349 réponses à ce sujet

[The Angry One]

DocDoomII wrote...

beetlebailey123 wrote...

Why would the reapers leave the Mass Relays, and allow them to advance so they could wipe them out so they won't be wiped out by synthetics?

The most reasonable solution to this would be that they use evolved species to 'reproduce' and build new reapers.
Giving them the mass relayes allow the new 'rising' species to spread on more than one planet and grow exponentially in number thus granting a bigger harvest every 50.000 years.
The 50.000 years limit would have been more logical if they noticed that it was the approximate time needed for a 'higher' species to develop a syinthetic race that could rebel and destroy its creator and by doing so ruin the harvest.

Reproduction woul be a logical reason enough without this condescending and illogical explanation about synthetics vs. organics.

[Janus382]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

*snip

You really want nothing else but a pissing contest, don't you? I'm pretty much done with this, I think. I'm responding to your posts because I respect your opinion even if I don't agree with it. However you seem more interested in other things.

But anyway, they would not glass every world. Even the Krogan understand the basic premise of survival if only on a subconscious level sometimes. Your use of "my logic" is terrible. It's not even remotely what I'm saying and I'm starting to get the picture that nothing I say will be taken in properly by you. That is not an attack on your intelligence, mind you, but that our approaches to this subject differ too wildly.

Organic life will never destroy organic life. Nothing in the known universe organics create, or the mass effect universe, that I know of could completely elminate it. Including the Krogan. However I can concievably consider a scenario that is logical where Synthetic life destroys it.

So again, it is logical. It may not be a probable solution. It may or may not be backed up by facts deep into the past. But it makes sense.

And that's all I have to say on the subject, to you anyway.

Have a wonderful day.

"Nothing that you know of could completely eliminate it".  So, you're coming to that conclusion from the evidence that's been presented to you... which is the only way we can make rational conclusions.  That is the problem with the Starchild's logic.  There is zero evidence, beyond what the starchild (an enemy) says, that suggests he is correct.  However, we are presented with quite a bit of evidence to say he is incorrect.

Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable to assume his logic and arguments are flawed.

Modifié par Janus382, 27 mars 2012 - 06:49 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

Jonwes wrote...

A few points -

I'm not trying to debunk EVERY plot hole - just the ones that have popped up and that others have called "plot holes" even though they are clearly not. Either because they do not fit the definition or because they are actually explained quite adequately.

To address a few points raised:

A "rebellion" does not mean an unjustified revolt. I am well aware the Quarians shot first. That's why I let them die in my run-through. That doesn't mean that they still didn't rebel. The Catalyst didn't seem to make any judgements about the synthetics, to me, when he said they'd wipe organics out. He didn't say it was unjustified every time. I just think the synthetics end up having the odds stacked in their favor.

Whether you agree with the Catalyst or not doesn't affect the basic logic of what he is saying. From his perspective and the long view he is able to take of events, his logic is sound. It might be horrific or wrong to you, or make you feel like you've ended up with a lousy set of choices. But people keep saying it isn't logical or doesn't make sense. That's not true. And since none of us have lived through millions of years witnessing the rise and fall of civilizations, we can't really say whether it's true or not. The Geth and EDI prove that not all synthetics are evil. That's why you're given a choice of destroying or not destroying them or joining with them.

But I don't think it's about good or evil. It's about two opposing forces, one of which becomes so strong it knocks every thing out of balance.

Destroying synthetics does not prevent them from being developed by organics again in the future.

You are depicting the Catalyst as an omnipotent entity, who has witness extinction many times over. We have no basis for this line of reasoning. Therefore, the Catalyst must have an origin. This makes it logic flawed by default as it hinges upon the mind of its creator. What may have happened a million years prior is not bound to repeat itself with unbridled certainty however the Catalyst makes that precise assumption and claims it as fact.

The Geth and EDI prove it is not an inevitability, therefore the Catalyst presenting its logic as fact, is a plot hole.

[Saul Iscariot]

As for Joker fleeing having picked up the remaining crew members the fault is entirely BWs. A few cut scenes and it easily could have made sense.

[Baronesa]

The Angry One wrote...

DocDoomII wrote...

beetlebailey123 wrote...

Why would the reapers leave the Mass Relays, and allow them to advance so they could wipe them out so they won't be wiped out by synthetics?

The most reasonable solution to this would be that they use evolved species to 'reproduce' and build new reapers.
Giving them the mass relayes allow the new 'rising' species to spread on more than one planet and grow exponentially in number thus granting a bigger harvest every 50.000 years.
The 50.000 years limit would have been more logical if they noticed that it was the approximate time needed for a 'higher' species to develop a syinthetic race that could rebel and destroy its creator and by doing so ruin the harvest.

