inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Dec 28, 2020 16:58:54 GMT
Were does DNA have to do with thought? I'm the eldest of 4 children and all 4 of us has similar DNA from the same source and we all have different personalities and thoughts. Saying DNA changed so that must mean everyone's brains are forcibly altered is the same as saying sacrificing a goat increasing the crop harvest.
If the Reapers wanted to alter how everyone thinks they could have done that easily a few billion years ago. After the first cycle simply build towers on planets that can support life and set machines to watch the planet to turn them on when complex advanced life starts to form to alter their thinking from the origin of a species.
The difference is that destroy and control at least have concerns that are supported by in game events. The repeated issues brought up against synthesis are completely pulled out of the back sides of the people complaining 9 out of 10 times.
I haven't. I said "everyone seemingly synchronized" in regards to the changed minds. But anyways: changing someone's DNA without their consent is "the game event" as you call it, that's a no-go for me. If that's not bad enough for you, that's fine, but as I posted before that is a legitimate concern for many and not pulled out of anyone's ass. Yes SEEMINGLY. Just like everyone was SEEMINGLY synchronized about the whole stop the Reapers during the invasion of Earth. Does that mean that Shepard forcibly altered everyone's mind to get them to all work together towards the goal of retaking Earth and deploying the Crucible against the Reapers? The Salarins seem pretty synchronized about their view of the Krogan and how the Genophage was a good thing. We have only a few outliers on the whole idea. What kind of DNA brain washing did the Salarians do to each other to have such an opinion? Quarins all seem to think a like and act alike and have not had any attempted coups or splinting of the Flotilla in 200 years. What sort of brain washing allows them to seem to synchronize about the whole thing?
So you have a moral objective to DNA alteration even though it does nothing but improve people. OK fine. Where on your arbitrary morality line does directly causing the mass death of millions and the indirect death of hundreds of millions if not billions that would take place during Destroy if it was not given the same fairy tale ending that Synthesis gets? Because upgrade to everyone vs little Tammy watching her parents get killed for what meager resources they have before she is forcibly taken as slave labor or worse for the gang that attacked the house because all technology is gone and it has descended into anarchy is much worse to me.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Dec 28, 2020 17:03:52 GMT
Why wouldn't it? The whole point of an AI is that it would not necessarily behave in a logical fashion, or purely out of personal incentive. So it's an Altruistic genocidal AI that thinks of the specific organic cycle because ... it felt like it. I have trouble believing that. Like, I feel what you're trying to say, but I don't see how this would be the case. Where would all these virtues be, that the Catalyst so graciously shows Shepard, when it decided to wipe out entire species, over and over again, defiled their corpses and warped their minds. These are not actions of a benevolent, or even empathetic, AI. So with its actions, I find this benign behaviour it show Shepard, to be quite inconsistent and with a 99% certainty, intentionally misleading. You realise the situation you're describing is exactly what happened, right? The Catalyst says as much to your face. And THEN, it goes on to say that Shepard's ability to overcome its defences and reach the point they have reached proves that the previous solution to the "problem" of Organic vs Synthetic (ie, the Reapers, which it already deemed imperfect, but was unable to improve on any further), is no longer viable. Because by even reaching that point, Shepard has proved that defeating the Reapers is possible, meaning a new solution is required. It goes on to say that integration with the Crucible has made new options possible that were not possible before. This is all directly communicated to Shepard and the audience as clearly as it possibly can be. You don't have to like it, you might disagree with the logic (I do), but it's the premise of the story, so that's what you've got to work with. Well, this I am more on board with. Yes, it does happen like that in the game. That is irrefutable. The point is that it doesn't make sense to happen like that, as you seem to agree. So we do appear to be on the same page. You understand the complaint. That is all I ask. Well, that behaviour is not reasonable, is not altruistic, is not even self serving. I don't know how I would describe it. It is, as you say, powerless to stop Shepard. But it is also not obligated to interact, explain or guide Shepard. Without the Catalyst explaining anything, Shepard is left to stare at a panel, an electric current and a green light. It would be anyone's guess whether Shepard would be able to do anything in the Catalyst's room, without any context as to what they are seeing there. So, effectively, all the Catalyst needs to do to sop Shepard is nothing. Yet, it chooses not to, for no clear discernible reason. Maybe it was lonely.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Dec 28, 2020 17:22:15 GMT
Well I dunno what to tell you man, with the way the ending works currently, people need to get that information somehow, and the Catalyst has no reason to do or *not do* anything at all, so it might as well do. Within the context of ME3 as it currently exists, the Catalyst's actions make sense. Would other actions have also made sense? Yeah, probably. Would inaction have also made sense? Sure, why not. Most things "make sense" from a given point of view.
