211 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

You would think that since the Reapers apparently can control Synthetics pretty easily you would think they would do that to prevent the whole tech-singularity fiasco.

Imagine if just one reaper came down from the sky and with a booming voice decided to lecture organics about synthetics rather than use its death rays to incinerate millions and turn millions more into reaper glue. Think about Klaatu and Gort telling humanity about what Gort could do to them if they decide to militarize space in The Day the Earth Stood Still.

[ImaginaryMatter]

KaiserShep wrote...

Imagine if just one reaper came down from the sky and with a booming voice decided to lecture organics about synthetics rather than use its death rays to incinerate millions and turn millions more into reaper glue. Think about Klaatu and Gort telling humanity about what Gort could do to them if they decide to militarize space in The Day the Earth Stood Still.

Hell, maybe Sovereign was right. The Reaper's are beyond my comprehension.

[KaiserShep]

Not beyond the power of the almighty Carnifex hand cannon though.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Hell, maybe Sovereign was right. The Reaper's are beyond my comprehension.

Nah, that was a clever device used by BW  to say that they had no idea what the **** was going on.

[jamesp81]

Synthesis is an abomination.  It is a betrayal of Shepard as a person and that for which he has fought the hardest for.

All the endings were dumb IMO, but Destroy was considerably less dumb than the others.  Though the cost was high, Shepard ultimately accomplished what he intended to accomplish, and ridded the galaxy of the most hideous thing living in it.

Synthesis is the destruction of freedom, self determination, and individual liberty, so you better believe I'd pick Destroy.  I'd pick it every day and twice on Sundays.

Modifié par jamesp81, 13 décembre 2013 - 04:16 .

[jamesp81]

Eryri wrote...

Vicious wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

It's the ending that is apparently the best according to the epilogues.

This. It's a dumb idea but it is the best and befits its place as the "hardest" to get.


Anything else is fanfiction.

Strictly speaking, Destroy with the breath scene is the hardest to get, so much so that prior to the EC you could only get it after raising galactic readiness with multiplayer, or the iOS games. The requirements for all the endings were lowered after the EC, but the breath scene is still harder to get than the others.
(Edited for clarity)

And also constitutes the real best ending.  It destroys the enemy with the highest number of survivors.

[Wayning_Star]

destroy invokes the catalyst creation.. sorry but that really sucks in the long run.. lol

[ImaginaryMatter]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Hell, maybe Sovereign was right. The Reaper's are beyond my comprehension.

Nah, that was a clever device used by BW  to say that they had no idea what the **** was going on.

This Reaper knows what's up:



I think the Catalyst knows just as much about Synthesis.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

jamesp81 wrote...

Synthesis is an abomination.  It is a betrayal of Shepard as a person and that for which he has fought the hardest for.

All the endings were dumb IMO, but Destroy was considerably less dumb than the others.  Though the cost was high, Shepard ultimately accomplished what he intended to accomplish, and ridded the galaxy of the most hideous thing living in it.

Synthesis is the destruction of freedom, self determination, and individual liberty, so you better believe I'd pick Destroy.  I'd pick it every day and twice on Sundays.

I honestly would never go so far as to call anything an abomination, and you honestly can't say what each Shepard would fight for. It's just dumb and pointless and terribly written, explained, and executed. I can also say why it would be something seen as terrible by organics as well, but I really wouldn't say synthesis is an abomination. I wouldn't say anything is. 

To be honest, you're words don't really make you sound much better. There's a reason the Reapers are bad, yes, but you're putting way too much emotional outrage into something that really shouldn't deal with it.

[rekn2]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Synthesis is an abomination.  It is a betrayal of Shepard as a person and that for which he has fought the hardest for.

All the endings were dumb IMO, but Destroy was considerably less dumb than the others.  Though the cost was high, Shepard ultimately accomplished what he intended to accomplish, and ridded the galaxy of the most hideous thing living in it.

Synthesis is the destruction of freedom, self determination, and individual liberty, so you better believe I'd pick Destroy.  I'd pick it every day and twice on Sundays.

I honestly would never go so far as to call anything an abomination, and you honestly can't say what each Shepard would fight for. It's just dumb and pointless and terribly written, explained, and executed. I can also say why it would be something seen as terrible by organics as well, but I really wouldn't say synthesis is an abomination. I wouldn't say anything is. 