Reproduction woul be a logical reason enough without this condescending and illogical explanation about synthetics vs. organics.

I actually liked that reasoning as implied on ME2. Kinda like Galactus eating planets... still a real threat, but it is not evil per se... although Reaper's actions are undeniably cruel and sadistic.

[Xeranx]

Schrijver wrote...

Now try and debunk the Normandy running off with teleporting squadmates

It didn't happen.

[DocDoomII]

The Angry One wrote...

DocDoomII wrote...

beetlebailey123 wrote...

Why would the reapers leave the Mass Relays, and allow them to advance so they could wipe them out so they won't be wiped out by synthetics?

The most reasonable solution to this would be that they use evolved species to 'reproduce' and build new reapers.
Giving them the mass relayes allow the new 'rising' species to spread on more than one planet and grow exponentially in number thus granting a bigger harvest every 50.000 years.
The 50.000 years limit would have been more logical if they noticed that it was the approximate time needed for a 'higher' species to develop a syinthetic race that could rebel and destroy its creator and by doing so ruin the harvest.

Reproduction woul be a logical reason enough without this condescending and illogical explanation about synthetics vs. organics.

Just trying to find a compromise.
I liked better the dark energy theory that was leaked time ago. Even if it was still unpolished (or I just read an incomplete source)

[The Angry One]

Saul Iscariot wrote...

As for Joker fleeing having picked up the remaining crew members the fault is entirely BWs. A few cut scenes and it easily could have made sense.

No it doesn't, it still doesn't explain why he's fleeing, where he is, how he could safely land in a planet and why they apparently forgot that being dragged out of FTL speeds in an uncontrolled manner will, you know, kill the crew.

[anlk92]

It is truly appaling that some people are not able to comprehend the basics of how a story should work.

You can't have spacebrat show up at the very end of the trilogy with a nonsensical argument, say that he's someone with superior knowledge (who also happens to be the main villain) and expect the player to accept it just because of that. You need to back that argument up with some examples from your story, you need to foreshadow it.

In the context of Mass Effect, the whole synthetics will kill everyone thing is as stupid as saying "Everyone will choke on sliced bread so we're killing you before you invent it".

[gudman]

Xeranx wrote...

Schrijver wrote...

Now try and debunk the Normandy running off with teleporting squadmates

It didn't happen.

But everyone who saw the ending, saw the normandy sequence. 

[DocDoomII]

Baronesa wrote...

I actually liked that reasoning as implied on ME2. Kinda like Galactus eating planets... still a real threat, but it is not evil per se... although Reaper's actions are undeniably cruel and sadistic.

Hm. Didn't noticed this implication. Can you elaborate?
Still I could have noticed the parallelism. In the Ultimate Universe Gah Lak Tus was very similar to the reapers.

[WizenSlinky0]

Janus382 wrote...

"Nothing that you know of could completely eliminate it".  So, you're coming to that conclusion from the evidence that's been presented to you... which is the only way we can make rational conclusions.  That is the problem with the Starchild's logic.  There is zero evidence, beyond what the starchild (an enemy) says, that suggests he is correct.  However, we are presented with quite a bit of evidence to say he is incorrect.

Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable to assume his logic and arguments are flawed.

All reasoning and arguments is inherently flawed. That's not my point. My point is that his position has logical basis. His conclusion does not have to be correct for his logic to be sound and for him to make sense.

We come to wildly different conclusions all the time as humans, we're doing it right now, but that does not make our "logic" flawed. It doesn't mean we don't make sense. It means we drew different conclusions based off the evidence that's been presented.

The starchild is the same. He was presented certain evidence upon creation/upload/whatever and he drew a conclusion after considering the logical outcomes. He could be proven wrong beyond a reasonable doubt and still make sense within the context of what we know.

I'm not telling people to agree with him. Only to stop saying he's illogical and doesn't make any sense. Disagreeing with him is a perfectly viable option. Which is why one of the badly done endings is DESTROY HIM AND THEM and basically say screw you, allowing Synthetic life to thrive in the future.

[The Angry One]

anlk92 wrote...

In the context of Mass Effect, the whole synthetics will kill everyone thing is as stupid as saying "Everyone will choke on sliced bread so we're killing you before you invent it".

By making you choke on sliced bread.

[Orthodox Infidel]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

You are depicting the Catalyst as an omnipotent entity, who has witness extinction many times over. We have no basis for this line of reasoning. Therefore, the Catalyst must have an origin. This makes it logic flawed by default as it hinges upon the mind of its creator. What may have happened a million years prior is not bound to repeat itself with unbridled certainty however the Catalyst makes that precise assumption and claims it as fact.

