91 réponses à ce sujet

[Lukertin]

[quote]Anacronian Stryx wrote...

[quote]Lukertin wrote...
Because only a galaxy-spanning race will constitute sufficient biomass for the Reapers to melt down.  We already saw one of the reasons they harvest organic life is to make a Reaper out of them.  Derp.
[/quote]
Humans have a insignificant biomass and they still tried to make a reaper out of humans, Hell galaxy wide i bet you could find a whole host of non-space faring non technological using species that would have tens of thousands the biomass of any of the space faring populations.
No it must be like the game states, The reapers are after races that develop along the path the reapers have set forth, Using the mass relays and the citadel, If it's because they are uncreative and needs other to develop their technology for them nobody can say, But it is what both Sovereign and Vigil stated.
[/quote]
You don't know how many Humans are required to make 1 fully functioning Human Reaper.  It could be on the level a 1 billion human, or 10 billion humans.  The number of humans in the galaxy is certainly not insufficient to make a Human Reaper, just based on the hundreds of thousands they kidnapped they were able to make a shell of a Human Reaper, which obviously lacked pretty much any high level functionality given that 3 people were able to take it out very easily.

There's absolutely zero logic tying "They must develop mass effect technology" to "They are suitable for destruction by the Reapers".  Until you find some, proclaiming the development of mass effect technology to be a requirement for destruction by the Reapers (which doesn't even make sense) is totally illogical.

[quote]The way i describe the event's is no different than how it's described in game, I only add that if Sovereign observes that his indoctrinated servants(Rachni) are in the process of launching a devastating assault on the council races he(Sovereign) could opt to stop them even if my theory is completely wrong this part is still true - Sovereign did indoctrinate the Rachni, He could make them stop launching attacks if he wanted to.[/quote]
Treated in isolation, this makes sense, however in the overall context of your point I still disagree.

[quote]No it doesn't.  Examples of war carried out for no purpose whatsoever (e.g., World War I, every war going on over religion, political ideology, etc).  Are you honestly suggesting that if these wars did not take place the world would be worse off than it is now?  I'm not talking situations where a stronger civilization waged war on a weaker civilization to secure farmland or gold mines or whatever, those wars have a purpose and generally do lead to a stronger civilization (e.g. Rome; but in comparison look at colonization of the Americas).  And that doesn't diminish the fact that diplomacy to solve whatever issues are on hand are a much better solution than waging all-out war, and do not result in the subjugation of entire civilizations into slavery or extinction.  Unless you actually think those things are good for humanity.
[/quote]
You're misinterpreting stronger = God for humanity.
Look at your own example World War I - The biggest winner in that war was USA, It was the victory that propelled Northern America into being the world leader, A position the USA have held until this day.
The war acted as an resurgence of pretty much every aspect of American society from economic to military, Hell the war was such a boost that even with the great depression of the thirties America still held on to it's position as world leader.
And this was as you stated a war with no purpose.[/quote]
You're misinterpreting "Person who wins war got stronger" with "War makes those involved stronger".  America barely did anything in World War 1. They were entirely removed from the conflict for pretty much the entire period of the war, got fat and rich selling supplies to both sides, and were pulled themselves into the conflict only because they were afraid of a Germany-supported Mexico waging war to take back Texas and California. America 'winning' World War 1 was barely nothing more than opportunitionalist posturing. It's like a corrupt cop watching two gangs duking it out and then asking for bribes from the one gang that was happy to offer them while the other gang was going to rat the cop out to Internal Affairs. It has nothing to do with my statement that War is bad and makes both sides worse off.  The mere fact that World War 1 sent the entire world into a depression is evidence enough that War is bad and weakens everyone involved.

