1009 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

Rifneno wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

umadcommander wrote...

synthesis is the least popular ending for a reason

Control is actually the least popular. 

Has BW said this, or is that going by BSN polls?

Several polls, including a very big poll by masseffect-universe.de with about 15k participants. The results have been replicated several times in BSN polls. The only known bias in those polls is the high number of hardcore fans compared to the general ME3 player base, of which there are no published polls, though Bioware likely knows.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 23 décembre 2012 - 08:39 .

[Iakus]

[quote]Ieldra2 wrote...
Krogan Rebellions [/quote]
It would've happened as soon as the krogan got spaceflight. Doesn't matter how. The restraining factor was Tuchanka's hostile environment.

Also, that wasn't my point. I didn't say technology exchange can't be dangerous. But developing things on your own is not intrinsically better than getting things from somewhere else, unless it affects understanding. As I said, had the krogan developed spaceflight on their own, the same thing would've happened.
[/quote]

Or the krogans could have developed their society to the point where they could focus on something like spae flight without blowing themselves up.  Mordin seemed to think so.

It's not where you get the tech, it's how well you understand its applications.  Of understanding the potential risks and being able to handle them.  Throughout the trilogy we've seen examples of the dangers of rushing too far too fast without understanding what you're getting into.

Peak 15 and the Rachni
Project Overlord
Uplifting the krogan
The thorian
Paul Grayson
Leviathan of Dis
The accidental creation of the geth

All are examples of toying with something you don't understand, with inadequate preparation, leading to disasterous results.  Heck the mass relays themselves are a Reaper trap, designed to keep the galaxy dependant on technology they don't understand so the Reapers will have an easier time harvesting them. 

Synthesis is one person making a choice to change not just one colony, one planet, or even one species, but all life, everywhere, using technology that's not understood by anyone.

[BrookerT]

jstme wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

All endings can be seen as different kinds of evils:
@Destroy is Genocide and murder
@Control is mass indoctrination committed by Shepard
@Refuse is the Reapers Winning because Shepard is too chicken do to anything
@Synthesis is the forced and invasive evolution of all sapient life in the galaxy

All are bad in some way, and yet all give hope in different way:
@ Destroy gives hope for a future free from the reapers and the pain of the past (geth invasion)
@Control puts Shepard in the role of benevolent god, and leads to hope to a society built on a stable structure where all have a voice
@Refuse shows how the next cycle wins triumphantly due to your actions in this cycle
@Synthesis leads to a future of infinite possibilities, a technological paradise with no synthetic/organic conflict

If synthesis is an abomination, then so are the other three, All ask you to defy your own morality in some way. You must accept that no choice is perfect, all are abominable yet all give some form of hope (even if you don't believe that hope should exist)

Synthesis is removal of all organic life in the galaxy. It is not "evolution of sapient life" simply because it effects ALL organic life that exists prior to synthesis,and does not exist after synthesis.
So while i agree to your approach that all ME3 endings were created flawed in purpose, synthesis is most horrible of them all. 

No more Organic Life? There is still organic life. Synthesis does not make every Organic and Synthetic an Hybrid. It gives every organic the ability to easily upgrade technology, the synthesis beam does not change the DNA it adds to it, you can see it in the EC. Synthetics don't suddenly gain skin and have babies, their still synthetic beings, but they now have human emotions, like empathy. 

The whole point of synthesis is that it allows organic life to easily "upgrade" itself, so it is never bettered by synthetics, and that syntheitc life will value a human life in emotional worth, instead of cold hard logic.

[JamieCOTC]

It's symbolic. You're not supposed to take it literally.

Yes, really. <_<

[BrookerT]

JamieCOTC wrote...

It's symbolic. You're not supposed to take it literally.

Yes, really. <_<

Why do you say that? In the Mass Effect Universe, it's real. The endings, the whole of mass effect contain symbolism.

[ziloe]

JamieCOTC wrote...

It's symbolic. You're not supposed to take it literally.

Yes, really. <_<

No. I literally just played through the whole series, along with DLC in this last month. Albeit a game, and a fake world, in that world, it was a universe of its own. And in that universe, what we did affected the outcome. If Shepard jumping into that Synthesis machine (or any of the others for that matter) was just symbolism, then creating the crucible at all, was for nothing, because it did nothing.

[Rifneno]

ziloe wrote...

JamieCOTC wrote...

It's symbolic. You're not supposed to take it literally.

Yes, really. <_<

No. I literally just played through the whole series, along with DLC in this last month. Albeit a game, and a fake world, in that world, it was a universe of its own. And in that universe, what we did affected the outcome. If Shepard jumping into that Synthesis machine (or any of the others for that matter) was just symbolism, then creating the crucible at all, was for nothing, because it did nothing.

Hehe.  But no, really, I certainly hope it's symbolism.  Woe be to the galaxies whose Shepard chose to become a Reaper or... hell, I don't even know what synthesis is supposed to be besides stupid.  Leaves with printed circuitry?  Seriously?  Honestly, that's the part where I thought "this can't be real... it's too stupid to be real... they know it's too stupid to be real."  But of course, people just go "bad riteing!" because they don't realize how much real science was used in Mass Effect because it went over their heads.

