779 réponses à ce sujet

[ObserverStatus]

CosmicGnosis wrote...
Anyway, can we finally just accept that people who choose Synthesis are not megalomaniacal racists who wish to bend the universe to their will? 

In a word, no.

[Auintus]

Eterna5 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Why do plants, varren ect need to handle technology?

Because they will be subjected to said technology. The technology of galatic civilizations affects the entire galaxy, lesser organics will also need safeguards. 

Subjected is the wrong word. The technology is a part of them, as much as a leg or a nose. You learn how to use those growing up. Anything else would do the same.

[KENNY4753]

I love reading controllers and synthesizers arguments. they make me lol.

like how synthesis lets everybody use advanced tech safely. Where does synthesis show this. All it shoes are the same slideshow pics but people have green vains or whatever.

That doesnt mean people are perfect and not f up. Nobody is perfect and everybody can never be perfect (not everybody sees everybody the same way and people dont see the same things as right or perfect). That means wars will still break out and people will still make mistakes.

Of course the devs would never show you this as it would ruin their favorite ending

[Eterna]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...
Every spacefaring organic relies on dangerous technology. Everyone who uses that technology is a danger to the galaxy at large because everyone is liable to make a mistake. Intention does not matter, what matters are the reprecussions of the mistake. 

Today for example we have nuclear weaponry. One mistake could cause a nuclear war that could very well lead to the extinction of our entire species. 

The problem here is that you think of Synthesis as a punishment, it is not. IT is an upgrade that allows everyone to handle advanced technology safely. 

Thanks for telling me what I think but no, I don't think it's a punishment. I think it's, severe solution to problem that isn't as dire as it's made out to be. I don't think it's needed, we've had nuclear weapons since 1945, I'm not about to start advocating that every life from on our planet undergoes gene theopy to make them more resistant to radiation  because something might go wrong down the line.

You know what researchers found in some of those radiated area used for bomb testing? Plant and sea life not found anywhere else because they're uniquely suited to survive the radation levels, and it can thrives because those levels keep away the competition. Life adapts on it's own, there is absolutely no need to force it hand.

If you feel that way then don't pick Synthesis. 

[MegaSovereign]

Synthesis doesn't make much sense from a role-playing perspective. Why would my Shepard choose to "fix" all life in the galaxy if his original long term goal was to save them?

[ObserverStatus]

Scepsis wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...
In a word, no.

You're not helping the toxicity levels on these boards.

That's why I wear the gas mask.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Auintus wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Where do you draw the line? Where are your boundaries? What synthesis does affects ALL life, not simply advanced organic life. It's not an ideal state. It's not going to create a utopia unless you are going to brainwash everyone into believing that you have a utopia.

Forget the animals in nature. It's obvious no one gives a s*** about them.

* What about the husks who suddenly become sapient again? They gain back their memories of who they once were. What they once looked like. Now, they see themselves differently. Probably they're horrified. I'd be.

* And if people are still people, and not brainwashed into believing everyone is equal and the same, you now have a permanent underclass.

* Another thing that isn't resolved -- The Catalyst, now partly organic, still controls the reapers. I guess this is to make sure no upstart newly natural organics who arrive on the scene in 750 million years or so make synthetics, since that problem still exists -- oh he failed to mention that, did he?

* But EDI is alive and not alone. The same with the Geth. They are more organic. Organics are more machine. The union of flesh and steel. The strengths of both. The weaknesses of neither.

That's the beauty of it. I don't draw the line. Why should we?
I never said utopia. Nothing in Synthesis ever said utopia. Drop the utopia.

Uh, okay?

Well, according to the ME3 multiplayer description for the Awakened Collector(which are husks of Protheans, as I'm sure you recall), they remember who they were. And check it out, they don't give a damn. They just go back to making themselves useful. Judging by that husks expression, I'd imagine it would be confusing as hell. Unless you're hopelessly attracted to your reflection, I'm sure you'd get over it. Brutes, on the other hand...

Permanent underclass of what? Husks? Everyone remembers. They know what they used to be. Would you look down on a husk knowing that it could have been you? Or a friend? Even if you did, enough people would get over it. Besides, husks, as I recall, are not reproductively viable. They wouldn't last long.

By which point their is no reason why one would not have a small-scale Synthesis-Crucible to welcome new species to the advanced society. If they choose not to, they can get wiped out by their synthetics, which will hopefully join or get wiped out. And the Catalyst existed to make a bridge between synthetics and organics. That bridge has been made. Mission accomplished.

Yep. Everything that I ever wanted from the world. Lucky bastards.

You forget about bigotry and prejudice. The prothean husks lasted 50,000 years, or were they reproductively viable at first? Or not. Or did they just last and last and last. Or was that just an ass pull?

[Eterna]

KENNY4753 wrote...

I love reading controllers and synthesizers arguments. they make me lol.

like how synthesis lets everybody use advanced tech safely. Where does synthesis show this. All it shoes are the same slideshow pics but people have green vains or whatever.

That doesnt mean people are perfect and not f up. Nobody is perfect and everybody can never be perfect (not everybody sees everybody the same way and people dont see the same things as right or perfect). That means wars will still break out and people will still make mistakes.

Of course the devs would never show you this as it would ruin their favorite ending

It isn't supposed to remove war and make everlasting peace. IT is supposed to remove the threat of advnced technology. 

[Rikketik]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...
Keiji's Grey Box becomes sapient according to the "twitter canon". Before synthesis, Keiji's Grey Box is a recording of a bunch of memories that Keiji and Kasumi shared + a bunch of stuff that would embarrass the Alliance. IOW Tech. It is nothing more than extending this.

