553 réponses à ce sujet

[AresKeith]

Double post

Modifié par AresKeith, 23 mai 2013 - 10:46 .

[Redbelle]

KaiserShep wrote...

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?

It's interesting that much of science that has gone on for generation's, is now asking, not what..... but why?

E.g. the question is not, what is mass. After years of bathroom scales. Counting proton's in a nucleus and coming up with a periodic table of element's and discovering that Earth's pull loosen's it's grip the higher up you go. We are now asking the question. Why do these thing's happen. What is the underlying universal mechanic that govern's the phenomanon we take for granted to date. And how does it work?

So I pulled an article on mass. There's alot there but I yanked this section out to whet the appetite of any who are interested.

Link
What Is Mass?

Isaac Newton presented the earliest scientific
definition of mass in 1687 in his landmark Principia: "The quantity of
matter is the measure of the same, arising from its density and bulk
conjointly." That very basic definition was good enough for Newton and
other scientists for more than 200 years. They understood that science
should proceed first by describing how things work and later by
understanding why. In recent years, however, the why of mass has become a
research topic in physics. Understanding the meaning and origins of
mass will complete and extend the Standard Model of particle physics,
the well-established theory that describes the known elementary
particles and their interactions. It will also resolve mysteries such as
dark matter, which makes up about 25 percent of the universe.



It then goes on into talking about the Higg's Bosun...... yes! That crazy little Particle Accelerator Prototype Canon <cough> science experiment really does have alot to do with the why of mass. And by understanding Higg's, might help explain how Mass Effect is possible if you can reach in with a clearer picture of how the universe makes us weigh something.

[sharkboy421]

Seival wrote...


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.

Huh? I don't understand what you mean.  The codex explicitly tells what eezo is and how mass effect fields are created.  This is one of the things the game has to tells us in establishing the Mass Effect universe.  We see the results of eezo all around us sure, but we never actually see the exact process that happens in a mass effect core.

But this is ok because we are told exactly how it works as part of the establishment of the universe.  Anytime a new fictional universe is created with "new" technologies already present we have to be told how they work.  The level of detail is up to the creators and this does set the tone for the rest of story. 

Mass Effect tells us exactly how this process works and shows us the results constantly.  There is no observation period where we learned this from the game; the game flat out tells in the codex immediately. 

Yes we see the results of the synthesis, but how we got there is extremely vague and murky and this is where my point of contention is.

[Phatose]

Well,for the Mass Effect itself, it's explanation leaves out a bunch of important details, and has some real nonsense to it. Positive current?

[Asharad Hett]

essarr71 wrote...

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.

I'll grant you that Synthesis is introduced suddenly without foreshadowing.  That is bad storytelling.   If they had foreshadowed it, would you feel any different?

[Seival]

Asharad Hett wrote...

essarr71 wrote...

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.

I'll grant you that Synthesis is introduced suddenly without foreshadowing.  That is bad storytelling.   If they had foreshadowed it, would you feel any different?

There is nothing bad about introducing without foreshadowing. Good surprizes in a story are always welcome. ME Trilogy storytelling is great (especially in ME3 and its ending).

[Seival]

sharkboy421 wrote...

Huh? I don't understand what you mean.

Try to understand then. That is all I can suggest here. You know where to find my previous replies.

[Asharad Hett]

Seival wrote...

Asharad Hett wrote...

essarr71 wrote...

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.

I'll grant you that Synthesis is introduced suddenly without foreshadowing.  That is bad storytelling.   If they had foreshadowed it, would you feel any different?

There is nothing bad about introducing without foreshadowing. Good surprizes in a story are always welcome. ME Trilogy storytelling is great (especially in ME3 and its ending).

Don't rebuke me.  I'm on your side for a change.

[sharkboy421]

Seival wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

Huh? I don't understand what you mean.

Try to understand then. That is all I can suggest here. You know where to find my previous replies.

Can you respond to the rest of my post? I explained why I felt your assertion of "an oberservation of properties" was incorrect.

[Wayning_Star]

actually the choices were foreshadowed, but that was only realized just after making audience with the catalyst.