To be honest, you're words don't really make you sound much better. There's a reason the Reapers are bad, yes, but you're putting way too much emotional outrage into something that really shouldn't deal with it.

i have no choice but to counter saren in me1. he outright defies what synthesis stands for in that game.

for your second point, the reapers started it. i would be content with coexistence but we both know that wont happen. ill stop fighting when they stop.

[jamesp81]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Synthesis is an abomination.  It is a betrayal of Shepard as a person and that for which he has fought the hardest for.

All the endings were dumb IMO, but Destroy was considerably less dumb than the others.  Though the cost was high, Shepard ultimately accomplished what he intended to accomplish, and ridded the galaxy of the most hideous thing living in it.

Synthesis is the destruction of freedom, self determination, and individual liberty, so you better believe I'd pick Destroy.  I'd pick it every day and twice on Sundays.

I honestly would never go so far as to call anything an abomination, and you honestly can't say what each Shepard would fight for. It's just dumb and pointless and terribly written, explained, and executed. I can also say why it would be something seen as terrible by organics as well, but I really wouldn't say synthesis is an abomination. I wouldn't say anything is. 

To be honest, you're words don't really make you sound much better. There's a reason the Reapers are bad, yes, but you're putting way too much emotional outrage into something that really shouldn't deal with it.

1.  Shepard pretty clearly opposed the concept of Synthesis in ME1 when speaking with Saren

2.  It's an abomination because it goes against #1, which is more or less a canon part of Shepard's character.

3.  Synthesis also forces people into a life that they may or may not want.  Use of coercive force against others for any reason other than self defense or justified warfare is, itself, evil.  Synthesis is therefore, in my view, the most evil of all the possible endings, even worse than Control (though not by much).

[Brigader666]

Synthesis won't stop wars. Look at humans, we're all made of flesh and blood and when you get right down to it the same protein structures make all of us. While genetically diverse we are all one singular species, yet we still fight wars. On average the US gets into conflict once a decade and there are at least 140+ small scale wars going on at any one time.

Synthesis just means at every living thing in the galaxy is now part machine.... which doesn't really make sense to begin with. Meaning no outside conflicts have been solved just the no more organics thing has been solved... if you don't take into account that humans homeostasis is amino acid based and Turians and Quarians rely on dextro-amino acid for their homeostasis. Meaning Shepard couldn't use his DNA to synthesis with those species.

Putting all that aside though the Reapers are killing off organics so they don't get too evolved, but realistically turning everyone into Robo-cop by infusing their DNA with protonated (yes its a word) Reaper DNA doesn't put a hult on evolution. There is nothing to suggest that Shepard couldn't have kids if he didn't want too, and in order for Shepard's injuries to heal his cells still need to die and go through mitosis.

Taking those things both into account the Reapers still have purpose then. Kill off the dextro based races, and/or kill off the later generations of living creatures.

So i would argue that the question really is does Synthesis solve anything? Or better yet was it ever a viable option to begin with?

[jamesp81]

Brigader666 wrote...

Synthesis won't stop wars. Look at humans, we're all made of flesh and blood and when you get right down to it the same protein structures make all of us. While genetically diverse we are all one singular species, yet we still fight wars. On average the US gets into conflict once a decade and there are at least 140+ small scale wars going on at any one time.

Synthesis just means at every living thing in the galaxy is now part machine.... which doesn't really make sense to begin with. Meaning no outside conflicts have been solved just the no more organics thing has been solved... if you don't take into account that humans homeostasis is amino acid based and Turians and Quarians rely on dextro-amino acid for their homeostasis. Meaning Shepard couldn't use his DNA to synthesis with those species.

Putting all that aside though the Reapers are killing off organics so they don't get too evolved, but realistically turning everyone into Robo-cop by infusing their DNA with protonated (yes its a word) Reaper DNA doesn't put a hult on evolution. There is nothing to suggest that Shepard couldn't have kids if he didn't want too, and in order for Shepard's injuries to heal his cells still need to die and go through mitosis.

Taking those things both into account the Reapers still have purpose then. Kill off the dextro based races, and/or kill off the later generations of living creatures.

So i would argue that the question really is does Synthesis solve anything? Or better yet was it ever a viable option to begin with?

