232 réponses à ce sujet

[dfstone]

The dark energy thing really thru me off. It was all over ME2. Gianni Parasini talked about it, Liara talked about it, Tali talked about it. Then ME3 comes and its like Dark Enerwhat?

[markusprime]

Also the kid avatar catalyst is annoying as fook

[Jaron Oberyn]

No t doesn't make sense. For example, harbinger bragging that the experiments will continue. What experiments? Made sense for a dark energy plot purpose, but for the hypocritical we kill organics so that they wont build synthetics to kill themselves, nope. There are a lot of inconsistencies from me1/2 to me3.

Another example of how their purpose is just plain stupid, why not kill the synthetics that the organics create rather than butcher organics? Plot. Holes.


-Polite

[Ajensis]

^ Someone asked the same thing earlier in the thread and was responded to. Something like... page 4 or thereabouts? Not sure, but it's there somewhere

Myrmedus wrote...
Their logic would've been 10x more supported and riveting if organics, not synthetics, were the problem. I would've much rather them talk about their experiences where organics hit the technological singularity but with their aggressive instincts they ended up wiping out entire galaxies. This would've made more sense and also produced a much more engaging dilemma for Shepard (the player) at the end.

That's a good point, it would've furthered the reasoning a lot to include organics. I suppose they just really liked the whole theme about created-vs-creator

The Angry One wrote...
An impossibly ancient AI should not engage in circular logic. Period.
Circular logic which is disproved in the same narrative.

I'd like to hear you elaborate on how it's circular logic 

NormanRawn wrote...

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Sounds like the Reapers circular logic to me.

I'm pretty sure the Reapers were expecting the same result - and, for all we know, have acquired the same result for a long time. Until the Protheans sabotaged the Citadel and gave us a fighting chance :happy:

Modifié par Ajensis, 19 mars 2012 - 04:27 .

[Neeh]

Geth are like the worst example of the danger of synthetics. When they fought off the quarrian, they just went back to living peacefully.

Sure, I get the idea of zomg zomg syths can take over, but it's so flawed and there's no build up at all and all the **** sovreign and harbinger mopped about is just put aside for this akward last minute reveal.

Also, why can't the reapers just kill synthetics, instead of screwing over organics? z.z
Or, as noted above, have organics be the "threat" that's what I felt was the issue in ME1/2, sorta, they let organics evolve then put a stop to it, either cause it was to dangerous to let us become too advanced, or they needed advanced races for some other purpose.

Modifié par Neeh, 19 mars 2012 - 04:37 .

[Lionel Ou]

Ajensis wrote...

GoblinSapper wrote...

shurryy wrote...
[Xzibit picture]

Yes, that's the picture I mentioned in the first post and which I'm arguing has no reason to exist. I'm not sure I understand why you're quoting it.

Because it is the exact thing that happens?
God-Child-in-the-Sky sees synthetics beginning to wipe out organics and thinks to himself "That shouldn't happen!". Never mind that organics kill organics all the time, even going so far as to salt the earth their enemies cities were located on, to stop them from ever coming back.

Does he see this happen once, twice, a hundred times? He claims that synthetics will wipe out all organics. Evidently this never happened, since no organics would then be around. Unless they left bacteria around that evolved into new sapient species after he blasted the synthetics out of the space.

After this, he builds a fleet of reapers to "preserve" or "ascend" the organics he feels have reached a certain level. Therefor he resets the galaxy every 50k years by harvesting organics. This harvesting consists of rounding up untold numbers of organics then making biological slurry of them. This is then transformed somehow to the core of a new reaper. How does this preserve anything of their species? If you reduce a brain to slurry, nothing of the individual mind remains.

By reseting the galaxy every 50k years he deliberately ends any chance of species evolving past the road block of AIs. He never gives them a chance to make it work.

Does he wait, to see if AIs are made and if they are hostile? What happens when someone creates AIs 5000 years earlier than planned and doesn't tell anyone? Does it never happen that a species evolve on a planet that has no relay near it, invents AIs and they live in peace?

[Ultra Prism]

Then they should have another encounter with Harbinger to emphasis Technological Singularity...Reapers purpose is implied which many of us get it ... but when you put STAR GOD CHILD out of the blue, it goes like WTF with some new logic of its ... so yeah the ending didn't give onething ... What happens to rest of world after the shepard sacrifice or whatever you want to call it

[Drak41n]

The reaper's 'logic' - or lack there of - only makes sense if harvesting biological species served them in some way. Based on EDI's conclusions about the Reapers I assumed that there was more to the story than we knew. I mean, writers don't stick pointless conclusions into their stories.  Do they?  It doesn't seem to reconcile well with the conclusion that the Reapers are hyper focused on their own survival while selflessly eliminating all sentient biological life in the galaxy before it achieve a tech singularity occurs.

Of course, that's never explained. Nothing is explained. We're just told "we do this because being made extinct is good for you!" Like genocide is the Reaper's equivalent to building character. It's just weird, circular and meaningless. Even the hyper-rational HAL had more sense than the Reapers did.

