110 réponses à ce sujet

[Madecologist]

xsdob wrote...

This ending isn't really all that better. Why couldn't the reapers destroy organics to stop them from creating synthetics that rival themselves.

Think about it, the reapers were invented by a race as a means of preservation, they rebel and become the most powerful race in the galaxy. The reapers rule for a little longer than 50,000 years, controlling their former masters empire's until a subservient race invents another synthetic race that turns on them and comes close to wiping out the reapers.

Fearing this, they begin to wipe out races every 50,000 years, the time just before their own rebellion was had, and harvest organics to strengthen their own forces and to upgrade themselves should a synthetic race come about that is stronger than they are.

All the countless millennium's of cyclical genocide was based off of them trying to prevent an uprising, with organic life being near inconsequential to them, a resource to be used and disposed of. They're not protecting organics or ensuring galactic safety, just cowardly suppressing life to allow themselves the chance to prolong their rule.

I agree, withing the framework of Machine Singularity there is a lot of variations. ME3 went with the single worst one I can imagine. You idea is actually very familiar to another I read. You only need to factor in why the Reapers don't just glass all life bearing worlds to prevent future life and why deliberately seed tech so the races develop a certain way.

They addressed it by saying the Reapers actually do use the organics and tech they had to 'reproduce'. So they still need them as a 'food' source as it were and need them to reach a certain level of tech so that they are compatible for the process. So the cylce is just that, the time it takes for primitive life to become advanced enough to be 'consumbale' but before they can be a threat. Enforcing their domination over us, but on a time frame that is beyond our own magnitude. Thus making the Reapers a horrific species.

This leads back to BW really did drop the ball with the ending we got... independent of theme they could have used.

[PsychoWARD23]

iamheartbroken wrote...

The Reapers were much better as a vague enemy you could only guess at the origin of. Trying to explain them kind of hurts it. Some enemies are better when understood, some enemies are better when they're a mystery. I can't help feeling that the Reapers fall under the better as a mystery section.

Yeah, you should have just been able to destroy them with the Crucible, not fully knowing how, but it blows up Earth too, or SOMETHING


ANYTHING

[SnakeSNMF]

There was little foreshadowing about dark energy, but it did discuss its' effects and plenty of the technology in the Mass Effect universe use it.

As a physicist, the theory of dark energy is only, well... A theory. But it also states that at one point in time, the amount of dark energy in the universe will overpower everything because it accelerates the expansion rate of the universe and rips galaxies away from eachother at an alarming pace.

So, yes. That won't happen for another twenty billion years, nontheless it's a terrifying truth. If the Mass Effect series follows to par, then that'd be great.

You think with how large the galaxy is however, -- 125 billion galaxies known of at the moment in our observeable universe, then you'd believe that people around us-- not just our galaxy, but the others, would've changed the fact already and saved everyone.
There's just too many variables and our universe is too large.

That's why this ending doesn't make sense.

[QwertyMusicMan]

If anything, I would just like to know why Bioware decided that the current ones are better than this explanation. From a creative standpoint.

Personally, I don't see why they would ever use the current ones in favor of this. If ME3 ended with the Dark Energy dilemma, it would go down as the most paralyzing moment in my gaming career.

[psychocandy]

starkid's explanation of the reapers isnt a bad story, just poorly told and the choices given are poor(probably monstrously so), the EDI and Joker story should have had a greater impact than it did, that is such a wasted opportunity, probably the biggest error bioware made

all organic's being destroyed isnt the reapers purpose, Saren tells you the disdain they have for the geth in ME1
the reapers were created to protect the next cycle, as the current one has hit it's percieved destruction point, i.e an organic v synthetic conflict

[MadMatt910]

Snakes, id not take the science too literally - as a geneticist I can tell you a lot of what they use is wooly at best.

With the ammount of information in mass effect it was always going to be hard to give us a conclusive ending that made sense. My problem with not knowing reaper logic in the ending now woudl be that we have already had their logic from this ending and the dark matter ending.

[NoUserNameHere]

Arcian wrote...

>Plenty of foreshadowing
>One mission in ME2
Yeah, how about no.

The reason this ending wasn't included was because it wouldn't justify the Reapers harvesting species. Also, would 50,000 years of non-tech really "reset" damage caused by dark energy? Hardly. It would continually increase each cycle, which would make the Reapers completely pointless and make universal doom a certain thing.

