546 réponses à ce sujet

[CulturalGeekGirl]

JKoopman wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

****Warning! I use Harry Potter spoilers as analogies in this reply. ZOMG. Welcome to five years ago, internet!****

JKoopman wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
We learn a lot of really important stuff in ME2.  A LOT of stuff. Why do the reapers let organic life evolve if they're just going to reap them? What happens during a Reaper Attack? How do the Reapers monitor the Galaxy during their downtime?
These questions were neatly answered:
1. They let organic life evolve because they need us, either as slave races or fuel for their goo vats.

We already knew from ME1 that Reapers use organics as slave races. That's nothing new. And the info about "goo vats" actually contradicts what we're given in ME1.

Where in ME1 did we hear that the Reapers use anything other than individual indoctrination? Where did they tell us that they subvert entire races, and turn them into servants?  Where did we learn that they use us to make Reapers?There are the Keepers, yes, but their function and design is radically different than the collectors, and has very different implications. The fact that the Reapers once made a slave race, millions of years ago, is one thing. The fact that they made one the last time they were here, and maintained that Race for 50,000 years until it reached the end of its usability for them... that has different implications altogether.

Sovereign: "Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays; our technology. By using it, your society develops along the paths we desire."
Tali: "They're harvesting us! Letting our technology advance to the level they need, then wiping us out!"

This actually makes more sense. After all, why would the Reapers direct organic races along a specific technological path and harvest us only once our civilizations had advanced to a desired point if their intention is to harvest us for our biology? Our biology isn't affected by our ability to achieve spaceflight or use mass relays. Why not begin the cycle of harvesting before the first organic race has made it into the Industrial Age, when no one would stand a chance against them?

Conflicting information--especially conflicting information that makes no sense--doesn't give us a better understanding of the Reapers.

No offense to Tali, but that was just her theory. If a character in a book develops a theory, and then later that theory is contradicted by evidence, that is not a plot hole. In Harry Potter there is a ton of evidence that Snape was clearly evil. It's logical for the characters to conclude that he's probably evil. Then, a book or two later, more evidence comes to light, proving that he is good! Directly contradicting what characters said earlier! That isn't a plothole! Is it a plothole on House when they develop one diagnosis based on the evidence, and then later in the episode they realize they've been looking at the evidence wrong, and what they thought was Lupus is actually Cholera? No! It's a new assessment of what is going on, given new information.

Evidence in ME1 caused the characters to come to one conclusion. Additional evidence from ME2, added to the evidence in ME1, causes characters to alter their conclusion. This happens in every mystery story. You come up with a theory, new evidence comes to light, you change your theory. You still haven't provided any place where evidence in ME2 directly contradicts evidence in ME1 - only that new evidence makes theories that characters in ME1 developed seem incorrect. You were willing to take those theories as read in ME1 - you were emotionally invested in the idea that Snape was evil, and now that new evidence comes to light, you're upset. I can understand that.  I hate it when I have a good theory all worked up and then the plot goes and contradicts it... I'm looking at you, Lost!

JKoopman wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

2. When they attack, it's going to take a while, because they're probably going to want to take a substantial portion of at least one of our races alive, in order to make collector-style minions. They're also going to want to take even MORE beings alive, in order to make one (or more) new reapers, a process that requires living sentients.

That you used the word "probably" should be enough of an indication to you that this is all just your own supposition. This isn't stated for a fact anywhere in the story of ME2.

No, it isn't a fact. It's our new theory, based on the current evidence we have available... see above. In the same way it wasn't stated explicitly that reapers were reaping us for our tech and only our tech (a character simply drew that conclusion from evidence available at the time), what Mass Effect 2 is providing us with is more clues, using which we can update our hypothesis. I like stories where we're given evidence and can theorize along with the characters, untll the big reveal. That is the kind of story Mass Effect is. It isn't for everyone.

So ok, to stick entirely to the facts we learned in ME2, omitting any obvious conclusions, we learned this:

2. The last time the reapers attacked, they took the time to take a bunch of Protheans to use as a servant race. They just indoctrinated them at first, but that degrades a species over time, so they replaced bits of them with tech. At this point, so much of them has been replaced with tech that they are waning in their usefulness.