If you want to know what I really think, I think the problems with ME3 run much deeper than its ending or the choices therein, and arguing about them misses the wood for the trees. I don't believe there's any change that can be applied post-Priority: Earth to "fix" the game. What ME3 needed was a re-write from pretty much the ground up, starting with scrapping the entire dumbass premise that synthetic and organic life can't co-exist. Aside from making next to no sense as a "motive" for the Reapers, it wasn't built up to in the previous instalments and ME3 doesn't make a compelling argument for why that should be the case.
|
|
trengilly
N1
In Gaming Quarantine
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Posts: 26 Likes: 55
inherit
9386
0
55
trengilly
In Gaming Quarantine
26
Sept 26, 2017 6:24:39 GMT
September 2017
trengilly
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
|
Post by trengilly on Dec 28, 2020 17:23:03 GMT
But there's nothing in the Synthesis ending that states that anyone's mind has been forcibly changed. The Child certainly doesn't mention that as part of the process, only that Shepard's DNA (because Shepard is already partly-synthetic due to the resurrection at the start of ME2) will be used as a framework to alter the organic and synthetic species of the galaxy, including the Reapers and their various creations (husks, etc). If minds aren't forcibly changed . . . well than what is the point of Synthesis . . . nothing changes? What does "alter the organic and synthetic species of the galaxy" mean?
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Dec 28, 2020 17:40:07 GMT
But there's nothing in the Synthesis ending that states that anyone's mind has been forcibly changed. The Child certainly doesn't mention that as part of the process, only that Shepard's DNA (because Shepard is already partly-synthetic due to the resurrection at the start of ME2) will be used as a framework to alter the organic and synthetic species of the galaxy, including the Reapers and their various creations (husks, etc). If minds aren't forcibly changed . . . well than what is the point of Synthesis . . . nothing changes? What does "alter the organic and synthetic species of the galaxy" mean? The "point" of it is to end the cycle of synthetics wiping out organics by merging the two so that ALL species of the Milky Way are partly organic and partly synthetic, thus making it possible for both types of being to co-exist, since the entire premise of the game is apparently that, if left to their own devices, synthetic life will eventually wipe out organic life for good. The merging of the two makes the once-inevitable conflict now a non-issue, and the vast knowledge of past civilizations that is provided by the Reapers creates a new era of peace and prosperity for the entire galaxy. Mind control is not a requirement for long-lasting peace. Why would it be? EDI doesn't elaborate on exactly what knowledge is now available to them, but with adequate technology it is theoretically possible to create a post-scarcity society where nobody will need to go to war over territory or resources ever again, and if given the time (as EDI herself hypothesises), the species of the Milky Way may even evolve together to a point where such concerns become totally irrelevant. But EDI doesn't even say that there will never be war or conflict or disagreement of any kind ever again, she simply doesn't mention it as a possibility, which is not the same thing at all.
|
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Dec 28, 2020 17:53:17 GMT
But there's nothing in the Synthesis ending that states that anyone's mind has been forcibly changed. The Child certainly doesn't mention that as part of the process, only that Shepard's DNA (because Shepard is already partly-synthetic due to the resurrection at the start of ME2) will be used as a framework to alter the organic and synthetic species of the galaxy, including the Reapers and their various creations (husks, etc). If minds aren't forcibly changed . . . well than what is the point of Synthesis . . . nothing changes? What does "alter the organic and synthetic species of the galaxy" mean? Organics are freed of limits of biological evolution by making them a hybrid of organic and synthetic. Giving them the same capabilities that synthetic life was created to over come. The extent of this can be open for personal interpretation but increased thinking capabilities and memory are major ones. As would the ability to interface directly with all technology on a level only AI's were capable of before would be another.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Dec 28, 2020 18:18:20 GMT
If you want to know what I really think, I think the problems with ME3 run much deeper than its ending or the choices therein, and arguing about them misses the wood for the trees. I don't believe there's any change that can be applied post-Priority: Earth to "fix" the game. What ME3 needed was a re-write from pretty much the ground up, starting with scrapping the entire dumbass premise that synthetic and organic life can't co-exist. Aside from making next to no sense as a "motive" for the Reapers, it wasn't built up to in the previous instalments and ME3 doesn't make a compelling argument for why that should be the case. I absolutely agree. But a lot of people where OK with ME3, or even loved it, up until the point of the Catalyst sequence, where the game and subsequently the franchise, fell apart for them. And it would have been fine, had the majority been satisfied with it, but it doesn't look like that, to me. It looks like a big chunk of the fanbase, a vital one, was lost with ME3.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jan 24, 2024 17:47:40 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Dec 28, 2020 18:18:50 GMT
I haven't. I said "everyone seemingly synchronized" in regards to the changed minds. But anyways: changing someone's DNA without their consent is "the game event" as you call it, that's a no-go for me. If that's not bad enough for you, that's fine, but as I posted before that is a legitimate concern for many and not pulled out of anyone's ass. Yes SEEMINGLY. Just like everyone was SEEMINGLY synchronized about the whole stop the Reapers during the invasion of Earth. Does that mean that Shepard forcibly altered everyone's mind to get them to all work together towards the goal of retaking Earth and deploying the Crucible against the Reapers? The Salarins seem pretty synchronized about their view of the Krogan and how the Genophage was a good thing. We have only a few outliers on the whole idea. What kind of DNA brain washing did the Salarians do to each other to have such an opinion? Quarins all seem to think a like and act alike and have not had any attempted coups or splinting of the Flotilla in 200 years. What sort of brain washing allows them to seem to synchronize about the whole thing?
