Sure, but that doesn't make it right. It also could have that as a red herring. Shepard doesn't know shooting the tube will do what the Catalyst claims. In fact, the Catalyst never says to shoot the tube! And if Synthesis "is not a thing that can be forced," alternatives must be presented.
Also remember that Destroy is there first and foremost because it was expected and was the original goal.
Original goal of the Reapers? The Catalyst? The Crucible was of Prothean design, but the Citadel was not.
Yet, the Intelligence offers Shepard up to four choices; none of which it had to do. While one does not have to believe it, they are presented as options. This speaks to the objective nature of the entity, at least for myself.
No, the original goal of Shepard and the player. That's why it has to be there.
er...No, it doesn't. Shepard is beaten. TIM kicked Shepard and Anderson enough that it is game over until the Catalyst grants a Mulligan for a chance at the switches.
er...No, it doesn't. Shepard is beaten. TIM kicked Shepard and Anderson enough that it is game over until the Catalyst grants a Mulligan for a chance at the switches.
Well, if Shepard is beaten then Refuse it is. Because Synthesis doesn't feel like the victory over the main antagonist at all.
Yes the Mother alone has the choice. She can be informed but the choice ultimately comes down to her because she is the only one capable of making the choice. That choice will effect the child for better or worse. A lot like the ending of the game.
Where does it say/show Synthesis removes diversity? This seems to be a very common set up when it comes to synthesis ending. The complaints about it aren't supported even vaugly by anything said or shown in game.
There is no removal of diversity. Their respective societies might change but that change would happen due to advancements in technology anyways. Protheans were killed by Reapers but it was lack of a diverse MILITARY STRATEGY that ultimately caused their defeat. Which has no baring on the effect of Synthesis on the galaxy.
Besides the fact I like this song a lot. It is about how you can't actually understand someone's situation till you have been in it. This is a fundamental fact of life. It doesn't matter how much you study something you can not fully understand it until you have experienced it yourself. Organics can learn the quarks of synthetics and synthetics can write massive programs on how to interact with each other but neither side will fully understand each other until they have walked a mile in each others shoes.
Quarians and Geth stopped fighting because they were facing a mutual enemy that vastly over powered either of them. That is great for short term but not really long term peace.
The full extent of synthesis's effects are not shown in game because it is very costly to do so on the game's part, it is only natural to speculate things.
Too much is unknown about the subject: can it be switched off? how can it be switched off? does death still happen? How does reproduction work as organics and synthetics are reproduced differently? does a new born baby knows how to operate on a cancer patient, thus robbing the surgeon parent's fulfillment of teaching the child? (Of course, you may argue that now people are capable to fixing themselves, the hell with specialized professions, everyone is operating on god-mode...) The list goes on...
I don't understand why it is so important to get under someone's skin in order to gain "understanding" so to attain accord. It is like you need to be your wife in order to love her... sure, our communication is not perfect but we get by and we continue learning and that is why life is meaningful. Why does a human want to be a rat for a day to appreciate life, and decide not to kill anymore rats? To conclude: synthesis has nothing to do with attaining "understanding" of ugly truths, actual understanding is done BEFORE synthesis
Anyway, my concern is: synthesis made sure that everyone is using the same kind of technology to advance and as time goes by they develop reliance on it, and this is similar to races developing reliance on the mass relays, without them, or, if this technology turned out to be defective against some OTHER intergalactic threats, they are doomed
er...No, it doesn't. Shepard is beaten. TIM kicked Shepard and Anderson enough that it is game over until the Catalyst grants a Mulligan for a chance at the switches.
Yes it does. Had it not been, the player outcry would have been even louder. Unlike Synthesis, it actually fit the story.
Well, if Shepard is beaten then Refuse it is. Because Synthesis doesn't feel like the victory over the main antagonist at all.
It isn't!
Your feelings aside, no more cycles and advanced civilization for all appears to be a rather suitable outcome.
So why didn't the Catalyst just show up and offer this at the start rather than kill everyone over and over? It couldn't figure out a giant battery to power it?
So why didn't the Catalyst just show up and offer this at the start rather than kill everyone over and over? It couldn't figure out a giant battery to power it?
Shepard had to prove that humanity (ie; organics) had evolved enough to be given the opportunity.
The full extent of synthesis's effects are not shown in game because it is very costly to do so on the game's part, it is only natural to speculate things.
Too much is unknown about the subject: can it be switched off? how can it be switched off? does death still happen? How does reproduction work as organics and synthetics are reproduced differently? does a new born baby knows how to operate on a cancer patient, thus robbing the surgeon parent's fulfillment of teaching the child? (Of course, you may argue that now people are capable to fixing themselves, the hell with specialized professions, everyone is operating on god-mode...) The list goes on...