Everyone might be better off to think of it all as 'conceptual' as that might effect the MEU via the power of the crucible/citadel/catalyst/Shepard connection. Synthesis is, as any other choices made, are acted upon with the energy to make 'thought' as solid as any, yet nondescript tool.


The ending was a multi curve ball, but not really all that remarkable, in the sense of being "one way" then "another". Unknown if the writers intended for the speculation to reach critical mass effect?

[essarr71]

Asharad Hett wrote...

essarr71 wrote...

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.

I'll grant you that Synthesis is introduced suddenly without foreshadowing.  That is bad storytelling.   If they had foreshadowed it, would you feel any different?

Absolutely.  And depending on how they foreshadowed it, it could have been a lot more popular. 

Imagine just a single event were someone makes a breakthru.. says that by integrating some Reaper goo from Sovy into a broken piece of geth there was a staggering change in how it operates.  Imagine if, instead of a code, Legion wanted to use the actual civ inside of that destroyer to turn the geth alive..  or if, while at Grisson, David Archer is revealed to have an amazing connection to VIs from his time from Project: Overlord.. capable of activating or using their databases without any contact with them.  ANYTHING that shows synthesis has tons of exciting potential from a source outside of the villian and outside the ending would have been better.  We don't get that.  And I thought of this stuff while writing this post.

[Redbelle]

I would be happy with Synth if I knew the following happened. (Mainly to get BW to make a sequel after the event's of ME3..... hey, I'm an optimist!)

1. Synthesis was not permanent. I do not appreciate how the Catalyst, through Shepard, dictates that to be a pinnacle of life and evolution you have to be something the Starbrat thinks of as the final stage of evolution. This goes against all known observation's of how evolution works...... it's like watching an episode of Star Trek where a crewman say's. I've evolved beyond needing to kill you Captain. (He's actually just changed his mind after thinking about it a little. If thinking were evolving we'd all be apex species by now).

2. The consequence's of synthesis live on in some form. I think the idea of Synthesis wearing off can be explained by the new DNA being slowly outcompeted by the species old DNA that was not completely overwritten. Synth's meanwhile would fall apart and need to build non synthesised bodies. (Bringing into question, are all metal alloy's synthed? Or just the ones with a CPU attached)

However, to bring a new sub species into the ME universe for every race. The babies produced will be have stable synth DNA. Which by implication, mean's the Krogan have to the most synth'd offspring in the galaxy! Time to plumb in cold water for all those showers then.

While the physical effect's of synth wear off, synthetic's and organics maintain the knowledge and understanding that they gained. But are now free of any kind of mind control that may have enforced that outlook. E.g. Edi is a learning machine and, though she loses her synthed form, does not lose the knowledge she gained from that experience. Also, the husk who apparently decided not to kill that soldier in the ECDLC ending's when he was synthed, get's sit down and decide what to do with (his?) life now he looks like road kill with no genital's.

3. The Reapers get mopy about being huge death gods and start trying to commit sucide by flying into suns. Only to be switched off by the less mopy ones and stored back in darkspace till they can fix them up. For some reason I keep seeing this in my mind as a ball of deactived Reapers, packed together to form 'The Reaper Sphere' A small world made entirely of dormant Reaper's piled together.

Ok, maybe not all of that would be neccessary to accept synth.... but a damn good chuck of it.


But ultimately, the main problem I have with Synth is that the Reapers get a free pass for all that death and destruction they inflicted on Sheps cycle, Javiks' cycle, and every other cycle that they were present in. The attempt to destroy civilisation's cannot be condoned and ultimately, the Reapers and Catalyst must be held to account with some form of either punishment, or reparation that does not allow the Reapers to beneift from melting people into goo and pouring them into war machines. Those civilisation's that only exist within Reapers will never be expressed in any way again. Their genetic material exists in a cage that kills while claiming that being goo inside them is 'better' for everyone.

No. Just.......no.

Modifié par Redbelle, 23 mai 2013 - 11:17 .

[Wayning_Star]

essarr71 wrote...

Asharad Hett wrote...

essarr71 wrote...