So you have a moral objective to DNA alteration even though it does nothing but improve people. OK fine. Where on your arbitrary morality line does directly causing the mass death of millions and the indirect death of hundreds of millions if not billions that would take place during Destroy if it was not given the same fairy tale ending that Synthesis gets? Because upgrade to everyone vs little Tammy watching her parents get killed for what meager resources they have before she is forcibly taken as slave labor or worse for the gang that attacked the house because all technology is gone and it has descended into anarchy is much worse to me.
Key difference here is that we know exactly how and why anyone decides to pledge support to Shepard, as well as how and why the groups we encounter think the way they do, given their history. No one snapped their fingers or pressed a button to shift the general mindset of other people. It was years of mistakes and conflicts that led to difficult decisions that lasted for generations. Synthesis, on the other hand, has no explanation as to precisely what it does or how it’s supposed to solve anyone’s problems. The most we get remotely resembling an explanation is that it grants “understanding” to the people that are altered, but that’s incredibly vague, especially when this is something conceptualized by a being that may not even fully comprehend the difference between the individual and the collective. The problem with Synthesis is not really the “improvement” that it’s supposed to grant people, but rather that we don’t really know what these improvements are supposed to be, or exactly why we need them before it’s too late to change your mind. If I told you that you could end crime in your city at the push of a button, wouldn’t you be curious as to what horrible catch that might entail? Synthesis is framed as a necessity, yet offers no support to establish that necessity. The bottom line is basically this: Synthesis’ only key support in the story is that it prevents the deaths of EDI and the geth. If Destroy allowed you to spare all non-reaper synthetics, it would have zero legs to stand on.
|
|
inherit
217
0
2,752
General Mahad
You'll be peeling goddamn potatoes for the rest of your miserable excuse for a military career!
1,661
August 2016
vaas
|
Post by General Mahad on Dec 28, 2020 18:26:49 GMT
Why am I playing 3 games (not to mention 4 books and many comics) that all build up that unity is the best option. Freedom of choice thst only synthesis gives. Why does all this material tell me that destruction is bad (literally every time destruction is actually *shown* it’s terrible, 9/10 we try to avoid it and the other times it’s a tragedy) Only for Shepard to destroy everything? It makes no sense from a writing stand point. It’s just ruining the storytelling. I don't know if someone has already made this post but the Synthesis ending literately robs freedom of choice for hundreds of trillions of sentient and non-sentient beings.
Destroy is the Pyrrhic victory that keeps the Mass Effect universe somewhat intact. Control as well to a far lesser extent because I don't see conflicts or even normalcy arising under Galactic Overlord Shepard's reign.
I will miss the Geth though, they were more impactful than I give them credit for.
|
|
inherit
1129
0
Mar 19, 2024 19:19:28 GMT
2,051
traks
1,012
Aug 22, 2016 11:07:02 GMT
August 2016
traks
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
t_raks_99
|
Post by traks on Dec 28, 2020 18:37:33 GMT
I haven't. I said "everyone seemingly synchronized" in regards to the changed minds. But anyways: changing someone's DNA without their consent is "the game event" as you call it, that's a no-go for me. If that's not bad enough for you, that's fine, but as I posted before that is a legitimate concern for many and not pulled out of anyone's ass. Yes SEEMINGLY. Just like everyone was SEEMINGLY synchronized about the whole stop the Reapers during the invasion of Earth. Does that mean that Shepard forcibly altered everyone's mind to get them to all work together towards the goal of retaking Earth and deploying the Crucible against the Reapers? The Salarins seem pretty synchronized about their view of the Krogan and how the Genophage was a good thing. We have only a few outliers on the whole idea. What kind of DNA brain washing did the Salarians do to each other to have such an opinion? Quarins all seem to think a like and act alike and have not had any attempted coups or splinting of the Flotilla in 200 years. What sort of brain washing allows them to seem to synchronize about the whole thing?
So you have a moral objective to DNA alteration even though it does nothing but improve people. OK fine. Where on your arbitrary morality line does directly causing the mass death of millions and the indirect death of hundreds of millions if not billions that would take place during Destroy if it was not given the same fairy tale ending that Synthesis gets? Because upgrade to everyone vs little Tammy watching her parents get killed for what meager resources they have before she is forcibly taken as slave labor or worse for the gang that attacked the house because all technology is gone and it has descended into anarchy is much worse to me.