I don't understand why it is so important to get under someone's skin in order to gain "understanding" so to attain accord. It is like you need to be your wife in order to love her... sure, our communication is not perfect but we get by and we continue learning and that is why life is meaningful. Why does a human want to be a rat for a day to appreciate life, and decide not to kill anymore rats? To conclude: synthesis has nothing to do with attaining "understanding" of ugly truths, actual understanding is done BEFORE synthesis
Anyway, my concern is: synthesis made sure that everyone is using the same kind of technology to advance and as time goes by they develop reliance on it, and this is similar to races developing reliance on the mass relays, without them, or, if this technology turned out to be defective against some OTHER intergalactic threats, they are doomed
The full extent of any ending are not shown in game because it is very costly to do so on the game's part. The difference between speculation about Destroy and Control ending is all the complaining about possible negative effects are not even hinted at in game. At least the game has a couple of instances of unnecessary conflict between organic and synthetic to justify the what if about destroy. AIShep's ending speech can give you reason to worry about possible future actions depending on if you are a paragon or renegade. The only thing for Synthesis is if Wrev is still alive that he no longer wants to engage in a galaxy wide bloody war that ends with the Krogan grinding all other races under their boots in a river of blood. And a altering a murderous war lord into a not murderous war lord doesn't really scream terrible change.
A couple of those don't seem like legitimate complaints. Generally speaking the ability to remove sickness is considered a good thing. If medicine is no longer needed to be practiced they can move onto other fields. As well reproduction differences between a human and a AI again have no connection on the ending. As for the questions that have some legitimate holding on the subject. Since it is fully integrated with the body no it can't be switched off and on at will anymore then your nerve endings can. Development particularly mental development will be able to happen at much higher speeds probably close to if not a bit faster then what Salarians are capable of doing. Like wise life could certainly be extended but generally speaking being shot or falling from some place high. There is only so much that can be done.
To truly understand someone or what someone has gone though you would have to be them or gone though a similar problem. In your funny case of rats we can watch them all we want and infer why they do what. But unless you are a rat the specific reasons for their actions and to fully understand them is impossible. Cats and Dogs specifically suffer from this issue. People get them and expect them to act a certain way. Dogs and Cats think fundamentally differently then people do despite the human characteristics given to them. People try to understand the reason behind the actions but ultimately every day hundreds of dogs and cats are brought to shelters or abandoned because their owner couldn't fully understand them. And every day hundreds are put down because shelters lack the ability to hold that many pets.
When Eve is talking about the life of female Krogan and the despair that hit them when the babies would be still born on of my female friends who's house I was over while she was playing this game broke down in tears at that point. Because she not to long ago had a still birth. And in that instant the game effected her far more then it did me. To me it was just a sad story. Sympathy and sadness for what happened but I don't truly understand what it would be like to be in that same situation. She turned on a dime from wanting to sabotage the cure to wanting it to happen.
Your examples are child like. I don't mean that as in insult but you really only touch the surface about what I'm talking about. A leaf is green simply because you see it as green. Rather then it is green due to the cellular action in the plant which then interacts with light wave lengths with all other colors being adsorbed by the plant and only green being reflected back towards our eyes.
Synthetics jumps up to a new level of tech for all races to then develop from that point. There is no more and no less reliance on technology then already exited. And don't forget with Synthesis ending they have the Reapers on their side. So any attempt from an extra galactic enemy to attack they would already have to be massively more advanced.
Original goal of the Reapers? The Catalyst? The Crucible was of Prothean design, but the Citadel was not.
Yet, the Intelligence offers Shepard up to four choices; none of which it had to do. While one does not have to believe it, they are presented as options. This speaks to the objective nature of the entity, at least for myself.
Uhm...the Crucible's design was created long before the Protheans. They merely perfected one thing or another and had something to do with figuring out how the Citadel was supposed to be attached to it and use it as a power source.
Source: the Prothean VI on Thessia and in the Illusive Man's chamber.
Your feelings aside, no more cycles and advanced civilization for all appears to be a rather suitable outcome.
It's impossible. The feelings of the people you're talking to won't be put aside. As long as people won't see that the ending isn't about things like good and evil or winning and losing, it's actually that they don't care about the ending itself. They only talk about what they the game to be. Instead of an analysis of the writing they only talk about their expectations and their feelings.
If we take a look at many people here, when they argue against synthesis, they actually want people to share their point of view. They force people to see the game just like they see it. They don't care about some choices the player and Shepard could have taken that would lead to a situation where Shepard could see synthesis as the best solution for them. It's kinda ironic to see that most of their time they use an analogy : reapers are supposed to be like nazi or fascist but at the same time we all know that fascism is based on imposing people a point of view. Fascism forces to say and think in one way. Fascism uses moral in order to give the illusion of agumentation.