I admit that I am just forming a theory based on the evidence when I say that these facts suggest that they will probably do something like this again.

If you do not think that the fact that someone did something before indicates they will probably do it again, that's fine. I'm willing to make that leap, until/unless ME3 comes by and gives me some contradictory evidence. I will admit that a lot of Mass Effect's plot relies on your willingness to entertain a theory that is not yet established as fact. The willingness to play along with the Lupus hypothesis, until it turns out to be something else. If you are completely unwilling to entertain a theory that has not been proven as fact, and insist that all theories you are presented with never change in the face of new evidence, then I can see why you would have a problem with this story.

JKoopman wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
3. The Reapers decide to just outright orbitally bombard some planets, but they also spend some time on indoctrination and harvesting. Also, during the "downtime" they use a slave race to take samples, and evaluate which of the currently active races are best suited for slave-dom, which are best suited for reaper-dom, and which are best suited for orbital bombardment.

Again, nothing we didn't already know from ME1.

All we learn in ME1 is that the Reapers killed most of the Protheans, indoctrinating some of them in order to find and kill the rest.

Where in ME1 was it established or hinted that the Reapers build and maintain a multi-generational slave race for the point of obtaining samples from other species in order to study them and determine which species are most suited for future use? I don't remember that ever being established. I also don't remember it being established that some races were being evaluated for other reasons, to determine if they were useful as building materials for Reapers. These are all new facts, building on preliminary ideas established in ME1.

I can pretty much dismiss this entire post with one word: Keepers.

This is pretty much conclusive evidence that you have limited understanding of traditional speculative fiction sotry structure. Which is this: You learn a thing, develop a theory, you learn more, related things, and iterate that theory. This process is what a lot of Science fiction fans enjoy about Science Fiction.

In Mass Effect 1, all the information we have about the keepers is that they are an organic race that does maintenance on the citadel, they don't communicate with anyone, and they are controlled by the Reapers. As far as we know, they are the only race that was ever used this way, and they were created tens of millions of years ago.

Mass Effect two expands on this idea, filling in the details with more evidence.

Are you saying that, After ME1, If I had asked you about the Reapers, you would have been able to tell me "Oh yeah, they've built slave races all the time, they used the Protheans to build one, and that race is abducting sentients for study. Also, they're trying to figure out uif any of us would make a good Reaper. Also, some races degrade and lose usefullness after being turned into a slave race, which is the exact opposite of what we learned from the Keepers.

I explicitly established this in my post... that ME2 builds on established preliminary facts in ME1, allowing for new interpretations.

Where we probably disagree is that I LIKE it when a story does that, and you do not.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 07 avril 2011 - 09:35 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

I'm loving your blog, Leah; that is to say, CulturalGeekGirl.

[aimlessgun]

Well this went off the goddamn rails. Are we seriously arguing over whether or not the Reaper's purpose makes sense when nobody in-universe has proof of their purpose? We cannot know until the 3rd game.

I guess this is the kind of criticism piemanz was complaining about on page3. There are plenty of things wrong with ME2, but this ain't one of them (IMO).

(For example, yeah ME2 built off ME1, but the way they built off it was half retarded)

Modifié par aimlessgun, 07 avril 2011 - 09:38 .

[ADLegend21]

I tried my best to give him the benefit of the doubt, but when he stopped to comment on the direction of the background effects, I lost all interest in his opinion. Who the hell is he to say he can fix a Game that got 9's and 10's from PROFESSIONAL game reviewers. this is the perfect example of when you give the wrong people voices on the internet. I feel like I should add more classes to my schedule next semester so i may gain the intelligence I lost fro the 6 minutes I listened to this video.

[squee913]

aimlessgun wrote...

Well this went off the goddamn rails. Are we seriously arguing over whether or not the Reaper's purpose makes sense when nobody in-universe has proof of their purpose? We cannot know until the 3rd game.

I guess this is the kind of criticism piemanz was complaining about on page3. There are plenty of things wrong with ME2, but this ain't one of them (IMO).

(For example, yeah ME2 built off ME1, but the way they built off it was half retarded)

Rails? We have dismissed tha claim!