I wouldn't call leaving the decision whether you want to merge with synthetics up to you arbitrary. Yes, self determination and free will is that important to me that I will not make such a decision for you nor for the whole galaxy. Why did I say that synthesis seemingly also alters the mind? Because that's the only explanation to me for everyone accepting such a drastic change of their being without a revolt. I also already said that your concerns about destroy are legitimate concerns, although of course I don't see billions dying. Every organic stays alive, the knowledge and lessons learned through encountering the Reapers are still there, so I am pretty hopeful for that scenario.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Dec 28, 2020 18:44:10 GMT
Yes SEEMINGLY. Just like everyone was SEEMINGLY synchronized about the whole stop the Reapers during the invasion of Earth. Does that mean that Shepard forcibly altered everyone's mind to get them to all work together towards the goal of retaking Earth and deploying the Crucible against the Reapers? The Salarins seem pretty synchronized about their view of the Krogan and how the Genophage was a good thing. We have only a few outliers on the whole idea. What kind of DNA brain washing did the Salarians do to each other to have such an opinion? Quarins all seem to think a like and act alike and have not had any attempted coups or splinting of the Flotilla in 200 years. What sort of brain washing allows them to seem to synchronize about the whole thing?
So you have a moral objective to DNA alteration even though it does nothing but improve people. OK fine. Where on your arbitrary morality line does directly causing the mass death of millions and the indirect death of hundreds of millions if not billions that would take place during Destroy if it was not given the same fairy tale ending that Synthesis gets? Because upgrade to everyone vs little Tammy watching her parents get killed for what meager resources they have before she is forcibly taken as slave labor or worse for the gang that attacked the house because all technology is gone and it has descended into anarchy is much worse to me.
Key difference here is that we know exactly how and why anyone decides to pledge support to Shepard, as well as how and why the groups we encounter think the way they do, given their history. No one snapped their fingers or pressed a button to shift the general mindset of other people. It was years of mistakes and conflicts that led to difficult decisions that lasted for generations. Synthesis, on the other hand, has no explanation as to precisely what it does or how it’s supposed to solve anyone’s problems. The most we get remotely resembling an explanation is that it grants “understanding” to the people that are altered, but that’s incredibly vague, especially when this is something conceptualized by a being that may not even fully comprehend the difference between the individual and the collective. The problem with Synthesis is not really the “improvement” that it’s supposed to grant people, but rather that we don’t really know what these improvements are supposed to be, or exactly why we need them before it’s too late to change your mind. If I told you that you could end crime in your city at the push of a button, wouldn’t you be curious as to what horrible catch that might entail? Synthesis is framed as a necessity, yet offers no support to establish that necessity. The bottom line is basically this: Synthesis’ only key support in the story is that it prevents the deaths of EDI and the geth. If Destroy allowed you to spare all non-reaper synthetics, it would have zero legs to stand on. Yes, if only the game was totally different in a major way.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Dec 28, 2020 18:48:28 GMT
I wouldn't call leaving the decision whether you want to merge with synthetics up to you arbitrary. Yes, self determination and free will is that important to me that I will not make such a decision for you nor for the whole galaxy. Why did I say that synthesis seemingly also alters the mind? Because that's the only explanation to me for everyone accepting such a drastic change of their being without a revolt. I also already said that your concerns about destroy are legitimate concerns, although of course I don't see billions dying. Every organic stays alive, the knowledge and lessons learned through encountering the Reapers are still there, so I am pretty hopeful for that scenario. Okay, but literally the entire trilogy is a series of massively impactful choices that affect the entire galaxy being made by one person acting unilaterally? You're imagining a brainwashing scenario that wasn't stated because you can't conceive of people genuinely wanting to co-operate to achieve lasting piece, whereas the Catalyst explicitly states that destroy will wipe out not just non-Reaper synthetic life, but also much of the technology that the civilizations of the Milky Way rely on to function. There's literally no way that doesn't kill billions of people just in the short term.
