98 réponses à ce sujet

[Hyper Cutter]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Vegielamb wrote...

Until they reveal that humans were "created" by the Protheans and are the closest living relatives to the Protheans (or are direct decendents of surviving Protheans). I see this one coming a mile off.

Yeah, sounds logical enough. Never thought of it but I did call the protheans being alive in some way, so Bioware going that extra step wouldn't surprise me.

They couldn't be created by the Protheans, because ****** sapiens predates them (by at least another 50,000 years). Granted, Bioware seems to think mammals evolved 160-odd million years after they did (And about 30 million after they'd become dominant, for that matter)...

It does seem likely that the Protheans uplifted humans somehow, and probably all the other existing races as well. Perhaps as one last "**** you" to the Reapers from scientists who had realized their civilization was doomed.

[NYG1991]

i think the growth of humanity fits the narrative well. tey could have added 30 years and kept it within a generation. if it was to long you would have humans being more heavily influenced by other races. plus an organization like cerberus wouldn't exist as it does now after 300 + years of alien influence(just think they wouldn't be such a shadow organizition). the first novel talks about humans rapid rise being suspect and other species have their own criticisms of humanity's rapid rise so it wouldn't surprise me if the writers expand on this.



it could also be that humanity is much closer to the protheans or reapers than was originally revealed. which would make them naturally better at adapting reaper/prothean tech. the first novel kinda mentions this in passing but doesn't elaborate.

[adam_grif]

It's not really surprising that humans are expanding so fast, it's surprising that other races are totally stagnant despite having been space faring for thousands of years.

[hangmans tree]

They might base this on shorter lifespan of humans = greater activity and creativity (alas, confirming superiority).

In last deacade we as humans achived technological progress equal to previous 50.000 years of history; because this evolution accelerates in terms of exponential equation or our cyvilizational progress is an exponential function (I hope I got it right in english).

To make it simple: we learn quicker and develop tech in rapid speed. And the jumps will be larger and larger.

So maybe its that?

[Speakeasy13]

hangmans tree wrote...

They might base this on shorter lifespan of humans = greater activity and creativity (alas, confirming superiority).
In last deacade we as humans achived technological progress equal to previous 50.000 years of history; because this evolution accelerates in terms of exponential equation or our cyvilizational progress is an exponential function (I hope I got it right in english).
To make it simple: we learn quicker and develop tech in rapid speed. And the jumps will be larger and larger.
So maybe its that?

Except the Salarians have even shorter lifespan and greater proficiency. Yet they aren't shown to progress as much as we do. Other than that, I can comfortably accept your explanation.

The last decade = 50,000 years? I don't think so. More like the last millenium = 5,000 years I reckon. Mind you we didn't actually have anything akin to technology until what 6,000 years ago?

Modifié par Speakeasy13, 06 mai 2010 - 01:20 .

[askanec]

What is the basis for any proposed correlation between shorter lifespans and progress? In fact, the opposite would likely hold true. Species that live longer can plan and work at long-term projects with a higher yield. They can keep at studies on fields that take decades to master, while species with a shorter lifespan simply die off and leave their work behind for someone else to pick up. There is no logical basis why the technological progress of long lifespan species would stagnate.



Stop reading those fantasy books with elves stagnating while humans thrive on progress with their shorter lifespans.

[tonnactus]

I agree.Salarians and not humans would be the number one if shorter lifespan means faster progression.

[tonnactus]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Actually, that's remarkably low, and begs the question of why. Populations tend to double between every 50 to 90 years, a

Look at the birth rates of the most advanced countries.There are not even big enough to prevent that the population would decrease without emigrants.
Most anticipation expect that the human population would reach 9 billion in this century and would stagnate after that.

[Speakeasy13]

askanec wrote...

What is the basis for any proposed correlation between shorter lifespans and progress? In fact, the opposite would likely hold true. Species that live longer can plan and work at long-term projects with a higher yield. They can keep at studies on fields that take decades to master, while species with a shorter lifespan simply die off and leave their work behind for someone else to pick up. There is no logical basis why the technological progress of long lifespan species would stagnate.

Stop reading those fantasy books with elves stagnating while humans thrive on progress with their shorter lifespans.