I wouldn't bother trying to make sense out of Synthesis from a scientific standpoint.  It's nothing but space magic from top to bottom.  The entire Crucible / Catalyst thing is too, for that matter, but Synthesis is worse on that count than Destroy or Control.

As far as fighting wars, unless Synthesis also exerts a kind of mental control to force people to get along, it's obvious that Synthesis does not stop all wars.  And if it does, then it means the complete destruction of self-determination, which is itself is a horrible outcome.  I don't think it was ever a viable option to begin with, even if BW thinks so.

Modifié par jamesp81, 13 décembre 2013 - 08:30 .

[Brigader666]

jamesp81 wrote...

I wouldn't bother trying to make sense out of Synthesis from a scientific standpoint.  It's nothing but space magic from top to bottom.  The entire Crucible / Catalyst thing is too, for that matter, but Synthesis is worse on that count than Destroy or Control.

As far as fighting wars, unless Synthesis also exerts a kind of mental control to force people to get along, it's obvious that Synthesis does not stop all wars.  And if it does, then it means the complete destruction of self-determination, which is itself is a horrible outcome.  I don't think it was ever a viable option to begin with, even if BW thinks so.

While for the most part ME does follow theortical and non-theortical physics (to a degree) I will agree it is a fair point to make. Though i would argue that if your going to make a game based on science you should know what your doing while you do it. I.E. shouldn't we put logic and science to a game based around logic and science? But the over use of Dark Energy/Space science does cause too many problems.

While i personally enjoyed the overall ending of ME3 it is rather apparent that Bioware put themselves into a corner and if you think about it from ME1 all the way through ME3 your goal was killing the reapers. Personally i've never had a shepard that did anything other than Destroy becasue no other option made sence to me.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

jamesp81 wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Synthesis is an abomination.  It is a betrayal of Shepard as a person and that for which he has fought the hardest for.

All the endings were dumb IMO, but Destroy was considerably less dumb than the others.  Though the cost was high, Shepard ultimately accomplished what he intended to accomplish, and ridded the galaxy of the most hideous thing living in it.

Synthesis is the destruction of freedom, self determination, and individual liberty, so you better believe I'd pick Destroy.  I'd pick it every day and twice on Sundays.

I honestly would never go so far as to call anything an abomination, and you honestly can't say what each Shepard would fight for. It's just dumb and pointless and terribly written, explained, and executed. I can also say why it would be something seen as terrible by organics as well, but I really wouldn't say synthesis is an abomination. I wouldn't say anything is. 

To be honest, you're words don't really make you sound much better. There's a reason the Reapers are bad, yes, but you're putting way too much emotional outrage into something that really shouldn't deal with it.

1.  Shepard pretty clearly opposed the concept of Synthesis in ME1 when speaking with Saren

That's not really synthesis. That was Saren having been dominated by the Reapers. Granted, is synthesis a Reaperized utopia? Possibly... probably, but this is really no more than a fan idea.

2.  It's an abomination because it goes against #1, which is more or less a canon part of Shepard's character.

It's not canon. And that doesn't make something an abomination. This is not a valid comparison.

3.  Synthesis also forces people into a life that they may or may not want.  Use of coercive force against others for any reason other than self defense or justified warfare is, itself, evil.  Synthesis is therefore, in my view, the most evil of all the possible endings, even worse than Control (though not by much).

Evil is a very subjective term. Your definition of evil is not the same as my own definition of it, I can guarantee that. While I oppose synthesis, I put more of an ontological metaphysical thought into how its categorically invalidated by non-science and redundant possibilities coupled with misleading terminology and general unconfidence in a logic bomb program stipulation.

Destroy does the exact same thing by the way. 

It's why I think people who make decisions based on an objective morality ought to be removed so as not to contaminate judgement with an emotional bias.

[rekn2]

"That's not really synthesis. That was Saren having been dominated by the Reapers. Granted, is synthesis a Reaperized utopia? Possibly... probably, but this is really no more than a fan idea."

youre missing the entire point, shep speaks out against it, no matter what the player thinks or feels. shep has been anti borg from day 1

[Astartes Marine]

jamesp81 wrote...
1.  Shepard pretty clearly opposed the concept of Synthesis in ME1 when speaking with Saren

2.  It's an abomination because it goes against #1, which is more or less a canon part of Shepard's character.

3.  Synthesis also forces people into a life that they may or may not want.  Use of coercive force against others for any reason other than self defense or justified warfare is, itself, evil.  Synthesis is therefore, in my view, the most evil of all the possible endings, even worse than Control (though not by much).

