101 réponses à ce sujet

[CrimsonNephilim]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

I waited 5 years so I could pick the color of the explosions on my screen. I die in virtually all of them, the mass relays are destroyed, and the Normandy crashes. Wow. That's a deep ending. Five years so I could pick the color on my screen. But it's the meaning behind the colors. But what is the meaning? How do you feel?

^

What Shotgun Julia said. 5 years playing this series just to end up with an ending that asks me what color of the RGB spectrum I particuarlly favor at the moment.

Red = Possibly die; Blue = Die; Green = Die


Yup. Deep.

[dreamgazer]

It's all interpretation and inference, kiddos, whether it's positive or negative. Pots, stop calling the kettles black.

[Indy_S]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Arguments against synthesis always go against in-game evidence.

People call that impossible, but they are okay with biotics, but *only* because it's explained. It's okay to ignore the fact that biotics are literally impossible in today's world to do, but there is NO WAAAY synthesis could possibly happen.

Biotics are a conceit of the setting. They are established early and rationally connected to the other elements of the setting with a set of rules. Synthesis has no rules. It is not connected to the other elements of the setting.

People say that choosing that option is metagaming and there is no way to predict the good outcomes shown in the epilogue, but curing the genophage is a pretty popular choice despite the fact that there's no way--especially given the Krogan's past--that people could possibly think it would go well after Wrex and Eve are out of the picture. It seems that people are just fine metagaming and assuming a happy outcome with headcanon, but if you do that with synthesis you're somehow beneath the average poster around here.

There's a difference in immediacy here. Whatever Synthesis is going to do, it's going to do it now. There is no way to prepare for the effects and if they are bad or life-threatening, there's nothing we could do about it. However, for the krogan, the threat will only present itself decades or centuries down the line. Furthermore, even when a bad outcome does happen, it will take time to form into a coherent threat. Additionally, the krogan would not affect every form of life. I guess what I'm saying is: the risk is very different.

People argue that synthesis is doing exactly what Saren wanted. Well, destroy is doing exactly what the Reapers want. You're proving them right. Organics can't coexist with synthetics. Sacrificing all synthetic life without the bat of an eye proves it. You can twist it any way you want it, but synthetic life simply did not mean that much to you if you choose to destroy all of it. Don't give me the "sacrifice" line either. You hate the Reapers because they destroy life. You want to destroy the Reapers to preserve life. The more species you sacrifice to kill the Reapers, the further away you got from your actual plan.

Thankyou for letting me twist it any way I want. I believe I will.

The Reapers pose a great and immediate threat. Synthesis and Control propose risks to deal with this threat. Destroy, on the other hand, proposes a far more definitive solution. Negligible risk. However, there is a downside, the one you're pointing to. But if I perceive the risks of Synthesis and Control to outweigh the cost of Destroy, my choice will be on the safer bet.

[spirosz]

Uncle Jo wrote...

It ain't about synthesis anymore, you're just bashing its supporters. It's getting boring.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Indy_S wrote...

Yestare7 wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

You've gone too far, Gecko. This is not an argument against Synthesis, this is you telling people that they're wrong. This is nothing but flamebait.

Telling people that they are wrong is nothing.

Calling people Luddites, hyppocrites, sociopathic mass murderers, and genocidial maniacs,
NOW you are doing it right!! 



Y

Yeah, that's the proper way to do it. No half measures.

Accept no substitutes!

[Iakus]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Arguments against synthesis always go against in-game evidence.

People call that impossible, but they are okay with biotics, but *only* because it's explained. It's okay to ignore the fact that biotics are literally impossible in today's world to do, but there is NO WAAAY synthesis could possibly happen.

Biotics are an accepted reality within the Mass Effect universe, and have been for thousands of years for some races.  And we've seen how it functions throughout the trilogy.  Synthesis is pure space magic, with neither the process nor results being understood by anyone save the player's "speculations".

People say that choosing that option is metagaming and there is no way to predict the good outcomes shown in the epilogue, but curing the genophage is a pretty popular choice despite the fact that there's no way--especially given the Krogan's past--that people could possibly think it would go well after Wrex and Eve are out of the picture. It seems that people are just fine metagaming and assuming a happy outcome with headcanon, but if you do that with synthesis you're somehow beneath the average poster around here.

Sure, there's a risk that the Krogan Rebellions can start up again.  You're gambling that Wrex and Eve can show them a better way.  But that's a known quanity.  You know Wrex.  You know Eve.  You know the krogan. What do you know about Synthesis?

