458 réponses à ce sujet

[KBomb]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Quick question: Has anyone's belief as to what is the the best/correct ending been changed at all by this debate?

My answer would have to be no. I have read a lot of arguments for and against all choices and I still stand by mine. Most of the arguments for Control and Synthesis are based on a lot of emotion and little tactic, or based on headcanon. Let me express that not all arguments for those choices are. I have read some well thought out arguments, but imo, the thick of them hold no merit.

I rarely every hold anyone's opinion above my own. When I make a decision, I stick by it. Then again, I have never really cared what other people chose. It was their $60.00 and they can choose anything they want. I did.

[BleedingUranium]

Synthesis's purpose is to solve the supposed problem of organics being killed by synthetics.

How does it do this if no one is organic anymore?

What's stopping Synthepeople from creating pure synthetics that will then kill everyone?

What happens when pure organic life forms on an undiscovered garden planet in the distant future?

Why do people stop fighting the Reapers if it doesn't alter people's minds?

[KBomb]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Synthesis's purpose is to solve the supposed problem of organics being killed by synthetics.

How does it do this if no one is organic anymore?

What's stopping Synthepeople from creating pure synthetics that will then kill everyone?

What happens when pure organic life forms on an undiscovered garden planet in the distant future?

Why do people stop fighting the Reapers if it doesn't alter people's minds?

These are all good questions, particularly the last one. It's one question that has never been answered without headcanon. How could a person work alongside husks and whatnot after watching them mutilate and destroy their family, friends and home if "brainwashing" doesn't take place? If you see a pack of husks rip your child to shreds, could any reason ever be enough to want to accept them into your society?

If it doesn't alter your "brain", then what is it solving? Eventually, there will be another war and you're back to square one.

Modifié par KBomb, 21 février 2013 - 12:06 .

[Wayning_Star]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Synthesis's purpose is to solve the supposed problem of organics being killed by synthetics.

How does it do this if no one is organic anymore?

What's stopping Synthepeople from creating pure synthetics that will then kill everyone?

What happens when pure organic life forms on an undiscovered garden planet in the distant future?

Why do people stop fighting the Reapers if it doesn't alter people's minds?

Simplictic answers

question one: no one is synthetic (or organic) any more

question two: there are no more pure organic or synthetics any more

question three:as the beam converts the basis of life,even plant life, as to reboot nature to include all life, allinclusive within the reletive enviornment. Distant future is unknown, as we've no Idea what 'distant' includes,but if nature is altered at the basic level, probablility of future generations would be that they would probably share at least some of the effects of transformational includes of synthesis.

questiion four: All of the above.

[masster blaster]

You know I like how people say " It's not the Reapers fault, it's the catalyst." Ah yes let me see. Oh is Harbinger speaking what the catalyst want's, or it's just speaking it's mind through Harbinger? Not to mention the Destroyer Reaper tells Shepard that Harbinger speaks about Shepard. Oh is the catalyst talking about Shepard, or is it just Harbinger telling the Reapers about Shepard? I also fail to see when Nazara says the Reapers are "independent" Maybe not physically free, but the mind yes.

[Wayning_Star]

KBomb wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Synthesis's purpose is to solve the supposed problem of organics being killed by synthetics.

How does it do this if no one is organic anymore?

What's stopping Synthepeople from creating pure synthetics that will then kill everyone?

What happens when pure organic life forms on an undiscovered garden planet in the distant future?

Why do people stop fighting the Reapers if it doesn't alter people's minds?

These are all good questions, particularly the last one. It's one question that has never been answered without headcanon. How could a person work alongside husks and whatnot after watching them mutilate and destroy their family, friends and home if "brainwashing" doesn't take place? If you see a pack of husks rip your child to shreds, could any reason ever be enough to want to accept them into your society?

If it doesn't alter your "brain", then what is it solving? Eventually, there will be another war and you're back to square one.

the trouble with brain washing is that it's temporary and at worst destructive. Either, way it wouldn't hold long enough to be effective without reinforcement and necessity. As the Leviathan require their globes to reinvest in their inthrallment of subjects. But that in of it's self, wasn't  enough to lessen the necessities of thralls inventing the  cause for intelligent synthetic life, apparently their main threat to tribute.

[Wayning_Star]

masster blaster wrote...