[Il Divo]

JKoopman wrote...

But EDI is qualified to say why they would want us?

To quote squee, am I the only one who sees the hypocricy here?

Squee already addressed this, but you're comparing a companion ass-pulling a theory about why Reapers are harvesting us against an advanced AI who is able to data mine the Collector Ship in a matter of minutes, and produce a complete layout of the Collector Base. EDI herself admits that she's only theorizing, but she has more substance to go on in making deductions than Tali.

[Il Divo]

JKoopman wrote...


ME1 established a supposed motivation for the Reapers: That they are harvesting organics for their technology. This is supported by Sovereign; an actual Reaper. ME2 comes along, contradicts the established motivation via a "squadmate's" supposition with no supporting exposition from Harbinger and suddenly it's sacrosanct bibilical truth and anyone who subscribes to the original motivation is just "misinterpereting facts"? The fudge?

Tali is not Sovereign. Where does Sovereign say "Hey, we are purging the galaxy of all life to steal their technology?" The entire point of the conversation with Sovereign is that we cannot contemplate the Reapers' motives.

[squee913]

JKoopman wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Where did I say I was guessing about anything? ME1 flat out tells us what the Reapers are harvesting us for: They are harvesting us for our technology, then wiping us out. It doesn't explain WHY they're harvesting us for our technology, but then neither does ME2 explain WHY the Reapers are apparently harvesting us for our biology. It simply tells us WHAT they're harvesting us for. In ME1, it's our technology. In ME2, it's our biology.

Who says that?

Sovereign or squadmate?

And who says anything about the Reapers harvesting us to facilitate Reaper reproduction by melting organics into grey goo?

Harbinger or Normandy AI?

ME1 established a supposed motivation for the Reapers: That they are harvesting organics for their technology. This is supported by Sovereign; an actual Reaper. ME2 comes along, contradicts the established motivation via a "squadmate's" supposition with no supporting exposition from Harbinger and suddenly it's sacrosanct bibilical truth and anyone who subscribes to the original motivation is just "misinterpereting facts"? The fudge?

If you simply would rather subscribe to the later motivation, that's fine. But don't try to claim that ME2's motivation didn't contradict ME1's or tell people who're puzzled by the sudden change in motivations that they just didn't pay enough attention.

First of all, no one here is saying anything is sacrosanct biblical truth except you. (And I quote, " don't try to claim that ME2's motivation didn't contradict ME1's") We are pointing out that you are guessing, just like us, but trying to criticize us for it.

Secondly, The fact that they are staring at a baby reaper with organic goo being pumped into it does not do anything to support EDI's claim? Wow... I need to watch more CSI, because I must not understand how evidence works.

Modifié par squee913, 07 avril 2011 - 10:29 .

[JKoopman]

Mesina2 wrote...

^So guessing of AI who was scanning every info from Collectors when in contact is less credible then squadmates just assuming from little info they got few seconds after?

You assume that EDI was somehow connected to the Collector database. We've been over this before. There is no evidence that suggests this is the case, and she doesn't say that she's pulling the info from Collector databanks. In fact, she uses many modifying phrases like "I assume", "It would seem", "It appears", etc that would indicate the exact opposite.

In point of fact, when questioned by Shepard about what purposes the Human Reaper could be for, EDI flat out says, "They may be facilitating the equivalent of Reaper reproduction. Or it could serve some other purpose. I do not have the data to speculate further."

How much more evidence do you need that this was all just speculation on EDI's part when she herself even tells you that she's speculating?

But sure, whatever. Tali was just talking out of her ass, EDI is obviously the only reliable source of "information" and I'm clearly just misinterpereting facts.

Your attempted mockery, as usual, falls flat.

Modifié par JKoopman, 07 avril 2011 - 10:33 .

[Almostfaceman]

JKoopman wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

^So guessing of AI who was scanning every info from Collectors when in contact is less credible then squadmates just assuming from little info they got few seconds after?

You assume that EDI was somehow connected to the Collector database. We've been over this before. There is no evidence that suggests this is the case, and she doesn't say that she's pulling the info from Collector databanks. In fact, she uses many modifying phrases like "I assume", "It would seem", "It appears", etc that would indicate the exact opposite.