Except if you live longer, you're less inclined to strive for anything because you always think you can start later and still finish your purpose in life. Whereas if death is pressing concern to you you're more likely to have a sense of urgency to acheive your purpose in life before your clock runs out. Even our life, short as it is, is too long for some who acheive greatness early on and many of these early-acheivers tend to lead an anticlimatic later life because they're no longer motivated. It's human psychology and multiple psychologists/philosophers/anthropologists have theorized about this.

Modifié par Speakeasy13, 06 mai 2010 - 03:15 .

[Mangalores]

Arawn-Loki wrote...

Humankind's power isn't the most unbelievable aspect of the Mass Effect universe. They explained it pretty well in the codex entries and backstory. 

1. The vast majority of planets in the galaxy are uninhabitable. Some intriscally (gas planets, planets too close to starts, etc), others because they are undergoing a phase unsympathetic to the needs of bipedal sapient life. Terraforming is a time consuming and logistically demanding process that can take decades to centuries.

2. Mass Relays link to points spanning the entire galaxy, but vast spaces between these areas have never been explored and are suspected to harbor unorthodox and dangerous life forms.

3. There are many technologically, advanced sapient life forms in the 'known' galaxy that incorporate to varying degrees of the many flaws of human nature and who are accordingly mutually dangerous to one another if provoked.

4. Prothean technology forms the basis of advanced military and commercial tech in galactic civilization, and its study and incorporation is highly regulated to prevent disturbances in the galactic equilibrium all species depend on for peace and prosperity.

1. Applies to humans just the same so their colonies are mostly nothing more than outposts and the largest ones equivalent to a single city.

2. Council races had far more time to develop territory inbetween mass relays => denser development so even without greater spread far greater development within that territory.

3. Not quite a point to why humans should have it easier than guys already around for awhile knowing those thugs

4. The council seems tp sent science teams to every single site actually making sure that the knowledge will be distributed to the whole community, not just the finder so I cannot really buy into that.

Arawn-Loki wrote...

Conclusion: The Citadel Council is formed to mitigate conflicts. The Citadel Council regulates the activation and use of Mass Relays and galactic exploration to prevent episodes like the Rachni Wars. This vastly limits the number of potentially habitable worlds that can be discovered. The Council surveys these worlds and apportions them to species in a complex give-and-take policy which varies according to a species needs and economic and military power. Of the dozens/hundreds/thousands of Council associate species, each might receive only one or two per century. Furthermore, the more they receive, the less they are likely to receive as the centures proceed forward. These worlds must be terraformed, and after that, it would take decades or centuries (aka, generations) to move or grow a resident population. Building infrastructure would further complicate and lengthen the process, and making sure not to colonize what cannot be protected or will be exploited poses an additional obstacle. Lastly, newcomers might enjoy more or less advanced forms of spaceflight, but they can't approach the technological power of socieites that have adapted to Prothean technology. Their ability to study and incorporate this tech is limited by those preexisting societies (Asari, Turians, Salarians) that do not wish for the galactic equilibrium to be disrupted.

Humans weren't subject to either of those rules: they activated every relay they could, found and settled all the habitable worlds they could, and developed all the Prothean-based tech they could, with no regulation and near boundless resources and enthusiasm. Thus, the subordinate position the Council might have otherwise forced on them as new associate species was not appropriate to their economic or military position.

All might explain a greater territorial expansion but not a seemingly comparative strength. If you spread the same resources over a greater area you do not end up stronger, just more vulnerable. Council races spending centuries developing worlds (and actually having the time to do so) will mean all the territory they have settled will be economical sustainable. The question is how mankind can sensibly adopt revolutionary tech, built entirely new infrastructure from it, sent sufficient resources elsewhere to build new colonies and still end up with a larger navy than most.

The 30 years make no sense from a generational point of view. It takes 20 years for a single human generation to have been brought up in a new environment and usually 30 so a generation completes education. So mankind being capable to understand, adapt and use the Prothean tech would be already a stretch because our biological upbringing would dictate basic development and fundamental changes in our modern societies are still measured in decades of change, not months.