So for them Mass Effect ending is partly bad because of the "synthesis choice", when it's just a choice. The game never forces anyone to take that way. It would be ridiculous to say that something is bad because we have the possibility to do something we don't like. So how can it be a reason why the ending is "bad"?
An example that shows that there is no discussion and you're talking with haters who don't want to understand the game but spend their time jsut to try to convince you because they can't stand the fact that some people can like it :
"So why didn't the Catalyst just show up and offer this at the start rather than kill everyone over and over? It couldn't figure out a giant battery to power it?"
that question is already answered in the game : synthesis can't be forced. That's the answer of the game. Anyone who can't understand it is actually someone who doesn't want to understand it. (or it's someone who can sum up the cycle to "yo dang" then it's someone who never really played Mass Effect and actually was expecting to play Call of Duty in space)
Uhm...the Crucible's design was created long before the Protheans. They merely perfected one thing or another and had something to do with figuring out how the Citadel was supposed to be attached to it and use it as a power source.
Source: the Prothean VI on Thessia and in the Illusive Man's chamber.
Aye; but the Protheans were the last civilization to build on it. And I do not know the others to name them. Rule's lawyers....
All that said, it was the Catalyst that seemingly created the switches, even the ones that supposedly were opposed to their own interests. This speaks of objectivity to me. But if one suspects deception, why then pull the switch that supposedly destroys them? Rhetorical; they will come back anyway....
An example that shows that there is no discussion and you're talking with haters who don't want to understand the game but spend their time jsut to try to convince you because they can't stand the fact that some people can like it :
"So why didn't the Catalyst just show up and offer this at the start rather than kill everyone over and over? It couldn't figure out a giant battery to power it?"
that question is already answered in the game : synthesis can't be forced. That's the answer of the game. Anyone who can't understand it is actually someone who doesn't want to understand it. (or it's someone who can sum up the cycle to "yo dang" then it's someone who never really played Mass Effect and actually was expecting to play Call of Duty in space)
Still sticking with stupid ad hominem "haters," eh? Well I wouldn't expect you to learn to make substantive arguments in only a few days. I'm the one who brought up the "can not be forced" line. But no other cycle got the opportunity because the genius AI needed the squishies to build the giant battery before Synthesis was even possible.
Still sticking with stupid ad hominem "haters," eh? Well I wouldn't expect you to learn to make substantive arguments in only a few days. I'm the one who brought up the "can not be forced" line. But no other cycle got the opportunity because the genius AI needed the squishies to build the giant battery before Synthesis was even possible.
Yea generally speaking you have to build something before you can realize it's potential. That is why the computer didn't just magically appear one day out of thin air.
Yea generally speaking you have to build something before you can realize it's potential. That is why the computer didn't just magically appear one day out of thin air.
But humans built computers. We didn't have a problem and need bears and pigeons to build a computer to solve them .
Where's that rocket ship going over the point picture you had? I need it now.
Humans made both of those. We didn't need inferior beings to come solve the problem or build them for us.
And in one sentence you ignore how often animals were used to help create a lot of stuff. Like Oxen solving the problem of how to plow multi acre fields in a day. We had the idea of wanting to farm larger bits of land at a time and it was the oxen/horse/donkey that made it possible.
Synthesis is intentionally non-specific. It is meant to simply signify a leap in development - some existential state of advancement which we otherwise would not have reached without a lot more bloodshed. Trying to specify it would naturally make it sound ridiculous. Shepard's essence added to the Crucible is probably meant to signal that development along the players' ideal path, so it is different things to different players.
Original goal of the Reapers? The Catalyst? The Crucible was of Prothean design, but the Citadel was not.
No it wasn't. Everything is of Reaper design or functions because of the legacy tech reapers created. Starjar tells you. So does leviathan. So does Liara. Pay attention
"So why didn't the Catalyst just show up and offer this at the start rather than kill everyone over and over? It couldn't figure out a giant battery to power it?"
that question is already answered in the game : synthesis can't be forced. That's the answer of the game. Anyone who can't understand it is actually someone who doesn't want to understand it.
This is backwards logic. Had the Catalyst straight up offered the choice of becoming synthesized, it would be giving the galaxy more of a choice than what they got if Shepard jumped into the beam, which is none at all. It says it can't be forced, yet suggests that forcibly synthesizing the galaxy is the ideal option. Consider this: if the Catalyst just scooped up a random person/alien and threw it into a Crucible of its own making, there would be no difference between this act and when Shepard does it. I doubt it being Shepard physically makes a difference. It could probably toss in a vorcha to the same effect. There's no good reason (at least none explained in-game) why this wouldn't work.
Retour en haut