This is actually not the strongest argument. The strongest argment is that the continued existence of any organic life in any form proves that the thing the Catalyst is trying to prevent has never happened, and no probability can be assigned to an event which has never taken place. What the creator of that machine was thinking at the time is totally irrelevant.

The Geth and EDI prove it is not an inevitability, therefore the Catalyst presenting its logic as fact, is a plot hole.

It's only a plot hole if we're supposed to assume the Catalyst is correct. Idiots present their opinions as fact all the time. However, every statement the dev team has made seems to indicate that Bioware wanted us to take the Starchild seriously and at face value. So yes, it is a plot hole, and the OP needs to admit it.

Modifié par Orthodox Infidel, 27 mars 2012 - 06:56 .

[Agamo45]

Okay, even if the Catalyst thing made sense, it's still an AWFUL way to end the trilogy.

[lillitheris]

The Joker so-called plot hole is easily explained: he crash-lands to what seems to be Gotham City Central Park, and he's got these weird green and purplish-red streaks…

[WizenSlinky0]

Agamo45 wrote...

Okay, even if the Catalyst thing made sense, it's still an AWFUL way to end the trilogy.

And that's a perfectly valid response to his logic.

[The Angry One]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...


All reasoning and arguments is inherently flawed. That's not my point. My point is that his position has logical basis. His conclusion does not have to be correct for his logic to be sound and for him to make sense.

....... are you kidding? He bases a faulty conclusion based on faulty logic and complete assumptions.
Again, nothing he says is provable. Everything is contradictable.

I will say this in all caps so you notice.
ANSWER THE POINT ABOUT THE PROTHEAN CYCLE HYBRIDS.

[squee913]

While I feel the term plot hole is used to widely, the starchild's logic still does not make sense. Let's say I decide that when children grow into adults they become smart enough to make weapons to kill each other and start wars that could wipe everyone out. So the only solution I can come up with is to kill all the adults when they hit a certain age and leave the children? That is my plan? The fail in logic is that this was the conclusion as opposed to many other possible, and less destructive solutions such an advanced race could dream up. The reapers have already shown they can control the geth at will. They could unleash a virus into any budding AI to kill it. They can wait until the AI starts a war and then come in and wipe them out. I am sure Organics would not mind at that point. Both of these options make more sense, require less resources, and do not involve the genocide of organics.

Plot hole? Maybe not. But logical? Not with out a lot of exposition on why this was the only method they felt would work.

The problem with the "Synthetics will always attack" debate is not so much with the starchild but with Shepard. The Starchild could well believe that, but Shepard has conceivably had two experiences in the game that completely disprove this idea. EDI and Uniting the Geth with the Quarians. The idea that Shepard can experience this and then not even question Starchild's logic is a plot hole. Prior narrative has established that Shepard believes in co-existence with AI. Shepard just out right believing Starchild goes against the logic set by the prior narrative.

Modifié par squee913, 27 mars 2012 - 07:02 .

[Carlthestrange]

Sorry, but these still make no sense to me.

[Iconoclaste]

The Angry One wrote...

Saul Iscariot wrote...

As for Joker fleeing having picked up the remaining crew members the fault is entirely BWs. A few cut scenes and it easily could have made sense.

No it doesn't, it still doesn't explain why he's fleeing, where he is, how he could safely land in a planet and why they apparently forgot that being dragged out of FTL speeds in an uncontrolled manner will, you know, kill the crew.

And just to prevent someone to jump on this one...

I read an explanation of  "space magic not destroying mass relays, you whiners" on other threads. It grossly depicted the "blast wave" to be a gentle thing doing subtle damages to what it encounters, if being the "synthesis option". Sticking to this, and seeing the aft part of the Normandy being thorn to shreds, I dont connect the "sweet green blast" with that scene.

I imagine an organic peacefully working in his laboratory on some advanced "mass effect - driven device", that suddenly goes "blam" in his face. We did not even see a flinch on the soldiers' weapons on earth when the "sweet green wave" passed by, yet these weapons are based on "mass effect".

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 27 mars 2012 - 07:01 .

[Baronesa]

DocDoomII wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

I actually liked that reasoning as implied on ME2. Kinda like Galactus eating planets... still a real threat, but it is not evil per se... although Reaper's actions are undeniably cruel and sadistic.

Hm. Didn't noticed this implication. Can you elaborate?
Still I could have noticed the parallelism. In the Ultimate Universe Gah Lak Tus was very similar to the reapers.

EDI says this about the Human Reaper: "It could be to facilitate the Reaper equivalent of reproduction, or itmay serve another purpose"

Sure it is left open... but the idea of being used for reproduction is still there.