|
|
inherit
1129
0
Mar 19, 2024 19:19:28 GMT
2,051
traks
1,012
Aug 22, 2016 11:07:02 GMT
August 2016
traks
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
t_raks_99
|
Post by traks on Dec 28, 2020 19:01:13 GMT
I wouldn't call leaving the decision whether you want to merge with synthetics up to you arbitrary. Yes, self determination and free will is that important to me that I will not make such a decision for you nor for the whole galaxy. Why did I say that synthesis seemingly also alters the mind? Because that's the only explanation to me for everyone accepting such a drastic change of their being without a revolt. I also already said that your concerns about destroy are legitimate concerns, although of course I don't see billions dying. Every organic stays alive, the knowledge and lessons learned through encountering the Reapers are still there, so I am pretty hopeful for that scenario. Okay, but literally the entire trilogy is a series of massively impactful choices that affect the entire galaxy being made by one person acting unilaterally? But none alters living beings (that stay alive ) like synthesis does. You might think Genophage, but of course I undo the Genophage almost every time and I have argued often enough, that the Krogan will eventually find a cure for the Genophage (whether Shepard helps them or not), because they won't stop pursuing it just because any Shepard thought that the status quo is better for the galaxy or that it makes sense out of tactical considerations. I really am not one that likes these power fantasies of one person deciding everything and am of the belief, that none of us is/should be THAT important. Maybe that's why I'm also more open to different scenarios for the next Mass Effect game. My Shepard made his decisions in the trilogy, but just while considering them the best options at that particular moment, nothing that definitely changes everything forever. With the exception of stopping the Reapers of course, which is the ultimate accomplishment of Shepard and the only lasting one when looking forward to the next game.
|
|
inherit
1129
0
Mar 19, 2024 19:19:28 GMT
2,051
traks
1,012
Aug 22, 2016 11:07:02 GMT
August 2016
traks
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
t_raks_99
|
Post by traks on Dec 28, 2020 19:17:22 GMT
You're imagining a brainwashing scenario that wasn't stated because you can't conceive of people genuinely wanting to co-operate to achieve lasting piece, whereas the Catalyst explicitly states that destroy will wipe out not just non-Reaper synthetic life, but also much of the technology that the civilizations of the Milky Way rely on to function. There's literally no way that doesn't kill billions of people just in the short term. It's forced on you via the crucible changing the DNA, it's not cooperation. Post destroy the galaxy is still in crisis mode, but everyone is already working together and the resources and knowledge are still there, so I wouldn't equate destroy with devastation. It also is the only option that definitely is a solution to the Reapers, because as I already said, in control someone else might gain control of the Reapers, in synthesis they still might keep everyone at bay (not a worry as long as everyone acts streamlined , but for example are you allowed to reverse synthesis?) and in refuse you obviously have to keep fighting them. We didn't agree 8 years ago and won't now. Which is Ok. Again: all I ask for is more understanding. I for one know, that players that choose synthesis interpret it differently and that BioWare probably didn't mean it to be as bad as I interpret it even being an option and the presentation.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Dec 28, 2020 19:30:52 GMT
You're imagining a brainwashing scenario that wasn't stated because you can't conceive of people genuinely wanting to co-operate to achieve lasting piece, whereas the Catalyst explicitly states that destroy will wipe out not just non-Reaper synthetic life, but also much of the technology that the civilizations of the Milky Way rely on to function. There's literally no way that doesn't kill billions of people just in the short term. It's forced on you via the crucible changing the DNA, it's not cooperation. Post destroy the galaxy is still in crisis mode, but everyone is already working together and the resources and knowledge are still there, so I wouldn't equate destroy with devastation. It also is the only option that definitely is a solution to the Reapers, because as I already said, in control someone else might gain control of the Reapers, in synthesis they still might keep everyone at bay (not a worry as long as everyone acts streamlined , but for example are you allowed to reverse synthesis?) and in refuse you obviously have to keep fighting them. We didn't agree 8 years ago and won't now. Which is Ok. Again: all I ask for is more understanding. I for one know, that players that choose synthesis interpret it differently and that BioWare probably didn't mean it to be as bad as I interpret it even being an option and the presentation. BioWare glosses over the potential negative aspects of all the options because it wants to give all the players a happy-ish ending, regardless of their choice, so of course it doesn't examine the explicitly stated consequences of Destroy as it's laid out in the game, but we're talking nearly ALL technology in the Milky Way being instantaneously deactivated: ships falling from the sky, hospitals going dark, Quarians dying en masse because their suits no longer function, all forms of long-range communication and travel knocked out... It would be more than a crisis, it's basically sending society back to the stone age. But at least people have the freedom of choice to decide if they want to forage or hunt, lol.
|
|
inherit
217
0
2,752
General Mahad
You'll be peeling goddamn potatoes for the rest of your miserable excuse for a military career!
1,661
August 2016
vaas
|
Post by General Mahad on Dec 28, 2020 19:32:19 GMT
I wouldn't call leaving the decision whether you want to merge with synthetics up to you arbitrary. Yes, self determination and free will is that important to me that I will not make such a decision for you nor for the whole galaxy. Why did I say that synthesis seemingly also alters the mind? Because that's the only explanation to me for everyone accepting such a drastic change of their being without a revolt. I also already said that your concerns about destroy are legitimate concerns, although of course I don't see billions dying. Every organic stays alive, the knowledge and lessons learned through encountering the Reapers are still there, so I am pretty hopeful for that scenario. Okay, but literally the entire trilogy is a series of massively impactful choices that affect the entire galaxy being made by one person acting unilaterally? Yeah, politically or economically, hell Shepard's responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people and the destruction of a star system.