[quote]The war might had gone bad but not to the point of catastrophe.
As you yourself point out :... Salarians had to find the Krogan, transplant them to another world, make them breed a couple generations, then develop weapons for the Krogan, teach them space combat, and send them against the Rachni...
So clearly the "war going bad" was based on long term projections because you don't just do all that in a day.[/quote]
The war wasn't going bad based on long term projections.  It was going bad, period.  The wiki states the Citadel was fighting a losing war for a century until the Krogan came on the scene.  After the Krogan came on it then took another two centuries for the Krogan to completely defeat the Rachni.

[Anacronian Stryx]

Lukertin wrote...
You don't know how many Humans are required to make 1 fully functioning Human Reaper.  It could be on the level a 1 billion human, or 10 billion humans.  The number of humans in the galaxy is certainly not insufficient to make a Human Reaper, just based on the hundreds of thousands they kidnapped they were able to make a shell of a Human Reaper, which obviously lacked pretty much any high level functionality given that 3 people were able to take it out very easily.

All of humanity could easy still be on Earth since 99.7% still lives there and obviously the Reapers thought humanity "worthy enough" for harvest, So you don't need to be a "galaxy wide civilisation" in order to have sufficient "biomass" to be harvested.

There's absolutely zero logic tying "They must develop mass effect technology" to "They are suitable for destruction by the Reapers".  Until you find some, proclaiming the development of mass effect technology to be a requirement for destruction by the Reapers (which doesn't even make sense) is totally illogical.

I'm gonna work under the assumption that by destruction you mean harvest.

Shepard : "Why would you construct the mass relays and then leave them for someone else to find?"
Sovereign :"Your civilization is based on the theology of the mass relays, Our technology, By using it your society develops along the paths we desire, We impose order on organic evolution, you exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it.
NPC :"They're harvesting us, Letting us advance to the level they need and then wiping us out.

Later.

Vigil :"Our worlds was stripped bare, Harvested by the indoctrinated slaves, Everything of value,All resources, All technology was taken, Certain that all advanced organic life was taken the reapers returned though the citadel relay to dark space.

So obviously there is more needed than just having enough biomass in order to be harvested, In fact everything indicates that the reapers are after something very specific like races that evolve along the paths they desire.

 
Treated in isolation, this makes sense, however in the overall context of your point I still disagree.

Ehh so why don't you tell me why you disagree?

You're misinterpreting "Person who wins war got stronger" with "War makes those involved stronger".  America barely did anything in World War 1. They were entirely removed from the conflict for pretty much the entire period of the war, got fat and rich selling supplies to both sides, and were pulled themselves into the conflict only because they were afraid of a Germany-supported Mexico waging war to take back Texas and California. America 'winning' World War 1 was barely nothing more than opportunitionalist posturing. It's like a corrupt cop watching two gangs duking it out and then asking for bribes from the one gang that was happy to offer them while the other gang was going to rat the cop out to Internal Affairs. It has nothing to do with my statement that War is bad and makes both sides worse off.  The mere fact that World War 1 sent the entire world into a depression is evidence enough that War is bad and weakens everyone involved.

War spurs on technological research, Social economics, every type of construction every facet of life is touched by war, This has been true ever since we lived in caves and were at war with the neighboring cave, War press us to think new ways of doing things from big to small, The only reason as to why we have come so far as we have is because we have been at each other's throats all along.

The war wasn't going bad based on long term projections.  It was going bad, period.  The wiki states the Citadel was fighting a losing war for a century until the Krogan came on the scene.  After the Krogan came on it then took another two centuries for the Krogan to completely defeat the Rachni.

So we agree the war was going bad but not catastrophic and as you yourself pointed out you cant raise the Krogan from their wasteland of a world in a day so obviously the long term projection was a "bad war" so what are we disagreeing on?

Modifié par Anacronian Stryx, 02 avril 2011 - 11:03 .

[atheelogos]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Making the Reapers a credible threat would make the game too depressing for all the Paragon players.

lol too true.