It seems to be the complete opposite. Keiji comes to life again because his memories, or at least a sufficient portion of it, were still there. It's like preserving someone's brain and implementing it into a new body. With those husks, they come alive and somehow automatically grow a new brain--with all the memories from their previous destroyed brains in them, no less. How does that make sense?

[GreyLycanTrope]

Eterna5 wrote...
If you feel that way then don't pick Synthesis. 

I won't but I will protest you using arguements that people don't like the option simply because they don't understand or fear it. It's condesending.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 02 avril 2013 - 09:17 .

[Mr.House]

Auintus wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Why do plants, varren ect need to handle technology?

Because they will be subjected to said technology. The technology of galatic civilizations affects the entire galaxy, lesser organics will also need safeguards. 

Subjected is the wrong word. The technology is a part of them, as much as a leg or a nose. You learn how to use those growing up. Anything else would do the same.

When I see a varren use a toaster, I'll call you.

[Eterna]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Synthesis doesn't make much sense from a role-playing perspective. Why would my Shepard choose to "fix" all life in the galaxy if his original long term goal was to save them?

Synthesis saves them and more. It advances everyone in the galaxy to a stage three civilization. 

[cyrexwingblade]

In response to the OP -- while I can't know which parts of DA he wrote, are you really surprised he would choose Synthesis? Even in the original DA alone, you get choices like 'convince your friend to sleep with a witch... or you die.' Or, later, 'sacrifice your friend or be a martyr for the cause'.

Someone related to creating these kind of 'no win' situations wouldn't have a problem with ANY of the three endings.

I don't like Synthesis because without metagaming, my Shepard has no reason to believe it's legitimate. The only 'synthesis' we've seen up to that point is Saren and Reaper ground forces, none of which she'd actually want inflicted on anyone she knows. She'd Destroy if it wouldn't kill an entire race of allies and one of her friends. So she's left with Control, and is weeping all the way to the blue pedestal.

Yeah, the ending of DA hit about the same chord for me...

[Mr.House]

Eterna5 wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Synthesis doesn't make much sense from a role-playing perspective. Why would my Shepard choose to "fix" all life in the galaxy if his original long term goal was to save them?

Synthesis saves them and more. It advances everyone in the galaxy to a stage three civilization. 

Everyone was not ready, not even the current cycle was ready.

[Auintus]

KENNY4753 wrote...

I love reading controllers and synthesizers arguments. they make me lol.

like how synthesis lets everybody use advanced tech safely. Where does synthesis show this. All it shoes are the same slideshow pics but people have green vains or whatever.

That doesnt mean people are perfect and not f up. Nobody is perfect and everybody can never be perfect (not everybody sees everybody the same way and people dont see the same things as right or perfect). That means wars will still break out and people will still make mistakes.

Of course the devs would never show you this as it would ruin their favorite ending

Why wouldn't it? You can use your arms safely, right? It's a part of them.

Synthesis requires the highest EMS for a reason. The energy manipulation has to be precise to avoid screwing anything up.
Of course no one is perfect. Yes, some batarians will still hate humans(though they say somewhere that most of them are less of a pain since the hegemony was destroyed). Conflict will still exist, but Synthesis is still a step forward.

[ObserverStatus]

Scepsis wrote...
*facepalm*
...and my point is missed entirely.

I can accept that the gamers who chose this option are not bad people. After all, it is just a game. However, I still think that in this case they would prove that the character they play is a bad person.

[Auintus]

Mr.House wrote...

Auintus wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Why do plants, varren ect need to handle technology?

Because they will be subjected to said technology. The technology of galatic civilizations affects the entire galaxy, lesser organics will also need safeguards. 

Subjected is the wrong word. The technology is a part of them, as much as a leg or a nose. You learn how to use those growing up. Anything else would do the same.

When I see a varren use a toaster, I'll call you.

A varren isn't made part-toaster. It would only need to use what technology it possessed.

[Eterna]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...
If you feel that way then don't pick Synthesis. 

I won't but I will protest you using arguements that people don't like the option simply because they don't understand or fear it. It's condesending.

I never said they don't understand it, I said they don't like change. Which if you read this thread, seems to be the most common argument against it. 

[Eterna]

Mr.House wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Synthesis doesn't make much sense from a role-playing perspective. Why would my Shepard choose to "fix" all life in the galaxy if his original long term goal was to save them?

Synthesis saves them and more. It advances everyone in the galaxy to a stage three civilization. 

Everyone was not ready, not even the current cycle was ready.

Says who? You?

[AresKeith]

Eterna5 wrote...

KENNY4753 wrote...

I love reading controllers and synthesizers arguments. they make me lol.

like how synthesis lets everybody use advanced tech safely. Where does synthesis show this. All it shoes are the same slideshow pics but people have green vains or whatever.

That doesnt mean people are perfect and not f up. Nobody is perfect and everybody can never be perfect (not everybody sees everybody the same way and people dont see the same things as right or perfect). That means wars will still break out and people will still make mistakes.

Of course the devs would never show you this as it would ruin their favorite ending

It isn't supposed to remove war and make everlasting peace. IT is supposed to remove the threat of advnced technology. 

And whats to stop them from making even more advanced technology?

And according to the Starbrat that wasn't the problem of the cycles

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I see my large argument against synthesis got ignored.

[Mr.House]

Eterna5 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...
If you feel that way then don't pick Synthesis. 

I won't but I will protest you using arguements that people don't like the option simply because they don't understand or fear it. It's condesending.

I never said they don't understand it, I said they don't like change. Which if you read this thread, seems to be the most common argument against it. 

I picked Davids ending in Deus Ex:HR and I merged with Helios in Deus Ex. Don't tell me I don't like change.

[KENNY4753]

umm where exactly does synthesis say it is just about letting us use advanced tech safely?

I mean Starbrat already contradicted you once so Id love to hear what he has to say