553 réponses à ce sujet

[Asharad Hett]

essarr71 wrote...

Asharad Hett wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

This is one of the issues with Synthesis.  ...  It just needs an explanation that makes sense within the context of Mass Effect. 
{snip}
  Synthesis is just a vague idea. 

Control and Destroy are also just vague ideas.  Can you explain those any better than Synthesis? 

The idea of control being possible has a foundation in the game from Mars on.  Destroy is also established thru dialogue and codex entries regarding the crucible.

Synthesis isn't posed as a possibility or necessity until the final conversation.

What foundation were we given that shooting a tube could destroy all synthetics, or that electrocuting myself could give me control?  

Face it, the endings make zero sense.  You cannot sanely criticize one without criticizing the others.

[KaiserShep]

Asharad Hett wrote...
Control and Destroy are also just vague ideas.  Can you explain those any better than Synthesis?  

All of the endings are vague, but the principles of control and destroy are simpler. In control, Shepard's mind, or at least memories, upload to whatever contains the AI you were just speaking to. The nitty gritty details of the process don't matter at this point , because mass effect fields themselves involve more space magic than what's at work here. Destroy is arguably the simplest. Repurposing the relay network to disperse an energy wave that focuses squarely on the reapers' energy signatures seems like a reasonable enough thing to assume. 

As for the tube thing, and even the control rods, I'm chalking this up to the flaws of trying to make this "artsy" ending gel with gameplay mechanics, but just to be fair, the power conduit tube is not part of the crucible, but rather the citadel. Destroying the power conduit directly destroys the catalyst AI, so you could just jump through whatever hoops of crazy MEU logic you can to go from there. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 23 mai 2013 - 10:02 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

xlegionx wrote...

@MassivelyEffective0730:

Seival doesn't accept the codex as reliable evidence for an argument. Tread carefully

I know that quite well thanks. 

My arguments are meant more to show how full of **** Seival is to people by highlighting how he disregards in game facts and lore if it doesn't suit his beliefs.

In short, it's informative for other people.

[Nole]

I have always seen synthesis as a way to improve the human body through the use of cybernetics and remove physical diseases and, maybe, the psychological ones.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Asharad Hett wrote...

essarr71 wrote...

Asharad Hett wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

This is one of the issues with Synthesis.  ...  It just needs an explanation that makes sense within the context of Mass Effect. 
{snip}
  Synthesis is just a vague idea. 

Control and Destroy are also just vague ideas.  Can you explain those any better than Synthesis? 

The idea of control being possible has a foundation in the game from Mars on.  Destroy is also established thru dialogue and codex entries regarding the crucible.

Synthesis isn't posed as a possibility or necessity until the final conversation.

What foundation were we given that shooting a tube could destroy all synthetics, or that electrocuting myself could give me control?  

Face it, the endings make zero sense.  You cannot sanely criticize one without criticizing the others.

As I said, the concept of Destroy itself (as presented isn't really that far-fetched).

I'll be the first to complain about it's execution though. That's the first time I've ever had to shoot something to activate it.

On a whole though, the concept behind the endings (especially in the OE) does kind of qualify as a Gainax Ending

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 23 mai 2013 - 10:05 .

[sharkboy421]

Asharad Hett wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

This is one of the issues with Synthesis.  ...  It just needs an explanation that makes sense within the context of Mass Effect. 
{snip}
  Synthesis is just a vague idea. 

Control and Destroy are also just vague ideas.  Can you explain those any better than Synthesis? 

Apologies for the late reply I was eating dinner.  I realize my post comes off very anti-synthesis.  I will be clear as I can right now:  All four options suck.  I hate all the endings and couldn't agree more; they are all vague ideas with no real explanation and I take issue with every one.

[Seival]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Seival wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

Seival wrote...
You want explanation of Synthesis with formulas and lab experiment recordings? We will have such explanation when humanity will become advanced enough. But I'm afraid you will not live long enough to see that.

Sci-fi is mostly about ideas and visions of the future. Sci-fi have little explanations, but asks some interesting questions and tries to answer them mostly intuitively. Asking authors for exact explanations of everything is absurd. What exact explanations are you waiting from an attempt to see the future and challenges it prepares for us?

