553 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkNova50]

Robosexual wrote...

DarkNova50 wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

What is a husk when it gains life? A completely new individual? The person it was before? A combination of both?

I'd assume they'd be like the Awakened Collectors. Perhaps a new individual but with "foggy" memories of their past? Like a combination of both then.

"Shoot the tube, Shepard! Shoot the tube!"

What you're saying is you think it's better to remove choice, to take life, based on uh..?

Maybe some of the Husks would want to die, maybe some of them wouldn't, but it would be their choice.

The people are already dead. The Husks are just cybernetic corpses dancing to the plucking of the Reapers' strings. Having your consciousness shoved back into that would be a waking nightmare for most people, assuming their consciousness was even remotely intact.

And Destroy actually offers the best chance for choice and free will. You preserve the majority of the galaxy's species, and without the looming threat of the Reapers (under Shepard/Catalyst's control) they're free to choose their own path, even if it means they destroy themselves in the process. That's the drawback of free will.

And Synthesis is the ultimate robbery of free will. You're forcing everyone/thing in the galaxy to become what you think is best, and they get no choice in the matter.

[Clayless]

Atemeus wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

What you're saying is you think it's better to remove choice, to take life, based on uh..?

Maybe some of the Husks would want to die, maybe some of them wouldn't, but it would be their choice.

No, you missed the point. It could be morally objectional to force such a choice on beings that have already passed on and died. Their lives aren't there to be taken. You are the one that gives birth, you initiate the whole exchange at your volition. Husks are portrayed as completely dead until you Synthesis Wave them.

In case you didn't know, something you object to on moral grounds is how I define "Evil."

That or they are alive (we even see them doing intelligent things, like planning and cooperation) and Synthesis mearly releases them from Reaper control, like we see is possible with the Collectors.

Removing choice, straight up comiting genocide or denying feel will, is worse than giving choice in my eyes.

[Stormcutter]

Robosexual wrote...

Stormcutter wrote...

My opposition to Synthesis lies in the fact that it denies every single being in the galaxy the right of self-determination from the instant it is used. No one is consulted. Shepard simply decides, because the creator of his mortal enemies tells him so, that it is the perfect solution and damn everyone else's opinion.

Many would oppose it and not just Luddites. As an example, Mordin would have opposed it, and he's one of the most brilliant scientific minds in the galaxy. Shepard has no right to force that on billions or even trillions of unwilling people.

It can't soley be that though. Destroy changes the universe on a dramatic scale and straight up comits genocide, removing choice completely.

Control doesn't remove individual choice, but does have this whole police state angle to it.

Synthesis grants more choice and allows everyone to decide how they want to deal with the situation themselves.

Destroy's changes are mostly positive, in that the Reapers are dead and the cycle is broken. That's what eveyone wanted. That's what they signed on for. The Geth are... well, that depends on your opinion of the Geth for one thing, or if they're even still alive at that point for another.

There's a simple matter of scale there. Which is worse? Killing twenty or so billion people, or ramming electronics into trillions of people without their consent? Even if only 1% can't take it and kill themselves, you've still just lost around the same number as there are Geth in existence. And that's not even taking into account depression or other psychological conditions that such a rapid change might cause in billions more. The brutal calculus of war, right? Depends on your perspective. For me, it wasn't a problem. i'd already killed the Geth on Rannoch because I didn't trust the Reaper Code, so that was that.

The only choice Synthesis gives trillions of people is how to react to the violation of their body. That's hardly a positive thing.

Control... A Paragon Shepard Control isn't too bad. I just question how far he'll go.

[KaiserShep]

I guess it's really a matter of whether or not Shepard wants to spare the reapers as well. If it came down to wiping out a race to rid the galaxy of machines that are hellbent on taking more than that, then so be it. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 23 mai 2013 - 01:15 .

[AresKeith]

KaiserShep wrote...

The awakened collectors are nothing more than a playable gimmick for multiplayer, otherwise they'd be part of the actual story.