The relative strength of mankind is hard to explain in ratio to the history of the council races they face. Given those races are generally introduced as just as smart, cunning and ambitious, it makes it even harder to understand why there is such a fundamental difference in  development because as noted above your points should mostly apply to mankind as well or work to her disadvantage.

[Mercuriol]

Well it did go fast... but exactly how was humanity doing a hundred years ago?

We exploded both in numbers and in technology. Everything can go really fast if the factors are right. 30 years is ofcourse even shorter, but just check the fifference between '45 and '75 for example.

Modifié par Mercuriol, 06 mai 2010 - 03:53 .

[Dean_the_Young]

tonnactus wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Actually, that's remarkably low, and begs the question of why. Populations tend to double between every 50 to 90 years, a

Look at the birth rates of the most advanced countries.There are not even big enough to prevent that the population would decrease without emigrants.
Most anticipation expect that the human population would reach 9 billion in this century and would stagnate after that.

Looking at developed countries ignores most of the rest of the world, which have very expansive birth rates which do maintain those other countries populations. As those low-birthing countries have more and more immigrants, their birth rates will too raise.

Past a point, predicting birth rates becomes unjustified: without foresight as to the history, economy, and culture 50 years from now, we have little basis for predicting population 100 years from now. We can only predict likely numbers 30 years from now because most of the child-bearing population will have already been born by that point.Predictions are incredibly varied: the UN medium projection for the end of the century is 9 billion, the low is 5.5 billion, and the high is 14 billion. That's a range of nearly nine billion, and little more than a wild guess as to history before it happens: more and more first-world countries are already implementing policies to re-encourage having children, for example, and only time will tell how effective those efforts are.

Seeing the population double two, three times in the next 200+ years? Perfectly feasible.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 06 mai 2010 - 11:35 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Speakeasy13 wrote...

askanec wrote...

What is the basis for any proposed correlation between shorter lifespans and progress? In fact, the opposite would likely hold true. Species that live longer can plan and work at long-term projects with a higher yield. They can keep at studies on fields that take decades to master, while species with a shorter lifespan simply die off and leave their work behind for someone else to pick up. There is no logical basis why the technological progress of long lifespan species would stagnate.

Stop reading those fantasy books with elves stagnating while humans thrive on progress with their shorter lifespans.

Except if you live longer, you're less inclined to strive for anything because you always think you can start later and still finish your purpose in life. Whereas if death is pressing concern to you you're more likely to have a sense of urgency to acheive your purpose in life before your clock runs out. Even our life, short as it is, is too long for some who acheive greatness early on and many of these early-acheivers tend to lead an anticlimatic later life because they're no longer motivated. It's human psychology and multiple psychologists/philosophers/anthropologists have theorized about this.

The simplest problem with this argument is the assumption that the most productive years of a person's life are the ones where they fear death most. That would be the elder years, and that would not be true: companies are constantly under fire for discriminating against the elderly in favor of younger workers, whereas your argument would insist on just the opposite.

The most productive working years aren't the ones spent with death looming over the shoulder: they are the early years, when people don't think about it. The twenties through fourties are the most productive years, with productivity generally plateuing in middle age (when people feel lost from young but not yet apprehensive about death). Elder age, when death is a concern, is when creativity and productivity decline and even the brain slows down.

There is an argument that younger life cycles would be more productive, but you've neglectedit: it's the case of older peoples increasingly falling behind the technological curve, where as the young are constantly taught up to the latest standard. That's one reason productivity and innovation favor the young in technological-innovation industries: professionals have to play catch up to developments and theories already made that they weren't aware of, or else their skills increasingly become obsolete. The theory about short-lived races is that they wouldn't have the dead weight of the elderly.

Of course, that argument is also flawed, because it assumes (1) that technology is always growing at such a rapid pace and (2) that re-education isn't feasible.  The first neglects that in recent history it's been the computer age driving our growth,
and computer improvements will eventually level out. The second ignores that education is a standard practice, but it remains costly and after a point companies have little incentive to retrain an elderly worker who won't be around much longer. An long-lived race would not have that problem, and would be able to recylce its intellect far longer.