[Red Panda]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

umadcommander wrote...

synthesis is the least popular ending for a reason

Control is actually the least popular. 

Has BW said this, or is that going by BSN polls?

Several polls, including a very big poll by masseffect-universe.de with about 15k participants. The results have been replicated several times in BSN polls. The only known bias in those polls is the high number of hardcore fans compared to the general ME3 player base, of which there are no published polls, though Bioware likely knows.


Which of course is entirely voluntary response, so the entire thing is a pile of poo when you actually want to use it for anything.

[kalasaurus]

Rifneno wrote...
*snip Anders pic*

Lol, Anders.  I took him and Justice everywhere for their random outbursts.

Anyway, I agree with the OP but you're preaching to the choir.  I'm glad that the Extended Cut added dialogue to reject the concept completely before making the choice.  "You're asking me to change everyone, everything.  I can't make that choice.  I won't."  At least it made the set-up more neural and not heavily in the favor of "peace" and the "final evolution of life".

I'm just surprised how well everyone takes glowing in the dark after the Crucible fires.  Merge organic and synthetic DNA (?), OK, but why does everyone have to glow green?  How bizarre.

[Ieldra]

iakus wrote...
It's not where you get the tech, it's how well you understand its applications.  Of understanding the potential risks and being able to handle them.  Throughout the trilogy we've seen examples of the dangers of rushing too far too fast without understanding what you're getting into.

Peak 15 and the Rachni
Project Overlord
Uplifting the krogan
The thorian
Paul Grayson
Leviathan of Dis
The accidental creation of the geth

All are examples of toying with something you don't understand, with inadequate preparation, leading to disasterous results.  Heck the mass relays themselves are a Reaper trap, designed to keep the galaxy dependant on technology they don't understand so the Reapers will have an easier time harvesting them. 

Yeah, and I hate that one-sided message almost as much as some people hate ME3's endings. *Every* attempt  ended in disaster, there are almost no positive examples except those needed for the main plot. Also, there's another message I hate even more: specifically those attempts fail which fall into the domain of the life sciences. There's one positive example: Miranda, and they hurry to invalidate that as well. 

You see, what those examples tell me is "be more careful", not "keep away". I will not accept "keep away". I can imagine a setup that would enable reasonably safe study of indoctrination. It is inconceivable that Cerberus and others are too stupid to do likewise.  

Synthesis is one person making a choice to change not just one colony, one planet, or even one species, but all life, everywhere, using technology that's not understood by anyone.

And the other endings are different.....exactly how? Nobody knows the long-term effects of any of the endings. Also, would your opinion be different had Shepard found a data cache detailing how things work?

@GlassElephant:
The silly concept of unifying DNA isn't on the table anymore with the EC. The line still exists, but the added exposition reveals it's nothing like that.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 23 décembre 2012 - 09:41 .

[AlanC9]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Several polls, including a very big poll by masseffect-universe.de with about 15k participants. The results have been replicated several times in BSN polls. The only known bias in those polls is the high number of hardcore fans compared to the general ME3 player base, of which there are no published polls, though Bioware likely knows.

It'd be a rather amazing data-collection fail if they didn't know. Not inconceivable -- they could have failed to track the choice the way the save fails to store your choice.

Modifié par AlanC9, 23 décembre 2012 - 09:49 .

[kalasaurus]

@ Ieldra: Ah, I didn't catch that. I should replay the ending then.  It's been awhile.

Modifié par GlassElephant, 23 décembre 2012 - 09:47 .

[Ieldra]

GlassElephant wrote...
@ Ieldra: Ah, I didn't catch that. I should replay the ending then.  It's been awhile.

You could consult my Synthesis thread. The description and the epilogue is in the OP.

[WhiteKnyght]

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.

((Discuss))

Bah, I'll drag their assess to glory whether they like it or not.

You love EDI and Legion, but you're racist towards synthetics and don't want to do anything for their benefit? As for the Geth and the Quarian suits, Tali wouldn't have bothered to tell Shepard unless she had proof that it was working. Mimic an infection to jump start the immune system.

If you think Synthetics are a detriment to society, then you're a hypocrite just for posting it on the internet, with technology(aka synthetics)

The point of Mass Effect is survival. Not to exterminate the Reapers. Stopping everyone from being murdered is the goal.

[Steelcan]

EDI's narration makes me sick

[Ieldra]

Rifneno wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
As for Mordin: he's a character in a game. I am not required to agree with him. See my answer to iakus.

Once again, the socio-technological speech is not just something they made up to make Mordin sound smart.  It's real science.  Deal with it.  You can no more disagree with it than you can disagree with gravity.

The assertion that taking technology from somewhere else is intrinsically worse than creating your own is not science but ideology.

That technology can have undesired side effects on society is a banality. Where that technology comes from, however, is irrelevant. It's just as possible that we develop a technology whose effects we don't understand well enough and create a disaster.