Modifié par Drak41n, 19 mars 2012 - 04:35 .

[DarklightZERO]

I would like the whole 'AI is stuck on the wrong conclusion' if there was a high paragon/renegade option to point out its flawed logic.

There was this theory I read at the time of Mass effect 2 in the Tvtropes Wild Mass Guessing page where it was suggested that the reapers originally 'arks' to ensure the survival of organic life and they got corrupted though the pain of the species who where forcibly assimilated.

[SimKoning]

I like the fact that so many ME fans seem to have just recently found out what a technological singularity is. Just so some of you know, a technological singularity is not a sure thing at all. It's based mostly on speculation and assumptions.

It also doesn't = galactic robot apocalypse by default. A lot of people refer to it as the techno rapture...

Modifié par SimKoning, 19 mars 2012 - 05:23 .

[Mr Indivisible]

It makes sense, only if you assume that the creators where flawed themselves, and only saw one solution to a problem with infinite variables and possible solutions.

[The Angry One]

Mr Indivisible wrote...

It makes sense, only if you assume that the creators where flawed themselves, and only saw one solution to a problem with infinite variables and possible solutions.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:
I think that, while it completely neuters the Reapers as the cosmic horrors they were supposed to be, that would at least make sense. If Shepard didn't take it as fact.

[Silhouett3]

Please stop putting that ridiculous Xzibit thing, read previous posts. There's more to it.

Conflicts leading to annihilation and technological singularity are not simply between AIs and organic civilizations. I explained it briefly already. Here's a hint :

A bioweapon capable of wiping out entire species without murdering anyone.

Thank you.

Modifié par Silhouett3, 19 mars 2012 - 05:37 .

[Foxtrotarmy]

Baronesa wrote...

Federally wrote...

Really from a literary sense suddenly changing the motives of the Reapers in the last five minutes was a poor decision. Whether you can justify partial genocide to prevent possible total genocide or not the introduction of this new information so late was a bad decision.

The Reapers were a threatening, mysterious and downright scary antagonist in ME1 when they were an unknown force lurking in the background. In ME2 their motivation was revealed, they killed organics not for fun but for procreation. Not only were you gonna die, but you were gonna get turned into a monster and used to kill your family/friends. That's worse then plain old dead. So why at the end of act 3 do we need to change their motivation? Even worse change it to something easily turned into a joke. It's just bad writing

This, this so much of THIS

Definitely this. Like any other "species" the Reapers exist (on a base level) solely to continue existing, but unlike Chaos/Life which contributes and influences the universe around it (art, culture, etc), the Order/Reapers side of the coin just exist to exist. They have nothing to give the universe, instead of creation, they destroy, and the only way they know how to create is to destroy (i.e. harvesting life into more Reapers). That's a terrifying enough motivation because you can't convince a Reaper to start painting or something. They just want to destroy you, it's all they can do. They are the monsters in the dark that just keep coming. They cannot be bought, bullied, or reasoned with. They just want to watch the world burn. Er, galaxy.

Modifié par Foxtrotarmy, 19 mars 2012 - 05:45 .

[dfstone]

Neeh wrote...

Geth are like the worst example of the danger of synthetics. When they fought off the quarrian, they just went back to living peacefully.

Sure, I get the idea of zomg zomg syths can take over, but it's so flawed and there's no build up at all and all the **** sovreign and harbinger mopped about is just put aside for this akward last minute reveal.

Also, why can't the reapers just kill synthetics, instead of screwing over organics? z.z
Or, as noted above, have organics be the "threat" that's what I felt was the issue in ME1/2, sorta, they let organics evolve then put a stop to it, either cause it was to dangerous to let us become too advanced, or they needed advanced races for some other purpose.

Cause the reapers for some unexplained reason, need organic DNA to make more of themselves.  So they have to kill organics to survive.  That was the whole plot of ME2.  The Collectors were kidnapping humans to turn them into goo so they could build a new reaper.

Modifié par dfstone, 19 mars 2012 - 06:16 .

[Silhouett3]

Guys -for the last time- in Reaper logic, organics are not destroyed, they are saved in Reaper form. Probably in Reapers structure you would find many ancient species' complete genetic structure to create them again. A Reaper is made of millions of individuals of one species for this purpose. That's how "they are each a nation".
Organics are not needed as a "fuel source" for a Reaper to work. Don't make things up. The idea behind the invasion cycles surpasses procreation.
Like it or not, Reaper cycles maintains evolutionary diversity and prevents advanced species (like Protheans) from exploiting primitive ones (like Humans in Stone age). Didn't Javik suggested that last one?

I'll quote my earlier post; which isn't yet criticized:

Silhouett3 wrote...

Yes it makes sense;

you have to "ignore superficial appearance. Down to genetic code."

...in Reapers logic, processing and "saving" advanced species genetic material while allowing primitive species evolve on their own is the way of "imposing order on chaos" and at the same time the way to ensure all life has equal chance to create diversity. To them saving life is not saving the "form" of organics but the material of organics. Hence the fundamental conflict between organics and Reapers. Organics are not aware of their material. Your mind is not aware of the cells in your body. We can only comprehend the form. Supposedly Sovereign could comprehend both. Therefore every Reaper you meet start and end the conversation with the "You don't understand me, you are a fool" line.