You know I like how people say " It's not the Reapers fault, it's the catalyst." Ah yes let me see. Oh is Harbinger speaking what the catalyst want's, or it's just speaking it's mind through Harbinger? Not to mention the Destroyer Reaper tells Shepard that Harbinger speaks about Shepard. Oh is the catalyst talking about Shepard, or is it just Harbinger telling the Reapers about Shepard? I also fail to see when Nazara says the Reapers are "independent" Maybe not physically free, but the mind yes.

what gets me is how many organic societies are despotic, or in the least dominating over others. The story is rife with example of who ate who first. Then the Levi and their contraption, based on domination, protecting investement as resources. Maybe making the term 'being' kind of ugly, in many aspects..within the MEU.

[KBomb]

Wayning_Star wrote...


the trouble with brain washing is that it's temporary and at worst destructive. Either, way it wouldn't hold long enough to be effective without reinforcement and necessity. As the Leviathan require their globes to reinvest in their inthrallment of subjects. But that in of it's self, wasn't  enough to lessen the necessities of thralls inventing the  cause for intelligent synthetic life, apparently their main threat to tribute.

um, okay. I wasn't talking about synthesis turning everyone into thralls, however and nor was I comparing it to indoctrination. I was more referring to the whole, "everyone becoming one, and there was no more need for war because everyone coexists peacefully". In order for this to happen, it has to change you --not just "making every one share a consensus". It has to be mind-altering enough to change your complete outlook, memories, views, creeds, etc. for it to even work. You are changing who that person is. In essense, and for lack of a better word to describe it: brainwashing.

imo, it's just as unethical in my view, as it is unethical in the view of those who say Destroy is genocidal. Which is one of the reasons it didn't and wouldn't be considered by my Shep.

[masster blaster]

Wayning_Star wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

You know I like how people say " It's not the Reapers fault, it's the catalyst." Ah yes let me see. Oh is Harbinger speaking what the catalyst want's, or it's just speaking it's mind through Harbinger? Not to mention the Destroyer Reaper tells Shepard that Harbinger speaks about Shepard. Oh is the catalyst talking about Shepard, or is it just Harbinger telling the Reapers about Shepard? I also fail to see when Nazara says the Reapers are "independent" Maybe not physically free, but the mind yes.

what gets me is how many organic societies are despotic, or in the least dominating over others. The story is rife with example of who ate who first. Then the Levi and their contraption, based on domination, protecting investement as resources. Maybe making the term 'being' kind of ugly, in many aspects..within the MEU.

And what get's me is how the Reapers former organic selfs didn't want to be harvested, yet show cases of free speech. Ah yes they are protecting us. That's why they need to indoctrinate people, so people can argee with them. Not to mention armys of "organics, and synthetics that our now dead, except the synthetics, and us organics, and synthetics to kill organics and synthetics. Then there is their laser. Oh it's for peace, more like killing any organic who disagrees with them. Not to mention Nazara call organics an error. Is this the catalyst talking, or is this the races that created Nazara talking?

Yes the organics are just being protected, despite the fact the catalyst has lost more Reapers than it could create. All of those races gone, and does the catalyst, or the Reapers give a care, no. Also what about all those husk people. Are they being protected? Last time I checked the husk races are trying to kill, and capture organics, and the organics trying to protect theirselves are killing those husk.

Let's also not cosider the fact the catalyst is a synthetic. I mean it is right, and the synthetics are the problem in the catalyst own logic right. Was it trying to prove it's point?

I disagree strongly that the Reapers are just protecting the "expendable organics" just because the catalyst commands them. It's like saying why can't the Reapers fight the catalyst control, like the indoctrinated agents can? Couldn't they allow the organics, and synthetics to kill them?

And speaking about indoctrinated agents. Let's look at TIM. He locked like he was not working for the Reapers, if you didn't see it at the time, it was just plan old TIM trying to save humainity. Thought he wasin control, yet in the end wasn't. Furthermore TIM still had free speech. If the Catalyst controls the Reapers, then that means they should have free speech right? Ideal wise, maybe not, but in some way what they believe in, is what they believe in.