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.

I'll grant you that Synthesis is introduced suddenly without foreshadowing.  That is bad storytelling.   If they had foreshadowed it, would you feel any different?

Absolutely.  And depending on how they foreshadowed it, it could have been a lot more popular. 

Imagine just a single event were someone makes a breakthru.. says that by integrating some Reaper goo from Sovy into a broken piece of geth there was a staggering change in how it operates.  Imagine if, instead of a code, Legion wanted to use the actual civ inside of that destroyer to turn the geth alive..  or if, while at Grisson, David Archer is revealed to have an amazing connection to VIs from his time from Project: Overlord.. capable of activating or using their databases without any contact with them.  ANYTHING that shows synthesis has tons of exciting potential from a source outside of the villian and outside the ending would have been better.  We don't get that.  And I thought of this stuff while writing this post.

I assumed that to be reaper code and/or the innate ability of all things Leviathan tech, to be capable of life giving properties. I've always wondered why it took so long for Edi to actually become 'alive'... Humans didn't do it, reaper technology did it. Even the alien computer people seek audience with the council to discuss reaper upgrades?

[Seival]

sharkboy421 wrote...

Seival wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

Huh? I don't understand what you mean.

Try to understand then. That is all I can suggest here. You know where to find my previous replies.

Can you respond to the rest of my post? I explained why I felt your assertion of "an oberservation of properties" was incorrect.

I don't like to repeat myself.

I already told that Mass Effect and Element Zero have only descriptions of observations of their properties. There is no detailed scientific data on the matter. If there was, we would already live in an age of easy space travel.

For ME3 Synthesis has enough details. They just introduced it via epilogue scene, not a codex entry.

Modifié par Seival, 23 mai 2013 - 11:20 .

[Wayning_Star]

Redbelle wrote...

I would be happy with Synth if I knew the following happened. (Mainly to get BW to make a sequel after the event's of ME3..... hey, I'm an optimist!)

1. Synthesis was not permanent. I do not appreciate how the Catalyst, through Shepard, dictates that to be a pinnacle of life and evolution you have to be something the Starbrat thinks of as the final stage of evolution. This goes against all known observation's of how evolution works...... it's like watching an episode of Star Trek where a crewman say's. I've evolved beyond needing to kill you Captain. (He's actually just changed his mind after thinking about it a little. If thinking were evolving we'd all be apex species by now).

2. The consequence's of synthesis live on in some form. I think the idea of Synthesis wearing off can be explained by the new DNA being slowly outcompeted by the species old DNA that was not completely overwritten. Synth's meanwhile would fall apart and need to build non synthesised bodies. (Bringing into question, are all metal alloy's synthed? Or just the ones with a CPU attached)

However, to bring a new sub species into the ME universe for every race. The babies produced will be have stable synth DNA. Which by implication, mean's the Krogan have to the most synth'd offspring in the galaxy! Time to plumb in cold water for all those showers then.

While the physical effect's of synth wear off, synthetic's and organics maintain the knowledge and understanding that they gained. But are now free of any kind of mind control that may have enforced that outlook. E.g. Edi is a learning machine and, though she loses her synthed form, does not lose the knowledge she gained from that experience. Also, the husk who apparently decided not to kill that soldier in the ECDLC ending's when he was synthed, get's sit down and decide what to do with (his?) life now he looks like road kill with no genital's.

3. The Reapers get mopy about being huge death gods and start trying to commit sucide by flying into suns. Only to be switched off by the less mopy ones and stored back in darkspace till they can fix them up. For some reason I keep seeing this in my mind as a ball of deactived Reapers, packed together to form 'The Reaper Sphere' A small world made entirely of dormant Reaper's piled together.

Ok, maybe not all of that would be neccessary to accept synth.... but a damn good chuck of it.

generally speaking, it's a no brainer to see that anyone in the MEU is totally dependent upon advanced tech to survive or thrive in deep space. The catalyst was invented as the 'intelligence' by it's creators as a tool to over come "what"? Organic beings dependent upon machines that can ultimately destroy them. This is why destroy won't work.