There is a way to make Synthesis inevitable without canonizing any ending:
http://social.biowar.../index/13740862

This is one of the issues with Synthesis.  No it does not have to have a "real" explanation.  It just needs an explanation that makes sense within the context of Mass Effect. 

For instance, Element Zero and the mass effect itself are not real.  But we have an explanation that makes sense for the universe.  Synthesis is just a vague idea.  Something that is this important to the story needs to have an explanation that makes sense in-universe.  Even if it was something as shallow as the thermal clips explanation, there is still an in-universe explanation that fits within the context.

You may disagree with the explanation or feel that it is inappropriate, but as long as it uses means that have been pre-established in-universe, then nearly any explanation would go a long way to making synthesis look like ME as opposed to how some people see it now.

Actually, Element Zero and Mass Effect have no real explanations at all. There are only explanations of what those things do and how people use them. Synthesis is represented in the story absolutely the same way. There is nothing to complain about here.

You're kidding right?

Element Zero and Mass Effect fields are explained within the codex of the games in depth according to the science of the universe. They are referred to numerous times throughout the trilogy with specific capability's and feats (along with explanations that fit the in-game lore).

Element Zero (Atomic Number 0, Chemical Symbol Ez), also known as 'eezo', is a rare material that, when subjected to an electrical current, releases dark energy which can be manipulated into a mass effect field, raising or lowering the mass of all objects within that field. A positive current increases mass, a negative current decreases it. This 'mass effect' is used in countless ways, from generating artificial gravity to manufacturing high-strength construction materials. It is most prominently used to enable faster-than-light space travel without causingtime dilation. When humans discovered the Prothean ruins on Mars, they also discovered refined element zero that the Protheans had left behind. It enabled research into FTL ship drives before the Charon Relay was discovered.Eezo is generated when solid matter, such as a planet, is affected by the energy of a star going supernova. The material is common in the asteroid debris that orbits neutron stars and pulsars. These are dangerous places to mine, requiring extensive use of robotics, telepresence, and shielding to survive the intense radiation from the dead star. Only a few major corporations can afford the set-up costs required to work these primary sources. Some planets have small eezo deposits or coalesced around a larger deposit during their formation. While these secondary sources are safer to mine, the yield from the ore is not as large. There are rumours that the Nemean Abyss has particularly rich eezo deposits.Dust-form element zero is often released after engine accidents. It is used by many species to influence or strengthen the presence of biotics. If a child is exposed to dust-form element zero in utero, due to its mutageniceffects, there is a small chance they can develop eezo nodules throughout their nervous system that react to electrical stimuli from the brain. This allows them to use biotic abilities, but many exposures have no effect, or result in terminal cancer. There is some question about just how 'accidental' some of those initial exposures were, after the link between eezo and biotics was established.Element zero forms the basis of many advanced medicines throughout Citadel space. The biotic drug 'red sand' allegedly has element zero as its base — according to urban legend, it was created by criminal triads on Mars from the eezo samples recovered there. The SSV Normandy's massive Tantalus drive core cost 120 billion creditsbecause of the amount of element zero needed to power the stealth system.

Taken from the ME wiki and codex

Meanwhile, everything about synthesis is told to Shepard in the span of about 40 seconds, in which case it breaks logic and defined biology several times and is presented by a being who is being very enigmatic and not explaining what he wants at all. Add to that EDI's creepy narrative where she simply explains her new life, without actually saying what Synthesis actually is or how it works.

No, I suppose that you are kidding, actually. That is explanation of what Element Zero does, and what properties it has. There are only "observations of its properties" plus some history in that text. There is no explanation of how it works and why it works like that.

Synthesis is represented in the story absolutely the same way, but not in codex. It's just a perfectly made epilogue scene.

[IntelligentME3Fanboy]

mass effect expert Seival will explain synthesis.

[essarr71]

Asharad Hett wrote...

What foundation were we given that shooting a tube could destroy all synthetics, or that electrocuting myself could give me control?  