People argue that synthesis is doing exactly what Saren wanted. Well, destroy is doing exactly what the Reapers want. You're proving them right. Organics can't coexist with synthetics. Sacrificing all synthetic life without the bat of an eye proves it. You can twist it any way you want it, but synthetic life simply did not mean that much to you if you choose to destroy all of it. Don't give me the "sacrifice" line either. You hate the Reapers because they destroy life. You want to destroy the Reapers to preserve life. The more species you sacrifice to kill the Reapers, the further away you got from your actual plan.

All the endings prove the Reapers right.  Organics and synthetics cannot coexist on their own.  So you have to either 1) Eliminate one side  2) Set up a referee to make sure everyone plays nice (by force if necessary) or 3) Force everyone to hybridize, to become a third side.

So in that sense, I agree:  Destroy is no better than Synthesis, save that you're "only" screwing over the synthetics.  All the endings suck.  None of them allow the galaxy to find their own path, to achieve understanding and peace on their own terms.

[shodiswe]

I favor Control over Synthesis since that isn't forcing myself on others.

People get to live their lives, make their own choices. The spread of synthesis isn't made with the consent of everyone reciving it.
One could argue that Shepard is supported by most of the galaxy to do what it takes, and is therefor enpowered with the "Democratic representative" Power to make such a choice.

So, from the Point of view of a democratic representative view on things, it's a choice democraticly made decision if you chose Synthesis.
It's however a big enough decision that would normaly requier a relection or a vote on it in most democracies

I don't Think Synthesis is bad, I kind of liked it but then I decided that Control was better since it saved more people and allowed people freewill and to choose their own future.

The only part of Control that's hard to interpret which would throw me of is that slide where the Geth are standing with a Reaper in the backgroudn and talking about harnessign the strengths of your enemies.
I sure hope that isn't a pointer towards AI shep enslaving the Geth aswell.
"Enslaving" the Reapers nad rehabilitating them, that I can live with.

Turning the Geth into mindless slaves would upset me though.

While it's not said out right that slide does bother me sicne in Synthesis Geth and Quarians are gettign along and seemignly havign a good time enjoying each others Company while in Control the Geth and Quarians are separate and "represented with a Picture of Reapers in the background" and were told about the Wisdom of harnesing the pwoer of your enemies.

It's possible Bioware will manage to disgust all their "players" when they reveal the darksides of all endings including Destroy and it's consequences.

I have a feeling the next game will get controversy over it's "explaining" of what happend.

Destroy, as it stand right now is off the tables for me. The only worse pick would be Refuse.

Modifié par shodiswe, 24 mai 2013 - 05:55 .

[shodiswe]

The only problem I got with Synthesis is that I respect the phobics and haters out there too much to forcefully "improve" them.

[Auld Wulf]

iakus wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

People call that impossible, but they are okay with biotics, but *only* because it's explained. It's okay to ignore the fact that biotics are literally impossible in today's world to do, but there is NO WAAAY synthesis could possibly happen.

Biotics are an accepted reality within the Mass Effect universe because it is known to us, and have been for thousands of years for some races.  Synthesis is pure space magic, because it is unknown to us.

The emboldened text was added by me, to address exactly what is wrong with your line of thinking.

Just because it's accepted within and known to one culture, doesn't mean it is to all. Something can be new to one culture, yet ancient to another. You have a very, very, very narrow view of what is and isn't acceptable, do you see? And I find that this is a problem with many who dislike Synthesis.

My point is is that if biotics were introduced all of a sudden, you'd be saying the same thing about that. Then biotics would be space magic because all of a sudden it's this big, new thing which isn't accepted to your culture. The way in which you perceive reality is limited, because it means that anything which isn't already established is impossible. By your illogical thinking, science itself is impossible.

To wit, Synthesis isn't space magic, it's just advancement. A smarter man has said as much. If I might introduce you to him.

This is how we know that you aren't a scientist of any degree.

[Indy_S]

Auld Wulf wrote...

iakus wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

People call that impossible, but they are okay with biotics, but *only* because it's explained. It's okay to ignore the fact that biotics are literally impossible in today's world to do, but there is NO WAAAY synthesis could possibly happen.

Biotics are an accepted reality within the Mass Effect universe because it is known to us, and have been for thousands of years for some races.  Synthesis is pure space magic, because it is unknown to us.

The emboldened text was added by me, to address exactly what is wrong with your line of thinking.

Just because it's accepted within and known to one culture, doesn't mean it is to all. Something can be new to one culture, yet ancient to another. You have a very, very, very narrow view of what is and isn't acceptable, do you see? And I find that this is a problem with many who dislike Synthesis.