That said, that pales in comparison to altering the DNA of all life in the galaxy with space magic.
Don't put your words in my mouth.
Lasting peace? What a joke. Civilization thrives on conflict and the Mass Effect Universe is no different. The only ones capable of a having a lasting peace were the networked Geth and they still experienced a civil war despite openly communicating their issues and trusting their rebels. Hell, Legion needed to brainwash them to rejoin the Geth Collective and not all of them agreed to rejoin the Geth.
Also I didn't say brainwashing more like infection and unwanted bodily manipulation.
BTW Utopias are complete fantasies, more so than the Reapers. The Mass Effect Universe is realpolitik to the ninth degree.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Dec 28, 2020 19:34:12 GMT
Okay, but literally the entire trilogy is a series of massively impactful choices that affect the entire galaxy being made by one person acting unilaterally? Yeah, politically or economically, hell Shepard's responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people and the destruction of a star system.
That said, that pales in comparison to altering the DNA of all life in the galaxy with space magic.
Don't put your words in my mouth.
Lasting peace? What a joke. Civilization thrives on conflict and the Mass Effect Universe is no different. The only ones capable of a having a lasting peace were the networked Geth and they still experienced a civil war despite openly communicating their issues and trusting their rebels.
Also I didn't say brainwashing more like infection and unwanted bodily manipulation.
BTW Utopias are complete fantasies, more so than the Reapers. The Mass Effect Universe is realpolitik to the ninth degree.
I haven't put words in your mouth, I wasn't talking to you.
|
|
inherit
Usually respectful
701
0
5,084
Shinobu
Grateful to have this forum. Also, a giant killjoy.
1,540
August 2016
shinobu
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
Shinobu211
|
Post by Shinobu on Dec 28, 2020 19:36:24 GMT
I find I'm liking both sides of this argument.
10/10 would like again.
|
|
inherit
217
0
2,752
General Mahad
You'll be peeling goddamn potatoes for the rest of your miserable excuse for a military career!
1,661
August 2016
vaas
|
Post by General Mahad on Dec 28, 2020 19:40:25 GMT
Yeah, politically or economically, hell Shepard's responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people and the destruction of a star system.
That said, that pales in comparison to altering the DNA of all life in the galaxy with space magic.
Don't put your words in my mouth.
Lasting peace? What a joke. Civilization thrives on conflict and the Mass Effect Universe is no different. The only ones capable of a having a lasting peace were the networked Geth and they still experienced a civil war despite openly communicating their issues and trusting their rebels.
Also I didn't say brainwashing more like infection and unwanted bodily manipulation.
BTW Utopias are complete fantasies, more so than the Reapers. The Mass Effect Universe is realpolitik to the ninth degree.
I haven't put words in your mouth, I wasn't talking to you. My bad, that being said, your arguments for Synthesis are a bit naive.
|
|
trengilly
N1
In Gaming Quarantine
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Posts: 26 Likes: 55
inherit
9386
0
55
trengilly
In Gaming Quarantine
26
Sept 26, 2017 6:24:39 GMT
September 2017
trengilly
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
|
Post by trengilly on Dec 28, 2020 20:01:53 GMT
BioWare glosses over the potential negative aspects of all the options because it wants to give all the players a happy-ish ending, regardless of their choice, so of course it doesn't examine the explicitly stated consequences of Destroy as it's laid out in the game, but we're talking nearly ALL technology in the Milky Way being instantaneously deactivated: ships falling from the sky, hospitals going dark, Quarians dying en masse because their suits no longer function, all forms of long-range communication and travel knocked out... It would be more than a crisis, it's basically sending society back to the stone age. But at least people have the freedom of choice to decide if they want to forage or hunt, lol. Bioware glosses over BOTH the results of each choice AND the actual process of what each choice does. There is nothing specifying that 'ALL technology' is instantaneously deactivated . . . what even is 'All technology'. Bioware intentionally (I think) left it all vague so that each player could decide for themselves how each option played out and what that meant to them. They gave us three 'ideas' to choose from and, yes, made them all open ended 'happy-ish' endings. All of the options are equally valid for players depending on how they choose to interpret the results of their decision. If you feel in your playstate that Synthesis just causes everyone to get smarter so they can decided to live happily ever after, well then they do. And if in my universe Destroy doesn't do much lasting damage so there is no terrible fallout. Then that happens. This is all part of the 'choice' Bioware gave us . . . we each get to interpret the very vague ending as we like.
|
|
ahglock
N5
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
Origin: ShinobiKillfist
Posts: 2,867 Likes: 3,483
inherit
9886
0
3,483
ahglock
2,867
Feb 21, 2018 17:57:17 GMT
February 2018
ahglock
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
ShinobiKillfist
|
Post by ahglock on Dec 28, 2020 20:03:28 GMT
Lol. All your arguments are bad and you should feel bad for making them.