And Shepard would definitely get told about this or find it himself/herself

[Stormcutter]

Robosexual wrote...

Atemeus wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

What you're saying is you think it's better to remove choice, to take life, based on uh..?

Maybe some of the Husks would want to die, maybe some of them wouldn't, but it would be their choice.

No, you missed the point. It could be morally objectional to force such a choice on beings that have already passed on and died. Their lives aren't there to be taken. You are the one that gives birth, you initiate the whole exchange at your volition. Husks are portrayed as completely dead until you Synthesis Wave them.

In case you didn't know, something you object to on moral grounds is how I define "Evil."

That or they are alive (we even see them doing intelligent things, like planning and cooperation) and Synthesis mearly releases them from Reaper control, like we see is possible with the Collectors.

Removing choice, straight up comiting genocide or denying feel will, is worse than giving choice in my eyes.

Bull****. Husks are dead as doornails and controlled by the Reapers and you have no proof otherwise. We see the Husk back off, but we also see the Reapers backing off at the same time. It's just as likely that the Catalyst ordered their retreat as anything else is.

If they are alive, then I pity them. If there's anything left of their minds, it must be screaming in horror.

[GipsyDangeresque]

What I prefer about Destroy is that it doesn't try to force World Peace on the galaxy through tyranny (the giant robot fish will KILL you if you wage war) or genetic modification (Shepard sprinkles for all sentient beings!)

How does synthesis ensure no more fighting, anyway? Look, you got robot parts in my organics! You got organic parts on my robotics! We're similar, and thus will be best friends and certainly never come to blows for any reason ever again.

Strained resources? Revenge? Love and Hatred? Fear? Insanity? If these things are not present, then Synthesis brainwashes sentient beings to remove such qualities and is evil. If these things remain present, and Synthesis just tries to bring them closer together, then it accomplishes nothing (and rightfully so) just as Destroy does.

Modifié par Atemeus, 23 mai 2013 - 01:15 .

[Clayless]

DarkNova50 wrote...

The people are already dead. The Husks are just cybernetic corpses dancing to the plucking of the Reapers' strings. Having your consciousness shoved back into that would be a waking nightmare for most people, assuming their consciousness was even remotely intact.

And Destroy actually offers the best chance for choice and free will. You preserve the majority of the galaxy's species, and without the looming threat of the Reapers (under Shepard/Catalyst's control) they're free to choose their own path, even if it means they destroy themselves in the process. That's the drawback of free will.

And Synthesis is the ultimate robbery of free will. You're forcing everyone/thing in the galaxy to become what you think is best, and they get no choice in the matter.

That's not the case, when it comes to future choice in the 3 endings the figures are:

Destroy - Comits genocide, removing choice completely.

Control - Doesn't remove choice, but creates a semi-police state where choices can have more dramatic consequences.

Synthesis - Grants more choice.

AresKeith wrote...

Have you even read the description of the Awakened Collectors? 

Lets skip to the end, is your source actually just fanon discontinuity? And not anything that says they're not canon?

[GipsyDangeresque]

Your source, a simple piece of fan-service from developers that are in a different facility with no oversight from the team that composed the story for Mass Effect 3 or the endings, is the one that is dubious and idiotic to embrace blindly.

Modifié par Atemeus, 23 mai 2013 - 01:17 .

[Clayless]

Stormcutter wrote...

Robosexual wrote...


That or they are alive (we even see them doing intelligent things, like planning and cooperation) and Synthesis mearly releases them from Reaper control, like we see is possible with the Collectors.

Removing choice, straight up comiting genocide or denying feel will, is worse than giving choice in my eyes.

Bull****. Husks are dead as doornails and controlled by the Reapers and you have no proof otherwise. We see the Husk back off, but we also see the Reapers backing off at the same time. It's just as likely that the Catalyst ordered their retreat as anything else is.

If they are alive, then I pity them. If there's anything left of their minds, it must be screaming in horror.

That's not the case, evidence we have:

Collectors gain awareness when released from Reaper control, as implied by the Collector General and shown by the Awakened Collectors.

