232 réponses à ce sujet

[Ajensis]

Let me start off by saying that I wasn't satisfied by the ending at all. There are plot holes and inconsistencies, yes. However, I think it's important we direct our attention to what didn't make sense, and the purpose of the Reapers isn't one of them. I'll try and keep it brief:

Scenario 1: "Order"

This is the state of the galaxy in the Mass Effect universe until the ending of the 3rd game, and how it's been for at least hundreds of thousands of years (and much more if we choose to believe the Catalyst).
In short, organic life evolves everywhere in the galaxy at different paces. When the Cycle has come to an end, the Reapers set out to perform their routinely task of wiping out all sentient life. They do this in order to preserve life - this is not a contradiction. Remember, they do not kill anything that's alive, only those who have attained too much wisdom and resourcefulness. Allow me to be the Devil's advocate for a second in hopes of elaborating my point:

Scenario 2: "Chaos"

The Catalyst explains that they believe that at a certain point, organics will have the skills and knowledge to create something too dangerous. It doesn't matter what you believe and that you proved the Catalyst wrong in a case or two - they're not human, so we can't necessarily apply our logic. The argument still stands: without the Reapers, organics may gain too much knowledge and create something they cannot control. Imagine the Geth conflict prior to its resolution, except galaxywide. Probable? I don't personally think so. But possible? Yes, anything is possible. It is this possibility that the Reapers guard us against.
What the Catalyst is protecting us against (however horrible the method) is the possibility that a synthetic race will overcome the ones that created them. If that happens on a larger scale, what are the odds that they'll allow new life to rise up and evolve without interference? Again, this is way out in the vague world of hypothetics, but we're not dealing with a human race - the mere 0,1 % chance of this scenario could mean a world of difference to a different race than humans (and possibly even to some humans). So what the Reapers are meant to prevent is having a synthetic race dominate the known galaxy by ensuring that organic life could never rebel against them.

The difference is that the Reapers allow organic life to exist, whereas our future creations might not. Life gets to evolve for 50.000 years, to live and love and experience and create and ponder. An ancient civilization merely thought it necessary to 'reset' life at specific intervals to make sure life wouldn't endanger itself. This is what we're fighting against. If we get a different ending without the Mass Relays blowing up, destroying the Reapers is basically throwing our future into a great Unknown where anything can happen. But, being human, I would of course never adhere to the logic of the Catalyst but now I'm digressing, sorry.


The popular Xzibit picture with "Yo dawg, I heard you don't wanna be
killed by synthetics, etc." does not point out a plothole. We've got
other things that we're better off addressing.

Keep up the civil behaviour and thoughtful criticism!

PS: feel free to let me know if someone made a thread about this as well. I searched through a dozen pages, but there's just so many threads in this forum (and not all of them descriptive in their titles ).

[Reptilian Rob]

But that circular logic...

[MrPuschel]

It is somehow logical if you lookt at it on a small roster. However, it's stuff for a Star Trek Episode but not for the end of an 5-Year Trilogy.

[likta_]

Why would they believe that synthetics will inevitably wipe out all organic life? It never happened before. And why wouldn't they just roam the galaxy and kill off all synthetics? Because the damn ending does not make any sense, that's why.

Modifié par likta_, 19 mars 2012 - 09:49 .

[mmmu]

Hey, nice post. I've thought about this as well, and I think you explained in nice detail. I agree that the purpose of the Reapers is clear enough, and personally I enjoy the vagueness of their description - it adds to their threat and as stated multiple times - they are beyond our comprehension ^^;

[Qutayba]

Yes, it makes sense in and of itself. It's based on the "real world" theory of the technological singularity. They want to save Life at the expense of individual lives. (There's actually some theology/philosophy here, too, under the surface: are God/gods simply the caretakers of apathetic natural forces or do they assign value to individuals?)

I just think Shepard would feel that Life without particular lives might not be worth saving, and that's what makes him human.

[Midnight Eternal]

If we assume so called RGC logic as true, then how in blue blazes does making everyone part synthetic part organic stop the cycle he uses as premise for his existence. What is to stop them from making purely synthetic AI constructs just as pure organics did? For being a "God child" he is really stupid.

[likta_]

Why do the Reapers think that organic life is more worth saving than synthetic life? Sovereign states that Reapers are the pinnacle of evolution. It does not make sense.

[Evil_medved]

likta_ wrote...