[2kgnsiika]

I never understood Sovereign fan boys. All that "vanguard of you destruction" crap was incrediby lame, IMO. Shepard's reply was far better: "You're just a machine. And machines can be broken." Did you also forget the fact that, in the end, Sovereign got his ass handed to him by a guy in a wheelchair?

[Anacronian Stryx]

2kgnsiika wrote...

I never understood Sovereign fan boys. All that "vanguard of you destruction" crap was incrediby lame, IMO. Shepard's reply was far better: "You're just a machine. And machines can be broken." Did you also forget the fact that, in the end, Sovereign got his ass handed to him by a guy in a wheelchair?

So what Shepard got his ass handed to him by bugs.

[hex23]

Pwener2313 wrote...

Yeah, the Reapers are in no way a credible threat. Of course they're not, these are just Geth ships, no reason to get worked over this, dismissing them is enough.

I'd like to know what made the OP state that they're nit a credible threat. LOOK AT THOSE THINGS! I go with trolling because nowhere in ME2 was there any indication that they weren't genocidal machines that make the Terminators look like toddlers. We defeated the Collectors and stopped they're arrival? Those weren't Reapers, those were they're lackeys. If I kick a guy's dog, Im not kicking the guy.

You posted 3 pictures. Two show them flying through space. OOH SCARY!

The last pic, as I've pointed out, could be misdirection from Bioware. Same as the Geth they showed wearing a "dead" Shepard's armor for "ME2".

And for the record, I've been kicking the sh*t out of the Reaper's dogs for 3+ years and all they do is talk. Blah blah blah cosmic wind.

Hell at this point in the game Shepard has killed more people (300k+) than the Reapers have since they popped up this cycle.

[hex23]

blindchaos wrote...

I'm not sure why people have been saying the Reaper threat has been diminished by ME2. Look at all Harbinger accomplished over the course of that game:

He killed Shepard, granted it didn't stick but it took him/her out of the conflict for two years. Without Shepard's influence the galaxy ignored the Reaper threat, and now seems much less prepared then it could have.

Harbinger was responsible for the killings of entire colonies of humans and as a consequence created some political instability among humans in the Traverse and the Alliance.

Then there was the plague on Omega, generating anti-human sentiments while also showing that they can make a plague that is deadly to almost all civilized alien races.

Lastly, all of Arrival. The Reapers might be delayed up to a year but at the cost of weakening Humans yet again with a conflict with the Batarians, not to mention if Shepard is detained for the Trial. The reapers have accomplished this with apparently minimal losses, Harbinger showed no anger at losing the Collectors as a resource, and only used them because they were in dark space.

Frankly this all seems more damaging then anything sovereign accomplished. The galaxy is clearly unprepared for the Reaper invasion, when they finally do make their entrance i expect a lot of chaos amongst the various races.

This would all be very impressive if their primary objective wasn't wiping out all life in the galaxy. "Political instability" isn't exactly a good substitute for that.

[2kgnsiika]

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

2kgnsiika wrote...

I never understood Sovereign fan boys. All that "vanguard of you destruction" crap was incrediby lame, IMO. Shepard's reply was far better: "You're just a machine. And machines can be broken." Did you also forget the fact that, in the end, Sovereign got his ass handed to him by a guy in a wheelchair?

So what Shepard got his ass handed to him by bugs.

That's what the bugs thought and look where they are now.

[Dave666]

blindchaos wrote...

I'm not sure why people have been saying the Reaper threat has been diminished by ME2. Look at all Harbinger accomplished over the course of that game:

He killed Shepard, granted it didn't stick but it took him/her out of the conflict for two years. Without Shepard's influence the galaxy ignored the Reaper threat, and now seems much less prepared then it could have.

Harbinger was responsible for the killings of entire colonies of humans and as a consequence created some political instability among humans in the Traverse and the Alliance.

Then there was the plague on Omega, generating anti-human sentiments while also showing that they can make a plague that is deadly to almost all civilized alien races.

