326 réponses à ce sujet

[Bionuts]

CronoDragoon wrote...

This is why Synthesis improves the
physical nature of organics: now, like synthetics, their technology is
inseparable from their physical being. They can advance at the same rate
as synthetics, mitigating the fear of obsolescence. For synthetics,
they now understand the chemical processes of organics, specifically how
it all functions up there in the brain to create emotions and morality.
With a better understanding of this, they can better communicate with
organics and form diplomatic agreements/bonds, thereby catalyzing
organics' understanding of them.

Seems pretty good, but I've seen much hate for it.

[Sir DeLoria]

Shall I get my popcorn already?

Anyway, here's my two cents:

Reapers should die anyway, the Geth are purged and I don't give a damn about EDI. Hey, Shep even has a chance of survival! Thus: Destroy > everything else

Modifié par Necanor, 02 août 2013 - 12:05 .

[ruggly]

Other than how bad the execution is?

[DeinonSlayer]

You had to make a new thread by lifting someone else's post from an already-active thread?

[CronoDragoon]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

You had to make a new thread by lifting someone else's post from an already-active thread?

To be fair, it wasn't on-topic from the other thread.

The objections to Synthesis are as follows:

1. No one asked for it. You're making a permanent change on everyone in the galaxy whether they like it or not, which is a violation of the concept of autonomy.

2. The Catalyst asserts that organics and synthetics cannot coexist without it, but is this true? Aren't the geth and quarians now coexisting? Is such a change necessary?

3. Does it even fix the problem? Won't organics still create new synthetics even if their bodies are upgraded?

4. The way they explain how it "alters" DNA doesn't really make sense.

5. It's kinda out of left field.

6. It isn't a compelling conclusion to a series about learning to coexist with another race if the solution was simply to force change on everyone. The implication here is that if two groups of people are different enough from each other, respect, peace, and coexistence are impossible. This isn't a message that I really want to hear personally, whether it's true or not.

[Bionuts]

Necanor wrote...

Shall I get my popcorn already?

Anyway, here's my two cents:

Reapers should die anyway, the Geth are purged and I don't give a damn about EDI. Hey, Shep even has a chance of survival! Thus: Destroy > everything else

How is that better , though? It would seem like people would be healthier, smarter, and more physically capable which is a good thing.

[phillip100]

CronoDragoon wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

You had to make a new thread by lifting someone else's post from an already-active thread?

To be fair, it wasn't on-topic from the other thread.

The objections to Synthesis are as follows:

1. No one asked for it. You're making a permanent change on everyone in the galaxy whether they like it or not, which is a violation of the concept of autonomy.

2. The Catalyst asserts that organics and synthetics cannot coexist without it, but is this true? Aren't the geth and quarians now coexisting? Is such a change necessary?

3. Does it even fix the problem? Won't organics still create new synthetics even if their bodies are upgraded?

4. The way they explain how it "alters" DNA doesn't really make sense.

5. It's kinda out of left field.

6. It isn't a compelling conclusion to a series about learning to coexist with another race if the solution was simply to force change on everyone. The implication here is that if two groups of people are different enough from each other, respect, peace, and coexistence are impossible. This isn't a message that I really want to hear personally, whether it's true or not.

That's pretty much it.

[DeinonSlayer]

OK, CronoDragoon, that I can agree with. I, personally, found the conclusion to Ender's Game far more compelling - the formic queen, despite having a mental structure vastly different from a human, grasped the concept of individuality and gained an appreciation for the value of human life, and a human does the same in turn. Neither had to stick a fork in their brains to gain that understanding; it came naturally through long-delayed interaction and reconciliation. Cultural assimilation is a learning process.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 02 août 2013 - 12:17 .

[HellbirdIV]

Synthesis sucks because it's a magical Deus Ex Machina ending that fundamentally undercuts the themes and motifs of the Mass Effect franchise.

[CronoDragoon]

Oh, I agree, Deinon. I don't pick Synthesis for the reason you said. I was just explaining to Bio what we know about Synthesis from the EC dialogues and epilogue.

[Bionuts]

CronoDragoon wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

You had to make a new thread by lifting someone else's post from an already-active thread?

To be fair, it wasn't on-topic from the other thread.

The objections to Synthesis are as follows:

1. No one asked for it. You're making a permanent change on everyone in the galaxy whether they like it or not, which is a violation of the concept of autonomy.

2. The Catalyst asserts that organics and synthetics cannot coexist without it, but is this true? Aren't the geth and quarians now coexisting? Is such a change necessary?