Husks are capable of intelligence and planning, as seen and heard throughout the Reaper war.

The Husk in Synthesis doesn't retreat, his reaction is similar to the humans.

Modifié par Robosexual, 23 mai 2013 - 01:21 .

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

The title made me laugh, so I clicked it to answer the question. Or rather... not answer the question... exactly.

I've recently switched, I actually intend to give Destroy a shot if I ever play again. Without caring whether or not the writers intended it, I just decided I like Indoctrination Theory better as an ending, and I'm entirely happy with buying into it, since the alternative is... obvious.

But I chose Synethesis originally for a handful of reasons, which I'll go ahead and share with you (while chuckling at the absurd use of the word "evil" in this context.)

- I brought all assets from all three games in a full canon play-through with 100% achievements and missions, fetch or otherwise, and the all the points necessary to get all three endings (though I was unaware of the point limitation at the time.) I didn't put in 100s of hours on a "perfect playthrough" where I saved literally every species in the galaxy that can be saved, only to ****** it all away at the ending by destroying the Geth. 

- Legion was my comrade and crewmate, and I had no trouble negotiating peace between the Geth and the Quarians. I brought Legion with me to the Quarian fleet in Mass Effect 2. If you've never done it, I highly recommend it. It's HILARIOUS whether you're playing a Renegade, Paragon, or Paragade. Some of the best RP Sci Fi in the series happened when I shot down the General's attempts to have Legion removed. If you love playing as a great Uniter, that scene is HUGELY rewarding. I got attached.

- Given the information available (assuming no Indoctrination Theory,) it is the only option that guarantees no further species' destruction by the Reaper Cycle. With Synthesis, you don't just save a generation or 12 of some species, you save the entire galaxy, and break the cycle, which was the point of the exercise. Both other options came with the caveat that their solutions were temporary, and would result in the cycle beginning anew.

Also, it was a game. The choices would have been meaningless if we were only allowed to pick one, and the existence of the choice would be pointless if all three were not valid endings.

All of which I say without weighing in on the actual storytelling quality of those choices... much.

Modifié par Jeremiah12LGeek, 23 mai 2013 - 01:21 .

[Cheviot]

Atemeus wrote...

How does synthesis ensure no more fighting, anyway?

It doesn't.  It just means that it's not organics trying to wipe out all synthetics, and synthetics trying to defend themselves (and eventually wiping out organics). 

[KaiserShep]

Throwing around the word genocide is fine and good but it does kind of ignore the bind these options put the player in. It sucks to have to wipe out an ally, let alone its entire "species", but in these circumstances, it seems unfair to judge it as murder or something. For sake of roleplaying, if this was actually happening, I would bet a fair sum that everyone here would simply kill the reapers.

[Clayless]

Atemeus wrote...

Your source, a simple piece of fan-service from developers that are in a different facility with no oversight from the team that composed the story for Mass Effect 3 or the endings, is the one that is dubious and idiotic to embrace blindly.

In other words, the game series. 

So yeah, my source for canon is information from the Mass Effect series.

[AresKeith]

Robosexual wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Have you even read the description of the Awakened Collectors? 

Lets skip to the end, is your source actually just fanon discontinuity? And not anything that says they're not canon?

Only things I have is Christ Priestly telling Jadebaby that the MP isn't canon in a PM, and the fact that the concept on the MP and its Operations are the only things to consider canon

All you have is a made gimmick character that is literally fan-service to add

[GipsyDangeresque]

The cycle can never be broken. The catalyst is merely discriminatory, pointing out that Synthetics will have reasons to fight Organics just as all sentient beings will.

Hybrids will always turn on and kill Hybrids. Synthesis saves nothing from the ravages of war, unless you're naive or the procedure itself is more sinister (brain washing) than most supporters claim.

Modifié par Atemeus, 23 mai 2013 - 01:22 .

[Stormcutter]

Robosexual wrote...

DarkNova50 wrote...