Synthesis is an internal change, to the bases levels of evolution. Sticks and stones can break the bones, but synthesis never hurt anyone. 

[Redbelle]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

I would be happy with Synth if I knew the following happened. (Mainly to get BW to make a sequel after the event's of ME3..... hey, I'm an optimist!)

1. Synthesis was not permanent. I do not appreciate how the Catalyst, through Shepard, dictates that to be a pinnacle of life and evolution you have to be something the Starbrat thinks of as the final stage of evolution. This goes against all known observation's of how evolution works...... it's like watching an episode of Star Trek where a crewman say's. I've evolved beyond needing to kill you Captain. (He's actually just changed his mind after thinking about it a little. If thinking were evolving we'd all be apex species by now).

2. The consequence's of synthesis live on in some form. I think the idea of Synthesis wearing off can be explained by the new DNA being slowly outcompeted by the species old DNA that was not completely overwritten. Synth's meanwhile would fall apart and need to build non synthesised bodies. (Bringing into question, are all metal alloy's synthed? Or just the ones with a CPU attached)

However, to bring a new sub species into the ME universe for every race. The babies produced will be have stable synth DNA. Which by implication, mean's the Krogan have to the most synth'd offspring in the galaxy! Time to plumb in cold water for all those showers then.

While the physical effect's of synth wear off, synthetic's and organics maintain the knowledge and understanding that they gained. But are now free of any kind of mind control that may have enforced that outlook. E.g. Edi is a learning machine and, though she loses her synthed form, does not lose the knowledge she gained from that experience. Also, the husk who apparently decided not to kill that soldier in the ECDLC ending's when he was synthed, get's sit down and decide what to do with (his?) life now he looks like road kill with no genital's.

3. The Reapers get mopy about being huge death gods and start trying to commit sucide by flying into suns. Only to be switched off by the less mopy ones and stored back in darkspace till they can fix them up. For some reason I keep seeing this in my mind as a ball of deactived Reapers, packed together to form 'The Reaper Sphere' A small world made entirely of dormant Reaper's piled together.

Ok, maybe not all of that would be neccessary to accept synth.... but a damn good chuck of it.

generally speaking, it's a no brainer to see that anyone in the MEU is totally dependent upon advanced tech to survive or thrive in deep space. The catalyst was invented as the 'intelligence' by it's creators as a tool to over come "what"? Organic beings dependent upon machines that can ultimately destroy them. This is why destroy won't work.

Synthesis is an internal change, to the bases levels of evolution. Sticks and stones can break the bones, but synthesis never hurt anyone. 

If a person was offered the choice of being synthesised and they said no........ and then that person was synthesised anyway.............. That is a violation of the body and mind.

The same is true, even if the person did not know that synthesis was coming and they then looked at themselves and said they didn't want this. It's still a violation of the body by a second party who dismissed the will of the first party, all so that the second party could fufil their need/desire at the expense of the dignity of the first party.

That is a hurt that strikes right at the core of anyone who has to suffer that indignity.

It would be fine if people could choose for themselves, that their yes or no's were heeded and acted upon. But synthesis is indiscrimanate in who it targets. Therefore, synth will hurt some people in that galaxy who were happy with the people they were before synth was forced upon them.

In my playthrough I was given all the choices. But that does not mean I ever forgot that, fundamentally, people also have to choose for themselves.

Modifié par Redbelle, 23 mai 2013 - 11:27 .

[Wayning_Star]

Redbelle wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

I would be happy with Synth if I knew the following happened. (Mainly to get BW to make a sequel after the event's of ME3..... hey, I'm an optimist!)

1. Synthesis was not permanent. I do not appreciate how the Catalyst, through Shepard, dictates that to be a pinnacle of life and evolution you have to be something the Starbrat thinks of as the final stage of evolution. This goes against all known observation's of how evolution works...... it's like watching an episode of Star Trek where a crewman say's. I've evolved beyond needing to kill you Captain. (He's actually just changed his mind after thinking about it a little. If thinking were evolving we'd all be apex species by now).

