116 ответов в этой теме

[Hrulj]

Since most people consider synthesis to be the best ending, I would like to know how exactly would people around you, and you personaly react to being turned into a cyborg without any warning or other option available. 

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I chose synthesis in my last play through. It was the happy ending because everyone in the ending is happy. And it's the only ending with closure. Shepard is dead. There is no head canon to manufacture.

 

To answer your question, that is something that I as Shepard thought about for two seconds and then thought about the head canons required with the other two endings and ran straight ahead.

 

Previous to this I had chosen Destroy 4 times and Control once.

 

If synthesis healed my physical ailments, I would not mind at all. But it is all space magic.

[Vazgen]

If this is a bait, then it is a weak one

 

If not, imagine how would a blind person feel if he suddenly gains the ability to see. Should be something similar.

[themikefest]

I don't consider synthesis the best ending. Destroy is the best ending

[Vazgen]

I expect Julia to change her mind and play again eventually. She can't sustain this.

The cycle must continue

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Well there's always this ending:

 

Spoiler

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

You know another thing that's good about synthesis? Since it is green at the end of that video, I get links for how different compounds in weed are synthesized by the cannabis plant.

[Heimerdinger]

Since most people consider synthesis to be the best ending, I would like to know how exactly would people around you, and you personaly react to being turned into a cyborg without any warning or other option available. 

 

Most people don't consider Synthesis to be the best ending, in fact opinions seem to be very divided on the matter.

[Callidous]

Everyone lives in a utopian society with complete happiness and no war for all eternity while transcending mortality? No genocide has to be commited and the only sacrifice is Sheppard? Ummm...duh. Sign me up.

[Ambivalent]

It is basically what Saren was after so i don't consider it good.

 

But most people forgot about first game because it has been a while or maybe completely passed it because of so-so controls and first part of ME 1 was kinda uninteresting. 

 

So when people saw synthesis first response was "Why not both? Sure." I call it Bioware's bait to tell us to play or remember the first game

 

Probably most used option though.

[SuperJogi]

Everyone lives in a utopian society with complete happiness and no war for all eternity while transcending mortality? No genocide has to be commited and the only sacrifice is Sheppard? Ummm...duh. Sign me up.

 

Yes because a single person forcibly changing the biology and behavior of every single living beeing in existence has no ethical issues what so ever.

 

I hate synthesis. It rustles muh freedoms, and I'm not even american.

[Laughing_Man]

Yes because a single person forcibly changing the biology and behavior of every single living beeing in existence has no ethical issues what so ever.

 

I hate synthesis. It rustles muh freedoms, and I'm not even american.

 

Not really true. "Forced" is a bit of an exaggeration, everyone just gets cool green glowy tattoos, and access to more data and possibilities than they ever knew existed. (or rather - Singularity)

 

In what situation can you call this "bad"?

 

My problem with this ending is that it cements the twisted idea that the Reapers are somehow right, and Shepard has to bow to their "wisdom".

 

Also, it makes no sense, and brings a new meaning to "space magic".

[Hrulj]

Not really true. "Forced" is a bit of an exaggeration, everyone just gets cool green glowy tattoos, and access to more data and possibilities than they ever knew existed. (or rather - Singularity)

 

In what situation can you call this "bad"?

 

My problem with this ending is that it cements the twisted idea that the Reapers are somehow right, and Shepard has to bow to their "wisdom".

 

Also, it makes no sense, and brings a new meaning to "space magic".

But if Government today offered to cut your legs off and replace them with cool awesome and much stronger mechanical prostethics, would you accept it?

[MrFob]

"Forced" is not an exaggeration at all. People have no choice in this. The very foundation of their being is changed by synthesis. They would have to crawl out of their skins to resist.

How is it bad? I'll tell you how it's bad: People are diverse, weird and irrational. Mass Effect's story is all about this diversity. It's one of the foundations of the story, especially in ME3 and in think in LotSB Shepard even says something to the account that he fights even for all those people he doesn't agree with. So you really think everyone in the galaxy will like this change?

One of my major dreams for development within the next 100 -200 years is a situation where we have direct access to a global communication network like the internet from our thoughts or at least a situation where we can access data directly via a brain machine interface (think of it as a USB port into your head). I think it would change the very nature of how we interact on a global scale and it would do so for the better. I am not sure how feasible it is in that time frame (hard to predict) but even though this is science fiction today, there is definite progress into that direction.

When I talk about these ideas to people who are not familiar with the field, I very often encounter responses like "I hope I will be dead before something like this happens." or "I wouldn't want to live in a world like this." Lot's of people are scared by these kinds of radical ideas and they will oppose them, actively or passively. And that's cool, although I would personally disagree.

What would happen if you exposed them to such technology against their will? Even if they would ultimately benefit from the results, you can be sure they'd feel violated. Synthesis is no different. The nature of the change or the benefit it may bring are irrelevant to the fact that you force people into a situation they did not want and they cannot reverse (at least as far as we are shown).