[Dean_the_Young]

One reason (besides 'humans are special') that Humans were anywhere close to the galactic standard despite the time span of history is rather simple: the rest of the galaxy has had to develop from the Prothean standard in the last several hundred years, while humans more or less got right to the Prothean standard via mars and the other prothean ruins they found pre-first contact.

It's worth remembering that, in first contact, nothing really says that the Humans and Turians were equal in technology/means, and alot suggests the Turians were ahead. They just weren't lightyears apart, and so the human surprise response was good enough, massive enough, and quick enough to take the small Turian force by surprise. The humans got where they were by stealing the predecessors of the galactic standard, whereas all the Turian advancements had to be done the old fashioned way. However, all the implications were that had the First Contact War not ended when it had, the Turians would have curbstomped humanity in attritional warfare.

That the current galactic standard isn't far beyond the Protheans is more than attributable to two themes: copying stagnates true innovation, or most species have been so focused in catching up to Prothean technology that they have struggled to surpass it, and that the Prothean standard really is more or less a technological plateau: the ideal point for the Reapers to wipe everyone out (and possibly why Sovereign felt it could wait for so long after the Reaper trap failed and yet now feels compelled to act: the Council species are on the cusp of reaching the end of the technological quagmire and are in sight of a technological renaissance).

The only 'humans are special' implication to take from this is thath humans don't seem to have been affected by the 'copying breeds stagnation' impulse that afflicts most of the rest of the Citadel species: despite hecter-skelter copying Prothean, then Citadel Council, technologies, humans remain innovative in ways the Council has not: fighter-carriers and the Normandy, which blended human innovation (the drive core) with Council technological expertise (to make the concept possible).

Perhaps that's why humans are deemed worthy by the Reapers: we can emulate without losing our ability to create.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 07 mai 2010 - 12:11 .

[adam_grif]

Ehh, the Protheans weren't all that advanced, the only reason most people think they are is because they thought the Prothean and Reaper technology was one and the same. Their greatest technological feat was reverse engineering something (the conduit). We have no idea of the relative difficulty of this, because apparently nobody tries (remember the bartender saying that they should start building new mass relays got her laughed off the planet?), and if they do we haven't heard anything about it. Everything of theirs we've seen in action is:



- A prothean beacon, which can mind link. The Asari can do this biologically, so no real biggie here.

- The Prothean cache on mars, which put us on par with / within striking distance of the council races, technologically.



You might be tempted to think that the collector ship/base could be used as examples, but we have no idea how much was natively produced and how much was given to them from the Reapers. Even so, the only advanced thing about the stuff is the O4 relay itself and (maybe) the particle beam, which isn't even that spectacular a weapon anyway.





Now, the current races are hundreds of years overdue for a reaping, possibly thousands (if the Rachni were being manipulated, but this is only speculation), giving them hundreds of years more time on top of what the Protheans had to advance their tech. They had samples of Prothean technology, and constant access to the citadel + relay system for all this time.



The Asari found the Citadel thousands of years ago. The Salarians and Turians have been active for less time, but still far longer than us puny earthlings have. But somehow they all managed to squander these centuries, despite the Asari longevity, despite the Turian's military prowess (and thus, it stands to reason, interest in advancing military technology to maintain a competitive edge over hostile powers), despite Salarian scientific affinity (and short lifespan, which might be advantageous), despite having external elements battering on their doors on several occasions (Rachni, Krogan) and several other powers being generally unfriendly and menacing (Batarians, Geth), none of these civilizations managed to surpass the Protheans. And worse, none of them were that much more advanced than humans were.



We managed to invent the (apparently useful, despite how stupid they are) fighter carriers, medigel, and stealth systems. Every race is apparently massively incompetent, but what is the excuse the Geth have? They are a hive-mind race that doesn't have to worry about personal ego getting in the way of scientific progress, they have known about the Reapers for decades, and have displayed creativity (the whole heat sink innovation thingie, which again is stupid but is apparently good in-universe). Their collective intelligence is orders of magnitude greater than any other in the galaxy, and they have both the means and the will to develop superadvanced technology.



So why are the heretics getting pounded by the systems alliance navy? Why are the non-heretics not so far beyond everybody else in the galaxy? They don't have to breed new scientists, they can build them. They don't have hangups on using artificial intelligence because they are artificial intelligence. They are bound by no council treaties, and have none of the disadvantages that are apparently hindering other races. They know that relying on reverse engineering isn't a good thing to do.