It is, yet again, the difference between technical expertise and technology assessment. It's possible to have the former but to be not knowledgeable enough in the latter, wherever the technology comes from. Usually, we engage in technology assessment after we have acquired the technology and the expertise to use it. 

Modifié par Ieldra2, 23 décembre 2012 - 10:02 .

[fiendishchicken]

I predict an ending war soon, since the people who like control and synthesis tend to be the people that actually like ME3's ending.

It's garbage and space magic. That's all Synthesis is.

To any synthesists, I can pull the definition vitalism and life energy.

[Iakus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

iakus wrote...
It's not where you get the tech, it's how well you understand its applications.  Of understanding the potential risks and being able to handle them.  Throughout the trilogy we've seen examples of the dangers of rushing too far too fast without understanding what you're getting into.

Peak 15 and the Rachni
Project Overlord
Uplifting the krogan
The thorian
Paul Grayson
Leviathan of Dis
The accidental creation of the geth

All are examples of toying with something you don't understand, with inadequate preparation, leading to disasterous results.  Heck the mass relays themselves are a Reaper trap, designed to keep the galaxy dependant on technology they don't understand so the Reapers will have an easier time harvesting them. 

Yeah, and I hate that one-sided message almost as much as some people hate ME3's endings. *Every* attempt  ended in disaster, there are almost no positive examples except those needed for the main plot. Also, there's another message I hate even more: specifically those attempts fail which fall into the domain of the life sciences. There's one positive example: Miranda, and they hurry to invalidate that as well. 

You see, what those examples tell me is "be more careful", not "keep away". I will not accept "keep away". I can imagine a setup that would enable reasonably safe study of indoctrination. It is inconceivable that Cerberus and others are too stupid to do likewise.  

That's exactly what those examples are.  I never said "keep away" I said "know what you're getting into"  And Synthesis flies in the very face of that concept.

Synthesis is one person making a choice to change not just one colony, one planet, or even one species, but all life, everywhere, using technology that's not understood by anyone.

And the other endings are different.....exactly how? Nobody knows the long-term effects of any of the endings. Also, would your opinion be different had Shepard found a data cache detailing how things work?

You are assuming I actually like any of the endings.  I don't

As to a data cache, it would make Synthesis less bad.  Butthe entire "force it on everyone and everything in the galaxy" is stll a major stumbling bloack

[Rifneno]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

Bah, I'll drag their assess to glory whether they like it or not.

You love EDI and Legion, but you're racist towards synthetics and don't want to do anything for their benefit? As for the Geth and the Quarian suits, Tali wouldn't have bothered to tell Shepard unless she had proof that it was working. Mimic an infection to jump start the immune system.

If you think Synthetics are a detriment to society, then you're a hypocrite just for posting it on the internet, with technology(aka synthetics)

The point of Mass Effect is survival. Not to exterminate the Reapers. Stopping everyone from being murdered is the goal.

They're one and the same.  If you think killing yourself and hoping for the best because a Reaper told you that'll change things is ensuring the end of the horror then you're doing it dreadfully wrong.  There's a reason you're told time and time again: dead reapers are how we win this.

[mass perfection]

What I read:"Uhhh Synthesis is bad cus it like.....Kills diversity and stuf and Reaperzzzzz wins and it kills all synthetics and organics and it's bad,man"

[Ieldra]

Tell me something new, fiendishchicken. We all know the rationale for Shepard's sacrifice in Synthesis is an epic fail of Mac Walters' comic book science. I have my own rationalization of it which doesn't require vitalism: Within the constraints of the Catalyst's exposition, what Shepard thinks Synthesis is, it will be.

[Steelcan]

As much as I hate to admit it, the Catalyst was designed as an information dump, we are supposed to take his word as gospel because he is a god like AI.

This plan obviously back fired, immensely. I personally think the Catalyst is full of it, but I'm not fooling myself by saying that is how he was intended to come off as

[Rifneno]

Rifneno wrote...

But of course, people just go "bad riteing!" because they don't realize how much real science was used in Mass Effect because it went over their heads.

Ieldra2 wrote...

We all know the rationale for Shepard's sacrifice in Synthesis is an epic fail of Mac Walters' comic book science.

Hehe.

[fiendishchicken]

Ieldra2 wrote...
The assertion that taking technology from somewhere else is intrinsically worse than creating your own is not science but ideology.

That technology can have undesired side effects on society is a banality. Where that technology comes from, however, is irrelevant. It's just as possible that we develop a technology whose effects we don't understand well enough and create a disaster.

It is, yet again, the difference between technical expertise and technology assessment. It's possible to have the former but to be not knowledgeable enough in the latter, wherever the technology comes from. Usually, we engage in technology assessment after we have acquired the technology and the expertise to use it. 

Banality might be the wrong word there. 

It is worse. I'm a believer in tempered advancement. If I found alien technology that could be used to potentially open up the stars to us, I would, crazily enough, not show it to the world. I would keep it hidden till comes a day when Humanity either proves through sufficient cultural revolution and change, or if it was rendered irrelevent through the natural progression of human technology. We aren't ready for that kind of technology. We would never use it for something that could be hopeful or good.