Let's face it, the dark energy ending couldn't have worked and would, in fact, have been even darker and more doom-and-gloom than the endings we got.

The reaping cycle here would unite all members of a species at their peak into a singular hivemind -- one giant computer devoted to solving the problem once and for all, yesh? Extreme, but arguably neccessary. Better than 'preserving' organic life in a (synthetic) form nothing like anthing we can relate too.

The dark energy ending choice certainly fits the tone of the series a little more. You have the choice to submit and build a human reaper or fight and risk extinction. As it stands your only real choice is varying degrees of submission to the Catalyst. Extinction ain't even an option.

[Madecologist]

MadMatt910 wrote...

I'm not sure anyone is really saying that this ending woudl be better no matter the execution. But I think it certainly has more potential. Removing the star child and having a conveersation with harbringer instead would be a leap forward - especially if harbringer was the original reaper created due to the dark energy problem or something. They could make it all work with the previous games and the lore.

Lets remember too, a lot of the science in science fiction is pretty weak, I think that thats not  amassive issue if its consistent and used to tell a good story though. Currently we do more or less have gigantic plot holes concerning the actions of sovereign, necessity of the keeper and conduit, plus what the hell the dark energy shadowing has anything to do with anything. And all three endings more or less mess up the relays and leave races stranded in sol.

Oh I agree, what we got... was... trust me... I really really... REALLY hate the ending we got. Everytime I see Joker fleeing the blast.. I just want to drive for a few days and punch someone in Alberta. Or down the street, but those guys mostly done the Multiplayer only.

I was just saying the Dark Energy premise would have to be handled carefuly or it could be just as bad. If they wanted to switch to the Machine Singularty, that too would need to have been handled well and have the Dark Energy forshadow prooperly addressed. Which none of it was.

[SnakeSNMF]

MadMatt910 wrote...

Snakes, id not take the science too literally - as a geneticist I can tell you a lot of what they use is wooly at best.

With the ammount of information in mass effect it was always going to be hard to give us a conclusive ending that made sense. My problem with not knowing reaper logic in the ending now woudl be that we have already had their logic from this ending and the dark matter ending.

I take "science" too literally in this sense because the entire universe is based on making some realistic ideas out of what our actual universe presents us.

Can't travel faster then the speed of light?
Okay. Here you go. Relays.
Just an example throwing out there.

They just didn't expand on the dark matter or energy theorys enough through both games and capitalized it on small missions (Tali on Haelstrom) with the sun.

[Furluge]

MadMatt910 wrote...

The leak about dark energy was from an employee several months before the full script leak.

Unfortunately, compared to the full script leak, you can't really call that leak more than rumor. : / Maybe the change happened and it was earlier in the development cycle, but we'll never know exactly when a change happened, if it actually did.

[psychocandy]

NoUserNameHere wrote...

Arcian wrote...

>Plenty of foreshadowing
>One mission in ME2
Yeah, how about no.

The reason this ending wasn't included was because it wouldn't justify the Reapers harvesting species. Also, would 50,000 years of non-tech really "reset" damage caused by dark energy? Hardly. It would continually increase each cycle, which would make the Reapers completely pointless and make universal doom a certain thing.

Let's face it, the dark energy ending couldn't have worked and would, in fact, have been even darker and more doom-and-gloom than the endings we got.

The reaping cycle here would unite all members of a species at their peak into a singular hivemind -- one giant computer devoted to solving the problem once and for all, yesh? Extreme, but arguably neccessary. Better than 'preserving' organic life in a (synthetic) form nothing like anthing we can relate too.

The dark energy ending choice certainly fits the tone of the series a little more. You have the choice to submit and build a human reaper or fight and risk extinction. As it stands your only real choice is varying degrees of submission to the Catalyst. Extinction ain't even an option.

the dark energy ending makes no sence at all, Sovergein told you that we develope along paths they want.....so why not just change that path rather than the numerous reapings?

[Lparsons7641]

I honestly wouldn't have minded if the reapers were left unexplained. It was dark and menacing. It fit a "genocide" theme. Hitler didn't need to be explained, you know he needed to be stopped.

[MadMatt910]

psychocandy wrote...