Why do the Reapers think that organic life is more worth saving than synthetic life? Sovereign states that Reapers are the pinnacle of evolution. It does not make sense.

And Harby says “I am limitless. You are bacteria.”. Reapers obviously HATE organics. All that saving and preserving is bull****.

Modifié par Evil_medved, 19 mars 2012 - 09:58 .

[Sparse]

It just about makes sense in itself, but why do that Reapers operate according to this doctrine?? Who put them up to it?? How does it all work??

The particular problem I had with the story as a whole is that so little explained, we had 2 games of build up and then very few answers. I realise that they had to make it playable for new players but there are just so few answers.

[likta_]

Why did Sovereign tell us that the reason why the do what they do was "beyond our comprehension" when spacechildgodthing is able to wrap it up in one measly sentence? Why didn't he tell us then and Shepards reaction was "not on my watch"? Mainly because the writers didn't know back then what the reason was, but the actual reason why they do what they do is just an magicall a**pull. Its stupid and does not make sense.

[Baronesa]

Just the premise that Synthetics will always turn against organics is beyond repulsive, not only we have been presented with examples of that NOT being the case, but as others have pointed out on other threads, it is akin to racism and genocide.

Star-child justify it's position with pure bigotry.

I can accept this is what they believe, but I cannot accept that Shepard, blindly accepts such stupid premise without objecting to it, specially after helping EDI and making peace between Quarians and Geth.

Now, even if you consider this the premise they work from, it contradicts what Sovereign and Harbinger had told us on the previous games.

[shurryy]

 

[Armass81]

I can kinda see what they tried to do with the singularity thing. The catalyst is an AI that is programmed to do what it is told, and it sees no alternatives to its programming. Other reapers also follow this programming as slaves, they are not given any option anymore than hand is given an option to dissobey the brain.

It sees that AI uprising is inevitable with organic civilizations that advance enough. And all it takes is one time for an AI to grow so powerful it can easily outsmart and do its opponents and consume everything in the galaxy. Everything... planets would be stripped of resources for the ever consuming machines and organics would be simply wiped out as useless, there would be no life anymore, they would eradicate and consume everything, all that would be left is bacteria. This is what the catalyst is trying to prevent. Its solution, tough insane one, is the reapers. It preserves the cycle of life and evolution in the galaxy witout machines interfering and taking it over, it brings order to the chaos. No matter how paradoxical it is, catalyst doesnt care, its programming tells it what to do, it cant go against it.

I know the Geth are an anomaly, but there was war between them and the quarians. There was war between the Zha'Til and the Prothean empire. Who knows how many other AI uprisings the galaxy has experienced, since the prothean VI tells there are marks of the same patterns repeated in the each cycle, tough a little differently. It happens, AI's are being made, there is conflict, the catalyst has seen this pattern repeat over and over again. Problem with teh geth quarian peace is Shepard doesnt really bring that up... when he should.

Besides what guarantees do we have that even if the geth are peaceful now, they dont form a new concensus in the future and at that point they as machines have evolved(or upgraded) so powerful they truly dont need organics anymore and simply trample over them?

Crucible is the one that changes the Catalyst and creates new "possibilities" when it connects.

Modifié par Armass81, 19 mars 2012 - 10:15 .

[Icinix]

At a very base level its logic makes sense....


...but since the Reapers are all remote controlled organic life hating cyborgs.....

..no you know what. Nothing about the Reapers motivation or the ending makes sense.

[Sparse]

Harbinger and Sovereign did both get quite angry about it all.

[Ajensis]

Oh no, just realised there's no multi-quote function or am I being daft?

Reptilian: what circular logic are you thinking of? 

MrPuschel: that's arguably true. I'm not claiming this is a good plot twist, merely that we should focus on everything that happens after this elaboration on the Reapers. BioWare are less likely to take our points seriously (I imagine) if we keep repeating a plot hole that's not a plot hole. My intention was not to defend the quality of this explanation (although I admit I sort of liked it myself  even though I can fully understand how the mystery of the Reapers is lessened by being explained - that's how I feel in most cases too. Don't know why it felt differently for me in this case, but that's not important, anyway).

likta_: How do you know it never happened before?  who knows how close they came to that in the millions of years before? Think of all that's happened in our Cycle alone - in a span of millennia. Now consider how much more that's happened to countless other civilizations. I think it's safe to conclude that a case like the Geth must've happened before and possibly on a larger scale.
As to why they do it this way: as I said, you can't necessarily apply human logic to a non-human race. And just think about it: would you be comfortable having super-advanced machines roaming the galaxy, destroying our creations if they become too advanced? It would be a much bigger disadvantage than bonus; some races would eventually band together to get rid of these machines, even if the Reapers had shown us no hostility. Too many factors that can't be accounted for.

mmmu: Thank you! And yes, I too like that the reason they exist isn't something we can readily accept as human beings it would be kind of boring if we could.