In point of fact, when questioned by Shepard about what purposes the Human Reaper could be for, EDI flat out says, "They may be facilitating the equivalent of Reaper reproduction. Or it could serve some other purpose. I do not have the data to speculate further."

How much more evidence do you need that this was all just speculation on EDI's part when she herself even tells you that she's speculating?

But sure, whatever. Tali was just talking out of her ass, EDI is obviously the only reliable source of "information" and I'm clearly just misinterpereting facts.

Your attempted mockery, as usual, falls flat.

Are you forgetting she's already tapped enough from that base - before they even make their assault - to get a detailed schematic of that base - including console's and their functions?  EDI's wired into that base.  Prove she's not.

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

Tali is not Sovereign. Where does Sovereign say "Hey, we are purging the galaxy of all life to steal their technology?" The entire point of the conversation with Sovereign is that we cannot contemplate the Reapers' motives.

Sovereign:  "Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays. Our technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we desire. We impose order on the chaos of organic life. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it."

Tali'Zorah nar Rayya: "They're harvesting us! Letting us advance to the level they need, then wiping us out! "

Commander Shepard: What do you want from us? Slaves, resources?

Sovereign: "My kind transcends your very understanding. We are each a nation - independent, free of all weakness. You cannot grasp the nature of our existence."

It's never addressed why they need us to advance to a particular technological level.  But at the same time "We wanna make babies with you" is not nearly so transcendant a concept as Sovereign seemed to imply.

[Almostfaceman]

JKoopman wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

^So guessing of AI who was scanning every info from Collectors when in contact is less credible then squadmates just assuming from little info they got few seconds after?

You assume that EDI was somehow connected to the Collector database. We've been over this before. There is no evidence that suggests this is the case, and she doesn't say that she's pulling the info from Collector databanks. In fact, she uses many modifying phrases like "I assume", "It would seem", "It appears", etc that would indicate the exact opposite.

In point of fact, when questioned by Shepard about what purposes the Human Reaper could be for, EDI flat out says, "They may be facilitating the equivalent of Reaper reproduction. Or it could serve some other purpose. I do not have the data to speculate further."

How much more evidence do you need that this was all just speculation on EDI's part when she herself even tells you that she's speculating?

But sure, whatever. Tali was just talking out of her ass, EDI is obviously the only reliable source of "information" and I'm clearly just misinterpereting facts.

Your attempted mockery, as usual, falls flat.

Educated guesses by advanced Reaper-tech A.I. vs. guesswork from part of a conversation with a Reaper by Tali.  Hmmm - yeah I go with EDI.  Not that the results are mutually exclusive anyway, in my opinion.

[Almostfaceman]

iakus wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Tali is not Sovereign. Where does Sovereign say "Hey, we are purging the galaxy of all life to steal their technology?" The entire point of the conversation with Sovereign is that we cannot contemplate the Reapers' motives.

Sovereign:  "Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays. Our technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we desire. We impose order on the chaos of organic life. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it."

Tali'Zorah nar Rayya: "They're harvesting us! Letting us advance to the level they need, then wiping us out! "

Commander Shepard: What do you want from us? Slaves, resources?

Sovereign: "My kind transcends your very understanding. We are each a nation - independent, free of all weakness. You cannot grasp the nature of our existence."

It's never addressed why they need us to advance to a particular technological level.  But at the same time "We wanna make babies with you" is not nearly so transcendant a concept as Sovereign seemed to imply.

One Reapers transcendence is another human's baby-making. 

[JKoopman]

Il Divo wrote...

JKoopman wrote...


ME1 established a supposed motivation for the Reapers: That they are harvesting organics for their technology. This is supported by Sovereign; an actual Reaper. ME2 comes along, contradicts the established motivation via a "squadmate's" supposition with no supporting exposition from Harbinger and suddenly it's sacrosanct bibilical truth and anyone who subscribes to the original motivation is just "misinterpereting facts"? The fudge?