Even worse, the synthesis epilogue gives the impression that people are altered not only physically but that they are altered in their behavior as well. There is no more discord, no more difference in opinion. Everyone just seems to be precisely on the same page. That doesn't look like a society that just has access to data, it looks like a brainwashed society to me, whether deliberately or by just accessing all that knowladge, I don't know and I don't care. Because in any case you have forcibly removed the one thing that is time and time again referenced in this story to set us apart from the reapers: Our diversity and our individuality. You have achieved something that in 1930s' Germany was called "Gleichschaltung". Congratulations.

 

So yea, my problem with this particular ending does not end with its execution. I am more fundamentally opposed to the entire idea.

[SuperJogi]

@MrFob: 100% agree

 

If synthesis was the only way to stop the reapers, you could justify it with 'the ends justify the means', but it isn't, there are better options.

Control also has it's ethical concerns since shepard effectivly makes himself "eternal space dictator", leaving the galaxy at his/her mercy.

Destroy is the most ethical solution imho.

 

Maybe it's because im german, but any idea of a forced Utopia makes me really uncomfortable.

[Laughing_Man]

Still think you guys are over thinking this.

 

This has very little of the dangers inherent to early-stage bionic enhancements, especially not the understandable fear that someone will just hack you and make you a prisoner of your own enhancements.

 

This is the "space magic" version of the enhancement question, technical problems and misuse are not part of the equation because "a wizard did it".

 

I don't really think that Synthesis forces everyone to agree or think similarly, just gives everyone access to more data. Points of view will still be different, and past experiences are still valid. Not to mention the basic structure of the brain in different races, etc.

 

"...it looks like a brainwashed society to me, whether deliberately or by just accessing all that knowledge..."

This is a fallacy. You can't brain wash someone by giving him access to an infinite amount of data and tools to understand it.

This is the complete opposite of brain washing.

 

"You have achieved something that in Germany was called "Gleichschaltung"."

And here you validated that internet rule claiming that given enough time, any topic on the internet will lead to accusations of Naz*sm. Congratz.

(which is kind of ironic considering my grandmother was an Auschwitz survivor)

 

I was a product of religious brainwashing as a young man, until I kicked the entire pile of BS and started doubting, so I know something of brainwashing, and I detest the automatic rejection some people has of anything that they call "playing god", or the strange worship of the incredibly flawed biological contraption that is the human body, as if it somehow represents purity and "god's image".

 

Emotions have their place in human society, they are a part of what makes us human. But logic is what truly separates the H0mo sapiens (really? that needed to be censored?) from any other beast. Because contrary to what some may think, many animals have shown some capacity for what is most likely the ability to feel certain emotions.

[Vazgen]

I would not call Synthesis as forced. More like, conducted without asking people what they think. Not everyone will be opposed to the idea. Not everyone will try to resist it. Not everyone will try to change back after the change was made. From what we see from the slides, even bloodthirsty Wreav becomes peaceful and cooperative. We don't really know the effect Synthesis has on an individual. It can be brainwashing, opening new possibilities and abilities (blind person example I brought) or something entirely different. We don't even know whether the people after Synthesis will value the same freedoms as before.

[MrFob]

Well, I am just going by what I see in the epilogue and I don't see a single person who has a problem with the whole affair. True, they might just not be shown but that would be just as bad. Because for those people - if their views would remain unaffected - it can be the absolute worst kind of torture to be trapped in a body that you may no longer consider your own when they look in the mirror. There should be people trying to claw their own green eyes out, others that just get really depressed by the change and yet other that are outraged and start getting violent. You might find it irrational for people to think that and you may point out all the benefits that they can now enjoy but people are diverse, irrational and just aversive to even the most benevolent kinds of sudden changes. You may not agree with them (I know I wouldn't, I'd be thrilled to be synthesized myself) but that doesn't male it right to make the decision for them of how they should live their lives. There should be millions of different reactions and a lot of them should not be pleasant, even if the vast majority enjoys the new situation, those few are enough to deter myself from the decision.

So does the epilogue just sweep all of these aspects under the rug or is it actually the case that suddenly everyone is the happy image that we see there? IMO, both options are really, really bad.

 

 

 

I would not call Synthesis as forced. More like, conducted without asking people what they think.

I fail to see a difference that goes beyond a euphemism.

[Laughing_Man]

Well, I am just going by what I see in the epilogue and I don't see a single person who has a problem with the whole affair. True, they might just not be shown but that would be just as bad. Because for those people - if their views would remain unaffected - it can be the absolute worst kind of torture to be trapped in a body that you may no longer consider your own. There should be people trying to claw their own green eyes out, other that just get really depressed by the change, there should be millions of different reactions and a lot of them should not be pleasant, even if the cast majority enjoys the new situation, those few are enough to deter myself from decision.

So does the epilogue just sweep all of these aspects under the rug or is it actually the case that suddenly everyone is the happy image that we see there? IMO, both options are really, really bad.

 

But the question is - why? Why would they try and claw their eyes out? Because a chemical imbalance in their brain caused them to become depressed?

 

I will agree that it is most likely that something like Synthesis will re-enforce the logical side of every individual it affects, and will most likely fix things on the level of depression capable of causing self-mutilation and / or suicide.

 

Life may become slightly more boring in some respects, but not worse.