My point is is that if biotics were introduced all of a sudden, you'd be saying the same thing about that. Then biotics would be space magic because all of a sudden it's this big, new thing which isn't accepted to your culture. The way in which you perceive reality is limited, because it means that anything which isn't already established is impossible. By your illogical thinking, science itself is impossible.

To wit, Synthesis isn't space magic, it's just advancement. A smarter man has said as much. If I might introduce you to him.

This is how we know that you aren't a scientist of any degree.

My counter argument.

Modifié par Indy_S, 24 mai 2013 - 06:36 .

[DarkNova50]

Synthesis is a jarring addition to the story because it doesn't fit in with the pre-established logic of the series. Biotics are impossible in real life, but we accept them in the game because there's an in-universe reason for them being there, and they function according to a set of rules. It would be just as jarring for the player if Jack suddenly blew up a mass relay with her biotics, because there's been nothing up to this point that suggests the in-universe rules work that way.

It's conceivable that within the context of the game, a species could develop a device that would allow the synthesis process to take place. It's also conceivable that, within the universe of Harry Potter, Voldemort could have opened up on Harry with an AK-47. But doing something like that upsets the tone of the work, and usually succeeds in upsetting a large portion of the audience.

All philosophical arguments aside, if we look at Mass Effect as a game series with a story, synthesis doesn't make any sense within the context of the plot, and so it fails in that regard. It's the same reason people hated seeing an advanced galactic empire getting beaten by the damn Ewoks in Return of the Jedi.

The Catalyst is the Ewok of Mass Effect.

[Yestare7]

Auld Wulf wrote...

but just... hate threads? No. I mean, look at this one right here, it's nothing more than a hate thread.

The irony here is just delicious.
(who else on this forum makes hate threads?? mm??)





Y

[Indy_S]

Yestare7 wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

but just... hate threads? No. I mean, look at this one right here, it's nothing more than a hate thread.

The irony here is just delicious.
(who else on this forum makes hate threads?? mm??)





Y

Why, whatever could you be alluding to?

[jstme]

Auld Wulf wrote...

iakus wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

People call that impossible, but they are okay with biotics, but *only* because it's explained. It's okay to ignore the fact that biotics are literally impossible in today's world to do, but there is NO WAAAY synthesis could possibly happen.

Biotics are an accepted reality within the Mass Effect universe because it is known to us, and have been for thousands of years for some races.  Synthesis is pure space magic, because it is unknown to us.

The emboldened text was added by me, to address exactly what is wrong with your line of thinking.

Just because it's accepted within and known to one culture, doesn't mean it is to all. Something can be new to one culture, yet ancient to another. You have a very, very, very narrow view of what is and isn't acceptable, do you see? And I find that this is a problem with many who dislike Synthesis.

My point is is that if biotics were introduced all of a sudden, you'd be saying the same thing about that. Then biotics would be space magic because all of a sudden it's this big, new thing which isn't accepted to your culture. The way in which you perceive reality is limited, because it means that anything which isn't already established is impossible. By your illogical thinking, science itself is impossible.

To wit, Synthesis isn't space magic, it's just advancement. A smarter man has said as much. If I might introduce you to him.

This is how we know that you aren't a scientist of any degree.

Except that biotics were NOT introduced all of a sudden.
Green wave of rediculous sensless magic was.
Synthesis in ME3 is pure form of space magic that has nothing to do with science.
This is how we know you are wrong.

Modifié par jstme, 24 mai 2013 - 10:12 .

[dorktainian]

Auld Wulf wrote...

iakus wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

People call that impossible, but they are okay with biotics, but *only* because it's explained. It's okay to ignore the fact that biotics are literally impossible in today's world to do, but there is NO WAAAY synthesis could possibly happen.

Biotics are an accepted reality within the Mass Effect universe because it is known to us, and have been for thousands of years for some races.  Synthesis is pure space magic, because it is unknown to us.

The emboldened text was added by me, to address exactly what is wrong with your line of thinking.

Just because it's accepted within and known to one culture, doesn't mean it is to all. Something can be new to one culture, yet ancient to another. You have a very, very, very narrow view of what is and isn't acceptable, do you see? And I find that this is a problem with many who dislike Synthesis.

My point is is that if biotics were introduced all of a sudden, you'd be saying the same thing about that. Then biotics would be space magic because all of a sudden it's this big, new thing which isn't accepted to your culture. The way in which you perceive reality is limited, because it means that anything which isn't already established is impossible. By your illogical thinking, science itself is impossible.

To wit, Synthesis isn't space magic, it's just advancement. A smarter man has said as much. If I might introduce you to him.