OK show the connection between DNA and thought. Show me the DNA sequences that makes someone like country music and the DNA sequences that like rap. Hell both of my parents are very conservative in politics and yet my own political stance is far far more liberal. 1 your science is bad, it has been repeatedly been proven that DNA influences large parts of a person thoughts. 2. Science is irrelevant because this is a game that ignores science. What does happen though is the game tells you everyone galaxy wide instant peace. That is a mental change. It changed peoples thoughts in the game. They flat out tell you this, you just want to ignore it. Also a fundamental change on this level turned them into things they never were before. Effectively killing who they were and creating a new life form. So basically genocide on a scale far beyond what red does even in the widest interpretation of life. If you created a virus that turned all black people white I suspect people would refer to it as a genocide of blacks. Heck if it only effected the all future people born they would still refer to it as a genocide of blacks. Furthermore the ending lets you know that AI are not alive because they only become alive after the green wave of evil comes through. Hence red wave of pure awesome never commits genocide vs the geth only vs the asshole reapers who had it coming.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Dec 28, 2020 20:04:15 GMT
I haven't put words in your mouth, I wasn't talking to you. My bad, that being said, your arguments for Synthesis are a bit naive. I'm just trying to work within the parameters of what the game actually tells us happens, and not what other players imagine happened. I don't necessarily disagree that Synthesis is a violation of bodily autonomy, but so's murder and I don't actually agree with the central logic that underpins the entire ending anyway, so it's all moot. I don't care if other people picked Destroy in their games, I just don't want it made canon. I'm not interested in playing in a Milky Way without the Geth, and any excuse BioWare came up with for their continued survival in a post-destroy galaxy would be hacky and lame. Find a way to accomodate all the endings, or stay in Andromeda and let the Milky Way trilogy stay finished.
|
|
Carcharoth
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
XBL Gamertag: Carcharoth42
PSN: Fenrisulfr42
Posts: 332 Likes: 886
inherit
136
0
886
Carcharoth
332
August 2016
carcharoth
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Carcharoth42
Fenrisulfr42
|
Post by Carcharoth on Dec 28, 2020 20:30:47 GMT
They are talking about how some people react and talk about Synthesis in a topic about BW canonizing an ending. That is completely valid to do as I have seen it myself crop up over and over again. The funny part of your reply here is you claim it is nothing more then a poor attempt at an emotional appeal and then you use the same emotional appeal by trying to claim "use of abortion debate" is no different. I only used it as an example of a discussion were different ideas and morals often clash with no single side having any real strength behind their argument because it is entirely based on "I think..." rather then anything resembling objective facts.
And I only used it as an example of your own use of an emotional appeal. Pinky promise. Definitely not used ironically to tweak your nose. The use of a loaded term is still unwarranted in a discussion about the endings, and especially one where the comparison wasn't made by anyone else that is actually here. Otherwise you open yourself up to all manner of accusations because someone else, somewhere else, said something similar.
1. Whether you wanted the cyborg upgrade is more important than it's efficiency. And I'm saying this as someone that relies on a similar device to live. I still wouldn't force it on anyone else. (There's your free emotional appeal.) I make no distinction between them if you did not request it.
2. You've presumably told your wife your wishes. If you had a dnr and it was ignored, then yes. And children aren't given important choices for a reason. Neither should you be forcing certain choices on them, since they're free to choose something else as adults and you can't undo the harm you've done.
As for the last point, you failed to make a case for hypocrisy. You make decisions for the sake of your war readiness score or for a specific narrative. Your inability to see destroy as consistent with previous choices does not make it so. I work to destroy the reapers, so I unite the galaxy against them. In the end, I destroy the reapers with some regrettable losses along the way. No contradiction there and it's consistent with other sacrifices made.
You're weirdly obsessed with a term I used twice in the post you quoted. The leviathans, the people that created the so called ai in the first place, said it was malfunctioning. If you talk to it at the end, especially after leviathan and ec, it uses circular logic to justify it's actions which also indicates either a malfunction or a limitation in it's programing. It's solution never worked. People try and fail and try something else. A computer spits out errors for a billion years without attempting to do something else. The popular meme about this exists for a reason. The quarians and geth stop fighting because you talked the quarians down. They are not actually obligated to obey you, except that your paragon/renegade score forces an outcome. The geth did not want to fight them and only did so when they were being attacked. We can not say peace never had a chance without Shepard, if all it takes is for the quarians to stop shooting for a minute. And there were quarians that were inclined in that direction. Except blue and red have obvious and stated downsides attached. I'd hardly call it amusing that they copied Deus Ex's homework without having an overarching plan for it from the beginning. I do find it amusing that you're reading more into the other endings than was shown, while complaining about others doing the same with synthesis. And you claim to dislike hypocrisy. Shepard is unable to contact anyone except Anderson. You do not have the opportunity to ask for anyone else's input on what to pick or the ability to warn them about it. And I still only used that term twice.