If I could like/thumb-up/whatever a post I would for this one. 

I find Synthesis utterly distasteful for more than just being the equivalent to a hippy ending, and upon first learning about it I was against it with every fiber of my being...still am as a matter of fact.

[rekn2]

"It's not canon. And that doesn't make something an abomination. This is not a valid comparison."


what a joke but here it goes...you speak about subjective terms and then say something isnt an abomination. what is then, why do we even have the word?

when some one says something is an abomination its obviously an opinion.

Modifié par rekn2, 15 décembre 2013 - 11:02 .

[CronoDragoon]

jamesp81 wrote...

1.  Shepard pretty clearly opposed the concept of Synthesis in ME1 when speaking with Saren

I'm no ME1 expert, so I'll ask what Shepard says specifically against Synthesis. What sticks out in my mind was Saren's "submission or extinction" rhetoric to which Shepard countered it's actually more like "extinction now with a possibility of victory or certain extinction later".

3.  Synthesis also forces people into a life that they may or may not want.  Use of coercive force against others for any reason other than self defense or justified warfare is, itself, evil.  Synthesis is therefore, in my view, the most evil of all the possible endings, even worse than Control (though not by much).

Every ending forces people into a life they may or may not want. That's a sliding scale with no determinable poll.

[rekn2]

CronoDragoon wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

1.  Shepard pretty clearly opposed the concept of Synthesis in ME1 when speaking with Saren

I'm no ME1 expert, so I'll ask what Shepard says specifically against Synthesis. What sticks out in my mind was Saren's "submission or extinction" rhetoric to which Shepard countered it's actually more like "extinction now with a possibility of victory or certain extinction later".

3.  Synthesis also forces people into a life that they may or may not want.  Use of coercive force against others for any reason other than self defense or justified warfare is, itself, evil.  Synthesis is therefore, in my view, the most evil of all the possible endings, even worse than Control (though not by much).

Every ending forces people into a life they may or may not want. That's a sliding scale with no determinable poll.

synthesis is subversion to the reaper cause.

[CronoDragoon]

rekn2 wrote...

synthesis is subversion to the reaper cause.

So Shepard only objects to Synthesis in ME1 insofar as it represents submission to the Reapers?

[His Name was HYR!!]

CronoDragoon wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

1.  Shepard pretty clearly opposed the concept of Synthesis in ME1 when speaking with Saren

I'm no ME1 expert, so I'll ask what Shepard says specifically against Synthesis. What sticks out in my mind was Saren's "submission or extinction" rhetoric to which Shepard countered it's actually more like "extinction now with a possibility of victory or certain extinction later".

Add to this: Saren's vision comes off of an empty promise from a Reaper before bringing their whole armada into the galaxy, whereas ME3 Sync takes place in the midst of the war and achieved by how Shepard uses a device to end it.

Unless you reductio ad absurdum the circumstances surrounding the end of ME3, they're not comparable events.

Use of coercive force against others for any reason other than self defense or justified warfare is, itself, evil.

It is a self-defense action.

[MR CauSe iM GoD]

I don't like the synthetic ending because we are handed perfection, our differences make us prefect. I wouldn't want to live in a world where everyone is the same.

[Reorte]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Every ending forces people into a life they may or may not want. That's a sliding scale with no determinable poll.

Synthesis is vastly more wide-reaching than the others - the implication is that it will affect every single living thing in the galaxy, which will include millions or maybe even billions of worlds that we've never even heard of. How forced anyone is in Control is anyone's guess, it depends whether you trust it or not (IMO it doesn't really make sense to) and what your Shepalyst is like. Destroy is a massive impact on a small proportion.

[Brigader666]

MR CauSe iM GoD wrote...

I don't like the synthetic ending because we are handed perfection, our differences make us prefect. I wouldn't want to live in a world where everyone is the same.

It's only making them gentetically similar in the fact they all are part cyborg. It does not make them the same as far as personality or anything like that goes.