And not a big fan of ultimates universe xD some things have been done a lot better there, mind you, but in general... I think it is a bit meh... and anyway I WAS a DC girl... until that horrible reboot.

[Aurvant]

Debunking the OP's thread:

The problem with TIM's appearance isn't that he is there, but that his role in that scenes framework makes no sense. The Illusive Man appears in a way that does not make sense, and his newly formed powers are seemingly tacked on with no explanation as to how he's doing it. He supposedly can force Shepard to shoot Anderson, but there's no precedent beforehand that shows an organic life form taking control over another life forms mind. Why didn't he just have Shepard shoot himself in the head if TIM had such amazing power? Oh, wait, that's because the scene itself doesn't make any freaking sense.

The Catalyst's logic is flawed because of EVERYTHING WE KNOW BEFOREHAND. If the catalyst had said what he said in context with preceeding events that supported his claims, then there would be no problem. The issue arises when you recognize that the argument falls flat on its face when you just look at the reapers actions. Screw what they claim their motives are, LOOK AT THEIR ACTIONS.

The reapers claimed to be culling organic life to prevent an advancement of synthetics that would eventually eradicate all organic life. Ok, that's kinda stupid, but ok that's fine. THEN THE REAPERS GO AND COMPLETELY DO THE ASS BACKWARDS THING BY RECRUITING THE ONLY FULLY SYNTHETIC LIFE-FORM AS THEIR ARMY. The Reapers reached out and convinced the Geth to help them kill off organic life forms so that those organic life forms would be saved from synthetic life forms killing off organic life forms?

That. Is. ****ing. Stupid.

Oh, and the Geth didn't rebel against their masters. The Geth defended themselves from their masters. When the Geth attained awareness the Quarians immediately acted as an oppressor and and went so far as to even kill their own citizens if those citizens were protecting the Geth. The Geth also stopped attacking the Quarians once the Quarians had been pushed away far enough. Also, the Geth IMMEDIATELY desired peace once the influence of the Reaper had been removed. Legion repaired the damage caused by the Reapers and the Geth became peaceful again.

The Reapers were the source of corrupted influence that drove the Geth to maintain aggression towards organics. WE SEE THIS ON RANNOCH. Then the Reaper on RANNOCH attempts to foreshadow the eventual end by claiming that the war on RANNOCH is proof that synthetics and organics can't play along. This has to be immediately thrown out because we had just learned that the Reapers were controlling the Geth and forcing them to attack.

The Catalysts logic is broken because, despite what it's motives or intent may have been, the Reapers actions are contrary to everything it says.

[Phearmonger]

The Chewbacca Defense (From South Park):
Cochran: ...ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!
Gerald Broflovski: Damn it! ... He's using the Chewbacca defense!
Cochran: Why would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of 2-foot-tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests

The Reaper Defense:

Ladies and Gentlemen of the supposed galaxy, this is the Catalyst.
The Catalyst is a Reaper from Dark Space, but the Catalyst is the Citadel in our galaxy. Think about it: that does not make sense!

Why would a Reaper, a huge metal squid, want to come to our galaxy and kill organics so that synthetics don't have the chance to kill organics. That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: what does this have to do with the stated goal? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with the stated goal! It does not make sense. Look at me, I'm a ghost child telling you how killing you is actually keeping you safe! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're on that platform deliberatin' and conjugatin' the emancipation of every organic nation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed galaxy, it does not make sense! If the Reapers want to kill you in order to save you, you must submit! The defense rests

There, plot hole solved.

[lordnyx1]

Orthodox Infidel wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

You are depicting the Catalyst as an omnipotent entity, who has witness extinction many times over. We have no basis for this line of reasoning. Therefore, the Catalyst must have an origin. This makes it logic flawed by default as it hinges upon the mind of its creator. What may have happened a million years prior is not bound to repeat itself with unbridled certainty however the Catalyst makes that precise assumption and claims it as fact.

This is actually not the strongest argument. The strongest argment is that the continued existence of any organic life in any form proves that the thing the Catalyst is trying to prevent has never happened, and no probability can be assigned to an event which has never taken place. What the creator of that machine was thinking at the time is totally irrelevant.

Unless Synthetics can create organics then further maybe some synthetics(maybe the Reapers?) did destroy all organic life at some point, felt remorseful, (re)created organics and decided to watch over them to make sure they don't create synthetics but over the years that purpose got damaged until they do very nearly what they originally tried to prevent.

Or maybe the reapers were a civ that was losing a war against Synthetics and converted themselves into hybrids, fled their galaxy and became racists ****s.
Speculation!

Modifié par lordnyx1, 27 mars 2012 - 07:04 .