The people are already dead. The Husks are just cybernetic corpses dancing to the plucking of the Reapers' strings. Having your consciousness shoved back into that would be a waking nightmare for most people, assuming their consciousness was even remotely intact.

And Destroy actually offers the best chance for choice and free will. You preserve the majority of the galaxy's species, and without the looming threat of the Reapers (under Shepard/Catalyst's control) they're free to choose their own path, even if it means they destroy themselves in the process. That's the drawback of free will.

And Synthesis is the ultimate robbery of free will. You're forcing everyone/thing in the galaxy to become what you think is best, and they get no choice in the matter.

That's not the case, when it comes to future choice in the 3 endings the figures are:

Destroy - Comits genocide, removing choice completely.

Control - Doesn't remove choice, but creates a semi-police state where choices can have more dramatic consequences.

Synthesis - Grants more choice.

Destroy- Commits genocide of a fraction of known sapient life in the galaxy, no more than 1% or 2% at max. Grant's complete freedom of choice to the rest. This assuming the Geth weren't killed on Rannoch, in which case the number of AI's is neglible.

Control- More or less right, though the degree depends on Shepard's alignment

Synthesis- Strips away choice from nearly 100% of life in the galaxy, forcing Synthesis upon them. Their only 'choice' is how to react to a violation of their rights and bodies.

[The Night Mammoth]

Robosexual wrote...

That's not the case, when it comes to future choice in the 3 endings the figures are:

Destroy - Comits genocide, removing choice completely.

For some. The rest are free to do as they wish. 

Control - Doesn't remove choice, but creates a semi-police state where choices can have more dramatic consequences.

The choices of one person.

Synthesis - Grants more choice.

Why has this skipped over the part where no one's given a choice over whether they want Synthesis or not? And I mean no one. Destroy only has ramifications for a minority faction, Control for no one except Shepard, whilst Synthesis has consequencces for every person in the galaxy, and, providing the vast majority of these individualised Husks and VI's don't just kill themselves or go on rampages like we've seen in the past,  potentially consequences for unknown numbers of new people, not the mention the effects of the whatever has happened to the Reapers themselves. 

[Cheviot]

Atemeus wrote...

The cycle can never be broken. The catalyst is merely discriminatory, pointing out that Synthetics will have reasons to fight Organics just as all sentient beings will.

Hybrids will always turn on and kill Hybrids. Synthesis saves nothing from the ravages of war, unless you're naive or the procedure itself is more sinister (brain washing) than most supporters claim.

Yeah, wars will still happen, but not organic against synthetic.

[GipsyDangeresque]

The best implication in Destroy is that some day, new synthetic races like the Geth will rise and exist peacefully with entirely organic beings, with no threat of Reaper tyranny to scare them into submission, but by choice.

And on that day, the Catalyst and Reapers will have finally been truly defeated.

Cheviot wrote...

Yeah, wars will still happen, but not organic against synthetic.

Exactly, so people that choose Synthesis are merely ignorant or deluding themselves if they believe their choice is the only one that saves the Galaxy from "the cycle" because "the cycle" itself is merely a construction in your mind of a divide between the two categories of sentient being.

Synthesis just tries to change the game by removing the previous categories. In reality it accomplishes little in this regard for the long term.

Modifié par Atemeus, 23 mai 2013 - 01:27 .

[AresKeith]

Cheviot wrote...

Atemeus wrote...

The cycle can never be broken. The catalyst is merely discriminatory, pointing out that Synthetics will have reasons to fight Organics just as all sentient beings will.

Hybrids will always turn on and kill Hybrids. Synthesis saves nothing from the ravages of war, unless you're naive or the procedure itself is more sinister (brain washing) than most supporters claim.

Yeah, wars will still happen, but not organic against synthetic.

What makes that any better?

[DarkNova50]

Robosexual wrote...

DarkNova50 wrote...

The people are already dead. The Husks are just cybernetic corpses dancing to the plucking of the Reapers' strings. Having your consciousness shoved back into that would be a waking nightmare for most people, assuming their consciousness was even remotely intact.