Qutayba: the theological aspect is interesting, yeah. And they did touch upon it indirectly in the first game. I think... Wasn't there something about cavemen detailing contact with some godlike power? Ah, my memory fails me. And yes, agree with your last sentence too!

Midnight Eternal: RGC logic?
I can't answer those questions and I agree that the ending is lacking in so many ways. I'm not trying to defend the "choice of three endings" or their premise. If it were up to me, it would be very different. I'm solely concerned with saying that the Reapers do exist with a purpose.

likta_ (again): I don't think the Reapers consider organic life more worth than synthetic. They merely carry out the function they were created for. They're tools - horrible and terrifying tools, but tools nonetheless. And to them, they are the pinnacle of evolution - our evolution. It makes sense, at least to me

Edit: yikes, many new posts while I wrote this one... How can I keep up with this??

Modifié par Ajensis, 19 mars 2012 - 10:16 .

[likta_]

Why would they kill of entire civilisations even before they created synthetics that could kill them instead of killing the synthetics if they MAY rise up? Is that really the easiest and most practical solution?

[Guglio08]

It is intentionally flawed logic. The Reapers are the antagonist. Their reasons for existing are incomprehensible and thus our limited understanding of them doesn't make sense. Villains always have twisted mentalities.

[Tregon]

Ajensis wrote...
What the Catalyst is protecting us against (however horrible the method) is the possibility that a synthetic race will overcome the ones that created them. If that happens on a larger scale, what are the odds that they'll allow new life to rise up and evolve without interference? Again, this is way out in the vague world of hypothetics, but we're not dealing with a human race - the mere 0,1 % chance of this scenario could mean a world of difference to a different race than humans (and possibly even to some humans). So what the Reapers are meant to prevent is having a synthetic race dominate the known galaxy by ensuring that organic life could never rebel against them.

Except that requires two things which MUST be true...
1) Synthetic life must want to destroy ALL life.
2) Synthetic life must be able to DO that.

You need motivation and ability both, one or another does not work.
Geth for example lack motivation, and when we look at might of Citadel species, they lack power as well.
Ragtag fleet of Quarians in ME3 were pressing Geth hard. Add in Turian and/or other Citadel species fleets and Geth are kicked down hard.

[Baronesa]

Ajensis wrote...

likta_ (again): I don't think the Reapers consider organic life more worth than synthetic. They merely carry out the function they were created for. They're tools - horrible and terrifying tools, but tools nonetheless. And to them, they are the pinnacle of evolution - our evolution. It makes sense, at least to me

I have a big problem with that argument, Evolution is an unguided process, with no end goal... so that argument, given by the reapers is nonsensical.

[Defiantfa11]

Reminded me of Battlestar Galacticas Finale really, except they had some closure.. well kind of

[likta_]

@Ajensis

1.) It never happened before because there IS life in the galaxy, and there is no malevolent synthetic species hell bend on killing everything except for the reapers, which have no desire to kill off all life.

[Iwillbeback]

Baronesa wrote...

Ajensis wrote...

likta_ (again): I don't think the Reapers consider organic life more worth than synthetic. They merely carry out the function they were created for. They're tools - horrible and terrifying tools, but tools nonetheless. And to them, they are the pinnacle of evolution - our evolution. It makes sense, at least to me

I have a big problem with that argument, Evolution is an unguided process, with no end goal... so that argument, given by the reapers is nonsensical.

But all beings will eventually become them, half organic and half Synthetic.
That's the way they see it so they decide they will make the leap for them.

[Iwillbeback]

likta_ wrote...

@Ajensis

1.) It never happened before because there IS life in the galaxy, and there is no malevolent synthetic species hell bend on killing everything except for the reapers, which have no desire to kill off all life.

Life could of been extinct in the sense there were no clear organics that were capable advancing to something greater and then after time it started up again and the cycle began soon after.

Modifié par Iwillbeback, 19 mars 2012 - 10:24 .