NoUserNameHere wrote...

Arcian wrote...

>Plenty of foreshadowing
>One mission in ME2
Yeah, how about no.

The reason this ending wasn't included was because it wouldn't justify the Reapers harvesting species. Also, would 50,000 years of non-tech really "reset" damage caused by dark energy? Hardly. It would continually increase each cycle, which would make the Reapers completely pointless and make universal doom a certain thing.

Let's face it, the dark energy ending couldn't have worked and would, in fact, have been even darker and more doom-and-gloom than the endings we got.

The reaping cycle here would unite all members of a species at their peak into a singular hivemind -- one giant computer devoted to solving the problem once and for all, yesh? Extreme, but arguably neccessary. Better than 'preserving' organic life in a (synthetic) form nothing like anthing we can relate too.

The dark energy ending choice certainly fits the tone of the series a little more. You have the choice to submit and build a human reaper or fight and risk extinction. As it stands your only real choice is varying degrees of submission to the Catalyst. Extinction ain't even an option.

the dark energy ending makes no sence at all, Sovergein told you that we develope along paths they want.....so why not just change that path rather than the numerous reapings?

That point about Sovereign is interesting. I guess it could be argued that they direct technology to go towards somethign that could help solve the dark energy problem, but thats pretty much a terrible explanation lol.

However, that does mess up the games ending even more. We make you develop towards developing synthetics that will kill you, so our synthetics kill you to stop the synthetic we made you make, from killing you

[MadMatt910]

Madecologist wrote...

MadMatt910 wrote...

I'm not sure anyone is really saying that this ending woudl be better no matter the execution. But I think it certainly has more potential. Removing the star child and having a conveersation with harbringer instead would be a leap forward - especially if harbringer was the original reaper created due to the dark energy problem or something. They could make it all work with the previous games and the lore.

Lets remember too, a lot of the science in science fiction is pretty weak, I think that thats not  amassive issue if its consistent and used to tell a good story though. Currently we do more or less have gigantic plot holes concerning the actions of sovereign, necessity of the keeper and conduit, plus what the hell the dark energy shadowing has anything to do with anything. And all three endings more or less mess up the relays and leave races stranded in sol.

Oh I agree, what we got... was... trust me... I really really... REALLY hate the ending we got. Everytime I see Joker fleeing the blast.. I just want to drive for a few days and punch someone in Alberta. Or down the street, but those guys mostly done the Multiplayer only.

I was just saying the Dark Energy premise would have to be handled carefuly or it could be just as bad. If they wanted to switch to the Machine Singularty, that too would need to have been handled well and have the Dark Energy forshadow prooperly addressed. Which none of it was.

I beginning to think a lot of us are on the same page with this idea, across a number of threads now.

[Bendok]

The term "Mass Effect" refers to mass effect fields that are created by element zero, which RELEASES Dark Energy. This is why the game was called Mass Effect and why the original ending makes more sense. It was probably the ending planned from the very beginning when they named the series. ALL of this technology is based on this and clearly there was supposed to be a negative cost associated with creating all that dark energy long term.

In the context of ME3, the Mass Effect name doesn't really have any meaning. May as well just call it Space Commandos or something.

[MadMatt910]

SnakeSNMF wrote...

MadMatt910 wrote...

Snakes, id not take the science too literally - as a geneticist I can tell you a lot of what they use is wooly at best.

With the ammount of information in mass effect it was always going to be hard to give us a conclusive ending that made sense. My problem with not knowing reaper logic in the ending now woudl be that we have already had their logic from this ending and the dark matter ending.

I take "science" too literally in this sense because the entire universe is based on making some realistic ideas out of what our actual universe presents us.

Can't travel faster then the speed of light?
Okay. Here you go. Relays.
Just an example throwing out there.

They just didn't expand on the dark matter or energy theorys enough through both games and capitalized it on small missions (Tali on Haelstrom) with the sun.

Yeah, its possible that they took out some of the capitalization as they went through ME3, possibly because they werent sure of an ending and didnt want to introduce it in case. I think the only indication in ME3 that it is important is Conrad's dissertation? (I could be wrong).

I was talking with a friend the other day about the science of mass effect, with us both realiing ultimately if you apply real lif ebiology and physics to it, the plot holes become very big very quickly.