Tali is not Sovereign. Where does Sovereign say "Hey, we are purging the galaxy of all life to steal their technology?" The entire point of the conversation with Sovereign is that we cannot contemplate the Reapers' motives.

Sovereign specifically states that the Reapers intentionally develop organic races down a desired technological path and harvest us at the apex of our civilizations, from which Tali extrapolates that they're harvesting us for our technology. As I said, this makes far more sense than allowing organic species to rise to the apex of their technological glory before harvesting them for their biological components.

You act like I'm just pulling this out of my ass. People were specifically saying that there was no evidence whatsoever to support the idea that Reapers weren't harvesting organics to be used in Reaper reproduction, and that anyone who thought otherwise was just "misinterpereting facts" from ME1 and there was no contradiction or conflict of motivations. Not only have I shown that there was substantial evidence to support that idea, but also that the idea that organics are used to facilitate Reaper reproduction is even admitted in ME2 to be nothing more than speculation on EDI's part.

At this point, continuing to argue the fact just makes you all look like hypocrites.

Modifié par JKoopman, 07 avril 2011 - 10:44 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

JKoopman wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

^So guessing of AI who was scanning every info from Collectors when in contact is less credible then squadmates just assuming from little info they got few seconds after?

You assume that EDI was somehow connected to the Collector database. We've been over this before. There is no evidence that suggests this is the case, and she doesn't say that she's pulling the info from Collector databanks. In fact, she uses many modifying phrases like "I assume", "It would seem", "It appears", etc that would indicate the exact opposite.

In point of fact, when questioned by Shepard about what purposes the Human Reaper could be for, EDI flat out says, "They may be facilitating the equivalent of Reaper reproduction. Or it could serve some other purpose. I do not have the data to speculate further."

How much more evidence do you need that this was all just speculation on EDI's part when she herself even tells you that she's speculating?

Your attempted mockery, as usual, falls flat.

You've just proved my point.

Nobody should be too surprised when a current theory gets replaced with another one. Nobody should take any theory as read.

Traditional science fiction (the kind that isn't Kurasawa movies in space) is all about trying to develop a theory based on evidence.  This means we have to continually re-evaluate all the evidence we've gathered, and determine our degree of confidence in that evidence.

Right now there are a few facts I'm fairly certain of For Now:  the Reapers Reap everything every 50,000 years or so, they've been doing this for tens of millions of years, the protheans were the last race of organics, the collectors are modified versions of the protheans, the Reapers can interact with the Citadal to open up a corridor to dark space, the Reapers build or modified the Keepers, the Reapers were controlling the Collectors, the collectors were dissolving humans into go and building something that looked like a Reaper, the collectors had pods for a LOT more humans than they had taken, the Reapers can do indoctrination.

I may have missed something, but that list contains most of the things we're actually pretty sure about. I'd say "reasonably sure" because they are things that we have both been told and seen direct evidence of.

So to make theories, we have to make some guesses. Because of that our theories may change as we  make educated guessed based on the information we're not sure of.

If we're only allowed to think about facts we're pretty sure are true, and not make educated guesses based on facts we are less sure of, then it's really hard for us to think or plan effectively.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 07 avril 2011 - 10:50 .

[Almostfaceman]

JKoopman wrote...

At this point, continuing to argue the fact just makes you all look like hypocrites.

Easy there, Koopman, let's keep this civil.

[JKoopman]

Almostfaceman wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

^So guessing of AI who was scanning every info from Collectors when in contact is less credible then squadmates just assuming from little info they got few seconds after?

You assume that EDI was somehow connected to the Collector database. We've been over this before. There is no evidence that suggests this is the case, and she doesn't say that she's pulling the info from Collector databanks. In fact, she uses many modifying phrases like "I assume", "It would seem", "It appears", etc that would indicate the exact opposite.

In point of fact, when questioned by Shepard about what purposes the Human Reaper could be for, EDI flat out says, "They may be facilitating the equivalent of Reaper reproduction. Or it could serve some other purpose. I do not have the data to speculate further."

How much more evidence do you need that this was all just speculation on EDI's part when she herself even tells you that she's speculating?

But sure, whatever. Tali was just talking out of her ass, EDI is obviously the only reliable source of "information" and I'm clearly just misinterpereting facts.