Lastly, all of Arrival. The Reapers might be delayed up to a year but at the cost of weakening Humans yet again with a conflict with the Batarians, not to mention if Shepard is detained for the Trial. The reapers have accomplished this with apparently minimal losses, Harbinger showed no anger at losing the Collectors as a resource, and only used them because they were in dark space.

Frankly this all seems more damaging then anything sovereign accomplished. The galaxy is clearly unprepared for the Reaper invasion, when they finally do make their entrance i expect a lot of chaos amongst the various races.

This to me is the problem.  ME:2 had FAR too much of a focus on Humanity.  The Reapers are a Galactic threat.  Nobody is safe.  Every space-faring race is threatened, Volus, Hanar, Elcor, Asari, Turians, Krogan, Salarians and Humanity.  by focussing solely on Humanity it lessens that sense of Galactic threat.  How much did the Collector threat bother the Volus?  Or the Asari? Or anyone that wasn't Human?  Whilst in ME:1 Sovereign and Saren also attacked Human colonies, because of the attack on the Citadel EVERYONE was at risk.

Does that make sense?

Modifié par Dave666, 03 avril 2011 - 01:39 .

[Ice Cold J]

That trailer makes me really, REALLY afriad of the Reapers.

[Marta Rio]

Ice Cold J wrote...

That trailer makes me really, REALLY afriad of the Reapers.

Yeah, when I read the thread title I was like, "LOL, whut?"  The threat seems pretty credible to me.  I guess the trailer could be the hypothetical "bad" ending to ME3, but it doesn't seem like it is (especially since Shep hasn't shown up yet...).  I'm certain there will be plenty of Reaper-induced carnage in the third installment.

[JamieCOTC]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Making the Reapers a credible threat would make the game too depressing for all the Paragon players.

My Paragon Shep's theme song. 

[DirtyGreasy]

Wait, did I miss somthing? when did Shepard kill another reaper?

[ajburges]

Reestablishes? The last time we directly fought reapers was ME1. Remember Hackett reminding us that it took SEVERAL FLEETS AND THE DESTINY ASCENSION TO KILL 1?

They never stopped being a credible threat, ME2 just gave us proxy's (and mercs) to deal with.

Dave666 wrote...
This to me is the problem.  ME:2 had FAR too much of a focus on Humanity.  The Reapers are a Galactic threat.  Nobody is safe.  Every space-faring race is threatened, Volus, Hanar, Elcor, Asari, Turians, Krogan, Salarians and Humanity.  by focussing solely on Humanity it lessens that sense of Galactic threat.  How much did the Collector threat bother the Volus?  Or the Asari? Or anyone that wasn't Human?  Whilst in ME:1 Sovereign and Saren also attacked Human colonies, because of the attack on the Citadel EVERYONE was at risk. Does that make sense?

Not all threats are hard. Can't you see our good friend the Turian counciler throwing humanity under the wheel because "The Reapers just want the humans" only for the rest of the galactic civilization to be next on the Reaper's list?

Modifié par ajburges, 04 avril 2011 - 05:07 .

[Jagri]

OP needs to get into Warhammer 40k...

[Bamboozalist]

The Reapers aren't a credible threat?

Let's see

We've done nothing to them, hell ME2 establishes they still are a credible threat, they get their goons to kill us, manage to kidnap millions of humans (Freedom's Progress alone had 900,000+), oh and our big suicide mission to destroy/take over their research base and us destroying an entire system to delay them? Mild inconvenience.

[Ice Cold J]

Why doesn't anyone realize that The Destiny Ascension had nothing to do with Sovereign's defeat? The Citadel Fleet was pwned by Sovereign and the Geth Fleet. When the Arcturus Fleet came in, they saved The Destiny Ascension (maybe) and then finished off the Geth with the remaining Citadel Fleet.
They then went into the Citadel's arms and finished off Sovereign. I don't believe there were ANY Citadel Fleet cruisers in that part of that battle. And The Destiny Ascension was too busy high-tailing it with The Council.