3. Does it even fix the problem? Won't organics still create new synthetics even if their bodies are upgraded?

4. The way they explain how it "alters" DNA doesn't really make sense.

5. It's kinda out of left field.

6. It isn't a compelling conclusion to a series about learning to coexist with another race if the solution was simply to force change on everyone. The implication here is that if two groups of people are different enough from each other, respect, peace, and coexistence are impossible. This isn't a message that I really want to hear personally, whether it's true or not.

1. For the greater good. It would be improving them, no? Also, Shepard (even Paragon) can be very unconcerned at times. Pragmatism runs in her blood.

2. I'm thinking more of the benefits. I'm still a bit dumbfounded by this particular issue. Perhaps the EC, as well as DLC will give more insight into the situation.

4. It's a stupid execution for sure.

6. Aren't people like this in real, though?

[SiniisteR]

Bionuts wrote...

Necanor wrote...

Shall I get my popcorn already?

Anyway, here's my two cents:

Reapers should die anyway, the Geth are purged and I don't give a damn about EDI. Hey, Shep even has a chance of survival! Thus: Destroy > everything else

How is that better , though? It would seem like people would be healthier, smarter, and more physically capable which is a good thing.

If you tried telling that to the galaxy before making the decision, I doubt many would agree. Regardless of whether you tried to convince them that it would be a good thing, it'd be too much of a change that people would feel comfortable with.

As for it being out of place, I don't think it is as much as people think, especially if throughout the game you have the talks with EDI about her becoming "alive".

[CronoDragoon]

Bionuts wrote...
1. For the greater good. It would be improving them, no? Also, Shepard (even Paragon) can be very unconcerned at times. Pragmatism runs in her blood.

If your Shepard is pragmatic then yeah this objection won't hold much weight.

6. Aren't people like this in real, though?

That's a personal question that will largely depend upon your philosophy and view of history, similar to asking if history is progressive or cyclical. There's evidence either way.

I'd say if you buy the Catalyst's argument that organics and synthetics will always try and wipe each other out, and you don't have a problem making this change on the galaxy (because as you say, it certainly has its benefits) then Synthesis is probably the ending for you.

[Bionuts]

SiniisteR wrote...

If you tried telling that to the galaxy before making the decision, I doubt many would agree. Regardless of whether you tried to convince them that it would be a good thing, it'd be too much of a change that people would feel comfortable with.

As for it being out of place, I don't think it is as much as people think, especially if throughout the game you have the talks with EDI about her becoming "alive".

If I had the choice in real life, I'd push the button to make it happen if the benefits were true. Wouldn't really care if the world wanted it initially. Seems like something that benefits the greater good, and in time people will adapt for it to become a non-issue.

Synthesis seems to have many benefits. I believe it would benefit in making people healthier, more intelligent, understanding, etc.

[DeinonSlayer]

Bionuts wrote...

1. For the greater good. It would be improving them, no? Also, Shepard (even Paragon) can be very unconcerned at times. Pragmatism runs in her blood.

Gee, where have I seen that before...

"These are just a few of the images we've recorded, and as you can see... it isn't what we thought. There's been no war here, and no terraforming event - the environment is stable. It's the Pax. The G-23 Paxilon hydrochlorate that we added to the air processors. It was supposed to calm the population, weed out aggression... well, it works. The people here stopped fighting. And then they stopped... everything else. They stopped going to work. They stopped breeding, talking, eating. There's thirty million people here, and they all just let themselves die.

*crash*

"I have to be quick! About a tenth of a percent of the population had the opposite reaction to the Pax. Their aggressor response increased, beyond madness. They've become... well, they've killed most of us. And not just killed. They've... done things... I won't live to report this, but people need to know. We meant it for the best - to make people safer. Oh God! NO!!!"

2. I'm thinking more of the benefits. I'm still a bit dumbfounded by this particular issue. Perhaps the EC, as well as DLC will give more insight into the situation.

What benefits? Even its proponents are thin on details.

6. Aren't people like this in real, though?

There was once a time when an Irishman wouldn't spit on an Italian unless he'd just stuck a knife in his back. These days, one has better food, the other has better beer, and they typically get along.

People change. Best to let them do so, legitimately, at their own pace, rather than impose it from above.

[CronoDragoon]

Stop the Whedon quotes Deinon or I might have to bro-pound you through my computer. And then buy a new computer.

[SiniisteR]

Bionuts wrote...

SiniisteR wrote...

If you tried telling that to the galaxy before making the decision, I doubt many would agree. Regardless of whether you tried to convince them that it would be a good thing, it'd be too much of a change that people would feel comfortable with.