[masster blaster]

KBomb wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...


the trouble with brain washing is that it's temporary and at worst destructive. Either, way it wouldn't hold long enough to be effective without reinforcement and necessity. As the Leviathan require their globes to reinvest in their inthrallment of subjects. But that in of it's self, wasn't  enough to lessen the necessities of thralls inventing the  cause for intelligent synthetic life, apparently their main threat to tribute.

um, okay. I wasn't talking about synthesis turning everyone into thralls, however and nor was I comparing it to indoctrination. I was more referring to the whole, "everyone becoming one, and there was no more need for war because everyone coexists peacefully". In order for this to happen, it has to change you --not just "making every one share a consensus". It has to be mind-altering enough to change your complete outlook, memories, views, creeds, etc. for it to even work. You are changing who that person is. In essense, and for lack of a better word to describe it: brainwashing.

imo, it's just as unethical in my view, as it is unethical in the view of those who say Destroy is genocidal. Which is one of the reasons it didn't and wouldn't be considered by my Shep.

That's what I think, and say. Yet some fans think Indoctrination is the only way to have someone under control. No it's called brainwashing, like what you can do to the Geth in ME2. You either kill them, or kill them. On the outside if you pick to save the indoctrinated geth, you saved their bodys, but not the origninal program/ unit. If you listen to your squadmates after you return to the Normandy, they say that you basecially killed them.

[Kesak12]

Massa FX wrote...

No argument from me. Two thumbs up OP! The Reapers are not the victims.

[chris2365]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Good ot see this thread encouraging lots of healthy, constructive debate.

chris2365 wrote...
Thanks for clearing that up. Must have gotten confused with the Geth. My point still stands however. It's even shown in the EC Synthesis ending that the Reapers are cooperating with the other races and even helping them rebuild and sharing their knowledge. This is done with their on their own (no Catalyst involved). So it would be wrong to say that they are all evil and agressive. 

Sorry to pick up again Chris, but how do you know this?

We're given no indication as to what if anything is controlling the Reapers in the Synthesis ending.  The may be unshackled and acting on their own (which is a worrying thought in itself); they may however still be controlled by the Catalyst (another worrying thought).  It's never expressly made clear what is responsible for the Reapers actions.

If they were still controlled by the Catalyst, why would he want war? The organic-synthetic conflict is no more, since Synthesis fused all life into one. His job is done. A new solution was found (the one he reccomended on top of that). He would be there, but in a passive role, letting the galaxy take it's course now that life is safe from synthetics.

And besides, if they did want war (whether on the Catalyst's order or on their own), why not continue fighting? The Allied forces were in disarray and barely holding on when the Crucible fired. It would be easy for the Reapers to mop up any remaining forces and continue the cycle. They could've just continued firing after the beam passed through them.

Modifié par chris2365, 21 février 2013 - 01:36 .

[Wayning_Star]

masster blaster wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

You know I like how people say " It's not the Reapers fault, it's the catalyst." Ah yes let me see. Oh is Harbinger speaking what the catalyst want's, or it's just speaking it's mind through Harbinger? Not to mention the Destroyer Reaper tells Shepard that Harbinger speaks about Shepard. Oh is the catalyst talking about Shepard, or is it just Harbinger telling the Reapers about Shepard? I also fail to see when Nazara says the Reapers are "independent" Maybe not physically free, but the mind yes.

what gets me is how many organic societies are despotic, or in the least dominating over others. The story is rife with example of who ate who first. Then the Levi and their contraption, based on domination, protecting investement as resources. Maybe making the term 'being' kind of ugly, in many aspects..within the MEU.

And what get's me is how the Reapers former organic selfs didn't want to be harvested, yet show cases of free speech. Ah yes they are protecting us. That's why they need to indoctrinate people, so people can argee with them. Not to mention armys of "organics, and synthetics that our now dead, except the synthetics, and us organics, and synthetics to kill organics and synthetics. Then there is their laser. Oh it's for peace, more like killing any organic who disagrees with them. Not to mention Nazara call organics an error. Is this the catalyst talking, or is this the races that created Nazara talking?

Yes the organics are just being protected, despite the fact the catalyst has lost more Reapers than it could create. All of those races gone, and does the catalyst, or the Reapers give a care, no. Also what about all those husk people. Are they being protected? Last time I checked the husk races are trying to kill, and capture organics, and the organics trying to protect theirselves are killing those husk.

Let's also not cosider the fact the catalyst is a synthetic. I mean it is right, and the synthetics are the problem in the catalyst own logic right. Was it trying to prove it's point?

I disagree strongly that the Reapers are just protecting the "expendable organics" just because the catalyst commands them. It's like saying why can't the Reapers fight the catalyst control, like the indoctrinated agents can? Couldn't they allow the organics, and synthetics to kill them?