This is how we know that you aren't a scientist of any degree.

      

Now forgive me for sounding a bit stupid here.

This synthesis arguement is kinda pointless, and someone should introduce Wolfie to what would happen to DNA if you started messing with it.  There is a reason Synthesis will never happen.  It's called Biology.

Organic Machines...Yes.  Organics with their DNA fiddled with to make them more machine?  Nope.

Wolfie is talking about Cyborgs.  There is no certainty we are all going to become Cyborgs is there wolfie?  If we become more machine than Human then....... oh oh...     

To say Synthesis is inevitable is just utter rubbish.  Evolution is inevitable.  Synthesis is Extinction through stagnation.

[TheProtheans]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

An atypical handwaving argument spouted by supercilious pro-Synthesis posters.

And a fairly ironic one as well, because no-one - NO-ONE - understands what Synthesis "really is", least of all it's supporters.  Whose who would claim to do so are mired in a swamp of self-justification and speculative headcanon.

Synthesis as a potential "solution" to the Reaper threat is introduced three minutes from the end of the game.  It is given a miniscule amount of narrative exposure and it's actual mechanics are glossed over entirely.  You are simply told to accept that it is now possible, and left to hope for the best.

And after all, what is Shepard's headlong dive into the Big Green Beam ™ but an allegorical leap of faith?

No-one who has played Mass Effect "understands" what Synthesis (as presented within the game) "really is", because we are never told or shown what it "really is" - the developers left all the pertinent questions unanswered.  Certainly Shepard is never given anywhere near enough information on the subject throughout the course of the Mass Effect trilogy  to make a clear and informed decision in it's favour (and yet Shepard is given plenty of narrative clues to do just the opposite).

Point me to someone who says "I understand what Synthesis really is", and I'll show you a liar.

I understand what Synthesis is.
It is a happy disney ending in the headcanon of it's deranged supporter.

Modifié par TheProtheans, 24 mai 2013 - 11:58 .

[TheProtheans]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Arguments against synthesis always go against in-game evidence.

People call that impossible, but they are okay with biotics, but *only* because it's explained. It's okay to ignore the fact that biotics are literally impossible in today's world to do, but there is NO WAAAY synthesis could possibly happen.

And that's really the problem, the crucible and it's powers are unexplained and completely destroy what was left of the suspension of disbelief.

[Enhanced]

TheProtheans wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Arguments against synthesis always go against in-game evidence.

People call that impossible, but they are okay with biotics, but *only* because it's explained. It's okay to ignore the fact that biotics are literally impossible in today's world to do, but there is NO WAAAY synthesis could possibly happen.

And that's really the problem, the crucible and it's powers are unexplained and completely destroy what was left of the suspension of disbelief.

Right, the Crucible itself is unexplained. But, the same can be said about the Mass Relays, which has never been explained. Like the Crucible, we know what they do, but not exactly how they do it. So,  suspension of disbelief should have been destroyed for you since the introduction of Mass Relays in ME1.

Modifié par Enhanced, 24 mai 2013 - 02:16 .

[ryn_wolf]

i cant agree with synthesis at all since I've been playing since ME1 was released and synthesis is what saren wanted and control is what TIM wanted... oh yes that makes perfect sense lets agree with the bad guys who are indoctrinated that couldn't go wrong at all...

[AlexMBrennan]

But, the same can be said about the Mass Relays, which has never been explained

If you rush through the game blind, deaf and dumb, sure but your inability to read does not prove anything of the sort. For the record, the codex says the following about mass relays:

Mass Relays Edit
Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 Edit

Audio: Mass Relays

Mass relays are feats of Prothean engineering advanced far beyond the technology of any living species. They are enormous structures scattered throughout the stars, and can create corridors of virtually mass-free space allowing instantaneous transit between locations separated by years or even centuries of travel using conventional FTL drives.
Primary mass relays can propel ships thousands of light years, often from one spiral arm of the galaxy to another. However, they have fixed one-to-one connections: a primary relay connects to one other primary relay, and nowhere else. Secondary relays can only propel ships a few hundred light years, however they are omnidirectional: a secondary relay can send a ship to any other relay within its limited range.

There are many dormant primary relays whose corresponding twins have not yet been located. These are left inactive until their partner is charted, as established civilizations are unwilling to blindly open a passage that might connect them to a hostile species.