As for it being out of place, I don't think it is as much as people think, especially if throughout the game you have the talks with EDI about her becoming "alive".

If I had the choice in real life, I'd push the button to make it happen if the benefits were true. Wouldn't really care if the world wanted it initially. Seems like something that benefits the greater good, and in time people will adapt for it to become a non-issue.

Synthesis seems to have many benefits. I believe it would benefit in making people healthier, more intelligent, understanding, etc.

I can respect that, I just know that me and many others wouldn't like the feeling of making a change like that without the galaxys opinion on it. Plus I wasn't able to make peace on Rannoch and decided to side with the quarians, soi didn't have the guilt of sacrificing the Geth affecting my decision.

[DeinonSlayer]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Stop the Whedon quotes Deinon or I might have to bro-pound you through my computer. And then buy a new computer.

They say you're never supposed to strike a monitor with a closed fist, but it is, on occasion, hi-larious.

...too much? 

[MassivelyEffective0730]

As there is already another active thread on this issue, instead of linking you many arguments for why synthesis is bad (narratively, thematically, executionally, morally, ethically, theoretically, and philosophically), I'm just going to report this thread for spam.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 02 août 2013 - 12:37 .

[o Ventus]

in it for the lolz wrote...

*snip*

This gif is almost as annoying as these kinds of threads.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Necanor wrote...

Shall I get my popcorn already?

Anyway, here's my two cents:

Reapers should die anyway, the Geth are purged and I don't give a damn about EDI. Hey, Shep even has a chance of survival! Thus: Destroy > everything else

As a destroyer, I'm going to say that this argument falls woefully short. I concur, though I think that if this is your reasoning....

The Quarians will probably end up starting the cycle again.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 02 août 2013 - 12:44 .

[ruggly]

Bionuts wrote...
understanding, etc.

You can't force understanding.

[DeinonSlayer]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Necanor wrote...

Shall I get my popcorn already?

Anyway, here's my two cents:

Reapers should die anyway, the Geth are purged and I don't give a damn about EDI. Hey, Shep even has a chance of survival! Thus: Destroy > everything else

As a destroyer, I'm going to say that this argument falls woefully short. I concur, though I think that if this is your reasoning....

As a destroyer, I maintain that people who pick Destroy because Shepard lives are doing so for the wrong reasons (and metagaming).

o Ventus wrote...

in it for the lolz wrote...
*snip*

This gif is almost as annoying as these kinds of threads.

Well, I guess that's that. :innocent:

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 02 août 2013 - 12:43 .

[Ledgend1221]

It's stupid.

[Bionuts]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Bionuts wrote...

1. For the greater good. It would be improving them, no? Also, Shepard (even Paragon) can be very unconcerned at times. Pragmatism runs in her blood.

Gee, where have I seen that before...

"These are just a few of the images we've recorded, and as you can see... it isn't what we thought. There's been no war here, and no terraforming event - the environment is stable. It's the Pax. The G-23 Paxilon hydrochlorate that we added to the air processors. It was supposed to calm the population, weed out aggression... well, it works. The people here stopped fighting. And then they stopped... everything else. They stopped going to work. They stopped breeding, talking, eating. There's thirty million people here, and they all just let themselves die.

*crash*

"I have to be quick! About a tenth of a percent of the population had the opposite reaction to the Pax. Their aggressor response increased, beyond madness. They've become... well, they've killed most of us. And not just killed. They've... done things... I won't live to report this, but people need to know. We meant it for the best - to make people safer. Oh God! NO!!!"

2. I'm thinking more of the benefits. I'm still a bit dumbfounded by this particular issue. Perhaps the EC, as well as DLC will give more insight into the situation.

What benefits? Even its proponents are thin on details.

6. Aren't people like this in real, though?

There was once a time when an Irishman wouldn't spit on an Italian unless he'd just stuck a knife in his back. These days, one has better food, the other has better beer, and they typically get along.

People change. Best to let them do so, legitimately, at their own pace, rather than impose it from above.

1. Synthesis is the situation where something of that nature would be successful. Not sure why it has to be all doom and gloom. Change is good.

2. I assume organics recieve many benefits from being intertwined with the cyborg synthetic (whatever the hell it is). Perhaps becoming more intelligent, more physically capable, etc., is not a giant leap. I haven't seen the EC, but I've heard the ending to be pretty positive.

3. Humans take much too long to accept change. Even now, there isn't the slightest hint of peace. Tis' pig with lipstick.