technology of the Reapers? How is that even possible? - now you're asking the right questions.  We don't know.  It's never explained to us.  We don't know who originally designed the Crucible, but we do know that "BY USING OUR TECHNOLOGY, YOU DEVELOP ALONG THE PATHS WE DESIRE".  We have mistakenly used Reaper tech before, believing it to be benign.  I have no reason to trust the Catalyst, or it's dubious "new solution".

5. We have to be given that information because we are building it do you think we can build for example: a particle accelerator whitout knowing what it does? - no, we don't, because no one designing or working on the Crucible had any idea that it was going to be used for Synthesis in the first place.  Everyone believed it was a weapon, to be used against the Reapers.  Synthesis is NOT our idea, Hackett's idea, Liara's idea or any of the Crucible scientist's ideas, it is an idea and suggestion put forward by no-one other than the Catalyst, and the Catalyst alone.  Reaper technology allows Synthesis, and as we are explicitly told within the game by Garrus "nothing good EVER came from Reaper tech."

Modifié par ElSuperGecko, 06 janvier 2013 - 11:30 .

[Keatstwo]

I really don't understand this "it makes everyone the same" argument. All it does is give everyone the same basic DNA structure. You already have this in common with every other human being on the planet, does that make us the same? Obviously not.

[Krunjar]

I know right. And people quote mordin's speach about the collectors as if the reapers and collectors are the same thing. Clearly missing the point. And images of "reaper forms" in society such as the banshee and abomination pic are just silly cos with the reapers working for us those forms can be modified easily enough. Perhaps even giving them back their originals. And even if they can't forcing our own sense of biological comfort to define things is just plain bigoted.

[NightAntilli]

Destroy? Have fun with the Leviathans taking over everyone.