2. The consequence's of synthesis live on in some form. I think the idea of Synthesis wearing off can be explained by the new DNA being slowly outcompeted by the species old DNA that was not completely overwritten. Synth's meanwhile would fall apart and need to build non synthesised bodies. (Bringing into question, are all metal alloy's synthed? Or just the ones with a CPU attached)

However, to bring a new sub species into the ME universe for every race. The babies produced will be have stable synth DNA. Which by implication, mean's the Krogan have to the most synth'd offspring in the galaxy! Time to plumb in cold water for all those showers then.

While the physical effect's of synth wear off, synthetic's and organics maintain the knowledge and understanding that they gained. But are now free of any kind of mind control that may have enforced that outlook. E.g. Edi is a learning machine and, though she loses her synthed form, does not lose the knowledge she gained from that experience. Also, the husk who apparently decided not to kill that soldier in the ECDLC ending's when he was synthed, get's sit down and decide what to do with (his?) life now he looks like road kill with no genital's.

3. The Reapers get mopy about being huge death gods and start trying to commit sucide by flying into suns. Only to be switched off by the less mopy ones and stored back in darkspace till they can fix them up. For some reason I keep seeing this in my mind as a ball of deactived Reapers, packed together to form 'The Reaper Sphere' A small world made entirely of dormant Reaper's piled together.

Ok, maybe not all of that would be neccessary to accept synth.... but a damn good chuck of it.

generally speaking, it's a no brainer to see that anyone in the MEU is totally dependent upon advanced tech to survive or thrive in deep space. The catalyst was invented as the 'intelligence' by it's creators as a tool to over come "what"? Organic beings dependent upon machines that can ultimately destroy them. This is why destroy won't work.

Synthesis is an internal change, to the bases levels of evolution. Sticks and stones can break the bones, but synthesis never hurt anyone. 

If a person was offered the choice of being synthesised and they said no........ and then that person was synthesised anyway.............. That is a violation of the body and mind.

The same is true, even if the person did not know that synthesis was coming and they then looked at themselves and said they didn't want this. It's still a violation of the body by a second party who dismissed the will of the first party, all so that the second party could fufil their need/desire at the expense of the dignity of the first party.

That is a hurt that strikes right at the core of anyone who has to suffer that indignity.

the only real way out of that is don't evolve and especially being totally dependent upon technology to do it.


When galaxies are created, does the stars worry about who might be insulted when their hapless planets become star dust?

[Phatose]

But we happily actually accept such indignities all the time as a simple part of being part of a society.

I, like many of us no doubt, grew up next to a major highway. Which meant at lot of cars, and thus a lot of car exhaust, which inevitably ended up in my body when I breathed it in. It's a violation of my body and mind - yet if I were to say that everybody needs to give up their cars so that I don't have to breathe that, I'd be called crazy.

Water is flouridated and chlorinated, air is polluted. We're violated in exactly that fashion on a daily basis. The guy next to you has a cold but goes into work anyway. Crimey, the guy sitting next to you farts and he's violated your body. Happens all the time.

[sharkboy421]

Seival wrote...

I don't like to repeat myself.

I already told that Mass Effect and Element Zero have only descriptions of observations of their properties. There is no detailed scientific data on the matter. If there was, we would already live in an age of easy space travel.

For ME3 Synthesis has enough details. They just introduced via epilogue scene, not a codex entry.

That is a misunderstanding of the point I was attempting to make.  My apologies I must not have been clear enough.  I shall try again.

When I am asking for an explanation of synthesis, I am not asking for it to make sense in the "real" world that is Earth as it is exists right now, in the year 2013.  I am asking for an explanation that fits within the Mass Effect world of 2186 that exists only within the three video games and a few books and comics.

The example of such an explanation I have used is element zero and the mass effect.  We are explicitly told from the very beginining of the first game what they are and how they work.  Bioware establishes that within the Mass Effect world, element zero is a real thing and works in the way the codex explains. 

We know that eezo is not a real thing in our world, but the Mass Effect world is fictional and that eezo exists there.  It is then given an explanation of how it works that is relatively simple.  It does not work in our world true, but in the Mass Effect world it does.