Grrr....

[hangmans tree]

Indeed, why?

Morning War reminds me Matrix and rise of the machines. The only reason I see is that geth want to understand "life" first, its their priority to find their space in the universe. Just thinking out loud.



As for human "superiority" - humans are genetically most diverse. Other species follow the same pattern (more or less) so maybe that is the key to human ingenuity? Well, it seems a little far fetched though.

The Asari found the Citadel thousands of years ago. The Salarians and Turians have been active for less time, but still far longer than us puny earthlings have. But somehow they all managed to squander these centuries, despite the Asari longevity, despite the Turian's military prowess (and thus, it stands to reason, interest in advancing military technology to maintain a competitive edge over hostile powers), despite Salarian scientific affinity (and short lifespan, which might be advantageous), despite having external elements battering on their doors on several occasions (Rachni, Krogan) and several other powers being generally unfriendly and menacing (Batarians, Geth), none of these civilizations managed to surpass the Protheans. And worse, none of them were that much more advanced than humans were.

maybe Protheans hid, destroyed, prevented collectors' tech to spread to future species? They knew the threat; blocked the relay and signal, altered the keepers...Put up a warning and a beacon for someone like Shepard to be found.

[Dean_the_Young]

It's a stated fact that the Reapers, after their conquest, strip as much technology as they can from their conquests before they leave. It's why beacons and Prothean data caches are so rare: the only tech caches left are the ones that were overlooked. The Protheans were more or less at the current galactic standard, but it would be like trying to develop to develop current-state global technology from the middle ages after the world has been nuked flat and then tens of thousands of years passed.

[Naughty Bear]

Barquiel wrote...

http://tvtropes.org/...umansAreSpecial

The one thing I hate about the ME universe...Bioware used it too much imo.

Lol at the bottom. Humans are infectious. Humans are Cthulhu.

Modifié par Naughty Bear, 07 mai 2010 - 10:38 .

[Bebbe777]

I thought the Reapers were Cthulhu

[adam_grif]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It's a stated fact that the Reapers, after their conquest, strip as much technology as they can from their conquests before they leave. It's why beacons and Prothean data caches are so rare: the only tech caches left are the ones that were overlooked. The Protheans were more or less at the current galactic standard, but it would be like trying to develop to develop current-state global technology from the middle ages after the world has been nuked flat and then tens of thousands of years passed.

Well, the Middle Ages started ~1600 years ago, and 1600 is considerably less than the 10,000+ you just stated, so you should probably recheck your figures there. 50,000 years ago technology didn't exist in any detectible capacity.

Not having much actual Prothean tech to aspire to isn't really relevant in this case. The technology was obviously developed by somebody originally who had nothing to reverse engineer from. The vast majority of all tech discoveries made by all of the current spacefaring races weren't invented by reverse engeineering Prothean tech, because they had to be space-faring in order to discover it.

Ergo, the scientific method and engineering concepts can't possibly be foreign to them. Which means at some stage, they just kind of went "you know what? **** it. Let's just stagnate our technology even though we have fierce rivalries and/or wars currently going on."

Just about the only species that have excuses are the Krogan, who can't seem to stop killing each other long enough to advance their science a great deal, the Rachni because they've been dead for most of that time, and the Quarians because they're trapped on a flotila of spaceships fighting to survive. And even then, they're still making advances.

Gosh, they're even sitting on the Citadel, for THOUSANDS OF YEARS. And they haven't studied any of it? They have no idea about the composition of the Mass Relays or how to build them, even though they've had thousands of years to reverse engineer them? And don't say it's too much, because the Protheans couldn't have been much farther beyond what all the races are circa ME/ME2, and they did it with a team of like 80 dudes within their own lifetimes.

[Dean_the_Young]

adam_grif wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It's a stated fact that the Reapers, after their conquest, strip as much technology as they can from their conquests before they leave. It's why beacons and Prothean data caches are so rare: the only tech caches left are the ones that were overlooked. The Protheans were more or less at the current galactic standard, but it would be like trying to develop to develop current-state global technology from the middle ages after the world has been nuked flat and then tens of thousands of years passed.