Mass Effect 3 Edit

Once believed to be of Prothean origin, mass relays were in fact created by the Reapers using technology far beyond that of other living species. The enormous structures, scattered throughout the stars, create corridors of virtually mass-free space. This allows instantaneous transit between locations normally separated by years or even centuries using conventional FTL drives.
Primary mass relays can propel ships thousands of light-years. The flight path, however, is fixed to a single relay elsewhere in the galaxy. By contrast, secondary relays, while only capable of propelling ships a few hundred light-years, can reach any other relay within their limited range.

Many primary relays lie dormant, their destinations not yet known. These relays are often left inactive on purpose, as established civilizations are unwilling to blindly open a passage that might connect them to a new, hostile species. The Reapers do not share the same concern, and freely use the dormant relays

[Enhanced]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

But, the same can be said about the Mass Relays, which has never been explained

If you rush through the game blind, deaf and dumb, sure but your inability to read does not prove anything of the sort. For the record, the codex says the following about mass relays:

Mass Relays Edit
Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 Edit

Audio: Mass Relays

Mass relays are feats of Prothean engineering advanced far beyond the technology of any living species. They are enormous structures scattered throughout the stars, and can create corridors of virtually mass-free space allowing instantaneous transit between locations separated by years or even centuries of travel using conventional FTL drives.
Primary mass relays can propel ships thousands of light years, often from one spiral arm of the galaxy to another. However, they have fixed one-to-one connections: a primary relay connects to one other primary relay, and nowhere else. Secondary relays can only propel ships a few hundred light years, however they are omnidirectional: a secondary relay can send a ship to any other relay within its limited range.

There are many dormant primary relays whose corresponding twins have not yet been located. These are left inactive until their partner is charted, as established civilizations are unwilling to blindly open a passage that might connect them to a hostile species.

Mass Effect 3 Edit

Once believed to be of Prothean origin, mass relays were in fact created by the Reapers using technology far beyond that of other living species. The enormous structures, scattered throughout the stars, create corridors of virtually mass-free space. This allows instantaneous transit between locations normally separated by years or even centuries using conventional FTL drives.
Primary mass relays can propel ships thousands of light-years. The flight path, however, is fixed to a single relay elsewhere in the galaxy. By contrast, secondary relays, while only capable of propelling ships a few hundred light-years, can reach any other relay within their limited range.

Many primary relays lie dormant, their destinations not yet known. These relays are often left inactive on purpose, as established civilizations are unwilling to blindly open a passage that might connect them to a new, hostile species. The Reapers do not share the same concern, and freely use the dormant relays

That only explains what it does, not how it works. That's why the technology is never reverse engineered and replicated throughout the games, only after the ME3 endings. Nice try though.

Modifié par Enhanced, 24 mai 2013 - 02:34 .

[dreamgazer]

Folks really need to stop using Clarke's laws as a technology hand-wave.

Using that logic so literally, it would be tolerable for Shepard to use a ray gun that turned all Reapers into asparagus because of "sufficiently advanced technology".

[jstme]

dreamgazer wrote...

Folks really need to stop using Clarke's laws as a technology hand-wave.

Using that logic so literally, it would be tolerable for Shepard to use a ray gun that turned all Reapers into asparagus because of "sufficiently advanced technology".

You disagree with Harry Porter being a pure form of science fiction? Heretic! Luddi.... Oh, sorry,wrong science fiction... Muggle!!  Volde... oh,sorry again, Auld Wulf, tell him that he is no scientist.

[sharkboy421]

Well, I have played through the game many times both pre- and post- EC and I kinda feel like I have a good grasp of at least the concept behind each ending.

I have the same intense dislike for all four choices but I feel like I at least understand where Bioware was trying to go with them. 

I will freely admit however that I do not understand how control, synthesis and destroy work beyond a beam of colored coded magical energy.  Refuse is actually very easy to understand the how.

Calling out another person's preferred ending choice is a really unnecessary thing to do.  I believe its fine to want to discuss the various choices and explain your point of view on why you feel the way you do, but no one's opinion is more valid than the another's.

I actually enjoy discussing the endings and that is why I tried really hard to understand each choice so that I could come to a discussion with at least some idea of just what the otherside is talking about.  I may have interpreted the facts differently, but I still feel that I have idea of the concepts down.

[TheRealJayDee]

iakus wrote...

All the endings prove the Reapers right.  Organics and synthetics cannot coexist on their own.  So you have to either 1) Eliminate one side  2) Set up a referee to make sure everyone plays nice (by force if necessary) or 3) Force everyone to hybridize, to become a third side.

So in that sense, I agree:  Destroy is no better than Synthesis, save that you're "only" screwing over the synthetics.  All the endings suck.  None of them allow the galaxy to find their own path, to achieve understanding and peace on their own terms.

This. So much this!