Synthesis is as important to the Mass Effect world as eezo is, perhaps even more so.  However it is not given an explanation like eezo is.  We are told what the results are but the how is left very frustratingly vague.  The game never gives anywhere near the level of detail on the "how" of synthesis as it does on the "how" of eezo/mass effect fields. 

Yes, eezo does not follow the scientific rules of the real world.  It does however, follow the fictional scientific rules of the fictional Mass Effect world and we told exactly how it does so.  Synthesis may or may not follow these same rules.  I do not know if it does because we are never told how it happens.

[Redbelle]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

I would be happy with Synth if I knew the following happened. (Mainly to get BW to make a sequel after the event's of ME3..... hey, I'm an optimist!)

1. Synthesis was not permanent. I do not appreciate how the Catalyst, through Shepard, dictates that to be a pinnacle of life and evolution you have to be something the Starbrat thinks of as the final stage of evolution. This goes against all known observation's of how evolution works...... it's like watching an episode of Star Trek where a crewman say's. I've evolved beyond needing to kill you Captain. (He's actually just changed his mind after thinking about it a little. If thinking were evolving we'd all be apex species by now).

2. The consequence's of synthesis live on in some form. I think the idea of Synthesis wearing off can be explained by the new DNA being slowly outcompeted by the species old DNA that was not completely overwritten. Synth's meanwhile would fall apart and need to build non synthesised bodies. (Bringing into question, are all metal alloy's synthed? Or just the ones with a CPU attached)

However, to bring a new sub species into the ME universe for every race. The babies produced will be have stable synth DNA. Which by implication, mean's the Krogan have to the most synth'd offspring in the galaxy! Time to plumb in cold water for all those showers then.

While the physical effect's of synth wear off, synthetic's and organics maintain the knowledge and understanding that they gained. But are now free of any kind of mind control that may have enforced that outlook. E.g. Edi is a learning machine and, though she loses her synthed form, does not lose the knowledge she gained from that experience. Also, the husk who apparently decided not to kill that soldier in the ECDLC ending's when he was synthed, get's sit down and decide what to do with (his?) life now he looks like road kill with no genital's.

3. The Reapers get mopy about being huge death gods and start trying to commit sucide by flying into suns. Only to be switched off by the less mopy ones and stored back in darkspace till they can fix them up. For some reason I keep seeing this in my mind as a ball of deactived Reapers, packed together to form 'The Reaper Sphere' A small world made entirely of dormant Reaper's piled together.

Ok, maybe not all of that would be neccessary to accept synth.... but a damn good chuck of it.

generally speaking, it's a no brainer to see that anyone in the MEU is totally dependent upon advanced tech to survive or thrive in deep space. The catalyst was invented as the 'intelligence' by it's creators as a tool to over come "what"? Organic beings dependent upon machines that can ultimately destroy them. This is why destroy won't work.

Synthesis is an internal change, to the bases levels of evolution. Sticks and stones can break the bones, but synthesis never hurt anyone. 

If a person was offered the choice of being synthesised and they said no........ and then that person was synthesised anyway.............. That is a violation of the body and mind.

The same is true, even if the person did not know that synthesis was coming and they then looked at themselves and said they didn't want this. It's still a violation of the body by a second party who dismissed the will of the first party, all so that the second party could fufil their need/desire at the expense of the dignity of the first party.

That is a hurt that strikes right at the core of anyone who has to suffer that indignity.

the only real way out of that is don't evolve and especially being totally dependent upon technology to do it.


When galaxies are created, does the stars worry about who might be insulted when their hapless planets become star dust?

No it doesn't. Because the panet is an inert ball of rock.......

It has no mind, body or soul. Does not mark memorable event's like birthdays with parties. Does not weep when love one's perish. A planet spins in place and circles a star as gravity defines it's orbit whereas, though trapped on it's outer surface, we have the potential to roam freely over it and even escape the planet's clutches only to look further out and wonder what is out there.... and how to get there. A planet does not dream, or pick the wrong size shoes and have to suffer walking in them. A planet can not kiss or kick a football.