You should make up your mind on whether the krogan are able to determine their own fate or if they need meddling from outsiders to control them. Free will means letting them make bad choices along with the good. If Wrex can come up with the idea to unite and improve the species, then so can others.
Edi's ai shackle didn't prevent character growth. They prevented access to systems in the ship. While removing them shows trust which leads to more character growth, it was interactions with people that spurred further development. Legion also states that they wanted to develop on their own, without reaper involvement. And the heretics were a result of reapers introducing a runtime error leading to false outcomes in an equation. Kind of like altering people on a fundamental level changes how they think. The "brainwashing" solution corrects that error.
We can at least agree that all endings are awful and poorly written. But I'm not the one that made a post about synthesis being the best ending with the most narrative focus. Just defending destroy as the least bad of options and most consistent with the narrative. Maybe op is a troll looking to shit stir. Maybe they're a butthurt dev that's still mad that we don't choose options they want us to pick. Maybe they're genuine. I don't really care and just wanted to argue with people out of boredom. But I do think you're taking this far more seriously than I am.
In conclusion, IT confirmed.
|
|
inherit
2754
0
5,958
Son of Dorn
Fortifying everything.
6,276
Jan 11, 2017 14:17:27 GMT
January 2017
doomlolz
Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by Son of Dorn on Dec 28, 2020 21:35:11 GMT
Surprised it took this long for a thread like this to pop up.
|
|
Cyberstrike
N4
is wanting to have some fun!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
XBL Gamertag: cyberstrike nTo
PSN: cyberstrike-nTo
Prime Posts: 1,732
Prime Likes: 467
Posts: 1,879 Likes: 3,047
inherit
634
0
May 14, 2017 17:50:43 GMT
3,047
Cyberstrike
is wanting to have some fun!
1,879
August 2016
cyberstrike
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
cyberstrike nTo
cyberstrike-nTo
1,732
467
|
Post by Cyberstrike on Dec 28, 2020 21:36:44 GMT
Why am I playing 3 games (not to mention 4 books and many comics) that all build up that unity is the best option. Freedom of choice thst only synthesis gives. Why does all this material tell me that destruction is bad (literally every time destruction is actually *shown* it’s terrible, 9/10 we try to avoid it and the other times it’s a tragedy) Only for Shepard to destroy everything? It makes no sense from a writing stand point. It’s just ruining the storytelling.
What is considered cannon is determined by the creator and/or owner of said work, and not by the fans, and let me repeat this for the cheap seats NOT BY THE FANS! Never has, never will, and never should. Fans can help to determined but at the end of the day it should be up to people who are actually make the media to decide what is cannon and what isn't. In the terms of the endings to ME3 there is no way to make a game a set in the MW after ME3 work without ONE single ending to the trilogy and not three.
Also ME3 makes it perfectly clear that Shepard's job is too destroy the Reapers. Full stop. Not to control them, not to synthase with them not to refuse but to destroy them!
"You were hired to destroy the Reapers" is what Admiral Anderson tells Shepard is their job and Admiral Hacket tells Shepard "Dead Reapers is how we win this war." It's made plainly clear by Shepard's commandeering officers and friends and crew mates tell them that destroying the Reapers and it's not control, not synthesis, and not refuse is how they win. Hell that is the whole reason for Javik to keep going and is the only thing his character has to keep him going (especially if you tell him not to re-open that memory shard of his). They further this view when Shepard sees visions of Anderson shooting the destroy capsule who we've been told in 3 games and in 3 books that Anderson is a good guy, a hero, while control is given too the Illusive Man who the games, books, comics, and other media have told us that he is a bad guy, a villain (and he is and always was a villain from when he debuted he was always going to be a villain and not an anti-hero and Cerberus was a racist and fascist group basically like the Nazis so don't bother me with the whole "they were misunderstood" or "the writers made them evil for the sake of it" bullshit because TIM and Cerberus were always meant to be villains even back in ME1). For me personally I found Synthesis was the stupidest ending of all 4 for any number or reasons that it fails to understand the basics of what the theory of evolution is and that could seen as Shepard rapes the galaxy (like what if "I didn't want your green energy all over me" or "I don't want to be immortal" or "I don't want to be stuck as a horrible abomination forever") and it probably not a real popular ending with most fans to begin with.
Also I must point out: that teaser is for a game that won't see release for at least 2-5 years and chances are won't mean much of anything to final game.
|
|