Face it, the endings make zero sense.  You cannot sanely criticize one without criticizing the others.

You're missing my point.  I agree that the nature of all the endings is a mess.  The crucible is a nonsensical mystery.  However, narratively, two endings have a foundation to stand on.  Hackett is sure the crucible has the potential to release and insane amount of energy.  Codex entries hint at how it can focus it.  Control, a trickier idea, has tons of build up, until it's own climax with sanctuary - where we learn its possible, even without the crucible. 

Synthesis has no foundation in the narrative.  There is no point where someone mentions the crucible is capable of it.  No codex entry of some scientist who is trying to achieve it.  We have a single story, from a DLC character, who says that a race did it (sort of), and it made them insane and vulnerable to the reapers.  Then, in the last 5 minutes, it's the ultimate solution to the galaxy's biggest problem no one knew about.

[sharkboy421]

Seival wrote...

Actually, Element Zero and Mass Effect have no real explanations at all. There are only explanations of what those things do and how people use them. Synthesis is represented in the story absolutely the same way. There is nothing to complain about here.

Well I was going to respond but Massive covered it quite nicely in his post for me.

I know Eezo and the Mass Effect aren't real.  That is ok; ME is a sci-fi game.  The tech in it is going to be fictional.  Just like Warp speed in Star Trek, it isn't real and most likely never will be.  But that is ok because the universe of ME and Star Trek have established their own rules which permit Eezo and warp speed and have explained how. 

I suppose I should have been clearer.  A technology, event, etc. that is vital to the story does not have to have an explanation that makes sense in real life or the real world.  Rather it should have an explanation that makes sense within the context of its own world. 

Again, Eezo makes sense in the Mass Effect world.  It most definitely does not make sense in the real world.  But Mass Effect established Eezo and its properties right from the start and made it an integral part of its world.  So while there is no real life explanation for it, the explanation for it within the context of the story is perfectly valid.

[KaiserShep]

Seival wrote...
No, I suppose that you are kidding, actually. That is explanation of what Element Zero does, and what properties it has. There are only "observations of its properties" plus some history in that text. There is no explanation of how it works and why it works like that.

For the love of Garrus. A fictional element can never have information as deep as what you're describing, because this requires actually delving into the raw details about its chemistry and physics, and completely making stuff up. Heck even real materials on earth are not entirely within our grasp of understanding. This would completely break the believability of eezo in the MEU, because in order for technomagic to benefit from suspension of disbelief, certain details must remain a mystery. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 23 mai 2013 - 10:19 .

[sharkboy421]

Seival wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...


Element Zero (Atomic Number 0, Chemical Symbol Ez), also known as 'eezo', is a rare material that, when subjected to an electrical current, releases dark energy which can be manipulated into a mass effect field, raising or lowering the mass of all objects within that field. A positive current increases mass, a negative current decreases it. This 'mass effect' is used in countless ways, from generating artificial gravity to manufacturing high-strength construction materials.

No, I suppose that you are kidding, actually. That is explanation of what Element Zero does, and what properties it has. There are only "observations of its properties" plus some history in that text. There is no explanation of how it works and why it works like that.

TL;DR of how Eezo and the mass effect works:
1. Electric current across eezo creates a mass effect field.
2. Positive current will cause the field to increase mass.
3. Negative current cause the field to decrease mass.

[xlegionx]

sharkboy421 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Actually, Element Zero and Mass Effect have no real explanations at all. There are only explanations of what those things do and how people use them. Synthesis is represented in the story absolutely the same way. There is nothing to complain about here.

Well I was going to respond but Massive covered it quite nicely in his post for me.

I know Eezo and the Mass Effect aren't real.  That is ok; ME is a sci-fi game.  The tech in it is going to be fictional.  Just like Warp speed in Star Trek, it isn't real and most likely never will be.  But that is ok because the universe of ME and Star Trek have established their own rules which permit Eezo and warp speed and have explained how. 

I suppose I should have been clearer.  A technology, event, etc. that is vital to the story does not have to have an explanation that makes sense in real life or the real world.  Rather it should have an explanation that makes sense within the context of its own world. 