Well, the Middle Ages started ~1600 years ago, and 1600 is considerably less than the 10,000+ you just stated, so you should probably recheck your figures there. 50,000 years ago technology didn't exist in any detectible capacity.

I was unclear. I was trying to say it would be as if people from (say a post-apocolyptic) middle ages tried to build modern technology after the world had been nuked flat, raided for tech, and then everything else left to sit for tens of thousands of years.

Not having much actual Prothean tech to aspire to isn't really relevant in this case. The technology was obviously developed by somebody originally who had nothing to reverse engineer from. The vast majority of all tech discoveries made by all of the current spacefaring races weren't invented by reverse engeineering Prothean tech, because they had to be space-faring in order to discover it.

Ergo, the scientific method and engineering concepts can't possibly be foreign to them. Which means at some stage, they just kind of went "you know what? **** it. Let's just stagnate our technology even though we have fierce rivalries and/or wars currently going on."

There's space faring, and there's space faring. Humanity found the Mars cache when stuck to chemical rockets. You can use a mass relay with an armored vehicle, so all it really takes is to be in the same system as a mass relay and you more or less have access to the Citadel. Even developing primitive FTL gets you to more Prothean technology with better FTL.

What is the basis of 'prothean' technology? E-zero physics. No one is said to have developed it on their own. Everyone is said to have been technologically backwards compared to those who came before. Reverse engineering it has nothing to do with throwing away the scientific process. Developing it significantly further has everything to do with advancing knowledge to the point of a breakthrough point, scientific method or no.

No one is ever suggested to have made a deliberate choice of technological stagnation. That there are points at which technological advancement isn't exponential is actually historically common. There was the rapid advancement with the scraps of Prothean technology, but the Citadel and Mass Relays are simply so far beyond that.

Gosh, they're even sitting on the Citadel, for THOUSANDS OF YEARS. And they haven't studied any of it? They have no idea about the composition of the Mass Relays or how to build them, even though they've had thousands of years to reverse engineer them? And don't say it's too much, because the Protheans couldn't have been much farther beyond what all the races are circa ME/ME2, and they did it with a team of like 80 dudes within their own lifetimes.

They have been studying it. The technology is simply so advanced they have to build up to the point where they can even ask the correct questions. You give medieval science to cave men and then tell them to reverse engineer a space elevator designed not to be studied, and it's still going to take them a great deal of time to figure out.

The Protheans didn't crack the secrets of the Citadel with 80 dudes in a single life time. They, to, had thousands of years of dominance trying to understand the citadel and mass relay technology, and at the very end their best and brightest could only make dent in any of it. They were only at the cusp of understanding the relays when the Reapers attacked, just like the Council now. Only recently has technology able to effectively study the keepers been invented, or discovery of the dark switches on the Mass Relays.

[Vegielamb]

Sharn01 wrote...

A bit off topic but it was mentioned earlier in the thread, why is it when an Asari acts like a douche all Asari are douche bags but if a human does it only pertains to that particular human. Just another example of how because the players of the game are human they see themselves as individuals and humans as speceal, but group all aliens in to specific types. Asari are like this, Turians are like that, and all Krogans are such and such, etc.

It's because we're all humans and don't like to admit we're douche bags. At least not on a good day.

[Dean_the_Young]

I hope your day gets better then, Vegielamb.

[Speakeasy13]

We like to assume we fear death more as we grow old. This has proven to be not true. Almost all happiness studies universally hint at that elders are less afraid of death than younger people, because they have so little time left, most of them, by that stage of life, have either achieved their lifelong goals; and if they haven't, they've pretty much made peace with the fact that it's not gonna happen.



I can't say without solid evidence (it's hard to measure such things anyway), but I'm willing to wager that the human productiveness increases as life progress (due to accumulating experience and resources), up to a point after which it all goes down hill. Maybe the person is struck by a midlife crisis and moved onto other things, maybe he's simply reached his peak.



You aren't most productive when you're young and the impending doom is not on your mind; neither are you when your time is almost limited; it's the in-between years that make the difference. Proof: People who stumbled upon success early in life almost always fail to live up to the same success in later years.