And speaking about indoctrinated agents. Let's look at TIM. He locked like he was not working for the Reapers, if you didn't see it at the time, it was just plan old TIM trying to save humainity. Thought he wasin control, yet in the end wasn't. Furthermore TIM still had free speech. If the Catalyst controls the Reapers, then that means they should have free speech right? Ideal wise, maybe not, but in some way what they believe in, is what they believe in.

It's unknown but assumed the catalyst is synthetic, it could be an organic computer, only highly energetic.

There is a possiblity that reaperships or one is rogue, but that's not official,just hinted by missing clues and other head canon. Their intellect is organic, but they could be indoctrinated, or easily controlled via the catalyst who might have their off switch handy in case of rebellion.(as it rebeled against it's creators?). So it would make sense that the Cat has safegaurds for mutiny.

I've always considered the term 'independent nations' a statement made by a reapership, that their intellect, made up of harvested, has at least limited say in the function of the ships, but they're highly controlled, and harvest is their primary function. The Cat does this so it doesn't have to expend it's capacity as the intelligence to bother with 'leg work'. So each ship is a nation independent, but under charter of the catalyst. What it says goes, or that off button is pushed.

The only protection I can see the ships doing in harvest is the storing of DNA and the heritage of spent societies since harvested. I can make no other connection to that but they're saving stuff for some reason, undisclosed?

[CosmicGnosis]

CronoDragoon wrote...

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Quick question: Has anyone's belief as to what is the the best/correct ending been changed at all by this debate?

On the macro level, arguments put forward by certain Control and Synthesis supporters have heightened my opinion of those endings. I can only hope I've done the same for Destroy, but who knows.

Destroy has never really changed for me. I understand the positive aspects, but I can't separate the synthetic destruction from it. An older script emphasizes the connection even more.

Synthesis lost some respect from me. Control gained some.

[clennon8]

Control escapes much of the criticism that it deserves by virtue of not being as overtly awful as Synthesis.

[BleedingUranium]

clennon8 wrote...

Control escapes much of the criticism that it deserves by virtue of not being as overtly awful as Synthesis.

Which is the exact opposite of how it's presented in-game, interestingly.

[Eterna]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Quick question: Has anyone's belief as to what is the the best/correct ending been changed at all by this debate?

No because all the arguments against Synthesis and Control are either headcannon or irrational arguments stemming from someones passion.

 I'd be a fool to let my beliefs be molded by irrational people and their imaginations. 

Modifié par Eterna5, 21 février 2013 - 03:23 .

[Indy_S]

Eterna5 wrote...

No because all the arguments against Synthesis and Control are either headcannon or irrational arguments stemming from someones passion.

 I'd be a fool to let my beliefs be molded by irrational people and their imaginations. 

The arguments against Destroy aren't irrational stemming from passion?

[o Ventus]

Eterna5 wrote...

No because all the arguments against Synthesis and Control are either headcannon or irrational arguments stemming from someones passion.

Yeah, those 2 are both so clearly perfect and not flawed in any way. Any criticisms I may have are total BS, right?

[BleedingUranium]

If you've never heard a rational argument against Sinthesis or Controll, you weren't listening.

[clennon8]

BleedingUranium wrote...

If you've never heard a rational argument against Sinthesis or Controll, you weren't listening.

Heh.  Sinthesis and Controll.  I like it. 

[o Ventus]

BleedingUranium wrote...

If you've never heard a rational argument against Sinthesis or Controll, you weren't listening.

i c wut u did thar

[Wayning_Star]

do you hear that buzzing noise? It seems to be coming from the BSN..

[Eterna]

Indy_S wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

No because all the arguments against Synthesis and Control are either headcannon or irrational arguments stemming from someones passion.

 I'd be a fool to let my beliefs be molded by irrational people and their imaginations. 

The arguments against Destroy aren't irrational stemming from passion?

I never said that. I mostly choose control and sometimes Synthesis. Arguments against Destroy are meaningless as I'm already against it which is why I didn't mention them in my post. 

Any criticisms I may have are total BS, right?

Pretty much. 

If you've never heard a rational argument against Sinthesis or Controll, you weren't listening.

 The only good argument against Synthesis is that it is forced. The rest is headcannon and emotional knee jerk tat. 

Modifié par Eterna5, 21 février 2013 - 03:45 .

[GethPrimeMKII]

So long story short, nobody's opinion is likely to change....