I explained it briefly here: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10219096/

[Joccaren]

Armass81 wrote...
I elaborated on this already, you cut the root of the cancer out, you dont just destroy the cancer when it appears. Catalyst AI thinks this is more efficient, and it is. It doesnt care what civilization is alive, tough it does "preserve" them through horrible means, its main purpose is to ensure there is continuation of life in the galaxy. If AI's ever grow powerful enough, nothing would be able to stop them, not even the reapers. They would consume everything, all resources, all life would be destroyed. Forever.

By that logic ALL organic life in the galaxy should be harvested and turned into Reapers straight up as it is the most efficient way of ensuring Organics never make synthetics whilst keeping Organic life in the galaxy.
If the Reaper's let the synthetics get too strong, they're doing something wrong. It wouldn't even matter if they played world police, and allowed only civilian ships - any military ships would be destroyed outright - and constantly watched for synthetics whilst ruling with an Iron fist. That would make more sense logically, and it would actually let Organics live as opposed to get farmed (Seriously, that is pretty much what Reapers are doing).

[fanman72]

OP is indoctrinated

[Yttrian]

Using synthetics to kill you, so you don't get killed by synthetics.

Preserving organic life for no logical reason by killing the best of it regardless of circumstance.

[agathokakological]

shurryy wrote...

 

This. Also, you've been... INDOCTRINATED!!!!

Modifié par agathokakological, 20 mars 2012 - 05:52 .

[Aurvant]

Another issue with the OP's logic is that for The Reaper's purpose to make sense, then we have to completely ignore EVERYTHING we did with the Geth just a few hours prior.

The Catalyst states that synthetics will eventually rise up and mercilessly create conflict to wipe out organics. However, when we look at the best example of that possibility (the Geth) we actually learn that the situations COMPLETELY BACKWARDS. The Geth are supposed to serve as prime examples of a synthetic uprising, but we just learned that they were, for the lack of a better term, innocent. It was organics that instigated the war against the synthetic life-forms and created the "chaos" that the catalyst spoke about.

Hell, when presented with the choice of either peace or war, the synthetics (Geth) IMMEDIATELY chose the peaceful option. Even after 300 years of war, the Geth (restored by Legion to original function after the reaper was destroyed) remained devoted to the Quarians which is evidenced in their reverence b addressing them still as "Creator".

And speaking on the point reaper logic and Geth, if the reapers were trying to stop synthetics from killing off organic species then WHY WOULD THEY REACH TO AND SUPPORT THE GETH!?

[Straw_foot]

shurryy wrote...

 

This

*The Yo Dawg meme if it doesn't show up

Modifié par Straw_foot, 20 mars 2012 - 06:07 .

[Amonthes]

Another issue with the OP's logic is that for The Reaper's purpose to make sense, then we have to completely ignore EVERYTHING we did with the Geth just a few hours prior.

The Catalyst states that synthetics will eventually rise up and mercilessly create conflict to wipe out organics. However, when we look at the best example of that possibility (the Geth) we actually learn that the situations COMPLETELY BACKWARDS. The Geth are supposed to serve as prime examples of a synthetic uprising, but we just learned that they were, for the lack of a better term, innocent. It was organics that instigated the war against the synthetic life-forms and created the "chaos" that the catalyst spoke about.

Hell, when presented with the choice of either peace or war, the synthetics (Geth) IMMEDIATELY chose the peaceful option. Even after 300 years of war, the Geth (restored by Legion to original function after the reaper was destroyed) remained devoted to the Quarians which is evidenced in their reverence b addressing them still as "Creator".

And speaking on the point reaper logic and Geth, if the reapers were trying to stop synthetics from killing off organic species then WHY WOULD THEY REACH TO AND SUPPORT THE GETH!?

I doubt a being that has been around for millions of years would be swayed by a weeks-old truce between one AI civilization and the creators they almost annihilited.  In the long run, it would only take one hostile AI civilization reaching a certain point of power to wipe out organic life, forever. One example of a good AI culture might reasonably not be viewed as a strong counter-argument.

I understood the reapers to merely be using the geth as a means to an end. Sovereign was not overly fond of them.

I would like the whole 'AI is stuck on the wrong conclusion' if there was a high paragon/renegade option to point out its flawed logic.

Shepard does reject the star child's logic, and the star child himself says that the Crucible has changed him and that the something needs to change. All three choices involve different ways of breaking the cycle.

[Hy0ga]

EVERY SINGLE TIME a story tries to tell something "beyond human comprehensions" it fails. And will always be that way. Whoever wrote it is human ... you can see where i'm going with this.

You can, however, say that something is beyond human comprehension and leave that way. We can accept that. It's like watching a David Lynch's movie; I utterly fail finding logic in the story, but I love to try. Even tough I always find holes in my theories. It's fun to have your mind boggled.