A planet can provide a life sustaining environment on it's surface if certain condition's are met........  I'm sure a planet can do more.... but at this point I think we've hit the ball out the park that a non living planet and a living human being are two completely different thing's and must be respected in different ways.

[Wayning_Star]

sharkboy421 wrote...

Seival wrote...

I don't like to repeat myself.

I already told that Mass Effect and Element Zero have only descriptions of observations of their properties. There is no detailed scientific data on the matter. If there was, we would already live in an age of easy space travel.

For ME3 Synthesis has enough details. They just introduced via epilogue scene, not a codex entry.

That is a misunderstanding of the point I was attempting to make.  My apologies I must not have been clear enough.  I shall try again.

When I am asking for an explanation of synthesis, I am not asking for it to make sense in the "real" world that is Earth as it is exists right now, in the year 2013.  I am asking for an explanation that fits within the Mass Effect world of 2186 that exists only within the three video games and a few books and comics.

The example of such an explanation I have used is element zero and the mass effect.  We are explicitly told from the very beginining of the first game what they are and how they work.  Bioware establishes that within the Mass Effect world, element zero is a real thing and works in the way the codex explains. 

We know that eezo is not a real thing in our world, but the Mass Effect world is fictional and that eezo exists there.  It is then given an explanation of how it works that is relatively simple.  It does not work in our world true, but in the Mass Effect world it does.

Synthesis is as important to the Mass Effect world as eezo is, perhaps even more so.  However it is not given an explanation like eezo is.  We are told what the results are but the how is left very frustratingly vague.  The game never gives anywhere near the level of detail on the "how" of synthesis as it does on the "how" of eezo/mass effect fields. 

Yes, eezo does not follow the scientific rules of the real world.  It does however, follow the fictional scientific rules of the fictional Mass Effect world and we told exactly how it does so.  Synthesis may or may not follow these same rules.  I do not know if it does because we are never told how it happens.

alien science primers are not available online at this time. Check back in a few years for possible updates. Thank You.

[Redbelle]

Phatose wrote...

But we happily actually accept such indignities all the time as a simple part of being part of a society.

I, like many of us no doubt, grew up next to a major highway. Which meant at lot of cars, and thus a lot of car exhaust, which inevitably ended up in my body when I breathed it in. It's a violation of my body and mind - yet if I were to say that everybody needs to give up their cars so that I don't have to breathe that, I'd be called crazy.

Water is flouridated and chlorinated, air is polluted. We're violated in exactly that fashion on a daily basis. The guy next to you has a cold but goes into work anyway. Crimey, the guy sitting next to you farts and he's violated your body. Happens all the time.

Technically accurate and in line with waht I was talking about. But I would point to the permance of your situation in those cases as being events with a temporary consequence and that can be altered by choosing to move. (unless that pollution you mentioned gave you cancer, in which case............ )

Synth on the other hand is something that happens to you. And since it has not been demonstrated as such....... does not wear off, so it's for life.

Your talking about the right concept, but I think we have yet to look at synthesis on the same scale.

Modifié par Redbelle, 23 mai 2013 - 11:42 .

[Wayning_Star]

Redbelle wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

I would be happy with Synth if I knew the following happened. (Mainly to get BW to make a sequel after the event's of ME3..... hey, I'm an optimist!)

1. Synthesis was not permanent. I do not appreciate how the Catalyst, through Shepard, dictates that to be a pinnacle of life and evolution you have to be something the Starbrat thinks of as the final stage of evolution. This goes against all known observation's of how evolution works...... it's like watching an episode of Star Trek where a crewman say's. I've evolved beyond needing to kill you Captain. (He's actually just changed his mind after thinking about it a little. If thinking were evolving we'd all be apex species by now).

2. The consequence's of synthesis live on in some form. I think the idea of Synthesis wearing off can be explained by the new DNA being slowly outcompeted by the species old DNA that was not completely overwritten. Synth's meanwhile would fall apart and need to build non synthesised bodies. (Bringing into question, are all metal alloy's synthed? Or just the ones with a CPU attached)

However, to bring a new sub species into the ME universe for every race. The babies produced will be have stable synth DNA. Which by implication, mean's the Krogan have to the most synth'd offspring in the galaxy! Time to plumb in cold water for all those showers then.