Again, Eezo makes sense in the Mass Effect world.  It most definitely does not make sense in the real world.  But Mass Effect established Eezo and its properties right from the start and made it an integral part of its world.  So while there is no real life explanation for it, the explanation for it within the context of the story is perfectly valid.

On the subject of Warp drives, don't be so sure they'll never happen: www.youtube.com/watch

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Seival wrote...

No, I suppose that you are kidding, actually. That is explanation of what Element Zero does, and what properties it has. There are only "observations of its properties" plus some history in that text. There is no explanation of how it works and why it works like that.

Synthesis is represented in the story absolutely the same way, but not in codex. It's just a perfectly made epilogue scene.

I explained exactly what synthesis does and how it works. You're changing what you're saying and how to interpret words now to suit your own needs. 

You've changed your statement from what and is, to why it is and how it does something, and you're only going to continue changing your stance to make synthesis look credible.

Observations of its properties and the history do an even clearer job of what Eezo does. We know how it's created, we know how it works, and we know what it does.

What you're asking for now is something that really can't be provided. Why does hydrogen work the way it does? Why does hydrogen have only one proton? Why does Oxygen refract light and give the sky a blue appearance?

You're changing your argument to one that is similar to the God of the gaps argument and changing it for synthesis. And you keep changing the nature of your explanations to be deliberately unfalsifiable.

You making statements that cannot be disproved and using that as objective credibility for your postulations. You are the one making ridiculous and far-fetched assertions and statements and putting the burden of proof on your disbelievers and skeptics.

You're saying that you have all the answers and using your idea and opinions as objective fact. 

You're a joke Seival. A lame joke that wasn't funny a year ago, and you're certainly not funny now.

You give a lot of your fellow synthesis fans a bad name.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 23 mai 2013 - 10:21 .

[Seival]

KaiserShep wrote...

Seival wrote...
No, I suppose that you are kidding, actually. That is explanation of what Element Zero does, and what properties it has. There are only "observations of its properties" plus some history in that text. There is no explanation of how it works and why it works like that.

For the love of Garrus. A fictional element can never have information as deep as what you're describing, because this requires actually delving into the raw details about its chemistry and physics, and completely making stuff up. This would completely break the believability of eezo in the MEU, because in order for technomagic to benefit from suspension of disbelief, certain details must remain a mystery. 

And finally you understood why we don't have detailed scientific description of Synthesis.

..."certain details must remain a mystery" - yes, that's true. And Synthesis already has enough explanations, you just need to watch epilogue and ask Synthesis fans if you didn't understand something.

[The Night Mammoth]

I don't care so much about the how, but I do care about the what.

What does Synthesis actually do? There's zero explanation. Even if there's no technobabble, I'd want some basis for its effects and consequences. I don't have the inclination to do that myself, so this remains a barrier to choosing it.

Also, how about a little explanation for the visual elements? That's actually important. It's all well and good believing there's no need for any explanation at all, but it's stupid to show things like a massive green wave giving everyone glowing circuits on their skin and eyes, but not saying what means.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 23 mai 2013 - 10:30 .

[KaiserShep]

Seival wrote...

And finally you understood why we don't have detailed scientific description of Synthesis. 

..."certain details must remain a mystery" - yes, that's true. And Synthesis already has enough explanations, you just need to watch epilogue and ask Synthesis fans if you didn't understand something.

You don't understand. All of MEU's tech and fictional elements are based on scifi jargon to plant them in their reality. In contrast, synthesis gets no such thing. There's no superficial information on how it works. There's no rhyme or reason that grounds it like everything else in the story. For control, the idea of melding one's organic mind with synthetic was already established well before this, and focusing energy to kill the reapers through the mass relays is about as simple as it gets. But why doesn't synthesis at least have an inkling of data? Nanites? Spontaneous formation of synthetic material out of organic compounds?

[Seival]

sharkboy421 wrote...

Seival wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...


