But you also just noted they are different from Synthesis.
That is kind of the point in the end, what Saren and the Collectors are is not Synthesis in the way that works, it is the perversion of it.
Yep, the poster I quoted said Saren.collectors foreshadowed synthesis. I disagree since they are different themes. Slavery/cyborg abomination vs well, whatevert he heck synthesis is supposed to be 
Well yeah? Imagine the three-way
stopped reading there
stopped reading there
Dirty minded barbarians...
Dirty minded barbarians...
And what is it about Salarians that you find to be barbaric?
And what is it about Salarians that you find to be barbaric?
Your people ate flies.
Your people ate flies.
Your people threw poop at each other.
Your people threw poop at each other.
WE DO THAT TOO!
Yep, the poster I quoted said Saren.collectors foreshadowed synthesis. I disagree since they are different themes. Slavery/cyborg abomination vs well, whatevert he heck synthesis is supposed to be
Don't worry, when it is all said and done Shepard will have not picked Synthesis. It was just an embellished ending stargazer told to random kid.
Too big to ignore isn't too big to retcon!
Hey, if the entire Mass Effect trilogy was just a story being told, I can buy into that.
I am willing to go the path of Ret Gone is it takes RGB with it.
Guy who previously fused organic beings with tech to create horrible monstrosities promises that if you let him merge organics with synthetics by rewriting the DNA of every living thing in the galaxy, the results will be totally different this time.
Well, they were. The epilogue scenes showed that.
So that complaint is kind of invalid don't you think?
I would think so...but then you have sub groups of pretentious idiots who think they are more intelligent than you because they picked the other two...then again, that was mostly the Synthesis crowd.
Almost as pretentious as the lowest-common-denominator and their egregious shots at those who chose differently.
Well, they were. The epilogue scenes showed that.
So that complaint is kind of invalid don't you think?
My issue with the synthesis ending is borne of my own genre related paranoia. It promises too much, too vaguely, and I've simply read and watched too much sci-fi horror to trust it.
Anyway, I hope the expedition left before the events of the ending. Less messy that way.
Agreed 100%
Well, they were. The epilogue scenes showed that.
So that complaint is kind of invalid don't you think?
Nope. Major rule of speculative fiction: "characters should act the way real people would if placed in similar circumstances."
At the time Shepherd has to make the decision, she doesn't have the benefit of hindsight. She doesn't know what the epilogue to the extended cut will say. All she knows is what she's gathered from 3 years of fighting the Reapers. And everything she's gathered up to that point tells her that Synthesis would be a terrible idea. So not only would it be irrational for Shepherd to pick synthesis, but writing a fairy tale ending to synthesis - an ending that is in stark contrast to the rest of the series - is bad writing.
It's been like 3 years since I saw the ending and I only picked it once to see it. But is it?
I mean does it show what happens in any real length of time from now. Or just like tomorrow looks okay. Indoctrination was rarely immediate.
Also this. How did the Krogan feel about their new synthesis DNA? Seems like they'd be a tad uncomfortable about a single member of a council species unilaterally rewriting their DNA... again.
doesn't matter what Shepard chose
why not just say "sheppherd"? why try and force a fem shep on2 people. thats like when kotor 2 tried making reven a girl in the beginning by default.Nope. Major rule of speculative fiction: "characters should act the way real people would if placed in similar circumstances."
At the time Shepherd has to make the decision, she doesn't have the benefit of hindsight. She doesn't know what the epilogue to the extended cut will say. All she knows is what she's gathered from 3 years of fighting the Reapers. And everything she's gathered up to that point tells her that Synthesis would be a terrible idea. So not only would it be irrational for Shepherd to pick synthesis, but writing a fairy tale ending to synthesis - an ending that is in stark contrast to the rest of the series - is bad writing.
Nope. Major rule of speculative fiction: "characters should act the way real people would if placed in similar circumstances."
At the time Shepherd has to make the decision, she doesn't have the benefit of hindsight. She doesn't know what the epilogue to the extended cut will say. All she knows is what she's gathered from 3 years of fighting the Reapers. And everything she's gathered up to that point tells her that Synthesis would be a terrible idea. So not only would it be irrational for Shepherd to pick synthesis, but writing a fairy tale ending to synthesis - an ending that is in stark contrast to the rest of the series - is bad writing.
Except were beyond the point of speculative fiction when you have a cutscene showing the after effects.
You know, a visual telling people what happened. Everything else is personal fan speculation, I.E, headcannon, which is basically all bullshit.
Speculative fiction refers to the genres of science fiction and fantasy.
If you are really going to play the genre card of how things are supposed to go or whatever, keep in mind that we are dealing with a game here, where people can select the fate of the narrative beats of the said game.
For example, if you broker peace with the Geth and the Quarians, you encourage a relationship between EDI and Joker, your character would be, logically speaking, more susceptible to Synthesis versus a character who is not. The evidence against Synthesis is there, but again, the major difference is the forced-choice dichotomy, free will vs. predestination of what Synthesis can represent changes that mindset if Shepard believes it. So how Shepard behaves is dependent on what narrative you have.
The internal logic of the character, and the person playing in that mindset, trumps the narrative every time. You are right, Shepard doesn't have hindsight or know everything, but Shepard also doesn't need it to make a decision that can be based on faith or feelings or logic, depending on how Shepard behaves.
If you are really going to play the genre card of how things are supposed to go or whatever, keep in mind that we are dealing with a game here, where people can select the fate of the narrative beats of the said game.
For example, if you broker peace with the Geth and the Quarians, you encourage a relationship between EDI and Joker, your character would be, logically speaking, more susceptible to Synthesis versus a character who is not. The evidence against Synthesis is there, but again, the major difference is the forced-choice dichotomy, free will vs. predestination of what Synthesis can represent changes that mindset if Shepard believes it. So how Shepard behaves is dependent on what narrative you have.
The internal logic of the character, and the person playing in that mindset, trumps the narrative every time. You are right, Shepard doesn't have hindsight or know everything, but Shepard also doesn't need it to make a decision that can be based on faith or feelings or logic, depending on how Shepard behaves.
Look. My criticism isn't directed at the players who chose synthesis. It's directed at the writers for creating a shitty ending. And part of what made the ending shitty was that "if you pick destroy, EDI and the Geth get it" nonsense. That wasn't put in there because the writers thought it would make for a better story. It was put in there to prevent absolutely everyone who'd played the game from picking destroy. Destroying the Reapers was the one ending that was consistent with the story's narrative. But, in order to make their other shitty alternate endings more attractive, they decided to make the narratively consistent ending shittier as well in an incredibly tacked-on unsubtle fashion.
For example, if you broker peace with the Geth and the Quarians, you encourage a relationship between EDI and Joker, your character would be, logically speaking, more susceptible to Synthesis versus a character who is not. The evidence against Synthesis is there, but again, the major difference is the forced-choice dichotomy, free will vs. predestination of what Synthesis can represent changes that mindset if Shepard believes it. So how Shepard behaves is dependent on what narrative you have.
Talking down the suits and robots and playing cupid for a robosexual couple is great and all, but honestly, in Shepard's shoes, none of that would really weigh on my mind with the whole idea that I'd have to dissolve in a giant death beam to change everything. It just feels so grossly disproportionate. Even if I hit a red sand/cocaine cocktail off Liara's bosom and did ryncol body shots I couldn't be convinced that it's how I'd want to go out, but that's 'cause I'm a selfish bastard that likes living, so my Shepards are too.
Retour en haut