Your attempted mockery, as usual, falls flat.

Educated guesses by advanced Reaper-tech A.I. vs. guesswork from part of a conversation with a Reaper by Tali.  Hmmm - yeah I go with EDI.  Not that the results are mutually exclusive anyway, in my opinion.

Her being based on Reaper tech or not, the fact that she has to guess--even if one were to assume that they were "educated" guesses despite there being no evidence to support this position one way or the other--would seem to indicate that she doesn't know regardless.

You choose to believe EDI that knows what she's talking about. That's fine. That's your choice. But recognize that it IS a choice. That it ISN'T sacrosant fact. That it DOES conflict with the previously established motivations. And that people who don't subscribe to your specific belief AREN'T simply deluded and misrepresenting the plot.

[Almostfaceman]

JKoopman wrote...

Her being based on Reaper tech or not, the fact that she has to guess--even if one were to assume that they were "educated" guesses despite there being no evidence to support this position one way or the other--would seem to indicate that she doesn't know regardless.

You choose to believe EDI that knows what she's talking about. That's fine. That's your choice. But recognize that it IS a choice. That it ISN'T sacrosant fact. That it DOES conflict with the previously established motivations. And that people who don't subscribe to your specific belief AREN'T simply deluded and misrepresenting the plot.

Um, what previously established motivations?  Are you talking about what Tali said?  Because that was guesswork as well.

Modifié par Almostfaceman, 07 avril 2011 - 10:53 .

[JKoopman]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

^So guessing of AI who was scanning every info from Collectors when in contact is less credible then squadmates just assuming from little info they got few seconds after?

You assume that EDI was somehow connected to the Collector database. We've been over this before. There is no evidence that suggests this is the case, and she doesn't say that she's pulling the info from Collector databanks. In fact, she uses many modifying phrases like "I assume", "It would seem", "It appears", etc that would indicate the exact opposite.

In point of fact, when questioned by Shepard about what purposes the Human Reaper could be for, EDI flat out says, "They may be facilitating the equivalent of Reaper reproduction. Or it could serve some other purpose. I do not have the data to speculate further."

How much more evidence do you need that this was all just speculation on EDI's part when she herself even tells you that she's speculating?

Your attempted mockery, as usual, falls flat.

You've just proved my point.

Nobody should be too surprised when a current theory gets replaced with another one. Nobody should take any theory as read.

Traditional science fiction (the kind that isn't Kurasawa movies in space) is all about trying to develop a theory based on evidence.  This means we have to continually re-evaluate all the evidence we've gathered, and determine our degree of confidence in that evidence.

Right now there are a few facts I'm fairly certain of For Now:  the Reapers Reap everything every 50,000 years or so, they've been doing this for tens of millions of years, the protheans were the last race of organics, the collectors are modified versions of the protheans, the Reapers can interact with the Citadal to open up a corridor to dark space, the Reapers build or modified the Keepers, the Reapers were controlling the Collectors, the collectors were dissolving humans into go and building something that looked like a Reaper, the collectors had pods for a LOT more humans than they had taken, the Reapers can do indoctrination.

I may have missed something, but that list contains most of the things we're actually pretty sure about. I'd say "reasonably sure" because they are things that we have both been told and seen direct evidence of.

So to make theories, we have to make some guesses. Because of that our theories may change as we  make educated guessed based on the information we're not sure of.

If we're only allowed to think about facts we're pretty sure are true, and not make educated guesses based on facts we are less sure of, then it's really hard for us to think or plan effectively.

The point is, people were trying to defend ME2 by saying that anyone who felt that the Reapers were simply machines out to harvest organic races for their technology instead of semi-organic "sapient constructs" out to harvest organic races to facilitate Reaper baby-making were simply deluded, mistaken, "misinterpereting facts" and had nothing on which to support their position. They were saying that ME1 never suggested this. I've clearly shown otherwise.

Also, it was meant specifically to refute your argument that we learned something about the Reapers or their motivations in ME2. We learned an alternate theory. A possible explanation for their motives which conflicts with the previous possible explanation. So, which is it? And how does it help us? And if we can't be sure either way, then did we really learn anything.