Element Zero (Atomic Number 0, Chemical Symbol Ez), also known as 'eezo', is a rare material that, when subjected to an electrical current, releases dark energy which can be manipulated into a mass effect field, raising or lowering the mass of all objects within that field. A positive current increases mass, a negative current decreases it. This 'mass effect' is used in countless ways, from generating artificial gravity to manufacturing high-strength construction materials.

No, I suppose that you are kidding, actually. That is explanation of what Element Zero does, and what properties it has. There are only "observations of its properties" plus some history in that text. There is no explanation of how it works and why it works like that.

TL;DR of how Eezo and the mass effect works:
1. Electric current across eezo creates a mass effect field.
2. Positive current will cause the field to increase mass.
3. Negative current cause the field to decrease mass.

Which is just an observation of properties.

Like I said, Synthesis is represented absolutely the same way:
(1) Organics became fully integrated with synthetic technologies, which means they need no synthetic implants anymore. In addition, that doesn't mean organics became half-synthetics or just synthetics. Instead that means organic "hardware" became advanced enough to have some of powerful properties of synthetic hardware. Organics remained organics, but become evolved. We see no synthetic materials crawling inside organic beings in Synthesis ending.
(2) Synthetics gained full understanding of organics' way of thinking and emotions, i.e. stop being completely alien to organics.
(3) Reaper ships, husks, and VIs became self-aware.

...Observation of new organics' and synthetics' properties, introduced by the beautiful epilogue scene instead of just text.

Modifié par Seival, 23 mai 2013 - 10:32 .

[KaiserShep]

We see no synthetic materials crawling inside organic beings in Synthesis ending.

The glowing eyes and circuit board skin disproves this claim.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

(1) Organics became fully integrated with synthetic technologies, which means they need no synthetic implants anymore. In addition, that doesn't mean organics became half-synthetics or just synthetics. Instead that means organic "hardware" became advanced enough to have some of powerful properties of synthetic hardware. Organics remained organics, but become evolved. We see no synthetic materials crawling inside organic beings in Synthesis ending.

Nothing in that paragraph has any substance whatsoever. It's all vapid conjecture, waffle, 

(2) Synthetics gained full understanding of organics' way of thinking and emotions, i.e. stop being completely alien to organics.

Those things were possible without Synthesis, and indeed, were on there way to being realised before the Crucible was even finished, so why would anyone need Synthesis for these reasons?

(3) Reaper ships, husks, and VIs became self-aware.

Those are things I do not want.

...Observation of new organics' and synthetics' properties, introduced by the beautiful epilogue scene instead of just text.

Speculation, not observation.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 23 mai 2013 - 10:40 .

[Seival]

KaiserShep wrote...

We see no synthetic materials crawling inside organic beings in Synthesis ending.

The glowing eyes and circuit board skin disproves this claim.

Those glowing green eyes and skin look quite organic. "Zooming into the improved organic material" also doesn't show anything synthetic inside organics.

You don't like the glow and its texture? They are not material you know? Those are just lighting, not some actual organs or implants. A lighting effects, just like when someone uses a biotic ability (but with different VFX). Do you think biotics are abominations? No? Then why that double standard about synthesized people?

Modifié par Seival, 23 mai 2013 - 10:41 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

Those glowing green eyes and skin look quite organic. "Zooming into the improved organic material" also doesn't show anything synthetic inside organics.

You don't like the glow and its texture? They are not material you know? Those are just lighting, and not some actual organs or implants. A lighting effects, just like when someone uses a biotic ability (but with different VFX). Do you think biotics are abominations? No? Then why that double standard about synthesized people?

The light has to come from somewhere. It's looks like circuitry, and their eyes glow, like Shepard's or the Illusive Man's synthetic eyes did. 

Perfectly reasonable to speculate that people now have synthetic compontents of some descrpition in their bodies or their bodies have been altered in some way. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 23 mai 2013 - 10:45 .

[KaiserShep]

If leaps of logic were athletic ability, you'd be a god among man.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 23 mai 2013 - 10:43 .

[AresKeith]

KaiserShep wrote...

If leaps of logic were athletic ability, you'd be a god among man.

Seival? Logic?