And Destroy actually offers the best chance for choice and free will. You preserve the majority of the galaxy's species, and without the looming threat of the Reapers (under Shepard/Catalyst's control) they're free to choose their own path, even if it means they destroy themselves in the process. That's the drawback of free will.

And Synthesis is the ultimate robbery of free will. You're forcing everyone/thing in the galaxy to become what you think is best, and they get no choice in the matter.

That's not the case, when it comes to future choice in the 3 endings the figures are:

Destroy - Comits genocide, removing choice completely.

Control - Doesn't remove choice, but creates a semi-police state where choices can have more dramatic consequences.

Synthesis - Grants more choice.

Yup, that's a real prime choice right there. Live with what I think is best, or go kill yourself. It's not a choice, it's a damn ultimatum.

I don't know what choice you think Destroy is obstructing. The Geth and EDI are wiped out, true, but the survivors are free to choose any future they want for themselves. They're not being railroaded down one path thanks to some dubious green space magic. They're not being monitored by "The Man" and his cybernetic cuttlefish goon squad. And they're not being turned into Soylent Green because Shepard couldn't handle being put on the spot.

The price of freedom is steep. If one species has to die so the others can self determinate free from the Reapers, I can live with that.

[Clayless]

AresKeith wrote...

Only things I have is Christ Priestly telling Jadebaby that the MP isn't canon in a PM, and the fact that the concept on the MP and its Operations are the only things to consider canon

All you have is a made gimmick character that is literally fan-service to add

That's great but given your track record I'd need like an actual source.

Stormcutter wrote...

Destroy- Commits genocide of a fraction of known sapient life in the galaxy, no more than 1% or 2% at max. Grant's complete freedom of choice to the rest. This assuming the Geth weren't killed on Rannoch, in which case the number of AI's is neglible.

Control- More or less right, though the degree depends on Shepard's alignment

Synthesis- Strips away choice from nearly 100% of life in the galaxy, forcing Synthesis upon them. Their only 'choice' is how to react to a violation of their rights and bodies.

So we agree, Destroy removes future choice through genocide, Control is so-so, Synthesis grants more.

[GipsyDangeresque]

Synthesis grants beings the choice of how to react to evil, and thus is evil.

Good that you've read his post and understand now. All three endings provide choice to anyone that survives.

Destroy presents the choice of how to move forward in our own world.

Synthesis merely destroys everything that makes the galaxy what it is and removes the abilitiy for Organics and Synthetics to ever come to peace on their own. Their choice, YOU removed it by destroying the distinction.

Modifié par Atemeus, 23 mai 2013 - 01:31 .

[Stormcutter]

Robosexual wrote...

Stormcutter wrote...

Robosexual wrote...


That or they are alive (we even see them doing intelligent things, like planning and cooperation) and Synthesis mearly releases them from Reaper control, like we see is possible with the Collectors.

Removing choice, straight up comiting genocide or denying feel will, is worse than giving choice in my eyes.

Bull****. Husks are dead as doornails and controlled by the Reapers and you have no proof otherwise. We see the Husk back off, but we also see the Reapers backing off at the same time. It's just as likely that the Catalyst ordered their retreat as anything else is.

If they are alive, then I pity them. If there's anything left of their minds, it must be screaming in horror.

That's not the case, evidence we have:

Collectors gain awareness when released from Reaper control, as implied by the Collector General and shown by the Awakened Collectors.

Husks are capable of intelligence and planning, as seen and heard throughout the Reaper war.

The Husk in Synthesis doesn't retreat, his reaction is similar to the humans.

Collectors are not husks. They're far more advanced and have more biological components. Note that you don't see Awakened Marauders or Husks running around despite the fact that they too are exposed to the Leviathans control.

Husks are capable of planning and intelligence because the Reapers, who direct them, are.

And the Husk's reaction is to crumple to it's knees and stay there. As if, say, any direction had been shut off.