[squee913]

JKoopman wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

JKoopman wrote...


ME1 established a supposed motivation for the Reapers: That they are harvesting organics for their technology. This is supported by Sovereign; an actual Reaper. ME2 comes along, contradicts the established motivation via a "squadmate's" supposition with no supporting exposition from Harbinger and suddenly it's sacrosanct bibilical truth and anyone who subscribes to the original motivation is just "misinterpereting facts"? The fudge?

Tali is not Sovereign. Where does Sovereign say "Hey, we are purging the galaxy of all life to steal their technology?" The entire point of the conversation with Sovereign is that we cannot contemplate the Reapers' motives.

Sovereign specifically states that the Reapers intentionally develop organic races down a desired technological path and harvest us at the apex of our civilizations, from which Tali extrapolates that they're harvesting us for our technology. As I said, this makes far more sense than allowing organic species to rise to the apex of their technological glory before harvesting them for their biological components.

You act like I'm just pulling this out of my ass. People were specifically saying that there was no evidence whatsoever to support the idea that Reapers weren't harvesting organics to be used in Reaper reproduction, and that anyone who thought otherwise was just "misinterpereting facts" from ME1 and there was no contradiction or conflict of motivations. Not only have I shown that there was substantial evidence to support that idea, but also that the idea that organics are used to facilitate Reaper reproduction is even admitted in ME2 to be nothing more than speculation on EDI's part.

At this point, continuing to argue the fact just makes you all look like hypocrites.

No one is acting like you are puling anything out of your ass. You just don't want to admit that there is more than one way to interpret what Sovereign said. You swear up and down that ME1 showed us with out a shadow of a doubt that the Reapers were harvesting us for our tech. This was never proven at all.

Tali may have suggested it, but there were other things he could have meant by this (Like the fact they wanted us to use their  tech so we are easier to take down. The get us at he apex of our Civ because that is when we are the most numerous) We have stated these more than once, and you continue to ignore them.

You are just clinging to one small fact that a crew member SUGGESTED something after talking to sovereign for 2 minutes and you are trying to say that that is irrefutable proof that that is what he reapers intended to do. While at he same time telling us that what EDI says is rubbish simply because she did not remind you every 5 minutes that she is mining the collector database.

Is EDI right? maybe, maybe not, but we have in front of us, evidence that a reaper is being made and that organic material is being used in it's construction. Was Tali right? Evidence from both games would suggest that she was not.

Modifié par squee913, 07 avril 2011 - 11:05 .

[JKoopman]

Almostfaceman wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Her being based on Reaper tech or not, the fact that she has to guess--even if one were to assume that they were "educated" guesses despite there being no evidence to support this position one way or the other--would seem to indicate that she doesn't know regardless.

You choose to believe EDI that knows what she's talking about. That's fine. That's your choice. But recognize that it IS a choice. That it ISN'T sacrosant fact. That it DOES conflict with the previously established motivations. And that people who don't subscribe to your specific belief AREN'T simply deluded and misrepresenting the plot.

Um, what previously established motivations?  Are you talking about what Tali said?  Because that was guesswork as well.

Yes, it was guesswork. I haven't said otherwise. But it was the originally established guesswork; and guesswork that makes substantially more sense, I might add. ME2 then came along and dropped an entirely different (and frankly ridiculous) set of guesswork on us with no elaboration. That's how and why people can say "Um, I thought this was what the Reapers were about. And now it's that?" and why it's not just some baseless claim. Pardon if I'm not making myself clear.

[Torhagen]

i think it was a good point that its strange shepard would not bring the scientist to the normandy and did not contact hackett for an update

[JKoopman]

squee913 wrote...

You just don't want to admit that there is more than one way to interpret what Sovereign said.

At least we're getting somewhere. You admit that there's more than one possible way to interperet the conversation with Sovereign. That's at least a step up from (to use your own words) swearing up and down that ME2 showed us without a shadow of a doubt that the Reapers organics for our biological components in order to facilitate Reaper reproduction, and that anyone who thinks otherwise is just "misinterpereting facts".

Modifié par JKoopman, 07 avril 2011 - 11:18 .