While the physical effect's of synth wear off, synthetic's and organics maintain the knowledge and understanding that they gained. But are now free of any kind of mind control that may have enforced that outlook. E.g. Edi is a learning machine and, though she loses her synthed form, does not lose the knowledge she gained from that experience. Also, the husk who apparently decided not to kill that soldier in the ECDLC ending's when he was synthed, get's sit down and decide what to do with (his?) life now he looks like road kill with no genital's.

3. The Reapers get mopy about being huge death gods and start trying to commit sucide by flying into suns. Only to be switched off by the less mopy ones and stored back in darkspace till they can fix them up. For some reason I keep seeing this in my mind as a ball of deactived Reapers, packed together to form 'The Reaper Sphere' A small world made entirely of dormant Reaper's piled together.

Ok, maybe not all of that would be neccessary to accept synth.... but a damn good chuck of it.

generally speaking, it's a no brainer to see that anyone in the MEU is totally dependent upon advanced tech to survive or thrive in deep space. The catalyst was invented as the 'intelligence' by it's creators as a tool to over come "what"? Organic beings dependent upon machines that can ultimately destroy them. This is why destroy won't work.

Synthesis is an internal change, to the bases levels of evolution. Sticks and stones can break the bones, but synthesis never hurt anyone. 

If a person was offered the choice of being synthesised and they said no........ and then that person was synthesised anyway.............. That is a violation of the body and mind.

The same is true, even if the person did not know that synthesis was coming and they then looked at themselves and said they didn't want this. It's still a violation of the body by a second party who dismissed the will of the first party, all so that the second party could fufil their need/desire at the expense of the dignity of the first party.

That is a hurt that strikes right at the core of anyone who has to suffer that indignity.

the only real way out of that is don't evolve and especially being totally dependent upon technology to do it.


When galaxies are created, does the stars worry about who might be insulted when their hapless planets become star dust?

No it doesn't. Because the panet is an inert ball of rock.......

It has no mind, body or soul. Does not mark memorable event's like birthdays with parties. Does not weep when love one's perish. A planet spins in place and circles a star as gravity defines it's orbit whereas, though trapped on it's outer surface, we have the potential to roam freely over it and even escape the planet's clutches only to look further out and wonder what is out there.... and how to get there. A planet does not dream, or pick the wrong size shoes and have to suffer walking in them. A planet can not kiss or kick a football.

A planet can provide a life sustaining environment on it's surface if certain condition's are met........  I'm sure a planet can do more.... but at this point I think we've hit the ball out the park that a non living planet and a living human being are two completely different thing's and must be respected in different ways.

I was inferring the force of nature as relevant to the ideal of auto processing unwilling beings on synthesis. Shepards choices are all 'non diplomatic' in regard to 'permissions' granted by all interested parties.

Apparently the "chaos" as the catalyst commits, seems totally indifferent, if not dependent upon unwilling participation in harvest and cycles of destruction. Billions of lives lost, trillions of lives altered indefinitely by the ORGANIC need to create tools. Some they cannot control, much less destroy... This is the 'sense' that is made by all the seeming nonsense within the MEU.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

So much crazy.

I love it.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 I was just thinking a bit about this.

Here's the thing, you have the initial "a new... DNA" explanation. I'm still not sure if that's meant to be taken at its face, as just a dumbed-down explanation, or both. If you press him about the details, he explains it as "organics will be able to integrate with technology, synthetics will gain understanding."

So, it's a no-change for synthetics -- "understanding" is not a tangible substance. Organics gain some sort of new innate ability (which seems to match the "alter the matrix of organic life" line).

So I basically asked myself, "Self, if I change a man to grant him a new ability, which he doesn't like and proceeds to shun it completely -- have I even changed that person at all?"

I tend to think "no" to that one. So in the end, it comes down to giving people funny tattoos to stop the Reapers.


Not what I'd call "evil" ... just "unorthodox!"