[LucidStrike]

Arcian wrote...

>Plenty of foreshadowing
>One mission in ME2
Yeah, how about no.

The reason this ending wasn't included was because it wouldn't justify the Reapers harvesting species. Also, would 50,000 years of non-tech really "reset" damage caused by dark energy? Hardly. It would continually increase each cycle, which would make the Reapers completely pointless and make universal doom a certain thing.

Let's face it, the dark energy ending couldn't have worked and would, in fact, have been even darker and more doom-and-gloom than the endings we got.

Yeah, "We are the end of everything" and "You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it" don't sound like the words of even a benevolent dictator. It's just plain psychotic. =/

[Deltateam Elcor]

 One mission in the entire trilogy does not warrant an ending.

No it did not make sense, the entire story of ME3 would have to be rewritten to include it, the synthetic/organic ending was quite right in fact, the only question is if it was actually just an imagination of it or not.

It was the main element of ME1, it was continued in ME2 and ends in ME3 with the geth being taken away from reaper control and saving them from the Gerrels ego.

Dark energy, nothing in ME1, one mission and a few bits here and there in ME2, nothing in ME3.

How wonderful.

You could however say that it was implied throughout the entire series due to the very name of it "mass effect" and the use of FTL/Fields causing disturbance, but there just isnt enough in the story itself, im sorry but its dead.

[zer0netgain]

While I thought it was foreshadowing in ME2, I equally accept it was also (1) a plot tool to let us have a mission that ends with us recruiting her to the team, and (2) a red herring to keep the fans from getting keen to how the writers had always intended to end the ME trilogy.

Think about it. How many popular movies have false scripts leaked out to keep the fans from knowing what will really be in the movie when it comes out?

[mupp3tz]

Shwiggliness wrote...

Why was this thrown out, why? The Reapers are way better than their bull**** explanation these days

Because this... which probably explains why the series suddenly took a turn we didn't want/expect it to.

[WarBaby2]

Bendok wrote...
In the context of ME3, the Mass Effect name doesn't really have any meaning. May as well just call it Space Commandos or something.

Exactly! Thank you!

[DxWill103]

I recall reading something a while back about Bioware changing the ending after the leaked scripts. So basically, whoever leaked the script is responsible for the ending we got. If it hadn't been, there might have been a much better ending. Even if it isn't, I most likely couldn't be much worse than the current one.

[MadMatt910]

Actually in mass effect 1 there were codex entries specifically saying that dark energy is created when electrical currents are running through element zero. And in ME3 you get a dissertation from conrad verner on dark energy which is considered a war asset - i ask how, if dark energy is irrelevant, it can be considered an asset?

It has also been said that the human reaper was an act of desperation of reapers trying to create a reaper with human genetic material (sure the genetics of the ending are absolutely terrible, but they are consistent).

I think the conflicts with the geth ask an independant but relevant question. What does it mean to be alive? Since you can brainwash/rewrite them in 2 after finding out there are 2 subsections of geth, and in 3 where you see the war broke out due to quarian actions.

The truth is, the organic/ synthetic thing is possibly even more flawed since sovereign claims to direct our progress. As I said in a previous post: That point about Sovereign is interesting. I guess it could be argued that they direct technology to go towards somethign that could help solve the dark energy problem, but thats pretty much a terrible explanation lol.

However, that does mess up the games ending even more. We make you develop towards developing synthetics that will kill you, so our synthetics kill you to stop the synthetic we made you make, from killing you

[MadMatt910]

DxWill103 wrote...

I recall reading something a while back about Bioware changing the ending after the leaked scripts. So basically, whoever leaked the script is responsible for the ending we got. If it hadn't been, there might have been a much better ending. Even if it isn't, I most likely couldn't be much worse than the current one.

The leaked script already had the ending weve ended up with, it was prior to that a strong/reliable rumour abou tthe dark energy plot and details came from someone on the team. That information is not in an old/locked thread on these forums.

[WarBaby2]

DxWill103 wrote...

I recall reading something a while back about Bioware changing the ending after the leaked scripts. So basically, whoever leaked the script is responsible for the ending we got. If it hadn't been, there might have been a much better ending. Even if it isn't, I most likely couldn't be much worse than the current one.

Yea, ok, but now the game is out... they should put in the original ending and leave it at that.